What's changed is my focus. Screw teams and what they're doing, it's all about the clients who call us in. Whether we "scienfically" and "Empircally" set forth to HELP them, or we gather their families, referrals to counselors or call in clergy… the CLIENT is the reason for the season, Kim.

Bleeding heart, maybe. But the negativity really begins to wane my views on some of those who I really looked up to; you included.

That's where we differ.

My goal isn't to be looked up to or for recognition and you obviously gleaned something different than was intended from all this.

But you are correct in your own words…

"Who Bloody Cares"… LMAO!

GB… can you be more specific in what do you do as far as "correct interpretation" so I know more where you're coming from?

As for being taken seriously, it comes down to how others interpret you and/or your group by what you do, regardless of what you choose to call it. One of the reasons why I don't really care anymore about what the "community" thinks is that I see, time and again, where it all ends up being a big argument about what one person considers (or interprets) is scientific, or the correct way to go about things… and it jives with what the other person interprets as scientific or the correct way.

And for the record, I do understand the difference between a scientific method. /wink.png' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='' /> However, the important thing in my opinion is that what people consider to be a scientific method and how they apply that opinion. For example, would you consider hearing a creak from another room and coming up with an idea of what it could be, then investigating that possibility to prove it either is that or is not that a scientific method? Because I've had that very example used to describe an investigator's use of scientific method in paranormal investigations.

I guess I should just refrain from making comments on general forums and stick to the specific ones. Too many thin skinned people although I have to wonder why that is. No one specifically, just a general statement.

What I said earlier as far as scientific method is that it wasn’t open for interpretation or what people consider it to be or what they think it means to them. It is a set protocol. It is not about what one person considers or interprets as meaning scientific and it is not semantics, Scientific means Scientific.

I said; To be termed scientific, a method of inquiry must be based on gathering observable and measurable evidence subject to specific principles of reasoning. Also a scientific method consists of the collection of data through observation and experimentation and the formulation and testing of hypotheses. I didn’t make it up that is the definition.

I just don’t understand why people would take a word and place their own meaning to it. Simple as that. Wasn’t trying to start an argument just get other people’s feelings and I think I have succeeded.

I am not trying to say anyone has to do anything. People can do as they please. What I was saying is that if someone is going to say they are doing something, then maybe they should do it and not just say it. Nothing more, nothing less.

To answer your example. I may be wrong but what you describe sounds like debunking to me. Finding something that COULD BE the reason.

Putting it to scientific testing involves the basics of observation and experimentation. If I hear something then at best, I have a clue. Then by experimentation over and over and recording my findings and if I am getting the same results. Then I may have evidence and can formulate a hypothesis and that’s practically all there is to it. It’s a simple procedure and I don’t understand why people get so upset. If people don’t want to do it then fine. No skin off my nose.

However, I agree and believe everyone is correct in that it seems like everyone wants to be an individual and do their own thing