Skeptic: Promoting Science and Critical Thinking

top navigation:

eSkeptic: the email newsletter of the Skeptics Society

Bookmark and Share
Thursday, August 10th, 2006 | ISSN 1556-5696

photograph by Eduardo Hirose

The Fourth International Conference on Origami
in Science, Mathematics, and Education (4OSME)

September 8th–10th, 2006
Caltech, Pasadena, CA

4OSME is the 4th interdisciplinary conference that has brought together artists, scientists, technologists and educators to explore the relationships between origami (the Japanese art of paperfolding), mathematics and science. Although not a likely combination, to be sure — surprisingly, origami is deeply connected to many fields of mathematics and has made contributions to practical scientific problems ranging from the design of airbags to medical implants and unfolding structures in space! For more information:

VISIT the conference website >


In this week’s eSkeptic Alison Smith, the founder of Skeptical Analysis of the Paranormal Society (SAPS), an investigative team devoted to re-creating and debunking popular paranormal video footage shown on television, debunks “Ghost Hunters” — a Sci-Fi Network TV show by one of the most famous paranormal investigation groups in the world (TAPS — The Atlantic Paranormal Society). Smith is a licensed private investigator, armed security officer, and is also a psychology major at the University of Texas at Arlington.


image from www.scifi.com/ghosthunters/

TAPS vs. SAPS
The Atlantic Paranormal Society meets the
Skeptical Analysis of the Paranormal Society

by Alison Smith

The Atlantic Paranormal Society (TAPS) is one of the most famous paranormal investigation groups in the world according to their web site, with over 50,000 hits to the site per day. Their fame comes from being able to deliver, on a regular basis, enough paranormal evidence to catch the attention of the Sci-Fi Network which led to their own TV show — “Ghost Hunters”. The hour long show takes you inside various supposedly haunted places, led by founders Jason Hawes and Grant Wilson, along with a troupe of lesser known TAPS members that includes two demonologists and one Wiccan, amongst others. TAPS claims to have a scientific approach to investigation, using gadgets like EMF Detectors, Flir cameras, and handheld digital thermometers to either prove or disprove a haunting. Founder Jason Hawes has said in various interviews that when TAPS is called to investigate paranormal claims, they go in attempting to debunk the haunting. The public’s trust was gained through the number of “true hauntings” TAPS uncovered. The percentage was shockingly small considering more popularity could be attained with more hauntings. In the first season, only 25% of all investigated locations were deemed “haunted”. The numbers went up, however, in the second season when 51.22% of the locations were haunted.

The show “Ghost Hunters” came to my attention when I stumbled upon their web site and watched a full episode posted there, available for viewing. I was impressed with their lack of paranormal evidence, and purchased Season One on DVD. Episode 104 featured an investigation of Race Rock Lighthouse. During a review of their investigation, they discovered that a folding travel chair that had been left in an empty room moved, apparently on its own. I immediately grew wise in the ways of TAPS. Earlier, in the context of the show, Lead Investigator Grant Wilson, who had been sitting in the chair had gotten up, taken it with him, and left the room closing the door behind him. This did not fit with their findings, which showed the chair in an empty room with the door to the room open. I wondered why this inconsistency existed, and decided to attempt a re-creation of a chair moving of its own accord. I tried a variety of methods, finally settling on black thread to move the chair. Because of this re-creation, Skeptical Analysis of the Paranormal Society (SAPS) was formed.

VIEW the TAPS original footage >

VIEW the SAPS re-creation footage >

In creating the footage for this site, I discovered many other people who were skeptical of the TAPS footage and had attempted re-creations as well. One of these was for Episode 105: Eastern State Penitentiary. During this episode, a camera that no one was anywhere near picked up an image of a cloaked figure that seemingly appeared out of nowhere and ran down the catwalk the camera was pointed at. This piece of footage has been debated hotly on the TAPS official message board.

The footage is debated with such passion because, in attempting a re-creation, it was discovered that the effect that made it appear as though the cloaked figure materialized out of nowhere could only be created by altering the footage to 15 frames per second instead of the usual 30 frames per second TAPS records at. This would mean that the only people who had access to altering the footage were the TAPS crew themselves, as they are the ones who do the “reveal” at the end of each episode, where they share their findings with the owners of the location.

VIEW the TAPS original footage >

VIEW the SAPS re-creation footage >

VIEW the entire debunk for episode 105 >

In Season One of “Ghost Hunters” TAPS used DVR cameras, IR cameras, EMF Detectors, Digital Thermometers, Digital Cameras, and Digital Voice Recorders in their attempts to debunk haunted locations. As the success of the show grew, Season Two brought in the Flir thermal camera. In Episode 223: Ghostly Soldier, a Flir camera captured an image of a person projected on a locker with a number “2” printed on it. TAPS was convinced that this was evidence of a deceased soldier’s spirit, who was said to haunt the location. However, analysis by a third party investigator revealed that, in fact, the image was more likely a reflection off the locker from Lead Investigator Grant Wilson. The apparition even appears to be looking down at something in its hand — the screen of the Flir camera as Grant held it.

VIEW the TAPS original footage >

VIEW the third party re-creation footage >

TAPS maintains that they do not charge for their investigations and are only interested in researching the paranormal, not making money off of it. Evidence of this could be seen in the first season when, while not involved in investigations, Grant and Jason worked as plumbers for Roto-Rooter. This has led many fans to believe that TAPS is a charitable organization, and that they also do not receive income for their appearances on “Ghost Hunters”. However, in the second season of the show, Roto-Rooter was put on the back burner in favor of working in the majority for TAPS. Questions put to Jason Hawes through e-mail about his salary for “Ghost Hunters” were unanswered. TAPS also has a button on their main page where you can offer donations, and another link for purchasing “Official TAPS Gear” which will soon be available in department stores across the U.S.

The TAPS 18+ Message Board, home to nearly 4,000 members, is a favorite of fans for discussion of episodes, anecdotes about personal hauntings, and investigation techniques for the up-and-coming paranormal investigator. Members who have repeatedly posted skeptical evidence, or links to the above re-creations have been banned from use of the boards without explanation. I was one of these people, but I was far less likely to let it go. After repeated attempts to contact the forum’s technical administrator, I was informed that my ban was without any particular reason, and that the order to ban had come from Jason Hawes himself, who said simply that I would know the reason for the ban. The only reason I could fathom, having never broken any of the rules stated in the board’s TOS, was posting skeptical analyses of the TAPS footage. Third party review of evidence collected by TAPS is not encouraged, and members who have contacted the group asking for full footage from everything recorded at the haunted locations have also gone unanswered.

SAPS formed to balance the type of information that the public receives about paranormal investigations. While our intention is not to disprove that there are unexplainable phenomena, we hope to show how easy it is to duplicate the footage that TAPS uses as proof, and explain the psychological reasons that people are so eager to believe. One of the things we are most interested in concerning “Ghost Hunters” is not only the actual evidence presented, but the way that it is presented and the choice of words the TAPS members use when presenting it. The conversations bear striking resemblance to False Memory Implantation. TAPS, when finding paranormal evidence, tends to go through one particular cycle. First, something questionable happens, like a figure passing in front of a camera. A member then exclaims in shock, protesting that it isn’t possible since no one was around, and prepping the audience for what the investigators want them to see. Usually they show the exclamations before actually showing the footage, thus allowing their reaction to influence what the audience will later see. Then, when they finally reveal the footage, the TAPS members immediately shut down any possibility that the experience wasn’t paranormal at all by making a statement that sounds like fact but, in actuality, isn’t. For example, in Episode 104: Race Rock, when the chair seemed to move of its own accord, Grant and Jason both immediately jumped in while reviewing the evidence and stated that the chair could not possibly have been moved with fishing line, as a reflection off the line would be visible on camera. However, a fellow skeptic filmed fishing line attached to a chair leg under various lighting conditions, and it was never visible.

