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

Current User: Guest Login Register
Please consider registering


Lost Your Password?

What changes would you like to see in the investigations themselves?

Reply to Post
UserPost

10:33 pm
March 26, 2009


Oubliette

Igloo in NJ

Lead Investigator

posts 574

GHI did this while in South America.  It works quite well, IMO.  It adds the local touch and the person can help with the language problem.  Plus it gives other groups a chance to show their skills and maybe bring some fresh ideas to the investigation.

GH seriously needs to consider this and other options.

If 50 million people believe a foolish thing, it is still a foolish thing.
Anatole France

12:41 am
March 27, 2009


Learjet

Australia

Lead Investigator

posts 1122

What changes would I like to see to investigations? At this stage of the train wreck I think they may as well stop. Everything they add gets sillier and sillier. The investigators themselves are hopeless, the equipment used is based on hearsay in it's ability to find ghosts and when used incorrectly just makes things worse.

Let's ask ourselves, how would a group of scientists perform a paranormal investigation? Because that's about all that's going to satisfy me now. Something performed in a truly scientific manner. What equipment would they use? Honestly I don't even know where to start.

Whatever they do, it would have to be worthy of publication in a scientific journal like Nature for peer review.

OD'd on EMF

2:34 am
March 27, 2009


Revenant

Hopelessly Locked In A "Fear Cage"

Lead Investigator

posts 1393

If the question is "what changes would I like to see in the investigations by both GH and GHI?" then my answer is none.  I love watching the shows.  I love watching them fumble about in the dark, using equipment incorrectly, throwing around wild terminology and unsubstantiated claims.  When they toss in the shenanigans…that's just icing on the cake.  I'm with Learjet on this one…they are too far gone.  Salvation is not at the of this tunnel.

Now, as Learjet asked "how would a group of scientists perform a paranormal investigation?"  Well, my starting point would be the way that the investigation is approached.  Science isn't made for the TV.  Science is hard work and slow going.  In no way, shape, or form is a team of scientists going to run an experiment for 6 hours and base conclusions off it.  They're going to want to run countless experiments in the same conditions.  That means that they would stay in the same location for months.  Possibly years.

It is in this setting that discoveries could be made.  I'm not even talking about paranormal evidence yet.  The structure would need to be thoroughly examined to prevent contamination.  Basic equipment would need to be tested in every part of the structure to prevent contamination.  From this point, arguments could be made for various pieces of equipment to be included or discarded.  More testing.  Even more testing.

No ghost hunting yet.  Theories must be devised as to what "paranormal" means in scientific terms.  What constitutes solid paranormal evidence.  This, most likely, is the biggest hurdle to get over.

More arguments over specifics of equipment used and settings.  Possibly devising new equipment…which will take even more time because that will now have to be thoroughly tested.

Then…still no ghost hunting.  A list of experiments must be devised.  A schedule, if you will.  Every experiment must be documented and verified using a variety of methods (ie. multple cameras show different angles of the same location, etc).

Finally…ghost hunting.  For days, and weeks, and months, and possibly years…at the same location.

This is not "must watch" TV.  People want results and they want them now.  Science isn't like that.  Science is hard work and slow going.  No way around it.  This is why I don't want GH/GHI to change anything.  It's fun to watch every week.  If you want scientists to find evidence of the paranormal….you're going to have to wait about 10-15 years for the two hour special on the Discovery Channel.  Hmm…at least it will be in HD.  

"Skepticism is not a position, it's a process." -Dr Michael Shermer

4:30 am
March 27, 2009


Learjet

Australia

Lead Investigator

posts 1122

I'd rather watch the professional 2 hour discovery channel version than 200 hours of rubbish from you know who. It's a quality verses quantity thing. After all I originally watched these shows to actually discover some evidence of ghosts. Maybe I keep watching on the odd chance that they accidentally find one in spite of themselves.

I guess the problem is money or funding. GH/I fund themselves with the TV show, the pros would have to find other means, difficult for a project that runs into years and an area that has a poor reputation in the scientific community thanks to the amateurs.

OD'd on EMF

9:19 am
April 17, 2009


Martimus

Arid-zona

Investigator in Training

posts 21

Personally I think if there was one thing that I'd like to see them do it would be to stop all of that "did you hear that?" and "what the f— was that?" types of responses every time they hear something.  Well maybe that and drop the eery background audio track.

If they really feel the need to add scare tracks to some episodes then they've missed the point of the show.

Reply to Post


Reply to Topic:
What changes would you like to see in the investigations themselves?

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:
4 + 6
   



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