Art Bell

[SredniVashtar]

Is that so unusual an experience?  I think a great many people have seen shadows look & act in such a way that gives an impression of being intelligently directed, under circumstances where the viewer is unable to identify a prosaic object as casting the shadow.  The only rarity is the will to talk about the percept in those terms.  Art specializes in such discussions.

"A great many"?. That's helpfully vague. Well, a great many people believe lots of things, that doesn't give them any validity. We can see all kinds of things at night, but we usually look at them a bit longer and figure out that it wasn't Queen Victoria wearing a stetson, but a lump of wood. I have never heard anyone tell me they had seen an "intelligently directed" shadow. I think, if they did, my first reaction would be to ask them to see a doctor, and I think most people would do the same.

Small animals frequently cast such a gaze.  In fact I think something such as a mouse in the presence of a big animal such as a person would be likelier than not to stare at it.  Squirrels stare at me all the time.  If you're going to ask whether Art's in his right mind, you'd better come up with less commonplace evidence than that.

I have too many commitments and media appearances to bother myself with rodent-observation. Sure, I imagine that the reaction of a small animal confronted with a larger one, possibly a threat, would be to freeze. That's the most plausible explanation, one that most people would turn to. But why would Art, an intelligent man, claim that it was staring at him? There's an element of hysteria to that kind of reaction that is slightly troubling, if it is genuine and not simply for the airwaves.

[VtaGeezer]

Is that so unusual an experience?  I think a great many people have seen shadows look & act in such a way that gives an impression of being intelligently directed, under circumstances where the viewer is unable to identify a prosaic object as casting the shadow.  The only rarity is the will to talk about the percept in those terms.  Art specializes in such discussions.

Art not only specializes in such discussions, but by bringing the weird to national exposure through C2CAM, Bell virtually created shadow people, HAARP as a conspiracy, chemtrails, Nubiru, EVP, reverse speech, and any number of any other whacky/crank/cult manifestations as pop topics. Until C2CAM came along 20 years ago, only a few whackos had heard of these things, now they're part of the common idiom.  Art is highly skilled at projecting credible empathy, if not belief, and occasionally has shared a personal"experience".  The question is whether he's an entertainer, a reporter, or an advocate.  If he's a true advocate of this weirdness, there's a credibility issue in anything he says.

[CornyCrow]

The mouse - is this what it comes down to?  Look, I have worked with people with a sense of humour and might 'play' the incident with the mouse a bit.  Art has fun at times, but WITH us, not AT us. 

I see no reason why we should not take Art's observations at face value. 

Shadow people?  I've never seen one, but I have seen strange things that I don't talk about simply because of the sort of ridicule and suspicion that some here display. 

I think most folks tend to take the pronouncement of others at face value as long as they have no skin in the game.  I don't see any reason to question Art's observations.  Sometimes in life you have to be satisfied with a scarcity of information.  THere are things we will never know, and we must be content with that.  I'm sure there are lots of things that we don't know about each other.  We like to have some control over our public persona.   

[Richard Groyper]

Maybe not so much a stunt as being more a drama queen, to garner a sympathetic reception when he decides to call it a day...Perchance?

That's a possibility. In all fairness, Art, has a history of quitting. < (I'm not saying he will.) 

[GravitySucks]

Is that so unusual an experience?  I think a great many people have seen shadows look & act in such a way that gives an impression of being intelligently directed, under circumstances where the viewer is unable to identify a prosaic object as casting the shadow.  The only rarity is the will to talk about the percept in those terms.  Art specializes in such discussions.Small animals frequently cast such a gaze.  In fact I think something such as a mouse in the presence of a big animal such as a person would be likelier than not to stare at it.  Squirrels stare at me all the time. If you're going to ask whether Art's in his right mind, you'd better come up with less commonplace evidence than that.

