The Pembroke Voice

[PPI Brian]

I recently stumbled across a series of articles regarding the "Pembroke Voice". This AVP (misidentified as an EVP) was captured in a 1,000 year-old castle in the U.K. and was clearly heard by the investigators at the time of capture. It has created much controversy and has become a hot debate topic in the paranormal community. Here are the links:

Paranormal United
http://paranormalunited.blogspot.com/2006/10/ghost-voice-caught-on-video.html

Ghostmag.com
http://www.ghostmag.com/main_story4-spr07.htm

Youtube:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0X4Yjv8guIQ

and last but not least, the Spirit Level Investigations website
http://www.spiritlevelonline.co.uk/home

Thoughts anyone?

Regards,

Brian Miller

[dwalters]

Shoot. I don't know what to say. It's TOO GOOD TO BE TRUE!

[Donna]

Sorry, not buying it. If they really thought it might be someone outside on the walkway the cave opens onto, they should have been running out there trying to dispel the contamination possibility- regardless of whether or not they thought the person might be distressed. For me, that would have been an even bigger reason- to ensure that that person was ok. But to stand there and, "cover the camera lens (and stand quietly) so as not to catch the attention of someone who was in distress", then claim it was paranormal because nobody walked in front of the cave opening? Spare me.

[donaldhicks]

I agree this is interesting, but i think Donna has it, if you dont go to see where the voice is coming from, how can it be certain that it is paranormal and not contamination?

[PPI Karl]

I'll add my voice of agreement to Donna and Don.  This smells like three-day-old fish.  What's this drivel about "No scientific explanation is currently available"?  If I hear the coyotes yapping in the canyon nearby but I don't know where they are, I don't say there isn't any scientific explanation for their yapping!  You have to be involving science in the first place in order to contend that no scientific explanation is available.  A video camera and several inert people holding mics does not make for scientific inquiry.  First off, what about the empirical method?  As the two of you are already saying, go the hell into the castle already and start LOOKING for the source.  Secondly, what kind of analysis and what methodology for analysis was used to study the sound sources afterward?  In what frequency bands did the AVP occur?  Was a voice imprint taken?  Did it match anyone known to be in the area, or any of the crew?  Third, what steps were taken to dispel the possibility of this being a hoax?  Did anyone take statements from witnesses outside the investigation team?  What about injured groundskeepers, bored custodial staff, sad docents, or schizophrenic homeless persons taking refuge in those walls?

Personally, I feel the conclusions arrived at about this voice are as lazy as the investigative techniques used to make them.  As Dave said, it is too good to be true.  Until real science is presented, and not anecdotes from people making a film they need to promote, I have no compelling reason to think this is evidence of a disembodied spirit--evidence of "decapitative thinking," yes.  But spirit voice?  No, not yet.  And when people use this flimsy "scientifimical" rhetoric to sell their so called proof, it makes me even more suspicious of the investigators than of the evidence.

(Okay, Karl.  Steady on.  There's enough soapbox here to wash a castle floor! )

[TAPS Jen]

What he said. 

[PPI Brian]

What he said. 

Yeah, what he said.  And what she said too. Why did the camera man put his hand over the lens when they heard the AVP? That doesn't make any sense. And why weren't they tearing the place apart searching for the source of that sound? When we are investigating and a door slams or a sound is heard, we are on our feet and poking around looking for the source.

SLPR attempts to answer some of the very questions that were raised in this thread on their website. Unfortunately, their explanations fall short; they didn't conduct their investigation in a scientific manner, and their evidence analysis is sadly lacking. That's a shame, because if this AVP were in fact genuine, their sloppy investigative techniques will prevent the "evidence" from being taken seriously. 

I offer the following as an example of their sloppy explanation... this except is from the SLPR website:

Eventually we got in contact with a Parapsychologist who agreed to analyse the voice recording. His findings were that the frequency of the voice starts at between  500 Hz and 600 Hz and stays within that range until its abrupt end despite the obvious increase in volume. This suggested that the voice was not borne from human vocal chords and that from start to finish the voice was no further than three metres from the recording device.

The statement that the frequency of the "voice" suggests that it was not created by human vocal cords is incorrect. A little bit of light research brings the following facts to light:

The following vocal range classifications are typically used in classical music (from highest to lowest):
Soprano (240 - 1170 Hz)
Mezzo-soprano (220 - 900 Hz)
Contralto (130 - 700 Hz)
Tenor (130 - 440 Hz)
Baritone (110 - 350 Hz)
Bass (80 - 330 Hz)

The more I read on their website, the more inacuracies I discovered. The more I researched, the more I began to doubt the authenticity of this AVP. Why did this group get "in touch" with a Parapsychologist? Aren't they paranormal researchers? Why can't they analyze their own data? I could go on, but what's the point. 

[PPI Karl]

That was awesome, Brian.   8)