Dr. Andrew Nichols V. Paranormalist Feeb-Geeks?

Gosh, that was an neat interview.

Always interesting to see the cold, hard, icy logic of the scientific method (which, it should be remembered, doesn't hate you - it just doesn't care about your feelings one way or the other, which is why it works) being applied to the equation. (And more to come soon, with Jim Houran on April 23rd.)

I am especially jazzed by the idea that gross paranormal events (like apparitions and physical interventions by unseen forces) can be regarded as extrinsic manifestations of psychological (and in the old Freudian sense, psychic) states and dilemmas on the part of observer-participants, including investigators.

I am especially conscious of the difficulty that this idea will have as regards the supposed separation of investigator and the investigated.

Also, the idea that paranormal enthusiasts may actually resist the 'solving' of epoch-long mysteries like hauntings and after death communications is very illuminating.

Dream theory is a rich and complicated world, but one with which I have some familiarity. This is quite intriguing.

I do think, however, that Dr. Nichols may want to consider the possibilities that open up when one regards spacetime from a multiversal perspective (as advocated by Paul "there is no death" Eno) which permits many possible life cycles for any given person, including deaths and survivals and divergent (or convergent) resonances, and which may manifest at some level of the psyche and – it seems – physical world.

Good stuff GT crew, and nice going Doc!