Evidence- particularly phtographic

Hi,

Well I have always been mildly unenthusiastic about most photographic evidence, mainly because there is actually no real way of proving that they are of a paranormal nature. The exceptions are of course the rare examples when we find clearly definable figures and/or features, which are clearly distinguishable from the surroundings.

If its not obvious then its probably something ambiguous and a matter of suggestable interpretation by the mind! And there is no value in something that might or might not show something that vaguely looks like something that maybe should not have been there. What is the purpose of something that cannot be proved?

I know many of you will argue strongly against that statement, but that's what I believe.

Most paranormal sites on the internet are absolutely oozing dust particles and water vapour, claiming them to be paranormal.

Now we do quite a good job with scrutinising our evidence and not jumping on the orb wagon every time a speck of light appears above somebody's head, but I think a slightly stronger, no-nonsense stance toward photographical evidence that doesn't quite cut the mark would really increase our reputation among the serious scientific community and the general public on the whole. Basically what I'm trying to say is- lets distance ourselves from the unprofessional groups out there who don't really know what they are doing or seeing! (may I add that we are doing a brilliant job at that already, but lets really make a mark)

We get some good solid evidence on our investigations, lets make sure we continue to exploit it on the web, and keep the weak stuff completely out of it! In my opinion this means 99.9% of orb photographs and anything that doesn't clearly represent something human.

Lets stand out as the rational and scientific group that we are.

I just don't see any progress in what most 'paranormal' groups spend nearly all their time doing- orb and light anomaly snapping, with the occasional EVP (I know we don't but I'm making a point).

I am currently working on a system that will simultaneously measure and record temperature and EMF at various and separate points in a room or location, the data can then be fed into a graph and can be used to document all levels and fluctuations in a time line which would cover the entire investigation (hopefully). We should be able to use it on our next SW investigation on the 17th.

This would be great as it quantifies any evidence and can be used to prove, in a scientific manner, our results.

Please let me know what you think about what I have said, feel free to disagree, I am just expressing my opinions!

Regards,

Robb

I agree with the principles but a lot of what may be paranormal will not appear as a clearly discernible human figure and does not always stand out, which is why we have to really examine photo's, if we were to rule out everything that is not immediately noticeable then we may as well not bother with images at all. On many occasions one person may not notice something in a picture and another may see it straight away which is the reason we will send photo's to each other to get more than one opinion, As for the item you are working on I wish you good luck with it and I hope to see it working as it will be a great asset to investigations.

Hi,

My point is that photographs that do not show anything other then 'possibilities' are useless. We could collect 10 million photographs of photographic anomalies, adding to the trillions which are already out there, and we could say 'they might be paranormal' but we cant prove it; the photographs amount to nothing and take us no closer to proving anything.

The only way a photograph gets treated seriously is if it clearly shows something definable and recognisable; I just find the process of scrutinising a light anomaly for vague outlines or rough faces a waste of time-because it is ultimately worthless. Persuade me otherwise. My goal as a paranormal investigator is to find proof, solid irrefutable evidence, in my opinion this cannot be found in photographs (supported, yes, but only with exceptional examples)- If it could it would have been done by now.

Photographic evidence is important, but vague and uncertain anomalies are not worth the time.

I also think orbs are the same.

An interesting article written by Troy Taylor from the American Ghost Society sums it up pretty well: http://www.prairieghosts.com/trouble.html

Again, please let me know what you think, debate is good.

Regards,

Robb

As far as orbs go genuinely paranormal types of orb are few and far between, other photo's showing somewhat ambiguous anomalies are important not so much as in evidence of the paranormal but they do show there is a possibility of something occurring at a location, The perfect thing would of course be a full body apparition appearing on video but even then the sceptic would say it was trickery of some kind, I would like to hear what in your opinion can be taken as proof of paranormal is there in fact any type of evidence that could be presented that cannot have been tampered with in any way?an emf reading is good but how could that be proven at a later date the same goes for temperature drops, photo's and video would be declared to have been altered audio they would say was someone in the room making a noise. So as evidence goes the only proof would be for the sceptic to actually witness the phenomena first hand but even then that is not proof enough as they could deny it afterwards.So when you actually look at it the only people we can prove it to is ourselves and even then is is still open to an individual interpretation. Therefore I can only see that evidence of any type can be accepted by different people what you may think is insignificant may have an entire different meaning to someone else, hence the reason I do not rule out evidence because it is vague in fact it actually raises my interest to try and find out if it is true.

Quote :

I would like to hear what in your opinion can be taken as proof of paranormal is there in fact any type of evidence that could be presented that cannot have been tampered with in any way?an emf reading is good but how could that be proven at a later date the same goes for temperature drops, photo's and video would be declared to have been altered audio they would say was someone in the room making a noise.

