Atheism and Purpose

[TheDarkestOfAngels]

Neurologists have no more idea where consciousness comes from than anyone else. I'm sorry you think they do, and that they've concluded it's a result of the human brain, and even more that they are right. You need to read a little more about the theories of mind in order to realize that consciousness is one of the most contested areas in neurobiology.

I'm sorry, did you just accuse people who've studied how the human brain works that they know less about conciousness and the inner workings of the human mind than any other person?
I've recently saw on the science channel where a group of scientists successfully gave a woman an out-of-body experience (the woman, at best, was agnostic) by stimulating a particular cluster of neurons.

It's even easily googleale - http://www.time.com/time/health/article/...32,00.html
here - http://www.nytimes.com/2006/10/03/health...3shad.html
here - http://archives.cnn.com/2002/TECH/scienc...outofbody/
and here - http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/sh.../5841/1048

You may be right in that we have many competing theories on the nature of conciousness and the science of it hasn't yet been pinned down, but accusing scientists who exclusively and professionally study the brain and conciousness to know less than laymen on this science is frankly ridiculous and outright ignorant.

But make no mistake, the study of consciousness is the next frontier. Physics is all but dead as a science. In fact, almost all branches of theoretical science are nearly dead. Until we have a theory of consciousness, we aren't going to be able to go any further in our search for the truth about our cosmos.

I can't even begin to explain just how much of a absolute failure of a statement this is. Every branch of science is not only still making wonderful discoveries that make headlines virtually every day, but the number of such discoveries is not only increasing, but accelerating.
Saying otherwise is a practice in ignorance so massive that I struggle to comprehend what kind of hole you had to live in in order to miss that kind of knowledge.

You've already made up your mind about my paper before you've even seen it. And you're different from the fundamentalists, how?

It doesn't appear to be promising. So far, you've made clear that it's not a scientific paper and you've stated that neurologists are irrelevant to understanding human conciousness and that the only frontier of science worth doing is the study of the conciousness.
You've acknowledged that the article is not only not a scientific paper, but hasn't even been peer reviewed by anyone in any field related to the science of the brain.
So no, neither I nor anyone else has any reason, even this early, to find that it has any validity in what it promises to expose as truth.