Believe me on this one, computer scientists are wrong!!! 

Each person has their own reality, so each person has truths subject to their beliefs.  Though, universally, we live in a collective reality that is subject to all our beliefs.  Universal truth is the state of existence as perceived by the collective reality or individual reality, it's just how things were.  To go further, universal truth is what compiles our universe in it's truest nature, how it just is.

Infinite truths make up the universal truth, commonly known as god.

And were we suppose to believe that?

Excellent articulation my friends.

You're speaking in negatives.

And?  It is better referred to as a belief.

The problem is that anything you would call 'objective' is still filtered through a subjective lens.  This is inescapable.  It's impossible to say objectivity exists independent of subjectivity because subjectivity is required to acknowledge that which is objective.  We simply don't have the luxury of asserting what reality would be like if we stripped away its subjective components.  You can't strip away a CPU from a desktop and still call it a working model of a computer.  Similarly, you can't strip away subjectivity and call what remains a working model of reality.  It's a necessary component of reality, and it's a logical impossibility to assert what a reality absent of subjectivity would be like because you have to communicate from a subjective reference point to do so!

Exactly.  We have two different ways of looking at and interpreting information.  That is exactly why objective information cannot be absolutely independent of subjectivity.

If you walk into what you believe is a wall and you believe that you bump what you think is your head, then you have subjectively defined some real information.  That's what subjectivity does.  You learn about the world by forming a series of abstract categorical relationships about it.  This literally defines the way reality appears to you.  There is no wall for you to bump your nonexistent head upon unless categorical relationships exist between concepts such as "head" and "wall" and "you.". Without subjectivity, all that objective information is rendered completely unintelligible and is therefore meaningless.  Thus, you can't say what reality would be like without subjectivity because you would need to use meaningful words to describe a reality totally absent of meaning.  You can't say "well there would still be planets and stars and space without any subjectivity" because words like stars and planets and space are meaningful and are defined subjectively.

Whatever you believe is true.