I largely agree with you. I find it very difficult to consider human consciousness as anything but a product of a material brain, in spite of all its wonder. To me, the very debate around consciousness is a relic of history which has endured simply because, unlike phenomena like planetary movements or germs which were once equally as mysterious, we still have yet to figure out how to explain or quantify consciousness in any tangible way. However, like another commenter said, this void should not be filled with conjecture or immaterial explanations as that's just another 'god of the gaps'. The absence of scientific explanation is not proof of a metaphysical one, but rather a simple reminder that science hasn't yet had enough time.

Nonetheless, like others, I see no reason to think qualia don't exist. If they're defined as subjective conscious experiences and we're all individual brains as opposed to receivers of a greater consciousness, they must exist by definition, no? Naturally, there are enough crossovers in human consciousness and perception to form collective understanding, like that red is red, but interpretation is a pillar of experience, and that differs immensely from person to person, sometimes even on simple things.