I've never been on a "ghost hunt" or a vigil - it has never interested me as:
a) I don't believe that ghosts exist (as entities in their own right); and
b) I have always had a stereotypical image of ghost hunters (yes I know that I should know better) as credulous people just looking to find what they want to see.
Now I'm aware that there is some serious research that is being done on ghosts, or at least the very real ghost experiences that people have. Members of the SPR and ASSAP do scientific research for example.
I was wondering though, what effect Most Haunted has had on this field of research.
I found this article by Dr Paul Lee (www.paullee.com): http://www.btinternet.com/~dr_paul_lee/ghostresearch.htm
Most Haunted seems to have had quite a negative effect. Unless of course you're one of the thrill-seekers.
.
I don’t think it’s any exaggeration to say that the show Most Haunted single-handedly brought about an explosion in popular interest in all things paranormal that hasn’t been to the good. While it’s producers originally claimed it to be a ‘serious investigation’ (!) into paranormal phenomena, a very obvious combination of abysmal research, lack of proper investigative expertise and experience coupled with a resident medium who had more in common with a slapstick clown eventually saw its demise. What can one expect from a show which originally started with an actor as a parapsychologist, a ‘historian’ with a conspicuous lack of academic credentials, investigators who were either the producer’s extended family, make up artists etc and a medium who wouldn’t look out of place in a local amateur dramatics group so used is he to portraying fictional characters? Oh yes – and commissioned by a TV Exec who asserted it was all “paranormal bollocks” back in 2003 during a debate at the Guardian TV festival in Edinburgh..
OK so Most Haunted may be hanging on in there – Antix are shooting series 8 as I write - but only just and not before its followers have wreaked havoc across the world of the genuine paranormal investigator and set paranormal tourism on a new and accelerated ascendancy. While no fan of ghost investigations myself - mainly as no-one can satisfactorily demonstrate the apparent ‘proven’ link between an emf meter readings and the presence of a so called ghost, there are a tiny handful of groups who genuinely try to determine the reasons, environmental factors etc why people report the phenomena they do. Sadly, their activities have been severely disrupted by the burgeoning mass of ‘medium’ led wannabes.
Crumbling old piles with struggling visitor numbers have jumped on the paranormal bandwagon with almost indecent haste wondrously repackaged as pukka haunted venues with inflated charges, psychic evenings and organised ghost hunts. Others like Chingle Hall have closed their doors altogether after their experiences. Meanwhile gaggles of eager twenty-somethings meet armed with their trusty emf meters and digi cameras to scramble over venerable ancient sites in the hope of capturing the odd orb, spirit light, shadowy figure, shapeshifter or other such nonsense – often to cries of trespass in some cases and to charges of actual criminal damage in others.
Its now de rigeur amongst a certain age group to be able to discuss the finer points of fixed object experiments, table tipping, EVP, malevolent spirits and shapeshifters. – In all it’s a shameful business that has created a whole world of absolute nonsense for the credulous to explore. Most Haunted, together with Living TV must take its share of the blame.
Hi Everyone,
I have to confess from the outset that I have been on many ghost hunts and that the subject has always intrigued me. This is not to say that I am a card carrying believer, far from it, and I recognise that programmes such as Most Haunted are a missed opportunity for serious research.
I very much enjoyed reading Muse's post and agree with a lot of the content but I'm not sure how much harm MH has done really. People have always believed in ghosts and will continue to do so and if they want to enjoy a 'jolly' at some creepy castle or rambling stately home with like minded individuals good luck to them.
Toby :)
Hi, Toby. And welcome.
My point, well strictly Paul Lee's point, is that with the explosion of amateur investigation groups there are very few, if any, really interesting places left where serious study can be done as they've all been visited by these amateur groups. Understandably, owners of such places are also keen to make a quick buck so the charges for visiting these places have gone through the roof.
That's the damage that MH and the likes have done.
It would be interesting to find a place that was allegedly haunted so that a scientific, longitudinal study could be done on the place. Sadly, too many groups think they can go in, do a one night vigil, and solve the mystery.
John
.
Hi John and thanks for the welcome. I appreciate the argument about the proliferation of amateur paranormal groups but could it not be said in their favour that they do discover the occasional interesting case that the more serious researchers like the SPR and ASSAP can then focus on?
The longitudinal study would indeed be an ideal, but hard to set up in reality. If ghostly goings on occur at all they are by nature spontaneous and occasional occurrences.
Toby
Hi Toby and welcome to the boards :)
Thanks for your kind comments.
Like you I agree that a series of properly conducted longitudinal studies is way overdue but feel this approach although worthy is resource intensive and so not likely to happen in the near future. There are very few systemmatic models for conducting proper research in haunted locations. Michaeleen Maher and Gertrude Schmeidler (Parasychological Association) came up with one which was highly praised. However it is seldom used as it is painstaking, resource intensive and very time consuming.
