The Devil's Advocate

Episode 26: A Response to Andy Coppock and Michelle Brown

by on Aug.10, 2011, under Podcast

This episode features Dave and Stephen with repeat guest John Keegan, responding to statements made by Michelle Brown concerning their alleged filing of a lawsuit against the Devil’s Advocate, and its hosts, as posted in, as well as

6 Comments for this entry

  • kay

    Another great show, guys! I remember listening to #6 and thinking-“hmmmmph-whatta scam, whatta scam!
    Seems their credentials and peer reviews are a bit lacking? Surprise , surprise!
    After listening to this show I am going with my first impression-for entertainment purposes only!
    Now I’m going back to listen to #6 again-I need a few yucks to round out the weekend!
    I may not comment for each show, but I listen to them all more than once. Love you’alls sense of humor!

  • kay

    OOPs, it was episode 9, not 6.

  • Administrator

    Thanks Kay!
    All we want to know is what where when and how. As observed, they seem lacking. We believe that extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence to back them up. While my own research lacks a formal peer review, it is posted on my website and I do get review from knowledgeable “peers” about my work. When applicable, it is added to the process, allowing me to refine my research and throw out the artifactual, and zero in on the factual. An official governing agency/organization that provides peer review for paranormal research is sorely needed. And about our sense of humor, you have to laugh at yourself, as well as the offereings being paraded as paranormal truths! When we lose the ability to laugh at ourselves, we lose all objectivity, IMHO.

  • Aanica

    David, you bring class to the paranormal podcast, great show

  • Vince

    This is an awesome podcast! We need more people like you making people accountable for what they say. Looks like you know a liar when you hear one. keep up the great work!

  • James

    I am much more interested in your research than in listenIng to you discredit an obvious charlatan. Who freaking cares. I understand what you guys are trying to do and I sympathize with you. Ive had several nasty email debates with the likes of Seth Shostick and I can tell you that he will dismiss your evidence regardless of it’s veracity or the way in which it was collected.
    As far as saying “we believe that extraordinary claims…….”, read this.

    You really should read the whole paper since you present yourselves as serious minded people trying to do serious research into anomalous phenomena in the hope that by dong so you and your research will be accepted by mainstream academia.
    A. Not sure it will be regardless
    B. Not sure you should care as much as you seem to.
    Mainstreamers have revealed themselves for what they truly are; narrow minded bigots that are money and agenda driven. The truth should be enough for you.
    I’m amazed by your research and there are plenty of reasonably intelligent, non-scientist members of JQ Public like me out there that can distinguish between what you are doing vs an Andy whatever his name or even between you and a James Randi or Neil deGrass Tyler.
    Keep it up fellas, I for one am loving hearing about the RESEARCH!

Leave a Reply

Looking for something?

Use the form below to search the site:

Still not finding what you're looking for? Drop a comment on a post or contact us so we can take care of it!