But I wasn't assuming everyone else knows as little as you about what you chose to cut 'n paste...
Have you actually met Hameroff? Watched one his presentations? You would understand why I would say he is indeed just a showman. Putting it politely.
I could be as specific as you like about his bogus ways.
Here is a starter for you, the kind of thing he throws into his slide shows, where the casual listener wouldn't know whether he is talking fact or speculation.
A tubulin dipole. Perhaps you could give us your opinion of whether this is fact or speculation.
Can you point to any peer-reviewed research which support your claim that
i) Hameroff's work is "entertainment not science..."
ii) Hameroff has bogus ways
iii)Hameroff is a showman
Otherwise we are back to where the conversation began. Someone on an internet forum rendering a glaringly subjective "opinion" about the peer-reviewed, Accredited-university-supported work of another scientist. For all I know, the guy took your place on the high school rugby team and you've hated him ever since. Or, perhaps you are a fiscal liberal and he's a conservative and you hate him for it. Or, perhaps you don't like names that begin with H.
See where I am going with this? This is how conscientious thinkers - especially those who are aware of how the brain processes information selectively based on pre-existing biases and perceptions - evaluate sensory input. (See Brown's work, "PHYSIOLOGICAL PARAMETERS AND LEARNING" out of RMIT University, Australia concerning this claim).
I don't accept anything as fact without careful consideration. Furthermore, I have little patience for particularly bold, subjective opinions that aren't at least substantiated by some sort of research. So when you make scientifically undocumented statements like the few enumerated above - particularly those that seek to attack both the character and validity of another scientist's work - it should be clear for you to see how it would raise an RAS red-flag to the discerning eye.
Therefore, I'll leave you to convince the other readers. Perhaps they've different standards than I do.
Last edited by a moderator: