Oooh, prove it. That not evidence that is a statement that would need to be tested, more so because its open ended anything short of infinite number of parts would not prove it, so its a statement that is impossible to verify. But if we assume that the human brain is entirely a construct that exists in this universe then your statement is clearly wrong: the brain is made of a finite number of components and it produces consciousness. Now you might argue that maybe a Turing machines can't produce consciousness, but that is unlikely as a Turing machines should be able to simulate a brain, it would just require many fold more computing power in the Turing machine the the brain its simulating. If worse came to worse we could just have analogy FPGAs or literally hardware neurons do the thinking.
And yet that could just because we have not developed the technology enough yet. I can just hear you back in 1900 "Oh we been trying to achieve heavy than air flight for decades, even longer if you consider Greek mythology, clearly it can't be done, and I should know, I'm an expert!"
So it hasn't happened yet therefor it never will? I'm pretty sure that a fallacy, for example "I have not crashed my car yet, therefor I never will!" yeah so just because it has not happened does not mean it can't, you need actually evidence for why it could never ever happen and track records do not go on to infinite so that not evidence. Now I'm not a computer scientist, you claim to be, so therefor its up to you to prove it can't be done, I'm merely stating that without evidence at present we can't say it can or can't be done.