Revenant said:

But….but….in the Spalding Inn episode, Robb said that J&G were "hardcore skeptics."  So…they're just like us then, right?  Wait…

That is right he did!  How can J & G have it both ways. . .oh, I get it–if they're the ones that are skeptical, then it is okay.

Gee whiz, did Jason really think anyone would take him seriously after the green olive story?  And IF that had happened to me, I certainly would not have told a living soul.  So, if he is eating his green olives, how come he sees all those dark shadows he chases?   

I just watched this episode the other night.  I had heard that they had edited the "controversial" scenes, but I didn't know to what level.  And…wow…they just butchered it.  No explanation.  No apology.  Just business as usual… 

For anyone still on the fence about the integrity of the Ghost Hunter show, watch an old Utube clip of when the show first aired and then what you are "allowed" to see now.  And I don't want to hear the feeble "But…but…it was Pilgrim, not Jason and Grant!"  Jason Hawes and Grant Wilson are producers of the show.  It is their integrity on the line, not Pilgrim's.  Not to run some sort of disclaimer about the show or just pull the show entirely is simply shameful.  It's the equivalent of pulling the curtain back so you don't see the guy working the controls in "The Wizard of Oz."  Or perhaps even better…a child breaking a vase and then sweeping the shards under the couch so no one sees it.  "Nope….nothing to see here.  I'm a good boy… "  Whatever…

And instead of public outrage…people are signing up to take their "ghost-hunting" classes and seminars.  It's just so disappointing on so many levels… 

@ MissMissy:  The only time I think someone is looking down on me is when I get a great parking space during my travels.  My Dad was always very lucky that way and all my friends knew it so, whenever we go out they always make me drive and say "I hope your Dad is looking our for us today".  I have to admit it works.  I think this works on this thread but could also be posted in the Visualization or not? thread in the forum.

Oubliette:

Certainly agree that if my reputation was on the line as a producer or otherwise, you can be darn sure I'd want to see the finished product as well as how I was portrayed, etc.  How can you claim to be a producer and not want to see the finished product?  I have seen though, when Jason and Grant have been asked about certain episodes recently filmed and aired, they had rather short memories if any and could not answer the questions.  They acted as if they had no idea what they filmed and they were the ones being filmed!  Suprise!  How they handled it was by just reversing the question and asking the person what they thought.  Typical con.  I can just see Robert Preston as Professor Harold Hill in Iowa trying to sell those band instruments to the small town and at the pool hall singing we've got Trouble my friends, Trouble right here in River City!

"Going back to Season 1 is like watching another show.  And waaay back, they actually did post one or two pieces of evidence on the TAPS website.  That practice did not last long, and is another nail in the coffin of their dubious claim of being scientific.  Any scientist will always submit his/her findings for peer review.  Why not TAPS?  Well, we can certainly guess why, can't we?"

I'm guessing this was also at the request or direction of Pilgrim and staff.  They didn't want anything to be "seen" by the public as being questionable (little did they know then) and there is only so much you can edit from their end and putting out something they cannot control or put out themselves, would not be acceptable.  They have to have complete control – no exceptions.  That's where Pilgrim pulls rank on Jason and Grant.  However, they got really cocky with the success of the show and went "live".  BIG mistake.