Ghost Hunting Tools of the Trade

Why the use of electronic equipment by TV ghost hunters is so stupid.

You should follow me on twitter here.

Skeptoid #81
January 01, 2008
Podcast transcript | Listen | Subscribe
Bookmark and Share

Television shows about ghost hunting have been popular for over 50 years, and though the basic concept is the same, recent decades have seen the hunt become less about psychics and séances and more about electronic detection gear. Just about every TV show about ghost hunting sends a crew of investigators into a building, armed to the teeth with all sorts of equipment.

The use of any kind of measuring equipment to detect ghosts is fundamentally, and completely, bogus. How can I make a blanket statement like that? Measuring equipment detects what it is designed to detect, whether that's light, heat, electromagnetism, or whatever. Thus it will only detect things that emit measurable amounts of those energies. For us as viewers to accept that some piece of handheld measuring equipment has a useful function in detecting a ghost, we must base our acceptance on the premise that ghosts are known to emit those types of energies in measurable amounts. If there were any truth to this, science would have discovered it long ago. Hospital operating rooms would have ghost detection equipment built in. Mortuaries and crematoriums would have ghost detection equipment at the top of their list. Search and rescue crews would use ghost detection equipment. If ghosts did exist and were detectable, you can bet that there would be huge industries behind it. I can't think of anything that would attract more venture capital dollars from Silicon Valley. However, no rigorous research has ever shown that ghosts can be reliably detected with hardware. It's easy to disbelieve me, but it's much harder to disbelieve the lack of interest from greedy corporate America.

So now let's look at the popular tools of the trade of ghost hunting. The important takeaway is to understand what these devices are actually detecting when the ghost hunters point them around the room, and why their crazily jumping needles and indicators are perfectly consistent with, and explained by, the absence of ghosts.

When you turn on the television and you watch people pointing their gizmos around the room, acting all dramatic and pretending to detect ghosts all around them, any intelligent adult should laugh out loud. Or better yet, change the channel. Of course an intelligent adult should be free to watch whatever they want, and that's fine — but one place I will draw the line is the point where you let your children watch one of those shows and allow them to accept the silly claims as fact. Watch it and enjoy it as entertainment, if you find those people truly engaging and clever enough to be entertaining; but please, explain to your kids the science behind what they're seeing. Or, as the case may be, the lack of science behind it.

You should follow me on twitter here.
Drop a tip in my tip jar? or become a supporter

Brian Dunning
Brian Dunning

© 2008 Skeptoid.com

References & Further Reading

Barušs, Imants. "Failure to Replicate Electronic Voice Phenomenon." Journal of Scientific Exploration. 1 Jul. 2001, Volume 15, Number 3: 355-367.

Fraden, Jacob. Handbook of Modern Sensors: Physics, Designs, and Applications. New York: Springer Science + Business Media, Inc., 2004. 243-251.

Juliano, David. "Ghost Hunting 101." Ghost Hunting 101. The Shadowlands, 1 Jan. 2009. Web. 2 Nov. 2009. <http://www.ghosthunting101.com/>

Knoll, Glenn F. Radiation Detection and Measurement. New York: John Wiley and Sons, 2000. 29-57, 103-119, 201-215.

Lipták, Béla G. Instrument Engineer's Handbook: Process measurement and analysis. Stamford: CRC Press, 2003. 575-578.

Reference this article:
Dunning, Brian. "Ghost Hunting Tools of the Trade." Skeptoid Podcast. Skeptoid Media, Inc., 1 Jan 2008. Web. 12 Mar 2010. <http://skeptoid.com/episodes/4081>

Discuss!

5 most recent comments | Show all 125 comments

Remember, you should always read with skepticism the comments of anyone too lame to put their real name & city.

""You approached this with scientific theories, but science has never agreed with subjects of this matter & to date has never been able to explain nor debunk the abnormal readings.""

So if a given method doesn't "agree" with you, it's automatically useless?

I also disagree with your statement that "science never has explained or debunked abnormal readings". It has. For every "inexplicable" ghost story out there, there's a ghost story explained in perfectly rational ways by sceptical inquirers. See this very site for several examples.

""You must examine each case infividually & study the evidence. then lets see you explain it.""

Don't be ridiculous, of course we mustn't. The burden of proof is on you to prove ghosts exist, not on us to prove they don't.

Safe-Keeper, Norway
February 25, 2010 1:58pm

The mystery would be solved once and for all if the Ghost Hunters would just test the pH of the tap water of the haunted location that they are investigating. No one has explained or debunked abnormal pH levels. We must examine each pH level individually & study the evidence. Some research has shown that a mass of energy between the faucet and the glass will cause changes in readings. What would your explanation for fluctuations with that?

Baba O'Reily, Miami, FL
February 26, 2010 4:33am

You fail horribly to mention that any investigator worth their salt knows exactly what their equipment will detect. When they get an anomoly, it is because their equipment is detecting things that should not set them off. Just because they do not go into great detail about their equipment on T.V. does not make them not credible. Television shows have strict time limits. So going into detail about the equipment would be pointless as there would not be enough time to describe each piece of equipments functions. Television producers want to spend more time on the spooky aspects. So in closing I find this verbal vomit you are spouting absolutely ridiculous, and if anyone donates to this crap then they are just as ignorant, and blind as you.

justin, cheyenne, wy
February 27, 2010 12:14pm

"Any investigator worth their salt knows exactly what their equipment will detect."

And that is...? And is directly plausible to...?

"When they get an anomoly, [sic] it is because their equipment is detecting things that should not set them off."

And the anomalies are...? And they are directly plausible to...?

Did you have any insight to this or are you just expressing your apathy to the author?

Baba O'Reily, Miami, FL
March 01, 2010 3:36am

I love it when people say "Disprove my ghost in the closet theory, and if you cant then I'm right" rather then say "Heres the solid repeatable evidence i am showing that proves whats going on. Provide me with alternate explanations and I shall show you why the evidence rules these more mundane explanations out". When is the last time a ghost hunter said that? An old but excellent reading is Carl Sagans "Demon Haunted World". Woth its weight in gold I think.

This episode reminds me much of the Norway Sprial Lights. People were saying "prove to me conclusively its a rocket malfunction and not HAARP and if you cant then it was HAARP making a black hole with Scalar technology". I provided rational explanations and even basic simulations and then challenged them to do the same showing me why it was HAARP and Scalar stuff and all I got was "you havent convinced me it was a rocket, you lose". Brian if you want to tackle an utter load of conspiracy drivel, I suggest you put that one up. That episode alone should make for another listener feedback episode all its own lol! Excellent work as always!

Cam, Thunder Bay, ON.
March 01, 2010 8:01am

Make a comment about this episode of Skeptoid (please try to keep it brief & to the point). Anyone can post:

Your Name:
City/Location:
Comment:
characters left. Discuss the issues - personal attacks, advertisements, and other useless posts will be deleted.
Answer 3 + 6 =

You can also discuss this episode in the Skeptoid Forum, hosted by the James Randi Educational Foundation.

Join the Skeptalk email discussion list.

What's the most important thing about Skeptoid?

Support Skeptoid
 
Skeptoid host, Brian Dunning
Skeptoid is written and produced
by Brian Dunning


Newest
Zeitgeist: The Movie, Myths, and Motivations
Skeptoid #196, Mar 9 2010
Read | Listen (12:08)
 
Student Questions: Mosquito Repellent and Einstein's Gestation
Skeptoid #195, Mar 2 2010
Read | Listen (11:55)
 
The Denver Airport Conspiracy
Skeptoid #194, Feb 23 2010
Read | Listen (14:25)
 
The Faces of Belmez
Skeptoid #193, Feb 16 2010
Read | Listen (11:15)
 
Ball Lightning
Skeptoid #192, Feb 9 2010
Read | Listen (11:58)
 
Newest
#1 -
How to Argue with a Creationist
Read | Listen
#2 -
The Real Philadelphia Experiment
Read | Listen
#3 -
Religion as a Moral Center
Read | Listen
#4 -
Apocalypse 2012
Read | Listen
#5 -
The Devil Walked in Devon
Read | Listen
#6 -
The Detoxification Myth
Read | Listen
#7 -
Medical Myths in Movies and Culture
Read | Listen
#8 -
MonaVie and Other "Superfruit" Juices
Read | Listen

Recent Comments...

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution - Noncommercial - No Derivative Works 3.0 United States License.

[Valid RSS]

ZIP Code Database

Skeptoid Podcast Skeptoid Podcast   Skeptoid on Facebook   Skeptoid on Twitter

inFact with Brian Dunning

Skeptoid is not responsible for the content of the ads below. Often they are great illustrations of what this episode is examining critically, so feel free to take a look.