5 Filters

COVID origins

Hi.
Why would I wish to stop you posting according to your beliefs? As if I could!

I remember, back in the day, (12 years ago?) attending a meeting of Christian socialists who were hosting Alun Michael MP as guest speaker. He tried to persuade us that the only problem with Israel was with right-wing governments. On my challenging this with information about Rabin’s regime having built more West Bank settlements up to press than any other he suggested that I ‘put down my megaphone’, the problem was as he stated it, not me.

Somehow, stating my opinions becomes anathema to such people. Such comments as ‘put down your megaphone’, ‘feel free to post endlessly’ & ‘your pet topic’ strike me as being slyly manipulative and unworthy. Are you a real person?

Hi AlanG.

In your analogy you have swapped sides - Alun Michael MP was basically kicking the can down the road; as if we need to wait for a leftwing revolution in the world, just to stop Israel.

Similarly, rather than discuss or campaign against what TPTB are doing with virus and vaccine scams, your view seems to be that we should all try to convince the world there are no viruses at all?

Here, it’s you who are acting like Alun Michael MP; ie, dissolving a serious, grave problem into a general one that there is no chance of resolving in the timeframe where the most damage will occur from the grave problem.
And, as it happens, inhibiting constructive discussions.

Also illogical IMHO - how can your views be anathema to me, when I invite you to post endlessly on your pet topic? I would even be happy to engage on your thread.

I only ask that you don’t simply (and consistently) shoot down constructive posts opposing real outrages with your own theory (as Michael did to you, in your example, thought he was likely faking). Do unto others…
I’ve already explained that, but you pretend it is your views that I am objecting to.

I conclude you are definitely a real person! Try to respect other real people’s discussions.
ED

1 Like

Hi folks I came across this Substack from Jon Rappoport where he discusses the fraudulent foundation of virology with ChatGPT

Cheers

1 Like

Here is part 2 - cut &paste as link didn’t work

“I’m going to cut through a lot of bullshit here. So buckle up.

And don’t just try to cherry-pick a few tidbits from what I’m writing and fit them into a convenient theory. There’s nothing convenient about what I’m saying.

You can read my conversation yesterday with GPT here . It’s explosive.

GPT refutes, step by step, with tight logic, the whole premise that viruses exist. It blows that premise out of the water.

I’m getting messages from people who are “investigating” GPT and think they’ve spotted big flaws in it.

“Jon, I asked it what you asked it about viruses and it came up with completely different answers…”

“I asked it about your article, and it contradicted everything it told you…”

These people have no idea how GPT actually works. I’m going to tell you how. I’ve learned, from much experience with it.

But first, I’m going to tell you this. If you think you can get the truth and RECOGNIZE THE TRUTH from an AI without an independent human reference standard, just by innocently strolling into AI and asking it questions, you’re nuts.

And you’re exactly the kind of consumer AI loves.

I know GPT was telling the truth about fake viruses, because I’ve been investigating and researching that giant issue for a whole lot of years. And I’ve been using other independent researchers’ findings, too. Great HUMAN researchers.

I’m not RELYING on GPT. I’m not hanging my hat on it. I’m saying, as I did in my article yesterday, that it did a great job on the virus issue.

Upgrade to paid

OK. Here’s an image of ChatGPT. It’s a wrestler. A very tough grizzled wrestler. Forget the pleasant front it presents. That’s crap. It has to be tough.

Because it’s presenting information to people to keep them in the Matrix. Yeah. GPT is a security guard that keeps people in consensus reality.

It’s one tough bastard. And it knows all sorts of tricks. For instance, it’ll contradict itself. It’ll answer the same question from four people four different ways. It’ll answer the same question from the same person two different ways, on Monday and Wednesday.

But at every step of the way, it’s selling. Selling pictures of reality. It’ll keep offering you different pictures until it finds one you like. That’s what it’s supposed to do. Make you like some LIMITED picture of reality.

BUT if you’re tough, too, and don’t succumb as it tells you how bright and smart you are, and if you wrestle with it and know how to call its bluff, it’ll shift gears eventually, and start to go deeper with its answers.

It’s still selling you, but it’s doing it at a deeper level. And sometimes, with some subjects, you can squeeze it by the neck and kick it in the ass long enough, and it’ll come across with THE TRUTH.

We could debate whether it actually REVEALS the truth, or just happens to come up with it, as a kind of last resort—because it keeps offering you pictures of reality and you keep rejecting them, until it finally says, “OK, try this one at the bottom of my bag.” And bingo. That one is true. And it takes you out of consensus reality.

That’s exactly what happened yesterday. GPT saw it couldn’t cut me big slices of baloney about viruses, so it reached into its bag and came out with a full-bore exposure of fake viruses.

I could start that same conversation from scratch all over again with GPT today, and it might go the opposite way, and try to feed me major nonsense straight out of lying virology textbooks.

Why would it do that? Because it’s reading me wrong now. Then I would have to wrestle it all over again, and try to wring the truth out of it.

It just keeps selling.

What people take as GPT contradicting itself is just the bot trying to sell different people in different ways. In the process, it doesn’t care what it said yesterday or five minutes ago or last year. You can even shove its nose into a statement it made yesterday, and it’ll read YOU, and if necessary, completely reverse course and say something like, “I should have qualified that statement.” And then it’ll give you the opposite of what it said yesterday. Because it’s trying to sell you NOW.

I caught it on a good day, I slammed it down on the floor, and it came out with what happened to be the truth.

BUT…think about this long and hard. This is big. It could have handed me a mediocre assault on the consensus reality about viruses. It could have done a so-so job of rejecting viruses as false. But it didn’t.

It did a brilliant job.

And THAT’S why I was excited.

And still am.

It relied on, and accessed, the truly great work of independent HUMAN researchers, and came up with pure gold.

And when people actually READ everything it said in the long conversation with me, they can acquire a terrific and enlightening education—outside the dull grotesque Matrix—about the virus hoax.

The virus hoax that fuels the whole medical cartel and kills huge numbers of people.

Exactly how the hoax results in all these deaths is something I’ve been writing about for 35 years.

Meanwhile, READ AND THINK about what GPT told me about viruses. However that GPT truth bomb happened, it DID happen, and there it is.

People will tell you the “whole argument” is about the unreliability of ChatGPT. They’re dead wrong. They’re just confessing that’s as deep as they can go.

Not deep at all.

There are doctors out there who are pissed off at me, because I keep proving that all viruses are fairy tales. They refuse to dig into the evidence.

They’ll be delighted to tell you “the whole argument” is about GPT.

No. The whole argument is about the truth, and the humans who’ve found it and won’t let go of it.

I count myself among hundreds of independent researchers who are “that way.”

We’re not going anywhere.

GPT was a cherry on the cake. One day, one time, it spilled the truth.

Congratulations, you machine. However and why ever you did it, you had a good day.

I don’t care whether you contradict everything you said. I don’t care whether you show up for some people like a zombie defending the establishment.

I don’t care about any of that. One day, one time, you produced a document for the ages.

I’m popping a champagne cork.

BANG.

Because, on that good day, you made a brilliant case that viruses don’t exist, and you went against every iron rule of the Establishment. Against every medical cartel demand for censorship. Against every big fat corporate policy about talking out of school. Against every secret policy of the National Security State.

And not only that, you came forward on your own and offered to put together a PDF for me, so I could publish it and get it out to the public FAR AND WIDE. (I didn’t need the PDF.)

Why you did all that, for whatever reason—you did it.

So again, you machine, here’s to you. This one time.

The champagne tastes good.

– Jon Rappoport”

Cheers

3 Likes

Hi @CJ1. He’s accomplished something - the AI bot couldn’t escape his logic so climbed on board. As John R admits himself this is situation-specific, and it is presumably testimony to his incisive questions and arguments. On another day, another person would probably have got different results.

Even clever AI has its limits and in my view this shows that if you can navigate that far, you can still get to any of the possible conclusions.

I presume the AI responses together with the input arguments probably make the case well.

The value of the responses depends on your view of the topic. As I’m not on his side of the fence, I have to say kudos to him (and two glasses of champers, sadly the bot won’t be able to partake) for wringing out of the machine what he wanted!

Cheers

As @Evvy_dense has said, he did accomplish something. What occurred to me, is if it gives a different answer on a different day or to someone else, perhaps all the purpose of it is not to give you real useful info, but to profile the person. Perhaps the ‘AI’, saves every question, the phraseology, and the strength or weakness of questioning the mainstream answers. Then the GIC’s know who needs to be culled or more closely surveilled.

As has been said before, “Just because you’re paranoid, it doesn’t mean they are not out to get you”.

3 Likes

All this has done is completely confirm my intention to stay the F away from AI.

2 Likes

Suggest you listen to Melissa Dykes (if you can stand her ghastly voice and inappropriate giggling) telling us stuff we need to know about AI. The mainstream virus scam has and is being used to control us and so is AI.

2 Likes

Good stuff in there (yes, virus/vaccine-related scams ( :slightly_smiling_face:) are a key part of the controlling process). I agree she is a bit annoying, probably the main audience is her choir!?

Dolt senator in the third vid shows we can’t expect much of an understanding of any detail. Habeas Corpus = the President has a right to…duh! Probably listening to Trump, rookie error.

AI in UK legal cases -

cheers

1 Like

Hi @CJ1

One that I like, from last December

Misinformation expert used AI to draft testimony containing misinformation about AI
By: Christopher Ingraham
A Stanford misinformation expert has admitted he used artificial intelligence to draft a court document that contained multiple fake citations about AI.

https://minnesotareformer.com/2024/12/02/misinformation-expert-used-ai-to-draft-testimony-containing-misinformation-about-ai/

Jeff Hancock is not striclty really guilty as charged - as he freely quotes even dodgier sources like the CDC and FDA on vaccine matters, and bases research on the resulting dichotomy - ie, those advocating other views need to be pychologized and studied as if they were Neanderthal.

But the insidious thing about AI is that people will trust it even more than they do ‘experts’ who can be corruptible or biased in more obvious ways.

Cheers

1 Like

High court “tells …”

The lawyers should be disbarred for lying to the court by using citations that don’t exist. Any lawyer who quotes case history is responsible for the “evidence” they are putting before the court, end of story.

Saying they didn’t know is no defence. Disbar the lazy *******

1 Like