Open-minded Skepticism & Thoughts on James Randi's Pros and Cons

Good day!

I'm an open-minded skeptic. Electronic Voice Phenomenon is the one phenomena that I know exists, from personal experiments with it. But I also recognize plenty of recordings are contrived, imagined or originate from a mundane source.

It's sheer assumption that ghosts are the cause of EVP. While open to this idea, the more sensible theory (for me) involves quantum physics. Especially when you consider that an EVP can be captured anywhere. An EVP can be picked up in a graveyard or on the toilet. In my experience "they" have an ability to mimick people's voices. Telepathy may be indicated where it's believed "the dead" supposedly grant a special message.

Speculation re: quantum theory isn't unique. Meanwhile, it's impossible to confirm the existence of apparently invisible entities like angels, demons or ghosts. There's an implicit Christian bias involved as well.

Personal EVP style: screw white noise. It's a confounder for EVP study, implicates rampant apophenia. Generally I record in relative silence. Ideally, absolute silence (use of Faraday Cage), is the ideal. If you would like tips or want to talk about EVP, please feel free to PM me!

PS - About James Randi and his '1,000,000 Paranormal Challenge' ...

James Randi has the right idea since there are some heinous, shameless sheisters who could use a shake up. Unfortunately he uses a pseudo-scientific approach. His approach in discerning psi from mundane explanations bias to a shameful degree. Objectively testing an "adversary" (his title for challengers)... is an oxymoron in science; antithetical to proper, scientific testing. Nor does he use proper blinds. As the tester, he even breaks one of the basic rules by observing his testing subjects w/in the testing area. The "adversary" is forced to choose from Randi's personally hand-picked entourage of clinicians and observers, who may or may not be bias to Randi, and therefore adverserial as well. That the reward money is an investment from people supporting his skeptical foundation, demotes the whole operation to circus status. Objective testing meets gambling?? Sure.

Stating that scientists make flaws (refrencing psi researchers), he nevertheless assigns "scientists" who agree to using improper scientific protocol.

Moreover, he fails to acknowledge that *proper* scientific testing is still the best form of objective "truth" testing available. That a few people misapply science (including his team), does not negate it's extreme relevance. It's nice to know we have people like Randi using his credentials as - LOL - a magician, in place of the well-established application of sound and respected scientific methodology. I will entertain your comments or shrill hate speech regarding Randi. Just PM me.