Is there any scientific proof of ghosts?

There is no scientific “proof” of ghosts or anything else.

“Proofs” come from mathematics and logic.

scientific proof of ghosts - not in any libraryScience relies on evidence, and much of it is provisional.

Scientists are constantly improving techniques and research methods. Thanks to a steady supply of new discoveries, there is no final word in science. That makes it an exciting, evolving field.

So, there is no proof. If you want conclusive, scientific evidence of ghosts, it doesn’t exist yet. You may find an answer that makes sense to you. It might be all the evidence you need.

Scientific evidence is something else.

We can go to a haunted site and — often but not always — trigger unexplained phenomena. However, our results aren’t consistent.

In other words, ghostly phenomena can’t be duplicated to lab standards. Never mind “scientific proof of ghosts.” We don’t even have reliable scientific evidence at this point.

If we could reliably duplicate what we encounter at haunted sites, we might find better answers to many ghost hunting questions.

Whole Brain Emulation (WBE) or “mind uploading” could open doors for ghost research. It’s the storage of intelligence — what’s in your brain — in digital format. Engineer Ray Kurzweil predicts that will be possible by the year 2045.

Let’s say we could routinely store memories for every human being. Let’s also assume we’ve refined communication with ghosts. Then, we could compare what the ghost tells us about his life, against his digitally stored (WBE) memories.

At the moment, that’s pure sci-fi. However, it’s one of many possibilities. If the data in the computer or avatar match what’s conveyed by the ghost, point for point, that could be compelling evidence.

But, it’s still not scientific proof of ghosts.

We’re also trying to refine EMF detection. Some orbs may result from EMF that accompanies a haunting. With better research tools, we may understand more about orbs, EMF, and ghosts.

However, people have been trying to understand ghosts for centuries.

We’re still far from turning this into a credible science.

For now, there’s no “proof.” We can’t convince skeptical critics that ghosts are real, either. Of course, there may never be enough evidence for that.

Many people believe what they want to believe. After all, some people still insist the world is flat, and nothing will persuade them otherwise.

I’d love to claim that there’s scientific proof of ghosts, but there isn’t and never will be. What we’re actually searching for is scientific evidence of ghosts. And, we’re making good progress there.

What do scientists think about ghosts?

Scientists believe in ghosts the same as the rest of the public do.

In other words, some believe and some don’t. They’re as likely to be skeptics (or believers) in the same percentages as non-scientists.

Do scientists believe in ghosts? Yes. And no.

In public, they may not admit to believing in ghosts.

Some scientists pretend they’re hardcore, skeptical critics. That’s to protect their reputations and their jobs.

In private, those same scientists believe in ghosts, and are happy to share their evidence with those they trust.

Other scientists won’t accept the reality of ghosts without significantly more evidence. That’s a rational choice, and I respect it.

In general, scientists are accustomed to laboratory research. They rely on the scientific method. That’s why they separate their personal experiences from their professional opinions.

Healthy skepticism is important in our research. That’s why many paranormal investigators freely admit that we cannot prove that ghosts exist.

We know that something unusual is going on at some locations.  For now, trying to prove that is enough of a challenge.

I’ve investigated with several MIT scientists, and several regional police officers, as well. It’s always been a positive experience.

They’re as interested in this topic as anyone else.

Stereotypes don’t apply to scientists.

Whether they believe or don’t believe in ghosts is a matter of personal opinion. That opinion is usually rooted in their personal experiences.

I believe that’s true of most ghost hunters. Unless they have another agenda, they’re looking for something that confirms (or debunks) ghosts, once and for all… at least for them.

That’s probably why you’re interested in ghost hunting, too.

Some scientists believe in ghosts. Others don’t.

If a scientist joins your research team, don’t assume he or she is going to be a skeptical critic. Avoid being on the defensive.

Adding a scientist to your ghost hunting team might be the very best thing you could do.  He or she might bring tools and insights to your investigations. And, those tools might provide the breakthroughs we’re looking for.