VIEW the skeptical fishing line footage >

READ about TAPS and False Memory Implantation >

Other statements of supposed fact include that orbs — which sometimes appear in photographs as balls of light — are collections of energy, that spirits drop the temperature of a room by using thermal energy surrounding them in order to appear — sort of like energy sponges, that high EMF readings and high orb activity are usually found in haunted places, and that dowsing rods can be used to indicate the presence of spirits. These statements are all made without the blink of an eye, or a consideration of a reference. In fact, in some of the paranormal investigations, the only thing that makes it paranormal is the word of TAPS themselves. An example can be found in Episode 219: Haunted Lighthouse, where figures are seen on a DVR camera that was filming from the bottom of a spiral staircase looking up. In this footage, a figure can be seen some number of floors up, walking rapidly up the stairs. The TAPS crew perceives this as paranormal, despite their own timestamps, and the titles added during editing placing both Jason and Grant on the stairs at the time the footage was filmed.

VIEW the evidence >

However, during the reveal at the end of the show, the timestamp is removed from the footage, and Jason and Grant tell the owners of the lighthouse that no one was on the stairs at that time.

While it is possible that somewhere, somehow a spirit roams the earth, it would seem unlikely that TAPS has discovered it. At Skeptical Analysis of the Paranormal Society, we hope to undo the damage of falsehoods presented as truths by groups like TAPS and educate the public on belief systems, how they are formed, and how groups like TAPS can take advantage of our desires for proof of something beyond.

Please, visit us often, and feel free to contribute information or re-creations of your own. — Alison Smith, Founder of SAPS, Founder@SkepticalAnalysis.com

References
Bookmark and Share
Share this eSkeptic with your friends online.
Comments (72)

72 responses to this post.

  1. Janice Kelly says:

    Dear SAPS,

    I enjoyed reading your article analyzing the validity of the Sci-Fi Channel’s “Ghost Hunters”. After having viewed quite a few episodes of the show I was angered. I found it amusing that the show depicted Grant Wilson and Jason Hawes still working as plumbers when I know they’re raking in millions of dollars. That in itself was an indicator to me of just how phony this show really is.

    I think it is sad the way they’re taking advantage of people’s need to believe that somehow life continues on after death, and making a fortune doing it.

    Thank you for helping the public wake up!!

    Sincerely,
    Janice Kelly

  2. Jim says:

    Either way, the show is entertaining. Does not mean it has to be 100% scientific fact, nothing is indisputable.

  3. Dana Brielle says:

    yes. It’s entertaining, but they should put a disclaimer before the show stating this show is for entertainment purposes only, and isn’t proven science.

    My boyfriend’s family had a group out of Arkansas, ARPAST, come do an investigation about a year or 2 ago. Their website says they are professional, but I saw nothing professional about them. Wouldn’t recommend them.

  4. WOOP says:

    Ghost are real no matter what you say

  5. Sandy says:

    I searched on site for some place to express my disbelief in this ridiculous show. Yes, absolutely entertaining, but completely ridiculous. I watched an episode last night where a door “violently” slammed shut and I clearly saw a hand in the lower right screen pushing it shut. The other situation that was ridiculous, was that Grant and Jason were in a room, inticing the “spirit” to speak to them. We heard a noise and they noted a hangar was on the floor that apparently was not there before. Now, if you’re hoping this will happen again, don’t you think you’d place your camera at the coat rack where the suppossed hangar came from?? Not these two…and guess what? Another hangar got thrown into the picture from some unseen place! Give me a break.
    I’m angered that they believe some the public actually buys into this….

  6. William says:

    What I mostly find odd is the lack of ambition in technology. It seems a low tech approach leaves enough ambiguity in things to keep it interesting. But socially, its weird to me that if Sci-Fi and Taps were truly close to something as earth shattering as the existence of ghosts, why would a bunch of millionaires spare pennies in proving it?
    If I had a million dollars and somebody told me a ghost was walking a starecase eternally, then I would set up a regular camera, a night camera and a thermal camera in that location for months and months and months and months to prove my point.
    Their approach seems a bit dated and I have to wonder if that is on purpose.

    • Mark says:

      William, exactly because of skeptics who won’t give it any credit at all, no matter what evidence they do have. If it is already pre-judged to be fake, and the mainstream is far more ready to accept that over all the evidence in the world, then no one is going to pay attention. So anything outre will not have major funding, and since the phenomena is fleeting and you can’t drag a ghost into a lab and have it submit to multiple tests, you can’t apply scientific method. So naturally scientists won’t accept it. It’s a catch-22.

      • Dave says:

        You can still create a controlled environment in a supposedly-haunted house. As for TAPS’ evidence not being accepted by the scientific community, it’s simply due to the fact it’s not scientific evidence. Don’t blame science for having standards – blame TAPS for having none.

  7. nathan says:

    I too have been left feeling uneasy about some aspects of the show. And the examples given are compelling enough to raise doubts.

    However a majority of TAPS evidence has not been disproved–though I would guess even one good instance is enough to cast doubt on all of it.

    It would seem that pre-TAPS TV and pre-Season 1 you had an organization based on like-minded individuals who had some level of some success in the paranormal. Then fame and money caused what looked like production concerns to compromise their integrity.

    But damn–the level of acting required in some instances would have to be pretty high to pull these scenes off and all of the TAPS people have “real world” (i.e. non-acting) bios.

    Also some of the arguments to TAPS seem more like atheistic arguments disguised as technical arguments. If SAPS is an athestic organization it should be upfront about that–as I refusal to believe no matter what is as much a bias as wanting *to* believe.

    However until some of SAPS fair points are answered I think this site remains relevant.

  8. james says:

    hi. when i first started watching GH i was totally fooled by the “regular joes” that sci-fi portrayed jason and grant to be. now i know better. the sad thing is that steve, tango, brian, etc. are just pawns in jason and grants game. they actually think they’re investing the paranormal. have you noticed that all the significant evidence (hangers being thrown, faucets turned on, loud disembodied voices heard with the human ear, flashlights being turned on, human figures in thermal camera, etc) is caught by jason and grant only??? steve, tango, etc. only see things out of the corner of their eyes or think they hear mics. voices and noises. also, if there is paranormal evidence to capture, it’s going to take more than one night somewhere. like a previos post stated, if sci-fi really wanted to get paranormal evidence, they could place cameras at “active” locations or days or months on end. i could go on and on, but don’t have the time. one more thing, how long does it take to review all the hours and hours from multiple video cameras and audio recorders??? maybe sci-fi “helps” them, if you know what i mean.

  9. rose says:

    I do believe that most of it is fake but that doesn’t stop me from watching the show. It’s very amusing, and I don’t stop watching something just because someone else says it’s bogus.
    I notice that most of the stuff that goes on was because of sci-fi. I mean, they wouldn’t have even been able to afford any of the equipment otherwise. A thermal imaging camera could cost up to 50,000 dollars!
    However, I do believe that ghosts exsist and maybe some of their evidence is true. But most of it is not, I know. Like the hanger that got thrown off screen. Obviously someone threw that.
    Besides all of that, I love the show and the guys on the show are likable. I even hope to meet them someday.

  10. Micki says:

    For starters I believe in ghosts. I work at a haunted library and I myself have heard, smelled and seen things that others say are not real. We keep a record of all reports as they are turned in to us. We have had “professionals” investigate also. With that said, I also watch “Ghost Hunters every week. Yes there are times that I do not always agree with what they claim to be evidence, but I have learned a lot from them. I think like everything else on TV, some has become more “staged”, but I believe that generally they are trying to actually search for the paranormal. It is very hard to dismiss some things. Some can be debunked or explained by science, but not all. Just remember until you have heard a voice whisper your name over your shoulder, you turn and no one is there….try to keep an open mind.

  11. Mark says:

    I agree with Micki. Just because something CAN be faked doesn’t mean it is, and there is plenty on this show that I have looked at from all angles, and unless it is a major special effects sham, which I don’t believe for a minute, then there are some real events being caught on film and audio. As for them once having been plumbers; they were. The show is popular now so doing this is now more lucrative. So what? Whatever pays the bills. That they are “raking in millions” is a major stretch. They don’t charge people for their services – whatever they get they get from the Sci-Fi Channel. I think TAPS is on the level, whereas I don’t trust other shows like Ghost Adventurers, or even worse, Most Haunted (which has been accused by its own members of being scripted and faked). I don’t feel like a dupe when watching Ghost Hunters, the way I do those other shows. I would be very surprised if Jason or Grant were allowing fakery to be done, and until I see hard proof of this, it will remain this way.

  12. chaz huprich says:

    Dear Jason Hawas

    My name is Chaz Huprich i have news for you. Micheal Jackson’s ghost has bin seen by the fireplace and the bathroom at Neverland. Could you do me and answer this. “Do you think ghost kick people in the nutts?

  13. Phil says:

    I for one have had my own experience personally that no one could tell me was not real thats just how it is. As for what these guys do sure its possible some of it has been faked to get ratings but considering the fact that they actually debunked some major “haunts” that have been advertised as such for years I can say it can’t be entirely for ratings as that would actually lower ratings in some instances. I’ve seen alot said against several bits of footage they have where people said they could do the same thing but seemed to fail to show that very thing was done in the shows footage. Maybe it really is faked but until you can give me more than some way you can copy it there isn’t really any point. People make counterfeit bills to pawn off to unsuspecting people but the original is still the real deal. Show the original video to be false itself and then you’ll get my attention. This is how true science works anyways.

  14. Lord Erik says:

    When I see people typing about these massive amounts of evidence I can’t help but think “what evidence?”. I’ve seen four seasons of the show, and the only “firm” and truly bizarre thing that has happened is the chair moving in the lighthouse. And I don’t doubt for a second that this was staged either by TAPS or by others.

    The rest of the so called evidence is made up of a large portion of personal experiences, EVPs, and other completely unconvincing incidents. Most of the evidence with the thermal camera seems to me to be a product of the crews incompetence with, and complete misunderstanding of, their own equipment. Resulting in the “spook-alarm” being set off by things like Grant or Jasons reflected bodies in certain surfaces.

    But come on. These two are plumbers, not scientists. It takes more than scientific equipment to do science. I am sure that Jason and Grant are both very nice people, but they seem to have no appriciation for, or knowledge of, the scientific method whatsoever.

    In fact, the only thing that keeps me watching this show is the social drama between the characters.

  15. Phil says:

    It is kind of hard to use scientific method on anything paranormal since it requires gathering data to make a hypothesis testing the data in a controlled environment or some sort of control. Collect data from experiment and analyze. Then interpret and draw conclusions as a start for a new hypothesis. After you publish results and allow for “peer review”. The problem with this and anything paranormal is there is no way to have a true control in the experiment also since “peer review” is done by people with equal lack of knowledge in what truly can be used to measure paranormal activity there is no way for what cant be easily “debunked” to be 100% proven to be paranormal. We can only say we can’t explain it. Science just calls this simply “unexplained phenomena”. It’s not disproven it just can’t be proven or disproven with current knowledge or methods. Any scientist who says paranormal research isn’t a true science forgets that science was never and still is never 100% it is always “best guess”. This is why new discoveries can be made. Just recently scientists have found that Einsteins own theory of relativity may need to be modified because of new evidence that has been recently discovered. They found out certain objects in the universe are accelerating which is contrary to what the theory of relativity states. Does this mean that Einstein was a fraud? No! It just means the information he had to come up with his hypothesis wasnt complete.

    • Lord Erik says:

      I must disagree with you there Phil. It is absolutely possible to study the paranormal in controlled settings. It has been done lots of times, and yielded nothing. Walking around in a house with $20 infrared thermal meters and filming yourself with a camera whenever you feel uncomfortable or queezy isn’t it though.

      The major problem with Jason and Grant is that if they cannot explain something, they declare it a haunting. Any rational person would tear down the entire house in search for a natural explanation before even taking over themselves the possibility of something so radical.

      Why radical? Radical because there is nothing to suggest that people continue to live on after their death.

      Comparing the imperfection in Einsteins equations to the “imprefection” in ghost hunting is just… an amazing reach.

      • Phil says:

        There is also nothing to suggest that people don’t live in on some form or another after death. Just because you don’t know something to be true doesn’t mean its false either then again it doesn’t mean its true. We just don’t have enough evidence to know for sure and most likely we never will have that evidence.

        As for calling it radical thinking most of science is the result of radical thinking. Think of Galileo who was considered so radical in his time he was imprisoned and forced to denounce his work. Copernicus refused to have his work published until he was dead because he feared the same thing. If it wasn’t for “radical” individuals like these we would still be stuck in the dark ages. They didn’t call it the dark ages because it was dark all the time.

        A rational person wouldn’t tear down a house costing hundreds of thousands of dollars just to prove or disprove something they think is paranormal. They either just live with it or they move. The irrational person is the one that does what you just said.

        As for my making a comparison to the a well noted scientist of our age who has since been proven that his theory needs modification because of the advance of technology and our ability to understand our universe is a good example of why you can’t just say something like paranormal research is bogus. They proved alchemy wouldn’t work with chemistry and the fact that you can’t just turn one element into another with a simple chemical reaction. They actually found a valid reasoning for why alchemy would never work with knowledge gained through scientific study. There is no science that can explain all of what we call paranormal activity now so the only thing we can do is exactly what the pioneers of science did. We have to work with what we have and try our best with the scientific method and deductive reasoning to come up with explainations of the world around us. This has been the foundation of science since the beginning and probably always will be.

        • Lars says:

          I would for sure tear down my entire house piece for piece if something disturbed my sleep. As a person with lively imagination I seek out the reasons for my “ghosts”. I have yet to find a supernatural or paranormal cause for anything. There is for sure nothing supernatural hiding in the dark lurking on us and waiting for an oportunity to scare us, hurt us or just have fun. How hard could it be to obtain some evidence for a claim so many presents of haunted this and that. People really need to get their heads out of the dark age muck filled with superstition and get some evidence for their beliefs. It´s not skeptics that have to disprove the excistence of supernatural beeings or postmortem awareness. If you claim to see, hear or experience fenomena you should bring this up with your doctor on your next exam, it might be the signs of real problems needing medical investigation.

        • Mark says:

          Sorry Phil, ghosts do not exist. If they did exist, certain places would be extremely haunted. For instance the Colisseum in Rome, Buchenwald or any gas chamber in Texas. Some places would literally have a ghost per cubic centimeter and would light up like a 4th of July fireworks display as soon as the sun goes down. There would be no need to argue about ghosts, everyone would have seen one.

          Believe what you want but there is not nor will there ever be proof of ghosts existence.

          Regards,
          Mark

          Regards,
          Mark

  16. Lord Erik says:

    Does it strike anyone else as a bit stupid to look for ghosts with all the lights turned off when they rely so much on cameras and other equipment which records light?

    I don’t suppose the owners of the locations they investigate walk around in complete darkness, but yet they appear to be seeing and hearing ghosts. So why not keep the lights on during the “investigation” as well?

    If they had the lights on perhaps they wouldn’t be scared and fall over themselves or run away whenever they think they see something. In fact they might actually catch something other than flickering shadows.

    But then again, I suppose flickering shadows are a lot more exciting than no flickering whatsoever.

    • Savant69 says:

      Exactly! Why not dispense with the darkness, scary music [at least for the audience], and the creepy night vision ala Blair Witch Project? They have to set the mood, because the “spook” has no objective existence – it is rather a product of their hypervigilance, which is sharpened by the darkness, and the fact that they gather the “facts” from the property owner/manager in advance, which prejudices their observations.

      Furthermore, these are rubes playing with scientific equipment in a way it wasn’t designed for. There are no “ghost meters.”

      More importantly, if ghosts did not want to be heard/seen/or felt they wouldn’t be. If they wanted to be heard/seen/felt, they surely would be far less subtle than these vague encounters demonstrate. This vagueness reminds me of backward masking BS from the 1980s.

      I guess you have to perversely admire a couple of scientifically illiterate plumbers who managed to rake in the cash by duping an audience of dunces.

  17. gina b says:

    well i like the show it seems very interesting to me i believe in order for people to believe in ghost hauntings or paranormal as you will its not right to critisize anybody on there beliefs i would like to personally investigate with taps before i would say the show is fake once i get a taste of a real investigation i would rather determine or realize it on my own and i know a lot of shows are fake because of modern technology now but i really enjoy taps like i said i would like to be a part of a real investigation with jason and grant and the crew before i can determine if it is fake until than i will enjoy watching it.

  18. Rachel says:

    I used to love this show. In the beginning it seemed that the goal was to figure out the real reason why people may have thought the environment they believed was haunted was having odd activity. I loved seeing them find out that the cause of strange noises, sounds and others were explained by pipes, holes in walls, etc. To me this was just as fascinating, actually more so than the findings that the team believed could not be explained. Actually I think that most that was unexplained could have been so if only a bit of logic and time and perhaps some valid scientific research was applied. I also loved that they do not have the absurd obsession with “orbs” caught on camera. I hate the shows that do. Come on, they are in dusty bug filled places, of course the cameras and the lights will show them as orbs when the people roam through disturbing them.

    I am most definitely a skeptic in the sense that I believe that most claims though believed by the person who experienced them, are false. I also believe that more than half of those claims have legitimacy in the category of unusual, but could be explained by logic if one should set their minds to discovering it.

    I am also very afraid of the dark outside my own bedroom. Many think this is contrary to my skeptic personality but I think it fits well. The dark simply scares me because I cannot see what might be lurking, and/or find the cause of the sounds I might hear. I do not fully discount any possibilities of paranormal activity, however I do believe that if and when there is it is usually do to things we have not fully understood scientifically yet. Things like magnetic forces on certain objects in certain environments is not fully understood so could easily fall into the category of paranormal until we understand it fully.

    This is why Ghost Hunters has been so disappointing lately. They have stopped trying to explain much of what seems so obviously explainable and place it into the odd activity category.

    I was just watching ghost hunters international and they were investigating an attic in a castle. An investigator threw a stone and the stone apparently was thrown back though they did not show the stone, but the sound was obvious. But if you looked at the floor, there were gaps that showed a very obvious sub level to this attic, under the floor boards. To assume there are no mice or rats up there is a bit odd. I would assume there were. Assuming that, wouldn’t it be logical to assume that throwing a stone at the floor might make a mouse jump and run, possible resulting in dislodging a pebble that skittered under the floorboards? It would account for the noise and the lack of the actually stone. But they never bothered to even consider this.

    It is too bad- I really enjoyed it when they used to consider all possibilities. It would have made anything they found that they could not explain valid far more valid and worth looking into. The slow decline into pleasing the audience with displays of the “unknown” is sad. It was the only show of its kind that originally did not.

  19. Marc Skyler says:

    Why exactly do we live in this fantasy world that recreating an event negates the event. I have seen plenty of realistic murders on TV and film, yet I am pretty sure I believe they take place in real life as well.

    And second, this “skeptical” viewpoint that all science is invalidated by any connection to making a living from it. Seriously. Do you listen to yourselves when you make this lil snide attack? Do you think your patron Randi is a peasant magician? That Saint Carl Sagan donated all his money from Cosmos?

    Seriously…do good science…gather real evidence of fakery if you can. But get the hell over yourselves. The show is a show and at least it takes steps to show some level of critical thinking. But I suppose that is not good enough unless you dogmatically ID yourself as a skeptic and keep painfully reminding the world just how much smarter you are than everyone else.

    Get over yourselves. Get off the internet. And serve science instead of your egos. Apply your skeptical eye to department of defence reports, medical studies for diet drugs and faked data leading to Government grants. The world will be a better place for it.

    • Joel says:

      You mean it uses just enough of a pretense at “critical thinking” to be a very effective con job for those already inclined to believe in fantasy. You need to get over yourself.

  20. Judy Holiday says:

    I never believed in “ghosts” until I visited my ex-bf’s parents house.We were only there for the weekend but if I could’ve left sooner I certainly would have.I get goose-bumps everytime I relieve it but here goes.. we had gone out for the evening and came back at around 1a.He’s parents were also gone so we went downstairs to the game room.We were sitting on the edge of the pool table when all of a sudden we heard footsteps up in the living room.We both looked at each other and said there’s someone up there and at about that time his mom’s poodle dog starts barking and going insane.He grabs a baseball bat and we start up the stairs and we could hear the walking and the growling and then he trips and makes a noise and bam the footsteps disappear but not the barking we find the dog underneath a table just going insane.We checked all the doors and windows and they were locked.I know in my heart that what we heard that night was not in lets say human form.The footsteps were loud and heavy and the floor was carpeted so all I can say is that there are somethings in life that can’t be explained or debunked.I agree there are con artists out there who make up scenario’s to get rich or whatever but I’m here to say that not all things that go bump in the nite are fake.

  21. Chris says:

    Excellent analysis, I greatly appreciate it. I enjoy watching Ghost Hunters and I find it entertaining. Of course I have my doubts about their evidence and methodology and its refreshing to see someone taking the time to give it enough attention to discount evidence that does not stand up to scrutiny. If TAPS desires there findings to be useful in proving or disproving the existence of spirits or ghosts, this type of critical analysis is how science is supposed to work, there must be enough credible evidence able to handle this kind of scrutiny to be taken serious. I’m a bit saddened to hear that Grant and Jason are unwilling to allow skeptics or people who are willing to question their work into the discussions on their site. It seems to me that the show can be great entertainment, but not a credible source for evidence of the paranormal.

  22. Steve says:

    One thing I have always found. And that is skeptics are very narrow minded invididuals – like a lot of skeptics say that we need to go and see a doctor. What do they come back with more than 1 person sees the same thing? They both their brains got effected exactly the same way to make them think they saw the same thing? Yeah right.

    I think there should be to choices – on the fence or a believer. Like I say, people who say they sceptical always seem to have a very limited personality. I imagine most don’t believe through fear. A fear of the unknown. So not believing is easier for them and makes them feel better.

    The question isn’t whether ghosts exist as it’s blatently obvious that they do exist. The question is, what are they?

    • s8ist says:

      Wow, Steve. I tend not to make statements of belief, but I can say quite easily that I believe everyone is dumber for having read your post. Hopefully, there are more people in agreement with that belief than “on-the-fence.” Thankfully, the sanction on disbelieving outright the notion that people are made dumber by having read your post at least favors my position.

      My main point of contention, which you may have figured out, is that you chastise others for being narrowminded but then wish to limit the number of conclusions one can have about a claim (in this instance, ghosts as they relate to the supernatural).

      I will say that I am skeptical about ghosts. That doesn’t mean that if it were presented to me in a verifiable way that I would be resistant toward accepting it. But I also think it would be quite easy to strap disco-lights and smoke machines onto myself and convince some ignorant tribe that I am some kind of God. In other words, the fact that many of us are ignorant to technology and the scientific method, and also shape our perceptions through a lens of cultural bias (including a wide array of myths and superstitions), it would be very easy for us to make shortsighted conclusions about what we see. Attributing all explanations to the unkown and relegating all unexplainable phenomenon to the supernatural simply makes for an appealing argument from ignorance.

