Research? Who needs research???
Ghosts are the spirits of the dead! Isn't that great! I can completely re-create the site and tell the researchers to stop our experiments now as it's all been answered! Now that we KNOW what a ghost is, what's the point? These reports and stories are now more of a journal... I should re-do the site to show this at ONCE!
Uh-oh... wait a second...
Apparently, there's no such thing as ghosts! Well, see! I'm glad that's all cleared up, again, now I can stop wasting my time and energy or re-label the site as a work of pure fiction.
Anyone notice the flaw here?
Yup, it's "Investigation by Proclamation". Again, using a Stanton Freidman line when it came to Sceptdebunkers and, in the above case, "Too-True Believers".
I find it very sad that BOTH of the above groups proclaim that THEY have an open mind and THEY have accepted 'the truth' (apparently, 'the truth' is out there... somewhere) and those of us who DARE question their brilliance and information... well, we're just bad or plain loopy.
Forgive me but to BOTH the above groups... WHAT HARD EVIDENCE DO YOU HAVE TO CONVINCE ME OF YOUR "PROOF"?
"Don't trip over your open mind."
- Royce J. Meyers III's Signature Line
One of CSICOP's credos can be easily turned against them... "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence."*
Fair enough.
Okay, what about those of us that say "Okay CSICOP, you claim ghosts don't exist. I find this to be an extraordinary claim. Where's your extraordinary evidence on all if not most cases of hauntings?"
Where's the research?
* - "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence" is a quote often falsely attributed to astronomer and friend of CSICOP, the late Carl Sagan but it was actually coined by the late Marcello Truzzi who, in hind sight, wished he'd never said it... at least, not that way. In his eyes, ALL claims need evidence regardless of how "extraordinary" they are. He was correct but Truzzi's old group, CSICOP, cling to the 'original' phrase to this day.
How about when I have asked TWO questions online...
#1: What studies have been done to correlated paranormal phenomena with high EMF readings?
Answer: None, really. In fact, as stated in our EMF editorial, the ONLY conclusive study on EMF and the paranormal was done by Dr. Michael Persinger who PROVED that high electro-magnetic energy bombarding the human brain would cause hallucinations. NEVER THE LESS, MANY people said there was LOADS of proof! Many experiments and tons of data! Truth to tell, no there really wasn't and when ASKED where these studies were... well...Next question:
Now, in fairness, there are MANY amateur ghost hunters that show, in their reports, jumps in EMF in certain 'haunted' places but they never seemed to have a 'mean' or generic EM reading BEFORE the spike, they also never seem to try to account for the spikes via 'natural' (or man made) means. Conclusion... So far, the only thing we KNOW for certain about high EMF is that it DEBUNKS most hauntings.
#2: Aside from 'ghost hunters' going in cold (without a historical report of an experience with paranormal phenomena) how come there aren't many ghost reports from cemeteries? How come burial grounds seem to be terribly under-acknowledged as the hotbed of ghosts we are sometimes led to believe?
Again, people kept saying "But there's TONS of stories, reports and books out there!See, even the "Too-True-Believers" are as guilty of "Investigation by Proclamation" as the debunkers! Methinks we accept a little too much because "we", as believers, are EXPECTED to.
I would ask... "Where? What are the titles? Remember, I'm looking for historical reports not cold 'ghost hunting' information."
That's when communication would usually cease.
Then, not just once, people would say "Bachelor's Grove! Bachelor's Grove!"
...and I would reply... "Okay, that's ONE in HOW MANY?"
I have to face facts... There are a total of FIVE known 'haunted' cemeteries in Ontario... and that's five in a total of thousands.
Lately, I've noticed that the already questionable 'ghost photos' containing "mists" are now, without question, being referred to as "Ectoplasm" or just "Ecto".
Really?
What is "Ectoplasm"? What is "Ecto"? What is it's chemical composition? What is the "theory" on it's origin? How much "Ecto" do you figure that average 'ghost hunter' has retrieved for analysis?
[NOTE: One of our PSICAN researchers has done an article on good ol' "Ecto"... click here to have a read.]
HOW DO WE KNOW THAT THE MIST IS INDEED ECTO???
Apparently, "we" just do! It's faith, my friends! We should ALL have faith! Why question what is unknown?
Okay, fair enough again...
I will no longer question widely held beliefs within the world of the paranormal.
Ergo: Since I've heard more than once that paranormal phenomena does NOT exist, and this is from people better educated and older than I, it (the 'phenomena') cannot be.
Whoops, circular logic.. again.
What's the point of this rant?
It's fine and dandy to say "I think" and "I believe" and state a hypothesis or even educated conjecture but MAKE SURE that's what it is and is being read as... YOUR beliefs, YOUR hypothesis and YOUR educated conjecture... not "proof" and accepted evidence.
Isn't that why this is all about "Paranormal Study"? I guess I must have missed it when it became an exact science.
Maybe "Paranormal Study" became an exact science by proclamation only. It would be fitting, somehow.
In closing, I'm going to have to address TWO groups here...
Sceptics if you want to proclaim that 'x' phenomena or experience is spurious, then PLEASE research it and give us GOOD data and GOOD arguments. If the "proof" is presented, we (those of us who do believe) would be very open to your arguments. If you are going to throttle me with your views and non-beliefs regardless of the arguments you have, are you going to listen to my arguments or simply shout me down or dismiss me?
True Believers before you get upset with me for being a TRUE sceptic (not a sceptdebunker because, as I hope you know, I DO believe in paranormal phenomena!) remember the old adage about forcing religious beliefs down someone's throat... You may feel that you truly DO have all the answers and perhaps, for yourself, you do but HOW do you know it's right for me and what EVIDENCE (and I mean HARD evidence) are you brining to the table? If you are going to throttle me with your views and beliefs, are you going to listen to my arguments or simply shout me down or dismiss me?
Interesting how similar these two groups truly are...
"Why investigate? CSICOP has proclaimed!"
Stanton Freidman in a letter on UFO Updates
Comments? Please send them to me, This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. at This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. and please note in your mail that it is about the editorial named "Research? Who needs research?"
Editor's Change/Addition: Paranormal research "...is beset by True Believers ('They must be, therefore they are!') and True Unbelievers ('They can't be, therefore they aren't!') Rare are those who pursue evidence wherever it may lead, no matter how the results may square with their cherished hopes and dreams. Ironically, both the TBists and the TUists see themselves as champions of objective analysis and critical thinking, when in fact they are defenders of their respective faiths and, not incidentally, their egos."
Karl Pflock in Saucer Smear