Adicionar um enredo no seu idiomaInvestigates mysterious videos, photos, and audio, using experts and technology to analyze seeming impossibilities like UFOs, giant beasts, and conspiracies, separating hoaxes from credible ... Ler tudoInvestigates mysterious videos, photos, and audio, using experts and technology to analyze seeming impossibilities like UFOs, giant beasts, and conspiracies, separating hoaxes from credible evidence in a quest to understand our world.Investigates mysterious videos, photos, and audio, using experts and technology to analyze seeming impossibilities like UFOs, giant beasts, and conspiracies, separating hoaxes from credible evidence in a quest to understand our world.
Explorar episódios
Avaliações em destaque
10kelani
This show is like a beacon in a world of paranormal genre shows that cater to sensationalism, fabrication, fake experts, and reality-esque dramatization.
Tony Harris works well in this as a narrator, although his claim of being a journalist is a bit suspect. He calls it like the experts see it, and isn't afraid to get a little snarky when hoaxes are involved. That's perhaps my favorite part, because the only thing worse than the current paranormal genre is all the people muddying the waters by creating hoaxes for YouTube hits.
In another refreshing change, the experts are actual experts in their fields, not amateur or armchair types blabbing opinions or pseudoscience. They have credentials, credibility, and really know what the hell they're talking about.
I don't understand why some people are so upset when the verdict is "unexplained phenomenon", because frankly, that's exactly what they are. Further investigation might change that, but for the purposes of the show, that's really the only place they can leave it. It's also silly to expect this show to go beyond its scope and further investigate these cases. That's not what this show is about. The experts are simply giving their time for the show, and probably have no time or desire to leave their day jobs hunting for answers to this stuff.
All in all, it's a great show. I really love seeing video clips that have been labeled "100% authentic OMG paranormal" on other shows being debunked by science, logic, technology actually used properly, and common sense.
Tony Harris works well in this as a narrator, although his claim of being a journalist is a bit suspect. He calls it like the experts see it, and isn't afraid to get a little snarky when hoaxes are involved. That's perhaps my favorite part, because the only thing worse than the current paranormal genre is all the people muddying the waters by creating hoaxes for YouTube hits.
In another refreshing change, the experts are actual experts in their fields, not amateur or armchair types blabbing opinions or pseudoscience. They have credentials, credibility, and really know what the hell they're talking about.
I don't understand why some people are so upset when the verdict is "unexplained phenomenon", because frankly, that's exactly what they are. Further investigation might change that, but for the purposes of the show, that's really the only place they can leave it. It's also silly to expect this show to go beyond its scope and further investigate these cases. That's not what this show is about. The experts are simply giving their time for the show, and probably have no time or desire to leave their day jobs hunting for answers to this stuff.
All in all, it's a great show. I really love seeing video clips that have been labeled "100% authentic OMG paranormal" on other shows being debunked by science, logic, technology actually used properly, and common sense.
I believe Tony Harris is the real deal. He calls them as he and experts see them. No sugar coating, no bs analysis, he's not fake. I gave Him and the show a 9 was because there were some things blatantly obvious and they called it unexplained. Other than dat, Tony Harris is genuine and give the show two thumbs up! Congratulations on the new season. Im glad to see the show made it for another season. If you don't like it, don't watch! Don't be bagging on Tony Harris for doing a job, that's fun and trying to show the public, some of the most bizarre crazy a** sh't, thats out there. That's what its all about! Get it! Some of the weird a** experts still are experts and I trust what they say to be true. Unlike the News, there's at least video, were the news would say a unnamed source, now that's BS!
To be honest, I love looking at the unusual things around us and trying to figure it out with logic, science and common sense. This show leaves me divided. I know that many things we see on the show can be misidentified, optical illusions or very rare, and some are complete hoaxes, but I also know that not all things can be easily explained even with science.
The scientific method requires the same results repeatedly, so when they speak to 1 expert for their 'opinion' without actually showing the scientific method, I am still left with doubts of credibility.
I love that they start by analyzing the video for inconsistencies since AI and video compositing can produce realistic results. This should be the first test in all cases. If it's a fake, stop there.
However, there's a 'Marine Biologist'... thats the only title. No credentials, no PHD or title or accolades to build credibility, who gives her opinion in debunking animal related incidents and that is 'fact'? I'm not saying she's not correct, it's still her words, opinions and observations. A generic title doesn't make an 'expert' and an opinion from this 'expert' isn't proof. I wish there were a little more science in some of the episodes and less opinion to quickly dismiss things that still could be something else.
The scientific method requires the same results repeatedly, so when they speak to 1 expert for their 'opinion' without actually showing the scientific method, I am still left with doubts of credibility.
I love that they start by analyzing the video for inconsistencies since AI and video compositing can produce realistic results. This should be the first test in all cases. If it's a fake, stop there.
However, there's a 'Marine Biologist'... thats the only title. No credentials, no PHD or title or accolades to build credibility, who gives her opinion in debunking animal related incidents and that is 'fact'? I'm not saying she's not correct, it's still her words, opinions and observations. A generic title doesn't make an 'expert' and an opinion from this 'expert' isn't proof. I wish there were a little more science in some of the episodes and less opinion to quickly dismiss things that still could be something else.
I'm a skeptic and think there are logical explanations for most things. One thing I love about this show, is they don't try and build some BS like other shows. They separate the BS from the true unexplained. Great show!
I generally like this show, but have a comment about the zoologist who thought the film was a hoax because the creature didn't run away. Has this zoologist never been around animals???? I live in Hope, BC, Canada and have been 8-10 feet away from deer and Black bears, and neither of them interact with humans. So long as you don't move, or move slowly, most animals are content to leave you be. Watch a nature show about lions, woman! Antelope will let lions be close at the watering hole so long as they aren't being threatening.
Principais escolhas
Faça login para avaliar e ver a lista de recomendações personalizadas
- How many seasons does The Proof is Out There have?Fornecido pela Alexa
Detalhes
- Data de lançamento
- País de origem
- Central de atendimento oficial
- Idioma
- Também conhecido como
- The Proof is Out There
- Empresa de produção
- Consulte mais créditos da empresa na IMDbPro
- Cor
Contribua para esta página
Sugerir uma alteração ou adicionar conteúdo ausente