+ Submit News Link

Ghost Adventures


Share |

12>


harper   posted:1/11/2009 4:13:03 PM  (Reply)
I am sitting on the fence on that one.
daecghnaegh   posted:3/15/2010 7:04:27 PM  (Reply)
Really?  I watch it when I want a laugh.  It is without question the most ludicrous ghost hunter knock off going.  They are not investigators in the usual sense, just entertainers.  The devices they use do not exist and any real investigator should recognize that.  The TAPS people, while leaving much to be desired, are still the gold standard in my book.
Shadow of Man   posted:3/15/2010 8:55:26 PM  (Reply)
TAPS is a scripted show, just like any other television show. The only standard it meets is that of programming and ratings.
tapuout4985   posted:3/15/2010 10:55:23 PM  (Reply)
I think the fact that the Ghost Adventures guys are so very not good at investigating makes the show so much better because they freak out more than most shows.  A lot of their technology isn't mainstream but is all custom built and more or less state of the art or updated versions of older tricks.  I think something interesting is something they sort of hinted at in one episode.  During their initial tour they will mark hot spots with black Xs, which in voodoo is used in place of a summoning circle.  I think that might factor in to why these three guys stumbling around have gotten several pieces of good evidence.
Garuhn   posted:3/16/2010 2:20:36 AM  (Reply)
Ya, I don't know, everyone says everything is fake. It's hard to know what's real and what's not. If you were investigating, and found real good evidence, would you like to commercialize yourself? or just keep doing what you're doing?  I think it's REAL annoying that if YOU DO find good evidence, no one will believe you whatsoever.. even people who see it first hand don't believe it and just ignore it. :(
tapuout4985   posted:3/16/2010 8:56:20 AM  (Reply)
That is definitely the problem with this new age of scepticism.  Now days everyone wants proof because they can't trust the word of even the most sincere of people.  Until there is a truly world wide experience there will be people who just refuse to come out of their shell and would rather hide from the darkness than confront it head on.  Hell, even after a world wide experince I'm sure there will be people saying, "it was hoax, terrorists must have dumped millions of gallons of LSD into the ocean and everyone just happened to hallucinate the same thing at the same time."
tapuout4985   posted:3/16/2010 9:34:24 AM  (Reply)

In Reply To:
tapuout4985  posted:3/16/2010 8:56:20 AM  (Reply)
That is definitely the problem with this new age of scepticism.  Now days everyone wants proof because they can't trust the word of even the most sincere of people.  Until there is a truly world wide experience there will be people who just refuse to come out of their shell and would rather hide from the darkness than confront it head on.  Hell, even after a world wide experince I'm sure there will be people saying, "it was hoax, terrorists must have dumped millions of gallons of LSD into the ocean and everyone just happened to hallucinate the same thing at the same time."
My personal favorite is Paranormal State.  They don't always get the best evidence when compared to other shows, but I like how they aren't just there to get footage, but actually want to help the family and make thier life better.  I also like how they approach each case differently and have both a devout Catholic as their leader, but also a pagan in their group.
caniswalensis   posted:3/16/2010 12:11:28 PM  (Reply)

In Reply To:
tapuout4985  posted:3/16/2010 8:56:20 AM  (Reply)
That is definitely the problem with this new age of scepticism.  Now days everyone wants proof because they can't trust the word of even the most sincere of people.  Until there is a truly world wide experience there will be people who just refuse to come out of their shell and would rather hide from the darkness than confront it head on.  Hell, even after a world wide experince I'm sure there will be people saying, "it was hoax, terrorists must have dumped millions of gallons of LSD into the ocean and everyone just happened to hallucinate the same thing at the same time."
Hi Tapuout,Even the most sincere of people can be wrong about their experiences.  We humans are subject to all sorts of Sensory & mental errors.  Every one of us.  That is why personal stories, eyewitness accounts and similar sorts of subjective evidence are not acceptable.We do not need a world wide experience to prove that paranormal phemomena are real.  What we need is a single objective piece of evidence.  Something that is not based on an individuals interperetation for its validity.  So far, we have none.I do not agree that it is fear that makes one a skeptic. Most honest skepticism is based on a desire to be objective and to perchieve the world as acurately as possible.  The modern skeptical movement revoles around the scientific method, rather than relying on intuition or metaphysical ideas.Regards, Canis
tapuout4985   posted:3/16/2010 1:24:57 PM  (Reply)

