People who are CONVINCED to their bones that they have experienced “woo” become changed.

It’s like a religious conversion.

After that, “debate” becomes problematic.

Now, I fall into that category (I’ve been changed).

It’s certainly possible to be relatively logical with your woo.. and if you make theories involving science, then you are taken more seriously, but you”ll have the “pseudo-science slur” used then.

It’s also certainly possible to discuss woo philosophically, but then you run into the huge problems of subjectivity, epistemology, and ontology, which lead to exactly nowhere.

Those changed by “real woo” become like democrats, compared to those who have not experienced ‘real woo’
are like republicans (just metaphors here).

It’s really difficult to come together.

The standards of what constitutes “proof” becomes altered irreconcilably.

I think that you could have taken Carl Sagan, who wrote “The Demon-Haunted World: Science as a Candle in the Dark” and if you dropped a black triangle ufo on his head (like happened to me), then he’d have to struggle with “woo” just like the rest of us “woo people”.

Kevin Pretty Bear