Just because there has been a replication crisis doesn't mean you can dismiss all scientific studies willy nilly.
Those are not some Deepak Chopra style BS, they are actual clinical studies (and I've just sent a sample, there are tons). And the "replication crisis" argument doesn't really hold up if independent studies reach similar conclusions (as is the case with a lot of these).
>People like you who blindly believe anything a supposed authority puts out there in the name of science are real curse to the gift of science.
I don't "blindly believe anything a supposed authority puts out there". I respect multiple teams working on a field and coming up with relevant results, and having their papers peer reviewed etc.
I don't use issues like the "replication crisis" to dismiss any study I don't like based on predetermined convictions.
Notice also how your links are irrelevant. We are not talking about Psychology studies but medical clinical studies. So whether "Positive” Results Increase Down the Hierarchy of the Sciences" (as another paper says) is irrelevant, as we're not talking about soft sciences and humanities here.
I went to the first reference from your wikipedia link
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19123875
Conclusion: Most clinical trials on meditation practices are generally characterized by poor methodological quality with significant threats to validity in every major quality domain assessed. Despite a statistically significant improvement in the methodological quality over time, it is imperative that future trials on meditation be rigorous in design, execution, analysis, and the reporting of results.
Second reference from wikipedia
http://ebooks.cambridge.org/chapter.jsf?bid=CBO9780511816789...
The Cambridge Handbook of Consciousness,
Cambridge Handbooks in Psychology
And, Yes universities are filled with idiots, egotists and scamsters with their own nefarious motives. How do you explain the absurd 90% hypothesis validation? [3]
you have your own brain to observe and meditate on, why do you need some authority to tell you what to do.
>If you want to prejudicially exclude research, don't claim to speak in favor of science.
People like you who blindly believe anything a supposed authority puts out there in the name of science are real curse to the gift of science.
1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Replication_crisis#Psychology
2. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12185845
3. http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal....