Scientifical Americans

by Sharon A. Hill

  Respect for the evidence. The application of reason to a body of solid evidence is the best method we have to obtain reliable knowledge.

  Respect for methods, conclusions and the consensus of science. Science is a specific way of obtaining information that is designed to reduce the chances of coming to an incorrect conclusion. Using a scientific process will minimize errors (but not eliminate them entirely). So those following a skeptical approach are often vigorous advocates of science—in medicine, in schools, and for informing policy decisions. Fake, junk, and pseudo-science is called out as a ruse. Logic and math are also components of science that can be valuable in assessing claims.

  Preference for natural, not supernatural, explanations. Material laws based on careful and repeatable observation of the natural world provide rational boundaries to determine explanations. No external agent or manipulator is invoked. A skeptic will seek an explanation that does not call for a supernatural, unproven (and possibly unprovable) entity to be included.

  Promotion of reason and critical thinking. Many skeptics are practiced in identifying mistakes in arguments and reasoning.

  Awareness of how we are fooled. People routinely fool themselves and are fooled by others. All of us can be fooled; there is no shame in admitting that we tend to trust what others tell us. Frequently, we over-rely on our senses and memory to provide facts—for example, “I know what I saw” or “I remember it like it was yesterday.” Skeptics are wary of eyewitness testimony because observation is fallible and memory is malleable. Stories of events, even from trustworthy people, make for poor evidence on their own. Even collectively, anecdotes can’t tell us much about the validity of the claim. Skeptics recognize that people tend to look for, remember, and favor the evidence that supports their preferred conclusion. The human brain is prone to seeking patterns and meaning that may not be genuine. We have a tendency to associate a number of events together in meaning if they occurred associated in time.

  Skepticism, like science, is a collective activity. One person can’t go it alone. To improve critical thinking requires learning, practice, discipline, and seeking other sources for input. It’s work. It’s easy to doubt things just because it feels like you should; proper skepticism involves understanding why one should accept or deny a claim (or to withhold judgment) and to elucidate the reasons for doing so.

  I’ve not had an experience I consider paranormal but exploring the topics has changed me. As hard as it may be for me to accept an eyewitness’ conclusion that they experienced the paranormal, a person’s experience is their own. I will not disparage your experience or try to convince you of my point of view. Psychological research has shown that doing so can create a “backfire effect” that causes people to double-down to defend their own position.1 Therefore, my approach will be to present my view and you can freely decide what to do with it.

  After years of studying the paranormal, including a significant body of academic and skeptical sources as well as primary accounts, I have discovered that the array of explanations for any paranormal experience is possibly limitless. We can’t ever exhaust all the options and we may not be able to obtain the necessary information to conclude a reasonable explanation for all claims. I’m OK with that. What I’m not OK with is those who jump too quickly to the paranormal conclusions and promote these to the public. My deep interest in paranormal themes in popular culture in America is not dependent on belief, it is informed by evidence and guided by practical skepticism.

  Worldviews

  In the excellent book Worldviews: An Introduction to the History and Philosophy of Science, Dewitt (2004) explains how we construct our personal vision of the way the world works. Just like a mosaic or puzzle, everyone connects their own pieces together from experiences, learning, feelings, beliefs, and hopes. This is our “worldview.” Beliefs can be acquired from those around us—taught to us in childhood, or absorbed through our cultural products or social interactions—or from our conclusions based on life experiences. We try to fit our subsequent experiences and beliefs into this puzzle. From within a particular worldview, whether based on scientific consensus or supernatural beliefs, the facts and explanations seem to be common sense, correct, and obvious. It is difficult to step outside of that sphere and consider a different worldview. Most people won’t. Therefore, it’s uncommon to ditch the puzzle entirely and start blank. But the puzzle pieces can be modified or gradually replaced by other pieces if we allow it. Eventually, the entire picture can change and a new worldview is in place. A shift in worldview is often a slow process but can be dramatic and life-changing. If you accept your life is normal one day but the next day you are convinced everyone is playing a role in a virtual reality scenario, for example, everything looks and feels a lot different.

  Beliefs color our observations leading to bias and perception errors. Beliefs are tied to how we behave and how we identify ourselves. So, unfortunately, we can be easily lulled into only acknowledging the evidence we favor to support our beliefs, our worldview, discarding the rest. We will interpret facts in a way favorable to our beliefs, or we may accept what we are told from those we see as authorities. Those who have a strong, often emotional investment in paranormal beliefs are reluctant to discard those cherished beliefs and will berate and reject the skeptical approach in examining them (Hess 1993). I understand. No one wants the skeptic to expose the flaws in beliefs we hold dear.

  Our worldviews allow us to function and make meaning out of the world every day. Paranormal beliefs don’t color my worldview anymore, although they used to. I can rather easily slip back to imagining what it’s like to hold a paranormal worldview and “put myself in someone else’s shoes,” at least for a while. At this point, however, I don’t just want to believe; I want to know. I want to scientifically know, not just “know” in my gut or bones. I want knowledge based on reliable information that would be convincing to others as well. This degree of knowing takes a good deal of effort to achieve. It’s not always fun, either. At Fort Mifflin, as the skeptic, I was the unwanted outsider. There was no mistaking that impression. But it was important that I challenge my assumptions, which I did.

  An extremely common reason given for accepting a paranormal reality is that so many people report these experiences and believe in them that there must be something to it. This argument from popularity is called the “bandwagon appeal” (Pigliucci 2010); we all want to jump on. The skeptic is not always keen to jump on the bandwagon, though, and is not afraid to tell the other riders why she refuses. We need skepticism to sift through the deluge of information to obtain reliable knowledge from big scientific questions to personal decisions about finances and health. I accept an awful lot, but I doubt a lot more. It’s OK to hold a provisional conclusion while waiting for better information to come along. And it is OK to just say “I don’t know” until you actually do know and can back it up.

  Organizing Principles

  Some category of paranormal belief is widespread among at least half of the U.S. population, and this has remained so over many decades, indicating that it is part of the human experience to entertain thoughts regarding that which may be beyond our mundane daily environment. Amateur researchers spend considerable time exploring these topics. The serious researchers directed their aim toward exploration of specific claims and locations. They carefully structure their activities to attempt to understand or conclude facts about these topics and to satisfy their own interest. It is a human endeavor with which I fully sympathize and encourage.

  My effort to examine and reconcile the difference between amateurs’ work and the scientific community is explained thoughtfully by Dolby (1975) who wrote about how a scientist should approach a differing viewpoint than one’s own:

  A scientist … should try to become familiar with the conceptual and methodological approach of his opponents. He should try to see what is appealing about the other view, what is accepted as fact and what methods of reasoning are most acceptable.

  H
e can enter into a dialogue with his opponents. He should try to put his critical reaction into forms which will be acceptable to his opponents….

  I do not categorize the amateur investigator as an “opponent,” but they do have a viewpoint very different than mine. I could not fairly comment, criticize, or reject their efforts without attempting to understand what, how, and why they do what they do. What I concluded is deeper and more nuanced than skeptics and non-paranormalists assume—the people and their goals are worthwhile; it’s the structure they work within that is flawed. That structure has been erected and encouraged by our popular culture and is now entrenched.

  Ghost hunters, Bigfoot trackers, and UFO chasers pursue the unknown; it’s exciting, dramatic, romantic. Consulted by media as “experts” in the paranormal and even referred to as parapsychologists (a PhD-level title), they may be called into difficult social situations where trained experts would be recommended. (See examples in Houran & Lange 2001.) The public sees them as educated specialists, maybe even brave explorers or minor superheroes. Some have become celebrities and in demand at events. They are seen as “scientific,” serious professionals. I try to explain why social cachet occurs in various threads throughout this book. As we see with climate change, and previously with the concept of evolution of life on earth, the public overall is not adept at understanding the depth and breadth of scientific consensus on a subject. Are there ghosts, UFOs and monsters to find? Or is this a snipe hunt?2 I surely don’t know all of what might be out there in the dark, but I do know that the belief that there is something extraordinary to find is a powerful impetus for humans to go out and look. They spend huge amounts of time, money, and emotional and physical effort doing it.

  Much of the information and attitudes of what I term amateur research and investigation groups (ARIGs) contained in this volume was gathered in 2010; therefore, many of the quotes will no longer be available on the web due to the ephemeral nature of websites. Also, some ARIGs may have changed their views and would not relate the same sentiments today. But, the general concepts, the purveyance of paranormal ideas, and the methods of investigation remain basically unchanged. The people may have moved on, but the cultural niche and associated behaviors remains. It’s time to think more deeply about why and how to research fringe topics and if answers will be found via scientific methods or what people think are scientific methods.

  1

  Amateur Research and Investigation Groups (ARIGs)

  The world is full of curious, passionate amateur inquirers. This book is very much about the average American who has engaged in activity about which he or she has strong feelings and concerns. Amateur literally means “one who loves.” Those who research paranormal topics as hobbyists fit this description well.

  Labeling people as “amateurs” can be a way of discrediting their contributions (Lyons 2009). However, I am not using the word in this disparaging way. An amateur’s passionate dedication is admirable and inspiring. We are all amateurs at something—fascinated with a subject to which we commit considerable time and money to gain understanding. Though amateurs are motivated out of love for the subject, with that comes a normal human desire to be acknowledged for their contributions, as they should be (Mims 1999). But it’s not easy for the academic outsider to be recognized. There is a no man’s land in the area between amateur and professional scientist. Disputes regularly arise.

  Science as a serious vocation emerged by the 1870s and become established so that insiders in each field gained an air of eliteness based on their specialized knowledge. Progress in gaining new knowledge in the sciences quickly outpaced the public’s ability to obtain and understand it. As this happened, science became a professional arena. But this did not mean amateur contributions disappeared. Amateurs are free to explore any subject they wish, to be innovative, unencumbered by the seemingly endless task of finding funding, producing journal papers, teaching, and advancing their own careers. They are typically working on topics and concerns abandoned or ignored by institutionally affiliated scientists. Paranormal researchers have taken advantage of these seeming voids. Yet, these topics only appear to be abandoned. As discussed later, scientists did seriously examine these fringe topics, decided there was nothing there to pursue, and then moved on. Alternatively, these subject areas became valued in cultural or psychological studies.

  The American public remains fascinated with possibilities of paranormal reality. It was rare to see official scientific exploration into field studies of ghosts, UFOs, and strange creature sightings. With reported cases growing and gaining media attention, the amateurs stepped in, fueled with interest and enthusiasm to meet a personal and public need. Amateurs spend their own money to travel and investigate the subjects they are passionate about. They buy books and equipment. They will also mirror social and academic societies by maintaining websites and organizing meetings and conferences. Despite the paranormalists who have found a measure of celebrity through television, books, and the Internet, very few will financially profit from these activities. They will likely not land a paying job on television (or even a paid interview) and related business ventures such as ghost tours, paid investigations, educational offerings and book publishing, or expeditions to find the quarry won’t be financially successful. Thus, money is a secondary concern for many who pursue this passion as it appears to provide great personal enjoyment and meaning in their lives.

  Leisure Time

  Americans love their leisure time. Indeed, this time is so critical to our lives that we schedule our leisure activities—like watching TV shows, sports, seeing movies, reading, even volunteering—as things we must do. These activities become a necessary part of life. How we spend our leisure time plays a key role in defining who we are. What we do outside of our job or family responsibilities provides an opportunity to expand our self-identity, to provide an outlet for personal expression, and explore unfulfilled potential. Our “real” jobs may be viewed solely as the means to sustain leisure activities and interests. Many of us socially define ourselves more by our leisure activities than by our careers—the animal lover, sports fan, history buff, auto enthusiast, etc.

  The concept of “serious leisure” was proposed by sociologist Robert A. Stebbins in 1982. Stebbins defines this as “the systematic pursuit of an amateur hobbyist or volunteer activity that people find substantial, interesting and fulfilling.” This activity allows for expression of special skills, knowledge, and experience (Stebbins 2007). Our practice of these activities gives us great personal and social rewards and enhances our lives. We feel better about ourselves, like we have a purpose. It is rewarding (Stebbins 1982 and 1992). For some, pursuit of paranormal research and investigation is serious leisure, incorporated as part of their lives, and integral to the way they view themselves and present themselves to others.

  Defining Amateur Research and Investigation Groups

  I am interested in how amateur research and investigation groups work, behave, and utilize the concepts of science and skepticism. The group, not individuals, is my unit of study for this project, although much of the conclusions can be applied to individuals as well. Not all these groups would self-identify as “paranormal researchers” as some find the term “paranormal” limiting or suggests less-than-serious goals and methods. Personal belief was of less interest to me than the methods and framework they used for investigating strange claims which left open the inclusion of groups who took a skeptical approach. Therefore, I coined a more inclusive term—Amateur Research and Investigation Group, or ARIG (pronounced AIR-rig). Criteria that define the amateur research and investigation group (ARIG) are as follows:

  1. Not under the auspices of an academic institution or headed by working scientists. This excludes organizations such as the Institute of Noetic Sciences, the Parapsychological Association, or a university-affiliated lab. Paranormal investigation groups headed by a working scientist as part of academic research may be common in fictional depictions but are rare to n
on-existent in real life. Such groups would also be outside the scope of this research as they would be significantly different than the typical groups in operation around the country.

  2. Activities pursued focus primarily on unexplained events such as reports of hauntings, mystery animals, unidentified aerial objects, natural anomalies, and parapsychological phenomena.

  3. Having a grassroots process of formation and organization, but may hold some affiliation with a larger group. One characteristic of these groups is that they can be independent to a fault, dissolving and reforming repeatedly. They are almost exclusively self-sustained by their members’ contributions, donations, or fundraisers.

  4. Advertisement of the group, and their activities and/or services via the Internet. Internet presence is a must-have for these groups as a major means to gain new clients, cases, media attention, and credibility. Even as word-of-mouth between friends, family, and neighbors is the primary means to be introduced, those interested in contacting an ARIG will typically seek out information about them online.

  5. Activities undertaken by such groups do not provide a primary form of income for participants. Most groups do not charge for services. In some cases they may ask for reimbursement of expenses incurred for travel. Some are registered non-profits or state they are not businesses. Some groups are affiliated with tourism activities, such as guided tours, shops, or museums, or will promote books or other merchandise sales which generates some income that presumably is used to sustain the group’s activities. Those few groups that have members with some degree of notoriety will charge public or private appearance fees. But, in general, paranormal investigation is not a money-making venture, but, like most hobbies, is an expense.