Baby Nemesis
Master Poster
For anyone in the UK, (or anyone inclined to listen online), there's a programme on tonight on Radio 4 where scientists tried to create the conditions that would make a place feel haunted:
-
Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more
Interesting-sounding programme on haunted houses tonight
- Thread starter Baby Nemesis
- Start date
Cainkane1
Philosopher
When I watch Ghost Hunters I never see any ghosts that couldn't be explained away by a skeptic. Good luck to the Ghost hunters in the UK.
Baby Nemesis
Master Poster
I heard it too. Unfortunately, I didn't think much of it at all! Disappointing.
They interviewed two experimentors. One had put together this simulated room, and got various people to spend fifty minutes in it. Sometimes the experimentors transmitted low-level sound and electro-magnetic charges (or whatever they were) into it, and sometimes they didn't. They asked people to tell them when they experienced sensations, such as feeling dizzy, or feeling as if there was a presence there. Totally predictably, the interviewee said some people experienced weird sensations when nothing was happening at all. The scientist being interviewed said they then tested the temporal lobe activity (or something of that nature) of both those who'd felt sensations when there was nothing going on and those who hadn't. He said those who had felt something had higher activity, and he said that was known to be correlated with suggestibility.
He didn't say how well correlated.
Nor did he say whether any of the people who experienced something when there Was something there said they could have mistaken it for a ghost if they didn't know better. For instance, he said one sensation he told people they might feel was dizziness. His simulated room was just a round bare space. If some of them had got dizzy, it might have been from pacing around and around in it for the want of anything else to do!
The scientist said that a high percentage of people did feel as if there was another presence in the room with them sometimes, but didn't say how many of those were the "suggestible" ones.
So he was rather vague as to whether his experiment had been worthwhile, and there didn't seem to be too much point interviewing him. The sensible thing for him to have done might have been to take the suggestible people out of the experiment and to have done it again with the others, and asked them whether they might have assumed there could be a ghost there if they didn't know what was causing the sensations.
The second interview totally missed the point, in my opinion. The interviewee said it had been discovered that a bed in a castle reputed to be haunted had a particularly strange magnetic field about it. He totally neglected to mention whether, or what sensations people who'd actually slept in it had reported, and whether they had taken those in particular to be evidence of ghosts in the vicinity. He said there were other reasons the castle may have got its reputation for being haunted, such as things about its general atmosphere, like portraits of medieval characters looking out. Thus, the relevance of the magnetic oddity about the bed was left totally open to question, which, since it was supposedly the reason for the interview, rendered the interview rather pointless. The scientist did say there was a "complex" feel around the bed, but didn't attempt to explain himself any further whatsoever.
The interviewer only had a short time to ask the questions, so obviously neither experiment could be discussed in much depth at all. But still, they could have utilised the time better by asking better questions, although it wasn't entirely their fault. They did ask a question about one experiment, and the scientist started going on about how people in the experiment had rolled around in the bed creating all kinds of odd magnetic wave forms on his equipment. As if that was the point!
He didn't say a word about whether they actually felt any strange sensations.
I think I could have done a better job of interviewing him.
Still, the interviewer did do a good interview with someone before that, with someone who did some experiments and found that people who witness rudeness tend to get too angry and distracted to be creative.
They interviewed two experimentors. One had put together this simulated room, and got various people to spend fifty minutes in it. Sometimes the experimentors transmitted low-level sound and electro-magnetic charges (or whatever they were) into it, and sometimes they didn't. They asked people to tell them when they experienced sensations, such as feeling dizzy, or feeling as if there was a presence there. Totally predictably, the interviewee said some people experienced weird sensations when nothing was happening at all. The scientist being interviewed said they then tested the temporal lobe activity (or something of that nature) of both those who'd felt sensations when there was nothing going on and those who hadn't. He said those who had felt something had higher activity, and he said that was known to be correlated with suggestibility.
He didn't say how well correlated.
Nor did he say whether any of the people who experienced something when there Was something there said they could have mistaken it for a ghost if they didn't know better. For instance, he said one sensation he told people they might feel was dizziness. His simulated room was just a round bare space. If some of them had got dizzy, it might have been from pacing around and around in it for the want of anything else to do!
