(1) But computers only do what you program them to do so they cant possibly be more intelligent than the programmer.
(2) And you cant program consciousness because it arises from quantum mechanics.
QED
I think that is a bit too strict. According to (1) a child could not possibly ever become more intelligent than its parents and its teachers at school. At least the second part of that is demonstrably wrong. A lot of children become adults that are more intelligent (and more knowledgeable) than their school teachers. One of the big differences between a computer and a child is that eventually a child will decide to do something else than what it's told. Also, it will eventually realize that not everything it is told is necessarily true.
Though what you are saying is somewhat correct, nevertheless. Although things like fuzzy matching exist, computers are generally very inflexible in doing any such thing, or in doing meaningful things on their own, without an a-priori well-defined set of rules for every possible case. But I think it is this ability to take a decision (not simply by following a programmed ruleset, but really taking a decision) which is what distinguishes an intelligent being.
About (2), I daresay that nobobdy knows where consciousness comes from (or what exactly "makes" intelligence). Nobody even knows even remotely how our brain works.
Sure, we know there are synapses and stuff, and we kind of know how they work and how they react to certain chemicals, from a bird's eye perspective. We also have a somewhat rough overview of what regions in the brain are connected to what others, and what they most probably do. Or, we think that we know that -- what we really know is that there is electrical activity in certain regions when a person does certain things, and that non-lethal defects in certain regions tend to have certain failures (but with a huge variance and a huge regeative ability in using different regions). Everything else is just conclusions and theories, but not something that we truly know.
None of what we know happens in the brain can't be simulated. The only thing that is still forbidding is the immense complexity of the brain.
However, it it was really that simple, someone would have created a very simple artificial brain with a concience a long time ago. It needed not be the fastest, most brilliant brain in the world, as long as it has a concience. Maybe an artificial brain that has half the intelligence of a very stupid dog. It would even be enough of a sensation if such a brain placed into a robot with some unknown wiring learned that being shown a red triangle means it's going to be beaten in a moment (which gives a "negative" stimulus) and if it learned to walk away without someone telling it how to do that -- solely by observation and learning that sending certain impulses will move a "thing" in its body and create a certain stimulus, which corresponds to where it is in the world. Alas, no such thing has happened.