A Talking Mongoose? Seriously?

Before getting into exactly where I am coming from on this post, let me just drop a little chunk of background in here.

For many in the paranormal field the fact that I have mentioned a talking mongoose will affiliate this post with the very famous paranormal investigator Harry Price.

Harry writes about the case in ‘The Haunting of Cashen’s Gap: a Modern Miracle Investigated’ and its later documented in Price’s book ‘Confessions of a Ghost Hunter’. During these accounts he openly presents the oddity of the case, drawing comparison to the other strange cases he had investigated. However this particular request from a lady from the Isle of Man in 1932, was indeed strange even by the standards Harry was used to.

The communication that Harry received described the weird discovery of a creature by the lady’s farmer friend Mr. Irving, that with some coaxing had developed the power of speech.

The fanciful nature of this case is often seen as quite beyond belief with Gef the Mongoose having various conversations about town whilst riding around on the bus. It’s quite easy to see why such a case makes some wonder why Harry would even bother with something that sounded unbelievably fictitious.

However this case itself has managed to raise some very interesting points today I think.

The Mongoose Question Bet

During the Paraforce UK 2017 weekend I was lucky to attend with Kerry Greenaway from Parasearch Radio. As we approached the convention on the Sunday a conversation developed in the car between us around something to do investigation case validation. I believe I may have utilised the Talking Mongoose case as an example to back my own argument, which fundamentally was based on the fact that you can’t simply discount a case just because it sounds beyond belief or highly unlikely. After all as paranormal investigators we are in the business of beyond belief and highly unlikely.

I believe Kerry may have disagreed with this point, which in reflection makes perfect sense as there appears to be no logic in accepting that there is a possible talking mongoose at large.

So, more importantly how do two paranormal investigators that have reached an impasse on a particular point rectify the issue. Well, we could have commented on each others social media negatively, sorry couldn’t resist! We could have gone with not talking the rest of the day, was that even an option, damn it!! No, we decided to create a theory and test it. Otherwise known as a good old-fashioned bet!

You see I made the bold statement that if you asked many of the people at Paraforce if they would investigate a talking mongoose, I believed the majority would. I also added to that it was my assumption that both Joe Chin and Barry Fitzgerald from Ghost Hunters International would investigate a talking mongoose.

Kerry accepted the challenge gracefully and I looked forward to my free coffee.

Literally everyone Kerry asked said they would investigate the talking mongoose, and yes both Joe and Barry said they would too. In fact Joe was one of the first and answered with great excitement. Barry said he would, but referred to the Isle of Man, presenting the fact that he was very aware of the Price case. I think it was also around the time that Kerry asked Barry that she realised I may have made my point that day.

Thank you Kerry for being a great sport and accepting the challenge by the way.

A Talking Mongoose and Social Media

Of course there is more to the talking mongoose than the case Harry had investigated, the challenge I set Kerry and more.

You see I find some great smilies in the concept of the talking mongoose and the paranormal field’s social media activity.

I often watch the various posts, which pop up from time to time on social media within the paranormal field and some of the comments do sadden me regularly. During this time where we seem to hold a fascination in paranormal pictures, videos and audio; we are very quick to conclude the authenticity of someones ‘evidence’. I’m not saying every piece of media placed on social networks for the world to see is evidence of the paranormal, but equally I’m not condemning it as fake either!

Many draw assumptions, without looking into the stories themselves very much these days. Jumping to conclusions or not looking at all the available information leads to nothing, but assumption and unsubstantiated information.

We have all seen this before, someone will post a picture of something paranormal and various comments will follow. Often some of these comments may take the form of more negativity towards the individual or simply categorically stating that said picture is ‘obviously a fake’!

What I find slightly ironic (just a little bit) about all this is that often the very individuals that slate the proposed evidence of others, present similar evidence themselves. This is our fundamental flaw in the use of Social Media to assist us with our investigation of the paranormal. We should be using this medium to support and constructively remark on said posted ‘evidence’.

These pictures, videos and audio snippets are very similar to Harry;s talking mongoose case. You see, just like Kerry’s assumption of the talking mongoose case, many don’t take the time to assess what they see. Rather than simply claiming something to be fake or rubbish, suggest possibilities or ask questions.

Don’t get me wrong though, there are many out there that are positive and do ask questions, it’s not all bad. Just like the challenge I set Kerry, investigators of the paranormal would take up the case of a talking mongoose.

What’s truly interesting about this is; if I posted a video of a talking mongoose on social media, how many would believe it, how many would call it fake, but how many would ask questions about the video in order to understand more?

Yet so many said they would investigate a talking mongoose, when asked face to face! That tells a story in itself for me.

The Mongoose is Still Talking

We may not be investigating fanciful cases such as talking mongoose on the isle of man, but lets not discount anything without supporting our assumptions good facts.

I’ve heard some odd things communicated by mediums during many of my own investigations, but I don’t discount them simply because they sound ridiculous. In fact, often those weird and wonderful tidbits can later gain greater understanding when you look at the bigger picture.

We are dealing with an amazing field that encompasses a great deal of diverse approaches and information. Investigation of the paranormal has had me research location history in local archives, gather huge amounts of data from online sources, log data in search of patterns, learn aspects of physics and quantum physics (the basics, I am no expert lol), look at forensics, investigation techniques, and so much more.

Perception is often the one thing in every case which presents us with a different experience, especially when it comes to the paranormal. Take the Ouija Board for example; I have one in my home, used one on many occasions, know the history and have no fear of them. However talk to someone else in the paranormal and they will present a different story; they won’t have one in their home, they will never use one, believe they are dangerous. These are like polar opposites for something that has little or no evidence to support them as being evil! We have many, many more examples of these kind of things in the paranormal field too, including various perceptions of haunting.

Our perception is based on our belief and knowledge of those aspects. Which means in order to properly assess something we need to gather the data, seek the information, gain an understanding and find the alpha case (thank you Greg Lawson). We need to investigate and do the leg work.

This is why, when someone asks you if you would investigate a talking mongoose, you smile and then start to gather the data. The truth is in the leg work, its in the data and the information.

If you’ve liked this post, please feel free to like, comment and share below…