Come on now, there's no need to get into this again. If someone thinks science is flawed, let them. If someone thinks science is the answer to everything, that's their prerogative.

I think both perspectives have merit in some ways. Science doesn't explain everything...however, that's because science doesn't claim to explain anything that can't be backed with some kind of evidence. The fact that science currently doesn't have an explanation for phenomena that some describe as "ghosts" doesn't represent a flaw in science. It's just an indication that we don't yet know how to go about proving anything one way or the other.
Sure, sometimes people choose to believe things because they want to or convince themselves they saw something that they didn't. Other times people see things they can't explain and prefer to jump to some conclusion (g-g-g-ghost) rather than to simply say, "I don't know what that was."
There are a lot of things that we still can't explain with science (yet). If someone told me that they saw a candelabra float across the room I might think they imagined it. I'd also be open to the possibility that they actually did see it. I would not jump to the conclusion that it was caused by the spirit of a dead person, however, because that's just one of an uncountable number of explanations for what they saw (magnetic field...brain tumor...etc.).
