Bees and flowers communicate using electrical fields, researchers discover

Alchemy was actively frowned upon by the church, as was witchcraft of all kinds. People who worked in these traditions were burned at the stake and sentenced to death. Alchemists, like Newton, got their harder science published but not their Alchemical work. Other Alchemists/Magicians got burned to death for their work, like Bruno. There was a very strong disincentive to publish the more spiritual work, and the work that might have related to the convergence of science and the spiritual.

So people who were actively engaged in science were actively engaged in these studies and a.) were censured, b.) weren't able to get them published. c.) were burned at the stake

This was because they didn't fit into the Christian set of assumptions, which were enforced by torture, death and censure. So the texts that form the groundwork for our scientific understanding of the world leave out a whole dimension of the thinking of the people who wrote them, who were either unable to publish that part or afraid for their heads.

Asian mysticism is deeply traditional and faith based, just a different kind of faith (placebo based).

Everything is faith based unless it's actually rigorously tested. Your assertion that my experience is a placebo effect is based on your faith in Qi being unreal. Many studies have been done on acupuncture that have shown very real benefits.

If these types of communications are so subtle that we're hardly aware of them, then that means that they are in fact weaker than the placebo effect.

They're not so subtle if you train yourself to be aware of them. But to train yourself to be aware of them you can't have faith in their nonexistence.

People are convinced they spoke to God and were abducted by aliens, why should I believe that you can sense subtle magnetic fields?

Calling people who have beliefs that don't fit into your philosophical assumptions about how the world works delusional is both hubristic and counterproductive in that it turns science into something like a religion and defines the boundary conditions of what is and is not allowed to be studied, which actively inhibits our getting a clear view of the world.

This is a feature, not a bug. Scientific understanding depends on quality of the science, not the reputation of the scientist. It also doesn't depend on faith, but on experiments and observations that can be reproduced.

We use this method because it's the most reliable way we know to arrive at answers that give us predictive power about how our world works, rather than just answers that "feel right". An answer that feels right may still be right, but that doesn't make it scientific.

Your assertion that my experience is a placebo effect is based on your faith in Qi being unreal.

You seem to be interpreting the placebo effect to mean "unreal", but our present scientific understanding is that the placebo effect is real.

To put it another way: Nobody is denying your subjective experience. It's the attribution of that experience to mysterious mechanisms that require faith for observation that is incompatible with scientific understanding, not the experience itself.

This is important when you're suggesting that science excludes some things from study -- what it actually excludes are things that can't be studied scientifically, such as vaguely defined hidden dimensions or energies. It's like trying to hammer nails into air: you have the hammer, the nails, and plenty of air, but no matter how hard you swing, there's nothing for the nail to be driven into.

They're not so subtle if you train yourself to be aware of them. But to train yourself to be aware of them you can't have faith in their nonexistence.

This faith requirement is incompatible with your desire for more study on the subject. Science allows for the answer of "we don't know why this happens", but not the answer of "we know because we believe", as the latter undermines the very meaning of what it means to "know".