      Oddly enough, while you limit your choices to belief or being agnostic about the subject, it seems you think that ghosts’ existence is “blatently obvious.” If they are so blatantly obvious, why would it be questioned? Gravity is obvious. Does it make sense to be “on the fence” about it? I think the truth is that you are, on some level, aware of the fact that your beliefs are not well supported by science or reason. Your projection about how beliefs that may be comforting are more easily adopted is more telling than any half-baked suspicions about the ulterior motives of skeptics. They’re not out to crap in your apple pie. They’re out to tell you that someone already has, while you complain and defend for your right to happily eat the next bite.

      • s8ist says:

        I’d also like to analyze this last part that I forgot to in my previous post:
        “…it’s blatently obvious that they do exist. The question is, what are they?”

        This is the most obvious example of NOT thinking critically that I have seen in your post. In order to establish something exists at all, we should at least be able to tell what it is that we are looking for (basic characteristics, properties, etc.). Otherwise, I could suggest that “ghosts” are what I ate for lunch, or my favorite song.

        • Joel says:

          No, he’s right. It is blatantly obvious that ghosts do exist. They’re dust motes extremely close to camera lenses. They’re the people who fake paranormal encounters and “evidence.” They’re the normal sounds of houses settling. They’re friends playing jokes on others. Whenever someone encounters something completely innocuous and assigns to it a fanciful supernatural explanation, that’s a ghost.

  23. morgvork says:

    Sorry earthlings, we are the reason you see ghosts. we use a stealthing technology which makes us appear on occasion as apparitions. we have called our tech department to fix this bug in our equipment and are sorry we gave you any false hope of life after death. we are here to observe only, mainly in the locker rooms of hot college girls at college.

  24. Amy says:

    I am convinced by some of the arguments on this page, but for those of you who argue that TAPS should stay in one location for many days – they do. Watch Steve’s five-o’clock shadow and the buttons on Jason’s shirts. They will change as episodes progress. Please keep in mind, in general, that there is a difference between the show _Ghost Hunters_, and the organization, “TAPS.”

    :)

  25. Chip says:

    I’m so happy I found this website.
    I was angry when John Edward was on SciFi a few years back.
    It’s horrible that Edward & Ghost Hunters, are allowed to influence children, or anyone of any age with this obviously untrue information.
    Personally I believe that giving out fraudulent statements as The Ghost Hunters do & Edward has, and still does, warrant some kind of legal monetary fine and maybe some jail-time as well.
    It’s more dangerous than just telling lies.

  26. Paul says:

    Why is that? Simply because they prove the old adage of, “A fool and his money are soon parted?”
    So what if people WANT to believe in life after death, or ghosts, or bigfoot, or aliens? I don’t care what people believe, or do not. Whatever. It doesn’t matter. Whether consciousness endures after death, or simply ceases at death, there’s nothing anyone can do about it.
    If aliens exist, ok they exist, if not, that’s ok too.
    I think some people are a bit too hasty to string up others simply because they subscribe to a belief which doesn’t fit into the realm of the five senses, or accepted scientific evidence and theory.
    Please recall that it was only a few hundred years ago that members of the scientific community were being “strung up” by the church for practicing their beliefs.
    But why would snyone believe in this drivel? Because a lot of people need to feel that they are part of something much larger than the world around them. Something that is beyond our capacity to explain. They want to have hope. And there is nothing wrong with that.

  27. Chip says:

    Much truth in what you say.
    I just find belief in these types of things harmful.
    Of course, charlatans have been popular for thousands of years.
    Scientific values propel the human race forward. (my opinion)
    Belief in pseudo-science keeps us slaves to ignorance.

  28. Paul says:

    Oh, I agree completely. Ignorance has led the human race down some very dark roads in the past, and does so to this day. I also agree that these kinds of beliefs have the potential for much danger, as there are misguided souls who will accept the utterly fantastic as truth, without a second’s hesitation. (Heaven’s Gate, anyone?)
    However, I also realize the need for escapism, so long as it’s enjoyed in reasonable & rational quantities.
    Let them have their ghosts and aliens. Maybe they’ll find one, or the other, or both. Who knows?
    Also, I apologize for being so abrasive in the previous post. That wasn’t my intention.

    “Live long and prosper.”

  29. Dustin says:

    Has anyone noticed that the show is on a channel formerly called Sci-Fi? Do any of you realize what that stands for? Science FICTION. You know what Fiction is, right? To watch a show on a FICTION channel, and then get upset that it is fake….c’mon…

    • Joel says:

      Your little clever semantics game aside, it’s a show that passes itself off as real, as a documentary, with real evidence of the supernatural. Occasionally, the Sci-Fi Channel– or is it SyFy now?– shows documentaries about the making of various movies. Are those documentaries “fiction” as well?

  30. Lyra says:

    I also have no doubts that some, if not most of the activity shown in Ghost Hunters is likely staged. It comes of no surprise however. Shows like to cater to what the viewers want to see. Think Man vs. Wild. Bear does the crazy stuff that you undeniably should NOT do in a true survival scenario because the viewers like it better then someone in a true scenario. Here, the viewers want to see the paranormal activity, ergo, it is provided.

    That said, shows that forge evidence do nothing to sway me away from my personal beliefs that paranormal activity does occur around us anymore then those debunking the claims of activity on shows such as these. I’m not talking ghosts, hauntings, all that fun stuff. Just plain and simple paranormal activity which is, by definition, “Beyond the range of normal experience or scientific explanation”. I myself have experienced events which do not follow logical order, even when examined thoroughly and numerous possibilities thought of. Example, I have managed to literally collide (like when you walk into someone) something that was not there. Nothing was anywhere near me to have caused the impact. In fact the closest object I could have hit was a tree about 5ft out of my reach to the right. No branches extended to where I stood. I can’t say I wasn’t a very imaginative teenager at the time, so perhaps it was just me daydreaming again, but it was not something that fell into logical explanation otherwise.

  31. Jason says:

    I don’t have any real stance on the paranormal or the afterlife, I tend to lean towards the skptical side but stay openminded. Because ever since I was a kid I’ve loved getting spooked and hearing ghost stories around the campfire, etc. I wasn’t expecting anything to be found, but I thought it would be fun to watch.

    At first I was impressed with their professionalism, my previous experience checking out paranormal investigators and their “evidence” over the internet was mostly overweight 30-40 year old guys with thick glasses and Lord Of The Rings t-shirts blabbering on about orbs in photographs like they had found he Holy Grail or something. Either that or EVP’s that sounded like nothing more than static. And TAPS didn’t pay any attention to orbs. If every orb in a photograph meant paranormal activity, then pretty much every roll of film I have shot shows evidence of a haunting. Oh by the way, it appears that the Dumbo ride at Disney World was being visiting by a ghost back in 1984, because I have a photo of an orb in frame with a 4 year old me enjoying said ride, so be careful kids.

    But like many people I started to get wise to some of TAPS tricks, be it making unqualified statements and presenting them as fact, or what appears to be clearly faked evidence. What it all boils down to is they HAVE to fake evidence if they want to stay on the air. TAPS has hid behind this idea that since they aren’t taking money from the people they investigate there is no reason for them to fake evidence or declare a place haunted and that they are truly un-biase. When they became T.V. stars and producers of the show the expectations to entertain and produce something conflicted with that notion. It’s not rocket science, like most people they want to make money, and they stand to make the most money the longer their show stays on the air, and it won’t stay on the air if they produce nothing in the way of evidence or entertainment.

  32. DeemanBx says:

    Hey, There are things we just cannot or are not willing to see. I have had a few experiences and have no reason to lie about that. The general public is too busy to even consider the possibility of other realms of existence and such. TAPS may be fake, maybe not. But ghosts…i gotta believe cause i know what i saw…and felt. One day, there will be numerous revelations to many things thought to be myths. Remember when everyone KNEW the world was flat? Time will tell.

    • Joel says:

      A lot of people make the mistake of assigning a single cause to their experiences. People also misjudge events due to their limited perceptions of those events. You may believe you experienced something supernatural– and perhaps you did– but more than likely it was due to any number of perfectly natural reasons. Why discount hundreds of those in favor of just one explanation? Other than you were predisposed to believe in ghosts or spirits?

      It didn’t really take educated people long to conclude the earth was indeed not flat. If there had been educational systems in place during those times more people would have been aware of this fact. It’s kind of specious logic to compare people who ask for scientific proof of outrageous claims to ignorant people who believed in a flat earth. Ghost believers are the ones with the Medieval thought level.

      And that’s not even fair to people who lived in Medieval times who didn’t have access to libraries and schools as we do today.

  33. Joel says:

    I’d actually love to see a show of this nature, but with totally (or as totally as possible) objective– not skeptical, not believing– investigators putting haunted sites to a very rigorous investigation using true scientific methodology. I would imagine even the relatively modest 25% positive results from this show’s first season would be reduced considerably. 10%? 5%?

    Probably less.

    It would more than likely end up tediously boring to the viewers and frustrating to the site owners and their advertising campaigns.

    I think it’s pretty funny these guys claim they’re out to debunk hauntings when it’s clearly in their best interest to do the opposite. If they went around getting negative results each time, the message might get out there that there’s no such thing as ghosts after all and they’d be out of a lucrative TV contract and forced to go back to plumbing full-time.

    I mean, look at who stands to benefit financially here– the production team, Sci-Fi, the hotels and tourist traps they investigate. Which is fine; I’m in favor of capitalism. But that in itself should be reason for approaching this show and its conclusions with skepticism, rather than blaming SAPS for taking them to task.

    It also find it amusing that within his pseudo-debunking pose, they seem to jump directly to the supernatural conclusion on very scant evidence. It seems that if your camera picks up a mysterious image of what is possibly a ghost, that’s the beginning point of your investigation, not your concluding point. You then subject that image to rigorous testing and attempt to reproduce your results after eliminating as many elements that might skew them as possible.

    Are they also faking evidence, rather than just willfully misinterpreting it? Quite possibly. I’m not completely convinced but this would also be to their benefit– as long as they control the video masters and no third parties come along to prevent them and embarrass them– to do so and even if caught, they’re going to have enough true believers to back them up and defend them against all us fun-spoiling naysayers with our suspect motivations like “truth” and “good science” as opposed to the “Ghost Hunters’” good semi-honest all-American money-making.

    It’s a fun show, no doubt, but it does a disservice to its gullible viewers by presenting itself as scientific in any way. Real scientific investigation would welcome opposing viewpoints and transparent scrutiny, not ban posters on message boards for bringing up legitimate doubts and counter interpretations.

  34. Joel says:

    Oh… and no, I’m not objective at all. I don’t believe in ghosts and won’t until I see some empirical evidence, not just two plumbers jumping at shadows.

  35. Jen says:

    The problem is the act of looking for something of which you do not know what it is. Ghosts may exist, but what is a ghost? The traditional assumption is that ghosts-if they exist-are dead people. A ghost might be any number of natural phenomena. It might also be a quirk of one’s own brain. (Recover from a nerve disorder and you learn much about phantom perception and how real it seems. In fact, it is real in the case of nerve damage, but is information interpreted incorrectly). Anyway, I suggest that “ghost” is undefined.

    Science, as it has been pointed out above, has neither proven the non-existence of ghosts, nor has anything else proven existence. Why would the presence of infrared light prove the existence of ghosts anyway? When we do not actually know what a ghost is or may be?

    That said, I am a sceptic of shows like Ghosthunters, but I find it oddly fascinating. And, it should be considered that you would be hard pressed to find a culture on this planet that didn’t have some kind of ghost belief. The ghost belief is not consistent though, it may be a detached spirit, dead person, or some other entity. We should be clear that much of what we are dealing with is a Euro-western belief system. Fear of death is a big part of that, but from my casual experience, some cultures that don’t associate ghosts with specific dead people seem to have a more balanced view of death.

    Still, I rule nothing out just because I can’t see it.

  36. Victor says:

    I love how people get on here and claim to have experiences that just HAVE to have been ghosts but only a few people give actual examples of their stories… which could all easily be explained by the way. (Judy, that noise WAS the dog running around, likely because something it saw outside. When your boyfriend tripped it ran and hid under the table and that’s why the footprints stopped. Your memory of the event is probably distorted a bit by retelling and the fact that you were in a state of fear at the time. Not as fun as a ghost story, I know, but it is a far more likely explanation than a dead guy stomping around on the floor for no apparent reason.) (Lyra, you ran into the tree because you weren’t paying attention and stumbled about 5 ft away after the impact. Either that or a dead guy materialized, physically and violently interacted with you but then immediately left you alone after its initial contact… which of those sounds more likely?) Look, I’m not trying to be an asshole. It’s fun to believe in these sort of things, that you were a part of something unexplainable. It is perfectly natural to be defensive about such an experience.
    I had my own ghost story for awhile and I defended it zealously for awhile. My friend and I were in the woods as kids and they were pretty flooded at the time. We were walking around in a foot or so of standing water and we see this white blur, behind and among some vegetation, as it goes bolting off away from us. There was splashing and everything and then after a few yards the splashing stopped and it seemed to just disappear. We both turned and looked at each other, fear plastered all over our faces, something had to have been there. We hauled ass out of the woods and ran all the way back to my house. For years we thought we had seen a ghost and we told people as much. Then I started to think a bit more objectively about the situation and realized that it wasn’t a ghost, it was a deer. The splashing stopped because we were right near the end of the flooding where the land began to go a bit uphill. It just happened so quickly that it was easy for my active mind to turn the whole event into something that it wasn’t.
    Why is it that in these stories a ghost never appears directly before somebody and make direct communication with them. They always happen behind the subject, in the peripheral, or at a distance. It’s never, I saw the ghost, he was a foot in front of me, and we had a conversation.
    I’m sure if more people with ghost stories were truly honest with themselves, if they really analyzed the situation they were in, then they would have to admit that their first impression of the situation probably wasn’t correct. Unfortunately most people take that impression and run with it instead of analyzing it. I understand though. It’s a lot more fun to have a creepy story about a ghost in the woods than it is to have a story about how you nearly shit your pants when you saw the backside of a running deer.
    As for TAPS, their faking things for money and I’m sure they know it. It all about the Benjamins. I’m sorry but if I wanted to grain credibility as a ghost investigator I would call BS on most of the claims and then say a few were real even though I know they weren’t… just like season 1 of ghost hunters. Then once I had credibility, I’d make the show more interesting by increasing the positive claims… like the subsequent seasons. It’s all too obvious.

  37. Donna says:

    I’ve been into the paranormal going on six years. I never expect to find anything, but when something does happen, what a thrill! I have a tape recorder, a digital camera, and sometimes video. I have pictures of mist, orbs (real ones) not moisture or dust. The mirror at Myrtles Plantation not one but two ghost showed up. REALLY!!! The Birdcage in Tombstone, a shadow with an e.v.p. That was a first for me. Say it’s real, say it’s fake. I have no reason to lie or mislead anyone. I just love the whole idea of “Ghost Hunting.” I have to add this. I sure got into Taps at first, even wanted to be on the their show, but now I’m not so sure. Sorry to say but I’m getting bored with it. Tango does little more than agree with everything Steve says. He has no clear opinion of his own. What happen to the fun they had at first? I did find the show entertaining, funny. Maybe I’ll start my own team. I’ll keep it real, promise..

  38. Chip says:

    I am all for entertainment. I used to watch pro-wrestling in the 70s. I loved Andre the Giant.
    However, I knew it was fake & drank a beer at each break.
    But…
    The Ghost Hunters & John Edward present their “facts” as Truth, which is unproved.
    Yes, I understand it is entertainment… & I can get into that, but not with these producers, which is what Grant & Jason are, as they laugh all the way to the bank.
    Their show is full of errors, with non-professional production values.
    It makes me cringe to see young people believe in these charlatans.
    If there were ANY truths on this show, it would appear in SCIENTIFIC journals.
    You have brains… use them.
    Or… make sure you laugh at the nonsense Grant & Jason provide.
    thanks for your time…

  39. Martin says:

    Why do people want that much to believe in ghost! I’ve seen a lots of people saying that not being able to prove the existence of ghost doesn’t proof they do not exist!! But when we have more plausible prof that they do not exist, why would you still believe they do? I think that it is only a way for these people feel more safe about what death really is. My opinion is that there is no such things as <spirit>.

    Why? Here we go.

    First, because we are, like everything living on earth, composed of the same substance. This is proved by the theory of evolution, which IS proved scientifically. If there was some kind of <spirit>, the TAPS team would have heard as much animal ghost than human ghost. And dog ghost wouldn’t have a reason to hide themselves so they would be easily observable. If you say that dog doesn’t have <spirit> because they are less intelligent, that would mean that someday, in the past, when the human was slowly gaining in intelligence, they started to have <spirit>? Because I haven’t heard of Chimpanzee ghost and we were less smart than them some day!

    Second. If humain <spirit> really does existed, that would mean that they either stay on earth or go to the paradise or hell. I think this is what most of these people beleive, but lets say first that they all stay on earth. Holy crap! There would be so much ghost! We are currently about 7 000 000 000 people on earth. If we say that in 100 years, we will all be dead, that would mean 7 000 000 more ghost in only 100 years! Do you see the problem. That would mean that ghost would be everywhere! But, wait!! this is strange!? I don’t remember having seen the probably 5 to 10 ghost in my house?? hmmm. And now, the paradise, hell option. Ok, ghost exist and they eventually go to paradise or hell, so it make more room to the newest, freshest ghost. This goes to the same problem we had before, but in to different place, hell and paradise. Because hell suck, lets go to the paradise. I am kinda agoraphobic (I don’t like being in a crowd). Even if the paradise is infinitely big, this is a big bunch of people! I’ll also get to see people I don’t like. That is not paradise if I have to see them! I wan’t to be with people I like. If we say that, in paradise, all our trouble goes away and we all are friend, that would mean that this is no more me! I am what I am! And if that’s not the case, I would prefer to be dead! BUT THIS IF FUCKING ETERNITY. So I’m fucked….. eternaly.

    I think I went a little over the subject, but I had to say this!

    Like I said, this is my opinion and you don’t need to believe in it, but gather information and think about them!

    If paradise doesn’t exist, we can a least hope for our earth paradise, so don’t be an asshole and reply by anything like YOU SUCK or stuff like that that doesn’t deserve to be heard.

    Thanks!!

  40. Stephen says:

    After considering all the above views, I have come to one quite obvious conclusion. Human beings are goofy. Real goofy.

  41. Chip says:

    We is Goofy as hell.
    As a matter of fact, I just built me a “Goof” detector.
    I just points it at a person… let’s say one of the Ghost Hunters, I presses the red button on top, and poof!
    A flag pops up and I’s located me a “Goof”!

    Look for my new show on the Food Channel called “Goof Hunters”.
    I promise to cook up some Goofy Stew.
    And we will all act really Goofy!

  42. jeff says:

    Did anyone see the St. Augustine lighthouse episode? Any ideas as to how they faked that? My guess would have to be computer animation. What do you guys think?

  43. Mick. says:

    I find the subjects of ‘ghosts’ interesting,I have not made my mind up either way as to wether I believe they exist or not.
    I used to watch Most Haunted and sometimes would get goose bumps,but now,after it was proved to be so blatantly faked,I dont watch any more.I am getting a bit like that with T.A.P.S. now.How does their thermal image camera show up a ‘ghost’ as being a glowing figure when people are supposed to get chills and the themometer drops at the presence of a ghost?
    My wife’s mother is the most down to earth,strait laced no nonsense person anyone could meet but when pressed she will tell the tale of the figure of a woman that used to appear in a shop she once worked in.(Appear,then walk through a solid wall).
    One of my interests is outer space/UFO’s.Space is just so massive surely we cant be the only occupied planet.I have seen something in the sky that nobody can explain.It is an impressive sight to see a jet at high altitude in a clear sky leaving four white lines behind it.I was strolling alongone day looking up at such a sight when a silver ball came from no where,crossed the back of the plane at right angles then suddenly changed direction and followed the plane.
    I have possibly seen a UFO,hopefully one day I will see a ghost.

  44. nomad says:

    Why are ghosts always limited in their scope to current local culture. If you count all the people that have lived on this planet and if only 10% of them became ghosts, this place would be humping with ghosts.

  45. Mick. says:

    We might walk through big groups of them in certain areas,it might be that we are not tuned into them so we dont sense them,and vice versa,they might not be tuned into us.
    There might be ghosts walking about that have never seen a human,there might be ghosts right now looking at humans on their version of Youtube.Lol.

  46. Patric says:

    I have had two very specific personal experiences in my life that make me sure that there is “something else” out there, so to speak. I am not a fan of some of the so-called science on the show, and a couple of the cast members drive me nuts with their obvious lack of even general intelligence.

    However, sites like this that work so hard to disprove the existence of paranormal activity, by decrying the “lack of science” to prove the existence of residual energy, spirits, or ghosts, ignore the huge range of possibilities presented by science in fields like quantum mechanics, and astrophysics. What we DON’T know about energy, time/space etc. dwarfs what we do know by a million times over. Scientific law is law, only until the next breakthrough discovery that rewrites the “laws”

    My experiences were both so clearly “other-worldly” as to make me an ardent fan of shows that at least call into discussion the possibilities of what could be.

    In my opinion, Ghost Hunters is the only show that seems to at least work from the premise that most of what people see and feel as paranormal, has very normal explanations.

    If you want to debunk a show that is full of lies, tattered mythology, and superstition, why don’t you start with “The 700 Club,” and leave these two ingenious-former-plumbers alone?

    • Phil says:

      Exactly! Many here do the same thing people have been doing to science over the last millenia. Just because you can’t explain something with your current knowledge doesn’t mean your opinion about it is infallible. An example is Bode’s law. This law was a hypothesis that celestial bodies orbited in a semi-major axes in an exponential function of planetary sequence. It was a huge advance in its time and explained the orbits of many of the planets in the solar system and many of their moons. The problem was it still couldnt explain the orbit of Neptune or Pluto when it was discovered 200 years later. Later on Einstein’s law of general relativity and Stanley Dermott’s law explained the discrepancies.

  47. Mike says:

    My 3 favorite shows which seem much more credible than GH are as follows: 1)”Ghost Lab” on Discovery Channel which does not have any of the wishy-washy qualities of the earlier shows; and also states in writing that none of the evidence has been manufactured or manipulated in any way. 2)”Ghostly Encounters” on Bio which simply consists of very real and very believable ordinary people (all Canadians I think)simply sitting in a wooden chair detailing their experiences with ghosts. 3)”Celebrity Ghost Stories” also on Bio, which is the same format as the above show. This one is even more believable, I suppose it’s because we feel like we know them personally. All three shows are highly recommended, give them a try!
    As for the ridiculousness of “it should be easy to gather evidence” of ghosts, plenty of people are absolutely sure there is a God, where is your controlled lab data to back that up?

