Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 1
lone wolf2

theories behind evp's

36 posts in this topic

Oh man, the Warrens.

I believe what they say/said like I believe Elmo is real.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh man, the Warrens.

I believe what they say/said like I believe Elmo is real.

Elmo is very real to me.....Very real.

KATY-PERRY-SNL-ELMO.jpg

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Go to google and look up books on the subject. There is a wealth of material done by scholars and PHDs in the field. One of the more noted paranormal guys is John Zaffis of Haunted Collector fame on SyFy. He has been on such shows as "A Haunting" and other documentaries and has done numerous books detailing incidents throughout his decades of research. He even worked with noted paranormal investigators Ed & Lorraine Warren. For those who don't know, they were both experts in the field and Lorraine Warren was supposedly a clairvoyant who could interact with these spirits. Anyway, those who are serious enough to look into this ghost phenomena and the EVP side of it will find the material if they so choose. Looks like you just quoted my above statement to be sarcastic, which is fine. If you seriously want to find the documented cases, you will by looking through websites, books, and documentaries on this. If not, you are just another skeptic looking to do the online immature thing. Either way, I'm not going to be drawn into that. I am simply stating what I've seen and read and giving my take on it. Deal with it.

I was not being sarcastic.

If anyone wants to claim " documented ", do not use " paranormal " groups as the authors.

When I see a major University, or a Scientific journal " documenting " these things, then I will listen.

As for your warrens, I suggest you do some research......

P.S.....I mistakingly put them down as Dwayne Claude......Same thing.

I was talking about this, just in case.....Although the Warrens are worse.

http://eyeontheparanormal.blogspot.com/2011/05/issue-28-say-no-to-demon-exorcist-part.html

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not even going to say anything about Big Bird. LOL

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

John is a fraud, and should be in jail.

By all means, let me play devil's advocate; what exactly indicates to you or proof do you have that Zaffis is a "fraud"? Because he seems like a legit investigator who has consulted with other experts in the ghost/EVP field. That explanation will be riveting, I'm sure :D

Ed Warren......Nice. To bad the thread is not still here from the woman whom was on the show. That case, and that guy were over whelmingly proven to be a fraud, both by her statements, history, and by investigation. A nice thing was done from this, Discovery channel was " hit " by a ton of emails about them showing crap like this. Did you notice, no other show for the fraud again.

Once again, I have to ask where is the solid proof? There is no actual proof that any of these people are frauds at all. Just skeptics that want to dismiss something they don't believe in or agree with. Which is shallow as far as looking at all possibilities.

So, there are no documented cases. Just claims, by proven frauds.

Not gonna repeat myself here, but I will say I am willing to see direct proof that exposes Zaffis and the Warrens as "frauds". Such monumental claims warrant monumental proof.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

By all means, let me play devil's advocate; what exactly indicates to you or proof do you have that Zaffis is a "fraud"? Because he seems like a legit investigator who has consulted with other experts in the ghost/EVP field. That explanation will be riveting, I'm sure :D

Once again, I have to ask where is the solid proof? There is no actual proof that any of these people are frauds at all. Just skeptics that want to dismiss something they don't believe in or agree with. Which is shallow as far as looking at all possibilities.

Not gonna repeat myself here, but I will say I am willing to see direct proof that exposes Zaffis and the Warrens as "frauds". Such monumental claims warrant monumental proof.

This has been discussed in numerous topics here, in detail. I am not into repeating myself anymore on these things. It is always a repeat about once a year or so. Same old stories, same old discussions, all of them carbon copies of what has been discussed ( here and other places ) numerous times all ready.

One clue for you.......The Amytiville Horror was not a true story !!!!!!!

http://www.mmdnewswire.com/brothers-sue-world-famous-psychic-lorraine-warren-for-false-accusations-in-devil-book-2347.html

Anyway, whether I wanted to go through all of this again or not, saying " psychics " and " ghost hunters " are valid people to use as proof and more importantly, using them as credible for " documented cases ".......That is a joke.......No bias there huh?

As said, Find some from a University, a registered journal would be even nicer.

By the way, welcome to UM......

Use the search tool here, you will find a ton of topics as I said about frauds like them, and them.......

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This has been discussed in numerous topics here, in detail. I am not into repeating myself anymore on these things. It is always a repeat about once a year or so. Same old stories, same old discussions, all of them carbon copies of what has been discussed ( here and other places ) numerous times all ready.

Thus is the circle of life. Everything repeats eventually :)

One clue for you.......The Amytiville Horror was not a true story !!!!!!!

Skeptics always use that one example as their explanation of dismissing the whole field. As in any field of research whether it be conspiracies, ghosts/evps, or UFOs there are going to be frauds and hoaxes. Simply because it is human nature to want to profit from special interest topics. A lot of people will pay for proof of those things and there will always be those waiting to exploit that. That being said, I do not believe all cases of ghost activity and EVPs are fake.

http://www.mmdnewswi...-book-2347.html

Anyway, whether I wanted to go through all of this again or not, saying " psychics " and " ghost hunters " are valid people to use as proof and more importantly, using them as credible for " documented cases ".......That is a joke.......No bias there huh?

