Brian Jones Experiment!

Once they're interested in you, it seems THEY decide when they want to talk to you rather than the other way around.

That makes sense. It would work just like communication between two living, intelligent beings.

I think it says "Steven Cannot Hear Us Because He Thinks It's a Lie".

Perhaps not a lie, but skepticism. The scientific method demands that one not draw conclusions from insufficient or questionable data.

I have been following the SPIRICOM work for a while also, though for different reasons. I hope, at some point, to attempt to replicate the experiments on my own to gather further data.

--
The Doctor [412/724/301/703]

......and I am sure that is how Stephen feels also! :) I feel the same way as well, and that is why we have so much work to do. But maybe that is the fundamental problem here. If you are so dead set in your ways, you alter the chemical make-up of you brain and "filter" these voices out. I think in this case with what happened Monday, the issue lies on more of the technical end though.

But maybe that is the fundamental problem here. If you are so dead set in your ways, you alter the chemical make-up of you brain and "filter" these voices out.

That would thus alter the electrical activity of the human brain, which could interact with electromagnetic fields in the vicinity.

--
The Doctor [412/724/301/703]
Antarctica Starts Here.

Doc, we need to get a drink together sometime. :) Very interesting angle, and it is a theory!! :)

<laughter>

I get the feeling that if we do get together, little drinking but much discussion will go on.

--
The Doctor [412/724/301/703]
Antarctica Starts Here.

It’s funny. I listened to the Sunday show, and when Scott said that they were having the bonus show with Brian on Monday because an EVP said October 9th is your night, I thought, well maybe Brian should have been somewhere else that night and now he’s going to miss his night and he’ll never know why.

Then listening to the show; early on, the 5th guest said October 9th is no longer the night (yes Scott I herd it too) and I thought, see I know he should have been somewhere else. Never try and make fate happen, it will happen or it won’t.

Then again, the 5th guest showed up so I can't think about what better could have happened. :)

Anyway, it was a great show guys.

_________________________________________________________________

"Thinking outside the pine box."
Nathan Schoonover

" "Science is facts; just as houses are made of stones, so is science made of facts; but a pile of stones is not a house and a

Yeah Avid! I mean, I am never sold on anything nowadays, but, man, the feeling I got when I heard that voice on the show was like nothing I have ever felt. I am not saying I was possessed or anything like that, but my gut was telling me something. There still is a lot of investigating to do though.

I respect Dr. Rorke in the highest degree because he can come on our show twice and do about 3 solid hours of giving us reasons why Spiricom never happened, but still be able to come on the show this past Monday and be part of whatever it was that happened. :)

Usually when I try to interpret my own recordings I try to figure out several things it could possibly be then narrow it down. I didn't bother typing up all the times it said BRIAN because those are rather clear, and numerous. This is what I've come up with:

17:07 BRIANS NIGHT TONIGHT (or they're saying the same thing's I listed for 17:15, repeating themselves)
17:15 TONIGHTS YOUR NIGHT TONIGHT (or)
BRIANS NIGHT TONIGHT (or)
NOT YOUR NIGHT TONIGHT
18:28- I AM HERE
24:52 DID YOU CATCH ALL THIS?
24:55 ALRIGHT (OR) I'M TIRED (Stressing the I in tired)
25:18 HI (OR) brIan (Is cut out exept for I in his name
26:04 OCTOBER THE NINETH IS NO LONGER THE NIGHT

My guess as to what the final voice's message is that it might have a different meaning than we are interpreting. The way it is interpreted now is they were going to do something and changed their mind midway through. We were expecting something amazing to happen. It did. I think this is their way of saying they are done talking to you for tonight. They did it. They made it his night, as this was the night to talk to them. I think it means this is their way of saying goodbye we're done for tonight, because the voices stop for the most part after that.

~Avid
http://avidlebon.deviantart.com/

PS: Off topic, I wonder if Dr Rorke has any opinions on the Hutchison Effect... From all the videos I've seen it reminds me of the making of "Apollo 13" with a few other...techniques.

I also made a timeline of 12 voice appearances. I clipped out the appearances and put them in a zip file.

The timeline I wrote is below. Note that the 12 appearances correspond to the time-coded entries of the timeline.

---------Time line (minutes:seconds into the 128k archive)-------------
7:52 & 7:54 -- While Brian was talking. One syllable, repeated.

We ask Dr. Rorke if he was hearing that. He wasn't.

8:41 & 8:43 -- While Doug was talking first, then while Brian was talking. One syllable, repeated.

We ask Dr. Rorke again if he hears these things. He doesn't. He hears a popping sound (which we're familiar with), but not a voice/quack/scrape.

9:55 to 9:56 -- Again, one syllable, repeated, while Doug & ScottL are talking.

10:12 & 10:14 -- Again, one syllable, repeated, while Doug & ScottL are talking. Only now, Brian thinks it may have said his name.

11:53 & 11:55 -- One syllable, repeated, while Brian was talking.

15:56 & 15:58 -- One syllable, repeated, while Brian was talking.

17:06 through 17:09 -- About 3 syllables, unclear.

17:15 through 17:17 -- About 5 syllables, unclear.

Dr. Rorke is concerned it may be the wire on his headset. ScottL turns his cell phone off. (Doug's cell phone is already off because we're supposed to have them off during a show.)

The phone line for us is crystal clear, but it's breaking up for Brian and Dr. Rorke, so we take a break and play an indie music selection submitted by an independent band.

During the break, we hang up and redial Dr. Rorke and Brian in hopes of getting a better line for them to hear us. We ask Brian and he says it's still choppy for him. We find we have lost Dr. Rorke.

24:47 through 24:57 -- Multiple appearances.

25:12 -- Two words, unclear.

25:16 -- A single word. Clear. Doug interpreted it in real time.

We decide to get Dr. Rorke back on the line while still broadcasting. Before ScottL can do that, though...

26:05 through 26:08 -- A complete, clear sentence. The sentence is whispered and well enunciated. It seems to refer to a recording taken over a month prior to October 9th that inspired us to talk to Brian and Dr. Rorke on October 9th, 2006. ScottL interpreted it in real time. Dr. Rorke was not on the line at the time because ScottL did not have time to do that before the sentence was heard.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

~~==- Doug -==~~
Phone: +1 (586) 222-1397
co-host, Ghostly Talk
panelist, Paranormal Minds
fan of everything Indie

Thanks for the lengthy analysis. I didn't detect a question.

I had hoped that this would be as good a place as any to answer questions about the event. A sort of a brainstorming of ghost hunters, if you will.

Regarding the sound levels of the caller...we had Dr. Rorke extremely loud and Brian extremely soft. Perhaps you could assist the old and newfangled telcos in solving such issues (which happen with great regularity regardless of the characteristic of being broadcast/recorded). Additionally, our levels are set so the caller can hear us. We would lose all interactivity with the guest(s) if we set our levels to normal because the caller would not be able to hear us. Send us an Innkeeper and we'll gladly replace the Gentner.

~~==- Doug -==~~
Phone: +1 (586) 222-1397
co-host, Ghostly Talk
panelist, Paranormal Minds
fan of everything Indie

Max, I can read your technobabble. Using $3 words and $11 phrasing is not uncommon in the circles amongst which I travel.

And I am offended.

You have officially ticked off someone who is not quick to anger--someone who is diplomatic oftentimes to a fault.

I leave it to you to do the right thing.

~~==- Doug -==~~
Phone: +1 (586) 222-1397
co-host, Ghostly Talk
panelist, Paranormal Minds
fan of everything Indie

Hey Doug!

It's perfectly fine that you mod me down (make my comments invisible, only showing your responses on the Oct 9th page) and publicly reinforcing both your largely-emotional response, and denigrating my participation by reference to some dollar-value measure (which actually seems very generous, as it happens).

What is genuinely a bit sad, however, is that this should be the treatment given to someone who is throwing critical light upon a situation which could clearly be either a hoax, or a genuine instance of anomalous activity.

As you'll likely agree (later on, possibly, when you are not so annoyed with me) your emotional response will probably incline the dispassionate observer towards the possibility of the former, rather than the latter.

I know how cool-headed you are, and am a little surprised that I've earned your ire.

For what it is worth, also, I respect you and the GT crew a great deal, have never deviated from my positive feedback re the show (apart from the long-running level mismatches, as discussed) and actually would prefer to be publicly sidelined, because of my views, by the leadership of a given group (like this one, and like you) rather than simply fall into line with the prevailing emotional groupthink for the sake of inclusion.

You know, I think, that I am not some cold-hearted skeptic (view my very open-minded discussion elsewhere) but I am conscious of the fact that Dr Rorke has - in the past - drawn a controversial line in the sand regarding his critical views re EVP and ITC, and I can't help noting that the Oct 9th episode did seem to be doling out some kind of 'measure' to the good doctor, as his evident frustration and "I'm over this" tone seemed to indicate. That is interesting, for a number of possible reasons including one which allows for an entirely paranormal explanation to the 'fifth caller' phenomenon.

You still, I note, have not engaged with the intentionally-chilling information, discussed in my modded comments, re Dr Rorke's 'aliveness' being called into question.

So, if what I've written has caused irritation, or offense, that is unfortunate but - because my argument is that the uncontrolled aspects of the October 9th show mitigate against the likelihood of this being a genuinely paranormal phenomenon - I will have to stick by my words.

All the best in the meanwhile, Doug, and thanks for your time.

Hi Max,

I am going to keep this as brief as possible because I can generally get my point across in a couple of sentences as opposed to a couple of paragraphs. Here is the bottom line. I have to say that I LOVE to read your comments and opinions. That is what Ghostly Talk and the infrastructure of this site is built upon. You have presented some great ideas from what I have read. But then you finish off your "I call 'probable hoax' but..." posting on this thread with this:

"I have to say that this episode is a perfect example of the tendency for the GT crew to sweeten their own voices at the apparent expense of the phoned-up guests: Jones was about a third as loud/clear/bassy/penetrating as the hosts."

Yes Max, you are soooo correct!! It is our primary goal to take every chance we get to "sweeten" our own voices and drowned out our guest. It is something we have spent years perfecting and Doug and I sit down after EVERY show laughing at how much louder we are than the guest. It is a new fetish amongst the Paranormal Talk show host community as a result of us losing a couple members by that whole freaky autoerotic asphyxiation craze from not too long ago. Much safer don't you think?

"Although I realize that the GT crew are presumably boosting the gain on the guest inputs as much as possible, it may be appropriate for them to sacrifice the gain on their own inputs (and perhaps boosting the output levels) so that listeners are not constantly riding the volume throughout the show...

Presumably? Oh crap!! The jig is up!! You got us Max. We have been lying the whole time! There really is no difference at all between the conditions and dynamics of each person we call or whom calls us to talk on the show. It's all a conspiracy to "sweeten" our voices, as you say.

Let's get a few facts straight, and believe me, they are facts:

1) We have ONE phone line as of right now. This will be changing very soon.

2) In order to have 2 people on like we did on Monday, we have to conference the 2 callers together on our telephone and then patch them into the Gentner that goes through the board. We have NO control of who is going to be louder or softer between the 2 callers we conference like this. Until we get multiple lines, this will be an issue, cope with it or buy us an innkeeper.

3) From the hours of laboring over our board trying to find the best way to even things out, it still comes to pass every show that when a guest comes on the show, they cannot hear us, our internal phone volume is cranked to 10, the only other alternative is to boost up our volume levels a bit, so that the GUEST can hear us and we have some interactivity, god forbid!

4) You also have to worry about boosting the levels too much, because too hot of a signal produces this thing call "feedback". It has happened a couple times when I was trying to boost the phoned-up guests signal so they could be louder. OOPS, did I just say that? Oh yeah, I did, I WAS TRYING TO BOOST THE PHONED-UP GUESTS SIGNAL SO THEY COULD BE LOUDER!

5) The Gentner, that was so graciously donated to us by our dear dear dear friend, the mighty Scott K. has done us a great job for the last year and 8 months, but I am convinced it is on it's last leg, upgrade time!

6) Ironically, I was contacted on Tuesday night by one of our affiliates who we had a discussion about our levels with just last week, as a matter of fact. This affiliate informed me that Monday's show "sounded great" and that he/she was very excited about that. I immediately called Doug and informed him of this because I was excited about this news and new he would be also because that information was coming from a VERY reputable source. Strange, don't you think that we are discussing this now?

I want to make it very clear Max, that Doug (and I for that matter) are in no way annoyed about your OPINION on the events that unfolded this past Monday. In fact, I myself, was very excited to see your feedback. We are annoyed at a direct attack you publicly posted here disrespecting the both of us and also calling us liars. Remember Max, Perception Is Everything. I personally think, that if you just could have phrased things a bit differently and dropped the melodrama by about 3 notches, we would be discussing the control factors you mentioned as opposed to us having to justify the sound output of our show.

One last thing, as I have spent much more time than I wanted to on this post already. The "MOD" system on this site is controlled the same way by everyone, if you are "Trolled" down, someone can "Interesting" you back up so that the post will be viewed like the rest of the posts in this thread. As Doug says, it is a very Democratic system, and I agree. So, ANYONE can "MOD" anyone's post, it has nothing to do with who is an Admin on this site or not. I really hope we can put this issue to rest now and move on with what we are trying to do here:

- Exploring The Unexplained
- Discussing The Unexplained
- Having Fun!! :)

I look forward to your future feedback Max!

Hi ScottL,

Thanks for the feedback.

I have no real issue with anything you've written here, except for two points, which I will put here for the record.

The first is that I would calmly and firmly dispute any suggestion that my comments have been disrespectful in any way, to you or anyone else associated with GT. I am assuming that the emotional responses which have been directed toward me are a result of the word 'hoax' being used, at all. It is worth noting that I have been discussing the possibility of hoaxing, as well as the possibility of actual paranormal activity, firstly, and that the limited ways by which a hoaxing of this kind might occur may actually result in the possibility that you and Doug have actually been victims of a hoax. (I don't claim this has happened, you will note. I suggest it is possible.) Note also that my detailed commentary equally allows for the possibility that the unusual forms of paranormal activity which seem to accompany your guest Mr Jones may actually be a potential area of research. Since this seems to have been one of his stated goals during the interview, this should be welcome, I imagine, by him at the very least.

The second is that the heavy sarcasm that accompanies your reply is clearly intentional, and (from a psychological perspective) is likely intended to provide you with some emotional relief which you feel is warranted in the situation, and perhaps also to frame the general run of third-party responses aimed towards me in this instance, given your leadership position, here. As mentioned to Doug, I will have to reply that this kind of emotionally-centred response is not characteristic of the dispassionate researcher, but of an emotionally-invested stakeholder in a given situation. As noted, this is natural, in the circumstances, and I certainly don't hold it against you. (A good part of the charm of GT is the emotional content and personalities of the hosts.) Problem is, from the perspective of the interested but emotionally-removed observer like myself, this same emotionality mitigates against one's ability to view the Oct 9th events as being genuine. In these circumstances - as I hardly need to write - one has to ask the question: do the emotional responses of the participants in a potentially-anomalous phenomenon indicate that they have crossed over into the group of people that are best described as 'believers,' or as still-rational doubters who are primarily interested in solid evidence and the examination of procedure?

I stand by my statement that there are too many uncontrolled aspects to the described setting for this series of anomalies, and that this makes any kind of theorising difficult, if not impossible.

Thanks for the detailed technical information regarding the GT bridge-calling setup, and the explanation for the level mismatches (although I've said enough about the accompanying, and needless, sarcasm above) which is exactly the kind of relevant information which a technically-minded observer like myself is most interested in when potentially-anomalous situations like this emerge.

I refer you, as I did Doug, to the still-pending discussion regarding the 'hissper'-type voice's statements re Dr Rorke's 'liveliness' in the ITC recordings played during the show in question. This is one of the key pieces of the phenomenon, in my opinion, and it really does need to be addressed, I feel.

In all, this has been a very interesting psychological and sociological episode, if not - necessarily - a paranormal one.

At this point, how could anyone know for sure?

Hi Doug!

Interesting stuff.

Also, it would be nice to get everyone on some hard copper lines next time. Cellnet tech is iffy.

Also, it would be nice to have remote recordings at Dr Rorke's and Mr Jones' locations also;
- call bridge recording
- remote participant recording
- plus ideally input level graphs

Complicated stuff.

Nice work, in the meanwhile, D!

I still find it amazing that so many paranormal researchers, investigators and enthusiasts still know nothing of the research in the ITC field. This research has been going on for nearing 40 years with many thousands of hours of recorded contacts (direct two-way communications). There are short spurts of time in its history where the subject will receive a lot of attention and public excitement. Then the nay-sayers raise their ugly little heads. I have never...ever seen a skeptic change his or her mind, no matter what evidence is presented to them. They will always find some argument (even fabricated) to denounce and debunk a phenomenon.

I read Max's critical comments and he makes some good points but his accusatory tone is what is so offensive. Let me let you in on a little secret that will always ring true for ITC and contacts beyond the veil, earthly science will never explain it. Scientific types hold on to these laws so tightly, even when those “laws” are constantly being torn apart by new discoveries in subtle energy fields. The advent of quantum physics nearly destroyed classical Newtonian physics. Laws that were once absolutes had to be changed to include new phenomenon being reported in laboratories all over the world. As our technology gets more advanced the bigger our universe becomes because we can sense more of it.

The contacts can only happen when initiated by the non-physical entities that operate on a completely different set of scientific laws. This "we are the center of the universe" mentality has never been sloughed off by human beings, thinking that the rules we have created to explain our environment and the apparent reality surrounding us are the ONLY explanations for existence. Yet they still cannot explain consciousness and I’m relatively sure that it exists.

People who want to pursue this kind of research need to associate with people who are supportive and who will enhance your experience, not someone who you have to argue every point with and waste your energy trying to convince them. Once you surround yourself with this harmonious atmosphere, you will have some truly incredible experiences that will be really hard for even you to believe. Remember attitude is everything and like attracts like!

Sorry if this seems to be rambling and jumpy, but I was trying to touch on a lot of points without writing a book.

Frank

You know that is really clever! I never made the connection. Wow, that is an interesting angle to look at it from.

I just got to listen to the show today. Very intense. Great show, can't wait till next week's show.