[skidoo]

Originally Posted by Open Mind

If one looks into psychical research, numerous cases of witnesses claiming empirical evidence of communication not via normal physical senses, of course materialists reject this a-priori or materialism model becomes at least partially falsified.

This is not empirical evidence, it's anecdotal evidence. Big difference. And again, you give no references.

But you should also note that those modern fMRI studies are seldom doing what Penfield was doing. Before brain surgery Penfield was electrically stimulating directly parts of the brain to see what would occur while the patient was still conscious, his experiments AFAIK have not been repeated in recent times, so Penfield's work remains valid.

Are you kidding me? Go read those studies. They were all done while the patient was conscious, and they provide empirical evidence for what regions of the brain are involved in decision making. If you damage these decision making centers, this affects the patient's decision making capacity. The ability of an independent agent (be it a homunculus or a transmission or whatever) to make decisions (AKA free will) is at the root of all dualist hypotheses. These studies CLEARLY show that decision making originates in the brain.

And you seem to like analogies so arguably these are just like asking/stimulating people to turn a car, with a camera showing regions called the steering wheel and pedals are activated then physicalists claiming this as evidence the steering wheel and pedals are involved in decision making of the car driver.

No, wrong. Alter the brain, alter the decision making abilities (lesions, scars, electro-magnetic suppression, etc.). I can't help it if you don't have access to the actual articles. Read the abstracts and the cross-references and the papers that cite THESE papers, and I'm sure at least some of them have the responses available online. Follow the actual evidence, and dispense with the fantastical speculation.

Correlation isn't enough, one needs to explain causation, how one aspect triggers another and so on

Bullcrap. Sailors->scurvy->limes. Nevertheless, cause is directly attributed to brain function in most of these studies.

I am aware of most of these and they still do not falsify the brain as a filter of the consciousness hypothesis

You're hopeless. You cited near-death experiences as evidence of mental phenomena occurring without brain function. I referenced a small sample of the multitude of studies which suggest far more plausible explanations. You're clinging to your faith by your fingernails.

Only one of those refers to recent research names I am not aware of ....... so let me check if I can obtain it;s content without a subscription.

More vagueness. Why not actually rebut the evidence?