Nope, none at all. You wanted to know about "documented cases" and while I never listed a specific case, I did list Zaffis and the Warrens as those who have documented cases on this subject. Whether they are all real is not up to me to decide. What I will say is that there seems to be enough of these cases to show something to it beyond mere coincidence or strictly hoaxes in all cases.

As said, Find some from a University, a registered journal would be even nicer.

As I have pointed out in other topics with other debaters in threads I reply to, I don't live to give proof or give links all day long. Most users here will insist that everything is about proof when infact, in the end anyway, it is opinion based on what everyone perceives as "evidence". What one person claims is evidence may not seem that way to another. Sorry, I don't happen to have my own personal university or a registered journal on payroll to dispute threads on an internet forum to discuss matters of opinion. Though that may be nice to have :D Certainly, there would be less controversy over opposing mindsets overall.

By the way, welcome to UM......

Use the search tool here, you will find a ton of topics as I said about frauds like them, and them.......

First off, thank you. To be quite honest, I post here in what spare time I have for fun. Because I believe in a lot of unnatural or unexplained phenomena on this planet. I still believe there is a certain amount of magic and wonder to be explored and explained, which is why I do not spend multiple paragraphs giving links to "proof". While I understand that probably will not make me a popular user here, I'm not here to win people over. I just browse here from time to time and enjoy talking about the unexplained. I like seeing the differences in belief systems and I always respect whatever any opposing viewpoint may be, which others have not in kind thus far. Oh well, so much for the welcoming committee! And the fan club grows :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thus is the circle of life. Everything repeats eventually :)

True..... Snipped the rest of the quote, just want to say thank you for not taking any of this discussion personal, and for having a mature discussion. This has been rare.

Big respect for that...... :tu:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

True..... Snipped the rest of the quote, just want to say thank you for not taking any of this discussion personal, and for having a mature discussion. This has been rare.

Big respect for that...... :tu:

I will be the first to admit that I am a bit passionate in my views and am hardheaded as hell. I don't take anything personally, as it shouldn't be anyway. I also admit that I do tend to gravitate towards controversial topics when it comes to the unexplained. If anyone asks to see proof, I can only give examples of documentaries I've watched[which I forget the names of most of the time, since I watch so many on various unexplained topics] and books I've read. One of the main reasons I didn't give a specific book read on EVPs is because I am relatively new to the topic and not as caught up on the newest research into that particular field. Give me a good UFO related topic and I can give numerous book titles and examples :D Or especially the conspiracy topics like the JFK assassination. I have read so many books and watched so much content on those things that I could give dozens of examples of great research points on. Still, I have enjoyed the debate on the EVP subject. It is an interesting unexplained topic that definitely deserves more research and serious study.

Also, big respect to you too as far as sticking to your viewpoints. I don't expect the world to agree with my views and the world would be a boring place if everybody agreed on everything. :tsu:

Edited by conspiracy buff

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I will be the first to admit that I am a bit passionate in my views and am hardheaded as hell. I don't take anything personally, as it shouldn't be anyway. I also admit that I do tend to gravitate towards controversial topics when it comes to the unexplained. If anyone asks to see proof, I can only give examples of documentaries I've watched[which I forget the names of most of the time, since I watch so many on various unexplained topics] and books I've read. One of the main reasons I didn't give a specific book read on EVPs is because I am relatively new to the topic and not as caught up on the newest research into that particular field. Give me a good UFO related topic and I can give numerous book titles and examples :D Or especially the conspiracy topics like the JFK assassination. I have read so many books and watched so much content on those things that I could give dozens of examples of great research points on. Still, I have enjoyed the debate on the EVP subject. It is an interesting unexplained topic that definitely deserves more research and serious study.

Also, big respect to you too as far as sticking to your viewpoints. I don't expect the world to agree with my views and the world would be a boring place if everybody agreed on everything. :tsu:

I mentioned I am not going to go back and try to find everything that has been discussed.....

I do have a couple links you may enjoy.

Please do not used TV Documentaries as educational, they are more dramatized then soap operas.

Paranormal books, same thing.

Try to look for science journals, or books on certain topics.

Anyway, here are a couple of topics that may or may not help you. ( EMF's, Radio Waves, and the psychology of paranormal )

Maybe one day I will try to find the different things I have talked about ( meaning topics here that others discussed)

http://www.unexplained-mysteries.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=222978&hl=

http://www.unexplained-mysteries.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=222943&st=105#entry4300641

http://www.unexplained-mysteries.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=237926&st=0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This phenomenon, called 'skip' occurs as the atmosphere immediately above the earth cools down. High temperatures act as an impedance to radio waves, and lower temperatures just the opposite. If the air is cool enough, radio waves will literally 'bounce' off the ionosphere to points out of sight, making a bend around the earth. This is accentuated in summer months when there is warmer air in the troposphere, about 7-10 miles up, that keeps a colder-air 'duct' below. So under these conditions radio waves will travel remarkably far. This is why more powerful AM radio stations are licensed a 'cleaar-channel' at night, for they will simply cause interference to local stations on similar frequencies.

