Ghost Hunters 2.6: "31 Aug 2005"
Case #1: Ledge Lighthouse
Case #2: Merchant’s House Museum
Every week, it seems like I have to remind myself to be patient. It ought to be easy enough to understand why this sort of thing happens. In my line of work, a person can take a square inch sample off the inside of a 20,000 square inch tank for microbes and wonder if they picked the right spot when nothing is found. I imagine that hunting for evidence of the paranormal is similar, if it’s done correctly.
It’s all about proving a negative, which is, of course, impossible. You sample a tank in specific spots because you believe that those are the most likely areas where the microbes might be, if any were there. There’s a lot of thought and consideration that goes into planning the whys and wherefores, but at the end of the day, it’s only a reasonable, defensible guess. One must draw general conclusions from a relatively small collection of data points and observations.
In this case, every time Jason and Grant walk into a place, several factors play against their success. Even if one assumes that the paranormal activity can be recorded (or even exists), there are difficulties in capturing that evidence. One issue is timing: if the activity doesn’t happen that night, regardless of how frequently it happens otherwise, then it simply didn’t happen. The other issue is location: if the equipment isn’t in the right location at the right time, then it won’t capture the evidence. And then there’s the question of getting the right equipment, using it correctly, etc.
Logically, I understand all of that and accept that any “candid reality” series based on such a situation will rarely, if ever, produce something worth seeing or hearing. That’s why a series like “Most Haunted” is so ludicrous; every little piece of dust and noise is attributed to paranormal activity, because otherwise, there would be little to discuss. It’s also why I laugh when other “paranormal investigators” criticize TAPS for not catching anything. Logically, if one is taking a harsh look at the evidence, 99.9% of what’s found will be considered routine and “normal”, even if it’s unusual.
My point is this: know all of that doesn’t make it any easier to see a series built on “ghost hunting” produce so little in terms of evidence. Especially when the first season was a lot more substantial. I can’t help but wonder if the only places willing to have SFC film on premises are the places that want to promote their legends, rather than places with more substantial claims.
First case:
This one falls directly on Andy, and reinforces what I already thought about the guy. He’s too damned eager, and his agenda doesn’t really mesh with the agenda of TAPS all the time. They’re trying to debunk, in the hopes that in turn, they will find something if it’s there. Andy was all about going someplace with crazy activity. Not exactly the most objective approach! But it does fit into my emerging suspicion: SFC pushed for it because it had “documented” evidence of activity, and they wanted it on film.
Second case:
This was another situation where there was a lot of anecdotal evidence, but not much else. I actually think that the owner was pissed that nothing was found, but when so many things can be explained away, what other conclusion can one come to? It highlighted the fact that Jason and Grant can only guess how best to approach clients when presenting the reveal.
Regardless of all else, my main issue with this episode (and the season to date) has been the emphasis on the interpersonal issues. It was there last season, too, but not nearly as much as this season. The stupidity between Steve and Andy is the kind of “office politics” that I can’t stand in the “real world”, and all that time spent on Brian was a waste. Clearly, the man is going through rough times. Why make him stage a conversation with Jason and Grant? I have a feeling he’ll be back at the end of the season, all for the purposes of some idiotic “character arc”.
Chill Factor: 3/10
Case #2: Merchant’s House Museum
Every week, it seems like I have to remind myself to be patient. It ought to be easy enough to understand why this sort of thing happens. In my line of work, a person can take a square inch sample off the inside of a 20,000 square inch tank for microbes and wonder if they picked the right spot when nothing is found. I imagine that hunting for evidence of the paranormal is similar, if it’s done correctly.
It’s all about proving a negative, which is, of course, impossible. You sample a tank in specific spots because you believe that those are the most likely areas where the microbes might be, if any were there. There’s a lot of thought and consideration that goes into planning the whys and wherefores, but at the end of the day, it’s only a reasonable, defensible guess. One must draw general conclusions from a relatively small collection of data points and observations.
In this case, every time Jason and Grant walk into a place, several factors play against their success. Even if one assumes that the paranormal activity can be recorded (or even exists), there are difficulties in capturing that evidence. One issue is timing: if the activity doesn’t happen that night, regardless of how frequently it happens otherwise, then it simply didn’t happen. The other issue is location: if the equipment isn’t in the right location at the right time, then it won’t capture the evidence. And then there’s the question of getting the right equipment, using it correctly, etc.
Logically, I understand all of that and accept that any “candid reality” series based on such a situation will rarely, if ever, produce something worth seeing or hearing. That’s why a series like “Most Haunted” is so ludicrous; every little piece of dust and noise is attributed to paranormal activity, because otherwise, there would be little to discuss. It’s also why I laugh when other “paranormal investigators” criticize TAPS for not catching anything. Logically, if one is taking a harsh look at the evidence, 99.9% of what’s found will be considered routine and “normal”, even if it’s unusual.
My point is this: know all of that doesn’t make it any easier to see a series built on “ghost hunting” produce so little in terms of evidence. Especially when the first season was a lot more substantial. I can’t help but wonder if the only places willing to have SFC film on premises are the places that want to promote their legends, rather than places with more substantial claims.
First case:
This one falls directly on Andy, and reinforces what I already thought about the guy. He’s too damned eager, and his agenda doesn’t really mesh with the agenda of TAPS all the time. They’re trying to debunk, in the hopes that in turn, they will find something if it’s there. Andy was all about going someplace with crazy activity. Not exactly the most objective approach! But it does fit into my emerging suspicion: SFC pushed for it because it had “documented” evidence of activity, and they wanted it on film.
Second case:
This was another situation where there was a lot of anecdotal evidence, but not much else. I actually think that the owner was pissed that nothing was found, but when so many things can be explained away, what other conclusion can one come to? It highlighted the fact that Jason and Grant can only guess how best to approach clients when presenting the reveal.
Regardless of all else, my main issue with this episode (and the season to date) has been the emphasis on the interpersonal issues. It was there last season, too, but not nearly as much as this season. The stupidity between Steve and Andy is the kind of “office politics” that I can’t stand in the “real world”, and all that time spent on Brian was a waste. Clearly, the man is going through rough times. Why make him stage a conversation with Jason and Grant? I have a feeling he’ll be back at the end of the season, all for the purposes of some idiotic “character arc”.
Chill Factor: 3/10
posted by John Keegan | 06:20
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home