There is some logic fallacy here:
When someone says: this is paranormal.
And scientists find some spooky "evidence" for the paranormal, it's not paranormal anymore. It becomes part of science and it's part of nature.
The spooky interaction between electrons at a distance or entanglement is part of nature. It's not been called 'paranormal'. But it is by defintion 'paranormal'.
So, scientists have some logic defencemechanism against the paranormal.
When it's been proven, it becomes part of science and it's been called normal instead of paranormal.
So, something is paranormal till it's been proven.
When someone says: this is paranormal.
And scientists find some spooky "evidence" for the paranormal, it's not paranormal anymore. It becomes part of science and it's part of nature.
The spooky interaction between electrons at a distance or entanglement is part of nature. It's not been called 'paranormal'. But it is by defintion 'paranormal'.
So, scientists have some logic defencemechanism against the paranormal.
When it's been proven, it becomes part of science and it's been called normal instead of paranormal.
So, something is paranormal till it's been proven.
via JREF Forum http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=283362&goto=newpost
Aucun commentaire:
Enregistrer un commentaire