Arkansas Sanatorium 2007
Human Bait Experiment Findings
Additional Findings and Information:
EVP During Questioning Part 1
EVP During Questioning Part 2
EVP During Intrusion
Screen Captures of Audio with words marked








Comments


On this page we will attempt to include some of the more important findings and give their significance. Supporting links to audio, photo and video are listed to the right.


One of the first to point out would be the experiment itself worked and due to the EVPs captured one could conclude that the activity in this location was of an active rather than a residual nature. Responses relevant to the questions asked were captured and within a very short time period after the asking. Now as to the accuracy of the information captured we can't tell at this point. There are a couple of what sound like references to names as well as some other identifing information. This will require some very thorough research but a starting point has been provided.

Second, the powerful intrusion and the direct responses to questions seem to indicate the desire to contact was shared.

Third, the EVP "I Killed her" was captured on both a analog recorder and a cam which were six feet apart. This in itself is a very uncommon occurance.

Fourth, One EVP in a teasing comment addressed an investigator by their first name while another insulted the Investigator. Putting in on a personal level also reinforced the active finding.


It is not necessary to insult or taunt to coax responses. Persistant questioning with some challenging questions/comments can stimulate responsiveness and still be respectful. When conducting experiments of this nature there needs to be a minimum of three people. The subject, one to monitor the subject and one to monitor the experiment and participants as a whole for safety purposes.

Having captured a large number of EVPs from this location we were able to discern a pattern. At the least there were two possible entities and perhaps three. The EVPs were occurring in three different bandwidths with each having a distinct cadence and timbre.

One kept occuring in the 500hz to 1khz bandwidth and was so low that we had to amplify the cleaned versions to make out the words. The other ranged from about 800hz to 2khz and seemed to come in loud concentrated bursts which were easy to hear but difficult to understand. We found that by slowing them down (expanding from 120% to 150% of normal) we were able to make out some of the words.

Experiment was concluded 1:55am 1/28/07