1.4 Validate It or Trash It---Fifteen Years of Exclusion
How do you study something that refuses to enter a lab?
You can't cage it. You can't control the variables. You can't summon it on demand for a Tuesday afternoon appointment.
But you can do one thing: Systematically rule out everything else.
This has been the core principle of my fifteen years of work:
- Assume every "paranormal event" has a mundane explanation first.
- Rule out psychological factors: Grief? Intoxication? Hallucinogens?
- Rule out environmental factors: Infrasound? Carbon monoxide leak? Faulty wiring?
- Rule out human factors: Prank? Unconscious cueing?
- Only when all of the above fail do we move to the next step.
And then, it's not about "belief." It's about operation.
If a specific method---a particular talisman, a specific ritual, a defined process---produces predictable, repeatable results across different locations, different subjects, and different operators, then we keep the method.
If it fails, we ditch it. No faith required.
My teacher was a proper lineage holder of the Qi Cultivation tradition. The day I formally became a student, I swore an oath to Heaven and Earth: "May I be aided to understand the mysteries of the world." I was thirty years old, steeped for decades in a materialist education system, my head full of "that's impossible" and "that doesn't exist."
Fifteen years. Hundreds of field cases. From observing my teacher to handling things on my own. Recording successes, recording failures, and recording the murky in-between states.
To this day, I hold space for that possibility: that one day, someone might develop a cleaner, more elegant scientific theory that explains all of this away. If that day comes, I'll set this framework aside without a shred of regret.
But until then---this methodology has shown consistent, cross-contextual efficacy in hundreds of cases. For a pragmatic person, if the tool works, you use it. Provided, of course, you understand its scope and its limits.
Comments (0)