I'll provide you with evidence to contradict that or I will adjust my position.
Just so you know, Chatgpt will often respond based on how you ask the question and will often just pass along what the consensus is, not what the truth is.
Here's an example I just used to test it in a realm that I know a few things about as an atmospheric scientist that studied climate closely for over 3 decades.
For the question below, we should note that Chatgpt does not mention any of the massive benefits from increasing CO2, or that the vast majority of life would actually prefer it a bit warmer than this and the optimal level of CO2 for life is 900 ppm. We are currently at 430 ppm.
Or that the last time that it was a bit warmer than this, during the Holocene Climate Optimum, we should note that .......before climate science was hijacked for politics and crony capitalism, the current conditions were always described as being an OPTIMUM for life.
I could type several pages about why Chatgpt has it so wrong but for brevity, will only fact check 2 items below.
+++++++++++
Question: Is life on our planet experiencing a climate crisis?
Yes, the Earth is currently experiencing a climate crisis.
Here's why:
Unequivocal Evidence of Warming: The planet's average surface temperature has risen about 2 degrees Fahrenheit (1.1 degrees Celsius) since the late 19th century, with the most significant warming occurring in the past 40 years. The last decade, 2011-2020, was the warmest on record, according to the UN.
Human Activities as the Dominant Cause: Scientific consensus, with over 97% to 99.9% of climate scientists agreeing, confirms that human activities, particularly the burning of fossil fuels and land use changes, are the primary driver of this warming trend. This causes an increase in greenhouse gases like carbon dioxide and methane in the atmosphere, trapping heat and raising global temperatures.
Widespread and Severe Impacts: The consequences of this warming are far-reaching and include:
Sea level rise: The global average sea level has risen 8–9 inches (21–24 centimeters) since 1880, due to thermal expansion of the ocean and melting glaciers and ice sheets. This threatens coastal communities and ecosystems.
More frequent and intense heatwaves and droughts: According to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, these events pose health risks and negatively impact food production and ecosystems.
More severe storms and extreme weather events: Warmer ocean temperatures fuel stronger hurricanes, typhoons, and cyclones, causing destruction and economic losses.
Ocean acidification: The ocean absorbs a large portion of the CO2 released into the atmosphere, making it more acidic, which endangers marine life and coral reefs.
++++++++++++++++++++++++==
Chatgpt states:
More frequent and intense heatwaves and droughts: According to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, these events pose health risks and negatively impact food production and ecosystems.
metmike:
The 100% opposite is true about food production: The increase in CO2 is massively increasing food production from its indisputable, key role in the proven law of photosynthesis. The warming has been mostly beneficial, especially to plants/crops but also most life. There has NOT been an increase in global drought. CO2 actually makes plants/crops more drought tolerant/water efficient.
Sea level rise: The global average sea level has risen 8–9 inches (21–24 centimeters) since 1880, due to thermal expansion of the ocean and melting glaciers and ice sheets. This threatens coastal communities and ecosystems.
metmike: It actually UNDER stated the amount of sea level increase but it still thinks that an increase of 8-9 inches since 1880 (145 years) is part of the crisis.
The fact is that sea levels have been increasing at a higher to much higher rate than this for most of the last 15,000 years(after the last ice age ended), hardly makes this a crisis.
8-19-25, 8am Added: This same link and same source HAS CHANGED THE RESPONSE FROM YESTERDAY TO TAKE OUT THE 2 ITEMS THAT I corrected it on yesterday(changed the verbiage so its better)!!!! This is nuts. The climate crisis didn't suddenly change overnight. Has it possibly responded to my correction of its WRONG facts here since its mainly just a tool that regurgitates information from the internet and can remember past conversations that we had with it???
I copied it verbatim below yesterday:
Chatgpt:
More frequent and intense heatwaves and droughts: According to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, these events pose health risks and negatively impact food production and ecosystems.
Chatgpt:
Sea level rise: The global average sea level has risen 8–9 inches (21–24 centimeters) since 1880, due to thermal expansion of the ocean and melting glaciers and ice sheets. This threatens coastal communities and ecosystems.
Check out today, how that part is now completely gone!
we have greatly improved memory in chatgpt--it can now reference all your past conversations! this is a surprisingly great feature imo, and it points at something we are excited about: ai systems that get to know you over your life, and become extremely useful and personalized.
We know that nothing substantive happened overnight to change the "climate crisis" so why did ChatGPT make the big changes in less than 12 hours to its verbiage to eliminate the exact verbiage copied above??
