You’re absolutely right about paranormal investigations not being real science. At least, not how it’s practiced now. I mean, it could be handled scientifically, but no one does that I know of.
First of all, the theories that have been put out have thus far all been guesses. Not just guesses, but random guesses that are not based on any real world observations. There’s nothing wrong with that per se, until you assume that the guess is true. Take for instance the very prevalent theory of EM surges indicating a ghostly presence. Whoever first theorized that EM surges may indicate paranormal activity made a random guess that had no basis. Again, nothing wrong with theorizing in that way, but the problem starts when you take it as fact. Until someone finds a way to provide some type of evidence to support this theory, it’s no better than fiction. Someone could just as easily theorize that an EM surge indicates a invisible alien using some type of personal cloaking device. The problem with either is that you can’t prove that it indicates whatever it supposedly indicates.
The theory of orbs has the same problem. This guy who emailed you talked as if it was a fact that orbs were a spiritual fingerprint. That’s just a guess someone made, and to take it as fact withpout anything to support it is the opposite of science.
The other problem the field of paranormal investigations is that the things they look for can come from any number of sources. For instance, EM fields are generated by so many different things that you never can say definitively where it’s coming from. Power lines or any type of electronic or electrical device generates EM. Static electricity can be generated through friction when you walk. The earth itself has its own magnetic field surrounding it. When paranormal investigators go out and measure EM fields, they could be detecting any number of different factors. Same thing with the orbs; could be a lens flare, or any other number of fluke tricks of light or lens (camera lenses can do a lot of weird stuff to light; auras, flares, spots, etc).
Another problem with the field is that the investigators are way to quick to jump to the conclusion that a certain observation supports their theory. In any other scientific field, you don’t make a declaration like that until you test the heck out of something over and over and over and in a huge variety of situations & taking every conceivable factor into consideration. If all you do is walk into a house, run a few sweeps for EM surges, record a couple of orbs, and then leave, you can’t then say, “there’s a spiritual presence here.” For one thing, as I said before, the idea that these observations indicate spiritual presences is a guess, so saying they indicate spirits is no more valid scientifically than saying that they indicate aliens. Also, I doubt the tests these paranormal investigators run are thorough more often than not. You can’t just say, “Well, I measured some EM fields, and I can eliminate a small handful of possible sources, so it must indicate ghosts.” With real science, as I said, you have to be exceedingly thorough before you can make any conclusions.
Another problem with the field is that before you can go out and run actual field tests, you have to do a lot of homework before hand. No, that doesn’t mean studying stories of hauntings. That means not simply assuming EM fields, orbs, etc indicate ghosts, but thinking through all the possibilities. You need to come up with a testable and provable theory. Sweeping for EM is a test, but the results are wide open to interpretation, so to prove the theory of EM indicating ghosts, you have to do more than measure EM. It seems to me that most paranormal investigators are too anxious to grab their cameras and EM detectors and go scan for ghosts.
Another problem is that a lot of paranormal investigators seem to put too much weight on the validity of stories. Just because a few people say that they had some type of paranormal experience doesn’t mean that you take it at face value. This kind of heresay would never hold up in court. Stories of hauntings that are passed around have zero scienfitic value. For one thing, stories often become exaggerated the more they are repeated. Second, if you take everything told to you at face value, you’re opening yourself up for the people who like to create hoaxes. Third, if you weren’t there yourself, you can’t verify the facts. Someone may very well have seen something, but there could have been another explanation, and it’s impossible to know.
I would also doubt that the experiments that are conducted are done scientifically. Scanning for stuff in a haunted house is not enough. Any real experiment needs a control. This is not optional; it’s 100% necessary. A base line needs to be established. I’ve personally never heard of a paranormal investigation that did not take place at a supposedly haunted location. The problem is that you *at least *need to also run these same tests in a place that is not haunted so you have something to compare. Of course, I also think that people need to develop some better ways of testing for paranormal stuff that *isn’t *based on an unprovable assumption from the start, but I already talked about that. Again, the idea of creating a control isn’t simply a “good idea,” it’s a crucial, integral part of any *scientific *experiment, and I’ve never heard of anyong doing it.
Now, I am not saying that all this means that ghosts don’t exist. I’m saying at the moment we don’t know, and unless someone comes up with a valid way to determine their existance, then all we have is plain and simple speculation. I am also saying that if paranormal investigators want to be taken seriously, there needs to be a complete paradigm shift. Paranormal investigators need to be way more through & skeptical, and not be so quick to adopt every theory. They need to think critically, and come up with a way to prove the existance of the paranormal that isn’t wide open to interpretation. Never make assumptions, think for yourself, be extremely thorough, and don’t be too quick to make conclusions. Don’t simply take it for fact that EM equals ghost, or that orbs equal a “spritial fingerprint.”
Another thing, I realize that EM and orbs aren’t the only signs that paranormal investigators look for, but the same principles hold true for any of them. They’re based on someone’s guess, and simply looking for them in a haunted location doesn’t accomplish anything towards supporting the base theory either way. A true scientist is skeptical of everything, and never takes anything at face value. They don’t declare anything as truth until they’ve proved it to some degree at least, and nothing in the paranormal field has been proven in any degree thus far (sorry, but it’s all guesswork at the moment).
Ok, that’s enough. Sorry if this rambles a bit. :oops:
