34 replies to this topic

[simman]

Hello. I have posted many things on this site having to do with evidence, stories, etc. Being that there are no real experts in this field, just ones that have done this type of thing more then others and ones using more high tech equipment then others. There are alot of things said about pictures, videos, evp and other things associated with the paranormal and really all you get are people's opinions and sometimes sarcasm. I will say there are those out there that like to fake pictures, videos, evp, etc and that makes it look bad for the real captures that are done. With that being said, how can anybody do any more then just offer their opinions, sarcasm or whatever else they offer on this topic? My point of view on mostly all things, you never really know what is real or not real unless you are there to experience it first hand, just like any other person, that is my opinion. Also, I am a believer, just to make that clear.Thoughts?

[Laurie Ann]

I do have to agree with you, Simman. No one out there is an expert at the Paranormal...no one. When someone shows us a pic of their home that has perhaps evidence to explain all the going-ons inside the home, then we get a few on here that wants to slap it down...it gets irritating and fast. All we can do is just go with our gutt-feeling. All we can do is post the pics and well, it really is left open for all types of opinions be it good or bad. But now...I've personally posted pics on here and no matter what anyone sais, I believe something has been and still is going on in my home. There are a handfull of my friends on here that will be honest with me and tell me if they believe it's the real-deal or not...this is, to me, what makes friends. You don't have to believe in the same thing to be friends. And those same friends have shot down some of my pics....no worry because the bottom line at what is important is what I believe. And at the end of the day, we're still friends and we all know that the only one that knows what is truly going on is the poster of the topic. Again I emphasize...no one is an expert in this field. The only thing we have is what we personally experience. And actually, it's all good.
I swear to God when I die, I'm going to come back to GV and settle this once and for all. And you watch...some wise-n-hymer out there will think I'm just a reflection or a dustie (no disrespect to the skeptics out there what so ever).
All in all Simman, don't let it get you down. You know what's going on in your home and you know when you look at pics if it's the reral mccoy or if it's not. That's what we're all here for....and that is to learn from one another and hopefully together we'll all come up with an answer. Until that glorious day though, keep taking pictures. You never know which one will be *THEE* one that rattles the cages.

Edited by Laurie Ann, 29 December 2008 - 12:02 AM.

[Puti]

I agree. There are no real experts except the one experiencing the happening. I always ask people the question..."how did you FEEL about this" what ever it was.
Even if I carried my camera around with me, photos would only be shared with family and closest friends. Ones open to the paranormal. I think paranormal just means along side the normal. For some people, like me, it's all normal anyway. I really don't care what others think.
And....you know what they say about opinions! They're like -------- and everyone's got one! ;-)

[peepers]

The closest thing to an "expert" in the field would probably be a person who follows a credible method of examination to thoroughly research and collect evidence.... a recent article published by David Rountree can be found here:

http://www.visionsma.../index7orb.html

David's blog can be found on the Ghostvillage blog page....

In this particular article, David outlines the Scientific Method in which credible researchers use.... ....enjoy!!!!

[leslie_dragonlvr]

peepers, on Dec 29 2008, 08:15 AM, said:

The closest thing to an "expert" in the field would probably be a person who follows a credible method of examination to thoroughly research and collect evidence.... a recent article published by David Rountree can be found here:

http://www.visionsma.../index7orb.html

David's blog can be found on the Ghostvillage blog page....

In this particular article, David outlines the Scientific Method in which credible researchers use.... ....enjoy!!!!

I have to agree. I have read David's work too. Very good article.

[Gosman]

That article by David Rountreee while providing a reasonably good basic introduction to the scientific method is missing some critical points about testing one's hypothesis. There is no mention of controlled randomisation and, (most important from my point of view), double blinding of testing. Without these tests are open to bias both in data collection and interpretation.