  48. lilfly says:

    I don’t believe the show is real, I think the channel sci-fi want to make their profit higher. What I do know for sure though is the fact that some saddos life is so pathetic that they have nothing else to do than watch ghost shows, try and find in what way they are fake and then make blogs about that. Pathetic! Just face the blatant fact that science cannot explain everything (starting with what comes after life) if you are so smart why don’t you start cloning Human Beings? Let us know how it goes given that scientists were not even capable of cloning a sheep without having it sick and dead within 6 years (when you know most sheep live 11/12 years). Scientists are not and will never recreate what God created, the paranormal scares them because they have no control upon it, so all they can do is jump up and down screaming fakefakefake!! Calling believers morons just because they believe in things non-believers are not capable of imagining. Open your minds people we are sorry to give you that shocking news but : the world does not revolve around your belly button!

  49. lilfly says:

    and if I may add : some prefer not to believe because they are conscious of the fact they are not living honest lives. They’d rather pretend nothing is waiting for them after they die… tutut living in denial is not healthy!

  50. siguy says:

    I wanted to agree with Mike that Ghost Lab is definitely something anyone interested in paranormal should watch. They dont always come up with spectacular evidence and they usually have two cases per show. They debunk a lot of stuff right away and to some it may seem their evidence isnt much – but maybe that exactly how the manifestations of the paranormal are. No cloaked figures running around, no one getting hit or scratched… Who knows, right?
    I have been watching TAPS for a while now and I see a big change from their earlier shows that seemed to concentrate on human interaction during the investigations (losing equipment, bad setups, etc) combined with very little evidence. Now we have EMF detectors “answering” questions intelligently, shadow figures appearing regularly, any palce they walk into is just buzzing with activity. I cant remember which episode it was – when Grant went to bed and few minutes later he heard noises. “Luckily” the camera was pointed in the right direction to catch a chair that was supposed to be moving on its own. We see a picture frame being moved. Grant few times says that its amazing that it wasnt just moved, but it was tilted towards the chair. WHAT? Dude, if I were in a room, heard noises and then i saw a picture frame that moved like that – I wouldnt give a damn WHICH WAY it moved. Who cares! You just caught what seems to be a legitimate paranormal activity and you are completely cool pointing out that the picture was moved in certain direction? that makes no sense!
    with that said I have to say that they do seem to gather some “evidence” but I am sure SyFy likes results and most of it is staged. Previous posts and other blogs talk about debunking a lot of what they claim to be paranormal and I think thats OK, it deosnt take away from the show, we watch it for entertainment…
    I am a believer, I have had personal experiences on two occasions and the second one happened last weekend and this time I had a witness, we both experienced exact same thing – something that we cannot explain, debunk in any way.
    My previous encounter happened about 10 years ago and it repeated itself in the same manner 3 days in a row.

    So yes, I am a believer but to be honest I am not sure what I believe in. I think there is something out there and quite possibly calling it a “ghost” is something we do because we dont understand it fully. Something must happen to energy we all have when we die. Where does it go? We know – laws of physics – it doesnt just disappear. So what happens? Are ghost-hunts and answer? Maybe… And maybe some day a Roto-Rooter guy or Lab – Ghost guy will come up with a scientific proof. Until then we will have many opinions and many questions. But since we cannot DISPROVE – it doesnt mean it does NOT exist.

  51. MuGGz says:

    Ever think that dragging their names thru the dirt just fuels their popularity? Good or bad, it’s still pumps the hype. True or not, they are still being talked about and raking in ratings. The skeptics watch to prove them liars and the followers watch to see new shows. Don’t you think the biggest protest would be to stop watching? Wait… That’s impossible. You still have assumptions about people that you’ve never met or had any kind of personal relationship with. Regardless of what kind of people they are, everyone is entitled to an opinion. But think about this, your trashing someones child with kids of their own, and your main concern is that their lying? Pull that bus over to the side of the pretentiousness turnpike… Grab a mirror… And let he without sin cast the first stone….

  52. Martin says:

    Because we can’t prove it doesn’t mean it doesn’t exist. Is that the same about the pink invisible unicorn? And the flying spaghetti monster? We can’t disprove something that doesn’t exist, but we can prove it exist. We have spectrum analyzer, quantum analyzer, radio receiver, sonar captor, photon spectrometer, heat sensor, radioactive sensor, etc. We can analyze everything, and by everything I mean everything. Matter is made of atoms. If they are not atoms, they must be energy in a king of way, because even if you disagree, we can’t escape physics laws, even <>. If they exist, we CAN analyze them. But we don’t find anything. Which mean it DOESN’T exist. Sorry for you, but human, even animals, have their brain showing them false render of the reality. It is a common neural issue that we CAN measure. Brain is not perfect. And it is not because scientist can’t prove it that they say O MY GOD THIS IS SO FAKE, it is because:

    1) We proved it is fake, because yes we can explain every single things that happen

    2)We have tried so many time to find ghost without any results that it can only prove their non-existence.

    I have lived a honest life and I like my life but I don’t believe their is something after it. Just enjoy your life while you can. I’ve seen <>. You know, when we die, all the energy doesn’t go away. It get buried under the ground. What make our brain work is K+ and Na- ions. When the brain cells die, they just stop making their activity, and the remaining unused energy is buried or eaten by other creature.

    Have a good day!

    • Martin says:

      The word ghost goes between the first  <> and

      But what happen to the energy when we die?
      between the second <>

  53. Mike says:

    Well, after longing to be one of those investigators I’ve watched on TV so long, This last Saturday was my first experience, as I joined a local paranormal group, and went on my first investigation. My gut feeling has always been that “they are out there”, and let me tell you, I am sure of it now. Apart from plenty of weird stuff happening to other team members (the females in the group were being choked, scratched, and feeling sick, I had several incredible unexplainable experiences, including hearing a woman call out someone’s name so loudly, I didn’t pay attention to it until everyone else said “who said that?”. Also, I did catch about a half dozen EVP’s on my Sony digital voice recorder, one which says my name! Let me tell you, hearing that through the headphones was a really creepy feeling, yet so exciting I can’t wait to go again. Suffice to say I am a believer, and I am hooked on this new hobby.

Leave a Reply

search

Facebook logo (copyright Facebook Inc.)
Myspace logo (copyright Myspace Inc.)

Donate to Skeptic
at no cost to you!

Planning on shopping at Amazon.com? Start your shopping by clicking the button below, and the Skeptics Society will receive a commission. Your prices for all Amazon products will remain exactly the same, yet you’ll provide essential financial support for the work of the nonprofit Skeptics Society.

amazon.com

See our affiliate links page for Amazon.ca, Amazon.co.uk, Amazon.de, and iTunes links.

FREE PDF Download

Learn to be a Psychic in 10 Easy Lessons

Learn to be a Psychic in 10 Easy Lessons

Psychic readings and fortunetelling are an ancient art — a combination of acting and psychological manipulation. While some psychics are known to cheat and acquire information ahead of time, these ten tips focus on what is known as “cold reading” — reading someone “cold” without any prior knowledge about them.

Super Deal!

cover image

$8.95 autographed!

The Mind of the Market
by Michael Shermer

In this eye-opening exploration, Shermer uncovers the evolutionary roots of our economic behavior and explains how evolution shaped the modern economy.
ORDER the hardcover

Super Deal!

cover image

50% off the cover price!
now only $7.98 paperback
now only $10.98 hardback

The Bible
Against Itself

by Randel Helms

The Bible frequently seems to contradict itself. Randel Helms discusses these contradictions by looking at the cultural and historical factors that produced them.
ORDER the paperback
ORDER the hardcover

$5 VHS clearance

$5 SALE on VHS

All Caltech lectures on VHS are now reduced to $5 each (no minimum purchase) while supplies last!

Browse PDF offline

Pseudoscience, psychics and magic; environment and global warming, religion, the cosmos, space exploration, extremism, cults, math, stats, satire, songs and more…