Greetings Paul

You made the following statement ‘I get a little concerned with what I percieve to be a line that is being drawn between scientists and mystics’.

The scientific method is something that is clearly defined and when I talk about a scientist I am talking about people that practice the scientific method. I did not use the word mystic. It will be helpful if you can further elaborate on what you mean by a mystic.

The point that I was making is that there are things that human beings have been experiencing for a long time which are yet to be clearly documented and explained in scientific textbooks.

I believe that it is very useful for me to investigate the usefulness as well as the limitations involved in perceiving the world via the scientific explanations that can be found in textbooks and journals. There are many different ways to interpret the world and in my view the information provided by scientific journals is simply one approach.

Note that because a phenomenon is yet to be properly explained in scientific journals does not imply that the phenomenon does not exist or is not well ordered.

I adopt a similar approach when reading the bible because I recognize that the bible is useful to some extent, but it also has serious limitations and if I try to view the world with only biblical explanations it will then be very difficult for me to overstand other very important information about the world.

Personally I believe that I will be seriously restricting my options if I wait for information to appear in a scientific journal before I consider whether something exists.