Many people involved in paranormal research think that they are scientific when they’re actually using dodgy science instead. This makes them no better than those people who used biased methods of spirit communication, like ouija boards, psychics or dowsing rods even though they probably think quite the opposite.
Just over a month ago I wrote a piece exploring how methodologies set apart paranormal researchers from ghost hunters. I wrote that ‘a ghost hunter is someone who literally hunts or searches for ghosts and doesn’t seem to realise (or care) that this means they are using a completely biased methodology because they use tools and methods that assist in their quest to prove that they are encountering a ghost.’ Continue reading You’re Probably Not The Scientific Ghost Researcher You Think You Are
Confirmation bias, according to its Wikipedia entry, is ‘the tendency to search for, interpret, or recall information in a way that confirms one’s beliefs or hypotheses’ and we’re all prone to this bias even when we think we’re not. In fact I think it’s fair to say that we’re really good at thinking we’re not biased when we actually are. This is why scientists introduce controls to their studies and get their peers to review and replicate their research to ensure that their results are not biased or flawed. Continue reading Ghost Hunters vs. Paranormal Investigators
The GhostArk claims to be the world’s first ‘all in one’ piece of ghost hunting equipment. It’s a proud boast but it amounts to very little because all of the functions that it offers the user are mostly pseudo-scientific and don’t do very much at all. It’s the same old ghost hunting nonsense dressed up in a new box. As Engadget state ‘ghost detection is based on junk science’ and it’s not even clear if the product will make it to market at all. The website for the soon-to-be-released device lists the functions and gives a brief description of each. Continue reading GhostArk: Same Old Pseudo-Science In A Different Box?