Constructive criticism Curt. When someone gets offended like this, apologise and rephrase. Do not say, "Well I'm just asking questions from the feed". Nobody is saying things are off limits, but you need some emotional intelligence when dealing with people like this. Linda has probably had to defend herself her whole career. All the best mate.
Couldn’t agree more.. to have someone of her caliber should be honored. I understand asking questions but by reading questions from the “feed” like that takes the personal ambience away from what your trying to do which in most cases to the guest it makes them feel like your more interested in asking questions and disinterested in the answers given. Cheers..
Hi Curt. This was a collision of old journalism and new journalism. She just sees you and doesn't understand the nature of this interview. If you had said "There are 238 people watching us right now and they are submitting questions." Then later explain that "Our audience has voted on the questions submitted and THEY want ME to ask YOU...X,Y&Z." I think she would have been more understanding.
@@jackclements2163 JC in a canoe ;( Look at your playlist. (All your bible vids have been deleted, btw).Into that weird octopus porn?. Have The neighbours been notified? “Your” neighbours?.
Linda is an amazing investigative journalists, author, director and producer. Happy 80th birthday my love. The world is a better place with you. I hope you know that many many more of us think very highly of you than the last few insignificant minutes of this interview. Thank you for everything Linda xo
Roger Anzini Your treatment of Linda Moulton Howe leaves me stunned. I was watching you rolling your eyes and looking around you as Linda gave extended answers to your questions. This woman has spent a lifetime in a body or work where the brave fear to tread. Perhaps it's lost on you that she has spent over 40 years seeking to remove the long hidden cover that hides the most important truth in the history of Human-kind. This woman seeks these truths in the hopes that someday we might stand united as one species, invited to discover what awaits in the boundless uncharted seas of the Cosmos. This is what she wants for each of us. Thank You
I actually enjoyed her long answers, steeped in detail, including where Curt tried to cut her off when he didn't understand the Evidence she was providing on materials analysis, but she then insisted on going into detailed explanation to establish that the material was not from earth. It's ironic that Curt assails her credibility at the end and questions her veracity when earlier he couldn't care less, lacked the attention span, to listen to important evidence. Then blames the final attack questions on his audience feed up votes. Maybe he should be more discerning about questions from the audience and not be a mouthpiece for an Internet mob.
Little frustrated here 19:40 she gave us some very pertinent information about 3 alien races being in conflict on our planet for over 270M years but Curt for some reason jumped back to cows.
That was very outlandish. The retired secret agent tells her about that but doesn’t want to elaborate because it could put their lives at risk… How convenient.
She boosts about her studies and her scientific approach, which would prevent her from being manipulated by disinformation operations. She has a BA in English Literature and a MA in Communication. She is no scientist, she isa journalist. As such the preferred target for manipulations. Still, the cattle mutilation subject is intriguing , because there is a lot of physical evidence in contrast to alleged alien abductions of human beings, where there. are only recollections after hypnotic regression but no hard proofs. The question is: what causes cattle mutilations and why? The many interviews to sheriffs and veterinaries who analyzed several cases are really compelling.
Lind is correct. She's a very respectful professional journalist , please treat her as such. She deserves our due respect. Questions from dog183 or some such name who can't give real names bogus questions.
It's dangerous when people in a community become unquestionable celebrities, and sadly, this seems to have happened with Linda. She has been putting out information in the past 10 years that is increasingly questionable, and you were right to call her out on the fake, video-game pictures that she's presenting on her website as authentic, despite having been sent information showing it's from a video-game. During this entire interview, she kept dodging questions, or answering questions you hadn't asked, in order to stick to her script. She kept mentioning her awards as though they should somehow shield her from having to account for posting fake pictures on her site. They don't and shouldn't. She demonstrated her attitude that she can't be challenged because she's been doing this for a long time and has awards and no one else has been challenging her in interviews. That just shows the depth of the problem in this community. She's not a guru, she's a human, and fallible. You were right to treat her as such and she was wrong to act like a diva over it. We can't be a truth-community if we create celebrities that we don't challenge or call out, when they share disinfo or misinfo.
What’s the story with the game pictures? As in someone sent her screen grabs from a computer game and she’s posted them as photos that someone took? Is that the general idea?
Ive watched all of Curt's interviews on this topic. And a couple about TOE's ( Even picked up a copy of My Big TOE trilogy thanks to this channel). And I knew Curt was going to tear her apart. I love Linda. She has done great work. But recently I just don't know if she's doing it now for the money to live on. Or if she really believes she's so special that all these insiders are telling her these outlandish things, and only her.
The defensive attitude she had and the way she avoided questions and repeated the same personal history and accolades instead of simply answering your questions is a red flag to me. You need to be able to back up what you say when you make wild claims, if they are true back them up. You did nothing wrong Curt!
Oh look, another comment without a little ❤️ from the creator. It's funny how the people calling this woman out for obvious false claims and avoidance of scrutiny without butt-kissing for her or the channel get no love here. Claiming the military has been to another solar system alone is utterly rediculous and the host defending this woman's very obvious dishonesty for any reason is b.s. Don't apologize for skepticism. Just another example of cancel culture making people more concerned about likes and popularity than the truth. Unsubscribed on principle, which is a shame because this has been a good information outlet until now. Entertaining this woman is like listening to the ramblings of a madman on a street corner and ultimately takes away from serious discussion on a very real phenomenon.
I appreciate your skepticism, but Linda is a legend in the field. She is a legend because she has committed herself to understanding an almost impossible to understand subject- UFO's, ET's and what it all means. We can all disagree but I found most of your questions to be rude, to be honest. Ive always struggled with your channel because your approach isnt respectful of the guests- you are more interested in cornering them. The way the interview ended, I give great credit to Linda for not storming off. She was clearly upset, but demonstrated her integrity. Curt, you just waited for her to make an ass of herself, and....she gave it right back to you. Cheers to Linda for being a committed and honest journalist. Even if she recieved bad information here and there, which EVERY UFO INVESTIGATOR WILL, she approaches the topic with an open mind. More than I can say of you.
She was extremely defensive and pretty much said no she's too awesome to b given false info. Every one knows there's false information, and many many disinformation campaigns out there.
I watch the podcast and he's not rude, he's a very intelligent man and a good interviewer but he did tell her that he's new to this field and in no way an expert. He was trained as a scientist, and the topic is new .
Doesn’t mean she knows what she’s saying or what’s actually happening. For example there are many other investigators who say these abductions and mutilations are done by man using reverse engineered craft. She always blames the “aliens” but not the human potential when considering reverse engineered craft. The beings I met in 1996 when I was a child, showed me visions of a burning earth, they weren’t evil or using bad intentions. They were educating me
@@numbercruncher6242she does give names of universities & some folks, who obviously gave her permission to quote them or their studies. She probably has to be very careful who she quotes from where. Isn't this interview done Before the government has publicly acknowledged UFOs exist?
All due respect to Linda, she deserves accolades for her diligence all these years reporting on unpopular topics. Her expertise is not metallurgy so quizzing her on specific aspects of the metal artifacts is not fair. I, on the other hand, have some exposure to the manufacture and analysis of aluminum alloys. I worked for the 2nd largest aluminum reduction company in the United States. That company routinely manufactured aluminum with a purity of 99.99999%. However, the market for such a product was miniscule and was rarely sold in that state. Aluminum is routinely alloyed with other metals such as bismuth and magnesium per customer specifications. The ingot or billet stock would then be drawn, rolled or extruded to a finished form. Until 1990 there was no process available in the public marketplace that could produce a metallic cladding (layering) on such a microscopic scale that she describes. It would have to be a military project to do such a thing as the costs would be prohibitive. Rolling and spraying could, in theory be implemented for such a result but again, not on the described microscopic scale and the constituent element isotopes would be in agreement with earthy ratios. What she describes is nothing like I've ever seen.
It could possibly be done in space in a way similar to the anodizing process. Most things react differently in a weightless vacuum making some alloys possible that might not or would not be possible on earth. We have been doing an awful lot of secret testing in space for a long time now so who knows really
Lawrence i agree. My late father inlaw was an Professor PhD Professor and engineering Dept . Head. Of his 2 PhD's , one involved metallurgy. Specifically bubble formation in liquid aluminum. I brought this same question about manufacturing with layers of bismuth . He noted exactly what you did. He also mentioned the magnetic properties peculiar to bismuth. He made speculations on the topological offsets which if present are key to layering that produces superconductivity, possibly.
I don’t know that the question was unfair. He was not asking general questions about metallurgy. He was asking about specific items that she has been involved with. She referred to herself as caretaking in regards to the artifacts. I would expect her knowledge by this point to be quite deep as she is able to focus on them.she needs to be able to address these questions.
@@0001nika This subject is so complicated and government spreads so much disinformation that no one can be 100% correct. It’s unfortunate to see people like you criticising a hard-working woman without any reason.
I agree. She has dedicated her life to this specific topic. Its beyond anybody's comprehension what's really going on in this Extraterrestrial field. We just try to do our best to bring this to the light.
Linda has obviously been working on this topic for many years and has sought guidance from many experts across a plethora of fields throughout the years. I hope she does more public forums and brings those experts in to discuss these topics with her. The issue is that this topic has been so taboo that experts in these scientific fields may study it in darkness but are reluctant to discuss the topic publicly. I hope that is changing now that more people in various branches of government are coming forward. Linda is truly a pioneer.
This guy need to get training on how to conduct himself I personally could help him so much I wish he would let me because there are like 2 podcast that cover this subject that I can listen to
He wasn’t rude at all, I watched the entire video twice. How was he rude? If he is finding other tests are contradicting her statements, he has to bring it up
@@nickfanzo they are only used to softball interviews circlejerk bullshit, everyone who even dares to question obvious lies of the ufo community in the most polite or slightest way is labeled a disinformation agent. I recommend all of you to watch Truthseekers covering about all of this fraudsters, he was or is a genuine believer but he exposes the all of those frauds in frightening detail
@@nickfanzo "This last one is a tough question, but you're a tough lady with your leather jacket", which he said after laughing at her. I'm wondering if this poor kid might be on the spectrum --- he could easily get help with that.
The interview was not hostile or unprofessional in anyway. She overreacted to polite, professional, and necessary questions. Lue Elizondo fields the same kind of well intended questions all the time and does not take them personally or refuse to answer them.
I have nothing but total respect for Linda and her life long work. It takes a lot of guts and hard work to have done all she has done. Even at 80, she’s as sharp as a tac. Personally I find most of Curt’s questions and those of his audience very immature, superficial and outright ignorant. How can anyone say Linda is a dis-informant to the government when everything she’s ever done and tried to expose is the antithesis of what the government wants us to believe? Linda isn’t just a reporter who depends on others. She is a tireless investigative reporter who gets her hands dirty. Asking her to tell you why the ETs haven’t shown themselves to us yet, is ridiculous and asking her to speculate. She has never claimed to be a contactee or an abductee! If anyone is interested in understanding this complex and highly sophisticated subject, they need to be willing to do their own research which requires lots of reading, contemplation and meditation. Try getting some legitimate information from the government even through the FOIA and see how difficult and frustrating it’s. Listening to a 1-2 hour podcast will never get you anywhere.
LMH is a natural treasure! So very hard to watch her dredge through your questions. Also, the lack of respect from you was unnerving. Resting your chin in your hand, rolling your eyes, mumbling, ... so disrespectful.
She's lovely but seems she has been fooled all her life because of a lack of scientific education. So many things do not make any sense. Also she never answers in a clear way, ever. And the major question of this entire interview was "could you have been a disinformation agent unknowingly?"... He really nail it....
Linda has become increasingly arrogant over the last 20 yrs. First it was Art Bell then George Noory giving her a platform to tell her ever more bizarre stories. You are probably the first person to challenge her and it pissed her off. For someone claiming to be a reporter that should be 100% ok with having her facts checked, she didn't like it. I say good on you for challenging her.
@@thefitgurutv Subconsciously looking for, or preferring, data (or interpreting data in a way) that confirms what one already believes, or prefers to be true...while missing, dismissing, reinterpreting, or excluding data that doesn't. It's not dishonesty, everyone is susceptible to it, and it doesn't even mean they're wrong...but it's one of the most important biases to watch out for, because it often lead to incorrect conclusions, or failure to consider other possibilities, and/or overconfidence about one's evidence and beliefs.
Please don't feel badly, I think she misinterpreted the questions and I truly think those were reasonable questions to ask. I'm not sure why she gets so defensive and cannot admit to having made a mistake with Richard Doty. She totally danced around the answer to that. She is incredibly verbose and repetitive but there was so much great information in this interview. I appreciate you, Curt!
I've been following Linda since she came into the public eye. She does awesome work! Now for the interviewer, you questioned her credibility from the start, I was surprised that she didn't turn you off sooner. You remind me of people that purposely back people against the wall, knowing which direction that you are steering the conversation. Fortunately many, don't play your game. I just wished she wasn't so kind and cut you off much sooner.
the problems at the end of the interview/podcast are simply a generation gap situation. Linda doesn't like being doubted because she is, as a professional investigator, does things an did things in her accumulative career in a certain way we call "old school" and she is deservedly so very proud of what she has accomplished, so when someone asks her if she ever had to redact something later on, which nowadays to most younger people is no big deal, she takes it as "questioning her authority" on the matters at hand, where younger people would now say something like " oh no i never had to redact anything because i researched it thoroughly and stand by what i say" or, they would say "oh yes, you know there was this one time when i thought i had all the facts and then later on i did have to redact and correct or omit something i know wasn't accurate". she gets offended when "some of us youngsters ask petty questions" but to us they're legit questions. like i said, it's just a generational thing. she sure doesn't like to be considered gullible. personally, i think she is a very cool lady who has gone to the ends of the earth for what she believes and wants to find out about. i give her lots of credit for everything she has done on the subjects of govt. secrecy and trying to get to the bottom of it all. i always had the thought about what happened and when homo sapiens became something different than neanderthal man and she talked about that here for a bit, but i started thinking if there was genetic manipulation then there is the possibility that there are actually different species of humans now on the earth. i mean modern mankind could be different species of modern mankind. why not? it would account for alot of differences in all the different peoples on the earth now. look at how many different species of cat there are, tigers/lions/chervils/puma etc but they're all Cats. so when you think about it, it's a real possibility. we just learned each others languages but i totally think we all could be different genetic species of humans.
I am total agreement with you....a generation gap. She is old school and she felt her work is so thorough and has always been that her work stands on it's own. She is an expert and has always done everything to the T. She doesn't need to be questioned or vetted on the veracity of anything she does in this field. She is one of the finest. I think she felt trolled and I don't blame her. Few of us , including those who criticize will be at the top our field, like she has been for a very long time. The criticizers were probably not even born at the time she was already collecting evidence and at the top of her game working along others at the top of their game. Linda Is an icon and I praise her not only for her decades of work, but also for her continued strength, intelligence, and tenacity....Happy Birthday Linda !
I just turned 70, & I tend to feel the 'younger' people making comments are just flat out rude, with an attitude. They want to think older people are just wrong, because they're older. Imo, of course
She clearly vocalized it had been 2 1/2 hours and obviously fatigued yet he kept pressing her to continue. That's when she had a meltdown. She is the oldest person he has interviewed. At 80 let's cut her some slack. Up to that point she was calm and highly respectful. Interviews of politicians that age are 30 min maximum. I'm guessing she later apologized..
Most professionals will not fall back upon “i am a professional with a great number of awards” when her legitimacy is questioned. She claims to have great knowledge and information about issues that are mysterious and not completely knowable, and she should understand why people may doubt her sincerity, integrity or knowledge. To try to put off well-intentioned questioners by blocking the question as she did calls into doubt, for me, her basic honesty. She could be 100% honest, but her response was unfortunate.
@@jonesywilliams4595 dolan never says he knows things for a fact, just because some people tell him storys which cant be proven. Dolan is far more honest about thinks he knows and thinks he doesnt know than Linda
People who study ufology are always going to be on an edge since all of there work has probably been ridiculed most of the time, but I wouldn't beat yourself up about it, these are the questions people want to know. I think it was a great interview especially at the end, I laughed of how calm you were as she was losing it, but credit to linda for the time and effort she's been doing in the field.
I was playing in a field on a farm in Wales in the 80s, and i heard a real loud thud the other side of a dry stone wall, I climbed it cautiously and i saw a dead sheep with a slice the length of the underbelly, I saw intestines and they looked wiped dry and clean. I told the farmer and went back the next day to check and he had removed it, there was a bit of blood after he moved it. I knocked his again and he went bezerk with me and told me not to come back. That was one of these cattle mutilatios for sure. The slice was a perfect straight line, and my memory says it was a perfect surgical slice 💯
As long as ive been studying the same topics as Linda. I'm 67 years of age. I like to think of myself as intelligent, analytical, and respectful. I have had the pleasure to read most of Linda's work and hear her speeches on this topic. But she has always come off as a bit touchy when people interview her. She comes across as wanting to control the narrative topic. And if you ask a question she could or might be compelled to override your question and turn on you. Just as she is here. I still give her the respect and props well deserved. She is the edgy type from my opinion. I can recall her act this way during Art Bells interviews.