[peepers]

Gosman, on Dec 29 2008, 03:14 PM, said:

That article by David Rountreee while providing a reasonably good basic introduction to the scientific method is missing some critical points about testing one's hypothesis. There is no mention of controlled randomisation and, (most important from my point of view), double blinding of testing. Without these tests are open to bias both in data collection and interpretation.

Yes.... correct observation.... but, I don't think the point of the article was to satisfy a complete education in the area.... but to whet the appetite of pursuit down the right path....;~}.....

[Old Guy]

simman, on Dec 28 2008, 08:12 PM, said:

Thoughts?

Several.

Where's the data?

There are no standards. Actually, there are many. Pick the one you like.

Methodologies are flawed: (Take a picture. Spot an orb. See a face. Post the thumbnail on the web. Where's the raw, uncompressed, original image?)

EVPs are inherently faulty. Digital recorders were designed as electronic memo takers. I've only taken two apart. Both were void of any shielding and very susceptible to RFI. Everything I've prototyped on the bench that has an audio circuit is very susceptible to RFI. (No surprise there.)

Anything handheld is suspect. Our bodies interfere. Search for "theremin."

Anything labeled "Ghost", "Paranormal", or "Ecto-" anything is suspect. It works according to whom? Calibrated to what standard? Traceable? Tested? How? Where's the data?

I'm an expert. Just ask.

XSPURT: X = the unknown. Spurt = a drip under pressure.

I'm frustrated, too. <duh> What is a ghost? According to whom? Determined by which method? Where's the data?

<sigh> (Vent complete.)

[CaveRat2]

Actually we do have experts on here. They just aren't experts in the paranormal field. (In that there are none.) But they still can serve a useful purpose, that is eliminating the mundane. And by so doing they enhance the paranormal field.

It goes beyond "feelings" too. Suppose someone posts a picture. They have no idea what it is, only asking opinions. Right away someone else says they "feel" this picture is paranormal. They have no training, no background in photography, yet they are already validating the picture as paranormal.

Finally along comes someone who by training IS an expert. Say he is a professional photographer, and he dismisses the picture as a lighting anomaly based on something he has experienced many times before. He can duplicate it. He can explain it. In so doing he has helped arrive at a rational explanation. Now consider who's opinion is more credible, the professional expert or the one who has a feeling?

Yet some are willing to throw common sense and scientific reasoning to the wind and go with a feeling. That is like having a water balloon thrown in your face, having others watch it burst, then hearing you claim, "I'm not wet because I don't FEEL wet." as the water drips down your shirt.

While it may be true there are no paranormal experts, there are experts in the fields of study we understand. We need to use them to the degree we can to begin to get to the bottom of what we don't understand.

[CASEY WELLS]

well put, cave.

[leslie_dragonlvr]

CaveRat, on Dec 30 2008, 12:43 PM, said:

Actually we do have experts on here. They just aren't experts in the paranormal field. (In that there are none.) But they still can serve a useful purpose, that is eliminating the mundane. And by so doing they enhance the paranormal field.

It goes beyond "feelings" too. Suppose someone posts a picture. They have no idea what it is, only asking opinions. Right away someone else says they "feel" this picture is paranormal. They have no training, no background in photography, yet they are already validating the picture as paranormal.

Finally along comes someone who by training IS an expert. Say he is a professional photographer, and he dismisses the picture as a lighting anomaly based on something he has experienced many times before. He can duplicate it. He can explain it. In so doing he has helped arrive at a rational explanation. Now consider who's opinion is more credible, the professional expert or the one who has a feeling?

Yet some are willing to throw common sense and scientific reasoning to the wind and go with a feeling. That is like having a water balloon thrown in your face, having others watch it burst, then hearing you claim, "I'm not wet because I don't FEEL wet." as the water drips down your shirt.

While it may be true there are no paranormal experts, there are experts in the fields of study we understand. We need to use them to the degree we can to begin to get to the bottom of what we don't understand.

