jamesd1

PSI is directly related to and integral to Dr. Phillip's writings. If anyone had actually look at The lnks at provided or did any even a superficial reading of the abstracts of his papers, then that would have been obvious. I'm done here folks. We'll leave the last word to you.

I don't think an over-the-top analogical exaggeration Is a reasonable response to the physicist writings.

I think you may not be giving enough attention to the description in the links I referenced.

Silence does not automatically mean truth but I don't think that's a fair characterization of what he wrote. Calling something pseudo/non-scientific is just "name calling," is a way to easy dismissal and besides: https://www.americanscientist.org/blog/from-the-staff/stop-using-the-word-pseudoscience About evidence, I suggest exploring: Selected Peer-Reviewed Journal Publications on Psi Research A List of 100+ Peer-Reviewed Papers that Offer Scientific Evidence for Psi Phenomena Contents A-Z | Psi Encyclopedia

For those who may be interested, there is an article that presents the subject of of Stephen Phillips writings and related matter in context here: https://theosophy.world/encyclopedia/occult-chemistry The book "Occult Chemistry" is online at this link and there is a list of a dozen or so related article: https://theosophy.wiki/en/Occult_Chemistry_(book) I exchanged a few emails with Stephen Phillips and inquired about the reception that his writings on "Occult Chemistry" received. He replied as follows: "My books have never been reviewed in scientific magazines or commented upon by scientists other than a few who are supportive of parapsychology, such as Dr E. Lester Smith, FRS, who isolated B12 vitamin for the first time, and Professor Brian Josephson, a Nobel Prize winner in physics, who invited me in 1984 to deliver a seminar on the topic to researchers and Ph.D. students at the Cavendish Laboratory at Cambridge University - a lecture that was very well-received. I was not surprised at the lack of response to my books from orthodox science circles. In fact, I drew from it the positive inference that the lack of any criticisms of my conclusions from scientists probably meant that I had succeeded in making my analysis so sound and that I had presented evidence so convincing that no one in the science community was able to refute my conclusion that micro-psi accurately describes the subatomic world. When mainstream scientists cannot find any weakness to enable them to criticize a piece of research that contradicts their ideological assumptions, their response is often to ignore it in the hope that the rest of the world never notices it. This tactic is often quite successful, as it has been with my work, and I no doubt assisted in not bothering to make much effort to publicize it but to let my books speak for themselves to anyone who had ears unbiased enough to listen. So I am undismayed by the silence, and I have gone on to publish in 2009 a fourth book, entitled "The Mathematical Connection between Religion and Science" (Antony Rowe Publishing, England). This refers to my previous work and provides further remarkable, irrefutable evidence that the description of the UPA by Besant & Leadbeater was objective and accurate. My latest book, I believe, gives the definitive solution to the ancient mystery of the meaning of the friezes carved on the world-famous " Gate of the Sun" at Tiwanaku, in Bolivia. This turns out to have a profound bearing on both the two Theosophists' observations and my earlier analysis of them, although my book intentionally does not explicitly state what the connection is. It will get published hopefully when the current coronavirus crisis settles down. I hope this answers your question. Very sincerely, Stephen M. Phillips, Ph.D. physics"