6 Possible EVPs From the Conjuring House — What Do You Hear?

Hello, spooky cats!

I need your ears.

During our paranormal investigation at the Conjuring House, we captured six audio clips that might contain EVPs—Electronic Voice Phenomena. Instead of telling you what I think the voices are saying, I’m doing something different.

I want you to listen first.

No subtitles telling you what to hear.

No dramatic text saying “GET OUT!”

No suggestion planted in your head before the audio even starts.

Just six recordings and one question:

What do you hear?

Why I’m Not Telling You What I Think the EVPs Say

In some of our older paranormal videos, I would put text on the screen showing what I thought an EVP was saying.

I’ve stopped doing that.

There’s a good reason.

When someone tells you what an unclear voice supposedly says, your brain immediately starts listening for those words. A vague sound that might have sounded like absolutely nothing five seconds earlier can suddenly become a very clear sentence.

That doesn’t necessarily mean the words are actually there.

It can be a form of auditory pareidolia—our brains trying to find recognizable patterns, especially speech, inside ambiguous sounds.

And humans are extremely good at it.

So now, when we capture something that might be an EVP, I’d rather let people hear the recording without being influenced by my interpretation.

If I hear one thing, but fifty people independently hear something completely different, that tells me something.

On the other hand, if a large number of people hear the same word or phrase without being told what to listen for, that becomes much more interesting.

Why I Made a Separate EVP Video

There was another problem with asking viewers to help analyze our evidence.

Our full paranormal investigations can be long.

Sometimes very long.

The six recordings in this experiment came from Part Two of our Conjuring House investigation, and expecting someone to sit through an hour-long ghost hunt just to find a few seconds of possible EVP evidence isn't particularly practical.

Apparently people have lives.

Very inconvenient.

So I took the six clips and put them together in one short video.

You don’t have to watch the entire investigation unless you want to.

You can simply listen to the evidence and tell me what you think.

What Is an EVP?

EVP stands for Electronic Voice Phenomenon.

In paranormal investigation, the term usually refers to a voice-like sound that appears on an audio recording even though investigators don't remember hearing anyone speaking at the time.

That sounds exciting.

But there are plenty of things that can create false EVPs.

A distant person talking.

Someone whispering nearby.

Clothing rubbing against a microphone.

Breathing.

An investigator making a noise and forgetting about it.

Sounds traveling through walls.

Electronics.

Animals.

Radio interference.

Audio compression.

Or simply a random sound that our brain turns into speech afterward.

That’s why I don’t automatically call every mysterious whisper a ghost.

The goal is to figure out what the sound actually is.

Six Possible EVPs From the Conjuring House

What surprised me most was how many potentially interesting audio clips we found.

There are six possible EVPs in this video.

And those six didn't even come from our entire night at the Conjuring House.

They came from only part of the investigation.

Several of the clips sound like possible female whispers, which definitely got my attention while reviewing the recordings.

But I'm deliberately not going to describe what I believe each one says.

That would ruin the experiment.

Instead, here’s what I want you to do.

EVP #1

Listen carefully to the first recording.

Don't worry if you hear nothing.

“Nothing” is a perfectly useful answer.

If you do hear a voice, write down exactly what you think it says.

Then move on to the next clip.

EVP #2

Listen again without trying too hard to force words out of the sound.

Does it sound like a person?

A whisper?

An ordinary environmental noise?

Something else entirely?

Write down your first interpretation.

EVP #3

This one struck me as particularly creepy when I heard it again after returning home.

But creepy doesn't equal paranormal.

That's why I want independent opinions.

What do you hear?

EVP #4

Same rules.

Listen first.

Write down your interpretation.

And resist the urge to read everybody else's comments before deciding.

Once someone else gives you a phrase, it becomes extremely difficult to un-hear it.

EVP #5

By this point, you may notice certain patterns in the recordings.

Or maybe you think we're hearing ghosts in completely ordinary noises.

Either answer is welcome.

I’m not looking for people to agree with me.

I'm looking for honest interpretations.

EVP #6

The final clip is the sixth possible EVP from this portion of the Conjuring House investigation.

Again, tell me exactly what you hear—or whether you hear anything that resembles speech at all.

Please Comment Before Reading Everyone Else’s Answers

This is probably the most important part of the experiment.

Don't read the comments first.

Listen to the clips.

Write down what you hear.

Then post your answers.

