Scientific Paranormal

Can Paranormal Investigations be Scientific?

By definition: Paranormal means, 'that which is outside of scientific understanding and can not be defined in scientific terms'.

Basically, the paranormal IS paranormal because science can not define its existence, nor can it prove the phenomenon does not exist. I explain it with what I call, “The God Theory”.

The faithful in God do not have proof he exists. It's merely our faith, and our belief, some based on life experiences, that make us believe God is real. We can't show non-believers some tangible and irrefutable proof that God is watching. It is strictly faith based.

However, those whose faith solely reside in science and do not believe in the existence of God, can not offer definitive, scientific proof that God does not exist and did not have a hand in creating the world.

Yes – the big bang theory has all the right scientific components... but can you provide an equation or formula that irrefutably proves God did not have a hand in lighting the wick to the cosmic candle that caused the big bang?

The idea of God is basically paranormal. God is outside of the scientific equation. His existence can neither be proven nor disproven by science.

That is basically the paranormal in a nutshell. It's something intangible, and it can not be held to scientific scrutiny on either side. It can't be proven to exist, but one can not prove that the phenomenon does not exist.

Basically, we do not have proof of the existence of spirits/ghosts/demons/angels etc. that can be proven scientifically. Of course, if we did, it would no longer be defined as “Paranormal”.

So a lot of skeptics get upset when they hear paranormal research groups using the phrase “We take a scientific approach to our research”, or “We try to research the paranormal from a scientific mind frame.”

It feels to skeptics like an oxymoron. How can you be scientific in your research of something that is paranormal – which by definition – defies scientific explanation? Is that even possible?

I write this article to say... Yes, it is.

It is completely possible for paranormal groups to take a scientific approach to something that can not be explained by scientific definition.

Those who don't believe in the paranormal like to be dismissive.

There was a paranormal topic about why it is foolish to simply dismiss paranormal events simply because the paranormal hasn't lived up to scientific terms as of yet. I responded in agreement stating simply, "It is true we have not yet proven paranormal occurrences, however, there have been events that were tested 100 different ways, and were just not explainable by natural means either. So why dismiss something simply because you don't believe it to be true... especially when it can't be proven to not be true either. Isn't the whole point seeking the truth? If you simply dismiss something that hasn't been explained, how is that truth? Maybe there is a natural explanation... shouldn't we seek to find the truth one way or the other?"

Someone made this response to me:

“You can't prove x or y's existence. It is not supported by evidence, thus it can't be tested... so, yes, it can merely be dismissed. Disbelief of something that can not be proven is not a belief or matter of faith. It just isn't, so it's not even a question. It just isn't. You can't test something that isn't.”

Sure... It's easy to say just because you can't prove something – that you can merely dismiss it and move on.

If it were that black and white... then there are a lot of things in science that can be dismissed as well.

In the history of science, there have been things that were not supported by evidence (at the time) – but were hypothesized, tested, experimented on, and proven theory.

I wonder how far science would be hindered if scientists held a closed-minded skeptic's belief that if something isn't supported by evidence, it should just be tossed aside and not even thought about...

Thankfully – that isn't how a scientist's mind works. If they have a hypothesis, they go forward with testing to try to prove themselves correct, or prove their conjecture was wrong. It is because of this, science advances.

When it comes to science, it starts with a hypothesis.. a proposed explanation for something to which there is little or no current evidence, as a starting point for further investigating. A hypothesis is highly speculative. It's basically a guess that has to be tested.

Now, based on the above statement of the close minded skeptic that responded to me in that paranormal discussion... if something is not based on evidence it can be dismissed... well then science should stop at the hypothesis and say, “eh, screw it.” But it doesn't. It moves forward and tests the 'guess' or 'idea' whether there is evidence to support it or not.

From a hypothesis, scientists begin phases of testing and experimentation to see if their hypothesis has merit. Sometimes it causes a hypothesis to be reworked, retested, have more experiments, and sometimes it does mean that it has to be thrown out because the evidence provided by the experiments prove to be fruitless.

