"SENS has many unsupported claims and is certainly not scientifically proven. I personally would be surprised if de Grey is correct in the majority of his claims. However, I don't think Estep et al. have proved that SENS is false; that would require more research. In some cases, SENS makes claims that run parallel to existing research (while being more sensational). Future investigation into those areas will almost certainly illuminate the controversy. Until that time, people like Estep et al. are free to doubt SENS. I share many of those doubts, but it would be overstating the case to assert that Estep et al. have proved their point."

[ Seems disingenuous. Essentially, Myhrvold, speaking for the judges, is saying that the submissions failed to successfully argue that SENS doesn't deserve learned debate and careful study because no one has yet done careful study.

The challenge, as I understand it, was explicitly to present a case for dismissing the concepts of SENS. I think that's pretty silly to begin with, but given that, it's contradictory to ask people to write dismissively, and then tell them they haven't taken the concepts seriously enough.

Anyway, I've read de Grey and I put his work largely in the category of religion. It sounds wonderful and makes you feel good, but it stresses the limits of reason to accept as true.

Nonetheless, people must put their money where their mouth is, so to speak. If the proposals are so patently absurd, then demonstrate them as such. Do the science. -k]