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?