The Paranormal Blog

"It would be better if everyone was more concerned about 'Cause' rather than 'Effect' when it comes to investigating the paranormal." - Matthew Didier

I've always been good at sound bytes.

What I meant when I wrote these words was that too many people looking into the paranormal get, for lack of a better term, rather hung up on "what" happened... rather than "why" it happened.

Since the word "investigator" is bandied about a lot in these types of studies, let's look at it like a criminal investigator in a hypothetical situation...

They walk into an apartment and see a dead body on the floor with a bullet wound to the head.

Imagine if the investigators on that crime scene simply went, "Look! A body! A bullet wound! Cool!" and that was it. They left with the cool evidence of a body with a bullet hole in it's head on the floor. End of.

This is what's happening all too often with many supposed paranormal investigators... looking only into the effect and not the cause of what happened.

Using my example again, a normal criminal investigator on that scene would want to know things like "What caused the bullet to enter the victim's body causing death? How long was the victim alive? What predicated the bullet wound?" Without this information, a criminal investigator has no case.

Now, back to the paranormal... and haunted places as an example... you have people running into places with tape recorders, getting odd sounds recorded, and then presenting them.

Um...

There's a few questions that need to be answered, wouldn't you think?

What caused the sounds? What evidence do you have to support what you believe caused the sound? What happened/was happening during the recording? What happened *before* the recording?

Basically, what caused the recording?

Simply getting something "weird" on audio, video, or any other type of media... or even a witness experience (as an investigator) and presenting it amounts to little more than reporting a bit of sensationalised news with no substance.

Most people don't question whether or not people do feel they experience things we call "paranormal"... nor do many question that there are odd things recorded and "captured" that occasionally defy easy explanation...

...what is always at question is what if the causation of the event in question?

To answer that question properly, we'd need to be able to actually (at least) have a reasonable expectation of something happening that is estimatable in it's frequency or occurrence... and we can't do that unless we figure out certain variables.

Popular fiction would have you believe UFOs are only seen on country roads late at night... preferably somewhere deserted... which is not true. How many stories about ghosts have the clock strike "thirteen" or at least midnight? One newer popular thought is there is a specific time that ghosts tend to be most active during... and one wonders, how in heck did anyone figure that out? Our files (amongst many others,) say that thinking is flawed in the extreme. Sasquatch is only in dense forest in the Pacific Northwest? No... that's not accurate...

...so we need to see what the commonalities are noticeable in these experiences.

What happens just before a paranormal experience? Is there any common thread?

Harkening back to my ghost investigators example, I doubt we'll ever find out at the rate we're going because one line of questions is rarely fully explored... and that is not only what happened DURING an event... and immediately before the event... but what was happening well before the event took place.

What was the witness doing? What made them notice something weird was happening? Did they have a reason to look towards or pay attention to the place where "whatever it was" was experienced? Did they notice any environmental changes prior to the experience? What tasks, if any, were they involved in? What was their state of mind?

If you knew these answers, you might very well be able to guesstimate when something was about to occur... and be prepared to capture that experience on tape or whatever... and know what many of the possibilities could be.

This information, which needs to be collected on a case-by-case basis, could lead to almost any possibility as to why things happen.

As an example, we're noticing a small "bump" in data that seems to say people involved in repetitive tasks relying on little or no physical activity are more prone to experience a change in environment that allows them to "see" apparitions when they report them to us. This is not a "rule", mind you... just a small, but noticeable "bump" in data.

Is this because they're almost in an altered state of conscious due to the "hypnotic" effect of what they're doing? Is it because the mind is released from certain duties allowing a more PSI formed event to occur? Is it because they're almost in a form of "dream state" and imagining things or, even possibly allowing the witness to be privy to something a "woken" person might not see?

...actually, that last one in terms of hallucinations isn't as great a catch-all answer as some would believe because of cases with multiple witnesses... one has to assume they're not all having the exact same hallucination... but still, it should be examined as a possibility.

If we noticed that witnesses saw lights... or noticed the sound in a room changed... or the temperature altered... as I said, that kind of thing could lead to a place where these things could be predicted to a degree and therefore examined to a better understanding.

What you're reading now, however, is really an "alpha" thought... no beta testing as yet. It's obviously something we're going to work on and look into... but we can hope that other's may follow suit... and instead of only looking into the "effect" of a paranormal event, will want to try and look into the "cause" as well... and improve all our understandings of these things.