Board Thread:Suggestions/@comment-5553481-20160330135833/@comment-19903036-20160401184246

Gacsam wrote: A lot of random objects could be used when you think about it *rubs his chin* Yea, and a lot of random conclusions have been jumped to, like cloud bursting. Or a ball rolling off of a table. Those require multiple tests with multiple answers and for you to come up to some sort of average as the answer. Same reason why a thermostat isn't viable. It can read differences in the environment, but the weather can change on it's own.

Skeptics make results hard to consider because there needs to be no doubt in order to accept something. Otherwise it deserves not to be looked at biasly for or against. The scale i'll take, but there aren't many things out there that can confirm it's activity like a geiger counter. *rubs his eye* lol, I just woke up from a night. -_-