Just an added thing I just noticed. In the "After" picture it actually looks like the tablecloth *IS* bunching up just a little bit. It *could* be a shadow created by the lighting, but it looks quite similar to the little bump we see in the tablecloth in the 1st debunking picture.

This is quite sad.

In my mind, with the many examples you've put forward, the trustworthiness of TAPS has flown right out the window.

In the first place, why the hell didn't SciFi do this show right and use legitimate, degreed parapsychologists? Not to malign citizen ghost-hunters, but wouldn't a TV show about the paranormal be better served with principals who actually know what they should be doing to properly investigate anomalies?
*especially* when it comes to debunking!

…I can't remember as I only watched the show once, but wasn't it the SciFi channel who, in another forgettable paranormal investigative show, hired as a skeptic 'Boston Rob' whose sole claim to trained skeptical fame was he was on (and partially won — by marrying the winner!) 'Survivor'?

Interesting: I do hope the guys are not trying to “create” evidence to bring in the viewers.

Remember- TAPS started long before the tv show started. I don’t think that they would want to ruin their credibility by faking things.

The show is edited a lot and it could be possible that things were “hacked” up so it could appear that they didn’t do a good job debunking the lamp. I saw that on a few other episodes as well where it appeared that they didn’t debunk a few things.

I did want to add that this is a very interesting site and it is nice to get a different perspective of the show. (I have a lot of questions on the whole Manson episode!)

Cherchez la Femme, the show with Rob Mariano as the "skeptic" is Sci Fi Investigates. The site is scifi.com/investigates

[...] how that makes it even more awesome. Really, I've got nothing to say on this. Just read the moving lamp page if you're unfamiliar with [...]

Just to say, good job on the debunking end.

Re: The lamp moving in the Slave Shack on the Plantation.

After watching that episode again - Yes! – I’ve come to the conclusion that Grant isn’t as honest, and upright, and clean as he makes out on the show. There’s no question that the cord had been moved and was up in the air enough to suggest, if not prove, that Grant had a hold on it. It’s pretty sad because it calls into question the integrity of all the, so called, evidence that the Ghost Hunters have collected – not to mention some other things mentioned on this site.

– Dave

It crossed my mind that another possible explanation is that someone has plugged another device into the same outlet at some point and gotten that cable entwined with the lamp's. Imagine if it were, say, the audio guy or camera operator and, as they move slowly 'round with his gear, he slowly pulls on the lamp cord.

Of course, someone would have had to un-plug that device later (and someone tucks it back under the frame, obviously) and would surely, if honest, have pointed this out to everyone. So, in the end, even positing this benign explanation, it still smells of un-truth.

Maggie

PS - My personal feeling is that Jason might err on the side of skepticism when push comes to shove, but that Grant is a true believer in search of validation for his belief. I think this is shown quite clearly on their radio show when they have Steve Novella on. Grant just couldn't grasp why the skeptics were dismissing his anecdotal/experiential 'evidence' in favour of following the scientific method. Jason, on the other hand, seemed to readily agree that extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence and that skeptics were correct in that none had been presented. The constantly increasing implausibility based on lack of real evidence doesn't seem to cause Grant's steadfast belief to waver one iota.

Maggie: I had wondered if they had a bit of the true believer syndrome, what with calling people with sheets draped over them running about paranormal and all.

What you say about Grant seems to confirm it, at least for him.

I wonder if being a true believer would drive someone to try to fool people by faking stuff.

Maggie,

The camera appears to have been set up at such a location and angle to capture the movement of the lamp and nothing else. There was nothing else of interest in the picture (e.g. why wasn't the camera on wide angle covering the whole room, as usual). This double damns Grant.

– Dave

J.,

I've never tried to figure out what a true believer would do, but I imagine there are all kinds, like in anything else. Some would never fake evidence, some would fake it some of the time, while others would readily fake it all the time.

It's kind of like U. Geller. In my opinion, some of his early work in ESP was likely genuine - but you can't get rich and famous by demonstrating knowing 8 dice throws in a row. So, what to do? - claim you stopped Big Ben, and other such sensational nonsense, in order to get the attention.

– Dave

The more people a true believer can get to believe in their particular thing, the more sane it makes them look. Afterall, the more people that believe in it, the more truer it is… right?

Sorry, but nope.

Sanity by consensus is crap. It works well for religions tho.

Uhg, "psychics". I don't know who is worse.. religious charlatans who claim they can heal people but instead swindle the gullible and desperate out of their money, or psychics who purport to know personal info, or worse yet talk to one's deceased friends and relatives, and also cheat people out of their money.

J.,

Re: Who is worse?

Actually, religious charlatans are far worse because they claim to do it in the name of God – as if endorsed by God Almighty.

“Thou shalt not take the name of the thy Lord thy God in vain.” – Bible

Most people think this means swearing, but it really means what you’re talking about.

Let them be damned to the everlasting flames in a scorching, stinking HELL – except when they make an appearance on Ghost Hunters, of course.

- Dave

I dunno, psychics that claim to talk to your deceased friends and family are pretty low too.

Some of the psychics might claim to do it in the name of God too.

i agree.. "Boston Rob" as skeptic on a show? ridiculous! but, to hire "parapsychologist" or "professional paranormal investigators"? i dont know. ive said this a few times.. but just look at the travesty on the travel channel???

WOW… now after i reviewed what you wrote about the cord again. WOW.. that cord is with out a doubt being pulled! or atleast looks to be being pulled. AND not just that, if you look closely there is TWO CORDS right at the edge of the table, before it strecthes in the direction towards grants covered left hand. There seems to be another cord. of the way it is being pulled is from the middle of the cord and just folded up as being pulled. BUT in another picture there is clearly another object that is plugged in. so this could be the other cord (in the photo with grant having his arms folded).

This makes me really upset. It clearly looks like he is pulling the cord. WOW. im at a loss for words. i would like to hear or see a different explanation that would show why the cord looks to be being pulled by Grant. I was all about their intregity and honesty. that they seemed legit. this completely has changed EVERYTHING!

sorry for another comment. i am just so suprised at this piece of evidence. this is more clear cut and upsetting than the doctored "FLIR" footage. that could be a mistake. this is NOT. he is pulling that cord!

When you take this, a pretty damning example of Grant perpetrating a hoax, then you add the thump under the table at Stanley Hotel (that startled the cameraman), the bed sheet being pulled off Grant's feet at the Copper Queen Hotel (which looks suspiciously like a string tugging the sheet back off camera) and the Queen Mary incident (which also looked like a string pulling the sheet back), then it leaves you with one obvious answer: Grant is manufacturing evidence for the show.

Notice how angry Grant is when the hoax is revealed on the Queen Mary episode. Then watch the Copper Queen Hotel episode (where he's presented with another ghost story of a spirit supposedly pulling sheets off a bed) and notice that this time the camera is ONLY aimed at his feet, the rest of him is completely off screen. It's as if he was trying to employ the trick once again, but this time he wasn't going to let the same mistake happen twice.

None of what I'm saying is proof of anything, but rather a theory of mine that fits a disturbing pattern. You can write off the FLIR incident as Pilgrim Films tampering with the evidence. You could maybe even excuse the Eastern State footage as some kind of JFK like conspiracy by Pilgrim and/or Sci-Fi Channel (with the footage being sped up it rules out a prank by someone from Eastern State). But with Grant being caught red handed like this, it throws out all of TAPS' credibility right out the window and calls everything else into question.

Shawn

Marc, ….. I'm sure the second cord, you're refering to there, is actually just a shadow of the original cord on the wall (you can also see a similiar shadow at Grant's nose, on the wall).

Shawn, ….. The bed sheet being pulled off Grant's feet, at the Copper Queen Hotel is likely faked. Because of the convinient angle of the camera, Grant could have easily just reached down, under the covers, and pulled the sheet from underneath with his hand. Given the lamp-cord trick, this didn't impress me when I saw it.

– Dave

I agree. The sheet being pulled up while Grant was "sleeping" is not impressive at all and probably is faked.

Anybody who touts this as evidence of the paranormal is really reaching. Then again, they think people with sheets draped over them running around is impressive.

I also agree with Shawn's previous post. It really hurts their credibility, especially Grants. But not only does them getting caught hoaxing stuff lessen their credibility, so does them thinking weak, flimsy evidence is good evidence. Their bad debunking jobs don't help anything either.

Actually if you watch the reveal in that episode with the sheet being pulled off Grant's feet you will see a little tension between Grant & Jay.

Grant is all gung-ho about calling it solid evidence and Jay gives him a look that seems (to me, at least) almost as if he suspects something isn't quite right, and repeatedly states very strongly that he feels the video is inconclusive.

His given reason is that we can't see where Grant's other leg is and he might have accidentally moved the sheet with his other leg, but in fact we can see quite clearly the dent where Grant's other leg is (or was) and the only way his other leg could have moved the sheet in that way would be very carefully and deliberately.

This is only one of a number of times early in the show where Jay seems to specifically distrust some evidence Grant personally collected and/or had possible opportunity to tamper with.

So the question on my mind is: Why doesn't Jason do anything about it if he thinks Grant is possibly hoaxing stuff?

And for that matter, why doesn't SciFi or anyone else step in and do something about it?

But why would Sci-Fi care at all if they were faking evidence on the show? As long as it's bringing in the ratings, they're not going to care one bit what goes on behind the scenes - as long as it doesn't come out, which would nail the coffin shut on the whole series. Sci-Fi certainly isn't worried about how the consequences of it could seriously tarnish the credibility of the paranormal field, and why should they?

And that's what kills me the most. If you listen to J & G on "Ghost Hunters", as well as their radio show, they're always going on about how they hope everything they've shown will help people take the paranormal more seriously. They've pointed out how they've had countless people from the FBI, NASA, and other government agencies, as well as universities around the country, coming to them to understand more about the paranormal. Yet here they are caught manufacturing evidence - not Sci-Fi Channel, not Pilgrims Films, not even lowly members of TAPS, but Grant himself, the "co-founder". How bad does this look?

As far as whether or not Jason knows, honestly, I don't see how he can't not know. It's possible I suppose, but rather unlikely.

Now my understanding of Jason and Grant's relationship was that they both had met while working for Roto Rooter as plumbers, became good friends and formed TAPS together. However, according to the two of them on "Beyond Reality", Jason was looking for someone who could create a web site for TAPS back in the early days and Grant responded to his ad. If that's the case, then Jason had founded TAPS before he met Grant.

So could Jason hold TAPS dearer to him than Grant does because its really his baby? I suppose there's an argument for that. But even if that is the case, he's not doing a very good job of protecting the group's image if his own partner is sitting there faking evidence right under his nose. So you see, whether Jason knows or not, it doesn't make him look good either way.

L & J, ….. The "Roto Rooter" angle looks like just a plug for that company. Maybe only Jason worked for that company, who ssems more knowledgable in that area, and they threw in Grant as a fake plumber. On the other hand, maybe it's all fake and just for publicity and sponsership? And yes, it's inconsistant with the other story. I also wonder if the Sci-Fi people went to them first, or if they when to Sci-Fi with the proposal. It would be interesting to get the real story, but I guess we never will.

Somehow, I think the FBI, NASA, and other government agencies being interested is pure bull. I mean, give me a break! I wouldn't have believed that even as a 5 year old kid. Well, that's entertainment.

And yes, I'm sure Jason is aware of Grant's shenanigans.

I think that Jason is no saint either. In the Stanley, with the drinking glass scenario, you hear, what sounds like, the bit of glass dropping off and vibrating on the table, and then the chink-sound of the glass breaking. The sounds should be in the other order (chink-drop rather than drop-chink).

– Dave

Funny thing about Grant’s table-thump at the Stanley. Just before it happens there’s a shot of Grant closing the drapes and looking back into the camera — as if he’s wondering if he’s being watched. If it is a trick, I can’t quite figure out how he did it? When I first saw the shot, I thought it might have been due to a gust of wind whipping through the window? One way to fake it could be to put a little thing under one of the legs of the table, making it off balance, and kick it out. The chair moving away is more interesting. In any case, one possibility is that Grant was originally just trying to jerk the chair back with his foot but bumping his knee, accidentally, against the top of the table causing it to jump. Unfortunately, I have no idea how heavy the table is to allow this or not. Grant did look surprised but he may have also been freaked by the cameraman’s weird “yelp.” Then again, it could be paranormal - only Grant knows for sure, and never will confess.

– Dave

Shawn -
you could not have said that ANY better. Although, I still believe in the paranormal and I still think some of those on this show are being honest. BUT, you are so right about Grant. I never realized he seems to always be the one with the greatest claims and evidence. Yeah, why is that camera only pointed towards his legs? (where the sheet mysteriously moved up his leg). Why is it only pointed in that direction? why not the whole bed, if that is what they were trying to catch? Bottom line, GRANT NEEDS TO GO! Also, wow: i never thought that it could be Grant who manipulated the footage on the Queen Mary. I have noticed tension b/w Grant and Jay at times. Even if the sheet incident, the table moving and other claims are legit. It seems Grant is always involved with the most profound and arguable evidence that is easier explained as hoax than actual paranormal.

I am amazed on how wrong i was. I thought this show was legit and they all seemed full of character and integrity. I am glad there are ppl out there willing to review evidence, b/c i easily tend to just believe what is shown to me. THANK YOU GUYS! So, that means, I could be wrong for all the ppl on the show. I hope that my first impressions of Steve and Jay will still stand up in the future.

PLEASE CAN SOMEONE ANSWER THIS…
I've been so taken back by this evidence. it is much more clear cut than the IR footage. BUT.. In this episode where the lamp is moving across the table.. Doesn't this happen over a period of time? In fact, a few hours?? or atleast a half hour to an hour? This could not explain, nor does it make sense to have Grant seemingly pulling the cord? He couldn't be sitting there all that time or go back each time to pull the cord.
So in writing all that.. i could of just simply asked.. How long does it take for the lamp to 'mysteriously' move???

They speed up the tape so it's difficult to tell, but from the other things we see on the tape it's clear that we're talking about a couple of minutes, at most.

At one point we see Grant lean forward and then lean back again, so you can see it's about the same speed as someone fast-forwarding a video tape. Also of note, if you mark the position of the lamp right before Grant leans into the shot (and blocks it) you will notice that the lamp stops moving for the entire time Grant is leaning forward because it's in the same exact place when he leans back in his chair again.

The general motion of the lamp isn't entirely smooth, but it's steady enough that it should have moved at least an inch during the time when Grant was leaning forward, but it didn't. To my mind it's about as damning circumstantial evidence gets, but unfortunately all our evidence *is* still just circumstantial.

So the fact is this: We have more evidence of hoaxes than we do of things that can't be explained and could possibly be paranormal.

The bad outweighs the good, does it not?

So why do we still continue to give TAPS the benefit of the doubt when it seems like they have forfeited their right to be given it?

J. -
I don't know. That is a valid point. Maybe b/c we want to believe they are legit. I am still hoping they are. (with the exception of Grant-he needs to go) but there is alot of evidence that they have presented over the seasons. they would all have to be in on it if the whole show is faked. someone would eventually come forward. it, in a sense is fraud. they are coming forward as a reality show as non-fiction. i hope they will stick with integrity over ratings.

I hope this evidence goes mainstream. I am such a fan of the show, that i wonder if anyone can call Grant on this? or atleast has anyone brought this matter to anyone's attention on the show? producers? or other castmembers? I mean, this is very powerful evidence. The more you look into it, it doesnot seem to be a mistake. Grant is pulling that cord. i do hope he could come up with a good answer. all in all, i feel stupid that i had such faith in the show's integrity.

Well, technically speaking we don't have enough evidence to support claims in either direction. We can lean, though.

hey guys,

i thought you'd be interested in this… It is not much. But a little suspicious. I had friend requested most of the cast members from Ghost Hunters/TAPS on myspace. On Jason's page I left a comment respectfully asking if someone could provide me with any answers or help in debunking or proving the mytrles plantation incident with the lamp moving. I then went on to say, I do not think that anyone is guility of anything but am really confused as to why it seems that Grant was involved either as an accident or purposeful.
I wrote it at night around 11pm, by morning I was deleted (about 8-12hours). What bothers me is that I was very professional, very respectful and even did NOT accuse anyone, nor was I being Judgemental. Atleast I didn't think I was.. but I did express my concerns and suspiciouns. So, that to me, makes it more obvious that they are fully aware of such.. Also, they must have some kind of PR machine monitoring all the forums and comments.

to actualy watch the scene (shown on SciFi) go here
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6lhW31xlKNw&feature=related

pay attention to 1:20 and then at 1:57

At about the 1:57 mark, if you look really closely you can actually see that lamp chord, which is now aimed towards Grant rather than the outlet, slowly moving as if being tugged.

It's so funny because while Jason is pondering why they got into the field and how they've burned bridges because of what they know to be true, Grant is sitting there tugging on a lamp chord, faking evidence under everybody's noses.

Marc - I am not surprised at all that your message got deleted. This has happened numerous times on the TAPS message boards that you would think at some point the TAPS faithful there might start to question it (but then again, when you see the number of people with avatars that have things like "I Love Jason Hawes" and "Grant's a Cutie" splayed all across them, it's easy to see why they don't).

Two thoughts: (1) It could just be the lighting/darkness but it doesn't even look like the same tablecloth. The day before and after the incident the tablecloth looks like one of those delicate doily(sp) looking things, but that night it looks to be a smoother surface….. Again, it could just be the lighting that night. (2) SURELY, whoever is doing the 'tampering' could do a better job. Jason sitting next to the lamp is just way too obvious.

