Paranormal   

Question of the Week

Posted July 26, 2010

   Each week I will post a question raised by people I meet at book events or  at

haunted locations I visit, or submitted to me by e-mail. I will post my  answer

Monday evenings, usually no later than 6:00 PM. I would appreciate your

feedback if you have additional information you believe I should include, or if you  

have a contrary opinion.

Has ghost hunting become more scientific in recent years? Will it ever be accepted as a true science?

This question was submitted to me prior to my appearance on Doug Carnahan’s radio show (The

Haunted Truth) yesterday and the timing is perfect. Doug brought up this same issue, focusing

particularly on the second part of the inquiry.

Let me answer to second question, first:

Will paranormal investigation ever be accepted as a true science? Probably not. Even with

advances in technology and a better understanding of the scientific method, paranormal investigation

will not achieve the same level of credibility and respectability as biochemistry, astrophysics, or geology.

I recognize that the term paranormal investigation is broad and includes much more than ghost

hunting. Laboratories at Duke University, Harvard, and other prestigious universities may make great

strides in advancing our knowledge of paranormal phenomena such as pre-cognition and remote

viewing, but the nature of the phenomena under study prevents the application of a rigorous scientific

method of investigation that would generate a solid base of confirmed theory. Confirmed theory is FACT,

and facts are the foundation of any body of scientific knowledge.

We shouldn’t feel too badly about this. Fields such as psychology, social science, economics, even history,

are not viewed as “true science” by those who do research in chemistry, physics, physiology, and

oceanography.  That’s because many fields – including the paranormal – do not offer a way to control

the multitude of variables that may confound measurements or observations that comprise the “results”

of laboratory or field studies.

What should we do about this? That depends upon your objective. In most cases, my objective in a

paranormal investigation is the paranormal experience.  I don’t desire to accumulate hundreds of

photographs of light anomalies, shadows, etc., nor do I try to gather a vast collection of recording of audio

phenomena (EAP or EVP). I seek the experience, not a crate of “evidence” that might convince skeptics

or comprise proof of “life after death.”  

Having said that, I’ve read statements at several websites in which paranormal groups cite their

objectives which include getting evidence of life after death, or proof that a ghost exists. It may be more

feasible to seek enough experiences that confirm our personal theory or belief that ghosts exist. Trying

to do more than that may lead paranormal investigators into a realm where the investigation falls

pitifully short of the science needed to convince skeptics or comprise evidence.

Why is that so? Because very few people who engage in ghost hunting use methods that qualify

as scientific.

Getting back to the two-part question:has ghost hunting become more scientific in recent

years? 

Not really. There are people who have done some incredible research-and-development of equipment,

however. And, on TV, we’ve seen some awesome equipment packages put together, most notably on  

Ghost Lab. Gadgets and impressive arrays of sensors, computers, display screens, etc., have given

many people the impression that ghost hunting has become scientific, but that is not an accurate

conclusion.

It is important to remember that a “scientific” investigation is not defined by the equipment used. It is

implicit in the methodology of data acquisition, rigorous analysis, and unbiased interpretation. The latter

point – unbiased interpretation -  is where many ghost hunters fail.  The lack of consideration given to

these concepts by many practitioners of paranormal investigation is one of reasons why the United State

National Science Foundation contends that there is no scientific evidence to support belief in the

paranormal, including ghosts.

Ghost hunters also fail to adhere to the scientific method when they do not consider;

Validity of the “data” they obtained, whether it is a light anomaly in a digital image or a swing of the

EMF needle. This has a lot to do with the equipment used to sense paranormal activity. Orbs used to be

a prized objective of ghost hunters, but we now know that more than 95% of orb photographs do not

represent anything paranormal. A little research has made the orb invalid as an indication of paranormal

activity in most cases. We need to scrutinize other detection devices such as the EMF meter, Ovilus,

Puck, and all the other gadgets for which is there no data, or other information, that establishes their

validity.

Accuracy of the detection equipment; this also requires a consideration of the appropriateness of the

selected equipment. If ghosts are not comprised of atoms, or any charged particle, why would an EMF

meter indicate the presence of a ghost?

Reliability of the measurement: this means, can the EVP, EMG needle swing, or light anomaly be

detected repeatedly or it is a singular event? Without a high index of reliability, the “evidence” lacks

scientific credibility.

I’ve talked about the issue of repeated measures, or reliability, in other essays. I know many

paranormal groups like to advertise how many investigations they do in a year, believing that a long list

of venues makes them appear successful or competent. It is far more impressive to investigate 5

locations on 5 different occasions than to investigate 25 different places.    

