Worshipping poltergeists is not that bad of an idea

Hi there. This is my first debate here. All the best!! First to simplify things, I will refer to Poltergeists with P. I will now refute your arguments. 1. Correct me if I'm wrong but I interpret this argument as if P has greater powers (able to perform supernatural events), then A who has less powers (unable to perform supernatural events) should worship P. I disagree with this because I believe that the usage of all powers should be justified and thus only benevolent beings with greater powers should be worshipped. I believe that the terrorist that hijack the planes in the Sept 11 incident are more powerful then us. But logic dictates that we should not worship them. Pro has not provide any evidence here that all P are benevolent beings. 2. Same as with 1., there is no prove that P are benevolent beings. And there is no proof that P desire worship and that worshipping would grant us their favor. Pro is also weak in his statement. Bill gates is rich and MAY decide to make me rich too by giving me 1 million USD. Then again, he MAY NOT. Thus this point is a fallacy of ambiguity. 3. P only exist in folklore. There has not been any scientific documentation of the existence of P. Thus if they are not even proven to exist, how can there be evidence of murder by them? It's like saying your private jet plane has never broken down when you don't even own one. 4. I have tried to research for "cultures worshipping poltergeist" and have been unable to find any matches. This point is thus invalid as Pro has not provided any evidence for it. This is a fallacy of weak inference. 5. Same as 1. and 2. This point is a fallacy of both ambiguity and weak inference. And using Pro's logic, it is also possible that the poltergeists spirit us away into a plane where it is worst then hell and every imaginable nightmare manifests itself. Note: I do not understand how the Predator, Will Smith and Shrek qualifies as P as they are definitely not disembodied or subtle-bodied. Now for my arguments, 1. One of the members of P are spirits of the dead. But not just any dead. Spirits of the dead that linger on are those that have strong negative emotions during time of death and are unable to move on. Causes of negative emotions include brutal deaths, fear, anger, sadness and etc. Now if you are filled with such strong negative emotions to the extend that you are unable to move on, would you be wiling to use your powers for the benefit of others? 2. Aside from spirits of the dead, there are many others that qualifies from Pro's definition of P. However most of these are always associated with negativity such as demons, ghosts, wraiths. Demons are malevolent beings. Ghosts are spirits of the dead which I have already mentioned in 1. and Wraiths associated with omens and portents. I believe that Pro will use his assumption of P to justify more benevolent beings. However he has yet to give any example of said beings. Thus the BOP is now upon him. 3. Just because something such as P have potential to be more powerful, it does not mean they should be worthy of worship. Otherwise wouldn't the passengers in the plane of the Sept 11 terrorist attack worship the plane hi-jackers? Pro has expressed his own opinions on a few points but has been unable be firm with his conviction nor quote relevant examples. And through that, I am all the more convince that Con is the way to go in this debate.