63.16.91.50
In Reply to: RE: Absolutely agree posted by AJinFLA on June 05, 2007 at 03:44:28
I have seen some people react to or create 'para normal' phenomena. Interestingly, they have never claimed to have seen a 'ghost'. But that is totally off topic. Funny how 'seeing' a ghost seems to be a visual phenomena. Very few such observers seem to mention smelling a ghost.
There is a difference between a vivid imagination and reality, however. I met a 'nose' once, a professional 'smeller' who worked in the perfume industry. His sense of smell was uncanny. One long sniff and he could rattle off chemicals and ingredients I didn't know even existed in his sample. Just because I couldn't detect it doesn't mean that I would dismiss his analysis.
Nor do I dismiss anything these days, quite honestly. I am a skeptic, but I do not disparage anyone who claims otherwise until I witness proof for myself. I do believe in science, and I do believe there are many little things in the world which still have yet to be fully investigated.
Case in point, and surely you must have come across it, was my explanation for the Brilliant Pebbles phenomena. I believe there is a simple rational explanation, but no one, particularly the skeptics, seem to want to even try and replicate the experiments which led me to that conclusion.
So now you tell me, do you make subjective pronouncements on food and drink quality? Or do you avoid stating such an opinion until you do a DBT? Do you withhold an opinion of food or drink until you run a spectrographic analysis of that particular sample before making your decision?
Just curious,
Stu
Follow Ups: