| User | Post |
|
8:47 pm
December 26, 2008
|
NewbieGhost13
| | |
| Investigator in Training | posts 19 |
|
|
I know I'm a bit behind the times and I apologize if this should have been posted somewhere else or otherwise handled; but as I was reading the article about the tampered with Manson FLIR footage I noticed that throughout the post and comments there were no links to a video clip of that event. I did look closely at the pictures but had a real hard time seeing what all of you were seeing as tampered with.
At least, that was until I downloaded the full episode and watched it for myself. That's when I really saw what looked shady about the footage.
Anyway, I decided to post a link to that video here so others could view it and take a close look for themselves. (It's not the full episode. I do not have the patience to upload the whole thing. But it is the clip of the offending footage. You'll see the jumping numbers at about 1:35)
Just wanted to share.
http://tinypic.com/player.php?v=1q1jph&s=5
|
|
|
11:49 pm
December 26, 2008
|
Stephen
| | San Jose, CA | |
| Admin
| posts 589 |
|
|
Thanks, NewbieGhost13– it does show up far more obviously in motion. But the real smoking gun isn't the numbers jumping (although that's pretty incriminating)– it's the fact that the timestamps 2:43:16 to 2:43:19 goes by twice, with different temperatures! Compare the FLIR clip at 0:30 in the video with the clip at 1:35.
|
Stephen the Friendly Skeptic
|
|
|
12:15 am
December 27, 2008
|
NewbieGhost13
| | |
| Investigator in Training | posts 19 |
|
|
Yeah, finally I'm awake enough to see the timestamp messup. It was the strange way the numbers were jumping after the commerical break but not before that got me looking closer at the footage in the first place to see what your guys were talking about regarding those timestamps. But now I cearly see both issues.
By the way, I wanted to say thanks to the creator of this site and everyone on it for these discussions.
This is by far the most down-to-earth reasoned debate I personally have ever come across on the web and the most civil and nice.
Here's my short story:
First I was introduced to TAPS on this years Halloween Live and thought "oh what was that?. that looks hard to deny or debunk" then "Wait a minute…its a big place..how do they know…"
Which lead me to (the next extreme) SAPS website where I said "Ah, ha yes that's debunking…" to "Wait now, actually that's not even logical debunking, you didn't even remotely re-create the event ..what the..?" and "hey I don't believe in mediums but I don't think they are nessacarily mentally ill either…..etc…"
which finally lead me here! Oh, thank god! I just love it!
|
|
|
11:38 am
December 30, 2008
|
Logisti
| | |
| Admin
| posts 177 |
|
|
NewbieGhost13 said:
Here's my short story:
First I was introduced to TAPS on this years Halloween Live and thought "oh what was that?. that looks hard to deny or debunk" then "Wait a minute…its a big place..how do they know…"
Which lead me to (the next extreme) SAPS website where I said "Ah, ha yes that's debunking…" to "Wait now, actually that's not even logical debunking, you didn't even remotely re-create the event ..what the..?" and "hey I don't believe in mediums but I don't think they are nessacarily mentally ill either…..etc…"
which finally lead me here! Oh, thank god! I just love it!
Hah! That's pretty parallel to my own experience a while back. I started thinking, "These guys seem very legit" and then at some point, "Well *that* looked pretty suspicious, and come to think of it a few other things did too — I wonder if anyone's really 'keeping them honest' any reviewing their findings critically?" followed by finding SAPS and thinking "awesome!" followed shortly thereafter by "Holy cow, this is just as bad as TAPS when it comes to making claims their evidence doesn't remotely support — they're just making the *opposite* claims: Everything's a hoax" and basically ended up throwing this site together because it seemed to me like there was a gaping hole in the internet right at the spot where people should be having an honest, intelligent discussion on these things. I'm very glad that so many seem to believe this site succeeds in filling that gap, and very happy we've been able to build a little community from the ground up. The real value of this site is all the people who contribute to the discussions, and now you're one of them so thanks :)
|
|
|
2:07 pm
December 30, 2008
|
NewbieGhost13
| | |
| Investigator in Training | posts 19 |
|
|
Thank you, Logisti! When I found this clip I wanted to share because even though you put up screencaps of the episode's FLIR footage, I'm the kind of person that likes to see the thing in motion at normal speed and then pick it a part frame by frame. As I said, viewing the footage in motion helped me to better see the doctered parts of it. That's just how my brain works. The same was true for the Gibbon's home Shadow Staute footage. It wasn't until I saw the thing in motion and better orientated where that statue was in relation to objects in the background that it became clear to me that it was the statue.