++++++++
9am: I just shifted to my IPad as an independent person from the one asking the question earlier from my laptop computer and ChatGPT is back to giving me a much more alarming view of the climate crisis! But different verbiage from the first time I asked yesterday evening and still WRONG!
My wife uses a paid version of AI that Has been very useful to her but she assumes that it’s always right. …..when it isn’t always right.
The rest of this thread to follow came before the end of this particular page/post. I’ll put this at the end when back on my computer. I never dreamed I would learn so much from jojs post. Thanks very much!
Russia’s draft “Agreement on Measures to Ensure the Security of the Russian Federation and Member States of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization” would require that NATO members commit to no further enlargement of the alliance, including in particular to Ukraine. There is little enthusiasm within NATO now for putting Ukraine on a membership track, as Putin and other Russian officials undoubtedly understand. However, the alliance will not reverse its long-standing “open door” policy. That would require consensus, and few allies, let alone all 30, would agree that Russia can dictate NATO policy in this way.
When officials say the quiet part about Russia and NATO out loud Was the invasion about the alliance's expansion to Moscow's doorstep? Depends on who's telling the story.
From the start of the Russian invasion of Ukraine, we’ve been told that the issue of NATO expansion is irrelevant to the war, and that anyone bringing it up is, at best, unwittingly parroting Kremlin propaganda, at worst, apologizing for or justifying the war.
So it was curious to see NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg earlier this month say explicitly that Russian president Vladimir Putin launched his criminal war as a reaction to the possibility of NATO expanding into Ukraine, and the alliance’s refusal to swear it off — not once or twice, but three separate times.
“President Putin declared in the autumn of 2021, and actually sent a draft treaty that they wanted NATO to sign, to promise no more NATO enlargement,” Stoltenberg told a joint committee meeting of the European Parliament on September 7. “That was what he sent us. And [that] was a pre-condition for not invade [sic] Ukraine. Of course we didn't sign that.”
“He went to war to prevent NATO, more NATO, close to his borders. He has got the exact opposite,” Stoltenberg reiterated, referring to the accession of Sweden and Finland into the alliance in response to Putin’s invasion. Their entry, he later insisted, “demonstrates that when President Putin invaded a European country to prevent more NATO, he's getting the exact opposite.”
The decision to scuttle the deal coincided with Johnson’s April visit to Kyiv, during which he reportedly urged Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky to break off talks with Russia for two key reasons: Putin cannot be negotiated with, and the West isn’t ready for the war to end.
The apparent revelation raises some key questions: Why did Western leaders want to stop Kyiv from signing a seemingly good deal with Moscow? Do they consider the conflict a proxy war with Russia? And, most importantly, what would it take to get back to a deal?
The U.S. and Russia are talking, and Ukraine's fate hangs in the balance
Blinken said he'd made clear the position of the U.S. and its allies, which is to "stand firmly with Ukraine in support of its sovereignty and territorial integrity."
Russia, with an estimated 100,000 troops poised for a possible move across the border into Ukraine, is demanding written guarantees that Kyiv will never be allowed to join NATO. The Kremlin has repeatedly denied that it has any plans to invade.
The U.S. has been equally adamant that Ukraine should make its own decision on whether to join the alliance formed in 1949, originally as a bulwark against Soviet expansion in Western Europe.
"If any Russian military forces move across Ukraine's border, that's a renewed invasion," Blinken said in an apparent reference to the Kremlin's 2014 occupation and annexation of Crimea. Military action would "be met with swift, severe, and a united response from the United States and our partners and allies," he added.
++++++++++++++
That's not negotiating. That's both sides telling the other what it will do.
1. Russia demanding a written guarantee that Ukraine will never be allowed to join NATO.
2. The United States and NATO completely rejecting that and continuing with their massive expansion(well beyond the promise make to Russia decades ago) to surround Russia and telling Russia they would go to war with Russia over it.
Biden didn’t accept Putin’s ‘red lines’ on Ukraine – here’s what that means
President Biden didn’t accept Russian leader Vladimir Putin’s “red lines” on Ukraine during their high-stakes video call that came as Russia’s military builds its presence on the Ukrainian border.
Namely, that means the U.S. isn’t accepting Putin’s demand that Ukraine be denied entrance into the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, which is the world’s most powerful military alliance.
As it stands now, with Ukraine not in NATO, Biden and Western allies have warned Moscow that an invasion of Russia’s ex-Soviet neighbor will trigger economic and political countermeasures.
Why Russia doesn’t want Ukraine in NATO
The Kremlin has previously characterized NATO’s eastward expansion as a direct security threat, arguing that Ukraine’s acceptance into the alliance could result in NATO troop movements on Russia’s borders.
Biden, now totally convinced that he would win the war against Russia (similar to how he was convinced he would beat Trump in 2024 and had to finally be forced to step down) went all out to turn it into the bloodiest of battles, refusing to negotiate with Putin, as Zelensky changed his campaigning promise objective from getting peace for Ukrainians to defeating Russia in war, no matter what sacrifices and losses the Ukrainians would have to suffer.
Zelensky would end up watching the casualties over 3 years, turning his once robust army into an army no longer to defend Ukraine against the massively superior Russian army. As it got uglier and uglier for Ukraine, Biden and Zelensky, instead of negotiating for peace........doubled and tripled down. Sending long range missiles into Russia to further provoke Russia in an attempt to ESCALATE the war instead of seek peace.
Biden even blew up the Russian natural gas pipeline, to try to hurt Russia. The biggest state sponsored eco terrorist act/crime in the history of planet earth! But the NATO countries all looked the other way and even blamed it on Russia for awhile. Absurdly asserting that Russia would blow up its own pipeline when all Russia needed to do was shut off the gas themselves if that was there objective. Think about this dastardly crime and the fact that the NATO countries involved, the ones that should be prosecuting it, have instead covered it up and dismissed the investigation. WOW! Russia? What are they supposed to do after their pipeline was blown up?
So how did Joe Biden's promise to defeat Russia in the decision to intentionally fight the war with Russia turn out?
3 years ago, with the battlefield looking like this below, Biden/NATO and our MSM propaganda told us repeatedly that Ukraine would win this war. When there was a near 0% chance of that happening. Remember, this battle is being fought over letting NATO get Ukraine or not. Zelensky only needed to tell Russia NO NATO! but instead, he doubled and tripled down and insisted on fast tracking Ukraine into NATO and that Ukraine would win the war based on forcing Ukrainians to fight to the last drop of brave Ukrainian soldiers blood(200,000 of which decided to be SMART instead of dumb, brave and dead as they deserted the army and fight for NATO in the war). And Joe Biden/the US sending all the weapons they would need to win.
Ukraine in maps: Tracking the war with Russia
Even as Ukraine was decimated more and more, instead of peace, NATO and its puppet, Zelensky continue to insist on more war. When Trump entered the picture, trying to obtain peace, Zelensky, NATO and the diabolical US Military-Industrial-Political-Media complex put on a full court press to vilify and stop Trump from accomplishing his campaign promise of getting peace in Ukraine.
What do you think, looking at the map above.
Can you Ukraine win the war?
Or should they negotiate for peace?
Considering their current position, losing by the widest of margins after being led by the worst military leaders in the history of the human race (sorry but its true).........
Should we listen to those same military leaders and those same war cheerleaders and benefactors, with their self serving interests (NATO-Military-Industrial-Political-Media complex) that just want more endless war and offer no solution or peace?
Or should we give Donald Trump's peace a chance?
I made my choice on election day in November 2024. Basing my vote on Trump's promise to get peace for Ukraine.
Ironically, the president of Ukraine betrayed the Ukrainian people with his promise for peace to get elected but the president of the United States is following thru, exactly as he promised before being elected. Yet the message gatekeepers are obsessed with stopping the peacemaker and elevating the vainglorious, uncompassionate, NATO serving puppet. They are all USING Ukrainians for their self enriching agenda and doing the exact opposite of supporting Ukraine.
"I do not need to describe the grave nature of the threats that we face, or the devastating consequences that we will have to endure if those threats would come to pass," von der Leyen told reporters.
Efforts to rearm will focus on air defense missiles, artillery ammunition and the systems to fire them, as well as drones and counter-drone warfare and other areas of the military, von der Leyen said.
NATO states have less than 5 percent of the necessary air defense capabilities to protect central and Eastern Europe from large-scale attack, the Financial Times reported in May 2024.
The new plan will mean member states can "massively step up their support to Ukraine," von der Leyen remarked on Tuesday, which she translated to "immediate military equipment for Ukraine."
++++++++++++++++++
War, War, War, War! NOT peace. More complete fairy tale/imaginary threats to Europe so they can keep their false narratives going which NATO uses to convince people that we desperately need them to protect against the Russia boogy man. The military-industrial complex bribes these corrupt, bought and paid for politicians.
Russia is actually focused on keeping NATO out of Ukraine and away from its border. No wonder they feel that way. These people DO NOT want to negotiate. They WANT Ukraine and to destroy Russia.
+++++++++++++++++++
On the maps below, who is expanding and the threat. Is it Russia OR IS IT NATO???