Of course, I meant Grant sitting next to the lamp, not Jason.

guys,
you are not going to believe this.. it may have been my repeated comments that i left on jason hawes myspace page, some deleted, some not…or by chance, he just so happened to read this one… first, i will admit, i was harsh and unfair in what i said. but in sum i said "i cant believe you guys would chose ratings over integrity, i have lost all faith in the show. Grant needs to be fired b/c its obvious he has faked evidence such as the myrtles lamp that moved…etc etc."

So, to get to my point..i actually spoke with the man himself, jason hawes. i was quite suprised, but none the less, it was him. But I atleast FINALLY got their version of the story and was he adamant about it… in fact, he seemed very upset and frustrated. he said he went over that footage at every angle with every camera. and it seems that it was just the edited footage that had made it look like Grant was pulling the cord. (altho he did not say this, but it is still possible that grant pulled the cord b/c maybe he missed something.) I am sure, beyond a reasonable doubt, that at the very least Jason and TAPS either are unaware that Grant did something OR he really did not fake the lamp moving.. I know there will be others that hope we could see the entire footage, we could only hope so. But, I do feel very strongly now, that Jason was telling the truth.. maybe Grant was doing something at that moment that made him look suspicious, add in edited footage and it'll look faked.. So, i thought it be best and only fair to extend Jason Hawes rebuttal as sincere, honest and very professional..

Marc,

Did you post him a link to this blog so that he could at least see that it's out there and being discussed by many others? I think if he saw that he might come on here to write a rebuttal (much life Chip Coffey did over on the PS posting) or publicly make a statement on his My Space blog, etc. My thinking is that he figured by sending you an email/PM off the site it would quiet you down and hopefully ease your doubts.

Honestly, his explanation to you really doesn't make much sense from where I'm sitting. How could the editor make the lamp chord pop out from behind the frame and then run up to Grant's side? It could be that Grant did it without Jason knowing it (which I hope was the case), but even so he's had to have had it pointed out to him sometime before you posted your comments on his page. Looking at the footage it's so plainly obvious and considering that millions of people have watched the episode, someone somewhere had to have caught it back when it first aired and sent TAPS an email about it. At the very least, you know the editors at Pilgrim undoubtedly saw it when they were piecing it together.

Good job in getting him to at least respond Marc. Let us know if you get any more follow ups as I'd be curious if he ever comes back to you with anything else.

Shawn

Hi Shawn!

i just wanna explain a feww things.. i tend to take ppl at their word. b/c mine is as truthful and honest as i could get. i am a flip flopper tho.. b/c i was a huge fan, read the stuff on the website, became a devastated fan.. i joined the Scifi.com/ghosthunters forum… i now realize that it very well may not have been Jason writing to me on myspace.. even tho it was his profile. basically, in reading everyone's replies here and on the forum, i came back down to level ground. i really touched alot of nerves and feel horrible about it. some ppl don't even believe me. and i actually heard alot of what you said.. about many ppl trying to contact him and he never responds to anything, altho sometimes will and will be distraught in his reply….

also, shawn, im sorry if i confused you with my first response on him writing me.. i would like to say, i DID ask his permsision to say we spoke. he did agree. i wouldn't have otherwise. im new to this stuff, really i am. i believe in ghosts but never took a step in trying to question evidence and now find it very interesting. yes, his response really wasn't much. atleast i am positive about one thing… he is 110% aware of this controversy surrounding Grant and this footage… b/c the way he stuck up for him…

on the other hand, even tho i asked and he said yes.. to the matter of me somewhat 'publicizing' our brief interaction.. i did NOT say which website i was going to post at. ALTHO.. in my repeated comments that i left him.. in almost these exact words, i said… "not only have i joined the scifi.com forums, almost on accident, i found http://www.skepticalviewer.com and it is a very professional, non-judgemental, sincere and interesting discussion based on this tv show"
so at the very least other ppl reading his comments on his myspace page read where i am "literally" coming from…

Marc-

I too want to believe there are paranormal phenomena in this world. I'm sure it was Jason that you spoke to and I'm sure he does feel horrible about the situation. If you think about it he has been in the paranormal research field for 20 years. Jason doesn't want his credibilty to be shot. Hopefully Grant did not pull the chord closer to him. I just wish Grant and Jason would have a show about all of the things that have came into question and tell us there side of the story.

Anyway, keep up the good work Marc. It is because of people like you and everyone else posting on this site that keeps paranormal researched honest. There are many researchers out there that claim that everything they see is a ghost.

You know Marc, I think that it's not just TAPS and Pilgrim Films who would rather not recognize this evidence but also the TAPS faithful, who I think would almost see this as being an attack on their faith (in an after life at least). I've noticed that many, many people are putting stock in what GH offers about the possibility of an after life (much like Logisti pointed out) and for them to see something like this, it could shatter their more than just their loyalty to the show - it could cause them a loss of hope.

I've seen this with my own wife who recently lost her mother and grandmother with in a month of each other. Since then she has taken a stronger interest in the paranormal and shows like GH and GHI, almost as if they offer some kind of reassurance that there is something beyond the grave. I know she is still skeptical of everything she sees on the shows (and most often she never really accepts what they try to pass of as evidence), but there's still a vulnerability there and I try to be mindful of it.

My first instinct when I started suspecting GH of presenting bogus evidence was anger for fear that it would damage the credibility of paranormal research. Now I think it goes deeper. People WANT to believe. And if TAPS is manufacturing ghostly apparitions for the sake of ratings, then it really doesn't make them any different from supposed psychics like John Edwards and Sylvia Browne who prey upon those who are grieving (especially if they faked the apparition seen behind Steve at the Gibbons home considering the teenage daughter was still mourning the loss of her mother).

Shawn

The skeptics are certainly making a bold attempt to debunk the debunkers.

Shawn-

You are absolutly right. Once people's faith is questioned they tend to lose interest in everything. People as well as me want to think that there is something out there after we are gone.

