On 8/21/06, Ray Saintonge <saintonge(a)telus.net> wrote:
made. It doesn't help that most scientific
evaluation in this area tend
to be remarkably inconclusive, and fail to give a knockout blow for
either side.
Which is kind of the problem, and articles end up falling into the
trap of "is it real, is it not", with lots of material debating
whether proof exists either way. Whereas often these things are just
best treated as social phenomenons, like "for some reason, people have
decided to believe that X". It would be like filling [[Jesus]] with
material debating his existence or attempting to debunk his miracles -
to me, it would just be missing the point.
Steve