The Forum [is where Ancient Roman skeptics hang out.]

Current User: Guest Login Register
Please consider registering


Lost Your Password?

The top 5 Ghost Hunting Mistakes

Reply to Post
UserPost

3:48 pm
February 26, 2011


Learjet

Australia

Lead Investigator

posts 1122

http://radfordbooks.com/top5mistakes.pdf

Benjamin Radford makes some excellent points in this PDF about science and psuedoscience in ghost hunting. Also mentioned are our friends we love to hate – TV Ghost Hunters.  

OD'd on EMF

4:40 pm
February 26, 2011


Nosfer

Rotaredom

Moderator

posts 2956

Nice find, Learjet.  I felt like I was reading a condensed version of many of the discussions here on SV!  I particularly like following statement which has been oft-mentioned here:

Using a calculator doesn’t make you a mathematician, and using a scientific instrument doesn’t make you a scientist.

Legal: The content of this post is copyrighted and is intended exclusively for use on skepticalviewer.com It may not be copied, distributed, or redisplayed on any other site without the express written consent of the author.

4:51 pm
February 26, 2011


Nosfer

Rotaredom

Moderator

posts 2956

Here is where I have to disagree:

There is no reason for any scientific investigator to possess or use these devices, since there is no evidence that they detect ghosts. Using a tool or device without being certain it works to find what you’re searching for is illogical and unscientific. What’s the point in using a tool that—even if it works as you think it does—can’t prove anything one way or the other?

While he is correct that none of the devices have been proven to detect ghosts, there still could be reason to use them.  For example to collect corroborating evidence and to determine whether or not they COULD be used to detect ghosts.  I agree that when they are used as a single "ghost/no ghost" tool that their usage is incorrect.  But to use them to determine IF there are any correlations to "ghostly activity" is not a waste of time.

This has also been mentioned here before.  The problem is that shows like GH are skipping the experimentation phase and moving right to the implementation phase with this equipment.  They state some vague "theory" that ghosts produce EMF and jump right to using EMF detectors as a means of detection (unless the amount measured is really high, in which case they switch over to "fear cage").

And shows like Ghost Lab sort of go through a brief experimentation phase, totally misinterpret the results, and then incorrectly implement their new-found-findings.

Legal: The content of this post is copyrighted and is intended exclusively for use on skepticalviewer.com It may not be copied, distributed, or redisplayed on any other site without the express written consent of the author.

5:01 pm
February 26, 2011


Nosfer

Rotaredom

Moderator

posts 2956

Just finished it.  Again, great find, Learjet, I'm pinning this.

Legal: The content of this post is copyrighted and is intended exclusively for use on skepticalviewer.com It may not be copied, distributed, or redisplayed on any other site without the express written consent of the author.

5:41 pm
February 26, 2011


Stephen

San Jose, CA

Admin

posts 589

Also, hear Ben Radford talk about the same subject in our interview with him.

The question is, without a working definition of what a ghost is (which is a whole 'nother thread) how could you prove a correlation with ghostly activity?

I guess, if I had my own ghost investigation team, I'd invest in a recording EMF meter. (Meaning I'd commission one from LearJet, I guess.) I'd sit it in the corner in all investigations. I would keep the recordings archived and deliberately not look at them. I would investigate both supposedly haunted locations and places with no reported paranormal activity, and record the team's verdict of haunted versus not.

The next step would be to compare recorded EMF activity to other signs of paranormal activity (whatever they might be). When I get here, though, I'm not sure on how to proceed. Average signal level? Peak level per session? I'm not sure what the paranormal EMF hypothesis is supposed to predict.

So I'm going to side with Radford here, since the EMF hypothesis is not well enough defined to let us gather data for a correlation.

Stephen the Friendly Skeptic

8:47 pm
February 26, 2011


Nosfer

Rotaredom

Moderator

posts 2956

Well, like in any other field, one does have to start somewhere.  And also like in other fields, it is the pioneers in that field who come up with the hypotheses and test them.  As in other fields, again, there are those who go about this in good and in bad ways (witness the NASA press release of December as just one example) which is why it is necessary for solid peer review, sharing of data (evidence), and repeated tests to make any headway.

Legal: The content of this post is copyrighted and is intended exclusively for use on skepticalviewer.com It may not be copied, distributed, or redisplayed on any other site without the express written consent of the author.

1:57 am
February 27, 2011


Learjet

Australia

Lead Investigator

posts 1122

I found the link while browsing a thread over at JREF. http://forums.randi.org/showth…..p?t=201933

My interest being in EMF studies, I found Radford's comments quite agreeable as well as his comments on Persinger's lab experiments.