If you ever need a clip, I'm the one to call on. I've got all the full episodes stored on my exteral harddrive and wouldn't mind uploading clips to share. (only clips, mind you, obviously not the whole thing… )
|
|
|
1:59 pm
January 8, 2009
|
Ike_Spink
| | |
| Investigator in Training | posts 5 |
|
|
Good find. I met Chris Fleming at my university this fall, so I decided to email him about it (at about 3am yesterday. He responded around 9am today. Great guy.) Here's what he had to say:
"Yeah I did see that a long time ago, I asked grant and he figured they didnt have the shot with the thermal doing it (which it did) because one camera was on me, one was on jason and the handheld temperature gauge which was also going down (shown on the show) and the other camera was on grant from a wide shot. They may have edited that cut to coincide with what was happening in the room since they didnt have it on film.
While I was not happy to see this, as it is obviously doctered footage, since then I have shown a lot of people at the events I have been at.. Queen Mary (footage on you tube) Stanley Hotel, Rolling Hills, Eastern state, Waverly Sanitarium, etc the same technique with other peoples equipment and my own. That somehow ghosts are able to manipulate the LED readings on the temp gauges and go up or down to a number we ask for. It is remarkable and very similar to the ELF that are being affected in the same principle as the K-II meter.
There must be that range of frequencie that they are able to affect and in that aspect asking them to do certain things with devices that pick up that frequencie and when it shows a response to what we ask for the result has to be that some form of conscious energy is affecting the device. Especially when we test it over and over.
Very promising in communicating with what I believe to be ghosts and spirit energy.
Thanks for asking,
-Chris Fleming"
So, doctored footage, yes. All lies? No. Come on guys, theres simply too much evidence out there. So what if ghost hunters didnt have visual footage of the exact time something was happening, and they edited footage? Would you rather watch a black screen and hear just the audio?
|
|
|
9:05 pm
January 8, 2009
|
Stephen
| | San Jose, CA | |
| Admin
| posts 589 |
|
|
Ike, I'd rather they didn't lie to us, myself. Yes, no doubt it's the production company's fault, but we can only see what TAPS does through what Pilgrim shows us. If we can't trust Pilgrim, how can we trust Ghost Hunters? Yeah, I'd rather have some dull honest footage over doctored exciting footage.
But I disagree with "All lies? No. Come on guys, theres simply too much evidence out there." There's a lot of footage, but how much of it is actually evidence? How much of it is actually compelling and verifiable?
If, at this point, this were the only questionable incident, I think I'd be willing to shrug and forget it. Instead, I kind of look at this one as the "good old days." Now, post-Collargate, the Manson incident seems almost innocent to me by comparison.
|
Stephen the Friendly Skeptic
|
|
|
7:26 pm
January 9, 2009
|
NewbieGhost13
| | |
| Investigator in Training | posts 19 |
|
|
Well, now, I'm not saying there isn't paranormal things out there and I'm also not saying that there isn't good footage out there to suggest it. But as Stephen said how much of the stories and footage are real evidence? Clearly some is but not all, not even by half.
I, unlike others, am willing to sort of forgive & ignore the staged plumber bits and greetings TAPS has with clients. It's not a huge deal to me because it is a TV show.(Although it is a bit odd.)
But the one thing I will not tolerate under any circumstances is clearly and obviously doctered video that's touted as paranormal evidence even after many viewers clearly see it has been messed with. But what really enrages me about this specific video is not just that it was docterd but it was TAPS response or lack thereof, that trurly angered me. Because I am willing to believe, I have no problem believing, that TAPS is innocent of doing the hack job and that the production company did it and we're all victims of them but…wheather TAPS did it or not does not change the fact that TAPS originally defended the FLIR footage as not altered and then finally was forced to say something was up and that 'they would look into it.' and never mentoined it again. That's what's wrong.
Remember, Tango discovered the video camera was messed with on the Queen Mary and that someone else and messed with them. You see, that will get my respect because as soon as they realized the footage was funny they never tried to defend it. They knew it was screwed up and had no problem saying so. But when people pointed out the Manson Muders FLIR footage being off, they ignored the obvious and defended it.
(Now, some say that a TAPS memeber did do it on the Queen Mary but I'm not going to argue that here because that's another discussion for a different day.)
|
|
|
8:51 pm
January 11, 2009
|
Ike_Spink
| | |
| Investigator in Training | posts 5 |
|
|
I don't get it. Why does that piss you off so much? They didnt have a shot at the moment. Would you rather have a document saying "the temperature went down to 60", or just a blank screen on the show, while they ran the audio of them saying "There it goes to 60."?
As much as you'd like it to be a perfect scientific study, it isn't. It's a TV show, and they need ratings.
|
|
|
10:28 pm
January 11, 2009
|
Stephen
| | San Jose, CA | |
| Admin
| posts 589 |
|
|
Can't speak for everyone here, but it doesn't "piss me off", personally. In this case, Pilgrim is doing their job, trying to turn black-and-white footage of people shouting out numbers into compelling video. I'm doing my hobby, watching Ghost Hunters with my brain turned on.
What undermines the "they had to fake it, it would have been dull otherwise" argument is that they excised the doctored footage from the DVD and it's unnoticeable. It's no less (or more) exciting.
We can argue back and forth over the ethical obligations of the producers of a show that claims to be scientific. We can debate whether or not a "reality show" is supposed to be a show about, you know, reality. But we here have a perfect right to show where Pilgrim and TAPS have blown it, and I personally find it kinda fun.
This particular incident doesn't exactly keep me up at night. After the moving chairs, sliding picture frames, tinny voices, and jumping tables, I'd almost forgotten about it. But you could use the "it's just a TV show" logic to argue for any of the excesses we've encountered. "Well, maybe Grant did fake the collar pull. Would you prefer they just showed an investigation with nothing happening?" If nothing in fact happened? If they did it compellingly? Sure!
|
Stephen the Friendly Skeptic
|
|
|
10:02 am
January 13, 2009
|
Logisti
| | |
| Admin
| posts 177 |
|
|
Ike_Spink said:
I don't get it. Why does that piss you off so much? They didnt have a shot at the moment.
I second what Stephen said, but mainly I want to challenge this assertion that "They didn't have a shot at the moment". They were sitting stationary in a room, gathered there for the sole purpose of documenting this drop in temperature. How could they not have a shot? Either they're terrible at their job, in which case they shouldn't have a TV crew following them around while doing it, or they're engaging in deliberate deceit, in which case they shouldn't pretend their show is about truth, reality and science.
|
|
|
1:41 pm
January 15, 2009
|
NewbieGhost13
| | |
| Investigator in Training | posts 19 |
|
|
*Sigh* I didn't mean to imply that I am that incredibly angry about it. And I'm not looking for a 'perfect scienitific study'. Even TAPS would probably admit that they know there might be some inherit problems with some paranormal thoeries.
I know it is a TV show. I get the ratings part. But that is exactly why I'm tearing into whatever footage they show as scientific evidence or proof. Far from bring really angry about it I find it also just as amusing that they got caught. But your defense of it is perpelxing to me.
You are telling me not to care because it is a show and as such need ratings. OK. And what does that have to do with anything? I mean my personal feelings mean nothing and are my own problem; they do not change the fact that the film was messed and originally defened against all ration and logic as not doctered. Even you acknowledge that it was doctered, Ike. And so, apparently, does Chris Flemming. And really, out of all the footage to doctor for compelling TV reasons why this one? There's nothing riveting about numbers going down on a camera.
You also talk about how there is so much evidence of the paranormal that it all must be real and not all evidence is fake or hoaxed. I agree. I never said I didn't believe. I just said this particular footage was tampered with. That's all I mean to say. I don't know why it was done. I just know that it was.