Unfortunately, until this method or one similar is widely adopted, it seems that Paul Lee's article will remain an accurate statement of the current situation. The vast majority of ‘paranormal investigators’ have neither the knowledge or the wherewithal to mount such detailed examinations in the field. Sadly, with study after study in the UK concluding that 'belief in the supernatural is bigger than Jesus' it looks like this ghost hunting craze is here to stay for the foreseeable.
My main gripes with the new breed of ghost hunter are,
Lack of Knowledge - Many groups find the short term thrill seeker approach delivers the kicks they want although it hardly ever reveals anything worthwhile.
Sadly few know of the many ways in which the brain can fool us by misinterpreting incoming information and are more inclined to seek validation for their ghostly beliefs than a rational explanation for events. Inexperienced investigators wielding equipment they don’t understand (hence orbs) or equipment that is wholly inappropriate for the job (emf/trifield meters) makes for a high rate of reported 'phenomena'. In addition many groups are unwilling/unable to research a location properly and are responsible for propounding half truths, fairy tales and downright rubbish as 'historical research'. A crime that Most Haunted is also guilty of.
Damage- One investigator has despaired of the current crop of ghost hunters saying,
Here’s some examples of problems caused by the less professional groups. From past research I know that there are a lot more – but you get the general picture from this selection.”Of course I used to do this (ghost investigations) but the class of ghost hunter is no longer what it was when I was young. Then we used to get charming Americans, interested Japanese, well educated doctors and skillful tradesmen, (including bakers, plasterers, bricklayers and brewers). Now, sadly ghost hunters have become rowdy, drunken, irreverent and largely illiterate chavs, who often vomit on the antiques of the places we visit. Therefore I have given it up.”
http://www.afallon.com/index.htm
Drunken ghost hunter sets fire to Gate House, Darlington, causing 5,000 damage
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/tees/4115702.stm
CCTV installed at the site of Borley Rectory to monitor hordes of ghost hunters and sightseers that are indulging in anti social behaviour, criminal damage and causing nuisance to residents. The scheme is a Home office Funded Project , the ‘Anti Social Behaviour Initiative 2003/4’.
http://tinyurl.com/zw6o4
Damage caused by ghost tour group (involving Richard *****) at Elvaston Castle raises questions over the holding of any further paranormal events there
http://www.derbygripe.co.uk/castle2.htm
Numerous problems at Highgate Cemetery from ghost hunters, vampires assorted weirdos requiring police presence. One instance here.http://www.afallon.com/stories/highgate.htm
The residents of Pluckley in Kent, the most haunted village in England, according to the Guinness Book of Records, want people to understand that anyone intending to do a little psychic research please note that the majority of sites are private residences and the owners do not welcome ghost hunters after being overrun with them for years.
http://www.pluckley.net/history/ghosts.htm
…and don’t get me started on the venue owners who invent their own history and distort the facts so that they can charge higher fees…..
:D
I must admit that this is not an area that I'd claim any expertise in as it's never been a particular interest of mine.
I think there are some professional (para)psychologists etc. who do these studies and there are other, probably vastly more in number, amateurs (in the sense that they don't have a professional qualification) who also do some great work and help the field of study immensely.
The original query I was making was about a third group: the true amateurs (who don't have a clue what they're doing).
It's just that I have seen serious investigators complaining about the deliterious effect that these 'thrill seekers' have on this field of study, and much of the blame lies at the door of Living TV and Most Haunted.
e.g.
If there is a location that is allegedly haunted and it gets a lot of visitors, say a pub, guest house, hostel, then tracking down the people who've had experiences there and finding out what they were would give useful background information to be used to design a protocol for investigation.
If 70% of people said they heard a scream in a certain room then obviously that room and that event would be the focus of investigation.
What can happen however, is that a truly amateur group hears about the place, does an overnight vigil complete with emf meters, dowsing rods, Ouíja board, and of course their resident medium and they inevitably make some sort of contact and 'solve' the case.
Then they go home, write it all up, publish their findings on their website, and another location has been ruined as an investigation site because a load of information is revealed about the place.
If they say they made contact with a ghost called "Harry" then the legend of "Harry" will grow and whoever goes there knowing the story will see "Harry".
Like I say though, this is what I've learned from others - I have never been on a ghost hunt or vigil.
It's sad and ironic that the very people who are so keen to accept ghosts as real are the very people who are hampering the chances of anything significant ever being found if indeed any of this is at all real. :-\
.
From a different perspective, I was absolutely thrilled when Most Haunted first began. Ihave always wanted to participate in a ghost hunt, and at the time was convinced there would be somethign to find, if they went abou tit the right way.
