I would really like to open an honest debate about this. First, let me explain myself. I am a skeptic. In
fact (if I may use that word), you can even call me a pseudo-skeptic if you'd like since many of the people who read this are pseudo-believers anyway. I don't believe in ghosts, UFOs, Bigfeet (well I do wear a size 14, but...), psychics and/or mediums, astrology in any sense of the word, and a host of other paranormal or conspiracy ideas. Why don't I believe in it? I haven't seen any proof. So, why does that make me so bad? I throw out questions and in return, I get labeled a debunker and/or a pseudo-skeptic, am told my statements are illogical, am told that my opinions are based on personal belief rather than knowledge and that I am terrified that if something is real, I would have to re-examine my beliefs. Not sure what I could possibly be terrified about, but okay, let's go with it anyway. So, what I really want to know is, why am I so wrong to want to see proof of anything before I believe it? I see evidence of almost everything, but there's no proof. 120 years ago, if you had told my great-grandfather that people would be flying all around the world, that people could watch baseball through a box on a wall, or talk in a little "thing" to someone half way around the world he would probably have called you a quack, even without any evidence for the time. There was definitely no proof that those things would be possible. Yet, here we are. I don't believe that I have ever said that any or all of the paranormal claims are crap. All I do is question claims and then get criticized and labeled when I ask for proof. Why? Probably because there is no proof and people who believe are defensive. (Just my perception, open for discussion) I know I get extremely defensive when I'm told that I'm wrong about something. To me, people who are believers or "pseudo-believers" are wrong for believing in something that only has evidence and not proof (regardless of the strength of or lack of strength of the evidence) and are promoting deception to the general public without any proof. Asking for proof of something surely doesn't make me and other skeptics (or even "pseudo-skeptics") worthy of constant ridicule, does it? To conclude, let me say this about myself: I have never been wrong. I thought I was once, but I was wrong...

I hope that we all can keep this civil.