I too have no regard for John Edwards or Sylvia Browne. It makes me sick to my stomach every time I see them.

Paranormal research has been an underground and taboo thing for many years and has finally came into main stream media. If GH and GHI are faking spirits and EVP's it will push research back to the stone age and will never have any credibility. I for one hope that is never the case.

I posted a link to this page on a TAPS My Space page and a couple of people on there made a good observation: the table cloth the night of the investigation and afterwards is different (or appears that way at least). How can they be doing a recreation with a completely different tablecloth?

You said Grant's left arm is hidden, it was tucked under his other arm. People seem to forget that Ghost Hunters is for entertainment and they want ratings. Who knows if someone else within the show is doing things to make it look like some thing happened.

exactly, but sorry, i meant… you cant see his left HAND b/c it is 'hidden' or 'tucked' under is right arm.. i tend to write quick with out explaining all the details, altho in other posts i have been more specific. sorry for any confusion.
well, thats true.. this show is for entertainment.. but they don't say that… not even close. atleast thats my opinion. b/c that is not how they present the show. they come across saying they try to debunk everything, they are honest and professional paranormal investigators who do NOT hoax.. if it was just for entertainment purposes, they shouldn't (possibly lie or exxagerate)and say those things… this is a very sensitive issue for some ppl. in fact, of all forums i read on..(from poltics to finance to physics..etc) therre is no other topic that gets as much heat as the paranormal.. AND this show.. the reason being.. well, quite possibly b/c of ppl's beliefs. the "afterlife" is the number one mystery and question in all of human history… so when you see a show like this saying they are credible and possibly, just possibly are hoaxing or faking evidence.. ppl are going to be mad, and rightfully so..

shawn,
i remember reading that in someone's comment… i gotta look into that now.. im curious… but didn't put the two together.. i thought they were just talking about the same tablecloth but was just crumpled up a bit from the lamp moving…
So i understand…. are you saying the tablecloth possibly looks different from the night of the investigation? to the time they went back to present the evidence to the owner?? (the next day)… or… the tablecloth looks different from the first scene when it hadn't moved to the next scene when it did??? just curious.. thanks

shawn…
you couldn't have said it better… in fact, i have been brought that up a number of times on the scifi.com/ghosthunters forum… about why ppl are so angry, so sensitive about possible hoaxed evidence AND like Andy and you said… that ppl who are backers of the show b/c of their beliefs in the show and the afterlife.. they too get angry at the thought of us NOT believing in the show.. think i just made a run on sentence, but hopefully you get what i mean…
basically in all of human history, there has been no other question that comes even close to the controversy of the "afterlife" and if it exists?? i believe in the afterlife, altho i am NOT religous… so i could see how ppl will get real angry at TAPS and GhostHunters for creating evidence and saying it is real.. altho, otherwise!

Andy,
WOW.. thank you, that was NICE!! really, thanks! Atho, i without a doubt need to admit.. i am NOT an investigator of the paranormal.. altho i read alot about it and watch alot of documentaries on it.. i only just recently have started questioning evidence, just this month.. after finding this website acccidentally i have NEVER questioned paranormal evidence.. anywhere.. (altho sometimes on the internet and especially that joke of a show on the travel channel..haha) but i really believed in everything TAPS said.. AND i always got made at the "skeptics" for questioning TAPS.. like thinking "how could they do such a thing??" meanwhile, its the "skeptics" who are looking out for the rest of us…
so as i stand now.. i still believe in hauntings.. and i still have some faith in the show.. i do NOT think all evidence is FAKE.. and I have the utmost respect for other investigators in this world, b/c like you said, this show could do extreme damage to the world of paranormal investigators and their credibility.. i would love to go on a "ghost hunt" one day…

marc,
Re the tablecloth, it looks like two different ones to me. The before and after photos show the tablecloth as a more delicate doily looking material, while the one at night appears to be smoother. But as I said in an earlier post, it could just be the night lighting.

marc-

By no means have I ever been a paranormal researcher. I too happened to stumble onto this site. This is a great place to debate and share our thoughts about GH and the paranormal. I too want to believe that everything they say, feel and see are true. I guess that I would call myself a skeptic/believer, if that makes sense? I want to believe that there are things out there that we can't explain. But on the other hand some of the evidence GH and other paranormal shows have given can be explained in many different ways.

I also stumbled on a site called Planet Paranormal. By no way am I endorsing there site. Jason and Grant do a radio show I think on Saturday nights. They talk about all things paranormal.

In my opinion the more people that find this site and read what others have to say the better. It will in the long run make paranormal researchers better and think before they show things as evidence.

CrowTRobot -

sorry, im still a bit confused… which photo's or scene's are you talking about?? are they at different times? is one photo/scene taken the NIGHT of the investigation and then the other photo/scene is when they return to myrtles to present the evidence? (but before they do, they go look at the lamp and table?)

again, sorry.. it takes a while for me to understand things..lol

Thanks, Logisti. That makes sense.

And for the record, I really WANT to believe TAPS is legit. I'm a bit late to the parade - I watched my first GH episode this past Halloween but have been watching it since. I even bought the first two seasons on DVD.

I'm a skeptic (although at 2:00 in the morning in some abandoned insane asylum I might waiver a bit), but I like the thought of us not having all the answers. I'd like to think there's something out there that can't be explained away.

Logisti - I thought about that too but would the IR also erase the floral patterns seen in the table cloth in the follow up pics?

Shawn

It's not a floral pattern on a tablecloth, it's a floral pattern in lace, with holes through which you can see the tablecloth below it.

Logisti,

I finally got the opportunity to read all of the posts about this issue. Posts gone wild is more like it

I noticed that in fact Grant does move the chair closer to the table. You can see where the arm of the chair interrupts the natural drape of the table cloth.

At the same time the cord is being pulled in a downward and out angle. To me the cord looks like it is up higher than where Grants "hidden" hand would is.

If he were in fact pulling on this cord don't you think that the cord would be slanted down more, given the weight of the lamp? Also I do not see that the table cloth is bunching at all, how would one explain that exactly?

I am not saying that it isn't faked but I am curious as to what you think about that?

[...] There are people out there who get all exercised over the fact that they think Grant faked the moving lamp, you [...]

The table cloth HAD been changed the one in the invest. is a solid material and the one when they went to debunk is obviously lace. THe lace would show even in night vision so the debunk can be debunked lol

OH another thing I wonder why they dont use a time stamp on the filming it would aid in seeing the passing of time better than the occasional blurb of the time flashed on the screen.

Just a note about the end result of the "lamp" phenomena, In the end I believe Jason said they had to discount the evidence because it could have in some way been caught up by someone and moved. They did present it in the end because it was something to "question". As is commonly stated often by T.A.P.S. members, post production by the Sci-Fi Network doesn't always show all they do to try to debunk things and often they leave in info that T.A.P.S. themselves have discounted simply for viewership reasons.

All in all i seem to recall Jason saying he wouldn't trust the lamp incident as hard evidence. He merely made it a point to include it as a possibility.

I am glad that this episode was on again in rerun prior to this weeks show. I got a chance to look at this footage again. After watching this I really do not believe that Grant is moving this lamp by pulling the cord. Now I am not saying that a ghost moved it either, I am just saying that I do not think Grant moved it. Also the table cloth is the same, it was not changed and you can see the lace in the evidence footage.

I don't believe it was Grant for this reason. They actually show the lamp starting to move prior to evidence discovery. You see Grant in the chair on the left of the table, Jay in the chair to the right and a sound or camera man. All three are interacting with one another, the sound or camera man moves as Jay gets up and goes to get on the bed, you see the lamp moving and then Grant leans forward in the chair as if he is looking at or speaking to someone.

It seemed to be that this vignette was a shot set up, it is a TV show after all. I say this because right after is when Jay is on the bed and he begins to engage Grant in the why are we doing this conversation.

Whatever was going on during that scene they were not aware that the lamp was actually moving at that time.

I also watched this episode last Wednesday. I looked closely at the scene where Grant appears to be holding the lamp cord in his hand. I don't think he is holding it. His upper body, with his arms folded across his chest, moves slowly up and down with his breathing. The lamp cord doesn't appear to move at all. The cord is pulled taut by something or somebody behind Grant. It makes me think somebody from the production crew is responsible. The camera was placed in an ideal spot to catch the movement. So maybe Grant is innocent? But it does seem he would have noticed the lamp moving at the time. Or maybe the lamp was moving too slowly and in total darkness. I don't know.

My take on this is - real or not, it's still just a lamp moving.

I need something more before agreeing that some place is haunted. If something threw the lamp on the floor or at one of the TAPS members, OK. That's something to work with. But a lamp moving, since it could easily be a hoax, just doesn't convince me.

Kevin,

The thought of the production crew moving the lamp crossed my mind as well. If they were dinking around in the room and setting up the shot it would be very easy to get it caught on something. Also it was dark and it is possible to not have noticed the lamp moving. I would not say it is proof of anything but it was odd.

This looks bad to me. Seems a lie detector test would be in order if the truth is what we are after. Unless TAPS has something to hide.

Taps did not start as early as you think, Maybe about 2002-4
Give or take Sounds good for the show though

2 plug-ins. Last picture I see 2 plug ins, first picture I see 1 plug in. To me you have to wonder if someone had hold of a cord going directly under the table when the lamp moved. Notice when you see the 2 plug-in picture there is no other item around that needs a plug in view. Its even possible that taps was duped here. My theory is that someone taps didnt know about could have been under the table with an extra cord attached under the tablecloth that they could pull even while the dummy cord was plugged in. At some point they then plugged in the extra cord as well. This would explain why different physics could occur with the movement as 1 cord was likely shorter. As far as we know no-one ever checked under the table, they should have.

I'm relatively certain TAPS has been around for a number of years, it's the show that started in 2004.

Has anyone read the autobiography of Jason and Grant? It's interesting because it explains how Jason got into paranormal investigations (by way of some Wicca action) and other experiences that they claim to have.

The title is "Ghost Hunting: True Stories of Unexplained Phenomena from The Atlantic Paranormal Society." There's even a story that mentions how Jason and Grant recorded some vicious, negative energy inside one homeowner's house, who wanted the only copy of the tape proving its existence. And they relinquished it.

I'm a bit off topic and I apologize, but I think it's important for anyone watching the show to understand where these guys came from and their experiences. How much they've got to lose if their credibility is ever denied, what they'll do to keep us believing in their evidence.

you see 2 plugged because they plugged thier equipment in if you look… DUH LOL.. and looks to be they plugged inafter the fact.

Skeptics seem to go to far greater lengths to disprove things than the beleivers do to prove them as is evident here.
Did Grant move the lamp? Doubtful knowing he had stationary and mobile cameras on him at all times. Not to mention the fact that although we can see clearly with the IR lense on the cams they are in pitch darkness. He would have had to actually search with his hand to find the cord to pull( while cameras are rolling) and then fold his arms in such as way as to disguise his hand holding the cord.

Hmm sounds like the origonal poster of this "hoax evidence"
is trying a little too hard.
Perhaps he has somthing against TAPS? Who knows?
Guess that's another mystery that needs to be solved.

Shawn, I don't think so. Their equipment would likely need a 3-prong outlet and this looks like a 2-prong plug. Also, the full-light photos were taken on a completely different day (when they went back after reviewing the evidence) so they probably didn't even bring as much crew. Not sure what the second plug is, but I also think it's probably not significant or anything suspicious.

Greg, you bring up an excellent point: It would *seem* that the camera was pointed at Grant and the lamp non-stop the whole time they were in the room. If that is in-fact the case, and assuming Grant is entirely blameless, then that means they must have footage of the lamp cord lifting itself out from under the frame and then being pulled taut in Grant's direction (by itself).

If they have that footage it would be really amazing evidence. It would also clear Grant of any suspicion. Unfortunately they haven't shown us that footage, so one of three things must be true: Either 1) the camera *wasn't* on Grant the whole time, 2) the footage in-question shows Grant pulling the cord, or 3) the footage exonerates Grant of any blame, but no one loves him enough to exonerate him publicly.

…and I have to suggest you take a step back and think about your remark "Skeptics seem to go to far greater lengths to disprove things than the beleivers do to prove them". Of course we do. If we only put in the same amount of effort as they did, then we'd be doing just as bad a job of examining the facts — and that would be rather silly because this site isn't about proving TAPS wrong, it's about examining the facts more thoroughly than they often do.

One other thing, the table clothes have been changed. The first time we see the table cloth it is a cloused weave top and made of a heavier fabric. When they come back to try and debunk it is light weight lace fabric. Of course its going to bunch up when they move the lamp. After the Wright paterson show I am done with these phonies, knock once for no and twice for yes, PLEASE I can see that stupid crap on Most Haunted. All thats left is for Jay and Grant to start screaming every time they hear a noise.

I saw this part of the show and I told my wife at the time that the lamp looked like it had moved.I don't think that Grant or Jason would do anything that would give the legions of skeptics out there that look for any little thing to call something that was paranormal not the paranormal.i remember when Tap's went to the haunted plantation in New Orleans and got the footage of the figure out side the door. They could have used that and maybe got away with it.The thing is they know their fan's and I don't feel that they would sink to that level.

I'm sure that this has been said elsewhere, but rumors about ghosts at a hotel = loads of curious guests = $$$$!

Possibly it's Grant, but more likely it's someone from the hotel and Grant is just not going to delve into it that much. Not sure how that would have worked, but it's possible, and maybe G and J are just kind of told to "look the other way," or it's a kind of tacit understanding. I thought they would have been MUCH angrier about the Queen Mary - I was furious when it happened!! I thought they should've taken them to task - maybe they couldn't because of their contract??

I like what someone else said: that Grant and Jay were obviously given an option to quit their day jobs and be tv stars full time - and with those families to support, who wouldn't fudge a little, or look the other way if you had to get the job done?

SciFi isn't paying TAPS to find nothing. And whether or not Jason and Grant want to say or not, they HAVE to be getting paid by SciFi for their appearance. Otherwise, they wouldn't have enough time to go on all these investigations because they'd be too busy at their day jobs as Roto-Rooter plumbers to pay their bills and support their families.

No paranormal activity on a show that touts a group of paranormal investigators = no ratings. And SciFi is in it for the ratings.

The thing that gets me is how TAPS can capture all these so-called paranormal incidents and EVPs on $500 or less equipment, yet they don't appear anywhere on SciFi's $30,000+ cameras. Surely the cameras the production crew uses can pick up anything in the environment since they are technologically superior to anything TAPS uses.

Obviously it is staged and probably only under the powers of the "always in the right place and at the right time" Grant. As discussed there is obvious movement by Grant from the first pic to the second pic. The camera angle changed none from the two shots. You can tell this by looking at the background of the wall. Only Grant moves. Then the lamp moves. Love the show but if you are going to stage the "ghostly activity", lets see some real scary stuff. Its almost like watching wrestling between two no namers. And add some humor to the show. And some hotter chicks besides Kris. Now we're talking Jerry Springer. One last comment, better not go on the Ghost Hunters forum and give opinions or show any humor. They have "adiminstrators" that are much like the characters on the show, stiffs.

And if you go to the Ghost Hunters website use caution of whom you may offend. They have these "administrators" that will delete anything that challenges their opinions.

I'm just going by the pictures at the top of this page and haven't hit Youtube to actually look at the footage but has anyone noticed the actual angle of the camera in those scenes?

If you look at the picture and the table top you'll notice the camera has moved (in the second picture it looks to be lower and pointed more toward the side of the table) which makes Grant appear closer to the table than he was previously and reveals the lamp cord at a different (apparently suspicious) angle. I also don't think the cord is actually under the frame in the first picture but appears that way because of the angle at which it's viewed.

As for the table cloth, there is clearly a pattern on the tablecloth , visible in full light, that doesn't appear under the black and white night vision camera they use. It still appears to be the same tablecloth.

I can't say for certain that nothing was tampered with but the 'evidence of tampering' presented here is just as suspect.

After reviewing the actual footage from the episode it appears the lamp is moving between scenes and is only caught on Grant's camcorder (no one is ever lucky enough to catch that sort of thing clearly on tape it seems). I can't say it's definitely a hoax simply because I can't see the lamp while it's actually moving.

My only reserve in saying Grant moved the lamp is, if they're determined to film a hoax they could easily find a more convincing way to present it than pulling on a lamp cord.

Can't say yay or nay on this one as it is definitely NOT OBVIOUS one way or the other. Throwing out definitive accusations of tampering because it COULD be true is just as reprehensible as manufacturing evidence.

DMadCat, We're not claiming the proof here is definitive, but as for "a more convincing way" to hoax than pulling on a lamp cord I have to completely disagree. In nearly every instance where there is suspicion of Grant, the alleged mechanism of mischief is always very simple.

And this is completely in line with what could be reasonably expected. The more complex the gag, the more chance of being caught — or conversely the more people you need to have "in on it".

Even looking at the allegations of Grant throwing glass, many of us didn't even think twice about the errant piece of glass. It seemed almost too trivial to bother hoaxing — but then again it's a little thing that could be quickly and easily faked with little chance of discovery, just like every other time Grant has been under suspicion.

Perhaps the only time anyone has seriously suggested Grant may have pulled off a hoax of any magnitude was with the moving picture frame — but in that special case he was alone in a room with a tape-loaded camera that could be stopped, rewound and taped over.

With unlimited time and access, and no chance of being walked-in on, one might expect more complex hoaxing; but with other people in the room and no conspiracy then any potential hoaxer would have to keep it simple.

DMadCat, also the angle does not actually change very much. Look at the curtains above the table and to the left, as well as the table itself and the angle of the molding on the wall above the wainscoting.

With those objects as anchors it is clear the angle of the two pictures is nearly identical, and I must say even as a standalone photo (#1) I don't think there is any possibility the lamp cord only *appears* to be under the frame due to the angle. It's clearly under the frame.

Using Grant's chair as an anchor it does look like the camera moved, but the curtain, table and especially the angle of the wainscoting on the wall prove this is not the case — walls don't move, chairs do.

It's a fairly airtight and conclusive proof that only three things moved: The lamp moved towards the wall and slightly towards Grant, the lamp cord moved several inches laterally towards Grant and Grant's chair moved about eight-inches closer to the table.

My husband noticed this–he's wondering if it's the same tablecloth that's under the lamp both during the incident and during the debunking attempt. I told him I thought it was one and the same but the lace didn't show up in the "moving" shot.

Any thoughts? Same tablecloth or was it changed for the attempted debunking shot?

This is discussed at length on this page, but in short: I'm certain that it is the same table cloth. The debunk was still done poorly though.

There's no such thing as a 'degreed parapsychologist'… Anyway, the examination from picture to picture is silly as it looks more likely that the sci-fi cameraman has moved to the right and therefore we get the differing view of grant/table/cord. The initial 'debunking' never takes into account this possibility and after reading madcat's reply you'd have to side with him.

Peter Venkman had degrees in both Psychology AND Parapsychology…. but seriously now, The camera did NOT move to the right. It moved downwards maybe a few inches, but that's about it. Look at the table, look at the wall: They are in the same place. The chair moved left.

Notice how the right arm of the chair (to the left as we view it) has imposed on the table cloth in the second photo and not in the first, indicating that either Grant or the table has moved. My money is on Grant.

IMO most definitely Grant has moved the chair closer to the table. And a different camera angle cannot explain how the cord itself moved from underneath the frame or whatever it is leaning on the table against the wall. And the position of Grant's arms look oh so suspicious. When I try to follow the cord in the second b/w photo, I have to wonder why it isn't just hanging straight down like in the first one.

I think most of us really don't want to think there is some funny business going on. When I was a kid the Sunday paper used to carry cartoon like drawings. They were side by side and the game was to pick out what was different between the two. Silly, but that's what these two photos at the top of the page remind me of–find xxx amount of differences between the two pictures.

Sorry to say "A picture is worth a thousand words" and I'm afraid that's the case here. I really used to trust these guys I'm still debating whether Jay is in on it, doesn't realize what might be happening or has his own suspicions.

I've been reading this site for a few months now and quite enjoy it. While I think some of the evidenence they find would be easy to fake. This one does raise some questions, but I don't agree with some of they other opinions that have been put forth. IMO, in the stills shown anyway, Grant's arms appear to be both be in front of the right arm of the chair. In the first his right hand is resting in his lap. In the second it appears to me that both of his arms are crossed in front of him with his right elbow hanging over the edge of the arm of the chair.

As for him moving closer to the table, it is possible that durring the filming the crew decided that they wanted to use that angle, as Grant was so close to it, and had him move more into frame. This could also explain the slight difference in the camera angle, as it seems to have panned down a bit, possibly to make sure Grant was being illuminated. I say that because the table appears to be flatter and more of the surface the camera is on is visible. Anyway, it's not a great explenation, but it is an alternate one.

Kevin, some excellent points. Certainly realistic filming concerns we hadn't considered, but specifically re: moving Grant's chair so he would be in the frame better, if you take a look at the footage again at about 6:15 into the video, you'll see Grant isn't in the frame at all.

In fact, now that you mention the framing, I've got to wonder exactly what they were trying to Frame there. Jay is in the picture, but he's not central to it. Grant isn't in the frame at all until he leans in. Typically, even when Jay & Grant are sedentary in a room the camera operators are standing up and moving the camera from Jay to Grant and around the room; so what would posses this camera operator to set up a steady shot of the table, with Jay in the background and Grant out of frame?

Here's more food for thought: If that camera was set down on a table or something for that shot, the operator of the camera could have knelt down, reached behind Grant's chair (there's almost no light to see by in there, after all) and got hold of the lamp cord. I'd almost prefer that to be the case, because now that I started thinking about why anyone would frame out that shot of the table, because another possibility that arises is that if this is indeed a hoax the evidence could suggest more than one person is involved… and I really don't want that to be the answer.

Logisti, the framing I was talking about was of the two screen caps of the show you have posted above in the main article. I had actually forgotten about the footage they had shown during the reveal (been awhile since I've seen the episode). That camera was likely just trying to get as much of the room as possible and was set up in a hurry (isn't that the one Brian had forgotten to set up?).

Kevin, I did understand that you were referring to the footage that I posted up top, I was just pointing out the other angle because Grant is just barely out of frame in the other one, which doesn't make sense if they were carefully framing their shots.

You bring up a good point though, that other footage might not be Pilgrim's, it might be the mini-dv set up on a table, in which case it's unfair to assume the camera was positioned professionally.

Sorry about that Logisti, I wasn't sure as you brought up a different camera angle in reference to Grant moving his chair.

Logisti, good thoughts on what might have happened to the lamp cord if someone was placing the camera and accidentally moved the cord. My first thought was that if the cord were pulled, the frame would fall. But then again, if the cord had been pulled fast enough, it might not have.

Yes, it does seem like we are trying to see how this might have happened by accident. Regardless, there seems to be nothing paranormal about the movement of the lamp. Too many other explanations, as cited in this thread–hoax or not.

Yes they may not have a degree but the thing is that they have been doing this for around 18 years now. I was a skeptic until I watched all the episodes of their show and found myself truely beginning to believe in the paranormal. They do really good jobs at debunking and their job as plummers helped that. Try going and watching the episode where they are at moss point distillery. Great episode…it has caused controversy but the way they handled it was amazing. The people did not tell them the complete truth but they found out and it made the people upset that they did not get called a haunted place. All I have to say about TAPS is that they need to keep up the good work I hope to see them on air for years to come!