So legitimate scientific study is limited to the physical world, including the human body, astronomical bodies, measurable energy, and how structure work ...

Clearly, this paradigm does not and cannot exhaust all aspects of reality, in particular the nature of human existence. In addition to the objective world of matter...there exists the subjective world of feelings, emotions, thoughts, and the values and spiritual aspirations based on them.

said daylia.

How do you distinguish "feelings, feelings, emotions, thoughts, and ... spiritual aspirations" which are valid from those that aren't? Why is your astrology different from David Icke's patent nonsense? He feels it to be true as strongly as you do.

You are quite wrong about science; if science has nothing to say about various aspects of human experience at the moment, that's not the same as saying it can't say anything in principle. And if there are areas in which it can't say anything in principle, you still have to show that any other approach can.

Why should anyone believe YOUR version of reality rather than someone else's? You must have some tests to distinguish between various models of reality; you've said that they don't involve statistics, what are they? Anything more than the massive egotism of saying "I feel it so it must be true"?