It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Conducting Investigation and looking for help from skeptics.

page: 1

log in


posted on Mar, 8 2011 @ 03:19 PM
Hello all,

I am a paranormal investigator, and I'm currently working on reworking the entire approach to ghostly investigations. The way we work currently, though there are slight variations, is go to a site and attempt to record video and/or audio in hopes of some anomaly presenting itself. If we do see something odd it's presented as evidence of the unknown. This approach is rubbish!

I need your help, skeptics, to reinvent this process. Science must be brought in, but how? What tools would be needed? If we capture an EVP or some anomalous object in a photo/video, how could we better submit the images/sounds for testing in a way that would give it more credibility? In what ways can I improve my own investigations?

I am going to be conducting an investigation, hopefully this month, using your suggestions. If I can find any evidence that may live up to your standards I will present it here for all to see. If I don't get anything worth your time then I will still have the personal satisfaction of knowing that I've been able to put your ideas to practice and improve the way things are being done.

posted on Mar, 8 2011 @ 03:39 PM
How are you intending to do this paranormal investigation? Personally i am slightly sceptical of ouiji boards especially with the 'most haunted 'disaster however i have experienced a ghost sighting myself. a few theories say that the could be in a different dimension but still on earth as such and others think that they might be able to communicate experimenting with frequencies. Still though if it is a real phenomena (which i believe it is) it's near impossible to proove anyway. Plus there will always be sceptics to try disproof everything.

posted on Mar, 8 2011 @ 04:03 PM
reply to post by aletheia

I am by no means an expert, but I have always kept up and attempted different techniques in my own novice investigations, but it should also be said that I focus primarily on demonic phenomena. No matter the technology, the best way to test for paranormal activity is to consider the point of view of those who have experienced it, what are their beliefs? How can those beliefs affect what an individual sees when they have have an encounter or experience? that is to say that a piece of moldy bread, to me looks like a colony of fungi, but to some, maybe the Virgin Mary, Jesus, Elvis, etc.

I find that paranormal research is just as much about technology as it is psychology. Next, consider your own beliefs. Do you believe it is all nonsense and you wish to prove that? Do you believe unequivocally it is real and you have to prove it? There is nothing wrong with that, but it will affect your interpretations of the data you record. On one hand you might say, I can explain this with light or reflections or any myriad of things in the natural world. On the other, there isn't anything in the natural world that explains this completely so it must be real.

From a TRUE scientific perspective, both conclusion are biased and lack evidence that can be tested rigorously and yield the same result every time. A real scientist wont say its fake or its real, he or she will say the investigation must continue until a viable outcome is yielded.

Don't be fooled like I was by people who call themselves "skeptics" but the only thing they do is refute everything without critical analysis and speak their opinions as "logical" or "realistic". These people I found out, are no different than those who believe without any proof whatsoever.

In my opinion, approach everything as a possibility. Test and re-test and also try to imagine how the person who reported the experience, based on their beliefs, could see, feel or hear what they reported. I hear people say I never believed until_____happened to me. True, but even a cursory interest as a child can manifest later in life.

I feel that following this procedure will allow you to explain and collate your evidence into a credible report which other scientists can take an interest in without wasting their time. I certainly hope this helps. Best of Luck.

posted on Mar, 8 2011 @ 09:16 PM
reply to post by aletheia

Well, I'm a skeptic (in that I need evidence to alter my assessments and don't "believe" anything), and I'll do my best.

The first thing you need to recognize is that we don't know squat about "ghosts". We have no over-arching evidence-based explanations for the phenomena commonly ascribed to spirits and whatnot. In my opinion, it seems extremely likely that there are a _wide_ variety of distinct processes that have little to do with each other that are smeared with the same label. I do not rule out the possibility that such events are caused by some sort of post-living continuation of a person, but it seems unlikely to me that such an explanation applies to all such non-imagined phenomena. So I would advocate casting a wide net in your explorations.

Try to collect as much hard data in as many multisensory modes as possible. In less pedantic terms, you will want as much technology as possible collecting as much data as possible -- infrared, ultraviolet, RF EM fluctuations, thermographic, visual, and any other electromagnetic fields you can measure. Ultrasound, infrasound, and EVP accoustics. A geiger counter would not be ill-advised. I would also be personally inclined to see the results of how a true random number generator (based on quantum behaviors/radioactive decays -- like 'The EGG') would behave in a ghostly environment.

In many such instances, investigators have reported that their battery packs have been inexplicably drained of energy so you may wish to look into modifying your equipment such that the batteries themselves reside outside the area of interest, powering your equipment through wires. I have no idea if that will make a difference, but I don't recall reading about any such attempts.
(At the very least, bring a TON of spares.)

If you are willing to explore less reliable/duplicatible sources of information gathering, find a hard-headed, non-woowoo Wiccan/psychic and get their responses. (And yes, such beasts do exist.)

Finally, some hypotheses: a LOT of ghosts don't seem to be like 'people' so much as... 'fragments of people'. They are one behavior or set of actions repeated over and over without regard for the environment in which are found -- the don't react to the people around them, and on the rare occasion when they do, they do so without understanding. They are usually more like a recording/hologram of the past than a continuation of it. Often, they are not like seperate entities at ALL! So, don't go in with preconceptions.

And, above all, accept that what you will be doing is "collecting data" with very little chance of finding "The Truth", assuming such a thing exists.
edit on 8-3-2011 by Stunspot because: typo

posted on Mar, 10 2011 @ 04:36 PM
reply to post by megatracker

I am going to a local cemetery where many local people have claimed to have had paranormal experiences. I plan to bring my video camera and my digital audio recorder. As far as other tools I may need to bring, that is what I'd like feedback on. I thought about a laser guided digital temperature gauge, but cold spots are hardly proof of paranormal activity, especially outdoors.

Anyway, ideas and discussions are a great way for me to figure out how best to do this.
edit on 10-3-2011 by aletheia because: (no reason given)

posted on Mar, 10 2011 @ 04:42 PM
reply to post by Stunspot

I like all of your suggestions! I'm going to see exactly how much of the equipment you mentioned I can actually get my hands on and use.

And you bring up a good point about interactions with the a living human and a "ghost." I wonder if I can somehow come up with an experiment to disprove they are conscious entities...

edit on 10-3-2011 by aletheia because: Fixed grammar.

posted on Mar, 10 2011 @ 04:57 PM
One aspect of audio recordings that is interesting, and helps credibility that it is something abnormal, is they are usually recorded at a frequency totally off from what it is when known voices are being recorded at the same time, or in the same recording..

Many times with a good recording of a ghost voice, the section of ghost voice is below or above human hearing range, except the recorder amplifies and plays it back in the hearing range of frequencies, so you can then hear them..

top topics


log in