An academic scientist must keep up his credibility.
This is something that is close to my heart; this is an experiment (I hope not 'in terror') I am in the midst of now, and am happy to be able to report have been able to find enough credible links to MBT concepts that I can use them in my current scholarly thesis. Consciousness as a nonphysical digital information system, decision space, quality of consciousness (QoC), intent based on QoC, and probably others are currently sufficiently referenced for scholarly use based on MBT.
The reason I almost say 'experiment in terror' above is that my BS degree Capstone (the big 'tada') experience ended badly (C- grade after straight A's) because I tried to open a psychology professors mind up to the bigger reality back in 2005, and he balked. My topic, which he approved, was the neural correlates of mystical experience, but he wouldn't accept my evidence (the easiest way to say he couldn't grasp the concept) and tried to reject the entire paper. My other chair person stepped in, got the guy to give me a C, so I said fine lets be done with it. I guess the C- was just evidence of an extra lock on that guys mind, it really bugs me to this day. Someday I will get the data from my old computer where this paper exists, I have to have it mined professionally as the computer gave me the blue screen of death years ago. It would be interesting to read it again now, 3.5 years worth of quality intake (specially since I found you all) later. If I ever get it out of my old machine I'll share it with anyone whom wants to look at it.