Paranormal Research 14 Years Of Hard Dat

Paranormal Research - 14 Years of Hard Data Robert “Brad” Bradley, Research Director The Center for Paranormal Research and Investigation Phone: 804-452-7377 Email: science@centerpri.org Introduction Over thousands of years there have been continuous reports of perceived supernatural or paranormal phenomena. There is a documented public desire and a perceived spiritual need to know more about it. The physical sciences offer many tools to understand the phenomena1 and many theories have been presented over many years regarding its nature2. The Center for Paranormal Research and Investigation (CPRI), a 501(c)(3) educational research organization has taken on several of the proposed theories since 2010 using scientific method and experimental design protocols, collecting, and analyzing data from the various experiments. The theories selected for analysis were those that were more amenable to being tested using physical science methodologies. Some of these theories include but aren’t limited to environmental factors surrounding perception of manifestations3, magnetism and ionizing radiation as indicators4 and electronic voice phenomena existence5. While analyses were conducted, several ancillary discoveries were also made pointing to new lines of research and experimentation. Discussion Before joining CPRI, I was a skeptic in regards to reports of paranormal phenomena. In 2010, I attended an event by a paranormal celebrity in an inn with claims of paranormal activity. It was during this event that I witnessed something I couldn’t explain. This put me on a path to determine exactly what I witnessed which in turn brought me to CPRI. Upon joining the organization, I found several barriers

to the research within the field. These are listed below. ● Phenomena had been sensationalized in the media. ● There is a lack of support from mainstream science. ● There is a lack of qualified personnel to conduct research. ● There is a lack of understanding of proper research and experimental techniques. ● There is a lack of funding. ● There is a lack of outlets for new scientific work. ● There is little sharing of data due to various reasons. ● There is fraud and gross negligence in this field of research. CPRI is working diligently to overcome these barriers and has been not only a significant resource, but a strong advocate in this field. CPRI follows mainstream academic methodologies including, but not limited to the scientific method and experimental design. This is summarized below. ● Generate hypotheses generated, based on prior theory, reports, and patterns. ● Design experiments to gather appropriate data, including proper instrumentation. ● Perform experiments and gather data/evidence. ● Perform data analysis. ● Report. 1 ● Repeat process. Initially, it was theorized that all reported paranormal activity was of a non-interactive nature. A series of experiments were designed where audio and video were collected alongside environmental data such as temperature, barometric pressure, humidity, vibration, visible light and magnetic fields3. See examples of the environmental data below collected from a single experiment where an audible sound of footsteps on stairs was detected. Vibration Intensity Visible Light Intensity 2 Temperature and Humidity Magnetic Field 3 There was

good correlation between environmental data and the audible footsteps detected on the stairs. However, since the footsteps were also detected by the vibration sensor, it was determined that this activity was actually interactive instead of non-interactive. This threw into question the theory that all reported paranormal activity was non-interactive. Also, it was noticed that the sensor detections were small, indicating that these could be microevents in the sphere of surveillance. While conducting these experiments over several years, we began looking into weather data for the various locations surveyed. During examination of data from the Geostationary Operational Environmental Satellite (GOES), we found that there seemed to be a correlation between the downward slope of the geomagnetic field measured at the satellite and the amount of activity reported. We also found what seemed to be a correlation between the steepness of the downward slope and the intensity of the activity (louder, more visible, etc.)4 See an example below showing a point where an example of perceived activity was detected. GOES Magnetometer Data The detection of this correlation was purely accidental, as are many important data milestones in science. For example, while conducting research at Bacon’s Castle in Surry, VA, we were using a microphone array of 8 microphones and 100’ microphone cables. One of the microphones was improperly grounded which created a radio frequency antenna. While conducting surveillance, a radio program was detected on this microphone and recorded. It was noticed that the program was from a few months prior. Upon checking

with the transmitting 4 station, it was determined that they were not broadcasting a recorded show at that time. This detection has started an entirely new line of research into possible time anomalies at surveillance sites. As another example, CPRI began experimenting with the “battery drain during paranormal activity” theory. A circuit attached to a battery was monitored for voltage during surveillance periods. No voltage change was detected over several years of data collection even when the circuit was found to be at the center of perceived activity. However, we have experienced two electromagnetic pulses (EMPs) at the Gauss level at two separate surveillance sites that seem to have deactivated battery operated equipment within two feet of the device that detected the EMP. The EMPs were not detected by or deactivated any device outside of that two foot radius around the device that detected the EMP. This would seem to indicate that the EMPs were very localized to that small area. This also correlates with other environmental anomalies detected only within a two to three foot radius of a perceived activity point source3. Interestingly, when the equipment was turned back on, batteries showed full to almost full charge. As various research projects have progressed over time, more instances of possible interactive activity have been detected. Footsteps felt by observers, doors opening and closing, and items moving have all been detected. This seemed to disprove the theory that all activity reported was of a non-interactive nature. CPRI had also employed Geiger

Counters at various sites in an effort to mitigate possible Radon gas exposure during data collection projects. It was noticed that during possible interactive activity, counts per minute (CPM) readings on these Geiger Counters would spike to three times or more of background radiation levels. It was also noticed that changes in the intensity of the local geomagnetic field also occurred. Data collected around this interactive activity (radiation, magnetic field, EMP) seems to mimic data collected during cryptid and unidentified aerial phenomena (UAP) encounters as reported by Bigfoot Field Researchers Organization (BFRO), the Mutual UFO Network (MUFON) and the Skinwalker Ranch research site in Utah. The mimicked data has indicated a need to research a different causation mechanism for these types of interactive events. Radiation Spike Example 5 As another example, during analysis of audio data collected over multiple years, it was noticed that audio anomalies were detected on multiple recorders with different intensities based on distance from a perceived source. This would indicate that these anomalies were actually audible, though not heard by observers at the time. Anomalies detected only by a single recorder tended to have no other recorders available nearby. This throws into dispute the electronic voice phenomena theory5, though more work needs to be done in this line of research. A vast amount of video data was also collected during this same time period. Reviewing such large amounts of video became very problematic and there was a concern that anomalies may be missed. A computer algorithm

was created by Tommy Amos, CPRI president, that allowed for the detection of video anomalies in a much shorter time with much less manual review. After using this algorithm, it was determined that it was very possible that we had been missing video anomalies. An example of this is the detection of a pixelated transparent mass moving up the stairs at a location where footsteps had been detected. Previous manual review had missed this anomaly. An example of this is shown below. Further work needs to be done to determine the source of the anomalies. Video Anomaly Example 6 Conclusions What began as a search for non-interactive activity causation has since expanded into interactive activity. As with most scientific research, the “ah ha” moments have been mostly accidental, occurring while investigating other research avenues. Also, big data analysis seems to indicate possible multiple source types of activity beyond just interactive and non-interactive types. Our research has pushed us in directions where determining causation seems to be just around the corner for niche types of activity. Future lines of research include, but are not limited to: ● Time anomaly experiments ● Interactive activity: Is there an Einstein-Rosen Bridge connection? ● Non-interactive activity: What are some possible causes? ● Correlations in data between paranormal, cryptid and UAP incidents ● Audible anomaly causation ● Transparent, pixelated video anomaly causation ● Phantom smells vs Gas Chromatography/Mass Spectrometry analysis As with any scientific endeavor, as more data is available, theories and data interpretations change over

time. This is an evergreen process and the work continues to evolve. —---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Sources 1 Townsend, Maurice. “Why Study the Paranormal Scientifically?” ASSAP.ac.uk. Web. 27 Feb. 2021. 2 Townsend, Maurice. “Paranormal Theories and Science.” ASSAP.ac.uk. Web. 24 Jan. 2021. 3 Bradley, Robert. “Environmental Factors Surrounding Perceived Anomalous Phenomena.” Academia.edu. Web. 20 April 2020. 4 Bradley, Robert. “A Proposed Correlation between the Perception of Paranormal Manifestations and GOES System Magnetometer Data.” Academia.edu. Web. 21 March 2016. 5 Bowmaker, Tony. “EVP – Classic Research.” Anomaly. Vol 9. Nov. 1991. 7