looney

This wasn't some looney that snapped and walked into a school with guns blazing.

But it went quickly into looney-land about half way through.

So the scale tips a little toward looney, but I'd have to read more before discounting him.

At the least, you'd should argue "He's looney about X, which we all agree is false, therefore we should not trust him on Y".

But it's more likely that they're either fraudulent, misreading their data, or just a looney tune.

Just a bit of a warning from an Australian, Clive Palmer is known locally as a bit of a looney.

That certainly could be a legitimate case of "He's looney about X therefore we shouldn't trust him about Y", but I'm not familiar with either Houck or Crichton's beliefs.

In fact, much of the themes of those books could be summed up in, my friend - this really awesome and earnest robot - and me are out in the vast cosmic unknown and it's desolate, lonely, and I'm one step away from going looney, but luckily my friend - the robot - is here for me.>>> When it comes to assessing how people might react when blessed with superaugmented intelligences, there are plenty of cautionary examples of people with natural but notable extremes of intelligence who've been tripped up by crippling vulnerabilities.