That is what I am planning to tackle with my ambitious device. To simultaneously capture video, EVP (in multiple locations), temperature (multiple sensors), EMF (multiple sensors) through a linear, time coded device where each instance can be correlated with each individual reading and then shown in graphs and figures which can back up and complement the less tangible evidence is a good start.

People take data much more seriously than shadows and whispers.

Quote :

So as evidence goes the only proof would be for the sceptic to actually witness the phenomena first hand...

Then am I wasting my time? Are we all just on personal journeys to satisfy our own scepticism? Why collect evidence if the people who we are trying to convince will never believe? I personally believe that we can convince them, the current way just isn't working very well.
The reason sceptics don't believe is because of poor evidence- sceptics deny the validity of personal experiences because of lack of evidence- they deny the validity of objective experiences because of a lack of evidence.
Lets give them better evidence.

Regards,

Robb

as for photos they are but part of the evidence we scrutenise..

ok, let me put this to you rob... in two different locations we have got 3 camera abnormalitys, on 3 different cameras.. so is that down to the paranormal or to fluke we were lucky to see them..

personally im on a quest for proof for myself if in the process other people belive in the evidence i have produce... one thing to remember is we have to keep taking everything appart to maintain our integraty.. if we dont our word of what happens means nothing, we have to keep taking photos testing things out.. finding ways to give people proof... if you gave me data personally id not be interesting to a vast degree unless theres a picture of something to go with it something i can see and analise...

Yeh a lot of evidence is subjective to what you hear ,and what i hear i tested that out once on another forum with a very good and clear evp, all my freinds wrote the same thing.. online was a different matter people heard in some case what they expected to hear... so all evidence is subjective... dont dispare the skeptic is what drives teams forward...

Hi,

Quote :

ok, let me put this to you rob... in two different locations we have got 3 camera abnormalitys, on 3 different cameras.. so is that down to the paranormal or to fluke we were lucky to see them..

I would have to see them to gain an opinion. Remember at no point have I said that I wish to disregard photographic evidence, and I have also stated that data should be used alongside visual and audio, on it's own it is also useless!

The majority of photographic evidence is unconvincing, the only justification for connecting them to the paranormal is that whatever it is cannot be easily explained. This however does not mean it is a ghost. Some rare photographs however are pretty damn good, these types of images, when used with strong, quantifiable collected data, is evidence.

If evidence is subjective to individual interpretation then it isn't evidence of anything. It has to be constant and solid.

Just so you know, I am not a sceptic, I just have a sceptical rationale!

Regards,

Robb

your device does sound terrific and I will look forward to it s use and to seeing results but( the following is not my opinion) the scientific community and the sceptic community may look at your results and then just turn around and say they have been manipulated which although you and I and the rest of the team will al know they haven't we then have to prove they haven't this is the most difficult part proving beyond a shadow of doubt that the graphs, readings and data are 100% accurate we may know they are but people who do not want to believe will never agree that what is presented is fact they will always find an argument. I personally do not doubt your device or it's results but you also must remember we do not all have one and so the only evidence i can get is video,photo and audio and though they may not be the best forms of evidence I will still get them, I admit they do not always prove there is paranormal but they can prove that it may not be loose pipes making that knocking noise or electrical interference making someone feel uneasy in a room . So the methods may not be proof positive but they can disprove a lot of physical reasons for strange happenings and if there is no physical reason for it then why does it happen?

I actually fully agree with what you are saying, I'm just a little bit dubious about certain types of photographs, but that is just my opinion.

All the points made on this thread are valid and they inspire debate, which is always good!

Thanks for the feedback!

Regards,

Robb

Hi Guys

When is a photo an authentic paranormal photo?

Even film experts have problems meeting a decision on that question, one of the best answers is to know your equipment type of camera and a basic knowledge of basic photography and the mistakes and problems that can occur, including smoke ,fog, glare, hair on the lens, smudges on the lens, extraneous light can all cause photo's to look strange and things to appear on photo's that may not be there, if you can carefully rule all of these out to your satisfaction and you are in an area where paranormal activity has been recorded and maybe even backed up with equipment that measures energy levels and atmospheric conditions at the time the photo was taken , in other words if you adhere to protocols to avoid taking or believing that every strange photo is of paranormal origin you must have collateral evidence to support that a anomalous image might be of paranormal origin.

greets
ian

Hi All

This is a really interesting thread, and from my point of view I can find myself agreeing with what everyone is saying. My take on this is that the more different types of media and equipment you can use on an investigation the better your evidence is going to be. I absolutely applaud Robb for the work he is doing creating this device and I can't wait to see it in action. How good would it be to capture evidence on video, camera, emf and temperature simultaneously? Yes, the sceptics will always find an argument against your evidence, but it becomes increasingly difficult for them to do so if simultaneous evidence is available from a number of different sources.

