Can you prove that conscious is an emergent property of the bio-chemical brain? If you can, there is a sweet noble waiting for you. Otherwise it’s speculation on your part.
Your internally perceived reality is a "visualized+ object" that is similar to a visual and auditory recall of a historic event, or a future event "imagined". That object includes body impressions, smell, taste, etc. Hunger. Pain. Impatience in understanding the nature of consciousness. Etc. All of that is built from sense impressions. Buddhists call these "aggregates".
The internal model of reality is an aggregate object which is refreshed from senses. While it looks very close to what everyone else sees inside, it is very individualistic to the person experiencing it and distinctly different from the various wavelengths of light and sound bouncing around in various material configurations which are then sampled by imperfect sensors.
Would it be surprising to learn that not everyone's world model is complete, especially when attention is not being held on it? See "basketball gorilla attention" on Google. Yet, we all take it for granted so much that we forget we do it, sort of like the fact most people take for granted they can see their parents in their mind's eye but don't ever bother wondering how it is they can actually see an image representation of something without it being processed through a sense organ.
It shouldn't come to anyone's surprise that reality is hallucinated into being and we experience that hallucination inside alone and outside together. If you stop hallucinating it, you lose consciousness. Dreams.
People do have experiences, and are made out of matter. QED. I will expect your nomination.
If your speech center is damaged, your speech is impaired. If your audio processing center is damaged, your hearing is impaired. If your visual cortex is damaged, your vision is impaired. If your hippocampus is damaged, memory formation is impaired. If your frontal lobes are damaged, your judgement is impaired. If your cerebellum is damaged, physical coordination is impaired. If your reasoning ability is damaged, you believe in woo.
Moreover, to believe in the fairy tale of physicalism implies accepting that the building blocks of such worldview (fundamental particles) pop up into existence out of thin air, that the universe is made mostly of "dark energy", and that experiential properties "emerge" from unconscious matter... is this the kind of woo you were referring to when you mentioned damaged reasoning ability?
What have you got against fairies? Can you prove that fairies don't exist? Can you prove that fairies are not the true manifestation of consciousness? Can you prove that you, yourself, are not a fairy who is extremely confused? Woo.
Dressing up religion as sense never turns out well for religion or sense.
What I am interested into is exposing the double standards of materialists/physicalists whose world view is based on even more woo, it's way less parsimonious, leaves out the most in-your-face phenomenon we observe, and when it makes the huge mistake to venture into philosophy/metaphysics like many militant materialists like to do, it's even internally inconsistent.
It's a shame, because science is not supposed to be a religion. We should be looking past our own nose tip.
But, sure, flat-earth creationist moon-landing denialism is engaging and zero-calorie fun. You can twiddle away your life and not interfere with people actually, you know, doing things.