Science. Paranormal. These two words can cause a great deal of debate and discussion with the paranormal field. However, I feel that many groups still do not have a firm grasp on what science or even being scientific is all about. Science can be a valuable tool in helping to understand and bring true discovery into the field of the paranormal. That is, of course, if it is done correctly. I suppose however, first explaining the different sciences is crucial to understanding science itself, and then on how to be scientific when investigating.

There are 3 basic categories for the sciences, you have the hard sciences, soft (social) sciences, and the metaphysical, often called pseudo-sciences.

The hard sciences are the physical sciences, they are the grand daddy of them all, so to speak. Physical sciences are primarily fact based because they typically consist of physical and tangible subjects. The following are some prime examples of the hard sciences;

- Physics
- Earth Sciences such as Geology, Hydrology, Oceanography, etc.
- Chemistry
- Astronomy (while some might not necessarily consider all of it to be so)

Then you have your soft or social sciences. These sciences are more observational studies. While extensive research and data has been conducted and collected, very little if anything is considered 100% factual, and there are always exceptions. The following are examples of the soft sciences;

- Psychology
- Psychiatry
- Sociology
- Human Behavioral Studies
- Anthropology

Finally you have the pseudo or metaphysical sciences. These are the hardest sciences as there is very little, if any, valid data collected to prove the existence of the paranormal or inclination of any therein. Most scientists look down upon these sciences (if they see them as science at all) as they have nothing tangible, or credible to validate the theories set forth by others in this field. To a degree I cannot help but agree with them. Examples of the metaphysical sciences;

- Parapsychology
- Cryptozoology
- Ghosts and Hauntings
- UFOlogy

As you can see, already being considered a pseudo-science in the field of scientific research is setting us up for many great hurdles. The problem increases when researchers and teams in this field continue to stack hurdles on top of the already existing ones. Many teams claim to be scientific in nature, when in fact, there is very little about their research that is scientific. Before we get into those, lets start with those groups that do not use science.

Many groups claim that science is not open-minded, which is the reason it cannot be followed in the paranormal field. Science itself is considered a provisional field. Science can and always will change once new evidence is submitted to support new theories. This has been the nature of science for thousands of years, and it the reason advancement in technology and thinking exists. To me, that is the most open-minded you can get. The problem is that science might contradict with the "researchers" current belief on the paranormal, so they disregard the use of science all together. Its not science that is being close-minded, its the researchers themselves. In order to advance in the field of paranormal research, this mentality needs to cease.

Debunking. A commonly used term to describe what some groups would consider scientific investigations. Problem is, debunking is not science. Debunking is...debunking. Many times investigators of the paranormal will stop searching or collecting data once they find a logical or reasonable explanation to account for the phenomena. Often referred to as Occam's Razor, the simplest answer is often the best. It may seem logical, but scientifically, its wrong.

It is possible, and probably likely, that the explanation for the phenomena is correct, however science is not concerned with just any explanation. Instead science is concerned only about the correct one. There is always the possibility that there is another explanation that has not been considered or found yet. As a researcher, you must test your theory exhausting all possibilities in order to validate your claim. The simplest and most obvious is not considered the correct one, until proven to be so.

Evidence. This is probably the biggest downfall to the paranormal community. It is not the lack of evidence, its the surmounting piles of what researchers are considering evidence. First there is the anecdotal evidences. These are the experiences that are being used to "prove" to researchers that the paranormal exists. Does it mean that their experiences are false or that they are lying? No, it simply means that their experiences are subjective, and cannot be considered as evidence, not alone. There are also psychological factors that can play into a persons experience as well, so this limits the credibility of experiences.

Now there are instruments and tools being used quite often in the research field to verify and measure these anecdotes. EMF meters, Thermal cameras, IR cameras, Camcorders, barometric gauges, gauss meters, etc etc. Again, the issue arises when researchers rely on more anecdotes for measuring their data. For example, the most commonly accepted belief (notice I didn't say fact) is that EMF spikes are correlated to paranormal activity. This belief is being accepted as fact amongst many paranormal investigators, which is where the problem comes about. First, there is no conclusive evidence to support that high EMF readings are ghosts or spirits, as some would commonly believe. There have been no scientific publishings linking EMF spikes to any ghostly activity. Research is essential when investigating the paranormal. Theorizing that an EMF spike might have a correlation within the paranormal field is acceptable, but it also needs to be thoroughly tested. Where is the data? What other factors are you contributing or finding to account for high EMF readings? Have you eliminated all possibilities? If so, how did you do so? Has it been reviewed by other peers in the field to offer suggestions and critique?

Science can impact the field of paranormal research greatly if used correctly. This field can grow and advance to a much higher degree if other researchers start to look upon the field with a more objective mindset. Utilize science the way that it is supposed to be utilized and not be afraid to do a little grunt work. There is a fascination with capturing the paranormal, many want that instant gratification. That gratification has no credence when it comes to proving or disproving the paranormal. Instead, do your research, gather your data, and collect the evidence to prove your theories correctly. This will in turn be more gratifying than any photo or video you capture.

< Prev		Next >