Excellent commentary- in the end I couldn't have said it better myself- a strong response from TAPS in now necessary to defend their hard-fought credibility.

Thanks for the analysis! Keep up the good work…

Great work on trying to get the word out. TAPS' continued silence regarding this issue is disturbing.

If you all have that much time on your hands to go through every bit of evidence that taps has trying to find where it might have been tampered with Ya'all haven't enough stuff to do. Get a life people.

Dear MissCatLady:

For me, at least, the paranormal IS my life. I've been dedicated to it literally from childhood.
(That, and animal rescue. I've got 11 rescued cats/kittens at the moment, all abandoned an tossed on the street like garbage.
Need another? They're all vetted, neutered, shots & well loved. There are just too many for me to give each the full attention s/he deserves, so can you open your heart up to love one more? Write me.

Back to my point:
Only I want REAL evidence — is that truly too much to ask, especially from people who profess their desire for the same thing?
If the SciFi channel wants to make money at this, a weekly show portraying the debunking of most if not all claims of 'I live in a haunted house' should make just as much money; unfortunately.

Ask any professional parapsychologist such as Lloyd Auerbach or Susan Blackmore (the former writes very entertainingly, the latter is encyclopedic in her reasoning and knowledge –and vice versa. Both are degreed in that field; they are dedicated and legitimate and well worth the reads). They'll tell you the search for Psi is long and frustrating with very little success in capturing evidence; mainly because anomalies simply cannot be called up to order in one or a limited number specifically watched place, K2's and dead celebrity chasing notwithstanding. Multiple captures of 'irrefutable evidence' per episode are, to put it mildly, highly suspect. The quantity of TAPS 'evidence' alone is leads one to skepticism, but this quantity is perhaps not so remarkable when cable channels, producers, and even investigators want to make a profit or at least desire to get picked up for another season. Witness the mess of Most Haunted — and where (and in what state of legitimacy) it ended up.

This field of study has suffered through too much hoaxing and too many fraudulent con men all throughout its history. It's way past time to get dead serious ('scuse the pun) and take only the undoctored evidence exactly where it leads — even if it leads exactly nowhere.

In the meanwhile; kindly don't deign to dictate what you think my life should or shouldn't be dedicated to (after all, I already have a sister who fills that job description very nicely :^) and I won't dare declare to you how you should live yours.

Deal?

Ok first of all, how do you just demand that TAPS respond to some random comment on some random board? Has it been brought to their attention in any other way than you posting it here on your own little corner of the internet?

Secondly, what credentials give you the overall authority to tell us how the footage is faked? Are you a professional? Do you have an education in the knowledge you say is so damning? If it's your word vs. theirs then why should we believe you? Because you have some fancy screen shots of some of the sci-fi episode? You are NOT examining the true film, just the edited version aired by sci-fi. Heck, what's keeping us from thinking YOU altered the screen shots to try and cast doubt on the TAPS team?

If you would kindly head over to here:

forums.scifi.com/index.php?showforum=70

You would see this fakery is not only well documented, proven and almost universally agreed-upon, but also that Jason & Grant have been duly informed of it through this site, that message board and their own home-front, the TAPS message board.

In fact BOTH of them at separate times have examined the evidence of this fakery put-forth by their fans, both of them on separate occasions said they had no explanation for the discrepencies in the footage and that they would have to talk to some people and get back to us, and both of them have (as of 10/2/2007) never gotten back to us.

BUT, this episode was just re-run recently and the offending footage was not in the re-run. They cut it out. To be perfectly clear on this: Jason and Grant BOTH agreed there was a problem with the footage which they had no explanation for, promised to address it, never mentioned it again and the episode in question had the offending footage removed from reruns.

Does that answer your question?

hi i want to know why when u asked the questions to so called ghost and the light on the hand held thing was going one for yes twice for no te questions u asked it were so stupid [ are u mad u are dead ]what kind of question is that
u should ask it [ who killed u ] and why do u need help crossin over simple yes or no questions you ask it to move the tempature just great u guys would make bad cops. that perso with u who asked the question has his own show [dead famous ]should no better to ask questions that have substance good luck
mike kane

Just a couple of comments:

In their radio show, I believe they claimed that ONLY the digital thermometer that was being held by one of the TAPS team members registered the temperature change. Yet they showed footage of the FLIR cameras reading the temperature change?!?

Thinking as a TV producer might… Those digital thermometers don't show up on camera well, but the FLIR camera does. Having evidence of people sitting around saying "Hey look, the temperature is dropping" but not showing it, might not be convincing, so the team responsible for editting may feel they needed something to 'show', so they created the FLIR footage for illustration. As someone pointed out above, it was not used among the evidence.

There are frequently other bits of evidence that don't get shown to the homeowner/business owner. Perhaps that is a clue about those bits of evidence?

From a TV production POV, when a show becomes popular, there is tremendous pressure to keep the ratings up, after all that's how all the people connected with the show are getting paid, and if ratings drop, leading to cancellation, then they are out of work. That plus time constraints, plus the need to be entertaining leads to the need for the sort of creative editing that everybody hates. However, without that editting, the sound effects, the dramas, the staged dialog, the 'what's that' moments that turn out to be a bug or something, the show would be like the live halloween special– very boring to watch. People might tune into the Halloween specials b/c they're GH, but if the show had been like that from the beginning, how popular would it have become?

As to why Jason and Grant are silent, well who knows what is in the contracts they signed? Coming out and saying that the production company is faking evidence, may seem like the right thing to do, but might it harm ratings and open themselves up to lawsuits? Very probably. It's great to take a stand and everything, but you also have a family to provide for, and would rather not have the pants sued off you. Listening to their radio show, they dance around production issues like this, legal liability is the most likely reason.

My take is that TAPS likely has/had intentions of keeping things honest, but the pressures of the TV biz often force you to 'sell your soul' so to speak. TAPS might not be directly responsible for tampered evidence, it could be the production crew trying to pull one past them, maybe a bed that unmakes itself on the Queen Mary (which TAPS caught, but SOMEBODY had to stage it), or a cloaked figure at Eastern State that approaches a camera that might be played by somebody that the crew snuck in while everyone else is at dinner.

the camera stuff goes way above my head, but as far as TAPS faking evidence i ask this.

when they investigated the Queen Mary, it looked as though the bed unmade itself. that was til Tango explained how he could see the tape stopping. now, did they show this because any film editor could catch this? or because they are trying to be real as possible?

i'm still skeptical as far as tv shows, but know my true-life experiences were real. i believe TAPS does try hard to be real and their wish to debunk more than they find makes them more trustworthy than others.

Great evidence! I posted my evidence on debunking the "ghost soldier" episode of TAPS in the "show evidence" section on the Taps Main Board, under my same name (OverMachoGrande). It's completely obvious once you read what I posted, and that they HAVE to throw out their re-creation attempts, but wow… I got pretty ripped to shreds over it. It seems like you are getting a lot further than me, so congrats!

I personally think it's a great show, and I don't think that Grant and Jason had anything to do with manipulating the evidence you provided or were trying to pull a fast one with the debunking I did, but if something is WRONG… we should be able to point it out!

-O.M.G.

In response to Bill Kelly concerning the Queen Mary…my opinion on that is that they had no choice but to say it was faked. Had they claimed it as 'real' proof, the person who was responsible for the staging could come out of the woodwork and 'prove' the show was bunk. That is assuming someone outside of the crew staged the scene (which I believe they did). It was an obvious job of it, so had TAPS ignored it, someone could say they didn't know their stuff (or look closely enough at their 'evidence') to see that it was fake.

in other words…faking your own stuff, and doing it well is a much better option than claiming someone else's cruddy try at it. It also lends credibility and realism to their 'debunking' claim.

Howdy All,

I just want to say that after all of the time that Ive logged into watching Ghosthunters, it has become totaly apparent to me that they are sorely lacking for material. People watch Ghosthunters to see/learn "ghost stuff". Not to watch commercials (every 5 mins w/5 min commercials), not to observe the dynamics of the TAPS employees' relationships/HR problems, nor do I watch it to be lead on a nailbiting goose chase (Grant & Hawes chasing "shadow" down the hall in Waverly) that ends up not showing anything and comes to an abrupt halt. If the camera guys can focus on Grant and Hawes that well, they sure as heck can shift the camera slightly enough so that the audience can see what TAPs sees. I'm so fed up with this carrot being dangled in front of my face ("Look over here, isn't that weird"=Grant talking into camera which NEVER shows us what Grant saw.) that I'm ready to call it quits. The conversations between the workers are so staged. So little evidence and such lack of concern pertaining to authenticity makes me want to cry after watching it this long. It started out good and went downhill. It actually was the best when the "Englishmen" were at the helm. (if my memory serves me correctly). Anyone else out there that is as frustrated as I am?

I wish they would wear helmet cams. Then we could see what they are seeing. I too keep hoping to see whatever Jay and grant are chasing. A helmet cam would be the way to go.

Tinkertoy05 - That would be the reason this site exists

"Multiple captures of 'irrefutable evidence' per episode are, to put it mildly, highly suspect."

This bugs me, because you have absolutely no idea how many investigations TAPS actually does. Do all their investigations make it to the show? You don't know the answer to that.

Which is the problem I have with a lot of these debunkings: assumptions. Essentially, for every event that you have no reasonable explanation for, you assume foul play. Which means, in essense, you can debunk *everything*!

For instance, your particularly harsh tarring-and-feathering of Grant based on completely circumstancial evidence. That bothers me.

What it boils down to is: why should I trust you over TAPS? You seem no more professional than they, and less qualified as well. I couldn't help but notice you ignored that question from Kevin, Logisti.

I'm actually looking for a reason here. My statement here may be pretty bold, but I'm not trying to hurt any feelings. What are your credentials? Why should we believe you over TAPS? You can't just make some intelligent and logical arguments, tote them as fact, and expect to be taken as gospel truth, my friend.

sneakers98: Is it also folly to assume that all the evidence TAPS captures is unquestionable? Would that mean that, essentially, you would believe *everything* they try to foist as "irrefutable", or even "good evidence" for that matter?

I don't think anyone is saying to believe anyone over another, merely that we should be skeptical of claims and evidence by TAPS, read the alternate/skeptical views put forth here, and make up our own minds… instead of just blindly accepting things as they are presented to us by TAPS.

TAPS, nor their most ardent fans, also can't assume to tell us that the evidence is irrefutable as if it were fact, and expect us to take it as gospel.

J: Have I said anything along the lines of "TAPS is irrefutable"? Certainly not. There are a couple instances which I believe to be not paranormal, and a few members of TAPS that I firmly believe to have overactive imaginations.

However, I've implied that TAPS seems like a group of honest folks. I'm also fairly certain that, if there were foul-play going on, it would have been leaked. There's always a loudmouthed camera guy, or an audioman who has his price. There's a good amount of fame and fortune in spilling the beans, and I figure it would have been done by now.

This is irrelevant to my point, but I thought I'd state that anyways.

There are several bits of evidence that, assuming TAPS is not doctoring their stuff, are at least in some shape or another evidence of the paranormal. This is the middle group I'm talking about. This is where it's either TAPS, or the Skeptics.

And that's why I'm asking. Why should I be taking his/her word above theirs? Is it really fair to accuse TAPS of misuse of equipment for unintended purposes when there's really *no* equipment with the label "ACME Ghostbusting" on the side? Is it really fair to accuse TAPS of being nothing more than amateurs, when the skeptics I've read are amateurs themselves?

Double standards are dangerous things.

