Neither of you have provided anything other than evidence of the same well known mistakes we always see with erroneous conclusions. These are the same mistakes we must be aware of whether forming a belief about ghosts, bigfoot, or gravity. You have provided no more than anecdotal evidence, the same anecdotal evidence I could find for leprechauns or aliens. Personal accounts are certainly enough evidence to start an investigation, but never factor into the final conclusion. This is for good reason, once an investigation starts it is imperative to control for all known mistakes, otherwise how can we trust the conclusion?
All I have done is subject your claims to consistent doubt and point out errors in your reasoning. I even provided sources for the errors I sighted, it's not as if I unfairly made them up. I gave you valid reasons why I don't believe, and you couldn't give me valid reason why you do believe. Listening to you describe your experiences, it seems providing proof would be a simple matter and almost elementary to the process. In the end, you can only tell me that any proof that can ever be provided comes after death. It would be easy for me to claim the same; once you die it will be proven that there is no afterlife. If I said that, would it do anything to convince you at all? Of course not. That's because it is nothing more than
cognitive dissonance.
I understand why people make these mistakes. What I don't understand is why they defend these mistakes after they are pointed out.