[orgaelin]

OK, ok. I suppose I set myself up for that piss-taking session you call a post!

In my defence, I did not say I was an avid believer of the idea. Only that I was open to it if someone showed me appropriate evidence, or might not believe in it if someone showed me evidence to the contrary.

You do illustrate a point of mine quite well; that something can be perceived two ways, and what for some is proof of 'xyz' is for another a total disproof of the same.

To be honest, I think I am in a better position than you because I am able to see either side of the fence. You sit so firmly on your own side that you refuse to even look over the other side. That's fine. But note that whenever there is a fence for people to sit either side of, persons on both sides always have perfectly good reasons why their side is the better one, just like you do, just like believers in synchronicity do.

If I discovered sychronicity to be real, I would then attempt to find some sensible explanation for it. The sub-conscious mind, for example, is quite capable of steering a person without them having any knowledge of it.

Did you ever see the episode of Derren Brown's show where he deliberately set up loads of stimuli for two ad-designers, and then sat back to watch them draw exactly what he had made them draw through the stimuli? It was a brilliant example of how much control the sub-conscious mind has over us. That could easily explain the phenomenon. If someone put up posters of people tripping on blue marbles all along your route to work, you probably would trip at the sight of a well placed marble in your office.

Regardless of the reason behind it, there *is* an observable phenomenon at work here. You can ridicule, or you can question, analyse, and ultimately explain away. But that's the order of understanding among us Stupid White Men isn't it? First ridicule, then reconsider, then take it as accepted fact. (As in the shape of Earth, Human flying machines, etc.)

The bottom line here is that there is an observed phenomonon which is quite able to provide an interesting extra understanding for scientists/psychologists, or alternatively a source of faith and comfort to those who prefer to think in that way. You can choose one or the other, but that makes you closed, because once you've made up your mind you will no longer be open to new evidence or discoveries. That's why I presented my first post with nothing but a question and an example, but not a statement that it was any particular way. Someone else should have come back with what I have said in this second post, but as it happens it seems I might as well talk to myself!