It used to be, but I sprinkled formaldehyde into every room like holy water, and it seemed to quiet the spirits...it also quieted the termites, mice, and pesky salesmen.... /blink.png' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=':o' />

/laugh.png' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='' /> Smart thinking......... /laugh.png' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=';)' />

Gene, are you telling us that your funeral home isn't haunted? /blink.png' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=':o' /> /laugh.png' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=';)' /> /laugh.png' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='' />

It used to be, but I sprinkled formaldehyde into every room like holy water, and it seemed to quiet the spirits...it also quieted the termites, mice, and pesky salesmen.... /blink.png' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='' />

... I just, like others here, hate the word "debunk". It is like nails on a chalkboard to me, and it is overdone and misused by both sides of the paranormal coin. ...

I think this word, like many, was reintroduced into our culture by television/media, took on it's own, new, evolving definition by society like any somewhat-slang. (which, completely off topic, made me think about people who use the word MacGuyver-ish to describe Richard Dean Anderson's Stargate character, without knowing who MacGuyver was.) Anyway, when people say they're going to debunk, I've never taken the word in the literal definition when pertaining to ghost hunting. I think any investigation should be approached not to prove or disprove, but to find truth. Part of that process would, in my opinion, be to first rule out (or debunk in the new socially adapted definition) and and all possible alternatives.

BTW, that word is nails on the chalkboard to me too, for some reason. Not because of the definition, but just the overuse of it. LOL

Great topic!

I like that phrase better..."searching for alternative explanations"....it sounds better then debunk...i think the consensus here is the misuse of the word debunk.....but we can thank a popular tv show for the misinterpretation of that word and style of "investigating".

IMO, any investigation will automatically source out the alternative explanations of said claims and activity of clients. That seems like a given...IMO. IF you were to walk into my funeral home at a certain time of day, you may hear a loud banging coming from my office. Could that be paranormal? The short answer is no, a thorough investigation and analisys of the building and proper questioning will determine that this loud banging is the building settling. Now if you had 5 different teams in here at different times doing their own "investigation" I wonder how many of them would deem that noise as paranormal...1 out of 5? It will always be open to interpretation....plus the fact that people have preconceived notions of certain types of building...so some investigations (IMO) are tainted from the start....(oh, its a funeral home, it must be haunted)....

Gene, are you telling us that your funeral home isn't haunted? /blink.png' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=':o' /> /laugh.png' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='' /> /laugh.png' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=';)' />

I agree with the misuse of the term "debunking".

Why can't investigators, that use the term "debunking," say what they are really doing....."searching for alternative explanations"?

I like that phrase better..."searching for alternative explanations"....it sounds better then debunk...i think the consensus here is the misuse of the word debunk.....but we can thank a popular tv show for the misinterpretation of that word and style of "investigating".

IMO, any investigation will automatically source out the alternative explanations of said claims and activity of clients. That seems like a given...IMO. IF you were to walk into my funeral home at a certain time of day, you may hear a loud banging coming from my office. Could that be paranormal? The short answer is no, a thorough investigation and analisys of the building and proper questioning will determine that this loud banging is the building settling. Now if you had 5 different teams in here at different times doing their own "investigation" I wonder how many of them would deem that noise as paranormal...1 out of 5? It will always be open to interpretation....plus the fact that people have preconceived notions of certain types of building...so some investigations (IMO) are tainted from the start....(oh, its a funeral home, it must be haunted)....

Why can't investigators, that use the term "debunking," say what they are really doing....."searching for alternative explanations"?

I completely agree with you GhostBreakers. "Debunking" is not paranormal investigation, period.

I think the over use of the word has a lot to do with the proliferation of skeptics who are part of paranormal groups and boards. The tv shows have of course added to the constant use of the word and the idea that it somehow shows that you are taking a scientific approach by being a debunker.

That doesn't mean that a paranormal investigator is susceptible to every bump in the night.

Absolutely 100% correct. IMO So many people use words and terms without even knowing the meaning and I can't understand why. I'm no brainiac and if I am not 100% sure of something I wll look it up rather than take someone’s word for it. It's that easy. I think it also may undermine peoples work & credibility. Debunk is one of the most misused words in the paranormal field.

Oh well, I guess many people are influenced by TV and will follow them. That is fine if you consider it a hobby and I bear no ill will towards any of them. So too will I do as I see fit.

I will agree with NYPD however, in that everything must be thoroughly looked into and if there is no explanation then it should be noted that no explanation was found but not that it was paranormal. I also don't think looking for an alternative and going with the first possibility is the correct approach either.

There is an addition to Holme’s statement that wasn't mentioned. “ If nothing remains, then the impossible may be possible .“

Debunking is not investigating.

Ruling out things is the process of elimination (not debunking. see definition.) and an important part of investigating.

Paranormal investigation is what it says... The investigating of the paranormal not the heating pipes.

Debunking is only finding excuses not to investigate the claims of the person(s) reporting the incidents.

Paranormal Investigation is NEVER "About looking for", alternate ideas, excuses, etc. (that will come out in the investigation) It is about the incidents/experiences. Paranormal investigation is also not only about ghosts, that is just a portion of it. The reporting persons reasons, motives and "why" they think it may be a haunting is paramount.

People always seem to miss the point. It is not about alternatives nor the skeptics etc. It is about the Paranormal and the people having the experiences. That is why it called Paranormal investigation.

I completely agree with you GhostBreakers. "Debunking" is not paranormal investigation, period.

I think the over use of the word has a lot to do with the proliferation of skeptics who are part of paranormal groups and boards. The tv shows have of course added to the constant use of the word and the idea that it somehow shows that you are taking a scientific approach by being a debunker.

That doesn't mean that a paranormal investigator is susceptible to every bump in the night.

To paraphrase Sherlock Holmes, "When you exclude the impossible what ever remains...however improbable...must be the truth."

That being said, I do think it is important to rule out things and search for every "normal" explanation as part of the process of seeking a paranormal explanation. Still - I see some "natural" explanations that are actually far more convoluted and less likely than a paranormal one. Make as few assumptions as possible. Go from there.

I am not opposed to eliminating natural or fraudulent events/activity, it is necessary. I just, like others here, hate the word "debunk". It is like nails on a chalkboard to me, and it is overdone and misused by both sides of the paranormal coin. Disprove, eliminate, etc... much better words. Hatred of the word debunk is my pet peeve, but I have no problems with objective approaches.

Andy

I have the same type of pet peeve for "evidence" and "theory." So I know exactly where you're coming from! /laugh.png' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=':mellow:' />

Is it because it is eaiser to find excuses than a ghost? Hmmmmmmm...

No, it's easier to find every day NORMAL reasons for occurrences. You must eliminate all the possibilities before jump to the conclusion that there's a spook in the house. JMO

Andy