Beardo Live: Fake Vs Real Pt4

This article will discuss the fourth part of a livestream which was titled 'Is the FAKE paranormal damaging the legit investigators? With guests'. This stream was conducted by Beardo, from the youtube channel 'Beardo Gets Scared', on the 14th of August 2024 and ran for roughly three hours. The guests involved in this portion of the discussion were Justin from the 'Paranormal Monkey Podcast', Paul from 'Ghosts On Trent', Joe Vitale from 'Entity Seven Paranormal', Kev Kerr from 'Kev Kerr Paranormal', and Kenny Biddle. 

As this is the fourth part in what I have called the 'Beardo Live: Fake Vs Real' series, I highly recommend you read the other parts if you haven't yet done so as they are all good documentations of an excellent discussion which occured during this livestream. I also recommend you watch Beardo's livestream, and you will find the link for this at the end of the article. This article will also include my own thoughts on the points discussed by all teams involved. 

Beardo's Question: 

"Has any of you ever run?"

This question was asked in relation to seeing investigators run away when they hear a noise. It's quite common to see 'paranormal investigators' hear a noise and instead of investigate it, they run away, or overreact in some regard. Everyone answered by saying they don't run away, and Kenny said "I walk quickly towards it". Beardo agrees and says he's ran at things. Justin, from the Paranormal Monkey Podcast, elaborated that he walks slowly towards it as he's worried something might happen to him. He then said he used to do lots of live streams, and preferred lots of lives instead of edited episodes. 

Justin also said he used to have a locked off camera, would lock up the property, and go out for a few hours to let people listen in live for a few hours to whatever was happening with no one there. He explained they got knocks, taps, stuff playing with the microphone, male voices, female voices, and Latin voices. Justin said it was interesting for them as they knew the noises were all around the microphone, but because of fakery anything you see like that which may be genuine doesn't even make a ripple in terms of viewers and subscribers. He went on to say this is because so many bigger and wielder things are being faked, and that he thinks smaller channels have to work harder to prove it's a real experience as a result. 

I agree with Justin's concern over going towards a noise because, depending on the context, it could be a living person you're about to encounter. It's common for teams to investigate abandoned locations, and so the threat from the living is very real in this context. While investigating, you should always find out what the noise is though; and this is why you shouldn't investigate a location alone unless you're certain it's safe, for instance with a rented location. I believe that anyone who claims to be a paranormal investigator, yet runs away or makes lots of noise, is not at all a good paranormal investigator. You need to be able to establish what the sounds are, and you need to be quiet enough to hear if it happens again and to know exactly what it sounded like. Anyone who immediately makes noise as a response is potentially missing further sounds, or masking where the sound they have heard is coming from. It doesnt mean they're faking things, but it does mean they aren't investigating appropriately. 

In regards to Justin's later comments, I again agree with him; and I know that what he's described regarding sounds around a microphone can happen. A while ago I let a camera capture footage in my cellar for an hour during a few nights and caught similar noises to what Justin has described; so it was interesting for him to describe something I can relate closely to. I haven't seen the footage he's described, but possible explanations are the internal mechanisms of the camera making noises, and the microphone possibly picking up people from outside. The same goes for my own footage too, and also bugs could be a factor to the noises. 

Paul's Response To Julie Cross

"If you're not interested in what debunkers have got to say, then you're not interested in the paranormal as far as I'm concerned"

Paul has a really good point in his response. I never understand why anyone is antagonistic towards debunkers; especially when it's investigators. The only logical reason I can think of is that investigators who don't like debunkers are investigators who are faking things and don't want to be exposed. The same kind of logic can be applied to those who aren't investigators as perhaps they don't like debunkers because they don't want their favourite teams to be exposed. If this is the case, then Paul is right in saying they aren't interested in the paranormal. To be interested in the paranormal, you don't so much support the team, but rather you support the team's contribution to the paranormal field. This means people who are interested in the paranormal should only be interested in finding out if it exists, and all the answers around that, and if that means exposing investigation teams as fake then so be it. 

Joe, from Entity Seven Paranormal, then added to the conversation by pointing out that belief and psychology play the biggest role in the paranormal. He explained that people believe they've captured something, and so want to believe it for their own reasons. This then leads them to putting photos out there of things such as orbs, and if you give them an explanation to what they've captured they then react like you've kicked their dog due to how angry they get. He went on to say that people want to experience something and to be apart of something, so they take what they capture at face value regardless of the alternative explanations which are provided to them as to what they've captured. 

Joe makes excellent points, and acknowledges something I didn't earlier; the personal connection. Another reason, as Joe excellently explained, why people don't like debunkers is because of their own personal beliefs around the existence of the paranormal. They could have these beliefs because they don't want to let go of family members who have died, and so if a debunker tells them that the orb they've captured is actually a bug, then they take it personally as to them it is personal. They may view that one thing not being real as everything relating to the paranormal not being real; which would cause them to face a possibility that perhaps they do have to let their family members go as maybe they aren't actually around anymore as they believed. 

Kev, from Kev Kerr Paranormal, then added by saying when he used to do it, social media wasn't huge. This meant if you were skeptical, you definitely didn't have a following, and if you did then it would be maybe forty people. He explained belief is personal, and people feel bullied or like you're going against them as you're telling them that their loved one is gone, or it's an emotional attachment. He also said as a skeptic or debunker, you have to understand you're offending people due to their own belief system. He finished his point by saying it either comes from a deep need of an afterlife being real, or that it's mystical stuff which is developed through a trauma response and the debunkers are prodding at their protection. 

Beardo said he and Kenny are on opposite ends of the spectrum, but if someone goes to them and says they can smell cigarette smoke, and so thinks their mum is visiting, then both he and Kenny will say that if if it makes them feel better to believe their mum is visiting then they shouldn't let anyone tell them they're wrong. He then clarified that he doesn't debunk the paranormal, he instead debunks fake paranormal channels. He continued by saying if someone sends him footage in an email, then he will respond asking "do you really want to know the truth". Beardo explained that one guy messaged him saying his kids were terrified of the garage as they captured an apparition in there, so Beardo looked at the footage and saw it was only a cobweb which kept going across a cheap camera. 

Before telling the guy what was causing the apparitionl Beardo asked the man if it was personal, and once the man said it wasn't and that the kids were terrified, Beardo told the man it was just a cobweb being pulled across due to a vacuum which was created through the door being pulled. The man then checked the footage, and confirmed that every time the door closed the ghost walked past. Beardo then said he doesn't feel bad debunking that, but when it comes to personal stuff then he's careful with what he says. Kenny then added by saying with personal stories, he asks if it makes the person effected feel comfort and good. If so, then he doesn't say much more to them as long as they don't go out, start a church around it, and get money from it. He explained that he has no problem with letting people believe as it brings them comfort, and so will have no further say in it. He also went on to say if they go on tv saying it's true, then he may further comment as it's out in public; but he will still remain polite and professional. 

I think there's an interesting conversation around ethics which Beardo and Kenny both touch on there; this being a debate around how ethical it is to lie to someone if the outcome is they feel a sense of comfort or ease. I think the clear answer would be to maintain the lie as it brings comfort and an immediate emotional benefit to the person in question. However, the harder answer would be that the overall impact does more harm than good. Within the last year I learned about Plato's allegory of the cave; and this reminds me of that. If you aren't familiar, this concept describes a group of people who have been held captive within a cave their entire lives. These people are chained to face a wall, and behind them there is a fire with puppeteers casting shadows onto the wall the prisoners face. As these shadows are all these prisoners have known, this is their reality; and so these shadows are how they believe the world to be. 

