Real Paranormal Activity
There’s a fine line walked while sorting through the plethora of material gathered from witnesses and old accounts from times gone by.
Those who work within the paranormal genre, whether this be researchers, Investigators or observer, must ensure they only deal with the facts of each and every case.
But can we go too far and lose out on real paranormal activity and raw experiences?
I mean yes, we should be pushing for progression and certainly evolve with the times, but do we throw out the baby with the bath water in regards to raw stories and experiences.
It’s all too easy to dismiss someone’s personal experience – and jump into cynical mode – even questioning the witness extensively as if trying to catch them out.
I believe at times we gloss over the witnesses side of events – playing down their testimonies – when in all actuality I would like to see more time spent working with the witness and more emphasis placed on their information.
I’m well aware that some witness accounts are not as strong as others and it has been clearly noted that some people do fabricate stories to gain attention.
This is not an excuse to doubt every witness you work with however, every single case should be dealt with using a fresh perspective that is flexible and open-minded.
My own methods dictate that even if I feel a witness may be fabricating a story – or that the occurrence is far removed from paranormal possibilities – I still give 100% full attention and focus, while working with them respectfully till a conclusion can be reached.
The aforementioned conclusion is always delivered with the intention of not dismissing the witness.
I keep in mind their feelings when setting down my thoughts on their experience and strive to assist fully so they may understand what has transpired.
In short, the witness is the most important factor and should ALWAYS be respected regardless.
Real Experiences NOT Textbooks
When being a true open-minded sceptic, you need to understand that this does not mean you dismiss – and debunk – everything for the sake of it.
You’re on the fence till evidence can be supplied in the hope of moving you closer towards a firm conclusion.
If you dismiss – or debunk – everything first, you are displaying the signs of pure cynicism which is a million miles from true scepticism.
You see, you have already pre-judged the case without so much as a full investigation, along with extensive conversation with those witnesses involved.
Don’t fall into this trap, it’s a massive one that seems to grab a lot of researchers who before they know it dismiss everything REGARDLESS.
Remember these words from Einstein, words which I parrot continuously:
Condemnation without investigation is the highest form of ignorance
Try to keep your mind open to all possibility, but attached to nothing and certainly not to belief systems on either end of the scale.
This way you can be flexible in your work, your thinking and move with the information that you receive.
Whatever you do, don’t stick with a firm stance which could become highly embarrassing when you need shift position due to outdated data and rigid thoughts from yesteryear.
The real nuts and bolts of the paranormal is experience – and even old myths & tales – that have lasted the time, passed down from generation to generation.
I put heavy emphasis on this part and this heightens further when I get many examples of paranormal activity from independent sources.
This is perhaps where I slightly differ from many people and certainly those types who are trying to be overly scientific in their approach.
I treat witnesses with the utmost respect and see them as the key part of the investigation and not the lowest part, with more energy seemingly put into the gathering of data.
There’s a place for environmental data gathering for sure, but I would not over-rule the witnesses, certainly not in favour of textbook information or to back up a firm held belief.
Real Paranormal Activity Is Not Always Present
You see, Investigating is a funny old game where you go to these location and may get absolutely nothing.
Does this mean the place has no haunting?
Of course it doesn’t, it only means that we have been unable to get access to the location – in the exact conditions – as witnessed by the person who contacted us.
I mean, the phenomena may never transpire again, frustrating as it can be, but in the end I know many in the paranormal field understand that it’s not possible to recreate the paranormal phenomena all the time.
Science would thus discount all witness reports – and data – citing that it therefore can’t be measured under the scientific model.
So why do we have paranormal participants in research trying to be overly scientific to measure the – mostly – unmeasurable?
This results in dog chasing tail actions!
You’re beating a new path of discovery, foraging through new areas of reality, while looking for answers that mainstream rarely wish to probe.
In this you must employ new ideas, tactics and working models that can evolve us past old thinking and cynicism from material reductionism.
In conclusion, I would urge my fellow friends in the paranormal field to give a little more credit to the witnesses – or the reports – and build from there on in.
Leave the case open – both ways – till a cause that fully 100% can be agreed upon by both researcher and witness is reached.
It’s okay to not know the cause, seriously, you are allowed to be mystified by the events and admit you are at a loss to explain the reported phenomena.
There are some fantastic accounts of real paranormal activity – through witness reports – that get overlooked because a few visits never produced the same phenomena.
The location is then deemed as not haunted, but no explanation for the original reports are provided.
I think we have a duty as researchers to work more closely with witnesses and to also leave cases open – or concluded – in a respectable way.
I therefore suggest that contrary to cynical thinking on anecdotal evidence – and raw experience – that they key element and most important aspect of ALL paranormal activity is the person who witnesses the unseen.
How about they are treated with the respect, importance and involved fully in all areas of the research then?
Feel free to leave your comments or constructive criticisms below.