i completely agree!!!!!!!!!!!
*edited to fix an issue*

Yeah, I couldn't imagine how pissed they were having to drive all the way across the country to go someplace that turned out to be complete BS. The dude's excuse for not telling them, "It just slipped my mind", pathetic. What a douche. At least admit it. You have just made a complete *** out of yourself on national television. Try to preserve any shred of dignity you might have left for yourself. I loved how during the reveal, the guy was just laughing the whole time and Grant was trying to be nice, while Jay just sat there looking like he wanted to punch a hole right through the guy's face. I wish he had, actually. Would have made for great television. If Grant had seriously hurt himself when he fell down, they could have sued the crap out of that guy.

oh yeah totally agree, my god he made himself a complete fool...it's shocking how nothing went off by command while they were there LOL, i find it quiet funny. I wish that Jay would have punched him i surely would have, that's a lot of gas they wasted to cross the country to easily debunk it and find all that faked stuff...my god....i knew it was going to have something juciy just by the comercials they were playing all week LOL and yeah Grant could of sued the place beause of they way the floor is my god....*sighs*

Apparently it's *well* known that the Moss Beach Distillery does this. It's not any kind of secret, one minute with Google bears this out, and it has been featured in print and television many times. Apparently someone from the distillery even checked with the production crew before hand to make sure TAPS knew about it in advance. Way more info than you would want here: http://www.skepticalviewer.com/forums/ghos...igation/page-1/

what sux is that from the preiview last week i knew they had set them up on the chandeleirs... i called that one but overall the episode was borring. It reminded me of classic GH from a lot eirlier seasons, debunk everything no evidence. Maybee they are trying to gain more support agin. Be really objective again b/c a lot of people thought the evidence was getting shady. What a total waist of time on that second one. Maybee the resteraunt is going under they need business so they tryied to pull a fast one and sneak in some bunk evidence.

wow, so maybee it was played up to make us think there big bad debunkers and they caught it.... when they might of known all along. I mean they do research on possible clients and investigations right? i'm convinced i think they knew.

Actually it sounds like Pilgrim knew about it but purposely didn't let TAPS know before the investigation.

Do you remember the first Queen Mary investigation episode? When they were getting the tour that hotel "expert" womain showed them a piece of machinary she insisted was not in use but always made noise, then on the investigation they proved it was in fact being used? She looked pretty foolish.

I don't know if they actually knew or not. From what I've read, it would seem that they genuinely did not know, which makes the scientific part of me rejoice, because there's way too much front-loading the way it is now. At the same time, this would be very out of character for TAPS as we're shown them, especially since they drove like a billion miles to be at this place.

Regardless whether they actually knew or not, the episode was definitely intended to show them in a very critical and down to earth light, triumphing over the "evil" hoaxsters trying to put one over on them. If the Sharon Tate house wasn't their shark jumping place, then this surely is.

I had it on, but was on the phone and missed it..drats.LOL..JN

All i know is i woulda punched that fool out!!!

I wouldnt use physical force but man it wouldnt have been nice, i can tell you that much.

That case reminded me of an old one they included in their book. A couple called them over and complained that there was activity around a single wall in a hallway. They always heard noises and voices from behind it, and claimed they were both forced against it one time. During the investigation, they found a door with a padlock on it. They made the husband or boyfriend or whatever open it up, and there was a tape player playing ghostly noises in the locked room. They guy said they just wanted their house to be on the show Sightings.

I'm sorry if I sound like a huge ignoramus but what does 'TAPS' stand for ?????

I can't figure it out........

The Atlantic Paranormal Society

I've heard them refer to that case during their presentations. Wow.

We did an investigation of a local business during which we did hear what sounded like voices. We checked everywhere we could think of for speakers - even in the A/C vents! - but couldn't find any.

not they it's one person who sets up these things and talk to people so...


yeah i remember that now, totally forgot till you mentioned something lol

I don't even know what I would've done. I try to be non-violent. But if I had to travel halfway across the country, listen to claims, and then find out they were messing with me and my team, I don't know. I'd almost assuredly cuss him or her out.

Can you sue for something like that? They wasted time, expenses, etc. If it was an option, I'd strongly consider a lawsuit.

I'm pretty sure they sign waivers that they won't sue before investigating. Besides, when you do what Grant did, you risk falling down. No one hired him to climb up and look in ceiling tiles.

I looked at that debunking link, and it's just speculation, no one can say TAPS knew in advance about the devices.
My real question is...Why would the "client" not mention that these devices were installed, even in passing? Like, "Oh, you guys do know about the mirror and the recording, right?". Or, why didn't he make sure these items were turned off before the investigation started?

Even if the guy genuinely wasn't trying to fool anyone, he looks like a tool. As far as it being some kind of a setup...? You'd have to pay me a LOT to be a tool on national TV, and even MORE to make the place I work look like a fraud. I mean, don't you think that you would NOT go there after seeing this show? I know it's off my list of haunted places to visit! Even if I was in the Bay area anyway, I wouldn't take the time to stop by there. (I was there YEARS ago, but didn't go to the restaurant.)

Yeah, that's too bad...because I would definitely consider a lawsuit were it an option. Not because Grant hurt himself, but because that restaurant deliberately lied and caused TAPS, etc to travel all the way out to California, wasting time, energy, manpower, expenses, etc....all for a hoax.

And yeah, I wouldn't go to that place either. I'd long been a fan of the Blue Lady reports, but should I ever find myself in the area, I'm not even going to bother stopping in.

I'm not sure a lawsuit would even be possible, unless the owner/manager of the restaurant signed a document or made a statement that they would not attempt to falsify evidence or something of that nature.

This would be an interesting topic on its own for investigative teams. Legal rights, responsibilities, binding contracts, ownership rights of gathered evidence. I would imagine it would be wise for a large-scale team to retain a lawyer just to handle the documentation.

Maybe if a "client" was required to sign an affidavit that there was no intentional fraud being committed, or they would be charged for the investigation at a rate of $25 per hour per person, plus mileage and per diem, this would never have happened.

EDIT: I wonder how many groups are going to draw up documents after reading this post...maybe I should COPYRIGHT it fast!

The thing is, the distillery didn't deliberately lie about anything. It's a well known fact that they have those "special effects" set up. It's their gimmick. It's just what they do. Apparently they didn't tell TAPS about the devices, but they did tell the production crew, and were told that TAPS knew about them. The pneumatic chandelier movers were on timers and weren't going off during the investigation, and the face in the mirror was broken until Jason and Grant fixed it, so the only effect that was actually working at the time was the recording of the woman laughing, which was obviously not real, and the guy said that it just slipped his mind, because it was in the women's bathroom and he never goes in there, which seems entirely plausible.

Jason and Grant kept saying that the place was just a funhouse, and that's true. The distillery is an attraction, and they use those props for atmosphere, not for trickery. I tried to check out the distillery's website and see what they said about it, but the hordes of angry TAPS fans have used up all their bandwidth

Jay and Grant were upset because it wasn't what they were expecting, but the episode was edited to make it look like the distillery guy was trying to put one over on them, and that's just not so. I'd actually love to see them go into a place knowing absolutely nothing about it, because that would eliminate a lot of front-loaded bias. But it's becoming plainer all the time that it's more of a soap opera than a real investigation.

no he wasnt talking bout the speaker he was talking bout the face in the mirror that that had slipped his mind...still though....

I agree with you, I mean there is no way anyone would think that corny laughing and image in the mirror was nothing more than a prank.

If it's true that the Moss Beach Distillery told the Sci Fi production crew, but the crew didn't inform TAPS, that kind of goes along with what a few people here have been saying all along. That TAPS might not be faking anything, but the network is definitely doing its best to tamper with things in order to produce more exciting television.

This is a bummer. Yeah, I think it's understandable about what happened at the Moss Beach distillery, but I was looking forward to this episode. Fortunately, it was a typical investigation of the first place, but the Moss Beach one is taking up all the interest. The colonial House Inn, the first investigation, is where my husband and I honeymooned at in 1991, and I was excited in seeing the place being investigated by TAPS. I really do not remember much haunted interactions, but I do have glimpses of memories of certain things. One being that we were in that Widow's watch, where the guy hung himself, and I do remember feeling like we should leave and not feeling like we belong there. The rest of the place was nice. Room 107 that they showed on the show, was probably the closest to what our room looked like, and that was also on the third floor. I think I remember finding a piece of jewlry of mine on the floor of our room, when my husband and I came in from somewhere. And I thought I heard something across the hall, when I didn't think there was anyone there. I could be suggestive thinking of this, but I don't know, for I have had these memories for some time. Anyways, what I definately do remember was that it was a comfortable and nice place to stay. The food was awesomely great! I don't remember that manager, it could have been another one at the time, but I remember the owner there we saw at the beginning of the episode. I remember him and his wife, as being the nicest people alive. They allowed my husband and I do take pictures and video for our memories of our honeymoon. We ate dinner on that deck, and had breakfast in one of those rooms in the kitchen area. What they didn't show, was a cute indoor swimming pool. Everything is the same, and I loved that part of the show.

I agree one hundred percent. If it is true that production kept this a secret from TAPS my theory is correct about the network.

Here is what had me yelling at the screen during the Moss Beach Distillery episode.

Both the smirking executive chef and the TAPS members presented the case as if to say, these experiences have been happening here for a long time, and it's about time somebody investigated them.

That is completely dishonest. None of these people could possibly fail to know that Prof. Lloyd Auerbach, one of the most prominent if not the most prominent paranormal investigators working today, has been conducting a full, ongoing investigation of Moss Beach Distillery since 1991. His results have been publicized on television, on his own lecture circuit, and in his 2005 book A Paranormal Casebook.

GH not only failed to acknowledge this previous research-- TAPS and the Distillery staff gave the false impression that there had been none.

In real academic research, failure to acknowledge previous investigations is a grave kind of dishonesty.

Just one more difference between real research and what TAPS is doing.

Those of you who want to investigate the paranormal from a "scientific" standpoint: please don't imitate TAPS! Instead, please take a university course in social science research methods and steep yourself in the primary journal literature of parapsychology. If you are interested in quantitative research methods and experimental design, go to a university library and look in the HA29 section (Library of Congress call numbers) for some books to read.

GH is fine television sometimes, and it may point the way toward possible research questions, but it is an entertainment product, as is the TAPS magazine. This is not research! Our field is on thin enough ice as it is without calling this stuff "scientific." If we ever want to "prove" anything with any degree of confidence, we have to do way better. The academic world will show us the way.

i donno. they know all the history of the place whats to say they didn't know. If its common knowledge they should of found that out just by looking at a website or a brief skim of history cause it's modernly installed equipment. If they did they wouldn't tell us they did. They would leave it portraying them better cause they found it. Its paving the way for some more evidence comming up i think. I mean even when he saw the one ceiling tile jason was like why is that ceiling tile moved or out of place? It seemed a little set up to me. i like taps its just tv i can't accept things that obviously make ratings better.

I have never seen any taps evidence. I have seen one investigation at a prison where they videoed a shadow running down a rampway. Other than that its all ghost stories.

seax

See i liked that evidence. Did i accept it as truth.... i donno bout that but it was compeling. I would say that its possible on that one, but without having seen it with the own eyes its hard to formulate a conclusion based on anothers evidence. You never know what hands have touched or enhanced the evidence. I trust some taps members but how far i couldn't tell you. I just look at the evidence and say plausible or not.

Well, if the public knew about those fakes, IM sure Kris or whoever, must have done research on the place, as someone always does. Im not sure, I just know it was rotten of that place, and TAPS went across country to expose them. Maybe that was the set up to begin with..JN

I am not a dedicated watcher, however, I get annoyed when the investigators have to be bleeped so many times for bad language. It makes them look like a bunch of uncouth exhibitionists. It would serve the show if the researchers would try to restrict themselves from cursing every 4th word. Just an opinion of an old lady. Sorry if I stepped on toes, but gee, it really would lend more credibility if they would attempt to control themselves just a bit .

yea cant really control how people talk so i just look past that stuff. Besides if you were scared, or got startled suddenly it would be very easy to say the s word or others.. i don't know about scared just like if someone jump out from around a corner ya know..

TAPS wasn’t deliberately hoaxed though, this place is an attraction and it has been for years. So what if the owner put up some little hokie gags, I mean you couldn’t tell they were beyond fake when you heard it? Not even a child would pass the laughing off in the bathroom as authentic or the reflection in the mirror, those were all gags that could be made and bought from a local Halloween store. The hydraulics on the lights were on a timer that wasn’t even on. http://www.mossbeachdistillery.com/loydaue...ersepisode.html here is an article that is on the distilleries website, it’s a pretty lengthy read but it’s worth it. Jason is a big guy and I think if something was deliberately hoaxed Jason and Grant would have acted a little different. For instance if I were being hoaxed do you think for one second I would have stopped to fix the light bulb in the mirror? No way was it all done for TV? I cant say for sure, but I think it may have been.

I don't know if I agree with this. In certain situations where you are startled you are bound to say things without thinking, it's just human nature. I don't think it hurts credibility any unless you are getting bleeped every 3 seconds and only that may show unprofessionalism.