The concept then describes that one prisoner could be freed, and they could leave the cave. Upon doing so, they witness brief pain as their eyes aren't used to seeing the daylight, but they then truly see the world for what it is; and that it is in reality quite different from the shadows the prisoners had experienced. This free person then returns to the cave to free the other prisoners, but the free person finds they are blinded due to their eyes no longer being used to the dark. The prisoners all witness the free person stumbling around, blinded by where they have been, and so refuse to leave the cave and be free; believing they will be harmed if they do. Any that do try to leave, taking faith that they will not come to harm, find they do meet harm upon leaving due to their eyes not having witnessed daylight; and so they retreat back to the cave and to the darkness they know. The whole allegory is a debate between belief and knowledge; the prisoner's way of life versus the free man's. This is the same debate which Kenny and Beardo discuss here, even though they don't really debate it. 

Both Kenny and Beardo seem fine with letting people believe something which is wrong, provided it brings them comfort. This is the equivalent to letting the prisoners stay within the cave. The reason why I would argue towards the truth being told, regardless of the consequence, is because nothing can ever progress unless the truth is pursued in it's entirety. In the context to Beardo's conversation, this means the upset caused by the revelation around a family member perhaps not still being around would be akin to the initial pain caused by leaving the cave. Given time, the person would heal and they would move on with an accurate world view in mind. However, maintain the lie and the person would forever be in the dark. 

The slight difference here though is that you aren't completely destroying the individuals beliefs by telling them that the footage they have captured is not their relative. A more appropriate response than maintaining the lie would be telling the truth about the footage, but then saying that doesn't mean their relatives can't still be spirits somewhere. As Beardo said, there is a difference between debunking the paranormal and debunking fake paranormal teams. If so, then there is a difference between debunking the paranormal and debunking false paranormal footage. Discounting an individual piece of evidence does not disprove the entire subject; it merely tips the scales a little in favour of the paranormal not existing. So, I think the best way of ethically handling these topics is to tell the truth so that the subject can progress, but also there must be emphasis on nothing being proven or disproven yet. This way the truth is told, and the hope and belief which the person may need is still mostly intact. In regards to the allegory, this is the same as slowly leading people out of the cave and warning them that the sunlight may hurt their eyes at first. 

Kenny's Question To Beardo: 

"What do you mean that we're on opposite ends of the spectrum? What does that mean? Can you clarify that?"

Beardo explains it probably isn't the right term, but that what he means is he's a believer due to paranormal experiences, and when things happen his brain kicks in to 'what would Kenny say' or 'what would Mr. Grey say'. He said it's a more skeptical side, and that he's sent footage to Mr. Grey asking for his thoughts due to him being skeptical and so Beardo values his opinion. Beardo also said he tries to find the middle ground between believing and being skeptical, but Mr. Grey and Kenny are more skeptical. Kenny then said Beardo isn't the opposite to him as he's looking for an answer and isn't posting on social media claiming things to be a ghost. He then says he thinks the only difference between himself and Beardo is that Beardo believes in an afterlife and he doesn't. 

Joe's Question: 

"What got y'all into the paranormal and debunking?"

Kenny answers the question by saying he grew up Catholic, and so had a belief from the beginning that there was an afterlife and that miracles along with other spooky stuff could happen. He also grew up with the TV programmes 'In Search Of' and 'Unsolved Mysteries',  and so began ghost hunting when he grew up and had adult money to go out with. From there, he joined clubs and found that everything wasn't as it seemed due to having a personal experience which showed he was mistaken for a ghost. The ghost hunters thought he was a ghost, and they wouldn't accept any information he gave to them. This caused him to look into skeptical literature such as 'Skeptical Enquirer Magazine'. He then gained more knowledge in editing, and found the more he learned, the more he realised mistakes were being made. So, he decided to share his knowledge with others which means he writes, makes videos, and tries to educate people. 

Joe, from Entity Seven Paranormal, answers by saying he didn't want anything to do with paranormal investigating, and thought it was seen on TV anyway. He was then dragged into it. He continued by saying part of being a paranormal investigator is debunking, and so you're supposed to listen to claims, check it out, and then explain it. He also said he has always debunked and that it's part of the fundamentals of being an investigator. I agree with what Joe has said here as I always say there are three or four parts to the process of investigating the paranormal. These parts are research, investigation, analysis, and debunking. The reason I say three or four is because analysis and debunking have some overlap, but are not exchangeable. I would say a good paranormal investigator would do all of these stages, although I am aware people tend to stick to one or two and go on to specialise in that area. 

Kenny elaborated by saying it's result of an investigation. He also said if you set out to debunk, then you set out with a bias as you are looking to take out the claim. He went on to say that to investigate, you approach looking for the truth. If the claim is a ghost, and you find evidence that it isn't, then you've taken the bunk out of it and so it is debunked. He then explained that they end up debunking as it's a fundamental part, but they don't intend on debunking as it's just a result. He also said if there isn't enough information, then they have to go with 'I don't know' as they can't make up a conclusion; therefore they can't say it is or isn't a ghost, and this is when they have to say 'I don't know'. Joe then makes a point about residential investigations and that they're supposed to put people at ease when doing those. He also said the legitimate explanations as to why things are happening do put people at ease. 

I think it's really good that Kenny elaborated on what it means to debunk something, and that he acknowledges the bias involved when setting out to debunk. It's absolutely right what he's said regarding debunking being a fundamental part, but that it should only be done when looking at something which has happened. It's also great to hear him saying that 'I don't know' is a perfectly valid response. When investigating there can be a fair amount of pressure on explaining every little thing which has happened, but sometimes it is perfectly fine to acknowledge that you don't know. However, you don't have to accept that you don't know; and as a result you can pursue further knowledge on the subject to find adequate explanations. This is why sharing footage with debunkers is incredibly useful as they've already done this further research. 

M.A.D Paranormal Investigation's Comment: 

"You must be open to it or you'll never catch anything x" 

I've heard this type of comment quite a few times, although I can't place exactly where; I suspect Yvette Fielding has pushed this on Most Haunted. My own belief is that spirits will be more active around those who try to interact with them. I don't believe that an investigator has to 'be open' and believe in order for spirits to communicate, I think the important part is the active attempt for communication. It's easier to picture if you imagine one immortal person standing within a house. Through their life, they are prevented from leaving the house and witness people come and go; but these people never talk to the person within the house. Some of these other people are passing by, but others may actually move into the house and live there for a time. Meanwhile, the one person is ignored as they watch everyone else live their alive around them. The person being ignored would eventually get impatient and may start throwing items and doing everything they can to draw the attention of those within the house. The residents notice the activity, but they do not notice the person. This causes more people to enter the house, but they actually try talking to the immortal person; albeit not directly to their face, and it may be a very broken up conversation. I think this is all a good way of thinking about the paranormal. It may not be correct, but it's a possible explanation behind the psychology and behaviour of spirits. 

As a result of what I've described, I don't think you have to be open to a belief in the paranormal to catch something. I think you'll get more activity if you try to communicate, and I think you'll get activity if the spirit is bored or wants attention. As for psychics interacting with spirits, they may get more activity as they're more likely to have a good conversation with the spirit instead of a broken one. Beardo replied to the comment by saying he doesn't think it's a true statement, and that he knows people who are very skeptical that have seen something and so have had their minds blown. Kev backed this up by saying he's been a skeptic for fifteen years, yet has still had multiple experiences. 

Beardo continued by saying his mum doesn't believe any of it, but she rung a couple of weeks ago, visited the house, and then saw her mum come into the room, say 'I'm sorry', and walk back out. Beardo said his mum then said ghosts aren't real, but that she saw her mum. Beardo then said she potentially came in and said that, or that his mum had dreamed it; but his mum was convinced to being awake as she knew what she was doing at the time. Beardo also explained everything he does is nonsense to his mum, but since that event she now watches other paranormal channels.

Justin, from the Paranormal Monkey Podcast, added by saying he gets it again and again where people say he doesn't get anything as he isn't open minded and needs to open himself up to it happening. He then acknowledged he's skeptical, but has still experienced what he believes is a genuine paranormal experience. He also said that wasn't because of him, or his belief system, and it was nothing to do with him being closed off; it was just something that happened to him. He also said he thinks it's purely something that will happen no matter what. 

