Apologies if you think I've in some way misrepresented your thinking. I agree with you that there are no proofs, and the sentence you quote seemed merely to confirm what you have said here. New Agers may use the word 'proof', but I don't think that's true of me (unless I'm quoting others); I think I always use 'suggest' or something similar.
I obviously don't expect you to read everything I write but, as I've made clear in the past, I am not equally sympathetic to panpsychism and idealism. I mentioned them both here merely because that is the type of thinking which the experimental evidence suggests. I share Kastrup's distaste for panpsychism, and wrote a criticism of Goff's book in the past. I consider panpsychism to be merely a possibly useful stepping-stone on the journey away from physicalism, if that is what it takes to shake up materialist thinking.
If you think the evidence I presented in this article regarding actual experiments is 'grasping at anything', then I don't know what to say. You must be pretty desperate yourself. Of course the implications are not proof, but they are suggestive. At the very least, they need explaining. I note that you haven't made any comments or offered alternative interpretations of these experiments in your response. I would be more interested in that than everything you say here.
You still fail to understand what I've said about my spiritual worldview. You seem to think that the word 'spiritual' is some kind of catch-all term for almost anything, and can't be divided up into different areas of belief. As I made clear, before I read about quantum physics, I had no understanding whatsoever of Idealism and its implications – I hadn't even heard the word at that time. The findings of quantum physics were an eye-opener for me.
This may be the last word between us on this subject, but I'll continue writing on this theme as and when appropriate.