Thursday, December 2, 2010

The Nonsense of "Scientific" Ghost Hunting.

If your not familiar with these shows, Ghost Hunters ect., you probably have better things to do with your time. In this post I'm going to point out quickly why these ghost hunters are not doing science. They use this word in an attempt to lend some legitimacy to what is otherwise a group of adults walking around in the dark and giving themselves frights.

The Equipment:
The ghost hunters, paranormal investigators or what ever it is that they choose to call themselves. Will often wander into a site to be investigated festooned with a multitude of electronic gizmos to be employed in the detection of the spirits. Lets go through some of the common items and see how they work and why it is unlikely they can be used to detect ghosts.
1) A thermometer. Everyone knows what a thermometer is right? It detects the temperature of the air or a surface ect. The thermometer is one of the favored tools of the paranormal investigator. Often its use is to find cold spots, or hot spots, in a room or on a surface or anywhere really, and then declare this to be ghost cold, or hot. Do we see the problem with this line of reasoning? First of all there are variations in temperature in any environment. If there weren't, we probably wouldn't need thermometers. Secondly. Being hot or cold has never been shown to be a property of ghosts. Therefore you can no more say that a cold, or hot, spot is a ghost then you can say my foot hurts because a giant invisible elephant is sitting on it.
2) A sound recorder. These are used to record electronic voice phenomena, or EVP. This is where the investigator makes a recording and hears nothing at the time. But later when the recording is played back. There is a ghostly voice speaking in the background. This is easily explained as normal interference on the recording combined with a good dose of pareidolia. Pareidolia is a psychological phenomenon where a random stimulus is interpreted by the brain as a meaningful pattern. It's incredibly powerful and can be very convincing. Pareidolia is especially likely in situations where the person is wanting to find something. Like a ghost hunter. Or the devout Christian who sees the face of Mary in her grilled cheese. What is the claim here. That the ghost is able to somehow imprint their voice directly onto the recording medium? If so they usually do a rather poor job.
3) A night vision camera. Night vision cameras work by using an infrared bulb to illuminate the area to be filmed. This light is then picked up by the receiver in the camera. Since people cannot see in infrared, and the camera can, the camera appears to be filming in darkness. The usual use of these devices in ghost hunting is to see shapes or orbs that the camera picks up but were not visible to the user at the time. The reason for this happening should be obvious. Since the camera is essentially filming in the dark. Of course anything it films is going to be unseen by the operator. The types of things seen on these ghost films are almost always known artifacts and effects of filming with such cameras. They can usually be reproduced with complete accuracy by someone who knows what they are doing.   
4) The EM field detector. An EM detector detects the orientation and magnitude of Electromagnetic Fields. This is probably the most ridiculous of all the tools that the paranormal investigator deploys in the attempt to look for spirits. Once again they simply wave it around and wait for the needle to move or the numbers to change and then declare it to be a ghost. Or psychic or paranormal energy or other such meaningless rubbish. They probably haven't a clue about what the device is actually measuring or how it is measuring it. EM fields are everywhere. You couldn't walk around a home with one of these devices and not have it register something. And, just like the thermometer, EM fields have never been shown to be a property of ghosts or a result of paranormal activity.

The Method:       
In order to do a scientific investigation of ghosts and paranormal activity one must follow two possible methods.
Method 1) First you would need to establish the theoretical basis for the existence of ghosts. This would allow you to construct a theoretical ghost model that would allow for some of the properties of ghosts and ghostly activity to be hypothesized. Once these properties are known and a method for examining and/or measuring  them is devised. Then an field expedition to a hunted site could be mounted to gather data and check it against the model. If the data fits. Success. If it doesn't. Failure. The model needs to be revised to explain the data and make further predictions that can then be tested in turn. 
Method 2) Start by gathering data. Go to a haunted site and gather data. Take plenty of care to recored all the relevant information so that it can be useful later. Then you would need to look at your data and use it to come up with a model of ghosts and their properties that can explain your data and make predictions about further data that you can then go out and test.  
The ghost hunters never follow either of these basic methods. What they engage in is anomaly hunting. They simply wander in with equipment that they don't understand and get excited when it does something they can't explain. It should not be hard to see why this isn't science. It isn't even investigation.  In fact it isn't anything more than a waste of time and effort. These investigations do nothing to advance knowledge about ghosts or their behavior. And they bring us no closer to being able to understand what exactly a ghost is and how we can reliably detect one.  

You can't scientifically investigate the paranormal. By definition it is outside of the laws of nature and therefore not amenable to scientific investigation. If there were spirits and ghosts that could have an effect on the real world, then we would be able to detect their presence and they would no longer be outside of nature. Alas, everything we have learned over the past few centuries of scientific investigation leads us to conclude that there are no such things as ghosts. The ghost hunters aren't doing science. Aren't doing an investigation and are just making themselves look stupid.  

7 comments:

  1. What paranormal researchers are looking for with the emf detector is the variation of emf, that cannot be explained, and hopefully backed up by an unexplained noise, video evidence or other anomaly. Combine that with data from data loggers, static video cameras, other personal experiences, there is bound to be evidence that could be considered paranormal after all other "normal" possibilities are ruled out. The Klinge brothers on "Ghost Lab" have gotten a few amazing EVPs, especially one of Doc Holiday saying "tell my wife I love her". Yes, this could be faked, but if it isn't then it's one of the best EVPs I've heard. EVP's are a tough one, though, and many audio anomalies are tossed out because they are indecipherable and susceptible to pareidolia.
    As for cold/hot spots - there are many claims that where there are hauntings or especially what some call demonic or evil spirits there are cold blasts of air, cold spots, and sometimes hot spots. Again, what paranormal researchers are looking for are unexplained spots where they shouldn't be. Sometimes a cold spot can be tracked through an area, up stairs, etc.
    So, to totally tear apart your thirteen year old's logic, paranormal research is in it's birth stages. We don't exactly know what ghosts or spirits are made of. Even psychics don't exactly know. The more data we have the better our understanding of the paranormal, whatever it is. That is science.

    ReplyDelete
  2. "cannot be explained"
    Cannot be explained by who? How do you possibly rule out all natural or man made causes?
    Why should these things be considered paranormal? Is it not infinitely more likely that you have simply failed to find the true cause?

    EVP? really?
    Where is the evidence that paranormal entities have the ability to manipulate oscillating EM fields of the precise strength, orientation and pattern so as to produce an audible signal?
    Is it not more likely to be random interference combined with a good dose of pareidolia?

    By definition the "paranormal" and "super natural" lie outside of science. Science must by definition restrict its self to the natural world. I.e. What is real.

    Psychics, really? The only thing psychics know is how to do a lame cold reading and take peoples money.

    I'm afraid your attempt to "tare apart" my logic. Falls at the first hurdle. I certainly appreciate you trying though.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Hahaha.. your ignorance on this topic is amusing! You have stated your proposed "facts" about how these shows conduct their "scientific research", and each of your points are invalid at their very core. You obviously haven't done YOUR research here.

    I am, by every account, an inherit skeptic. This doesn't mean I'm a pessimist or a bigot. This just means I must be provided with enough data that will eventually sway my views to one direction or another. This doesn't mean I am stuck in my ways. A skeptic should not be biased to begin with.

    I am very much a skeptic of "ghosts" or paranormal activity. However, I have been provided with enough perceived "evidence" to convince me that some of the theories of what is considered "paranormal" by modern standards is, indeed, "real life". One important thing is to realize that paranormal is a very broad term to generalize anything out of the norm. The definition does not ban the idea of scientific research! It simply implies that it's not of current mainstream scientific views. If we didn't attempt to scientifically research things that weren't normal... scientific theories would not exist! MANY of the concepts in science are still referred to as THEORIES, even when we have come to view these theories as fact. Much like the theory that the world is flat.

