LOL Would somebody please explain this one to me? 
I ran across this while some of my cohorts and I where checking out some new local "teams" in my area and would love to be enlightened on the "science" of the "Ghost Meter " from some of you more venerable "Paranormal Investigators" ...
I may reveal the team's name later (stay tuned) 
[quote=Wes Forsythe]There is no science behind it as far as it pertains to the paranormal. It is just your standard EMF meter marketed specifically to ghost hunters by removing the probe (makes it one hand use) and a lighted display and alert noise so that it is easy to see in the dark. It was originally designed to measure cell phone radiation specifically, but was so popular with ghost hunters that it was modified slightly and then marketed specifically.[/quote]
So it basically a one handed K2 that beeps?
I suppose one would need to stay clear of any stray cell phone signals for this to be effective.
[quote=Wes Forsythe]Um...yeah...that's what I said, a one handed K2 that beeps.
[/quote]
I just wanted to make sure I had it straight ...
[quote=Wes Forsythe]
It has at least some usefulness as your standard, run-of-the-mill cell phone signal is not strong enough to register on it. It was originally marketed as the cell sensor (still is) when they started trying to prove a link between cell phone use and brain cancer.
In other words it won't beep unless you make a call normally.[/quote]
thus making it the gadgetry of choice for the detection of paranormal activity or the presence of inordinate levels of EMF when cell phones can so skewer the readings ( as designed )....interesting 
[quote=Wes Forsythe]Actually the gagetry of choice with most investigators are the tri-field meters (standard and the natural), but not everyone wants to or can afford to invest the money. The Cell Censor/Ghost Meter are generally considered "entry level" but that's fine with me. Not everyone can enter the field and start off with the expertise and "proper" equipment.
[/quote]
I am familiar with Tri Field meters and will address them when I can afford the subject more time
[quote=Wes Forsythe]
But still, if used correctly, it can be a useful tool. Knowing that a spike in EM is occuring might encourage an investigator to stick around long enough in a particular area to capture meaningful evidence on a camera or at least figure out that the field was probably man-made and not paranormal.[/quote]
that is unless a cell phone or countless other possible sources cause the spike ...
Not sure I understand that last part. Are you saying its a bad thing that the investigator stays in the area long enough to validate or debunk the reading? I can't say I see a problem with an investigator taking his time to validate or invalidate an EM reading so long as he doesn't just jump to conclusions any more than I condemn someone for taking a hundred digital shots of a corner just because they got a "feeling".
I guess that is just a matter of preference. I prefer the shotgun method where all of the data is compared to see if anything matches up (i.e. cold spot at the same time as that EM hit). True, it still may not prove anything, but at least I am trying.
Wes,
Along the lines of shotgun style investigations, you may wish to check out this link regarding a system called ARCADIA. While it is a rather extreme array of gadgets, I find it quite impressive. Granted, a lot of the theory behind it is purely conjecture, I cannot help but find it a worthwhile endeavor if one has the time and patience to invest in the instrumentation, related software, and education required to use this set-up.
http://www.ghostgadgets.com/_arcadia/
This post was edited by Phil Payette at July 24, 2010 12:42:20 PM EDT
[quote=Wes Forsythe]
Let's not take ourselves too seriously.
[/quote]
Eureka!
there may be hope.
so have you ever recorded any thermal spikes that matched an EMF spike? and if so was any compelling photo/video/audio data captured in conjunction with said "spikes?