Paranormal Underground

Explore the Unexplained

twitterfacebookyoutubeyoutuberss

The Right and the Wrong

by Karen Frazier, Managing Editor
Paranormal Underground

womanlightbulb

As you might have guessed, I wind up discussing the paranormal with a lot of different people. Interesting and knowledgeable people with phenomenal ideas, thoughts and theories about the paranormal.

I love talking to these people because there is such a diversity of ideas. Certainly there are common themes that also arise, but there are great differences in ideas, as well. Especially when it comes to paranormal investigation.

Each investigator (or team) has come up with an investigative approach that fits with the skills, knowledge and abilities of their team. Some rely heavily on psychics or sensitives. Some rely heavily on equipment. Some seek to explain. Some seek to disprove. Some seek to comfort the living. Some seek to help the dead. Some are just in it for a good time.

Yes – paranormal investigation is a diverse field full of different personalities with a variety of agendas and methodologies. So who is right and who is wrong?

Paranormal investigation is a field in its infancy. We don’t know who is right. We don’t know who is wrong. We don’t even really know what it is we are looking for.

There are many who would like to standardize investigation. While I can see the merits of this – such as establishing a code of ethics for paranormal investigators, I can also see some difficulties. Because really, what is there to standardize at this point? What do we know about the paranormal that extends beyond the realm of theory? And, if we establish investigatory standards too early in the process, does that limit the creativity that can lead to true breakthroughs in discovery?

Parapsychology (and paranormal investigation as an offshoot of that) is a hugely underfunded field. Sadly, there’s not a huge faucet of money flowing out there that helps to fund great research. And so, research is done at a grass roots level, with each investigator or group digging into their own pockets and contributing as much money as they can afford to explore the unseen.

I’ve made this point before – paranormal is not a science. Science deals with our physical world, and it does very well explaining that. Paranormal – at least as it exists now – is part of the unknown. We haven’t found a way to quantify it – but that isn’t surprising. We also haven’t found a way to quantify human consciousness. Perhaps some things will remain unquantifiable until we have a better understanding of the energetic influences that exist in our universe on the tiniest levels.

In searching for evidence of ghosts and hauntings, we are searching for evidence of the human spirit. We are searching for evidence of our consciousness living on after our bodies die.

We are only human. We can only perceive this three-dimensional universe in which we live – in spite of the fact that there are at least six folded dimensions that we can’t perceive. (You can take my word on that, or you can do some research into quantum physics, folded dimensions and Calabi-Yau manifolds).

If we are only capable of perceiving our three dimensions (plus the pseudo dimension of time, which seems as if it may be illusory at best), how can we truly study our physical universe? Perhaps the unknowable and the unknown exist in those folded dimensions that we know are there but haven’t yet figured out how to measure and observe.

Paranormal research may not be in the realm of science yet, but who’s to say it won’t? After all, continental drift was once considered pseudoscience. So was cosmology. Likewise, things that were once considered highly scientific – such as alchemy – are now considered pseudoscience.

We live in a fluid universe. Knowledge and discoveries are constantly in a state of flux. Don’t believe me? Think about the stuff that you had to learn as a kid in school. Now look at what today’s kids have to learn. They have to cram their brains full of not only everything we learned, but all sorts of new stuff on top of it. We’re constantly improving on our knowledge and abilities. Dick Button won an Olympic gold medal doing a single axel. Today, they’ve perfected triples and they’re working on quadruples.

Random skating references aside, our skills, knowledge and ability are constantly evolving. Who’s to say what humans will know four or five generations down the line? Just as we look to our great-great grandparents’ time and marvel at how much they thought they knew vs. what we know now, so will our great-great grandchildren do with us. Chances are, they’ll find us highly unsophisticated with this knowledge and technology of which we are currently so proud.

Which brings me back to what I originally claimed this blog was about before I took you on a merry wander through my mind. Is there a right way and a wrong way to investigate the paranormal? I don’t think so. I think that we try things and we learn. And if we share what we’ve tried and what we’ve learned from that with other investigators, then we can begin to create a foundation of knowledge upon which those intrepid future investigators seeking out the unknown can build. We, as investigators in the field of the paranormal, become the shoulders upon which future generations can build their knowledge and methodologies.

As I allow you to ponder this, I will leave you with a few quotes by Thomas A. Edison.

“Hell, there are no rules here – we’re trying to accomplish something.”
“I have not failed. I’ve just found 10,000 ways that won’t work.”
“I start where the last man left off.”

Comments (4)
  1. GhostBreakers / Reply August 11, 2009 at 11:16 am

    First, the authors comments in this article have been made by many well before this. Any reference to one of the statements is just that and not directed towards the author. I always follow the rules of argument. Attack the argument not the arguer. If it seems otherwise I can assure you it is not and I apologize.

