Having an interest in many different criticisms of science and also being a cognitive psychologist, I happen to know a bit about parapsychological phenomena as well. To me, proposing any legitimacy to these views is like saying that creationists have a plausible alternative model that should be considered along with evolutionary theory. I excised the next few paragraphs. I do not understand them, and I do not understand how any serious academic could view them positively, if in fact supporters of these views are academics. It is not scientists who blindly follow some misguided but charismatic leader.
Scientists are the ultimate skeptics and want to test ideas for themselves.
That is why it is difficult to read material that does not demonstrate clearly what evidence and line of reasoning led to a particular conclusion. It might seem sensible to someone who has immersed themselves in a grand worldview that might not itself be justifiable, but it does nothing for outsiders.