somebody wrote:
> In other words, odds are, all paranormal claims are nonsense. To even
> *begin* investigating, there has to be some extraordinary supporting
> evidence.

And there was. Numerous witnesses all over saying it worked and they had 
seen miracles with their own eyes.

Think up a list of nonsense that *didn't* get investigated that might have 
aided the military, and you'll understand perhaps. :-)

> My argument (not feeling) is, there is a finite set of confirmed truths at
> any finite time, but potentially uncountably many falsehoods. Unless there's
> good evidence *before* we start, we cannot simply waste time investigating
> anything and everything. The onus is on who deem paranormal investigation is
> worthy to show that the paranormal claim in question is somehow different
> than all these falsehoods.

And they did. They offered eye witnesses. Then the scientific method, during 
investigation, showed that the eye witnesses were mistaken. What more do you 
want?

-- 
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
   Human nature dictates that toothpaste tubes spend
   much longer being almost empty than almost full.

Post a reply to this message