The Paranormal Blog

Preface:

As a rule, we and many "ghost groups" have usually done their best to keep the whole history of a site and it's reported phenomena away from observers and investigators in order to maintain neutral observations and keep those actually doing the investigation from being corrupted.

Basically, if you were in a reportedly haunted home where the "possible" ghost was (reported to be) a woman who haunted the kitchen and died in the bedroom, ten will get you twenty that most investigators and observers will flock strictly to those sites and will only be looking for things that match the reported phenomena... possibly missing other and equally important information.

That said, during a recent investigation, a new thought and concept came to light.

Observation:

Most of the "best" (clearest and most easy to understand) collected samples of electronic voice phenomena seem to come in response not to questions, but intersecting conversations with a team not related to anything within an investigation.

This led to the concept of two ideas... both are considered "interactive EVP collection".

Interactive EVP Collection Method One: The concept is two or more investigators (preferably only two) record on a fresh tape. During the session, a series of questions and "related" conversation is said aloud by the investigators. The questions, when possible, are related as closely as possible to the location and people that "might" have been at the site at any time.

Interactive EVP Collection Method Two: Two (or more - but preferably two) read a selection of scripted questions leaving a suitable break for an answer from the possible EVP source.

These two methods seemed to make sense and took the "intersecting EVPs collected" and attempted to swing the situation from "interruptions" to a channeled question and answer period.

These two methods have yielded some interesting results, but nothing that could be absolutely described as two-way communications without question.

Observation - In The Field:

Recently, in a field investigation at a site we'd visited several times previously, we were working with a sensitive who said they had picked up on an entity that, according to the sensitive, was aware of "our" presence. We have the sensitive free reign to allow the entity to communicate/do what it wanted with a minimum of questions from us.

At one point, the entity started "bantering" about his co-workers, the city we were in, and then mentioned some information about a former Prime Minister of Canada... to which, since many of us on site have a decent knowledge of history, a wee conversation broke out about the Prime Minister... to which, the sensitive started acting as a "true medium" and relaying his part of the conversation and interjections.

During this time, an epiphany occurred to us...

Adaptation of a Theme:

Effectively, since recorded history, rumour and idle chit-chat have been probably the most popular activities from "courtly rumours" to "water cooler talk", humans have always been interested in fairly mundane or at least, probably not-terribly important talk about the world and people around them.

Politics, personalities, and genuine "gossip" are all universal.

Using this simple truth about the human condition, perhaps keeping the "history" of a time and place being investigated may not be as good an idea as one would assume... at least, not while trying to collect "interactive EVP".

In fact, working on the untested hypothesis that "ghosts" are creating electronic voice phenomena... and that ghosts are some form of left-over residue of human that once occupied the reportedly haunted spot, then it would go to reason that "strangers" barking out odd questions, regardless of context and possibly asking these questions yards away from the "target" (or "ghost"), then it really is not surprise that there has been limited success with this method.

On the other hand, however, since EVPs do seem to be simply intersecting interjections and many do not seem to properly (with absolute qualifications) answer questions put out by observers/investigators, perhaps we need to modify what's said an why...

Implementation of Adaptation #1 - Interactive/Interruptive EVP Gathering:

With the whole team educated to a degree on the site's history, the possible human entities who may be involved as the "targets" (the "ghosts" - please remember we are working from the aforementioned untested hypothesis) may

be a high suggestion to "spur" conversation within the team about the personalities and functions not only of the site, but of the pertinent time in history.

This may "spark" any "entities" (again, using the untested hypothesis) to wish to interrupt or take part in the conversation as they would be genuinely involved and knowledgeable... or at least able to "jump in with their two cents worth" to any conversations... Ergo: Possibly leading to captured and relevant EVP.

Implementation of Adaptation #2 - Interactive/Interruptive EVP Gathering:

Select a handful of observers and investigators on the site's history, the possible human entities who may be involved as the "targets" (untested hypothesis again) who would then be responsible for doing an "educational talk and tour" with other members of the team. Again, assuming that the "entities" (using the untested hypothesis) should be versed in the topic being talked about and may try to interject meaningfully.

Commonality with Adaptations #1 and #2:

With the possibility of relevant interjection, if this type of EVP is received in quantity with normal EVP collection controls in order (to eliminate the possibility of "mistakes" or "false positives" due to members of the team talking and being "mistaken" for "entities", radio signal bleed through, or any other "natural" environmental elements being taken as possible "paranormal" elements,) it would indicate that...

#1: The original target for EVP collection is aware of the present situation and surroundings enough to comment on conversations therein.

#2: Could be the start of an "entity" wishing to communicate to simply either "catch up" on news or to get their version of things out... thus leading to possible two-way, sentient communications.

...of course, if this method is a failure after a predetermined amount of experiments and actual field attempts...

#3: Will eliminate possibilities for several variations of interactive EVP collection.

Conclusion of Concept...

Although it is still recommended that on an initial investigation of a site that only the bare information be given to the team in order to keep neutral observations from a team possible with as few people allowed to know as much about the whole case and site, if one wishes to pursue these adaptations of interactive EVP collection, they (and either all or a selection of others) would need to be versed not only in the possible identity of an "entity" suspected as being the "target" of the phenomena, but also on the popular figures of the day, the history of the area in which the phenomena is occurring, and enough that, in essence, they could carry on a "water-cooler conversation" with whatever might be at the site.

Effectively, think of this...

Would you be more likely to "speak up" to a person asking you "How did you die?" while not looking in your direction... or would you most likely speak up and join a friendly group of people discussing your favourite celebrity or politician?

If we are to entertain the hypothesis that human consciousness is involved with "ghosts" and EVPs, I would suspect that the latter would be more likely to be effective.