Some people can exaggerate their experiences or say that every creak of the stairs in their house is a ghost. The ones who go to extremes, labelling everything "supernatural" are the ones who invite the skeptic's ridicule. However, if we test ourselves and subject our own experiences to scrutiny then we can really identify the truly meaningful experiences that cannot be explained away by a skeptic. E.g. did others experience it at the same time (or at different times but without communication between them until after the experience)? did the experience reveal something previously not known (something that it was not possible to have known beforehand)? was the information specific enough not be interpreted lots of different ways? after the event, did you discover any external confirmations of the experience as being genuine (e.g. a specific symbol or set of words was used which later can be investigated in books etc.) etc.
There are experiences which meet the above criteria and skeptics try their best to argue it was some sort of group hypnosis or hallucination, etc. but their explanations seem pretty feeble....like "you changed your memory after the event" to which I reply....so did everyone else also change their memory? Did the people I told after the event change their memory of what I said back then?
Each experience needs to be considered on its own. However, I'd also like to say that those experiences which are experienced by someone alone and which don't necessarily meet the skeptics "tests" are still often valid for the individual and the individual can decide what significance it has for them. The only thing I'd say is if you've had such an experience which you cannot prove, don't go around expecting everyone else to believe you.
Sirona