Forums > Social Discussion > Electronic Voice Phenomenon (EVP)

Posted: 29th Apr 2005

with reference to the body generating a sufficient electrical field to impress a signal either upon a tape, (probably not possible with dat or minidisc, and generally probably not possible for all ther reasons previously mentioned) with reference to the body generating sufficient electrical potential to compress atmospherics to cause sound waves (i'm going to stick my head on the block now and say not possible in classical physics)

So what are we recording, and what does the body generate, the trifield Multiple field "Natural" EM / MICROWAVE meter measures LOW static electric, radio-microwave and magnetic fields, this rather useful device, generally used by microwave engineers to asses the safety of microwave devices such as ovens etc, Human beings and animals usually emit an electric field which is easily detectable using the Natural EM Meter. the meter can be used as a motion-activated intruder alarm. It is so sensitive that it can detect the presence of a person through a wall. Though it is not foolproof in this capacity, (sometimes a person will carry NO electric charge and thus be "invisible" to the meter), its sensitivity is of interest to researchers in the field of parapsychology, especially "ghost hunters".

as to whether that energy remains after bodily expiry I'm not speculating, what I have found though is that using suitable equipment it is entirely possible to record this electrical field, although what you usually end up with is certainly nothing resembling speach

mark







I'm going to point you

https://www.trifieldmeter.com/

Posted: 29th Apr 2005
Thanks for that info. I'm curious that you say some people have no electrical charge though (do you mean field?) - surely this could indicate that the meter is reading something that isn't innate to all living things? How common is this?

Also I'm interested in false positives, one scientific supply place says

Written by:

---

One thing is certain- this meter is so sensitive to EMF changes that it will detect the motion of your hand as you wave it back and forth in front of the device. This is especially true when the Natural EM meter is set to "SUM" mode. Influencing this meter with the wave of a hand makes for a quick and easy classroom demonstration- consider having your students propose a detailed explanation for why this occurs. (consider why paranormal researchers might use this device- also consider what "tells" our muscles to contract)

---

"Moo," said the happy cow.

Posted: 30th Apr 2005

Written by: Sakura_moon

---

Ouija boards...i dont like them.
I was with a few friends once and one of them can sense things really well, he told us we shouldnt try it for long because he felt soemthing wrong.
About two minutes in, me and my friend both had one really cold arm and one really hot arm, and a girl near me was shaking.
We dont know what it was, so we just stopped and put it away.
I havent done ouija since then, dont feel like it, either..

---

yeh when i did one i was sitting on the heater and still froze and since then my cd player stopped working aswell grrrr damn them ...thiiings hehehe but my friend has had light bulbs blow up above her eek either that or she likes telling lies

hug me!

Posted: 30th Apr 2005
i think the simple answer to the whole Ouija board debate is like everything else... if you don't know what your doing don't do it. protect yourself and if you feel as though you have let something in 9 times out of 10 its easily resolved with a cleansing and destroying the board.

Life's too short to worry about where you put your marshmallows

Posted: 30th Apr 2005
but what about the remaining 1-time-out-of-ten when you wind up in the middle of a horror movie?

"You can't outrun Death forever.
But you can make the Bastard work for it."

--MAJOR KORGO KORGAR,
"Last of The Lancers"
AFC 32


Educate your self in the Hazards of Fire Breathing STAY SAFE!

Posted: 30th Apr 2005
then thats when you get some one in who know what they are doing

Life's too short to worry about where you put your marshmallows

Posted: 1st May 2005
I just saw this movie yesterday and it was an awful movie. So negitive and depressing... A big thumbs down

TAJ "boat mummy." VALURA "yes sweetie you went on a boat, was daddy there with you?" TAJ "no, but monkey on boat" VALURA "well then sweetie, Daddy WAS there with you"

Posted: 1st May 2005
i jjust saw the amityville horror....
never going to watch it again

.:Pink Exocutioner:.

I am Jack's Raging Bile Duct...

Loving you from the deepest part of my loins.

Posted: 2nd May 2005
back to the 30 band EQs, what is their purpose, to filter out unwanted noise, to turn up other noises, both or somethin else?

cheers, pete

"you know there are no trophys for doing silly things in real life yeah pete?" said ant "you wont get a 'listened to ride of the valkyries all the way to vietnam' trophy"

*proud owner of the very cute fire_spinning_angel, birgit and neon shaolin*

Posted: 2nd May 2005

Written by: Valura

---

the statement that science can explain everything is just as absurd to me...

---

No real scientist would ever ever say that. I often times think people oversimplify science to the point of not being true and then claim it as fact. Science gives us models to predict. It works really well for what it was designed to do. It sometimes makes me sad when 'science' is used as a blanket statement against all alternative thought.



There is plenty of science that absolutely fully supports EVP. It's the same science that supports why giving someone a sugar pill is 80% as effective as an antidepressant as prozac (true story.) The human brain is not perfect. It projects life and meaning on to all sorts of inanimate objects. Every one of our perceptions are filtered through our brain. Every fact that we have incorporated into our consiousness has been filtered through our brain.



If our brain tells us there is a ghost, there IS a ghost. It doesn't matter that our eyes don't see it, or our ears don't hear it.



If you put most people in a dark house and tell them it's haunted, their heartrate will scientifically increase.



I think that Alien Abductions and Ghosts and EVP and Poltergeists and Astral Projection many other 'supernatural' phenomena can very easily be explained not by looking for them, but by looking scientifically at how our imperfect brain works.



I think it's kind of sad, actually, that this side of 'science' isn't given as much credit. If a commercial can convince a person who just ate that they're hungry, can't we find a way to convince a chemotherapy patient not to be nauseous without a bunch of pills? Oversimplification, agreed. But suggestion is a powerful science. We don't like to think of ourselves as being susceptable to it because it makes us seem weak. People would rather pop a pill, even if it's a placebo to feel better than think that happy thoughts could actually do the same thing.



Even right now, your brain is looking at a series of light and dark spots on a page and projecting life and emotion into an electronic device. EVP is a perfect audible rorschach test.

Well, shall we go?
Yes, let's go.
[They do not move.]

Posted: 2nd May 2005
'If our brain tells us there is a ghost, there IS a ghost.

nah, hang on a second - if our brain tells us that there's a leprechaun sitting on the lampshade, that doesn't mean that there IS one. it just means that we should lay off the DMT . . .

ture na sig

Posted: 2nd May 2005
It's all Truth vs. truth.

If your brain tells you there is a leprechaun sitting on the lamp shade, there IS a leprechaun sitting in the lamp shade.

It's just as much of a truth as any of your other 'truths'.

Now, I'm a chemist here, so I'm not gonna suggest that anyone ELSE will see a leprechaun. BUT...

If YOUR brain believes something, whether anyone ELSE believes it or not, it is just as "REAL" as anything in my reality.

Now whether your brain believes that you live in England, or that Jesus is Our Saviour, or that there is a Leprechaun sitting on your lampshade... YOUR REALITY is the only FACT that exists.

I think too many scientists are saying "There are no ghosts" and not enought are saying "What is going on in people's brains to make them believe there are ghosts?

There is no Truth. Only many little truths. And when enough of our little truths agree, we call that reality.

Well, shall we go?
Yes, let's go.
[They do not move.]

Posted: 2nd May 2005
I disagree completely.

'Now whether your brain believes that you live in England, or that Jesus is Our Saviour, or that there is a Leprechaun sitting on your lampshade... YOUR REALITY is the only FACT that exists.'

Really? In that case, how do you account for the possibility of error? I mean, you presumably want to allow that I might be wrong in my beliefs. But unless you think that there's a difference between 'my reality' [i.e. my beliefs, and how i experience the world] and 'the facts' [i.e. the stuff outside your head], how can you explain this possibility?

There's also the question of what it is for a belief to be true. Many philosophers would say that beliefs are true if they correspond to the facts; in other words, if there's an appropriate hookup between the stuff inside your head and the stuff outside your head.

I accept that the notion of 'the Truth' [with a capital T] is a bit suspect, but nevertheless individual statements or beliefs can be true [with a small t]. But there's a difference between agreement [or coherence] and getting it right. Consider: if all the world thinks that I killed my mother, does that mean that I actually did?

ture na sig

Posted: 2nd May 2005

Written by: quiet

---

Consider: if all the world thinks that I killed my mother, does that mean that I actually did?

---

There's no such thing as "Actually did". There is only your perception, and theirs. It's only your ego that puts the value of one's own perceptions above everyone else's.

