Science Center conducts ghost hunts

[Resume]

I've just completed a study for a thesis project on paranormal investigation groups in the U.S. and how they do (or do not do) "science". The results, I think, can be extrapolated to what the American public thinks it means to do science. (Writing it up, now.)

Because they REALLY REALLY want to be taken seriously, they assume all the sciencey trappings. They totally get a rise out of saying they are affiliated with ANY institution that holds credibility with the public, even if it's only a community college. Watch out for those inflated egos at THIS event.

I'd love to read this thesis.

 

[JoeTheJuggler]

It sounds like you are asking them to prove a negative rather than calling them on the carpet for not having a solid foundation for any of their measurements.

No. My criticism is exactly what I said--that they're claiming to do hypothesis testing when they cannot come up with a falsifiable hypothesis.

From the material cited above (the "slideshow" document): "For instance, the idea that ghosts produce magnetic fields would be a hypothesis."

So, they use this so-called "hypothesis" and run out into the field with their EMF detector and take a series of measurements. One of two things happens: they detect some electro-magnetic fields or they don't. There's no logical connection between those readings and the hypothesis. If you don't get anything, you still haven't falsified this so-called "hypothesis". Similarly, detecting EMF is no reason to reject the null hypothesis (that ghosts are not the cause of these EMF), nor can it distinguish from any number of other silly supernatural "hypotheses" (Zeus produces magnetic fields, or my friend with PK powers produces magnetic fields).

My main complaint is that they are passing this off as hypothesis testing when it is not. They are disseminating misinformation about the scientific method, and the materials all have completely false statements (on Science Center letterhead).

My secondary complaint is that they're misusing the gadget and giving people a confused idea of what this technology is useful for. So rather than promoting learning about science and technology, they are promoting confusion about them (and promoting pseudo science).

ETA: Your analogy to looking for meteorites with a metal detector is apt if someone is claiming that doing so is hypothesis testing. The main difference, of course, is that it is possible to set up a falsifiable hypothesis regarding the ability of a metal detector to detect the presence of a meteorite. (Set it up similar to Randi's dowsing test set ups--basically you have a meteorite hidden from view in one of a couple of indistinguishable hiding spots.) It's impossible to set up a test of the hypothesis that ghosts cause EMF. But that point is moot--in both cases (running out to a field with a metal detector or running out to a "haunted" site with an EMF detector) you're not conducting hypothesis testing, which is what the Science Center's Haunted Hunt purports to be.

 

[JoeTheJuggler]

I've just completed a study for a thesis project on paranormal investigation groups in the U.S. and how they do (or do not do) "science". The results, I think, can be extrapolated to what the American public thinks it means to do science. (Writing it up, now.)

Because they REALLY REALLY want to be taken seriously, they assume all the sciencey trappings. They totally get a rise out of saying they are affiliated with ANY institution that holds credibility with the public, even if it's only a community college. Watch out for those inflated egos at THIS event.

I'd also like to see your thesis. In fact, I'd like to send it to the Science Center!

 

[idoubtit]

Would anyone be willing to read the first rough draft of my thesis in a few weeks and comment? You must be serious because it isn't going to be very short. I'd love to have some outside eyeballs take a first look. If so, send me your email and if you are at all qualified to judge its soundness. I'll give you props in the acknowledgements if you are helpful. Send to paskeptic(at)gmail.com

Thanks.

 

[Resume]

Would anyone be willing to read the first rough draft of my thesis in a few weeks and comment? You must be serious because it isn't going to be very short. I'd love to have some outside eyeballs take a first look. If so, send me your email and if you are at all qualified to judge its soundness. I'll give you props in the acknowledgements if you are helpful. Send to paskeptic(at)gmail.com

Thanks.

In what discipline is your thesis?

 

[idoubtit]

In what discipline is your thesis?

It's an education Masters - Science and the Public

 

[Resume]

It's an education Masters - Science and the Public

I have long felt these paranormal TV shows and their consumers were worthy of thesis paper in psych or science education. Best wishes.

 

[JoeTheJuggler]

Joe Nickell will be coming through St. Louis (on his way to Skepticon in Springfield, MO) just a couple of weeks after the Science Center's ghost hunt. I wish the timing were such that he could talk to the people running this program.

Meanwhile, here's the letter I wrote:


I respectfully urge you to drop the Haunted Hunts from the St. Louis Science Center Travel Programs.

Based on an examination of the materials on the website, I have no doubt that these events are contrary to the mission of the Science Center.

They do not promote science and technology but rather pseudo science and the misuse of technology.

I will spell out a few specific examples, but there are many many more.

The slideshow document gives a seriously flawed description of the scientific method (HauntedHuntSlideshow.pdf page 2). When you test a hypothesis you either reject the null hypothesis or you do not. There is no outcome where the hypothesis is found "partly true". The business of running around looking for "anomalous" readings is typical of pseudoscience, but has no place in science.

In the same vein (in the same document, page 8) we find the sentence, "For instance, the idea that ghosts produce magnetic fields would be a hypothesis." This is false. This is not a valid hypothesis. There is no measurement you can take with the EMF detector that could falsify the idea that ghosts produce magnetic fields. Further, even if you did some sort of control testing with the EMF detector to define what is "anomalous" you still couldn't distinguish the "ghost caused it" explanation from any number of mundane explanations or even other supernatural ones ("Zeus produces EMF" or "invisible leprechauns produce EMF" or "my friend who has PK powers caused the readings").

This outing teaches the misuse of technology. These measuring and recording devices were not meant to be used in this way. For example, the website has an mp3 of an "EVP" recording from April's Haunted Hunt. An audio recorder with the gain on max recording silence and then the resulting audio amplified further just produces white noise. Looking for hidden "voices" in the white noise might be an interesting psychological demonstration (similar to the now discredited Rorschach inkblot tests), but it says nothing about the presence or existence of ghosts, and is the unscientific misuse of scientific technology.

The document HAUNTEDBckgrndInfo.pdf contains a great many false statements, distortions of science and promotion of pseudoscience on St. Louis Science Center Letterhead. One example (of a great many, I assure you) is the definition of "Floating Orb". It is claimed that these spherical images "inexplicably" register on film or videotape. These "orbs" are nothing more than out-of-focus specks of dust, water droplets or sometimes small insects very near the lens. They are easily explained and easily reproduced in controlled circumstances.

And finally, lending the Science Center's logo and reputation to the Paranormal Task Force is a really bad idea. They simply want to gain some undeserved legitimacy by their association with a trusted and venerable institution (which, by the way, receives taxpayer money via the Zoo Museum District).

Again, I could provide many more examples of undeniably false statements in these materials. Most importantly be assured that running around with these recording and measuring gadgets is not science and has no place being associated with the Science Center.

I would recommend in its place an excursion teaching hypothesis testing and critical thinking. The real world is full of wonder and mystery, and that is what the Science Center ought focus on.

Sincerely,

 

[Uncayimmy]

Nice effort, Joe. Did you catch the SWIFT article about this?
http://www.randi.org/site/index.php...ed-message-at-saint-louis-science-center.html

 

[bozman]

Did they find any yet?

 

[Uncayimmy]

Did they find any yet?

Apparently they shoot them with tranquilizers and tag them with radio transmitters to track their movements. Believe it or not, they migrate with the seasons but the opposite of what birds do.

 

[bozman]

Believe it or not, they migrate with the seasons but the opposite of what birds do.

Oh... my... god. That's what I suspected all along!

 

[Gawdzilla Sama]

Joe, we will be at Skepticon, so if you need to send anything extra I can pass it along. You know how to get it to me.