I have followed Linda Moulton Howe’s work since the mid 80s. Her integrity and tenacity as a true journalist has always been iron-clad. Sure wish we had many more like her in journalism. 💞👏🥰💞
Curt, I don’t think this was an unfair question. She should have been prepared for something like that. I think the only mistake you made was that you did not notice how upset she was by the time you asked the question. I think she is honest about her intentions and she does not want to spread anything that she is not convinced about. This was a great interview again.
Linda has a certain methodology. She does what seems to me to be called "Investigative Journalism". That is what her Masters Degree from Stanford would be about, I think. The host is doing the mathematics of Theory of Everything. His approach is to create a hypothesis, a conjecture in other words, and then to work it out to see if it can be good enough to create a theory. Linda is not hypothesis based, she is fact based. Their methods overlap but are also different. So some conflicts can arise if things get out of hand and move too fast.
The host is also fact based in the sense that his facts are the proofs found in the approach taken with mathematics. Meanwhile Linda is fact based on the narrative of "this is what happened..." So each of them gets facts from a different level in the hierarchy of logical constructs. (e.g. bits, data, information, knowledge, truth, beauty, wisdom ..). This continues to the Meaning of Life. Then on to why does the Universe Exist? And Finally: Who or What Is GOD? Just as man has a hierarchy of needs according to Maslow, so do logical constructs. Both Linda and the host are trying to find truth but looking for it with different tools of methodology. Before I get clobbered with disgruntled readers where do I get my own findings. Here are some after my degrees in Biology and Biomed Electronics from University of Illinois: Departments of Bioengineering and Hematology at Rush Presbyterian. Hyatt International global reservations. General Electric Medical Systems. US Department of Energy. Honeywell Building Controls Baxter Laboratories Digital Equipment Corporation Digital Equipment of Canada. Motorola Data Communications Lucent Technology Fujitsu Data Communications. And so forth.
@@josephtraficanti689 You pretend to know what a hypothesis is. .. Tell us why "a Theory of Everything" is not a theory, but is an hypothesis. .. And since top down logic is anathema to the scientific method, explain to us why Curt is not applying the method properly.
to be totally honest there was a couple of questions I didn't fully understand which you read out Curt until you clarified the questions. Also I felt those questions challenging her perfectionism were wrongly placed when the 80 year old lady had been answering a mix bag of questions for over 2 and half hour without a drink/bathroom break. I felt she was getting tired at the end. however, those questions are important to get a better insight but maybe drop them in the middle wirh a bit of humour. This is just my opinion and my reading from watching, enjoying the interview which was so intresting all the way through.
I mean he just asked her if she ever had to redact information that turned out to be incorrect, that's a 100% fair question, and if the mere notion of her possibly being wrong is so offensive in her mind there has to be something wrong here.
I watch his podcasts he's not at all like that ! He asked her a fair question. She should know that theres been a disinformation campaign by the gover. It wasn't directed at her in a malicious manner at all. She took a question and got it completely wrong. He asked what she did to make sure she wasn't given misinformation. He wasn't trying to say she had no integrity. He's a great person.
Curt, I’m not sure how I have not found your channel before. All of the videos I have seen so far (>10) have been wonderful. I really enjoy your analytical and driving questions, it makes me happy to see someone that is precise asking important questions. Thank you! I’ll make sure to share your videos
The reason many of us watch Curt and not C2C, is because Curt asks questions like: "Have you ever published faulty research, and if so, do you also publish corrections when you find out?". If we find that insulting, we got to grow up. I am a software developer, and in the culture I work in, people that can't admit their own mistakes, gets fired. If I got angry like she does, and pretended to be insulted, when people point out bugs in my software, I would lose my customers or my job. When people find faults in my work, I get happy, because then I can improve my work. I don't act like this: "How dare you! I have developed software for longer than you have been alive. How can you be so abusive and claim that I make mistakes? Why do you insult me like this? Are you claiming I make typos? Make semantic errors? Or use inferior algorithms? How childish and disrespectful of you." Instead of getting pissed, she could have replied something along these lines: "No I have never made any mistakes, all my reporting is true and can be sourced and verified" or "I sometimes make mistakes, and when I do, I publish a correction." But we all know that neither of these statements would be true. Most of her reporting can not be sourced or verified. And she has NEVER published a correction. And THAT is why she became hysterical and wanted to end the interview. She is used to being on C2C, where they allow fakers and bullshitters to appear credible to their audience, most of which don't have the mental capacity to analyze or source the claims.
People like Linda Moulton Howe gels various disparate ET incidences into one spot where we can access and make sense of what's going on. She helping to build our knowledge incrementally to wisdom. We need more people like her around.
I have always had a lot of respect and I've been impressed with Linda's work she is a very intelligent informed journalist and when she speaks I listen.
Linda has had some GREAT takes over the years and provided outstanding, new information regarding UFO’s. She is a living legend in the field of the paranormal. I wish her many more years investigating the topic.
@@bken525 that’s the chance you take when your dealing with this topic and UFO’s. I know for a fact that some of her stories have been hoaxes but I don’t believe that she hoaxed them. All in all my opinion doesn’t change.
I am also 80 and have great respect, admiration and (ok I admit it) envy of this great woman. You, 😂sir, would show yourself in a better light if you showed appreciation for the honor of interviewing her.
Agreed. She clearly vocalized it had been 2 1/2 hours and obviously fatigued yet he kept pressing her to continue. That's when she had a meltdown. She is the oldest person he has interviewed. At 80 let's cut her some slack. Up to that point she was calm and highly respectful. I am in my late 50's and wouldn't have lasted over 2 hours. Interviews of politicians that age are 30 min maximum. I'm guessing she later apologized..
You are a treasure, Linda!! When everyone says I miss Art Bell, I miss Budd Hopkins, or I miss that person, I say we still got Linda! With all her knowledge and theirs! and she still looks the same!! We love you Linda!! We are so lucky to have someone as brave as you fighting in our corner!!
If a person is balanced and confident about their work... there's no need to be defensive and offended, no matter the question. A person would just answer the question, and bring CLARITY to the matter, no matter how controversial, or misunderstood it is. Be in tune with your feelings, gut and intuition...using those gifts as a guide for discernment.💜
it is easy to criticiaze others when you do not know what it means to stand such a pressure. The interview is balanced all the way till the end when he asks about the Dody case, evedently this case has had an emotional impact on her. The information was probably true but she was used to test the public reaction and than blamed of having spread governmanet intelligent disinformation. These things impact on people specially when they have invested so much. Finally consider she is 80 years old and that is factor on how much bs can take. Some of the questions were aimed at her credibility and in the end she has said much of the same things that Louis Alexandro said, but he is regarded much differently. I did not like the tone of the questions.
@@pioneerventures1737 First of all, you don't know me, or have any idea what pressure I've endured. So let's keep me and you out of it. I was referring to being balanced and confident in WORK, not personal. I was speaking in general terms... no need to be defensive if a person is standing their truth. She was defensive, and in other interviews I've also experienced her as defensive. Age is no excuse. If you can't handle the heat, get out of the kitchen, as the saying goes. In fact, at 80 she's more experienced to take on the interviews that she chooses. She did choose to be interviewed and talked about her 18 hour days & highest vitality EVER, so it's assumed she's up to the task. Good for her in making it to 80...many don't. She sure did have plenty of gusto in slamming people, including Greer in one interview i heard... projecting that he's paid off to do CE5 related work. Paid by WHOM? If he was paid, he wouldn't be doing grassroots work to educate and inform people. She seemed to have her own agenda in this interview. Completely MUTE when it came to answering questions. Circling around multiple times to her accolades. Good for her at accomplishing so much.
@@stanislavronin9931 She said herself with plenty of gusto that she's got more vitality than ever, and still working 18 hour days, and quite full of herself in accolades... so no reason to cry on her birthday just from a listeners questions. 🤷♀️
Moving point to point is “folding space.” “Warping space” is one type of point to point traveling. Each of these types of travel can appear to be instantaneous to an outside observer. It’s not magic , but technology.
Curt, your directness is what makes your podcast special and different than everyone else. Also the reason made me think that your podcast is more reliable than others. One suggestion I might have is that if your guest is unfamiliar with your work, perhaps starting your style of questioning and where the questions came from at the beginning of the interview, so your guess will be mentally prepared.
Most definitely. She couldn’t even answer a simple question most of the time. She kept falling back on her “credentials” when she couldn’t answer a simple question. This was brilliant and exposed LMH. Curt, was in fact - very nice to her. Curt is a very thoughtful person. This must’ve been hard for him. It felt like he was split between hurting Linda, and doing what is right with his questioning and the audiences rightful questions. He handled it brilliantly. Curt wears his heart and mind on his sleeve.
She seems very prideful and defensive. Taking his questions out of context and making accusations because she felt it suggest or insinuated that she is "naïve" or "not credible". Very disappointing, but regardless of her feelings, I feel she has and continues to do great and important work in this field.
She gets wayyy too defensive at the end and takes things extremely personal, ironic that she calls Curt unprofessional but how she reacts is EXTREMELY unprofessional... EXTREMELY. That's a huge red flag that she's too full of herself and has been heavily misinformed by people like Richard Doty and others. Don't waste your time interviewing her again.
Hi Curt, I've noticed that many people who do live interviews have someone else going through the comment section and taking note of the questions that will enhance the conversation of both the guest and host. Linda herself has Ian, Dark Journalist has Olivia, Richard Dolan has his wife etc........you know...I think instead of asking Linda if she'd ever been duped, if you'd had time to think you would have phrased it differently, more like...'You must have dozens of people coming to you with experiences, how do you vet them/ or decide who's legit?
Sure. A good speaker can do that on the fly, though. That's literally what good speaking is about. Personally, I like a raw, real experiences. It leads to stuff like this. These question choosers constantly filter and censor otherwise legitimate stuff for arbitrary reasons. That's not a scientific way to approach a topic. Linda wouldn't freak out about questions like that if she got them on a daily basis. By her own words, she doesn't get stuff like that. Meanwhile, many RUclipsrs get death threats and abuse from making videos about movies or socials interest topics, and Linda is upset about something like this? Sometimes "enhancing" an interview isn't the best way forward. This subject has gone mostly nowhere for 70 years. Let's shake it up.
@@O1OO1O1 That's true but debunkers (the ones that posed these questions) say the same stuff every time........'looks like CGI.....was it filmed using a potato?......you believe any BS that people tell you on and on, like you said for 70 years, My question to her would be 'If these entities are alive like us and presumably intelligent with the capability to mind read and communicate over great distances (according to Steven Greer you can send out an invitation and they will visit you in their craft/ship) why Linda do you think they haven't called on you, and explained why they mutilate our animals?.....let's face it she's put in the time, 50 years is more than half a lifetime for most folk! Have they no sense of duty? 😄
@@kittwetherell2895 I looked at some images of the image in question, featured on her website, and if those images are accurate (not doctored), they're pretty damming. I haven't verified it by finding the link to the original article. Perhaps someone who has can mention the name of the article so we can search engine it.
@@O1OO1O1 I don't know why she didn't just admit it was a mistake or say that she knew it was from a vid game but she felt it was a good representation of what she was describing. Haven't seen the actual article so I don't know in what context the pic was used.
I have never seen anyone flash their resume as much as Linda does in this interview. How insecure does one have to be in their work to act like this? She does it the entire interview. It seems like she is more trying to convince herself of her own legitimacy than Curt or the listener. Instead of simply explaining her claims of evidence, she acts offended and falls back on her credentials as if, just because she has some, she shouldn't be required to offer any. It seems very dishonest to me and I have a real hard time trusting people who act like that in everyday situations much less in a live interview. If it quacks like a fraud.....
He didn't give her much of a choice. I was impressed that she would pause before responding and would refer back to her history as he clearly wasn't familiar with the extent of her work. It looked to me like she was holding back on what she really wanted to say. She should have never been put in the position to defend herself.
Agreed. She had become really difficult to listen to, as of late. She just CANNOT answer any questions straight and concisely without going into 'Let me tell you a story.' or 'I've done this, I've done that' mode. She ends up getting run over by her own train of thoughts, seems like. That is if she actually answers the questions asked. She often does not. Clearly she had done a lot to this field, and I appreciate her as much as the next person, but her hubris and incredulity do not serve this topic, or herself. Just because she's the pioneer in this field, people shouldn't give her free pass, and gush over her greatness as some of her followers ga-ga over her without question. She had jumped the shark.
@@dixie5042 why not? She's on a frickin' science podcast. How does she not expect to have her ideas and methods scrutinised and torn to shreds? That's what science is about. Curt's whole thing is that he's approaching this like someone new to it, like Joe Rogan, so we can share the journey. Yes, it's an approach that has issues. But his approach is, by far, better than Rogan's. It's democratic and inclusive. Her response to a fairly common sentiment was, "la la la, I never hear that." It was the LMH equivalent of Trump saying, "such a nasty question. I have the best qualification, the best sources, believe me" Why would someone like her go on a show without some idea of what the show involves and is about? That's unprofessional. Take an hour or two to at least listen to a previous episode while washing some dishes or driving somewhere. It's part of how you prep for an interview. If your goal is to do a good interview, not just promote yourself.
I remember back in the 90's as a kid me and my buddies came across a mutilated cow with it's eyes removed here in Ireland.We thought maybe crows had pecked them out,but around it's eye sockets were burn marks
I am halfway through this show. Even a quarter way through I thought, "This guy doesn't even know how thin is the ice on which he treads." I predicted tense moments ahead. Ms. Howe doesn't like her science journalism questioned. (EDIT: There's a history behind Linda's sensitivity. She WAS unfairly used in the past.)
That's kind of being a hypocrite don't you think, he's only asking about her credibility, he himself might belief her and take everything at face value but not questioning someone's reasoning is bad science and really bad reporting. I mean at the end of the day asking questions and checking for credibility is her actual job
Unfairly used for what exactly? 😂 She needs to come down off her pedestal. No one should go off the rails like that for simply being asked a question regardless of the question being asked.
She is *80 Years Old.* I'm sure it was a different world back in the 1960s for women to be taken as an equal professional in her field. I believe her *defensive reaction* at the end of this interview is a natural cumulative response for someone who has had to battle both the sexism involved in our recent history and the stigma of being ridiculed as a "crazy UFO lady". Remember, she was a pioneer in this field back when the UFO community was still in its infancy. I'm sure *many* of us cannot relate to her personal life experiences as a woman in a "man's world" over 50 years ago, and especially as one who has had the courage to jeopardize their career with anything related to UFO research. Curt is bright. He obviously understands this, but for the younger members of his audience, this is something to consider.
At her age legacy matters as well. All her life's work gets criticized by government agents and armchair skeptics so no wonder she has that reaction at times.
I absolutely agree. I find it incredibly ignorant and short sighted that some people treat an 80 year old woman like this. She is an incredibly experienced person with decades of research, during a time where women were still expected to get married, have kids and be stay at home moms or follow professions like hairdressing, selling make up, sewing clothes etc. But she chose to follow her curiosity and her passion, always stood her ground and did so with integrity, honesty and logic. She probably had to defend herself numerous times, not only because of a fringe topic but also because of being female in a field where women simple didn't exist and weren't taken seriously. So what should she do now for people to not accuse her of spreading misinformation? Pulling evidence out of thin air from the 1970? It was a different time back then. You couldn't just screenshot something and put it on a harddrive. Or maybe name the people who talked to her confidentionally? She promised them to never reveal their identity. That's ridiculous, not only would she abandon her integrity but it could also be dangerous. People don't have to believe everything she says... I certainly have a different opinion on certain topics. But it's ridiculous and immature to critisize her like that without any knowledge or care for the older and experienced generation, who lived very different lives compared to us now, not only from a technological point of view but also a societal standpoint
@Outcast Your reply seems the best analysis of what happened in this interview. I'd like to add that some of Curt's question come across as petty 'digs' and attacks against her credibility, not expanding the discussion.
@@outofnowhere5796 I tried to tell Curt this but who knows if he will read my comment or email. I have said from the beginning he should not use the live chat to gauge questions to ask. Trolls go in there, sock puppets, disinfo agents and jealous grifters who want her to go away so they can step in. Take your pick. That being said I have seen Curt's previous interviews with UFO researchers and he was pretty good at navigating the mine field. Tact is something we all learn after many mistakes, Linda could have been a bit more diplomatic about the line of questioning but like I said, at her age legacy matters and for all she knows, Curt is the next government shill in this modern UFO world of censorship and technocrat tyrants and division. Just look what they have done with Covid. Right now as I speak Senator Johnson is holding a hearing with specialists about this pandemic and the lies and motivations of those in power and this is a topic of something with verifiable widely available science and facts...let alone UFO's and EBE's with seemingly magical technology. The government is damn good at what they do to trick the public, the worst part being they are using our money to do it.
@@OSYofRR but where's the evidence? "My anomynous sources told me" is all that they got. They will use it to the end to sell more books. Either they're telling the truth, lying, or misinformed.