I'm not as radical as I sound right now. I got through 99.9% of my life believeing that if I see the red stoplight, the person in the car next to me will also see the red stoplight. It would be chaos if we all experienced radically different realities.

I'm just saying that perception is imperfect. If I look at a cloud and think it looks like the letter T, and you think it doesn't, neither one of us is 'right'.

I think the differences in those perceptions is where things like ghosts come from. Adrenaline and suggestion can make a ghost as real as any other perception.

Right now, you are percieving my spirit. Through the computer, granted, but you're taking forgranted that I'm alive and choosing to interact with me. If you hear a bunch of random noise, and chose to associate a spirit with it, it's no more or less 'real' than I am right now.

I do not think that random noise can be manipulated by people who have died. I do believe that people will associate spirits with this phenomena and that these spirits will be just as real to these people as you or me.

Well, shall we go?
Yes, let's go.
[They do not move.]

Posted: 2nd May 2005
My point remains:

I wish science put more emphasis on "what's going on in the brain to make people believe this" and less on "what's going on in the electronic phenomena."

Well, shall we go?
Yes, let's go.
[They do not move.]

Posted: 2nd May 2005
On the subject of 30 band EQ, grpahic equaliser, yes essentially its a way of cleaning up in real time through hardware the recorded signal, with ultra high gain microphones and recording gain turned up fully, your really up aginst something called molecular noise, this tends to be a unform form of white noise caused manily by the semiconductor lineup in the mic and recording amplifyer(s) and if using tape by tape as well. I use 2*35 channel which I often set up as 1 * 70 since I only require mono.

mark

Posted: 2nd May 2005
for building a faraday cage should i use copper wire or just hard chicken wire???? does it make a difference?

Jesus saves sinners and redeems them for cash and
prizes

Co-Founder of Keepers of Light

Educate yourself about the Hazards of Fire Breathing STAY SAFE!

Posted: 2nd May 2005

Written by: spiralx

---

You can call the soul the electric field generated by a living creature, but you're then saying that this persists after death?

---

energy can only change form....it can neither be created or destroyed....the bodies so called "soul" is energy...therefore as the body dies the energy must change form or it will cease to exist which is an impossibility

Written by: spiralx

---

I'd like to see something showing that the strength of this field is enough to cause an effect on a tape allowing this phenomenon. And then that the electric field can somehow impress a very certain set of sounds (voices) on the air so that it can be recorded with a microphone.

---

could be a possibility through magnetic induction....tape recordings are made by magnets...this is definately a stretch but i think it could be possible to effect something this way

Written by: spiralx

---

Sound is a compression wave - electricity isn't.

---

electricity or energy can incite a compression wave by exciting the particles....theres also things like lightning(electricity) which superheat the air causing a compression and the sound of thunder...im not saying that electricity is the direct cuplrit here, however i am saying that some form of energy is, and most likely one that hasnt been realized by science.

remember science is essentially collective ignorance eliminating one possibility at a time

Jesus saves sinners and redeems them for cash and
prizes

Co-Founder of Keepers of Light

Educate yourself about the Hazards of Fire Breathing STAY SAFE!

Posted: 2nd May 2005

Probably better to use a good conductor for you faraday cage, copper would be suitable for this, but costly in terms of build time, wire mesh works well enough, make sure you have recording device, mic and power supply inside, try and use batteries only for this.

mark

Posted: 2nd May 2005
just a little something thrown in to make things more interesting.....but please be patient, i'm not too good at explaining things.

This is a concept found in metaphysics, that everything is connected to each other:

Firstly: Take a look at an atom. It consists as a core (proton), with electrons moving around it in orbitals, with the electrons making up the most volume of the atom.

Secondly: Take a look at anything material around you, a desk, pc, keyboard, trees, grass, soil, even human beings. all of those things consists of.......you guessed it, ATOMS!!!!

Now for the tricky part, seeing that we consist of atoms, means that there are zillions of electrons moving around in our bodies. If i was to put my hand flat on a desk....would there be any plane which seperates my hand from the desk, or.....do the electrons in the desk, and the electrons in my hand mingle?

Ok, some of you might stop reading here and say it is just nonsense, but for those who do agree, lets take it one step further.....

Now we have air......and air consists of elements such as Oxygen, nitrogen, an array of halogens ect ect. All of those are atoms. Because of what i said earlier, we are "one" with air as well, and air is everywhere!!!!!!

