FDMII
1. I think you misunderstand the intent.
Nobody wants to make an aircraft that could pass a Turing test.
I would go as far as to say that the exact opposite is the case.
The intent is to remove consciousness and all the problems it brings. The very last thing anybody wants in an autonomous aircraft is a personality.
The mere mention of Turing shows a deep misunderstanding of what people are trying to achieve.
2. You make some statements regarding whether it can be done safer, but have neglected to provide a shred of evidence or research to back them up.
Examples from the past of problems with computers etc are not valid examples for the simple reason that nobody has yet tried to build an autonomous airliner, therefore they are not autonomous.
ie "This Airbus I fly is rubbish! I keep having to help it out!"
An Airbus is designed to always have human pilots. Therefore, humans are part of the strategy for dealing with problems.
We can however point to the many many examples where increased automation has improved flight safety.
In every single instance I can think of, when automation is added to the flight deck flight safety has improved.
TCAS
EGPWS
FADEC
Can you think of an instance where this is not the case?