Mostly bizarre.

[unfogged]

In the meantime can you please provide evidence that the consciousness is a product of the brain.  

The bottom line is what is reasonable to believe.

In every example we have ever examined where we could detect consciousness there was a functioning brain with electrical and chemical activity going on.  The measurements of that activity correlates well with the perceived level of consciousness.  In every case where the brain activity ceases there is also a cessation of consciousness.  It is reasonable given all the available evidence to believe that consciousness requires a functioning brain.

The best way to show that that is not the most reasonable conclusion is a demonstrable example of a consciousness that it not associated with a functioning brain.  It might also be done if a plausible mechanism for supporting a consciousness without a brain can be shown to exist.  Neither has been done yet and that means it is unreasonable to believe that consciousness can survive the death of the physical brain.

The time to believe something is when there is evidence for it, not simply that it has not been disproven.

---

Suppose this material world is a giant mental projection of the creator.
In this case the natural is the creator mind not his creation.

In all case I would waste my time in explaining how the whole system works considering your ingrained  belief in the materialistic world.  

I have sufficient evidence to believe in the physical world.
I have vague, conflicting, and untestable claims for things "outside" the physical world.

Descriptions of any system must not only be sufficient but must also be necessary and that's where all religious claims fail miserably. 

I am open to believing anything for which good evidence can be provided.  Unverifiable speculations have no value.