Is consciousness to be found in quantum processes in microtubules?

[Bells]

This is a thread about microtubules, in case you missed that minor consideration.

And still no evidence that consciousness can be found in microtubules...

This?
To use one of your diversionary ploys, that was written in 1999 and has since been successfully addressed and resolved, and has been posted by me previously. I am not wasting my time to look for it. If you had read my quoted excerpts and referenced links, you would have seen the refutation of that objection. Don't place your ignorance of the history at my doorstep. I have provided plenty of referential materials at you disposal. You even complained about it, now you say there isn't enough material? Or is it that you did not read ALL of the links, but only those that furthered your argument, like citing Page #5 ad nauseam, which I have also shown to have been addressed by Hameroff et al and satisfactorily resolved.

Tegmark's stance, has not changed from what he wrote and was then cited and discussed in 2000:

And Hameroff's refutations were paltry. And Tegmark was not the only one who disagreed [https://www.nature.com/articles/440611a].

As for your quoted excerpts, pass thanks. Given your history of altering context, I rather just read the links.

Don't place your ignorance of the history at my doorstep. I have provided plenty of referential materials at you disposal. You even complained about it, now you say there isn't enough material? Or is it that you did not read ALL of the links, but only those that furthered your argument, like citing Page #5 ad nauseam, which I have also shown to have been addressed by Hameroff et al and satisfactorily resolved.

Where have I cited "page #5"?

Like what?

Oh hey, look. More trolling.

The quoted text is what.

Great, you finally got the spelling right. If you are going to insult someone it's best to get the spelling right the first time, don't you agree?

You are really hung up about typo's, aren't you?

And your attempt to change the subject has been noted.

It's a pattern..

I have given help in public service most of my life and have been very successful at it.

That's nice.

Would you like me to give you a slow clap now?

Don't presume you know anything about me.

We can only go by what we see.

Which is someone who is obsessed to the point of irrationality - and that's just for starters...

 

[DaveC426913]

Please seek help.

I have given help in public service most of my life and have been very successful at it.
Don't presume you know anything about me.

This is an excellent micro-example of the larger difficulty W4U chronically exhibits.

If we are to interpret W4U's response correctly, we would have to conclude that he thinks those who serve the public are somehow immune to needing help themselves.

It is more likely that what's happening is that W4U simply sees words without regard to content, and picks out keywords to respond to that really have no bearing on what was said.

Based on this long-standing communication difficulty as evidenced in past posts and threads, it could be plausibly conjectured that Write4U is, in fact, a Chinese Room.

 

[Write4U]

I am sure you believe that. Just as QQ believes he knows more than anyone about COVID-19 and "pressure harvesting," and River believes he knows more than anyone else about physics, and Jan Ardena thinks he knows more than anyone else about evolution. Lot of that going on here, so you are in good company.

Do they. Would you believe it if they did?

Whose? The expertise of Alois Alzheimer? No, I don't doubt his expertise. And he never, not once, ascribed the disease named after him to microtubules.

Yes, this Alzheimer.

Alois Alzheimer

ProfessionPsychiatrist, physician
Institutions

• Institute for the Insane and Epileptic ("Irrenschloss"), Frankfurt am Main
• Ludwig Maximilian University of Munich
• Silesian Friedrich Wilhelm University in Breslau

Sub-specialtiesNeuropathology
Signature

Aloysius Alzheimer (also known as Alois Alzheimer; /ˈɑːltshaɪmər,ˈælts-,ˈɔːlts-/;[1] German: [ˈaːlɔɪs ˈaltshaɪmɐ]; June 14, 1864 – December 19, 1915) was a German psychiatrist and neuropathologist and a colleague of Emil Kraepelin. Alzheimer is credited with identifying the first published case of "presenile dementia", which Kraepelin would later identify as Alzheimer's disease.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alois_Alzheimer

Alzheimer's occurs when plaques form within the brain. They are made of protein fragments, and as they build up, they block neuronal communication. They also stimulate the creation of tau proteins within cells, and these tau proteins congregate and kill the cell. They destroy the endoplasmic reticulum, the mitochondria, the ribosomes and yes, even the microtubules in the cell membrane.

Now we're talking.

a tau clump.

The Role of Tau in Brain Function and Dementia. December 27, 2015

Recent research into the causes of Alzheimer’s has become increasingly complex.
Tau is a critical protein that holds together the very active microtubules that build and rebuild structures in the axon and dendrite (see post on axon transport). A very complex relationship of tau, amyloid-β and inflammation is emerging as possible causes of Alzheimer’s.

Tau, itself, appears to be correlated with many other forms of brain disease. However, the latest research with tau is not at all clear or simple, either.
The clumps don’t exactly correlate with Alzheimer’s, but the transmission of tau (of some unknown type) along specific neuronal circuits does. In fact, these circuits map out the exact development of Alzheimer’s in the brain.

Tau is an unusual protein in that it is often unfolded, unlike most proteins that have highly specific shapes determining their functions. (There is new emerging research finding a variety of proteins have flexible shapes.)

Tau is critical for stabilizing microtubules in the neuron, which have been described in previous posts as the LEGO brain of the neuron, constantly building and rebuilding axons and dendrites in response to thought. Normal tau is soluble in water and doesn’t naturally combine with other tau molecules to form aggregates. An abnormal type of tau is part of the destruction of the brain in Alzheimer’s.

Tau is called a “microtubule associated protein”, one of many stabilizing and regulating the vast amount of shapes that microtubules form.

All of them disintegrate because the cell dies. Adding a bunch of microtubules back would do . . . jack shit, because the neuron is dead. It is the NEURON, not the magic microtubules, that make the brain work like it does.

No, that's like saying its the plumbing of the house that makes the water flow in the house. The water flows through the transport pipes in the plumbing network. Microtubules are the transmission pipes that make up the neural plumbing. The neuron dies because the microtubules disintegrate, like the pipes of plumbing network are failing. Almost every picture of a cell shows stuff floating in the citoplasm.

but that is a false view. What is shown are the various organelles which mat be compared to the various room in the plumbing network of a house. What is not shown is that the citoplasma is filled with ten of thousands nano scale "pipes", connecting the rooms in the cell and that reducing the scale f observation down to nano-scale a small portion of the cell reveals the pipes in the neural plumbing.

The green network is inside the neuron and connects all the organelles and their products and transports those products to other cells via the axon and their terminals, the synapses.

Too many phosphorus tags appear to be relevant but there are too many different sites and effects to determine what this means. Now, with many other tags, the picture is extremely complex and confusing. Clumping appears to be important, but the correlation is not exact. In fact, it could still be found that the soluble version of toxic tau is the one that is transmitted along the Alzheimer’s circuit.

http://jonlieffmd.com/blog/human-brain/the-role-of-tau-in-brain-function-and-dementia

When this microtubules network begins to fail, all the rooms in the cell begin to fail from lack of information.
This is the primary cause for Alzheimer's and YESSSSSS......it might be possible to restore microtubules and perform repair and restore restore normal neural functions. That's what Hameroff has intensively researched. He even mapped the computational properties of microtubules long before he heard that Penrose was looking for a nanoscale quantum processor. He read some of Penrose's work and it occurred to him that microtubules might be a candidate. He wrote Penrose and after meeting Penrose entertained the idea and saw no immediate objections.
Whether this is working out or not is really not

This is called "catastrophic microtubule failure" where the microtubule begins to unravel and is no longer capable of transporting vital biological information to the cell, through the axons. This is a pic of a the catastrophic MT destruction.

The tau tangle is clearly visible on the right.
This is the primary cause for Alzheimer's and YESSSSSS......it might be possible to restore microtubules and repair the restore normal neural functions.

Getting a tighter grip on cell division

Recent research into the causes of Alzheimer’s has become increasingly complex. For a long time it was assumed that buildup of amyloid-β causes destruction of neurons and, therefore, the degenerative brain disease

During cell division, a huge molecular complex called the kinetochore and a microtubule attach themselves to each chromosome and pull to create two daughter cells. Researchers have recently isolated the kinetochore outside of the cell, and have been able to demonstrate its functions in vitro. Surprisingly, the more tension there is on the microtubule, the more stable the connection to the kinetochore, analogous to how a Chinese finger trap ensnares a finger tighter as one tries to pull it off harder and harder. Credit: Zina Deretsky, National Science Foundation

The molecular machinery that shepherds and literally pulls the chromosomes apart consists of paired microtubules radiating from opposite poles of the dividing cell and an enormous, but precise, molecular complex called a kinetochore. This 'gentle giant' grabs onto a single special locus on the chromosome known as the centromere.

https://scx2.b-cdn.net/gfx/news/hires/microtubules_h1.jpg[/quote]

 

[Write4U]

I am becoming more complicated with every post it seems.

If we are to interpret W4U's response correctly, we would have to conclude that he thinks those who serve the public are somehow immune to needing help themselves.

If I interpret your responses correctly, I will have to conclude the you are taking it upon yourselves to play on-line psychiatry. Ever given thought on getting help yourselves?

Write4U is, in fact, a Chinese Room

LOL, that's funny. You are, in fact , Aladdin's Lamp. Rub you and out comes the genie.

Would you like me to give you a slow clap now?

Frankly, my dear I don't give a damn!....

The dissection continues....
And here I thought we were actually beginning to engage in a constructive discussion. Spoilsports!!!!

 

[exchemist]

This is an excellent micro-example of the larger difficulty W4U chronically exhibits.

If we are to interpret W4U's response correctly, we would have to conclude that he thinks those who serve the public are somehow immune to needing help themselves.

It is more likely that what's happening is that W4U simply sees words without regard to content, and picks out keywords to respond to that really have no bearing on what was said.

Based on this long-standing communication difficulty as evidenced in past posts and threads, it could be plausibly conjectured that Write4U is, in fact, a Chinese Room.

I had to look this up and I'm glad I did, so many thanks for teaching me something new. That's why I come to these forums - apart from the pleasure of periodically kicking W4U in the nuts of course........

 

[Write4U]

And Hameroff's refutations were paltry. And Tegmark was not the only one who disagreed

[https://www.nature.com/articles/440611a].
OK , from your link.

The relation between quantum mechanics and higher brain functions, including consciousness, is often discussed, but is far from being understood. Physicists, ignorant of modern neurobiology, are tempted to assume a formal or even dualistic view of the mind–brain problem.

Meanwhile, cognitive neuroscientists and neurobiologists consider the quantum world to be irrelevant to their concerns and therefore do not attempt to understand its concepts. What can we confidently state about the current relationship between these two fields of scientific inquiry?

As for your quoted excerpts, pass thanks. Given your history of altering context, I rather just read the links.

That is a lie.
I have never altered a quote passage. I have offered my interpretation of what quoted passages mean from my perspective, but I realize now that you are not interested in exploring that which is still being debated because nobody has a definitive answer, including you, and including me.
What gives you the authority to call me names if you do not have a clue of what its all about? You are prejudiced, plain and simple.

 

[Write4U]

I had to look this up and I'm glad I did, so many thanks for teaching me something new. That's why I come to these forums - apart from the pleasure of periodically kicking W4U in the nuts of course........

Yes, the little pleasures of life do reveal the person's emotional needs.

Such angry people. Can only find sadistic pleasure in inflicting pain and inflicting death with a thousand cuts.

But as they say; "Sticks and stones.........! Just don't come to my door and call me those names...

 

[Write4U]

Back to science.
Normal Tau Functions

Until recently, the function of tau was thought to be only stabilizing microtubules. However, its particular role in this regard seems to be regulating the instability of the microtubule structures.

This allows the cytoskeleton to rapidly change structures in the axon and dendrite. There are only small areas of the tau molecule that actually bind to the α and β-tubulins of the microtubule. So, the rest of the molecule remains flexible and changeable for new shapes. In fact, the normal regions, which become part of abnormal clumps, usually form a hairpin structure that looks like a paper clip.

http://jonlieffmd.com/blog/human-brain/the-role-of-tau-in-brain-function-and-dementia

Abnormal Tau, Mitochondrial Dysfunction, Impaired Axonal Transport of Mitochondria, and Synaptic Deprivation in Alzheimer’s Disease

Overexpressed and phosphorylated tau appears to impair axonal transport of organelles causing synapse starvation, depletion of ATP, and ultimately neuronal damage.

This article evaluates the role of tau in mitochondrial dysfunction and assesses how hyperphosphorylated tau impairs axonal transport of organelles in AD neurons

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3176990/

 

[exchemist]

Yes, the little pleasures of life do reveal the person's emotional needs.

Such angry people. Can only find sadistic pleasure in inflicting pain and inflicting death with a thousand cuts.

But as they say; "Sticks and stones.........! Just don't come to my door and call me those names...

Well, you see, when a person has wasted so much of everybody's time as you have, they tend to get a bit narked.

If you could restrict your contributions to a couple of sentences that could easily be dismissed as rubbish, it wouldn't be so bad. But one has to endure links that have to be read and work one's way through reams of drawings in technicolour, before concluding that, yes, they are all just as irrelevant as one suspected at the outset. And then there is the stupid hijacking of other people's threads, to try to wrench them round to your pet obsessions.

So, yes, giving you a good kick in the nuts periodically is highly cathartic.

 

[C C]

Note of interest regarding David Chalmers;
http://nautil.us/issue/47/consciousness/roger-penrose-on-why-consciousness-does-not-compute

Does this scientist sound like he has an agenda or can his judgement be trusted?
Any members of Sciforums belonging to the class "mysterians" per chance?

It's Chalmers you're referring to? He is both a philosopher and a cognitive scientist. Notice he only "speculated", and the author's mention of "others" as being the Mysterians. IOW, Chalmers isn't a card-carrying Mysterian. He's simply written papers about many if not most of the ideas and orientations on the subject out there. Chalmers dropped out of involvement in organizing those conferences when they got too far from mainstream.

Going down to a finer scale (Orch OR) than neural procedures does not answer Chalmers' question of "why should this nonalgorithmic [quantum] process give rise to experience?" any more than the conventional "why should this algorithmic process give rise to experience?"

The reason being that materialization[*] and its attributes (qualia) were prescriptively removed from matter centuries ago via the primary/secondary properties distinction of Galileo and Locke (i.e., the secondary properties are not amenable to physics and its philosophical offshoot physicalism).

And our trying to introduce such capacity to certain biological tissues (instead of more basic matter) as a late in the game remedy suffers from the same problem slash conflict, plus an added onus: Cells and their operations do not have a recognized magical ability to literally conjure. Being inside a skull does not grant electrochemical interactions special powers they lack at other locations. If investigation methodologically operated from an initial premise that the world was a phenomenal simulation yielded by Platonic-like generative principles, then arguably "conjuring" might not be so against the grain with that context as a standard. But science and its satellite philosophies don't proceed under that presupposition. Witches can't summon a large serpent because they haven't yet discovered the correct ritual and dance to perform (metaphor for algorithm) -- it is because fairy-dust answers like that are impotent.

Nowadays it's apparently preferable by a few scientists and philosophers to consider humans as coordinated by a universal, innate insanity that evolution introduced. Wherein we report this (remarkably consistent from person to person) fiction of having manifested content to our perceptions, feelings, and thoughts. For instance, robot scientists could probably still mechanistically conduct research without their environment being mediated internally by materialized representations. Likewise, a video game or computer simulation has no experience of itself in the electronics as what the human player observes on the monitor screen and hears from the speakers -- yet the system still functions ably without such intrinsic exhibitions.

Again, the problem of materialization ironically rests in "material stuff" being pre-conceived in a limited way, and the momentum of that historical prescription still holds dominion to this day. So even setting aside issues of evidence and viability, appealing to microtubules or any other fringe theory is probably futile unless ideas about matter become more liberal.

Twenty pages of dense techno-babble in a brain science discipline that boil down in the end to "When there is this particular arrangement of _X_, and these procedures are carried out, a specific phenomenal experience just inexplicably yet predictably happens!" is not a satisfactory explanation which would be equipped with non-controversial underlying principles and non-demented precursors for how it could occur. (Actually the "predictable" part could even turn out to be bovine output in terms of the same configurations of activity corresponding to the same experience from one person to the next. The associations between neural patterns and manifestations might be anomalous -- without adherence to global rules. But circumstances are unusual enough as it is in this territory without tossing that wrench into the works future-wise.)

- - - footnote - - -

[*] I'm not going to use that imprecise c-word (consciousness) in this reply, but instead a synonym of manifestation (i.e., materialization), originating from the clarity that Erwin Schrödinger reeled off in this sentence, that dodges those usual language obscurities: "But it [matter, stuff, cosmos] certainly does not become manifest by its mere existence. Its becoming manifest is conditional on very special goings-on in very special parts of this very world, namely on certain events that happen in a brain." --What is Life? Mind and Matter ... Cambridge University Press, 1959, page-1

 

[Write4U]

Well, you see, when a person has wasted so much of everybody's time as you have, they tend to get a bit narked.

Am I kicking you in the nuts if you don't read what I post? I force you to read my posts and that upsets you?
I am the victimizer? You are my victim now? Want me to start playing psychiatrist?

 

[Write4U]

Thank you for the interest. Chalmers clearly is not a "mysterian". The question was if any Sciforum members were.... There seems to be vehement denial of the fact that consciousness is not mystical, but physical and should be explainable with physics, not magic.

Cells and their operations do not have a recognized magical ability to literally conjure. Being inside a skull does not grant electro-chemical interactions special powers they lack at other locations.

I totally agree it is not magical, it is clearly physical. But that is precisely what is happening, the specialized neural network in parts of the brain literally combine to conjure self-conscious experiences. Let's remove the magical aspect of conjuring and call it an emergent property.

Consciousness is a product of a specialized section in the neural network of the brain, being fed sensory signals sent to the brain by the neural network. I believe all the proposed mechanisms are presenting a different version of what might be that specialized pattern which sets that specific part of the brain apart from the other unconscious sensory mechanics. There are some four hypothetical candidates which present the idea of an emergent super-sensory experience from physical functions. Anything else would indeed be "magical". Consciousness resides in the brain, that is a hard fact.

The task is to figure out what is required for the brain to produce consciousness as an emergent property of specific parts of the brain. We know with some certainty where in the brain this happens. The part that can be anesthesized and results in the loss of consciousness. That's a fact.

According to Tegmark, Consciousness is to neural network as wetness is to H2O, they are emergent properties when the biophysical patterns are arranged in a specific way. Apparently the brain has evolved such a pattern.

Personally I see no problem at all with that perspective. I believe this specific conscious brain pattern is the result of the mutation of two hominid chromosomes (2p and 2q) in to a single human double sized chromosome (2), which is the demarcation point of the human split from our other great ape cousins. Of all the great apes, only humans have 23 pairs of chromosomes whereas all other great apes have 24 pairs of chromosomes.

Clearly this is the major genetic difference between human and all other apes, and may well be the cause for our complex brain with some properties missing from our hominid cousins and down the evolutionary line all the way to to single celled organisms.

The phenomenon itself is demonstrated with Descartes' "brain in a vat" which presents the bodiless brain with the self-aware but false experience of running in the park. It's the combinatory richness of the electro-chemical processes in the entire neural network that produces the experience of consciousness and self-aware emotional responses to certain stimuli. When the conscious part part of the brain is anesthesized, the rest of the brain does not stop working, it continues to work just fine but it is no longer aware of being participant, i.e. the self-referential ability of the brain has been temporarily removed.

This is one of Tegmark's, "hard facts" and we know with great precision where this happens in the brain. That's what anesthesiologists do. If they screw up the person may be rendered permanently in a vegetative state, physically functional, but oblivious to the world. Anesthetics are targeted applications, a very important and delicate medical procedure.

Perhaps some scientist may disagree on details (the hard problem), but they all agree on the hard fact that consciousness is an emergent phenomena from physical neural mechanics, the molecular patterns and processes which combine to produce an experiential self-awareness.

This is not new. This is old science. A paramecium is functionally responsive, but not aware, i.e. it is unconscious just like a person under anesthesia.

But a paramecium can learn, which means it is able to store memories and react to relevant recognized stimuli,and in humans this ability has evolved to an exceptionally high degree. I am absolutely confident that we will find the answers. We will because we are self-conscious and can ask the question, how does it happen? "I think, therefore I am."

 

[Michael 345]

I think, therefore I am

I think, therefore I am. WHAT I am is open for debate

And even though I think, therefore I am I could be wrong

 

[Write4U]

I think, therefore I am. WHAT I am is open for debate

You are what you believe you are. It is a purely subjective experience, except for instances of empathic experiences.

And even though I think, therefore I am I could be wrong

Absolutely, we live by our "best guesses" of our brains. But there will come a time when our psyche can be quantified. We need to solve the hard problem then we can design sentient artificial brains for AI and mentally merge and become immortal....

Literally becoming "brains in a vat" and able to say; "I think, therefore I am"

 

[Write4U]

A new 'molecular nano-patterning' technique reveals that some molecular motors coordinate differently

Engineering has found that two types of kinesin molecular motors have different properties of coordination. Collaborating with the National Institute of Information and Communications Technology, or NICT, the findings were made possible thanks to a new tool the team developed that parks individual motors on platforms thousands of times smaller than a

single cell.

"Kinesin is a

motor protein that is involved in actions such as cell division, muscle contractions, and flagella movement. They move along these long protein filaments called microtubules," explains first author Taikopaul Kaneko. "In the body, kinesins work as a team to transport large molecules inside a cell, or allow the cell itself to move.".........

The team will be using their new nano-patterning method to study the mechanics of other kinesins and different molecular motors.

"Humans have over 40 kinesins along with two other types of molecular motors called myosin and dynein. We can even modify our array to study how these motors act in a density gradient. Our results and this new tool are sure to expand our understanding of the various basic cellular processes fundamental to all life," concludes Yokokawa.

https://phys.org/news/2020-01-molecular-nano-patterning-technique-reveals-motors.html

 

[Michael 345]

Literally becoming "brains in a vat" and able to say; "I think, therefore I am"

Arrrh but do we want (require) AI to say

I think therefore I am

OR, in my opinion, to be truely intelligent

I think therefore I am a AI brain in a vat

What say you Watson?

 

[Write4U]

Deep-sea osmolyte makes biomolecular machines heat-tolerant
by Hokkaido University

Biomolecular motors are the smallest natural machines that keep living organisms dynamic. They can generate force and perform work on their own by consuming chemical energy. In recent years, reconstructed biomolecular motors have appeared as promising substitutes of synthetic motors and expected to be key components in biomimetic artificial micro- or nano-devices. However, reconstructed biomolecular motors lose their ability to function due to thermal instability in artificial environments.

"Based on this fascinating defense mechanism in deep-sea animals, we attempted to control the activity of kinesin, a biomolecular motor associated with microtubule proteins, over a wide temperature range," said Arif Md. Rashedul Kabir. To investigate the activity of kinesins, the team conducted in vitro motility assays in which kinesin motors propelled the microtubules on a two-dimensional substrate.

https://phys.org/news/2020-01-deep-sea-osmolyte-biomolecular-machines-heat-tolerant.html

 

[Write4U]

A simple way to control swarming molecular machines
by Hokkaido University

The swarming behavior of about 100 million molecular machines can be controlled by applying simple mechanical stimuli such as extension and contraction. This method could lead to the development of new swarming molecular machines and small energy-saving devices.

The swarming molecules in motion aligned in one direction, exhibited zigzag patterns, or formed a vortex responding to varying mechanical stimuli. They could even self-repair the moving pattern after a disruption, according to a study led by Hokkaido University scientists.

https://phys.org/news/2019-10-simple-swarming-molecular-machines.html

 

[Write4U]

Why n

Arrrh but do we want (require) AI to say

I think therefore I am

OR, in my opinion, to be truely intelligent

I think therefore I am a AI brain in a vat

What say you Watson?

Why not, as long as the interaction is beneficial to both molecular patterns. A true symbiotic relationship.
Don't forget, humans are already biomes. We are 10% human and 90 % bacterial and viral. As long as we have the right balance of symbiotic co-habitants of the human body we are healthy.

Bacteria communicate with human cells, via microtubules? Looks like it.
Bacteria can communicate. It's called "quorum sensing" a purely chemical language used for signal communication, but very effective. Some bacteria teach our immune system how to defend against virulent organisms .

I haven't even thought about how many ways there are to communicate information. It seems to be some kind of mathematically related potential of spacetime. Some scientists believe all patterns in the universe are a result of a universal mathematical computational function. Everything communicates with everything else in a more or less meaningful way. When the information is meaningful to the recipient, it is accepted, if not it is ignored or rejected.

These abstract self-referential relationships are fundamental for the apparent ordering imperatives which seems to permeate spacetime.

 

[Bells]

[https://www.nature.com/articles/440611a].
OK , from your link.

Yes. I read it.

Which begs the question, why did you ignore the rest of the article?

That is a lie.
I have never altered a quote passage. I have offered my interpretation of what quoted passages mean from my perspective, but I realize now that you are not interested in exploring that which is still being debated because nobody has a definitive answer, including you, and including me.

Given that you just did it again, and your interpretation is so biased and slanted

What gives you the authority to call me names if you do not have a clue of what its all about?

Who are you addressing here?

What names have I called you, exactly?

You also accused me of "citing page #5", but you failed to actually point out what I am apparently citing on page #5 or where. Why are you avoiding that question and now accusing me of other things?

Why are you changing the subject?

You are prejudiced, plain and simple.

Still no evidence that consciousness can be found in microtubules.