The hijacked paranormal thread

[Ronin]

Hi Ronin, are you writing a paranormal book? You write well and I have enjoyed reading your posts so far. Can you tell us more about your project ?

No, it's not a book. The thing about me is that, at my core, it's important for me to know, not to do. Coupled with that is a lot of caution - bordering on hesitation - to share any information I consider...risky? dangerous? As an example, let's say I spent years studying magic. Not just spiritual, but elemental, deliberately trying to get physical interactions with the world. Were I to succeed, I'd immediately stop what I was doing, burn my notes, and never mention it again. Why? Because my goal was to know if it was really possible, not to do anything with it, PLUS if it was repeatable and reliable, I'd be far too concerned that someone unscrupulous would learn and use it against innocents. Power can corrupt, after all.

But anyway, theshadowlands existed for some years before I got there (and of course has endured after I left), and I spent a lot of time reading user submitted stories. During the course of this, several things jumped out at me, among them

1) As a function of time, it seems that haunted locations (woods, glades, mountains) give way to haunted structures (houses, hotels, hospitals)
2) A large majority of hauntings followed a distinct pattern of escalation, and would 'reset' even when one person followed right on the heels of another in the same place
3) A pattern seemed to emerge that might make it possible to categorize different types of entities as similar to one another in behavior and response

So, my goal is to diagnose the stories, assigning various keywords and notes, so that once I have enough, I can run queries against the data set to see what comes up. I'm not drawing any conclusions to open. I may end up with data that's useless or I could end up with some enlightening results. Either way, I'll know - not only something about the data, but how to extend my skills into cloud computing.

One bias I am showing, however, is to the source data. It's hard to explain without a (bigger) wall of text. At some point, it became clear that instead of submitting stories in an effort to have someone listen seriously, many people were instead embellishing to provoke a reaction or seek attention. I suppose that the site or topic had reached a critical mass where it went from a quiet niche where people felt safe enough to confide in strangers to something more sensational. That's not a commentary on the people of the internet, NOT theshadowlands site. But the upshot is I'm relying on submitted stories older than a certain date, and am not soliciting any material.

 

[Lynne]

No, it's not a book. The thing about me is that, at my core, it's important for me to know, not to do. Coupled with that is a lot of caution - bordering on hesitation - to share any information I consider...risky? dangerous? As an example, let's say I spent years studying magic. Not just spiritual, but elemental, deliberately trying to get physical interactions with the world. Were I to succeed, I'd immediately stop what I was doing, burn my notes, and never mention it again. Why? Because my goal was to know if it was really possible, not to do anything with it, PLUS if it was repeatable and reliable, I'd be far too concerned that someone unscrupulous would learn and use it against innocents. Power can corrupt, after all.

But anyway, theshadowlands existed for some years before I got there (and of course has endured after I left), and I spent a lot of time reading user submitted stories. During the course of this, several things jumped out at me, among them

1) As a function of time, it seems that haunted locations (woods, glades, mountains) give way to haunted structures (houses, hotels, hospitals)
2) A large majority of hauntings followed a distinct pattern of escalation, and would 'reset' even when one person followed right on the heels of another in the same place
3) A pattern seemed to emerge that might make it possible to categorize different types of entities as similar to one another in behavior and response

So, my goal is to diagnose the stories, assigning various keywords and notes, so that once I have enough, I can run queries against the data set to see what comes up. I'm not drawing any conclusions to open. I may end up with data that's useless or I could end up with some enlightening results. Either way, I'll know - not only something about the data, but how to extend my skills into cloud computing.

One bias I am showing, however, is to the source data. It's hard to explain without a (bigger) wall of text. At some point, it became clear that instead of submitting stories in an effort to have someone listen seriously, many people were instead embellishing to provoke a reaction or seek attention. I suppose that the site or topic had reached a critical mass where it went from a quiet niche where people felt safe enough to confide in strangers to something more sensational. That's not a commentary on the people of the internet, NOT theshadowlands site. But the upshot is I'm relying on submitted stories older than a certain date, and am not soliciting any material.

Ok so the Shadow Lands is an Internet forum ?

 

[Ronin]

Ok so the Shadow Lands is an Internet forum ?

The Shadowlands

It's one of the oldest paranormal sites on the Internet. I found it while looking for resources to help my wife explore Wicca, about 20 years ago now. I was part of the staff for 3ish years, writing a column called Manifestations.They're a terrific example of mid-grade writing; good enough for a general audience, bad enough to make you wince when you reach middle age.

 

[Donna K.]

1) As a function of time, it seems that haunted locations (woods, glades, mountains) give way to haunted structures (houses, hotels, hospitals)

Hmmm... I'd like to hear a little more on this... or rather your contextual thinking on this. Very interesting.

 

[Ronin]

Hmmm... I'd like to hear a little more on this... or rather your contextual thinking on this. Very interesting.

I don't draw a conclusion from the observation because I don't yet have data on it. It could be as simple as a trend toward being indoors more, and people are simply reporting from their location. It could be that since many things seem to be parasitic re: our energy, they could be following us indoors. My initial thought is to lean toward the latter, for one basic reason.

Confirmation bias.

Those of us here are, by definition, more apt to see and believe in paranormal phenomena. Yet, we have to appreciate that while the majority of people actually do believe in the paranormal to some degree (despite what the media would have you believe), paranormal events strong enough to be categorized as such without reservation by the witness(es) are actually fairly rare. They have to be, or we wouldn't have a scientific predisposition to disbelieve due to a lack of concrete evidence. That's even more so the case in the current age of near-ubiquitous recording.

Concurrent with the rise of recording is a fairly static amount of reporting. It's anecdotal, but the rate of stories I see (or rather hear) coming from the horror narrators has been fairly static for the past several years. If anything, reporting is down, not up, in an age where everyone has a public platform at their literal fingertips. You don't need to take my word for it: look at Debi's recent commentary on finding new reports to relay.

The confirmation bias is in the reporting. If our reports have followed us indoors, but haven't increased at the same rate as the population growth and ease of reporting would suggest, then - to me - it's a matter of the entities have followed where we lead because interaction with us seems a requirement for many. But this isn't my only reason for believing so. When you're dealing with haunted locations, the phenomena seem to have a much greater area of effect: a haunted forest or lake, for examples. But when you're dealing with haunted structures or items, the effects are not only localized, but seem bound to the structures rather than roaming.

If you're interested, I wrote an article on this way back when called 'Hypothesis of the Paranormal.' I can PM it to you if you'd like to read it.

Caveat: I could be entirely wrong and it's just not enough people are out there to report on events still happening

 

[Paintman]

HiPara Phil. Welcome aboard. I like the Chicago White Sox and ham. The last several years only ham has been good.
Ronin, just conjecture on my part. But I also believe Paranormal Activity can be located to a big area, but more frequently reported in homes, buildings, ect.. This is just based on my observations.
I really think demons are on the loose in Chicago. The level of violence there is like a low intensity War. It has spread into what are high dollar neighborhoods. Heavily policed areas where you would go buy a $2,000 pair of shoes.
Here are the two kickers. The Chicago Sun-Times newspaper article about the Archbishop of Chicago requesting many many Exorcists. The next day the newspaper issued a small retraction saying it didn't happen. An older guy at my church told me that that retraction was because they don't want to scare the hell out of everybody.
The second Point leads me to believe that this level of violence is limited to strictly the Chicago city limits. Just over the Indiana border,where I live, we have very similar demographics, but the violence stops. Maybe it is out of the Demons jurisdiction?
Just my observations.Dont bet the farm on being actually right.

 

[Ronin]

HiPara Phil. Welcome aboard. I like the Chicago White Sox and ham. The last several years only ham has been good.
Ronin, just conjecture on my part. But I also believe Paranormal Activity can be located to a big area, but more frequently reported in homes, buildings, ect.. This is just based on my observations.
I really think demons are on the loose in Chicago. The level of violence there is like a low intensity War. It has spread into what are high dollar neighborhoods. Heavily policed areas where you would go buy a $2,000 pair of shoes.
Here are the two kickers. The Chicago Sun-Times newspaper article about the Archbishop of Chicago requesting many many Exorcists. The next day the newspaper issued a small retraction saying it didn't happen. An older guy at my church told me that that retraction was because they don't want to scare the hell out of everybody.
The second Point leads me to believe that this level of violence is limited to strictly the Chicago city limits. Just over the Indiana border,where I live, we have very similar demographics, but the violence stops. Maybe it is out of the Demons jurisdiction?
Just my observations.Dont bet the farm on being actually right.

Whatever the truth, there is one thing I believe very firmly: We're not looking at things the right way.

Humans - as a species - are remarkably good at figuring things out. In the face of not figuring things out, we're actually even better in learning how to deal with them appropriately. And, as we're creatures of habit, we'll keep on doing things long after it's forgotten why we started doing them in the first place. We have our weaknesses, too, of course, and one of those is blindly following leaders when they are successful, even when they start doing things outside their strengths. Science is the leader I specifically have in mind here.

The scientific method is extremely powerful and extremely effective. It is rightfully held in reverence and awe by those who wield it. But the method has been conflated with the field itself. 'Science', as a field, is powerful but not so effective. It is, in fact, much like a religion: you either believe it absolutely and unconditionally, or you're a heretic to be shunned. Science all too often hands down proclamations without even using their tools, and their evangelicals gladly call these proclamations from the rooftops, despite any evidence, no matter how overwhelming, to the contrary. And the greatest crime: if we don't see it, it doesn't exist.

These fish went extinct 60 million years ago. Prayer is ineffective. There are no such things as ghosts.

Note the lack of a link on that last one. That is intentional, because no evidence has been presented that can efficiently refute the statement*. Yet I still believe (as do most of you). But why is that? What makes me so sure that unseen forces that can effect our world in an intelligent way exist? I certainly can't rely on my childhood story. That can easily be explained as a false memory, dream, hallucination, or all 3. I can't use my Ouija story; that could be kids playing a prank, hallucinations, or hysteria. I can't use the humorous story about ignoring a spirit for similar reasons. No, for me to believe, I have to have concrete evidence. Something that absolutely no other scenario can explain without a greater leap of absurdity than calling it a 'ghost'. But I have exactly that concrete experience. In fact, I have more than one. I am hardly unique in that.

So really, the question is then *why*. Why don't we have any proof. It's because the only subset of people that anyone trusts to do the looking either a) aren't looking, b) refuse to look, or c) looked, found, and are scared to say anything against the dogma of their church (Science). I'd say all of us old enough have encountered all three. But even the few who do look can't bring to bear sufficient evidence to prompt others to take a chance to do likewise. And that's where I come full circle in this wall of text. I believe we are all looking at these things the wrong way. It's why I so frequently use the term perspective. I think we fundamentally lack the proper one to tell what we're seeing, and I think there are many reasons that combine to make that the case. I won't go into them here because the post is too long as it is. Heck, I cut out my stories on why I believe and it's still too big. Sorry for the length. I tend to wax lyrical when I get into a subject.

*Specifically I meant evidence strong enough to refute it at a societal level

 

[Lynne]

Whatever the truth, there is one thing I believe very firmly: We're not looking at things the right way.

Humans - as a species - are remarkably good at figuring things out. In the face of not figuring things out, we're actually even better in learning how to deal with them appropriately. And, as we're creatures of habit, we'll keep on doing things long after it's forgotten why we started doing them in the first place. We have our weaknesses, too, of course, and one of those is blindly following leaders when they are successful, even when they start doing things outside their strengths. Science is the leader I specifically have in mind here.

The scientific method is extremely powerful and extremely effective. It is rightfully held in reverence and awe by those who wield it. But the method has been conflated with the field itself. 'Science', as a field, is powerful but not so effective. It is, in fact, much like a religion: you either believe it absolutely and unconditionally, or you're a heretic to be shunned. Science all too often hands down proclamations without even using their tools, and their evangelicals gladly call these proclamations from the rooftops, despite any evidence, no matter how overwhelming, to the contrary. And the greatest crime: if we don't see it, it doesn't exist.

These fish went extinct 60 million years ago. Prayer is ineffective. There are no such things as ghosts.

Note the lack of a link on that last one. That is intentional, because no evidence has been presented that can efficiently refute the statement*. Yet I still believe (as do most of you). But why is that? What makes me so sure that unseen forces that can effect our world in an intelligent way exist? I certainly can't rely on my childhood story. That can easily be explained as a false memory, dream, hallucination, or all 3. I can't use my Ouija story; that could be kids playing a prank, hallucinations, or hysteria. I can't use the humorous story about ignoring a spirit for similar reasons. No, for me to believe, I have to have concrete evidence. Something that absolutely no other scenario can explain without a greater leap of absurdity than calling it a 'ghost'. But I have exactly that concrete experience. In fact, I have more than one. I am hardly unique in that.

So really, the question is then *why*. Why don't we have any proof. It's because the only subset of people that anyone trusts to do the looking either a) aren't looking, b) refuse to look, or c) looked, found, and are scared to say anything against the dogma of their church (Science). I'd say all of us old enough have encountered all three. But even the few who do look can't bring to bear sufficient evidence to prompt others to take a chance to do likewise. And that's where I come full circle in this wall of text. I believe we are all looking at these things the wrong way. It's why I so frequently use the term perspective. I think we fundamentally lack the proper one to tell what we're seeing, and I think there are many reasons that combine to make that the case. I won't go into them here because the post is too long as it is. Heck, I cut out my stories on why I believe and it's still too big. Sorry for the length. I tend to wax lyrical when I get into a subject.

*Specifically I meant evidence strong enough to refute it at a societal level

This is a great discussion but those coming to this thread are expecting a welcome and a bit about ourselves. Perhaps this might be moved to a diff location?

 

[Ronin]

This is a great discussion but those coming to this thread are expecting a welcome and a bit about ourselves. Perhaps this might be moved to a diff location?

Paintman started it!

 

[Debi]

And I shall be moving you both shortly....as soon as I set you guys up a nice little home for this....