> > I find it difficult to conceptualise what exactly these people are
> > studying. They seem to be looking at the body of science and then
> > looking for anomalous data.
> It's the anomalies that allow our scientific knowledge to
> grow. Only Studying easily predictable phenomena is about
> as idioitic as the guy who only looks for his keys where the
> light it is.
Yes I realise this. But there seems to be (at least to me) a conceptual difference between creating a new theory of gravitation because the old one fails to explain some phenomenon and studying the paranormal. Say I do some experiments concerning the ability to predict symbols drawn on cards and my data suggests that certain subjects are correct more often than probability would suggest. Where do I go from here? What field of science does this concern? The study of the *paranormal* can, by definition, only tell us that science does not account for everything. This is not news.