Something like this works perfectly:

EVP 1: I hear ______
EVP 2: Sounds like ______
EVP 3: I don't hear a voice
EVP 4: Sounds like a woman saying ______
EVP 5: Probably environmental noise
EVP 6: I hear ______

After you've posted your interpretation, then go look at everybody else's.

That's where it gets interesting.

Do multiple people hear the same thing?

Is everybody hearing something completely different?

Does one recording consistently produce a particular word?

Or does knowing what someone else heard suddenly change your interpretation?

All of that is useful.

Debunkers, I Especially Want Your Opinion

If you don't believe these are EVPs, please tell me why.

Seriously.

I want skeptical explanations.

Could one be breathing?

Could it be one of us speaking off camera?

Could a sound have traveled from somewhere else in the house?

Does it resemble an audio artifact?

Is there something about the recording that makes it unreliable?

If you can debunk one of these clips, that helps us.

The point of skeptical paranormal investigation shouldn't be to collect the largest possible pile of “evidence.”

It should be to eliminate everything we can explain.

Whatever remains is far more interesting.

What Would Make an EVP More Convincing?

Personally, I become much more interested in an EVP when several things happen.

The sound is clear.

Nobody present remembers speaking.

All investigators are accounted for.

There isn't an obvious environmental source.

The recording is captured on more than one device.

And independent listeners hear approximately the same words without being prompted.

Even then, I wouldn't automatically say:

Ghost.

But I would say:

Okay, now we have something worth investigating.

That's the standard I'm trying to move toward.

Why Multiple Independent Listeners Matter

Imagine I play a fuzzy recording and tell you:

“Listen! It says, ‘Get out!’”

You listen again.

Sure enough:

“Get out.”

Very spooky.

But now imagine I play exactly the same recording to 100 people without telling them anything.

Twenty hear “get out.”

Fifteen hear “sit down.”

Ten hear “hello.”

Twenty hear random noises.

Thirty-five hear nothing resembling speech.

That looks very different.

Now imagine instead that 80 out of 100 people independently write:

“Get out.”

That doesn't prove a ghost said it.

But it makes the claim that there is recognizable speech in the recording considerably stronger.

That's what I'm trying to learn from this video.

The Conjuring House Makes This Even More Interesting

Of course, these recordings came from the Conjuring House, one of the most famous allegedly haunted homes in the United States.

That makes everything feel more dramatic.

And that's exactly why skepticism matters.

When you're inside a location famous for ghosts, you're expecting something paranormal to happen.

Every whisper becomes suspicious.

Every creak gets your attention.

Every unexplained sound carries extra weight because of where you are.

If we captured these exact same noises inside an ordinary house with no haunted reputation, would we react differently?

That's a question paranormal investigators need to ask.

The location shouldn't decide what the evidence means.

The evidence should.

We’re Trying to Make Our Ghost Hunting More Testable

Our paranormal investigations have changed over time.

When we first started, we did many of the same things other ghost hunters do.

Ask questions.

Turn on equipment.

Wait for something to react.

Call the reaction interesting.

But the longer I've investigated, the more I want to know whether these techniques can actually be tested.

That's why we're doing more control experiments.

That's why I'm testing paranormal apps at both haunted and non-haunted locations.

That's why I'm trying to eliminate radio contamination from spirit-box experiments.

And that's why I'm not putting subtitles over these EVPs.

I don't want to convince you that I captured a ghost.

I want to know whether there's actually something in the recording worth explaining.

What Do I Think the Six EVPs Say?

Nice try.

I'm still not telling you.

I definitely have opinions about some of them.

But if I tell you now, the experiment is ruined.

If enough people respond, I may make a follow-up video comparing what everyone heard with what I originally thought the recordings said.

That could be extremely interesting.

Especially if nobody hears what I heard.

Then I'll have to sit here reconsidering my life choices and staring suspiciously at my headphones.

Science!

Help Us Analyze the Evidence

So, spooky cats, this time I'm putting the paranormal evidence in your hands—or technically your ears.

Listen to all six clips.

Tell me:

Do you hear a voice?

What do you think it says?

Could it have an ordinary explanation?

Do you think it's a genuine EVP?

And please remember:

Listen before reading the other comments.

I want your first impression, not the answer your brain starts hearing after somebody else suggests it.

Whether these recordings turn out to be spirits, environmental contamination, ordinary voices, or nothing more than auditory pareidolia, every honest interpretation helps us become better investigators.

Because I don't just want spooky evidence.

I want evidence that can survive people trying to tear it apart.

Stay spooky, cats—and tell me what you hear.