The stars aligned just right over the past 24 hours and Nick Redfern is in town. Today I’m taking him on my “Weird L.A.” tour and then we’ll be live in the studio for a 2 hour conversation with Paul Kimball. First up on the agenda will be a discussion of this year’s spate of deaths of UFO personalities and researchers. Then, anything is fair game. Send questions or talking points to greg@radiomisterioso.com.
-

LIVE PLAYER
Streaming problems? See "Listen Live Links" below.↓↓LATEST NEWS
New show up top!

SHOW CHAT
LOADING...Autographed copies
Order autographed copies of It Defies Language! from me for $14.00 plus media mail shipping rate ($3.00 in the US.) $6.75 for first class priority. Inquire about international rates. Includes handsome collectible bookmark!
Site Search
Meta
Likeable Linkable
- Anomaly Radio Network
- Beamships Equal Love
- Binnall Of America
- Farah Yurdozu
- Forteania
- Gralien Report
- Hidden Experience
- Intangible Materiality
- killradio
- Music/ Not Music
- Our Strange Planet
- Steamshovel Press
- The Daily Grail
- The Debris Field
- The Gralien Report
- The Konformist
- The Orange Orb
- There’s Something in the Woods
Thank you! Processed through the
Excluded Middle Media Empire
LISTEN LIVE LINKS
Recent Comments
- Greg on Greg Bishop
- Greg on The Lost Bill Moore Interviews (Epsiode 1)
- Ewan Hoozarmy on Chris Lambright – X Descending, Paul Bennewitz, and the Air Force
- Chris on The Lost Bill Moore Interviews (Epsiode 1)
- Luis Cayetano on Greg Bishop
-
Recent Posts
Tags
- Aaron Gulyas
- Adam Gorightly
- Albert Bender
- alchemy
- Aliester Crowley
- Bigfoot
- Bill Moore
- Chris O'Brien
- Courtney OHearn
- Disclosure
- East Coast Paraconference
- ghost hunting
- Ghosts
- Jeff Ritzmann
- Jim Moseley
- Joshua Cutchin
- Karla Turner
- Kenn Thomas
- Mac Tonnies
- Men In Black
- Miguel Romero
- Mike Clelland
- Miles Lewis
- MUFON
- Music
- new ufology
- Nick Redfern
- occult
- ouija
- Owls
- Paranormal
- Paul Kimball
- Peter Robbins
- Red Pill Junkie
- Susan Demeter-StClair
- synchronicity
- Tim Binnall
- Tim Brigham
- time travel
- trickster
- tulpas
- ufology
- UFOs Reframing The Debate
- Walter Bosley
- Whitley Strieber




Oh one comment i forgot to make is i would love to hear a head to head debate between Peter Robbins and Paul Kimball on the abduction phenomenon. Between Peter’s eloquence and Paul’s litigiousness i think we the audience might gain insights and consider all sides of the issue.
Hi Ward,
Glad you enjoyed the show, but I have no interest in a debate with Peter. He’s a genuinely nice person, who I have no doubt means well… but a debate with him on the abduction issue would be like having a debate with a fundamentalist about the existence of God. Nothing I’m going to say will convince him of the errors made by Hopkins.
Besides, the material is all on the record, so people can sort it out for themselves and come to their own conclusions. In the end, it’s up to Peter or someone else to come up with a rational, reasoned counter to the Bob, Xang and Zorg scenario.
By the way, it isn’t litigiousness – it’s simply that I have no use for dogma.
Best,
Paul
Pardon me for saying (um, writing?) this Paul, but I feel you’re missing the point. The purpose of a debate is not to change your opponent’s mind —when has that ever happened in the history of mankind?— but to bring forth your case using your best arguments, and then letting the audience decide who won.
But it’s all right if you don’t feel inclined to do something like that. The people who’ve listened to you know it’s not due to a lack of debating skills 🙂
So how about a debate between Peter and Kevin Randle, moderated by Greg and Don Ecker? That would be pretty neat too 😉
RPJ,
I used to be a debater, both in high school (where I went to the 1985 National Championship) and law school, and you’re right in a sense – a debate is designed not to change your opponent’s mind so much as to influence the listeners, whether a judge in a formal debate, or an audience elsewhere. But that kind of competition isn’t what I’m interested in, because it has nothing to do with having a dialogue, which is a different thing altogether.
If what you want is a debate, then you already have it. Listen to Peter’s episode, where he outlines his points, or better yet listen to that episode of The Paracast where Hopkins and Jacobs made their defence of their work and methods, and then listen to this one, where Nick, Greg and I outline ours (and let’s be clear that I wasn’t along in critiquing “abduction research”, particularly the ones who use hypnosis), or read Kevin’s “The Abduction Enigma”, or listen to the Paratopia episodes covering the Woods case, or whatever, and there you have it.
Anything more at this stage would just be repetitive, and wouldn’t promote a dialogue, where people do indeed change their minds. It would simply act as a form of entertainment for people who think that kind of thing is entertaining. No thanks.
Paul
One other thing – a clarification, really.
I had originally suggested that Nick and I call in to chat about our friend Stuart Miller. Greg decided to make it a show about all of the recent deaths. I didn’t really have an interest in talking about the others (I didn’t know Valdez, for example, and couldn’t really add much to what Greg might say), but it’s Greg’s show, so no worries. If I hadn’t been specifically asked about Hopkins, I wouldn’t have said anything at all (as I didn’t about Valdez, really, and very little about Girard, at least not him specifically), and we probably would have moved on to something else, like lake monsters or tulpas or the Red Sox collapse (because I’ve written and said everything there is to say from my perspective). But Greg asked me, so I answered, and we went from there.
In other words… blame Greg! 😉
Paul