15 replies to this topic

[Old Guy]

Is the field of paranormal research science or just entertainment?

[Laurie Ann]

Personally, I definately think paranormal is anything but entertaining (unless of course we're talkimnmg about movies and when Hollywood gets involved).

I think the only reason why science would be involved is to show other ways that things happen when we think something is paranormal. This is a good thing, but I honestly think paranormal has everything to do with ones experience, which science just can't duplicate.

[Robot]

PEAR was run by Scientists at Princeton.

Edited by Robot, 14 June 2010 - 07:47 PM.

[Tantric Kitten]

I think it could be science. I definitely think it is thought of as fun.

I think that it goes another direction entirely. I watch people get into the field because of their own experiences in an attempt to quantify it at least pseudo-scientifically. I then watch their spiritual and religious selves blossom and they almost inevitably wind up at the point of going on investigations to help people -- both the living and the dead.

I am always looking for that breakthrough -- that new bit of technology or scientific understanding that can quantify the phenomena that we experience. I find it thrilling to go out and find "something" that I can't classify as something in the known world (and I definitely have a load of data and evidentiary findings to that end). But... really... when it comes down to it I'm in it neither for the science nor the fun of it... I'm in it because people come to me afraid to live in their own homes and I work with the tools at my disposal and a little bit of peer counseling to allow them to once again claim their homes and feel at ease.

[OMPRDave]

Depends on the person. If they believe they've had some sort of experience they are going to be a lot more open to finding out the cause.

[MoonChild]

Depends on the person. If they believe they've had some sort of experience they are going to be a lot more open to finding out the cause.

You are right, but from my experience most people do not want to find a plausible explanation, they are comfortable with the "ooooooh" and "aaaahhhhh" feeling they have inside them from the experience. Unless and until there are "out-of-the-way" methods to explain such an experience, it is hard to come with an explanation too. What I mean by "out-of-the-way" method is to go beyond what is limiting us today, what we already know and invent methods that can satisfy.

[Illuminated One]

Hello everyone! I agree with everyone that has posted so far. Laurie ann, tantric kitten, dave, great responses.

IMO, I wouldn't call it a science. Even though the scientific community is helping by expanding our toolset, among other things.

We all "enjoy" talking about the paranormal, helping people who are in need and searching for new strange experiences.

Would I call it entertainment? The thrill seekers who are in for the scare factor or tv ratings may call it that. I wouldn't call it "entertaining", as much as I would call it enjoyable or inspiring. When you see people with an interest in the paranormal genuinely helping, following up with and empowering the families who call on us for help.

Here at Ghost Village, people ask for/offer advice or opinions to eachother, empowering people and helping people everyday. I enjoy learning as much as I can about the mysteries of the paranormal and sharing my opinions and advice with all of my fellow like minded humanitarians here on GV and elsewhere, who genuienely want to help the families who are being traumatized by paranormal phenomena.

That is Important, Enjoyable & Inspiring to me.

IlluminatedOne

[Illuminated One]

Depends on the person. If they believe they've had some sort of experience they are going to be a lot more open to finding out the cause.

You are right, but from my experience most people do not want to find a plausible explanation, they are comfortable with the "ooooooh" and "aaaahhhhh" feeling they have inside them from the experience. Unless and until there are "out-of-the-way" methods to explain such an experience, it is hard to come with an explanation too. What I mean by "out-of-the-way" method is to go beyond what is limiting us today, what we already know and invent methods that can satisfy.

I agree. Well said Moon!

Where some claim to have paranormal evidence or proof. Claiming such is risky. I understand that coming up with an explanation is difficult of what to call or label the documentation of our findings during our experiences and investigations. I cannot and will not say that I have documentation of 100% proof of the paranormal. As I cannot 100% say that I have ever seen any. All I can do is document my experiences and claim them for exactly what they are "the documentation of my experiences" during my investigation of "possible" paranormal phenomena.

IlluminatedOne

[Old Guy]

Thanks for the responses. Though not really what I was hoping for, some of you hit it. Some didn't. Please allow me to elaborate:

If you're here, reading this, you're *probably* already in the category of investigator, believer, skeptic, and/or a few cynics.

What I'm asking is for your opininions on what John Q. Public's perception is.

Does the general public think we're conducting science, or is this only so much as a backyard magic show, with séances, taro cards and Ouija boards?

I'm asking because this is expensive and a lot of hard work. I can already "prove" what causes most people to see ghosts as easily as an orb zealot can "prove" that orbs are real. The problem is we don't have the capability of proving anything. If I'm wasting my time, enrgy, and money, I'd rather waste it on something more fun and tangible. Like drinking. (Just kidding. I don't drink.)

