IF

[NonServitas]

If I cared about this arguement concerning poltergiests and scientific proof/dis proof there of then I would post.

as soon as you mentioned the tosser uri geller..... boy!

for either arguement .... by the way.

is there not a philosophical arguement that goes kinda 'if you think about a subject then it exists (at least as a thought) but things exist that you have never thought about'

[Sharp_Kid]

Oh wow!
Someone who wants to discuss philosophy instead of religion.
Thank evolution.

'if you think about a subject then it exists (at least as a thought) but things exist that you have never thought about'

Interesting enough.
The first section, it is true to say that a "subject" may exist just because you think about it, but that has limited relation to the physical world, unless you can imagine things into life.
There is always a step between notion and realisation.

The second section is something we have argued here time and time again.
There are groups who do not deny that perhaps things come into being only by way of their discovery.
Personally I think that's ball hooks.
If certain properties of light or the pigments in our skin had not been discovered and therefore didn't exist, people would never have got sunburn, in which case we can take legal action against the scientists who discovered these things which lead to some of us getting skin cancer, can we not?