Did this YouTuber prove ghosts exist?
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 16 ก.ย. 2024
- Did Tyler Blanchard and AirRack scientifically PROVE ghosts exist, or was this a flawed experiment?
Use code WOLFE50 to get 50% OFF First Box and free wellness shots for life with any active subscription at bit.ly/3NDMctA!
Flashlight Debunking deep dive from Mythos Paranormal: • Ghost Hunting FLASHLIG...
Gaming videos on @JohnTwolfe
Thank you Factor for sponsoring this video!
Use code WOLFE50 to get 50% OFF First Box and free wellness shots for life with any active subscription at bit.ly/3NDMctA!
i am once again asking you to debunk my favorite ghost channel, overnight.
@gpheonix1 With the evidence you saw here and critical thinking, you can debunk most things from the Overnight channel.
Factor is actually delicious
My fiance and I have been using Factor this year and really like it so far! We do three a week each (6 meal plan) for work lunches. We were both kind of shocked at how good they were. We didn’t expect to keep ordering after our promo ran out but we did! :) I’ll have to have him use your code so we can snag a cheap week and support you! 😂
Really appreciate you choosing sponsors you actually use and have used for a long enough time it feels more genuine. Also appreciate the skit throwback.
For proper scientific results, they should also have 2 additional control groups. Once that is told they're in a normal house while being in a normal house and one that is told to be in a normal house while being in a haunted house. This likely wouldn't prove ghosts exist but we'd have something actually scientific to study, like if ghost are placebo.
Wonder what the scientific definition of a haunted house would be. Because if we would count deaths, I bet every huge apartment building has a way bigger toll than single family homes. Homicides? Suicides? Strangely, ghosts rarely like apartment buildings. Also, what is the definition of a "normal" house? Does grandma dying in her sleep disqualify a building? She could still not want to leave, right?
Just use a Faraday cage, invite ghost inside, and turn on your "magical" communication devices like evp, not rng dictionary thing, but of course, paranormal investigators don't have faraday cage, but they have magical devices to speak with ghosts lol
I'd honestly be interested in seeing the reactions of skeptics put into a (somehow confirmed) haunted house and told it's normal. How they would explain strange occurrences. Could make for a fun urban fantasy story.
Watchers did it, when Shane in haunted buildings, nothing happens.@@arshellnut2730
I know that if I stayed in a normal house but was told it was haunted, I’d probably think EVERYTHING was a ghost.
Pipes clang? Ghost.
Random creak? Ghost.
It’d be really interesting to see people reacting to a placebo house lol
How DARE YOU say that there's not enough evidence?!
The light goes flashy flash-flash and the music box goes spiny-tingting!
Enough to publish a full peer reviewed paper on paranormal.
How DARE YOU imply that this is real?!
Their friend going ham on the light switch and the music box just being spun by fishing wire!
Enough to cure special ed kids.
@@Galaxius2117 yeah there was really no need for that ableist comment at the end. my autism is literally part of my identity, theres no 'cure'. its the same as saying a 'cure for black kids'
"One of these houses is just a normal house, but one is actually haunted"
I feel like they skipped a step there
Yeah, they forgot to prove that the house is indeed haunted, and not just rumored/believed to be haunted.
The funniest thing about this oversight is that if they had evidence of the house really being haubted, then they a) wouldn't need to conduct this experiment as proving a house being haunted would also prove the existence of ghosts and b) be stripped of any and all scientific accreditation, because sending human test subjects into a house they (thought they) knew was haunted by paranormal phenomena would be subjecting them to an unknown risk an md therefore considered a grossly unethical human experiment.
And then the guy conducting the “experiment” goes with the group in the “haunted” house. The ammount of basic methodological errors here would earn you a swift kick in the nuts from the peer reviewers on a real scientific journal.
They also committed the scientific cardinal sin of assuming their conclusion before they even tested their hypothesis.
They went in with the assumption that one house was actually haunted. That's going to bias everything.
Exactly.
That's "presupposition".
Atheist do this same thing about God not existing and evolution being real there’s no basis or proof of either at all
Every time I see you pop up, I can't help but remember that short lived show where they had a haunted house investigated separately by ghost hunters and a home inspector, and the inspector would just be like "Oh yeah, these windows aren't properly sealed and causing a draft, some loose pipes rattling, and that weird smell is coming from the drain." I loved it because the inspector was just like a very normal guy and saying that instead of being scared of ghosts, just do some basic maintenance to solve the problem.
@@kirigherkinsparanormal home inspectors. All episode are on TH-cam
@@kirigherkins If its the show I'm thinking of, I think Jenny Nicholson did a video on it, it was called Paranormal Home Inspectors
I need to find this show, that sounds really interesting.
@@ninetailedfox579121someone already mentioned it, but Jenny Nicholson did a great video on it. Definitely check it out. It is so damn funny
My fav episode was the guy that claimed his bathroom door kept locking even though the door didn’t have a lock on it and it cuts to the home inspector pointing at the lock on the handle 😂
Hey appreciate the shout out! Thanks 😎🤘
Yo i am a big fan
John as internet ghost detective is the John we didnt deserve, but needed
🤖🤖🤖🤖🤖🤖
you're never gonna be like Justin Y.
Are you like a professional commentor or something? Cause I swear I see on almost every video I watch.
If you like debunking videos, I really enjoy TheSideEyeGuy and Beardo Gets Scared. They are very different from each other and John, so there's plenty of space for everyone's videos. :)
Classic bot comment from one of the most famous bot accounts on TH-cam.
I love that the weight of scientific evidence hinders on the activation of what seems to be a wound up music box.
haha hope the coffin is made of steel to bear that enormous burden...
I love the weight of scientific evidence of evolution is whale and chimp bones proven to be false ☠️
"I don't know" is an important lesson. It's better to say, "I don't know" than fill in the answer with our own preconceived notions. If people could be trusted not to run away with fiction to the most extremes, maybe there wouldn't be so much fear around fiction vs knowledge, and trying to prove or disprove. I think that's the real fight we're all working against - fear. Love what you do John. Keep it up
I love how John always compliments Shane and Ryan's Ghost Files series as being like, the only actual real ghost hunting experience
ikr!
When was this?? I must have missed it!
@@brendanwood8388 5:00
YES! I was looking for this comment
@@brendanwood83885:03 7:42
As a college psych research student YES people do not understand what science is at a basic level. There is always a confidence interval that you have to accept there is always some other possibility of things you cannot account for
Something about Airrack makes me irrationally angry and I don't know why.
Nice to see you here! :)
Same, I’m sure he’s a fine person but I just do not like him
sounds like an possession lol
Didn't expect to see you here, IGP. I love your videos btw :)
Small World lol
There actually is that video idea you want in the form of a show. It’s called Paranormal Home Inspectors. Everytime they freak out about ghost this guy comes in and explains what’s actually going on
Your comment about old houses being drafty is so true. The house I'm living in right now was originally made in the 1920s or so, and if there's smoke or a candle lit or anything like that during a windy day, you can straight up see it shift when the wind picks up, it's kinda crazy!!! Anyways, great video as always!!
Anything that still has lathe and plaster in the walls is insanely drafty. Currently redoing all the walls in our house to drywall, cause in the winter you can literally feel how cold the walls get because it basically offers next to no insulation.
@@ericlamb4501 Yeah exactly the same with ours. We're renting and we end up spending so much into heat because the insulation is so awful.
I was tearing my hair out reading comments about my “drafty house” theories in previous videos where it was obvious they didn’t know what living in a drafty house is like. It can get pretty wild in there!!
@@JohnWolfemy high rise was built in the 70s, which isn’t even *that* old in terms of buildings and is still drafty as all heck. Never doubted you. (Also as someone with cats I will never be able to know if I have ghosts.)
@@JohnWolfe Yeah it's crazy!! We can definitely feel the wind in any part of the house, it's true!!!
I love that mega close-up clip of Sam aggressively whispering, “true” has become part of your videos! Makes me laugh every time!
I’m waiting for it every time 😂
"we are going to treat group A with essential oils, and we'll treat group B with a placebo"
The problem with "proving" ghosts exist is that no one has adequately defined what ghosts are, and further, no one has ever said what would constitute "proof." A flashlight turning on and off, assuming no malfeasance on their part, isn't evidence of anything. Not saying it's not weird, but it's a big jump to go from "I dunno why this is happening" to "it's a ghost!"
And with the PNB, the fact that it's marketed as a ghost hunting device tells me that the makers have a vested interest in ensuring their device gets positive results. If you bought one, and it never triggered, it would be pretty disappointing, wouldn't it? You'd want something that went off as easily as possible. Like the Panasonic DR60 digital recorder. Ghost hunters love it because they get EVPs with it so easily, but that's because it records in such poor quality (worse than a land line phone) that it produces a lot of audio artifacts that sound like EVPs. They don't like better digital audio recorders because they're good quality and don't give artifacts they interpret as EVP.
Exactly. The equipment they use are always open for interpretation and the reasons why they use it are also all over the place. It's safe to say that ghosts are supposedly electromagnetic in some way since they can "mess" with electronics but back in the good old days with actual magnetic tape recording for video or sound it would make more sense because it's probably easier to mess with the magnetic properties of a tape than with a digital recorder that's probably electromagnetically shielded to a certain degree. I also remember ghosts messing with the "snow" on an old TV or radio or maybe even manipulate the sound on the radio as they might be able to manipulate the radio waves. That actually brings up another question because is it that they can mess with electronics because they have electric hands or are they supposed to be made out of electromagnetic energy because with all the wifi/radio/cellular signals you're probably not going to survive very long as a ghost or hold a specific shape for very long.
And the fact we dont even know if there are different types of ghosts or if each ghost acts in a similar way to others. We dont know anything about ghosts!! How can we try to prove ghosts are real if we dont even know the thing we're interacting with is a ghost and not some different entity?
The "True" clip gets me every time
True!
TRUE
TRUUUE
@@JohnWolfe hahaahahah
TRUEEE!!
You're 100% right about scientific illiteracy being a huge problem. I hate it when people say "well such and such is just a theory" or "this has never been scientifically proven."
Yes. Because a scientific theory is not the same the colloquial use of the word theory and science does not ever prove anything in the positive sense. The scientific method is designed to rule out possibilities to narrow down options. Please take a single science class. I think I learned this crap in elementary school.
I also love when some people go "there is no scientific explanation to this" as soon as they come across something that they can't explain.
How arrogant and simple minded does someone have to be to think that if they don't have an explanation, then nobody has it?
i like to imagine john doesn't tell kimmy what he plans to film and she walks in on him talking to a flashlight
My problem with ghosts is… there appear to be stringent time rules to ghosts.. meaning… no caveman ghosts… no early man ghosts.. it’s always (in the scope of humanity) recent people.
Clearly, the caverman ghost's energy has run its course ;-)
It's always creepy Victorian time ghosts/wild west ghosts/civil war ghosts or very recent in the event that the person hosting the show is cashing in on some murder detective angle or something.
I once believed if you refuse to move on or can't(however that works), your being or spirit or whatever has a finite time stuck on earth before it just moves on...but civil war ghosts still exist , even ancient old places so who knows ...if you hang around middle eastern ruins at night, talking thousands of years old, youre gonna experience some shit....in the end we only truly find out when we die 😂
I wonder if this means people only recently had trouble moving on to the afterlife.. do ya think heaven is backed up? Lol
“This house has been haunted by the spirit of HOO HOO BAH GOH, a cave man from the BCs who once lived on this land”
5:04 i love it when ryan and shane are mentioned
Ikrrrr🤍
Was hoping he’d use Shane asking if a ghost was Judith repeatedly until the flashlight turned on lol
Best ghost hunters in the world
The only real ghost hunters who even have their own bridge, not everyone can boast of that
I used to work at an alarm company and just about anything can set motion sensors off. Dust, bugs, rain, vibration, etc
Not to mention: An experiment doesn't set out to prove or disprove a hypothesis based on the findings of the experiment. Hypotheses are only supported or not supported by the evidence provided in an experiment. "Proof" comes with time and many, many, many experiments supporting the same hypothesis. The word "proof" is not really used in experimental science (or at least, it shouldn't be, given 'prove" is much too strong a word for what experiments can typically provide).
It's all pseudoscience, top to bottom.
These ghost hunters pretty much all throw around the terms like "proof" and "evidence" without any understanding of what it means to really test their assertions. They are using scientific terms in a wholly colloquial sense, because it feels like it confers some level of professionalism that simply isn't there.
This applies twice as much to all of the pseudo-scientific "tools" that aren't actually calibrated to anything, don't measure anything meaningful in this context, and are entirely designed to be visually and aurally interesting first and foremost. They are almost always given names and functions that provide an air of "scientific measurement" to ill-defined properties which received wisdom claims (without empirical evidence) must be specific features or markers of the supernatural.
@@JosephDaviesexactly and how can you prove something which has so many variables and personal interpretation and experiment methodology, sample size bias/personal bias. Unless your getting physical full manifestations every day - which never happens 😂. Love research.
You only really prove things in math. There's like a handful of proofs in physics like the Planck's mass and length.
Are you saying that science can't prove anything? Sorry but it's all science does, proving the cause or the "non-cause" of a natural phenomenon. And I don't know what you mean by "experimental science", all science comes from experimentation.
right! that's why even something as easy to demonstrate as gravity is called the theory of gravity, not proof of gravity. science doesn't rule out the possibility that their conclusions can change.
Ayyyyy another media literacy ghost video! Excellent stuff, John.
I think my favorite part is where you talk about the PMB: "How do you explain the motion sensor going off so consistently in the haunted house? It's pretty simple. I can't... But Tyler Blanchard can't either." - This is so key. There are a variety of things that could be causing a motion sensor to trigger, but based on the evidence, we can't definitively say one way or another what it was. It could be dust, insects, a drafty house, or probably any number of things. Hell, maybe it could even be ghosts. But the point is, there is not enough tangible evidence to draw a solid conclusion.
It doesn't necessarily matter if ghosts exist and can set off "ghost hunting equipment" because no amount of correlating anomalous electrical activity with ghosts can ever prove that the one caused the other. Besides all of that, the existence of Ghosts, much like the existence of God, is an unfalsifiable hypothesis by its nature. Ghosts are by definition invisible, intangible, and inscrutable. Even the definition can vary depending on who you ask or what culture you're looking at.
I love ghosts as a cultural phenomenon: I love the mythology of it all, I love hearing spooky stories that I can almost believe, I love trying to pin some unexplainable happenings on something mysterious (when the circumstances call for it), and honestly I would like to believe that there is such a thing as ghosts. I love ghosts because there is something poignant and psychically resonant about them - both reassuring and terrifying in a philosophical way - but when it comes to a scientific understanding of our world, a cultural phenomenon is all it can be.
Yeah this is the really important thing. The null hypothesis is that ghosts don't exist, and the burden of proof is on believers to demonstrate that they are, in fact, real. Having something mysterious happen isn't good enough, that still leaves room for all kinds of doubt. "We don't know why this happened" does not automatically lead to "ghosts did it."
I feel like if ghosts were provable scientifically it would have already happened. There are certainly enough people interested in trying. But "ghosts" are so inconsistent and the "experiments" so unreliable that there isn't really any way to conclude anything. So unless ghosts come out and start blatantly making themselves known, I have to conclude that the null hypothesis hasn't been disproven, and it seems unlikely that it ever will be.
The main problem with people trying to prove ghosts exist is that they can never provide an actual coherent theory of why ghosts exist, what exactly they are, and what results we should expect from an experiment if they were real. That's of course on purpose, they keep it vague so they can't be easily disproven but it also means that literally all their results have no greater implications. Like the motion detector going off remains just that, the motion detector going off because they haven't explained why or how a ghost would cause an ultrasonic motion detector to go off. In actual science when conducting an experiment you explain the theory behind it first so that you can convincingly show that your results line up with what the theory predicts.
7:11
Plot Twist: Your studio is actually haunted and this is the first documented proof.
It's literally the only possible explanation!
or is it all an elaborate hoax?
he acts like he what he believes is true that ghosts aren’t real but it’s not THE AFTERLIFE IS TRUE
@@nbeizzo And what proof do you have? Keep in mind that there is no concrete proof that the afterlife exists or not, and there never will be.
The amount of respect I have for John Wolfe is immeasurable.
Came here to post this!
I appreciate Johns work so much, I didn’t even skip over the paid promotion.
I love when John tries to be more risky and just have fun. Just be himself with no filters. I feel like there was a time he was more judgmental towards himself and was afraid to be perceived as cringe. Nowadays he feels more natural and self-confident and it's really great to see.
Totally agree. I feel like he is more relaxed and having more fun with his content. And I'm here for it all. I love his other channel, too. It's really chill. 😎
Agree 💯
Congrats on the 900k John!! I’ve been watching your videos for a few years and love the new direction you’ve taken. Happy for you and definitely deserved!
Today John learned his studio is haunted. Flashlight proves it.
it is haunted by a boy whose age is irrelevant. How spooky is that. It's funny to think, if John was a paranormal TH-camr, hundreds of people would likely believe that flashlight clip.
It's like they googled "how to science" and then thought they proved something.. lmao. The environmental difference is what lost me, honestly
"to prove ghosts exist, I'll be using a house currently occupied by ghosts"
Foolproof!
It really is striking that people can be so blind to begging the question so blatantly.
I don't believe in ghosts, but this complaint is just semantics. Yes, it'd be more precise to say that the house is 'believed to be haunted' or 'marketed as haunted,' but it's not inaccurate to shorten those phrases to just 'haunted.' The surrounding context fills in the rest.
@@softreyna It's important because it's a central part of the "experiment". The entire exercise is a mess precisely because *everything* is undefined, inaccurate, or takes its conclusions as initial assumptions.
@@JosephDavies No, the central part of the experiment is that believers generally accept the house as haunted, a state for which 'haunted' is an adequate word in the context of colloquial speech. Media literacy isn't just about recognizing when media is being deceptive or willfully ignorant, it's also reading media in reasonably good faith for what's actually being said rather than just taking the first literal interpretation that comes to mind and running with it.
@@softreyna It's not semantics: the only possible way the initial hypothesis can be "If people have experiences in the haunted house, but not the other one, that can only mean that ghosts are real" is by presupposing the haunting was real from the start. Particularly with how they don't bother to rule out, and even outright ignore, all other differences between the houses and external factors at play, that's pretty clearly their assumption. Maybe not on purpose, but they still designed it on that assumption.
But okay, let's go with your interpretation. What believers in specific believe it's haunted? How many of them? Why do they believe it's haunted? What was the reasoning and methodology for picking this specific supposedly-haunted house over any other ones? How can they be absolutely certain that nobody has ever had a "paranormal experience" in the other house? Why is the assumption that if there IS some different experience between the houses, it automatically must be because the supposed haunting is real?
It's still a pretty ridiculous a statement even reading it that way.
Are we going to avoid the obvious probability that there is a ghost in John's room.
If ghosts are real why are there no dinosaur ghosts?
How do you know there aren’t? Awfully large amount of people scratched and growled at out there 😆
Because their ghosts were wiped out by a space rock😂
Because the concept of ghosts is tightly linked to religious believes, believes that pre-dates the discovery of dinosaurs.
@@na-ky8ouI’m pretty sure they believed in Jesusaurous
“Nobody misses these”
Says who!? Bring on the skits ❤😂
i just want you to know as a semi-believer (i want ghosts to be real so bad thatd be so cool 😭) i LOVE your debunking vids!! i didnt rlly know why until rewatching a few vids; you dont bash people for having a belief, you simply have a problem when stealing money (lying to ppl and making them spend thousands to stay in a fake haunted house) and/or emotional/psychological manipulation (bringing up ppls dead family members, etc etc) is involved, and i admire that SO much!! thank u for these vids!!!
and also obviously you have a problem w people just straight up lying (the devices that are very specific to 'the paranormal', i try to steer clear from that shit lmao) and i LOVE that. i think my biggest ghost hunter pet peeve is when ppl talk abt orbs 😭 like pls think for more than ONE second PLEASE
Giving a whole new meaning to "think critically" on this channel. The HarshlyCritical days feel like so long ago. Keep up the good work, John!
Thank you for debunking the flash lights, I smelled fake in all these videos but these flashlights left me clueless.
Good video!
Regarding the ultrasound motion sensor. I noticed that in the haunted house the sensors are on tables and on the other house they are on the floor. Depending on how sensitive they are, vibrations from sound and steps could set them on. Basically detecting the wall or ceiling.
Edit.
After seeing the part of the functioning of the sensor. There is also another explanation, given that the sensor produces a cone of ultrasound, depending on the composition of the walls and ceiling the ultrasound could be reflected by them and detect movement outside the direct field of view of the sensor. Basically detecting the movement of the people even if they are not directly in front of the sensor.
Well explained!
Yeah. I work in sonar engineering, and honestly the type of ultrasonic sensors you find in these gimmicky toys are gonna be the cheap bottom-shelf junk--the sort of stuff you can buy for a few bucks and connect to your Arduino. They're janky af and like John mentions, anything from air currents to sound can set them off.
@@tychosis it's kinda funny how that works. most people would think detecting more is better in general, but it really isn't.
precision is the true sign of quality.
@@alicepbg2042 Yeah, I've been in engineering for a while, and one universal engineering tenet is "good, fast, or cheap. you can pick two." It isn't hard to build instruments, building *good* instruments is something else entirely.
I do also find it inherently suspicious that they use ultrasound detectors sold by a ghost hunting store, like wouldn't a ghost hunting store have a clear financial incentive to build “instruments” that are unreliable and thus “prove” ghosts? There's no reason to use these, you can buy ultrasound detectors from most hardware stores or you can get them as a kit for an Arduino so the choice to specifically use these is suspicious. I mean if they got the Arduino kit then they'd actually know exactly what the circuit was like and thus could rule out any trickery.
I've been away from YT for a bit but I have to say I am enjoying your analysis and methods on debunking these sorts of videos, really cool stuff. Thanks for the video and all the hard work!
at the bare minimum you would want every group to try this in both locations.
have more than 2 groups.
have groups of actual skeptics who dont believe at all, and are willing to inspect the equipment and areas fully for possible interference.
similarly have groups of extreme believers, these should guarantee false positives in the non haunted house.
do tests where you tell people both are haunted, and tests where you claim neither is haunted.
You'd also want a variety of different locations instead of just two. Have like ten different groups all inspecting each of 10 different locations, but don't tell any of them anything more than "Some of these houses are thought to be haunted, and some are not. See if you can figure out which is which." And make it double blind, so even the people running the experiment don't know which house is which until afterward.
Yeah why won't you do all of that?
@@-tera-3345now that's an experiment I would volunteer for honestly, a double blind test would be much better and expanding the sample size for both test groups and explored locations would bring in more data to analyze, but that would require actual time and effort unfortunately. I don't think most of these groups can afford that or care enough for trying, but wouldn't it be grand if they took an actually scientific approach, ir at least tried? We can still hope at least
I have watched buzzfeed unsolved and they have never encountered a ghost
John should have his own ghost hunting series. He can go to places to either debunk or see if he gets some real evidence.
yeah.... but we all know nothing actually paranormal would happen 🤣
There is a Swiss TH-camr doing that, "Le Grand JD"! He has been doing ghost hunting for years, never seen anything!
The issue with that is it would probably be boring. A lot of time just looking down dark hallways and talking to yourself.
If you want something close to what you suggested, Shane and Ryan did a great series for Buzzfeed Unsolved before getting their own channel called the Watcher. No set ups or overreacting just a mostly rational approach to ghost hunting with two funny dudes
I like how you imply that there'd be "real evidence". 😂
I wouldn't blame him for not doing it. Ghost hunting would be incredibly boring without having scaredy cats thinking they experienced something and devices that are guaranteed to give misleading results. Imagine going in with a modern LED flashlight, amazing quality voice recorder, EMF with all electronics actually off, etc. Snooze Fest.
How did you make a comment 44 minutes ago when the video has been out 35 minutes. 😮
One of the things I love about my favourite paranormal youtubers (you, Mr Grey, Beardo Gets Scared) is the love / respect you have for Ryan and Shane (Buzzfeed Unsolved and now The Watcher) 🙂
*Shane and Ryan
@@guy_commenting it doesn't really matter if it's Shane and Ryan or Ryan and Shane
@@wheezeeeshane has a bridge, Ryan does not therefore shane comes first
I love these ghost hunting debunking videos so much. I will watch them no matter what. Please keep them coming, John! 😊
YES SKETCHES! Keep up this ghost stuff, it's the most fun I've had in ages, I love it n
Sponsorships are the perfect excuse to bring back sketches!
i really hope one day john goes on his own ghost haunt and debunk everything as he goes along.
Whoa, John's camera in Dredge was moving on its own. We literally see him take his hands off and it still moves all by itself. Ghosts scientifically confirmed.
John is one of those actually honest TH-camrs that share their own opinion, with I feel like we have very little of these days😂
I love how their experiment to prove that ghosts are real hinges on the assumption that ghosts are real. If ghosts aren't real then neither house is haunted and the entire experiment is a failure right from the word go.
Begging the question right from the start...
Although I feel like you could rephrase it and say that one house is BELIEVED to be haunted and the other isn't, so having people react to them differently might imply there is something different about them...although, unfortunately, there would still be no reason to assume that it must be ghosts. They're already different in all kinds of ways. (And that's only if you assume the whole thing is genuine instead of just being staged with actors for the video.)
@@ZeroKitsune The only way for it to make any kind of logical sense would be to not have a paranormal investigation at all, but just tell both groups they are simply staying the night and that neither building is haunted. You could then set up any equipment yourself in equivalent locations and have a lot of cameras to check for any activity.
@@ninetailedfox579121That's exactly what i thought after watching this video. And not just one group nor just 1 night. They should have more than one group and probably spend a week in both houses unaware of any myths.
i’m someone who believes in ghosts and actively ghost hunts i enjoy videos like this a lot. i appreciate healthy skepticism. not to mention most of these “ghost hunters” on youtube don’t really show the reality of ghost hunting at alllll. this video is really fun! im excited to check out more.
I also think it’s telling that the Tyler guy only seems to attend the “experiment” in the supposedly haunted house. He is probably projecting his biases on their “tests.”
Great video as always! I love that you’re teaching us about literacy! I would only suggest more funny Zak Bagans inclusions lol
Actually, the coffin shape for the motion censor is to remind you that half your money spent was wasted on an edgy aesthetic choice instead of true working value
I love John for going over the basics of experiment design using a 10min clickbait video.
Definitely enjoy the new change with the channel! Crappy horror games are fun to watch but they get old fast when you're the one playing them.
Been watching you since I was in middle school man your almost there at that million can’t wait to see you get it ❤🎉
Mr. Wolfe, the patience, eloquence, and charisma required to make these videos is a gift to the community, like how you really spell it out for people. There’s logic and critical thinking to everything you bring to the table while still giving the benefit of the doubt. You are on the front lines of media literacy, thank you for your service.
Loved this, thank you for your debunking it’s greatly appreciated!! ❤
Genuinely love these videos, great marriage of "think critically" and the spooky stuff! Thanks, John!
Fun Video. I am an older man, living alone in an old house. In the long dark and cold Winter here in Norway, my house are making a lot of cracking an noises. Doors are opened by them self. But Ghosts? No, just an old house reacting to the cold. I am still big and strong and armed, but i just lock my doors and feel safe.
I'm happy I found this channel, the humor and debunking is great and John seems like a genuinely good person👍👍
cool video, liked the scientific aspects of it and the breakdown and was pleasently surprised on how the scientist disproved the reliability of two of the experiments, but if they had acquired the notive about the third device this would have been also quickly disproven in reliability. Thanks for the video.
This was fantastic. I loved your breakdown of the scientific process, critical thinking and the problem with pre-supposing an outcome to an experiment.
I worked in academia and although I was in the humanities the same approach holds true. You're trained to be critical and skeptical as a baseline so that you're always interrogating, not only the thing you're researching, but your own ideas and assumptions. I once heard someone describe being an academic as 'being a professional pain in the arse' because of the need to question everything and it's very true. Going into a research project saying you're going to prove something (in essence, stating your conclusion before you begin) is anti-academic at its core and casts serious doubt over the reliability of your analysis, the rigour of your research and the self-reflexivity of the project as a whole.
Questioning your own biases and assumptions is a vital part of this - embracing your curiosity to the point of not just being willing to be wrong but being happy to be wrong, because that means you get to ask more questions and dig even deeper as you try to understand whatever you're exploring. Only then do you have the possibility of gaining meaningful insight into a question and/or finding solutions to a problem. It's really refreshing and enjoyable to hear this being talked about. For me, the process of digging through the murk to keep finding complexity upon complexity is what makes life so interesting and the search for knowledge so insatiably endless. Thank you for taking the time to put these thoughts and ideas into words in your video!
On a totally different note, that clip from your Dredge playthrough on John Twolfe cracked me up. Really been enjoying all the content on your second channel!
I always enjoy these videos, and the rest of the things you put out. I'm glad to see that the ghost in your place is doing well and you all are talking more.
I got excited when John pulled out the Maglite for two reasons:
1. I figured out the trick they used before he mentioned it.
2. I love Maglites. Great flashlights for scouting.
Love these videos.
What's special about Maglites compared to any other flashlight?
@LRM12o8 they're pretty sturdy, so they can take a bit of rough treatment. In addition, the twist cap method also changes how the light comes out of the flashlight, so you can have a wide beam, or you can have a super concentrated beam. And finally, they often came with a little belt loop, so you could attach it to your belt (which is part of the scouting uniform). I'm hoping all of these are still true for it.
And the incandescent ones came with spare bulbs!
Scenario 1: ghosts aren't real, and it's purely environmental influence. This is not accounted for.
Scenario 2: ghosts are real and are literally everywhere, including in both houses. This is not accounted for.
Scenario 3: ghosts are not real, but someone in one or the other group is convinced they are and therefore propagates the idea that they are experiencing ghost activity. This is not accounted for.
Scenario 4: ghosts are real, but travel, and therefore aren't home right now. This is not accounted for.
Scenario 5: ghosts aren't real, but horses produce radio waves and can communicate telepathically, but it interferes with our equipment and one of these houses happens to be near a farm so we are actually seeing horse thoughts. This is not accounted for.
Scena- you get my point.
This proves absolutely nothing.
You know what no more spoilers
Edit: ayyy i got more replies and more likes than the pinned comment and IGP i love both of you btw
thanks for the summary
Comments ruin everything 🙄😂
This comment killed me😂😂😂, wasnt even 2min in the Video and saw this comment haha
Shooketh!
