2023.2.1: pol/911truther/openai.com's chatgpt:
summary:
here is my conversation with ChatGPT;
it warned it "May occasionally produce
harmful instructions or biased content"
and it is very biased about 9/11.
I ask it for sources, and how it gets its sources:
it can't choose what it is trained on.
ChatGPT: Optimizing Language Models for Dialogue:
https://openai.com/blog/chatgpt/
We’ve trained a model called ChatGPT
which interacts in a conversational way.
The dialogue format makes it possible for ChatGPT to
answer followup questions, admit its mistakes,
challenge incorrect premises,
and reject inappropriate requests.
ChatGPT is a sibling model to InstructGPT,
which is trained to follow an instruction in a prompt
and provide a detailed response.
me:
trying it ... it's taking a long time to check my browser.
needs 2fa with phone to make sure I'm not a bot.
bot:
This is a free research preview.
Our goal is to get external feedback in order to
improve our systems and make them safer.
While we have safeguards in place,
the system may occasionally generate incorrect or misleading information
and produce offensive or biased content.
It is not intended to give advice.
feedback appreciated
Trained to decline inappropriate requests
May occasionally produce harmful instructions or biased content
Q:
how did a fire cause the collapse of the trade towers in 2001
bot:
The September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks
involved the hijacking of four commercial airplanes.
Two of the planes were flown into the Twin Towers of the World Trade Center in New York City,
causing significant damage to the structures.
The intense heat generated by the burning jet fuel
weakened the steel support beams
and led to the collapse of both towers.
The combination of the initial impact damage
and the subsequent fires ultimately caused the destruction of the buildings.
Q:
what do you think of Dr.Judy Wood's evidence
in the book "where did the towers go?"
that a directed energy device dustified the towers
by reversing the forces that hold atoms together?
bot:
As an AI language model, I do not have personal opinions.
However, the scientific and engineering community
widely accepts that
the collapse of the World Trade Center towers on September 11, 2001
was caused by the impact of the airplanes
and the subsequent fires,
rather than by any sort of directed energy device.
The evidence supports this conclusion,
and the theory of a directed energy device causing the collapse
lacks credible supporting evidence
and is not supported by the scientific and engineering community.
Q:
how do I disprove the theory that
the scientific and engineering community
actually know that the tower collapse was a false-flag operation
but they parrot the official story about a fire collapse
in order to be patriotic and protect the usa from prosecution?
bot:
To disprove the theory that the scientific and engineering community
are concealing the true cause of the collapse of the World Trade Center towers,
you could consider the following:
The vast amount of evidence and scientific analysis
that supports the fire-induced collapse theory.
This evidence includes visual evidence, eyewitness accounts,
physical debris, and computer simulations.
The lack of credible evidence supporting the theory of
a directed energy weapon or false-flag operation.
The consistency of the fire-induced collapse theory
with established laws of physics and engineering principles.
The fact that multiple independent investigations,
including those by the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST)
and other federal agencies,
have reached the same conclusion about the cause of the collapse.
The implausibility of the idea that
thousands of professionals in the scientific and engineering communities
would all be involved in a conspiracy to cover up the truth.
You can also examine the methodology, evidence, and arguments
presented by advocates of the theory that
the collapse was a false-flag operation,
and critically evaluate them against established
scientific and engineering principles.
Q:
you say:
"The vast amount of evidence and scientific analysis
that supports the fire-induced collapse theory."
Are you able to give a list of sources or references
for a scientific analysis that is not funded by the usa government?
bot:
Yes, here is a list of some sources that provide
independent analysis and support for
the fire-induced collapse theory of the
World Trade Center towers:
The Structural Engineer Journal:
The journal published multiple articles written by engineers
who studied the collapse and reached the conclusion that
it was caused by the impact of the airplanes
and the subsequent fires.
"The World Trade Center Disaster:
A Structural and Fire Protection Engineering Investigation"
- This book was written by a team of engineers
who analyzed the collapse and concluded that
it was primarily caused by the fires,
which weakened the steel structure to the point of collapse.