Joe, from Entity Seven Paranormal, continued the conversation by saying paranormal activity is very rare. Kev then said it's part of the human experience and so isn't down to belief, but that belief does amplify it. He said there could be a psychological aspect, and that someone not thinking about ghosts can still have a paranormal experience. He continued by saying if there is an answer to what that is then it could be recreated, and it could be made to happen again and again. He also said that anyone regardless of belief system can have an experience, and that this is proven through history with multiple ghost stories. He finished his point by saying the majority of people will have a paranormal experience, and so it isn't based on belief. 

It's good that Kev pointed out that you don't have to be thinking about ghosts in order to have a paranormal experience. Of course, a psychological element would be at play regarding frequency of experiences during the course of an investigation; but that doesn't mean they can't happen outside of this setting. For instance, where I work there have been a few tales of paranormal experiences which have occured while people have been doing their jobs and not thinking about the paranormal at all. As described earlier, I believe these instances can occur due to a spirit being bored or seeking attention. They can also occur through normal means, after all it only takes an experience to be unexplained for it to be deemed paranormal. 

Thank You! 

Thank you for reading this article! I was expecting for it to be much shorter given it was only four pages worth of notes, but that just goes to show how good the discussion was. I also wasn't expecting the debate on ethics and it leading into the allegory of the cave. I hope everything's made sense though as I had to use a couple of analogies to explain various points. The next article will be a location article, documenting somewhere in Nottinghamshire. This will be published on Monday the 14th of October. Then, on Friday the 18th of October, I will publish Beardo Live: Fake Vs Real Pt5. This will be the final article documenting Beardo's livestream, and the following Friday will document the reaction to Beardo's livestream from other teams who were not involved in the discussion. If you want to watch Beardo's full livestream, then you can click the link below:

Beardo's Livestream

A special thank you goes to Damain, Nicolette, Kerry, GD, Gran, Chris Willcx, Nicola Jada, Nita Raveling-Hamilton, David Lee Jones, theinoculator, 1141520851813892291920, Angeles Wernicke Zapiola, Ke v, Crispinfandom, Thiago Lima, Edgar Darnell, Megzii Hughes, Jacks-and-graves, The Cornish Ghost Whispers, Beardo Gets Scared, Starlight Phoenix Paranormal, Paranormal Penny Pinchers, the Australian Paranormal Society, Codegas Codex of Curiousity, Phantom Detectives LLC, Shadow Walkers Paranormal Investigators, South Of Spooky, Don't Scare Claire, blogparanormalexpresso2stuff, Paranormal Connections, Phantom Seekers Paranormal, chatibelieveinghosts, Purbeck Paranormal Investigators, Ghost Investigations, ParanormalTruthNetwork, haunted, Kev Kerr Paranormal, and Tamworth Castle for your continued support of The True Paranormal. If you want to be thanked in an article, or in the monthly appreciation post I make across social media, then please share my articles and tag 'The True Paranormal'. If I see that you've shared, then I will publicly thank you! 

If you want to follow The True Paranormal you can do so on Facebook, Tik Tok, Instagram, YouTube, X (formerly known as Twitter), Tumblr, and Pinterest. You can also subscribe to The True Paranormal on YouTube, or directly to this website through the bar on the left which will give you email notifications. That bar also lists all of the links which will take you to The True Paranormal's various social media platforms. If you want to contact me about your own experiences, or about anything at all paranormal, you can email thetrueparanormal1@gmail.com

A Donation Message  

If you've enjoyed this article, it would be massively appreciated if you could donate anything you can towards The True Paranormal. With your donations, I can continue to build up the database and document haunted locations, paranormal experiences, the individuals who are involved in the paranormal, plus more. If you are interested in donating, then you can do so through PayPal. My username is Daniel Carr and my paypal email is danielcarr130913@gmail.com. If you donate, I will be sure to thank you across social media and in my articles. Anything donated is much appreciated.