Why is the felt experience of consciousness not taken seriously by the scientific community...

>disinterested non-object observer
>to design experiments

In what way to humans qualify as this?

>Why is the felt experience of consciousness not taken seriously by the scientific community?
It is by psychology, the field of science that pertains to those experiences, and also in neuroscience, which is related.

>psychedelic states of consciousness.
What do you mean by "taken seriously"? If you mean why don't people believe your hallucinations are real, it's because all the drugs do is cause your brain, your tool for perceiving reality, to malfunction.

>consciousness is the first thing we can observe
Not true. To observe your consciousness is to observe yourself being conscious of something, ergo you have to be conscious of something external first. But this is a minor point.

>But this is a minor point.

No, it's a wrong point. Conscious phenomena can correlate with objects observed though sense perception, but there's no reason why what you are 'conscious of' necessarily has to be external, even though in humans such phenomena tend to be based on currently or previously encountered patterns that first arise through sense perception.

>Why is blah blah blah psychedelics blah blah consciousness yada yada scientific community
There is far more important, pressing science to research that will further benefit the advancement of humankind and the well-being of daily human life than the understanding of it.

consciousness doesn't exist

>Consciousness is real and can be observed by any sentient being, just as much as atoms and rocks.
That's not true. Ten different people can look at the same rock one person is holding. Ten different people can't look at the same alleged "consciousness" one person is reporting.
Now they could all look at the *report* of that alleged "consciousness" if it's written down (or hear the report if it's spoken).
And of course that's what you actually deal in terms of if you want to be "scientific" about it: reports / behavior.
You don't assume what the person reports has any literal reality to it, you just work with the actually observable behavior they're presenting (or their physiology e.g. a brain scan).