This article is an example of how members of our community can speak out to say that we want authenticity. I can't remember the last time I spoke with someone who thought ghost TV was real. I can certainly remember the last time I talked with someone who thought ghost TV was representative of our community. Considering how many people show up at ghost hunting gatherings to celebrate the actors, I can't blame them.
Few people bother to look past the celebrity paranormalists to see the hundreds of people who are seriously trying to further our understanding. There are many who could use a little support.
Westerners are conditioned from school age to respect scientists without question. At the same time, few paranormalists realize that a high percentage of our beloved parapsychologists are actually trying to prove experiencers are delusional. Almost none accept the survival hypothesis, which is the assumed model for ghost hunters.
One caution I would add. We need to speak out when we think something is fake. At the very least, we need to ask questions. But with that said, we need to remember that none of us know the limits of how paranormal phenomena may occur. For instance, in pretty good light and just a foot or so away, I have seen an arm pass through a plastic cable tie in a seance setting. I have witnessed similar events demonstrated by different mediums in different places. Most people I know would say a report like that is just me being fooled. But until we understand the limits of apportation, we cannot say what is possible.
Comment, ask questions, express doubt, but give the practitioners an opportunity to answer before condemning them. As it was mentioned in the article, these things end up in print and seem to never go away. For sure, the skeptic editors of Wikipedia will cite the negative comment as proof we are all delusional.
We need to police ourselves, but we need to do so without handing our sword to those who would make us go away.
![[-]](https://psiencequest.net/forums/images/collapse.png)