In "recreations" I've seen, such as SAPS and the Penitentiary video (where a ghost appears, and scoots away from the camera), it's basically like skeptics feel they can get away with a "eh… that's close enough" attitude. Yet TAPS has to provide perfection. Frankly, their recreation reeked of amateurism, and very silly mock-ups - they didn't have the right equipment, nor anything remotely resembling the locale. And still, we were expected to believe SAPS over TAPS because they could make a figure covered in a blanket walk away from the camera.

These are the kinds of things I'm talking about. Skeptics expect the benefit of the doubt, but refuse TAPS the same luxury.

Thankfully no, you haven't said that. And which instances or evidence are the ones you do not believe out of curiosity?

Yes, Jason and Grant and the others do seem like honest people, but even honest people make mistakes and there have been instances which raise suspicion and doubt. Like: Was Grant pulling the cord or not? How can they present evidence to people that looks like a person in a cloak running to and fro and expect them and us to believe it is an apparition when our minds and eyes tell us otherwise? Why do they seemingly only do half-way attempts at debunking?

Yes, someone could spill the beans, and they still might. But considering being that audio-man and camera guy is keeping them employed right now, they just might not.. at least not until the end of the show.

Which pieces of evidence do you think it's either TAPS or the skeptics?

As I said before, make up your own mind. Read both sides, and then come to a conclusion.

And there can't be experts in a field where so little is known. There are no ghost or paranormal experts. So it would seem both sides are comprised of amateurs.

The burden of proof is on the person making the claim, in this case, TAPS. They are the ones that must prove what they say is the truth. The skeptics don't have to prove or disprove anything.

TAPS doesn't have to provide perfection, just the truth and enough good evidence to convince those skeptical viewers watching that it isn't a hoax and isn't something natural mistaken for something paranormal.

Skeptics expect proof, not the benefit of the doubt. If they are going to believe in something, they don't want it to be based on flimsy and weak evidence.

sneaker98, Kevin: My apologies for not taking the question about my "credentials" to heart — I assumed it was merely rhetorical and designed to highlight the fact that I don't spend nights regularly in darkened buildings with high-tech recording devices. Unfortunately, I'm going to have to answer that question in a way you're bound not to like: I am not going to give you any reason to believe me over TAPS.

Really, it comes down to this: I try to make things as cut-and-dry as possible using logic and footage you can rewatch for yourself. My background is irrelevant, you can think for yourself and review the video for yourself. If you disagree with my assessment that is fine by me.

You seem to misunderstand the entire purpose of this site. I am not asking people to believe me. I'm not asking for people to disbelieve TAPS. I'm only asking people to think for themselves. Don't just find an "authority" and believe what they tell you. Weigh what they say for yourself and reach your own conclusions. If your conclusions don't agree with mine, at least you reached them on your own.

sneaker98, I'd also like to address your SAPS remark, as well as "doubt". First off, I've heard that SAPS has mellowed out lately but they turned me off long ago with their "debunking" tactics. Some of their debunkings were built on taller houses of cards than the original TAPS footage they were supposed to be debunking.

They used what I liked to call a reverse-true-believer approach, which is exactly like someone who assumes TAPS is all about honestly & integrity and that ghosts really do exist — except in complete reverse. True believers watching must have thought it was a real joke and as a skeptic I'll tell you it was painful to watch/read what SAPS put out — so I stopped.

Bottom line: We're not SAPS and we don't support SAPS or align ourselves with them. Please don't throw us in the same pot as SAPS.

As for the application of doubt, I'm not entirely certain what isn't to your standards but it works simply and thusly: If reasonable doubt exists that "evidence" of the paranormal isn't actually paranormal, then it simply cannot be considered paranormal. Conversely if reasonable doubt exists as to whether a piece of evidence was deliberately "faked" then it should not be considered as such.

However, there has been at least one case where most people agree beyond any reasonable doubt that someone deliberately tampered with the evidence — although there is enough reasonable doubt in that case that it is unfair to claim TAPS was involved. I think we've been pretty consistent in our standards for doubt and have drawn (or withheld) responsible conclusions based on how much doubt surrounded the "facts".

I think we've done this fairly in every possible way, not favoring one side or other. If you still disagree, well you're perfectly entitled to do so but in that case I would suggest that you will probably not enjoy very many of the posts on this site.

in addition to what J and Logisti wrote, i'd like to add my two cents: why should we believe that Jason and Grant and the rest of team are so honest just because they seem to be honest and trustworthy?

i used to really think they were completely on the up and up, if maybe only playing things up a little for the entertainment value of the show. but after seeing multiple instances where they either ignored very doubtful "evidence", or where it appears as if they themselves were part of misleading the audience, i can't help but question their sincerity.

i don't think it's "tar and feathering" a person to doubt their credibility when we see evidence of dishonest tactics. it's healthy to question. question everything!

it's obviously very important to those of us who are holding TAPS' feet to the fire on this. most of us really want proof, but are skeptical, and so for TAPS to claim that they themselves are skeptical and looking for the truth, and then turn around and show us pieces of fluff, well, that's just unacceptable. they need to toe the line on this.

That was the episode that aired, October 19, 2005 when they were in Arkansas. The were investigating the Crescent Hotel when they got the "apparition" on the thermal cam. There is an analysis of that footage here: http://www.ultimatetechlinks.com/CrescentHotelAnalysis.html

On the moving chair in the lighthouse attic: I think it's too easy to fake and shouldn't be labeled as paranormal.

Are you saying TAPS aren't amateurs? How would you classify them? They do have experience in what they do, yes, but as pointed out, their methods aren't exactly precise and their conclusions are questionable to say the least.

Such as in the locker "apparition".

sneaker98 - there are a few pieces of evidence they produced that i think are very misleading, if not outright faked.

the first one that is more than obvious is the Gibbon's home footage. you can see the pics here on this site - http://www.skepticalviewer.com/2007/10/11/gibbons-home/, and here - http://forums.scifi.com/index.php?showtopic=2291401.

take a look at these and tell me if you think this "evidence" is NOT the statue on the coffee table. now, they can say that they didn't realize it was the statue, and that they truly thought it was a paranormal apparition, but, like you said, they were in that house for hours, and surely the homeowner could immediately identify the piece. it is deliberately, and i'd say woefully, misleading to present this as evidence to the audience when they knew what this was. at the very least, if they are truly trying to debunk hauntings first and foremost (as Jason has said over and over again), then they should have pursued this bit of evidence and then they would have indeed found that this was a shot of the statue and not an apparition of some sort.

another piece of evidence that i find extremely faulty is the Savannah 2005 Halloween episode found here - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0CwwxZ7z61o (not a good clip but i couldn't find anything clearer). this "apparition" going back and forth behind the pool table is laughable. but, if i were to give them the benefit of the doubt i would say they are grasping at straws and are a little more than gullible. for self-professed debunkers this is silly anyway. but, the comments they made during the reveal are beyond unbelievable. I think it was Steve that said that we can see through the form. i tried and tried but could not see through this to the wall. Jason said that it appears to be "coming out of the wall," as if this was a solid wall without a way behind it. but then later we see the team going behind this wall themselves.

there is more evidence that has been reproduced and seriously put into doubt if not proven to be faked (the penitentiary footage for one).

in any case, this site gives way more proof than i can of what's going on with GH and TAPS. believe me, i am very disappointed because i really believed these guys were genuine and honest. could be they have just sold out to SciFi. :-/

actually, i didn't need to post all of the above because this footage can be found right here on this site! sorry about that…

tracy, about the Gibbons home I want to say that I actually wouldn't expect the homeowner to recognize it because there's no way to know just how far away from the camera the image is — it looks like a person and that immediately leads one to assume it's person-sized and therefore in a different part of the room. TAPS still should have reviewed footage of the room to see if there was anything in it that might have caused the anomaly, though. I wouldn't say that particular incident smells of dishonesty, just a poor investigative method.

i actually disagree with you on this one, Logisti. when i saw the statue, and where it was sitting vis-a-vis Steve, i knew immediately what it was. when i first saw it and didn't see the statue, i immediately thought it was a solid, real person.

if i were Steve, and had been sitting in that space for a bit, i would probably recognize that it was the statue. if not at first, at least after going back in. but maybe it was only a careless mistake on EVERYONE's part, which would make it very poor investigating indeed.

In the 2005 Halloween special, during the reveal to Chris, the manager of the Moon River Brewing Co., he said the "apparition" darting to and fro behind the pool table was amazing.

When I first saw that on TV, I thought to myself "Amazing?! Are you kidding me?" It's definitely not amazing.. it's like tracy said, laughable. Yet the footage was taken seriously for some reason and did they even attempt to debunk it? Not that we saw. When J&G saw how much more of themselves was visible near the pool tables, Grant said it was "midget height" and he also said the Eastern State Penitentiary "apparition" was "midget height" too. So, because it's shorter than they are, that somehow makes it a real ghost?

I wonder why the "apparitions" from ESP and this one from Georgia had to run away from the camera — it's almost like the "ghosts" were afraid of the camera.

That definitely seems more like human behavior than ghost behavior to me. Do you really think a ghost would care about a camera?

And no sneaker, it wouldn't appear as a crisp human outline if it had a towel or something draped it over it. It looks like the person underneath was bent down to give it the appearance of being short.

sneaker98, yes — true logic is as unimpeachable as your motive to 'keep me in line'. Although if you're looking to keep some TAPS critics in line it seems to me you've picked the easy website. If you're itching to criticize someone for overstating their case and making claims about TAPS they can't truly back up with facts OR logic, check out SAPS.

J. precisely the theme that's developed over the years: Sheets at Eastern State Prison, Sheet at the Moon River Brewery, Sheet (or curtain) at Northern State Hospital. And the first two were upheld (along with a bunch of other garbage) as some of Jason & Grant's favorite evidence in the special last night.

I'll touch on some of this in an upcoming review, but wow it was disappointing to see some of that footage still at the top of their "amazing" list.

the reason i call the evidence laughable at the brewery in Savannah is not because it "could be" faked, but because it so obviously looks fake. one point in that particular scene that i find laughable - why does this entity only go to the the outer edge of the pool table and back behind the wall again? why not go out into the room? it just looked silly.

the prison footage - i think a lot of people have problems with this because it wasn't debunked enough. maybe you think it's because Brian is a dolt, sneaker, but Jay and Grant call the shots and let that one go. maybe we just have too high an expectation of them because they do have a lot to do during an investigation and then must get it out there for us to watch. maybe we should be blaming SciFi as well. and maybe it's because we viewers do want more in this regard. they thought they were making another reality show geared for the paranormal and they just didn't expect so much skepticism and people wanting more science and proof from the show.

on the other hand, maybe they just don't care over there at SciFi and at TAPS, because no hard questions were really asked in the revelations episode. i wondered if they even knew of the dissatisfaction that's felt among many of their viewers and even their fan base.

tracy: I think I know why the "apparition" didn't come out from behind the pool table.

It had been a year since we had seen Sheetie. The last placed he "materialized" was at Eastern State Penitentiary on November 3 2004. Then he shows up again on Halloween 2005, this time in Georgia.

Either he didn't want to show off his sneakers like at ESP, considering it was a year later and they had a lot of wear and tear on them and looked ragged.

Or, considering it was Halloween-time on his second appearance, maybe he had eaten too much candy and gained a little bit of weight, thus making him embarrassed to show the bit of extra heft in his paranormal tummy.

Or maybe Sheetie just has really skinny pale legs.

