Genuine question: does anyone actually believe poltergeists are real anymore?

I've been doing some reading on poltergeist cases - the classic ones, Rosenheim, the Pontefract case, historical stuff - and I'm struck by how the "explanations" have shifted over time. Originally, people thought they were demons. Then ghosts. Then psychic energy from troubled teenagers. Now the scientific explanation seems to be "it didn't happen" or "collective hallucination."

What I'm wondering is: does anyone on this forum actually believe in poltergeist phenomena as a real, measurable thing? Not as metaphor or psychology, but as actual physical phenomena that occurs. Or have we all basically accepted that the historical cases were either hoaxes, misidentifications, or confirmation bias?

I'm genuinely asking because I want to understand what the believer position actually is at this point. What's the mechanism? How does it work?

I don't think poltergeists exist as independent entities, but I do think there's genuine phenomena happening that we're calling poltergeist activity. Focused psychic energy from emotionally disturbed people causing minor telekinetic effects? Maybe. Manifestation of unresolved trauma causing reality glitches? No idea. But writing it all off as hallucination seems too convenient.

The problem is that poltergeist cases always involve someone (usually a teenager) who could be causing the phenomena consciously or unconsciously. The cases that hold up best are ones where the teenager is removed and the phenomena stop. That doesn't prove psychic power - it proves the teenager was involved somehow. Could be genuine telekinesis, could be elaborate hoax. Evidence doesn't distinguish between them.

What's the mechanism? How does it work?

If I knew the mechanism, I'd be publishing papers, wouldn't I? The honest answer is we don't know. We have documented cases of objects moving with no visible cause, we have multiple credible witnesses including scientists and investigators, and we have no good explanation. That's it. That's all we've got.

Most poltergeist cases collapse under scrutiny. The Pontefract case is actually a good example - seems genuine until you realise the teenager at the centre of it was absolutely capable of throwing objects and no one was properly watching. The Rosenheim case similarly falls apart if you're willing to look critically at the evidence. We're just not very good at investigating this stuff rigorously.

I think poltergeists as described in folklore probably aren't real. But I also think there's definitely psychological phenomena we don't fully understand that manifests as physical effects in some cases. Whether that's unconscious telekinesis or something else, who knows. But something real is happening, even if it's not what tradition calls a poltergeist.

The most honest answer is probably: we don't have enough good evidence to confirm poltergeists exist, and we don't have enough good evidence to say they definitely don't. Which is frustrating but it's where we are. Better to admit uncertainty than make up confident explanations for things we don't understand.

I've investigated three suspected poltergeist cases in person. In all three, there was someone in the household with motive and opportunity to fake it. In two, I found evidence of actual faking. In one, I'm genuinely not sure. But that doesn't make it poltergeist activity - it makes it "unexplained," which isn't the same thing as paranormal.