well, i've watched through part 8 of the 45 part series. wow that's a pretty long presentation!
anyway, what I think... I am undecided.
Some parts of what he's saying I have heard before from older sources than himself, so in some respects he seems to be borrowing from other physicists, which is perfectly fine, all physicists do, but the impression is that he's implying they are his theories... which may just be my impression of how he's presenting the material, and not reflect any actual intent on his part.
He does seem to love sacred geometry, which I am sure will titillate some here. Personally I've never been a fan of numerology or sacred geometry though.
I find his ideas 'exciting' but I would very much like to read some of his supposed 'peer reviews' first hand, and check their source.
At worst, he is a compelling resource for 'paradigm tinkering' (aka "food for thought").
I do intend to check him out more thoroughly and come to somewhat more decisive conclusions about his ideas. Until then, I'll just say he is very interesting and a very dynamic speaker.
on a side note, I personally found some of the 'thinking outside the box' content of his... not sure if you'd call his stuff a paradigm or a science yet, but his 'ideas', I found them useful mental exercise for indirectly resolving a few unresolved paradoxes in my spiritual path. that's enough for me to view him in a positive light, whether he's full of doo-doo or not (IMG:
style_emoticons/default/wink.gif)