pseudo researchers

[brett]

one of the things that give the skeptical reason to debunk ( **and you will find i tend to use the word sKeptical to include the pseudo sKeptic - rather than a normal sceptic - just an iddicincracy of mine - so please forgive ) - is the "pseudo researcher / research group / club " - and by this i mean those who use the paranormal as a vehicle for personal gain , be this fame , glory , financial etc - as opposed to the honest and genuine researcher /s who strive to find the truth of alleged paranormal activity - or at least their "own " truths

for myself , i do not claim to be any sort of expert or authority on the subject , neither do i sport any made up titles or dubious "qualifications " ( including PHD's in tot ally unrelated subjects that some use to lend "credibility " to their supposed expertise - no i am just a rank "amateur researcher and investigator " and proud of that

the funny thing is ( and the point of this post ) that the sKeptics ** - never seem to focus on the question of those who CLAIM supposed expertise /qualifications in the subject including themselves - when all of us KNOW there ARE no qualifications in the subject of the paranormal

like wise nor do they seem to condemn the blatant "using " of the subject by the shall we say "unscrupulous " for furtherance of their own aims be this to supposedly "prove " or "debunk " the subject - they are quick to attack the lone researcher or those trying to use the scientific method ( that old chestnut ) or at least rational methods , but are strangely quiet on obvious "motive" operations and practices

could this be , because they are guilty of them themselves ??

as always just my personal opinion , and maybe totally incorrect

discuss please if you will

[NinjaPuppy]

Not much for me to add other than to say I agree with you 100%. OK you sKeptics, tag you're it!

BTW, the 'sKeptic' tag is good.

[Scepcop]

Did you mean to write "pseudo researchers" in the thread title? I'll go ahead and fix it for you.

[brett]