There are a ton of ''viable'' hypothesis, so what? Why would you chose some hypothesis when there are already scientific theories that just work better. You are not proving anything here.
Prove it. Prove that parapsychological research is explained better by theories not involving Orch OR and survival. Since the tests can be replicated it should be easy to prove that the mind cannot influence matter, as you claim.
''Theories that support this idea are: Orch OR and survival.'' Orch OR is not a theory, is a hypothesis and I don't see how it directly supports magic but whatever, again and you know this, there is no scientific theory about any of what you mention.
Not true, you are making shit up again. Orch OR is a theory, it makes testable predictions, thus it is a theory. While mainstream theories assert that consciousness emerges as the complexity of the computations performed by cerebral neurons increases, Orch-OR posits that consciousness is based on non-computable quantum processing performed by qubits formed collectively on cellular microtubules.
Survival is a hypothesis, it is useful in explaining the evidence of parapsychology, the two are related and have strong explanatory power. The same cannot be said for mainstream materialist theories. I posted my evidence, so where is yours? You cannot claim that your preferred theory is better without citing evidence for it.
A review of Orch OR theory:
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1571064513001188Connecting QM to the survival of the personality and other parapsychological research:
http://www.near-death.com/science/evidence.html#a22http://www.near-death.com/science/evidence.html#a14http://www.near-death.com/science/evidence.html#a23Tests that you refuse to address or even look at, yet you claim to have a better theory? Prove it!
https://www.quora.com/Is-telekinesis-scientifically-true/answers/17777933
