Prejudice, science, etc.

[Parsons]

Considering ZM has recently been guilty of that particular distortion in his assumption that Dean Radin is a pseudoscientist, I will lump him in with the rest of us and say he has prejudices as well. :p

I definitely have prejudices, but never said Radin was a pseudoscientist. And since I never said that, that's just more fabrication and ignoring. That's why I said it's interesting - it really is interesting to try to understand rather than to dismiss.

You never actually said the word pseudoscience, but you essentially defined the term over your posts making Dean Radin out to be the opposite of credible in his scientific pursuits. Go ahead and argue semantics if you like, but I fabricated nothing.

By "quantum physics", I mean the theoretical research field (QT/QM) with peer-reviewed papers being published in some area, as opposed to someone's vague notion that through QT, some anecdotal evidence or phenomenological suspicion may ultimately be explained in theoretical form.

Anyone can have a vague notion about something they experience, or something which they think may be a candidate for research, and simply point to the field of quantum physics as already offering an explanation for it. Problem is, the theoretical support from scientific research is actually not there (i.e. for telepathy). People hijack science in this manner all of the time, perhaps because it makes them feel validated.

Dr. Dean Radin has spent years doing exactly the type of scientific research

No. Radin is a psychologist. This is the kind of hijacking I was talking about.

Pseudoscience is a claim, belief, or practice which is presented as scientific, but does not adhere to a valid scientific method, lacks supporting evidence or plausibility, cannot be reliably tested, or otherwise lacks scientific status.