Icculus said:

Do you feel that the fakery in Ghost Hunters has existed from the very beginning? Or do you think that there was there a point in time when they were honestly presenting evidence without manipulation or deceit?

And, leaving Ghost Hunters out of the equation, what exactly is your take on "ghost phenomena" in general? Whether it actually represents spirits of the dead or something else entirely, Do you think that there's something to it that's beyond the current reductionist/materialist scientific paradigm….or is it all tricks of the mind and bunco men?

Q1: No, I don't think fakery was there from the very beginning. Exaggeration? Yes.

Q2: Yes, I think there is something to the phenomena. While I've never experienced anything, I have known people that have and I do not doubt their claims. I have serious doubts about the conclusions many have drawn from their experiences. Early one night when I was 10 or 12 years old my family and I were returning from some short car trip to our rural home. As we pulled into our driveway my parents pointed out a glowing object in the sky. It was round, had a bright white center and had a glowing multi-color aura surrounding it. It made no sound and appeared to hover in the sky over a chestnut tree across the road. I watched it for a hour or so and went to bed with it still hanging in the sky. I was convinced I had seen a UFO. In the morning paper we found out that many had seen it and that it was a weather balloon. I have no reason to doubt this explanation because the object's appearance is consistent with a weather balloon in the upper atmosphere.

My point is that I saw something that at the time was inexpliciable. I think many people have had similar experiences with the "ghost phenomena". They just need to be explained.

I'll stand by what I said in earlier post – I think Jay and Grant and most of the TAPS members came into ghost hunting from an honest interest in the field — the need to make compelling (or at least interesting) television has forced them to move toward an emphasis finding "evidence" – no matter how dubious – with a few perfunctory debunkings thrown in. I think I was like a lot of people who were drawn to the show initially because they did seem to approach investigations from a more skeptical framework, and therefore we gave the team the benefit of the doubt. Now, the obvious hoaxings and the conflicts of interest in investigating places where they have a financial interest makes it clear that GH is just another TV show where everything must be taken with a huge grain of salt.

I wont add much other than to say I agree with the previous posts.  

They went into it with the best of intentions.  Somewhere they lost their way.  Either due to the production company, SciFi wanting ratings, their own desire to keep the show on the air, or simply $$. 

You remember how Jason used to be very very reluctant to ever call a place haunted?  And now everyother place they visit has to be haunted.

I think that says a lot.

I'm of split opinions.  On the one hand yeah they seemed more legit in the begining, there were other aspects to the show othere than J&G, the stooges, and Kris & Kris (one with the big mouth and the other with the nice ass.) 

But the other part of me can't ignore that this was a buissness deal for a TV show in the begining, and they wanted garentees.  I'm sure someone, at some time, had to consider what to do when nothing happens, and its just people walking around a house in the dark. 

And the whole thing with the Roto Rooter skits has obviously been faked since the begining.  I mean really, like they have a camera crew with them on every plumber job to catch the call. 

Not to mention all the set up shots in every show.  For instance, when they would leave a house the customer would shut the door behind them walking away, the crew filming from inside the house, supposidly staying behind with the customer.

Maybe the show didn't have high hopes in the beginning, so they were allowed to be real, then they got really populary, and were under more pressure to make a show.

Based on my observations, they started out legit, then started to hoax to keep the ball rolling.  With a skeptical suspision that the hoaxing was part of the plan (or kept in reserve) since day one.

The Doctor said:

Interesting … I've never known any 27 year old female writer to put "Chest: C cup" in her biographical data.

I suspect this entire story was written by a 12-13 year old male.

Doctor… personally I would have put "D cup", but I am a little older than 27. Maybe its an age thing.