Thanks for the response Curt, I appreciate this kind of discussion with someone I disagree with. Might you agree that what one person calls data is not what another would call data? As an example, a very large body of evidence, call it data, supports the claim that Near Death Experiences occur despite near or complete loss of brain function. (See Irreducible Mind or Evidence of the After Life for this data). I could provide a lot of other examples of evidence or data that you would likely reject. Don't get me wrong. I have no expectation of moving you off your position of determinism and physicalism. It is quite clear that the issues are firmly resolved in your mind. However, a sign of intelligence is being open to contrary "data." That's what data-driven science depends on. I hope you might be open to data that is contrary to what you have decided is dogmatic truth.