The Forum [is where Ancient Roman skeptics hang out.]

Current User: Guest Login Register
Please consider registering


Lost Your Password?

Mini Marathon 11 Nov 2009 and Gothic Controversy

Reply to Post
UserPost

6:28 pm
November 12, 2009


Learjet

Australia

Lead Investigator

posts 1122

Too much pizza again. Wink

OD'd on EMF

6:29 pm
November 12, 2009


Angelayo1970

Sysematically breaking all my new year's resolutions

Investigator

posts 162

Nosfer said:

Great! Now I've got this vision of Grant with spools of string and cats under his jacket :)


Is that a cat under your jacket, or are you just happy to see me? Tongue out

"In questions of science, the authority of a thousand is not worth the humble reasoning of a single individual." -Galileo Galilei

7:04 pm
November 13, 2009


Bobby Elgee; Sights

Guest

Ghost Hunters episode: November 11, 2009, New Hampshire Gothic

Ghost Hunters–the television show on the Sci Fi (Scy Fy) Channel featuring T.A.P.S. (The Atlantic Paranormal Society)–aired an episode entitled New Hampshire Gothic on November 11, 2009.

This episode featured T.A.P.S. controversial investigation of the Amos J. Blake House Museum, in Fitzwilliam, New Hampshire that is managed by the Fitzwilliam Historical Society.

Read more about the production crew's filming at the location by clicking on the following links:

Entities-r-Us

thebeyond.info

On-line Evidence of Amos J. Blake House

The group I helped found–Sights Unseen Paranormal–has intimate knowledge of the site, having investigated the museum several times. We watched the episode with interest to see if Ghost Hunters results coincide with what we know to be true regarding this location.

There is no doubt that the Amos J. Blake House Museum is a wonderful example of a New England historical society museum. Having been part of at least three investigations of the location I was pleased to see that TAPS results correlated with my experiences at the location, and not the exaggerated ‘evidence’ that I have read about the location in the past.

Concerning the 'evidence' that TAPS did gather, I believe that the ‘ghost cat’ could be debunked by assuming that a stray cat had recently made its way into the basement due to the advent of the cold weather. However, I can’t confirm this hypothesis and having been in the basement on multiple occasions, it appeared to be fairly secure. Still, you have to assume that this is more likely then the existence of a ghost cat.

As far as the chain moving and the pitchfork falling over, I found this suspicious. Having been in the location many times, all the furniture, etc. was placed pretty much as I remember it. One thing that I certainly don’t remember is the chain and the pitchfork. It seemed out of place to me. It appears unusual that these objects were in the location and placed as they were. I am unsure why, with many valuable artifacts around, one would stand a pitchfork on end and lean it against the wall where it could easily fall over.

In addition, considering the way a board could be stepped on in an old house, and something moves–the door latch upstairs did this earlier and Jason clearly points out that shifting boards can cause things to move–I propose that the investigators walking by could have triggered the movement by this principle. I’d have to see the footage analyzed by a physicist before I was really convinced that the event was paranormal in origin. It all just seems a little too convenient or coincidental to me. I do try very hard to debunk phenomena and believe that too often people resort to 'ghostly' explanations for phenomena with environmental causes.

Finally–and perhaps the most interesting–is the fact that the curator of the museum and the ‘volunteer’ that was interviewed are both members of a paranormal investigation team that formed after it was discovered TAPS was going to investigate the location. It was shortly after the group was formed that reports of multiple apparitions and conscious spirits haunting the location were reported and I suspect that the ‘evidence’ was highly exaggerated–or at least not thoroughly debunked–in an effort to pique TAPS interest.

Both the curator of the museum and the 'volunteer' are both former members of Sights Unseen Paranormal, but quit and formed their own group shortly after learning that TAPS was set to investigate the museum. This seems suspicious to me, especially when combined with the 'explosion' of paranormal activity reported at the location by the curator's team of paranormal investigators shortly after it was formed in the lead up to the television episode featuring the locale.

As an aside, I feel I need to address the issue of 'not-being-on-Ghost Hunters-envy' that has been suggested by certain individuals to explain my interest in the location and developments related to the recent television episode. So, to go on record, Sights Unseen Paranormal generally eschews publicity. In the last several months I have referred a television producer and two newspaper reporters to another group whom I hold in high esteem. And I, for one, have no burning desire to become a TAPS affiliate, meet Jason or Grant, nor do I generally watch the television show. Certainly I admire them for contributing to the recent explosion in interest in the paranormal, but that's really as far as it goes.

To sum up, I do firmly believe that there may be something is going on in the museum and would rate it a 2 out of 10 regarding possible paranormal activity. I’ve recorded a disembodied voice and had a cold spot sit on my shoulder while investigating the Amos J. Blake House Museum.

TAPS did do a good job debunking. For me, the smell of cat urine and a pitch fork falling over (even with the chain moving) aren’t enough for me–nor TAPS–to consider the place really haunted.

9:13 pm
November 13, 2009


alicat

Lead Investigator

posts 1215

You previously posted about this upcoming episode and your group in the Spalding Inn review/comments.  I saw no controversial evidence then nor do I see it now.  Thanks for posting but I don't know why you feel the need to address any issue of envy as no one here has ever mentioned it.  I can only ask how many sites you are posting the same pre-written press story interspersed with your "take" in order to sell you and your group?  This is not a PR house.  This is a "discussion" about GH and the aforementioned episode.  For that information, thank you.

8:54 am
November 14, 2009


Nosfer

Rotaredom

Moderator

posts 2957

Finally–and perhaps the most interesting–is the fact that the curator of the museum and the ‘volunteer’ that was interviewed are both members of a paranormal investigation team that formed after it was discovered TAPS was going to investigate the location. It was shortly after the group was formed that reports of multiple apparitions and conscious spirits haunting the location were reported and I suspect that the ‘evidence’ was highly exaggerated–or at least not thoroughly debunked–in an effort to pique TAPS interest.

Chicken-egg here…they formed the group AFTER they learned that TAPS was going to investigate, and only then did the apparitions etc begin to appear.

This begs the question of: If nothing (or extremely little?) was going on before, why was TAPS going to investigate in the first place? What I'm getting at is…what lead TAPS to investigate here, were they called in, or did they seek the place out?

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.

5:35 pm
November 15, 2009


HipKat

HipKat

Investigator

posts 45

… (double posted)

5:35 pm
November 15, 2009


HipKat

HipKat

Investigator

posts 45

dconlly said:

darkeyes said:

Well, I have to say that moving chain was a little odd.  Unless there were strings attached I’m not sure how it would move like that.  Hmmmmm.

 


Right before teh chain moves, you can see a white shirt pass in a corner of the shelving unit, one of the female investigator. This could have caused the wooden floors to shift, causing the pipe to vibrate, which in turns causes the chain to move.


The way the chain moved and considering that people walk around all the time there, I can't accept this reason. Besides, it didn't just move, it unraveled. Now, perhaps it's been twisted up, but I took a chain the other night and tried to get it to stay twisted slightly, and it just doesn't happen. If there was a major kink in it, we could have seen it, but I've watched that evidence over and over and there is no obvious kink in the chain from being twisted.

5:04 pm
November 16, 2009


The Doctor

Lead Investigator

posts 488

HipKat said:

dconlly said:

darkeyes said:

Well, I have to say that moving chain was a little odd.  Unless there were strings attached I’m not sure how it would move like that.  Hmmmmm.

 


Right before teh chain moves, you can see a white shirt pass in a corner of the shelving unit, one of the female investigator. This could have caused the wooden floors to shift, causing the pipe to vibrate, which in turns causes the chain to move.


The way the chain moved and considering that people walk around all the time there, I can't accept this reason. Besides, it didn't just move, it unraveled. Now, perhaps it's been twisted up, but I took a chain the other night and tried to get it to stay twisted slightly, and it just doesn't happen. If there was a major kink in it, we could have seen it, but I've watched that evidence over and over and there is no obvious kink in the chain from being twisted.


It seems like the chain is moving from the very first frame ( look below the horizontal )  … before the cameraman even gets near the door.

We don't see what happens before that so we never really see the chain standing still at all.

Curious that the Techmangler zooms so far in that he cuts off the tops of the curtain rod things that scrape against the wall as they fall to the left against it and actually create the noise.  

8:01 pm
November 19, 2009


Bobby Elgee

Guest

alicat said:

You previously posted about this upcoming episode and your group in the Spalding Inn review/comments.  I saw no controversial evidence then nor do I see it now.  Thanks for posting but I don't know why you feel the need to address any issue of envy as no one here has ever mentioned it.  I can only ask how many sites you are posting the same pre-written press story interspersed with your "take" in order to sell you and your group?  This is not a PR house.  This is a "discussion" about GH and the aforementioned episode.  For that information, thank you.


You are quite right, but my goal was to simply get the information out there. Whenever I know about an event first hand that smacks of possible fabrication of evidence, I feel I have an obligation to report. Though I have read comments on other web sites concerning 'ghost hunters envy' nothing was commented here regarding this proposed psychological phenomena. To be honest, it's been hard seeing from the inside out, and again I sincerely appreciate your comment. At this point, I consider the case closed and realize that I may have taken things a bit too far in an effort to get the information to the general public.

Thanks again for giving me feedback to allow me to gain some real perspective.

8:14 pm
November 19, 2009


Bobby Elgee

Guest

Nosfer said:

Finally–and perhaps the most interesting–is the fact that the curator of the museum and the ‘volunteer’ that was interviewed are both members of a paranormal investigation team that formed after it was discovered TAPS was going to investigate the location. It was shortly after the group was formed that reports of multiple apparitions and conscious spirits haunting the location were reported and I suspect that the ‘evidence’ was highly exaggerated–or at least not thoroughly debunked–in an effort to pique TAPS interest.

Chicken-egg here…they formed the group AFTER they learned that TAPS was going to investigate, and only then did the apparitions etc begin to appear.

This begs the question of: If nothing (or extremely little?) was going on before, why was TAPSgoing to investigate in the first place? What I'm getting at is…what lead TAPS to investigate here, were they called in, or did they seek the place out?


Good point. My involvement in the matter has lead to a mistake in my reporting. TAPS interest was already apparant. Considering there was what I suspect was exaggerated reports–and at least one instance of altered evidence about which we have firsthand knowledge–this was either done due to a 'want of belief' or to drum up publicity for the episode and the musuem itself–which is a wonderful place to visit. Again, my intention was to attempt to document events about which I had knowledge. Without much outside feedback prior to the event, I had a hard time obtaining any other perspective. As far as I'm concerned, TAPS discovered very little which jives with what I know to be true about the location. I probably won't be making any more comments here or anywhere else from this point on and sincerely appreciate the insightful posts here.

12:18 pm
November 21, 2009


Nosfer

Rotaredom

Moderator

posts 2957

Thanks for the additional info, sounds like possibly some self-fulfilling going on: Word gets out of some slight activity, GH wants to investigate, more activity reported to continue the buzz. Glad to see that their (GH) findings were a bit more inline with what you have found out.

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.

Reply to Post


Reply to Topic:
Mini Marathon 11 Nov 2009 and Gothic Controversy

Guest Name (Required):

Guest Email (Required):

Smileys
Confused Cool Cry Embarassed Frown Kiss Laugh Smile Surprised Wink Yell
Post New Reply

Guest URL (required)

Math Required!
What is the sum of:
1 + 9
   



Permalink Print
Copyright 2010 SkepticalViewer.com - The Ghost Hunters Fansite for Skeptics