Science is not spiritualism
I see how the scientific exploration, empiricism, collide with spiritual research, and label it often with unpleasant names. I have achieved a state, where I don't think spirituality is subject to research - each science has it's own methods, and for spiritual processes, the method is not to find repeated patterns.
I want to compare what we see as spiritualism against what is seen as neutral, general science, to approve or reject the truth and the mythology in spiritual theories:
First, about mythology. It's metaphorical and symbolic, or it's real - for scientist, this is very hard question and decides the plausibility of such mythology. For believer like me, this is only philosophy - desire to decide a question, which is relatively unimportant in practice, but important to our framing of truth. Metaphorical and symbolic stories give us deep, meaningful truth we can resonate with - this can occur in physical world, in past reincarnations of Cosmos, but it might be also a symbolic image about forces in nature. For scientist, it must be real event in known history, but for a believer, it might be many different things, and what it is, would change over time. The resonance of deep truth in a book or a religious text is what we seek for, and scientist's search for correlation to events in our near history is another, unrelated topic - for example, Bible definitely shows us the will of God, as we can understand much of such whole, but we cannot say, whether there was person Christ living at given time. If he did not live, he was still an example of godly personality and we can study our mental truth; for example I don't care, whether, when and how the given miracles happened exactly, but I care about the symbols and truth.
Miracles and awakened flow of people is unforeseeable, creative and follows a pattern of non-repeated instances; there is nothing automatic, rhythmic and repetitive, which would call to use methods from physics.
Many people tell they can see higher patterns of life - but how they see them is complex psychology and not a set of given facts. To connect this state of foreseeing an event in pattern with the pattern itself is scientifically hard, because first the emotion of awareness is cryptic and non-explainable, and second, so is the pattern.
Every person has unique abilities and one person cannot go to many experiments, yet another person born is different. Science would lose every recorded case eventually, unless it becomes really common.
For experiences karmic levels are required. When we speak a lot that miracles happen to those with good karma, be it God, Nature or karma itself, which is invoking the miracle - we can see that experiment itself is not a direct, good karma, and that the scientist might not have karma to experience the event. In my experience with people, who seek the scientific evidence - they do not start working on meditations and good karma, but they want some dumb example, where someone would provide them with direct, visible and isolated spiritual event, not as a part of flow of life, but as distinct, non-caused, event.
Generally, when we work on our lives and spiritual paths, we meet things, which are not repetitive and explainable, happening in our lives. Most typically it's the deepness and richness of our feeling or experience, which is unbelievable when compared to experience of the past. When we find out something scientific, it's normal to help the science - but when we see the flow of events, which is unforeseeable and does not like the lack of reason and purpose in scientific test, but happens in great pattern in the correct place - we are very happy, but we are not scientifically verified. Zen approach on miracles guides us to let go, to let the miracles happen, but to be happy with what we are given. We might meet a person, who sees something extraordinary, and thinks it "belongs to science" and now we "have to" be it's subject - we are not bound to it, and we can be unexplainable, but still living our own lives as what they are, not as a demonstration. Scientist must study our work abilities and outcomes neutrally, and our ability to communicate, work etc., as a general result, and not look for how this specific trait helps us. We are people to normally live in the world and the sensation of something different does not overweight our need to live a common life and use our abilities creatively - people must accept what we do in the life, measuring the objective life success and enjoying the results, but not to behave weird with one of our traits. If they see good patterns appearing, they normally be thankful for what there is and they can not say it's a food for their curiosity. I do something scientific, but it's research of karmic relations and reasons, which I can argue theoretically and in relation to science - for my personal experience, they are unique and I do not want to try to repeat them in scientific lab; they occur as meaningful occurrences and I do not really know a test for a meaningful occurrence.