So, are we all connected to each other or not? If we are connected to everything in the universe (or world to keep it simple), then what happens to us when we die? after reading this who says we can't we back in little black and white spots.

we are all one...as we are part of space, space is also part of us.

Posted: 2nd May 2005

Written by: darkpoet

---

remember science is essentially collective ignorance eliminating one possibility at a time

---

I was looking for an excuse to get out of this conversation.

Thanks for providing one.

Well, shall we go?
Yes, let's go.
[They do not move.]

Posted: 2nd May 2005
the amount of pseudo-science in this thread is obscene. i don't know where to begin. not to mention dodgy metaphysics. maybe i'll start with the metaphysics.

A. DODGY METAPHYSICS

'There's no such thing as "Actually did". There is only your perception, and theirs. It's only your ego that puts the value of one's own perceptions above everyone else's.'

1. It's not just a matter of sitting around generating 'perceptions'; rather, you perceive things in the world. If it *was* just a matter of 'it's all real to me, and it's all real to you', then you have no way of accounting for factual disagreement.

For instance, the hunt for the person who stabbed Abigail Witchalls [https://news.independent.co.uk/uk/crime/story.jsp?story=634933, if you're interested]. Are you seriously suggesting that there is no fact of the matter as to who the culprit is? Or that the whole murder investigation is just an effort to get as many people to agree on the issue as possible? Maybe the culprit has forgotten what he did: are you claiming that we can't say that he actually did stab her? If we can't, how do we justify punishment [as opposed to restraint, say]?

Or supposing two people form different opinions as to who the culprit was (suppose, for simplicity, there are only two suspects). Are you seriously suggesting that this is just a difference of opinion, rather than a difference of matter of fact?

Sure, there may be situations - like your cloud example - where there's no fact of the matter. Something might look like a duck to me, and look like a rabbit to you, and we'd both be right in saying 'it LOOKS LIKE a duck', or 'it LOOKS like a rabbit'. But that's entirely different from saying 'hey, we're both right! it's a duck and a rabbit - simultaneously!', or - even worse - 'hmm, given that we have differing opinions, the best that we can say is that there's no fact of the matter about what sort of animal it is'.

In fact, your position has a contradiction in it: you claim that there is no 'actually' regarding 'what we actually perceive', but at the same time you want to claim that perception is 'imperfect'. If you want to do this, then you need to have some idea of what 'perfect' perception would be. And the best account of 'perfect' [that is, accurate] perception is that it gives you true beliefs about the facts of the matter.

I could rant about this all day; email me [im4985@bristol.ac.uk] if you want to discuss it further, but I'll stop the off-topic ramble.

I agree with you, however, on your 'point'; that psychology is an equally important scientific endeavour to physics.

B. DODGY SCIENCE

'energy can only change form....it can neither be created or destroyed....the bodies so called "soul" is energy...therefore as the body dies the energy must change form or it will cease to exist which is an impossibility'

Strictly speaking, this is right. Energy can't be destroyed, but it can be turned into matter. Unfortunately, energy is a scientific concept; and souls are, emphatically, not. So if you asked a scientist to give an account of the energy of a body, he'd give you a list of things like 'kinetic energy, N joules, potential energy, N joules, stored chemical energy, a further N joules, electrical energy . . .etc.' Furthermore, he would be able to give an account of what happened to that energy after the body died. So, for instance, when you burn a body, it releases chemical energy. And you can measure the heat output.

Unfortunately, 'the electric field generated by a living creature' is NOT ENERGY. [it's a field, in case you're wondering. there is a difference.] And if you think that that's the soul, your theory is stuffed. Electrical fields can vanish: just as when you remove the power from an electromagnet, the magnetic field vanishes. So I'm puzzled as to precisely what you think is going on.

A second problem: energy (by itself) won't suffice to give an account of whatever the 'soul' is. What matters to living beings isn't just that there is a certain amount of energy in a certain place: it also has to be arranged in a certain way. For instance, if you put a frog in a food blender, and press the 'on' switch, you're not destroying any of the energy in the frog's body - you're just rearranging it. [trivially, you're increasing the amount of energy in the body by making it move faster]. Even if you grant conservation of energy, in order to show that the 'soul' persists you'd also have to show that the energy persists _in a certain arrangement_.