I also find common event correlation like EMF and orb or temperature change to be meaningless. While the average ghost hunter goes bonkers on such linked phenomena, they are about as common as a correlation between the Sun and wind. Common phenomena correlate all the time! Yet this seems to be proof paranormal positive for the average ghost hunter. It's not just the equipment misuse, it's the way they think.

For instance the latest MEL meter GHI uses has readout for temperature and EMF. So what. Both of these two environmental occurrences are so common that at some point they will inevitably cross paths.  That of course = ghost. Not. For two uncommon factors to cross, that's another matter, but EMF is not uncommon.

Given how complex EMF studies are, it is pointless for an untrained person to take on the task of EMF readings. They will choose the wrong equipment and they will inevitably come to false conclusions.

I will have to listen to the podcast. I must have missed it before.

OD'd on EMF

10:52 am
February 27, 2011


Nosfer

Rotaredom

Moderator

posts 2956

Well, the sun DOES affect wind though other factors are involved Laugh 

I'd agree with you above in that you speak of the average ghost hunter and looking at his article, that seems to be who he's targeted or referring to.  And the average ghost hunter WOULD make those jumps (he's seen it on TV afterall)  But then that sort of person is not a pioneer in the field and is simply following those that he thinks are.  Again it all comes down to how the equipment is used (or mis-used) and the expectations of it.

Much as I'd hate to, Zak and I could go into a place, each with a handheld spot-reading EMF detector.  When we came out the conclusions reached by the two of us (even though our meters each might have reacted the same way) would be totally different.  Zak would be convinced that some dead banker was trying to kill him and I'd be much more conservative in my pronouncement.  I say 'much as I'd hate to' not only because Zak would be with me, but also because I recognize the futility of just wandering aimlessly about with the meter.

It's kind of a Catch-22.  One cannot absolutely prove that an EMF detector is ineffective without, at the same time, proving that a place has paranormal activity in the first place.

Legal: The content of this post is copyrighted and is intended exclusively for use on skepticalviewer.com It may not be copied, distributed, or redisplayed on any other site without the express written consent of the author.

12:24 pm
February 27, 2011


Learjet

Australia

Lead Investigator

posts 1122

The difference between Zak and yourself or other skeptics is the way they think. The average ghost hunter will jump to conclusions, or declare an unknown to be paranormal, a skeptic should be more thorougher before jumping to anything.

I would love to discover that EMF was somehow connected to "paranormal activity". There's precious few leads from anyone even remotely skilled enough to be believable. David Rountree is one worth keeping an eye on. But shouldn't we be seeing others that are able to reproduce some of those results? I know of at least one retired spectrum engineer on the TAPS forums and a bunch of other engineers that have come up with nothing EMF wise. It's not looking good.

You know, it's 2011. One would think in the normal pursuit of science and engineering that if spooks were to produce EMF, it would have been discovered ages ago.

OD'd on EMF

4:43 pm
March 1, 2011


Learjet

Australia

Lead Investigator

posts 1122

Found another older article from Ben Radford in my travels, written when Ghost Hunters was in Season 2. I wonder what he would have thought at the time if he knew GH made it to Season 7 with multiple spin-offs and still no proof of ghosts or any real progress, except maybe backwards!

http://www.livescience.com/426…..nting.html

OD'd on EMF

5:28 pm
March 1, 2011


Nosfer

Rotaredom

Moderator

posts 2956

"If a device could reliably determine the presence or absence of ghosts, then by definition, ghosts would be  proven to exist."

Sounds pretty similiar to my last sentence in post #8, and I hadn't even read this article yet Laugh  I noticed a few things that he repeated in the PDF in the first link but they still stand.  A good read.

Legal: The content of this post is copyrighted and is intended exclusively for use on skepticalviewer.com It may not be copied, distributed, or redisplayed on any other site without the express written consent of the author.

5:31 pm
March 1, 2011


Nosfer

Rotaredom

Moderator

posts 2956

By the way, Radford is the same Radford who (rightly) just said that the magnetic boy in Serbia is just sticky lol

http://www.livescience.com/129…..ogdan.html

Legal: The content of this post is copyrighted and is intended exclusively for use on skepticalviewer.com It may not be copied, distributed, or redisplayed on any other site without the express written consent of the author.

1:57 pm
August 18, 2011


Orion

The Mundane Plane

Investigator

posts 105

Good read, thanks Learjet.  (yeah, I'm baaack..)

Overall, I agree resoundingly and wish more works like this were published, though I think he might've been just a tad heavyhanded on the EMF, but not by much.  Lloyd Auerbach has long claimed a correlation between geomagnetic disturbances and paranormal phenomena, as I'm sure a few others have. When he first tested this though, he used a high quality geomagnetometer, not a run of the mill EMF detector.  I've seen pics of him with a typical Trimeter more recently, so I dunno if that works as well for him or if he just "sold out". 

In any case, I think the reason it's okay to use them -for now- is the anecdotal "evidence" out there. There really aren't many leads to follow, and the few that exist should be researched. I absolutely HATE however when some ghost hunting know-it-all claims matter of factly that ghosts create EMF, as though it were some validated fact. And I hate the fact they have no idea how they work or how to use them, or that maybe they should be using a recording model and looking for specific frequencies, etc.. (sorry.. beating the old dead horse again) If at some point, enough ghosts could be "detected" via other means (sighting one, for example) with no visible change in the meter, and this happened a few times, I think it'd be safe to say that EMF is useless. ("Ah", says the devil's advocate, "but what if ghosts didn't emit EMF, but demons did!"  lol

I love that he debunked the "Persinger myth" as well.. another unvalidated bit of ghost hunting psuedoscience that irks me.

 

One major hurtle in ghost investigations however, is the supposed manner of manifestation of teh spookies. According to some paranormal psychologists, like Auerbach, ghosts truly only appear in the mind's eye, an externally, metaphysically produced hallucination of sorts;  to him, cameras do almost no good other than to catch pranksters or debunk natural causes (He allows for some exceptions, citing a form of telekinesis the ghost uses to make their form print on the film or CMOS sensor; Laugh the only other alternative he would have is to claim all spirit photographs as outright fakes or mistakes and that wouldn't be very PC!)  So, to LA, the EMF meter is more useful than a camera, as he believes it measures the only verifiable physical clue indicating paranormal activity. (well maybe temperature too)

On the other side of the coin are the ghost hunters who believe in outright physical manifestation, and they  value cameras above all else.  Let the wars begin!

Oh yeah, temperature, there's something Ben didn't mention, though maybe he does elsewhere in the full book.  I thought ghosts were always supposed to make the temp drop, and the classic idea is that they are cold as death itself; in that case, why would a FLIR show them as a hot spot? Seems to be another big mistake.

I think I'll have to buy his book now.

 

 

 

Having an open mind is a two way street.

5:17 pm
August 18, 2011


Nosfer

Rotaredom

Moderator

posts 2956

Orion said:

Oh yeah, temperature, there's something Ben didn't mention, though maybe he does elsewhere in the full book.  I thought ghosts were always supposed to make the temp drop, and the classic idea is that they are cold as death itself; in that case, why would a FLIR show them as a hot spot? Seems to be another big mistake.


 

We've whacked this one around quite a bit.  First, the FLIR they are using cannot read air temperature so there is a big problem right there.  Some experiments I've done, though, suggest that if the particulate count of the "vaporous anomaly" were high enough, it MIGHT pick it up. 

Now, as far as the cold vs hot spot.  Assuming that the FLIR could read it, the spirit is drawing energy out of the air to "manifest" (whatever that really means)  This means that the energy is going into the spirit so it should become warm.  The surrounding air is being depleted of it's energy and according to physics, remove the energy and the temperature drops.  So the cold spot that you feel would be the SHELL of the entity which would be a warm spot.  IF the FLIR can't detect the air temperature (which has gotten colder) but CAN detect the "vaporous anomaly" that is the "manifested entity" then it would show up as a warm spot.

In theory.

And that's probably more thought than any of these groups has put into the problem Smile

Legal: The content of this post is copyrighted and is intended exclusively for use on skepticalviewer.com It may not be copied, distributed, or redisplayed on any other site without the express written consent of the author.

1:44 pm
August 19, 2011


Orion

The Mundane Plane

Investigator

posts 105

lol Nosfer, I'm sure it is more thought than most groups put into it!

What you say sort of occurred to me as well, (the heat has to go somewhere, conservation of energy and all that) but isn't there a lot of anecodtal evidence of a someone passing through a ghost, or vice versa, and having a ghost touch them, and feeling cold? That would seem to suggest ghosts are actually cold themselves. Or maybe that's just Hollywood.

