Punnett seems like he doesn't take some paranormal topics seriously at all. He's similar to the local news guy who does a little joke about the recent UFO sighting, rather than reporting it like a serious news story. I also think Punnett isn't libertarian enough for the job. And I say that, not just in the political sense, but in the conversational sense as well. I mean despite Noory's drawbacks as an interviewer, he at least knows never to set himself up as the opposition to his guests' claims.
I agree and disagree. I like the fact that Punnett never gives anyone a pass, in fact, in some cases I almost wish he'd go in further. He always takes his questions to the edge without ever quite "moving in for the kill." I like the paranormal or I wouldn't listen to C2C but I don't think we do ourselves any favors by having a free forum for people to come on and say there are hibernating giants in Kansas without having to present any evidence short of "I heard from an anonymous source who herad from an anonymous source -." When I first heard Dr. Charles Tramont on C2C it was with GN and he came across as a patently credible, conservative, well-informed, sober researcher into reincarnation. The second time he was on - a year later - he came across as a raving nutcase who was even worse than "Dr." Bruce Goldberg. I often think that if GN had been more aggressive in his questioning the first time I wouldn't have been deluded into spending a year thinking the things Tramont said had any bearing on reality.
I also like Ian's "storybook" interview style when he interviews authors.
That said, I swear my head explodes each time he says "mmmkay, now I wanna challenge you on this ..." That specific line is so oft repeated it gets dulling.
I also just don't like Ian's voice. He's really not kidding when he says he has a voice made for print.
Also, when you say he's not libertarian enough in his questioning style, I'd move that to say he's also not libertarian enough in his philosophical style. I don't think a Minnesota fabian can really give a good treatment to conspiracy and parapolitical topics.
Finally, with Ian, sometimes I feel like I'm listening to Radio Comicon. My interest level in XYZ character from some indie comic from 1978 and the thought process that went into creating it is just about nil. It's like George and his ramblings about the Twilight Zone.
My vote is for Knapp hands-down. Knapp is informed, connected, not afraid to challenge guests (except, unfortunately, Bob Lazar), and increases his credibility by displaying investigative interest in topics of the mainstream (e.g. wild horses, Jim Gibbons' sex scandal, OST nuclear transports, etc.). I wish Knapp, though:
1 - didn't do the DJ act with the bumper music ... "taking us into break is a solid gold favorite from the Grass Roots; you won't be able to stop from clapping along to this cover of Edison Lighthouses' Love Grows ..."
2 - did something about his voice ... it's obvious he has a heavy foreign or regional accent he's covering up; the monotone of his voice is a washover of some dialect - whatever his real voice sounds like it's got to be better than that, though