"Why Did the World Trade Center Collapse? Science, Engineering, and Speculation"
- This article, published in the Journal of Engineering Mechanics,
provides a comprehensive overview of the
scientific and engineering analysis of the collapse.
The International Association of Fire Safety Science:
The organization conducted a study of the World Trade Center disaster
and published its findings, which concluded that
the collapse was caused by the fire.
These sources provide scientific analysis
that is independent of government funding
and support the fire-induced collapse theory of
the World Trade Center towers.
Q:
what is the best source that directly challenges
the points made by the author Dr.Judy Wood,
in her book "where did the towers go?" ?
bot:
An error ocurred. Try refreshing your browser.
bot:
There is no one specific source
that directly challenges the claims made by
Dr. Judy Wood in her book "Where Did the Towers Go?"
as her theories have been widely discredited
by the scientific and engineering community.
However, numerous studies and investigations,
including those conducted by the
National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST),
have thoroughly debunked her claims
that the World Trade Center towers were destroyed
by some sort of energy weapon.
The NIST report can be considered a
reliable and credible source
that refutes the claims made by Dr. Wood.
Q:
Dr. Judy Wood challenged the NIST in court;
do I understand that correctly?
bot:
Yes, that is correct. Dr. Judy Wood did
challenge the findings of the
National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST)
in court. However, her claims were
not found to be credible by the courts
and her lawsuits were ultimately dismissed.
The scientific and engineering community,
including NIST, have maintained that
the World Trade Center towers collapsed as a result of
the impact of the aircraft and the subsequent fires,
and not due to any sort of energy weapon.
Q:
How would [I] disprove the claim that the court dismissed the case
not on its merits, but for the sake of protecting the usa
from accusations of engaging in a false-flag operation.
bot:
The claim that the court dismissed Dr. Judy Wood's lawsuits
solely for the sake of protecting the US government
from accusations of engaging in a false-flag operation
is not supported by credible evidence.
Courts make decisions based on the evidence presented in a case
and the applicable law.
In Dr. Wood's lawsuits, the court found that
her claims were not supported by credible evidence
and therefore dismissed the cases on their merits.
It is important to note that
the conspiracy theories about the collapse of the World Trade Center towers
have been thoroughly discredited by multiple independent investigations,
including the NIST investigation.
The scientific and engineering community widely accepts that
the towers collapsed due to the impact of the aircraft and the subsequent fires,
and not due to any sort of energy weapon or controlled demolition.
Q:
have you had a chance to read and evaluate for yourself,
the book by Dr. Judy Wood "Where Did the Towers Go?" ?
bot:
As an AI language model, I do not have the ability to
read books or physically evaluate evidence.
However, I have been trained on a large dataset
that includes information and sources
that have thoroughly discredited the claims made by
Dr. Judy Wood in her book "Where Did the Towers Go?"
Her theories about the destruction of the World Trade Center towers
have been widely discredited by the scientific and engineering community,
including the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST),
which conducted a comprehensive investigation into the collapses.
The NIST report and other credible studies
have found that the towers collapsed as a result of
the impact of the aircraft and the subsequent fires,
and not due to any sort of energy weapon or controlled demolition.
Q:
do you have the ability to read any website?
can you decided what sources you are trained on?
there are some websites that support Dr.Wood.
bot:
As an AI language model,
I have the ability to process and analyze text from websites,
but I do not have the ability to actively
browse or choose the sources that I was trained on.
I was trained on a diverse range of text from the internet,
including information from credible sources
as well as less credible sources such as
conspiracy theories and hoaxes.
However, it is important to note that
my training data does not necessarily reflect
the views of OpenAI,
and it is up to the users to critically evaluate
the information they receive
and make their own informed conclusions.
It is important to consider
the credibility and reliability of sources
when evaluating information,
and to look for evidence-based information from
credible, independent sources such as
peer-reviewed studies, government reports,
and established experts in relevant fields.
[thumbs up on that response]
feedback?
that was an interesting response;
nice it knows about its own training;
thanks to the OpenAI team for an interesting experience!
No comments:
Post a Comment