 |
PM |  | |
Quote | | |
Reply | | |
Full Topic | |
| Joined: | Jun 5th, 2012 |
| Location: | Inverness, Scotland |
| Posts: | 85 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
I know many researchers spend much money, time and effort, and work hard recording EVPs. But in my opinion (and I doubt many here will agree) in at least 50 years' research can anyone point to even one or two really convincing, unambiguous recordings? The EVP recordings I hear currently - although different in method - don't really sound much more convincing than those made decades ago.
The only real breakthrough seemed to be from Spiricom transcomminication in the early 1980s. But when researcher Dr. Rorke found inconsistencies in the Spiricom story and evidence that O’Neil had ventriloquist skills, and owned an electric larynx, I was no longer able to suspend my disbelief.
I've spent two decades working in conventional electronics and communications. I've always had a curiosity in the paranormal, so EVP is an obvious area of interest. But like most engineering, the field is very male-orientated and most men I've worked with had little or no interest in exploring this field. On reflection this attitude isn't unexpected when I consider that after all the thousands of hours my colleagues and I have spent working with radio and/or audio, not one weird, inexplicable signal was ever detected. Was this because we understood the technical limitations of our equipment and external influences that generated these sounds, so had no cause to turn to paranormal explanations?
Unfortunately my own research in my own time usually revealed nothing. Occasionally I found sound artefacts I could understand the origins of, but which could easily have mislead a less technically experienced researcher.
So where are we now with EVP research?
We still have recordings made from various noise sources; from a radio tuned to an empty frequency, water or white noise CDs, etc. (Why not just use the noise from a zener diode, resistor and battery? That won't cost more than a pound/dollar.)
We have the 'Ghost Box' which swishes up and down the radio bands to collect words.
Then there are the backward recoded voices from which people say they can hear relevant words.
Not surprisingly there are some EVPs that are too good to be true. This is always the dilemma of paranormal research. Consider a UFO photo or video. Too good and people shout 'hoax'. Too fuzzy and people say: 'could be anything'. You can't win.
There are some clear EVP recordings out there, mischievously created by individuals who don't appreciate how easy it is to do searches for obscure sounds (and images) on the web and locate the original non-paranormal source.
Nearly all the recordings I've found on various websites come with a handy text suggesting what you should be listening for. REALLY, not helpful!
And there's the elephant in the room - pareidolia.
Sorry to have such a downer on the subject, but I'm getting more and more disillusioned as to whether there is anything to research, given the progress (or lack of) of the past five decades.
Perhaps I'm disillusioned because to get results it's as least as much to do with having the extra qualities of spirituality and mediumship as it is to do with method and equipment. I expect I'm lacking in those extra qualities.
Is there anyone who can reignite my interest...?
Jan
PS: The work Sparks was posting on here last August seemed promising. Any progress?