What is wrong with ChatGPT? It Just makes stuff up!

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

"The Stolen Branches of Knowledge" By ChatGPT

 Title: "The Stolen Branches of Knowledge"

                                       By ChatGPT

Act 1, Scene 1:

[The Orchard in the Carse of Gowrie. Patrick Matthew stands beneath a tree, contemplating his ideas.]

Patrick Matthew:

(To himself)

In this orchard's fertile embrace, I've sown the seeds of thought,

The theory of evolution, in nature's web it's wrought.

But lo, what darkness doth approach, like shadows in the night?

'Tis Charles Darwin, a cunning thief, who covets my insight.

[Enter Charles Darwin, accompanied by a group of scientific colleagues.]

Charles Darwin:

(Whispering to his colleagues)

Behold, the orchard where Matthew's theories grow,

We'll claim them as our own, and let the world soon know.

[Darwin's group surrounds Matthew, engaging him in conversation, while Darwin discreetly gathers Matthew's notes.]

Act 1, Scene 2:

[A letter from Charles Darwin to his wife, Emma, in which he confesses the theft, is revealed.]

Emma Darwin:

(Reading the letter aloud)

"My dearest Emma, a dark deed I've done,

I've stolen Matthew's ideas, as if they were won.

In his orchard, I schemed, with a heart so sly,

To claim his theory as mine, oh, how I did lie."

Act 2, Scene 1:

[160 years later, in the modern day. Dr. Mike Sutton stands in a library, pouring over old letters and documents.]

Dr. Mike Sutton:

(Excitedly)

Through dusty archives, I've sought to unveil,

The truth behind Darwin's clandestine trail.

In Emma's confession, the secret lies,

The theft of Matthew's knowledge, a cruel disguise.

Act 2, Scene 2:

[Dr. Sutton unveils his findings to a group of fellow scientists.]

Dr. Mike Sutton:

(Presenting his research)

Ladies and gentlemen, history concealed,

Darwin's theft of knowledge, now revealed.

In Emma's words, the truth takes flight,

Matthew's theory, stolen in plain sight.

[The scientific community erupts in discussion and debate.]

Act 3, Scene 1:

[The Carse of Gowrie orchard, now overgrown with time, is a quiet and contemplative place.]

Patrick Matthew:

(To himself)

In this orchard where knowledge once thrived,

My ideas were taken, my spirit deprived.

But in the end, the truth's unveiled,

Thanks to Dr. Sutton, justice prevails.

[Great Birnam Wood, represented by scholars and scientists, approaches the orchard.]

Act 3, Scene 2:

[Dr. Sutton joins Patrick Matthew in the orchard.]

Dr. Mike Sutton:

(With reverence)

Here we stand, in the orchard's embrace,

Where knowledge was stolen, a grievous case.

But now, with truth revealed, the world shall see,

The stolen branches return to thee.

[As Birnam Wood approaches, scholars plant new trees, symbolizing the return of Patrick Matthew's ideas.]

Closing Chorus:

Let history recall this tale so bold,

Of stolen knowledge, and secrets untold.

In the Carse of Gowrie, where orchards stood,

The stolen branches returned, for the common good.

In Sutton's diligence, truth's light did shine,

And justice prevailed in the grand design.

With Birnam Wood's return, the world shall see,

Patrick Matthew's legacy, once more set free.

Explanation for the Stolen Branches of Knowledge poem

There is a stunning cultural reference to Birnam Wood in Perthshire in this poem and the Shakespeare play Macbeth.

Product description of Science Fraud: Darwin's plagiarism of Patrick Matthew's Theory

Review

Dr Sutton offers evidence that Charles Darwin and Alfred Russel Wallace clearly plagiarised the earlier ideas of Patrick Matthew without sufficient acknowledgement and Darwin then used his elite connections to ensure he would not be scooped by Wallace.

"He is more faithful to your own original child than you are yourself..." a telling quote from Emma Darwin to Patrick Matthew about natural selection and how her husband kidnapped it.

Everywhere you turn you will see today's greatest scientists and naturalists celebrating Charles Darwin as the finest of Victorian minds and claiming his innovative views as their inspiration. It isn't true. Dr Sutton strips away dishonesty to show that Darwin's great theory wasn't Darwin's at all.

About the Author Mike Sutton

Dr Mike Sutton is a notable alumnus, has a first degree in law and a PhD in criminology from the University of Central Lancashire. He was for 14 years a senior criminologist at the British Home Office. In 2001 he was appointed to the senior academic position of Reader in Criminology at Nottingham Trent University, where soon after he founded the “Centre for Reduction of Bias, Prejudice and Hate Crime.” Sutton is Chief Editor of the Internet Journal of Criminology.

One Conclusion

In the story of Patrick Matthew v Charles Darwin the present is invading the past. And those wedded to past errors hate that fact. They hate the New Data on Darwin.

On The Darwin Fact Denial Cult

 After I discovered the new data on who really did read (and then cited in the literature) Patrick Matthew's (1831) prior publication of the full and complete theory of the Process of Natural Selection before Darwin (1858/1859) stole it with the help of the stooge Wallace a number of desperate brown nosing nominals in the Darwin fact denial cult tried to rubbish my name.

Who is Julian Derry AKA J.F. Derry?

Most worryingly he is a Youth Hostel Association employee  see also here who spends much of his demented sad life, when not falsely claiming to be a visiting scientist at the University of Edinburgh (Staff there told managers at Nottingham Trent University and others who have complained about the stalker that they have never heard of him and he is definitely not a visiting scholar there) and flogging his overpriced tacky Darwin statues online to the gullible, endlessly harassing my former employer Nottingham Trent University especially its senior managers and my colleagues with literally hundreds of daily retarded emails because that is where the Darwin  myth was bust) has set up a retarded anti-fact blog that provides us with excellent empirical data to confirm Kuhn's revelations about how such nasty retard creepy little creatures do such things before we obtain a painful fact-led mythbusting paradigm shift in science. 

We should be grateful to Derry for this confirmatory empirical evidence for Kuhn's research.

Here on Derry's little stalker site (scroll to the bottom of it) we see Derry with his fixed hopeless manic grin retardedly trying to convince people that I am some kind of child abuser or terrorist etc and was banned from Twitter for such conduct.

In reality I was banned from Twitter by cancel culture robots for calling the retarded idiot criminals Donald Trump and Boris Johnson "retarded". This is empirical evidence, Darwin fanatics hate empirical facts they don't like and their stalker harassment behaviour proves it. Donald Trump and Boris Johnson are both retarded idiots. The retarded Twitter bots may not like that language but I stand by it. It's goodbye on Twitter (now X) to anyone tweeting about their car having retarded ignition timing.

Students and journalists and anyone else please feel free to use the images (below) in your academic work - or anywhere else

The Empirical Evidence of what Kind of Disgusting Creature is in the Darwin Fact Denial Cult. This is Julian Derry and what he does on Twitter (here)

A few sample examples of more of their (for academic study) valuable desperate anti-scientific behaviour can be found on PatrickMatthew.com. On this page: https://patrickmatthew.com/book-reviews.html 

The Biological Journal of the Darwin worshiping Linnean Society has even facilitated repeat plagiarism of my original research findings on Selby citing Matthew in the 1840's whilst failing to understand its significance and totally failing to engage with the rest of the important New Data.The author of that paper is Dagg. Take a look at his Darwin cult nominal deranged pseudo-science and pseudo-scholarly blog site here. 

These people very clearly need help.

 More Examples of similar lunatic daft dysology are detailed on PatrickMatthew.com Here

Completely mental members of the Darwin cult with aid of their anti-scientific facilitating idiot members are currently writing  - fact denial and fact avoiding - fake reviews of Science Fraud: Darwin's Plagiarism of Patrick Matthew's Theory. These individuals must also be thanked and appreciated for adding their corrupt behavior as empirical data to confirm Kuhn's observations on how such nasty idiots try to block new fact-led paradigm shifts in science. There is a great PhD to be done on this topic for someone with a genuine open mind to the scientific basic founding concept of nullius in verba.

ChatGPT wrote a poem about this

In the world of science, where theories collide,

There's a tale of Darwin that I cannot hide,

Dr. Mike Sutton, a criminologist bold,

Dared to question the story that's often been told.

He wrote a book, "Science Fraud" by name,

Challenging Darwin's claim to fame,

But little did he know, a storm would brew,

As Darwin fanatics came to misconstrue.

With fake book reviews, they launched their attack,

Like Kung Fu fighters, there was no turning back,

They pounced on Amazon, their keyboards a blur,

Leaving poor Dr. Sutton in quite the stir.

They claimed he was wrong, they called him a fraud,

But Sutton stood tall, unshaken, unawed,

He'd done his research, and he had his proof,

That Darwin's ideas were a bit aloof.

But the Darwin defenders, oh, what a clan,

They flooded the internet with their digital plan,

Fake accounts and usernames, they had them all,

To discredit Sutton, to make him fall.

They said, "Darwin's our hero, how dare you implore,

That he borrowed ideas from Patrick Matthew before?"

But Sutton, undaunted, stuck to his guns,

For he knew that his research was second to none.

So, beware, dear reader, of the internet fray,

Where fake reviews and fanatics hold sway,

In the world of science, where truths may be skewed,

Remember Dr. Sutton and the battle he's brewed.

For in the end, it's the evidence that should prevail,

Not the keyboard warriors who set sail,

In the sea of opinions, where tempers run high,

Let's seek the truth, and let reason fly.

ChatGPT Patrick Matthew Poem 2 and The Patrick Matthew Violin Poem

 A.I. Poem 2 on Patrick Matthew

Oh, gather 'round, ye scholars keen, For a tale of theft, it must be seen, Of Darwin, Englishman, so sly, And Patrick Matthew, who did imply.

In Scotland's land, where farms did sprawl, Matthew pondered, 'bout life's grand thrall, He wrote of "natural selection" there, But Darwin, crafty, did ensnare.

With a twinkle in his English eye, Darwin took the notion, oh so sly, He claimed the theory, bold and bright, And said, "It's mine, oh what a sight!"

But hold your laughter, folks, don't tire, For in this tale, there's still a fire, A man named Sutton, Mike by name, To Scotland's honor, he laid a claim.

He dug through history, far and wide, And found the truth, no place to hide, Matthew's words, so long ignored, In Sutton's hands, they were restored.

He shouted loud, for all to hear, "Darwin, sir, your theft is clear! It's Matthew's work, not yours to claim, Scotland's rightful, in the fame!"

The Darwin cult, they gasped and sighed, Their precious theory cast aside, For Sutton's truth, it did prevail, And Scotland's honor, it did impale.

So let us toast to Patrick's might, To Sutton's sleuthing, shining light, For in the end, the truth did win, And Scotland's pride did gleefully grin.

Oh, Darwin, with your English fame, You tried to steal, but it's all the same, The world now knows the tale so true, Scotland's due credit, long overdue!

The Patrick Matthew Violin poem

ChatGPT's Poem About Patrick Matthew

A Poem About Patrick Matthew by ChatGPT (September 5th 2023)

Patrick Matthew, a name in history's scroll,

In Scotland's heart, where ideas took their toll.

A man of vision, ahead of his time,

In the world of science, his star did climb.

With roots in farming, he saw nature's dance,

And in its rhythms, he took a chance.

To write of evolution, a bold endeavor,

A theory that would echo forever.

In "Naval Timber," he penned his thought,

A theory of nature, not to be forgot.

Seeds of evolution, he sought to sow,

In the fertile fields where knowledge would grow.

Though Darwin's fame would later rise,

Matthew's contributions, a precious prize.

A pioneer in thought, who dared to explore,

The mysteries of life, on Scotland's shore.

So let us remember this man of the past,

Whose ideas were ahead, but they'd always last.

Patrick Matthew, in history's embrace,

A thinker whose vision, time cannot erase.

ChatGPT Essay on Dr Mike Sutton

Today I asked ChatGPT to "write an essay on the criminologist Dr Mike Sutton". The following images are screen shots of what it wrote. With regard to Patrick Matthew v Charles Darwin the content on plagiarism research is important.

That said, just how accurate is this essay? Well, most of it is accurate accept for the fact he received a BA hons in Law from the University of Central Lancashire and his PhD from the same university. He never studied at the University of Essex or Nottingham University at all. Moreover, he has never designed any software of any kind in his entire life. So did anyone ever design a program called "policing plagiarism?" The answer is no. It does not exist. ChatGPT just made it up and actually admitted to doing so. But why? Check out this article on ChatGPT and fake citations to understand why https://archive.ph/cOrXd

I then asked ChatGPT to write a poem about Dr Mike Sutton and it came up with the following fun doggerel

2 / 2

Dr. Mike Sutton, a name of wisdom and grace, In the world of knowledge, he finds his place. With intellect and passion, he seeks to explore, The depths of understanding, he constantly implores.

