7 - (The Most Common Cause Of Paranormal Events) Pareidolia Explained!

In the half century I have been investigating claims related to paranormal events ranging from UFOs and aliens to Ghosts and Haunts to Cryptids and Bigfoot some conclusions can be made. Most claims can be dismissed as natural explanations being misidentified. But how does this happen? What leads people to believe they are paranormal in nature? These misconceptions are not limited to any single type of case; they cover all areas where evidence is examined. This report will look at the most common explanation given when any visual or auditory form of evidence is analyzed. The word "Pareidolia" is the most common explanation offered. But what exactly is it and why has it become associated with paranormal cases? It is the purpose of this discussion to dig into this common conclusion and address this question.

Pareidolia - What Is It?

The first thing we need to do if we are going to claim "pareidolia" is to look at what it is. We all experience it; it is a part of human nature. A common example of pareidolia is the Rorschach Inkblot Test. In this test how one interprets a random blotch on a paper can be used by a doctor to gain insight into the thought processes of the subject. The reason this works is because the individual's mind causes the blotch to be interpreted by the mind in a manner based on his own input. This is also evident in how pareidolia affects our own research into the paranormal as we will see shortly.

Pareidolia: The tendency to perceive a specific, often meaningful image in a random or ambiguous visual pattern (Merriam-Webster)

Apophenia: The tendency to perceive a connection or meaningful pattern between unrelated or random things (such as objects or ideas) (Merriam-Webster)

Matrixing: Another word for your brain telling your eyes what to see. In other words, matrixing occurs when you find a face in the shapes and shadows of a collection of objects, reflections or patterned surfaces.

The three terms above get tossed about by paranormal investigators when examining evidence. These are very similar in that each describes the misidentification of something and how it is perceived. I personally don't like the term Matrixing because it also applies to a condition related to CCD imagers in digital cameras that has nothing to do with what one sees with their eyes. So to prevent confusion I don't use that term in relation to the paranormal. Pareidolia seems to apply more to a visual situation, however it is often used interchangeably for both visual and audio situations. Apophenia is a more generic term and can apply to either audible or visual phenomena. But it might also extend to patterns in numeric sequences or those found in tea leaves and scrying. I use the terms pareidolia and apophenia as needed since there is no hard rule that puts one over the other. Now that definitions are out of the way we can proceed to the topic at hand.

Why is Pareidolia so common in paranormal investigations? For that we can use the Rorschach test as an example. The Inkblot test is really a simple pattern. In reality it is mostly random. But the human mind does not do well with random. It wants identity given to what it deals with. This is thought to be based on our ancestor's need for safety. It was essential in survival to identify threats and avoid them or friends we could trust to help us. Any unknown had to be quickly placed in one category or the other. Our minds became trained to sort things out even before we could identify them. Thus pareidolia has become the tendency to place random patterns into something we could rationalize. We assign identifiable names to such unidentified patterns.

The Inkblot Test is an example of how this happens. Since we all have different personalities we all interpret things differently. One may look at a particular inkblot pattern and see a butterfly, another looks at the same pattern and sees a horse, or another a bird. Since it is the same pattern in each case, clearly it is only the interpretation that differs. Doctors can use this to gain insight into our personalities. This difference is a key factor in how evidence is interpreted with regards to a paranormal investigation as well.

Examples of the Cards from the Rorschach Inkblot Test

Let's take a look at why we all see things differently. All of us grew up with different influences throughout our lives. We experience different things, are taught different values, deal with different people, and have different interests. All of this leads to something called conditioning. Conditioning is a noun defined as : A simple form of learning involving the formation, strengthening, or weakening of an association between a stimulus and a response (Merriam-Webster). In other words, anything we encountered prior to the event in question has in some way influenced how we respond to the current event. Like the inkblot test (stimulus), it will influence what we see in the random pattern (response). Since we are drawing on a lifetime of learning we often use the term "Pre-conditioning" when referring to an investigation. This is because the stimulus may take place years before the event in question, or it may be just a matter of hours. The term pre-conditioning includes both early and more recent learning periods.

A few examples of early conditioning may be something as vague as Marvin the Martian influencing our thoughts about UFOs. Or Casper the Friendly Ghost in a haunted house from a comic strip. Or maybe an early viewing of a black and white "B" Horror Movie on late night TV has influenced your thoughts about ghosts. The point is everything you expect about anything paranormal has influenced your thoughts and expectations about these things. All who make claims of anything paranormal bring these issues to the table, it's just human nature. This illustrates one important thing that any serious investigator must consider when he does an analysis of any evidence. What degree might his own conditioning influence his evaluation? If you think that doesn't apply to you consider, how many of you turn out all the lights and "Go Dark" at night to do your investigations? Why do you do that? You've been conditioned to equate ghosts with the dark. The fact is that when I evaluate nearly 1,000 cases of all types regarding when events take place I find no time of day or night to have a pre-disposition as to when they happen. The only exceptions to that are "Light In The Sky" UFO reports which for obvious reasons are more easily seen in a dark sky.

Want more proof of how we are being conditioned to facial recognition? Go back to when many of you were only 2 or 3 years old. Remember exposing these to you or your kids?

Conditioning has played a large role in the pareidolia response. That holds true regardless of whether it is visual or audible. To a lesser degree it may even account for some of our other fears such as heights or dark caves. It is essentially an ingrained fear of the unknown. We'll dig a little deeper into conditioning next.

I Keep An Open Mind. How Can I Be Conditioned?

Consider conditioning and how it influences one's outlook. Preconditioning occurs when one expects a certain response based on something that they experienced years ago or set themselves up for a certain outcome. That affects all of us on an investigation; we are there expecting something unusual or paranormal. Our state of mind has already come into play before we even begin the investigation. It often applies before we leave home to meet up for the investigation. We are asking ourselves, "What will happen tonight?" Are we being conditioned? Consider the cars seen in the picture below.

Pick the Happy Car. Then choose the Angry one. Designers spent a lot of time making their product fit the image they want to portray. Is it a vehicle that becomes part of the family or one to display power and dominance? The "face" you remember from your childhood stays with you and allows you to be conditioned to impart emotion on a non-living object, like a car which obviously is an inanimate object without feelings.

Our little experiment here has demonstrated just how this works. First I conditioned you to apply a personality to a vehicle by sparking a childhood memory. Once you had those memories triggered you were primed to put a personality to the cars in the second panel of images. You were likely being conditioned without even being aware of it.

Psychic Mediums, Conditioning, and Pareidolia

I am placing this in its own section because I have noticed a high percentage of evidence submitted from those who claim some sort of ability that turns out to be pareidolia. This raises the question, Why is this true?

While certain to generate an argument from those who claim such abilities, we must consider what all these factors have in common. If you grew up in a home where a parent, or maybe Aunt Sally or Uncle John were known to have such abilities likely you were exposed to either stories of their ability or even directly exposed to them first hand. Your pre-conditioning started at a young age. You claim maybe your ability was simply passed on to you. But the facts based on studies dispute that claim. While several studies have been made along these lines, there has been no conclusive proof these abilities are genetic in nature. There is however no way to discount the conditioning effect you encountered growing up in this environment.

The only way to prove your ability is to submit your alleged ability to the test. That would be using scientific methods to prove you have an ability to relate something beyond the realm of what you might otherwise be capable of doing. I should add here that some people seem quite able to do this. But does that indicate any paranormal ability or is it simply some of us are better able to sense another's emotions or actions? Clearly some people have this ability, but it is more learned than any special power they have. I would contend that with careful observation and training any of us could accomplish the same thing.

So what does this have to do with pareidolia? Many photos submitted are in fact pareidolia, and those who submit them claim ability to sense they are paranormal in nature. As we have seen conditioning plays a role in how things are interpreted. And it is accepted that by better observing another person some can better "tune in" to that person's emotional state. But the problem with a picture is that a picture is simply a matter of color and shading on a piece of paper. It has no emotional impression to pick up. The only influence a picture can produce is creating pareidolia in the part of the observer. This means that any claim one makes of "Reading a photograph" is based only on pareidolia, not the picture itself. For this reason the practice of submitting a picture and asking, "What do you see?" is invalid. A picture without any supporting evidence is no evidence at all.

Pareidolia And The Paranormal

Above we have seen what pareidolia is and how it may be influenced. Now consider what we expect on an investigation. We enter a location with the expectation to encounter something. Or we hike into the woods searching for Bigfoot. Or maybe search the skies for anything that looks a bit out of the ordinary. Well guess what.... If you have ever done any of these things you have already conditioned yourself for the event. (Haven't we all done some of these things?) It is very likely if any source of pareidolia is created many will be more likely to jump to a paranormal explanation than try to find a natural explanation. After all we are human and we are about to encounter something unknown with a pre-conditioned mind set toward the paranormal.

Of course the paranormal is a fertile breeding ground for pareidolia. By nature the paranormal is an unknown. It could represent a danger so the mind works overtime to bring a rational explanation to what we encounter. Plus, since we are conditioned to expect a level of risk when we tramp around in the dark, the danger is amplified. We are primed for pareidolia before we even start investigating!

Then we enter the place and start the investigation. We use a camera with a limited range flash. This means that large areas of the picture will be under exposed and poorly lit. We have another source of vague, blurred images that seem to be exactly what are often captured. Or in the case of audio, unusual sounds heard in the distance are interspaced with background noise. Often the sound is subtle, buried in the background noise. And pareidolia kicks in and we hear a voice calling out to us. More pareidolia is generated.

It is beyond the scope of this article to go into all the technical reasons why some devices are prone to pareidolia. But we can see from the examples that if we minimize contamination we can reduce the possibility of pareidolia corrupting our evidence. But one important fact regarding pareidolia can be used to minimize its effects.

Pareidolia cannot exist in the absence of a "seed" or source.
It does not exist in total darkness or silence.
Some form of stimulus is required.

That means that without some form of stimulus we cannot experience pareidolia. In essence if a picture is a single solid color or intensity it will not contain a source of pareidolia. The same goes for audio. Pareidolia cannot exist in silence; there must be some form of sound for the mind to create it. (And in case you wonder, those who mention the "Voices in their head" are not experiencing pareidolia; that is an entirely different issue!)

But to dig a bit deeper, consider if you close your eyes in a dark room you can eliminate any visual stimulus. Audio is a bit more difficult though. Experiments have been done where subjects have been placed in sensory deprivation chambers to study how they are affected. Visually all stimulation is removed. However, even in a sound-proof room you cannot remove all auditory stimulation. The ear will still be influenced by sounds you yourself create. Most of us experience a certain level of tinnitus; it's that high pitched whistle in your ears. You probably don't notice but in the absence of any external sound it can become more invasive.

And that is only part of what can be heard in an absolutely quiet environment. Some people will hear a low frequency pulsation and begin to dwell on that. What is it, you ask? It is the sound of the heartbeat carried into your ears. The blood flowing through the arteries can also create sound. And let's also not forget other noises your body can make. When you swallow you can hear sounds it makes. And of course the gut itself may generate sounds at times!

The point here is to be aware that sounds can be created even in a perfectly quiet environment. And while you set in a dark room with heightened awareness to anything out of the ordinary, you are primed to pick up on any of these. And the "seed" for pareidolia is sown. Some of this may lead to pareidolia, some may simply contaminate your recordings. We need to do all we can to minimize this problem. It is why most EVP recording is done using remote recorders rather than one being carried by the investigator.

We can conclude that audio recording should be limited to the quietest condition possible with no external interference to the intended audio track. And pictures should be well lit with minimal dark areas or out of focus objects in the frame. Any evidence not meeting these criteria should be rejected as evidence since it cannot be depended on to provide valid proof of anything.

This means that for those taking pictures or video we discount those shadows in distant trees, dark areas behind objects, and those objects too far away to actually see clearly. And for audio we throw out anything where the voice is not clearly heard or audio which fails to pass the Rule Of Three evaluation

The Rule Of Three

To Use the Rule Of Three have three individuals listen to the audio two times independently of each other and write down what they hear, if anything.

Next compare their interpretations. If all agree there is a good possibility you have an actual, valid example of speech.

If two agree and the third is substantially in agreement, you have a 50 - 50 chance it is valid. (An example of substantially agree would be if two heard the word "Fog" and the third heard "Hog")

But if the third heard nothing or heard something totally different, you have an example of pareidolia. Throw the evidence out.

And of course if all three disagree or hear nothing, it is pareidolia. Toss it out!

The Pareidolia Box

No discussion on Pareidolia would be complete without mention of what I call Pareidolia Boxes. Some refer to them as Ghost Boxes, Spirit Boxes, or the various apps that rely on this method to "communicate" with spirits. Besides the issue of exactly how a spirit can interface with them (That's worth its own discussion and is covered in other topics), we have the principal of how these things use pareidolia to accomplish their purpose.

But it gets even worse. These devices started adding white noise (or pink noise, or some other noise) to the chaos. As if all the interference already present wasn't bad enough. But they were not done yet. Lately some have started adding echo or reverb to the audio track these boxes generate. This only serves to add still more randomness to the audio pattern. One has to wonder, if a spirit did try to communicate, how would it be heard over all the noise! But as long as there are people willing to shell out their hard earned money on this junk, others will be more than willing to take it. And new devices will be created to make them update to the latest fad.

Sorting Out The Pareidolia

We have seen pareidolia is undesirable because it serves to fool us into observing something not really there. As investigators we strive to minimize its effects even if it means we must throw out evidence that is not reliable. But there are ways to filter it out and make our evidence more trustworthy. The first method was mentioned above, the Rule Of Three. That is something any of us can do that is the first step in the process. While primarily intended for audio evidence, a similar method might be adapted to pictures or video. But is there a better way to sort out our audio evidence? Below is a brief outline of how I conduct such analysis. The method is somewhat generic; adaptations are made based on how a particular sample progresses through the process.

First of course is the Rule Of Three. Any audio must pass this or it is discarded. No sense wasting time on obvious pareidolia. But next the real analysis begins. The audio is run through an Audio Frequency Spectrum Analyzer. This allows us to determine what frequencies are actually present in the sample. Those frequencies not a part of the speech pattern can be identified and those that are within the range of speech, and any of its harmonics, can be sorted out. The next step is to run the sample through a band pass filter where desired and undesired frequencies can be either emphasized or filtered out. Note this may require several steps based on the end results of the process. I use a 31 band graphic equalizer to accomplish this step which allows fine tuning any frequency based on what is required.

The output from the equalizer is displayed on a dual trace oscilloscope which allows me to display individual phonemes making up the speech sample. When you simply listen to a particular audio sample the brain has a tendency to "fill in" missing sounds. That's how pareidolia works! But oscilloscopes do not suffer from pareidolia, they simply display what is present. Visually it becomes possible to identify any phonemes or sounds missing or being overlooked simply listening to the audio. This can help in actually determining what, if anything, was actually captured. And if I determine I may be missing something, the process may be repeated using a slightly different setting of the band pass filter. Several passes are often required to obtain the optimum results. In the end, if I find I have a valid audio sample I save both the original and the modified version for future reference. Pareidolia is minimized by doing the visual rather than audio comparison.

I should emphasize here that No Software Processing is done Any software will digitize the sample which can create artifacts that may alter the content of the audio. This is why I do not condone the use of any software or computer programs some use to "Clean up" the audio sample. In fact, I do not work with such altered samples unless the original is available. This also includes digital audio recordings unless they were made on recorders that meet minimum standards for sample rates, A to D conversion protocols, and file format. ( I cover these requirements in another article elsewhere so they are not repeated here.) For my own investigations where EVP / AVP is being done, I use a 4 Channel analog mixer/ recorder. No Voice recorders for EVP work as they lack basic requirements.

Pictures are also prone to pareidolia. In the case of pictures or video I require the original digital file as it comes from the camera. Copies posted online are often compressed and EXIF Data is missing. This data is essential to eliminate pareidolia since it provides the settings the camera used to make the picture, even if it was set on Automatic. I do not work any altered, cropped, or other modified images since such modifications can create situations that lead to pareidolia. However once I get the picture I may make my own modifications using various software programs in an attempt to bring out detail in the image. Often when altered this process will define the image to eliminate the pareidolia explanation. But the important point here is that I need the original to work with. Lacking that, any modifications done previously cannot be undone. It should be noted that alterations may help eliminate pareidolia but they can also create it. Thus the reason the original image is required. I have the original to revert to when something doesn't go right.

Examples of Pareidolia

We have seen the effects of pareidolia. But are there steps to take to minimize it? The truth is we can do something about it by using care in our methods. One place is your camera. The trend toward using phones and cheap digital cameras is first on the list. Here we have an example comparing picture quality. The loss of individual pixel data results in loss of detail in the image. Bigfoot was seen crossing a log into the woods and captured by the camera. The resolution is about what one would expect from a typical phone camera.

And for those of you who see faces in orbs, How many can you find in this image?

After you find them, keep in mind these orbs are really dust. I swept up the cloud myself and took the picture through the resulting dust cloud. Plenty of chromatic aberrations but no spirits here. But pareidolia will help you find the faces if you look and use your imagination!

Finally, it seems a lot of ghosts are seen in windows. Here are two of them, both examples of pareidolia. These were found on the internet and claimed to be proof of the paranormal.

Let's take a closer look at each. Window Ghost 1 was also posted with a back story involving someone who passed. Remember we discussed conditioning above? That was the first clue; the claim was associated with a ghost before any picture was taken. But that's not all. The form in the window pane does sort of resemble the left side of a face. But where is the right side? It does not actually come against the window stile. Why not? If the face was partially obstructed it should be seen next to, not away from the stile. Finally note that there are similar light areas in two other window panes. But these do not bare a resemblance to anything; they are just smudges on the glass. So why would one assume that a spot with the same physical characteristics as the others is not also a smudge? Just because pareidolia allows this one to be interpreted as a face does not make it one.

Now take a look at Window Ghost 2. This one I had to enlarge to make it better to see details. With some imagination one might see a face here. But look what is lacking. The "eyes" both simply merge into the background, the cheeks are not even seen. And the "forehead" is very low and deformed, out of perspective with the rest of the head. Sort of looks more ape-like than human. The "nose" is entirely too large for the size of a human head. And there is no mouth. Pareidolia is filling in the missing parts to make us see a face when none is there. The blurred focus only adds to the illusion. One more thing we are overlooking is all the stuff seen in the other windows. It looks like there are numerous objects sitting on a table. Why would we not assume the face is simply another object on the table? Clearly there is enough chaos seen to induce pareidolia. And the fact the picture is slightly blurred adds to this by making any good identification of anything difficult. Not only that, but in the course of writing this article I had my own bout of pareidolia with this picture. Anyone else see the larger, much clearer deformed face in the left window pane? Large hooked nose with its left eye visible? Even a mustache under the nose.... The original poster missed that one! Pareidolia at its finest.

We have taken a look at visual and auditory pareidolia above. But any of our senses can be influenced. While not often considered pareidolia, the same conditions may account for those fleeting smells sometimes experienced by those who experience what they claim is paranormal.

The sense of smell changes as you experience a certain background odor. You kind of "get used to it". Now suppose a different air current brings in a new smell. Your point of reference will eventually change and you will become accustomed to the new odor. Next let's assume you encounter the original smell again. But since your point of reference has also changed, the old smell may take on a different characteristic from what you originally encountered. It becomes a new smell that makes identification difficult. All of this simply proves you cannot trust smell as a valid data point when doing an investigation.

It would be different if we had a device of some type that actually could differentiate between subtle changes in odors. Unfortunately such efforts have not been very successful in developing a reliable device of that sort. We're stuck with our noses! Of course there are certain smells strong enough for us to easily detect them. one example of a strong odor is mercaptan, the smell intentionally mixed with natural gas to aid in leak detection. Another is the rotten egg smell of hydrogen sulfide. But many odors are much less noticeable. Those with only slight differences between them are much like the problem with how slight changes in color or sound can induce pareidolia in visual or auditory situations. Or in the case of smells, the way humidity may bring out a subtle hint of cigar smoke sometimes encountered in a location where years of previous exposure has imbedded the smell from a smoker years before. Couple that with the pre-conditioning of knowing the background history and you have a perfect set up for a pareidolia related spirit encounter based on smells.

The point here is that while not generally thought of as pareidolia, the sense of smell can also be affected in much the same way our eyes and ears are open to mis-interpretation. Something akin to pareidolia must be considered in these cases as well. The problem here is that while we can take measures with our equipment as it relates to visual or auditory conditions, smell must usually rely on only our noses. About the only real measure we might use is to have a second investigator confirm the smell we encountered.

Since we are considering our senses as they relate to pareidolia, I would be negligent if we didn't at least mention the last two, taste and feeling. Taste does rely to an extent on smell as well, so if taste is something to be considered the possibility of it being influenced by smell must also be brought into the mix. True, such a situation is unlikely, but still in some rare case it may come into play.

Touch or feeling is less prone to pareidolia. External conditions such as temperature or air currents may cause a response by hair follicles in the skin, but these are generally observable and as such would not be considered pareidolia. State of mind can also elicit responses by the body that go back to any conditioning we may have done before starting the investigation. The solution is that each case must be considered on its own merit and evaluation made should such a situation arise.

Hopefully this article has demonstrated why the use of inferior cameras and techniques provide no evidence of anything. The same applies to the use of cheap voice recorders that introduce electronic noise to the recording. And perhaps the worst is the spirit box that intentionally creates pareidolia to mislead the listener into hearing something in nothing. Posting such things online only adds to the confusion. It serves to encourage others to do the same, and such poor quality proves nothing. We do not need more examples of pareidolia since currently it is responsible for almost 90% of what is claimed to be evidence of the paranormal. This is also why I do not waste my time trying to analyze pictures that were made using phones and other low quality sources. If one intends to investigate claims of paranormal activity, they should understand the methods cameras and other devices use before going out into the field. And in the case of smells, be more critical of your own claims, knowing that only proof you have is your own testimony. Using what has been outlined here will improve the quality of any evidence we encounter. It will help support what is claimed.

8 - What Are Spirits And Ghosts?
(Do They Have Anything To Do With The Dead Or Are They Something Else?

This question breaks from my usual format in that it is based partially on faith and belief rather than strict scientific evidence. The reason is clear; There is no current concrete evidence that explains it completely. It is actually quite complex in its scope. For that reason I have broken it down into two parts. The first attacks the Traditional Ghost theory by demonstrating fallacies in its approach. The second will provide alternative thoughts which could account for much of what we encounter in the paranormal field. So read on to find out what accounts for Spirits,

This is a complex issue and one which reaches outside the scientific areas I generally discuss. But since it is key to what many consider the paranormal I have decided to address it here. I generally apply scientific methods to the topics I address. But this one forces me to also go with a level of faith. It will also delve into an area I usually try to avoid on these pages; That being religious beliefs. The reason for avoidance is not because of any agnosticism on my part. Rather it is because there are many different belief systems and in many cases they run counter to each other. It is also because most religions by their nature are unable to be validated by any hard, concrete evidence, rather they require Faith on the part of the believer. And faith is an abstract concept which by nature is not something one can prove by science. I am Christian in my belief, and as a result my response to this question will be based on my belief structure and scriptures. In this essay I will attempt to merge faith with a bit of logic to address the topic.

As to why religion has to enter into this discussion, the reason will become apparent as we go on. But this connection may also not be as firm as one may first suppose. The common point though between religion and what many consider a ghost is that most religions deal with an afterlife of some kind. Likewise most people make the assumption that a ghost or spirit is what remains of one who has died and passed over, in other words, the Traditional Ghost Theory. So clearly any understanding of a spirit must also deal with religion since both seem tied to the afterlife.

The Traditional Ghost Theory is the one most commonly held among people in general. The assumption is made that Ghosts or Spirits are the life force of one who has passed which is either left behind or returned to complete some task left unfinished before their demise. Many investigators and people in general approach the paranormal as though this is a proven fact. But how does this fit with Christian teachings? Based on what is taught in the Bible it does not.

Let's first look at the scene of Christ's crucifixion. The dialog as recorded in scripture between the three on their respective crosses went as follows:

Luke 23; 39-43 (NIV)

39 One of the criminals who hung there hurled insults at him: Aren't you the Messiah? Save yourself and us!

40 But the other criminal rebuked him. Don't you fear God, he said, since you are under the same sentence? 41 We are punished justly, for we are getting what our deeds deserve. But this man has done nothing wrong.

42 Then he said, Jesus, remember me when you come into your kingdom.

43 Jesus answered him, Truly I tell you, today you will be with me in paradise.

Note in particular what Christ says to the thief, "Today you will be with me in paradise". Emphasis here is on the word "Today". Crucifixion was a common means of execution in those days. People were well aware of how long it took for one to die on a cross. At the time Christ spoke those words He knew His time was measured in hours, not days or months. He knew the same was true for the thief. Hence the word "Today".

Note also the use of the word "will". Not "you might" or "if you want to". It was a definitive "will". By recognizing and accepting Christ, The thief had done what was required so his reward was assured. He wasn't given the option to delay or complete any unfinished business. His soul could not linger till later, he could not "haunt" anyone or visit his loved ones after death. Upon his death he was separated from this life, totally and completely.

But what about the spirit of one who passed being able to return to bring a message or finish a task? Jesus Himself made that clear:

Luke 16; 19-39 (NIV)

19 There was a rich man who was dressed in purple and fine linen and lived in luxury every day. 20 At his gate was laid a beggar named Lazarus, covered with sores 21 and longing to eat what fell from the rich man s table. Even the dogs came and licked his sores.

22 The time came when the beggar died and the angels carried him to Abraham s side. The rich man also died and was buried.

23 In Hades, where he was in torment, he looked up and saw Abraham far away, with Lazarus by his side. 24 So he called to him, Father Abraham, have pity on me and send Lazarus to dip the tip of his finger in water and cool my tongue, because I am in agony in this fire.

25 But Abraham replied, Son, remember that in your lifetime you received your good things, while Lazarus received bad things, but now he is comforted here and you are in agony. 26 And besides all this, between us and you a great chasm has been set in place, so that those who want to go from here to you cannot, nor can anyone cross over from there to us.

27 He answered, Then I beg you, father, send Lazarus to my family, 28 for I have five brothers. Let him warn them, so that they will not also come to this place of torment.

29 Abraham replied, They have Moses and the Prophets; let them listen to them.

30 No, father Abraham, he said, but if someone from the dead goes to them, they will repent.

31 He said to him, If they do not listen to Moses and the Prophets, they will not be convinced even if someone rises from the dead.

Now it would seem that this would be a noble task, Lazarus returning from hell to bring the proof needed to save his family from the wages of sin. But even this was denied him. God would not allow even something seemingly that important. His soul remained in hell, and his family still living would have to find the means of salvation through their own efforts. But there was a time when the spirits of ones who passed did come back, and they were clearly recognized by all present.

Mathew 17; 1-8 (NIV)

17 After six days Jesus took with him Peter, James and John the brother of James, and led them up a high mountain by themselves. 2 There he was transfigured before them. His face shone like the sun, and his clothes became as white as the light. 3 Just then there appeared before them Moses and Elijah, talking with Jesus.

4 Peter said to Jesus, Lord, it is good for us to be here. If you wish, I will put up three shelters one for you, one for Moses and one for Elijah.

5 While he was still speaking, a bright cloud covered them, and a voice from the cloud said, This is my Son, whom I love; with him I am well pleased. Listen to him!

6 When the disciples heard this, they fell facedown to the ground, terrified. 7 But Jesus came and touched them. Get up, he said. Don t be afraid. 8 When they looked up, they saw no one except Jesus.

Clearly this represents a "full bodied apparition" in its purest form! Moses and Elijah were not seen as mists or ghosts but were clearly recognized for who they were to the extent that the disciples even asked about caring for them. It also must be noted that this was a very special occurrence. This was the point where Old Testament prophesies and New Testament fulfillment comes together. It was a key point in Christ's earthly life.

Note at first glance there seems to be a paradox here. Back in Luke 25 we read of "a great chasm" set in place and none can pass between. But keep in mind that was a conversation between Abraham in Heaven and Lazarus in hell. It states none could pass between heaven and hell; it does not put such limitations between heaven and earth, or for that matter hell and earth. So when Moses and Elijah were seen with Jesus it was evidence of a heaven to earth connection. This same possibility may account for demons which from time to time have been found on earth and possessing humans. (Speculation on my part there.)

So where does that leave the Traditional Ghost theory? Clearly God does have the power to allow a visit by those departed but obviously providing proof of heaven and hell to those living did not rise to a level where contact was allowed. Finishing up earthly business was not enough to delay departure. From these examples we can see that upon death, the soul departed immediately. In light of this why would a paranormal investigator today assume that a spirit can hang around to answer a bunch of questions put to it at 2 AM by some paranormal investigator with a recorder? I would contend that it cannot. Therefore we need another explanation aside from the Traditional Ghost Theory so prevalent these days. Fortunately for the paranormal field there are a few circumstances that do not require death to be involved. We will explore them in Part 2.

So far we have dealt with the contradictions between the Traditional Ghost Theory and Christian beliefs. But certainly that does not preclude that paranormal events happen. Rather it simply means that some other explanation be proposed to account for those events. Part 2 will put forth some possibilities. Certainly they are not all inclusive, and in fact none may be correct. But each could explain what we investigate and none will run counter to direct scriptural teachings. In compliance to Christian teachings, each assumes the soul of the departed moves on at death.

Residual Energy

One alternative thought is the residual haunt theory. This involves energy left behind from the living. Assuming this to be the case whether the person leaving the energy is living or dead becomes irrelevant. Consider a scenario many of us have encountered.

Have you ever been preoccupied doing something, fully engrossed in the project? Maybe reading a good book or caught up in the story line of a movie. Suddenly you become aware that a family member has walked up behind you or entered the room. You look up only to realize they aren't there; They are still in the other room doing something else. So you go back to your project. You just write it off as an over active imagination, and that is as far as it goes.

But is that really what happened? Might it be possible you actually picked up on an energy field your family member left behind earlier in the day? Or maybe from when they walked in last week, or last year? This could explain your impressions if such a force existed. Now let's suppose the energy was left behind by a recently departed family member. You are already conditioned to "expect" this based on society and what many who accept the traditional ghost theory believe. Suddenly it goes from just an odd occurrence to a haunting; You have felt the presence of the ghost of your relative. It has just become a haunting.

Claims of residual energy are not uncommon but do exhibit certain characteristics. First they are not interactive, that is they run through a sequence of events and do not seem influenced by anything happening around them. Those who make these claims do not actually communicate; They simply observe the effects of what their senses are telling them.

This type of haunt is actually reported frequently and is often connected with some traumatic event. One possible explanation might be the strong emotional factors that took place. For instance, a battlefield is thought to be a good location for residual activity. This could in fact be true since the strong emotional responses may come from both the living and those wounded or dying at the time the energy was imparted .

Of course this is simply a theory that might explain some of these claims. There is no solid evidence such an energy field exists. It has not been detected with any of our measurement devices. But I should point out that since death or the spirit of a departed person need not be present the possibility does not go against any Christian principle regarding soul not passing on immediately upon death.

Interdimensional Visitor

Another possibility brings in the UFO / Alien angle. Consider the possibility that ghosts are actually observers watching or studying us. One method might be to observe from an alternate dimension. We are currently speculating on the possible existence of these dimensions; why could they not be inhabited by beings who are interested in us?

To expand a bit on this consider, Might these visitors interact with us at times? Maybe they are the ghosts, studying our reaction when they respond as a spirit. They may even impart certain things to us to manipulate our life paths for good or evil. Of course there is no real proof of any of this either, we can't cast them as our benefactors or those bent on our destruction. But for sake of discussion it should be pointed out that we do the same thing as we study animals here in our world. We manipulate them; they are lower forms of life and we are above them. But what if we are only animals being observed by a still higher life form?

Or better still, what if we are only the ants in some cosmic ant farm. The aliens are amused by our preoccupation with ghosts and haunting. When one alien looks to the other and says, "Let's poke 'em with a stick, make 'em think they see a ghost, and watch what happens..."

Demonic / Angelic visits

Demons and angels again raise the religious connection. There are many references in scripture regarding angelic visits and demonic possession. I include both together here because scripture points out that both demons and angels share the same roots.

Revelation 12:7-9 (NIV)

7 Then war broke out in heaven. Michael and his angels fought against the dragon, and the dragon and his angels fought back. 8 But he was not strong enough, and they lost their place in heaven. 9 The great dragon was hurled down that ancient serpent called the devil, or Satan, who leads the whole world astray. He was hurled to the earth, and his angels with him.

This passage illustrates that demons are angels which rebelled against God and were cast out from heaven along with Satan. Thus in that regard their powers are similar; it is simply a matter of allegiance as to which we are dealing with. It is beyond the scope of this article to deal with how to respond to demonic cases. But based on scripture demons are not as common as some would have us believe. In fact, in the course of my investigations over nearly 50 years I have encountered only two cases that possibly could involve some form of possession. And even those are not certain. So suffice it to say the demonic influence is overblown in this field.

As an aside here, it is sometimes considered to be sacrilegious for a Christian to have anything to do with study of the paranormal because of the demonic influence. But I would ask those who believe this if it is wrong to study your enemy? Scripture teaches that we are in a war with evil and are trying to promote God's will. But as soldiers in that battle where is it wrong to understand your enemy's battle plan? How else will you recognize something evil when it manifests itself? Rather than condemn this field they should embrace it if for no other reason to recognize the methods of the demons they claim are behind it all.

What about angels? To that we can also refer to scripture.

Genesis 19:15 With the coming of dawn, the angels urged Lot, saying, Hurry! Take your wife and your two daughters who are here, or you will be swept away when the city is punished.

Matthew 13:41 The Son of Man will send out his angels, and they will weed out of his kingdom everything that causes sin and all who do evil.

Matthew 24:31 And he will send his angels with a loud trumpet call, and they will gather his elect from the four winds, from one end of the heavens to the other.

Hebrews 1:14 Are not all angels ministering spirits sent to serve those who will inherit salvation?

These four passages (I actually did a search and found 96 references to angels) demonstrate some of what an angel's purpose is. They are servants of God as well as messengers. The first passage relates that an angel came to Lot in the Old Testament warning him to leave the city before it was destroyed. Here the angel served as messenger.

The second illustrates that angels act as judges; they are doing the bidding of God eliminating that which is evil.

In the third case they are gathering the believers together. Again it is a judgmental task, but where the first instance was bent on destruction of evildoers here they are working for the benefit of the believers.

And in the final example they are seen as comforters of the believers. It can be seen then that angels serve many functions. As to whether or not they can account for some of what we are investigating is difficult to determine. But what is shown is the motive for what they do. So we have to ask ourselves, Does the situation we are investigating fall within one of the general purpose of an angel's duty, and is it significant enough to warrant the angel's time and involvement? If the answer is no then chances are we are not looking at angelic activity. And even if it does there still remains the question of Is it really an angel or is it something else?

Demonic Possession

I am not a strong believer in this aspect. However in fairness it is a belief of some fundamentalist Christians so I will include it here. It is usually identified as some violent, negative reaction on the part of its victim. But I will raise another point, even if it is responsible the green vomit and spinning heads of Hollywood are not likely signs.

Consider the Bible describes Satan and his follows as deceivers. Their intent is to drive a wedge between man and God. If that is true then how many people would be deceived by such negative outward signs? Rather I contend that deception would be much more effective by taking a more passive role. Raise doubt, make one question their faith. Either would be more effective as a tool for deception. The fundamentalist takes this approach; according to them, all paranormal events are demonic in nature in that they raise these doubts regarding the afterlife. That seems to parallel the Traditional Ghost Theory in a way. Thus the means by which they associate the traditional ghost with demons. Who can say, but it is a theory.

Hallucinations / Energy Manipulations

And now we arrive at what I believe is in fact the most common explanation for most alleged haunting / spirit activity. It is all in your mind. Now before anyone takes offense at that comment consider I am not saying you just made it up. Consider that hallucinations can be the result of some very real influences. Considering how prevalent the Traditional Ghost Theory has become over the years people have been conditioned to "know" what represents a typical haunting. As an example, if you see an abandoned house on a hill, lit by a full moon and the skeletal image of a dead tree beside it, you just know it has to be haunted. This is an example of conditioning. But that is not the only way the mind may be involved.

I am going to consider another possibility that could result in hallucinations. They could be the result of external influences. Research has shown that EM Fields can influence one's brain activity, especially if the frequency falls in the range of normal brain activity. Suppose some external field, either natural or manmade happens to be in that range? It can cause apprehension where there is no sound basis for that emotion. It might cause physical problems; headaches for example. It might also compel a victim to respond in ways they normally would not. If an external EM Field can do this might it also cause one to see or experience something which is not really present? People are all different, how one reacts might be entirely different from another. Might this explain why some are sensitive and experience things while others are as sensitive as a rock? It is an area that definitely could use some serious study by qualified medical researchers.

And let's not ignore the possibility that it could be a combination of factors. For example let's go back to the interdimensional visitor we mentioned earlier. Suppose we are the subject of observation. Now let's suppose that one of their experiments involves intentional manipulation of our thought processes using some sort of EM or similar field. Might they not be able to directly influence our reactions based on a field they could control? Remember all our perceptions are based on something obtained by our 5 senses. We hear, see, taste, smell, or feel it physically. It is all a matter of how our mind interprets what the senses detect. And lest anyone think I have overlooked the psychic angle I haven't. It would likely be the sense easiest to be manipulated since it is directly tied into the mind instead of relying on one of the other five.

In summary, we have considered spirits from both scriptural and human sources. You may agree or disagree with some or all of them; that doesn't matter since none of these have to date been proven. But they have opened options that go beyond the Traditional Ghost Theory that seems so prevalent these days. Might this be why research into the paranormal field seems to be going nowhere? We may be so hung up trying to find evidence of the dead when the dead may have nothing to do with ghosts or hauntings. We may simply be asking the wrong questions and expecting certain answers that fall within our failed preconceptions. When they don't come about we continue to spin our wheels rather than considering the problem may be in our failure to consider alternative options.

This area of discussion comes up from time to time. I personally take a more scientific approach and don't consider dreams to have any hidden meaning, although admittedly they may help resolve problems by allowing a fresh perspective on issues you may be encountering. The difficulty is separating the dream from reality. Lucid dreaming and sleep paralysis also play a part. The dream I am about to relate here is a personal example I recently experienced involving both factors.

First a bit of background. What you are going to read is a compilation from keywords and a description of the dream saved on a voice recorder I keep by my bedside. I have kept such a recorder for the purpose of remembering my dreams. The reason is, as I stated above, sometimes a dream can help resolve something by allowing a fresh perspective on a real world problem. The trouble is that one quickly forgets a dream as they wake up. Keeping a recorder close by allows me to save details before that happens. Now on to the dream...

The Dream.

I found myself driving to work through a desert. The road itself was a slight cut about 5 feet below grade. As I approached a gradual turn I came to a foundation of a house built next to the road on the outside edge of the turn . One interesting thing was that there was a house on the foundation, but I never observed any details about it. I just knew it was there. One story, two story, who knows? Some type of aircraft had crashed into the foundation leaving two large gaping holes. Debris was scattered about. Among the debris were two tanks. They were about the size of those used by welders. Both were mottled with orange and white paint streaked by soot and burn marks that likely occurred in the crash. They were dented and somewhat damaged. Some material was burning near the foundation. Instinctively I knew that if the flames reached the tanks there would be a tremendous explosion. And someone in the foundation was calling for help. I ran up and looked into the basement. It was pitch black. An ominous growling sound could be heard.

Suddenly a white mist appeared in front of me. It forcibly blocked my entry into the basement. I repeatedly tried but each time I was driven back. I couldn't see who was there, but it was a male voice calling out to free him After numerous attempts, and seeing the flames were becoming more intense, I decided to go for help. I began to run down the road. But as is often the case with pursuit in dreams, I was going nowhere. I was running in place. Panic was setting in.

At this point I awoke. But did I? I found myself in bed at home. But it wasn't home, it was my room I had 50 years ago as a teenager. I was waking and knew I was late for work. I got up and started to dress. All the while the growl was coming from my closet. I was also somewhat out of breath, still I had to continue or I would be late. Next thing I recall is being in my car going to work. But it wasn't where I worked when the dream was taking place, it was where I worked later in life. Not only that, in real life I have been retired and haven't worked anywhere for 10 years! And to make matters worse, that growling was coming from the back seat as I drove faster and faster to get away. Another pursuit scenario.

I awoke, this time for real and with the presence of mind to hit "Record" and start noting keywords and everything I could recall about what I just experienced. Later I began to put things in context as to the order they happened in the dream and any other details I could recall. What you read above is the result of those notes compiled into the order they occurred. So what is my take on all this?

Evaluation Of The Dream.

As I stated earlier I do not ascribe any real significance to dreams. I do not believe they foretell the future or provide any direct influence on our lives, although certainly those who do might take something like this and direct their own lives accordingly. But I can see where certain real life actions influenced the dream. Take the growl for example. When I awoke I found myself laying in a position where I had been for some time. My breathing was partially obstructed and I was snoring. (Quite loudly according to my wife!) That sound was being heard and coming into the dream as the ominous growl, and the difficulty getting air contributed to the panic I was feeling.

So where did some of the other impressions originate? I began thinking back to what I recently did that might have had some influence. First, the desert. I watched a video where a self driving car was running out of control in a desert earlier that evening. Though I never drove through a desert to get to work, this might have been the trigger for that scene.

The house and foundation I am at a loss for. Since I can't recall the house itself I can't compare it to anything in real life. The same goes with the foundation. All I can associate is its ability confine whoever was held inside from me providing any aid. But I have no idea who or what was being held. And the road being down in a slight depression also adds a sense of confinement limiting free access.

The crash I can associate with earlier activity. I had been looking at pictures I took in 2014 of the Antares Rocket explosion in Virginia. I was there when that happened and experienced that event myself. I saw the blast and felt the concussion.

I also viewed a NASA video of the press conference held afterward where emphasis was placed on people who might have found remains of the rocket. The point was that such material could be dangerous and should not be handled. They also pointed out that debris was scattered about and might wash onto beaches nearby. Though I found no debris, I could visualize what it might be. I feel the tanks and other material originated from that scenario.

Finally the running and getting nowhere is a result of sleep paralysis. This is a common occurrence when we sleep. I attribute it to causing me to be unable to turn over or change position while sleeping when I was having difficulty breathing. It is like being trapped and unable to get away. That even carried into the second part of the dream when I was having trouble breathing.

This dream sequence had another factor that is not quite as common. That was the dream within a dream. This is a form of lucid dreaming where one is unable to separate a dream from reality. When I woke up in the first dream and found myself in my former home the impression was I had actually wakened up. If someone would have asked me I would have sworn I was awake when in reality I was still sleeping. This is the same scenario many encounter when they claim they were awake and experienced something paranormal. Had I seen a ghost in that phase I would swear I was awake when I saw it. Situations like this are more common than we think!

Conclusions.

I have posted this as an example of how dreams work by providing an example of one I personally experienced. I don't feel it is unlike many similar situations people encounter and report on regularly. By detailing, as best I can recall, I hope it serves as an example that could be used for reference when a similar dream sequence is reported.

10 - Can You Call Up A Bigfoot? Will It Answer?

First consider there are two ways you may get a response. The first of course is to turn around and find Bigfoot staring back at you. After you pick yourself up off the ground, regain your composure, and find your camera, hopefully you snap a picture. And even better it turns out nice and clear, not the blurred out of focus images we see all the time on the internet. Wishful thinking, I know.

Second and more likely is you get a response off in the distance. You Whoop and a couple seconds later something whoops back. Maybe this happens a couple times. But this cannot rule out a third party nearby just whooping for the fun of it. It would be human nature to do something like that! Another possibility to be aware of is you may trigger a response by an alpha male in a nearby pack of coyotes. After all, sound carries very well at night when everything else is quiet. Your whoop might travel a mile or more and the reply the same distance back. At the speed of sound that's almost 10 seconds for the response to reach you. But there is way to identify such responses if you are with a team in the woods.

Split your investigators up with a few hundred yards between them. If a response comes the results can be heard from several locations. Many TV Bigfoot hunters use this method. They communicate via walkie-talkie so the guy who is going to call the creature can let others know so they are prepared. This is fine, but there is a better way.

The team divides just as before. But more attention is paid to where each team member is with regard to distance from the caller. We'll put Team 'A' 1200 feet east of the caller and Team 'B' 1200 feet south of the caller. Plus, each team has an audio recorder at each location. When all are set up and ready to go, the recorders are started. Next the caller keys his radio to let everyone know when he is going to call. Each team has their radio receiver in a position so the radio can also be recorded when the caller transmits any communication. All radios and recorders run uninterrupted throughout the session.

The caller next whoops his call, and also transmits it to all the teams in real time. Each of their recorders will capture the sound of his whoop as it happens. They will also capture the audible sound of his whoop when it reaches their location. But since the speed of radio waves is the speed of light, and sound travels much slower (about 1125 feet per second) there will be two whoops recorded at Team 'A's and Team 'B's location. The difference between them is based on how far apart the caller and each receiver is located. One second represents a distance between the caller and the receiver is 1125 feet.

Now suppose you get a third whoop. That one is unidentified. But by knowing the timing of it with respect to the first two it will be possible to extrapolate its distance from each of the other recorders. Since you know the speed of sound you can time it with respect to the other two whoops on the recorders. For example, the caller's recorder has both the original call and any response captured. In his case both occur almost at the same time since his whoop originated at that location. Team A (1200 feet away) will have two whoops just a bit over 1 second apart. Team B will have a similar time differential.

Now consider that third whoop. If team A has a three second delay after the second whoop and Team B has a four second delay after its second whoop, we can determine the distance based on the 1125 FPS speed of sound. The third whoop at Team B originated at a point 1100 feet further away from Team A. This is true even if there is a variable delay between the second whoop and the third unknown sound. Of course that alone doesn't determine direction.

Now suppose the caller's recorder also captured the third whoop. It is also delayed 3 seconds. We can now determine the source is the same distance as Team A's position from the caller. If you plot this on a graph you will find only one point where all these distances fit in. That's the point of origin, within a couple hundred feet or so.

But we can do better still since we have the actual recordings to compare. The speed of sound differs slightly based on air density. I used a generic value above. But suppose we actually have the air temperature and humidity figures. The density becomes a known factor and the exact speed of sound can be determined for those conditions. Since have actual recordings we can measure precise times between whoops if we display the actual wave form on a dual trace oscilloscope. The scope will display delays down to milliseconds, better than just estimating them by listening. Using the more accurate data it is possible to calculate the source of the third whoop down to just a few feet, not hundreds of feet.

This method may also be used if one is doing wood knocks. In some respects wood knocks may be easier to time out although the multiple knocks commonly used could create problems keeping them separate when delays are factored in. If you choose to do wood knocks keep this in mind.

All of this is still inconclusive though. What we haven't addressed is the ambience of the area. Some terrain has cliffs or valleys which can create echoes. These will skew any results. But they can also be readily identified by doing repeated sessions. If it is an echo, and all factors remain unchanged, it will repeat each time. If it is Sasquatch, chances are each session will have a different outcome.

Finally a word about equipment. If you use the method outlined above I recommend a stereo recorder and high gain amplifier with voice pass band equalization. Connect one channel of the recorder to the amplifier / microphone to listen for subtle sounds of area. The second channel of the recorder would connect to the radio to record the caller's reference whoops for timing purposes. ( High gain is not needed on this channel.)

11 - I Got The Best Evidence Ever - How Do I Share It?

Pictures or Video ( Click this link for page related to sharing Sound or Audio )

Much otherwise good evidence is lost because of improper handling after the fact. This article will address the proper means of filing and handling your digital images and getting them out where they can be studied or viewed online.

To begin with this essay does not cover the actual making of the image. It is assumed at the outset you have used a good camera and the highest resolution and quality settings on it. We're going to cover what to do with the image after you get it home. Let's assume you captured a fantastic full body apparition setting by the flower pot on your patio. So what do you do?

Right now you have only the original on the flash card in the camera. The first step is to get a backup copy of the picture. If you are one of the few whose high end camera provides the option for the original RAW image file, use that format for backup of the original. But since most of us use cameras which produce JPG images we will use that for our discussion. Determine a destination folder for the picture on your computer. Then, simply transfer the image from the flash card to this folder in the computer. Use the COPY, not the MOVE Option. Sounds simple, but quite a few people have lost images in the transfer operation. By using COPY, if yours fails you still have the original available for a second try. The MOVE Option deletes the original from the flash card.

Once you get the file transferred you can view it on the computer. Take a look to verify it is properly saved. If so, the next step is dealing with its filename. Most cameras use a numeric system based on the number of pictures made. Something like "IMG2376.JPG" This is not very descriptive. better to rename it something more relevant, such as "Flower_Pot_Ghost.JPG". You can call it whatever you want, but two things need mentioned here. First, the extension MUST be the same as the original file. If it is a JPG, the extension must remain JPG. If some other format, the extension must remain the same as it started out. Second, and this is only a suggestion. Some early Operating Systems had problems with blank spaces in filenames. This has largely been corrected, but I still prefer to never leave a blank space between words. Instead of a space I use the underscore to separate them. Of course just as always, the file extension is separated from the name by a period.

Once the file is safely on your computer you can delete it from your flash card or camera. You can also make copies of the computer file as you wish from the renamed computer file to share or for additional backup using the COPY Option.

Sharing the Image for Study

Many want to post their evidence online, either to Facebook or a forum site. This raises a couple issues. The main problem is a result of file size. Take a look at the file list of images or right click on the image and view its properties. Most JPG images from a digital camera are about 2- 4 meg in size. If you have a RAW or high quality image it could be much bigger. In any event a file of this size is usually not well supported by some websites. For example, Facebook compresses ALL images submitted. This renders them useless as evidence. Thus Facebook, until they change their policy, is worthless as a site to evaluate photographic evidence. You need a site which allows the image to be saved in its original format. Three options exist for this.

First, there are photo sharing and hosting sites online that will store your image in its original form. I won't list any here simply because their policies change at times and to list one today might be wrong tomorrow. Instead I will outline a simple test you can do at any such site to determine if they compress files.

Start by choosing a photo hosting site. You will probably have to register and set up an account. Do so. Then, upload a picture for evaluation. It should be a fairly large JPG image, 4 - 5 Meg or greater. Once the picture is uploaded, close, then reopen the page to view it. Right click on the image to open the Options window. Choose "Save target As", or "Save to your computer". Download the picture into a temporary folder. When done, view the filename in the temporary folder. Compare the file size with the original you uploaded. They should be the same, or very close. If the downloaded file is substantially smaller, compression occurred. Find another website to host your pictures!

Another thing to consider, since this is the site anyone who evaluates your image will have to access, make sure the pictures can be easily viewed by all. Those who do photo analysis will not register or jump through a lot of hoops simply for the privilege of viewing your image! Also, some photo sites block the ability to download an image, instead requiring you view it at their website. If this one does, you'll need another host site. Anyone who analyzes images MUST have the ability to download an uncompressed copy of the original if they are to complete their work.

A second, preferred option for those who have a website of their own or their group, is to simply store it as a blind link on that site. To do that just upload it to the website host making note of the entire URL including the filename and any sub folders. Then all they need to do is put a link to the picture in the post. The analyst can go there and pull down a copy for study exactly as you uploaded it.

Photos saved using either of these methods can be studied in depth. There is a third method, but it doesn't permit public sharing. That is to simply e-mail a copy of the image as an attached file to the recipient. Keep in mind though, some free e-mail accounts impose strict limits on attached file sizes, although most serious analysts have long since moved beyond free e-mail and those limitations.

Sharing the Image among Friends.

This is much simpler. For this purpose the image may be altered or compressed. Of course the downside here is that any image so changed cannot be validated or seriously researched. This type of image may also be sent along as a supplement with an original where you wish to point out a particular detail. For this level just use whatever format the host site requires. Even the Facebook Wall Images are suitable here.

You can also change formats and reduce file size when you are only sharing among friends. But when you do this you should also change the filename to reflect the change. For instance, if you are cropping the original image we discussed above you might name it something like "Flower_Pot_Ghost_cropped.JPG" or if the size is reduced "Flower_Pot_Ghost_reduced.JPG". This clearly shows anyone viewing it that the copy is not original and that a better quality copy may be available for study if requested.

What About Enhancing a Picture?

The original must NEVER be altered or enhanced in any way. Otherwise it is unsuitable for study. The EXIF data will be lost and any credibility destroyed. If your image is difficult to see there is a proper way to point it out to the analyst. Provide two copies, the first is original as stated above. The second may be an enhanced version clearly indicated as to what was done to enhance it. For instance you may take a reduced quality copy and circle or otherwise mark it to point out something. Rename it to designate what alteration was done, such as "Flower_Pot_Ghost_marked.JPG". This can be sent to the analyst, along with a copy of the original. The analyst will use the original for study while viewing the marked copy to identify the area in question.

Photo analysis often requires various enhancements to obtain clearer images. But by keeping the original intact the processes to be applied will be determined by whoever is doing the work. This leaves the full set of tools available as he sees fit to use them. If you alter the picture before he gets it he has no way to undo what you did. It becomes a waste of time to try to work with such a picture. Besides, if you are dealing with a serious photo analyst he probably has better tools for that job than you do anyway. why do his work for him?

A Word About EXIF Data.

One of the most important pieces of data with a picture is the camera setting used. In the days of film it was common to record shutter speed, F-Stop settings, ASA rating, flash used, etc. on any picture. Today, digital cameras, even those automated point and shoot cameras are no different. The nice thing is that most digital cameras, even cell phones, record the settings used as a part of every picture. This is done in the Exchangeable Image File (EXIF Data file). Anyone doing photo analysis has a reader which can extract this data file and use the data to help identify certain characteristics in the picture. A picture lacking this data is generally assumed to be altered since this data is destroyed by most enhancing techniques. Most analysts won't waste their time if the EXIF Data is missing or altered. This is another reason the original must be available for study.

If you would like to see what is contained in the EXIF data there are readers you can install on your computer that allow you to view this data.

Keeping the above points when you work with your image files will ensure they are not corrupted by the file handling process. They will be capable of being properly studied under laboratory conditions.

Audio, EVP, AVP Recordings ( Click this link for page related to sharing Pictures and Video )

There is not as much of a problem sharing audio files as with pictures. The main issue with sound recordings is the quality of the original recording. Too many these days are still trying to use cheap voice recorders for EVP work. These files are likely corrupted before they are even submitted. This damage cannot be undone; once quality is lost it cannot be restored.

Most of the same requirements related to picture file also apply to audio files regarding compression. I am assuming you have recorded them using the appropriate recorders and file processing (non-lossy) covered back in Volume 3 so I won't repeat that here. If you have questions, go back and read the section on recorders in Volume 3.

As with pictures, audio should be saved in its original non-lossy format. If you are submitting it for analysis that is the version that will be required by any audio lab analyzing your recording. I recommend you make copies of the original using the "COPY To File" function on your computer. (Do not use the "MOVE" function as you run the risk of losing your original if something goes wrong.)

Posting recordings to social media or similar sites online is not satisfactory in many cases because these sites may compress your uploaded file. This could result in not being able to do any study of the file. Social Media is fine to simply share a copy to friends, but as with pictures or video the original must be available for review if you want any serious analysis made.

Finally, no audio file should be "Cleaned". I will not work with a file so processed because the cleaning process alters the original data stream. I require the original to use as a reference as I process it. Most of us who do such analysis have our own cleaning process that we will apply to the original if we deem it necessary. Otherwise we want the original in its original format.