157 - Andrew Johnson from 'Check the evidence'

Andrew Johnson from checktheevidence.com


As cult members will be aware - my work levels are through the roof at the moment. The podcast is now one week behind schedule. We shall catch up but the schedule on uploads is going to get a bit freaky for a while I think.

This was uploaded by my mobile phone. The picture we mentioned will follow tomorrow.


Here's a clip of the TV show: https://youtu.be/cb3KNpJg9EI



Check out this episode!


tinyjunco said…
Hullo Nick! it's me again. i feel a bit as if we're having a private conversation in a crowded cafe ;)

re: insular nature of much of the ufo subculture. I agree, it's tremendously tarsome. (And i have had experiences with non-human entities, including a bit of missing time, tho no UFO sightings to date.)

You may be interested in listening to Greg Bishop's pirate radio show (and podcast) Radio Misterioso. Greg has been interested in the topic for decades and considers himself very much part of 'the excluded middle' - not uber debunker, not a true believer. He has been focusing on discussing 'where do we go next to actually learn something new' on his podcast pretty extensively this last year, interviewing some people with fresh takes on the phenom who aren't necessarily big 'brand names' in the scene.

These podcasts may be a good introduction to this conversation:






whew, i've been a regular listener for a few years now, Greg has done so much on this topic! There are more, but i'm sure you can search around.

Greg has interviewed Chris O'Brien about cattle mutilations:

Take care and good luck with all that working! stephanie Q.
Andrew Johnson said…

Thanks for hosting the interview. Although we didn't get to discuss it, people can download my free eBook about 9/11 using this link.


Best Wishes

Andrew Johnson
Mel-iss-bee-ann said…
Hi Nick!

Autumn and I (you may remember her from a few episodes back) listened to the Eve Lorgen episode together. We came to the conclusion that Eve is probably a person who believes everything she hears, and therefore has no capacity to empathize with someone who does not. Your questions were concise and to the point, and only touched on personal issues a few times, and only when she mentioned the personal issues first. She doggedly dodged answering even what seemed like a simple question, "what is muscle testing?" It made us grateful to have the ability not to believe in things.

I can't imagine what it must be like to incorporate pieces of every theory one comes across into one's personal cosmology. A creative process, certainly, but also confusing. It allows for half-assed idea development, which is probably why she couldn't answer direct questions: she didn't know or hadn't even considered the questions herself.

I'm wondering if this is why you are feeling dissatisfied with exploring this particular subculture. Being a member, a "true believer," means that you have to take somethings on faith. I think Discordians take pride in having faith in nothing, believing nothing, and questioning everything. Anything that we might experience is up for examination. Sometimes the answer is, "I don't know." Uncertainty is a familiar, if occasionally uncomfortable, place to be. I'm wondering if you're dissatisfied with asking your interviewees "what if..." and they answer, "no, it is not like that." At some point in your questioning, you find something on which they won't budge. They can't entertain other possibilities, no matter how flexible and creative their mental gymnastics to get them to their conclusions in the first place.

Perhaps it's time to think about people you really enjoyed interviewing and see if they are doing anything interesting. Maybe a couple of joyfully challenging interviews will give you a better idea of where to take things. Personally, I really dug the short series (two or three) you had on current Discordians--Daisy Eris and John Higgs and such. I'm sure you will have your own favorites.
Rube Youngs said…
Hullo Nick!

I've been reacting very slowly to most of what the supposed thread of Van Allen belt radiation was, and that isn't a circular argument. The distances involved are very significant, and Earth's magnetic field is the thing which determines the distance. This is why Dr. Van Allen noted that the really dangerous zone is at distances of around 1000 miles outside of the atmosphere. 1000 miles = 1609 kilometers. The Moon is, on average, orbiting at 350,000 kilometers. In order to get to the Moon, the Apollo spacecraft had to be travelling at around 20 kilometers per second when near to the Earth, which is to say, shortly after launch. At that speed, it took over 80 hours to travel the distance, and the
really dangerous" radiation zone is not stretching from Earth all the way to the Moon.

This is not to say the astronauts didn't note many radiation effects on the various missions. Some of the later Apollo missions included studies inside and outside the Command Module; at least one astronaut ruined a television camera on the surface of the Moon, pointing it directly into the Sun. "Up Sun" is the terminology. Did they fake the non-existent Apollo 12 TV coverage, with all the photographs they took?

^ Apollo Surface Lunar Journal for Apollo 12. Loads of pictures with the same rock patterns in the background, because they were shooting sequential frames. Very Occam.

SYNT, and Hail Eris!

Popular Posts