A lot of these points remind me of ideas in Daniel Dennett's Consciousness Explained. He spent a lot of time attacking the "Cartesian Theatre" concept (similar to Captain Kirk commanding his starship looking at screens, listening to audio transmissions and reports from the crew). The Cartesian Theatre is clearly not a "place" in the brain, but it aptly characterizes subjective experience. But Dennett was right to say that while we might experience a thought in a single location in the Theatre, it tends to be constituted in multiple locations in the brain.

You said, or at least implied, that if thought is produced in the brain, then it must have a spatial location, because the brain has a spatial location. To disagree with this sounds like dualism, lock stock and barrel. It seems silly and/or obvious to claim thoughts don't have physical locations for the simple reason that they don't feel like they do. It sounds like someone who is confused, when sipping a drink on an airline flight, that he or she is moving at ~500 mph but their drink seems stationary in their hand.