Examples of scientific method in paranormal investigation?

Question

I would like to hear from paranormal investigators whether or not they try to use the scientific method in their investigations. TK studies have been beaten to death already, so I'm inquiring more about poltergeist investigations and so forth. In specific, I'm looking for key components of the scientific method which need to be present in order for the study to be accurately described as scientific.

1) Did you have a specific hypothesis? What was it?

2) Was your hypothesis both directly testable and falsifiable?

3) How would you have been able to falsify the hypothesis?

4) Comments on reproducibility? Statistical methods?

5) What was your conclusion? How did you modify your hypothesis based on the results you obtained?

6) Using your hypothesis, were you able to predict other paranormal events? How?

7) Can investigators skeptical of the paranormal use your methods to obtain the same results?

Please see http://teacher.pas.rochester.edu/phy_labs/AppendixE/AppendixE.html

Answer 1

I used the scientific method once, and it worked, but no paranormal investigators want to listen to what I have to say.

I was getting a lot of orb photos and tried to figure out what they were.

I hypothesized that they were dust, and that I could produce orbs by smashing pillows together and using a flash.

I took several pictures without the pillows and got one or two orbs in each shot, then I took the pictures after smashing the pillows together and got tons of orbs.  

I then went out and bought an SLR camera (not just for this experiment) with a lens hood. I could not pick up orbs with the lens hood on.

This is very reproducible, and I have told a number of paranormal investigators about my findings, and they ignore what I say.

Anyway, its kind of a hang up of mine, since people still insist that orbs are something supernatural.

Answer 2

Journal of Para-Normal Research...?

Surely they must publish something of the like with case studies in the format you seek.

Answer 3

There are quite a few experiments outlined and described in the Journal of Parapsychology archive:

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m2...

Most of these experiments do not demonstrate active Psi energies, but some have some statistical significance.  The researchers, for the most part, are sincere in their efforts to come to a realistic, experimentally based conclusion.

I hope that you can find something interesting ther TR.

***********************************

Followup:

Here's a brief description of one experiment I conducted.

- 2 subjects claimed the ability to perform remote viewing and/or telepathy. The goal of the experiment was to determine whether their claims could be verified.  We theorized that we could legitimately test these subjects and come to a reasonable conclusion concerning their claim.

-  The subjects were separated in different houses, miles from each other.  Observers were with the subjects to insure there was not communication between subjects.  No cell phones or wireless electronic communication devises were in either location.  A wired telephone was in each home, but was not used during the experiment.  Nobody left either location during the experiment.

-  The subjects were asked to attempt to make contact and initiate a conversation on a topic defined by the researchers and hidden from the subject until the experiment began.  The subjects had 14 hours to complete the conversation.

-  After 14 hours, the observers asked the subjects to describe the conversation that they had.  The descriptions were documented by the observers and compared.

-  The results:  The conversational records were very similar.  The order of the topics discussed were the same.  Exact phrases appeared in both summaries in the same order.  Though the discussion was less than 10 sentences, both summaries listed the same topics being discussed in the same order in the same number of sentences.  Each subject identified the speaker for each phrase, and both subjects connected the same phrases with the same speaker.

-  Conclusion:  With the lack of electronic communication, and the hidden selection of the topic to be discussed by the observers, it was highly unlikely that the subjects had been able to pre-arrange their responses.  The similarity of the responses, especially the length, specific word choices, and identification of the speakers that appeared in the summaries indicated a strong probability that there was a common knowledge between the subjects of what had been discussed.  Testing appeared to have been successfully completed in this case.

2 other attempts to verify with the same subject using similar techniques did not show the same results.

Post-mortem:  The experiments could have been better designed to eliminate the possibility of pre-arranged conversations between the subjects or the possibility that the observers were working together to falsify the results of the experiments.  The additional steps would have made for better experimental design and should be employed in the future.  

Also, one test showing significantly different results from 2 other test cases does not show evidence of repeatable results.  The results did not definitively show that there was communication between the individuals, but we did conclude that we were able to test the individuals for this ability.

************************************

My personal opinion in this case (not specifically scientifically based):

Knowing the observers in this case and their motivations, I do not believe that there was any "cheating" occuring in these experiments.  The results for these cases, though not the result of flawless expermental design, seem to accurately reflect the events.

In one trial, the subjects showed strong signs of having communicated from a distance.  The similarity of the data in that one case was so strikingly similar that it is unreasonable to believe that it is due to coincidence.  If they actually had this ability, it was not an ability that was always available to them or was not consistently accurate.  

*****************************

This is just one experiment, and not a particularly spectacular one.  It gives you a sense of the work that I have done, though it does not reflect how my style has changed over the years.    The details aren't all there, but this really isn't the forum to go into *complete* experimental design or examine data.  I hope that this information reflects what you were asking about.

Answer 4

The other day I was watching a show on nat geo which confirmed that most alleged psychic activities are because of the electro-magnetic anomalies existing in those supposedly  haunted places.

The variations in magnetic fields have really strange effects on the human brain which on exposure to such variations starts playing tricks with your senses.

Answer 5

Hi TR.  This is just a short "FYI" in hopes that it helps you with your inquiry.

I'm a "real" scientist and I've been watching (for amusement mostly) for evidence of the scientific method being used correctly in paranormal work for many years.  There really isn't much out there, and the reasons are pretty simple.

First, note that there ARE a few serious, and very dedicated people who, in fact, are educated who attempt to work with this area.  The other 98% are bozos--no matter how "well intentioned" they may be.  But that 2% is who's important here.

Their work always fails, as they'll tell you, on the issue of experimental accuracy.  That is, they cannot reproduce the same results from the same conditions time and again.  SO they have no testable, experimental validity to their research.  It's something like being an archaeologist--you only get to do the "dig" ONE time.  There's no going back and starting over if you forgot something.

But in paranormal work, there are not even emperical models for comparison of one's findings to some "standard", or to others work.  What I would like to see are numerous identical studies of the same phenomenon, at the same location, etc., to look for testable, reproducable observations.  That's all.  That would be a start anyway.

There's no use in charging ahead into the world of data interpretation, if the data itself is still suspect.  Right?  

Sadly, this hasn't been done yet.  Until it is, we're stuck with episodes of TAPS, I guess.

Good Luck, TR.  I hope you find something.

Answer 6

Go watch P.S.I Factor TV show.They say they're based on actual cases, but of course there's a lot of exageration in their stories.