I love the show. and think on occasion they have captured interesting things , but it isn't real investigation. Ghosts aren't dogs that come when called no matter how much you think degrading or challenging them will bring them out. And with the short amount of time they spend in any given area which amount to not retrieving evidence for the most part it becomes boring.

Maybe a week or two at a location would do better. But that would deter from a weekly show and cost viewers which would cost advertisers and money.

The fact that producers spoke to Prof. Lloyd Auerbach and he told them about the appliances yet they either didn't tell the cast is odd ( or even the cast knew - since they said nothing during the wrap up. very odd. I'd be pissed and bringing it up publicly especially since they found the appliances on air why not bring it up on air ? doesn't make sense. )

u watch the trailer for the next episode and u see them squealing in fear 'holy this and holy that' only to learn later that they had spotted insects
jason and grant are less dramatic especially jason,the rest are too talkative during an investigaton,like their minds wander a lot,they seem ,quite frankly,incompetent

They don't curse all that much, especially with Brian gone. The one you may be referring to is the British ghost show, Most Haunted. I can barely understand them with the slang and the foul language.

Hello everyone.
Ghost Hunters is a TV show about a paranormal investigations group (TAPS). Edited for time and content, the television program does not show the entire process, it is not a scientific documentary founded on repeatable process, established facts or recognized theory. Paranormal investigations is a fringe study of a highly controversial nature. I will admit there are flaws, quirks and irritations about the show. Most of those have to do with the production/editing of the show rather than the team itself. However, I find Ghost Hunters to be the best of the breed of like shows out there because of the team, TAPS.

This is my opinion on the article

http://www.mossbeachdistillery.com/loydaue...ersepisode.html

Interesting that the author says the operative word is investigation.

Go have a good dinner but don't expect to have a paranormal encounter and in the same thought states it's his favorite haunted place???
There is such cognitive dissonance in that it makes my head swim.

After the author criticize TAPS he then goes on to talk about his own investigation prior to and after the installment of the fun-house effects. If as an investigator an individual wants their work taken seriously, do not criticize another's work then insert how the work you do/did differs and imply yours is better. It's just bad behavior and doesn't make the author of the article look any more credible to me.. If the author would have stayed on course and said, it's easy to find out that the effects are in place, critic the show or any of the other aspect from their argument, it would have been fine. It was the insertion of their own work at the slight of another which for me is transparent and equals, "don't call those frauds, call my team instead" this in my opinion is TACKY.

The author of the article seems to forget that TAPS did stay and continue to investigate the place because they said even though the effects were in place it didn't negate the possibility of activity being present. They did go over audio and video evidence but didn't find anything other than the fun-house effects.

Could someone have been fooled by the effects? It's possible. Probably not the effects in the womens bathroom unless you had a few drinks or a nervous disposition, (when looked for) the door trigger was obvious and easily found. The mirror could have been found easily by a customer but they would have to be in the right frame of mind to do so, that would mean sober and not rattled by the door effect. I doubt that they turn the effects on during the lunch crowd when they could be easily debunked but wait until the dinner crowd or close to closing when people are relaxed, possibly tired and maybe a little tipsy. It is a distillery so they are serving alcohol. The effects over the bar are more covert. Finding those an individual would have to crawl up there and find them. So their intent is not just to "have a little fun" but to dupe their customers. They restaurant could have kept its reputation had it not resorted to cheap theatrics. For what? Now they have a bunch of PO'ed people who will not visit their restaurant no matter how good the food is. Which is what they should have based their restaurant on. If you have to resort to gimmicks then the product likely isn't very good.


I disagree. TAPS nor the episode of Ghost Hunters didn't do a disservice to the restaurant, the owners did that to themselves and to their clientèle all those who had experiences or wanted them. I myself would have been furious to have gone there, (I've heard of this place for years) and found the fun-house effects.

The author even says in the first quote I used, pertaining to paranormal encounters
Partly why the effects are there? What other reason would the effects be there? And why would Loyd Auerbach (the author of the article) event tacitly approve of them? He seems to cast no censure of the effects being there only about people not knowing of them.

from the same article quoting Loyd Auerbach.

So he doesn't have a problem as an 'Investigator' setting up these things? A researcher setting up and helping to rig the game? Does his honesty about it cancel his earlier dishonesty? And I'm sorry but it makes me question the validity of his work too. The field has enough issues with credibility without this type of Tomfoolery.



Regards,
Mabon.

OH man. They are turning into Most Haunted!

thankfully they are still miles from that crap.

The fact is IT IS a TV show, and because of that all tv shows have to be faking something. If they tell you it isn't scripted than they are probably lying because it's tv and they need certain dialogue to get them an audience.

