groups who charge

DANNY22XX

ok gang i came across this and for me personally its what gives groups a bad name ,,,imo,this is a big problem in the feild. http://www.nydailynews.com/ny_local/brooklyn/2008/03/04/2008-03-04_brooklynbased_paranormalists_will_clear_.html

name and shame imo:mad:would be intresting to find out what you all think

El_mariachi

20 an hour, they're cheap . I know people charging around 500-900 an hour.... and yes people will pay it.

6th

El mariachi, do you mean for the same service?

Danny, if they are providing a service i.e. riding a house of trouble then sure why not charge? Its not something I would do but going to a house to clear it is very different from going as a group to investigate it.

As long as the customer is satisfied and they pay tax etc then I dont see why not. The question of registering as a business comes into it and thats where it really gets interesting.

Yes, but most people who offer services usually offer ones that have fairly clearcut results. For example when a mechanic offers to fix a car it would be fairly easy to see whether the car had really been fixed or not. Further more if the mechanic didn't fix the car yet still charged, you are well in your rights to take said mechanic to small claims court. With these guys there is no clear results nor a regulating body to keep them in check and I'm pretty sure a case like this would be laughed out of court.(maybe not an American one)

6th

Lets not forget the clearing a council paid for in the UK: http://6thsensitive.blogspot.com/2008/02/council-pays-for-exorcism.html

And we all know how local governments are models of clear thinking and efficiency.:rolleyes:

6th

I'm not saying that but for an official body to accept such claims is a big deal.

A spokesman for Easington District Council said it agreed to pay half of the exorcism because the family were "extremely distressed" and the alternative was £40-per-night emergency accommodation.

Seems the only reason they paid for it was cause it was cheaper than a hotel and no doubt only to shut the woman up.
Besides Easington District Council hardly equates to an important official body.

DANNY22XX

6th wrote: »

El mariachi, do you mean for the same service?

Danny, if they are providing a service i.e. riding a house of trouble then sure why not charge? Its not something I would do but going to a house to clear it is very different from going as a group to investigate it.

As long as the customer is satisfied and they pay tax etc then I dont see why not. The question of registering as a business comes into it and thats where it really gets interesting.

how do you know the house is clear,,,because you say so,,what happens if the tennents keep having the same probs after paying you ,,what happens then ,,,you keep charging,,,i think personally its wrong but thats my opinion,,,i do think there should be some sort of body to make sure people are not charged for this,,,were there could be some sort of grant issiued or somthing.i know people thats said there homes have been haunted got a medium inn who paid 200 euro just get them to tell what was going on in the home,,,there were told a young child was murderd in the attic ,,they would hear moaning sounds in the evening but when a team call in to investigate the maoning was pigoens in the attic ,,so what hope has thoses people got of getting their money back.ie none.im disrespecting mediums or others teams its just a problem that is happening in the feild and there should be some sort of control.we talk about places to investigate and charges,,everyone getting a fair deal but what about the tennents they should be not be charged imo,the rewards are there in when you get an evp,or video or physical evidence then you can share and move on to find the veil that seperates between here and there,,,and stress this no disrespect to mediums etc,,,just somthing i would like to discuss more about,,,as you know there are bogus teams out there that think everywere is haunted,,,or bogus mediums etc,,,that can give teams and people a bad name,,,,.
there are diffrent ways to make money in this feild ,,,ie sponsorship,,,open inivestigations weekends,,,charity do,s etc,,,cònventions,,,what ever it may be,,i would support anyone who comes up with theses ideas,,and i know you would get more of public support for doing it.

kshiel

I am guessing a couple of these cases would or maybe will go to court berfore some form of law is passed to control these things in some way. Beats me how for the moment how it could be done.

I am sure there are groups out there who embelish or make more of the evidence they have to gain a name in the field just as there are hoax mediums as well and none should be tolorated.

If a group is honest in what they do they would be telling the house holders they cannot garantee anything but will try and find out what the hell is going on in the house and in that case the householder is well aware of what is going on as to regards what he/she is purchasing. Its not something I would do but that doesn't mean you can completly judge those who do this in the geniune sense.
The council agreeing to pay half for an exorism regardless if they meant it as a cheap way out has paved the way for a lot more cases like this coming forward to them.

Just to add to this what happens when a team goes in and finds that they cannot rule out paranormal activity and decided with the clients concent that a clearing is probally the best way to restore the peace of mind of the householder what does the team do then, do they recommend a medium they feel is genuine or leave it up to the house holder to go find one for themselves. My point is regardless if someone is getting paid to do this or not, it has the petental to be damaging to all involved. I agree some rules should be set in place. I am sure some basic ground rules could but how do you deceide the rules when really paranormal cannot be pined down enough yet to sugguest what is or isn't actual paranormal activity.

kshiel

kshiel wrote: »

Just to add to this what happens when a team goes in and finds that they cannot rule out paranormal activity and decided with the clients consent that a clearing is probally the best way to restore the peace of mind of the householder ...........but how do you decide the rules when really paranormal cannot be pined down enough yet to suggest what is or isn't actual paranormal activity.

Now thats kinda the problem. Most paranormal "investigators" go into these things already convinced the phenomenon is paranormal in nature. They use every noise, bump, draft twitch of the meter and even personal feeling as evidence to support their assumption.
This is most unscientific.
For example when a doctor sees symptoms of a really exotic illness he doesn't instantly assume the patient has that disease. He eliminates the possibility of it being a combination of other much more diseases before going on to the exotic one.
Then again if paranormal investigators did use scientific method properly, there would be a lot less hauntings around. :rolleyes:

Nevyn

I know of some in this country who charge between 300 and 600 for 'ghostbusting' and say that if the problem returns they may have to come out
a second time and it's the same amount again...

iamhunted

i dont think anyone who charges money to research the paranormal can call themselves a 'paranormal researcher' as it's not on to charge someone to help with your own research.

If people want to set themselves up as 'ghostbusters' and charge money to 'clear' houses of whatever and if they can find someone silly enough to pay them, then thats their lookout.

I'd draw a line seperating researchers and those who charge as the first is in it for knowledge (thats the payment) and the second is a wannabe 'ghostbuster'.

iamhunted

King Mob wrote: »

Now thats kinda the problem. Most paranormal "investigators" go into these things already convinced the phenomenon is paranormal in nature. They use every noise, bump, draft twitch of the meter and even personal feeling as evidence to support their assumption.
This is most unscientific.
For example when a doctor sees symptoms of a really exotic illness he doesn't instantly assume the patient has that disease. He eliminates the possibility of it being a combination of other much more diseases before going on to the exotic one.
Then again if paranormal investigators did use scientific method properly, there would be a lot less hauntings around. :rolleyes:

many groups I know of do much the same as the doctor in your example. there is no 'scientific method' to investigate the paranormal - just common sense.

Of the paranormal investigators whose videos I've seen, i have not seen one that uses the scientific method. They all go into the investigation convinced they are dealing with a supernatural phenomenon. (This isn't just the groups that charge by the way).
If these "investigators" want to be taken seriously a little critical thinking wouldn't hurt.

iamhunted

i actually agree with you on that, but at the same time every group is different and have their own way of doing things. some tend to rely on feelings, some reply on equipment.

iamhunted

iamhunted wrote: »

i actually agree with you on that, but at the same time every group is different and have their own way of doing things. some tend to rely on feelings, some reply on equipment.

But you see "feelings" have never been used in any kind of scientific investigation.(cept in House) And for good reason.
"Feelings" are completely subjective unreliable and ultimately untestable and therefore useless as evidence.
As for equipment, I've seen them miss-used so badly in these "investigations".
Now I'm not an expert in electronics or sound engineering or photography but wouldn't it be prudent to double up on equipment. say having two sound recorders or cameras in the same room for cross referencing? Never seen it happen. Also many of these investigator use various meters to detect magnetic fields and cold spots and like but I've never seen anyone of them who knew how to calibrate and use them properly, let alone interpret the reading they get.
Even though most of these investigators are amateurs its no excuse for bad science.

iamhunted

i dont think there can be such a thing as a professional paranormal investigator. professional ghosthunter who cxharge people money maybe, but investigator, not really.

say having two sound recorders or cameras in the same room for cross referencing? Never seen it happen.

i dont know man, maybe you're watching too much most haunted or something, but using two recorders etc in one room, for precisely that reason is commonplace.

Also many of these investigator use various meters to detect magnetic fields and cold spots and like but I've never seen anyone of them who knew how to calibrate and use them properly, let alone interpret the reading they get.

How do you calibrate a thermometre? or an emf metre? they both do pretty basic things - once detects the temperature (you cant calibrate for that) and the other detects electromagnetic sources. My emf has no way to calibrate it. I dont get what you mean there.

"Feelings" are completely subjective unreliable and ultimately untestable and therefore useless as evidence.

maybe so, but at the same time we should be striving to find a way to validate such feelings. just because they dont show up on an audio recording or an emf metre doesnt mean they arent real. OK - it also doesnt mean that every 'feeling' someone has actually means that their 'feeling' is correct but to be honest, we have no way, at the minute of being able to say the medium end of things is completely wrong (though we also cant prove mediums right either).

iamhunted

iamhunted wrote: »

i dont think there can be such a thing as a professional paranormal investigator. professional ghosthunter who cxharge people money maybe, but investigator, not really.

i dont know man, maybe you're watching too much most haunted or something, but using two recorders etc in one room, for precisely that reason is commonplace.

How do you calibrate a thermometre? or an emf metre? they both do pretty basic things - once detects the temperature (you cant calibrate for that) and the other detects electromagnetic sources. My emf has no way to calibrate it. I dont get what you mean there.

maybe so, but at the same time we should be striving to find a way to validate such feelings. just because they dont show up on an audio recording or an emf metre doesnt mean they arent real. OK - it also doesnt mean that every 'feeling' someone has actually means that their 'feeling' is correct but to be honest, we have no way, at the minute of being able to say the medium end of things is completely wrong (though we also cant prove mediums right either).

I never seen a group use two recording devices in the same room or for that matter an instance of two recording devices that confirm events on each other.
As I've said I'm not an expert on electronics and such. but wouldn't a baseline for and area be needed for measurements such as temperature and EMF?And wouldn't you need at least one control area to sample to get that baseline? Never seen any paranormal investigators do that. (then again it is the boring part of science).
As for the feeling regardless of validity are unreliable at best. You see these feelings are subject to the persons experiences and emotions and are affected by other sources than the supernatural ones they claim. For example people would get a bad feeling in an old spooky castle even if there was no evidence at all of supernatural events. Similarly people would not get a bad feeling in a normal place, say a restaurant, were ghost were claim to have been sighted.
And you see because there is no evidence to support the "medium end of things" we can actually say its completely wrong.

El_mariachi

Thaedydal wrote: »

I know of some in this country who charge between 300 and 600 for 'ghostbusting'

Yeah thats what i mean 6th, a general house clearing for exorcism!

iamhunted

King Mob wrote: »

I never seen a group use two recording devices in the same room

our own group regularly set up a video device and an audio device in the same room, so theres two sources of audio. often more than one camera and audio recorder

or for that matter an instance of two recording devices that confirm events on each other.

normally its more interesting if one device picks up an evp and the other doesnt.

As I've said I'm not an expert on electronics and such. but wouldn't a baseline for and area be needed for measurements such as temperature and EMF?And wouldn't you need at least one control area to sample to get that baseline? Never seen any paranormal investigators do that. (then again it is the boring part of science).
As for the feeling regardless of validity are unreliable at best. You see these feelings are subject to the persons experiences and emotions and are affected by other sources than the supernatural ones they claim. For example people would get a bad feeling in an old spooky castle even if there was no evidence at all of supernatural events. Similarly people would not get a bad feeling in a normal place, say a restaurant, were ghost were claim to have been sighted.

the electromatnegic frequency readings from everywhere is different. yes, its wise to do a baseline sweep and find any power cables in walls/devices giving off high emf - which again is something most groups do.

Tell me, where are you seeing these investigators you talk of? on TV or on investigations?

