We're basically talking about a logical illusion... an AI Ontological Argument... with all the flaws of an ontological argument (such as bearing no proof)...

In other words, you don't understand the argument, and are not moved by it, and so your estimation of improbability of the outrageous prediction stays the same. The only proper way to argue past this point is to discuss the subject matter, all else would be sophistry that equally applies to predictions of Astrology.