EmilyRose said:

Ahhh yes. So everything is fake. That's the premise. Gotcha.

I understand the sarcasm behind this statement.  I can even detect a bit of frustration as well.  Is everything "fake?"  No.  Are some things flat out faked?  Yes.  Are things sometimes left unexplained (or edited a particular way) to give the appearance of being paranormal?  Yes.  Do they  sometimes either intentionally or accidentally misinterpret many different aspects of their investigations?  Yes. 

So "everything is fake" is not our "premise."  I simply stated that because they have done everything that I've just mentioned, we cannot take their "word" for anything.  For example Emily, if we had lunch and within the first 5 minutes I told you that I had two metric tons of gold in my basement, that my dog speaks prefect Italian, and that on Tuesdays, I have the ability to fly…under 200 feet.  That's definitely an interesting start to a lunch.  However…after those first 5 minutes, no matter what I said…either lies, embellishment, or the truth…would you still believe me?  THIS…is where we are with GA. 

But beyond just their "word"…there are many reasons with ultra-sloppy investigatory methods holding the top spot.  Mis-using their equipment, not understanding basic scientific concepts…the list just goes on and on.

As for the "Gunslinger"…thanks for getting that video for us so we know exactly what you are referring to.  In the meantime, I would point you to this thread:

http://www.skepticalviewer.com…..rly-hills/

Check out the whole thing, but especially post #12.  Learjet shows how you can get phantom images (even a ghost cat…) that have been seen in several GA episodes.  After checking out that, if you have specific questions, just shout them out and Learjet might answer them for you.  He's good like that…

Emily said: "My point about standardized ghost hunting tools was corroboration. But why go there when everything's fake, right."

Well…there's the short answer to this and the long answer.  I'm wayyy too tired for the long answer.  So…the short answer:  There is no point to standardize "ghost hunting tools."  What is a ghost?  How do you know those "tools" work on it?  What exactly are you trying to prove or disprove by using them?  The people using these "tools" are not properly trained in using scientific equipment, they do not employ the scientific method and they certainly do not understand conventional scientific concepts.  So…any data they gather is useless.  If you truly want answers to the paranormal you must approach it scientifically…which is boring, no one would watch, and your favorite show is dead because the three amigos are fun to watch, but they aren't the brightest bulbs on the Xmas tree.  So standardizing the equipment has NOTHING to do with anything being "fake."  Putting the same EMF meter in Zak's hand and Jason's hand doesn't make it any less idiotic… 

Nosfer- Thanks for writing up the "long answer" for me.  By the end of my post I was so tired that I'm shocked that I even got the "short answer" out… 

I think if we hit the "the burden of proof is not upon the shoulders of skeptics" concept as well as the "ambiguous evidence is not acceptable evidence" concept…then I think we've covered a lot of ground in this thread.  And if we're going that far, if we throw in a nice "the absurdity of their methods" piece (Jason and Grant finding a cold spot near a giant chunk of ice and Zak getting possessed) then that just might sew this whole thing up…

Post edited 7:26 pm – January 11, 2011 by Revenant

Nice…

Eintopy gets the SV "Commander of Youtube/Master of the Intrawebs" award of the day.

So…"gunslinger"….yeah, Learjet nailed that type of event in the thread that I linked.  I think they've done it three times now but for the life of me, I can't remember where the third one was.  Too many green and white hallways.  So hard to tell them apart after a while.

As for the "giant" photo's…there seems to be three.  Emily, you're going to hate this…but I'm going with your "everything is fake" answer.  In this day and age, it's almost impossible to trust any photo.  Video is a bit easier because it contains more information.  Of course…we typically only get around 3 seconds of anything of interest (odd how that works out).

If a ghost hunter (professional, amateur, zombie…) wishes to throw a photograph down the skeptical way…we would really like to know the exact model of the camera, the settings used, why those particular settings were used if really weird, and both pictures and video of the environment in the same light and…wait for it…IN THE DAYLIGHT SO WE CAN ACTUALLY SEE SOMETHING!  (<— not that that irratates me or anything…)  The more information that we have, the more willing that we are to examine it.  But typically…we get "look at this ghost in this photo…….."  And that's it.  So as opposed to believing in "residual energy"…I am more apt to throw these photo's on the "not enough information" pile.  We're still working on our "Not enough information and the intent of the source of the material is also in question" sign.  It's a big sign… 

PS Eintopy…I originally wrote your name as "Entropy" and then realized that it wasn't.  Does it mean something?

PSS Learjet…EVP's…my favorite aspect is the actual history of them.  Originally, the "ghosts" would physically imprint their voices on the actual tape of the tape recorders.  When we switched from tape recorders to digital recorders there was nothing for the ghosts to physical imprint upon.  So, miraculously, the ghosts updated their technique…moving from physically imprinting on the tape to manipulating sound frequencies.  Funny how that worked out isn't it?  Those ghosts are awfully crafty…

It is so difficult today to verify evidence dealing with the paranormal field, especially photographs and videos.  Software is available that can produce results so authentic looking that only someone who is a professional in the field (and also has no interest either way in proving the existence of anything paranormal) can catch human manipulation of a supposed ghostly figure or event.

I was wondering if there has been any video or photograph that still has such experts scratching their respective heads.  Most seem to come to the conclusion that something abnormal has occurred, but stop short of declaring the event "paranormal".  There is just so much we don't as yet understand. 

There's something about Zak that to me just doesn't sit right.  He definitely likes drama and IMO will create some if necessary.  He just seems to go overboard, and this makes it impossible to determine whether an unexplainable event is actually occurring.

Personally, I do believe that something is going on when it comes to hauntings.  My own experiences as a child are not easily brushed aside and actually have made me into the skeptic I am today, rather than a full-fledged believer.  I do believe that someday there will be a breakthrough in this field.  But it won't be found in smudgy photos or blurry videos from often questionable TV shows.  Just sayin'.

Zak is a terrible actor, especially when he gets "possessed", but at least he provides a comedic element to the show when he attempts to convince us that a spirit, usually a nasty one, has taken over his body.

Many thanks to Eintopy for finding those clips.  I do not remember the Gunslinger but it is likely I didn't watch that episode.  Sort of looks like a real and very alive person to me.

The giant-could be anything but I'm going with the thermal reflection possibility.  Seems to be the most logical one at present.

Emily Rose – I hope you see that most of us are coming from the premise that anyone making the claim that something is paranormal needs to provide well-documented and researched evidence to substantiate their beliefs.  There are just so many other, more down to earth explanations for what GA-and the other groups on TV as well–present to the public as being paranormal.  Also the psychological aspects should be considered, especially when the
investigators and the audience are already primed to see or hear
something unusual.  I would love to see a show where investigators are not told anything beforehand about what has been seen, heard or felt at a location.  (Actually, there was a show that sent a supposed medium into a haunted house without giving him any prior knowledge about the alleged activity.  Needless to say, he completely bombed out, even getting the gender of the ghost wrong.)

IMO, Jason and Grant are the worst when it comes to declaring a piece of evidence as paranormal.  They are far from experts in anything, and seem never to even allow their evidence to be scrutinized by anybody else.   GA has not yet received the level of arrogance that IMO is a now firmly established characteristic of Jason and Grant.  Plus Zak and company are more fun to watch, if one does not take them too seriously.  They do exhibit a passion that has been sorely lacking in GH for quite some time.

Nosfer said:

Oubliette said:

(Actually, there was a show that sent a supposed medium into a haunted house without giving him any prior knowledge about the alleged activity.  Needless to say, he completely bombed out, even getting the gender of the ghost wrong.) 

---

 

Of course there was also MH where Derek was tested and given the name (fake) of some departed soul there.  Kreed Kafer (rearrange the letters….Derek Faker)   It was told to him during the set up and he got "possessed" by him as part of his "act" later.  He departed the show shortly thereafter lol

Yes, I remember that.  It was done as a means to get him off the show.  Since his departure, the show became REALLY boring.  He was quite the character and fun to watch.