Yes but the initial training sets did have thoughts and feeling behind them and those are reflected back to the user in the output (with errors)
Ability to generate words describing emotions are not the same thing as the LLM having real emotions
Featherless biped -> no-true Scotsman goalpost moving [saving us that step]
Humans are no more capable of originality, just more convinced of their illusion of consciousnesses. You could literally not pick a human out of a conversational line-up, so it is moot - computationally functionally equivalent.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinese_room https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mechanism_(philosophy)
At some point, their models will 1:1 our neuron count, and Pigeonhole principle then implies we are the "less intelligent ones" since "internal model" (implicit parameter count) is the goalpost of the hour.