Something about this interview is bugging me. When asked direct questions, or for more specifics, she seems to highlight her credentials, or repeats the story she has just said. Something feels off to me. A lot of what she has said is hearsay, and lacking further detail. She repeats specific details over and over again, but does not elaborate. It feels like a script, or list that she must stick to. I'm not saying she is lying or making stuff up, just that something is off. EDIT: Just finished watching the interview. I'm not sure what her problem was with the last question. I mean, no matter how diligent you are with sourcing material, occasionally you will be wrong or deceived. Especially with the topics she covers. Age may be a factor here. She is fricken 80 after all, and sharp as a whip in my estimation. I'm only 50ish and am grumpy a lot :P It's a right of passage to be grumpy :P Damn kids nowadays with their questions :)
I Love Linda, met her many times. so let's get that straight. Her problem? or the way she answers questions is not yes or no but she takes 15 minutes to answer a question that should only take 2 minutes. Her interviews are always way too long. Just commenting not making a judgement. some people you ask them the time and they tell you how to build a watch.
My personal take on the way this ended is that Linda clearly looked tired and was showing signs that she was ready to wrap this up (and expressed this verbally.) I'm not excusing her lack of professionalism or behavior but this is an 80yr old who apparently works 17hrs a day, and you're at the end of a 2hrs 45m interview. I'd put part of this scenario down to exhaustion.
Curt, you need to feel embarrassed. You needed to think through what questions should be asked from the get go. You blew it and need to reach out to her and apologize, although I would not stretch it by asking for another interview. I love and follow Linda's work and she has always been very credible. She has been validated for her work, experience and again, maybe someone who matches her credentials and professionalism might be entitled to interviewing her and asking challenging questions. You behaved inappropriately. Your questions not only tried to reduce Linda, you changed public view of what was perceived a moderately professional show to a "Don't Do Theories of Everything with Curt Jaimungal". The real pros will stay away from doing interviews with you. Look I do podasting and it's not easy. It's alot of scripting, producing and engineering, but it is thankless and mistakes are hard to recover from. You need to find a humble, thoughtful way to fix it and until you become a highly validated program and producer, don't try to be edgy in your questions like Barbara Walter's was. Few people can pull that off. Keep it straight and don't try to impress buy upstaging a courageous person who is one of a handful of people with the credibility, expertise and courage to broach the delicate topic of ETs, who has the respect of people who are afraid to speak about their real ET encounters in fear for their security, being ridiculed and being medicated. A friend and I saw an UFO together, in 2018 over Long Island, NY (about 500 feet above us, silently frozen in the air above us. It was egg in shape. We were being tracked by them. That was clear. My friend and I knew what we had seen and we know we are not alone. You offended millions of people who follow this woman's valued work.
He seems rude and right out the gate Linda is very defensive. Now days it’s the same with unbelievers in Sasquatch verses the Knowers! You cannot talk to people with closed minds
Listen she started off the podcast admitting to never having listened to Curts work. How disrespectful is that? But she expected you to have read all her books and have her career timeline memorized. You asked the tough questions and we need more of that in this community. Keep up the good work
What pissed me off is she would keep talking about herself being so professional but definitely was not being so when he told her multiple times these are questions from the community. She then tried to play dumb when she was challenged by real questions the internet wants to know straight from the horses mouth. The issue is, she spent money and time on this subject and cannot accept being wrong and just take the L on certain aspects on her career. Good job Curt. You did nothing wrong at all.
waitaminute, what on earth are you talking about the interview is not all about Jaimungal is it? SHE was called in for interview! The burden is on the interviewer to research the interviewee's work, not the other way round! Someone calls you in to interview you on your research means you're answering questions on your OWN research. LMH gets requests to talk and for interviews coming at her like a " black river" you think she should read all these peoples' books before that? C'mon, upside down. You don't need to read books on what the interviewer opines buddy!
LMH has been doing this work - in the field, struggling with DIA, CIA, NSA, FBI and Pentagon azzholes for FORTY YEARS long before Jaimungal ( and you probably) were 2 separate haploid cells in other peoples' gonads. Which way does respect flow? Jaimungal is the Johnny come lately here. Respect is earned, not asserted just because some youtuber asks a couple snarky questions!!
For years I've found Linda entertaining and a bit of a kook. Just like most guests on coast to coast. Little did I know those years of familiarizing myself with these weird people and their ideas would one day culminate in my own gradual paradigm shift. Linda is owed so much by us and like many other pioneers will be forever remembered
I watched the live stream, I think Linda misunderstood where the questions are coming from, when curt tried to explain that these questions are not his own but the audiences most asked questions in the live chat, Linda was too upset at that point and it clearly went over her head. I think Curts questions were great, he did a good job of remaining calm throughout the last portion when things went array. Linda spent alot of time in her answers establishing the already understood fact that she's a serious investigative journalist who follows the facts. I wish she would have listened to curts questions with a more open mind and answered without ego or emotion. Granted she has been subjected to ridicule and worse for 40+ years in her incredible career, so it's understandable that she expressed herself in this way. I was so excited for this interview. I hope curt manages to reach out to her and her team to mend this incident, hopefully he can bring her on again and give it another go. They're both great and each of their perspectives are important.
Yes. Kurt. What he said. Please have another go at it. I think that some EXTREMELY important insight could be generated with a different approach. I was so excited to see this interview.
She's much older than she looks. Weren't think of her as an elderly person but I think that has something to do with it. My hearing has gone to shit over the years as well. Too many concerts.
@@lightwarrior9911 Honestly I think age was a factor, towards the 2:40:08 mark you can see the defeat in curts face as he attempts to salvage what he can by explaining upvotes on questions and Linda clearly not grasping this concept. I think as soon as the question portion started and curt asked a personal question prefacing it with the statement that this is a personal concern of his as the channel grows, about unwittingly being used as an agent of disinfomation, things unravelled rather quickly onwards. She didn't undestand the distinction between his personal question and the remaining set of questions coming from the audience.
Curt, I just gained a ton of respect for you. It's taken me a while to warm up to your style and presentation, but you clearly in the end have a huge heart and never want to leave someone feeling bullied or belittled. I struggled to follow Linda throughout most of the interview and became frustrated at times, but the moment her voice cracked in the end was when I realized (much like my realization about you) that she has a really good heart. The ending was horribly cringy, but carried with it an important lesson about human nature. In the end, you're giving your all as an interviewer and Linda is giving her all as a journalist and researcher. Regardless of who's right or wrong, you're both passionate human beings. I feel strongly that you and Linda will work out these misunderstandings and may end up learning a lot from one another. Take care, Curt. Reflect on this experience, right any wrongs and move forward a better man. Linda, take a deep breath. You've worked tirelessly for many years and are admired by many. The questions posed to you near the end seemed to strike something deep within you. Whatever that is, I hope you'll be able to process it and push ahead. I wish nothing but the best for you both.
She have a lot of stories .but are they true. ? We know that the alien on the moon is video game .She was confronted with it right away.an honest person would take it down.but she just doubling down. UFO celebrities just want to sell stories.That is what evidence tells if you care about things like fakta.
The lady just needs to come to grips that just because you consider yourself a professional with years of experience, doesn't mean you cannot be wrong.
@@andrejohansen2783 when she found out she had been duped with that picture she came out and printed a full retraction. The retraction wasn't just a paragraph like most retractions are. It was the whole story of how she met the guy and why she believed him and how she turned out to be wrong. I'm sure having it thrown in her face in such a public and humiliating way shocked her. This "gotcha" bullshit has its place, but it is NOT with someone who has already admitted the fault!! Curt was dead wrong to do that. It was disgusting!
I feel that Linda kept pressing how professional she's been throughout her career, which may be true, but she ended that interview in the most unprofessional way. Curt shouldn't feel bad about the way this turned out, but perhaps should be aware of the need to redact and reword questions before asking them. In the interview with Travis Walton, I had the impression that Travis felt his experience was being belittled, when being pressed for, what for any scientist would deem necessary details, but what Travis no doubt thought were trivial, and missing the big point. Linda, though, doesn't have the excuse of being ignorant of the need for scientific rigour and detail, especially given how many times in this interview she reiterated how scientifically rigorous her own research has been. Still, now that it's done, maybe from this Curt can figure out how to attack the veracity of a claim in a manner that doesn't feel like an attack to the interviewee.
This is true, but the 2 questions at the end, which pissed Linda off were not Curt's....they were viewer questions that he read because they were the "most upvoted". And he read them word for word. Hopefully he will learn from this, and Linda won't tell the countless others she knows in the field not to deal with Curt and TOE.
Great comment Simon, but, in my opinion he WAS NOT attacking her. All she had to do was handle the question with the professionalism we all know she has. That being said, I respect your point of view 100%. 👌
@@robfields49 oh she understood alright. She’s 80, but not deaf, nor stupid. Kurt repeatedly explained about upvotes; no way she didn’t get that. She was upset because she felt her integrity and intelligence were challenged, and being tired I expect as she is elderly and it’s a long time to talk, and she let her pride and ego react to how she felt in the end. Also she couldn’t answer because she is so convinced she is right due to her belief but at the same time she knows that proper evidence wasn’t always there…she’s just convinced she’s right, and dead against the possibility that she has a blind spot called ‘belief’ and that is not the same as evidence. And she’s not a boomer, she’s post WW1. Boomer gen started post WW2 in 1946.
When Linda expresses that she is ready to finish this interview it is at about (if not a little more) the runtime she does for Coast to Coast AM, most conventions, and her own content. So, to ask the questions that call her journalistic integrity into question at the end (the leather jacket comment was also unnecessary) when the last inquiry was a courtesy, was a bad move imo. I get the importance of asking these questions, but they have to be phrased right, legit (seems the one was more accusatory than anything, as you said), asked earlier, and I think prepared with more care than those in the chat will typically present. I know this is about a year ago, so I don't mean to dig up old news, but I'm just finding out about this. I'm sure all parties involved have grown from the experience, and I appreciate the interview, always a pleasure to hear Linda speak 👍🏽
Linda seems like she has been in an echo chamber for too long and couldn't handle a proper interview in which her assertions were questioned. There was a misunderstanding in regards to where the questions come from but anyone who is really searching for answers to this phenomenon has to be open to seemingly stupid questions regardless of the source. Unless all of these assertions are thoroughly examined and probed for mis/disinformation then we aren't going to get anywhere in this discussion. Please keep asking questions Curt, no matter who you may offend.
That’s the reaction of some one who has been ridiculed for years, when all they do is their best and honest, trying to wake people up to the bigger picture. I’m just amazed at how magical life is these days. What a journey for us all. Great job Curt. Thanks to you both
To be honest, if her goal is to wake people up, she's really bad at it. Looking at her approach, it's almost like her goal is to get ridiculed. Compare her approach to, say, Richard Dolan. I don't even like his approach (I think it's flawed like hers), but I think it's far, far better than hers if the goal is to wake people up.
Everyone under 50 is missing the point. A holistic approach to this subject should include her early years of NO cell phone. NO instant access to information on Google and the uphill climb as a woman with great looks AND a great brain. She slogged through the years of misogyny and managed to rise above the fray. To those out there who have never seen a UFO or experienced a paranormal event you cannot know what she is driving at. To deride her says so much about you, not her.
@@O1OO1O1 i agree. It seems she can't handle challenges to her words and can't handle someone simply just not believing her. Reminds me of my narcissistic mother tbh.
Well, she did get taken in by a video game image and she could've laughed it off or at least explained it away somehow. If one is going to be involved in this field, a thick skin is a prerequisite. Come on man, as Joe Biden would say.
Yeah she became really defensive, at challenging questions which is a pity. I thought the questions were good and important, but it’s also somewhat understandable since I’m sure she’s gone through a lot of ridicule
I came across the skellital remains of a deer, there was no blood in the area, no guts meat or fur, the bones were held together by the tendons, some fur & hoof was intact on one hind leg, the flesh appeared to hav been stripped clean off the bones by a knife or sharp object, i didnt see knife marks on the bones, fine strippes of red were left on the bones, no butcher would hav done such a job, each rib was stripped clean, no ogans in its cage, a butcher wouldn't hav left this at the ballpark, behind the barier, laying between two trees, i reported this to the police, i hav no further info 😮
I do not understand why Linda would tolerate this interviewer. He interrupted, kept asking the same question that had been previously answered, and just generally did not seem to be in the same loop. She displayed a high level of tolerance (unless I misread the entire conversation) I found it frustrating to listen to him. OK, I finally got to the end of the interview and I saw that Linda finally did find Curt to be a dick and showed her displeasure. Good on you Linda, exhaustion took you down and made you feisty but I thought that was the good bit and long overdue. You can't win "them all but put this one down to experience and choose more wisely next time. Love your work.
I've had direct contact with 5 sasquatch altogether. An elder spoke to me telepathically in 2018. Very wise and loving. Said sasquatch might not survive the anthropocene extinction. He asked me to share what I know about them. There is much. They can also effect your dreams, give you psychic visions (project images), remote view, astral project and even cloak. Pretty wild
She was unjust in getting angry, it’s an honest question. No one’s perfect, everyone makes mistakes in their profession, we’re all human. I’m sure she’s had to redact something.
I realize this is nearly a year old interview however it could have been one I’d seen featuring LMH anytime during this the past 20 years. Linda has a huge body of work indeed. At this time of her life she’s just telling her stories. Thus the reason at times she doesn’t seem to be answering the questions you’ve asked her. She hears a couple of key words & relays HER related story as it pertains to those key words. Case in point Antarctica. She told her Antarctica story. It had nothing to do with the CURRENT developments your listener asked.
I've watched many of your videos and you always seem fair and balanced. The way this interview ended was cringeworthy but I didn't think your questions deserved that kind of reaction from Linda. In my opinion you were fair balanced and polite and I was sad to see her reaction. Keep up the great work!
She talks like a politician, never answering a question directly but instead tells a story that is loosely connected to the question. And the constant repetition… OMG.
Her getting offended at the end to any type of criticism only hurts her message she’s trying to get across. Nobody is immune to criticism. You can’t have an intelligent discussion if you can’t even consider that you may not know everything or have made mistakes in your findings. You can’t expect people to believe you 100% based on your reputation. The truth comes out eventually. Edit: It wasn’t your fault man, you did great.
@@Tom_Mroz He simply asked what his viewership had requested and introduced an idea that a debunker had in order to cover it for our sake. There’s nothing hostile about it. You can tell his intentions are not that way. It’s an interview to discuss ideas and counterpoints, not a one-sided propaganda soapbox. Extraordinary claims requires extraordinary evidence. Just because you can prove someone said something to you, doesn’t make what they said true. To be as decorated of a journalist as she is, the way she handled the slightest bit of criticism is a big red flag and overshadows the entire video before it.
@@UnincredibleAim you are right. I’m skeptic here. I’m more open to these possibilities since Commander David Fraser shared his testimony along with the government confirming the Tic-tac footage but crop circles and abductions I remain quite skeptic about. Consciousness from what I’ve researched is just an emergent property of the brain and nothing more. And death is no different than before you were born or even every night in deep sleep or during general anesthesia. It’s just nothingness. People don’t want to accept that but it’s really just that simple.
This lady is very dedicated to this subject. If you know anything! About her, this is the way she is and always has been. He’s not set up or has the time for the magnitude of what she has studied and found. Look at the age difference. She’s long time in this. And has done , been, seen did it. Just like she just said - involved! Also to the person above. This is her she’s not hostile! You know nothing of her.
Curt, I don’t think you did anything wrong. Admitting a mistake and then explaining how you came to the conclusion, and the steps you took to rectify the mistake shows your growth as a person. Linda was given ample opportunity to answer this, but did not.
Really surprised she took such offense to the question. Always have been a fan of Linda’s but one thing I didn’t know until this interview is how much she talks about her credibility. Saying over and over she has awards, Emmy’s, etc. that was really odd to me. Maybe she was just having a bad day?
He did nothing wrong she basically said she has never made a mistake. Which is a load of B.S . She came across as long winded and full of garbage and hear say.
This is a classic example of confirmation bias. She does nothing but confirm her own beliefs over and over again and if anyone dare question her she reads her résumé again and again. I’ve literally never seen someone read their résumé so many times in an interview. Linda has done good work but unfortunately, in this new climate, she is a relic. Curt you did a great job. You asked tough questions that frustrated someone who typically has her questions prepared.
This is the perfect summary of LMH. She is the opposite of Kevin from the office. Why answer a question in a few words when you could ramble for 15 minutes repeating the same thing I have said in every interview for a decade. There is 0% of her that is open to the fact that she could be wrong. I’ll probably end up like that when I’m her age to be honest tho.
Generally a great interview. The last questions were fair -- although a bit pointed. I suspect there may be a generation gap thing here. Linda may not be used to the idea of "crowd sourced" Q&A off the internet and she's not running for political office so there's less willingness to kow-tow. And I can see, empathetically, why she got piqued. But to her credit I found her to be incredibly articulate and wonderfully intelligent throughout 99% of the interview. Despite the tempermental ending, I came away with enhanced respect and admiration for her and for her accomplishments. She's a pathbreaker, a groundbreaker. It won't be perfect all the time, but nobody is. Too bad a good interview kind of crashed and burned, but overall it's good work on both sides.
So Linda doesn’t want to answer real questions, she only wants selective questions that are complimentary only. So, on that aspect right there, her work is suspect
She clearly vocalized it had been 2 1/2 hours and obviously fatigued yet he kept pressing her to continue. That's when she had a meltdown. She is the oldest person he has interviewed. At 80 let's cut her some slack. Up to that point she was calm and highly respectful. Interviews of politicians that age are 30 min maximum. I'm guessing she later apologized..
Huge Linda fan, that’s why I watched… I am actually surprised by Linda’s reaction to the questions. She is definitely an icon and has done so much for this subject! With that being said, I get the feeling that she either was frustrated by the length of the interview or had misunderstood your questions. I’ve listened to pretty much everything Linda has said and even subscribe to her Earthfiles subscription. Every singe interview she has ever given she has quoted the Richard Doty paper she had read as gospel. She admits that it is likely disinformation but still quotes the line about EBEN manipulating DNA in primates to create human, as if it’s fact. I can see the point of the question and I wonder that frequently. She does need to explain her trust in that document more thoroughly. You had the high ground until you gave your opinion on her lack of vetting her sources recently in her career. That is where you lost the interview and it became an attack. The problem with using upvotes and live Twitter question in a long interview, is that you (Curt) could not pick or think about good questions to ask. Of course the negative questions are going to get upvotes! Majority of people watching are not familiar with LMH and her career but like to see drama. Benefits to the live questions online is viewer engagement. Just maybe watch out for the trolls, or possible Gov stooges, attempting to hijack interviews.
"I am actually surprised by Linda’s reaction to the questions." Seriously? She pulled the "do you know who I am?" card and has been in that frame of mind for years, if not decades.
@@VectorOfKnowledge with all due respect, the amount of time she's spent in this subject when no one else would touch it with a 10 ft pole, how would you feel? There's got to be a level of frustration she's feeling and has felt her whole life from the stigma to where me and you would probably handle it worse than she did, look I'm not a believer or experiencer I just have an open mind and the amount of information out there amounts to SOMETHING strange is going on, not saying I know because I don't but just feel if we dug through these trenches for as long as she has, that we would do our due diligence and basic research of the topic and realize she's going to feel an entire lifetime of pushback, which will entice her to describe her credentials and past if faced with targeted questions against her integrity, yes I realize I'm biased and love Linda's bravery to approach something we're programmed to call bullshit, if we were in those stigma and taboo shoes for so long, we would've probably handled it the same if not worse
@@ReverendDr.Thomas - So you think your mysoginist "joke" is so great that it deserves to be repeated across the thread. I reported you and urge others, too, to not tolerate this kind of speech.
Curt, you're simply the best!!! And you are absolutely right in asking those questions, period. Don't have to feel bad cause she's the one who took it the wrong way. 👍
She clearly vocalized it had been 2 1/2 hours and obviously fatigued yet he kept pressing her to continue. That's when she had a meltdown. She is the oldest person he has interviewed. At 80 let's cut her some slack. Up to that point she was calm and highly respectful. Interviews of politicians that age are 30 min maximum. I'm guessing she later apologized..
I have the greatest respect for you and find your channel and topics veri interesting. Pls. Do not find this as disrespectful, but I think you should have formulated your questions differently after you noticed she was taking them personally and as critisicm. Linda has done more than anyone to get to the bottom of this for many many years and she deserves the utmost respect.
Linda is having a complete meltdown lmfao she’s completely misunderstood the platform and when he tried to explain it to her she said the last 20 mins wasn’t fair…. It’s hard not to laugh.
This was an amazing interview, from beginning to the very awkward end. Every bit of it, legendary. It's easy for us to tell you don't sweat it, obviously we're feeling the cringe with you in the moment, but you handled yourself so professionally with that and I think it says a lot about you as a person. Thank you for not chopping the end off and letting us see it all. People will learn from this, many lessons. You did great!
She gets wayyy too defensive at the end and takes critique extremely personal, ironic that she calls Curt unprofessional but how she reacts is EXTREMELY unprofessional... EXTREMELY. That's a huge red flag that she's too full of herself and has been heavily misinformed by people like Richard Doty and others. Don't waste your time interviewing her again Curt she's too far up her own ass.
Grandmas mouth open. I see pink gums. Reddish long tongue. Deep dark hot steaming throat. Grandmas throat is dark hot deep. Her mouth cheeks swell when comed in. I have been makeing love to grandmas mouth for 50 years. She still swallows. Such a deep throat. Grandma my first mouth. Only mouth. I got sent to grandmas for the summer. I never left the bed room for 3 months. Grandma said i could use her mouth. Anytime my zipper was down. Now 50 years later. Im still here. Momma stops by now and than. But she married my brother 30 years ago. I married grandmas mouth 50 years ago. My uncle married grandmas two hot armpits.
There is really no excuse for the flip at the end, but it is understandable. I have my personal perspective on her, and we all have flaws and quirks we can pick out in eachother. Linda, just by nature and area of pursuit, has endured a lot of trauma. That is what was felt in the end and why it hit you so hard. At point, I even saw you trying to push it off in frustration, but that pain hit hard... Just as hard as it hit her all her life. Triggered PTSD that in this field and time past she has been in it, could never understand. I will give her credit though. She has a lot of information. Some of it, I question and some of it corroborates with overall sentiment and personal experience. But as was questioned, I believe some is disinformation and the abuse she endured has caused her to build a great wall and self perception of infallibility to endure it all. I really do feel for her regardless of my opinion of who she is in projection of resilience. Because this area of study attracts a lot of attention from everywhere that has single intention of tearing you apart at a deeply personal level to keep you away. 40-50 years and it would tear anyone apart, especially during the decades she has done it in. Those years in truth seeking are nothing younger people in the internet generation could understand. It's very hard to bury instant world wide sharing, but back then, the few who did the leg work were the target of straight out psychological and physical warfare by those with endless resources at hand to carry it out. I really admire your interview style brother. And I want to say, time manipulation is real. How, I don't know. I have no proof of it I could offer other than personal experience repeated 3 times one night. I won't get into it as it would be a book alone, but I astral project when I sleep. And I am fully conscious and travel to many places that are as real as awake here. Not everytime I sleep, but a lot of the time. One night I was in a projection that was very long. It seemed like a month or months had passed in each vision, and the odd thing was, 3 times I woke up and went to the bathroom and went right back to the same place doing the same thing. Building a huge structure underground, or overseeing it. And it was mundane and I was not human, but humanesque. Irrelevant, but I was probably riding along with another consciousness. This does happen and I have tested it, but back to time. I don't know why, but just before I "fell asleep" I looked at my clock. We'll say it was 12:40, because I don't remember the exact time it was without going back to my notes of it. Anyway, I had this month long "dream" and kind of crashed back into my body woke up. It was kind of a shock and I looked at the clock. 12:30. 12:30? How is that possible, that dream felt like months long as I lived days in it. I said, okay, maybe I was mistaken on the time, but dreams move fast and maybe I was just mistaken. So went back to sleep. Same "dream" and time felt in it. Same wakeup again and this time I remembered the time just on principle. 12:20. 12:20? WTF? How is this even possible? How the hell can I be somewhere for what felt like months, but wake up 10 minutes before I went to sleep? Curt, I was super brain twisted... I am a logical guy and for this one, not possible, but just happened. I couldn't bring myself to accept it. Well, I have a lot of impossible things happen I won't get into that have been documented and witnessed. So I just went back to bed kind of half dismissing it. I figured since it was so shocking, it would be over. The prior time I just sort of half thought it was the case. So I went back to sleep... A third time, right back to that same underground place picking up where I left off. There for some time again, and woke up the same way, but this time my whole body hurt and it felt like I hadn't slept for far too long, like days or weeks where your eyes and whole being hurt. So looked at the clock and felt sick and just brain twisted. 12:10. Okay, something is super messed up because 1 time, maybe mistaken. Twice when I made sure I knew what time it was, okay... I know I am not mistaken, but I have to be, because it's impossible. 3 times in a row one right after another... You feel sick and your whole damned logic system crashes. I stayed up for several hours because my brain felt like a full computer melt down on a reason level. Again, I don't remember the precise times, but it was so traumatic, I did document it right after when I was able to gain my senses back. It could have been 20 minutes earlier each time and at 2 or 3 am, but each time it was the same number of minutes earlier, 3x in a row. I can't explain how it happened, but it did. So Curt, all I know is that reality is not reality at a very fundamental level. And the real question. If this is true, then what does that mean for everything we perceive as such, because our whole reality is based on time being the foundational arranger. If it is not, then all placed on it is not real as we believe it. And this is not the only or most validating thing to time being a perception alone. I have finished a 5 person conversation I had lived before it actually happening and many other things of seeing them like having already lived them, and then them being identical to what I tell others in overwhelming detail just to have it proved to be real for me to accept. Like I came to... Very hard to believe and maybe something you won't be able to allow yourself to until you are forced to by whatever that calls the shots for all things wants you to. But this is the truth in what happened. And again, this was only one time it happened like this and no I don't do drugs, I don't even like drinking. I am super analytical and logical and ranked 98th percentile in pattern recognition and have an IQ of 140. I don't like anything that disrupts my consciousness and presence, because I am not a "whatever" guy. When something that does not compute happen, I surgically dissect it or I cannot place it into perception and I can't move on. So take it for what it's worth, but I can say for a fact, time and reality are not anything like we perceive them to be.
Respect to the intervjuer who is not afraid to ask relevant questions in a pursuit to get the answer, which often requires interrupting the intervjued to keep on track. Individuals who like and are used to maintaining long monologues, usually do it for a reason, either hiding their incompetence, absents of factual knowledge or unvillingness to expose the knowledge. Appreciation and respect to a program host who is skillful, knowledgeable and strait forwarded enough to maintain control and structure of the dialogue and conversation. We don't want or need political correctness and politicizing in our conversation and pursuit of knowledge.
I worked at the competitor of the “Alcoa” Aluminum smelter that she’s referring to and we made the purest aluminum in America for sure but I also think in the world and I verify as the person who pulls the aluminum out of the pots and tests them.. we cannot make aluminum that pure just as she says Edit: the purest aluminum we can produce is what we sell to the contractors that build satellites and rockets and that aluminum is not near as pure as what she’s referring to
For last 40 minutes of interview Curt was presenting different forms of same question: "Linda, please proof to me you are not a fraud". She was answering very politely, but how many times one can be asked same hostile kind of question ? Curt crossed a line rather definitely and a few times too many. Then just because some question is upvoted, doesn't mean Curt should read it, especially when tone of question is hostile. EDIT:(I edited Curt's name, that I have misspelled).
@@Tom_Mroz Yes i fully agree with you. Internet comments are filled with morons. 100 fools can make an evil out of 1 wise person. The problem here lies with lengthy discussions without breaks. It can make anybody lose nerve. Both Kurt and Linda fell to their egos after a long relay contest.
@@Tom_Mroz I found the fault 100% _HERS._ She was claiming science and medical expertise multiple times throughout the interview, yet has _NO_ science education. Communications and science are not the same degree despite her claims. Kurt didn't call her out on that, even when she didn't know kangaroos were mammals, and claimed the James Webb would be able to see artificial structures on exoplanets (a ridiculous claim, easily falsifiable by any effort whatsoever on her part). So now she is saying she knows the exact number of alien civilizations in the Milky Way galaxy?! And she shouldn't be asked about the validity of her sources? - That's not acceptable in journalism or science- if you're going to make outlandish claims, you should be prepared to discuss the evidence, at a minimum. Instead, she harped about her awards and going to Stanford. I can't imagine another interviewer letting her get away with more unanswered Bull $h!t than Kurt did. If anything, he didn't press the issue enough when she repeatedly dodged the question. I certainly wouldn't blame him for her rude behavior.
![Luis Elizondo: UFOs, Hidden History, Disclosure, Alien Crafts, Pentagon [Part 2]](/img/1.gif)
Linda is 80 years old. Respect to her ability to still talk with such clarity and longevity.
Compare her to Joe Biden at 80
@@sammyvh11 Let's Go Brandon.
@@hunam3876 FJB
@@hunam3876 indeed! 😂
@@sammyvh11 Joe Biden can’t remember how to tie his shoelaces. It’s disgusting that he’s our so-called President.
Constructive criticism Curt. When someone gets offended like this, apologise and rephrase. Do not say, "Well I'm just asking questions from the feed". Nobody is saying things are off limits, but you need some emotional intelligence when dealing with people like this. Linda has probably had to defend herself her whole career. All the best mate.
yes and ty to not use internet crap lingo on og people bottom line is social media is circus of clowns and you brought her into that ....
Couldn’t agree more.. to have someone of her caliber should be honored. I understand asking questions but by reading questions from the “feed” like that takes the personal ambience away from what your trying to do which in most cases to the guest it makes them feel like your more interested in asking questions and disinterested in the answers given. Cheers..
@@maverick744 But you are saying things are off limits. Has this helped, or hindered the precious disclosure project?.
Hi Curt. This was a collision of old journalism and new journalism. She just sees you and doesn't understand the nature of this interview. If you had said "There are 238 people watching us right now and they are submitting questions." Then later explain that "Our audience has voted on the questions submitted and THEY want ME to ask YOU...X,Y&Z." I think she would have been more understanding.
@@jackclements2163
JC in a canoe ;( Look at your playlist. (All your bible vids have been deleted, btw).Into that weird octopus porn?. Have The neighbours been notified? “Your” neighbours?.
Today is Saturday, January 20, 2024. Happy 82nd, LMH.
Linda is an amazing investigative journalists, author, director and producer. Happy 80th birthday my love. The world is a better place with you. I hope you know that many many more of us think very highly of you than the last few insignificant minutes of this interview. Thank you for everything Linda xo
She is amazing! Ive always enjoyed, and respected her reporting
She's a legend.
She always speak to people who dont want to come out ! I heard this i heeard that she full of it
I remember her on the Art Bell show every once in a while back in the 90's overnights.
She's a fraud
Roger Anzini
Your treatment of Linda Moulton Howe leaves me stunned. I was watching you rolling your eyes and looking around you as Linda gave extended answers to your questions. This woman has spent a lifetime in a body or work where the brave fear to tread. Perhaps it's lost on you that she has spent over 40 years seeking to remove the long hidden cover that hides the most important truth in the history of Human-kind. This woman seeks these truths in the hopes that someday we might stand united as one species, invited to discover what awaits in the boundless uncharted seas of the Cosmos. This is what she wants for each of us. Thank You
Yes!!!
I actually enjoyed her long answers, steeped in detail, including where Curt tried to cut her off when he didn't understand the Evidence she was providing on materials analysis, but she then insisted on going into detailed explanation to establish that the material was not from earth. It's ironic that Curt assails her credibility at the end and questions her veracity when earlier he couldn't care less, lacked the attention span, to listen to important evidence. Then blames the final attack questions on his audience feed up votes. Maybe he should be more discerning about questions from the audience and not be a mouthpiece for an Internet mob.
Little frustrated here 19:40 she gave us some very pertinent information about 3 alien races being in conflict on our planet for over 270M years but Curt for some reason jumped back to cows.
That was very outlandish. The retired secret agent tells her about that but doesn’t want to elaborate because it could put their lives at risk… How convenient.
She boosts about her studies and her scientific approach, which would prevent her from being manipulated by disinformation operations. She has a BA in English Literature and a MA in Communication. She is no scientist, she isa journalist. As such the preferred target for manipulations. Still, the cattle mutilation subject is intriguing , because there is a lot of physical evidence in contrast to alleged alien abductions of human beings, where there. are only recollections after hypnotic regression but no hard proofs. The question is: what causes cattle mutilations and why? The many interviews to sheriffs and veterinaries who analyzed several cases are really compelling.
Mrs Linda Moulton Howe is the most honorable reporter. So much knowledge
"knowledge"
Lind is correct. She's a very respectful professional journalist , please treat her as such. She deserves our due respect. Questions from dog183 or some such name who can't give real names bogus questions.
It's dangerous when people in a community become unquestionable celebrities, and sadly, this seems to have happened with Linda. She has been putting out information in the past 10 years that is increasingly questionable, and you were right to call her out on the fake, video-game pictures that she's presenting on her website as authentic, despite having been sent information showing it's from a video-game. During this entire interview, she kept dodging questions, or answering questions you hadn't asked, in order to stick to her script. She kept mentioning her awards as though they should somehow shield her from having to account for posting fake pictures on her site. They don't and shouldn't. She demonstrated her attitude that she can't be challenged because she's been doing this for a long time and has awards and no one else has been challenging her in interviews. That just shows the depth of the problem in this community. She's not a guru, she's a human, and fallible. You were right to treat her as such and she was wrong to act like a diva over it.
We can't be a truth-community if we create celebrities that we don't challenge or call out, when they share disinfo or misinfo.
What’s the story with the game pictures? As in someone sent her screen grabs from a computer game and she’s posted them as photos that someone took? Is that the general idea?
(I’m only 1:25:00 in at the moment)
@@Justice_Hammer Yes
Ive watched all of Curt's interviews on this topic. And a couple about TOE's ( Even picked up a copy of My Big TOE trilogy thanks to this channel). And I knew Curt was going to tear her apart. I love Linda. She has done great work. But recently I just don't know if she's doing it now for the money to live on. Or if she really believes she's so special that all these insiders are telling her these outlandish things, and only her.
yeah she is making some incredible claims, but I can't tell if she is fill of beans or not
The defensive attitude she had and the way she avoided questions and repeated the same personal history and accolades instead of simply answering your questions is a red flag to me. You need to be able to back up what you say when you make wild claims, if they are true back them up. You did nothing wrong Curt!