AM radio uses shorter frequencies and the signal can travel much farther

(hundreds of miles at night). This is because of the Earth's ionosphere, a

layer in the atmosphere where the Sun's light ionizes the atoms (causes

them to lose an electron). The ionosphere reflects certain frequencies of

radio waves (less than about 30 Megahertz, though the exact number depends

on the density of electrons and varies with time) so they can travel much

farther. Some radio stations can even be picked up better at night because

during night hours, without sunlight, the ionosphere changes and becomes

more reflective to certain frequencies.

FM stands for frequency modulation. With radio waves, as with other waves, frequency tells us how frequently the waves are passing. We can illustrate that with the rope too. This time, instead of changing the amount of force you use to shake the rope, change how quickly you shake the rope. You will find that you can shake it slowly to make waves that are far apart, or you can shake it quickly to make waves that are close together. You are modulating the frequency of the waves in the rope.

The strength of a signal tends to vary by distance and location. Changes in strength cause changes in amplitude (AM), but not changes in frequency (FM.) This causes AM stations to have more static and interference than FM stations.

Another big difference between AM and FM is the length of the waves. For FM, the waves are fairly short, usually around nine to twelve feet. Short waves are much better at getting into buildings, bridges, and other metal structures, but they are easily blocked by large objects, such as mountains, and they do not travel very far.

For AM, the waves are much longer, often more than a mile long. These long waves are easily blocked by metal structures, making it difficult to get good reception in bridges, stores, and parking garages. On the other hand, the long waves are much better at moving around mountains, and they can travel hundreds of miles, letting you hear stations in distant cities.

So which is better? Well, that depends on what you want. For listening to local stations, FM tends to give a much better signal, with good reception in most locations. On the other hand, if you are on a long trip, FM stations tend to fade quickly as you drive along, while you may be able to listen to the same AM station for hours before you lose the signal. If you are on a camping trip, or somewhere away from cities, AM stations may be the only stations that you can pick up.

First, let's look at the AM radio band (group of frequencies). AM stands for amplitude modulation, which will be explained later.

AM radio ranges from 535 to 1705kHz (kilohertz, or thousands of cycles per-second of electromagnetic energy). These are the numbers you see on your AM radio dial.

np.gifNote in the tan area at the left of the illustration below that AM radio waves are of a lower frequency than either FM radio or TV waves. Thus, as we will see, after being transmitted, they will behave differently.

spectrum2.jpg

Stations can theoretically be placed every 10KHz, along the AM band. This means that there are a total of 117 different channels available for AM radio stations.

If it all stopped there, things would be rather simple; but, unfortunately, other factors come into play.

First, you can't put stations on the same frequency that are too close together in a geographic area. They will interfere with each other. And for the same reason you can't have two stations close together in frequency (close to each other on the radio dial) in the same area. So these are the first things that limit the number of radio stations in an area.

The good news is that since the signals of stations tend to be limited in their range, you can use some of the frequencies many times — as long as the stations are far enough apart geographically. This is why the United States can have nearly 5,000 AM radio stations on only 117 different frequencies.

np.gifHow far an AM station's signal travels depends on such things as the station's frequency (channel), the power of the transmitter in watts, the nature of the transmitting antenna, how conductive the soil is around the antenna (damp soil is good; sand and rocks aren't), and, a thing called ionospheric refraction. The ionosphere (see illustration below) is a layer of heavily charged ion molecules above the earth's atmosphere.

Are you still there? Okay, let's go on.

Ionospheric refraction is a big issue, because AM radio waves can end up hundreds and even thousands of miles away from where they started, and in the process interfere with all other stations on the same frequency.

But, as we'll see in a later module on international shortwave, ionospheric refraction can be good, because it makes possible long-distance communication.

Here's how that works.

ionosph.gif

np.gifNote that for AM radio stations the ground wave (in light blue above) doesn't go very far. This means numerous stations can be put on the same frequency without interfering with each other — assuming they are far enough apart. (Keep in mind that this drawing can't be anywhere near close to scale and show these things.)

The problem arises — if you want to see it as a problem — is the sky wave can end up in other states, provinces, or even in other countries.

The ionosphere is much more effective in reflecting these radio waves at night. (Incidentally, technically, it's refracting, not reflecting, but the effect is somewhat the same.)

That's why at sunset most AM radio stations in the U.S. have to:

  • reduce power
  • directionalize their signal (send it more in some directions than others), or
  • go off the air (sign off until sunrise the next day)

This may explain why your favorite AM radio station goes off the air at sunset, or becomes much harder to hear (because of reduced power).

Source : http://www.cybercoll...rtv/frtv017.htm

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 1

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.