I think not and can't imagine so. Essentially, isn't it arrogant or naive to assume that simulation of live is actually creation. If in fact we could mend the Goedel in a system 'recursively' would the mind always be sufficiently intelligent to grasp each new Goedel. Should the human ever fail would we then have an artificial mind which was sufficiently complete to be an indistinguishable approximation to the human mind. The mind it seems will always have the last word as the machine is always limited by what is definite.
Any definite machine is vulnerable to being out-Goedeled.
However he goes on to say that one difference is enough to show that they are not the same. Also It is a interesting theory but seems floored. Human minds are clearly not entirely consistent systems so. Surely someone who could be described as 'dappy' in nature glows with inconsistency. Lucas goes on to deal with this.