Then someone hacked your account when you previously posted; "Simply praying and expecting it to alter your physical reality, and then giving up when it doesn't happen promptly, is ignoring how the conscious mind affects reality... it takes a lot of practice along with skilled visualization, focused emotion, and strong belief in your ability to do so over a sustained period...to effect such changes."

So please don't reply with "Straw Man" until you can get the post appearing above your signature under control, or claim them as your own.

" If you are going to critique anything that goes against your strong ideological need to believe that the universe is not affected by consciousness in any way whatsoever--a tenet not supported by quantum mechanics, and which you and other atheists associate (wrongly) with religious belief, and thus need to denounce at all costs--then do so from an intellectually honest standpoint."

I DO NOT equate quantum mechanics to magik in its effects. Nor deny the observers role ( however slight ) in determining the extremely limited outcomes of observations below the level of Plank's Constant where those outcomes are valid solutions to the field-equations.

I do, however believe that you have demonstrated a lack of understanding of quantum mechanics as well as the scientific method. I believe that you are attempting to insert the solutions you wish to see at the output-end of the equation without bothering to look at the function or the values in the equations which drive the math.

"Let's take a look at two texts written by three quantum physicists who are respectable researchers and teachers in the field"

Lets. And when you do find these text please tell me.

But looking at the CVs of Rosenblum, Kuttner, and contributor to "Edge Science" magazines Henry, reveals that none of them are theoretical physicists working in the area of Quantum Mechanics. The two Applied Physics professors teach an undergrad course on which their book is based. But neither their degrees nor their research are in this area.

I'd hope that you'd have done the homework to see if they were, before making such a claim.

"Note the book Quantum Enigma by physicists and college professors (and thus hardly crackpots) Bruce Rosenblum and Fred Kuttner: http://www.amazon.com/Quantum-Enigma-Physics-Encounters-Consciousness/dp/0199753814/ref=pd_sim_b_5"

Intriguing title. Any quotes from it to shore-up your quantum=prayer position?

"Now note this professional review of the book by another scientist and college professor, Richard Conn Henry" .... "Note that Henry is an atheist like yourself"

RLY? ⚠️ ↗ Do you never look up something as soon as you see the slightest confirmation of your wishful thinking?

He is a religious loony who published his "professional" review in a magazine published by academics who are interested in the Little Green Men and other "anomalies." ⚠️ ↗ ( strangely not one of them could get their department or University to publish their "peer-reviewed" magazine. Hmmmm. )

And yes, of course an Astronomer ( not quantum physicist ) Who sides with those who start with unknown anomalies and believe that the burden of proof is on actual researchers to "explain them away" would find Rosenblum and Kuttner "too timid" and spend most of his "review" proclaiming what his own additions would have been to the book. ( Hardly a mark of professionalism. )

But then again, Rosenblum and Kuttner warn that Quantum weirdness makes “wild speculation inevitable.” And you provide plenty of what they warn against.

Physicists don't argue that the behavior seen in the macroscopic world shows none of the quantum weirdness. Quantumness does not as one Quantum Physicist put it ⚠️ ↗ "contradict local realism." ( But unlike kooky Astronomer Henry, Applied Physicist Rosenblum or his colleague Kuttner; Kaszlikowski is a practicing theoretical Physicist who is a principle investigator in Quantum entanglement and decoherence. So what does he know? )

"You can now see that I never said that observing particles on the sub-atomic level and focusing your will on them will result in radical alterations of matter, or changing one substance to another, and you clearly know this."

RLY? You deny being able to effect a physical change in the macro-scale ( as opposed to say, determining the singular outcome out of many equally valid ones on a level so small as to not effect the macro-scale? )

"the nature of our reality is affected by the observations of all sentient beings collectively. I stated in my first post that making conscious alterations in reality is difficult for this reason,

OK, now you can impact the physical universe, just with difficulty? But you can't violate local reality by having any kind of significant impact? Right?

"Rather, it can influence events on a usually subtle level (in fact, I used the word "subtle") that can nevertheless have potentially significant effects on someone's personal sphere, and it takes a huge amount of practice, visualization skills, and focus to accomplish with any degree of reliability, since moving against the consensus reality is like trying to run uphill.

Wait? Now you're starting to sound like that Straw Man you declaim, who has a radical ( non-local-reality-on-the-Macro-scale ) effect. The only thing to complete this Straw Manning of a position you distance yourself from would be to link it "wrongly" by invoking religious elements.

"That is the scientific reality behind what certain people have termed "magick" or "prayer" in the past, and why a lack of strong belief in its possibility sabotages its effectiveness if one tries it on a whim, or only in times of pure desperation."

Dang. You've really got to get your account secured. Because someone keeps posting these claims you hold as "Straw Men" under your nick.

Dante