Regards
Piers

Yes I agree that evidential combinations make better proof. I filmed such a clip in Hellfire where the video camera records me sensing something close to us, then the K2 spikes and then an orb floats first up and then down. Individually each of those things could be easily discounted but in sequence I feel they are much more valid.

Hi Guys

Well thats what it's all about ,catching a sequal of evidence at same time, with a couple of different devices that does solidify evidence ,that is also the whole point of rob's little device to able to catch reactions with thermometer and EMF at the same time and to be able to document it in the form of a graph on a laptop when we can timestamp the film at the same time , we will be one step further than we were before which is what we want .

And it is right that sceptics will always find something to argue about , but we shouldn't lose the path we are on we are not there to prove to the whole world that they excist , we are there to help other people come to terms with the problems that they have and explain what they may have at home , if we can prove something while we are doind it then that is a bonus.

greets
ian

What ever happened to the old way of ghost hunting?
Lets not forget what we are trying to do on this site and as paranormal investgators.....sorry but no pc can tell me what im feeling or seeing.
Everything we do here is trying to prove that there is somthing paranomal or other wise....let not loose site of what we are doing.....i would have to strongly agree with si on this one we need to be close by to catch anything and not feel tec alone will prove otherwise
phil

When was the last time that a person claiming to 'see' or 'feel' a presence, or similar, ever solidly conclude a haunting, or evidence of?

A PC can verify, backup and provide evidence of what we may 'feel' or 'see', along with other technology.

If I wanted to rely on the over active imaginations of slightly impressionable minds (this is an indirect reference to the generation of cult 'Most Haunted' followers borne out from the past 10 years, not the real thing) for verification of other worlds, then I would be posting on another website.

I would agree that in some way what ever your working on with be a big help to the gps team... im not knocking that,.but there is alot to do even before we can start an invesation...just because a room feels cold or has a strange feel to it will not mean that its paranormal....just maybe some left the window open?...or any other number of things like whitch way the house or room faces drying the day as it warms up and cools down..... and so much more ,all im saying is theres nothing wrong with the way investgaitons are done...yes i agree we need tec its a big part, but we cant rely of this alone....i have been doing this for a while now.even..before i came to gps....i lived with it growing up and am still seeing things form day to day....
Im really happy that somone is trying to work on somthing that will help us in this quest...to prove that this is all about.....

phil

Guys, I'm not talking about replacing humans with robots and computers!

Of course there are many people here who have been doing this for years in a perfectly decent and thorough manner and would do a much better job than myself! Please do not think I am trying to discredit tried and tested methodologies, because that's not what I aim to do. I simply want to push the importance of collecting and recording all possible data in some sort of tangible and verifiable format.

And can I please just stress once again that I do not believe and have never stated that technology should take the lead role or replace human beings on investigations! They are of equal importance and decent results would not be possible, in my opinion, with either without the other.

Regards,

Robb

Well said Robb,

I think we all have food for thought here in this thread.

It has been a great discussion and a good understanding of all points and the subject matter.

I am very impressed with those that have participated in this discussion, and have to admit that all the points were very well thought out and entirely reasonable and justified.

Ghost hunting is a science, an art, and a way of life for some of us. However, if we want to be taken seriously and make our mark in this field of Para-Science and on a blinkered world, we always need to look for tangible proof and logical reasoning.

I have always worked with instinct, logic, a psychic influence and most of all heart, but the scientific equipment I use is imperative to guide me into making the right assumption, decision, and reasoning.

The aim of G.P.S is not to pursue the world of ghosts with a third eye, but it is to seek out their existence and obtain proof that they really do exist, using science and technology. Science is one of man’s greatest achievements and in this day and age technology rules the world. We must strive forward and use it to aid our fantastic human senses, and for many of us the unique gift of a second sight.

Ian and I established G.P.S to conduct a serious study, research and investigation into all types of paranormal phenomena. We want to makes use of state-of-the-art photographic, video and sound recording equipment and techniques to undertake this research. We do also use psychics to further support the investigation work, so thank you Bongo.

thankyou for the thankyou

I have to say i agree with robbi on this one, the majority of us now are not too fussed re orbs, from my experience which obviously is not great or to the extend of a majority of members, obviously one can be more receptive than another, but during our experiment when my neighbour had been in our house on many occasions she had never felt anything day or eve, upon hearing we had confirmed (if one is to believe in mia dolan and my family and i's experience) spiritual activity it was that particular night she saw a man and she was quite descriptive. In alot of cases i believe it can be " a seed which has been planted", i am more sceptical now than i ever have been in my life, with regard to orbs as we are aware there are 900 possibilites of what this image could be, lets get something more substantial, somethings the other sites havnt produced and that being virtual proof.

And remember "things are not always as they seem"!

i agree they more ways we have to back up our findings the better. i have learned loads here and when i went on investigation and still have loads to learn apart from my many personal experiences. i look forward to the day gps get something that cannot be easily explained away and we can hopefully quantify at somepoint even if not immediately.