FUCK
I love how so many ghost hunting tools are just RNG machines of various sorts so they can pareidolia up "unexplained" phenomena.
He did scientifically prove idiots are gullible… So there’s that !?
when you’re using a device that is coffin shaped and has a creepy music box attached to it as a tool in a “scientific” “experiment” to “prove” ghosts exists, you already lost your credibility
🤓
I'm loving this new content! I also love the extra explanations and education sprinkled in with some absolute comedy gold 🤣
Personally I have missed your sketches, I think you're a silly guy!
Love the video!! Your ghost videos always fun !
Honestly love these ghost vids John is doing, super interesting and fun way to do my work and listen to something neat. Keep up the good work mans!
ah real test I'd like to see is to send some super chill, preferrably smart "non-believe" people into a haunted house without telling them anything about it but telling them to document their whole 2 nights or so, maybe even giving them some equipment to just turn on without them knowing how to use it.
Almost 900k John, woop woop! Well deserved!
a lot of logic leaps. 1: how do you know that house is haunted in the first place!!!
"I can prove ghosts are real. We're going to use this haunted house, which I know is haunted. No I don't need to prove that first. Anyway-"
This
Man, you are so awesome and hilarious I have been binge watching your videos and even fall asleep listening to your videos. Just can't get enough of your debunking. Keep up the great work!
John's production value has gone up by 700% since he changed his content style. I'll die on this hill.
As long as you also haunt it, its all good!😅
I'm wanted to ask since I have no idea, will he be not playing horror games from now on?
Maglite Flashlights make me irrationally angry when I see people freaking the fuck out over them. Even without knowing the exact science behind them just knowing about how they are set to just between on and off is enough to make you skeptical about them. That's why so many don't tell you that's how they work. Ryan and Shane at least explain how all their tools actually work alongside helpful visuals. Sam and Colby, and these other goofballs just go "trust me bro."
I think that's what frustrates me about Ghost Files though; other folks might be stupid and not even think about how these nonsense tools work, but Ryan and Share clearly do. Yet they still use them, despite being bogus.
Shane has admitted he just dgaf, but Ryan undermines his own credibility and any potential anomalies he finds by calling everything "evidence" regardless of the reliability of the source (or the lack of actually defining any experiments). There's nothing scientific about what they're doing, but they both treat it as if it is.
It's bizarre to me that they go out of their way to tell the audience how these tools work (or, rather, don't) but then treat them as if any of it is meaningful.
It's just that nobody cares about ghosts, ghouls, zombies and vampires, they're just scary stories from children's fairy tales. If someone seriously decides to do research on paranormal, they should post raw footage, not as evidence, but as a protocol, following which everyone in the world can conduct their own experiment and post results, this will allow to collect a large enough sample to at least form a hypothesis, which further research can possibly turn into a theory. There are houses where 1 person died, but there is a scary history there, so every creak and crackle will be perceived as a ghost. In my town, 1.3 million people died during WW2, but reports of paranormal are rare (most of them youtubers who scream when they see a flashing light on their magic device). No one does research such nonsense because there are real enough problems in the world that need to be solved. @@JosephDavies
Did people not grow up with incandescent bulb flashlights? Like seriously it doesn't even need to be that brand, if you shake a flashlight like that you'll flicker the light... The batteries move, the connection to the light moves, it's not difficult. They're pretty rudimentary tech.
Sadly, the reliably inconsistent behavior of the device _is_ the point.
@@aerrae5608honestly I'd love to know exactly when they went out of style because I'm 25 and I HATE those things. Have dealt with stupid twist flashlights and I've almost thrown one away thinking it was broken because they are just that touchy and like to flicker if they're even slightly off. Annoying things, would love to see a ghost hunter try not using one but I think it'd be an impossible challenge lol
Didn't realize how much I missed those sketches until now. Anyway, really love these debunk videos!
How Can Mirrors Be Real if Our Eyes Aren't Real?
Omg
Because salami is pink and red at the same time
brain rot
I hate Jaydan Smith so much.
How can you be real if your brain isn't real? Exactly, so shut your fucking mouth.
I love that you brought up scientists or magicians! The Amazing Randy is 100% a perfect example of how that works and helps!
The twist is that John Wolf's home is actually haunted by a male ghost who prefer not to disclose their own age, which is why "ghost hunting" equipment is triggered in his debunking examples.
Love the videos.
As an Atheist, I consider *ghost* debunk videos and *religious claim* debunk videos as being under the same umbrella.
*"Supernatural", fantastical* claims are always, inevitably replaced by *Naturalistic* explanations.
Never in human history has it ever gone the other way.
As an amateur electrical engineer, I can confidentally say the second device was cobbled together with components from amazon
The SPST switch which will give out after 5 switches.
The ardiuno is even soldered with the header pin wires usually provided in the kit.
For anyone out there who isn't sure: Science is, first and foremost, the process of attempting to disprove a hypothesis through experimentation. The most definitive things we can say about a hypothesis is whether it is false. If you can't seem to prove that it's false, you adjust the hypothesis accordingly.
I want to see John do a paranormal investigation with some of these TH-camrs.
I love that you left in your mistake with the flashlight. It feels good to watch and support someone so genuine. Keep up the good work, John - you're one of my favorite content creators out there. :)
I hope CK, Kimmy and you are doing well and that the baby girl is healthy and thriving!
That comment about trying to ‘prove’ not disprove your hypothesis had me cackling, just shows how badly some people want to prove they’re right because they don’t want to be wrong, rather then educate themselves (forensics undergrad here lol)
"Dr. Albert Newton Farraday" made me laugh so hard 😂
These scientific method breakdowns have been excellent. Reminding the people what they should have learned as a kid!
they tried to prove ghosts are real with sample size of 2, one "haunted" and one "not haunted". how did they determine either was haunted or not haunted?
I always felt like the ones who actually had paranormal experiences just keep it to themselves or a close circle . Not brag about it on social media .
It’s the equivalent of going around on YT saying “ look at me doing good things for the homeless !!! I’m going to record all of it instead of just doing it simply out of the goodness of my heart without a camera in front of me “
How are those even remotely equivalent?
@@msjkramey It's not the best example, but in both cases, when people are doing something in front of a camera, they have an obvious conflict of interest to appeal to whoever their audience is, instead of just being sincere and honest. If they stand to GAIN from it, how can we trust them to mean what they say? Couldn't they easily be lying or playing things up for their own benefit?
@ZeroKitsune my problem with filming homeless people isn't the perceived sincerity. It's the exploitation of people who are going through tough times. I don't really care WHY someone is helping others as long as they're helping them, but I do care about HOW. Talking about seeing a ghost isn't inherently exploitative, so I don't have a problem with it
@@msjkramey I just tried to explain myself like 3 different times the last 5 hours but the comments aren’t showing up for some reason . Idek if this one will . So sorry
I’m not saying that filming a “paranormal “ experience is exploitative. What I’m saying is when you do it how these ppl do it , it just comes off as attention seeking and fake . I’ve had 2 experiences throughout my life that I felt were paranormal but there could also be a logical reason behind it, I’m not going to go on YT and be like “ OMG GUYS THIS JUST HAPPENED TO ME AND NOW IM GOING TO SHOW YOU” like think about it , if something paranormal actually happened to you, would you REALLY film it ? No . Cuz you would in total shock about what just happened and you’d nope out of there . Same thing with helping the homeless , I’ve helped out here and there when the moment came like I’ve give them change or offer them a nice meal and go on with my day , not be like “ wait , hold up , lemme pull up my IG”
HOWEVER , what that couple did in John’s other video was actually exploitative where they were charging ppl to stay at their “ haunted “ house and triggering their customers saying that their dead loved ones were with them when in reality they just lurked through their social media and found posts and info about their loved ones that passed away and would pass it off as they’re “speaking” with them from beyond the grave .
@@RubexQewb lol this one did show up, funny enough
Logic and humor. Wonderful combo.
One thing to add with the "ghost lights"; though both the old and new houses had dust, old homes like the one in this situation are more likely to be drafty.
That would seem to be a reasonable variable with temperature fluctuating more, thus causing that light to go on and off more often than the new house "ghost light".
I will believe in ghosts if there is video with dialog with any means (evp, ghulboxes, etc) inside a Faraday cage. Then I can repeat this experiment myself and finally get my ghost to pay rent.
it's probably fakeable. just gotta bring all the necessary equipment inside the cage. assuming no camera trickery or post production stunt is going on.
but I know what you mean.
Anything fakeble, so I would always like to have raw footage in such cases, not as proof, but as a protocol what used in video, so that everyone can repeat experiment on their own, then the sample will increase and you can identify a pattern to make a hypothesis and further research to turn it into a theory. There are places where 1 person died but there is a spooky story, there are places like in my city where 1.3 million people died during WW2 but basically no one reports supernatural.@@alicepbg2042
I would've liked to have seen a third group that stayed in the "haunted" house with the assurance that it was an ordinary airbnb.
I know this is like the third or fourth time I’ve said this, but MORE DEBUNKING VIDEOS 😁😁. I follow all the debunkers - The Shape, SEG, Beardo, etc. - but yours are the funniest and most well put together.
My problem with ghost hunting youtubers is they generally tend to overreact when it comes to emotions to make the impact of their content seem more convincing. Zak Bilbo Bagans does this too. And since he's popular due to his show, people turn it into an example of how to improve on their content. People who don't question content become their subscribers, people who do? They end up here.
Airrack was at the haunted place. Thats why the equipment worked there. For that flashlight to work, he had to have calibrated it. For that coffin box to work, it needed to be calibrated. I am calling the calibration out on that box purposely faulty. The coffin design and weird jingle wasn't needed for such a device. It was purposely designed that way to sell the idea that it works and that ghosts are real.
Ghosts aren't real. But it would be so cool if they were though!
Be honest, the entire aspect of the movement detector and prize was a hoax. The one in the second video had an... Arduino. Like come one, an Arduino ? And the emotional part is definitely adding. And, really that thing is a proximity sensor, not a movement detector. Off course, things can be more complex to factors and such. But the overreacting part and making it sound like a challenge is too TH-camr-ish. A scientific proof should be at least a protocol, not a challenge