Please don’t take this the wrong way – it really isn’t meant to be derogatory – but, … what are you saying? Your ideas are devolving into gibberish:

You’ve talked about consciousness and introduced a new concept you call “free consciousness”. You claim that free will is tied to consciousness (and “free consciousness”?), make claims about some magical properties of the prefrontal cortex, acknowledge that we are bound by physical laws, yet we are somehow, although bound, not bound when we make choices. You claim that inanimate objects and other non-human organisms don’t have free will, but that humans, although constrained by the same physical laws, are somehow exempt from their consequences. Gibberish!

My ideas and beliefs are and have been consistent: I believe consciousness arises from an immaterial (non-physical) source. It is not bound to free will in any way, because free will (if defined as being associated with choice) does not exist. Only consciousness exists. The rest is “illusion”.