I thought this would happen. Let me say again that I am NOT arguing for the existence of ghosts.
As my links seem to have went downhill since I first read their site, I will change the argument to the existence of poltergeist on a more general scale rather than arguing around a specific case study.
Now Samson that is a pretty un-scientific statement. I mean you seem to have reached your stance on the existence of poltergeist merely because it is more convenient for you to believe all poltergeist cases are fake. Stop me if I am wrong here, but the lack of explanation for your conclusion leaves me with little choice but to conclude that you have not researched the topic at all before you reached your present stance.
I agree that many so-called poltergeist cases are the result of mis-interpretation of events, suggestion and wishful thinking. However, I also agree that the poltergeist phenomenon is as well documented as any phenomenon which has had to rely on the laughable attempts of part-time 'ghost hunters' for evaluation. I think the huge volume of data at least deserves a scientific study or two (as of yet I can think of no truly impartial study into the phenomenon).
I think to claim that there is a lack of evidence for psychic energy is a little unfair. There have simply has been no research into the phenomenon that I can recall-although there have been investigations into Chi which have had mixed results. The lack of research into psychic energy in relation to poltergeist means that trying to argue for or against its existence is theoretical at best. Do not mistake me, the lack of research does not constitute a belief in the existence of psychic energy, but neither does it constitute a lack of belief in the said phenomenon. A neutral stance is the best we can hope for considering the circumstances.
Dotard what evidence would you desire?
As my links seem to have went downhill since I first read their site, I will change the argument to the existence of poltergeist on a more general scale rather than arguing around a specific case study.
Now Samson that is a pretty un-scientific statement. I mean you seem to have reached your stance on the existence of poltergeist merely because it is more convenient for you to believe all poltergeist cases are fake. Stop me if I am wrong here, but the lack of explanation for your conclusion leaves me with little choice but to conclude that you have not researched the topic at all before you reached your present stance.
I agree that many so-called poltergeist cases are the result of mis-interpretation of events, suggestion and wishful thinking. However, I also agree that the poltergeist phenomenon is as well documented as any phenomenon which has had to rely on the laughable attempts of part-time 'ghost hunters' for evaluation. I think the huge volume of data at least deserves a scientific study or two (as of yet I can think of no truly impartial study into the phenomenon).
I think to claim that there is a lack of evidence for psychic energy is a little unfair. There have simply has been no research into the phenomenon that I can recall-although there have been investigations into Chi which have had mixed results. The lack of research into psychic energy in relation to poltergeist means that trying to argue for or against its existence is theoretical at best. Do not mistake me, the lack of research does not constitute a belief in the existence of psychic energy, but neither does it constitute a lack of belief in the said phenomenon. A neutral stance is the best we can hope for considering the circumstances.
Dotard what evidence would you desire?