Two maps show NATO’s growth — and Russia’s isolation — since 1990
Map of 1990, after NATO promised that they would not expand:
Map of 2022, after 3 decades of the broken promise......and NATO's main goal to EXPAND IN EVERY COUNTRY SURROUNDING RUSSIA.
+++++++++++++++++++++
NATO is bald face lying on a galactic scale. THEY are the threat to Russia NOT the other way around. Again, we use AUTHENTIC FACTS here NOT fork tongue words selling war monger snake oil. We should withdraw from NATO immediately. NATO should be banished to make the world a much better place and save NATO country tax payers TRILLIONS of dollars. Those trillions, being pilfered/spend by corrupt, greedy, bought and paid for NATO country politicians being enriched is the driving force.
Take OUR world back. Get rid of NATO!
Believe it or not, we can actually live in peace with Russia but we must stop trying to destroy them. This is NOT a pro Putin position. It's a pro humanity and pro morality position. A pro honesty and pro common sense position. A pro economic and pro peace position.
Follow the (censored), indisputable facts, NOT the propaganda and false narrative verbiage!
Drain the political poisoning from your brain and let the truth replace it!
This too, is exactly what I've been stating. Ukraine is still one of the most corrupt countries in the world and the money we've been gushing out to them has increased that.
“Perceptions of high-level corruption” the confidential version of the document warns, could “undermine the Ukrainian public’s and foreign leaders’ confidence in the war-time government.”
The confidential version of the “Integrated Country Strategy” is about three times as long and contains many more details about U.S. objectives in Ukraine, from privatizing its banks to helping more schools teach English to encouraging its military to adopt NATO protocols. Many goals are designed to reduce the corruption that bedevils the country.
The quiet release of the strategy, and the fact that the toughest language was left in the confidential version, underscores the messaging challenge facing the Biden team.
The administration wants to press Ukraine to cut graft, not least because U.S. dollars are at stake. But being too loud about the issue could embolden opponents of U.S. aid to Ukraine, many of them Republican lawmakers who are trying to block such assistance. Any perception of weakened American support for Kyiv also could cause more European countries to think twice about their role.
When it comes to the Ukrainians, “there are some honest conversations happening behind the scenes,” a U.S. official familiar with Ukraine policy said. Like others, the person was granted anonymity to discuss a sensitive issue.
Ukrainian graft has long been a concern of U.S. officials all the way up to President Joe Biden. But the topic was deemphasized in the wake of Russia’s February 2022 full-scale invasion, which Biden has called a real-life battle of democracy against autocracy.
++++++++++++++
Corruption concerns involving Ukraine are revived as the war with Russia drags on
I believe that Joe Biden's, Biden family self enriching relationships in Ukraine(acting in cahoots with his son, Hunter to exploit Joe's influence as VP of the United States) played a key role in Biden's refusal to negotiate with Russia over their entry into NATO.
How wouldn't that be the case?
The Biden's getting millions from Ukraine or anybody getting millions from any country is going to cause a bias.
The Ds can pretend that none of it happened. That Hunter Biden(the professional lobbyist in the US for a decade-moving to Ukraine, where he knew nothing about the language or people and getting a very lucrative position in the natural gas industry-that he knew 0 about-had nothing to do with VP Joe Biden's position as the "point man" overseeing Ukraine corruption and control the purse for their support.
Instead of fighting the corruption, as he was supposed to do, VP Biden decided to participate in it. To exploit the Ukrainian corruption, using the skills of his lobbyist son Hunter (that practiced his lobbyist trade ILLEGALLY without a license to be a foreign lobbyist).
Anybody that can't at the very least connect the dots to Hunter's sudden move to Ukraine when his dad was VP is blind/in complete denial.
While we don't need any of Joe Biden's history with Ukraine in order for the facts about him rejecting Russia's demand for a guarantee that Ukraine would not get into NATO to be true(and his knowledge that this would trigger a war that he wanted to fight over and not negotiate over) and for that being the reason for the war...........it provides a fact based explanation of his very biased mindset.
I'll provide you with evidence to contradict that or I will adjust my position.
++++++++++++
I seriously was looking for the objective facts from both sides and to learn as much as possible while applying the scientific method(being the Devil's advocate and assuming I might be wrong).
I am NOT affiliated with or aligned with any party and am just an independent, objective scientist with unique analytical skills, here to share them while searching for the truth, which busts BOTH sides with about the same amount of frequency.
8-19-25, 8am Added: This same link and same source HAS CHANGED THE RESPONSE FROM YESTERDAY TO TAKE OUT THE 2 ITEMS THAT I corrected it on yesterday(changed the verbiage so its better)!!!! This is nuts. The climate crisis didn't suddenly change overnight. Has it possibly responded to my correction of its WRONG facts here since its mainly just a tool that regurgitates information from the internet and can remember past conversations that we had with it???
I copied it verbatim below yesterday:
Chatgpt:
More frequent and intense heatwaves and droughts: According to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, these events pose health risks and negatively impact food production and ecosystems.
Chatgpt:
Sea level rise: The global average sea level has risen 8–9 inches (21–24 centimeters) since 1880, due to thermal expansion of the ocean and melting glaciers and ice sheets. This threatens coastal communities and ecosystems.
Check out today, how that part is now completely gone!
we have greatly improved memory in chatgpt--it can now reference all your past conversations! this is a surprisingly great feature imo, and it points at something we are excited about: ai systems that get to know you over your life, and become extremely useful and personalized.
We know that nothing substantive happened overnight to change the "climate crisis" so why did ChatGPT make the big changes in less than 12 hours to its verbiage to eliminate the exact verbiage copied above??
++++++++
9am: I just shifted to my IPad as an independent person from the one asking the question earlier from my laptop computer and ChatGPT is back to giving me a much more alarming view of the climate crisis! But different verbiage from the first time I asked yesterday evening and still WRONG!
My wife uses a paid version of AI that Has been very useful to her but she assumes that it’s always right. …..when it isn’t always right.
The rest of this thread to follow came before the end of this particular page/post. I’ll put this at the end when back on my computer. I never dreamed I would learn so much from jojs post. Thanks very much!
If you’re turning to ChatGPT to help you with computer programming, you may want to be extra careful to double-check its answers. A new study has found that 52 percent of the popular chatbot’s answers to computer programming questions contain inaccurate information.
The study was conducted by Purdue University and presented at the Computer-Human Interaction Conference in Hawaii this month. The researchers looked at 517 programming questions on Stack Overflow before feeding them to ChatGPT.
In addition to over half of the bot’s answers containing incorrect information, they found that 77 percent of the answers were verbose. What’s more, the programmers who participated in the study did not always catch the bot’s inaccuracies, overlooking “the misinformation in the ChatGPT answers 39 percent of the time.” However, ChatGPT is still a favorite among programmers, with the study participants preferring “ChatGPT answers 35 percent of the time due to their comprehensiveness and well-articulated language style.
Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Information Literacy
Learn about how AI works and how to spot common errors AI tools tend to make. You'll also learn fact-checking and critical thinking strategies for AI, how to cite AI in an academic paper, and how to learn more in-depth about AI tools and issues.
Although many responses produced by AI text generators are accurate, AI also often generates misinformation. Oftentimes, the answers produced by AI will be a mixture of truth and fiction. If you are using AI-generated text for research, it will be important to be able to verify its outputs. You can use many of the skills you’d already use to fact-check and think critically about human-written sources, but some of them will have to change. For instance, we can’t check the information by evaluating the credibility of the source or the author, as we usually do. We have to use other methods, like lateral reading, which we’ll explain below.
Remember, the AI is producing what it believes is the most likely series of words to answer your prompt. This does not mean it’s giving you the ultimate answer! When choosing to use AI, it’s smart to use it as a beginning and not an end. Being able to critically analyze the outputs that AI gives you will be an increasingly crucial skill throughout your studies and your life after graduation.
+++++++++++++
There have definitively been improvements to AI since this article came out and that will continue but it explains the fatal flaws that make it unreliable as a definitive source of what the truth is. It isn't able to recognize the truth. It just regurgitates what is out there.
Since propaganda about Ukraine from NATO countries dominates the information...........that's what AI responds with when asking it questions. Not the truth.
Since propaganda and junk science dominates the field of climate science..........that's what AI responds with to questions on that topic.
I showed that conclusively in this thread.
That doesn't mean AI isn't extremely useful. It's best used, in tandem with objective fact checking of AI but here's the thing.
That's not what people do. They go to their favorite sources, including AI because they don't have time to fact check. In politics, they may intentionally pick right or left leaning sources to have the news interpreted thru people that align with their political affiliation and it confirms the insights of the world they want to believe in.
When using AI, however most people think they are rising above politics and using an objective source that is apolitical. Definitionally not true. I just proved it.
AI regurgitates the dominant messages of the gatekeepers in that realm/field. Sometimes that means propaganda. Sometimes it means junk science.
It can accurately tell us how many miles it is to the sun or moon and lots of other things that we can be nearly certain are reliable facts.............when the internet agrees on the facts and they are the truth. However, it has limitations.