The scientist said that a high percentage of people did feel as if there was another presence in the room with them sometimes, but didn't say how many of those were the "suggestible" ones.
So he was rather vague as to whether his experiment had been worthwhile, and there didn't seem to be too much point interviewing him. The sensible thing for him to have done might have been to take the suggestible people out of the experiment and to have done it again with the others, and asked them whether they might have assumed there could be a ghost there if they didn't know what was causing the sensations.
The second interview totally missed the point, in my opinion. The interviewee said it had been discovered that a bed in a castle reputed to be haunted had a particularly strange magnetic field about it. He totally neglected to mention whether, or what sensations people who'd actually slept in it had reported, and whether they had taken those in particular to be evidence of ghosts in the vicinity. He said there were other reasons the castle may have got its reputation for being haunted, such as things about its general atmosphere, like portraits of medieval characters looking out. Thus, the relevance of the magnetic oddity about the bed was left totally open to question, which, since it was supposedly the reason for the interview, rendered the interview rather pointless. The scientist did say there was a "complex" feel around the bed, but didn't attempt to explain himself any further whatsoever.
The interviewer only had a short time to ask the questions, so obviously neither experiment could be discussed in much depth at all. But still, they could have utilised the time better by asking better questions, although it wasn't entirely their fault. They did ask a question about one experiment, and the scientist started going on about how people in the experiment had rolled around in the bed creating all kinds of odd magnetic wave forms on his equipment. As if that was the point!
He didn't say a word about whether they actually felt any strange sensations.I think I could have done a better job of interviewing him.
Still, the interviewer did do a good interview with someone before that, with someone who did some experiments and found that people who witness rudeness tend to get too angry and distracted to be creative.
Audible Click
The gap in the plot
How do they know that what they see are ghosts? What proof did they show that convinced you?
Baby Nemesis
Master Poster
Yes, my older sister once went to the Tower of London when she was at school, and feels sure she saw the headless ghost of Anne Boleyn. I don't know what really happened.
The programme didn't say one word about how either of the scientists might have tried to simulate ghosts so people thought they were seeing them. It sounded as if they didn't try. I think they just wanted to find out whether people might feel as if a place was haunted if they felt funny sensations, perhaps somehow assuming that people might think they were seeing a ghost if they felt funny sensations, or something. Neither one of them said anyone had actually done that in his experiments.
The programme didn't say one word about how either of the scientists might have tried to simulate ghosts so people thought they were seeing them. It sounded as if they didn't try. I think they just wanted to find out whether people might feel as if a place was haunted if they felt funny sensations, perhaps somehow assuming that people might think they were seeing a ghost if they felt funny sensations, or something. Neither one of them said anyone had actually done that in his experiments.
The bed-related paper is online here;
http://ejp.org.uk/ExampleArticles/Braithwaite-Townsend_EJP20.pdf
http://ejp.org.uk/ExampleArticles/Braithwaite-Townsend_EJP20.pdf
Baby Nemesis
Master Poster
Thank you.
Well, the article did suggest a bit more about the kinds of things the scientists thought they were looking for. Near the beginning, it lists the kinds of things that were interpreted as evidence of haunting by those who've slept in the bed in the past, or at least things they'd reported:
It says the scientists theorised that maybe people would be more likely to interpret things that happened as supernatural if they'd been influenced by having slept in the magnetic bed for a while, or that it in itself might induce some experiences they took to be hauntings.
There was a load of technical- speak I didn't understand; but it sounds as if they had fun looking at their magnetism-measuring equipment.
They still didn't quite manage to get around to specifying exactly what sensations they might expect people to get from the unusual magnetic activity! The closest they got was to say,
Not very specific! I did a brief Google search for a bit more information. I found another article by the same people. The bit I read elaborated slightly. I'm not impressed:
(Emphasis mine)
So what they basically seem to be saying is they went into the castle to see if a bed, which I gather they already knew was magnetic, was magnetic at the right frequencies to induce hallucinations that may or may not exist!
