I just made the mistake of watching Ghost Hunters on the SciFi Channel. It worries me to think that some folks might actually take this stuff seriously. I’m all for investigating claims of ghosts, and at first I was willing to give them some credit for trying. Unfortunately it seems like these folks don’t understand the definition of evidence. I think they define evidence as anything unexpected or unusual that they can’t readily explain. They then take things like somewhat human-shaped shadows without a visible source, unusual warm spots on thermal sensing cameras, and subjective personal experience of “it feels really creepy in here” as sufficient to declare a place haunted.
I turned off the television when they brought in a Dowser. That’s too far down the woo woo rabbit hole for me, thanks.