I can't prove anything of the paranormal exists or doesn't but then again can you?
Well it has been demonstrated on a number of occasions that certain alleged paranormal phenomena don't exist (usually where the paranormal effect is claimed to be direct, reliable and repeatable). Other more nebulous claims are more difficult to pin down. However from a philosophical point of view, it is very, very difficult to prove an ill defined negative (For example the old Oxford Don's philosophical exercise involving an invisible, incorporeal, fire breathing dragon which lived in his fireplace). However you are, I believe, a "psychic investigator", which presumably means that you have amassed some evidence one way or another.
It would be very interesting to see (or hear of) the evidence which you have collected, and the to discuss how that evidence could be interpreted, and what other possible explanations for the data there may be.
Yes we can prove that Manchester isn't a bishop as already stated.
Which gets into how you define "bishop", knowing a little about how religions are defined and regulated in the UK I suspect that
legally Mr Manchester has a right to use the title of bishop. However what that actually means is open to personal interpretation, and whether someone should use the title in relation to Mr Manchester or not is a matter of personal choice (and personal freedom).
I would ask though that we focus on matters directly related to the paranormal rather than the ecclesiastical standing (or otherwise) of Mr Manchester.
You Barbara and David seem to be in a position to offer a different point of view from most of the posters here, and frankly I think we have more interesting and relevant things to talk about than obscure churches. And given Darat's warnings about personal matters and past history, I wouldn’t want to miss the opportunity of asking you, and in particular David, some questions.
Manchester did indeed claim that the girl was a giant spider and not only that but it was the size of a giant cat. If you read the second edition of The Highgate Vampire it quite plainly says. If you have not read the story then how can you make a comment. Since when have I invoked images of the Queen Mother's (well that should be the late Princess Diana)nighties? Again that was not us but on one of Manchester's own ridiculous articles that he was promoting at the time of the late Princesses death. I'm surprised that he didn't change her into a immortal being in the process. Probably thought about it but thought better of it.
The problem for a lot of (probably all) skeptis with stories like this, is that both claims of vampires, and claims of deceased Royals appearing in images are implausible, and with no corroborating evidence presented for either how are we to determine one as more plausible than the other?
We know that "common sense" is so often wring, especially when confronted with things outside of our personal, and evolutionary, experience. So without corroborating evince we will place both stories on a footing equal with any other uncorroborated extraordinary claim.
arat
