Thursday, January 22, 2009

Paul Kimball: a haunted man

In Ghost Investigating, Vol. I, film-maker and comrade Paul Kimball writes:

As the hour went along, Holly and I were joking about Hutchings (well, mostly I was joking), and I was "challenging" him to appear if he really was there as a ghost. For several minutes, I had even hung a real noose around my neck as I sat there. Then, all of sudden, in one of those moments when Holly and I were being quiet, I had this feeling that the air around my throat had gotten noticeably colder - much colder than the room even. It was as if, to borrow an old song lyric of mine, the night wrapped around my throat. There was no choking sensation, but it was definitely an abnormal feeling.


I must admit: I had Paul all wrong. Once a seemingly rational and articulate proponent of serious UFO research, Kimball has obviously descended into a mire of sheerest lunacy.

But seriously -- I'm intrigued that Paul's intrigued. I could wax theoretical for many paragraphs -- and perhaps I will later -- but "ghost" hunting suddenly becomes much more interesting when someone trustworthy reports anomalous experiences (regardless whether or not they emanate from the realm of the departed).

Even better, perhaps there's a valuable ufological lesson to be learned as well.

10 comments:

Paul Kimball said...

I'll descend into any lunacy... so long as they pay me! ;-)

Besides, I can't let Redfern be the only paranormal Renaissance man!

On a serious note, as per our conversation at the Shoe Shop when you were last in Halifax, ghosts, if they exist, may represent, at least in some cases, something different than the traditional "spirits of the dead" explanation. Accordingly, I eagerly await your theorizing!

Paul

P.S. If you know of any haunted places in or around KC, let me know - we can still squeeze one more US episode in!

RRRGroup said...

Mac:

We've mentioned this to Paul a while back...

Our Fort Wayne office(s) have been subject to intrusions by "ghosts."

We (the boys there and myself) have experienced that "cold" which Paul experienced around his neck, and we've seen "people."

No one has died in the building as far as we've been able to discern (from neighbors).

And the "people" we've experienced walk by our open offices, down the hallway(s) -- and have done so several times.

I've seen a figure at the bottom of our stairway, with a glittering surcoat.

The things seen are palpable, and not hallucinations (as best as we can tell).

So Paul's new ghost-hunting enterprise is not lunacy.

But it is a bit eccenric, since there is no practical value in nailing a ghost.

But since when has Kimball been practical?

He's an adventurer, like Redfern, and you -- although your adventures are more mental than physical.

RR

Anonymous said...

"Most Haunted" wouldn't like me at all on their program. I'm the kind of person that, at the sign of anything unusual, v-lines directly towards the source to see if it is indeed unusual.

Personally, I would throw out any experience that is based purely on personal sensations. Anything that can't be measured and or recorded falls far too closely to subjective and likely suggestive experience. There may be something to ghostly hotspots but we really can't rely on the corruptibility of our senses to determine their reality.

-Denny

Paul Kimball said...

There may be something to ghostly hotspots but we really can't rely on the corruptibility of our senses to determine their reality.

I concur.

Paul Kimball said...

But it is a bit eccenric, since there is no practical value in nailing a ghost.

Did you miss the part about me getting paid, Rich? That's as practical as it gets!! :-)

RRRGroup said...

Paul,

Getting paid nowadays, in the lousy (global) economic climate, is as ephemeral as ghosts.

But I have to admit, it sure beats a breadline.

Good for you...now don't spend all that pay at your local pub.

RR

Katie said...

Personally, I would throw out any experience that is based purely on personal sensations. Anything that can't be measured and or recorded falls far too closely to subjective and likely suggestive experience.

I don't necessarily agree with this. I and my sister have both had unusual experiences with what we can only believe to be loved ones that have passed on. They may be personal and immeasurable, but considering the circumstances behind them (time, location, etc.) there was no way to write them off as dreams, or coincidences, or what ever you want to label them.

I think *most* paranormal experiences are probably immeasurable, but I don't think they should be written off just because those around you don't experience the same things you do. If they're not connected in some way to what's going on, it only makes sense that they wouldn't.

Mac said...

@Katie

I agree with you. We don't yet have a science that encompasses subjective experience. Maybe we should.

Anonymous said...

Hmm, I dunno, I guess I'm a sceptic, but in my mind "subjective" and "science" don't go well together.

Mac said...

Hmm, I dunno, I guess I'm a sceptic, but in my mind "subjective" and "science" don't go well together.

They don't -- at least under the conventional definition of "science."