Did you know that she’s a professional journalist with heaps of awards 😂
Oh look, another comment without a little ❤️ from the creator. It's funny how the people calling this woman out for obvious false claims and avoidance of scrutiny without butt-kissing for her or the channel get no love here. Claiming the military has been to another solar system alone is utterly rediculous and the host defending this woman's very obvious dishonesty for any reason is b.s. Don't apologize for skepticism. Just another example of cancel culture making people more concerned about likes and popularity than the truth. Unsubscribed on principle, which is a shame because this has been a good information outlet until now. Entertaining this woman is like listening to the ramblings of a madman on a street corner and ultimately takes away from serious discussion on a very real phenomenon.
Isn’t publicly announcing ‘‘cancelling” your subscription to this channel the same thing?
😂
@@Lindsaayyy lol 👍
I appreciate your skepticism, but Linda is a legend in the field. She is a legend because she has committed herself to understanding an almost impossible to understand subject- UFO's, ET's and what it all means. We can all disagree but I found most of your questions to be rude, to be honest. Ive always struggled with your channel because your approach isnt respectful of the guests- you are more interested in cornering them. The way the interview ended, I give great credit to Linda for not storming off. She was clearly upset, but demonstrated her integrity. Curt, you just waited for her to make an ass of herself, and....she gave it right back to you. Cheers to Linda for being a committed and honest journalist. Even if she recieved bad information here and there, which EVERY UFO INVESTIGATOR WILL, she approaches the topic with an open mind. More than I can say of you.
She was extremely defensive and pretty much said no she's too awesome to b given false info. Every one knows there's false information, and many many disinformation campaigns out there.
I watch the podcast and he's not rude, he's a very intelligent man and a good interviewer but he did tell her that he's new to this field and in no way an expert. He was trained as a scientist, and the topic is new .
Doesn’t mean she knows what she’s saying or what’s actually happening. For example there are many other investigators who say these abductions and mutilations are done by man using reverse engineered craft. She always blames the “aliens” but not the human potential when considering reverse engineered craft. The beings I met in 1996 when I was a child, showed me visions of a burning earth, they weren’t evil or using bad intentions. They were educating me
i couldnt disagree more with this
she wasnt answering the questions properly and she was getting defensive
I like how she answers questions, not with her opinion, but with reports from people or data she has vetted.
Yes!!
@@numbercruncher6242 that's alot of words to just say, "I don't trust people."😊
@@numbercruncher6242she does give names of universities & some folks, who obviously gave her permission to quote them or their studies. She probably has to be very careful who she quotes from where. Isn't this interview done Before the government has publicly acknowledged UFOs exist?
Yeah but in a Very long winded way that is exhausting to listen to 😂
All due respect to Linda, she deserves accolades for her diligence all these years reporting on unpopular topics. Her expertise is not metallurgy so quizzing her on specific aspects of the metal artifacts is not fair. I, on the other hand, have some exposure to the manufacture and analysis of aluminum alloys. I worked for the 2nd largest aluminum reduction company in the United States. That company routinely manufactured aluminum with a purity of 99.99999%. However, the market for such a product was miniscule and was rarely sold in that state. Aluminum is routinely alloyed with other metals such as bismuth and magnesium per customer specifications. The ingot or billet stock would then be drawn, rolled or extruded to a finished form. Until 1990 there was no process available in the public marketplace that could produce a metallic cladding (layering) on such a microscopic scale that she describes. It would have to be a military project to do such a thing as the costs would be prohibitive. Rolling and spraying could, in theory be implemented for such a result but again, not on the described microscopic scale and the constituent element isotopes would be in agreement with earthy ratios. What she describes is nothing like I've ever seen.
Top insight. Sounds military secret business hey.
It could possibly be done in space in a way similar to the anodizing process. Most things react differently in a weightless vacuum making some alloys possible that might not or would not be possible on earth. We have been doing an awful lot of secret testing in space for a long time now so who knows really
Lawrence i agree. My late father inlaw was an Professor PhD Professor and engineering Dept . Head.
Of his 2 PhD's , one involved metallurgy. Specifically bubble formation in liquid aluminum. I brought this same question about manufacturing with layers of bismuth . He noted exactly what you did. He also mentioned the magnetic properties peculiar to bismuth. He made speculations on the topological offsets which if present are key to layering that produces superconductivity, possibly.
I don’t know that the question was unfair. He was not asking general questions about metallurgy. He was asking about specific items that she has been involved with. She referred to herself as caretaking in regards to the artifacts. I would expect her knowledge by this point to be quite deep as she is able to focus on them.she needs to be able to address these questions.
Holy shit. Good comment.
Linda might not be 100% correct all the time, but people should appreciate her hard work in this field. She is a wonder woman of the ufo field.
10% accurate at best
Yes but her inaccuracy is maybe based off of much more information than we have, if there even is any inaccuracy 🤷🏾♂️
@@0001nika This subject is so complicated and government spreads so much disinformation that no one can be 100% correct. It’s unfortunate to see people like you criticising a hard-working woman without any reason.
She is good enough on the UFO information. She made me less sceptical about UFO's
I agree. She has dedicated her life to this specific topic. Its beyond anybody's comprehension what's really going on in this Extraterrestrial field. We just try to do our best to bring this to the light.
Linda has obviously been working on this topic for many years and has sought guidance from many experts across a plethora of fields throughout the years. I hope she does more public forums and brings those experts in to discuss these topics with her. The issue is that this topic has been so taboo that experts in these scientific fields may study it in darkness but are reluctant to discuss the topic publicly. I hope that is changing now that more people in various branches of government are coming forward. Linda is truly a pioneer.
I consider her a treasure.
he apologizes for being rude in his questioning, yet he continues to be rude. smh.
This guy need to get training on how to conduct himself I personally could help him so much I wish he would let me because there are like 2 podcast that cover this subject that I can listen to
He wasn’t rude at all, I watched the entire video twice. How was he rude? If he is finding other tests are contradicting her statements, he has to bring it up
@@nickfanzo they are only used to softball interviews circlejerk bullshit, everyone who even dares to question obvious lies of the ufo community in the most polite or slightest way is labeled a disinformation agent.
I recommend all of you to watch Truthseekers covering about all of this fraudsters, he was or is a genuine believer but he exposes the all of those frauds in frightening detail
@@nickfanzo "This last one is a tough question, but you're a tough lady with your leather jacket", which he said after laughing at her. I'm wondering if this poor kid might be on the spectrum --- he could easily get help with that.
@@HomeAtLast501 I’m on the spectrum. What does that even mean?
The interview was not hostile or unprofessional in anyway. She overreacted to polite, professional, and necessary questions. Lue Elizondo fields the same kind of well intended questions all the time and does not take them personally or refuse to answer them.
agree
I have nothing but total respect for Linda and her life long work. It takes a lot of guts and hard work to have done all she has done. Even at 80, she’s as sharp as a tac. Personally I find most of Curt’s questions and those of his audience very immature, superficial and outright ignorant. How can anyone say Linda is a dis-informant to the government when everything she’s ever done and tried to expose is the antithesis of what the government wants us to believe? Linda isn’t just a reporter who depends on others. She is a tireless investigative reporter who gets her hands dirty. Asking her to tell you why the ETs haven’t shown themselves to us yet, is ridiculous and asking her to speculate. She has never claimed to be a contactee or an abductee! If anyone is interested in understanding this complex and highly sophisticated subject, they need to be willing to do their own research which requires lots of reading, contemplation and meditation. Try getting some legitimate information from the government even through the FOIA and see how difficult and frustrating it’s. Listening to a 1-2 hour podcast will never get you anywhere.
Well said. It was the same choice of immature, superficial and ignorant questions that drove Lue and Sean apeshit.
LMH is a natural treasure! So very hard to watch her dredge through your questions. Also, the lack of respect from you was unnerving. Resting your chin in your hand, rolling your eyes, mumbling, ... so disrespectful.
Hiding adrenochrome harvesting Linda😢😢😢😢
Agreed 💯
She's lovely but seems she has been fooled all her life because of a lack of scientific education. So many things do not make any sense. Also she never answers in a clear way, ever. And the major question of this entire interview was "could you have been a disinformation agent unknowingly?"... He really nail it....
She is 100% correct working hard helps you live longer, when humans have a purpose in life they naturally live longer lives.
Linda has become increasingly arrogant over the last 20 yrs. First it was Art Bell then George Noory giving her a platform to tell her ever more bizarre stories. You are probably the first person to challenge her and it pissed her off. For someone claiming to be a reporter that should be 100% ok with having her facts checked, she didn't like it. I say good on you for challenging her.
I am a big Linda Fan and very sorry for the end of the interview.Thank you for your work,Curt!Love and blessings!
She's very invested in her theories. I've been listening to her since the mid 90s. Not saying she's wrong, just saying confirmation bias is strong
It is based on massive evidence. Consider that your belief in gravity is based on your confirmation biases - exactly as it should be.
Confirmation bias?
@@thefitgurutv Subconsciously looking for, or preferring, data (or interpreting data in a way) that confirms what one already believes, or prefers to be true...while missing, dismissing, reinterpreting, or excluding data that doesn't.
It's not dishonesty, everyone is susceptible to it, and it doesn't even mean they're wrong...but it's one of the most important biases to watch out for, because it often lead to incorrect conclusions, or failure to consider other possibilities, and/or overconfidence about one's evidence and beliefs.
Yes very very much so. She is very New Age and everything is going to go through that filter.
they recorded location and time stamps for each sample producing a detailed heat map
Thank you for your dedication, Linda!!!
Please don't feel badly, I think she misinterpreted the questions and I truly think those were reasonable questions to ask. I'm not sure why she gets so defensive and cannot admit to having made a mistake with Richard Doty. She totally danced around the answer to that. She is incredibly verbose and repetitive but there was so much great information in this interview. I appreciate you, Curt!
I've been following Linda since she came into the public eye. She does awesome work! Now for the interviewer, you questioned her credibility from the start, I was surprised that she didn't turn you off sooner. You remind me of people that purposely back people against the wall, knowing which direction that you are steering the conversation. Fortunately many, don't play your game. I just wished she wasn't so kind and cut you off much sooner.
the problems at the end of the interview/podcast are simply a generation gap situation. Linda doesn't like being doubted because she is, as a professional investigator, does things an did things in her accumulative career in a certain way we call "old school" and she is deservedly so very proud of what she has accomplished, so when someone asks her if she ever had to redact something later on, which nowadays to most younger people is no big deal, she takes it as "questioning her authority" on the matters at hand, where younger people would now say something like " oh no i never had to redact anything because i researched it thoroughly and stand by what i say" or, they would say "oh yes, you know there was this one time when i thought i had all the facts and then later on i did have to redact and correct or omit something i know wasn't accurate". she gets offended when "some of us youngsters ask petty questions" but to us they're legit questions. like i said, it's just a generational thing. she sure doesn't like to be considered gullible. personally, i think she is a very cool lady who has gone to the ends of the earth for what she believes and wants to find out about. i give her lots of credit for everything she has done on the subjects of govt. secrecy and trying to get to the bottom of it all.
i always had the thought about what happened and when homo sapiens became something different than neanderthal man and she talked about that here for a bit, but i started thinking if there was genetic manipulation then there is the possibility that there are actually different species of humans now on the earth. i mean modern mankind could be different species of modern mankind. why not? it would account for alot of differences in all the different peoples on the earth now. look at how many different species of cat there are, tigers/lions/chervils/puma etc but they're all Cats. so when you think about it, it's a real possibility. we just learned each others languages but i totally think we all could be different genetic species of humans.
I am total agreement with you....a generation gap. She is old school and she felt her work is so thorough and has always been that her work stands on it's own. She is an expert and has always done everything to the T.
She doesn't need to be questioned or vetted on the veracity of anything she does in this field. She is one of the finest.
I think she felt trolled and I don't blame her.
Few of us , including those who criticize will be at the top our field, like she has been for a very long time.
The criticizers were probably not even born at the time she was already collecting evidence and at the top of her game working along others at the top of their game.
Linda Is an icon and I praise her not only for her decades of work, but also for her continued strength, intelligence, and tenacity....Happy Birthday Linda !
I just turned 70, & I tend to feel the 'younger' people making comments are just flat out rude, with an attitude. They want to think older people are just wrong, because they're older. Imo, of course
She clearly vocalized it had been 2 1/2 hours and obviously fatigued yet he kept pressing her to continue. That's when she had a meltdown. She is the oldest person he has interviewed. At 80 let's cut her some slack. Up to that point she was calm and highly respectful. Interviews of politicians that age are 30 min maximum.
I'm guessing she later apologized..
Most professionals will not fall back upon “i am a professional with a great number of awards” when her legitimacy is questioned. She claims to have great knowledge and information about issues that are mysterious and not completely knowable, and she should understand why people may doubt her sincerity, integrity or knowledge. To try to put off well-intentioned questioners by blocking the question as she did calls into doubt, for me, her basic honesty. She could be 100% honest, but her response was unfortunate.
It’s about time she got asked some hard questions. She got exposed.
She's gotten away with far too much over the years. Disgraceful really. She should win awards for BS.
You were already a skeptic, be honest.
Curt should have expected this.
If I were Linda, I would not do anything like this again.
@@jonesywilliams4595 dolan never says he knows things for a fact, just because some people tell him storys which cant be proven. Dolan is far more honest about thinks he knows and thinks he doesnt know than Linda
@@jonesywilliams4595 not everyone who is telling something, is actual a witness and really did See what he or she says
People who study ufology are always going to be on an edge since all of there work has probably been ridiculed most of the time, but I wouldn't beat yourself up about it, these are the questions people want to know. I think it was a great interview especially at the end, I laughed of how calm you were as she was losing it, but credit to linda for the time and effort she's been doing in the field.
I was playing in a field on a farm in Wales in the 80s, and i heard a real loud thud the other side of a dry stone wall, I climbed it cautiously and i saw a dead sheep with a slice the length of the underbelly, I saw intestines and they looked wiped dry and clean. I told the farmer and went back the next day to check and he had removed it, there was a bit of blood after he moved it. I knocked his again and he went bezerk with me and told me not to come back. That was one of these cattle mutilatios for sure. The slice was a perfect straight line, and my memory says it was a perfect surgical slice 💯
As long as ive been studying the same topics as Linda. I'm 67 years of age. I like to think of myself as intelligent, analytical, and respectful. I have had the pleasure to read most of Linda's work and hear her speeches on this topic. But she has always come off as a bit touchy when people interview her. She comes across as wanting to control the narrative topic. And if you ask a question she could or might be compelled to override your question and turn on you. Just as she is here.
I still give her the respect and props well deserved. She is the edgy type from my opinion. I can recall her act this way during Art Bells interviews.
Thank you. I had wondered what happened. I have seen this twice and I didn't think he did anything wrong.
I have followed Linda Moulton Howe’s work since the mid 80s. Her integrity and tenacity as a true journalist has always been iron-clad.
Sure wish we had many more like her in journalism.
💞👏🥰💞
Try Whitney Webb🤗
Your could also try David Wilcock.😆😂🤣
Curt, I don’t think this was an unfair question. She should have been prepared for something like that. I think the only mistake you made was that you did not notice how upset she was by the time you asked the question. I think she is honest about her intentions and she does not want to spread anything that she is not convinced about. This was a great interview again.
THIS! You hit the nail on the head. And I’m a carpenter so this is my professional opinion as well.
I agree, it felt insensitive in the way it was handled.
Linda has a certain methodology.
She does what seems to me to be called
"Investigative Journalism". That is what her Masters Degree from Stanford would be about, I think.
The host is doing the mathematics of Theory of Everything. His approach is to create a hypothesis, a conjecture in other words, and then to work it out to see if it can be good enough to create a theory.
Linda is not hypothesis based, she is fact based. Their methods overlap but are also different. So some conflicts can arise if things get out of hand and move too fast.
The host is also fact based in the sense that his facts are the proofs found in the approach taken with mathematics.
Meanwhile Linda is fact based on the narrative of "this is what happened..."
So each of them gets facts from a different level in the hierarchy of logical constructs.
(e.g. bits, data, information, knowledge, truth, beauty, wisdom ..).
This continues to the Meaning of Life.
Then on to why does the Universe Exist?
And Finally: Who or What Is GOD?
Just as man has a hierarchy of needs according to Maslow, so do logical constructs. Both Linda and the host are trying to find truth but looking for it with different tools of methodology.
Before I get clobbered with disgruntled readers where do I get my own findings.
Here are some after my degrees in
Biology and Biomed Electronics from University of Illinois:
Departments of Bioengineering and Hematology at Rush Presbyterian.
Hyatt International global reservations.
General Electric Medical Systems.
US Department of Energy.
Honeywell Building Controls
Baxter Laboratories
Digital Equipment Corporation
Digital Equipment of Canada.
Motorola Data Communications
Lucent Technology
Fujitsu Data Communications.
And so forth.
