Without a Shred of Relevance


The other night, I was sitting in bed recording while my wife slept and the CPAP droned, but as soon as I stopped, she was awakened by a vivid dream. To make a very long story short, it turns out that I captured a voice saying “wake up” just seconds before she actually did.

I love it when EVP fit the situation so relevantly, and it seems to happen often. This kind of meaningful interaction is what most convinces me of their authenticity. No matter where they occur, EVP can be downright uncanny when it comes to situational significance, but lately I’ve been wondering just how often this actually occurs. I’ve been pondering a new kind of classification that reflects the relevance of these voices.

We already classify EVP as A through D to indicate strength and clarity, and personally, I use three others – N, E, and R. Huh? N designates a noise phenomenon – something I believe to rarely be paranormal (re: There Is No Silence, Chapter 4). E stands for Extreme EVP, and R represents those which need to be played in reverse to be understood. Now I want to add more! I am a bureaucrat at heart, you know.

Perhaps numbers could be used. We could start at the number one and go to five, with one denoting the most relevant EVP, and five indicating total irrelevance. Well, it needs work, but I wanted to see how many random EVP samples would actually achieve #1 status. It turns out not as many as I thought. The majority of 200 specimens were classified #3 – somewhat relevant, but not necessarily. In fact, the results made a beautiful bell curve when plotted on a graph.

Of course, this doesn’t attest to the authenticity of EVP. We’ve always been aware of how whacky some spirit comments can be, so this occasional absurdity is nothing new. Still, my test results have caused me to embrace these less lucid fellows much more than before. We should be more appreciative of the lowly #5 voices; those without a shred of relevance. I don’t know about you, but I find them infinitely more fascinating.

On July 7, 2009 I recorded a voice that said “Collins is 51 today” – a high-end, fully understandable B-class comment that related to absolutely nothing. This was quickly followed by another voice saying “caw caw caw.” (No, it wasn’t a bird – trust me.) The point is, these comments may not be relevant to situation, location, or people we know, but they’re spoken from somewhere other than here, and in that regard, they’re very important.

Statistics are important too. Indeed, statistical evidence may be the most compelling argument for the authenticity of EVP voices, but it goes much deeper than numbers, trends, or anything that fits on a chart or graph. Each individual EVP represents the expression of someone unseen, and my guess is that while they may not always be relevant to us, they’re probably very relevant elsewhere. So, happy birthday, Collins – wherever you are. You’re A number one in my book. Maybe I’ll throw a surprise birthday party this July 7th, so save the date. Do you think he’ll feel the love from so far away? I wonder how many of us it will take.

Advertisements

4 responses to “Without a Shred of Relevance

  1. I’ve always thought we should be adding another code to the end of our EVP/possible EVP. A code that denotes just how confident we actually are that it is EVP. And also, I’ve been reading some fantastic articles and studies from the ATransC journal that discuss one’s perception of the messages they actually hear in an EVP. It turns out, even when you have a large group of experienced researchers listening to and analyzing EVP responses (on their own), the great majority of the time they never agree on what the actual message was, anyway. The range of messages that researchers claimed to hear in a particular study blew my mind. Many of them were incredibly confident of what they were hearing, yet others didn’t agree. So, when class A is supposed to be something that multiple listeners would agree with, this becomes a problem. It’s fascinating to me. Makes me want to do some kind of study on my own. Maybe we’re classifying EVP the wrong way.

    • I kinda dealt with this in There Is No Silence a bit, because it’s very frequent. What I suggested was “possibly” the message is geared toward the person who records it – to better suit those physical capabilities unique to him or her. We think we all hear the same, but we don’t. Maybe I won’t get it when I hear your voices, and maybe you won’t get it with mine. Just a possibility? It’s like the old question: is red really red to everyone? Probably not. One man’s “get out” is another man’s “get down” or something. I struggle putting EVP on the podcast for this very reason, and sometimes I could kick myself for my choices. But recognizing an unexplained voice is the real battle – what it says is less significant. It takes more work than civilians realize, doesn’t it? 🙂

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s