Thanks--I'll read this and get back with my impressions. In the meantime, I would just say maybe we are over-reliant on the idea of science as an absolute arbiter of truth and what is real. My experience as a practicing scientist is that we don't know what we don't know, and we don't know what we think we know (we==scientists in this case). I can write an article on anything and find a way to get it published, that does not prove or disprove the veracity of my claims. Experimental evidence is not evidence of truth. Sorry to be so vague and cryptic, but bottom line: science is somewhat like the Catholic church in the middle ages--it claims dominion over truth but there are a lot of smoke and mirrors involved. In the end, I think we are agreeing in principle here.