In Reply To:
caniswalensis  posted:3/16/2010 12:11:28 PM  (Reply)
Hi Tapuout,Even the most sincere of people can be wrong about their experiences.  We humans are subject to all sorts of Sensory & mental errors.  Every one of us.  That is why personal stories, eyewitness accounts and similar sorts of subjective evidence are not acceptable.We do not need a world wide experience to prove that paranormal phemomena are real.  What we need is a single objective piece of evidence.  Something that is not based on an individuals interperetation for its validity.  So far, we have none.I do not agree that it is fear that makes one a skeptic. Most honest skepticism is based on a desire to be objective and to perchieve the world as acurately as possible.  The modern skeptical movement revoles around the scientific method, rather than relying on intuition or metaphysical ideas.Regards, Canis
I don't wholly believe that any single piece of evidence will ever change the minds of so many sceptics.  The only thing that can change the mind of a sceptic is first hand experience.  Scepticism itself is a mindset that will always be apart of the person, it is on the verge of being a disorder because a person can remain sceptical even in the face of overwhelming evidence because they don't want ot believe.  Paranormal investigators can produce a never ending supply of EVP, video, pictures, and personal encounters and the general opinion of any sceptic is, "it's all a hoax."  Sceptics don't want to believe and therefore never will. 
sasmysquatch   posted:3/16/2010 1:29:56 PM  (Reply)
The host of the show (and head investigator) talks way too much and freaks out when something "paranormal" happens. It comes off as really annoying and how is one suppose to gather evidence if the investigator is always gabbing? Im surprised that the group finds any evidence.  I will admit, the show does have its moments and on a positive note, the team does help expose new "Haunting" grounds and as does any televised Ghost Hunting show. The locations are usually interesting (historically).
caniswalensis   posted:3/16/2010 3:15:02 PM  (Reply)

In Reply To:
tapuout4985  posted:3/16/2010 1:24:57 PM  (Reply)
I don't wholly believe that any single piece of evidence will ever change the minds of so many sceptics.  The only thing that can change the mind of a sceptic is first hand experience.  Scepticism itself is a mindset that will always be apart of the person, it is on the verge of being a disorder because a person can remain sceptical even in the face of overwhelming evidence because they don't want ot believe.  Paranormal investigators can produce a never ending supply of EVP, video, pictures, and personal encounters and the general opinion of any sceptic is, "it's all a hoax."  Sceptics don't want to believe and therefore never will. 
Hi Tapuout,You clearly do not have a complete understanding of skepticism.  Not that you necessarily should, but several of your statements miss the mark.Skepticism is a methodology.  It's about applying critical thought to what we see around us. It's aim is to not accept things as true without adequate evidence.  To pursue the skeptical method is to be open-minded.  Skeptics face up to the fact that they and others are not perfect, and can make perceptual errors.  Nor is being a skeptic confined to the realm of the paranormal.  A true skeptic appllies the method to everything.  I use it daily in my professional & personal life, and it serves me well.  Being a skeptic is no more a mental disorder than being a musician or a grocery store bagger. :)This is why a first hand experience should not be sufficient to convince a skeptic.  Subjective evidence is just not good enough.  I used to be a believer.  I fully believed in a lot of paranormal phemomena.  I felt sure it was true, and that there was good evidence for it.  Eventually, I sought to understand the phenomena more fully.  I began to really study the evidence with an open mind, and came to realize that there is no real, objective evidence for these sorts of things.  It took me a long time to admit that and let let go of my beliefs.  I still want to believe, but I mow understand there is no real reason for me to.What about the mountains of evidence?  Well some of it is very interesting, but personal experiences are not enough.  They can not be measured or repeated.  Things like EVP, photos & vids are objective in the sense that anyone can look at them over & over and we are all looking at the same thing.  However, when people claim that they are evidence of ghosts, they are making a subjective assesment of the evidence.  It is not based on any form of measurement or objective scale.  it is all heavily biased and based only on folklore & supposition.  It is essentially guesswork.When I say we need one piece of evidence, I mean a truely objective piece of evidence, gathered under controled conditions.  That has never been obtained.  If we had that, it would be undeniable.  It would pave the way to forming a true scientific theory about what is going on, and allow some real research to take place.  Yes, there would still be naysayers, but if the objective data is there, those people would better be labeled as cynics, not skeptics.  They are worthy of no more attention than someone who believes every paranormal tale they hear with no critical thought.So, am I saying it is wrong for people to believe? No definitely not.  It's Ok to believe if they want.  I would just avoid making important decisions based on anything that is not supported by good objective evidence.  Whether that decision is which car to buy, or whether to give a psychic money to clense your home, it all the same.And lastly, make no mistake...Any skeptic worth his/her salt does not consider every piece of evidence to be a hoax, or beilievers to be crazy or dishonest people.  True skeptics acknowledge that the vast majority of people who have experiences are sane, intelligent & honest folk, who are simply looking for answers.I am a skeptic, and I will be a believer again the instant there is a reason to be.Regards, Canis
Ninnana   posted:3/16/2010 10:51:40 PM  (Reply)
Suggested Rules of Investigation for Unusual ClaimsRULE #1Controversial subjects generate polarized responses.RULE #2Record or write down everything as soon as possible, no matter how inconsequential or insignificant it might seem at the time.RULE #3Always credit your sources and respect requests for anonymity.RULE #4Always be ready for anything, anytime. Look for coincidences when investigating claims of the unusual. Often, there may be a synchronistic element at work.RULE #5It is impossible to be too objective when scientifically investigating claims of the unusual.RULE #6Always assume there is a mundane explanation until proven extraordinary (Occam's razor).RULE #7Appearances can be deceiving. There may be more happening than meets the eye.RULE #8If you publicise claims of the unusual, choose your words wisely, for your "spin" may have tremendous influence.RULE #9Media coverage of the unusual, because of its sensational nature, is often inaccurate and cannot be accepted as totally accurate by the investigator.RULE #10The human mind, when faced with the unknown, reverts to basic primal symbols to rationalise its experience.RULE #11When investigating claims of the unusual, one cannot reach conclusions based on intuition alone.RULE #12There is a possibility that the (sub)culture itself may cocreate manifestations of unexplained, individually perceived phenomena.RULE #13We must be extremely careful not to perpetrate our own beliefs, suspicions, or actual experiences into the minds of those who desperately want to have a "special" event happen in their lives - ourselves included!
tapuout4985   posted:3/16/2010 11:45:59 PM  (Reply)

In Reply To:
caniswalensis  posted:3/16/2010 3:15:02 PM  (Reply)
Hi Tapuout,You clearly do not have a complete understanding of skepticism.  Not that you necessarily should, but several of your statements miss the mark.Skepticism is a methodology.  It's about applying critical thought to what we see around us. It's aim is to not accept things as true without adequate evidence.  To pursue the skeptical method is to be open-minded.  Skeptics face up to the fact that they and others are not perfect, and can make perceptual errors.  Nor is being a skeptic confined to the realm of the paranormal.  A true skeptic appllies the method to everything.  I use it daily in my professional & personal life, and it serves me well.  Being a skeptic is no more a mental disorder than being a musician or a grocery store bagger. :)This is why a first hand experience should not be sufficient to convince a skeptic.  Subjective evidence is just not good enough.  I used to be a believer.  I fully believed in a lot of paranormal phemomena.  I felt sure it was true, and that there was good evidence for it.  Eventually, I sought to understand the phenomena more fully.  I began to really study the evidence with an open mind, and came to realize that there is no real, objective evidence for these sorts of things.  It took me a long time to admit that and let let go of my beliefs.  I still want to believe, but I mow understand there is no real reason for me to.What about the mountains of evidence?  Well some of it is very interesting, but personal experiences are not enough.  They can not be measured or repeated.  Things like EVP, photos & vids are objective in the sense that anyone can look at them over & over and we are all looking at the same thing.  However, when people claim that they are evidence of ghosts, they are making a subjective assesment of the evidence.  It is not based on any form of measurement or objective scale.  it is all heavily biased and based only on folklore & supposition.  It is essentially guesswork.When I say we need one piece of evidence, I mean a truely objective piece of evidence, gathered under controled conditions.  That has never been obtained.  If we had that, it would be undeniable.  It would pave the way to forming a true scientific theory about what is going on, and allow some real research to take place.  Yes, there would still be naysayers, but if the objective data is there, those people would better be labeled as cynics, not skeptics.  They are worthy of no more attention than someone who believes every paranormal tale they hear with no critical thought.So, am I saying it is wrong for people to believe? No definitely not.  It's Ok to believe if they want.  I would just avoid making important decisions based on anything that is not supported by good objective evidence.  Whether that decision is which car to buy, or whether to give a psychic money to clense your home, it all the same.And lastly, make no mistake...Any skeptic worth his/her salt does not consider every piece of evidence to be a hoax, or beilievers to be crazy or dishonest people.  True skeptics acknowledge that the vast majority of people who have experiences are sane, intelligent & honest folk, who are simply looking for answers.I am a skeptic, and I will be a believer again the instant there is a reason to be.Regards, Canis
...This is why a first hand experience should not be sufficient to convince a skeptic. ...When I say we need one piece of evidence, I mean a truely objective piece of evidence, gathered under controled conditions....A person who can not believe what they have experienced first hand is not going to believe evidence gathered by anyone, anywhere, no matter how bad they think other wise.  Control is an illusion.  The paranormal is the proof of that.  No matter how many times a parent tells their child that there is no such thing as monsters, or someone tells themselves it was just the wind, or swamp gas refracting the light of venus, or it was a shadow, or an echo, that it was just nothing, that doesn't make it so.  The modern thought process of science will explain everything and anything not explained by science isn't real is only going to get people killed.  So anyone and everyone can keep their heads under the covers if they want, it doesn't change the fact that there may be a monster on the other side of the sheet about to eat your face.
gloria    posted:3/25/2010 6:09:34 AM  (Reply)
WOW!!!! I can't belive this, this is awsome. I thought I was the only one who thought the show "Ghost Adventure" was truly a annoying show. Well, not the only one, but one of the few who get pist off , I remember when they first started the show. it was much more low key, and sounded like a man who had an experience once, and wanted to prove that ghost do exist...to me they do, because I too had a scary experince, not just I but three other people with me on that same night...but that is for another topic. everyone has there own belive and it should be respected. Now, what pist me off is the leader of the show, I forgot his name, and honestlly, don't care. But did anyone notice how much he puff up his body, a mean all of a sudden he comes back with all of these muscles, like he was getting ready for a confrontation with something physical,(not that I don't appreciate a well form man, I do.)  but come on!!!, I was put out when he started to act like he was all that. to me he had no respect for the spirits. and the way he was always putting down one of his friends, about his weight, and the way he yell out right to the unkown. like it would be affried of him...Ha, there was a couple of times he showed actual fear..that also pist me off...(I apoligize the pist off words but I'm from good old Brooklyn NY, and we do intend to swear, ) one minute he's yelling, the next he's being nice to the one's that was a victim..the thing is, even if the spirit was evil, and died because of it, does not mean you should be yelling and swearing at it..and looking  to hurt it..it does not work that way, you can still say something negative to it , but do it in a way that insult words are not used in a wrong way, you can get your  message accross with out insults. Anyway, I'm so glad I had the apportunity to vent out, I was holding that in for too long, so thanks guys for being there...I think all of you are a bunch of great people with great attitude and is wonderfull to have found you...  
Valantor   posted:4/3/2010 3:15:26 PM  (Reply)
What do we (as humans) actually need to lay this story to bed and convince the skeptics? Simply put, reproducible evidence. In effect, we need a cooperative ghost, one who will appear upon demand in a laboratory and be subjected to analysis by "qualified" objective individuals.To my mind, that is what paranormal investigations should be aiming for. Not ratings, not cheap amusement park thrills but the search for proof. All we need is one ghost willing to play ball. Maybe one day we will find one, but I do know we'll never find one if we don't look.
myprecious   posted:4/6/2010 9:49:23 PM  (Reply)
I watched for the first time last weekend.  All of these types of shows seem very melodramatic.  They play on people's lack of knowledge of the unknown.  Everyone seems to be fascinated by paranormal activities and the people that seem to believe in the happenings that this show seems to want to prove.  The locations seem interesting and the history behind these locations keep people interested.  The investigators do seem to talk too much and seem a little full of themselves.  I don't know that I would want to be the one locked in the house, let alone be left alone in an area that is supposed to be "haunted".  These types of shows will continue to draw an audience because everyone is looking for something that will make them wonder if it is real or not, as well as probably cause the location to become a vacation spot.
tapuout4985   posted:4/6/2010 10:06:45 PM  (Reply)

In Reply To:
myprecious  posted:4/6/2010 9:49:23 PM  (Reply)
I watched for the first time last weekend.  All of these types of shows seem very melodramatic.  They play on people's lack of knowledge of the unknown.  Everyone seems to be fascinated by paranormal activities and the people that seem to believe in the happenings that this show seems to want to prove.  The locations seem interesting and the history behind these locations keep people interested.  The investigators do seem to talk too much and seem a little full of themselves.  I don't know that I would want to be the one locked in the house, let alone be left alone in an area that is supposed to be "haunted".  These types of shows will continue to draw an audience because everyone is looking for something that will make them wonder if it is real or not, as well as probably cause the location to become a vacation spot.
I actually think this show is highly entertaining because it plays on the host's lack of knowledge on the unknown and his fear and insecurity of his fear.  It's just funny, and sometimes they get lucky and catch a good EVP or video.
tesec1   posted:4/10/2010 9:01:45 PM  (Reply)

In Reply To:
harper  posted:1/11/2009 4:13:03 PM  (Reply)
I am sitting on the fence on that one.
i worked in a hospital like theone depicted on GA Linda Vista hospital i can tell that GA is not a fake
jaguarsky   posted:4/15/2010 11:54:41 AM  (Reply)
Show sucks
pamelatida   posted:4/16/2010 2:31:43 PM  (Reply)

In Reply To:
daecghnaegh  posted:3/15/2010 7:04:27 PM  (Reply)
Really?  I watch it when I want a laugh.  It is without question the most ludicrous ghost hunter knock off going.  They are not investigators in the usual sense, just entertainers.  The devices they use do not exist and any real investigator should recognize that.  The TAPS people, while leaving much to be desired, are still the gold standard in my book.
and ............. let's be real how many investigations  does one do before they actually come away with evidence ? according to GH  every investigation we ALL know that is not true .................have they ever said  "We did not get anything"


Please log in or become a member to add a post.