What have I let myself in for?????

[MischiefMonkey]

Oh dear.

I'm going to a paranormal investigation group on Friday. I am looking forward to it (I get out so rarely I'd look forward to a night out in an abattoir)

I shouldn't prejudge, but they define a Skeptic as

"In parapsychology, one who insists on ruling out all possible natural causes for a phenomenon before calling it paranormal."???

The scientists amongst you would cry if I posted their definition of Kinetic Energy. Suffice to say, they don't describe it as "the work needed to accelerate a body of a given mass from rest to its current velocity":'(

Oh well. Might be fun.

[bobdezon]

Skeptic: One who instinctively doubts, questions, or disagrees with assertions or generally accepted conclusions. In parapsychology, one who insists on ruling out all possible natural causes for a phenomenon.

http://www.flghost.com/Paranormal%20terminology.htm

;D

[MischiefMonkey]

Skeptic: One who instinctively doubts, questions, or disagrees with assertions or generally accepted conclusions. In parapsychology, one who insists on ruling out all possible natural causes for a phenomenon.

http://www.flghost.com/Paranormal%20terminology.htm

;D

OK, you've forced my hand.

Kinetic energy - The ability to use pure energy to move objects.:cheesy:

[bobdezon]

Which group is it you are going with BTW? Anyone I have heard of?

[Mulder]

"In parapsychology, one who insists on ruling out all possible natural causes for a phenomenon before calling it paranormal."

That's not a skeptic, it's just a reasonable, cautious scientific approach (note the word 'inisists')! ALL paranormal research groups should use this as their standard method, not just the 'skeptics' among them! This is, in fact, the standard that most paranormal research groups (certainly all serious ones) used to follow maybe a decade or so ago. Sadly, since the advent of the ghost hunting TV shows, it is now just a small minority.

I suspect you may get some valuable lessons in psychology and sociology on your outing but come find no useful information about the paranormal.

[bobdezon]

To be honest I think thats a pretty dodgy description of a parapsychologist. They would be an idiot to label anything paranormal. The best they could feasibly do is "unknown". That is unless science actually knew what the paranormal was. Even then it would be perinormal, not paranormal right?

[Mulder]

To be honest I think thats a pretty dodgy description of a parapsychologist. They would be an idiot to label anything paranormal.

You're talking philosophical, I'm talking practical. When you are in the field, you're job is to do everything possible to eliminate natural causes. What you have left is 'currently unexplained'. It may be that you have missed a possible natural cause or that one may be discovered by science at a later date. All one can do then is to gather as much information about the event as possible to allow further and/or future analysis.

[bobdezon]

"curently unexplained" I can live with, calling it "paranormal" however just wont do. It is an innacurate, misleading, and loaded description. It would be a disservice to the field of parapsychology to label it so publicly.

[MischiefMonkey]

Which group is it you are going with BTW? Anyone I have heard of?

It's in Wolverhampton. Apparently there is a rival group trying to infiltrate. I didn't realise there was such intrigue!!

Looks like I'm the only skeptic going:-[ I'll have to think up a tactful way to suggest a more accurate definition for a skeptic.

How about

"In parapsychology, one who insists on ruling out all possible natural causes for a phenomenon before saying 'b*ggered if I know'";D

[Mulder]

Apparently there is a rival group trying to infiltrate.

That's the sociological bit I was referring to.

I think it's safe to assume they will hold their 'investigation' in the dark. You might want to ask them why this is necessary, given that most ghosts appear in daylight and darkness vastly increases the possibility of misperception. I'd be interested to hear what their answer is.

[bobdezon]

You wont get a coherent answer. It is pure ritual thinking. Like the use of EMFs to detect ghosts. Sure they all know the theory behind why they are used, try asking them where that theory came from. Nobody will be able to tell you. Ask them to provide references to the peer reviewed papers that show a correlation between allegedly paranormal phenomena and EMF readings. They will not be able to do that either.

[SimonC]

Based on my ( admittedly limited ) experience of going on investigations, it's probably not going to make you very popular if you mention this kind of thing...

http://www.fujifilm.com/products/digital_cameras/contents/shooting_tips/reflect/index.html

...when they start getting a little over-excited about their 'orbs'! ;D

[Graham Lappin]

MischiefMonkey - good luck with it. I was intrigued enough to see if I could find something similar locally but the ones I can find say things like "they use established psychics" and so I just knew this was not for me. I think I could cope with a group that just got their definitions a bit confused. Perhaps a good injection of scepticism may do some good but then again I am an incurable optimist. I hope you post back with your experiences.

Oh yes - if anyone knows of any sensible investigative groups around the York area, I would be pleased to know.

[FarSideOfTheMoon]

You wont get a coherent answer. It is pure ritual thinking. Like the use of EMFs to detect ghosts. Sure they all know the theory behind why they are used, try asking them where that theory came from. Nobody will be able to tell you. Ask them to provide references to the peer reviewed papers that show a correlation between allegedly paranormal phenomena and EMF readings. They will not be able to do that either.

Going slightly OT, but I found this interesting in a recent Skeptoid podcast.



EMF meters are perhaps the favorite tools. EMF meters detect electromagnetic fields, and are used in ghost hunting on the premise that ghosts emit electromagnetism, though this claim is rarely supported by any suggestion of what the power source might be. There are many different types of EMF meters. More affordable units, such as those typically used by television performers, need to be held precisely for a period of time at each of the three axis to get a reading, and so they are clearly not used on television in a manner that would produce any useful result. When they are, or when a more expensive three-axis meter is used, they are designed to detect the operation of electrical appliances or wiring. Ghost hunters are usually thoroughly accessorized with every electronic gizmo under the sun: radios, cell phones, flashlights, cameras, TV cameras, and other ghost hunting accessories; and all of these will produce a result on the EMF meter. Building wiring or appliances will also be detected. But, even in an environment with no electrical devices at all, the presence of the TV camera alone renders the EMF readings totally useless. Even without ghost hunting equipment, electrical wiring, or a TV camera, a sensitive meter can even detect the oscillation of a steel filing cabinet vibrated imperceptibly by footsteps. In the midst of all the absurd amounts of EMF pollution on a TV ghost hunting set, the pretense that the alleged EMF field of a ghost (who's not carrying any batteries) can be identified, is foolish.


http://skeptoid.com/episodes/4081

[MischiefMonkey]

It wasn't too bad at all I'm pleased to report:smiley:

Very friendly people, a few extreme believers but mostly fairly open minded if wanting to believe.

Some chap did a bit of psychometry which was a demonstration of cold reading at its worst.::)

Other than that, it was fun. There was karaoke after:smiley: Going on an investigation in a couple of weeks.