Have all the paranomal group names been used?

[MRT]

With so many paranormal groups around now, they are running out of names! There are only so many ways you can use the word 'paranormal'. One imaginative group calls itself 'It's Behind You'!

Can anyone think of any other new names?

[Dr B]

Are they affiliated to ASSAP - would not surprise me if they are not the executive

Sorry, could not resist.....

On a more serious note - how are groups with the term 'paranormal' in their title (thus reflecting some degree of world view) likely to be objective and scientific?

Are they not already making the fundamental assumption before even starting?

[MRT]

I think the word 'paranormal' is fairly neutral. Just because there is a word for something, it doesn't mean it has to exist! I think it is legitimate for a society's aim to be to investigate the paranormal, even if it comes to the conclusion that it doesn't exist.

[Legaleagle]

Has this one been used yet?

Paranormal Anomolies Newsgroup and Testing Society

Here's one for a university Parasychology department:

Durham University Paranormal Experimentation Department

[Legaleagle]

or how about the Fortean Anomolies and Karmic Education and Research Society

Sorry, I'll shut up now

[Admin]

para-nonsense.com

we-believe-in-ghosts-and use-mediums-but-claim-to-be-skeptics.com

we're-really-only-in-it-for-the-thrills.com

everything-is-paranormal-unless-it-can-be-proved-otherwise.com

[bobdezon]

I cant stand ghost hunters (not the tv series thats pure gold) but I have great sympathy for paranormal investigators under the proviso that they actually are paranormal investigators and not ghost hunters who just like the "fancier" name.

They test theories and perform experiments, and although they cant prove the supernatural they can sure disprove the silly theories associated with it, like orbs etc. I dont even mind if they use a medium for some experiments, I view that as just another way to prove it isnt really possible.

Some paranormal investigators do good solid work, but there appears to be little real organisation which many groups repeating each others works. If science was like that people would be rediscovering things all the time and working with outmoded data and wasting resources.

[dee]

I have come up with the:

Celestial
Rare
Arcane
Psychics

Club


Or to you and me, CRAP club for short!

[Admin]

I cant stand ghost hunters (not the tv series thats pure gold) but I have great sympathy for paranormal investigators under the proviso that they actually are paranormal investigators and not ghost hunters who just like the "fancier" name.

They test theories and perform experiments, and although they cant prove the supernatural they can sure disprove the silly theories associated with it, like orbs etc. I dont even mind if they use a medium for some experiments, I view that as just another way to prove it isnt really possible.

Some paranormal investigators do good solid work, but there appears to be little real organisation which many groups repeating each others works. If science was like that people would be rediscovering things all the time and working with outmoded data and wasting resources.

I like this idea: http://www.assap.org/newsite/articles/Xenonormal.html

I must admit that I wouldn't go on any sort of investigation to look for proof of ghosts or other paranormal phenomena as (my take on it all is) if any of it were real it would have been found by now.

To me it would be much more worthwhile and productive (as answers could actually be found) to investigate what it is that gives rise to reports of hauntings and other experiences.

I would postulate that it's mainly psychological reasons (errors of senses/perception, preconceptions, biases, etc.) but which are often exacerbated by environmental factors.

Ghosts (IMO) aren't real; but haunt-type experiences are. So to get answers to what's behind these experiences we need to be asking the right questions - and that doesn't mean assuming that ghosts are behind them and then looking for the 'proof'.

[bobdezon]

I dont know if ghosts exist, I think it might be cool if they did, but I havent found anything like evidence to support that (and Ive looked hard) Yet the phenomena reported is sometimes true. This would suggest that it is a purely human thing, maybe psychological or culturally influenced. I dont think anyone is looking in the right direction though as far as ghosts are concerned (if you believe they could be real) The paranormal field needs people who think "outside the box", but not so far out they lose sight of what is reality and what is imagination.

I think the first thing that should go is this rather silly, ghosts are energy theory.

[Julia]

Usually proposed by people who don't understand the word energy.

[bobdezon]

Exactly my point, I mean its actually very easy to prove. All they need to do is get a physicist to create a machine which would allow a visual representation of a moving mass of potential energy. you would be able to see the elctomagnetic field in the room, and if you could make out a human shape then it might be possible to prove it was a ghost (or at least very fekkin odd). Alas they prefer to wave cellphone sensors and emf meters.

They just dont consider the correct use and application of available technology to assist them in finding real phenomena.

[Dr B]

I think the word 'paranormal' is fairly neutral.

I beg to differ. It is loaded and emotionally charged as it can be used to assume something you have yet to demonstrate. The very groups you mention in the OP are the ones with things like 'paranomral' in their title and these are the fools assuming to be true, that which they claiming they are investigating as to whether its true or not. Its known as psychological baggage and most woo's buy into it a great deal and a great deal more than they know (i.e., a meta-cognitive error).

Just because there is a word for something, it doesn't mean it has to exist!

I never said it did! I said it guides thinking (even unconsciously) to interpret certain events / experiences in a certain way. I have never ever seen these groups go somewhere and report back that absolutely nothing happened - not once! They are starting from a theoretical position that already has an interpretive framework in place - as such it's all circular and pointless - this is due, in part, to loaded definitions.

I think it is legitimate for a society's aim to be to investigate the paranormal, even if it comes to the conclusion that it doesn't exist.

This is entirely consistent with my position - though you just need to use more neutral terminology. I suggest anomalous cognition / anomalous experiences etc - these definitions are far more useful as they do not assume 'paranormality' from the start.


I am not saying that by studying the paranormal you must believe in it - I am saying that many people give their groups names with 'paranormal' in the title and consciously or otherwise, they are already showing their cards.........

[MRT]

All they need to do is get a physicist to create a machine which would allow a visual representation of a moving mass of potential energy. you would be able to see the elctomagnetic field in the room, and if you could make out a human shape then it might be possible to prove it was a ghost (or at least very fekkin odd).

That would depend on which particular wavelength of electromagnetic field you were walking about. If it were light you could use a camera! If you are talking about disturbances to static magnetic fields, you'd need an array of mag sensors and software to analyse the field vectors in real time and present them as a moving visual representation. Someone give me the (quite large amount of) money and I could do it...

[MRT]

DrB: I'd like to see 'xenonormal' rather than paranormal but I'm not sure how popular it would be!