They all start from the point that there IS a supernatural force at work in the universe. That is a flawed assumption. Garbage in, garbage out.

Not true. They feel something more at work. Just because you dont feel the same thing doesnt make you automatically right. Just makes you different from them.

There are times I 'feel' that several small somethings are crawling on my legs. That doesn't change the reality that it is a misfiring of the nerve cells, and not several small somethings.

it's far different from that, i assure you.

An assurance without evidence. That's a surprise.

How can you prove emotion, or an experience? you cant tell a person born blind what it's like to see, let alone see the works of a great artist, or a beautiful natural occurance. you cant explain music to a deaf person. Not to say anyone's UNABLE to experience it, just that it's impossible to explain something along those lines.

What about those who can sense ghost/spirits...

Just because some of us can't see them, you can't just rule out and say they don't exist...

How does one resolve conflicts between competing ideals in your relativistic worldview? Not everyone can be right. I am concerned with objective observations and empirical evidence.

I can certainly say that until there is sufficient evidence produced, the idea that the supernatural existence will not affect my worldview. I would also suggest they compete in the Randi prize so that a) they can win some money and b) we'll finally have evidence for the existence of the supernatural. I'm not the one making extraordinary claims about how the universe works. The burden of proof is on the one making a claim.

if you're asking about differences in religion, i believe that, at our core, we're all worshipping the same God, just calling it by different names, and insisting that they're different. Sure, we have a few differences in the details, such as the afterlife, and some of the laws, but in the end, i believe, at least, we're all praying to the same thing.

as for emperical evidence, i have none but what i feel in my soul. And you'll call that into question and try to disprove what cant be disproved, and i'll try to prove what can only be felt. so there's no real point in debating.

Well there are proofs, it just depends on whether you choose to believe them.

If you choose not to believe them, no amount of "proofs" these people can bring up will satisfy your mind. (Photos, videos, people hearing things, predicting things, you'll give yourself reasons to not believe them - fake photo, fake video, just got lucky with coincidence etc...)

But the point isn't about whether you believe it or not. It's about your claim that these people are all just talking non-sense, ONLY BECAUSE you choose not to believe them. Maybe the ARE telling the truth...

I just don't think there's a need to make disrespectful remarks about someone else's believe only because you can't see the sense in it yourself.

And, it's a bit like, prove to me the sea is blue. But if you take a scoop of water out of the sea, it's clear.. so how come it's blue? so is the sea really blue? Or should we say that the sea is clear?

How your eyes works with your mind is not the 100% truth.