Margaret:
I choose to avoid Rolf and the other naysayers from now on, but you may be interested in a wonderful little book entitled, "The Structure of Scientific Revolutions" by Thomas S. Kuhn. In it he outlines a history of science fraught with revolution and reversals. He provides some interesting insights surrounding the work of Copernicus, Newton, Lavoisier, and Einstein, among others. In the section, "The Nature and Necessity of Scientific Revolutions," he states, "Let us, therefore, now take it for granted that the differences between successive paradigms are both necessary and irreconcilable." Kuhn doesn't seem to feel that the history of science represents anything like a linear march of "progress." He points out many scientific "rubrics" that have been set aside in favor of newer paradigms: Ptolemaic astronomy, Aristotelian dynamics, and corpuscular optics, for example.
BTW, Margaret, I do know what I mean when I use the term "paranormal," but it does sometimes seem to mean different things to different people and often carries a negative connotation. Do you feel Scheele relies on the paranormal as a basis for PhotoReading? I don't. In fact, I was quite amused that the term even came up in a previous posting. Maybe, though, we should discuss it seriously in another thread.
--George 
