It seems as though the central claim of Chalmers is based on what seems to be a faulty argument. He imagines a molecule-for-molecule identical copy of himself that lacks conscious experience, and then says that because it's logically possible to imagine it, there must be something other than molecules responsible. My problem is that he is jumping the gun. We don't know the brain well enough yet. He is taking an unsolved problem, imagining someone without this feature, then saying that this feature is therefore above the physical. Despite his dismissals of the wait-and-see attitude, I recommend we all do just that when it comes to conscious phenomena.