They didn't say how the kinds of hallucinations that researchers think may or may not exist correlate to what people have actually reported experiencing - for instance babies crying, footsteps etc., or whether the feelings reported by those who've slept in the bed, such as "severe foreboding", have been "proposed" to sometimes be induced by magnetic fields.
Nor did they elaborate even a tiny little bit, at least in what I read, on the types of "hallucinations" it's "proposed" people can experience if they're sensitive to magnetic fields! The number of references to the works of others they gave gave the impression it might be necessary to read a dozen books or papers before finding out. If they'd focussed their attention on writing a couple of extra little paragraphs to clarify things instead of spending the time cluttering the text with lengthy lists of references, their paper would have been more enlightening.
It all seems rather vague.
Plus, they clearly need a bit of PR training to make their papers more user-friendly!
Baby Nemesis
Master Poster
So even if these electro-magnetic field-induced hallucinations were proven to exist, those scientists still wouldn't have any idea what percentage of the reports of hauntings had anything to do with them, and what percentage were to do with "expectant attention", or other things. I'm beginning to wonder why they bothered doing the experiments, when their results were bound to be so inconclusive. 
It might have been better if their paper called Sleeping with the Entity had actually featured the experiences of people who did actually do some sleeping in the magnetic bed, where their brainwaves were measured to see if they correlated with changes in the electro-magnetic fields, and to see whether any of the people in the experiment reported what they thought might be hauntings, and whether they were at the same times that the electro-magnetic fields were changing to ones thought more likely to induce hallucinations.
And they'd have needed enough people for any correlations between the times that supposed hauntings were reported and the times there were changes in the magnetic waves not to have just been likely coincidences.
It might have been better if their paper called Sleeping with the Entity had actually featured the experiences of people who did actually do some sleeping in the magnetic bed, where their brainwaves were measured to see if they correlated with changes in the electro-magnetic fields, and to see whether any of the people in the experiment reported what they thought might be hauntings, and whether they were at the same times that the electro-magnetic fields were changing to ones thought more likely to induce hallucinations.
And they'd have needed enough people for any correlations between the times that supposed hauntings were reported and the times there were changes in the magnetic waves not to have just been likely coincidences.
That's what I understood too, but Wiseman's work seems to suggest otherwise - there was a correlation between "haunted" spots and "haunty" feelings, regardless of prior knowledge (assuming people weren't fibbing on their questionaires).
http://www.richardwiseman.com/resources/BJP-hauntings.pdf
This thread reminds me of some of the research I've done on Greyfriars Kirkyard, a supposedly haunted graveyard in Scotland. Some investigators have tried to link the underlying geology of the area to the physical and mental symptoms that many people have described experiencing there. From one report:
"As a precursor to the investigation, we contacted the British Geological Survey (BGS) at Murchison House in Edinburgh requesting information on the rock formations below the area. There are two valid, non-spiritual, possibilities here. Either there are (a) electromagnetic (EM) fields created by the action of micro tremors on the rock formations which are interacting with sensitive people, or, (b) there are low frequency terrestrial standing waves of around 5 to 7Hz, which can induce nausea, disorientation and in extreme cases, loss of consciousness ...
The reply from the BGS showed that the ground beneath the Kirkyard consists of mudstone turning to sandstone at about 300 ft. According to the information, if the pores of the sandstone were to become saturated with mineral electrolytes, this in effect would create thousands of tiny batteries. Given the right conditions, a micro-tremor perhaps, the stored energy could be discharged, creating an electrical field above the ground affecting a sensitive person by causing a tiny seizure in the temporal lobes of their brain. These seizures appear to run in distinct patterns, with the people affected experiencing the same or similar images. It is rather as if the responses in the human brain are common throughout all races and when triggered produce similar images." ---Source: Strange Phenomena Investigations (SPI)
Compared to many other supposedly haunted locations, Greyfriars is noted in terms of the amount of people who have described strong physical symptoms just by being present in the area. It's tempting to write much of it off as just mass hysteria caused by "ghostly" expectations, but the severity of the symptoms, including asphyxiation and unexplained bruising with no recollection whatsoever, seems a bit unusual.
"Even more interestingly, a number of deaths have taken place in the Kirkyard itself; In the most recent of these, 24 year old Clarissa Mayweathers succumbed to "natural causes" while touring the yard in February 2009. She was in peak physical condition and had no prior history of health problems; a later autopsy revealed the cause of death to be asphyxiation, but what caused Mayweathers to suffocate without alerting a tour guide or other patron remains unclear." ---Source: Wikipedia
"As a precursor to the investigation, we contacted the British Geological Survey (BGS) at Murchison House in Edinburgh requesting information on the rock formations below the area. There are two valid, non-spiritual, possibilities here. Either there are (a) electromagnetic (EM) fields created by the action of micro tremors on the rock formations which are interacting with sensitive people, or, (b) there are low frequency terrestrial standing waves of around 5 to 7Hz, which can induce nausea, disorientation and in extreme cases, loss of consciousness ...
The reply from the BGS showed that the ground beneath the Kirkyard consists of mudstone turning to sandstone at about 300 ft. According to the information, if the pores of the sandstone were to become saturated with mineral electrolytes, this in effect would create thousands of tiny batteries. Given the right conditions, a micro-tremor perhaps, the stored energy could be discharged, creating an electrical field above the ground affecting a sensitive person by causing a tiny seizure in the temporal lobes of their brain. These seizures appear to run in distinct patterns, with the people affected experiencing the same or similar images. It is rather as if the responses in the human brain are common throughout all races and when triggered produce similar images." ---Source: Strange Phenomena Investigations (SPI)
Compared to many other supposedly haunted locations, Greyfriars is noted in terms of the amount of people who have described strong physical symptoms just by being present in the area. It's tempting to write much of it off as just mass hysteria caused by "ghostly" expectations, but the severity of the symptoms, including asphyxiation and unexplained bruising with no recollection whatsoever, seems a bit unusual.
"Even more interestingly, a number of deaths have taken place in the Kirkyard itself; In the most recent of these, 24 year old Clarissa Mayweathers succumbed to "natural causes" while touring the yard in February 2009. She was in peak physical condition and had no prior history of health problems; a later autopsy revealed the cause of death to be asphyxiation, but what caused Mayweathers to suffocate without alerting a tour guide or other patron remains unclear." ---Source: Wikipedia
Baby Nemesis
Master Poster
Here's something else about magnetic fields causing ghost-like experiences.
From an old article called Galvanizing Ghosts from Psychology Today:
From an old article called Galvanizing Ghosts from Psychology Today:
Tricky
Briefly immortal
Yep, that's an old article all right. Is there any sort of update in the last six years on where this hypothesis led to, or did it die from lack of evidence?
Apology
This title intentionally left blank
- Joined
- Jul 6, 2007
- Messages
- 2,126
What I wonder is how your sister knew it was the ghost of Anne Boleyn if it didn't have a head.
What I wonder is how your sister knew it was the ghost of Anne Boleyn if it didn't have a head.
Anne's head was on the floor and the headless ghost picked it up and kissed it.
Baby Nemesis
Master Poster
What I wonder is how your sister knew it was the ghost of Anne Boleyn if it didn't have a head.
Anne Boleyn is apparently reputed to carry her head under her arm. ... Or is that someone else?
As I said, I don't know what really happened. Perhaps I'll ask her for an updated version complete with the benefit of hind-sight.
This website has some strange tales:
Tricky said:
I was hoping someone would be able to comment on that. I've heard Persinger's methods have been criticised, but I don't know any more than that. I'll do some more research myself.
Femke
Goddess of the Glowing Sunsets
- Joined
- Aug 10, 2008
- Messages
- 466
Last year I translated some episodes of a fairly recent documentary series Most Evil, in which dr. Persinger's research was presented as fact. While investigoogling the terms for translation I remember finding quite recent articles. He still seems to do his experiments on temporal lobes, using fMRI's if I remember correctly.
Femke
Remarkable how that went unreported in the news. You'd think someone dying mysteriously like that would at least make it to the 'And finally...' section. Oh and look, it's already been cut from the Wikipedia article because it's entirely unsubstantiated...
As usual - first establish whether there is a real effect before proposing theories on what might cause it...
Last edited: