I've been doing more than usual of my usual: listening to an assortment of paranormal-themed podcasts, buying books and whatnot--probably more than I have since the '80s. And I've concluded that probably 90 per cent of the material out there is drivel--complete fabrication, willful ignorance masquerading as enlightenment, deliberate disinformation, pseudo-philosophy, third-rate theological ramblings born of a fourth-rate understanding of discredited religious dogma.
How is this possible, when, at its core, the Paranormal (or at least our current understanding of it) best describes a truer nature of reality than found in official beliefs? To wit:
Remote viewing (when practiced by skilled viewers) seems to demonstrate that consciousness can transcend time, space, and individuality and pluck detailed bits of information from remote locales with an accuracy that puts Google search to shame;
Precognition is real, despite being scientifically impossible. We can perceive future events long before they are probable, or even possible, with startling detail;
The deceased not only can contact the living with valid evidence that they have survived death but can often affect physical objects, predict future events, offer profound insights into not just their world but ours.
UFOs not only have been extensively documented as real physical objects, but (unlikely as it might seem) have apparently crashed, at least once. (Remember, it takes only one white crow.)
How, then, with these core truths as a foundation, can the whole paranormal field be such a wretched tissue of absurdity?
Possible answers may be: "It's" designed that way. Or, perhaps, what appears to us as "true" may seem true only because we are conditioned to accept it as true. Or, our perceptions of what is true or untrue are irrelevant, since we perceive only symbols, or the surface.
In any case, this dichotomy that confronts the paranormal seeker might, ultimately, offer some useful clues into the ultimate nature of reality.