Stephen Bernhard is the co-founder, webmaster, and lead investigator for the Paranormal Activities Research Group (PARG). He recently sat down to answer some questions and give visitors to the PARG Web site a little insight into him, his motives, and the group.
Why form a paranormal investigation team? Aren't there already plenty of them out there?
Yes, there are quite a few. Thanks to the popularity of the TV programs. The purpose for this group is simple-to allow others to make as educated of a decision as to whether the paranormal exists.You are an unashamed skeptic. Does this mean that you try to disprove hauntings?
Absolutely not! I am a skeptic. And I do admire the works of Joe Nickell, James Randi, and Penn and Teller. I honestly do not believe in the supernatural, psychics, ghosts, and whatnot. Now this might sound weird, though, but I want to. I really would like to discover that ghosts are real and tangible. I honestly and truly do want to believe it, but I can't.
I have never seen 100% proof in the existence of any of it. To me, the idea of a ghost or spirit is like having a "life after death." This is a very appeal aspect to me. However-and I'm going out on a limb here-no group has ever found demonstrable evidence that makes me say "I'll be damned, it is real!" I am very scientific. I want proof. I want more than a "smoking gun." I want the body, as well.So, if you're not wanting to disprove hauntings, then what is your goal?
I don't set out to disprove anything. I set out to find facts. I want to gather the evidence that will allow you, the client, to make the determination as to whether a haunting exists. Our team will not make declarations like "yep, you got a ghost," or "nope, nothing's here." It isn't our job to claim a haunting. It's our job to document.
What if you document that some activity was witnessed?
We would do our best to capture tangible proof of it and inform the client. We will tell them what has happened, if it is similar to what is accepted as a ghost or haunting, if there were any possible "natural" causes to explain the incident, and any other relevant information. We will not say we caught a ghost on film, or voices on a recorder. We caught compelling imagery and sounds.
Why is it so important to you to not
say "yes, you have a haunting?"
Because there is no solid, verifiable scientific proof
that ghosts exist. If I were to say that a place is truly
haunted, then I would not be completely honest and
accurate with my assessment.
A ghost, spirit, or haunting is such a subjective anomaly in that they may be real to those who are devoutly religious, but not to those who are agnostic or athiests. Those of different cultures may have different interpretations, as well. Therefore, by documenting evidence properly, we can let the client decide, based on his or her own beliefs, culture, customs or whatever.
Well... there have been quite a few things that I have investigated, stumbled across, etc., that I can't explain. That is part of the reason that I have formed the PARG. I want to know exactly what I have experienced. If is is supernatural or paranormal, then I want to know.
Are all members of the PARG skeptics?
No! Actually, having both skeptics and believers can work as a good system of checks and balances. It also allows for different points of view on a variety of subjects. Having a skeptic is important, but so is having someone who believes.
Well, a medium has psychic abilities....
If you don't believe in it, then why use them?
Just because I do not believe in psychic abilities does not mean that it does not exist. I could very well be wrong. It is generally accepted by the paranormal investigative community that mediums are an effective way to communicate with the paranormal. Therefore, why shouldn't we use a medium? If a medium helps us obtain the tangible proof, then great! If not, then their reports can still be interesting and quite compelling to both the team and the client.
So, what constitutes tangible proof or evidence?
This is a great question. "Tangible" is defined as basically being real. "Demonstrable" means that you can demonstrate the existence of something. Saying "I feel a presence" is neither demonstrable or tangible for the purpose of this type of investigation. Getting something that can be scientifically scrutinized is best. The problem is this: how do we obtain evidence that can be literally "put under the microscope?"
There is, of course, photography and EVPs. These pieces of evidence can be absolutely compelling. However, they typically lack corroborating evidence, and therefore do not hold up to scientific methodology.
I think that the best that we can do is obtain as much demonstrable evidence that is corroborated by other evidence, and not just anecdotes of those who were there.
I don't disagree with it, either. I can't disagree if I don't have the proof to say that ghosts don't exist. However, I don't yet have any proof to say that they really do, either. Maybe a better way to put it would be that I am a "paranormal agnostic."
My personal belief in a majority of cases is that we, as humans, like to rationalize on what unknown things are. If we here a noise that we can't explain, or think that we see something out of the corner of our eye in a darkened room, then we try to explain to ourselves what it is.
With how prevalent stories, rumors, and whatnot that involve the supernatural are, and the various deep rooted religious beliefs held by probably millions upon millions of people worldwide, it doesn't seem so surprising that there are so many alleged paranormal occurrences. People are just inundated "ghost propaganda." Stories, movies, TV, books... you name it. Ghosts are very popular in our culture. With this in mind, anything out of the ordinary or not easily explained and quickly become a "supernatural event."
Some people wish to believe, and they inevitably run into one. That would be the easy way out to try to explain what a ghost is: a figment of an overactive and receptive imagination. But what about the others who once swore to be a skeptic,and then something goes bump in the night and they become believers? Most likely, there is some rational explanation to what they have experienced. They just may not have discovered that explanation for one reason or another. Surely, though, not everything can be explained....
These people who were once skeptics and convert to the believers' side are indeed compelling. There have been quite a few who were not influenced by religion in their beliefs, and were not only of sound mind, but of a rational, scientific one, as well. It does get hard to dismiss these people as just another person whose mind runs rampant on the subject of ghosts.