Artificial Intelegence over real player

I was wondering why we over-emphasize the emotion factor when playing against machines like it is the deciding factor to the outcome of the game? With or without emotion, we would lose regardless. 

So if a GM plays against Komodo privately, does emotion still plays a role in it after maybe a hundreds or thousands game between them? No. We lose simply because our brain is unable to calculate deeply the way they do. They are out of our depths. 

It is interesting to think also that during the '80s (up to early '90s perhaps), people are so quick to think, assume and ascertain that machines will not be able to reach the epitome of chess understanding the way human does. Same thing with Go. Present day tells a completely different story. Humans always (or most of the times) tells a story that favours him.

None of my oponents I have beaten have killed me, and I have not killed anyone for beating me in chess.  I imagine it is the same for everyone else on this thread.

did you mean 'intelligence'?

They have a vastly superior database of openings, endings and patterns, vastly superior calculation and are not swayed by emotion or bias (theoretically, however since engines are made by humans they are likely to contain very small amounts of bias).

Well for starters the computer would be able to spell intelligence.