2 replies to this topic

[Tom Butler]

Members of the Association have spent considerable time and money trying to establish an empirical reason to promote these technologies. Members promoting these technologies have interfered with other members learning to record for transform EVP (recording process and possibly added background noise). Because of this, the directors have decided to restrict examples to a single forum.

Concerns which resulted in this decision include:

The recent Windbridge study concluded that EVP reported from EVPmaker were likely imaginary. While this is not a well-based conclusion, it is based on some pretty good science. The take away message is that, after all of these years, EVPmaker is still too difficult to support to the public.

Along with mostly false positives, EVPmaker does produce the occasional EVP, but most of the EVP we have seen from EVPmaker that provides new information has been transform EVP and not the product of EVPmaker except as a novel noise generator. The same can be said of radio-sweep.

There is evidence that the really good examples of EVP from EVPmaker are likely examples of physical mediumship. This would explain why some people are able to produce astounding examples while the majority cannot. Because of the relative rarity of physical mediumship ability, is inappropriate for ATransC to support the use of these technologies to members still learning about EVP.

[Margaret Downey]

The physical mediumship aspect of using EVP Maker/Radio Sweep as background sources makes sense, Tom. Just want to acknowledge I've read your post and will comply.

[Tom Butler]

Thanks.

Remembering that much of your EVP is transform EVP using noise generated by radio-sweep, I know it will be a challenge for you to work with this. I appreciate the effort.