Your second sentence does not support the claim in your first sentence; it's merely a second unsupported claim. It is also entirely irrelevant to the argument.

Your second sentence does not support the claim in your first sentence; it's merely a second unsupported claim. It is also entirely irrelevant to the argument. The threshold for behaviour consistent with having emotions (note: not behaviour sufficient to prove emotions) was one I purposefully set extremely low, because your comparison to a disk drive is so ludicrous, and yet your disc drive will still not clear it. Do you have an actual argument?