Jump to content




Welcome to Unexplained Mysteries! Please sign in or create an account to start posting and to access a host of extra features.


- - - - -

Ghost Box


  • Please log in to reply
56 replies to this topic

#31    sinewave

sinewave

    Majestic 12 Operative

  • Member
  • 6,102 posts
  • Joined:23 Aug 2009
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:The Midwest

  • Belief proves nothing. Show me the science.

Posted 07 November 2013 - 01:16 PM

View PostParanormal_Fascination, on 07 November 2013 - 06:51 AM, said:

So, if its picking up just mixed broadcasts, how can they answer/make sense to the questions being asked during an EVP session?

Pareidolia and unless you made it yourself, you can't leave out the possibility the recording was faked.  Researcher bias is a huge factor when perception plays a key role in the interpretation of evidence. It is not just RF ingress with EVPs but CODEC noise.  The sampling rate of those little recorders is only fair. The analog to digital conversion introduces lots of low level noise.    

Consider also that some people claim to hear this when they play Stairway To Heaven backwards.  Go figure.

Oh here's to my sweet Satan.
The one whose little path would make me sad, whose power is Satan.
He'll give those with him 666.
There was a little tool shed where he made us suffer, sad Satan.[


#32    JesseCuster

JesseCuster

    Secret Jesus

  • Member
  • 3,089 posts
  • Joined:11 Jun 2011
  • Gender:Not Selected

Posted 09 November 2013 - 02:11 AM

View PostParanormal_Fascination, on 07 November 2013 - 06:51 AM, said:

So, if its picking up just mixed broadcasts, how can they answer/make sense to the questions being asked during an EVP session?
Have you got an example of said amazing Question & Answer question that shows a paranormal investigator asking questions while a Ghostbox is in operation and the resulting answers being recorded etc.?

Please?  I'm guessing "no" but I'm willing to be educated on the matter.

"The first principle is that you must not fool yourself and you are the easiest person to fool." - Richard P. Feynman

#33    sam_comm

sam_comm

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,006 posts
  • Joined:02 Jun 2013
  • Gender:Not Selected

Posted 09 November 2013 - 04:10 PM

View PostJesseCuster, on 09 November 2013 - 02:11 AM, said:

Have you got an example of said amazing Question & Answer question that shows a paranormal investigator asking questions while a Ghostbox is in operation and the resulting answers being recorded etc.?

Please?  I'm guessing "no" but I'm willing to be educated on the matter.

I give you an exemple here:

What is your name?

- voice1:Paul!, v2:Mary!,  v3:Kevin!


Do you live here?

- voice1:No!, v2:Sometimes!


There are many sounds you cannot hear properly out of a ghost box if not most and when you start processing the words and interpret them, you are experiencing pareidolia. However, there are of strange instances using a ghost box, when it is possible to hear direct answers relevant to a question asked that are audible for all the room. Is it the voices of the dead? I do not know and I am not ready to jump to such a conclusion.

Edited by sam_comm, 09 November 2013 - 04:16 PM.


#34    sinewave

sinewave

    Majestic 12 Operative

  • Member
  • 6,102 posts
  • Joined:23 Aug 2009
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:The Midwest

  • Belief proves nothing. Show me the science.

Posted 09 November 2013 - 05:51 PM

View Postsam_comm, on 09 November 2013 - 04:10 PM, said:

I give you an exemple here:

What is your name?

- voice1:Paul!, v2:Mary!,  v3:Kevin!


Do you live here?

- voice1:No!, v2:Sometimes!


There are many sounds you cannot hear properly out of a ghost box if not most and when you start processing the words and interpret them, you are experiencing pareidolia. However, there are of strange instances using a ghost box, when it is possible to hear direct answers relevant to a question asked that are audible for all the room. Is it the voices of the dead? I do not know and I am not ready to jump to such a conclusion.

Yes, you are correct in not jumping to that conclusion.  Because of the nature of the device, it is virtually guaranteed to produce the sounds of human voices - mostly those of people working in the broadcast industry.  Regardless of how well the responses seem to match up with the questions, for the results to be valid, you would have to be able to prove those particular voices were not part of any AM/FM broadcast available in the locale where the recording was made.

Belief is easy.  Science is hard.

Edited by sinewave, 09 November 2013 - 05:54 PM.


#35    sam_comm

sam_comm

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,006 posts
  • Joined:02 Jun 2013
  • Gender:Not Selected

Posted 09 November 2013 - 06:14 PM

View Postsinewave, on 09 November 2013 - 05:51 PM, said:

Regardless of how well the responses seem to match up with the questions, for the results to be valid, you would have to be able to prove those particular voices were not part of any AM/FM broadcast available in the locale where the recording was made.

Not at all. The main hypothesis concerning the ghost box concept in paranormal circles, including that of Frank Sumption, is that these entities actually direct the sweeping of AM/FM band to use and piece together words and sentences from the broadcast to communicate and relay messages.

Edited by sam_comm, 09 November 2013 - 06:24 PM.


#36    sinewave

sinewave

    Majestic 12 Operative

  • Member
  • 6,102 posts
  • Joined:23 Aug 2009
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:The Midwest

  • Belief proves nothing. Show me the science.

Posted 09 November 2013 - 08:20 PM

View Postsam_comm, on 09 November 2013 - 06:14 PM, said:

Not at all. The main hypothesis concerning the ghost box concept in paranormal circles, including that of Frank Sumption, is that these entities actually direct the sweeping of AM/FM band to use and piece together words and sentences from the broadcast to communicate and relay messages.

Pardon me but  Hahaha!  And he bases that more than slightly wild assumption on what?    Making up alternate realities to explain the behavior of a radio scanner is not even close to science.


#37    sinewave

sinewave

    Majestic 12 Operative

  • Member
  • 6,102 posts
  • Joined:23 Aug 2009
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:The Midwest

  • Belief proves nothing. Show me the science.

Posted 10 November 2013 - 12:31 AM

And sorry Sam  I am not laughing at you, just the absurdity of that idea.   From our chats (which I have enjoyed very much) I have come to understand you are a very intelligent person who is looking for answers.  I praise you for the effort but I will challenge you to think critically.  I am sometimes direct but I never mean any disrespect.  You have a good mind and I enjoy sparring with you.  :)


#38    Paranormal_Fascination

Paranormal_Fascination

    Alien Embryo

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 24 posts
  • Joined:07 Nov 2013
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:USA

Posted 11 November 2013 - 08:01 AM

View Postsinewave, on 07 November 2013 - 01:16 PM, said:

Pareidolia and unless you made it yourself, you can't leave out the possibility the recording was faked.  Researcher bias is a huge factor when perception plays a key role in the interpretation of evidence. It is not just RF ingress with EVPs but CODEC noise.  The sampling rate of those little recorders is only fair. The analog to digital conversion introduces lots of low level noise.

Consider also that some people claim to hear this when they play Stairway To Heaven backwards.  Go figure.

Oh here's to my sweet Satan.
The one whose little path would make me sad, whose power is Satan.
He'll give those with him 666.
There was a little tool shed where he made us suffer, sad Satan.[

I totally agree with you. Guess the only way to truly "know" is to have experimented for yourself. That goes to say with anything really. Hands on learning, best tool there is!

View PostJesseCuster, on 09 November 2013 - 02:11 AM, said:

Have you got an example of said amazing Question & Answer question that shows a paranormal investigator asking questions while a Ghostbox is in operation and the resulting answers being recorded etc.?

Please?  I'm guessing "no" but I'm willing to be educated on the matter.

But that doesn't answer my question on the assumption that its mixed airwaves.


#39    sinewave

sinewave

    Majestic 12 Operative

  • Member
  • 6,102 posts
  • Joined:23 Aug 2009
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:The Midwest

  • Belief proves nothing. Show me the science.

Posted 11 November 2013 - 03:22 PM

View PostParanormal_Fascination, on 11 November 2013 - 08:01 AM, said:



I totally agree with you. Guess the only way to truly "know" is to have experimented for yourself. That goes to say with anything really. Hands on learning, best tool there is!


Is it a way to know or merely validate belief?   The entire experiment  is predicated on the assumption of perfect perception and that is simply not science.


#40    sam_comm

sam_comm

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,006 posts
  • Joined:02 Jun 2013
  • Gender:Not Selected

Posted 12 November 2013 - 08:11 PM

View Postsinewave, on 09 November 2013 - 08:20 PM, said:

Pardon me but  Hahaha!  And he bases that more than slightly wild assumption on what? Making up alternate realities to explain the behavior of a radio scanner is not even close to science.

That depend how you consider it. Many alleged paranormal phenomenon are actually experienced through a medium that can either be an object such as a Ouija board, pendulum ect or by the person itself: dreams, automatic writings, visions ect.

Therefore, if you consider the ghost or spirit hypothesis seriously, it may be that an entity can find a way to communicate, however fragmently and temporarily, through a mean or a medium to relay messages. It could be that the 'ghost box' is another medium that can potentially be put into that category. It is far from been generally accepted though, even in paranormal circles there is some skepticism. It would need more testing and experimentations. I personally consider the device interesting but I'll not jump to a conclusion.

In order to prove that to a skeptical scientific community though, paranormal investigators will have to put in evidence and reach a consensus between themselves that this can indeed be achieved by an entity and that it is not a psychic phenomenon, a projection of the mind that are the root of the phenomenon. That's the current thinking in Parapsychology. But hey, an hypothesis is a potential explanation and though it may be ridicule for you, it can make sens for many others.

Edited by sam_comm, 12 November 2013 - 08:20 PM.


#41    FromTheOtherSide

FromTheOtherSide

    Alien Embryo

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 3 posts
  • Joined:13 Nov 2013

Posted 13 November 2013 - 10:13 AM

I have actually ordered a "Ghost box". I cant wait to have a go with it.
I will let you Know if it is any good.


#42    sinewave

sinewave

    Majestic 12 Operative

  • Member
  • 6,102 posts
  • Joined:23 Aug 2009
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:The Midwest

  • Belief proves nothing. Show me the science.

Posted 13 November 2013 - 01:53 PM

View Postsam_comm, on 12 November 2013 - 08:11 PM, said:

That depend how you consider it. Many alleged paranormal phenomenon are actually experienced through a medium that can either be an object such as a Ouija board, pendulum ect or by the person itself: dreams, automatic writings, visions ect.

Each of those paranormal instruments serves only to add random noise and biased interpretation to the data.  

Quote

Therefore, if you consider the ghost or spirit hypothesis seriously, it may be that an entity can find a way to communicate, however fragmently and temporarily, through a mean or a medium to relay messages. It could be that the 'ghost box' is another medium that can potentially be put into that category. It is far from been generally accepted though, even in paranormal circles there is some skepticism. It would need more testing and experimentations. I personally consider the device interesting but I'll not jump to a conclusion.

Ghost busters like to assign meaning to random events and often work backwards to create a paranormal reality in which those events tend to make sense.  My guess is someone was using a radio scanner in a random seek mode and felt there was meaning in the clips of sounds and voices heard over the speaker.  That person then arbitrarily decided the sounds were not in fact random but the result of the dead trying to communicate with us.  A determination made not from facts but perception and belief.  

More importantly an industry was born.  Lots of money is made selling ordinary or useless devices to believers with the promise they reveal the unseen.  


Quote

In order to prove that to a skeptical scientific community though, paranormal investigators will have to put in evidence and reach a consensus between themselves that this can indeed be achieved by an entity and that it is not a psychic phenomenon, a projection of the mind that are the root of the phenomenon. That's the current thinking in Parapsychology. But hey, an hypothesis is a potential explanation and though it may be ridicule for you, it can make sens for many others.

What paranormal investigators will have to do is remove interpretation from the evidence entirely.  They cannot just say that spirits direct the ghost box, pendulum, planchette, or whatever device, they have to conclusively demonstrate it.  Of course serious scrutiny and high resolution data have thus far been the enemies of the paranormal.  In their light, the paranormal simply vanishes.  Of course there are explanations for that which are little more than baseless assumptions and null hypotheses. Until those hurdles are cleared, the paranormal will remain in the realm of belief.


#43    sam_comm

sam_comm

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,006 posts
  • Joined:02 Jun 2013
  • Gender:Not Selected

Posted 13 November 2013 - 04:46 PM

View Postsinewave, on 13 November 2013 - 01:53 PM, said:

Each of those paranormal instruments serves only to add random noise and biased interpretation to the data.

I don't share this categorical point of view. I think there is a real possiblity that these instruments can serve as a mean, as tool to communicate however fragmentatly and inconsistently with entities. I've read and heard of very interesting testimonies of credible witnesses. It is normal for a rational mind to be skeptic of such claims, which may seem extraordinary and out of reality. I cannot blame you.

View Postsinewave, on 13 November 2013 - 01:53 PM, said:

Ghost busters like to assign meaning to random events and often work backwards to create a paranormal reality in which those events tend to make sense.  My guess is someone was using a radio scanner in a random seek mode and felt there was meaning in the clips of sounds and voices heard over the speaker.  That person then arbitrarily decided the sounds were not in fact random but the result of the dead trying to communicate with us.  A determination made not from facts but perception and belief.  
More importantly an industry was born.  Lots of money is made selling ordinary or useless devices to believers with the promise they reveal the unseen.
  

Instead of guessing, you should make some research and read about the history of the ghost box by Frank Sumption. You might not agree but you do not seem to know the background and how it came to be.

http://itcvoices.org...-the-ghost-box/


View Postsinewave, on 13 November 2013 - 01:53 PM, said:

What paranormal investigators will have to do is remove interpretation from the evidence entirely.  They cannot just say that spirits direct the ghost box, pendulum, planchette, or whatever device, they have to conclusively demonstrate it.  Of course serious scrutiny and high resolution data have thus far been the enemies of the paranormal.  In their light, the paranormal simply vanishes.  Of course there are explanations for that which are little more than baseless assumptions and null hypotheses. Until those hurdles are cleared, the paranormal will remain in the realm of belief.

I've to agree at some point, there is various interpretations about what this ghost box can or cannot do. I've even heard of some group who are in the opinions that they can use it to communicate with Aliens in parallele universes. Their theory is 'valid' but the interpretation differ. That is more due to the fact that there is no standard in the paranormal field and that anyone can do whatever he likes and think works best. That doesn't mean there is no legitimate claims and researches.

I've come to think that 'serious scrutiny' and 'high resolution data' are not the ennemies of the paranormal, just not the right filter for it. You cannot reproduce a Ouija session. Once the board is closed you do not know if you will have the same results again. The mainstream scientific community expect quantifiable and reproducable data to validate but that is not how the nature of these phenomenon appear to be. This is not baseless assumptions, rather an objective assessment of the phenomenon experienced and the scientific methodology currently used in the attempt to validate or refute them.

Edited by sam_comm, 13 November 2013 - 05:01 PM.


#44    sinewave

sinewave

    Majestic 12 Operative

  • Member
  • 6,102 posts
  • Joined:23 Aug 2009
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:The Midwest

  • Belief proves nothing. Show me the science.

Posted 13 November 2013 - 07:44 PM

View Postsam_comm, on 13 November 2013 - 04:46 PM, said:

I don't share this categorical point of view. I think there is a real possiblity that these instruments can serve as a mean, as tool to communicate however fragmentatly and inconsistently with entities. I've read and heard of very interesting testimonies of credible witnesses. It is normal for a rational mind to be skeptic of such claims, which may seem extraordinary and out of reality. I cannot blame you.

Testimonies are not evidence.  They are either the perception of the observer or something made up.  There is no doubt some people truly believe but that does not make their observations evidence of something paranormal.  Those devices do add noise.  Pendulums, for example are subject to several random forces that will affect the way they swing.  Then factor in the fact they are typically held in the had of the user and suddenly the ideomotor effect comes into play.  At that point you have lots of unaccounted for randomness that can be interpreted any way you like.  That brings it right back to perception as evidence. The same with Ouija boards, mediums, automatic writing, etc.  All of these things are based on key assumptions that must be accepted for the thing to be valid.   We are expected to take on faith that the radio scanner in a spirit box moved by the spirits attempting to communicate with us.  A critical thinker demands to know how the fundamental assumption was determined.  
  

Quote

Instead of guessing, you should make some research and read about the history of the ghost box by Frank Sumption. You might not agree but you do not seem to know the background and how it came to be.

http://itcvoices.org...-the-ghost-box/

Yes, he claims to have received the design from the spirit world as did the designer of the Spiricom - a similar device.   There is nothing magical or mystical about the circuit and it certainly did not come from beyond. If you don't know, a Frank's box operates by allowing random fluctuations in ambient EM fields to change the electrical values in the circuit that controls an AM/FM tuner.  It is essentially an EMF meter that instead of moving a dial or changing a ladder readout changes the station on a common radio tuner.  That is all it is.  As I have pointed out before, there are thousands of reasons for ambient EM spikes and dips that have nothing to do with ghosts so a ghost box is just a random radio tuner.  


Quote

I've to agree at some point, there is various interpretations about what this ghost box can or cannot do. I've even heard of some group who are in the opinions that they can use it to communicate with Aliens in parallele universes. Their theory is 'valid' but the interpretation differ. That is more due to the fact that there is no standard in the paranormal field and that anyone can do whatever he likes and think works best. That doesn't mean there is no legitimate claims and researches.

I've come to think that 'serious scrutiny' and 'high resolution data' are not the ennemies of the paranormal, just not the right filter for it. You cannot reproduce a Ouija session. Once the board is closed you do not know if you will have the same results again. The mainstream scientific community expect quantifiable and reproducable data to validate but that is not how the nature of these phenomenon appear to be. This is not baseless assumptions, rather an objective assessment of the phenomenon experienced and the scientific methodology currently used in the attempt to validate or refute them.

The bottom line is, if a hypothesis is based on an unverifiable assumption it is not very likely to be true.  

There are ways of testing Ouja boards BTW.  Look up Penn & Teller Ouija.  They did a nice job demonstrating the power of the ideomotor effect.

Yes, our understanding of the Universe is limited, no question.  However that does not justify wild assumptions and leaps in logic to force beliefs to fit.  The nature of the paranormal is consistent only with the ability of the human mind to create explanations where none exist.  These are indeed baseless assumptions.  Someone claiming to have received the "design" for a device from the spirit world should have to do more than talk to have the idea be accepted.  It is especially true in this case where the alleged design is derived from common devices.

Edited by sinewave, 13 November 2013 - 07:45 PM.


#45    sam_comm

sam_comm

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,006 posts
  • Joined:02 Jun 2013
  • Gender:Not Selected

Posted 14 November 2013 - 04:58 PM

View Postsinewave, on 13 November 2013 - 07:44 PM, said:

Testimonies are not evidence.  They are either the perception of the observer or something made up.  There is no doubt some people truly believe but that does not make their observations evidence of something paranormal.  Those devices do add noise.  Pendulums, for example are subject to several random forces that will affect the way they swing.  Then factor in the fact they are typically held in the had of the user and suddenly the ideomotor effect comes into play.  At that point you have lots of unaccounted for randomness that can be interpreted any way you like.  That brings it right back to perception as evidence. The same with Ouija boards, mediums, automatic writing, etc.  All of these things are based on key assumptions that must be accepted for the thing to be valid.   We are expected to take on faith that the radio scanner in a spirit box moved by the spirits attempting to communicate with us.  A critical thinker demands to know how the fundamental assumption was determined.

Testimonies are oral evidences provided by a witness under an oath, describing as accuretly as can possibly be. So, they've a value of their own, especially when you know the witness to be serious and honest. I would rather say perception of the observers  for it is not uncommon that a phenomenon is experienced by multiple witnesses. I never mentionned that this was proof or paranomornal activity but the documentation is certainly worth consider.

I've to agree with you though, at least 80% of all claim of paranornal activity can actually be debunked and attributed to a natural or psychological explanation. However, there is a 20% which doesn't appear to fall into this category and in which a rational explanations fails to encompass the phenomenon. It is almost laughable when scientific reductionism is used at large to force a phenomenon into a specific model, even if that doesn't make much sens. Making use of critical thinking allows to consider other explanations, even supernatural one, but not necesserely subscribed to at all cost without more evidences.

We know that the ideomotor effect exist and in my view can account for many Ouija experiences. When a person strain to use it, the cousciousness can very well be what is at play. A good exemple: ''What is your name'':  ''FRGHTJHYU''. That seems to me like uncousicious mouvements of the pointer. You can also try for a long period of time and get nothing whatsoever. But with regard to a very exaustive documentation of Ouija experiences, I cannot exclude that there might more than one cause to the phenomenon. For some, the ''game'' even kept going even after it was safely back in the closet.

View Postsinewave, on 13 November 2013 - 07:44 PM, said:

The bottom line is, if a hypothesis is based on an unverifiable assumption it is not very likely to be true.
  

Who says that a ''unverifiable assumption'' will never be verifiable? As for the ''ghost'' phenomenon, this not a belief rather a possiblity that has not been convincingly refuted in my opinion.

View Postsinewave, on 13 November 2013 - 07:44 PM, said:

There are ways of testing Ouja boards BTW.  Look up Penn & Teller Ouija.  They did a nice job demonstrating the power of the ideomotor effect.

I am aware of their video, they seem to want to prove their points rather than consider every aspect of the Ouija and the documentation objectively.  The medical experts will obviously not claim the Ouija board or any other devices to produce paranormal experience in some rare cases, they will find a suitable explanation in their realm of expertise. But one can be skeptical of this and have his own reserve.

View Postsinewave, on 13 November 2013 - 07:44 PM, said:

Yes, our understanding of the Universe is limited, no question.  However that does not justify wild assumptions and leaps in logic to force beliefs to fit.  The nature of the paranormal is consistent only with the ability of the human mind to create explanations where none exist.  These are indeed baseless assumptions.  Someone claiming to have received the "design" for a device from the spirit world should have to do more than talk to have the idea be accepted.  It is especially true in this case where the alleged design is derived from common devices.

I do not agree with the interpretation of Frank Sumpton in which he claimed to have received the design spiritually. However, in no way does that mean the device cannot be interesting to consider. He was an Ham radio operator and as a self-taught person he did know quite a bit about radio bands and broadcast. The guy has an interest in radio, EVP and spirit so he tried to develop a device in that regard. I do not dispute that a ghost box has provided no proof of the paranormal. That is pretty clear. it will need more investigations on that front before condamning though. That is my view.

As for wild assumptions and leapt of logics, you know I think as much as a scientific can be skeptical of the ghost phoenomenon and that kind of stuff the other way around can be true as well. Some people are skeptical of the explanations given by science. They look for alternative explanations.

Edited by sam_comm, 14 November 2013 - 05:56 PM.





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users