Halloween is right around the corner and lazy journalists everywhere are starting to take their cuts at the hanging curveballs amply served up by the realm of the supernatural. The laughable "Supernatural Science" section of Howstuffworks.com provides a perfect example of the kind of pseudojournalism that is becoming increasingly common these days in an article by staff writer and University of Georgia journalism degree holder Cristen Conger on the Top 5 Real-Life Haunted Houses. The article follows the common pattern of fluff science reporting to a tee with its lack of actual investigative journalism and appeal to superstition.
In it, Conger reveals that "Some people might be hesitant to admit that they believe in ghosts. But if you've ever heard a chilling bump in the night when you're home alone, ghosts might not be such a leap of faith." Apparantly Conger subscribes to the notion that there are no unbelievers when things get spooky. A similiar sentiment, assumed to be an unassailable fact of life by a substantial percentage of Americans, that there are no atheists in foxholes, is equally patently false. Far from being the exception to the rule (ever heard of Joe Nickell?), I don't break a sweat when confronted with eerie noises or unexplained visual phenomena.
Conger, while researching the subject of ghosts and hauntings, doesn't seem to have broken a sweat either, likely having simply clicked on the first few links provided by Google. These are almost always void of any skeptical input. But Conger isn't alone in taking such a credulous approach to reporting on ghouls and goblins. Not thinking critically and asking important questions, like are their legitimate contrary opinions on what I'm writing about (or in this case is their near total agreement by the scientific community that what I'm writing about is hokum), is the hallmark of pseudojournalism. Conger actually does list his sources, which consist of just a few unskeptical compendiums of popular haunted dwellings, at the end of the piece.
Conger cites the Association for the Scientific Study of Anomalous Phenomena (ASSAP) in the piece, failing to mention that this organization merely uses "science" as a thin facade while it employs a wide range of unproven investigational methods. They make a concerted effort to seperate themselves from other paranormal investigators by pointing out how flawed their research is and how challenging it is to do a proper scientific investigation of ghosts and other entities which according to true skeptics are lacking in both plausibility and legitimate evidence to support their existence. But their approach is far from unique with its blatant use of pseudoscience.
On their website, they point out that the many instruments used in the ghost hunting trade are not always reliable yet they still rely on them to snooker folks who may not know that the all the digital readings of room temperature and electromagnetic fields, and electronic voice phenomena, are examples of the misuse of scientific equipment and paredolia. Members of ASSAP fall into the same trap of circular logic that every ghost hunter eventually does. They use instruments to aid in differentiating true hauntings from frauds, hallucinations and misperceptions, while citing true hauntings as the means of establishing what meaningful anomalous instrument readings are. The entire endeavor is a house of cards built on a shaky foundation of anecdotes and buttressed by meaningless bells and whistles.
Conger addresses readers who may be concerned that their own home has been invaded by spirits and spectres and reveals a list of things to pay attention to provided by the science-based ASSAP. Accordig to these experts, you are at risk of being haunted if you "see apparitions, hear weird sounds, smell odd odors, feel "cold spots" within a room, notice objects that have been moved or observe your pet acting agitated." Having a toddler and a newborn in my house, I can personally attest to having experienced several of these warning signs recently but Conger and ASSAP can keep their digital video cameras and infrared thermometers to themselves. I'll stick to reality and base any concerns on properly performed studies. It's a heck of a lot more interesting, and considerably less likely to waste my time and energy.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
19 comments:
You say "On their website, they point out that the many instruments used in the ghost hunting trade are not always reliable yet they still rely on them to snooker folks who may not know that the all the digital readings of room temperature and electromagnetic fields, and electronic voice phenomena, are examples of the misuse of scientific equipment and paredolia."
When you use an instrument, it gives a reading, within its specification and limitations, whether it is is at an allegedly haunted location or anywhere else. A temperature is just a temperature! How is that a 'misuse'?
What is wrong with using thermometers to check if reported cold spots are actual temperature fluctuations or not? There are many possible natural causes for cold spots as the website points out.
The word paredolia is meaningless. It covers a variety of different misperceptions, hallucinations and other phenomena. Which precisely do you mean here?
You say "They make a concerted effort to seperate themselves from other paranormal investigators by pointing out how flawed their research is and how challenging it is to do a proper scientific investigation of ghosts and other entities which according to true skeptics are lacking in both plausibility and legitimate evidence to support their existence. But their approach is far from unique with its blatant use of pseudoscience."
Did you read http://assap.org/newsite/articles/Ghosts.html or http://assap.org/newsite/articles/Xenonormal.html?
Where, on the site, does it claim ghosts are entities? Did you read http://assap.org/newsite/articles/Culture.html?
You say "They use instruments to aid in differentiating true hauntings from frauds, hallucinations and misperceptions, while citing true hauntings as the means of establishing what meaningful anomalous instrument readings are."
Where, on the ASSAP website does it say this? Where does it describe 'true ghosts'?
You say "Conger addresses readers who may be concerned that their own home has been invaded by spirits and spectres and reveals a list of things to pay attention to provided by the science-based ASSAP. Accordig to these experts, you are at risk of being haunted if you "see apparitions, hear weird sounds, smell odd odors, feel "cold spots" within a room, notice objects that have been moved or observe your pet acting agitated."
People report such symptoms as hauntings. It is perfectly legitimate to investigate such cases and determine the true causes of the reports. Relying on studies is OK for generalities but not the specifics of a particular case.
It is a misuse if, as ghost hunters generally do, those readings are used to make claims of paranormal activity of some kind when there is no plausible reason, or legitimate scientific evidence, to support them. Cold spots are classically used as evidence of ghosts. It is no different than if I were to make the claim that a person has meningitis based on an elevated white blood cell count. A white blood cell count can be elevated for myriad reasons, only one of which is meningitis. The presence of a ghost may cause a drop in temperature, but there is no evidence to support that notion other than anecdotally matching the belief of a haunting with a measured low temperature. So why even bring it up at all during paranormal investigations if not to just make use of the sharpshooter's logical fallacy by drawing a bullseye around random noise.
Paredolia, the hard-wired human trait of assigning meaning where there is none, or finding patterns in random noise, might be meaningless if such a strawman definition were true. It has nothing at all to do with hallucinatiooins or other phenomena. It is a misperception however. Much of the so-called evidence, anecdotal of course, in favor of ghosts is simply paredolia. EVP is a perfect example. Listening to hours of background ambient noise and finding something that sounds somewhat like a word or sentence is especially suspect considering that even the best examples tend to be unintelligable to people who haven't already been told or read what they are supposed to be hearing. EVP is no different than the claims by some that hidden messages can be discovered by playing songs or speech backwards. It is paredolia and nothing more.
Like most believers in the paranormal, and despite bold claims about it all being about the science, what it boils down with this organization is that more emphasis is placed on the anecdotal experience of witnesses than on anything else. Eye witness reports are subject to any number of biases and are unreliable as evidence.
But you are right in one sense. I spent a lot longer today reading over the many articles and information on the website and they do not make any specific claims about what a ghost is and they do point out the many biases and misinterpretations of visual stimuli than commonly effect humans. But they are hardly off the hook as I think this is a sham to appeal to a different demographic of believers. They still are a prominent supporter of the irrational belief systems of confused and/or superstitious people. At the bottom of it all is the belief that ghosts, and many other unproven and implausible beliefs, are real. Organizations like this do nothing but foster irrational thinking. There are better ways to educate people.
Your comments about the ASSAP website may apply to any of a thousand ‘ghost hunter’ sites but are not appropriate here. ASSAP is not, as you claim a “... prominent supporter of the irrational belief systems of confused and/or superstitious people.” They advocate scientific investigation of cases, as well as doing their own studies and research (take a look at www.assap.org/newsite/htmlfiles/MADS%20haunted%20bed.html).
If someone reports a haunting, they usually mean a series of apparently puzzling events that they link to a ghost. It is perfectly legitimate to investigate such occurrences scientifically to determine their cause. You don’t have to believe that ghosts are spirits to investigate such things.
If someone claims they have experienced a cold spot, it is perfectly sensible to use a thermometer to test the idea. Such a cold spot could also be caused physiologically or psychologically and a thermometer can help rule out physical causes. None of this implies that the investigator accepts the existence of ghosts. If you think, however, that ASSAP advocates indiscriminate use of instruments on investigations, read this (http://assap.org/newsite/articles/Ghosts%20EMF%20meters%20and%20baselines.html).
Such investigations are useful because they research the actual reports that give rise to belief in ghosts. Paranormal studies, by contrast, though useful, tend to involve artificial situations. For that reason, their results are not often seen as relevant by ghost believers.
If you mean misperception, when you say pareidolia, why not say so? Neuroscientists (and even serious paranormal researchers) do not use the term ‘pareidolia’ because it is scientifically vague. On the subject of EVP and misperception you may find this page interesting (www.assap.org/newsite/articles/Analysing%20audio%20EVP.html). It is based almost entirely on published science.
You say “At the bottom of it all is the belief that ghosts, and many other unproven and implausible beliefs, are real.” Such attitudes lead to a priori dismissal of witness reports that are a perfectly valid subject for research. ASSAP does not “...foster irrational thinking”. It advocates scientific research and investigation of paranormal reports without bias or preconception.
Oh dear. Another sloppy sceptic not doing his homework!
You give us real sceptics a bad name!
Feel free to enlighten us with some real skepticism instead of making pompous statements like that. I've met far too many believers that like to think of themselves as "real" skeptics to give statements like yours too much credence. But seriously, by all means, impress me.
My word, a response! I concluded that as you had not addressed the other comments that mine would go unaddressed too.
For once I understand your scepticism when it comes to brief anonymous posters; I can similarly conclude that your criticism was silenced by the previous posters. I even appreciate your ironic 'pompous' comment ;-)
But to business: I have no need to impress. If I ever 'go public' with an ill-informed, under-researched viewpoint (and I have been guilty of that!) then I am sufficiently humble to do my homework and make good in the future.
I invite you to do the same!
I addressed the criticisms, just not to your liking apparantly. That is something I will have to live with. I have been remiss in keeping up with this blog for a variety of personal reasons I won't go into. Take that however you wish.
You may have retracted some of your ill-researched comments, but then went on to make yet further baseless and sweeping generalisations.
Skeptics look at the evidence, you are giving baseless opinion. Which is fine, but in fairness you should really state that is what you are doing.
So do you feel that your organization was misrepresented by the article in question with its inclusion of the following:
"According to the Association for the Scientific Study of Anomalous Phenomena (ASSAP), there are some things to pay attention to if you suspect your house is haunted. You may have some brooding banshees or bothersome bogeymen on your hands if you experience the following: see apparitions, hear weird sounds, smell odd odors, feel "cold spots" within a room, notice objects that have been moved or observe your pet acting agitated"
I have just googled that phrase and it doesn't seem to be on the ASSAP website...
You should verify your sources really.
So... back to the question?
Regardless of ASSAP's intentions, they are clearly being used by the more credulous members of the media to support belief in unproven entities like ghosts and the reality of hauntings. ASSAP's website is replete with language that can be easily misconstrued by the public. Is that ASSAP's fault? I don't know. I think they toe the line on purpose because underneath the rhetoric they are believers. That is an opinion. I stand by my statement that their organization's efforts are not the best way to educate the public regarding this subject.
I think we're getting somewhere now. There's a difference between being misconstrued and your earlier accusations.
Everyone is entitled to an opinion and you have expressed one. Although I will tell you that taking a genuinely sceptical line, such the ASSAP website does, wins you no friends. Believers (often using pseudoscience to back up their beliefs) condemn you, and you are often vilified by pathological sceptics for even bothering with scientific research into the area.
I would genuinely like to know you think it's better to educate the public. Bear in mind that in addition to a running a popular website, ASSAP people contribute to peer-reviewed journals, run training, run courses through colleges and provide education materials to schools.
Great debate here and some valid points too. I would like to add to it by asking where the word Xenonormal comes from as used on the ASSAP website? I have tried online dictionaries and even the Oxford English Dictionary and still cannot find anything related to Xenonormal? It would be far easier to state that the natural phenomena witnessed is nothing more than unnoticed natural occurance than giving the explanation a title such as Xenonormal?
I would also like to ask what colleges and Schools do ASSAP run courses for as to be honest there is no mention of any such courses or education programmes on the ASSAP website? You may be referring to the work that your academic members do as part of their daily job but not ASSAP as a whole or there would be articles plus dates of the courses being run in Colleges on the ASSAP website. (Please note this comment excludes your own training days and weekends run for ASSAP members.)
Why educate the public? As the vast majority have no interest in using science to find the legitimate answers anyway. A vast majority of the public out there only go on investigations after watching certain TV programme broadcast on cable and satelite TV, and with this came the dreaded money makers and their schemes holding public investigations and making a substantial profit causing more damage to the serious scientific researcher.
The downside to this is that respected researchers are now being asked to pay a substantial amount of money to access these sites to do scientific research. I would like to know if ASSAP has a vetting system to stop such people joining?
Can I also ask if this educating the public approach is just a PR exercise by ASSAP to entice more people to join?
Hello fellow anonymous person,
"It would be far easier to state that the natural phenomena witnessed is nothing more than unnoticed natural occurance than giving the explanation a title such as Xenonormal?"
Without being funny, you've taken 11 words to say the same as xenonormals 1 word. This is the reason for specific terms. Incidentally, I'm not familiar with the origins of the term.
"there is no mention of any such courses or education programmes on the ASSAP website"
This is true. ASSAP seems to hide its light under a bushel, and this should change.
"Why educate the public? As the vast majority have no interest in using science to find the legitimate answers anyway."
Question asked, question answered ;-)
"...respected researchers are now being asked to pay a substantial amount of money to access these sites to do scientific research. I would like to know if ASSAP has a vetting system to stop such people joining?"
Do you really mean that the way it sounds? ;-) We like respected researchers and have no wish to stop them ;-)
"Why educate the public?"
Too philosophical for my blood!
"Can I also ask if this educating the public approach is just a PR exercise by ASSAP to entice more people to join?"
If it were that easy. I'd love to live in a world where education is welcomed that much and viewed as an enticement.
Alas, no. Needless to say the people more likely to join such organisations and people interested in the paranormal. It would seem that most of these people are the TV-inspired or sensation seeking types.
For the majority the idea of education in this field is a big snore; a turn off. If ASSAP just wanted to attract members for its own sake, education would surely be out and sensational claims and exciting nights out would be in?
You talk about verifying sources in an earlier post, I really recommend you do the same when using Xenonormal as this word and it's context does not exist in any dictionary. Another interesting point is how many words will you use to describe Xenonormal to someone who has no idea of what Xenonormal refers to.
As for the majority of your reply to my post where you quote me you have failed to analyse and interprit my post correctly and just decided to take most of my post out of context. This raises the question about ASSAP and it's ethics as by misinterpritation and bad analysis you have made a totally incorrect hypothesis regarding my earlier post.
So let's see what you failed to take into account.
I posted...
"I would also like to ask what colleges and Schools do ASSAP run courses for as to be honest there is no mention of any such courses or education programmes on the ASSAP website? You may be referring to the work that your academic members do as part of their daily job but not ASSAP as a whole or there would be articles plus dates of the courses being run in Colleges on the ASSAP website. (Please note this comment excludes your own training days and weekends run for ASSAP members.)"
Your reply was....
"This is true. ASSAP seems to hide its light under a bushel, and this should change."
My reply
You have failed to answer the points I made and have not provided clear consice evidence that I required regarding the Schools and Colleges where these so called ASSAP training and education classes have taken place; further more there is no mention of such education courses in the ASSAP News or the biannual ASSAP Anomaly Journal?
I posted.....
Why educate the public? As the vast majority have no interest in using science to find the legitimate answers anyway. A vast majority of the public out there only go on investigations after watching certain TV programme broadcast on cable and satelite TV, and with this came the dreaded money makers and their schemes holding public investigations and making a substantial profit causing more damage to the serious scientific researcher.
Your reply was...
"Why educate the public? As the vast majority have no interest in using science to find the legitimate answers anyway."
Question asked, question answered ;-)
My reply
You have totally failed to comment about the fact that the general public are being mislead by certain TV programmes into thinking anyone can just go out there and investigate with little or no knowledge of what they are doing? Again another failure is your lack of comment on the vultures making a profit out of the general public by holding those ridiculous ghost hunting events that are only akin to most pseudoscientific practices being frowned upon today by scientists; plus the venues used are now charging a fortune for any serious scientific researcher wishing to research reported unexplained phenomena.
Do ASSAP encourage such events?
I posted...
The downside to this is that respected researchers are now being asked to pay a substantial amount of money to access these sites to do scientific research. I would like to know if ASSAP has a vetting system to stop such people joining?
Your reply was...
"...respected researchers are now being asked to pay a substantial amount of money to access these sites to do scientific research. I would like to know if ASSAP has a vetting system to stop such people joining?"
Do you really mean that the way it sounds? ;-) We like respected researchers and have no wish to stop them ;-)
My Reply
Ok I will give you this one as I did make a mistake in this part of my post; this part of my post should have read...
The downside to this is that respected researchers are now being asked to pay a substantial amount of money to access these sites to do scientific research. I would like to know if ASSAP has a vetting system to stop such individuals or groups who make a substatial personal profit from public events from joining ASSAP?
Does ASSAP have any disciplinary procedures to ensure that it's members or affiliated groups do not run profit making events for their own personal gain?
I posted...
Can I also ask if this educating the public approach is just a PR exercise by ASSAP to entice more people to join?
Your reply was...
If it were that easy. I'd love to live in a world where education is welcomed that much and viewed as an enticement.
Alas, no. Needless to say the people more likely to join such organisations and people interested in the paranormal. It would seem that most of these people are the TV-inspired or sensation seeking types.
For the majority the idea of education in this field is a big snore; a turn off. If ASSAP just wanted to attract members for its own sake, education would surely be out and sensational claims and exciting nights out would be in?
My Reply
I have to say that you do make some good points here; however there are a few underlying issues that I would like to mention. Unless ASSAP has some type of vetting system or increases it's membership fees to keep the undesireables away ASSAP will never really know the intentions of the individual wanting to join; lets face it the ASSAP membership fee is really low compared to the membership fee of the SPR.
I do know that there was a vast disruption through the ASSAP ranks when a respected scientist received abuse from an ASSAP member when the member was asked to produce tangible evidence to support their unfound claims; I am sure I heard that this member was cleared by ASSAP even though there was tangible evidence produced to show the abuse that was directed at the scientist?
Another question I would like to ask is why the ASSAP Chairman is submitting articles from the ASSAP website in a so called paranormal magazine? Are you sure you are not running a PR exercise to gain more members who are not really interested in science?
I also noticed how the ASSAP Chairman always seems to mention the group that he runs in comparison to ASSAP? Are Paranormal Site Investigations that good? Are they providing the articles for the ASSAP website or are they the ones responsible for the none existant Xenonormal word?
I think I have given you enough food for thought here. I am not too sure your debating skills are that good as you only seem to quote what you want to and avoid the more interesting questions; could it be that this is Mr Dave Wood Chairman of ASSAP and Liberal Democrat Councillor I am dealing with? This would explain the politician approach by avoiding the more difficult questions?
Well I am off as I have mark the work of my students; I will probably come back and read your further comment but to be honest I have put the record straight and hope to find some legitimate answers for once in stead of misquotes.
Ah, it's nice to know who I'm talking to ;-)
It is a shame, though, that someone should be left with such an axe to grind that they should be moved to such lengthy musings after such a period of time. That moves me.
Axes discarded, there are a few interesting points:
'Encouraging of such events'
To my knowledge ASSAP does not encourage such events, ASSAP doesn't run vigils as such either.
It's interesting that you feel that serious researchers are suffering through lack of access to fee-charging locations. This implies that such locations are worthy of study and that there is not a wealth of non-commercialised locations for the serious researcher. Neither assertion can be substantiated, methinks.
'Vetting systems for members'
ASSAP is a charity. Charity memberships must be open to all (unless serving a defined cleavage).
Thank you for your direct answers. Most of my previous post cannot be put down to purely musings when they are factual.
Anyway, I think the axes should be put down as we need to look at these commercial and non-commercial sites charging extortionate rates are the crux of the problem that is holding serious scientific research back, you need to look at the facts to see that these extortionate charges are only started emerging around 5 or 6 years ago with the arrival of a certain cable and catelite television programme.
I will take an example location for you. Tutbury Castle in Staffordshire was little known until these so called TV investigators got their hands on the place; I have information that prior to the location being filmed scientific investigators could actually gain access for the whole evening for as little as £75 to £100 to cover the member of staff's expenses.
Once the tv programme had been recorded and screened on cable and satelite television the rot started to set in; to gain even more cable and satelite TV coverage they decided to hold an event labelled as the worlds biggest ghost hunt; followed by a second such event 12 months later. During a short space of time the fees reflected the TV coverage first by raising to £300 per night and then came the staged ridiculous ghost hunt events which eventually drove the price up demanding a minimum of 20 people to each pay £38.00,which totals to £760.00. I am more than sure this price may be something in the region of between £40 to £45.
My personal opinion is that the vast majority of venues asking extortionate prices for serious scientific study to be conducted on their premises is nothing more than creaming money off the back of a very bad TV show; even locations who have not appeared on this TV programme are letting money making companies like Fright Nights and others run their pathetic ghost hunt events. It is not a case that these locations are worthy of study as the phenomena reported may not be genuine and may be faked in order to draw in the money; it does purely support the hypothesis that such venues are just purely money motivated and it has nothing to do with having any such phenomena of note worth studying.
Just go and have a look at some of these event companies; there so called evidence captured at their own events would make a very good comedy programme for the serious scientists out there.
Hi again,
I'm glad the sound of grinding has stopped.
"extortionate rates are the crux of the problem that is holding serious scientific research back"
I know this is just the starting premise and it seems contrary to take issue with it, but I feel I must.
There are many things holding scientific research back: lack of funding, lack of courses in institutions, lack of methodological and ethical awareness amongst amateur practitioners. I think price-charging at tourist locations is fairly low down the list?
"you need to look at the facts to see that these extortionate charges are only started emerging around 5 or 6 years ago with the arrival of a certain cable and catelite television programme."
Agreed. But (so long as this wasn't just a turn of phrase) why must I look at this? Indeed beyond the function of chat as putting the world to rights, why is this a concern of mine particularly?
"It is not a case that these locations are worthy of study as the phenomena reported may not be genuine and may be faked in order to draw in the money; it does purely support the hypothesis that such venues are just purely money motivated and it has nothing to do with having any such phenomena of note worth studying."
Possibly, there is certainly plenty of anecdotal evidence from such sites to support such an assertion.
There are campaigns out there against this sort of thing, but I don't really feel it has much to do with scientific research?
Hi There,
Enjoyed the article in the Spring edition of the ASSAP News on profit making paranormal groups.
I was surprised regarding the comment about making money from Ghost Walks and books. When basically having been on a Ghost Walk they are purely entertaining and cost very little compared to companies who make £45 to £85 plus per person to attend just one of their events.
Another comment which I find amusing was also aimed at Ghost Books. I aasume you mean those widely available on the internet. If so the Chairman of ASSAP himself is guilty of such an act as his book is also available under the "Ghost" section of most online book retailers. Please forgive me if I am mistaken and I am sure that the Chairman of ASSAP and his own group also has some involvement with Peter Underwood; whom also produced quite a few publications on Ghosts.
I think that the Chairman of ASSAP has been totally misinformed regarding those dreadful public event companies as he quotes in his article "There is surprisingly, a little discussed ethical benefit to charging companies and their public nights. The more Thrill-seekers book tickets to such events in a controlled fun environment the less likely they are to try and set up their own group and cause ethical havoc in their local pub."
Well controlled they are not as having a ticket given to me for free I went along to see if these events are indeed controlled and worth the fee. All I can say is that the amount of faking that goes on is unbelievable and the amount of uncontrolled chaos with people screeming and running around due to the organisers faking events is just a bad accident waiting to happen. Let's hope an accident does occur and these people get sued as they thoroughly deserve it.
I also have to disagree with the comment "The more Thrill-seekers book tickets to such events in a controlled fun environment the less likely they are to try and set up their own group and cause ethical havoc in their local pub." These type of events just encourage melpractice and bad ethics; or is it because there are a few ASSAP members who are known to work for these charging companies?
Which ever way you look at the comments of the ASSAP Chairman there is no real scientific value or ethics in what has been said. I would advise the Chairman that it would be worth having a quiet word in the ear of those attending these charging company events and asking those ASSAP members ether to stop getting involved in such events or asking them to relenquish their ASSAP membership as how can ASSAP claim to be a scientific organisation when their members are involved with these charging companies.
I also have to mention that some local little known locations have now started charging fees due to amatuer groups being set up and following in the footsteps of these larger companies. So who is to blame for this?
I have to disagree that tourist attractions are not worth investigating as any serious scientist would take such claims as hauntings and sightings of ghosts seriously and if these places are just using the claims of the paranormal for their own gain then this is a type of fraud and deceiving the public.
Nothing more to add.
Post a Comment