The shoddy approach to 'hunting', and the ridiculous willingness to accept 'happenings' without a second of sceptical thought had a perceptible effect on turning me away from such credulous attitudes.
I know of at least 2 other people who have become less inclined to believe 'true' ghost tales, and question claims in a different manner after watching how poorly Most Haunted approach the field. (Plus the terrible attitude of their forum members and in particular the moderators did not help much!)
Hi Everyone,
The gripes Muse outlines regarding damage by thrill-seekers are really quite shocking. Although I have been involved with lots of people over the last few years in various paranormal groups and vigils I have thankfully never come across such behaviour. Clearly it does go on from the examples presented here and that is inexcusable of course.
The lack of knowledge too is sadly prevalent in many groups and the use of mediums, or people who claim psychic abilities is regrettable as the whole investigation tends to be led by such people. It becomes difficult if not impossible to verify what they say and it is awkward to say the least to have to discount their claims to their faces which leads to bad feeling and group tension. I have to say here that I have met some nice people who believe themselves to be psychic. The pressure in a group to accept their assertions is surprisingly great.
I also recognize John's point about amateur groups 'spoiling' potential locations for more serious researchers who arrive later.
Like chillzero I was delighted by the appearance of Most Haunted in the beginning, for, as a long time ghost enthusiast, (I believed something was going on, if not necessarily the return of spirits of the dead), I had been waiting for a serious look at the subject on our television screens. I know now that MH was far from a serious look at anything and although an entertaining romp around some of the creepier places in our islands it was just entertainment dressed up as something more. :(
My situation is difficult. From an early age I have been fascinated by ghosts, be they the horrors emerging from the pen of M R James or the anecdotal stories of the very strange from witnesses who are close to me and whom I trust. However, I hold to a rational and logical approach to life and find it difficult to really believe that the dead survive physical death, still less that they waste their time flitting around tantalising us for goodness knows what reason. Hence my appearance on this forum. I hope my mind remains open to new information and reasoned argument from both sides of the paranormal fence and thank you for already providing me with food for thought.
Toby :)
Toby, there's some great reading on the ASSAP forum: http://www.assap.org/forum/index.php
I'm on there too although I don't post much; it's more a case of me learning from those who are a lot more knowledgeable than me.
A point about skepticism though. If ghosts are real, although very elusive, it's only through a scientific approach that they will ever by disvovered IMO. In order to recognise the paranormal, first we need to understand the normal.
I can't see the merit of using one unproven/disproven method (mediums/dowsing/etc.) to verify something else that's unproven (ghosts).
To be honest, I'm going to look a bit deeper into this subject as I think there's a lot to be learned from it. I'm thinking more along the lines of psychology though rather than finding a ghost.
.
Hi John,
Yes, ASSAP forum is full of interesting ideas from a psychological and even neurosciencentific angle. I'm prepared to believe that at least some of the answers may lie in the complexities of perception.
I'm a member too and I don't post much either but I try to follow the discussions.
Toby
I know a chap who failed to get a grant because the reviewers thought he wanted to do MH nonsense. This was a shame as his proposal was sound and was more an investigation into how suggesiton and belief in certain situations can impact on human exprience.
Here is one example of how even legitimate science is feeling the pinch!!!!
I have heard the new series of MH and MH live (sorry I don't have Sky) has a new expert......a student no less!!!!!
Basically, no professional in the country is going near it. I actually know this 'expert' - he runs a group and you can check it out here....www dot parascience dot org dot uk/
I have also heard he is starting a PhD at Liverpool (the course itself looks dire) in the same department as the last expert.
It is a woo site and deeply disappointing. The track record of the 'expert' is not good - he seems to do all the telly no one else wants (including stuff even I turn down!!!). Indeed, i met him at one of my cases where I turned down the filming because it was dire, only to see this chap show up with the film crew. He was supposed to be the expert. I think its kind of 'all about him'. A bit like the idiot off Big Brother who has just left (my wife watches it before you ask......) 8)
I asked the expert once - "how can you be an expert on this case....when you have never researched it?"......that was years ago and I am still waiting for a reply
He likes to appear scientific (as all good woo's do) but scratch alittle and the truth comes through. It is a shame as there are some clever people in the group spending time and money following him about. Ahhh well.
The bad thing is this person was openly critical of MH for years - but now they have offerred him the bright lights and stage.....that seems to be all forgotten about.....
If anyone sees him in action on the TV please keep us informed.
Orbs...
http://www.parascience.org.uk/misc/method/orbs.htm
It seems to me that applying the Orb TestTM (their attitude to orbs) is a good way of measuring the WooWooness of these groups.
They don't seem to have gone off the WooWoo scale altogether, but..., there might just be something to orbs after all...
.
It took me a while to figure out the site was supposed to be serious.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks