Fact or Faked: Paranormal Files

After viewing the first episode, I was sorely disappointed. Despite all the hype, there was precious little science, limited expertise, and no common sense in the evaluations. While one investigation was well done (Ghost Car), the rest were simply not worth the effort to have filmed.

The final "lights in the Arizona sky" segment killed any suggestion that the show intends to seriously address strange phenomena caught on videos. Anyone with any experience with military aviation could tell that the "unknown" lights were flares (sorry UFO fanatics – there may be something in the Arizona sky, but that wasn't it). This obvious explanation was never addressed by the "investigators", having apparently been dismissed because the person who took the video claimed that he had checked with the local Air Force base, and no aircraft were in the air when the video was made. Where was the confirmation? Why wasn't an effort made to recreate this important possibility? My guess is cost and an unwillingness to confirm the obvious. The (apparently) one night of investigation filming the area did record an interesting effect, but did nothing to prove or disprove the original video; all it did was create another video which needs further investigation. Saying that something odd is happening in the sky over Arizona doesn't answer the question, although the cast clearly thought they had done so.

Like too many of the paranormal related shows, this one also seems to want to find the paranormal more than it wants to provide accurate results. Granted, disproof doesn't get good ratings, but don't bill the show for what it is not. I for one won't waste time watching this in the future.

A group of straight unsuperstitious people set out to prove these supernatural/paranormal videos are fake. Simple premise - dumb but entertaining.

Unlike awful paranormal investigation shows this one tries to prove real "evidence" is fake as opposed to lolling in the dark for 50% of the episode and using the other 50% for an unfulfilling context dump. The show is best when they debunk it as quick as possible. Some of their attempts to replicate the footage can be dumbfounding, but hilarious.

Sometimes after failing to prove it is fake, they'll do a "paranormal investigation" from which they always get nothing from. Luckily it's heavily edited, unlike most boring ghost shows.

Nothing on TV? Put this on, it kills time effectively and it's quite addictive and engaging. Give it a go, don't expect much.

"Fact or Faked: Paranormal Files" is nothing more than an ultra-cheap ripoff of "UFO Hunters." The salient difference is that the ultra-youthful cast of "Fact or Faked" has zero scientific background whatsoever. They collect the cheesiest videos from here or there; set out to "prove" or "debunk" things based upon the most ill-conceived notion of the scientific method, indeed, of science in general; pepper the audience with nonsensical, high-falutin'-sounding nonsense such as, "Come on, guys, let's examinate this rocketological conburblification," and cannot-do-without exhortatives, such as, "Let's go green, guys!" (I think the kindergartners behave basically the same way on "Sid the Science Kid.") The kids are ignorant, annoying, unscientific, and a slap in the face to any viewer whose education extends beyond junior high school.

The big flaw with this show is that they claim these people are "experts" but in reality are 30 something actors who probably couldn't get a REAL job in the REAL world. They come across as rather cloddish when evaluating the so called phenomena and part of me thinks they are in collusion with Scyfy in promoting Ghost Hunters just like Destination Truth does. I really hope they aren't this anserine in real life, but my God! A prime example is when they are set to debunk the ghost footage and parade around as skeptics until we are forced to accept that they just can't replicate the original footage and therefore have to believe that something is actually, really and genuinely haunted...GASP! Correct me if I'm wrong but aren't skeptics really scientists who believe in the scientific method to prove that something is not what it seems? Never in my life would a real skeptic decide that something is haunted because they can't collectively agree that they can't replicate the same effect on film. From the episodes that I've seen, they did a great job in replicating the ghostly apparitions, but yet we are somehow forced to reject their findings and embrace their flimsy conclusion that something is haunted based on their beliefs alone?! Belief that something is haunted is just that, a belief and should not be an option in a scientific investigation. That being said this show never does claim to be scientific in nature and this automatically places it in the entertainment category. Don't get me wrong, what they investigate is fascinating, but in the end we the audience need to be entertained so queue the dramatic commercial break cliff hangers and eerie sound effects. So in all, if you want to be entertained then this show is for you. If you are looking for a valid scientific program that is set out to debunk the paranormal, then look elsewhere this show is not for you.

I love all flavors of paranormal shows even yours providing insight if something might be fake!! You definately show how it could be fake but you can't prove it really is fake and your team doesn't say that! You can create what was seen and recorded but that only means that it is possible someone faked the whole thing! The thing I'm saying is it still could be paranormal/Alien!? Thank you for listening, Linda