@@josephtraficanti689 You pretend to know what a hypothesis is. .. Tell us why "a Theory of Everything" is not a theory, but is an hypothesis. .. And since top down logic is anathema to the scientific method, explain to us why Curt is not applying the method properly.
to be totally honest there was a couple of questions I didn't fully understand which you read out Curt until you clarified the questions. Also I felt those questions challenging her perfectionism were wrongly placed when the 80 year old lady had been answering a mix bag of questions for over 2 and half hour without a drink/bathroom break. I felt she was getting tired at the end. however, those questions are important to get a better insight but maybe drop them in the middle wirh a bit of humour. This is just my opinion and my reading from watching, enjoying the interview which was so intresting all the way through.
I mean he just asked her if she ever had to redact information that turned out to be incorrect, that's a 100% fair question, and if the mere notion of her possibly being wrong is so offensive in her mind there has to be something wrong here.
You see it all over his smug face he's mocking and belidleling that poor woman she is his elder he's a bully.
I watch his podcasts he's not at all like that ! He asked her a fair question. She should know that theres been a disinformation campaign by the gover. It wasn't directed at her in a malicious manner at all. She took a question and got it completely wrong. He asked what she did to make sure she wasn't given misinformation. He wasn't trying to say she had no integrity. He's a great person.
Curt, I’m not sure how I have not found your channel before. All of the videos I have seen so far (>10) have been wonderful. I really enjoy your analytical and driving questions, it makes me happy to see someone that is precise asking important questions. Thank you! I’ll make sure to share your videos
The reason many of us watch Curt and not C2C, is because Curt asks questions like: "Have you ever published faulty research, and if so, do you also publish corrections when you find out?".
If we find that insulting, we got to grow up. I am a software developer, and in the culture I work in, people that can't admit their own mistakes, gets fired. If I got angry like she does, and pretended to be insulted, when people point out bugs in my software, I would lose my customers or my job. When people find faults in my work, I get happy, because then I can improve my work. I don't act like this:
"How dare you! I have developed software for longer than you have been alive. How can you be so abusive and claim that I make mistakes? Why do you insult me like this? Are you claiming I make typos? Make semantic errors? Or use inferior algorithms? How childish and disrespectful of you."
Instead of getting pissed, she could have replied something along these lines:
"No I have never made any mistakes, all my reporting is true and can be sourced and verified" or "I sometimes make mistakes, and when I do, I publish a correction."
But we all know that neither of these statements would be true. Most of her reporting can not be sourced or verified. And she has NEVER published a correction. And THAT is why she became hysterical and wanted to end the interview. She is used to being on C2C, where they allow fakers and bullshitters to appear credible to their audience, most of which don't have the mental capacity to analyze or source the claims.
Well said
Yep 🎯
I think you’re probably correct
She's in it for the money.
Just those womens getting hysterical, huh, bro? Cool sexism.
People like Linda Moulton Howe gels various disparate ET incidences into one spot where we can access and make sense of what's going on. She helping to build our knowledge incrementally to wisdom. We need more people like her around.
if you believe in "Snake Oil Peddlers and Scam artists"
I want to see the people she interviewed not her
@@BubuH-cq6km you r clueless..
Aliens were the cover story. They were doing biopsies to map fallout patterns
Wow I can't believe that Linda is actually 80 years old ? She is absolutely gorgeous 😊
I agree, if she said she is being kept young with alien intervention, it would be believable 😆😂😂 lol
I agree, but as a woman I never understood why she never did anything to tame those eyebrows! Sometimes that’s all I see when she’s talking.
I have always had a lot of respect and I've been impressed with Linda's work she is a very intelligent informed journalist and when she speaks I listen.
Linda has had some GREAT takes over the years and provided outstanding, new information regarding UFO’s. She is a living legend in the field of the paranormal. I wish her many more years investigating the topic.
@MysteriousOklahoma oh god, do some research man I’m not your tutor
@MysteriousOklahoma and if you’ve seen ZERO evidence and been following the same person for 40 years who’s the real fool?
🤣🤣🤣
She got many fake stories... many proved her to be (search youtube)
@@bken525 that’s the chance you take when your dealing with this topic and UFO’s. I know for a fact that some of her stories have been hoaxes but I don’t believe that she hoaxed them. All in all my opinion doesn’t change.
I am also 80 and have great respect, admiration and (ok I admit it) envy of this great woman. You, 😂sir, would show yourself in a better light if you showed appreciation for the honor of interviewing her.
I've heard that 80 is the new 40. And by the time I turn 80 I'll be like a teenager again. Stay strong 💪.
Agreed.
She clearly vocalized it had been 2 1/2 hours and obviously fatigued yet he kept pressing her to continue. That's when she had a meltdown. She is the oldest person he has interviewed. At 80 let's cut her some slack. Up to that point she was calm and highly respectful. I am in my late 50's and wouldn't have lasted over 2 hours. Interviews of politicians that age are 30 min maximum.
I'm guessing she later apologized..
You are a treasure, Linda!! When everyone says I miss Art Bell, I miss Budd Hopkins, or I miss that person, I say we still got Linda! With all her knowledge and theirs! and she still looks the same!! We love you Linda!! We are so lucky to have someone as brave as you fighting in our corner!!
OMG she is 81! She definitely had ET youth fountain! Wonderful guest and wonderful interview.
If a person is balanced and confident about their work... there's no need to be defensive and offended, no matter the question. A person would just answer the question, and bring CLARITY to the matter, no matter how controversial, or misunderstood it is.
Be in tune with your feelings, gut and intuition...using those gifts as a guide for discernment.💜
it is easy to criticiaze others when you do not know what it means to stand such a pressure. The interview is balanced all the way till the end when he asks about the Dody case, evedently this case has had an emotional impact on her. The information was probably true but she was used to test the public reaction and than blamed of having spread governmanet intelligent disinformation. These things impact on people specially when they have invested so much. Finally consider she is 80 years old and that is factor on how much bs can take. Some of the questions were aimed at her credibility and in the end she has said much of the same things that Louis Alexandro said, but he is regarded much differently. I did not like the tone of the questions.
@@pioneerventures1737
First of all, you don't know me, or have any idea what pressure I've endured. So let's keep me and you out of it. I was referring to being balanced and confident in WORK, not personal.
I was speaking in general terms... no need to be defensive if a person is standing their truth. She was defensive, and in other interviews I've also experienced her as defensive.
Age is no excuse. If you can't handle the heat, get out of the kitchen, as the saying goes. In fact, at 80 she's more experienced to take on the interviews that she chooses. She did choose to be interviewed and talked about her 18 hour days & highest vitality EVER, so it's assumed she's up to the task. Good for her in making it to 80...many don't.
She sure did have plenty of gusto in slamming people, including Greer in one interview i heard... projecting that he's paid off to do CE5 related work. Paid by WHOM? If he was paid, he wouldn't be doing grassroots work to educate and inform people.
She seemed to have her own agenda in this interview. Completely MUTE when it came to answering questions. Circling around multiple times to her accolades. Good for her at accomplishing so much.
I spent some time replying to you but I think I lost most of it. So I can't ivest more time but thank you for answering. ciao
@@stanislavronin9931
She said herself with plenty of gusto that she's got more vitality than ever, and still working 18 hour days, and quite full of herself in accolades... so no reason to cry on her birthday just from a listeners questions. 🤷♀️
You did Everything Wrong. You are a Jerk. Poor Linda!
You’ve been killing it with these interviews man...one of my favorite channels in all of RUclips by FAR. Keep up the great work!
Isn’t it though? It’s the best accidental find I’ve ever come across.
Yeah for real... This channel is CRUSHING IT...
What's crazy is that Bed Wetter West was a believer once. But it doesn't matter we were never alone and have always been an ET Laboratory.
If you like Curt, then do check out Exo Academian.
Exactly. Curt is a treasure, especially when there's so much nonsense flying around.
Moving point to point is “folding space.”
“Warping space” is one type of point to point traveling. Each of these types of travel can appear to be instantaneous to an outside observer.
It’s not magic , but technology.
Are you saying that we're now able to manipulate time and space? I mean, I'm sure we're trying. Would be one helluva party trick.
Curt, your directness is what makes your podcast special and different than everyone else. Also the reason made me think that your podcast is more reliable than others. One suggestion I might have is that if your guest is unfamiliar with your work, perhaps starting your style of questioning and where the questions came from at the beginning of the interview, so your guess will be mentally prepared.
Pissing someone off on a podcast is inevitable. Just keep doing what you're doing. You're not as impolite as she made you feel.
Most definitely. She couldn’t even answer a simple question most of the time. She kept falling back on her “credentials” when she couldn’t answer a simple question.
This was brilliant and exposed LMH. Curt, was in fact - very nice to her. Curt is a very thoughtful person. This must’ve been hard for him. It felt like he was split between hurting Linda, and doing what is right with his questioning and the audiences rightful questions. He handled it brilliantly.
Curt wears his heart and mind on his sleeve.
@@tottenhamhotspurish True. Her only argument was her credentials sometimes ..
She seems very prideful and defensive. Taking his questions out of context and making accusations because she felt it suggest or insinuated that she is "naïve" or "not credible". Very disappointing, but regardless of her feelings, I feel she has and continues to do great and important work in this field.
Curt, no harm, no foul. You simply asked the questions via Reddit, Twitter, etc. You are doing an amazing job. Keep up the great work! We support you!
what d'ya mean 'no harm no foul'
@@tony.broadhead.5eightbroad597 'no harm no foul' --> no harmful intentions_(Curt), therefore not foul play_(Curt, asking, questions).
Maybe ask different questions, instead of the same one 5x
Lol the questions come from Twitter!? 🤣🤣🤣 oh no no no no
She gets wayyy too defensive at the end and takes things extremely personal, ironic that she calls Curt unprofessional but how she reacts is EXTREMELY unprofessional... EXTREMELY. That's a huge red flag that she's too full of herself and has been heavily misinformed by people like Richard Doty and others. Don't waste your time interviewing her again.
Poor lady couldn’t even fathom the fact that she was psy opd.
I can’t believe she’s 80! Wow!
She dines on broccoli 🥦 and cauliflower which pretty much keeps you 18 forever. Use butter though as that will make these types of food yummiest
Hi Curt, I've noticed that many people who do live interviews have someone else going through the comment section and taking note of the questions that will enhance the conversation of both the guest and host. Linda herself has Ian, Dark Journalist has Olivia, Richard Dolan has his wife etc........you know...I think instead of asking Linda if she'd ever been duped, if you'd had time to think you would have phrased it differently, more like...'You must have dozens of people coming to you with experiences, how do you vet them/ or decide who's legit?
Sure. A good speaker can do that on the fly, though. That's literally what good speaking is about.
Personally, I like a raw, real experiences. It leads to stuff like this.
These question choosers constantly filter and censor otherwise legitimate stuff for arbitrary reasons. That's not a scientific way to approach a topic.
Linda wouldn't freak out about questions like that if she got them on a daily basis. By her own words, she doesn't get stuff like that. Meanwhile, many RUclipsrs get death threats and abuse from making videos about movies or socials interest topics, and Linda is upset about something like this?
Sometimes "enhancing" an interview isn't the best way forward. This subject has gone mostly nowhere for 70 years. Let's shake it up.
@@O1OO1O1 That's true but debunkers (the ones that posed these questions) say the same stuff every time........'looks like CGI.....was it filmed using a potato?......you believe any BS that people tell you on and on, like you said for 70 years, My question to her would be 'If these entities are alive like us and presumably intelligent with the capability to mind read and communicate over great distances (according to Steven Greer you can send out an invitation and they will visit you in their craft/ship) why Linda do you think they haven't called on you, and explained why they mutilate our animals?.....let's face it she's put in the time, 50 years is more than half a lifetime for most folk! Have they no sense of duty? 😄
@Dragon 😁
@@kittwetherell2895 I looked at some images of the image in question, featured on her website, and if those images are accurate (not doctored), they're pretty damming.
I haven't verified it by finding the link to the original article. Perhaps someone who has can mention the name of the article so we can search engine it.
@@O1OO1O1 I don't know why she didn't just admit it was a mistake or say that she knew it was from a vid game but she felt it was a good representation of what she was describing. Haven't seen the actual article so I don't know in what context the pic was used.
I have never seen anyone flash their resume as much as Linda does in this interview. How insecure does one have to be in their work to act like this? She does it the entire interview. It seems like she is more trying to convince herself of her own legitimacy than Curt or the listener. Instead of simply explaining her claims of evidence, she acts offended and falls back on her credentials as if, just because she has some, she shouldn't be required to offer any. It seems very dishonest to me and I have a real hard time trusting people who act like that in everyday situations much less in a live interview. If it quacks like a fraud.....
Totally agree.
Exactly right. Employing speech patterns used by fantasists to oversell. Highly manipulative individual.
He didn't give her much of a choice. I was impressed that she would pause before responding and would refer back to her history as he clearly wasn't familiar with the extent of her work. It looked to me like she was holding back on what she really wanted to say.
She should have never been put in the position to defend herself.
Agreed.
She had become really difficult to listen to, as of late. She just CANNOT answer any questions straight and concisely without going into 'Let me tell you a story.' or 'I've done this, I've done that' mode. She ends up getting run over by her own train of thoughts, seems like. That is if she actually answers the questions asked. She often does not.
Clearly she had done a lot to this field, and I appreciate her as much as the next person, but her hubris and incredulity do not serve this topic, or herself.
Just because she's the pioneer in this field, people shouldn't give her free pass, and gush over her greatness as some of her followers ga-ga over her without question.
She had jumped the shark.
@@dixie5042 why not? She's on a frickin' science podcast. How does she not expect to have her ideas and methods scrutinised and torn to shreds? That's what science is about.
Curt's whole thing is that he's approaching this like someone new to it, like Joe Rogan, so we can share the journey. Yes, it's an approach that has issues. But his approach is, by far, better than Rogan's. It's democratic and inclusive.
Her response to a fairly common sentiment was, "la la la, I never hear that." It was the LMH equivalent of Trump saying, "such a nasty question. I have the best qualification, the best sources, believe me"
Why would someone like her go on a show without some idea of what the show involves and is about? That's unprofessional. Take an hour or two to at least listen to a previous episode while washing some dishes or driving somewhere. It's part of how you prep for an interview. If your goal is to do a good interview, not just promote yourself.
I remember back in the 90's as a kid me and my buddies came across a mutilated cow with it's eyes removed here in Ireland.We thought maybe crows had pecked them out,but around it's eye sockets were burn marks
I am halfway through this show. Even a quarter way through I thought, "This guy doesn't even know how thin is the ice on which he treads." I predicted tense moments ahead. Ms. Howe doesn't like her science journalism questioned. (EDIT: There's a history behind Linda's sensitivity. She WAS unfairly used in the past.)
That's kind of being a hypocrite don't you think, he's only asking about her credibility, he himself might belief her and take everything at face value but not questioning someone's reasoning is bad science and really bad reporting. I mean at the end of the day asking questions and checking for credibility is her actual job
@@MAJIN_MAGIC In which case that should have been done at the beginning.
Unfairly used for what exactly? 😂 She needs to come down off her pedestal. No one should go off the rails like that for simply being asked a question regardless of the question being asked.
@@Mike_Davidson "Used." Do you know the story?
@@DavidBrown-bp4iq No not at all. How bad could it be exactly? 🤷♂😂😂
She is *80 Years Old.* I'm sure it was a different world back in the 1960s for women to be taken as an equal professional in her field. I believe her *defensive reaction* at the end of this interview is a natural cumulative response for someone who has had to battle both the sexism involved in our recent history and the stigma of being ridiculed as a "crazy UFO lady". Remember, she was a pioneer in this field back when the UFO community was still in its infancy. I'm sure *many* of us cannot relate to her personal life experiences as a woman in a "man's world" over 50 years ago, and especially as one who has had the courage to jeopardize their career with anything related to UFO research. Curt is bright. He obviously understands this, but for the younger members of his audience, this is something to consider.
At her age legacy matters as well. All her life's work gets criticized by government agents and armchair skeptics so no wonder she has that reaction at times.
I absolutely agree. I find it incredibly ignorant and short sighted that some people treat an 80 year old woman like this. She is an incredibly experienced person with decades of research, during a time where women were still expected to get married, have kids and be stay at home moms or follow professions like hairdressing, selling make up, sewing clothes etc. But she chose to follow her curiosity and her passion, always stood her ground and did so with integrity, honesty and logic. She probably had to defend herself numerous times, not only because of a fringe topic but also because of being female in a field where women simple didn't exist and weren't taken seriously. So what should she do now for people to not accuse her of spreading misinformation? Pulling evidence out of thin air from the 1970? It was a different time back then. You couldn't just screenshot something and put it on a harddrive. Or maybe name the people who talked to her confidentionally? She promised them to never reveal their identity. That's ridiculous, not only would she abandon her integrity but it could also be dangerous. People don't have to believe everything she says... I certainly have a different opinion on certain topics. But it's ridiculous and immature to critisize her like that without any knowledge or care for the older and experienced generation, who lived very different lives compared to us now, not only from a technological point of view but also a societal standpoint
@Outcast Your reply seems the best analysis of what happened in this interview. I'd like to add that some of Curt's question come across as petty 'digs' and attacks against her credibility, not expanding the discussion.
@@outofnowhere5796 I tried to tell Curt this but who knows if he will read my comment or email. I have said from the beginning he should not use the live chat to gauge questions to ask. Trolls go in there, sock puppets, disinfo agents and jealous grifters who want her to go away so they can step in. Take your pick. That being said I have seen Curt's previous interviews with UFO researchers and he was pretty good at navigating the mine field.
Tact is something we all learn after many mistakes, Linda could have been a bit more diplomatic about the line of questioning but like I said, at her age legacy matters and for all she knows, Curt is the next government shill in this modern UFO world of censorship and technocrat tyrants and division. Just look what they have done with Covid. Right now as I speak Senator Johnson is holding a hearing with specialists about this pandemic and the lies and motivations of those in power and this is a topic of something with verifiable widely available science and facts...let alone UFO's and EBE's with seemingly magical technology. The government is damn good at what they do to trick the public, the worst part being they are using our money to do it.
@@OSYofRR but where's the evidence? "My anomynous sources told me" is all that they got. They will use it to the end to sell more books. Either they're telling the truth, lying, or misinformed.
Something about this interview is bugging me. When asked direct questions, or for more specifics, she seems to highlight her credentials, or repeats the story she has just said. Something feels off to me. A lot of what she has said is hearsay, and lacking further detail. She repeats specific details over and over again, but does not elaborate. It feels like a script, or list that she must stick to. I'm not saying she is lying or making stuff up, just that something is off.
EDIT: Just finished watching the interview. I'm not sure what her problem was with the last question. I mean, no matter how diligent you are with sourcing material, occasionally you will be wrong or deceived. Especially with the topics she covers. Age may be a factor here. She is fricken 80 after all, and sharp as a whip in my estimation. I'm only 50ish and am grumpy a lot :P It's a right of passage to be grumpy :P Damn kids nowadays with their questions :)
I totally agree with you!
Well said.
I Love Linda, met her many times. so let's get that straight. Her problem? or the way she answers questions is not yes or no but she takes 15 minutes to answer a question that should only take 2 minutes. Her interviews are always way too long. Just commenting not making a judgement. some people you ask them the time and they tell you how to build a watch.
That’s because “ufos” are her job. How she makes a living.
Disappointed to see this on this channel
Damn it Kurt, you owe Linda an apology....and a box of butterscotch!
She got paid to do this that’s enough Jesus lol
👍👍👍 💞 😆
No he doesn’t. He was fine. She can’t handle tough questions clearly.
The combination of Linda and Art Bell were absolutely LEGENDARY back in those years!
GODSPEED Art Bell!
My personal take on the way this ended is that Linda clearly looked tired and was showing signs that she was ready to wrap this up (and expressed this verbally.) I'm not excusing her lack of professionalism or behavior but this is an 80yr old who apparently works 17hrs a day, and you're at the end of a 2hrs 45m interview. I'd put part of this scenario down to exhaustion.
by this age one would expect she already learned about planning ahead
Curt, you need to feel embarrassed. You needed to think through what questions should be asked from the get go. You blew it and need to reach out to her and apologize, although I would not stretch it by asking for another interview. I love and follow Linda's work and she has always been very credible. She has been validated for her work, experience and again, maybe someone who matches her credentials and professionalism might be entitled to interviewing her and asking challenging questions. You behaved inappropriately. Your questions not only tried to reduce Linda, you changed public view of what was perceived a moderately professional show to a "Don't Do Theories of Everything with Curt Jaimungal". The real pros will stay away from doing interviews with you. Look I do podasting and it's not easy. It's alot of scripting, producing and engineering, but it is thankless and mistakes are hard to recover from. You need to find a humble, thoughtful way to fix it and until you become a highly validated program and producer, don't try to be edgy in your questions like Barbara Walter's was. Few people can pull that off. Keep it straight and don't try to impress buy upstaging a courageous person who is one of a handful of people with the credibility, expertise and courage to broach the delicate topic of ETs, who has the respect of people who are afraid to speak about their real ET encounters in fear for their security, being ridiculed and being medicated. A friend and I saw an UFO together, in 2018 over Long Island, NY (about 500 feet above us, silently frozen in the air above us. It was egg in shape. We were being tracked by them. That was clear. My friend and I knew what we had seen and we know we are not alone. You offended millions of people who follow this woman's valued work.
He seems rude and right out the gate Linda is very defensive. Now days it’s the same with unbelievers in Sasquatch verses the Knowers! You cannot talk to people with closed minds
Well Said, You did a fantastic "job" calling Curt to task.@@CarmenAmorosGoldberg
& he was disrespectful !!! It was not about him !!!
Listen she started off the podcast admitting to never having listened to Curts work. How disrespectful is that? But she expected you to have read all her books and have her career timeline memorized. You asked the tough questions and we need more of that in this community. Keep up the good work
What pissed me off is she would keep talking about herself being so professional but definitely was not being so when he told her multiple times these are questions from the community. She then tried to play dumb when she was challenged by real questions the internet wants to know straight from the horses mouth. The issue is, she spent money and time on this subject and cannot accept being wrong and just take the L on certain aspects on her career. Good job Curt. You did nothing wrong at all.
waitaminute, what on earth are you talking about the interview is not all about Jaimungal is it? SHE was called in for interview! The burden is on the interviewer to research the interviewee's work, not the other way round! Someone calls you in to interview you on your research means you're answering questions on your OWN research. LMH gets requests to talk and for interviews coming at her like a " black river" you think she should read all these peoples' books before that? C'mon, upside down. You don't need to read books on what the interviewer opines buddy!
@@maitreya1906 you must be new to the channel
LMH has been doing this work - in the field, struggling with DIA, CIA, NSA, FBI and Pentagon azzholes for FORTY YEARS long before Jaimungal ( and you probably) were 2 separate haploid cells in other peoples' gonads. Which way does respect flow? Jaimungal is the Johnny come lately here. Respect is earned, not asserted just because some youtuber asks a couple snarky questions!!
@@naturalmystique1237 you must be new to the channel as well.
Happy Birthday Linda. I hope it is fun. Thank you for all the research you do on this subject you are talking about today. Keep up the good work.
LMH is a national treasure . She is non replaceable with her knowledge and contacts . I hope she is training a young person to follow her footsteps
I don't think it will be necessary at this point. We are all going to be experts soon.
For years I've found Linda entertaining and a bit of a kook. Just like most guests on coast to coast. Little did I know those years of familiarizing myself with these weird people and their ideas would one day culminate in my own gradual paradigm shift. Linda is owed so much by us and like many other pioneers will be forever remembered
Its only in the last 3 years I've become a believer. I used to halfway follow stuff like this but kind of laughed at it.
Linda Moulton Howe... She legit claimed to have a picture of an alien that was the cover of a video game
@@Corruptedd 🤣🤣🤣
@@TemujinMSM I've been knowing it's real since the days of Travis Walton and the Barney and Betty Hill cases.
I appreciate the in field research she did. Not afraid to get her hands and shoes dirty.
I watched the live stream, I think Linda misunderstood where the questions are coming from, when curt tried to explain that these questions are not his own but the audiences most asked questions in the live chat, Linda was too upset at that point and it clearly went over her head. I think Curts questions were great, he did a good job of remaining calm throughout the last portion when things went array. Linda spent alot of time in her answers establishing the already understood fact that she's a serious investigative journalist who follows the facts. I wish she would have listened to curts questions with a more open mind and answered without ego or emotion. Granted she has been subjected to ridicule and worse for 40+ years in her incredible career, so it's understandable that she expressed herself in this way. I was so excited for this interview. I hope curt manages to reach out to her and her team to mend this incident, hopefully he can bring her on again and give it another go. They're both great and each of their perspectives are important.
Yes. Kurt. What he said. Please have another go at it. I think that some EXTREMELY important insight could be generated with a different approach. I was so excited to see this interview.
I came to the same conclusion. Thank you
She's much older than she looks. Weren't think of her as an elderly person but I think that has something to do with it. My hearing has gone to shit over the years as well. Too many concerts.
Nothing to do with age
@@lightwarrior9911 Honestly I think age was a factor, towards the 2:40:08 mark you can see the defeat in curts face as he attempts to salvage what he can by explaining upvotes on questions and Linda clearly not grasping this concept. I think as soon as the question portion started and curt asked a personal question prefacing it with the statement that this is a personal concern of his as the channel grows, about unwittingly being used as an agent of disinfomation, things unravelled rather quickly onwards. She didn't undestand the distinction between his personal question and the remaining set of questions coming from the audience.
Brilliant God bless Linda 🙏 the truth always comes out in the end !
It's always super interesting hearing Linda talk about some of the information she has collected over the years.
Curt, I just gained a ton of respect for you. It's taken me a while to warm up to your style and presentation, but you clearly in the end have a huge heart and never want to leave someone feeling bullied or belittled. I struggled to follow Linda throughout most of the interview and became frustrated at times, but the moment her voice cracked in the end was when I realized (much like my realization about you) that she has a really good heart. The ending was horribly cringy, but carried with it an important lesson about human nature. In the end, you're giving your all as an interviewer and Linda is giving her all as a journalist and researcher. Regardless of who's right or wrong, you're both passionate human beings. I feel strongly that you and Linda will work out these misunderstandings and may end up learning a lot from one another. Take care, Curt. Reflect on this experience, right any wrongs and move forward a better man. Linda, take a deep breath. You've worked tirelessly for many years and are admired by many. The questions posed to you near the end seemed to strike something deep within you. Whatever that is, I hope you'll be able to process it and push ahead. I wish nothing but the best for you both.
Well said!
She have a lot of stories .but are they true. ? We know that the alien on the moon is video game .She was confronted with it right away.an honest person would take it down.but she just doubling down. UFO celebrities just want to sell stories.That is what evidence tells if you care about things like fakta.
☯️☮️
The lady just needs to come to grips that just because you consider yourself a professional with years of experience, doesn't mean you cannot be wrong.
@@andrejohansen2783 when she found out she had been duped with that picture she came out and printed a full retraction. The retraction wasn't just a paragraph like most retractions are. It was the whole story of how she met the guy and why she believed him and how she turned out to be wrong. I'm sure having it thrown in her face in such a public and humiliating way shocked her. This "gotcha" bullshit has its place, but it is NOT with someone who has already admitted the fault!! Curt was dead wrong to do that. It was disgusting!
I feel that Linda kept pressing how professional she's been throughout her career, which may be true, but she ended that interview in the most unprofessional way. Curt shouldn't feel bad about the way this turned out, but perhaps should be aware of the need to redact and reword questions before asking them. In the interview with Travis Walton, I had the impression that Travis felt his experience was being belittled, when being pressed for, what for any scientist would deem necessary details, but what Travis no doubt thought were trivial, and missing the big point. Linda, though, doesn't have the excuse of being ignorant of the need for scientific rigour and detail, especially given how many times in this interview she reiterated how scientifically rigorous her own research has been.
Still, now that it's done, maybe from this Curt can figure out how to attack the veracity of a claim in a manner that doesn't feel like an attack to the interviewee.
This is true, but the 2 questions at the end, which pissed Linda off were not Curt's....they were viewer questions that he read because they were the "most upvoted". And he read them word for word. Hopefully he will learn from this, and Linda won't tell the countless others she knows in the field not to deal with Curt and TOE.
I think Linda didn’t understand what he was saying and doesn’t understand all of the sources from which he compiles the questions - f’n BOOMER!
@@komergrowl7963 This. Exactly.
Great comment Simon, but, in my opinion he WAS NOT attacking her. All she had to do was handle the question with the professionalism we all know she has. That being said, I respect your point of view 100%. 👌
@@robfields49 oh she understood alright. She’s 80, but not deaf, nor stupid. Kurt repeatedly explained about upvotes; no way she didn’t get that.
She was upset because she felt her integrity and intelligence were challenged, and being tired I expect as she is elderly and it’s a long time to talk, and she let her pride and ego react to how she felt in the end. Also she couldn’t answer because she is so convinced she is right due to her belief but at the same time she knows that proper evidence wasn’t always there…she’s just convinced she’s right, and dead against the possibility that she has a blind spot called ‘belief’ and that is not the same as evidence.
And she’s not a boomer, she’s post WW1. Boomer gen started post WW2 in 1946.
When Linda expresses that she is ready to finish this interview it is at about (if not a little more) the runtime she does for Coast to Coast AM, most conventions, and her own content. So, to ask the questions that call her journalistic integrity into question at the end (the leather jacket comment was also unnecessary) when the last inquiry was a courtesy, was a bad move imo. I get the importance of asking these questions, but they have to be phrased right, legit (seems the one was more accusatory than anything, as you said), asked earlier, and I think prepared with more care than those in the chat will typically present. I know this is about a year ago, so I don't mean to dig up old news, but I'm just finding out about this. I'm sure all parties involved have grown from the experience, and I appreciate the interview, always a pleasure to hear Linda speak 👍🏽
Wow - how condescending this guy is! Linda is a global treasure with massive integrity and passion for her subject.
He was not condescending at all. Seriously...have u not seen his other podcasts?
Linda seems like she has been in an echo chamber for too long and couldn't handle a proper interview in which her assertions were questioned.
There was a misunderstanding in regards to where the questions come from but anyone who is really searching for answers to this phenomenon has to be open to seemingly stupid questions regardless of the source.
Unless all of these assertions are thoroughly examined and probed for mis/disinformation then we aren't going to get anywhere in this discussion.
Please keep asking questions Curt, no matter who you may offend.
That’s the reaction of some one who has been ridiculed for years, when all they do is their best and honest, trying to wake people up to the bigger picture. I’m just amazed at how magical life is these days. What a journey for us all. Great job Curt. Thanks to you both
To be honest, if her goal is to wake people up, she's really bad at it. Looking at her approach, it's almost like her goal is to get ridiculed.
Compare her approach to, say, Richard Dolan. I don't even like his approach (I think it's flawed like hers), but I think it's far, far better than hers if the goal is to wake people up.
Everyone under 50 is missing the point. A holistic approach to this subject should include her early years of NO cell phone. NO instant access to information on Google and the uphill climb as a woman with great looks AND a great brain. She slogged through the years of misogyny and managed to rise above the fray.
To those out there who have never seen a UFO or experienced a paranormal event you cannot know what she is driving at. To deride her says so much about you, not her.
@@O1OO1O1 i agree. It seems she can't handle challenges to her words and can't handle someone simply just not believing her. Reminds me of my narcissistic mother tbh.
Well, she did get taken in by a video game image and she could've laughed it off or at least explained it away somehow. If one is going to be involved in this field, a thick skin is a prerequisite. Come on man, as Joe Biden would say.
Yeah she became really defensive, at challenging questions which is a pity. I thought the questions were good and important, but it’s also somewhat understandable since I’m sure she’s gone through a lot of ridicule
I came across the skellital remains of a deer, there was no blood in the area, no guts meat or fur, the bones were held together by the tendons, some fur & hoof was intact on one hind leg, the flesh appeared to hav been stripped clean off the bones by a knife or sharp object, i didnt see knife marks on the bones, fine strippes of red were left on the bones, no butcher would hav done such a job, each rib was stripped clean, no ogans in its cage, a butcher wouldn't hav left this at the ballpark, behind the barier, laying between two trees, i reported this to the police, i hav no further info 😮
I do not understand why Linda would tolerate this interviewer. He interrupted, kept asking the same question that had been previously answered, and just generally did not seem to be in the same loop. She displayed a high level of tolerance (unless I misread the entire conversation) I found it frustrating to listen to him. OK, I finally got to the end of the interview and I saw that Linda finally did find Curt to be a dick and showed her displeasure. Good on you Linda, exhaustion took you down and made you feisty but I thought that was the good bit and long overdue. You can't win "them all but put this one down to experience and choose more wisely next time. Love your work.
🤡
Agreed 💯
Curt, you are the most patient, compassionate, open minded and insightful interviewer to grace the academic community. You give me hope. Thank you 🙏🏼
Curt, thank you for your journalistic integrity.
Curt is the one with the God-tier JOURNALISTIC integrity in this interview !!!!
I've had direct contact with 5 sasquatch altogether. An elder spoke to me telepathically in 2018. Very wise and loving. Said sasquatch might not survive the anthropocene extinction. He asked me to share what I know about them. There is much. They can also effect your dreams, give you psychic visions (project images), remote view, astral project and even cloak. Pretty wild
uhm. do you have any proof? how about a video? Or did the "elder" ask you sign a NDA?
I so very deeply appreciate Linda. She’s the real deal, she’s lived it for years. She KNOWS a stuff !
She was unjust in getting angry, it’s an honest question. No one’s perfect, everyone makes mistakes in their profession, we’re all human. I’m sure she’s had to redact something.
I realize this is nearly a year old interview however it could have been one I’d seen featuring LMH anytime during this the past 20 years. Linda has a huge body of work indeed. At this time of her life she’s just telling her stories. Thus the reason at times she doesn’t seem to be answering the questions you’ve asked her. She hears a couple of key words & relays HER related story as it pertains to those key words. Case in point Antarctica. She told her
Antarctica story. It had nothing to do with the CURRENT developments your listener asked.
