“Scientific” Evidence
When researching anything Super-Natural or Para-Normal you will frequently find a conclusion or disclaimer stating that there is not enough Scientific Evidence or controlled testing to conclusively recognise and categorise the ability or phenomenon as neither true nor genuine.
We have a number of issues with this…such as….
- Science and the knowledge and understanding of science is always growing and expanding, equally we believe what is understood and witnessed in Science isn’t always revealed to us/the general public.
- Who constitutes as an official body to monitor and measure any “scientific” testing and can they be trusted?
- Who selects what is worthy of “scientific” testing?
- Why do “scientific” tests vary in duration and what is required to pass successfully?
- What is recognised as a suitable ‘scientific” test and who sets those guides?
All of the above points have the risk of being controlled by an authority that could well be biased and favor certain groups and organisations and against other areas that don’t follow or suit a particular agenda, and therefore not regulating and recognizing factors fairly.
Perhaps, not surprisingly, many or most of the subjects within this website and what we at YANA research, according to “Scientific” study, will often not be acknowledged and recognised “Scientificly” as Truth nor real or genuine, simply because somebody/organisation states that there hasn’t been enough “Scientific” testing. At best they may emphasise that there has been a large amount of reliable witnesses or some controlled testing that could consider a case as credible.
As we always state. Do your own research, cross reference information, if possible investigate for yourself and then make up your own mind.