However, many times it leads into Theory. Many mix up theory and hypothesis and act as if they're one in the same. I do that sometimes myself... but they are not. While a hypothesis is basically an educated guess with no evidence to support it... a theory is when a hypothesis has been tested and retested and offer the same results which become widely accepted as true.

However, that does not mean “infallible”. Testing of theories is on going as science evolves and changes. Many past theories have been modified or improved upon. Some theories have even been proven wrong.

A scientist may have a new hypothesis regarding a certain theory, put that hypothesis to the test... that hypothesis may become a theory that oversteps the current one in place, proving that original theory to be faulty.

When it comes to theories, it's actually easier for scientists to disprove a theory than to say it's 100% infallible. Even Einstein had theories proven wrong. Like his Static Universe theory. Scientists can see the universe expanding. Using the Doppler effect, scientists can see the galaxies moving farther apart from us and each other. Using the theory of relativity, one can say a static universe can not be stable and will eventually need to expand (or contract).

So when it comes to science... it starts with a hypothesis which is not always based on evidence, it's based on speculation... it moves on to lots of testing and experiments, usually new hypotheses are created and eventually it becomes a theory – which means you can do x amount of tests and come up with the same results, and the theories are generally accepted in the scientific community... but that doesn't mean they're infallible and can withstand scrutiny (as we see with the Static Universe Theory)

That's basically science in a nutshell.

So what does all that have to do with some of us investigators of the paranormal claiming to use “scientific methods” in our research?

Well, we look at ourselves in the hypothesis stage of testing. Not all paranormal investigators use seances and Ouija boards to investigate (IO using the paranormal to research the paranormal). There are those that do, and more power to them. However, there are those who take a more scientific approach to the research.

Investigators have created many a hypothesis about what spirits are, why they are here, how they interact, etc. While, like any hypothesis, our thoughts are based on speculation – those comes from some evidence of eye witness accounts, personal experiences, and a research into the history of a location, of events that happened there, and into backgrounds of witnesses etc. So it's not like we're pulling a hypothesis out of thin air... there are events that led up to the creation of the hypothesis.

Once we have our hypothesis, we begin the experimentation and testing phase. I will explain an experiment I performed in one very active location.

I had two K-II meters. As you know, the K-II meter has a series of lights. The Green “on” light, a 2^nd green light, a yellow light, an orange light and a red light. The significance of these lights in the real world is to find man-made or natural electromagnetic fields (EMF). The higher the light, the stronger the EMF. It is used by electricians and plumbers to find faulty wiring or plumbing that may need to be replaced. One may hypothesize that a strong, constant surge of EMF can play on a person physically. It can cause feelings of wooziness, paranoia like you are being watched, and even cause headaches or a general feeling of uneasiness.

Now, when I do an experiment with a K-II meter... because it is known for random spikes due to it's hypersensitivity to EMF... I have a controlled set of tests to lower the risk of false positive responses. In this particular experiment, I placed an “A” on one, and a “B” on the other. I then placed the two a good distance apart from one another, but both were within my sight at all times.

The first part of the experiment was to sit quietly for 10 minutes to see if there would be any random spikes. When I was assured there were no random spikes, I begin a series of questions. These questions are yes and no questions – questions that are definitive, not speculative. I didn't ask, “Are you a male”, cause the yes meter could go off, but I have no evidence that it is a true statement.

I asked questions like, “Are we inside a building?”, “Am I wearing a hat on my head”, “are there two gray boxes in front of me?” etc. Questions that are obviously yes or no. Yes we're in a building, no there is no hat on my head, yes there are two gray boxes (the K-IIs) in front of me.

I then assign the “A” K-II to be yes and the “B” to be no and I begin asking the questions. In this particular experiment, the A box lit up for all the yes answers, and the B lit up for the no.

However, that did not satisfy the experiment. I asked the spirit that may have been there to bear with me, and I then explain the “A” K-II is now no and the “B” is now yes.

I then ask the same series of questions. I expect, if there is an actual spirit present, that the questions they answered “yes” to, will now be shown on the B side. I don't want to see that A box light up for yes questions any longer. Same for no answers. No is now “A” not “B”.

In this location – I was able to get the same answers. “Am I wearing a hat?” - “No, you are not”. Only instead of “B” lighting up as in the first series... when I stated that “A” was now no... the “A” box lit up in the 2^nd half of the test.

So I had a hypothesis, I tested it with A for yes and a B for no K-II meters, I got a series of responses that were affirmations that something was likely present with me because what I expected to be yes was yes and what I expected to be no was no. I then retested the hypothesis by switching which K-II meant yes and no... and I still received the same answers. Yes was yes and no was still no.

From there I theorized that the lights were not lighting up at random. Every Yes Question appeared on whichever box was “yes” at that time. Same for the “no” questions.

Now... the problem with the paranormal. No matter what you are talking about – Angels, demons, intelligent haunts etc... we're dealing with entities that have their own personalities and willingness to cooperate. Sometimes they may be willing to cooperate with one investigator, and not another. Sometimes, (like the case with inhumane, malevolent spirits) they don't care to play “lets chat” with you – their only purpose is to cause harm and/or chaos. Other times, some spirits just like to screw around and yes is no and no is yes and they think it's all funny.

So it is hard to recreate the same results every time... making it hard to get out of the hypothesis stage. That doesn't mean it will never happen.

Even in the world of science that skeptics hold above all else... a hypothesis can take decades to turn into theory, and as stated before: theories can be proven wrong, or at the very least... incomplete.

The Higgs-Boson was hypothesized to exist way back in the 1960's, and it wasn't until 2013, 50 years later, that it was officially confirmed. And in another 50 years, science may find evidence that the Higgs-Boson really isn't the “God Particle” key that ties things together as is currently theorized.

So in 50 years, we may be able to turn one investigator's hypothesis on spiritual activity into a proven and tested theory.

Until then... like any scientist with a hypothesis – we don't just throw things away because they are not founded in 'evidence' – we continue to hypothesize, and put those hypotheses to the test through various experiments, and keep expanding upon them, reevaluating them, putting some aside and coming up with new ones, until we can find a repeatable, tangible line of testing that can turn a hypothesis into a provable theory. Perhaps that will end up proving cases of paranormal events as nothing more than natural or man made occurrences. But perhaps one day, it will be proof of other worldly events.

People are having paranormal experiences... and we continue to seek the answer to, why. It would be folly to stop. Just like Einstein didn't stop testing his hypotheses into theory, we continue to push forward.

That is what a scientist would do. So while Paranormal research is not a science... yes... investigators can use scientific methods in their research in the hopes that one day it can be defined by scientific means.

As it is... the afterlife and near death experiences are considered "paranormal" because at the time, there was no scientific basis in which to define these events or even prove they've occurred. However, in recent years, there have been experiments, tests and studies that have brought us one step closer to understanding and scientifically defining this phenomenon. 10 years ago, saying that would have been UNHEARD of. Science proving an afterlife? Um... No...
 
Well, scientists from Southampton University have found new evidence of something that was previously assumed to be impossible. After four years research, examining over 2000 cardiac arrest patients, they’ve concluded that awareness can continue for at least several minutes after death, which could account for the potential of an afterlife and could explain near death experiences.

While it is still in the research phase and has not yet been considered widely accepted theory... did we think we'd come far enough to be at this point with something considered paranormal - considered impossible by the closed minds of the skeptic world? Where scientists are telling us, "yes... it seems, based on our current research, this could be possible"?
 
I am a skeptic. But I firmly believe in keeping an open mind, and a willingness to not accept "it just isn't" - until all hypotheses and tests have been exhausted. And we haven't even scratched the surface of what's possible. So we keep moving forward.

MAIN MENU