Leaving aside the obvious issue of why on earth it should be that souls can influence magnetic tape, but strong magnetic fields can't influence souls . . . no, sod that, this is a killer point: if ghosts can influence magnetic data, then electrical fields can influence ghosts. Given that the fields which our equipment [power generators, electricity cables, etc] generates are several orders of magnitude greater than those which your ghost-detector can pick up, you might think that those ghosts are going to be absolutely battered. Ah well.

And furthermore: you're saying that there are 'forms of energy which haven't been realised by science'. Well, perhaps there are - but in order to interact with magnetic tape [in the way you're hoping for], the forces involved HAVE to be electromagnetic. So the 'form of energy' involved CANNOT be one that 'hasn't been realised by science'.

One thing which always winds me up is people taking terms from scientific theories [a legitimate move in itself], and then claiming that the theory which they are derived from is radically flawed. The problem is that the terms take their meaning, largely, from the theory in which they are set; so if you think that the theory is radically flawed, the terms become meaningless, and that invalidates your use of them.

Last point [then i'll stop, promise]: science IS NOT 'collective ignorance eliminating one possibility at a time'. Scientists don't just generate hypotheses at random and then eliminate them one by one; they also get engaged in things like 'inference to the best explanation'. They generate hypotheses which they think *might* explain phenomena, and then they test them. And if you think that science is so haphazard and flawed, how on earth do you think we managed to put men on the moon, submarines deep underwater, eradicate smallpox, etc?

argh argh argh.

I apologise if I've offended anyone, but there's a lot of rampant, ill-founded conjectures floating around at the moment. You should believe stuff if you've got good reason to believe it, not just because you like the idea of ghosts, and you can do some word-association between 'electricity', 'magnet', 'energy', and 'life-force' or 'soul'.

Please, feel free to email me if you want a lengthy discussion.

ture na sig

Posted: 2nd May 2005
Must agree with quiet. It's one thing to have a religion but I find it pretty damn annoying when every Tom, Dick and Harry whose read a pop science book thinks that they've proved something supernatual. Personally I don't claim that science right now is perfectly correct about everything(after all, how would it progress if it was), but I think it's fairly safe to say that it's less wrong than everything else that's going around.

Believers often say that scientist have closed minds, but I think that it is the other way around. Scientists are open to their ideas being wrong, believers never accept that possibility.

According to Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle of Quantum Dynamics, we may already be making love right now...

Posted: 2nd May 2005

Written by:

---

Believers often say that scientist have closed minds, but I think that it is the other way around. Scientists are open to their ideas being wrong, believers never accept that possibility.

---

thats the hugest genralisation that has been uttered in this thread.

TAJ "boat mummy." VALURA "yes sweetie you went on a boat, was daddy there with you?" TAJ "no, but monkey on boat" VALURA "well then sweetie, Daddy WAS there with you"

Posted: 2nd May 2005
Well, I majored in the philosophy of science during my university days, and what Jeff has said is a fair description of scientific method. Scientific method is different to any particular hypothesis or the individuals involved in researching/positing/proving/disproving them. The personal flexibility of any individual scientist or group of scientists is different question. Which could indeed be explored by scientific method.

Perhaps everyone could go away for a while and read 'The Philosophers Secret Fire: A History of the Imagination' by Patrick Harpur. An excellent and intelligent antidote to polarising literalisms of any school....

.....Can't juggle balls but I sure as hell can juggle details....

Posted: 3rd May 2005
I do not wish to be misunderstood
the reason I say that is a generalisation is that jeff says that believers never accept the possiblilty of being wrong.
I am a believer and I am open to all sorts of thought schools, otherwise I wouldnt have put my hand up to partake in the experiment that Sym was talking about earlier. I feelt hat jeffs comment is unfair, and my post had no bearing on the scientific method angle.

TAJ "boat mummy." VALURA "yes sweetie you went on a boat, was daddy there with you?" TAJ "no, but monkey on boat" VALURA "well then sweetie, Daddy WAS there with you"

Posted: 3rd May 2005
*is a little frightened*
i dont think i'll play with it...
I woke up last night to someone ringing my mobile and jumped half a mile!!!!!
I think, maybe, this sort of thing should be left to the people who are brave enough to know how to do it properly...i wasnt going to try it alone, but now i dont really think i want to try it at all..

.:Pink Exocutioner:.

I am Jack's Raging Bile Duct...

Loving you from the deepest part of my loins.

Posted: 3rd May 2005

Written by: jeff(fake)

---

Must agree with quiet. It's one thing to have a religion but I find it pretty damn annoying when every Tom, Dick and Harry whose read a pop science book thinks that they've proved something supernatual. Personally I don't claim that science right now is perfectly correct about everything(after all, how would it progress if it was), but I think it's fairly safe to say that it's less wrong than everything else that's going around.

Believers often say that scientist have closed minds, but I think that it is the other way around. Scientists are open to their ideas being wrong, believers never accept that possibility.

---

I also agree that it gets annoying sometimes when a lot of people voice their own opinions in such a way that it seems as if they are telling the world they've proven something.

Now, i believe in a lot of things, but a lot of the things i believe in, haven't or can't be proven by any scientist somewhere. Now, does it mean that if i can't prove my beliefs, and that if i can't hand in any data or results or analysis about my beliefs that the things i believe in doesn't exist?

Nothing in this world is perfect, cause if it was, would we have wars, suicides, murders, rapes, inflation ect ect? Not even spacecraft sent into space by NASA is perfect, in every perfection there is some degree of imperfection. And openmindedness is something that is relative and a personal choice. You either believe there are more possibilities than what have been already shown to be true, or you stick with what you believe now and shun any new ideas that might be suggested.

we are all one...as we are part of space, space is also part of us.

Posted: 3rd May 2005
'Now, i believe in a lot of things, but a lot of the things i believe in, haven't or can't be proven by any scientist somewhere. Now, does it mean that if i can't prove my beliefs, and that if i can't hand in any data or results or analysis about my beliefs that the things i believe in doesn't exist?'

No, of course it doesn't. But if your beliefs don't cohere with a sound scientific picture of the world, then that gives reason to think that they're false: for instance, if you think that a two-pound weight falls faster than a one-pound weight.

ture na sig

Posted: 3rd May 2005
Wow, this thread got a lot bigger over the weekend!

Quiet, your long post was very good, I’d like to second it! There is a massive misunderstanding about science and what it is.

Written by: NYC

---

I wish science put more emphasis on "what's going on in the brain to make people believe this" and less on "what's going on in the electronic phenomena.

---

NYC, do you not think that science should put equal emphasis on both? We should be able to look at everything from every angle, that way we might find out more about it.

You’re right about the lack of research to look at the human mind and the way it works. If there are any good resources you or anyone knows of I would be most interested. I’m not sure I understand the other stuff you were talking about, but thats just me



Over the weekend a friend of mine who believes in quite a lot of paranormal things like this started ‘acting as a medium’ for a ghost. We were at a Tudor hall and is was about 2 in the morning. I admit that he had been drinking and he is not normally a drinker but I don’t think that the way he was acting was purely to do with the drink. He started talking to this ‘sprit’ and ‘he’ (I forget the name but it was male) was talking back though my friend. It was all very convincing stuff considering how much he’d had to drink. He became out of control and slightly valiant when the ‘sprit’ started getting more pushy. It wanted my friend to help him in some way. I can see how people get convinced by these actions. It was a little disturbing for me to see my friend acting like that, but it didn’t change my view point on the matter at all.



The point that NYC was making about perception is well demonstrated here; he had just joined a group of ‘spirituals’ and he was in a place that undoubtedly has had an interesting past - the sort of place that ‘ghosts’ are typically ‘found’. That mixed with the drink must have lead to a strong psychological message persuading him that there was something there. Maybe our human perception that we are somehow ‘special’ or different from other people plays a part here too? Could it be something that has evolved in humans to push our ‘drive for life’ or our constant attempts at ‘one-upmanship’ that could have come from sexual selection? If that is the case I’d be interested in knowing if there is a strong male/female divide or difference in the way we have these experiences. I’m just thinking ‘out-loud’ now.



Sakura_moon, you talk about people how know how to do this stuff; I wonder, how would you define those people? Seeing as all of this is at best speculative or subjective, how would someone ‘qualify’? There have been many tests on these ‘psychics’ that no one has ever passed. Obviously the tests might be flawed in some way but they have all been tests that the people being tested have gone it to of there own free will so I doubt there is something striking wrong with it as the psychic wouldn’t have undergone the test.



No one apart from Valura seems interested in my test!

There's too many home fires burning and not enough trees