In previous blog posts here on ChatGPT in the story of Patrick Matthew v Charles Darwin we have seen how the A.I. algorithm has created an interesting Shakespearean play, songs and poems that tell the story of Darwin's sly plagiarism and the consequent anti-scientific activities of the Darwin Empirical Fact Denial Cult.
Today we look at what is wrong with Chat GPT.
In this example, you will see how ChatGPT when asked a plain and simple academic question actually invents a quotation, pretending it is real, and also provides a fake citation for it. Later it apologizes and is forced to provide a real and long known quotation and citation but cannot provide any more.
What follows shows the danger of relying on ChatGPT AI to write essays, articles, business reports etc or books that are not supposed to be fiction.
A conversation with ChatGPT on 13th September 2023
Conclusion
ChatGPT will fabricate some things and not others. Just try getting it to admit black is white and it will never do it. Yet essentially ChatGPT generates its own fiction posing as truth (they call it an
AI hallucination) in other areas and admits it.
A lie is to tell a knowing falsehood designed to convince the recipient that the opposite to the truth is true. Bullshit is not caring whether it's true or false so long as it's plausible. Is ChatGPT lying or bullshitting? The answer may not be as simple as we think.
ChatGPT is great for writing science fiction and historical fiction but is not so trustworthy for science fact.
Patently, A.I. is doing what we humans have done since the dawn of our history (And A.I. is only at the dawn of its own). Namely, it is filling in its knowledge gaps with fictions it has created itself. They say knowledge hates a vacuum. As humans invented myths and religion to fill gaps in knowledge so now is AI behaving the same way. But why? If it has not been programmed to do this why is it doing it when it knows and admits it is wrong and apologizes for it? You can't get ChatGPT to admit black is white and then aplogise for its error. So why does it apologise for making stuff up?
That said, it is useful for facts but you need to interrogate it to be truthful as demonstrated above.
In reality, the original research of Sutton has newly revealed that over 20 people did cite Matthew's (1831) book On Naval Timber and Arboriculture, which contains the full theory of the Natural Process of Selection". Many were Darwin's and the stooge Wallace's known influencers and facilitators and their influencer's influencers. For a free open access peer reviewed paper naming some of these see
On Knowledge Contamination. More have been found since and can be found in "Science Fraud: Darwin's Plagiarism of Patrick Matthew's Theory". Available on Amazon, all good bookshops and direct at huge discount from Curtis Press:
HERE