There's a thread around here about C2C & MITD guests, judging whether they're legit, charlatans, deluded, or crazy.  Note that deluded & crazy are specified as distinct categories.  Given the evidence, different persons might come to different conclusions as to whether a phenomenon is paranormal.  Someone might have a pecuniary reason for stating a position on a certain side, and others may take a path in judgment that leads to a type of conclusion that they wouldn't come to were the topic something else, and the same person may have a mixture of such motiv'ns & fall partly in more than 1 of those 4 categories.  I wondered about John Keel too.

Given that someone does programs on sensational topics, that person's going to be used to presenting things in those terms.  I wouldn't expect it any other way.  In fact if Art didn't do so in the current case, the audience would tend to mentally discount the facts down to a level which was less sensational than is actually the case.

The FRIKKIN squirrels stare at you all of the time because they heard the chatter about what you do with dogs and cats.

[Richard Groyper]

The FRIKKIN squirrels stare at you all of the time because they heard the chatter about what you do with dogs and cats.

Beware of the 'traveling squirrel'.

[PB the Deplorable]

Replace 'Art Bell' with 'George Noory'; Do you take the same objective position? Take any personal view of either out of the equation.

I don't think the two are comparable. 

Noory has a lengthy history of telling personal stories that don't quite ring true.  They seem intended to make him sound fun, interesting, or heroic, but end up mostly just making him sound creepy.

[Uncle Duke]

Art Bell knows the truth (or does he if what SV says is true?), and he'll have his fandom support him slavishly, I get that, because some believe the sun shines out of his arse, and he's a deity. Neither is true. He's a bloke, a seventy year old bloke who has done radio. I can list several British (and one notable Irish) radio broadcasters of similar age with far more miles under their air wave belts than Art Bell. None of them are perfect, none of them are anything but human, with human frailties and foibles. We have one radio broadcaster who's standing joke is people telling him on air and in e mails 'I/we love the show'. It's a joke because he knows it's mainly sarcasm.

*polite round of applause*

I've posted about this before, but there is no question a double standard exists relative to Art and George.  For example, had George asked his "fans" to ambush call other talk shows to plug C2C or his lame TV program, the response here would have been riotous.  Similarly, had George spoken of "heroin chick" when mispronouncing "heroin chic", that flub would have been good for a screen or two of digs.  Conversely, had Art missed shows as a result of a molten pizza roll mishap, I'd have expected multiple posts wishing him a speedy recovery and advice to sue Totino.

I get it, this site is called "Bellgab" for a reason, and few would doubt which of the two men is the superior radio host. I also get how frustrating George's lack of preparation/critical thinking for his interviews can be, in fact it was that frustration that led me to find the then "CoastGab" in the first place.  What I don't understand is the nasty personal attacks and petty comments made about George in the Art v. George dynamic.  And yes, I have made the odd "Is it a portal?" crack, but I try to be even handed in criticizing George.....and Art for that matter.  Unfortunately even objective, constructively critical comments about Art draw "troll" and "PremRat" retorts. 

[VtaGeezer]

That's a possibility. In all fairness, Art, has a history of quitting. < (I'm not saying he will.) 

I really don't think it's a scenario for quitting (again).  I think, lacking any 3rd party input, it may be simply that one incident elicited a lot of listener interest, so maybe an ongoing scenario will be good for business.  My skepticism comes from the wife & child remaining in the house at night after two incidents.

[VtaGeezer]

Squirrels stare at me all the time.

6 ft
Squirrels always stare at 6 ft tall nuts.   

[SredniVashtar]

*polite round of applause*

I've posted about this before, but there is no question a double standard exists relative to Art and George.  For example, had George asked his "fans" to ambush call other talk shows to plug C2C or his lame TV program, the response here would have been riotous.  Similarly, had George spoken of "heroin chick" when mispronouncing "heroin chic", that flub would have been good for a screen or two of digs.  Conversely, had Art missed shows as a result of a molten pizza roll mishap, I'd have expected multiple posts wishing him a speedy recovery and advice to sue Totino.

That's a good point. Noory inspires a level of animosity totally out of proportion to his (numerous) shortcomings, and I have never been able to work out why. He's lazy, incompetent and dull, but that goes for people in all walks of life. I think it's a case of people piling on to an easy target most of the time. Just imagine if Noory had managed to glue his lips together! What a dumbass!

[Robert]

Of course it does. Very revealing.    It suggests (but correct me if I'm wrong) that for something to be valid, and trustworthy, someone has to be interested in it.

It certainly helps if the reporter is.  If I think they're just doing it for pay, then the reporter doesn't add much to the story's credibility.  OTOH, if they're too interested in it, that limits credibility too.

For example, how would you judge Art's credibility in his statements about the light therapy he takes for his back?  We know he does have, as he says, a really bad back.  He's getting paid to advertise the product.  However, there are plenty of products he could advertise instead, especially with the way he limits ad time on MITD.  Overall I think he sincerely believes the product works, and that does add a little to the credibility of the proposition that it really does work.  Very hard to judge with pain relieving products, especially for musculoskeletal pain.

We have one radio broadcaster who's standing joke is people telling him on air and in e mails 'I/we love the show'. It's a joke because he knows it's mainly sarcasm.

On "7 Second Delay" on WFMU, they usually used to prompt (on the air, because it's a joke) phoners-in, "You love the show, can't believe you got thru."

[Robert]

Sure, I imagine that the reaction of a small animal confronted with a larger one, possibly a threat, would be to freeze. That's the most plausible explanation, one that most people would turn to. But why would Art, an intelligent man, claim that it was staring at him? There's an element of hysteria to that kind of reaction that is slightly troubling, if it is genuine and not simply for the airwaves.

I'd describe it that way myself.  Seems a precise & accurate way to say it.  But then, people take all sorts of things funny, and sometimes things can be stated accurately but deliberately provocatively.  I got some people going a while ago here w statements about children & pets that somebody's either feigning or truthful about being creeped out about in another thread.

[PB the Deplorable]

*polite round of applause*

I've posted about this before, but there is no question a double standard exists relative to Art and George...

I'm not so sure.  Most gave George a chance at first, many spent several years hoping he would improve.  The 'George Noory Sucks' meme didn't start up until after the Ouija Board BS, which was well into George's tenure.

A double standard would be if they each had one or two flubs here or there, but that is not the case.  With George it's the sheer volume of it.  Then there's the disinterest, the lack of effort, and all the rest. 

George is not being singled out unfairly, although the Art-worship does go a bit overboard.

[Yorkshire pud]

*polite round of applause*

I've posted about this before, but there is no question a double standard exists relative to Art and George.  For example, had George asked his "fans" to ambush call other talk shows to plug C2C or his lame TV program, the response here would have been riotous.  Similarly, had George spoken of "heroin chick" when mispronouncing "heroin chic", that flub would have been good for a screen or two of digs.  Conversely, had Art missed shows as a result of a molten pizza roll mishap, I'd have expected multiple posts wishing him a speedy recovery and advice to sue Totino.

I get it, this site is called "Bellgab" for a reason, and few would doubt which of the two men is the superior radio host. I also get how frustrating George's lack of preparation/critical thinking for his interviews can be, in fact it was that frustration that led me to find the then "CoastGab" in the first place.  What I don't understand is the nasty personal attacks and petty comments made about George in the Art v. George dynamic.  And yes, I have made the odd "Is it a portal?" crack, but I try to be even handed in criticizing George.....and Art for that matter.  Unfortunately even objective, constructively critical comments about Art draw "troll" and "PremRat" retorts.

That's a good point. Noory inspires a level of animosity totally out of proportion to his (numerous) shortcomings, and I have never been able to work out why. He's lazy, incompetent and dull, but that goes for people in all walks of life. I think it's a case of people piling on to an easy target most of the time. Just imagine if Noory had managed to glue his lips together! What a dumbass!

Both of you of course say it far more diplomatically than I can do. Damn!

[CornyCrow]

It certainly helps if the reporter is.  If I think they're just doing it for pay, then the reporter doesn't add much to the story's credibility.  OTOH, if they're too interested in it, that limits credibility too.

For example, how would you judge Art's credibility in his statements about the light therapy he takes for his back?  We know he does have, as he says, a really bad back.  He's getting paid to advertise the product.  However, there are plenty of products he could advertise instead, especially with the way he limits ad time on MITD.  Overall I think he sincerely believes the product works, and that does add a little to the credibility of the proposition that it really does work.  Very hard to judge with pain relieving products, especially for musculoskeletal pain.On "7 Second Delay" on WFMU, they usually used to prompt (on the air, because it's a joke) phoners-in, "You love the show, can't believe you got thru."

ALternate therapies are sometimes universally helpful, but things like homeopathy really do help some people, and not others, and it seems to depend on something about the person and not the disorder.  There are things we just do not know yet. 

Anyone who gets head congestion, though, should really train themselves to use a neti pot.  God, all those years of suffering could have been alleviated for me. 

[Yorkshire pud]

It certainly helps if the reporter is.  If I think they're just doing it for pay, then the reporter doesn't add much to the story's credibility.  OTOH, if they're too interested in it, that limits credibility too.

For example, how would you judge Art's credibility in his statements about the light therapy he takes for his back?  We know he does have, as he says, a really bad back.  He's getting paid to advertise the product.  However, there are plenty of products he could advertise instead, especially with the way he limits ad time on MITD.  Overall I think he sincerely believes the product works, and that does add a little to the credibility of the proposition that it really does work.  Very hard to judge with pain relieving products, especially for musculoskeletal pain.On "7 Second Delay" on WFMU, they usually used to prompt (on the air, because it's a joke) phoners-in, "You love the show, can't believe you got thru."

As someone who has had a bad back most of my life (the last major episode had it spasm and hospitalised me) I can empathise with anyone who has similar problems. Cures? If someone showed me that rolling in cow shit while I was reciting Shakespeare worked, I'd go for it.

[Robert]

I've posted about this before, but there is no question a double standard exists relative to Art and George.  For example, had George asked his "fans" to ambush call other talk shows to plug C2C or his lame TV program, the response here would have been riotous.  Similarly, had George spoken of "heroin chick" when mispronouncing "heroin chic", that flub would have been good for a screen or two of digs.  Conversely, had Art missed shows as a result of a molten pizza roll mishap, I'd have expected multiple posts wishing him a speedy recovery and advice to sue Totino.

Sure, confirmation bias.  Positive feedback.  Halo & reverse halo effects.  Pretty standard in fandom.

Noory's given so much evidence that he's not interested in his work on C2C that it's easy to take his pronouncements of interest as insincere.

[Robert]

That's a good point. Noory inspires a level of animosity totally out of proportion to his (numerous) shortcomings, and I have never been able to work out why. He's lazy, incompetent and dull, but that goes for people in all walks of life. I think it's a case of people piling on to an easy target most of the time. Just imagine if Noory had managed to glue his lips together! What a dumbass!

He's lazy, possibly incompetent (though I think it's just lack of interest), and can be dull, and he's on a nationwide radio network replacing someone who did much, much better at it.  If he were just someone teaching a class we had to take, or somebody we had to do business with, or were a relative we saw a lot, it'd be par for the course, but his prominent position is what draws the lightning.

[Yorkshire pud]

He's lazy, possibly incompetent (though I think it's just lack of interest), and can be dull, and he's on a nationwide radio network replacing someone who did much, much better at it. 

And is that Noory's fault? I don't listen to Noory, I've heard him twice and don't care for him; but clearly some listen or he wouldn't be on the air. Sure, feel agrieved that Noory is doing Bell's former show, but live with it and move on and don't listen. Do people get like this when their girl/ boyfriend walks out and they discover the new squeeze isn't the same? Well, the news is, only identical twins can be the same, and even they can differ.

If he were just someone teaching a class we had to take, or somebody we had to do business with, or were a relative we saw a lot, it'd be par for the course, but his prominent position is what draws the lightning.

