WOlfgang:

It is unlike you to argue a point taken out of context! The actual statement I applauded was speaking to the quality of faith: "Faith for me is also remembering to fullly grasp and experience life even when I can't reduce it to an understandable and rational explanation . That is not to say --at least I never interpreted it that way -- that one should not seek rational explanation. There is a quiet openness and wonder in the presence of phenomena that appears to exceed one's rational models or known answers. Even scientists need to have the same openness in order to really see new data. But, granted, they don't speak of it in mystic or emotional terms, although Einstein did on occasion. Your companion who wanted to make the green flash mystical was entitled to her sense of mystery, but I prefer your brand of rationalism for most things.

Bill D:

I have spoken of Ingo Swann frequently in threads of this kind because he was a friend many years ago, and I find his discussions of remote viewing and such things persuasive; but I have not submitted his reports to extreme skepticism as James Randi would. I don't think much of Randi, as you can well guess. I distrust his motivation. Much, perhaps, as he would distrust mine, I guess. I believe that non-physical phenomena are important, and should be examined on terms consistent with how they work. I also believe it is perfectly possible to be scientific without being materialistic, another way of saying the same thing, perhaps.   

A