Yes, we want to avoid the reality for some weird reason,
A scientist claims there is no life after death because the laws of physics make it impossible.
I'd now like to see the "completely understood" scientific explanation of how physical matter creates consciousness.
Any such explanation would be complete bullshit because it's not understood.
It's not understood because the question isn't valid. Consciousness is fundamental NOT an emergent property of matter.
Because consciousness is fundamental the possibility of awareness persisting beyond death cannot scientifically be ruled-out.
Just because there is a debate does not mean your opinion is the right one, it just means there is disagreement. You would need to provide evidence to back up your opinion, otherwise it has no merit. Where is the evidence that backs up your opinion of the paper by Radin, et al and the Eisenbeiss case? Your links claim that a test is not valid unless the researcher has a certain philosophical beliefs. That is unheard of in any other branch of science.
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=737322.msg19336271;topicseen#msg19336271