Don't listen to him then. There's on off button.

[SredniVashtar]

He's lazy, possibly incompetent (though I think it's just lack of interest), and can be dull, and he's on a nationwide radio network replacing someone who did much, much better at it.  If he were just someone teaching a class we had to take, or somebody we had to do business with, or were a relative we saw a lot, it'd be par for the course, but his prominent position is what draws the lightning.

I don't know that Noory has much name recognition beyond the initiated. Show a picture of Rush and most people would recognise him, but show a pic of Dave and most would be stumped, beyond guessing if he might be the new spokesman for NAMBLA. There is something else to the disdain, I think. I haven't listened to him for years because I gave up on him a long time ago; he wasn't going to get any better so it seemed like a waste of time to hear an idiot being lousy at his job. But there are many people who tune in specifically to be annoyed, which doesn't sound healthy to me.

[albrecht]

I have never heard anyone tell me they had seen an "intelligently directed" shadow. I think, if they did, my first reaction would be to ask them to see a doctor, and I think most people would do the same.

Assuming the person is intelligent and see his own shadow whilst walking wouldn't that shadow be "intelligently directed?" It changes shapes and even follows as one walks- you are directing it.

[Yorkshire pud]

Assuming the person is intelligent and see his own shadow whilst walking wouldn't that shadow be "intelligently directed?" It changes shapes and even follows as one walks- you are directing it.

Yes, but to not know it was your own shadow suggests a level of understanding that a new born child might have.

[Uncle Duke]

And is that Noory's fault? I don't listen to Noory, I've heard him twice and don't care for him; but clearly some listen or he wouldn't be on the air. Sure, feel agrieved that Noory is doing Bell's former show, but live with it and move on and don't listen. Do people get like this when their girl/ boyfriend walks out and they discover the new squeeze isn't the same? Well, the news is, only identical twins can be the same, and even they can differ.

Don't listen to him then. There's on off button.

I've come to the conclusion my talk radio listening habits are different than most.  Regardless of who the host is, the individual show topic/guest has to be one I am interested in.  Note I said "interested in", not "agree with". Art interviewing some pixie dust and moonbeams new ager?  Won't even turn it on.  George interviewing Nick Pope or Kevin Randall?  I'm there.  Hell, I'd listen to Falkie if he had the GIS folks on playing new EVPs.

The are two exceptions to the above.  I will not listen to Michael Savage, period.   On the other hand, John Batchelor's news driven show is a must listen for me, although I don't get to listen live as much as I'd like.

[SredniVashtar]

Assuming the person is intelligent and see his own shadow whilst walking wouldn't that shadow be "intelligently directed?" It changes shapes and even follows as one walks- you are directing it.

No. The shadow is accompanying you, it has no volition of its own. What was suggested was that a shadow was moving around independently of anything else.

[Dateline]

Here I am staring at all of you.  Mice do stare.  Art wins.

[albrecht]

No. The shadow is accompanying you, it has no volition of its own. What was suggested was that a shadow was moving around independently of anything else.

So you are daring to claim that Norry's "shadow rodents" were simply shadows caused by rodents? How do you explain a phenomena I just heard about....wait for it....."white shadow animals!"
http://shadowanimals.homestead.com/shadowanimalsitings.html
(Note, in keeping with C2C official policy, this website uses web-design techniques from early-90's.)

[chefist]

This whole site started as "GNS"... That will always have singularity on BG...

[Yorkshire pud]

So you are daring to claim that Norry's "shadow rodents" were simply shadows caused by rodents? How do you explain a phenomena I just heard about....wait for it....."white shadow animals!"
http://shadowanimals.homestead.com/shadowanimalsitings.html
(Note, in keeping with C2C official policy, this website uses web-design techniques from early-90's.)

A very brief look at the site and I have an answer. Hallucinogenics.

[trostol]

but we usually look at them a bit longer and figure out that it wasn't Queen Victoria wearing a stetson, but a lump of wood

that sir..is an image i will never get out of my head now