Ghost Adventures Screaming Room: Demons In Seattle Decoded Commentary

                                                  
Just a commentary on what I saw and made some notes in response or just in general. It's not meant as a 'be all and end all. to this investigation, but more as so if you wanna jump in and criticize, or get your knickers in a knot go ahead, it's just an opinion and not written in any particular order.

What about making money off it.  Well what about other cases where this has happened re Black Swan Inn, with children and subjecting them to that activity and not moving out but didn't criticize that. To name one investigation.

Reading people: yes by all means go ahead, but not judging them when you don't know them personally just for the sake of it; which is how this came across. There are ways to express one's feelings tactfully and with some decorum and respect but in this instance looks said more than words and oh boy, if looks could kill!

It's not the first time they've encountered anyone whose life is in danger or they perceive it to be in    danger themselves. again I could go into the investigations but if you're that interested I don't need to do it, look them up for yourselves and do your own research.
With respect, Bishop Brian D Ouellette hasn't been on every single investigation with Zak when he tweeted he's encountered activity every single time when their investigation involves demons and can only speak to the ones he has been on.  Each case is not the same as the other.

How is Zak even judging what women will do in such circumstances, none of you are women, we're not all the weaker sex even when such activity is concerned don't speak for all women. Did you ask anyone or take a female investigator along - no!

It came across as how they were all in agreement and trying to justify each others' opinions, all you were doing is recounting that investigation and your own feelings, opinions.  Did any of them carry out any objective, unbiased research of their own or read what is out there instead of outright dismissing it all.

No Aaron spirits don't always know your names but do want you out. You misinterpret EVPs so much so who are you to judge and then make ill-found assumptions based on them.  Anything pointed out to them they don't want to know or even bother going over again, unless the mood strikes them, or whether they see it tweeted from followers.

So what happened with IR light on camera???? Didn't say! What happened to the camera going out in office?? How did it drain unexpectedly??  From getting no activity to this equipment "malfunctioning" but they didn't offer any explanations for it.  Was it malfunction or something paranormal??

How can Tina "check him" when they're in the dark??  Also it's not funny as they burst out laughing! Plenty of other people have done much worse to them.  Don't forget this was all edited for the show.

Why wouldn't spirits want to check them out without actually revealing themselves - they haven't seen them before.
But you all also do know that not one investigation reveals all.  Manifestations don't occur on command.

Zak's 'influenced by hysteria' too in other cases and he can talk about sensationalizing, he asks leading questions. Not all demonic infestations will be felt, at least not immediately.
Look at the doco and the UK team research. They found others living there more so the Irish settlers in the past.  Demons In Seattle Uncovered
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lAsPe63vWEY&feature=youtu.be
with parapsychologist Steve Meera and paranormal analyst Don Phillips.  Does it make any difference if he hadn't heard of them or that they were from the UK.  No not an iota and well, many haven't heard of Zak either.  What's that got to do with the credibility of an investigation. All you need to know are credentials and their findings.

Not talking about it objectively but passing judgement as if they're all right and there are no other explanations.
Why would everything be captured on camera.
They've had other cases where I thought the show has been boring cos of little or no evidence and not much was going on. So again contradiction that everything will happen on cue and will get activity every single second there.
Did Zak even watch the doco so now he's tarring investigators with the same brush they can say the same about him, you don't need to know them just how they conducted their investigations and they're findings.
Stop being defensive recall their first GA doco and how they went to experts to explain their findings and show not made up, same thing with Keith. (I'm leaving Nick out of it) well you Zak say you research, do research, look them up. He has researchers do your jobs. Also it was as if someone just said to him 'oh so and so came to investigate the house from UK, mention that too.'

This ep more like a gang initiation of 'if you don't agree with us, you're wrong.'  Okay maybe gang isn't the right word, a college initiation for a fraternity.  Steve is a veteran parapsychologist with many credentials approved. NO research into the history of the land not in depth anyway by GA.  How was this episode 'decoded' when all they did was just share the same views they held back when they investigated.  We had already gathered which way the investigation was headed and the outcome, conclusions from it.  Just adding their voices here to what they already said and thought.  Sorry (not sorry) but with so much controversy involved in this, there had to be some give in actually doing something about it if not convinced first time round.  There could have been a return but no.  They didn't even question past residents of the property.  Though Zak had wanted to do a Ghost Adventures ?? episode on the investigation.  How would that be any different or varied when he wasn't willing to accept any further evidence or debate findings rationally.

