The kind that get one laughed at are those that are not possible.
Right, but here's the thing I don't get: who gets the final say about what is "possible" and what is "not possible"? Does lack of evidence for something make it "not possible"? I would have thought that this also an unscientific sort of attitude.
By the way, thanks for setting me straight, everyone. I honestly thought scientific types were not open to all possibilities and would ridicule any ideas they didn't want to consider. But you have helped me to see that this whole idea is ridiculous, laughable and unworthy of further consideration.