I don’t want to sound pessimistic or discourage ghost hunters. My objective here is quite the opposite. I

want to encourage the scientific study of paranormal phenomena by raising some concerns before the

“scientific” ghost hunters stray so far from their stated objective that their efforts fail to contribute

anything to the science of paranormal investigation.

Thanks for your questions and visiting this page for anwers.

                              Stay in touch!       

                                                                    Jeff Dwyer

From last week . . .

Is the Ouija board really dangerous? How can it be used in ghost hunting?

This question is submitted to me every time the cast of Most Haunted uses a Ouija board or these

fascinating device are mentioned in the news. It came up recently when a friend came to believe his that

home was infested with evil paranormal beings after he developed an electronic Ouija board.

Are they dangerous? When used properly by following simple rules I’ve listed below, Ouija boards are

safe.

Warnings: Why do people warn of dangers? I believe it is because some users have mis-interpreted

the messages or have been psychologically unstable to the extent that they developed irrational fears.

Some warnings have been generated by people who cite Biblical passages.

It has been said that Satan and his demons use the board to give advice or guidance that seems good and

useful, and harmless, but, eventually proves damaging. The Biblical passage that supports this

contention is;

2 Corinthians 11:14-15 – “And no wonder, for Satan himself masquerades as servants of righteousness.

Their end will be what actions they deserve.”

Stan may sue the board to get people more deeply involved in spiritual activity that he can twist, making

them pawns of evil. This arises from;

1Peteer 5:8 – “Be self-controlled and alert. Your enemy the devil prowls around like a roaring lion

looking for someone to devour.”

Finally, some who oppose the use of Ouija boards go to the top of the spiritual pyramid and warn that

God view channeling or communication with spirits to be a sin.  Deuteronomy 18:11-12 – “Let no one be

found among you … who practices divination or sorcery, interprets omens, engages in witchcraft, or casts

spells, or who is a medium or spiritist or who consults the dead.  Anyone who does these things is

detestable to the LORD, and because of these detestable practices the LORD your God will drive out

those nations before you.”

More contemporary warnings have been given by people who used the Ouija board with some success.

For years, Poet James Merrill (1926-1995) obtained messages from deceased persons and used the

material in his poetry, the Changing Light of Sandover. In 1995, as he lay near death, he advised

against the use of the Ouija board.

Other Warnings: Some have warned that Ouija boards will allow evil spirits to enter your home,

control your body, or possess people around you. It has been suggested that Ouija boards open a

gateway, allowing evil or troublesome spirits to roam the earth. Others advise that, at the very least, the

use of a Ouija board is addictive, or the information obtained is misleading or misinterpreted  

People who are impressionable, desperate, irrational thinkers, gullible, or who cannot be grouped with

the sharper tools in the shed, may use Ouija board messages in a way that harms them or harms people

around them.

Rules for Using the Ouija Board: many writers have offered sound advice for using the Ouija. I’ll

summarize some of the best advice here.

1. Turn off all electrical devices in the area. Cell phones, recorders, cameras, etc., may generate small

lectromagnetic fields that impair spirit communication, resulting in unintelligible messages or messages

that make no sense.

2. Interpret messages carefully with the knowledge that spirits may lie or mislead Ouija users. Always

seek clarification of messages or advice and try to learn the name of the spirit who offers that

information.

3. Let the spirit finish spelling each word. Don’t rush the process by finishing a word for the spirit. Do not

reveal your personal information to any spirit that communicates through the Ouija board.

4. Don’t use the board when you are tired, ill, have recently consumed alcohol, or taken drugs.

5. Always close the session by saying “good-bye.” Do not take your fingers off the planchette until the 

communicating spirit has also said good or indicated the communication session had ended.

6. Make your questions as simple and short as possible. Don’t precede them with a long explanation of

what you need or want, or the nature of your problems.

7. Have a companion take notes of your questions and your answers.

8. Keep your Ouija sessions brief (less than 15 minutes) and focused on one or two specific concerns or

questions. Ask a question in different ways to see if you get a consistent reply from the communicating

spirit.

How can the Ouija be used in ghost hunting?

It may be useful to use a Ouija at the beginning of an investigation to;

1.  determine if a spirit is present or how many spirits are present

2. learn from the communicating spirit where, within the venue, it (the spirit) is located

3. obtain identifying information from the spirit such as name, gender, reason for haunting. etc.

     ask what is the best way to obtain evidence of the spirit’s presence (audio, image, temperature

     change, EMF change, etc.)

4. ask the spirit to increase the energy of its manifestations to enable members of the investigation team

    to perceive its presence.

I have had only a little experience with Ouija boards although I have plans to begin a series of daily

experimental sessions soon. (I’ll report those to you later in August). Years ago, I used one several times

with friends. None of us had deeply disturbing experiences although after one session, I did have an

annoying voice whispering unintelligibly in my ear for the following two days.