[MikeB]

This is a real tough subject for me. In the context of my own personal paradigm, the lack of corroborated evidence can only lead me to conclude that what we regard as paranormal phenomena is something else and that there is almost always a better explanation than one of supernatural disturbances. It stands as a good rule to remember never to attribute a supernatural explanation to something that might be explained, albeit difficultly, with a standard rational explanation. With this in mind I would logically come to the conclusion that there probably, though not certainly, is nothing to this at all. Or I would have, had I not have experienced a series of what I could only regard to be quite frightening paranormal experiences. Experiences which left me, at the time, with very little doubt as to their authenticity. As the years go by this small amount of doubt has grown, fed by a steady stream of logic and the understanding that eye witnesses make notoriously bad reporters of facts as they were. Nevertheless, I'm still reluctantly inclined to believe that there's perhaps something genuinely supernatural to it, even though I would naturally tend to dismiss myself I were looking at my account from the outside.