    I don’t think it’s necessarily a matter of right and wrong. However, the statement;

    (Each investigator (or team) has come up with an investigative approach that fits with the skills, knowledge and abilities of their team. Some rely heavily on psychics or sensitives. Some rely heavily on equipment. Some seek to explain. Some seek to disprove. Some seek to comfort the living. Some seek to help the dead. Some are just in it for a good time. )

    shows where the field is today. Just a bunch of people (most not all) running around doing their own thing. No rhyme or reason behind what they are doing. No records, notes, etc. Just pictures, audio, video and some good stories that we are all supposed to take on face value and accept the word of those who present it.
    I think that the idea of standardization is being misunderstood by a lot of people. Many ask how can you standardize the field. Being one of the few that is promoting standardization, let me clarify. No one is trying to standardize the Paranormal. That’s a silly statement. I don’t understand where people got that from. The term Paranormal has also been misinterpreted by most to mean Ghosts. It is much more than that.
    What is trying to be done is the standardization of the collection of information, data and how to investigate. That’s it in a nutshell for now. To get everyone who wants to, to be on the same page so that the information they may gather can be qualified as evidence or not and compared to other investigations from anywhere to find similarities that may show evidence of what is being investigated. One picture may be worth a thousand words but it gives no answers by itself. You can go anywhere today and see people saying that they have evidence from their investigation yet they can’t tell you what qualifies it as evidence and in fact it is not. I also see so many people who are very against standardization. Almost afraid of it and that I don’t understand. It will help immensely if people would only take the time to take a hard look. However, I understand that serious investigation isn’t for everyone and is not intended to be. So too the term Parapsychologist is so loosely used. There are actually only a select few that call themselves Parapsychologists that have psychology degrees. Like I mentioned in another post. I guess people just like labels that make them sound credible or important. Which is fine but they should not get upset when people call their qualifications into question.
    Standardization will affect no one except those who want to be part of the process and have their work recognized. It is never too early for anything but it can be too late. Investigation is already a science and the standards are set. It is just a matter of the serious people following the guidelines of formal investigation. Investigation is a science and a tried and true method of obtaining information that isn’t the debate. The debate is why don’t people employ these methods. I don’t understand why people want to call themselves investigators but not want to follow the guidelines for actually investigating. Why some over complicate things with talk of all kinds of things that no one understands, etc. Maybe what needs to be done is like anything else, begin small. Begin with baby steps before we jump to something that none but a few can understand. I do believe many things will be a reality in the future. The fact is that the paranormal does exist but is it real or something that we make up? Do we really want to know the truth or are we content with believing the stories we are told?
    I too have gotten off on a tangent. As far as the main topic. Yes in my opinion there is a right way and a wrong way to investigate anything if you want the truth. If you are content with the myth then you investigate in a manner where the truth cannot be found or just hunt. I guess the field may always be divided into the serious and curious and each will do things their own way.
    I will add one more Einstein quote…

    If we knew what it was we were doing, it would not be called research, would it?

    Well, now I am off to another post.

  2. Karen Frazier / Reply August 11, 2009 at 11:56 am

    Thanks for clarifying, GhostBreakers. I agree that it would be very cool if certain methods could be put into place – such as methods for data collection, etc. I think it would be good if baselines could be established, as well. You are right – there are a ton of people out there running around just doing what they see on TV – which I think we can all agree is probably the worst way to learn how to investigate. And I agree that until some kind of controls are put in place, no one will look upon paranormal investigation as “legitimate”.

    I don’t take any of the comments as a personal attack. My job is to get people discussing things, and I try to blog from that perspective. I think the discussion that things like this generate is important because it causes people to step back and evaluate (maybe).

    I do think you hit the nail on the head when you said that some people probably don’t want to know the truth. Beliefs are like that. If someone disproved God tomorrow, scientifically disproved God – I am guessing that many would continue to believe, because that belief is an important part of who they are. So it is with paranormal phenomena. Many people want to believe because it gives them hope that the soul carries on after they die. You are right – they aren’t seeking information – they are seeking confirmation. I have no problem with that as long as they realize that in seeking confirmation, there is an inherent bias, just as in seeking to disprove there is an inherent bias.

    True investigation is done from a place of impartiality. That’s why I am a reporter and not an investigator. I get to observe what everyone else is doing and report on it. In order to be effective, I have to do this from a place of neutrality, as well.

    Fortunately, I am pretty neutral. I am usually pretty good at seeing things from all sides – which is why I find just as much value in those who are (to borrow your terminology) ghost hunting as those who are legitimately investigating.

    Thanks for your participation and your ideas! I think you are bringing a lot to our site.

  3. Dreamsinger / Reply August 11, 2009 at 1:37 pm

    I have to agree with what GhostBreaker is saying, which has been one of my biggest frustrations with the paranormal community as a whole. They’re all off on different tangents and do little to properly document, and do little to actually research things. They are also like herding cats when it comes to trying to get a standard set of rules established, regardless of whether or not the standard rules are the best methods for recording any meaningful data. The only ones I’ve seen to have any success in getting a standard set amongst investigators is TAPS, but those are only pseudoscience rules.

    In part I think many investigators don’t want to use good methods because they are too hard. From what I’ve seen, many investigators only want to do it if it’s fun or easy. The moment it becomes tedious they walk away.

    Then there’s the point GhostBreaker made about some not wanting to find the truth, which I fully agree with. It’s much like those who will believe J&G regardless, even if they came out and admitted to hoaxing. They will cling to their beliefs and justify them by saying, “Someone made them say that.”

    Side note to Karen:
    I think you’ve clearly shown that you don’t take comments as a personal attack. If that were true, you would have depicted me as an attacker long ago.

  4. Karen Frazier / Reply August 11, 2009 at 2:01 pm

    “Side note to Karen:
    I think you’ve clearly shown that you don’t take comments as a personal attack. If that were true, you would have depicted me as an attacker long ago.”

    Well now, Dreamsinger, who says I haven’t? :P




Leave a Comment

Shopping Cart
12-Month Digital Subscription Only $19.99!
Get 12 digital issues of Paranormal Underground magazine. We’ll e-mail each new issue to you every month. Subscribe now and save 15%!
Subscribe Now for Updates
Video Gallery