But seriously, I think he or she didn't come out from behind the pool table because it would reduce the risk of exposing some legs or such and revealing it as a hoax. And without any legs/shoes exposed this time, it might seem more convincing to some.

Also, did you notice the way the camera was set up so that the pool table was blocking the view in between the table itself and the wall? There was very little, if any, space viewable between the two which would hide a hoaxers legs as they ran back and forth.

haha - i like that this "entity" now has a formal name - Sheetie! that's a good one, J.

about the pool table being right up against the wall - i didn't even think about that before and it's a very good point. how many pool tables in bars are up against walls so that the players can't move around it? hmmmm…….very interesting…:-)

and about Sheetie's height - Jay said that Sheetie was only about 4' tall at the pen, but i thought it looked much taller than the "foot taller" than the 3' railing that Jay said it was.

I'm not so sure the pool table is actually against the wall where Sheetie runs back and forth. I think it's just that the camera angle makes it look like there is little space in between the table and the wall the "entity" is behind, thus making it easy for someone to run behind the table without catching sight of their legs.

Wow you know as a person who knows more about paranormal then most , looking for small details like a desimal point really shows that you are looking at the wrong point..The unknown is just that. You can either be;ieve that there is something there, or not..I would rather watch people try to debunk then fake us into believing stupid beliefs. I mean watch paranoral state,,, I mean you talk about stupid?? Thatjust retarded with a capital S!!!!!!! I would rather understand what I know and believe and understand then worry about a desimal point between a #.. If you want some insite let me know// I think I can set you in the right direction.

Chris,

This is the point: It’s not, “You can either believe that there is something there or not,” it’s “whether to have reason to believe.”

The real trick is to get the unknown into the realm of the known, and that what you know is based on the actual facts. The FLIR trick simply calls into question the authenticity of the material we are presented with.

– Dave

Chris, the decimal point is not the wrong point, in this case it's one of the only points that matters — paranormal activity is beside the point. If that video showed a middle aged man eating a sandwich the temperature would still have been doctored. In that case I'd have a difficult time trying to deduce a motive, but the authenticity of the video is still unquestionably nil.

Something that has bothered me since I saw it….the closet door opening and the drinking glass shattered at the Stanley (I think it was the Stanley). It seemed that there wasn't a big deal made of that evidence. That closet door looked convincing. In fact, I think the few times I have seen doors opening and closing on GH have been the best evidence of paranormal activity. Let it be said that I could not be convinced by anything I saw on the tube. To easy to fake, even though I don't think it would be done intentionally by the TAPS team. I would need to see it myself to be convinced. I do believe that some of the evidence presented on the show probably 'slipped' by only because it gets really boring week after week without any evidence at all. I also think that the personalities on the show are becoming boring. All 'yes' men. I miss Brian. Sorry for rambling….my first post. Happy new Year!

i would just like to say that i absolutely enjoy taps ghost hunters and i wish them the best . jason and grant are great paranormal investigators as well as steve,andy. brian isn't /wasn't bad either.i have had my share of some paranormal activity back in sept/october of 1996.but all in all i think that jason ,grant,steve,andy and the rest of the taps team are incredible investigators.keep up with the ass kicking investigations guys.

pay attention to grant and especially Jay's reaction. if i am correct this is the episode where that guy who does all that funny stuff when a supposed entity takes over his body asks the entity to bring the temperature from 66degrees to 60degrees. Pay close attention to their reactions, they clearly are not that suprised, are angered or know it was faked. they do not show the enthusiasm as one would expect at such a "WOW" piece of evidence. I mean, this guy 'chris' is telling an entity to lower the temperature in the air… please, could i have come to my house and spend a summer with me in NYC in the sweltering heat? You would expect them to be more suprised like how they reacted to frank the sound guy getting flattened out, or the IR image of the guy wearing a ball cap standing right in front of them. those are sincere. these reactions to the temp difference are not. So, to me, that shows they were either forced into it and can not say anything, they knew it was faked and just acted angered, or they were in on it and bad acting b/c they were upset over the legitamcy. All of which would still lend creedence to them being honest investigators forced into a situation that they are held down by the big bad corporation looking for ratings.

I do watch this show waiting paitently to be convinced, has not happened to date. Not sure if these guys are the real deal but they are intertaining. Now for the show, why is it they "wrap it up and go" just when all the "ghost" are ready to play? If I had seen a ghost run down the hall in a black cape at a prison, I think I would want to stay longer in case he came back then maybe I would get a better look at him (if I were a ghost hunter that is), not being one, I would run sceaming from the place and NEVER go back. As for Waverly Hills Sanatorium, I still would like to know if the kids that did all that grafitti on the wall, saw or heard anything while they were doing their artwork? Oh wait, it was propbably daylight and ghost only work nights, debunked that one by myself too.

I have worked with computers for over a decade and have used timestamps as a key for various applications. I have gotten a few duplicates to the millisecond. Doesn't happen very much(to me, a few times in a decade), but it does happen. As for the digital alignment of the 2 and the decimal, it looks correct to me. It looks to be in line with the tail of the 4. Not sure if these guys are frauds or not. Just my 2 cents.

john, …. I believe you, but take a look at the original post and pics again. There are 3 different occasions where it reads 2:43:17.

– Dave

Did anyone else notice that during the St. Augustine revisit episode that once again the timestamp is not present whenever they cut to the FLIR video? However, if you look closely when they are reviewing the evidence, watch the FLIR monitor itself while they are trying to sync it up with the footage taken by the camera crew and you can clearly see the timestamp is visible there. When they cut back to the close up of the FLIR image again, the timestamp is gone, proving that they are indeed removing it in post now.

Shawn

Shawn,… Right, I was looking at that when it came up but not in as much detail as you mentioned. I'm not sure how that FLIR camera works as to whether you can watch it with or without the time stamp, so maybe the time stamp info is recorded somewhere in the camera and you can regain it? Any comments on that - or do you still thinks it's actually been CG'ed out?

– Dave

I'm going to have to rewatch that segment again, but my first guess is they're blowing up the FLIR image and cropping out the timestamp, though I could be wrong (and probably am). I would think that would be easier than having to cut and paste over it each week since that's such a painstaking task to make it blend together, but who knows?

Shawn

"franshetta" - i too would run like hell if a brick was thrown at me (Ghost Adventure-nevada) or saw some other activity. i am NOT an investigator, BUT, you raised a valid point. something i have thought of too. Altho, i am sure they go after an image caught as best as possible and are MOST definitely have an extreme amount of limited time to investigate. to me, if i had the opportunity, I would go in to a supposed haunting, place all these camera's as hidden as possible (in case ghosts are intelligent and know what they are? or just for someone trying to play a trick). stay at the location to see if anyone enters or leaves. but keep the camera's and equipment there for as long as possible. not just one night, but atleast a few nights where they know, NO ONE is in the building or area. then the activity caught, if any, would be much harder to discredit. ALSO, it seems they watch the footage split into "FOUR SCREENS" on the computer screen. altho it does conserve time, Jay and Grant have both expressed their concerns on how it can be easily possible to miss something. which i strongly agree.

it also could be, for the format of the show.. whatever it maybe, it is working and they do not want to change anything. i am sure the SciFi channel now pays or covers some or all of their expenses. travel and perhaps camera equipment. maybe they are also paid too. whatever the case maybe. THEY NEED TO SPEND ALOT MORE TIME AT ALL LOCATIONS.. ONE NIGHT, (sometimes two) IS NOT ENOUGH!!

Re: Cropped Timestamp FLIR Footage

Shawn, ….. I went over the Taps return to St. Augustine episode on YouTube, and, yes, some of the shots do show the FLIR’s timestamp being "cropped off" at the bottom. So it looks like you were right about that.

I guess they’re removing it due to people like Logisti analyzing it to close for comfort. Geeeeez! – they don’t want to be caught with their pants down again and have deliberately manipulated the footage. Oh well, there goes the last of my faith in these people.

– Dave

I have extensive background with Photoshop and have been looking at the evidence of tampering with the time stamp. Much like the evidence given during GH's reveals, I am not convinced.

Most everything I have seen on GH can be attributed to trickery of some sort or another, but it doesn't change my personal belief that there are ghosts among us. I do enjoy the show a great deal, and look forward to every episode.

GHI on the other hand is pretty much fodder. Too many "personal experiences" and not enough evidence. It is still more fun to watch than American Idol.

Personally, I have experienced 2 paranomal encounters in my life, and although I am a sceptic at heart, they changed my opinion about the paranormal in general.

Just found this forum today, and am glad that it is here. Keep up all the good work, and I look forward to contributing down the road.

Thank you Dave for pointing out that there were three time stamps with the same exact time. I was so busy looking at the digit after the decimal I didn't catch it. Why on earth would they do this? The temp is lower on the "faked" timestamps. It makes no sense at all to me.

As far as sheetie behind the pool table, how could they even show that? That was so stupid.

Oh well I still like the show and can't wait for the original to start up again.

IN the three 2:43:17 shots ONLY the original top one has the scifi logo on the bottom right of the screen ( also the last shot the logo is missing but its not always on screen). Where did it go? This is the final proof its been tampered with and why would they remove it? I work with photoshop programs extensively and I see the tampering but you have to look close. I really appreciate the people who DO catch these things as I don't always watch close enough.

I really didn't think at series start I'd have to watch out for frauds, silly me lol, but I watch very very closely now.

That isn't tampering. TAPS films the footage and gives it to Pilgrim Studios for post-production; Pilgrim edits the footage and assembles it into a finished product; Sci-Fi gets the completed episode from Pilgrim and then broadcasts it, adding their logo to some parts of the finished episode, but not all.

No, no I meant the 3 screen caps of the footage with three different temps, only the first one has the scifi logo on it. At that exact time the scifi logo is on the screen in the first cap, the subsequent ones ( same time) don't have the logo. WHY? I wasn't saying the scifi channel tampered with anything.
I know the logo isn't always on our tv screens but it's on the first one and not on the others of the same time. Wouldn't that make you think the time or temp was tampered with?

Hi, everyone! I just found this site, and I must say I am really enjoying it.

I have been watching Ghost Hunters for a few months now, and it really amuses me. (is that a bad thing?) I get a kick every time they say, "did you see that?" or, "did you hear that?" and then go immediately to a commercial! LOL! Honestly, I have TRIED to 'see' what they 'see', and 'hear' what they 'hear' (especially in those electronic, static recordings), but I never can. It reminds me of a horseback ride I took when I was a kid in Garden of the Gods in Colorado, and the guide kept pointing to rocks, and saying things like, "now see that? That rock looks just like Ricky Ricardo's congo drums", or some other such nonsense.

But the show IS funny and entertaining, and that's why I watch it, not because I believe in ghosts, or want to be convinced that ghosts exist. And yes, I do believe scenes are doctored. This is on a channel called, SCIFI, (Science Fiction) after all.

Keep up the good work. NOVA would be proud.

Mary - wait until you see some of the older episodes, with random images of dolls with flashing eyes and appropo sound effects.

I enjoy watching the show for the same reasons and I agree with you. However, I do believe in the possibility of ghosts, I've just seen very little evidence on this show to prove it.

I'm still trying to find out if this site has said anything about the black mass Steve managed to capture on the one episode in a private residence… the mass was near the ashes of a dead mother… I'll see if I can find more information; I'm sorry I can't remember the names.

I personally just like this site as an alternative to what is shown on GH. And, reality check, these guys here aren't in the arena for the profits.

I think that the "black mass" you're referring to was at the Gibbons Home. You'll find we've got quite a bit to say here:

http://www.skepticalviewer.com/2007/10/11/gibbons-home/

It's been well established that there was a statue sitting on the table of the right size and shape to cause the "black mass". See the link above for a picture of it.

did anyone even consider that this guy who claims his house is haunted by the ghosts of sharon tate and jay sebring,was doing a movie based on the murders?and used the ghost hunter show for publicity for it?he also claims that he first learned about the history of the house when they were doing construction on his.but then,he says he and his friends would drive up to the murder house when he was younger.this guy can't even get his lies straight.and as for someone who has knowledge of making movies,i wouldn't put it past him that he didn't rig the blinds slightly blowing or the "fake" voices of the murdered victims.he should be ashamed of himself.i hope his "movie" bombs!

First of all, I won't say that you're wrong in your examination. However, I would like evidence of all of your claims. I need to know for sure that Jason and Grant both agreed there was a problem, that it was definitley, without a doubt, brought to their attention, and that the original footage was edited by sci-fi and not the people proving the fakery themselves.

If they tried to fake it and failed, why would they even show it on TV and explain how someone failed to pull one on them, instead of simply tossing it out and not using the scene at all?

Shaun, I'd tell you to go watch the episode, but Sci-Fi pulled the footage from re-broadcasts. Perhaps the full episode is available on the DVD.

For the record, Sci-Fi is probably not at all responsible. Someone working at Pilgrim is the most likely culprit. For more information click that link above and read the thread.

You know, the FLIR footage is bogus even without the detailed analysis of the way the numbers move and the timestamp. The scale on the right goes down only to 63, and the bottom of the scale is black. The number on the upper right gives the temperature of the center of the crosshairs, not the general ambient temperature.

If the temperature at the crosshairs is 62.4, then the patch in the center should be black, like it is in the bottom of the scale. It isn't. It's purple, which would make sense if it's 64-65 degrees.

If a ghost actually were reducing the ambient temperature to 62, the walls should go black, and the bar on the right should rescale to put 62 on the bottom.

Couldn't have said it better myself! I believe production had something to do with it. Maybe they wanted a shot of the temp going down on the Flir but didn't have the shot they needed. So they improvised. I believe that TAPS is keeping it real but there is production to deal with. At the end of the day I believe what they experienced was real. It would take more than this to make me think that what we see on the show is staged. I DO believe that these kind of examinations are good though, but this is a minor thing that can easily be explain as a production "fix".

Tomson, I mostly agree with you but Grant's original reaction on his blog at the time was to say it was ridiculous to claim the footage was faked because he was holding the camera and those were the temperatures he saw on the screen.

Once it became clear that there was no debating that the FLIR footage had been doctored he said promised he'd "look into it" and get back to us, which he never did.

Grant's initial attempt to support the authenticity of the footage by claiming that's what he saw on the screen is really what keeps TAPS tied to this footage, in my opinion.

I agree with the guy/girl who wanted proof that TAPS was "faking everything."

Remember, guys, we are supposedly representing "science" and skepticism here - therefore, we need to come up with proof that things are being faked, or at least someone needs to do some investigations of their own. No sweeping claims without proof.

If you don't have proof that everything is faked, then it follows that you also don't have proof that it isn't faked. The best idea is to state that these are all opinions until proven otherwise. I would love nothing more than to see all of the GHs' "experiences" disproven - like the guy who debunked the K2 meter on YouTube (you can still find his video) - but until we can do that, everything else is just hypothesis.

I can't speak for anyone else, iwanttobelieve, but I've never claimed that "TAPS was 'faking everything'." Nor do I think you'll find such "sweeping claims" in Logisti's posts.

In this post Logisti makes no claim that TAPS is faking anything at all. He claims that someone– maybe TAPS, maybe Pilgrim Productions– has tampered with the FLIR footage. He also provides evidence to support this claim.

The evidence:

1. The timestamp on the footage jumps backward. Time normally moves forward.
2. The background pattern around temperature readout numbers does not match the area around it. The square shape of the mismatch is consistent with copying and pasting.
3. (My bit) The temperature readout does not match the color of the area in the crosshairs according to the scale on the right. It should be black; it's purple. Either the scale is wrong (and therefore the camera's malfunctioning) or someone tampered with the footage.

So I'm not sure why you're saying that we should claim that all of this is just our opinions when we are in fact presenting conclusions drawn from evidence. If you can provide reasons to doubt our conclusions or evidence, or additional evidence related to this particular clip, great! Provide them.

As a skeptic, I don't accept claims without evidence. I'm not asking anyone to do otherwise.

Sorry, guys, and Stephen in particular: my post showed up at the end, although I replied to one post way back up, in which someone claimed to watch "GH" for fun because it was all so obviously a joke and all fake.

It's actually kind of funny that this came after the big discussion in which you guys were doing EXACTLY what I was whingeing about - proving through evidence that something on GH was amiss!

All just a misunderstanding. I figured that since I replied to one post, this would just show up under that post. Guess not!

Doh! Iwanttobelieve, please accept my apologies. I really shouldn't post after spending a day editing audio!

Hey,

I just found this website and read through most of the posts. I find most of these arguments very compelling. As for the doctored FLIR, I'm not sure. It does make sense about the decimal point being very close to the "2" (I also noticed that compared to the other temp. readings, the "6" and "2" are spaced oddly far apart from each other compared to the numbers in the other readings).

I'd like to add, although her post was quite some time ago, that what Franshetta's first post ended with a comment about ghosts not coming out during daylight. Would it be far fetched to suggest that they do not come out when it's not dark because it's more difficult for the viewer to really examine the "evidence" at hand? Not an accusation, just a thought. The explanation for conducting investigations in the dark, as I understand it, is based on the idea that spirits can draw more energy and manifest more clearly when the energy in the area is not depleted by electrical lighting (at least I think that's the gyst of what I've heard - correct me if I'm wrong). Still, that's quite a pseudoscientific theory.

I have actually read a little bit about parapsychology, and I haven't come across anything that says investigations absolutely must be conducted in the dark. Besides, the people that call TAPS to investigate do not tell them that their experiences have ONLY taken place in the dark! Ghosts don't just pop up as soon as the lights go out. (As for the people who call TAPS, how do we know for sure that they aren't paid actors? "Reality" shows can be so tricky.)

Anyway, I like this site, and as a die hard fan of GH and GHI, I will be back. For me, even if a lot of the show is fluff, it's still entertaining as a fictional drama (or comedy)…

Stephen - no problem! I just found it funny when I realized what the misunderstanding was. Audio editing - sounds cool! You don't work for TAPS by chance, do you? Ha…

Alexandra - I LOVED your post. Very interesting. I agree with your sentiments about watching the show…and will only add that re: daytime apparitions - I just read about this woman and her family who were supposedly haunted for a long time (check it out, guys, if you have some time: http://www.thesalliehouse.com), and many things happened to them in broad daylight, such as going into her son's nursery only to find toys arranged in a circle on the floor (and her son was only an infant at the time).

Anyway, the darkness just adds another element of fear, and maybe spirits feed off of our fear? Eh, like you said, it's all speculation…

I have been wondering why Jason's head in the Manson FLIR footage registers a whooping 108 degrees! Just another anomaly for us "idiots" to contemplate.

To quote the movie Aliens, "You must be reading it wrong…"

"IT'S READING RIGHT, MAN!"

Seriously, I never noticed that before, but I don't think that's anything to be suspicious of. First and foremost, this device sees heat the way we see light, which means objects can either radiate their own or reflect some from a different source. I suspect Jason's face is doing a little of both.

Sometimes heat-light can play tricks, like you might see a human figure reflect off a brick wall (or a locker door :), but it doesn't mean the brick wall is actually a different temperature at the location where the heat is reflecting.

I enjoy the show for its entertainment value. I don't really have a feeling one way or the other about the existence of ghosts or genuine paranormal experiences. I guess I'm trying to say I think I'm unbiased by any personal motive for proving or debunking any theory.

What I do wonder, though, is why they rarely seem to follow up on some of the more dramatic "finds" - or if they do this, I don't recall seeing it. Perhaps they should do more follow-up visits when they find something they can't explain. I absolutely agree with the poster above who stated that part of one night is not nearly enough time to gather sufficient evidence. Anyone know if more in-depth investigations are ever done?

Just food for thought. Whatever the case, I like watching the show!

To me the footage appears to be unaltered. And what does time have to do with the temperature in the room? I'm still a believer in TAPS!!!!!!! They RULE! Dont be a skeptic if it doesn't make sense!!!!

Time has to do with the temperature in this way: When the same piece of footage, with the same time stamp shows up with two different temperatures, that means the temperature on one of them has been faked.

Furthermore, we can see telltale signs of the alteration and make the clear determination of which footage is the original and which was altered.

…and no, the pictures were not taken fractions of a second apart — if you watch the original episode you can see for yourself that the footage with the duplicate timestamps is a number of seconds long and many of those same seconds were seen in their consecutive entirety just a few moments earlier in the episode — just with different temperatures.

Of course you may have difficulty finding the episode with this footage intact, because after it was pointed out that several pieces of footage were faked the episode suddenly started being rebroadcast with the offending footage conspicuously removed — if that's not a tacit acknowledgment that our assessment of the video is irrefutable then I don't know what to tell you. I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for an admission of guilt from anyone.

Just saw this episode last night (7/2) for the first time. Much of this episode had the feel of an infomercial for the K2 meter. And I couldn't help but suspect the homeowner (who scored high on my 'creep-o-meter') and the K2 inventer were in this together.

The K2 meter…………what a pile of….Every response to the guy's questions looked the same. Of course, it helped that every answer was 'yes'. (I would think that you'd want to ask a question whose answer you already knew would be 'no' - just to check. But that's how I roll.) And the questions (insert rolley-eyes here): "Did the home owner ever use an Ouija board?" WHAT?!? And of course, the owner is beside himself since they are obviously communicating with the dead because, YES!!, he HAS used one.

And telling the spirits to lower the temperature to 60 degrees…."I want 60 degrees" (Insert another pair of rolley-eyes here) What? Do ghosts do magic now? Can they control temperature?….weather?….the thermostat? J&G have been hunting ghosts for years. This smuck walks in with some stupid contraption and in 30 minutes he's talked with Sharon Tate, some other guy, and now has them doing tricks. (Insert yet ANOTHER rolley-eyes here)

Anyway, as I was listening to the EVPs I remembered a post I read, either here or another website, about what the relatives of the victims must have been thinking. (True, they've probably never heard of GH, but I'd imagine someone pointed them to this episode.) Your child was a victim in the Manson Murders and now some TV show is exploiting that with claims to be communicating with her spirit. And, frankly, the alledged EVPs were quite disturbing.

It's hard to say, but if this episode had been my first exposure the GH, I may not have watched another.

EDIT: Oh. And this wasn't even the same house? (Insert one….more…..rolley-eyes…..HERE)

Welcome Ladies and Gentlemen to the Ding-a-Ling Circus.

Come to the Carnival Sideshow.

Watch as The Astounding Jasoni captures haunted spirits with his amazing FLIR device.

Listen as the Great Grantini communicates with the dead with his miraculous K2 Meter.

Behold the Lovely Kris as she distracts from the show as she walks up the stairs with the cameraman behind her.

Shout out when you see the Brave Steve scream in fear of whatever it is that he's afraid of this week.

Yes, Ladies and Gentlemen this can all be seen for one thin dime.
1/10 of a dollar.
Step up.
The show is about to begin.

Wonder if J&G get a commission off the sales of Chris Fleming's K2 meters everytime they whup one out on GH.