Atheism the unscientific belief (part one, two, and three)

[Nonpareil]

How the hell can physical science be able to investigate something outside his competence as the consciousness?  

Consciousness is the result of physical processes.

And science is, by definition, capable of investigating anything that exists, because science is just the art of observing things and making rational conclusions based on those observations. To say that something cannot be examined scientifically is to say that it cannot be observed - but, if it cannot be observed, it does not exist, by definition.

For those who have never met me before, note the use of the word "cannot" here, not just "currently cannot" or "cannot practically". Existence does not require that we have observed something - just that it is, in some way, however difficult, observable.

---

When you guys say........THE CONSCIOUSNESS IS A PRODUCT OF THE BRAIN, you state or make a claim but this claim doesn't have any evidence to support his validity so you can not say that is all about disbelieving a claim and similar bullshit.

Well, no. We do have evidence. In fact, we have literally everything ever experienced by anyone, ever as evidence.

Literally every experience anyone has ever had is not only consistent with the idea of consciousness arising from brain activity, but only makes sense if this is the case. For more direct evidence, there is the fact that no one without a brain (or, in the case of some simpler animals, some sort of primitive nervous system acting as a stand-in) is conscious, and that rendering the brain inoperable makes that being no longer conscious. Damaging, altering, or interacting with the brain also alters consciousness directly.

Everything that we know about the brain and consciousness - and we know quite a lot more than I think you realize - indicates that consciousness is a product of the brain.

If you believe otherwise, the onus is upon you to prove your position.