Scientists and rationalists do not accept that anything exists which defies verification and validation in laboratory experimentation. Interestingly, the entire citadel of Science and Rationality is raised on three tools whereby we humans apprehend the phenomenal world: (i) Observation of constancy, (ii) Measurability in terms of length, breadth/width, height/depth; weight; and count; and (iii) Recordable findings through lab experiments. All this seems reasonable until one realises from common experience during workaday existence that there are hordes of cases that no Science or Rationality can explain to satiate human curiosity. A bus accidentally falls into a khud 300 feet below the road-level, and everyone is killed except a three-month-old baby suckling at its mother’s breasts. Some people pretending to be smart and intelligent might suggest that debate would end the impasse, but I do not at all subscribe to their approach. I am convinced from long observation and experience that debate takes place when the terms of reference with respect to the subject concerned are not clear, and by this patent confusion you are provoked into shouting at others your point of view that is far off the mark. It is like shooting in a dark room at a black cat that is not there! There must have been reasons like these that the so-called among Homo sapiens decided that anything transcending the bounds of natural knowledge should be called ‘occult’—mysterious, magical, and supernatural. By virtue of this exigency a term called “Occult Sciences” has since been coined to cover alchemy, astrology, palmistry, numerology, magic, etc.