I hope you were not pertaining to me Cave.
I know quite a bit about photography, my husband was a professional photographer, he has taught me a lot over the years. I may not be an expert in the "lingo" but I understand it.
I try to use both my gifts and what I know about photography in what I do in trying to help others and in my own investigations. I have done so for over 24 years due to my own home and neighborhood.
What I try to do here, is help others understand both things. What they have presented as evidence or otherwise. I know I may say something about a photo, but I always try to add that what I am getting is not showing in the actual photo. I have been validated many times with this. I also do remote viewings with investigators who have asked me to help them out a bit. I have also been validated while doing this too. Its not proof by any means, but it does help them understand if the place is actually haunted or not and who might be there and why. Many here on GV know how well I do this.
Sorry, I just needed to add my bit to this. I am not one who just "feels" things. Tho there are plenty of those out there who make claims and they mess things up for investigators and amatures alike.

Les

[Gosman]

How have you been 'validated' in your work then? What sort of feedback do you regard qualifies as a successful validation of your ability?

[Puti]

Just to lighten things up, I'm doing a Barbra Striesand imitation of the song "Feelings". :-)

Don't get upset with me now. I am NO expert in any field. I'm not an investigator of the paranormal except in my own life and do not take pictures or send any in to GV. My above post was only to lighten up a serious subject.
Since I'm older than most of the people I associate with in my life....family and friends, and have been open to the paranormal all my life, they come and tell me their stories. This includes my own grown children. I wasn't there when the "happening" occured that they are telling, so all I have to go on, if they are asking for advice, is taking into account the person telling the tale. In my own head I'm asking questions like "why did THIS person have this particular sighting" or what ever it was. I always think about the person's experience being personal to them for whatever reason. Now photos....if anyone shows me a photo, as far as I'm concerned, it's just interesting. I don't know cameras at all. But I'm always curious about why did this person or that one know something or smelled something or heard something that no one else did. That's my starting point....the individual.
I noticed, a few years ago, while visiting my brother that I hadn't seen in years, that when we were talking about our childhood, we had completely different views of the same "happenings". So that's why I think our life experiences influence our whole view of a paranormal event.
Just an old woman's point of view. I mean no offence to you guys who are doing the hard work.

[thesameones]

simman, on Dec 28 2008, 10:12 PM, said:

Hello. I have posted many things on this site having to do with evidence, stories, etc. Being that there are no real experts in this field, just ones that have done this type of thing more then others and ones using more high tech equipment then others. There are alot of things said about pictures, videos, evp and other things associated with the paranormal and really all you get are people's opinions and sometimes sarcasm. I will say there are those out there that like to fake pictures, videos, evp, etc and that makes it look bad for the real captures that are done. With that being said, how can anybody do any more then just offer their opinions, sarcasm or whatever else they offer on this topic? My point of view on mostly all things, you never really know what is real or not real unless you are there to experience it first hand, just like any other person, that is my opinion. Also, I am a believer, just to make that clear.Thoughts?

Have you considered expertise through experience? In the world of critics and in the world of cynics for apparent conflict in position there are no experts. One who has personal knowledge through revelation would be reluctant to be cynical or critical on the subject of the spiritual encounter. Those who have been there take on the attitude that any thing is possible, while being aware that tricks have been orchestrated since the beginning of documented history. The catcher is when a contact or experience is so personal that only the spirit and the individual involved have insight. Where serendipity and syncrhonicity incorporate into the experience and are too evident, too strong, and too long to fall into coincidence. So as you say it is a personal encounter. In my world the nut fabricating material for attention or just plain fun is the rare exception. Some people may be high on imagination or taken in, therefore find more to a situation than there is, but in my world I just don't see a high number of people making up data or experience. Mostly I believe they have or they believe they have had a extraordinary experience. The ancient motive greed is alive and kicking, but deception usually manifest over time.

[Old Guy]

thesameones, on Dec 31 2008, 12:19 AM, said:

Have you considered expertise through experience?

Your post is well stated, but I'd really prefer that my thoracic surgeon be board certified - irrespective of her experience.