I do have a sort of interesting personal story there -  about a month after my father died in 2006, I was sitting on my bed playing my guitar, as I am wont to do (though usually I stand), and I suddenly felt an incredibly cold chill on/in my left shoulder.  It wasn't from the weight of the guitar and strap, as I was sitting.. there were no pins and needles afterward, it wasn't circulation related, I'm completely certain of that, and there was no draft, certainly not one so very narrowly focused and intense. I've never felt anything that before, or after, in my 35 years of playing, or 49 years of life. My shoulder just went ice cold for about 20 seconds. The thing that ran thru my mind was my dad "putting his hand" on my shoulder and saying goodbye, and coverage-wise it would be about a hand's width.  Evidence?  Of course not.. but it keeps my mind open.

Regards the FLIR, yeah, those are basically an array of IR thermometer sensors, so the ol' IR therm conundrum applies to them too.

 

 

Having an open mind is a two way street.

3:11 pm
August 19, 2011


Nosfer

Rotaredom

Moderator

posts 2956

Post edited 3:11 pm – August 19, 2011 by Nosfer


That's one of the problems with this "field"  To many contradictions and too many unsupported "theories" (ie, WAGs) thrown around.

Cold has been long associated with the afterlife, death, etc…consider the phrase "icy hand of death"  A variant of this is mentioned by James Shirley in the early-to mid 1600s in Death's Final Conquest:

The glories of our birth and state

Are shadows, not substantial things;

There is no armour against fate:

Death lays his icy hands on kings:

Scepter and crown

Must tumble down,

And in the dust be equal made

With the poor crooked scythe and spade.

Or in Old Fortunatus (even earlier in 1599): I faint, Death's frozen hand Congeales life's little river in my breast.

So, I would say that cold related to death (and thus ghosts) is a notion that long predates Hollywood.  It seems to run counter to the current thoughts espoused by these shows, though (the gathering of energy to manifest)  Do I trust Dekker over Jason when it comes to a theory? 

Recall, also, though, that Grant describes the flashlight that the ghost was playing with by saying that it is "wicked cold"  This would seem to follow the coldspot theory, assuming that you take at face value anything these people say.  Why, then, are the FLIR images hot?  Well, for one thing, we sure as 'eck don't know that they are images of a ghost, do we lol  The only one really of much interest to me is the moving spot at Fort Mifflin (not the infamous white hot figure next to the stove [described here] but rather the amorphous movement captured by the entrance to one of the other areas)

Legal: The content of this post is copyrighted and is intended exclusively for use on skepticalviewer.com It may not be copied, distributed, or redisplayed on any other site without the express written consent of the author.

4:42 am
August 20, 2011


Learjet

Australia

Lead Investigator

posts 1122

Hi again Orion, welcome back.

RE: Air temperature and thermal cameras. What about this infamous video? Or is it fake? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v…..xZkpG1naIw

OD'd on EMF

9:40 am
August 20, 2011


Nosfer

Rotaredom

Moderator

posts 2956

Post edited 9:45 am – August 20, 2011 by Nosfer


I'm going to go ahead and say there is a high probability that that video is real.  I don't see anything in it that would make me jump up and down and point and say "FAKE"  It's footage from a GF-Series FLIR which can do exactly what is shown there if the image polarity is set appropriately.

Current versions can detect about twenty different types of VOCs.

Edited: Here's a similar video showing gas fumes while refueling http://www.youtube.com/watch?v…..8Hoj-_v0W4

Legal: The content of this post is copyrighted and is intended exclusively for use on skepticalviewer.com It may not be copied, distributed, or redisplayed on any other site without the express written consent of the author.

10:07 am
August 20, 2011


Learjet

Australia

Lead Investigator

posts 1122

Post edited 10:10 am – August 20, 2011 by Learjet


That's a good video of petrol vapor. I'm still trying to decide how useful a thermal camera would be in ghost hunting. Could a ghost resemble a vaporous form? I don't recall thermal footage that resembles VOC vapors on any of the ghost shows. But then my memory isn't that good. To me that would be more believable (as long as it was in the right setting) than "hoody" or any of their other ridiculous TIR videos. 

OD'd on EMF

Reply to Post


Reply to Topic:
The top 5 Ghost Hunting Mistakes

Guest Name (Required):

Guest Email (Required):

Smileys
Confused Cool Cry Embarassed Frown Kiss Laugh Smile Surprised Wink Yell
Post New Reply

Guest URL (required)

Math Required!
What is the sum of:
12 + 7
   



Permalink Print
Copyright 2010 SkepticalViewer.com - The Ghost Hunters Fansite for Skeptics