Woooooo (lots of it)
The classic pursuit of detecting otherworldly phenomena is a form of skepticism that many people have adopted, which captures the imagination and brings people into analysing that which provides strong anacdotal evidence, providing a standard bearer for the skeptical movement. It is an enjoyable activity which brings a group of people close together and it also serves to highlight the power of anacdotal evidence and the difficulties science can have in disproving even the simplest of misinterpretations. It is a perfect case study for anomalistics – the rational study of anomalous data to provide a logical, scientific explanation.
This article is intended to outline basic time-tested methods of detecting the paranormal, analyses their efficacy in their role, looks at potential issues arising from their use and give you a base upon which to plan a ghost hunting event.
Photography
Cameras remain the most accessible method of detecting the paranormal. Most classic ghost hunting stories include a report of a picture being taken, exposed in a lab and a mysterious, chilling figure from the past being visible in the photo. There are plenty of variations on this theme. Analog cameras, digital cameras, nightvision cameras, thermal cameras, video cameras and disposable cameras all spring to mind.
A widely reported artifact of camera use is the ‘orb’. An orb artifact is a small, bright spot on the picture that occurs particularly during night or underwater. These are, demonstratively, caused by the reflection of the light from the flash on otherwise invisible or minor artifacts in the picture such as dust in a process known as ‘retroreflection’. They are particularly likely to be caused by compact cameras, where the flash is deliberately close to the lens and therefore any reflection is more likely to come directly back at the lens.
From an anomalistic point of view, these are easy enough to prove as false positives. Turn off the lights, blow up some dust and use a compact camera or deliberately set up a light source which is parallel with and very close to the lens of the camera. Then try the same using a light source perpendicular to the lens and no flash. The difference ought to be obvious.
Another common issue with photos is deliberate human manipulation. There are many things you can do to fool a picture, especially on spectrums invisible to the human eye (such as infrared) which a camera might be capable of detecting. Take along multiple cameras and multiple users. There is also an argument to suggest you should use analog cameras in preference to digital cameras, to reduce the scope for abuse. In addition, practices such as ’spirit photography’ can be used in analog photography, where a double exposure results in a seemingly ghostly visage appearing on the image.
EMF Meter
Electromagnetic field detectors come in two varieties: AC and DC. Both look for different electromagentic sources and both have different ways of presenting false positives.
AC electromagnetic fields are associated with man-made wiring such as main electricity and should be anticipated to be present inside any structure. Shifts could result from different usage of electrical equipment in the area.
DC electromagnetic fields are associated with natural electrical fields, such as the Earth’s poles. DC current is provided by batteries, solar panels or telephones. DC currents by their nature have a constant polarity, resulting in the possibility that they can fluxuate over time, as in a telephone voice signal.
It seems very easy to misinterpret an EMF reading and controls must be put in place for such a reading to be meaningful.
Voice Recorder
‘Electronic voice phenomenon’ (EVP) are one of the artifacts people commonly look for when ghost hunting. These are unanticipated phenomenon on an audio tape, such as voices or sounds which occur at certain intervals. These can be picked up on a common tape recorder, although it helps to be able to isolate the sounds digitially on a computer after the event if you have the technology available.
It is vital that proper controls are put in place for these to be used in any meaningful way. If, when you enter a site, there is a constant stream of white noise then it is not surprising that you might have some later. Vehicular activity, animal activity and many other sources could interfere with the recording of audio data.
‘Pareidolia’, the misinterpretation of random data, is also an issue. The human psyche deliberately interprets new and novel sounds (especially in the dark) as being potentially threatening and thus, frightening. It also looks for voices where there are none. Can you remember talking on a phone where the signal was really bad but still being able to make out the gist of what was being said? Your brain fills in the gaps for you because it tries to make sense of data as best it can.
In a similar vain, if you were to play an infinitely long tape of random noise in the right frequency range, you will eventually hear the entire works of Shakespeare on audio tape! This is no more scientific and surprising than if you set a monkey on a typewriter indefinately, they would write an infinite copies of Shakespeare’s works.
Geiger Counter
A geiger counter is used to pick up ionizing radiation – specifically beta and gamma, you need specialist equipment to pick up alpha rays.
Many objects emit radiation. A certain level of background radiation is present at all times and it is very hard to effectively control it. Unless you are in an isolated concrete bunker it’s very difficult to take any results from this seriously.
Motion Sensor
Motion sensors can look in various spectrums (visible, infrared and ultrasonic) and provide data on any unanticipated movement in the area. Like Geiger counters, motion sensors suffer from being very difficult to control effectively. Where you are sitting now, there is dust moving all about you. If you were to turn off the light and shine a torch, you would see the dust moving about under the torchlight. If the equipment becomes too insensitive, then it is useless, but if it too sensitive then you will pick up typical low-level movements expected in a given space.
They also suffer from other known issues. What about a cascading effect whereby vibrations from someone walking up stairs causes a book to fall? What about if a fellow hunter accidentally stumbles into the room? Without another form of evidence (such as photographic proof that they walked into the room, say) you may never find out why it happened. Regardless, if properly calibrated and controlled, they seem like a reasonably useful source of data.
Infrasound Sensor
Infrasound sensors pick up sound vibrations outside human hearing. They suffer from the same issues that voice recorders do, as well as being particularly vulnerable to the activity that ghost hunters might reasonably perform such as walking about. Data from these can very easily become next to useless with a single cough or a fall, not to mention a train, earthquake or an overhead flight! One of the chief characteristics of infrasound is that it travels over great distances, making it nigh on impossible to control.
Temperature Sensor
Temperature sensors such as infrared photographic equipment or thermometers can be used to look for the ‘chills’ so often encountered on TV ghost hunting expeditions.
One potential issue with these is that they are vulnerable to the activity of the people moving about inside the location. Their behaviour could have an impact on the ambient temperature. Central heating and other timed mechanisms, not to mention the weather, play a major role in messing up data collected using this method. Properly controlled and correlated they could provide interesting data.
Chemical Sensors
Chemical sensors such as carbon monoxide detectors are alternative sources of data on the environment which could represent paranormal activity. On the other hand, I’d suggest that if you have a carbon monoxide detector which provides a positive reading at any moment, then you shouldn’t have entered that building the first place – it sounds a little bit unsafe.
Dowsing Rod
A form of divination. Enough said, I think. Aside from disproving their effectiveness (which James Randi does very effectively) there isn’t any justification to heft one of these along.
Your Senses
Your senses are incredibly sensitive instruments, subject to lots of well catalogued misinterpretations of the world around them. Their interpretation is inexorably linked to your own psychology with your own state of mind affecting how you perceive the world. Hence, when the ‘lights go out’, your own senses become at best a double-edged sword. Your own nervousness, borne from your instinct to hypervigilance when your senses are at their weakest projects onto your interpretation of the data your senses provide and even goes so far as to create new ones where they did not previously exist!
Even shared experiences are fallible. Consider a book falling from a shelf. This can quite easily be put down to the fact that there are a mass of people walking about the floor causing vibrations which would lead to their fall. Although everyone can see and detect it, it is perfectly explainable. Humans are not a reliable source of information. Note things down, certainly, but take everything with a hefty pinch of salt.
Do you have anything to add? Better technologies? Better ways to interpret data or new and wonderful pitfalls with these methods? Feel free to comment and I’ll consider incorporating them into the article.
