The premise of this article is that nearly all reputed paranormal activity--or primarily the observable manifestation of such--originates in or is caused by the most sensitive piece of paranormal equipment, the human brain. Visit www.misconceptionjunction.com
If this were a scientific experiment, this would be my hypothesis.
The alternative--the null hypothesis--would be discovering that the majority of paranormal phenomena are occurring in the environment--and thus only interpreted as paranormal because of faulty perception. In this case, it would be measurable by other instruments, perhaps some that we do not yet possess. Of course, the final alternative is that certain paranormal events are actually occurring in the environment and something we don't understand. Ball lightening and UFO's fall within this category. However, for the purposes of this article, we'll limit ourselves to the type of paranormal phenomena that people describe as "ghosts."
There are ways to separate the two, however it is problematic to prove such possibilities as your brain may be acting on the environment, e.g. causing a cold spot or setting off a metal detector for example.
This is not an experiment, nor is it anything like it. This is a blog article. However, there is legitimate scientific research being conducted by some very competent people across a startling range of fields of study.
Consider the following that was articulated by a friend of ours:
"...there ARE groups who are doing the right things
- categorization of events, correlations with external factors,
equipment and phenomena testing (including lab experiments), all kinds
of cool stuff. Some interesting names to seek out might include Gary
Schwartz, Dean Radin, and Daryl Bem (recent), or Podmore, Jung, Price, Hans Bender, and Ian Stevenson (more historical)."
If this were a scientific experiment, this would be my hypothesis.
The alternative--the null hypothesis--would be discovering that the majority of paranormal phenomena are occurring in the environment--and thus only interpreted as paranormal because of faulty perception. In this case, it would be measurable by other instruments, perhaps some that we do not yet possess. Of course, the final alternative is that certain paranormal events are actually occurring in the environment and something we don't understand. Ball lightening and UFO's fall within this category. However, for the purposes of this article, we'll limit ourselves to the type of paranormal phenomena that people describe as "ghosts."
There are ways to separate the two, however it is problematic to prove such possibilities as your brain may be acting on the environment, e.g. causing a cold spot or setting off a metal detector for example.
This is not an experiment, nor is it anything like it. This is a blog article. However, there is legitimate scientific research being conducted by some very competent people across a startling range of fields of study.
Consider the following that was articulated by a friend of ours:
"...there ARE groups who are doing the right things
- categorization of events, correlations with external factors,
equipment and phenomena testing (including lab experiments), all kinds
of cool stuff. Some interesting names to seek out might include Gary
Schwartz, Dean Radin, and Daryl Bem (recent), or Podmore, Jung, Price, Hans Bender, and Ian Stevenson (more historical)."
I believe that the seat of the religious experience is in specific neuronal pathways and involves multiple parts of the brain. Advances in neuro-imaging technology now allow us to see how our brain works in real time--based on glucose uptake levels as well as other criteria.
It's a catch-22 until we can volunteer to have an implant, wear a device, or be viewed by some [remote] imagining device. If course the NDP (Near to Distance PET scan*) has lead to some interesting research and operates similar to a thermal imaging camera.*
*there is no such thing
**link to wikipedia article on thermal cameras
We can't tell whether a specific paranormal experience originated in the brain or not. Even with this technology, we still may not be able to tell. We may be able to eventually be able to ascertain with relative certainty if certain confluences of environmental stimuli generate paranormal experiences.
Consider some historic research on infrasound*
*http://www.skepdic.com/infrasound.html
Still, some of the time, the question of cause, e.g. was it generated by your brain or not, is probably never going to be answered. I believe in the existence of paranormal activity, but this is almost an oxymoron. There is no doubt that there are things we don't know, as any scientist may readily tell you...
"We know less than we know."
But that is the definition of paranormal activity--unexplainable by science. By definition, it should always exist.
I believe that I've encountered events that are paranormal. The reports of paranormal phenomena are widespread and certainly a legitimate human experience. However, many people discount the importance of paranormal phenomena. Some people have an interesting misconception--if it came from your brain it's not real.
Your perception is everything. In fact, your perception may be the reason that the phenomena happened in the first place. There has been some research to suggest that our brains can influence sub-atomic events.
I can change a litter box on a daily basis, and so know that I can influence a lot of matter, as well as time and space.
Your perception --for all functional purposes--is reality. What we really want to do is attempt to record some physical evidence, e.g. EVPs, video, and audio--that correlate with these experiences.
My premise is that most of what we perceive--and that implies you've interpreted the paranormal experience through existing neuronal pathways due to electrochemical activity--is perhaps caused by a series of environmental events. Deja Vu may be an example.
Of course, this is not an astounding revelation. In fact, it describes all human experiences whether paranormal or not.
We can never get away from anthropormorphizing, but we may be able to track down unique confluences of energy that exist in certain locations, and acknowledge how that energy creates certain patterns that our brains perceive as paranormal activity.
This doesn't mean that ghosts actually exist. "They" are just the context in which we are bound to perceive it. This would describe how certain locales are perceived to be haunted without having to make a gigantic assumption that ghosts prowl the location.
Consider the first hand reports of apparitions--manifestations of possibly paranormal phenomena that people usually associate with "seeing a ghost." How many times have you been in a room where an apparition shows up? I realize the event is rare, and considered one of the most energetic manifestations of paranormal phenomena.
If you've been there when this type of phenomena occurs, and there are multiple people experiencing it, one person may see something--ranging from shadows out of the corner of one's eye to the figure of a person in period dress--, one person may smell flowers or cigar smoke, one person may hear their name whispered in their ear, while another gets the "willies".
There are certainly environmental anomalies that have been recordable and this implies the phenomena is physical and not just due to perception. It is when these recordable phenomena are correlated with first-person accounts that the paranormal experience becomes even more compelling.
But all of it may still be seated in and/or caused by your brain. Search "poltergeist" and "spontaneous human telekinesis" to see what your brain may actually be possible of doing as far as causing a physical effect on the environment. Though the reports are anecdotal, there are some extremely compelling reports of such poltergeist phenomena.
In fact, it's possible that your brain caused the majority of events associated with paranormal accounts.Far-fetched? Yes. Does any really solid evidence exist of this premise? No. However it is much more likely that your brain caused these events than a ghost. There is no solid evidence that ghosts exist.
That would explain why the phenomena is interpreted as the ghost of a person. How else would we perceive it if it wasn't generated by ourselves?
I always amazes me when I encounter a ghost hunter who will completely discount the possibility of one's brain causing these events and yet ascribe such phenomena to ghostly causes. It seems to be both causes are extremely unlikely, but at least I know the brain exists. I can hold one in my hands--and have done so on at least one occasion. Ghosts, on the other hand, appear to be extremely hard to get your hands on.
Still this type of activity does appear to indicate that something is happening. However, it still doesn't mean that it is occurring independently of the person perceiving it and in fact, this line of reasoning has to lead one to believe that the person themselves is the cause, not the spirit of some deceased person or other nonhuman entity. Apparently, much of paranormal activity is either due to mistaken perceptions and/or manifested directly through the human brain. It is the nature of these manifestations that paranormal investigators and ghosts hunters are exploring, regardless of their purported cause.
You can believe whatever you want as far as the cause of such events. Belief is a theory based on faith and experience. But it seems to me that anyone that discounts the brain as a possible cause--instead wholeheartedly arguing for the existence of ghosts--is skipping a couple of logical steps and making a leap of faith I can't accept. Believe what you want, but realize that the way you express your belief may make you look like a fool.
I'm open to the existence of ghosts, don't get me wrong. But they just don't seem to be the most likely cause of such events. To me, anyone who is able to reason logically has to agree with this premise. If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, it's probably a duck.
Bobby Elgee; Sights Unseen Paranormal
