I agree with the fact that any supposedly serious paranormal investigations show should have an on-board sceptic. It is a requirement to have someone who isn't as ready to believe the odd creak or other noise is always of a paranormal nature. I do find it amusing though that these sceptics have received wide public recognition by appearing on shows who's aims and findings they are largely out to disprove. I would imagine that their services are also being paid for by these very shows. If a sceptic IS being paid by the television company who's show he/she is appearing on then how unbiased is it possible to be?. After all they can't be TOO critical of the show and it's findings or they would swiftly find themselves being replaced by a "gentler" sceptic - perhaps they should do it as a public service free-of-charge and really tell us what they think (says he grinning)
A few shows spring to mind, but I think you probably know the ones I have in mind.
Please don't think that I am decrying them in any way, because I am most definitely not. I think most happenings that have been described as paranormal have some rational, earthly explanation. It's the anomalies that can't be rationalised that are obviously the most intriguing.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment