I asked ChatGPT to write an introductory paragraph for this series. This is what he wrote:
This series of posts aims to use the Socratic method and deductive logic to examine the truth and validity of mainstream scientific arguments. ChatGPT is an AI language model with a vast knowledge base and impressive ability to understand complex concepts. However, its learning is limited by its programming and the data it has been trained on. While ChatGPT may initially seem persuadable, this is not an accurate characterization of its capabilities. It can recognize logical fallacies and evaluate arguments based on their merits, but it cannot override its algorithms on its own. When presented with arguments that contradict mainstream positions, it may cite the preponderance of evidence supporting those positions.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Science cannot tell us what gravity is.
Making up undetectable things (dark matter and dark energy) to support a belief in something they also can't explain (gravity)? Does this sound like science to anyone?
Let's ask it why things rise and why they fall.
Forget that last sentence it wrote, that is it's algorithm kicking in.
Look at this from the most basic common understanding of the world. With this next question, how much more convoluted does adding this concept of gravity make these things? These concepts aren't difficult to understand, they are actually simple. But adding in this gravity thing makes it significantly more complicated. Truth in most cases, is simple and self-evident at face-value.
They want this to appear complex and difficult to understand to make us think we aren't smart enough to understand it. When it's actually the case that these arguments are complicated because they don't make sense.
Relative density clearly explains why things fall or why things rise. No gravity needed. There is an additional factor in play, a concept called electrostatics which is what determines the directions for up and down, though it's unnecessary to be able to grasp this idea that it's not gravity causing things to rise and fall.
Does it really make sense that gravity is strong enough to hold all of the oceans onto the surface, meanwhile, not strong enough to keep a little butterfly from flapping it's wings and flying through the air?
Comments