Lighter:

I think it would be as logically sound to assert that the only evidence that thought rises from matter in the brain is the spirit's ability to imagine that is the case.

As for there being no objective reason to consider non-material sources, that's tautological, obviously.

Furthermore the annals of borderline non-material experiences collected by a wide array of authors (e.g., V. Zammit, Melvin Morse, M.D, KEnneth Ring, Moody, Dr. Robert Crockall , Dr. Elisabeth Kubler-Ross, etc.) is ignored on the grounds that it is non-objective. A Gallup poll in 1992 found that 5% of US adults had had a NDE. That's a lot of purely circumstantial non-evidence, if you work the numbers out. Here are a collection oftheir tales. If you can get over the instinctive repulsion toward anecdote, you'll find some interesting common denominators. See also Michael B. Sabom's 1982 "Recollections of Death". Here are some more such tales. I am not going to do anymore homework for you, though.

The value of these anecdotal collections is not in their empirical proof of anything, but in the distribution across the species of certain kinds of experience not readily accounted for by existing models. They are anomolies, from the perspective of a hard-core material paradigm and they are extremely uncomfortable because of thenumber of questions that would be raised if the primary agreed-on paradigm were to be invalidated, or its limits recognized.

Of course you can resort to whole-cloth rebuttal of all these people by saying it just ain't so. That way lies intellectual redneckery of the first order. It would make sense to me to allow the unknown to exist.

I am reminded of Dylan singing "Something is happening here but...".