If I understood the video correctly you are committing one of the common errors mentioned. The narrator would more likely say there is currently no proof that paranormal (supernatural) activity exists. If you could provide verifiable proof of paranormal activity, he would consider it and possibly change his position(that is being open minded). On the other hand, to accept paranormal activity without actual verifiable proof is failing to use your critical thinking skills and allows your head to be filled with nonsense(close minded). There is not a definitive explanation for everything that happens in the universe and likely never will be. That reality doesn't permit logical thinkers to just make up an answer to fill the void. Sometimes the best answer possible is "we don't yet know".
Haha yea i'm not buying the logic behind that explaination. Being that we are very limited beings (in our perspectives and interactions with the energy that makes up the light, matter, and antimatter that is all around us), and do not have all the answers to the universe, the planet, and our existance, means that there are going to be things and occurances that we do not understand, and will never understand unless we evolve in those areas.
And wouldnt the fact that if something happens outside our box of understanding automatically make it supernatural, or at least a candidate for it? And who gets to be the judge on what is considered proof versus what is not? I'd say its very close-minded, and not exactly rational to discount the possibility of paranormal activity across the board, especially when our senses, perception, and awareness in the general scheme of things is so low. Not to mention, it is very arrogant (and naive) to say that there is no such thing as supernatural phenomena when we know that we have nowhere near a complete understanding on things.
Their arguments dont make sense, and seem to exist on a very shallow level of critical thinking.
