Jim Sparks

[Tom Levine]

Well, I stayed up late last night, and listened to the Jim Sparks interview on Coast to Coast AM with Art Bell, in its entirety.

Without getting into a long recap of the show, let me just say that I didn't hear any big surprises last night. Primarily, it was a rehashing of everything Mr. Sparks has said already. Art Bell is still infatuated with him, the aliens still want to clean up the planet, they still taught Mr. Sparks the galactic alphabet, and Mr. Sparks is still morphing his analysis into an ET/Time Travelling/Inter-dimensional orgy of Grey workers, True Greys, multi-raced reptilians, USA Military, and I think I even heard him throw a nordic and a hybrid in there as well. Bottom line: If you heard the last interview on C2C, or if you listened to the interview on Kevin Smiths' show from back in Nov-06 (which is available via podcast), then you're up to speed, and you missed nothing really from last night.

There was one phone call at the end, which spoke directly to me. A gentleman called, and found Mr. Sparks claims hard to believe, much to the surprise of Mr. Bell. This caller asked if Mr. Sparks would submit to a myriad of different polygraph exams. Mr. Sparks response was that he understands healthy skepticism, and he thinks that's good, and yes, he would subject himself to a polygraph.

I'm so glad this call came through last night. This is exactly what I'm saying. While my description above may make it seem like I'm a party-pooper in the paranormal realm, I'm not. I think my temperament is like many: I am open-minded about the paranormal, and I will listen to anyone make any claim. But, I review the subject with a very healthy dose of skeptical cynicism.

Mr. Sparks is an amazing interview on the radio. I enjoy him, frankly, and his story mesmerizes me, as I'm sure it does many. But, guys like him have come and gone. If he is telling the truth, then this story is huge. If he is not, then he is a fraud who must be exposed. Either way, evidence needs to be built beyond only his testimony. From that, we can move forward, or away from, Mr. Jim Sparks.

I think he should be subjected to one, or many, polygraph exams. I think he should be interviewed on TheParacast. I think one, or several, UFO researchers out there, absolutely need to jump on this thing, and challenge Mr. Sparks to live up to his word, as given on Coast to Coast AM last night.

Let's begin building some facts, as to whether or not we should be interested in what Jim Sparks has to say.

t

[The Hawk]

There's a lot of ignorance about lie detection tests . Even the best of the best of the best in the field say at most it's 90-95% accurate done by a really good polygraph examiner.
10% is a HUGE margin of error!
People who fall into that 10% become cursed as such, when
they dont' deserve it.
Don't listen to that Maury Povich bull..
And btw Travis Walton's test doesn't mean squat; in those days polygraph tests were even less accurate.

[Tom Levine]

Originally Posted by The Hawk

There's a lot of ignorance about lie detection tests . Even the best of the best of the best in the field say at most it's 90-95% accurate done by a really good polygraph examiner.
10% is a HUGE margin of error!
People who fall into that 10% become cursed as such, when
they dont' deserve it.
Don't listen to that Maury Povich bull..
And btw Travis Walton's test doesn't mean squat; in those days polygraph tests were even less accurate.

Hey, let's back up for a second.

First of all, Jim Sparks, and his claims, need to be investigated. Forget about the polygraph for a second. This guy is making extrordinary claims, and it requires extraordinary evidence. Heck, I'll even settle for boring evidence. But personally, I think it's a mistake to sit back and let someone get away with what is potentially fraud. Look, if Mr. Sparks is telling the truth, then there's nothing wrong with selling a book and making a profit. But, if he is NOT telling the truth, then he is committing fraud, and I don't believe that's a victimless crime.

And with that said, I'm not claiming that Mr. Sparks is lying. I'm not claiming that he is, in fact committing fraud. But, I am saying that he is making some very wild, very incredible claims. If we sit back and do nothing, but simply buy it as either the truth, or as entertainment, then THAT, my friend, is truly an ignorant act. At least it is on my part, speaking for myself.

So, as to polygraphs. Mr. Sparks has already AGREED to take one, or several, in his interview last night. What's wrong with moving that process forward? I agree with you, that polygraphs are not 100% accurate. I think the 10% you claim as inaccurate could be fiercly debated (I think I've read it's more like 3%, but anyway), We can agree that certainly, it's not 100% accurate. So what does that mean? Well, in a court of law, that means that these tests are inadmissable. But, in the court of public opinion, I will have to disagree with you. It is fair game. Let's allow a polygraph expert to tell us what the deviation is, and perhaps, we can counter-balance that with a multitude of tests, and even a multitude of polygraph experts. But, to simply ignore Mr. Sparks agreement to take a polygraph? Well, that's just plain stupid. Let's see it through.

And, a polygraph isn't really my whole point on this thread:

A polygraph (or several) would be one avenue. But also, does he still possess that black, sticky goo in a jar he described to Art Bell last night, the gift that the Greys gave him, which allegedly came from his blackened smokers lungs? Also, what about that other eye-witness from the last interview at a mass-abduction? Can this person come forward, corroborate his testimony, and even perhaps subject himself to a polygraph, and provide any physical or circumstantial evidence that he might have? What about the ex-wife? Can she be interviewed to validate his descriptions of past experiences? What about other family and friends that certainly were around at the time of these experiences? Can they be brought forward for testimony? Given the nature of Mr. Sparks claims, all outlined in his public testimony, and in his written book, all of this is fair game to investigate.

So, my point is this: Mr. Sparks needs to be investigated.

One final point. Let's talk specifics about Travis Walton. There was a second polygraph, sponsored by skeptic Jerry Black, and performed by polygraph expert Cy Gilson, in 1993, using newer, more modern technology. I'll let the experts words speak for themselves, as quoted here:

"...The computer*based analysis returned a posterior probability of truthfulness of .964 in the first series, and a .961 in the second series. These indicating that charts like these produced in each series, by Mr. Walton, are produced by truthful examinees 96% of the time..."

And those are the facts, my friend.

[redalton]

If anyone runs across a link to the follow-up interview on C2C with Jim Spark please post it. I was not able to listen to the live broadcast either.

I am still looking forward to hearing him on the Paracast with Gene and David. I do find his story fascinating - it has all the great makings of a SCI-FI movie. Either he has been the victim of some life altering experiences - with some very incredible revolutions. Or he is delusional at best - and it is really not healthy to encourage the mentally ill. To his credit he is willing to subject himself to polygraphs - and open to entertaining skepticism, which is more then I can say about some people we have heard from before.

[David Biedny]

You can listen to the last 8 weeks or so of C2C here:

http://www.cjob.com/station/audiovault_preview.aspx

I've been listening to the the interview from last night, and you'll be happy to know that the entities are really, really interested in...

Hats.

We'll have an interesting talk with Mr. Sparks, rest assured.

dB

[The Hawk]

To David:

Yeah the hat thing doesn't surprise me actually.
I've read a dozen or so abduction account's with grays actually showing up with hats on. Then there's for example Jeff Ritzmann's experiences with the black bedsheets and whatnot ending with a gray/or similar species showing up in his room with a hat on. Or Whitley Strieber's encounter with a gray that had a hat on. And at least one of Jim Sparks own experiences included a gray with a hat on.

To Tomlevine1 and whoever:

I'm not saying he shouldn't take polygraphs I'm just pointing out not to put much faith in them. For the Travis Walton case and with Jim Sparks. The more polygraphs they could put Jim Sparks through the better.
For me from what I know of polygraphs it would take about 3+ all in a row passing or 3+ all in a row fail from various expert examiners to persuade me much in either direction. Even then I would say dont' be quick to label completely credible or completely not credible.

Polygraphs aside I find his story is quite a powerful one consistent with the majority of credible abductees (by grays) on many nuances. To make it all up and be that accurate he would had to have studied the phenomenon pretty well. And I can't imagine a motive other than attention grabbing combined with a possible environmental protection motive?

He certainly didn't pick the optimum way of pushing such an agenda and he let his book sit in limbo for 8 years. If he's a liar he's quite the accomplished one and possibly worth listening to anyways (as a story) if one wants a pieced together abduction story with all the details normally associated with grays. Not to give a positive spin to liars but we don't know either way, and we will probably never know as is with most abductees.

People need to understand that IF the phenomenon is real and is really happening to millions of people then unfortunately the one piece of true understanding that we do seem to have is that the abductors have absolute control and the evidence of this; is the LACK OF EVIDENCE.

Therefore we can deduce that if Jim Sparks is a real abductee then his ability to truly prove himself will probably be just about as worthless as a non abductee who made it all up. Though admittedly, if anyone has a good chance at getting evidence it should be someone in his position (assuming that position is real).

[Aaron LeClair]

Originally Posted by David Biedny

You can listen to the last 8 weeks or so of C2C here:

http://www.cjob.com/station/audiovault_preview.aspx

I've been listening to the the interview from last night, and you'll be happy to know that the entities are really, really interested in...

Hats.

We'll have an interesting talk with Mr. Sparks, rest assured.

dB

Thanks a billion for the link.

I couldn't figure out how to listen to Art's show however. Do you have to join to do so?

[Tom Levine]

Originally Posted by David Biedny

You can listen to the last 8 weeks or so of C2C here:

http://www.cjob.com/station/audiovault_preview.aspx

I've been listening to the the interview from last night, and you'll be happy to know that the entities are really, really interested in...

Hats.

We'll have an interesting talk with Mr. Sparks, rest assured.

dB

LOL! Yes, right! I forgot about the hats.

Boy, I'd love to hear Mr. Sparks interviewed on TheParacast. I enjoy you guys immensely.
Sincerely, t

[redalton]

Thanks for the Link David - I am looking forward to the upcoming interview and some challenging questions for Mr. Sparks. Something tells me Art Bell didn't challenge Jim anymore this time around then he did on the previous show.

All the same I am still interested in listening to the follow-up interview.

[Tom Levine]

Originally Posted by The Hawk

To David:

Yeah the hat thing doesn't surprise me actually.
I've read a dozen or so abduction account's with grays actually showing up with hats on. Then there's for example Jeff Ritzmann's experiences with the black bedsheets and whatnot ending with a gray/or similar species showing up in his room with a hat on. Or Whitley Strieber's encounter with a gray that had a hat on. And at least one of Jim Sparks own experiences included a gray with a hat on.

To Tomlevine1 and whoever:

I'm not saying he shouldn't take polygraphs I'm just pointing out not to put much faith in them. For the Travis Walton case and with Jim Sparks. The more polygraphs they could put Jim Sparks through the better.
For me from what I know of polygraphs it would take about 3+ all in a row passing or 3+ all in a row fail from various expert examiners to persuade me much in either direction. Even then I would say dont' be quick to label completely credible or completely not credible.

Polygraphs aside I find his story is quite a powerful one consistent with the majority of credible abductees (by grays) on many nuances. To make it all up and be that accurate he would had to have studied the phenomenon pretty well. And I can't imagine a motive other than attention grabbing combined with a possible environmental protection motive?

He certainly didn't pick the optimum way of pushing such an agenda and he let his book sit in limbo for 8 years. If he's a liar he's quite the accomplished one and possibly worth listening to anyways (as a story) if one wants a pieced together abduction story with all the details normally associated with grays. Not to give a positive spin to liars but we don't know either way, and we will probably never know as is with most abductees.

People need to understand that IF the phenomenon is real and is really happening to millions of people then unfortunately the one piece of true understanding that we do seem to have is that the abductors have absolute control and the evidence of this; is the LACK OF EVIDENCE.

Therefore we can deduce that if Jim Sparks is a real abductee then his ability to truly prove himself will probably be just about as worthless as a non abductee who made it all up. Though admittedly, if anyone has a good chance at getting evidence it should be someone in his position (assuming that position is real).

I think we have some common ground: Your sentiment on polygraphs is definitely noted. It would be scary foolish to hang your hat (pun intended) on something as circumstantial as a polygraph. I also agree in the wisdom of using caution, when it comes to labeling others with absolutes (such as completely credible or uncredible based on one or several polygraphs). I also agree that Mr. Sparks story is compelling, and that's why, perhaps, it intrigues me to the point of discussion on this forum. Furthermore, your analysis of possible Mr. Sparks explanations is interesting and insightful, as is your thoughts on the general subject of the phenomenon at large.

With that framework in mind, a thorough investigation should still be pursued into the empirical facts of the Jim Sparks story. While evidence may be elusive in cases like this, it's still necessary, and the primary role of 3rd party independent investigators.

We have folks like Stan Friedman and Richard Dolan, and even Budd Hopkins for example. We have Linda Moulton Howe and UFOMAG, and even our friend Royce Myers. All of them add a dimension to these cases, that allow us to examine them beyond the single testimony of one individual. All of them gather different information, different facts, from different angles.

Hopefully, once all of it is gathered and ultimately presented in various books, articles, and media appearances, we will be in a better position to judge Mr. Sparks claims. Just looking at the polygraph alone would be a mistake. But, add it to a growing body of evidence gathered from various 3rd parties, and I think it all contributes to the whole picture. That whole picture in the end, will likely be comprised of shades of grey (no pun intended), but that's okay. At least our depth of understanding Jim Sparks and his claims will be enhanced and enlightened.