Sounds like your own standard of evidence isn't much higher than pseudoscience.
I only scanned a few posts, but it appears to be an old anonymous blog with disjointed musings about why the author finds mindfulness "annoying". I didn't see anything to convince me that this is worth digging into further, like for example: a really cogent argument, or some research, or any kind of background in anything remotely related, etc. So I'm still unclear on what made you conclude from this random blog that Kabat-Zinn is just peddling pseudoscience.
It honestly sounds like you're just anti-mindfulness, which isn't inherently a bad thing. I don't think we should have sacred cows, and there may be valid anti-mindfulness arguments from serious people out there. But drawing conclusions based on this particular blog makes it seem like you're not interested in figuring out what's true (ie, science) as much as finding justification to support your pre-existing position, regardless of the evidence (ie, pseudoscience).