This is costing me way too much HN karma lol, I guess nobody likes to get down voted, but try rewording that first statement like this:

Observer exists independent of reality.

If that were true, what could be said about reality ? Who/what is this Observer, is it the same in every being ?

Is it possible to detach the observer from the self ? Yes. People have been doing this since there is history.

I guess that's the whole point I was trying to make.

Quantum mechanics would like a word with you.

You also seem to infer observer is some form of intelligence, in reality an observer or a measurement isn't anything more than a physical interaction.

I take you and your friend and draw 2 cards out of a deck one red one black.

I give each one of you a card without you or myself knowing which one has which.

You and your friend are now entangled, you share a unit of information if I split you without measurement I "lose" or to be more exact cannot quantify the information.

I know that each of you has a card, I know that together you have one red and one black card and just like entangled particles the moment I measure one of you by asking you to reveal a card the other knows which card they were holding.

This is a very rough experiment but the point stands; reality doesn't change and more importantly again a measurement isn't a scientist with a machine it's a physical interaction.

The particle wasn't localized because a person measured it it was localized because it had to interact with it another physical object which was the detector there isn't a non physical way to measure anything any measurement wil require an exchange of information which means that your system will become localized.

Also hidden variable theories aside, Pilot Wave Theory does make the same predictions as QM, explains the "weirdness"and is deterministic.

Shamans are a religion yes, and it probably wasn't very wise mentioning that in the presence of a bunch of ruthless capitalists - you may as well dangle a steak in front of dogs.

But while I can't know that anything is being said that is true, and can't discount it either. Theorems are proven by confidence level in the null hypothesis being incorrect. Evidence is the only thing that separates 'science' from belief. A lack of evidence is a failure to prove anything, not a proof that it doesn't exist.