I've watched many of your videos and you always seem fair and balanced. The way this interview ended was cringeworthy but I didn't think your questions deserved that kind of reaction from Linda. In my opinion you were fair balanced and polite and I was sad to see her reaction. Keep up the great work!
Anyone who spoke at the Citizen Hearing, I automatically have respect for.
I like how Linda pauses at length after being asked a question, and then gives a well-constructed, articulate, thoughtful answer.
I agree. I was absolutely captivated by her responses.
She talks like a politician, never answering a question directly but instead tells a story that is loosely connected to the question. And the constant repetition… OMG.
You're being ironic, right?
@@mortenpedersen8226 thats what _im_ seeing,,,
@@mortenpedersen8226 exactly
Her getting offended at the end to any type of criticism only hurts her message she’s trying to get across. Nobody is immune to criticism. You can’t have an intelligent discussion if you can’t even consider that you may not know everything or have made mistakes in your findings. You can’t expect people to believe you 100% based on your reputation. The truth comes out eventually.
Edit: It wasn’t your fault man, you did great.
Agreed
Curt has gone too far. Asking hostile questions way too many times.
@@Tom_Mroz He simply asked what his viewership had requested and introduced an idea that a debunker had in order to cover it for our sake. There’s nothing hostile about it. You can tell his intentions are not that way. It’s an interview to discuss ideas and counterpoints, not a one-sided propaganda soapbox. Extraordinary claims requires extraordinary evidence. Just because you can prove someone said something to you, doesn’t make what they said true. To be as decorated of a journalist as she is, the way she handled the slightest bit of criticism is a big red flag and overshadows the entire video before it.
@@UnincredibleAim you are right. I’m skeptic here. I’m more open to these possibilities since Commander David Fraser shared his testimony along with the government confirming the Tic-tac footage but crop circles and abductions I remain quite skeptic about.
Consciousness from what I’ve researched is just an emergent property of the brain and nothing more.
And death is no different than before you were born or even every night in deep sleep or during general anesthesia. It’s just nothingness. People don’t want to accept that but it’s really just that simple.
@@Tom_Mroz don’t ask hurt me feelings questions 🤣🤣🤣. it’s called real journalism and interviewing, watch fox or cnn if u want baba questions
This guy should respect this woman , she is the kind of person who makes you and who you are !
And for the rest the truth is out there, go and find it
This lady is very dedicated to this subject. If you know anything! About her, this is the way she is and always has been. He’s not set up or has the time for the magnitude of what she has studied and found. Look at the age difference. She’s long time in this. And has done , been, seen did it. Just like she just said - involved! Also to the person above. This is her she’s not hostile! You know nothing of her.
Curt, I don’t think you did anything wrong. Admitting a mistake and then explaining how you came to the conclusion, and the steps you took to rectify the mistake shows your growth as a person. Linda was given ample opportunity to answer this, but did not.
Really surprised she took such offense to the question. Always have been a fan of Linda’s but one thing I didn’t know until this interview is how much she talks about her credibility. Saying over and over she has awards, Emmy’s, etc. that was really odd to me. Maybe she was just having a bad day?
Yeas that’s true. I could see how she might feel there was some inherent ageism in the question…
He did nothing wrong she basically said she has never made a mistake. Which is a load of B.S . She came across as long winded and full of garbage and hear say.
There's plenty of cases where she hasn't had "hard data," ie "whistleblowers" claiming alien bases at South Pole, etc
The world is full of skeptics, & I'm shocked that Curt wasn't aware of that.
(including right here in these comments)
This is a classic example of confirmation bias. She does nothing but confirm her own beliefs over and over again and if anyone dare question her she reads her résumé again and again. I’ve literally never seen someone read their résumé so many times in an interview. Linda has done good work but unfortunately, in this new climate, she is a relic. Curt you did a great job. You asked tough questions that frustrated someone who typically has her questions prepared.
What's _your_ resume Adam? Barista at Starbucks? GTFOH
But Adam, she has so many awards!
@@KarlLind and she’s an accomplished editor, TV personality, Writer, expert…..
This is the perfect summary of LMH. She is the opposite of Kevin from the office. Why answer a question in a few words when you could ramble for 15 minutes repeating the same thing I have said in every interview for a decade.
There is 0% of her that is open to the fact that she could be wrong. I’ll probably end up like that when I’m her age to be honest tho.
@@dat972 well said. This is very true
Generally a great interview. The last questions were fair -- although a bit pointed. I suspect there may be a generation gap thing here. Linda may not be used to the idea of "crowd sourced" Q&A off the internet and she's not running for political office so there's less willingness to kow-tow. And I can see, empathetically, why she got piqued. But to her credit I found her to be incredibly articulate and wonderfully intelligent throughout 99% of the interview. Despite the tempermental ending, I came away with enhanced respect and admiration for her and for her accomplishments. She's a pathbreaker, a groundbreaker. It won't be perfect all the time, but nobody is. Too bad a good interview kind of crashed and burned, but overall it's good work on both sides.
So Linda doesn’t want to answer real questions, she only wants selective questions that are complimentary only. So, on that aspect right there, her work is suspect
She clearly vocalized it had been 2 1/2 hours and obviously fatigued yet he kept pressing her to continue. That's when she had a meltdown. She is the oldest person he has interviewed. At 80 let's cut her some slack. Up to that point she was calm and highly respectful. Interviews of politicians that age are 30 min maximum.
I'm guessing she later apologized..
Huge Linda fan, that’s why I watched… I am actually surprised by Linda’s reaction to the questions. She is definitely an icon and has done so much for this subject!
With that being said, I get the feeling that she either was frustrated by the length of the interview or had misunderstood your questions.
I’ve listened to pretty much everything Linda has said and even subscribe to her Earthfiles subscription. Every singe interview she has ever given she has quoted the Richard Doty paper she had read as gospel. She admits that it is likely disinformation but still quotes the line about EBEN manipulating DNA in primates to create human, as if it’s fact. I can see the point of the question and I wonder that frequently. She does need to explain her trust in that document more thoroughly.
You had the high ground until you gave your opinion on her lack of vetting her sources recently in her career. That is where you lost the interview and it became an attack. The problem with using upvotes and live Twitter question in a long interview, is that you (Curt) could not pick or think about good questions to ask. Of course the negative questions are going to get upvotes! Majority of people watching are not familiar with LMH and her career but like to see drama. Benefits to the live questions online is viewer engagement. Just maybe watch out for the trolls, or possible Gov stooges, attempting to hijack interviews.
"I am actually surprised by Linda’s reaction to the questions." Seriously? She pulled the "do you know who I am?" card and has been in that frame of mind for years, if not decades.
@@VectorOfKnowledge with all due respect, the amount of time she's spent in this subject when no one else would touch it with a 10 ft pole, how would you feel? There's got to be a level of frustration she's feeling and has felt her whole life from the stigma to where me and you would probably handle it worse than she did, look I'm not a believer or experiencer I just have an open mind and the amount of information out there amounts to SOMETHING strange is going on, not saying I know because I don't but just feel if we dug through these trenches for as long as she has, that we would do our due diligence and basic research of the topic and realize she's going to feel an entire lifetime of pushback, which will entice her to describe her credentials and past if faced with targeted questions against her integrity, yes I realize I'm biased and love Linda's bravery to approach something we're programmed to call bullshit, if we were in those stigma and taboo shoes for so long, we would've probably handled it the same if not worse
@@jaydom57 Well said.
@@ReverendDr.Thomas - So you think your mysoginist "joke" is so great that it deserves to be repeated across the thread. I reported you and urge others, too, to not tolerate this kind of speech.
You calling Steven Cambian a troll?
Curt, you're simply the best!!! And you are absolutely right in asking those questions, period. Don't have to feel bad cause she's the one who took it the wrong way. 👍
She clearly vocalized it had been 2 1/2 hours and obviously fatigued yet he kept pressing her to continue. That's when she had a meltdown. She is the oldest person he has interviewed. At 80 let's cut her some slack. Up to that point she was calm and highly respectful. Interviews of politicians that age are 30 min maximum.
I'm guessing she later apologized..
I have the greatest respect for you and find your channel and topics veri interesting.
Pls. Do not find this as disrespectful, but I think you should have formulated your questions differently after you noticed she was taking them personally and as critisicm.
Linda has done more than anyone to get to the bottom of this for many many years and she deserves the utmost respect.
Linda is having a complete meltdown lmfao she’s completely misunderstood the platform and when he tried to explain it to her she said the last 20 mins wasn’t fair…. It’s hard not to laugh.
This was an amazing interview, from beginning to the very awkward end. Every bit of it, legendary. It's easy for us to tell you don't sweat it, obviously we're feeling the cringe with you in the moment, but you handled yourself so professionally with that and I think it says a lot about you as a person. Thank you for not chopping the end off and letting us see it all. People will learn from this, many lessons. You did great!
She gets wayyy too defensive at the end and takes critique extremely personal, ironic that she calls Curt unprofessional but how she reacts is EXTREMELY unprofessional... EXTREMELY. That's a huge red flag that she's too full of herself and has been heavily misinformed by people like Richard Doty and others. Don't waste your time interviewing her again Curt she's too far up her own ass.
Grandmas mouth open. I see pink gums. Reddish long tongue. Deep dark hot steaming throat. Grandmas throat is dark hot deep. Her mouth cheeks swell when comed in. I have been makeing love to grandmas mouth for 50 years. She still swallows. Such a deep throat. Grandma my first mouth. Only mouth. I got sent to grandmas for the summer. I never left the bed room for 3 months. Grandma said i could use her mouth. Anytime my zipper was down. Now 50 years later. Im still here. Momma stops by now and than. But she married my brother 30 years ago. I married grandmas mouth 50 years ago. My uncle married grandmas two hot armpits.
There is really no excuse for the flip at the end, but it is understandable. I have my personal perspective on her, and we all have flaws and quirks we can pick out in eachother. Linda, just by nature and area of pursuit, has endured a lot of trauma. That is what was felt in the end and why it hit you so hard. At point, I even saw you trying to push it off in frustration, but that pain hit hard... Just as hard as it hit her all her life. Triggered PTSD that in this field and time past she has been in it, could never understand.
I will give her credit though. She has a lot of information. Some of it, I question and some of it corroborates with overall sentiment and personal experience. But as was questioned, I believe some is disinformation and the abuse she endured has caused her to build a great wall and self perception of infallibility to endure it all. I really do feel for her regardless of my opinion of who she is in projection of resilience. Because this area of study attracts a lot of attention from everywhere that has single intention of tearing you apart at a deeply personal level to keep you away. 40-50 years and it would tear anyone apart, especially during the decades she has done it in. Those years in truth seeking are nothing younger people in the internet generation could understand. It's very hard to bury instant world wide sharing, but back then, the few who did the leg work were the target of straight out psychological and physical warfare by those with endless resources at hand to carry it out.
I really admire your interview style brother. And I want to say, time manipulation is real. How, I don't know. I have no proof of it I could offer other than personal experience repeated 3 times one night. I won't get into it as it would be a book alone, but I astral project when I sleep. And I am fully conscious and travel to many places that are as real as awake here. Not everytime I sleep, but a lot of the time. One night I was in a projection that was very long. It seemed like a month or months had passed in each vision, and the odd thing was, 3 times I woke up and went to the bathroom and went right back to the same place doing the same thing. Building a huge structure underground, or overseeing it. And it was mundane and I was not human, but humanesque. Irrelevant, but I was probably riding along with another consciousness. This does happen and I have tested it, but back to time. I don't know why, but just before I "fell asleep" I looked at my clock. We'll say it was 12:40, because I don't remember the exact time it was without going back to my notes of it. Anyway, I had this month long "dream" and kind of crashed back into my body woke up. It was kind of a shock and I looked at the clock. 12:30. 12:30? How is that possible, that dream felt like months long as I lived days in it. I said, okay, maybe I was mistaken on the time, but dreams move fast and maybe I was just mistaken. So went back to sleep. Same "dream" and time felt in it. Same wakeup again and this time I remembered the time just on principle. 12:20. 12:20? WTF? How is this even possible? How the hell can I be somewhere for what felt like months, but wake up 10 minutes before I went to sleep? Curt, I was super brain twisted... I am a logical guy and for this one, not possible, but just happened. I couldn't bring myself to accept it.
Well, I have a lot of impossible things happen I won't get into that have been documented and witnessed. So I just went back to bed kind of half dismissing it. I figured since it was so shocking, it would be over. The prior time I just sort of half thought it was the case. So I went back to sleep... A third time, right back to that same underground place picking up where I left off. There for some time again, and woke up the same way, but this time my whole body hurt and it felt like I hadn't slept for far too long, like days or weeks where your eyes and whole being hurt. So looked at the clock and felt sick and just brain twisted. 12:10. Okay, something is super messed up because 1 time, maybe mistaken. Twice when I made sure I knew what time it was, okay... I know I am not mistaken, but I have to be, because it's impossible. 3 times in a row one right after another... You feel sick and your whole damned logic system crashes. I stayed up for several hours because my brain felt like a full computer melt down on a reason level.
Again, I don't remember the precise times, but it was so traumatic, I did document it right after when I was able to gain my senses back. It could have been 20 minutes earlier each time and at 2 or 3 am, but each time it was the same number of minutes earlier, 3x in a row. I can't explain how it happened, but it did. So Curt, all I know is that reality is not reality at a very fundamental level. And the real question. If this is true, then what does that mean for everything we perceive as such, because our whole reality is based on time being the foundational arranger. If it is not, then all placed on it is not real as we believe it. And this is not the only or most validating thing to time being a perception alone. I have finished a 5 person conversation I had lived before it actually happening and many other things of seeing them like having already lived them, and then them being identical to what I tell others in overwhelming detail just to have it proved to be real for me to accept.
Like I came to... Very hard to believe and maybe something you won't be able to allow yourself to until you are forced to by whatever that calls the shots for all things wants you to. But this is the truth in what happened. And again, this was only one time it happened like this and no I don't do drugs, I don't even like drinking. I am super analytical and logical and ranked 98th percentile in pattern recognition and have an IQ of 140. I don't like anything that disrupts my consciousness and presence, because I am not a "whatever" guy. When something that does not compute happen, I surgically dissect it or I cannot place it into perception and I can't move on. So take it for what it's worth, but I can say for a fact, time and reality are not anything like we perceive them to be.
I didn’t see any cringe. Just honest questions.
@@tacitus539en you didn't watch the end. Cringe starts around 2:36:00
Respect to the intervjuer who is not afraid to ask relevant questions in a pursuit to get the answer, which often requires interrupting the intervjued to keep on track. Individuals who like and are used to maintaining long monologues, usually do it for a reason, either hiding their incompetence, absents of factual knowledge or unvillingness to expose the knowledge. Appreciation and respect to a program host who is skillful, knowledgeable and strait forwarded enough to maintain control and structure of the dialogue and conversation. We don't want or need political correctness and politicizing in our conversation and pursuit of knowledge.
Love you both. My apologies on how it ended. From my perspective; no harm was intended.
I worked at the competitor of the “Alcoa” Aluminum smelter that she’s referring to and we made the purest aluminum in America for sure but I also think in the world and I verify as the person who pulls the aluminum out of the pots and tests them.. we cannot make aluminum that pure just as she says
Edit: the purest aluminum we can produce is what we sell to the contractors that build satellites and rockets and that aluminum is not near as pure as what she’s referring to
Unimpressed with Linda's reaction to the final question and totally in awe of your tactful demeanor. Great work Kurt.
"How dare you question me! I went to Stanford!"- . Just shows how shaky her "journalism" is: can't even be asked about mistakes and retractions.
For last 40 minutes of interview Curt was presenting different forms of same question: "Linda, please proof to me you are not a fraud". She was answering very politely, but how many times one can be asked same hostile kind of question ? Curt crossed a line rather definitely and a few times too many. Then just because some question is upvoted, doesn't mean Curt should read it, especially when tone of question is hostile.
EDIT:(I edited Curt's name, that I have misspelled).
@@Tom_Mroz Yes i fully agree with you. Internet comments are filled with morons. 100 fools can make an evil out of 1 wise person. The problem here lies with lengthy discussions without breaks. It can make anybody lose nerve. Both Kurt and Linda fell to their egos after a long relay contest.
@@Tom_Mroz I found the fault 100% _HERS._ She was claiming science and medical expertise multiple times throughout the interview, yet has _NO_ science education. Communications and science are not the same degree despite her claims. Kurt didn't call her out on that, even when she didn't know kangaroos were mammals, and claimed the James Webb would be able to see artificial structures on exoplanets (a ridiculous claim, easily falsifiable by any effort whatsoever on her part).
So now she is saying she knows the exact number of alien civilizations in the Milky Way galaxy?! And she shouldn't be asked about the validity of her sources? - That's not acceptable in journalism or science- if you're going to make outlandish claims, you should be prepared to discuss the evidence, at a minimum. Instead, she harped about her awards and going to Stanford. I can't imagine another interviewer letting her get away with more unanswered Bull $h!t than Kurt did. If anything, he didn't press the issue enough when she repeatedly dodged the question. I certainly wouldn't blame him for her rude behavior.
@@onebylandtwoifbysearunifby5475 exactly my thoughts!