And as for not having a shot? Maybe. But how does that make it okay?
If they really didn't have a shot then they simply should have left it at that and just shown the footage of the temp gauge because the FLIR to me, did not make it any more interesting as Stephen rightly pointed out.
But like Logisti, I have trouble accepting the poor excuse of 'they didn't have a shot at the moment.' So I'm not buying that explaination.
|
|
|
5:31 pm
May 14, 2009
|
alicat
| | |
| Lead Investigator | posts 1215 |
|
|
Episode alert. The Manson Murders episode will be repeated next Wednesday, May 20, 2009 in the 8:00 – 9:00 p.m. time slot followed by the "Salem Witch" episode. Obviously we are not going to see new episodes for a bit.
|
|
|
8:51 pm
May 14, 2009
|
Hannah
| | Texas | |
| Lead Investigator | posts 361 |
|
|
"No matter what we ever catch, will it be enough to prove to the skeptic, the skeptical world that there's ghosts?" Hawes asked. "No, because anybody can shoot down anything they want. They can try to recreate anything they want. But, you know what, it's enough for me to believe, it's enough for him…the other people involved within the society. And it's enough for the people who called us in to help them."
"I don't care at all what the skeptics think of what we're doing," said Wilson.
http://abcnews.go.com/Nightline/Story?id=3800431&page=3
If Jason and Grant, IMO, really wanted to help paranormal research, they would post the raw data. Sure, you are going to have people that think everything is evidence and have people that think nothing is evidence of the paranormal. But, I really think that the majority of people would find something intriguing and we all might learn something new.
|
|
|
3:22 am
May 15, 2009
|
Learjet
| | Australia | |
| Lead Investigator | posts 1122 |
|
|
It sounds like they have evolved into an "us and them" mentality so I don't think we can ever expect to see any raw data forthcoming. After all they are right and what they say is truth so no need to.
Anyway, I don't hold much value in the data taken from their 10 dollar toys.
|
|
|
|
|
3:43 am
May 15, 2009
|
Revenant
| | Hopelessly Locked In A "Fear Cage" | |
| Lead Investigator | posts 1393 |
|
|
But….but….in the Spalding Inn episode, Robb said that J&G were "hardcore skeptics." So…they're just like us then, right? Wait…
|
"Skepticism is not a position, it's a process." -Dr Michael Shermer
|
|
|
4:09 am
May 15, 2009
|
Learjet
| | Australia | |
| Lead Investigator | posts 1122 |
|
|
Hehheh, most of us are not even hard core skeptics.
|
|
|
|
|
6:17 am
May 15, 2009
|
Nosfer
| | Rotaredom | |
| Moderator
| posts 2957 |
|
|
Learjet said:
It sounds like they have evolved into an "us and them" mentality so I don't think we can ever expect to see any raw data forthcoming. After all they are right and what they say is truth so no need to.
Anyway, I don't hold much value in the data taken from their 10 dollar toys.
Yup, remember Grant's "either you believe us or you hate the paranormal" statement? I'm paraphrasing slightly because I can't remember the exact wording, but that was the gist of it.
|
Legal: The content of this post is copyrighted and is intended exclusively for use on skepticalviewer.com It may not be copied, distributed, or redisplayed on any other site without the express written consent of the author.
|
|
|
7:12 am
May 15, 2009
|
alicat
| | |
| Lead Investigator | posts 1215 |
|
|
And the reverse:
"No matter what we ever catch, will it be enough to prove to Jason and Grant, the Ghost Hunter/TAPS world that there are no ghosts?" Alicat said. "No, because anybody can shoot down anything they want. They can try to recreate anything they want. But, you know what, it's enough for me to believe, it's enough for him…the other people involved within the Skeptical Viewer. And it's enough for the people who read and research here to help us."
"I don't care at all what Ghost Hunters or TAPS think of what we're doing," said Alicat.
|
|
Login 
Register 
The Forum [is where Ancient Roman skeptics hang out.]
Reply to Post
Quote and Reply 
Print this Post 
Topic RSS 