    Do your research, you'll be surprised what you find. There are truly UNEXPLAINED evidence out there that will definitely change your perspective of what SHOULD and SHOULDN'T be defined as "wasting their time" and "looking stupid". I don't mean to offend you, but your ignorance is making YOU appear stupid.

    Each specific theory that is grouped in the VERY broad spectrum of what is considered "paranormal" by mainstream standards (it is different in each modern culture throughout the world) should be viewed independently of each other. Pyschics are a very different topic than EMF theories or the Law of Conservation of Energy. They're all different, so let's talk about each one separately, here.

    Overall, I enjoy intelligent debate! As long as we're all open minded, here. I'm STILL able to be swayed in any direction if the data presented seduces me. I hope by defining yourself as a skeptic hasn't locked you into any one train of thought or another. :)

    Cheers!

    ReplyDelete
  4. Ty,

    What a fantastic comment.

    "realize that paranormal is a very broad term to generalize anything out of the norm".

    Really? Para -From Ancient Greek παρά (“beside”) also meaning "next to, near, from," and also, "against, contrary to.
    Or From Wikipedia:
    Paranormal is a general term that designates experiences that lie outside "the range of normal experience or scientific explanation" or that indicates phenomena understood to be outside of science's current ability to explain or measure. Paranormal phenomena are distinct from certain hypothetical entities, such as dark matter and dark energy, only insofar as paranormal phenomena are inconsistent with the world as already understood through empirical observation coupled with scientific methodology.

    I don't think it means what you think it means. Also I think you are confused about the meaning of evidence, theory, skeptic and a few other concepts.

    I am more then open to someone "proving" the existence of anything they want. But to do this they must have a theoretical construct in witch their observations would be consistent with a coherent hypothesis. And the ability to predict future observations that could then be made to confirm the theory.

    With out these things they can never rule out other sources for anything they happen to measure.

    This is the essence of the scientific method. Simply blundering about gather data and evidence as the ghost hunters do is useless without any known, provable, observable and predictable properties of ghosts to compare it ot.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Anyone who buys this ghost detecting nonsense is an idiot.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Ghosts MAY very well exist. Just because science cannot demonstrate something does not necessarily make it untrue. Science cannot demonstrate WHAT I dreamed last night- but it DID happen.

    However, science does NOT get involved in supernatural things at all- it is NOT equipped to and can't.Science has limits. Science cannot determine if a mother loves her daughter, make moral judgements, tell us how to live our lives, tell us what to do with scientific knowledge, tell us if Guns N' Roses makes better music than Soundgarden, tell us if the Mona Lisa is better than Michaelangelo's work or tell us the value of Platinum etc.

    Science has its CONSIDERABLE limitations. It is a FALLIBLE HUMAN creation and a HUMAN endeavor.

    Without PHILOSOPHY there would be NO science. Einstein valued Kant and said that he would never have been able to come up with General Relativity if he did not read Kant.

    Science itself RESTS ON SEVERAL ASSUMPTIONS that we hope are true.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Your right Ashley, Ghosts may exist. And if their existence can be verified by empirical evidence I will accept that existence. In fact I conceded this point and explained it in my post. No science cannot demonstrate what you dreamed last night. But it would be able to tell you that you were dreaming. And may be able to tell you what you dreamed in the future.

      I have no idea what your point here is. I never claimed science could make moral judgements ect.(though we can certainly use science to investigate morals). I think your a little confused.

      Yes of course science has limitations. What does this have to do with what I wrote?

      Again what does philosophy or Einstein or Kant have to do with what I wrote?

      What are the assumptions that we "hope" are true? And how would science stop working if they were not? What assumption(s) that you think science rests on would cause your computer to suddenly stop working if it/they were not true?

      Delete