The scientists who have made contributions to the problem you say; the problem of incomputablity and simulation versus authentic consciousness, like Roger Penrose have a not 100% convincing science of Orchestrated Objective Reduction, accordingly have been pointed out that it's a fallacy to say at what point something is incomputable versus not. However considering quantum mechanics's counter intuitiveness with emperical experiment, you might be able to reconcile this fallacy. And if anything about science means anything then this is the first approach and nearest neighbor to what would be objective truth on the matter.

What someone needs is a bridge of this problem with epistemology, not the ontologies of simulation versus authentic, and that means deep work on how there is an approach to the science of consciousness. And how could any come to a conclusion over this? I don't think within the next 50 years. However I think like most scientists think, there is a definitive answer which can be ruled "certain".