What does general public think about the science called parapsychology? As a
rule they don't see any difference between parapsychology and New Age. Most
mainstream scientists have the same view, because they believe in what the
skeptics say and the skeptics say so.

That general confusion can be seen clearly in the category chains used by
booksellers, libraries and discussion forums, for example:

Free Books > Religion & Spirituality > Occult > Parapsychology.

Suomi24 > Keskustelu > Uskonnot & uskomukset > Rajatieto > Parapsykologia.

Translated: Suomi24-forum > Discussion > Religions & beliefs > New Age >
Parapsychology.

In my opinion parapsychologists have badly failed in their public policy.
The skeptics are much better in that art. What to do then? In my opinion
there would be at least following things to do:

1.. To take a clearer distance to religions and New Age. The difference
ought to be told and repeated on and on in parapsychological articles.
2.. The direct and undisputed lies that skeptics tell about parapsychology
and parapsychologists ought to be listed publicly, clearly and in detail,
especially in many sites in Internet. I have already gathered some points in
my files. The list would be _very_ long.
3.. Parapsychologists ought to let mainstream scientists check all papers
before publishing them. That would prevent for example pseudophysics and
pseudogeology to be written in the papers. There are fringe scientist in
every established field and it is unwise to rely on them too much. Scholars
are seldom able to understand the bases and details of natural sciences well
enough, and that can be very harmful to parapsychology as a science.

- Olavi