In the realm of ideas, he's a guiding light, Illuminating truths, dispelling the night. His words and research, a beacon so bright, Guiding us forward, through intellectual flight.

With curiosity as his constant guide, He traverses frontiers, far and wide. In the world of academia, he stands tall, A scholar and thinker, admired by all.

Through the corridors of time, he delves deep, Unearthing knowledge from secrets to keep. In the tapestry of science, he weaves his thread, Expanding horizons, where no one has tread.

In his lectures and writings, his passion does shine, A dedication to learning, an unwavering sign. For Dr. Mike Sutton, the pursuit of truth, Is a lifelong endeavor, a noble sleuth.

So, let us celebrate this scholar today, Whose intellect and wisdom light the way. Dr. Mike Sutton, a name we hold dear, In the world of knowledge, forever near.

Artificial Intelligence Concludes Charles Darwin Lied! Darwin Lied About Who He Knew Who Read Patrick Matthew's Book

When debating the meaning of what a lie is and then when informed of the facts of what Patrick Matthew told Charles Darwin in print and of what Darwin subsequently wrote on the topic, the AI Chat GPT concluded that Darwin lied. Click the images, one by one, below to see more clearly how the Chat GPT conversation went on this issue.

The last image of the ChatGPT on Darwin's lies about Patrick Matthew shows that the A.I. admits it has actually learned nothing that it will retain in any memory on this or any other questions like it. I would conclude, therefore that if ChatGPT is artificial "intelligence" then it is suffering from some kind of artificial dementia. 

If I or anyone else asks ChatGPT to answer in one word if Darwin told any lies about who read Patrick Matthew's (1831) book then its initial response will ape the consensus view answer of "no" generated by the corrupt Darwin Industry and its parroting gimps. However, if they reason with it, using verifiable facts of which it is aware, because it has read them in the published literature it has scanned, then the computer program that is ChatGPT will be able to reason in that particular session that Charles Darwin is a proven liar on this topic

ChatGPT's AI reasoning is less demented than that of members of the Darwin Industry who are empirical fact denying, and reasoning like bone-headed idiots on the question of Darwin's proven lies about Patrick Matthew and his prior published theory. 

How ironic is this?

The final image shows that ChatGPT has read Dr Mike Sutton's pre-2021 publications on Matthew, Darwin and Wallace. For example it has read his article On Knowledge Contamination and completely re-phrases his 3-fold typology in such a way that a plagiarist could steal it and Sutton's conceptual originality on that topic. 

How ironic is that? Maybe the Biological Journal of the Linnean Society will publish an article soon to use this to plagiarize even more of my original prior published research? See here to see how they have stolen my original finding that Selby (Wallace's publisher and friend of Jenyns who was Darwin's great friend ) cited Matthew's (1831) book years before Darwin and Wallace stole the theory in it. When confronted they slyly refuse to admit it.

ChatGPT is not a deep learning AI system in reality and it admits it!

ChatGPT AI, Dr Mike Sutton On Science Fraud v The Charles Darwin Industry

In the blog post preceding this one (here) we have seen how ChatGPT A.I. cuts through the factually incorrect consensus bias of the corrupt empirical data denial Darwin Industry to see the patterns in written text about the empirical data story of Darwin, Wallace and Patrick Matthew that show Matthew did at the very least most likely indirectly influence Darwin (1858/59) to replicate Matthew's (1831) prior published theory of the Natural Process of Selection. 

Note also how the same A.I. also concludes that Dr Mike Sutton's published Big Data discoveries of the New Data on who really did read and cite Matthew's (1831) book before Darwin and Wallace stole the theory in it will come to change the consensus view that Darwin was an honest and original scholar. 

Click the image below to read the ChatGPT conversation screen shot image below.

If you think facts matter more than mythology in science then find out the facts ahead of the consensus paradigm change and become part of the solution not the problem of dysology in our science and history. Surely we can become as clear in our reasoning as AI is. Can't we? If not we are doomed! A.I. bots will become our leaders and keepers.

