He actually cites someone else who agrees with him in his paper, so this can't be true.

I said as far as I know. I had not read the paper because I don't have a very high opinion of Loosemore's ideas in the first place, and nothing you've said in your G+ post has made me more inclined to read the paper, if all it's doing is expounding the old fallacious argument 'it'll be smart enough to rewrite itself as we'd like it to'.

I personally chatted with people much smarter than me (experts who can show off widely recognized real-world achievements) who basically agree with him.

Name three.