@prof I think we may have very different view on how science works, If something cant be 'scientifically' proven and yet, 'existst' (at least by testimonials of so many) than perhaps 'the scinece' (or better the people who claim that they are 'scientists') should try to find new methods or tools to examine those 'events'.
If you say aliens land in your backyard every night, you don't get to claim that we need better radars to detect their arrival. You need to first prove what you claim to be there, really is. Science has provided that mechanism for that. It is called controlled testing where the only variable is sound. You involve many other factors and senses and then ask that science go and prove based on sound alone, that what you heard is real? You have to be joking.
There is currently no research going on to validate what you all claim to hear. None. Why? Because you have not provided any evidence of something real. Do that and science will happily investigate. Stick to your biased testing and we know why you arrive and wrong conclusions. We don't need to advance the science any more. We have known for decades that people say they hear things sighted that vanish when tested blind. And that is that.
Put more directly, you need to advance your testing methods. Science is years and years ahead of you. To the extent you have no use for such science, then science doesn't owe you more work. It certainly doesn't need to spend money chasing people's imagined effects.