Sue St.Clair and Matthew Didier's Paranormal Blog

PSICAN's Facebook Page has really picked up some interesting conversations of late... thanks mostly to Elvis Podvorac and Ian Topham really...

I'm going to do two posts on these... this is the second... it was spurred by who Mr. Topham posited...

Looking at Elivis's post on Orbs it got me thinking about why people think Orbs are Ghosts or spiritual energy or whatever and it reminded me of a forum question I once asked 'What Are The Absolute Facts We Know About Ghosts?' and I wondered what you guys would put on the list.

...which led to me giving a rare "short" answer to this question...

This question is why I tend NOT to say the study of "ghosts", but the study of "ghostly experiences" or "ghostly events".

Perception is everything...

What Mr. Topham knows... what we all should know... is that we really don't know all that much about the events/experiences/"creatures"(?) we call ghosts... no matter what anyone writes or even tells you!

We have snippets of things from various cases... we even have similarly perceived things happening to people... but beyond that, what is an apparition? Is it different than a poltergeist in any other way than just "appearance"? I could go on about Angels vs. Demons. vs. "Bad Spirits" vs. Multidimensional Entities...

What about time slips? What separates those "ghosts" that seem aware of their current environment vs. the one's that aren't vs. the ones that seem to be between the two?

We know literally everyone DOES have their own way of seeing/perceiving things, but can we pigeonhole their experiences into one genus or class? Are there absolutes in terms of "what and how" with what happens when people experience these things?

Are they "things" or "events"?

Again, like my last post today, many people lean heavily on their own beliefs rather than evidence... and although many rightfully claim so-called sceptics are afraid of a variable mucking up their dogma (like finding out there MIGHT INDEED BE something we currently consider "paranormal" out there thus ruining their steadfast view of the universe...) one can equally claim that some of the absolute "too-true-believers" might have their steadfast view of their universe ruined should unignorable (yes, I made that word up!) evidence prove to the contrary of their universe-view.

The issue, as always, is that many who report that they are "in the field" or "in the study" are not able to separate themselves from the cold hard evidence and fall back on dogma...

...after all, ask any "ghost hunter", and all ghosts are spirits of the dead...

...after all, ask any legitimate and educated parapsychologist, and all ghosts are the manifestation of psi from the witnesses own being...

...after all, ask any demonologist, and all ghosts are demons or troubled souls that need to be exorcised at most, "crossed over" at least...

...after all, ask any "sceptic", and all ghosts are lies, delusions, hoaxes, the construct of the mentally ill...

...after all, ask any...

Funny thing is anyone above could be right...

Funnier thing is anyone above could be wrong...

Super-Crunchy-Double-Bonus-Points Funniest thing is that all of the above are almost completely wrong on most cases.

All anyone with a modicum of actual interest in truly looking into the phenomena knows 100% sure is people believe they experience these things.

No one with an IQ better than a bag of doorknobs thinks that people have never truly felt that they've honestly experienced "weird stuff" of some sort that's attributed to the paranormal.

...and equally, even the most credulous people I've met do not assume every report from everyone who says they have had an experience with the paranormal is perfectly reporting, without any mistakes or personal interpretations getting in the way, an absolute factual event.

This said, it's only a very vocal minority that believe everyone who's had these experiences is full of bunk.

In my eyes, this means we, those truly interested in answers moreso than promoting their own agendas must be neutral and down the middle and accept and view all data regardless.

It reminds me why on all of PSICAN's standard web pages, near the bottom of the page, you'll find this quote...

Paranormal research "...is beset by True Believers ('They must be, therefore they are!') and True Unbelievers ('They can't be, therefore they aren't!') Rare are those who pursue evidence wherever it may lead, no matter how the results may square with their cherished hopes and dreams. Ironically, both the TBists and the TUists see themselves as champions of objective analysis and critical thinking, when in fact they are defenders of their respective faiths and, not incidentally, their egos." which was written by the late Ufologist Karl Pflock.

There are people with genuine experiences... there are hoaxers... there are the mistaken... I think we can all accept this to one degree or another... but we all must not marry our minds to one preferred dogma because someone told us their version "Must Be True!"... no... we must ask questions, look into all possibilities, examine all evidence... and unless it's just so empirical that it can't be denied, allow for all potential answers without accepting any of them as a permanent and steadfast philosophy.

The paranormal... that which is "beyond normal"... is not completely understood by anyone no matter what you may be told or hear. It's not a study to be taken on as an absolute "as is", but something we should try to understand... and as such, we should be poking it (and those who make statements about it,) with a stick every so often... especially when we have questions.

The best investigators and researchers out there ask questions and demand evidence moreso from themselves than others as a rule... but this also makes them question others as well.

As I paraphrased above, and as Jacob Bronowski once said...

It is important that students bring a certain ragamuffin, barefoot irreverence to their studies; they are not here to worship what is known, but to question it.

So, no, I really didn't answer Mr. Topham's question... because there is no perfect answer for me... and there may never be one...

...but I do have a lot of questions still.