Ghost Hunters

[Capt_Piett]

So in an episode last week,

Spoiler: Last Week's Episode

they went to Dracula's Castle in Transylvania, and had this big, hyped up session, whereupon they decided the castle was in fact NOT haunted.

My question is this: How can they conclusively state that a place IS or IS NOT haunted by only investigating one night? I've read many stories in several books that state that some hauntings only take place at certain times of the year and some are sporadic and inconsistent.

IMO, it seems sort of arrogant for them to state that a place is not haunted after just spending a few hours there and then moving on.

 

[Balrog]

Yeah, I have to agree with you. If it's Aunt Nancy's old cottage in Montana that's never been investigated before, then they have a reason to say 'yes' or 'no'. But that place has obviously had documented reports going back hundreds of years, and it's arrogant that they would give their definitive stamp with only a few hours research when there is an equal possibility that it was just an off night.

 

[RaymondJames]

wow something in my filed for once As a paranormal investigator myself, you can not rule a place based on one investigation. However, TAPS used to never use the word haunted...they used active. They have changed over the years and I am not a huge fan of them or their show any more.

You are correct in saying a place may be very active at certain times of the day, month, year ect. It could be a result of the type of haunting or whats being done in the home or on the property.

 

[LutherSloan]

FYI, that episode was from last year. It wasn't new. It was the season finale of Ghost Hunters International's first season.

I do remember that episode though, and I found it very odd that they spent so little time in the episode focusing on that. They clearly must not have found anything worth looking at. The first investigation in that episode took up about 40 minutes of the show (or 2/3), but I forget where it was. I'm a little surprised that the team didn't stay longer at Dracula's Castle to see if they could get anything the next day or whatever.

 

[Amaris]

wow something in my filed for once As a paranormal investigator myself, you can not rule a place based on one investigation. However, TAPS used to never use the word haunted...they used active. They have changed over the years and I am not a huge fan of them or their show any more.

You are correct in saying a place may be very active at certain times of the day, month, year ect. It could be a result of the type of haunting or whats being done in the home or on the property.

I know what you mean, but I'd still take them over "Paranormal State" any day, bunch of hacks.

J.

 

[RaymondJames]

wow something in my filed for once As a paranormal investigator myself, you can not rule a place based on one investigation. However, TAPS used to never use the word haunted...they used active. They have changed over the years and I am not a huge fan of them or their show any more.

You are correct in saying a place may be very active at certain times of the day, month, year ect. It could be a result of the type of haunting or whats being done in the home or on the property.

I know what you mean, but I'd still take them over "Paranormal State" any day, bunch of hacks.

J.

hahahahaha Indeed though I like the Russian, I would only want the Russian investigating in my home if I were the client.

 

[kitkat]

I love, love, LOVE Ghost Hunters. However, Ghost Hunters International is not the same group.

I don't even watch the International version anymore. I think that they kind of got their asses kicked by Jay and Grant about saying things like "this place is NOT haunted", because they never say that. Jay and Grant say things like, "we did not find anything in our investigation to prove it's haunted but that doesn't mean it's not, it just means that we didn't find any evidence to support your accounts", etc.

ETA: I totally agree with you J.Allen about Paranormal State. What a bunch of losers!

 

[LutherSloan]

This season GHI has determined a bunch of places to not be haunted. So they are still debunking things.

 

[darkshadow0001]

So in an episode last week,

Spoiler: Last Week's Episode

they went to Dracula's Castle in Transylvania, and had this big, hyped up session, whereupon they decided the castle was in fact NOT haunted.

My question is this: How can they conclusively state that a place IS or IS NOT haunted by only investigating one night? I've read many stories in several books that state that some hauntings only take place at certain times of the year and some are sporadic and inconsistent.

IMO, it seems sort of arrogant for them to state that a place is not haunted after just spending a few hours there and then moving on.

A lot of shows are like this. I watch Most Haunted alot on the Travel Channel, and they do about the same thing. At least with them, they make it up to the viewer to decide if the place is haunted or not. What I would really like to see in these shows sometimes is when actual spirit coming out and scaring the pants off these people (But these shows are fun to watch, I think.)

 

[Brent]

I look at GHI as completely different than Ghost Hunters. Sorry, but Jason and Grant do a much better job on Ghost Hunters.

 

[shapeshifter]

I watch GH and GHI with equal interest.

I agree claims of a location not being haunted based on lack of evidence gathered in a single investigation doesn't seem fair but I suspect they have enough experience by now to know the difference.

The alternative is to say the ghosts have wizened up and now more carefully hide from investigators, but I am not ready to believe that.

More likely, everyone and their mothers with a creaky house or an old castle have become convinced it's haunted when it's really not.

Off topic but been on my mind about the GH teams: Something more is imo, needed from both teams; less only trying to prove or disprove a haunting and more attempts at thoughtful communication with entities when they are found. Why no one ever attempts to ask these things serious questions about their planes of existence is a mystery to me. I'd be all about trying to gather some real information from them about their existence and habitats.

I remember a few times an entity really seemed up for having a meaningful conversation but the team would, having acquired the proof, simply blew them off in quite a rude fashion imo, turning their backs and walking out.

Another thing that bugs me, when they ask for proof they are not alone I really, really wish they all would stop being so shocked and surprised when they receive an answer.