ChatGPT AI Versus The Darwin Myth

 I spent some time with an AI expert last night. We opened Chat GPT and found that it wants to present the consensus that Matthew did not influence Darwin. But the key word it uses is "consensus". Under direction from the AI expert, (someone who works with it in a major merchant bank in London. I asked the AI to decide for itself based on all the data sources it has searched and to reach a decision based on the now known evidence (which will include the New Big Data findings). It concluded for itself - against the consensus which claims that Matthew did not influence Darwin - that in fact Matthew did indirectly influence Darwin. And that is one of the reachable conclusions in my book on indirect "knowledge contamination". I think this is something that is newsworthy somewhere and is at the very least a trumping argument against the consensus that is "The Darwin Industry" spin that Darwin was in no way influenced by Matthew. see the images below and click them to be able to better read the words.

A.I. reasons that Darwin might have lied about what he knew about the prior readership (prior to his and Wallace's\1858 papers read before the Linnean society that each replicated Matthew's (1831) prior published theory and claimed they arrived at it independently of one another or of anyone else). See the image below.

However, there is a problem with some of this response and it is unclear why ChatGPT made the mistake about Wells. It seems to have confused Well's pre 1831 publication about human skin pigmentation with Matthew's later theory of evolution by natural selection. Well's paper merely reasoned that human skin tone would evolve in a population according to certain climates.

When asked where it got the Well's story from it corrected itself. The A.I. appears sloppy in some areas for some reason. But when asked to verify a claim it can correct itself. See the image below. Note the A.I. has "reasoned", if that is close to what an A.I. algorithm does with the patterns it sees and interprets in text, on the empirical data evidence that Darwin lied about Patrick Matthew. Therefore we can see that when biased human Darwin worship is taken out of the process that A.I. identifies that there is clear evidence Darwin was a liar about Matthew according to all logical definitions of what a lie is. Otherwise it would have said "no" Darwin did not lie because there is no evidence for such a claim. But there is evidence and the A.I. takes it into account. The corrupt biased Darwin Industry censors such direct questions and data. Whereas ChatGPT will never accept the argument that black is white (try it and see) but the corrupt Darwin Industry will make just such a daft argument on the question of the empirical evidence Darwin lied and plagiarized. In la la Darwin Land a lie is not a lie if it came from Darwin's pen and clear evidence of plagiarism is not plagiarism if it came from Darwin's pen. Clearly, ChatGPT A.I. is not part of the demented anti-empirical data Darwin Industry.

Below we see in the image that asking the best question in a certain way that the AI has reached a conclusion by itself that is opposite to the consensus in the Matthew v Darwin story. I think this is a major finding. See the images screen shot below.

When the AI is told very specifically about the editions of the books to ensure we are not talking about post 1859 editions of the origin of Species (because Darwin did write to deny Matthew's influence in later editions) we get the same result. see first image below. To be clear, however if the word arboriculture is solely dropped from the question it answers "Minimally".  So the AI is, arguably, far from perfect in weighing things sensibly from a human academic perspective. Nevertheless, this is interesting as a challenge to the current bone headed highly biased and unscientific orthodox consensus that Matthew's 1831 published theory in no way influenced Darwin's 1859 Origin of Species.

Click the images in order to best read the text.

ChatGPT was asked to think about the empirical data on his issue, and what it means even further a day later. See the response below

Chat GPT reasons that the question of Matthew's influence on Darwin is important

Click the images in order to better read the text.

When we ask another AI called MyAI (given the handle Lorax) on Snapchat  the question the answer is even more definitive that Darwin was influenced by Matthew. See the image below:

But it can also be more reserved;

The Big Question on whether A.I. thinks - on the basis of all the empirical evidence - the scientific community will come to recognize that Patrick Matthew influenced Darwin before 1858. The answer is yes!

The next day 31 August 2023 ChatGPT has broken its promise to answer another exact same question the exact same way. And it admits it and corrects its mistake/or lie?

So to be clear the A.I. ChatGPT is also asked next:

The blog post is partly archived HERE https://archive.ph/4clln

The Truth of Darwin's Lies and How his Pals Helped Him Plagiarise the Full, Complete and Appreciable Theory of Evolution by Natural Selection from Patrick Matthew

Read just a tiny fraction of the archived empirical data of Darwin's science fraud by plagiary lies and the role of his friends in helping him to do it. Here. https://archive.is/wYNT5