TAPS (Ghosthunters)-Do These Guys EVER Find Anything?

Cafe Society
61

[QUOTE=DigitalC]
I’m sorry but i just don’t get it. Making a chair move on camera is about the most trivial thing possible, i could make that happen and i have absolutely no film training. The things you are describing are in no way “freaky”, they are the simplest tricks known to man and have been done on film practically from its inception.
[/QUOTE]

Well, as I said, no doubt it could have been faked. Fabricated out of whole cloth, even. So you have to be willing to give them at least that much benefit of the doubt, you know? And as a scientist, of course that’s out of the question. So all I’m saying is, as a viewer, assuming it wasn’t faked, it’s pretty freaky.

62

[QUOTE=Sequent]
Well, as I said, no doubt it could have been faked. Fabricated out of whole cloth, even. So you have to be willing to give them at least that much benefit of the doubt, you know? And as a scientist, of course that’s out of the question. So all I’m saying is, as a viewer, assuming it wasn’t faked, it’s pretty freaky.
[/QUOTE]

Thats a pretty big assumption to make don’t you think? I’ve seen the show and i gotta admit its very entertaining, because even for non believers ghost stories ARE fun and creepy and i love them as much as anyone. But to go from there to thinking a buncha quacks from the sci-fi channel (uh… hello? sci-fi channel people!) have caught a ghost moving a chair on film is a pretty big leap of faith.

63

Unquestionably, a huge assumption. That’s part of the fun. You get to skip right past the years of peer-reviewed vetting and assume something that you might otherwise find completely unreasonable. I think that’s why science gets its own fiction. It’s a tv show, so as long as there’s no way we’re ever going to know anyway.

Also, I’ve seen them do several places where the owners mention chairs moving and doors closing on their own, and so they set up cameras pointing at chairs and doors. And the show being what it is, nothing ever happens. All night passes and the chair never moves once. So to see an example of it actually happen for the camera was pretty impressive. The fact that it would be so mundane to fake almost lends credence to it in a way. We know SciFi can do better special fx than that

64

[QUOTE=DigitalC]
But to go from there to thinking a buncha quacks from the sci-fi channel (uh… hello? sci-fi channel people!) have caught a ghost moving a chair on film is a pretty big leap of faith.
[/QUOTE]

Just because I’m assuming it wasn’t faked doesn’t mean I’m assuming it must have been a ghost. Or even paranormal. But definitely weird.

65

[QUOTE=Bearflag70]
Here?
[/QUOTE]

You’re being dishonest. I said, “If there is no measurable evidence for a thing”, and you deliberately changed it to, “If we lack the means to detect a thing”. That is not the same quote.

66

I thought of another extremely creepy scene. At one investigation, they are having a bit of a chin wag with the production crew. In the background, the sound guy, holding a boom mike with both hands over his head, is suddenly struck by his (maybe 2 foot long) tape deck flying up into his face.

67

[QUOTE=lowbrass]
You’re being dishonest. I said, “If there is no measurable evidence for a thing”, and you deliberately changed it to, “If we lack the means to detect a thing”. That is not the same quote.
[/QUOTE]

Sorry, I’m not trying to be dishonest. I was multitasking and skimming the thread. I’ll go back and read it again.

68

[QUOTE=Exapno Mapcase]
Wiki also notes that:

Hmm. And hmmm.
[/QUOTE]
I can think of a perfectly plausible and non-ominous explanation for this. Look, we are talking about 2 guys operating out of a store front. Since they don’t charge for their investigations, they refer to the organization as “non-profit”. Somebody from the IRS notices this, and says “Dudes, you aren’t a 501c(3) corporation. You can’t call yourselves that.” So they stop calling themselves that.

69

[QUOTE=Bearflag70]
Sorry, I’m not trying to be dishonest. I was multitasking and skimming the thread. I’ll go back and read it again.
[/QUOTE]

O.K., fair enough. The point I was trying to make was that if there’s no evidence for something, then you can’t say it “exists”, because that’s pretty much the definition of “exist”. But to say we lack the ability to find evidence for something at this point in time is another matter. That’s something you could only say in retrospect, after you found that evidence. To say “X exists but we can’t find any evidence for it” begs the question. That would be a paradoxical statement.

70

[QUOTE=Diogenes the Cynic]
Other physical causes than what? Do you mean any physical causes? If they can prove that a given phenomenon has no possible natural explanation then they will have made the biggest scientific discovery in history and they will win fame, fortune and Nobel Prizes. The same will happen if they invent a time machine or a perpetual motion machine or discover Narnia.
[/QUOTE]

Why don’t you want to stick to the topic?

The guys at TAPS are not looking for Narnia, or trying to invent a time machine or a perpetual motions machine.

Of course, since you don’t watch the show on a regular basis, and you know what happens on the show, then you must has psychic powers, go claim win the lottery every day.

71

You know - it really galls me to see people polluting their minds with this crap. If you’re watching it for laughs, no problem, but if you think you’re learning anything by watching this show, you’re mistaken. You’d learn more about science watching Road Runner cartoons.

72

[QUOTE=ralph124c]
I flip over to the SCIFI channel now and then-and frequently, the “TAPS” guys are on. They travel to remote places, checking out houses, abandoned hospitals, etc. for “psychic activity”. They set up video cameras, EMF detectors, etc.-but they never seem to get anything! Or have i missed an episode?
Anybody know iof these guys plan to give up soon?
[/QUOTE]

I dunno. How are the ratings going?

[QUOTE=Oslo Ostragoth]
And, by the way, in anticipation of the next barrage of criticism: it looks to me that they have well over 6 figures invested in their equipment. Personally, I wouldn’t spend that kind of money so I could go out and pull pranks on people while risking being exposed as a fraud.
[/QUOTE]

Pffft. I’d spent *millions * on equipment if it would result in a tv show that would bring me millions plus a margin. Of course, it is possible that I might get caught red handed faking a “chair moving sideways” shot, but these things tend to be deniable, and anyway TV production companies spend millions on plenty of shows that tank: there’s always risk.

[QUOTE=Miss Purl McKnittington]
In this case, I think it’s because people want to talk about the TV show, not whether or not ghosts actually exist. It would be possible to discuss the show civilly, without descending to an intelligentsia wank over the existence of ghosts. This argument has happened over and over again, and as far as I know, neither side has ever changed their minds.

Basically, what Zebra said (Oslo too, on preview). Popping into a thread about a certain TV show with “Of course they aren’t going to find anything, because there is no such thing as a ghost.” without offering anything more substantive to the discussion is akin to going to a thread about Buffy: The Vampire Slayer and saying, “There’s no such thing as a vampire, guys. Why do you waste your time?” Let me engage in some flights of fancy while I fold my socks and underwear, and then maybe talk about it on the internet.

[/QUOTE]

So when the OP said “do they find anything” he was meaning: “does this show feature, as part of the plotline, the apparent finding of evidence of ghosts” was he? Sure, he was.

You’re trying to have it both ways here. You suggest that attacking the veracity of the events purportedly depicted in the show is like attacking the veracity of events in obvious fiction like Buffy, and that this is inappropriate, but at the same time footnoting to say that you appreciate that Buffy is nothing like the show in question because it pretends not to be fiction. You’ve effectively destroyed your own argument.

People watch this show precisely because it purports to be real. Hands up anyone who would actually watch, if the show openly admitted the whole thing was scripted and nothing they showed was real?

[QUOTE=Sequent]
Also, I’ve seen them do several places where the owners mention chairs moving and doors closing on their own, and so they set up cameras pointing at chairs and doors. And the show being what it is, nothing ever happens. All night passes and the chair never moves once. So to see an example of it actually happen for the camera was pretty impressive. The fact that it would be so mundane to fake almost lends credence to it in a way. We know SciFi can do better special fx than that
[/QUOTE]

… and all the best scary movies heighten suspense by not having the monster jump out from behind *every * tree, and all the best liars tell the truth most of the time, and the Big Lie strategy is highly effective.

73

[QUOTE=Zebra]
Why don’t you want to stick to the topic?
[/quote]

How did I fail to stay on topic? I answered the question that you asked – what would happen if they found something that had no possible natural explanation. The answer is that it would be front page news and they would become instantly famous. Obviously, though, they have never found any such thing, nor are they ever likely to.

They’re looking for something equally as absurd, though. That’s my point. Their chances of discovering a real ghost are exactly the same as their chances of discovering Narnia or inventing a time machine.

It is not necessary to watch the show to know that there is no possibility they have ever found a ghost.