This guy think he can explain the hard problem of consciousness by neron science

"This guy think he can explain the hard problem of consciousness by neron science"

That's because he is confused by an illusion.
As a Buddhist we have separated the consciousness and illusion of the self for thousands of years, but it is humorous to see such an article like this.
Reason is an illusion...

Scott Adams, who in addition to being the author of the comic strip Dilbert, is a trained hypnotist. In an interview on FoxNews@Night with Shannon Bream on March 19, 2018, Scott Adams explained that hypnotism teaches us that people don't use logic to make decisions even though we think we do. (2:59:
We humans ignore facts but we think we don't. The great illusion of life is that we're rational beings making rational decisions most of the time. But when you become a hypnotist, the first thing you learn is that that's backwards and that mostly we're deciding based on our team, our feelings, our emotions, irrational reasons, we make our decision and then we rationalize it no matter how tortured that rationalization is."​

University of Virginia psychologist Jonathan Haidt expressed similar views in his book The righteous Mind. He wrote that people don't use reason to form their beliefs, they use reason to justify their beliefs which they form for emotional reasons. William Saletan described Haidt's views in the Sunday Book Review:

Why Won’t They Listen? ‘The Righteous Mind,’ by Jonathan Haidt By WILLIAM SALETAN SUNDAY BOOK REVIEW MARCH 23, 2012
The problem isn’t that people don’t reason. They do reason. But their arguments aim to support their conclusions, not yours. Reason doesn’t work like a judge or teacher, impartially weighing evidence or guiding us to wisdom. It works more like a lawyer or press secretary, justifying our acts and judgments to others.
They often compare dualism to vitalism

There are some historical parallels for this approach, for example in the study of life. Once, biochemists doubted that biological mechanisms could ever explain the property of being alive. Today, although our understanding remains incomplete, this initial sense of mystery has largely dissolved. Biologists have simply gotten on with the business of explaining the various properties of living systems in terms of underlying mechanisms: metabolism, homeostasis, reproduction and so on. An important lesson here is that life is not ‘one thing’ – rather, it has many potentially separable aspects.
I've seen steven Novella do this many times. This is remarkably childish for a professional neuroscientist, shows they haven't even thought about the hard problem.

I think the reason why most neuroscientists believe brain=consciousness is because of the many tight relationships between mental experience and brain states, so tight at first glance you would conclude brain=mind. In everyday experience, there's no example of mental experience without brain activity, even thinking requires a brain. What really frustrates me is these neuroscientists take NDEs a priori to be hallucinations of a dying brain, when these things are suggesting mental experience without activity and need to be investigated. If they funded veridical research we wouldn't be waiting til 2020 for parnia. There was a math student at cambridge with most of his brain gone and iq of 125, publish by Lorber, and it gets ignored. They ignore all evidence contradicting brain=mind and propagandise anything supporting brain=mind. I just cant believe the state neuroscience is in, there are very practical ways to investigate consciousness yet they ignore it and call it woo. All talks about consciousness are incredibly shallow, only the philosophers are willing to admit there's something wrong with the current trend of neuroscience.

Also Seth said Dennett's "consciousness explained" book was somewhat in line with his views, I see no reason to bother with eliminativists.