That the universe is non-deterministic? Quantum mechanics isn't actually an immature field of science - perhaps not as well understood as classical mechanics but more than mature enough to strongly indicate a lack of determinism in the universe. With quantum you never know where a particle will be - only the probability that it will be in an area - this by its nature violates determinism. The only way to reconcile quantum with a deterministic universe is for there to be hidden variables and there is nothing to indicate that this is true.

Could be an unknown variable. Time will tell.

then why say it in the first place? 

No... there is strong evidence that people given identical circumstances will always choose the same outcome.  All social and psychological sciences point to it.

Ask any socilogist or psycholigst and they will tell you so.

People who are identical genetic clones who have identical enviroments will live identical lives if everything is controlled for.

All social, expiermental  and psychological sciences show this.

If things were as you said the entire scientific method were flawed.

Nondetermism isn't what you think it is.  Non determinism in human descion making is when you don't follow the facts and make a desicion contrary to the one you "should" make.

For example a hunch is a case of nondeterminism.  However the same identical person will always get and follow the same hunch.

Nondertiminism is that at different points in time you will decide something differnetly even when given the same choices and facts.

You are generally interpreting wrong the term "Free will".

People may act similar - I'm not denying that natural instincts and past experience do not play a huge role in our lives. However you cannot claim that the question of free-will has been answered (which is what you are doing) because quite simply it hasn't.

Edit: Argh, you edited your post =P. Determinism is exactly what I think it is, its that the universe follows a set path and that the universe in its current state was inevitable from the beginning. Essentially determinism is the belief that with knowledge of the current state of the entire universe one could predict the future of the universe with perfect accuracy.

Also I do not believe I am misinterpreting free-will. Free-will is the rational control of actions, the ability to make a 'choice' without it being an inevitability which path you take.

Also rather than just saying 'The sciences all show this!' can you actually post links to some scientific studies that prove free-will doesn't exist?

No... you just don't understand what Free Will is... from a psychological perspective.

No offense... but Quantum Dynamic theory has been largely disproven by peoples inability to perform well in situations that require random behavior.

As far as the psychological world is argueing you may as well be argueing the world is flat.

Quantum approaches to consiousness are largely considered disproven.

I wish you would actually explain your points.

Your last post was 'you don't understand free will' without explaining what is wrong with my view of free will, then 'quantum mind is completely disproven' without posting any evidence that this is the case.

There is no way I can write a proper response to that as it didn't make any points other than 'you are wrong'.

There really isn't much to explain.  Quantum Theory Free Will doesn't bear out to expiermentation.

People very rarely randomly make choices and do things on "whims". 

If people's thoughts are rolling dice... they are most certaintly loaded dice and work nothing like subatomic particles.

When people make desicisons they always favor things.  Even when they make "coinflip" descisions... there is always something that makes the chances of picking one answer more then 50% for the person then the other.

People can't actually randomly choose things.

This is just from the social end.

From the Physical end you come up with the problem that the brain is simply too big... the insular cortex and all. 

and in general the math doesn't play out even if consiousness was quantum level.

Example.

http://www.sustainedaction.org/Explorations/problem_with_quantum_mind_theory.htm\

"Combining data about the brain's temperature, the sizes of various proposed quantum objects, and disturbances caused by such things as nearby ions, Tegmark calculated how long microtubules and other possible quantum computers within the brain might remain in superposition before they decohere. His answer: The superpositions disappear in 10**-13 to 10**-20 seconds. Because the fastest neurons tend to operate on a time scale of 10**-3 seconds or so, Tegmark concludes that whatever the brain's quantum nature is, it decoheres far too rapidly for the neurons to take advantage of it."

"If our neurons have anything at all to do with our thinking, if all these electrical firings correspond in any way to our thought patterns, we are not quantum computers," says Tegmark. The problem is that the matter inside our skulls is warm and ever-changing on an atomic scale, an environment that dooms any nascent quantum computation before it can affect our thought patterns. For quantum effects to become important, the brain would have to be a tiny fraction of a degree above absolute zero.

Physicists outside the fray, such as IBM's John Smolin, say the calculations confirm what they had suspected all along. "We're not working with a brain that's near absolute zero. It's reasonably unlikely that the brain evolved quantum behavior," he says. Smolin adds: "I'm conscientiously staying away" from the debate.

However Roger Penrose (the person whos paper Tegmark was disputing) has written a critique of that critique. I don't really understand the mathematics behind it but apparently one of the variables Tegmark used wasn't correct.

Also I'm not saying that peoples choices are always 50/50 - I'm just saying there is a possibility that their choice isn't always 100/0. Even you used the term 'very rarely', not never - if you think they ever do then you believe that free-will is not an illusion. Can you please clarify your stance? Or you deterministic or not? Compatibaiist or incompatibilist?

Also saying quantum theory free will doesn't bear out experimentation is bollocks, nobody has devised an experiment to falsify it yet.

Except it was correct... the only people who claim it wasn't are the two people who's theory was disporven.  Outsiders don't take the critique of the critique as valid.

And yeah... it doesn't bear out to expermentation.  Nothing outright disproves it but every twins study every done strongly rules agaisnt it.  Afterall given very different circumstances... two identical DNA twins make amazingly similar choices.

There is nothing to suggest the "Quantum Computer" theory and everything to suggest that even if the brain did work like that... it couldn't work like that.