Standardization and Regulation in Paranormal Research

[Jeff Crowell]

Can it be done? Seriously, professionally, effectively?

I have a lot to say on the matter so I wrote a blog post on it here, but feel free to add thoughts and replies within this thread.

 

[Gene Steinberg]

Thanks Jeff. We're on the same page here.

 

[Wade]

the term paranormal doesn't really help, maybe we should start calling it parascience I'm going to try to use that term in this forum and see how badly I get flamed.

 

[Jeff Crowell]

Too close to 'pseudoscience', I think.

Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 4 Beta

 

[Wade]

Maybe another problem is the idea of hauntings, Jeff would know better than I, but I understand that there are several different kinds of hauntings including residual repetitive events involving inanimate objects. (Which if legitimate is likely to be some kind of glitch in a time space field...or maybe the "ghost" train is in denial over it's demise. Is there anything solid that would tie all these different type of hauntings together and thus standardize them?

 

[Angel of Ioren]

Well said Jeff. This is why there's so much in-fighting among people looking at the paranormal - there are no standards.

 

[Jeff Crowell]

Maybe another problem is the idea of hauntings, Jeff would know better than I but I understand that there are several different kinds of hauntings including residual repetitive events involving inanimate objects. (Which if legitimate is likely to be some kind of glitch in a time space field...or maybe the "ghost" train is in denial over it's demise. Is there anything solid that would tie all these different type of hauntings together and thus standardize them?

I've taken quite a bit of issue with the repetitive, residual haunting hypothesis. As many scientists will point out, repeatability is a critical factor for proving something scientifically, and a residual haunting seems to offer this very opportunity. I've had countless individuals, including a few clients here in my local community, state that "Every night at 3:00 am 'x' happens all the time," or "At exactly 9:21 a ghost floats across the room in the kitchen." It never fails that when you attempt to observe this very phenomenon at these stated times, well, the event just doesn't happen. The excuses get pulled out then, from "They don't like being filmed or photographed," to "The energy was different this time," to "Well it's not going to happen if your LOOKING for it to happen! Der." I've yet to see a residual haunting pan out at the time and location I've been told.

That's the skeptic side of me, however the believer side of me points out that there could be many other factors involved in triggering the haunting, but again, what standard to I take in researching those factors? And if they produce no results?

To complicate the issue even further, where did the stated hypothesis of a residual haunting come from? Is it a hypothesis based on patterned research, from witness testimony, or from investigator speculation? Where ever it originated as a hypothesis, it's certainly grown in popularity, but ask any researcher who buys into it where it came from or if they have data to support it and you'll get blank stares. The repeating, residual haunting idea appears to be one of those ghost concepts (no pun intended) that everybody just states as 'fact' without really delving into investigating it.

If only we had an organization dedicated to looking into such claims. .

Peace.

 

[Randall]

Can it be done? Seriously, professionally, effectively?

Good Blog Post Jeff. It pretty much sums up the issue. To answer your questions:

1. Can It Be Done? Yes it's possible. But that doesn't mean it will ever happen.
2. Seriously? Yes, there are enough people who take it seriously.
3. Professionally? Yes, assuming professionally means with a high degree of skill and competency. You might even be able to get paid.
4. Effectively? Yes, provided the participants recognize that "effective" means something other than proving their own predetermined biases.

 

[Burnt State]

I think everyone sensible is looking for standardization but b/c so many "researchers" are either in it for $$$, notoriety or they unfortunately repeat and promote unproven narratives, distorting them in their broken telephone's version of Ufological history without care or concern. This problem plagues the internet generation of paranormal inquiry leaving the whole thing mostly laughable. Unless a bold and commanding figure is willing to proclaim a new path, rejecting all that is suspiciously fraudulent, and can take audience, science and media with them along for a new methodology there's no where to go. Unfortunately, the many diverse fans of this figure or that prophet would rather continue the crabs in the bucket scenarios of infighting and destruction from within. Everyone shares in the guilt this way as who is holding a stringent line that discounts the quacks, frauds and $$$ driven profiteers? If you did that there would only be a lot of rejection of most of the paranormal investigators. Look how much of Ufology is based on words alone: second generation narravtives, FOIA, MJ12. You might as well use cave paintings and folklore to prove ideas instead of consistent, scientific research.

We bat this idea around a lot here and I feel bad about it because Randall is the only one that attempts to defend the field and his own stringent approach. Who else congregates in that same pond? And why don't they collect to generate their own new path? I'm sure there's no real support for the lack of sexiness to this approach. Most consumers, receivers, musers, critics and paranormal conference attendees want to see the two aliens wandering the spacedeck in the Turkey videos instead of searching through comparative Excel spreadsheets and databases to correlate real information. That's the bigger problem right there.

Sorry for the familar rant.

 

[Randall]

I think everyone sensible is looking for standardization but b/c so many "researchers" are either in it for $$$, notoriety or they unfortunately repeat and promote unproven narratives, distorting them in their broken telephone's version of Ufological history without care or concern. This problem plagues the internet generation of paranormal inquiry leaving the whole thing mostly laughable. Unless a bold and commanding figure is willing to proclaim a new path, rejecting all that is suspiciously fraudulent, and can take audience, science and media with them along for a new methodology there's no where to go.

Hey ... No need to apologize. I always appreciate a good rant. Besides, what else are we supposed to rant about? But let's be careful not to throw the baby out with the bathwater. It's been a long haul and the few flakes of gold we have been able to pan out of these muddy waters are still valuable, even if they seem dated and the stories about them are repeated ad nauseam. These are the stories of the first generation to take the phenomenon out of the realm of religion and superstition and into the realm of scientific possibility. No longer are we willingly sacrificing our finest sheep or firstborn children. Now whatever is responsible has to sneak around and abduct cows and outrun fighter jets. These phenomena ( including paranormal phenomena in general ) have profound implications for our place as a sentient species in the universe, and the experiences from this period of time need to be preserved and passed along to future generations. We are the ones who have taken on this great responsibility, and it should be done seriously, effectively and professionally. ( end of response rant )

We bat this idea around a lot here and I feel bad about it because Randall is the only one that attempts to defend the field and his own stringent approach. Who else congregates in that same pond? And why don't they collect to generate their own new path? I'm sure there's no real support for the lack of sexiness to this approach. Most consumers, receivers, musers, critics and paranormal conference attendees want to see the two aliens wandering the spacedeck in the Turkey videos instead of searching through comparative Excel spreadsheets and databases to correlate real information. That's the bigger problem right there.

Thank you so much for that comment. It means more than you imagine .

 

[Blabyboy]

comparative Excel spreadsheets and databases to correlate real information.

That is the real frustration for me. I had to re-check my hearing when Peter Gersten (the UFO Center) guy said that he allowed the collection of data in various states - mining that data is going to be haaaard!

I'm still working on all this in the background, but perhaps the short to mid-term solution is to provide form code that can be cut/pasted into anyone's website that pushes the collected data into a hub and has specific criteria that needs to be collected for any paranormal incident.

The thing is, in some ways at present, it's in the collector's interest not to have it in a standard format because they think there's $$$ in it (there is still it seems, one born every minute), or it's just their hobby and that's the way they want to do it so why should they have to follow a standard - it's all things in the way of them enjoying their free time.

A reputation engine would also be useful based on several factors.... but let's not get ahead of ourselves. Just having a standard for data collection would be a good start.

Cheers,
Bb

 

[nameless]

university accreditation like every other thing.

 

[Burnt State]

university accreditation like every other thing.

You mean like this? Ufology

And this course here has to be the centerpiece of one's studies while pursuing their degree at Metaphysical U. Mind Traveling UFOs
I wonder what the earning potential is once you have your B. U.?

 

[Jeff Crowell]

You mean like this? Ufology

And this course here has to be the centerpiece of one's studies while pursuing their degree at Metaphysical U. Mind Traveling UFOs
I wonder what the earning potential is once you have your B. U.?

Probably the same for parapsychologists. If there has ever been a genuine scientific attempt at researching the paranormal, namely the ghosts, haunting, and psychic phenomenon, it's been the field of parapsychology. However, parapsychology died in the United States around the 1970's. It died as a scientific field of study because it yielded no significant (i.e. profitable) results, and colleges tired of dumping hundreds of thousands, if not millions of dollars into the departement only to have zero money coming back out.

I really feel bad for people like Loyd Auerbach and people like him. Loyd's a nice enough guy but I know he's not making any cash with his parapsych. degree.

J.

 

[Jeff Crowell]

That is the real frustration for me. I had to re-check my hearing when Peter Gersten (the UFO Center) guy said that he allowed the collection of data in various states - mining that data is going to be haaaard!

I'm still working on all this in the background, but perhaps the short to mid-term solution is to provide form code that can be cut/pasted into anyone's website that pushes the collected data into a hub and has specific criteria that needs to be collected for any paranormal incident.

The thing is, in some ways at present, it's in the collector's interest not to have it in a standard format because they think there's $$$ in it (there is still it seems, one born every minute), or it's just their hobby and that's the way they want to do it so why should they have to follow a standard - it's all things in the way of them enjoying their free time.

A reputation engine would also be useful based on several factors.... but let's not get ahead of ourselves. Just having a standard for data collection would be a good start.

Cheers,
Bb

Data logging. I've always wanted to setup an extensive system of data logging equipment. They tampered with the idea on Ghost Lab, place sensors and monitors, as small and subtle as you can get them, throughout a reportedly haunted location and let computers track the measurements and variations. That's the way to go. Every team I've worked with tried to track variables just through human observation....a guy in the corner holding an EMF detector, another guy holding the thermometer, etc.... Far too much excitement ensued because the temperature went up a degree when the EMF detector registered a .3 mgu flux. And it just turned out to be the airconditioner turning on.

Capturing raw data through a logger, then passing it through a data miner for specific variable fluctuations will tell much. Computers would allow us to breeze through gigs of data, pointing out only the serious, and real, variations in environmental factors, but that's just me dreaming, of course. Such a setup would take a small staff of computer techs and electrical engineers to get up-and-running, then a very well-trained and technical staff to actually operate. I'd say with equipment, the entire setup would range upwards of $10k just to start.

Pipe dream.

J.

 

[Randall]

Data logging. I've always wanted to setup an extensive system of data logging equipment ... Such a setup would take a small staff of computer techs and electrical engineers to get up-and-running, then a very well-trained and technical staff to actually operate. I'd say with equipment, the entire setup would range upwards of $10k just to start.

You might be interested in something like what these folks are doing: Paranormal research investigation anomalous phenomena scientific ASSAP

EXCERPT: September 20, 2011 Morton Report

Rumours had been circulating for months among the UK’s paranormal research groups. ASSAP -- the Association for the Scientific Study of Anomalous Phenomena -- had let it be known they had a major announcement to make, and there was much speculation as to what it would be.

The secret was finally revealed on Saturday, 10 September 2011, at ASSAP’s 30th anniversary conference. The Association -- an education and research charity interested in all manner of strange goings-on -- announced that it had been recognised as a professional body for investigators of anomalous phenomena. Officially recognised, that is, and by no less an entity than the UK Government ...

Source: UK Paranormal Research Gets Professional | The Morton Report

 

[Burnt State]

Data logging. I've always wanted to setup an extensive system of data logging equipment...Capturing raw data through a logger, then passing it through a data miner for specific variable fluctuations will tell much. Computers would allow us to breeze through gigs of data, pointing out only the serious, and real, variations in environmental factors, but that's just me dreaming, of course. Such a setup would take a small staff of computer techs and electrical engineers to get up-and-running, then a very well-trained and technical staff to actually operate. I'd say with equipment, the entire setup would range upwards of $10k just to start.

C'mon, man, the year's 2013. There has to be paranormal app for that?! My kids are finding ghosts every other day with my cell phone.

 

[Burnt State]

You might be interested in something like what these folks are doing: Paranormal research investigation anomalous phenomena scientific ASSAP

Getting back to previous conversations I was happy to see the section on magnetic field induced hallucinations as one of the possibilities for explaining paranormal experiences.

Magnetic fields and ghosts hauntings ASSAP

 

[Randall]

Getting back to previous conversations I was happy to see the section on magnetic field induced hallucinations as one of the possibilities for explaining paranormal experiences.

Yes. Interesting stuff. I'm sure you've probably also heard of Persinger's work? I guess the question is whether or not natural magnetic fields could be responsible? His theory is that there are geological forces at work that lead to concentrated EM bursts that could result in these types of hallucinations. Apparently there are also high power EM based non-lethal weapons that produce burning sensations among other things. And then there is also the theory that UFOs employ some sort of EM containment field as part of their energy storage system and that close unshielded proximity to a fully charged unit could induce similar hallucinations. So in the absence of "not simply crazy or on drugs", there are natural, accidental, deliberate, alien, and human possibilities for the inducement of hallucinations by exposure to EM fields.

 

[Burnt State]

Yes. Interesting stuff. I'm sure you've probably also heard of Persinger's work?

I was hoping to hear more from this character, but I read that Laurentian University closed his lab because they needed space and that Persinger's been pretty much silenced and dismissed. No follow up and the end of some really interesting research. I was hoping to wear the god helmet and talk to my dead father for a bit on one my drives through Sudbury. Maybe he could install one of them as an interactive exhibit at the science centre there?