Grover, i seems to me that you actually never listened to our interview with van den Broeke, nor did you pay much attention while reading the comments.
Hello Gene, thanks for your reaction.
Trust me, I did read the comments
. And because I did, it became clear to me that sharing a different point of view that is a bit less biased, less prejudiced/judgmental, less negative (as the majority of the commentary is on your forum concerning Mr. van den Broeke) would not be so worthwhile. This discussion we are now having illustrates my point:
It comes down to this: Van den Broeke has no evidence, other than possibly flawed testimony, to prove his claims.
Again, I repeat my question:
what is evidence? Apparently, testimonials from a person like Nancy Talbott are 'possibly flawed' for you? This is an
assumption. Let me ask you this question: what evidence do
you have to claim that these testimonials are 'possibly flawed'? What testimonials are you referring to actually? For example, well known Dutch 'media persons' are providing testimonials on Robberts site (and in several valued spiritual magazines in The Netherlands) about the talents of mr. Van den Broeke. Are you assuming they are 'possibly flawed' too? If so,
how do you know? In other words: how can you back up such a claims
yourself? (You see, discussions like these always turn around in circles and that's why I normally don't see a point in sharing my thoughts on forums like The Paracast on matters like these).
And the alleged "ghost" photos placed on the BLT site run by Nancy Talbott that purport to demonstrate his psychic powers are patently fake. Look for yourself.
This is your
assumption.
As to Greer, he discredits himself by being unable to provide evidence for some of his extraordinary claims. You also have to wonder about his CSETI club, a group that asks members to pay large sums to go on UFO hunting expeditions, but signs them up to disclosure agreements so you don't know what might have happened, nor is there any evidence that he's really found aliens, let alone compelling sightings.
It's interesting to see that you keep coming back to the point of evidence in the majority of your postings and then when some evidence is presented to you (and your forum members) by persons like Nancy Talbott and other testimonials about Robert van den Broeke, you judge it as non-evidence/possibly flawed testimonials. I am just wondering: what kind of evidence would help you/work for you, what would classify for you as valid? Obviously, we are not all the same, so differently people need different evidence/confirmation of things indeed. I do believe however, that evidence that is more 'valid' to the majority of people will come soon (see the last bit of this posting).
This is not a case of prejudice.
I respectfully believe it partly is (reading the loaded comments on your forum). But I also can understand you/your forum members need more backup evidence of the 'extreme claims' that are being made.
It's a case of dealing with people who make some very extreme claims and fail to back them up.
As said, it
is backup up. By lots of testimonials. But
you choose to not believe those testimonials. Which is your good right,
ofcourse. And you also perfectly have the right to be prejudiced: we all see things through our own filters:
A person like Mr. Van den Broeke can receive help from well known Dutch media persons or people 'in the field' (what's in a name if you think about cropcircles
) to share their testimonials to the world, and as I said before: a person like Mr. Greer can receive help from
many military, intelligence, government, corporate and scientific witnesses who are willing to put their name at risk by even providing evidence in the form of video-taped testimonials. To many people this is evidence enough. But even then there will still be people who will doubt those testimonials and presume it's all flawed. But this is
their doubt and judgement projected on it. It doesn't say anything about the testimonials that are given. I wonder, do people really think all those high placed officers just want to have their 15 minutes of fame by sharing what they needed to suppress for so many years (some their whole life)? Do people really think a person like Mr. Van den Broeke publishes all his messages deliberately fake? Apparently so. Just think: why on
Earth would he do that? The answer lies here: because, he has indeed a message for... the Earth.
There's no point arguing over it, obviously. People who are able to understand (better:
feel) what important roles persons like Steven Greer and Robbert van den Broeke have, will support them. (As illustrated for example by the fact that the Sirius project from Mr. Greer and (Emmy award winning) filmmaker Amardeep Kaleka got crowd funded for 250.000 in no-time:
http://www.sirius.neverendinglight.com/)
People who feel differently, will do the opposite and disregard 'anything' that doesn't fit their frame of reality. But it's totally understandable and okay. As I said before:
'Stuff like this always generates strong reactions and for the majority of people real evidence will be when they see an UFO right in front of them themselves. Still, if phenomenon like this is something that you can not place/relate to in your reality as of today, then one could easily classify it (such a sighting) as an hallucination or something along those lines, regardless. For most of the population an announcement of the government, combined with a worldwide major experience will make them change their minds. This is what 'Disclosure' is all about.
We at The Paracast accept the fact that weird things are going on, but there are people in our midst who detract from real investigation to find out what's going on. I'm sorry you do not see the distinction.
What I see is a fair amount of prejudice/judgements concerning this subject on your forum, -amongst others- based on the need of more 'real' evidence/investigation (whatever that means for different people). This 'real evidence' is indeed needed -so I understand your point- for the majority of the people to get educated on all this and therefor
Disclosure is so essential.
Peace
.
