Evidence for atheist claims

[Little Rik]

How would you hallucinate considering that your brain is 100% off and totally inactive as established by
doctors and neurosurgeons?
To hallucinate you need a brain that function or at least not completely dead so it is clear that the consciousness take over free from the constrain of body-mind.

The doctors generally don't 'establish' any such thing.  Doctors pronounce someone as having 'died' on the basis of non-brain factors, like heart functioning.  If the brain were truly 100% off, there would be nothing to come back to.  Nearly dead is somewhat alive.  Moreover, there is usually a period between such 'death' and coming back to consciousness when the brain is functional, but not awake.  You have no way of knowing that the NDE did not occur in that window, so your claim that the experience happened when the brain was 100% off is hollow.  According to an IANDS study, a third of NDEs occur outside life threatening situations.  There's no way the brain is "100% off" in those cases.

The heart stop.
The blood and oxygen stop flowing to the brain.
If you only knew the basic ABC about medicine you would know that after a very short time that the
heart stop working the brain is dead but you try to be smart and keep on creating guessing after guessing
just to keep your reputation alive and well.
Sorry yog.
You fail once again.    

Not only that but as described by most people who had an NDE the consciousness is even more sharp
than when the body was alive.
Easy to imagine that.
When the body is alive the consciousness is stuck inside a body so there exist limitations in what the
consciousness can do but when is free from the body then it can function a lot better.

You're just making this up out of whole cloth.  You have a theory, what's your support for it?  The experience of an NDE is qualitatively different from that of waking consciousness.  That in no way indicates an 'improvement', if anything, the brain's reduced capacity to distinguish between reality and visions could be seen as a degeneration.

Mine is not a theory yog.
A myriad of people went through these experiences.
You did not.
Yours is all about guessing and nothing else.

It is a dogma to think that we can not feel and perceive things like vision, sound, smell and all other feelings
without a body.

And yet here you are claiming that an NDEer cannot experience the sights and sounds of hell.  Sight and sound are physical phenomena.  If they can be perceived by a disembodied consciousness, what logical reason is there for supposing that it can't experience the sensation of physical pain?

Whooooo, whoooooo, whooooooo yog.
What a mess in your head yog.  
You claim that............  Sight and sound are physical phenomena.........
How the hell do you know that they are only a physical phenomena?
But let me explain why ........... an NDEer cannot experience the sights and sounds of hell.
As we understand the hell suppose to be physical according the religions version.

When you die physically you leave the body behind so a possible physical hell that of course
does not exist would not be able to make you suffer.
Your physicality is gone so a possible physical hell could not touch you.

The hell therefore is only mental for those whose karma require it but it is not a permanent hell
because through reincarnation anyone can and will sort out his-her own problems.

The consciousness is much more subtle and powerful than the physical senses.

What does this even mean?  Consciousness and sensation are different types of phenomena.  To compare the two and say that one is more subtle than the other is just a category error.

Wrong again yog.

When the consciousness is stuck to a physical body she is not fully able to express herself
but when she is free from the constrain of the body like when the body die then she is able to
fully express herself and therefore we can have the full expression.
Physical senses are constrained by the condition of body-mind that is why they can not give
the full expression.