Where they took samples of the substance pouring down the walls and analysis in the doco, found it was some form of oil.  Don discovering another case in Australia where this happened too, there was the occurrence in Zak's Demon House doco, where oil poured from the blinds in the window. Showing this can't be so easily dismissed.

They went into this ep blind without finding out what's been happening so not in any position to actually talk with an unbiased opinion. Especially with the 'oh really is that what happened' attitude from Billy and Aaron and I would've expected more from Jay.  Also in that he would have had something more to say than just being in agreement.

SO anyone looking for any rebuttals, further instances of contradiction.  In Zak's book Ghost Hunting For Dummies let me be so bold as to add the following.  Oh who am I kidding, I don't need ot be bold or anything of the sort.
P9 "there are many different types of hauntings.  No two cases are ever exactly alike. When conducting your research, you're bound to discover various kinds of activity and sometimes, believe it or not, it will be at the same location."

Also para 5 P9: "ghosts don't always make an appearance."  he explains how tehre can be noises, footsteps and the like. Or objects flying around as by themselves.  "...lights and appliances behave erratically or phantom smells come and go without logical explanation."  With reference to the IR light and the camera going out, which as stated, the cause behind it wasn't explained; was the problem even found.  "In other words you never know what you will find in a haunted location and hopefully, this book will help you prepare you for that."  Clearly it did not help this particular episode of the show.

& para 6 P9: where he says that you will probably find certain things in a haunted location, but not everything.  "there exist a great many misconceptions about ghosts and hauntings..." such as not having sheets over them, or chains making sounds (as in A Christmas Carol) and he says they're not out for revenge to to kill/harm.

P10: "There seem to be few clear-cut answers when it comes to ghosts.  For decades, ghost researchers have wondered what force or intelligence lies behind a haunting."  Yet many a time just don't want to put in the hard yards of revisiting a location to carry out further investigations even after being invited to do so.
Granted this book isn't  good one to turn to for answers or quotes as I didn't find it very good, but it was a starting point.

P11 "Paranormal researchers do not uniformly agree on what makes a place become haunted, how spirits behave, or even about what ghosts actually are.  There seem to be very few clear cut answers but that should never stop us from searching them."

P138-139 What Are Hauntings? contains some more points too many to mention here which are relevant in this context .  Basically P138 is just a repetition of P9 in relation to sounds etc, however he again mentions "manipulation of lights, electrical devices..." once more in the context of their equipment being affected.  (See above.)

Some paragraphs for perusal from the Zak book I wrote back in 2015:

Locations:   Yes GA investigations take take three full days and nights.  Historical research, interviews, experiments and lockdown.  Not just one night."  as I said sometimes it'd be good if can do more than one night especially if there's not much happening at a location on that night.  The next night might prove more fruitful.  Also I'd be good to try  Lockdown longer than twelve hours and the usual "from dusk til dawn."  Maybe 24 hours and see how the investigation differs or changes over the two nights.  Whether they'd get the same evidence or something completely different.  Zak: "I don't believe length is important.  I believe the right energies within people can open a location's doors to spirits."
In the documentary they spent over 2 weeks investigating various outcomes. Let's also say that sometimes length is important particularly if nothing is coming through.  Come back later, different times, days etc.

But sometimes the length of a lockdown could be seen as important if can't find anything the first night or not much happens, as said, leaving time to conduct other experiments too and with varying pieces of equipment.

Zak: "because investigations don't end when we leave - that's why I did 'Aftershocks."  28 April 2015.  Somehow I get the impression he was meant to say cos spirits still carry on after they leave their investigation.  
Or perhaps that's when more activity begins,  They're no fools do they really want to be observed, at least not every spirit wants their haunting captured on camera for the living. 

To end let me quote this, it's not just about writing, it's also about filming, interviewing, analyzing, discussing...
It's another reflection of the world we live in and quite frankly it doesn't hurt to be civil, especially if you're writing something about someone which will be read by plenty of people knowing full well you're going to garner all sorts of reaction from it - good bad, positive, negative.  It's just pandering to the masses who are quick to judge everyone and anyone who may have a viewpoint different to their own.