|
I keep hearing the term, “we go in to disprove a haunting.” I see it on television and I see it on web sites.
I would like some of you to explain what methods your group uses to disprove a haunting.
Before you answer, keep in mind that I have real problems with our loose use of terminology and buzz words/phases in paranormal research.
To disprove a haunting, aren’t you required to prove a negative. Unlike some, I do believe it is philosophically possible to prove a negative - but it is quite difficult and usually can be applied only to very limited, precise circumstances.
Let’s throw out an example.
You probably do not have a weasel in your pocket. Operating under this assumption, one would think you could simply show me the contents of your pocket, and by illustrating the lack of a weasel your point would be proven.
Here is the conversation…
| You |
I do not have a weasel in my pocket. |
| Me |
How do I know that? |
| You |
Because here are the contents of my pocket (you show said contents). |
| Me |
What if you have an invisible weasel in your pocket? |
| You |
Invisi…there is no such thing as an invisible weasel. |
| Me |
Prove it. |
| You |
Okay, I do not have a VISIBLE weasel in my pocket. |
| Me |
How do I know that? |
| You |
Because I just showed you the contents of my pocket. |
| Me |
But I cannot see the inside of your pocket. All I have to go on is what you have removed from your pocket. |
| You |
I will turn my pocket inside out (and you do so). |
| Me |
What exactly do you mean by “weasel?” |
| You |
Any small carnivore of the genus Mustela, of the family
Mustelidae, having a long, slender body and feeding chiefly on small rodents (you obviously were ready for that one). |
| Me |
Do partial weasels count? |
| You |
Partial? Why does that matter? |
| Me |
I did not examine the contents of your pocket thoroughly enough to see if there were partial weasels involved. |
| You |
Okay, I do not have any COMPLETE, VISIBLE weasels in my pocket. |
| Me |
Well, sure not now…but what about before? |
See my point?
While we can find alternatives for certain claims and events, we cannot declare any location “not haunted” by the lack of activity (or more accurately our inability to measure and document the activity) on any given night.
Even when we find that a door is easily opened by the wind, we have simply found an alternative explanation that leaves doubt. We have proved a positive, but we have not proved the negative.
It has been said often that ghosts do not perform on cue. I personally believe that most activity will follow patterns (moon cycles, time of day/month/year, etc).
I think we need to learn to use the words “inconclusive” and “undocumented” a lot more and stop acting like we are the final authority on what is and isn‘t. There is a big difference between saying "we find no evidence to support a haunting" and declaring "DEBUNKED."
|