And you see because there is no evidence to support the "medium end of things" we can actually say its completely wrong.

sorry I dont subscribe to that. if you dont go looking, you wont find anything - ergo no-one is in a position yet to say much about the reliability of mediums as we have no way of measuring accuracy. If enough people look, then maybe one day we might find out how to do so.

If you can prove to me conclusively and fully that mediums cannot do what they do, and do the job of a medium convincingly for me, then work away. Derrin Brown does a good cold reading routine but those kind of readings dont really apply to investigations.

iamhunted

iamhunted wrote: »

our own group regularly set up a video device and an audio device in the same room, so theres two sources of audio. often more than one camera and audio recorder

normally its more interesting if one device picks up an evp and the other doesnt.

the electromatnegic frequency readings from everywhere is different. yes, its wise to do a baseline sweep and find any power cables in walls/devices giving off high emf - which again is something most groups do.

Tell me, where are you seeing these investigators you talk of? on TV or on investigations?

sorry I dont subscribe to that. if you dont go looking, you wont find anything - ergo no-one is in a position yet to say much about the reliability of mediums as we have no way of measuring accuracy. If enough people look, then maybe one day we might find out how to do so.

If you can prove to me conclusively and fully that mediums cannot do what they do, and do the job of a medium convincingly for me, then work away. Derrin Brown does a good cold reading routine but those kind of readings dont really apply to investigations.

Surely an evp event that is on two separte devices at the same time would better. does it not eliminate mistaken sounds that appear just on the one.
as for the emf readings to you mark out all the locations of the wires and stuff and do you cross reference it with your findings.
most of the video have been from youtube and links from paranormal sites.
Because Mediums are claiming they have powers the onus is on them to prove it not for me to disprove it.
there are several methods for faking psychic readings of a building and stuff form doing research beforehand to making stuff up on the spot.

iamhunted

if i had two audio recorders in the same room and only one recorded an evp and the other one didnt, then it would mean the sound would have been localised to near the machine that recorded it- so if it was classed as an evo because no-one heard it at the time, plus only one recorder caught it then its easier to determine if it was noise pollution or an actual evp.

if both recorders caught it then theres a chance that its a natural sound. we've managed to debunk one of our own evps by listening to the second recording and found it was one of us sneezing - it just sounded way different in the other recording.

iamhunted

King Mob wrote: »

Because Mediums are claiming they have powers the onus is on them to prove it not for me to disprove it.
there are several methods for faking psychic readings of a building and stuff form doing research beforehand to making stuff up on the spot.

It doesnt matter where the onus lies - unless you can prove a medium is faking, you cant say they are.

k has worked with us on investigations and came up with information she couldnt have known (she didnt even know where the investigation was until she got there) so unless you can tell me how people can manage that then ......

Actually you can as i've said there are many techiques for faking and they all are easy to identify and test.

iamhunted

how about going somewhere about 100 miles away, to a private residence the medium knows nothing about? If the medium doesnt know thats the destination and if they have never met the people concerned or been at the residence before, hows it possible to dig up the required information in time?

Would a case report or a video be out of the question?
How much of the information is accurate? How much is verifiable?
There is a load of ways to do it but without specifics I can't say for sure.

iamhunted

We hadn't started documenting our case studies then, though we have some EVP from it. Doesnt have anything to do with the medium end of things though.

out of ten pieces of verifable information (from the owners themselves about the house, its history and tenants) K got 8 (I think). she couldnt have already known any of the information. Im sure Danny can vouch for that if he's about.

The specifics are she went to place she didnt know and told us about the people who lived there and various other things which matched the information previously received from the home owners which i know for fact she had no access to.

If you are correct, and such stuff is faked, then how did she do it? (btw - sorry k for using you as an example - but it fits)

iamhunted

iamhunted wrote: »

We hadn't started documenting our case studies then, though we have some EVP from it. Doesnt have anything to do with the medium end of things though.

out of ten pieces of verifable information (from the owners themselves about the house, its history and tenants) K got 8 (I think). she couldnt have already known any of the information. Im sure Danny can vouch for that if he's about.

The specifics are she went to place she didnt know and told us about the people who lived there and various other things which matched the information previously received from the home owners which i know for fact she had no access to.

If you are correct, and such stuff is faked, then how did she do it? (btw - sorry Kim for using you as an example - but it fits)

Could you tell us these ten pieces please? of the two she didn't get, where they wrong did she miss them or what? what where her exact answers?
You gotta work with me here and give me actual specifics.
Not sure but wasn't this how they did the Derek Acroah stuff?

iamhunted

nope - fraid not. that was private and the details remain private - but believe me, they were spot on accurate. I dont think there were many (if any) duds. Even if you knew all the details and the 'hits' it still wouldnt help you work it out. We've already been through all that.

Derek whathishead was caught out repeating a madeup ghost that the crew had been told about.

Well I'm going to go out on a limb and say the answer where not "spot on" but where in fact board generalisations that covered most of the pieces of information. Its a pretty easy and common trick and i believe some people do it unintentionally. But because the details are private i could be wrong.

Didn't they bring Derek Acroah out to places he knew nothing about?

stevenmu

This type of charging always sounds very dodgy to me, like others have pointed out, the defined results can be vague and there's no gaurantee the 'customer' will get what they pay for. I completely agree with iamhunted's differentiation between researchers and ghostbusters. While the latter may call themselves the former, I believe the former should stay well away from the latter.

iamhunted

King Mob wrote: »

Well I'm going to go out on a limb and say the answer where not "spot on" but where in fact board generalisations that covered most of the pieces of information. Its a pretty easy and common trick and i believe some people do it unintentionally. But because the details are private i could be wrong.

Didn't they bring Derek Acroah out to places he knew nothing about?

You're being presented with as much info as possible, plus we know ourselves theres no possibility of fraud in this instance, but you are refusing to accept it and saying instead the information is a 'broad generalisation' ...

thats just not good enough an answer for me. You cant, i conclude from this encounter, convince me that fakery is the culprit here.

As for derek whathishead - ive no idea as I wasnt involved in anything most daunted ever done - i just know how we conducted this particular investigation and trickery was no-where to be seen.

iamhunted

iamhunted wrote: »

You're being presented with as much info as possible, plus we know ourselves theres no possibility of fraud in this instance, but you are refusing to accept it and saying instead the information is a 'broad generalisation' ...

thats just not good enough an answer for me. You cant, i conclude from this encounter, convince me that fakery is the culprit here.

As for derek whathishead - ive no idea as I wasnt involved in anything most daunted ever done - i just know how we conducted this particular investigation and trickery was no-where to be seen.

The reason I'm not accepting it is because i see no reason why i should accept it. You haven't offered any proof of anything.
I actually said the information she supplied could have been a broad generalisation but I can't tell with out more info.
the thing i'm trying to get at with derek acroah is that this stuff is fairly common and easily faked.

iamhunted

the point is, there was no cheating involved.

theres no reason in the world why you should believe me, and I wouldnt for one minute wish to try and convince you of it - but your explanation of all things medium as being fake is out the window as afar as Im concerned. some - maybe many are - but not all of them.

iamhunted

iamhunted wrote: »

the point is, there was no cheating involved.

theres no reason in the world why you should believe me, and I wouldnt for one minute wish to try and convince you of it - but your explanation of all things medium as being fake is out the window as afar as Im concerned. some - maybe many are - but not all of them.

Actually if where to look back in my posts i mentioned that i have a theory that psychics and the like can do these trick unintentionally thus tricking themselves is it possible this is the case?
And again I have no reason to believe you because you offer no proof of anything.

iamhunted

aye, but unintentionally finding out info covers a lot of area. How can you unintentionally find out info about somewhere you dont know your going to? I dont get that.

anyway - we know where we both stand, so lets leave it at that ....

Let me explain.
The theory is that she is just throwing a lot of real broad and generaliszed statements some of which may be true in a broad sense. Some use this as a method of trickery maybe some use this techique unintetionally and mistake it for psychic ability.

iamhunted

aye, I see what you mean - but she wasnt though. the answers werent "lot of real broad and generaliszed statements".

seriously - we could go on forever here ....

or you could show some kind of proof? just a suggestion;)

stevenmu

Ok, this is just going in a never ending circle, can people please return to the original topic.

and King Mob please read the charter with specific regards to the part about demands for proof. Iamhunted has clearly stated that he is not willing to divulge the details.

stevenmu

stevenmu wrote: »

Ok, this is just going in a never ending circle, can people please return to the original topic.

and King Mob please read the charter with specific regards to the part about demands for proof. Iamhunted has clearly stated that he is not willing to divulge the details.

Wouldn't call that a demand but proof would be nice.

But back to the orginal piont,
Because this "industry" is unreliable and unregulated people should not be charged for any kind of clearing or investigation.
I doubt the Catholic Church charges for exorcisms.

karynp

OMG
Kingmob,you really are addressing this all wrong,in what interest would it be to iamhunted to come on and make elaborate statements that are untrue? This would only be fooling himself,nobody else,wheres the joy in that.
As said in the other discussions,you need to attend or delve deeper into you and try to get some answers.
I think you are bored and just looking for something to argue, and not even doing it well,it feels like badgering to me.
Not intending to offend,just saying my feelings.

karynp

King Mob wrote: »

Wouldn't call that a demand but proof would be nice.

But back to the orginal piont,
Because this "industry" is unreliable and unregulated people should not be charged for any kind of clearing or investigation.
I doubt the Catholic Church charges for exorcisms.

I dont think the catholic church is in anyway an example of your point,if we were to debate this,which i wont,then you would need to look a lot further into the role of the catholic church and what it has done over the years.

kshiel

First off King Mob what jamhaunted has been talking about as he said was a private resident and these peoples privacy will be respected so end of discussion on that. The information that was given by me to the boys investigating this home was given directly to them first and out of the ten pieces of information he had I got 8 accurate and the other two peiece could not be confirmed or to put it in a science way inconclusive.Jamhunted has I feel stated every thing else and it is up to your self how you choose to look at it, but judgements before knowing facts is not a good way of looking at it in my opinion.

Although I will say its a good thing you at least question it and hopefully it will lead you to delve deeper and open you mind more to other explainations be them different scienctific ones or spiritual.

I have learnt to walk away from other peoples quick judgements of me and there I will leave it.

Riamfada

Well Im not getting involved in the above hootenany but I just want to say my piece on groups charging for investigations and offering a service.

Firstly the paranormal industry cannot be regulated because, lets face it, we have all been at this along time and have no captured anything conclusive. How do you regulate an industry which offers a service removing things from your house that possibly dont exist nor are believed in by the vast majority of society.

Secondly anyone who is willing to pay a paranormal team to come in an investigate their house before calling a builder to find out what those noises are is a bit "odd" . If the investigators do their thing , run off with the cash and the noises come back its only the occupiers fault for being stupid enough in the first place. The same way if you pay a medium who asks you lots of questions ....

Payer "I lost my ring"
Medium "ok, im playing with the cards, but while im doing that have you looked for the ring"
Payer "yes I have looked everywhere, i dont know what to do"
Medium "really ? everywhere?"
Payer "yes"
Medium "the cards say you wont find it" , 35 euro please?"

same thing .


Finally, who here can actually say they are qualified to run a "ghostbusting" service. Out of all the groups here, including my own, i dont feel that anyone has the right to claim they are a "parasychologist" or "paranormal researcher" without at least an MA in psychology or another related qulification. Running around at night with a camera and Paul Fennel's book dosnt make you a scientific researcher. It makes you a bloke spending 50 quid on a friday night to have a bit of crack running around in the dark trying to take photos of ghosts while reading Paul Fennel.

Paranormal "investigation" will always remain a pasttime of people who have other responsiblities and occupations. Unless footage of Hitler dancing on O'Connell St or the armies of Rome marching down the Quays in rush hour taffic is presented. Paranormal Investigation will always remain a non profit pastime. People who jump on chances to take it to television and become the next "most haunted" cant claim to be legitimate scientific researchers.

ps: anyone who lets someone into their house who believes in ghosts is weird ! :P





Regards
G

Regards
G

DANNY22XX

King Mob wrote: »

Well I'm going to go out on a limb and say the answer where not "spot on" but where in fact board generalisations that covered most of the pieces of information. Its a pretty easy and common trick and i believe some people do it unintentionally. But because the details are private i could be wrong.

Didn't they bring Derek Acroah out to places he knew nothing about?

i was there and i was the only person who knew the details of the house ,,,she got 6 names from the location who i had written down from an interveiw with the owner,,,i know and belive me i will call a spade a spade ,,,but K had now prior knowledge to the location,,,because she didnt know were it was until we got there.this was a private house that you can even gloogle

DANNY22XX

Grimes wrote: »

Secondly anyone who is willing to pay a paranormal team to come in an investigate their house before calling a builder to find out what those noises are is a bit "odd" . If the investigators do their thing , run off with the cash and the noises come back its only the occupiers fault for being stupid enough in the first place. The same way if you pay a medium who asks you lots of questions ....

Payer "I lost my ring"
Medium "ok, im playing with the cards, but while im doing that have you looked for the ring"
Payer "yes I have looked everywhere, i dont know what to do"
Medium "really ? everywhere?"
Payer "yes"
Medium "the cards say you wont find it" , 35 euro please?"

same thing .


Finally, who here can actually say they are qualified to run a "ghostbusting" service. Out of all the groups here, including my own, i dont feel that anyone has the right to claim they are a "parasychologist" or "paranormal researcher" without at least an MA in psychology or another related qulification. Running around at night with a camera and Paul Fennel's book dosnt make you a scientific researcher. It makes you a bloke spending 50 quid on a friday night to have a bit of crack running around in the dark trying to take photos of ghosts while reading Paul Fennel.

Paranormal "investigation" will always remain a pasttime of people who have other responsiblities and occupations. Unless footage of Hitler dancing on O'Connell St or the armies of Rome marching down the Quays in rush hour taffic is presented. Paranormal Investigation will always remain a non profit pastime. People who jump on chances to take it to television and become the next "most haunted" cant claim to be legitimate scientific researchers.

ps: anyone who lets someone into their house who believes in ghosts is weird ! :P





Regards
G

Regards
G

well said grimes i couldnt of put it better my self,,,

ghosthunter73

[QUOTE=Grimes;55489738
Out of all the groups here, including my own, i dont feel that anyone has the right to claim they are a "parasychologist" or "paranormal researcher" without at least an MA in psychology or another related qulification. Running around at night with a camera and Paul Fennel's book dosnt make you a scientific researcher. It makes you a bloke spending 50 quid on a friday night to have a bit of crack running around in the dark trying to take photos of ghosts while reading Paul Fennel. [/QUOTE]


I would like to say that you have some valid points and some points that I think are not validated but that is what boards is all about and of course you are entitled to your opinion. Just wanted to say thanks for the plug on Paul Fennel's book "Haunted" is doing quite well and makes a good reference piece to anyone's kit!!!!

Riamfada

What points are not validated? I also have a copy of the book its a very interesting read.


edit: ah just realised there that you are a member of the PRAI so I wouldnt expect you to agree with my points but thanks for the feedback. Ive also been a member of an investigation team for over 3 years so my opinion is formulated through watching many groups and professionals including your group.

ghosthunter73

Grimes wrote: »

What points are not validated? I also have a copy of the book its a very interesting read.


edit: ah just realised there that you are a member of the PRAI so I wouldnt expect you to agree with my points but thanks for the feedback. Ive also been a member of an investigation team for over 3 years so my opinion is formulated through watching many groups and professionals including your group.

Actually I agree with alot of what your saying here. Being a member of PRAI has nothing to do with it I totally agree no one should be charged by a group to come in and investigate their house. I found the Payer and Medium actually very funny. I agree that most problems can be solved with a builder / plumber and so on. I don't agree with "i dont feel that anyone has the right to claim they are a "parasychologist" or "paranormal researcher" without at least an MA in psychology or another related qulification." A parasychologist yes a researcher no. Just because I don't agree doesn't mean I am saying your wrong again it's just our own opinions. I know some people here don't have a very high opinion of PRAI but I am not here to start problems just looking at how other groups are approaching research and investigations and so on.