On misconceptions about Science
Most of your comments are based around the kind of ideas and 'reasoning' that are themselves reason I so seldom attempt to engage you. You have so many misconceptions about the nature and practice of science, and about the state of current scientific knowledge, and you are so firmly wedded to your perspective, that it would almost certainly take far too long to even attempt to explain where I see you may be wrong, at enough points to have any real impact on your understanding.
Perhaps this is exactly what I need. Try me, take your time.
Perhaps the problem is, that I try to understand the world from multiple points of view at the same time. For example, quantifying a personality through multiple psychological methods, like MBTI, astrology and esoteric ray structure. I do the same with physics and just about everything else that I can, as long as these methods may be simultaneously true. If I see a solid experimental evidence for one method, I must keep it open as a possibility, in case the truth is there.
So you may feel that I don't give due credit to the only and true scientific method by forcing it to share the same head with other methods. For me, it is only having multiple instruments in one toolbox.
All I need to make it click together is my sole article of faith (= not perception or deduction) which is the String theory. When I see documents on String theory interpreted in layman terms, I see it says what esotericism claimed all along. The number of dimensions, the nature of matter, the basis and relationships of natural forces, and so on.
Even if there is more information you feel I am missing in your 'sources', I see in your accounts so many quite explicit misconceptions that I have little confidence that you really have a coherent world-view behind it all. Your failure to grasp many really simple physical explanations I have tried to present to you over the years, for what you have seen as strange phenomenon, is what also makes it far more plausible to me that your ideas are based on mis-understanding or faulty intuition than on having grasped some principles that someone like me simply cannot or refuses to.
My worldview is coherent, no doubts about that, it's just a bit too extensive to explain through the internet. There are of course many parts of it, which I regard as unverifiable, irrelevant for practice, formalistic, or with various degrees of certainity. But I chose this worldview out of necessity, because nothing else really fits on the world as my physical senses show it to me. A scientific worldview may be neater and provable to anyone, but it doesn't describe at all the daily experience of people like me and our shared experimental observations. I don't reject the scientific worldview, I use it when possible and try to expand it and reconcile with other worldviews by pointing at independent research.
I can grasp simple concepts, but just because there is a simple explanation, it may not be the only answer. Sometimes it is, sometimes my observations provide another explanation and sometimes both explanations are or may be true simultaneously. And it would do no good to explain all that to you.
So, take your time and try to formulate what do you think is wrong with me and my worldview. Fundamental problems of worldview must be resolved through very fundamental discussion, full of exposing the hidden assumptions. I'm looking forward to it, it will be probably very enlightening.
Beings who deserve worship don't demand it. Beings who demand worship don't deserve it.