I'm totally fascinated by "ghost hunting," while at the same time I'm totally skeptical about their existence (and I've done a few "ghost-bustings"), and that's what I like about their show. They actually don't try to engrandize things; they go a supposedly haunted place and try to disprove all the claims and in many, if not most, cases, they do just that. They do not use "sightings," or "soundings," including their own, as proof. If it isn't fully and clearly recorded, it's not evidence. The ironic thing is that on most of their shows, they come up with virtually nothing and declare a place "not haunted." One would think, with the lack of the sensational, the program would be a bomb (watching them traipse around and end up with nothing concrete, or even exciting, shouldn't be an audience-grabber). But I think it's because of their skepticism of a claim and their thoroughness, mixed with the rare, occasional recorded happenings (such as the sliding folding chair in the attic of that famously "haunted" lighthouse) that keeps people coming back for more. The audience is intellectually challenged, but when that rare "proof" is there, it's a shock. It's like a good horror or scary movie becomes a success. If stuff is shown all the time, it becomes blase. If nothing is ever shown, even in a small glimpse, it's pointless.
Is our "Collinwood" haunted? I doubt it. Let's face it - other than college students behaving like typical college kids, nothing "horrific" ever happened there. So why should it be haunted?
Gerard
