Artificial Intelligence?

Information from the usual suspects.

I posted on (X) this morning about my first interaction with ChatGBT. It certainly proved that my theory about the information sources being from the people behind the official narrative on everything.

First I asked if nuclear weapons existed or were they simply propaganda. The answer was an unequivocal yes. No room for doubt or debate on that subject. I then asked what destroyed Hiroshima and Nagasaki in 1945, and the answer was nuclear weapons. Hmmmm, no room for discussion once again.

I asked why, if there was so much radiation due to the nuclear explosion, why did a bank which had remained standing afterwards, opened for business two days later? This time the machine agreed that the bank had opened, but many people died from the radiation in the following weeks months and years.

It didn't explain where the customers who visited the bank, had come from and why they needed money if the city was destroyed. To me the official story is a mixture of information designed to confuse people who asked questions.

Anyway I moved my questions to the deserts of the American South West and the evidence of melted cities. This seemed to piss off the machine, which replied with exactly the answer I would expect from the trollbots on social media. Erosion of already standing rock formations due to rain and wind over millions of years.

Where does this information come from, I asked. Archaeologists and peer reviewed papers, answered the grumpy machine. At one point it gave me two separate conclusions to the melted remains and asked me to say which one I agreed with. I skimmed over the information and replied that I couldn't agree with either explanation and I doubted the independence of the machine and its answers.

Scientists and experts being quoted because their conclusions had been peer reviewed, sounded very much like the propaganda we had been fed over the C19 lies. If this is the pinnacle of information gathering, then the public has been duped once again.

Any search engine is only as good as the information uploaded and on the type of person putting in the information and their agenda.

If we, who know the official narrative is completely fake and our history is a lie, decided to design a search engine, it would have very different answers to the same kind of questions, but because of the indoctrination of the 80% it wouldn't be taken seriously.

My answer to the artificial intelligence question is to bombard as many as possible of the machines with the questions we have on every subject which contradicts the mainstream narrative, and give them the answers we know to be true, because if they are capable of “learning” from information requested, they will learn from our input.

Real intelligence might actually be capable of confusing the smug bastards.