Nice point, Ben. And why does she only focus on my work on cognitive science, when I have done so much on the philosophy of science and theoretical foundations of artificial intelligence, cognitive science, evolution and mentality and even the nature of morality in relation to politics? See http://www.d.umn.edu/~jfetzer/
This is called slanting evidence or "special pleading". Besides, anyone who actually read what I have done in the area of cognitive science would appreciate that I am clarifying the nature of mind in relation to the computational paradigm, which maintains that minds are machines and operate based upon the same principles as computers, which I deny.
This reprehensible kind of sloppy research and lack of understanding of those whom she criticizes demonstrates the inferior quality of her reasoning ability in general. Ask yourself why any rational agent would be attacking the author of a 5-star review? This suggests that, when she participates in a YouTube attributing to me views of one of my guests on "The Real Deal", she simply doesn't care that she is thereby committing the disgrace of deliberately misrepresenting my views. That seems to be part and parcel of her modus operandi. Perhaps that is how she is able to pull the wool over those less knowing and more gullible, such as Matthew Naus, who seems to believe everything she says.