It can be simple lies, but the fact is there are lies.

For example I was out in Hawaii and I met some of the stylist and people behind the scenes on Extreme Makover they DO NOT build the house in seven days as I learned, but it actually takes a WHOLE MONTH! Hence why you only see x amount of episodes a year ha-ha. Plus, if you think reality tv is reality it is anything BUT!...and if you believe that...well I don't even want to hear your arugements.

To believe that a tv show like TAPS isn't lying is really being ignorant to tv publicity in general.

I understand that the Moss Beach Distillery has a long record of Blue Lady sightings and that they have created funhouse style effects to "enhance" the customer experience....BUT the head chef of the place did give them a tour and present the funhouse effects as legitimate haunted activity. That would have made me mad.

Now, I personally did not know already about these effects in place. Ive seen stories on the place before on television, but the effects were never mentioned. Had I been going out to California to check it out myself, I would have looked into it further, of course. Knowing what I know about the place now, and knowing TAPS' reputation, they probably should have known this stuff in advance; whether from the guy who gave them the tour or through their own research. But I think, with the television show especially, they are relying on their production team to research locations and give them the inside dope. That is obviously NOT happening.

That being said, should I find myself in California, I wouldn't go to the Moss Beach Distillery. I'm not personally looking for funhouse style effects. To me, that does disrespect to the legitimate claims of activity the location may have.

True. But they seem to have the Knocking and cussing down.

Damn.. you guys are spoiling it for me. I haven't watched the new episode yet.

My cable provider is going all digital now. So I lost that channel. I watch it over my girlfriend's place on the weekends. She has a DVR.

They better not go Most Haunted on me!
I got no other ghost show to watch!

Although the Biography Channel has had some pretty cool ghost shows. Anyone watch those?

You can see it on youtube. Besides you still got Paranormal State.

Responding to Jason KB, post #544.

It does disrespect the sightings prior to special effects installation in 1990-91, and it also rules out the sightings after the special effects were added. Even if a full disclosure is given of what and where the special effects are located it would be impossible to accept any evidence after that date. If they are willing to call the hoaxing 'just enhancing the experience' I doubt them to be sincere about anything. The people having the experience after 90-91 would be sincere about their experience true, but it would be based on a fabrication of another.
Is the staff at the restaurant also encouraged to help 'enhance' the paranormal experience of the guests?

Trust and honesty are something that the loss of in this field is difficult or next to impossible to regain. Honest mistakes can be forgiven, fabricating evidence and calling it an 'enhanced' experience is not.

Regards,
Mabon.

I'm not that desperate!

Prof. Auerbach took the words right out of my mouth.

Investigation of a location, especially one with decades of history of reported paranormal encounters, involves interviewing witnesses, historical research, reviewing prior media coverage of the place, and contacting (if possible) other investigators who have gone before (or at the very least reading their published reports of their investigations).

It would appear that none of this was done for the Moss Beach Distillery. At least, there was no indication of it on the show. Of course, the producers cut the segment from many many hours down to less than 30 minutes, so there might have been some of this done. But there was no indication of this.

...Much has been written about the Moss Beach Distillery in books, magazines, newspapers and on the web.

...Dozens and dozens of TV shows and segments have featured stories on the Moss Beach Distillery and its resident ghost, the Blue Lady. I have been the person/investigator most associated with the restaurant, with psychic Annette Martin a close second (and often featured in segments with me). Many of these repeat endlessly on A&E, the Travel Channel, Biography, the History Channel, etc.

...The week before the TAPS team visited the Distillery, I got a call from a producer identifying himself as with the show... he mentioned the Distillery. I offered to provide him with any info about the place and folks experiences there, and specifically mentioned my book. He indicated they had what they needed.


That's a detailed version of the complaint that sprang to my lips as I was watching the episode. In an academic setting, investigators in any field have to acknowledge previous research, and there are several reasons for that. One is that we should give credit where credit is due.

But more importantly, the way that the state of knowledge advances in any discipline is by building on previous research. No investigation occurs in a vacuum, and no investigator starts from scratch. Otherwise, progress in the sciences would be impossible.

The unnecessary dead end at which TAPS found itself in this investigation illustrates the point nicely.

Auerbach addresses some other evident shortcomings of TAPS's methods, but this is the main one that got my attention this week. I enjoy this show a lot and do my best to never miss it, and in my judgement, it's yielded some footage worth thinking about. But it is an entertainment product first, and it shouldn't be presented as serious research.