shin, i don't think anyone was denying what you said to be a scientific fact, and one that has been resounded through the ages, via the Buddist teachings as well as Dzogchen and many others...the problem is in making sense of it...
this is why i too, started the thread on enactivism...b/c, there is something 'out there', there has to be to communicate with our conscious and cause neurons to fire in the first place to have the conscious experience 'in the brain'...or is this too, a solid position only to be investigated? from where i am viewing, it is a logical one.
we might ask, where does this 'conscious experience' actually take place? in 'my' brain? in 'your' brain? where are these 'brains'? and are they all reflecting phenomena at the same time? or is it more in line with the relationships between? the interaction? after all, i see my body, others see my body...so are we all just tripping like YAS says? some of us having one trip, and others having another?
and what about the universe and earth that apparently were here before the 'mes' and 'yous' of humanity were here to consciously experience it in human awareness?
it's nice to have all the 'pat' answers from religion and science, but they don't get us any closer to really understanding...they all seem to take us to a precipice where we have to either believe what we are being told by someone elses experience, or reject it as incomplete...
it's nice thinking of awareness as a mirror whose nature it is to reflect its essence and energy in form that is ever-changing...and taking it apart to understand it might well be a process...but when we put it all together are we any closer to really understanding? if we are, we are left with only old methods of articulating the same beliefs...and have again reached a limit...
i say the limit is an opening, or can be...b/c the explanations that science and religion have given us up until now, are not complete, and in my view not satisfactory...
conscious experience always arises in relationships...where the subject is the object of another subject that is the object of the first subject...which nullifies, subject/object...
anyways, i find this area of inquiry fascinating, and am pleased to continue on with it, as long as we do not get boxed in by our own labels and beliefs...
i, like you, share the frustration of the parroting of fixed positions...*