Consciousness created the universe

First I will give arguments against the notion that the brain creates consciousness then I will argue as why consciousness exists independent of the brain1) Brainless animalsIf the brain is the cause of consciousness and consciousness is considered any level of awareness then one must assert that Starfish are not conscious. Much like a clock or computer. Which means even though a Starfish "hunts" it is not aware that it is eating or satiated. This also means that I could take a living Starfish and slowly slice its limbs off or burn it and even though it struggles to free itself it's not actually feeling anything because it is not conscious. It is merely acting mechanically as it was programmed to. The same as if I abused a computer that tried to repair itself. The computer isn't actually suffering. This makes no sense. It is more reasonable to believe an organism that acts fundamentally as conscious beings shares their fundamental property i.e. awareness. For one to claim otherwise requires great evidence. 2) Food analogyIt is asserted that if many attributes of consciousness arise from the brain then Occam's Razor, a theory that dictates that with the lest assumptions should be true, says that consciousness itself must arise from the brain. Let's look at the following analogy to assess this claim:Bill: Where did you get those apples?Mary: the store.Bill: Where did you get those eggs?Mary: the store.Bill: Where did you get that milk?Mary: the store.Bill: Where did you get those bananas?Unfortunately, Mary dies before she can answer the question. Luckily, Bill's friend Occam is nearby. He asks the following: "Given what you know, what is more LIKELY, that the bananas come from the store or that they come from somewhere else?"Now let's complete the analogyBill's friend Henry is seen eating something. Henry lives in a town with no stores. Occam asks the following: "Given what you know, what is more LIKELY, that the bananas come from the store or they come from somewhere else?" In the case of this analogy, Occam's razor dictates that it is more reasonable to believe that consciousness (bananas) existed independent of the brain (the store) 3) Manipulation of consciousness It is asserted that if one can manipulate conscious by manipulating the brain then conscious must be exlusive to the brain. For example, if someone is given a local anaesthesia which numbs their arm, their consciousness has been altered because they have lost sensory in their arm. We know this because they exhibited no response which reflects an awareness of feeling. If we to come to such conclusions via demonstratable behaviour then we must conclude than when a creature does reflect responses caused by awarness that it is aware. If it is aware then it is conscious. A Jellyfish demonstrates signs of awareness of it's environment. If it is aware it is conscious. If it is conscious then conscious is not be an emergent porperty of the brain because jellyfish have no brains. 4) meditationIf the lowering of one's senses is synonmous with the lower of one's consciousness then one must assert that a buddhist monk in deep meditation is in a lower state of consciousness than an anxiety sufferer eating a hamburger. A person in a state of deep meditation loses sensitivity to their external environement and resides in a state of peak consciousness. This is how the Yogi Codoux is able to compact himself in a small box and be submerged underwater for 7 minutes. If increasing one's state of consciousness made one more sensitive of their environment then the practice of meditation prior to this event would have been counter-productive. 5) DreamsIf sensitivity of external simtuli is linked to consciousness then one must explain how somoene can react just as powerfully to the illusory state of dreams whilst in a deep sleep as they would to reality. 6) Something from nothingNo where in nature do we witness something coming into existence which ceases to be. Everything that exists already exists and will remain to exist forever - mainly in the form of atoms. Therefore, to assert that the brain creates consciousness which disappears after the destruction of the brain requires great evidence. If consciousness didn't exist prior to organic life forms then what is it? how did it come into being? And how was it created out of thin air?7) Conciousness and spaceConsciousness and space share a unique trait that no other form of existence shares. They're the only two things which can be completely absent of everything other than themselves. Empty Space: The complete absence of everything other than itself. Complete empty stillness Pure consciousness: The complete absence of everything other than itself. Complete stillness If we were to remove all matter and energy from the universe then we'd be left with only empty space. A state absent of everything other than itself. The same can be said if we were to remove everything except consciousness. There would only be a state of awareness and nothing else. This cannot be said for anything else. For example, the strings of string theory. Said to be the most smallest forms matter and therefore the most fundamental. But a string consists of 2 things; Itself and a single material - string. Yet space spaces consists of literally nothing yet it still is. It still consists of itself. Nothingness can be said to consist ofnothing even itself. Nothingness is completely non-existent. Nothingness: complete absence of everything. Non-existenceEmpty space: Absence of everything other than itself. Existence consisting of nothing. Everything else: Existence comprised of something. Pure Consciousness: Absence of everything other than itself. Existing as awareness but consisting of nothing. As you can see, this is evidence that supports the notion that empty space and conscious could very likely be one in the same thing. However, whereas empty space exists on the outter most regions of the universe consciousness exists in the inner most regions of the universe. Which is extremely coincidental considering how much quantum physics is being correlated with consciousness yet no one correlated Einsteins theory of general relativety with consciousness It is logical to assume that prior to the big bang there was only empty space. Or prior to all matter and energy existing there was only empty space. We come to this conclusion because it is self-evident. Without empty space to exist in nothing can exist. Therefore, empty space must exist prior to anything else. If empty space and consciousness exclusively share this unique trait then it's reasonable to believe that they co-existed prior to the universe. Considering there is no logical explanation as to how the birth of the universe can be caused by nothing then it's only logical to place the blame on the only culprit in the room -- consciousness. Therefore, conscious created the universe.8) Nothingness cannot beTo put it into perspective entirely let's start from the beginning:Nothingness cannot be. To be implies being and being is existing. Nothingness means non-existence therefore nothingness MUST not exist by its very definition. If there was no universe then there would be nothing but this is not possible because nothingness cannot be. This is why there is something instead of nothing. However, this only explains why there should be the bare minimum of something which is empty space. What caused the manifestation of the universe out of empty space? Consciousness, which is one and the same thing with empty space. Definitely not nothing. And definitely not God