I would think there is a burden to prove that physical laws are deterministic. This was an assumption for centuries, but only an assumption. There has been evidence against it as far back as Newton and the three body problem. Which, by the way, has no solution nor any prospect of solution.
Er, strong determinism is the casual effect of physical laws. And I wouldn’t be so quick to give up on solutions to the three body problem:
A new solution to the three body problem - and more by Bill Casselman
More on the new solution: Montgomery (pdf)
Do you assume that infants are not conscious? How about people born deaf prior to the invention of sign language? If you believe these people are conscious, do you have any evidence other than non-verbal behavior and similarity of brain structure?
Infants and deaf persons are conscious, they have language capability. The one is a blank slate and the other will use difference forms of language.
Here’s an interesting discussion for lurkers: Language, Thought and Consciousness
You assume most people are conscious because they have language. For those who do not have language, you assume they are conscious because "they have language capability". An interesting assumption, but at least in the case of the deaf, a false one. I specifically asked, in the case of the deaf, how you would classify them if they were not taught language.
This is not a trivial or trick question, because prior the the invention of sign language, "deaf and dumb" people were warehoused with the profoundly retarded.
By the way, are the profoundly retarded conscious?