• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

What does this "EVP" sound like?

What do you hear?

  • Here, back here

    Votes: 3 10.0%

  • The Black's here

    Votes: 3 10.0%

  • The Black Fear

    Votes: 1 3.3%

  • Get Back Dear

    Votes: 12 40.0%

  • The Flax's dear

    Votes: 3 10.0%

  • He Lacks Fear

    Votes: 3 10.0%

  • The Flax Beer

    Votes: 2 6.7%

  • Their Black Tear

    Votes: 3 10.0%
  • Total voters
    30
Herr dog tear.

(No kidding, this is exactly what it sounds to me.)
 
Last edited:
To me, it sounds like: "Their nice kids," spoken by a male with an Australian accent. Written phonetically (informally) it sounds something like: They-ah noyce kyeeds.

Is there a poll that is open only to non-English speakers? Even without a poll, I'm curious about how the native language(s) and/or accent of the listeners affect the perception of what is heard. Also, I'd like to see if the perception of what is heard changes if the listener is told the country in which the EVP was recorded.

I find the area of EVPs very intriguing, because while scientific equipment is used (or arguably misused) to capture EVPs, it is impossible to interpret them while staying entirely within the constraints of the scientific method. To be able to attribute an EVP to a particular source, you have to know precisely what is being said. And therein, lies the rub.

The value of an EVP as possible evidence of the paranormal is completely dependent on the interpretation of the words contained therein, especially if the paranormal researcher is claiming that the EVP is a response to a question posed seconds earlier.

If we were to apply standard experimental methodology to EVP interpretation, it is clear that the interpretation of an EVP should be done without any knowledge of the circumstances in which it was recorded - as was done for this poll. Human beings are predisposed to seeing patterns, even when none exists, so experimental protocol has to be designed to nullify the effects of this predisposition. For instance, a "responsive" EVP shouldn't be interpreted by anyone who knows the question that was posed preceding it because knowing the question would cause bias in favour of responsive interpretations.

Here's the problem: In normal language usage, contextual clues are essential to the comprehension of language. But in the interpretation of EVPs, contextual information creates bias towards positive results.

Even though I think that the existing "evidence" about the source of EVPs doesn't rise to the level of scientific evidence or proof of the afterlife or the ability to communicate with the dead, I don't think that the topic should be abandoned entirely. I think that we can use EVPs as a way to study the psychological and sociological components of language and language comprehension. Why use EVPs instead of other types of voice samples without attachments to the paranormal? Precisely to see how our feelings towards the paranormal affect our perceptions of what is being said.

I'm new to the board, and I'm in the process of reading the existing threads on EVP. I'm glad to see that other skeptics are interested in the topic, so I hope to add to the dialogue.

Cheers.
 
I also could not vote as I heard,

"You goth kids"

Goth kids are far creepier than any disembodied voice.
 
Chem-back-see-iss

Obviously a spell spoken by an American wizard at Hogwarts, most likely one from Slytherin.
 
I wish I was making this up, but I swear it sounds like "Thaiboxerken."
 
Are we all hearing the same thing or could the person that put up the recording be changing it?
 
Jonquill said:
Are we all hearing the same thing or could the person that put up the recording be changing it?
Click to expand...
Well considering the highest on the poll only gets 11 hits of the 28, I found that the Planet-X options in the thread total 74.

Most of the Planet-X options are similar to the phonetics I used for my post. Some of these are 2 years old, so I think we're discussing the same recording.
 
cos said:
"Cannot give."
Click to expand...

That's what I heard after reading the poll options, but before reading the rest of the thread.

It took me 3-4 listens to come up with that guess, but once I did it become more and more clear on subsequent listenings. Confirmation bias anyone?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom