Our Best arguments Against Simulation Theory

Sim theory triggers a lot of awkward questions

We at the realist, on balance, think there is a reasonable to strong probability we are, or, are in, a sim. However, that triggers a lot of awkward questions. And of course, there is a probability we are not. So, here is what we think is crazy about it:

  1. Diapers. Beginning of life, end of life, being in them, changing them - the whole thing sucks. Why would anyone code that?
  2. Childhood. Really? All the crying. Constant disappointment you can't have everything you want the minute you want it. Later, embarrassment. Koodies. And finally, acne and horrifically cruel peers in school. Why? If we are a sim that is a game - why would anyone intelligent and self-sufficient want to play that? If we are originated here in the Sim why are we born so helpless and pathetic. Most mammals are grown up in a few years. And walking much sooner!
  3. Geriatrics. Take the worst part of the diaper thing and mix in some of the Childhood stuff and add arthritis. Mmmmm. Lovely. Who designed that?

Why wouldn't we come in ready to enjoy our lives? We can think of "simularium" effect that could answer that. It is simulation as experiment rather than game. If we are a gloopy DNA based attempt at A.I. by others more advanced. The whole thing here evolves and optimizes over its own evolution... or it doesn't. But fitting consciousness into it seems difficult.