[CaveRat2]

The general public perceives the paranormal as a lot of wishful thinking coupled with imagination. It doesn't exist and those who think it does are delusional. That is the type of thinking we need to overcome. A few of us are trying, using scientific methods. The rest are using junk science, Oviluses, Ouija boards, and crystal balls and undoing what progress the true researcher is attempting to do.

Now those statements should draw some heated debate! But that ius how I see this field perceived by the public at large.

[OMPRDave]

Not too mention most of the stuff on television is so far over the top and out there it would be difficult for most people to see it as any kind of science.

[Old Guy]

Not too mention most of the stuff on television is so far over the top and out there it would be difficult for most people to see it as any kind of science.

That's what I was thinking while I was reading CaveRat's post.

The entertainment industry is making a ton of off shows about so-called investigations conducted while "using junk science, Oviluses, Ouija boards, and crystal balls." The so-called investigators are making money, too. So it's in their best interest to make paranormal discoveries and find ghosts.

[Illuminated One]

Not too mention most of the stuff on television is so far over the top and out there it would be difficult for most people to see it as any kind of science.

That's what I was thinking while I was reading CaveRat's post.

The entertainment industry is making a ton of off shows about so-called investigations conducted while "using junk science, Oviluses, Ouija boards, and crystal balls." The so-called investigators are making money, too. So it's in their best interest to make paranormal discoveries and find ghosts.

I'm finding this rather difficult to answer. I understand what you are saying and I agree that so far these shows on tv have done nothing for the field but add entertainment. But as an investigator who would like to see positive growth in this field, without the use of gimmick research methods. But I Also know that finding tools and research methods that will provide undeniable positive results in this field has proven to be or a miss than a hit.

Trial and error. let me know when they get a paranormal show on the discovery channel where all of the money it makes is being put back into developing new and improved tools and research methods for investigating the paranormal in which could bring more credibility to this field. There are different types of investigators as well who use different methods and toolsets to investigate the paranormal. Some use science, some use metaphysical tools, some use both. People use what give them results or that in which work best for them. We are far from finding a single undeniable scientific research tool or method that can prove of life after death or of any paranormal phenomena for that matter. So until that happens you will continue to see these shows on tv showcasing investigators and their gimmick tools trying suck people into to buying them. I bought a PX from digital dowsing, and I still haven't found out how to use it. I had refer to the support page and send the guy an email to try and get an explanation. He seemed frustrated in his response and
the answer he gave proved to be unuseful to me. Yes I am a fool for being sucked into buying one of these gimmick tools that...that is what they are........junk. Somebody got rich. I should have saw it coming through the 8 pages of disclaimers I had to read in order to actually get to the order page.

IlluminatedOne

[Old Guy]

I'm finding this rather difficult to answer.

Then let's go back to the original question: What is your understanding of what the public thinks?

There are different types of investigators as well who use different methods and toolsets to investigate the paranormal. Some use science, some use metaphysical tools, some use both. People use what give them results or that in which work best for them.

It's a safe bet *ALL* of them with television shows use advertising dollars.

We are far from finding a single undeniable scientific research tool or method that can prove of life after death or of any paranormal phenomena for that matter.

So true. The explanation has become obvious to me. Nothing in use today works.

I bought a PX from digital dowsing, and I still haven't found out how to use it.

That's a d@mn shame. Not that it helps much, but he must not be aware of the "word of mouth" concept. A fair number of people will read that. I certainly did.

[Illuminated One]

I'm finding this rather difficult to answer.

Then let's go back to the original question: What is your understanding of what the public thinks?

There are different types of investigators as well who use different methods and toolsets to investigate the paranormal. Some use science, some use metaphysical tools, some use both. People use what give them results or that in which work best for them.

It's a safe bet *ALL* of them with television shows use advertising dollars.

We are far from finding a single undeniable scientific research tool or method that can prove of life after death or of any paranormal phenomena for that matter.

So true. The explanation has become obvious to me. Nothing in use today works.

I bought a PX from digital dowsing, and I still haven't found out how to use it.

That's a d@mn shame. Not that it helps much, but he must not be aware of the "word of mouth" concept. A fair number of people will read that. I certainly did.

I think the general public see the paranormal field as a form of entertainment. If they do decide to investigate the paranormal, they use try to emmulate the methods used by those they have watched on tv. thus proving to the whole world and the scientific community that this is field is full of carnies who enjoy praying on the minds and wallets of young people, while hindering any forward progress for those of us who want the best for this field harder to achieve.

Young kids who watch professional wrestling shows emmulate wrestling holds and maneuvers on their friends and siblings around the world everyday. It's only safe to assume that this trend in the paranormal field will continue as well. labeling this field as entertainment only. thus taking credibility away from any claim or experience and hindering any growth of becoming a recognized and credible field of research.

IlluminatedOne