How important is it to convince the scientific community that psi exists?

You're welcome here as an intelligent and thoughtful poster but this (is) a psi forum.

Is that a provocative statement ? How does that imply that sceptics are not welcome ? 

As I said, I'm not going to waste any more time arguing about this.

As I said, I'm not going to waste any more time arguing about this.

That's fine. Do bear in mind that you started it, though. Do you not think my time is important too ?

I find myself in agreement with Irwin and Watt (French has also said he finds himself in "fairly full agreement" with the quote below):

"In the final analysis what fairly can be said of parapsychology? As far as spontaneous cases are concerned it seems likely that there are numerous instances of self-deception, delusion, and even fraud. Some of the empirical literature likewise might be attributable to shoddy experimental procedures and to fraudulent manipulation of data. Be that as it may, there is sound phenomenological evidence of  parapsychological experiences and experimental evidence of anomalous events too, and to this extent behavioral scientists ethically are obliged to encourage the investigation of these phenomena rather than dismissing them out of hand. If all of the phenomena do prove to be explicable within conventional principles of mainstream psychology surely that is something worth knowing ...; and if just one of the phenomena should be found to demand a revision or an expansion of contemporary psychological principles, how enriched behavioral science would be." (Irwin & Waytt, 2007, p. 260)

you started it

I find myself in agreement with Irwin and Watt (French has also said he finds himself in "fairly full agreement" with the quote below):

"In the final analysis what fairly can be said of parapsychology? As far as spontaneous cases are concerned it seems likely that there are numerous instances of self-deception, delusion, and even fraud. Some of the empirical literature likewise might be attributable to shoddy experimental procedures and to fraudulent manipulation of data. Be that as it may, there is sound phenomenological evidence of  parapsychological experiences and experimental evidence of anomalous events too, and to this extent behavioral scientists ethically are obliged to encourage the investigation of these phenomena rather than dismissing them out of hand. If all of the phenomena do prove to be explicable within conventional principles of mainstream psychology surely that is something worth knowing ...; and if just one of the phenomena should be found to demand a revision or an expansion of contemporary psychological principles, how enriched behavioral science would be." (Irwin & Waytt, 2007, p. 260)

Irwin and (Caroline) Watt ? Married to Richard Wiseman and author of "There's nothing paranormal about NDE's" Open mindedness at it's finest.

Irwin and (Caroline) Watt ? Married to Richard Wiseman and author of "There's nothing paranormal about NDE's" Open mindedness at it's finest.

I said I agree with the quote. I give fuck all if who said it married someone or wrote something else some other time!

I said I agree with the quote. I give fuck all if who said it married someone or wrote something else some other time!

Very precise scepticism at work !

Very precise scepticism at work !

Whatever that means. Troll someone else. I'm done engaging you on anything.

Whatever that means. Troll someone else. I'm done engaging you on anything.

You are extremely childish. (and dim)