Well maybe we should start there. What sort of scientific test have you done to prove the existence of these entities and could you share your results?

I suppose the first thing I would need to know is what measurable verifiable effects have you encountered?
I've encountered many wiccans who claim that they know a spirit has contacted them because of feelings of peace, empowerment, etc.
But none have been able to show "if X then Y" where both X and Y are quantifiable phenomena.
Personally, I'd be happy to see a demonstration by anyone who said they could meet that standard.

I would be interested in having you define what would classify as verifieable experience. since personal experience is the only thing that you as a person can have, what do you proclaim to be other menas off experience. without one form or another you can experience nothing.

I don't understand, then what was the purpose of you bringing up your degree and your understanding of the scientific method if you are incapable of applying it? It seems you asserted you understood what it would take to properly prove your claim and were willing to provide evidence. Are you claiming you can prove these entities exist, and to do it you must hurt someone?

I shall approach your points in a more better way, since they are heavily abreviated above. certainly as mentioned an experience of evolution can be said to be provided in evidence rather than personal experience, but truly every thing encountered in life whether livingg or not is a product of evolution and so can be said to have been personally experienced. but taking it from the common point of view that it is not I present these topoics in a manner that requires a personal experience as evidence. this may sound like I have contradicted you statement about cancer, but indeed I have not. at some point in order for diagnosis and for study someone had the personal experience of having had the disease, as well as the doctor that had the personal expeience of not only studying the patient but also the research performed. it must be present in some level in order to results to be generated as evidence, further elaboration would be the archeological records that are used to minor extent in representing evolution without the personal experience of having dug up the bones their existence would be purely opinion. to be breif you mentioned the scientific method and true I do understand this too much some might say. the trouble does not lie in my lack of understanding of it but rather in the material I am working with. to make an analogy would help me explain. today we take for granted the field of genetics, we understand that genes regulate all cellular activity and such the function of all living things. not too long ago it was known that something was regulating cellular activity and while many theories existed nothing truly showed the mechanism. So I say to you I can have this entity do such and such for you, to you, or to someone else and you agree and such thing occurs to you. well we have only reached the point of understanding that something is occuring but it has unknown origin. so you would have me present the object exacting the change and this is the problem. true I can have the being show up, communicate with you, interact with you, present itself in many ways but no manner of proof of succh being can be presented other than personal experience. So I make this happen to a group of people and I get to the question above, what would be the appropriate manner of conducting such a thing in order to convince people that they are not being psychologically tricked? I just ask the questions above so that Ican hear from a variety of sources the reply to such a question. as far as those that woudl try to prove things such as blue trolls exist, well if I can be presented with one I would believe as well. this woud follow most logic. the presentatoin of the blue troll most likley couloccur in many ways but personally I woudl have to experience it existence whether it be though seeing touching or other usual methds of determination. this can be done with teh diety but it is not a living organism or even an object that occupies space. so how would one with an understanding of the scientific method present a viable argument that it exists. the existence of a fourth dimension may have be hinted at by many physicists but they have yet to truly show it's eistence with anything but an atom.

Yes indeed you are correct and noticed the error. I am indeed referring to string theory, but since it has not been approached from a paranormal angle I am unable to attribute one such dimension to the existence of such things. this would be nice but has not been examined in any way. I will address the commentary on technical evolution very briefly. I would be primarily referring to speciation. to be even more specific you can take modern horse.the evolution from hyracotherium to the modernhorse was not predicted by any sort of technological evolution but rather by determined changes due to more than one form of speciation. it would not be possible to define which form had the greater impact. but also to mention these records and determined changes recorded occured long before any ability to examine by means other than visual recognition. there is no way to back up the evolution of the horse by newer technology.

as far as seeing the troll, I mentioned this as an example for personal experience as a verifiying factor in proof of existence. the troll theory would still stand as your friend says to you I have a blue troll so you go an see. here is the troll in front of you and eny theories of hallucination must be discounted as two independant individuals encountering the same hallucination with no known drug to be administerd will discount theories of psychology. the same hallucination to be encountered by two individuals in teh same settings at the same time without any outside cause would be mathmatically impossible. so you interact with this beeing and use all five senses to test its existence and you have discounted theories of abnormal brain function, as a person with all senses affected at one time by same brain misfunction would liley render a person dead. so it would still hold true to testing.

I hardle count pareidolia as a credible outlook. while it may be used by psychologists to bring about certain desirable mental states for analysis. but mass pareidolia is considered to be nothing more than weakness of the human mind.
I suppose the LSD would just have magically entered the body. edema and or seratonin irregularity are not natural occurance in the body, rather they are caused or induced by something acting on the body. so to say yes it is common for all senses to be misguided this would be a false statement. in me trying to present a point of proof by personal experience these things have no relavence. as the user woudl have had to ingest them or by affected by a body malfunction. for two such people to encounter such an experience without taking your acid would not be possible. seeing objects due to pareidolia is not a natural phenomenon with scientific backing and is likley a person could be easily brought into such a state with little or no effort. but cannot bee attributed or related to paranormal experiences in any way. as far as you mentioning why can these things not be made to occur anywhere anytime. they can I already mentioned that previously. the bringing about of such occurances has been around for centuries and has never been a basis for dispute. but rather the nature of what is being summoned. therin lies my questions above. what bee the most appropriate method of summation that such questions could possibly be answered. my expertice in biochem has no relevance in deriving such a proof of existence. so I ask others that might have some insight. arguing over pareidolia and drug use is irrelevant the existence of a an entity when summoned in a room of one or many cannot be denied and is not related to pareidolia. these entities are not something that you can attribute to a vague or faint stimulus of which has been given greater signifigance than due. nor can an entire room or seperated rooms in different unrelated locations seeing and all communicating with an entity with or without the understanding of others cannot be attributed to psychological explaination as well. Lon Milo Duquette has attempted to explain such things from a subconscious pcyshological response stand point and was immediatly disproven, as modifiying a test group will usually disprove a theory and the group being tested can be modified in any way you choose and the same entity can be interacted with. so once again I do not argue the theory of existence as I understand this already. I simply ask for impute from other disciplines as to manner of testing such existence as wouold prove viable.

There are no supernatural things

No one can practice that which cannot be performed.

They are either lying or deluded.

Getting goose bumps is not evidence of demons.

That is simply stupid. No one has to prove something does not exist. The individual who makes the claim that something does exist is the one who has to cough up the evidence.

What evidence do you have that you communicated with anything?

There is a big difference between being open mindedness and being delusional.

They are the hairs on the back of your neck that stiffened up from self induced fear.

Go to a morgue and pull out a body that has been lying on the shelf for 2 weeks and make it sit up and walk around and say “hello”.

burp…oop sorry. Is this what you mean?

You don’t even have any evidence yet, let alone proof.

Like what?

Perhaps you haven’t been getting enough sleep and studying too hard. Lack of sleep causes hallucinations. Also studying too hard can cause mental exhaustion.

There is no evidence of any of this shit.

Did a guy with a masters degree say "more better?"

I know typos happen, but... damn.

The scientific method observes phenomenon, proposes a hypothesis to explain the phenomenon, and then attempts to disprove the hypothesis through empirical evidence. Empirical means that an observer can verify it through repeatable physical means.

Soooo...

For you to prove that spirits exist, you have to find a test for them that involves influencing the physical world in a way that is documentable by an outside observer, and cannot be explained in another way.

Is that sufficient explanation?

Anyone ever played World of Warcraft? (Don't. Man, what a waste of time.) This guy is a warlock! "I have never had sexual relations with that demon."