I never said paranormal is an exception to all those *subjective* emotions and experiences. Imagination can indeed break universal laws, but that does not make them universal reality, it makes them is *personal* reality. I anticipated this and that's why I suggested you also include the psychology of *subjective* experience in your new definition.
LOL! Ignorance of what? I've studied the evidence of the paranormal for 14 years. How long have you been studying it? Never...
So, you are claiming to be an authority in ghosts and have the evidence to prove it. I say, you know as much about ghosts as I do and because I am an athority in photography I probably know more about (unexplained) phenomena in pictures than you. It comes down to ; You are making the extraordinary claim, the burden of verifiable proof is on you. Not me. What you are talking about is Tulpas, and that is a whole different issue.
I've provided quite a bit of evidence so far. If you are making the claim the evidence isn't real, then you need to back up that claim. Why are these photos not of real phenomena? Why did the rescuers hear the voice of that women from inside the submerged car? What was the motive to lie for a man who walks us thru his whole building relating paranormal experiences? Stuff like that.. Well la dee da! Aren't you special! lol!
And so you have no clue as to the distinction between drawings and photographs. Why am I not surprised?
No..but if you claim it is faked, you need to support that claim. Not just make up some shit about it being fake and leaving it at that.
Nope. Doesn't work like that. The burden of proof is one the one claiming the photo is genuine, not the one disbelieving the claim.
Nope..I provided the evidence. If you claim the evidence isn't real, you need to back it up. Show me why it isn't a real photo. But you can't do that, can you? Why you don't stick to claiming things you can actually prove?
Yazata: Everybody likes the idea of scientific anomalies, not least the scientists themselves. Believe me, scientists love scientific anomalies. It means we don't know something and that there's something new to investigate (like you say). It's a matter of degree. The natural world has more than enough mysteries and unknowns to keep us busy, without having to invent the supernatural to distract us. Magical Realist: And you know all this ... how? Please explain what an emotive imprint on a spin network of the quantum vacuum actually is, if it's not, as I suspect, just gobbledegook.
I used my radioactive high frequency discombulator. How else would I know this? Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
Magical Realist: This is the best you can do? You wrote: So, what was that? Made-up crap off the top of your head? Something you read somewhere else that you didn't understand but which you thought sounded good, so you copied it here? Or what? You're not really so stupid as to parrot words you don't understand. Or are you?