Personally, I feel many of the things being portrayed as "Solid Evidence" is pretty weak. This is not to discredit any team or say I am any better. However, I feel we need to start being more analytic of what we consider worthwhile of displaying for the public. Unfortunately, the sciences are very weak still and many people do not understand the depth of what we do. With ourselves being the exception, the majority of people find the most credible evidence to be photographic which is understandable. Therefore, I don't feel an investigation which claims a location is haunted yet has only orb photographs as evidence is a justice to our progress. A great photo is near impossible to come by. A credible orb photo is hard to come by especially when it wasn't shot as a pair. All I am saying is in respect to the progress of our field as a whole, I believe the community should make a conscious effort to scrutinize evidence harder before publishing it as fact. Your thoughts?
