Rudism (and certain other skeptics),
I don't understand why so many skeptical arguments at this forum are couched in vaguely disparaging language - you talk of fallacies, ψ of the gaps, and yet another reference to creationism. Every 'gap' is available to be filled with an orthodox explanation or supply evidence for a better theory.
This process has gone on throughout the scientific process.
Since we have a physics Nobel prize winner 'on our side', it really is a bit rich to write in such a condescending fashion. There is a lot of scientific uncertainty here - not least because of the enormous difficulty in explaining consciousness itself, so why don't we all accept that intelligent humans can come to different conclusions.
Can't we disagree in a more agreeable way
David