I have a friend who has been recording her deceased daughter on her computer, a reel to reel tape recorder and voice answering machine. This has been happening for about 2 years. She has written a book, she is in that movie White Noise - the trailer to the DVD and has a web site at aaevp.com under the subcatagory The Big Circle-bridge to the afterlife. Her daughter was 20 years old when she died in a car accident. One of her daughters interests was EVP, (electronic voice phenomena-which has been around since people first started using tape recorders many years ago. This woman found some books on the subject in her daughter's room after she had died and that is how she began this journey. My friend has saved all of the audio files and tapes of the recordings, which are very clear and articulate not simply white noise, which have been confirmed by her minister, and many others who knew her daughter. My friend leads an active life, has another child and older parents to care for. I am saying that she is not dilusional, nor frozen by grief. Does anyone out there have any experience like this or know someone who does?
FortuneHunter
Unregistered
F
scriptcoc said:
One word - Apophenia.
And nope - can't say I do.
Would still like to hear those recordings - especially if they have been recorded on a computer.
EVP
apophilia ...O.K. I will have to look that one up
but if you want to hear those messeges she got from her dauther Cathy, then by all means go to her web site
www.aaevp.com
then on the top of this web site click on the Big Circle Recording Group
then on the left side of the Big Circle Bridge to the Afterlife recording group web page click on the examples of evp or something like that...let me know what you think while I go look up that love of something word.....love of death probably -but i thought that would be necrophilia??
apophilia ...O.K. I will have to look that one up
but if you want to hear those messeges she got from her dauther Cathy, then by all means go to her web site
www.aaevp.com
then on the top of this web site click on the Big Circle Recording Group
then on the left side of the Big Circle Bridge to the Afterlife recording group web page click on the examples of evp or something like that...let me know what you think while I go look up that love of something word.....love of death probably -but i thought that would be necrophilia??
Bronze Dog
Copper Alloy Canid
- Joined
- Mar 9, 2005
- Messages
- 4,993
http://www.skepdic.com/apophenia.html
An auditory equivalent to pareidolia comes to mind as well for EVP: http://www.skepdic.com/pareidol.html
And, since I'm handing out a lot of Skeptic's Dictionary links: http://www.skepdic.com/evp.html
An auditory equivalent to pareidolia comes to mind as well for EVP: http://www.skepdic.com/pareidol.html
And, since I'm handing out a lot of Skeptic's Dictionary links: http://www.skepdic.com/evp.html
Starrman
Graduate Poster
- Joined
- May 23, 2003
- Messages
- 1,171
scriptcoc,
I listened to most of the files on that site - I'm sorry, but if your friend thinks those are the voices of the dead than you have no choice but to call her "delusional". And you conclude that she is not "frozen by grief" - even though she is trying to contact her dead daughter with an answering machine. I'm sorry but that reeks of desperation.
And to say that the recordings are "very clear and articulate not simply white noise" is simply not true. Many of the recording at the EVP site are real stretches. Check out the ""You have to help Martha tonight".
Also - none of them seem to be saying anything specific that would confirm that the voice belongs to the deceased. Unless "brain turd" (I'm not kidding) is some kind of secret code.
That's my 2 cents, anyway.
I listened to most of the files on that site - I'm sorry, but if your friend thinks those are the voices of the dead than you have no choice but to call her "delusional". And you conclude that she is not "frozen by grief" - even though she is trying to contact her dead daughter with an answering machine. I'm sorry but that reeks of desperation.
And to say that the recordings are "very clear and articulate not simply white noise" is simply not true. Many of the recording at the EVP site are real stretches. Check out the ""You have to help Martha tonight".
Also - none of them seem to be saying anything specific that would confirm that the voice belongs to the deceased. Unless "brain turd" (I'm not kidding) is some kind of secret code.
That's my 2 cents, anyway.
Scriptcoc your poll does not cover all categories, which is why no-one has voted.
You have, for example, not included options:
"Don't believe EVP is really voices of the dead"
or
"Have heard them and they sound exactly like static"
or
"Never heard one and have no interest in doing so"
(I also really hope this isn't another troll posting about EVP)
You have, for example, not included options:
"Don't believe EVP is really voices of the dead"
or
"Have heard them and they sound exactly like static"
or
"Never heard one and have no interest in doing so"
(I also really hope this isn't another troll posting about EVP)
feyd rautha
Student
- Joined
- May 17, 2004
- Messages
- 40
that dictionary sure is no match to the holy google, use that instead. wikipedia.org knows many things too!
@asshles
who cares, we all know it is a skeptics board. or will you treat to tattle again?
Steven Howard
Graduate Poster
- Joined
- Nov 16, 2004
- Messages
- 1,797
jmercer said:I think he's trying to say...
Huh. Wait a second...
Hmmm....
I have no clue either.
Maybe it's a transcription of one of those "EVP" tapes.
The structure of random noise and the structure of the ear, along with auditory overdetection in the CNS, can easily combine to create this kind of effect, especially when a context is created, and the mind can put together random bits into the kind of names/etc that are expected.
The key is to try to fit the "speech" to some other words. After you find out that it works no matter what you think it says, you're on the right track.
Blind testing, of course, too.
The key is to try to fit the "speech" to some other words. After you find out that it works no matter what you think it says, you're on the right track.
Blind testing, of course, too.
CptColumbo
Just One More Question
scriptcoc said:
While I'm almost certain they want to believe what they hear I would suggest she take the raw recordings to an expert in the field of audio engineering or audio recording, and not modify the recordings or tell them what she thinks the messages say. See what they come up with.
I remember once driving by a local airport with the radio off and picking up the tower on just my cars speakers. This could explain alot of the EVP out there.
Beleth
FAQ Creator
- Joined
- Dec 10, 2002
- Messages
- 4,125
Where were you a year ago?
Summary: If you think something is supposed to sound like voices, it will. If you don't think something is supposed to sound like voices, it probably won't.
In other words, if you listen to enough electrically-generated random noise thinking that there are voices in it, you'll hear them, whether they are really there or not.
Summary: If you think something is supposed to sound like voices, it will. If you don't think something is supposed to sound like voices, it probably won't.
In other words, if you listen to enough electrically-generated random noise thinking that there are voices in it, you'll hear them, whether they are really there or not.
New Evidence
Wait now...do any of you believe in PSI or mediumship? Telecommunication between identical twins has been proven.
It is not too hard to look that information up....so If it is possible to communicate by some "line in the sky" between identical twins, why is it such a leap to beleive that when you die your mind is still able to send and recieve information?
Wait now...do any of you believe in PSI or mediumship? Telecommunication between identical twins has been proven.
It is not too hard to look that information up....so If it is possible to communicate by some "line in the sky" between identical twins, why is it such a leap to beleive that when you die your mind is still able to send and recieve information?
Beady
Philosopher
Re: New Evidence
Where and when?
scriptcoc said:
Where and when?
jimlintott
Master Poster
- Joined
- Jun 9, 2002
- Messages
- 2,893
The few audio samples I tried were simply noise. Nothing articulate or intelligible.
I most certainly do NOT believe in PSI or mediumship!!
I most certainly do NOT believe in PSI or mediumship!!
Bronze Dog
Copper Alloy Canid
- Joined
- Mar 9, 2005
- Messages
- 4,993
Re: New Evidence
As for the identical twin thing: The only case I've heard of was disproven when they added one control: Originally one twin selected an image out of a choice of four and tried to communicate it to his counterpart. This resulted in a 50% success rate, well above chance. When, however, the image to communicate was randomly chosen, the success rate dropped right back down to 25%. Explanation: The twins probably just had similar tastes in pictures, thanks to their common DNA and upbringing. They both just picked images they liked.
So far, it seems the information is very hard to look up: Believers never link to it when asked, and when I search for it, all I see is a bunch of poorly designed tests, or worse, commentaries on tests that don't have their protocols described.
My view: I'd love to believe some of this stuff, but it'd better be able to withstand scrutiny.
Can't speak for everyone, but I don't believe in any of that.scriptcoc said:
As for the identical twin thing: The only case I've heard of was disproven when they added one control: Originally one twin selected an image out of a choice of four and tried to communicate it to his counterpart. This resulted in a 50% success rate, well above chance. When, however, the image to communicate was randomly chosen, the success rate dropped right back down to 25%. Explanation: The twins probably just had similar tastes in pictures, thanks to their common DNA and upbringing. They both just picked images they liked.
So far, it seems the information is very hard to look up: Believers never link to it when asked, and when I search for it, all I see is a bunch of poorly designed tests, or worse, commentaries on tests that don't have their protocols described.
My view: I'd love to believe some of this stuff, but it'd better be able to withstand scrutiny.