ghost hunting myth busters..?

I feel like we've become the ghost hunting equivalent of Mythbusters.

That's not necessarily a bad thing, but I'm afraid that all these debunking articles will make us look like rabid skeptics instead of believers who choose healthy skepticism, and do research accordingly.

I try to steer our research away from what I call 'Amazing Randi syndrome'; in other words, just because we can fake a ghost photo, doesn't mean that all ghost photos like it are fakes. In fact, they may all be real. We're just trying to eliminate mistakes when we say that something in a ghost picture is an anomaly.

I hate it when we put a photo online and declare that it's an anomaly, and later realize that it was a bug or a reflection. We look stupid, and I like to think that we're smarter than that.

But anyway, I look at all of our debunking research this month, and wonder if new visitors to our website will think that we're a bunch of raving skeptics.

Amityville

This week, I watched a documentary questioning the hauntings at the 'Amitville Horror' house.

On one hand, I try to be very respectful of researchers' subjective and psychic experiences.

On the other, the 'believers' on the show were Ed and Lorraine Warren, with support from Hans Holzer.

Several years ago, we debunked the Ocean-Born Mary tale, which had been one of the Warrens' earliest investigations. Hans Holzer also claimed that the house was haunted by Mary Wallace.

Our extensive research is described at The Truth about Ocean-Born Mary's Ghost. Some of the historical information was true, but most of the hauntings cannot be attributed to Mary Wallace.

(That said, we've heard from the daughter of the psychic who went to Henniker, NH with Hans Holzer, and she is confident that something haunts the famous house. We haven't done enough research to identify who that spirit might be... we only know that it's probably not Mary Wallace.)

Since that Henniker, NH research, I tend to be extra skeptical about sensational hauntings.

The Amityville documentary was inconclusive. Each side--believers and skeptics--maintain the truth of their claims.

I've been skeptical ever since I learned that the Lutz family let their kids sleep in the same beds where the previous residents' children were murdered. As a parent, I can't even think about doing that... even under the most compelling financial circumstances. But, it certainly increases the horror level when the story is told.

That, more than anything else, makes me question whether it was planned as a hoax from the start.

Oh, the interviews with Mr. & Mrs. Lutz seemed sincere and compelling. They probably believe the story as they tell it. And, it's a very good story.

I also believe that they could be working with false memories, which are a volatile area of psychological study; I'm reluctant to say that anyone is lying.

Also, during the show, Ed Warren generalized that ghosts are seen telepathically.

In most cases, that may be true. It's rare to see a full figure, solid-looking ghost.

However, many of us have seen ghosts and briefly confused them with actual, living people. For example, I've seen two ghosts that looked like real people at Gilson Road Cemetery in Nashua, NH.

One of our team researchers--with a third-degree Black Belt in Karate--was so convinced that one of the Gilson Road Cemetery figures was real, he tried to physically block the figure from attacking me.

So, that ghost was not seen telepathically, but in real life and by several of us at the same time.

The Amityville documentary emphasized the importance of physical evidence. While no proof will be enough to convince a determined skeptic, it can tilt the scales when someone isn't sure about a haunted site.

I'm still very doubtful about the Amityville house.

Ghost hunting remains a subjective study until we have more proof.

Although this research can be fascinating and personally meaningful, researchers should continue to collect as much evidence as possible. From EMF to EVP to 'ghost photos', it's key to document everything that provides proof of anomalies in haunted settings.

skeptical?

Whenever I post an article providing a natural explanation for some ghost photos, I feel like such a skeptic. I try to keep in mind that, if we don't keep our critical thinking skills engaged, we look less than scientific and objective as researchers.

That said, I still hate to say that a site isn't haunted, or that a photo doesn't show anything paranormal.

Today, we posted a series of articles (featuring experiments with hair near the camera lens) that may 'debunk' some 'ghost vortex' photos. I'll feel sad if this spoils anyone's fun. I mean, most people like the magic of believing, and they feel affirmed when a photo can't be explained in normal terms.

On the other hand, our tests with dust and dirt have--so far--confirmed what many of us have said: Ghost orbs aren't necessarily dust, pollen, or moisture.

I'll keep trying to create convincing orbs with dust, dirt, and other particulates, but nearly 50 test photos last night didn't offer any encouragement with dust and dirt.

Derek Acorah's 'Ghost Towns'

This weekend, I watched an episode of the new cable TV show, Derek Acorah's 'Ghost Towns' and it took me by surprise. He's taking the concept in some intriguing new directions, but some of these new investigations look quite startling.

Many people ask me if Mr. Acorah is genuine. I can only reply that, in ghost hunting, almost anything is possible.

When Mr. Acorah was on Most Haunted, he generally relied on a spirit guide called Sam. This intermediary provided some 'insulation' from direct possessions.

In this new show, Mr. Acorah is still working with Sam, but sometimes the psychic appears directly possessed by spirits. That's a very different experience for him... and for the viewing audience.

This could be one reason why the Ghost Towns show looks extreme at times: Mr. Acorah is comfortable with ghosts, and can rely on Sam for help if it gets too dangerous. It's also possible that Mr. Acorah has always been experiencing 'possessions' like this, but they were generally edited out of the Most Haunted episodes.

It's always smart to remember that TV shows are primarily entertainment, unless one is presented as a factual documentary. (Important note: I did not say that anything is 'fake' or even unlikely. I watch and enjoy these kinds of shows, myself, and take many of them seriously.)

Few ghost hunts are as exciting as what you see on TV; those shows are generally edited to omit hours of waiting while nothing's happening. But, even if the producers have used editing and re-enactments to 'enhance' the show, most ghost-related TV shows include things that can happen on any ghost hunt.

Who says...?

In researching our new article about Buying or selling a 'haunted' house, I began wondering who gives the final word on whether a house is haunted or not. Then again, if a 'stigmatized' house has a haunted reputation, do the facts really matter?

Recently, hotels, bars, restaurants, and other businesses have discovered that many customers seek them out because they are supposed to be haunted. And, the 60 percent or so who don't believe in ghosts*, generally don't care if their favorite watering hole claims to have ghosts.

So, I'm not sure how much of a 'defect' it is if a house has a reputation of being haunted, as long as curiosity seekers don't become a problem for the homeowners.

It will be interesting to see if increased interest in haunted houses leads to laws that address this specific issue.

* ref: Smart People See Ghosts, by Brad Steiger. Fate magazine, April 2006.

Ghost hunting by day

I've always been confident that ghost hunters will get the best results when they schedule investigations after dark. I'm not sure if it's like radio stations that can be heard more clearly and over a greater distance without interference from the sun. Whatever the reason, after-dark ghost hunts are usually far more successful than their daytime counterparts.

However, daytime ghost hunts aren't always a waste of time. I'm reminded of Gilson Road Cemetery in Nashua, NH. The haunted/psychic energy builds there each day, starting around 11:30 or noon. If you put your attention--perhaps your 'psychic radar'--on the woods in back of the cemetery, you may sense (or even see) some very odd things, daily.

By night, the energy manifests visibly as eerie lights that flicker on and off in those same woods. And then, the energy is gone by dawn. Around noon the next day, the cycle starts all over again.

This morning, we were reviewing some early morning photos taken at downtown Houston's La Carafe wine bar at 813 Congress Street. We'll need to spend more time analyzing them, but when a location is profoundly haunted--and La Carafe is--even early morning research can be fruitful.

No matter where you are, even if your only research time is during daylight hours, you can still have eerie experiences and record anomalies in photos, EVP, and with other ghost hunting tools.

why this blog

Regularly, I muse about possible theories related to ghosts and hauntings. Frankly, although I'm a psychic, I tend to lean towards the geek side of ghost hunting. So, whether I'm reconsidering an ancient earth-based view of time, exploring whether 'string theory' could apply to hauntings, or some other slightly off-the-wall concept, you can read about my current thoughts, here.

However, what I think when I post in this diary could change ten minutes later. I won't usually 'correct' past entries to keep them current with my at-this-moment views and theories. Frankly, I like to show the progression of my research.

Also, I'll be posting some of my psychic impressions about ghosts, hauntings, and possibly-haunted sites. They may be the result of formal investigations and/or readings, or simply a 'gut feeling' that I think may be important.

I don't intend to make each new diary entry a 'new at Hollow Hill' blog entry as well. Many of my posts won't be that profound... or they may not seem that way to me, at the time.

My better thoughts, theories, and encounters will later become webpages at Hollow Hill, or be included in my books. What you're reading here may be the half-baked versions, or a series of notes to myself for future reference.

Keep in mind that this blog--and all of my blogs--offer an RSS feed so that you can stay current with new posts, without the bother of revisiting this webpage.