I never said the above.
You missed my point.
What I stated is;
It is possible for beings to be real and greater [in power, whatever] than human beings on Earth.
However to be possibly real, such being must have at least basic empirical anthropomorphic qualities, e.g. the bearded man in the sky.
If it does not have human physical qualities, it must at least have human like agency and consciousness. If such aliens are identified as non-empirical, then it has no emprical basis and cannot be proven [empirically and rationally] to be real at all.
Thus is it possible to have human-liked [the most basic] aliens [empirically based] who are highly intelligent existing somewhere billions of light years away. Perhaps what is going on in our known Universe is merely a reality-TV show for them! We can speculate on anything for them as long as they are empirically based. The ultimate is the production of empirical evidence to prove their objective existence.
It has to be empirically based so that its existence can be confirmed [empirically and rationaly] if empirical evidence are produced for verification of its existence.
And btw, to the LDS Mormons, God IS “human like”.
It could be human like but being monotheistic, it is ultimately to be more likely an absolutely perfect God which is thus an impossibility.
There are those who believe their God is monkey-liked existing somewhere in the Universe.
If they do not insist such a god is absolutely perfect, then I can accept such a god is empirically possible [of negligible probability]. So the question of realness is for them to produce the empirically evidence for a real monkey-liked to appear for empirical testing and verification. Based on current knowledge, the possibility of such an empirically-based monkey-liked god is very unlikely.
Note theists who claimed their monkey-liked god exists will naturally concede their God is not absolutely perfect as such a monkey-god [hanuman] cannot be superior to a elephant-liked God [Ganesha]. In general, empirically an elephant is more powerful than a monkey in nature.
Normally those who believe in a monkey-liked God and other empirical based Gods will also believe in one absolute supreme perfect God that dominates all other god [e.g. Brahman of Hinduism]. Such a supreme God is generally idealized as an absolutely perfect God which cannot be empirical, thus an impossibility.