Is Ghost Hunters real?

reply to post by dave420


but it is entertaining. one thing that has always bothered me is how they go on about how the EMF detectors and cold spots are indicators because spirits need to get energy from the environment in order to manifest. so why dont they leave all the lights on? it seems like the more energy and heat in the rooms, the more the ghosts would have to draw from and more easily manifest, at least according to their own logic. but i still love watching it.

dave420 is right about the orbs, most of the young members of the team do get excited over each one. hell brian sees ghosts in footage before they even hit play.

reply to post by Azrael75


Exactly! How can they possibly say such things as "ghosts need energy to materialise" when they have absolutely ZERO evidence that's even true? And then yeah - they turn off the lights! It's so contradictory it's hilarious. It is entertaining to me, too, but mainly because they're such fools, running around playing Ghost Busters like they actually know what they're doing. They're clueless amateurs, nothing more. They will never, ever demonstrate anything of any use to anyone.

And don't get me started on Brian. What a goof.

reply to post by dave420


oh come on. brian is the show man. when he left i was bummed. but then we got GHI!!! heck yeah! and there was that retarded, cant keep a story straight while he is still tellin it, sees a ghost EVERYWHERE, motherchucker. he cracks me up. even better that GHI leader Crazy-eyes Lisperman.

If ghosthunters does everything wrong then what ghost hunting crew is doing anything right? That seems to be what every goof is doing, running around in the dark saying they "felt" this and heard that.

What ghost show / team is doing it more scientifically?


So going out to a location and trying to find evidence / proof of something paranomal is not scientific? All the stuff they capture on video? They debunk a lot of claims.
As for the orbs, whenever jay and grant present evidence to the client they never mention that stuff and always say something to the effect that "orbs are nothing, we cant show that as evidence" when the other team members get excited. Hell, I have a ton of orbs in my vacation pictures, its not ghosts its freaking dust. When was the last time you watched it? They dont even mention orbs anymore.

I love that show whether it is real or not. I remember awhile back seeing some good stuff debunking the show but nothing that was really any more definitive than what they come up with either. Does anyone know of a good site like that or have anything good showing them faking or at least really exagerating nothing to a point of deception?

reply to post by Azrael75


Yeah Brian was hilarious.

I went looking for something with evidence of them faking but I couldn't even find that lighthouse footage again. Hmm. Well they do toss out soooo much of the evidence, but i cannot help but feel that they know that just makes people tune in that much more in hopes that this week Gilligan won't screw up and they will finally get off the Island.

reply to post by D.Gribble


No shows I'm aware of are doing it more scientifically, but then that doesn't instantly mean we should accept Ghost Hunters as being scientific. They clearly are not.

And no, just going out and putting some cameras out in an uncontrolled environment, making assumptions about what they find, etc. is as far from science as you can get. Just because they use instruments doesn't mean it's scientific. Science is a method, not a set of equipment. Debunking is great, but that doesn't instantly mean they're being scientifically objective.

And yes, they do mention orbs. The people reviewing the evidence mention it every single time they see some dust. Jay and Grant distance themselves from it, but the fact their team members accept that orbs exist belies their objectivity.

reply to post by dave420


Here Here!

I completely agree. And Jay and Grant are the bosses. The could have either asked that that stuff be cut out or that the boys stop getting so excited over it each time but so far......nah. So we hear, "Dude what was the frick was that? Right there, floating in from here and then off over there." - you know the thing that looks like dust that gets brighter as it enters the range of the IR LEDs and then floats off just like dust does. Every episode. And we must be honest, what is scientifically hunting ghosts anyway? I mean we have no idea if anything anyone of the groups on any of the shows is actually doing anything. If anything, we have several seasons worth of proof that they are doing it all wrong, or ghosts do not exsist.

Personally I love the show,

The St. Augustine Lighthouse in my opinion gives some very good evidence for ghosts. the black shadow that over looks the railing seems too real to me. and not faked. To me it's a great piece of evidence.

However I know of an instance where they chalked up something to being paranormal that I know had a perfectly reasonable cause.

When they were on the USS North Carolina, the battle ship that was torpedoed in WWII. They were in one of the crews shower rooms. The room was right around the water line and a few crew members were taking a shower when the torpedo hit killing them. So the Ghost Hunters are standing in this room right next to the huge welded back together patch of hull where the torpedo hit looking for ghosts. their EMF meter is going off and they come to the conclusion that the EMF detector is getting evidence of a Spirit.

Buuuuuuut Weldings are known to have magnetic fields. and they are standing next to a huge weld job. The navy degausses ships all the time after they make repairs on them to remove the magnetic fields that the welding leaves (among other things) welders know that welding leaves magnetic fields.

They say that theres ghosts in that room due to the EMF. I say they are picking up the welding, and confusing it with ghosts.

but that aside I agree that the show is the most scientific of all the ghost hunting shows and that they are the best at what they do.

Most haunted. I can't even watch that show for more than a few seconds before getting annoyed and changing the channel. that show should be on MTV2 and not where they are right now. With the actors on that show it's more on the level of an MTV watcher than their current demographic they are attempting to harness.

As for the characters on Ghost hunters. heres my take not that anybody cares.

Jason and Grant. Honest people. Good folk. I doubt they would be involved in a hoax. Although on season 2's deleted scenes there is a part where at the mertle's plantation jason smacks his set manager for firing one of the camera men and for having a sprite bottle filled with jack daniels or something. It looked a little fake to me, and jason would have been sued for assulting somebody.

Steve-honest guy, don't think he would make stuff up. seems to have an even keel except for his various phobias. but those phobias seem to be real and not embelished. he truely seems afraid to fly. nothing wrong with steve, I think he makes a great tech manager.

Justin- does a good job, a little too in to himself and annoying with the backwards visor thing but a good guy, not a faker.

Dave- a good guy. more intelligent than he seems but is a little shy and dumbs down to fit in more. he doesn't like conflict nor is he a alpha male, but he is smarter than he leads on. seems like a good guy.

Brian- a putz. I feel for the guy cause he is a nice guy, but a low self esteem, blame the world type. he always has an excuse, he's always getting his feelings hurt. he's always easily excited. Sees a ghost in everything. he's even had to debunk himself once when he mistook his own shadow for a ghost. (literally while at leap castle)

I like most of the girls on the show. I like donna. she seems alright to me and not a hoaxer. The new girl that was on GHI for the first few episodes but is gone sucked. the one who dressed like she was from New Jersey. (Got nothing against new jerseyers)

The Irish guy barry is alright in the sense that you can tell that he is deeply passionant about ghost hunting and seems to have some in depth knowledge about the field but he wigs out on everything. everything is a ghost to him. too much like brian, but minus the bad interpersonal skills.

Andy. hated him at first. a 12 year old pre pubecent boy stuck in a grown mans body, but he is good at debunking things. a little annoying and over zealous about it, but he has a good role to play. not god camera material though. he's annoying.

Question. what does an EMF detector prove? couldn't just about everything set one of those off now a days not just ghosts. What I mean is if one were inside a house. wouldn't a lot of things effect that thing other than faulty wiring?

All my gripes aside the show is great. the best one for ghost hunting out there.

reply to post by BASSPLYR


LOL, i totally agree about most haunted. i tried watching it a few times and never made it all the way through. it is really pretty annoying.

Question. what does an EMF detector prove? couldn't just about everything set one of those off now a days not just ghosts. What I mean is if one were inside a house. wouldn't a lot of things effect that thing other than faulty wiring?

Exactly! What does anything that they do really prove? I mean if they ever really proved anything, case closed right? But they havent. So everything that they are doing could be a complete waste of time. There could be some completely different "scientific" way to catch ghosts that actaully works.

[edit on 30/8/08 by Tiamanicus]

I also have to question things like Ion meters, and that meter that they used on the Charles Manson murders. The one that they used to have a conversation and it would flash once for no twice for yes. that seemed a little fishy to me.

The thermo is cool, but I have a question. why would a ghost show up as hotter than their environment on thermo? whats the theory behind why a ghost would appear on thermo? Also, it's been said that ghosts pull energy from their surroundings to manifest. the air gets cold first. wouldn't this air temp cooling show up before the thermal shows a ghost dart by. wouldn't the air begin to cool first then re heat after the event? around the images of ghosts on thermal wouldn't the air around the heat source be cooler than the atmosphere that is ambient? like a aura around the apparition that is cooler than the surrounding air? we never see that in the thermo images I wonder why and how that plays into the theories of ghosts.

Also, I was pretty happy to see the episode for the manson murders. Why, because my grandma lives in that same neighborhood up cielo. it's not a creepy neighborhood. very pretty. seen the house a few times while driving by and it seems normal to me. so it was a kick to see the ghost hunters had done a show on the location. wished I could have driven up to my grandma's one day and see the ghost hunters vans out in front of the guys house. problem with that episode. it's not at the actual manson murder location.

reply to post by BASSPLYR


I always assumed ghosts were hotter because they are energy.

Well that might add to the theory but what about the fact that they are drawing the energy away from the surrounding environment to manifest. (According to theory-referring to cold spots etc.) wouldn't those show up around the entity during a manifestation of one?

Like an aura around the ghost that it cooler than the ambient air?

Don't get me wrong. I'm not anti ghost or anything. I've stated in several threads that I grew up in a house that is known to be haunted. I've even given the location of the house each time. I know what paranormal activity feels like. It's pretty similar to a lot of the experiences one would see on the ghost hunters show. cold spots, moving shadows etc. but I still don't understand how the thermo doesn't show these cool spots around the heat signature of the apparition. especially if they are pulling heat from the air to manifest.

reply to post by BASSPLYR


No-one knows, as these are just opinions people have given over time which have been absorbed into the whole "ghost busting" field simply because they have nothing concrete to go on. The entire field is simply a bunch of kids playing Ghost Busters. That's it. They don't have a single theory backed up by evidence. It's ridiculous.

And don't get me started on those chicks on the show - they're always banging on about ghosts and entities and such. It's so absurdly ridiculous it damages the show's credibility even more (if you can believe such a thing).

The whole show is pantomime designed to generate advertising revenue for the Sci-Fi network. It will never ever discover anything of use to anyone.

As long as the 'evidence' they find can be faked, one has to assume it is faked. To do otherwise is logically bankrupt.

I agree with much of what you posted dave420.

THe evidence is pretty sketchy in scientific terms. and My family does work in the film/media industry and I know how easily things can be faked. some of the stuff looks hoaxed like the lamp cord at the mertles ranch. other stuff looks real to me like the st. augustine light house.

but as for as it being objective or science. not really.

Originally posted by BASSPLYR
Well that might add to the theory but what about the fact that they are drawing the energy away from the surrounding environment to manifest. (According to theory-referring to cold spots etc.) wouldn't those show up around the entity during a manifestation of one?

Like an aura around the ghost that it cooler than the ambient air?

Don't get me wrong. I'm not anti ghost or anything. I've stated in several threads that I grew up in a house that is known to be haunted. I've even given the location of the house each time. I know what paranormal activity feels like. It's pretty similar to a lot of the experiences one would see on the ghost hunters show. cold spots, moving shadows etc. but I still don't understand how the thermo doesn't show these cool spots around the heat signature of the apparition. especially if they are pulling heat from the air to manifest.

Good point, I had to read it twice to understand what you meant but I agree; hadnt thought if this.

I've always been a bit skeptical about some of the evidence that has been presented through the seasons, but I've also always respected the fact that these guys have more "not haunted" than "haunted" conclusions. They are good at offering logical explanations for things that could be passed off as paranormal by other "investigators" on other shows.

Now, Ghost Hunters International, on the other hand, bothers me. They are too quick to offer up a sound as a single syllable EVP, and say that it is a direct answer to a question that an investigator asked. Then, they conclude the place is haunted based on that one so-called EVP.

I watched the season premiere of Ghost Hunters last Wednesday, the 3rd, where they were in the museum that used to be a Funeral Home. The EVP's that were caught up in the attic - "Whaddya want?" and "Leave me alone.." were bone-chilling to me. They were the same voice, and went along with the agitation that they felt from the "spirit". I admit, I became a little less skeptic after that...

The most recent one was really interesting when they used the K-2 meter at the old mill/factory. They were asking questions and getting responses. They would even ask the same questions in different ways and in a different order and got consistent answers.

I agree the GHI is far less interesting. They seem quicker to label things as paranormal and I haven't yet seen any hard evidence from their investigations.

[edit on 12-9-2008 by an0maly33]

I used to activelt investigate ghosts and hauntings many years ago and what these people in these shows do is laughable.
Of course Ghost hunters and other shows like Most Haunted, The Three Psychics etc, are not real. Somewhere, someone realised that if you combined the Ghostwatch BBC hoax documentary with The Blair Witch camera techniques and Scooby Doo, add a lot of fake screaming and unwarranted excitement and voila- you have a hit on your hands. . .