>There is no experiment that can disprove all simulation hypotheses. There is always another hypothesis where that result is simply a valid part of the simulation.
>Similarly, there is no evidence that can demonstrably disprove the existence of "God." In fact at the fundemental level these two beliefs are basically identical; the difference is in language and emotional baggage.
The former is a claim that I made explicitly. The latter is also true to a certain extent, but a whole raft of the claims made by those who hypothesize the existence of a "god" have been shown to be empirically false.
The simulation hypothesis isn't falsifiable either, but it doesn't make demonstrably false claims.
"Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence."
All that said, both are metaphysics[0] at best, and to paraphrase Sir Peter Medawar[1], a "bounteous harvest of gobbledygook" at worst.