Grok aggressively defends the Climategate scamsters.
Disrupting the Borg is expensive and time consuming!
Google Search
-
Recent Posts
- Grok Defending Climategate
- It Is Big Oil’s Fault
- Creative Marketing
- No Emergency Or Injunction
- The Perfect Car
- “usually the case”
- Same Old Democrats
- Record Arctic Ice Growth
- Climate Change, Income Inequality And Racism
- The New Kind Of Green
- The Origins Of Modern Climate Science
- If An Academic Said It, It Must Be True
- Record Snow Cover
- Stopping Climate Misinformation
- Arctic Ice Free In Two Years
- “Decades Of Scientific Research”
- The Atlantic : Tesla Bombings Not Politics Or Terrorism
- Tough Times For Eco-Terrorists
- EV Mandates
- “Oswald is a patsy. They set him up”
- In This House We Believe In Science
- “BEAUTIFUL, CLEAN COAL”
- Federal Judge Orders Astronauts Be Returned To Space Station
- Mikey The Victim
- Colorado Local Hero
Recent Comments
- roaddog on Creative Marketing
- Jack the Insider on No Emergency Or Injunction
- Scott Allen on No Emergency Or Injunction
- conrad ziefle on Grok Defending Climategate
- arn on Grok Defending Climategate
- arn on Grok Defending Climategate
- MichiCanuck on Grok Defending Climategate
- william on It Is Big Oil’s Fault
- conrad ziefle on It Is Big Oil’s Fault
- Denis Rushworth on It Is Big Oil’s Fault
However, Grok 3 Beta has an interesting peer reviewed paper out:
https://scienceofclimatechange.org/grok-3-beta-et-al-a-critical-reassessment-of-the-anthropogenic-co%e2%82%82-global-warming-hypothesis/
“(models) fail to replicate observed temperature trajectories, and sea ice extend trends,
exhibiting correlations near zero when compared to unadjusted records”
interessting
Seems Grom is simply reciting 1:1 the official narratives of googles
search results of its preferred/authoritative propaganda sources,
with the standard claims,deflections and accusations
without adding a single thing of its own “intelligence” to it.
An intelligent Grok would wonder wether coherence is even possible by combining temperature data that exists on daily/hourly basis and tree rings
that appear yearly,with no numbers at all(and that are so open to interpretation that Briffa got completely different results than Mann in the same year).
And then it would ask which other science “hides” and uses “tricks” and how scientific such an approach can be.
And Grok knows that deleting emails “reflects frustration”?
I can not even imagine how “frustrated” the IRS and Hilary must have been
to destroy all those harddrives.
And the “Wigley,a respected climatologist”(i bet Fauci is also a respected scientist,who used “tricks” to pull an arbitrary 6 feet social distancing out of his ass, or his tricks to disappear natural immunity,the flu and ivermectin and the trick to reverse his ice age masks don’t protect to masks protect AGW)
is standard BS.
And how comes that a water temperature blip that occured as result of changing sea water measurements also occured on land at the same time?
(an intelligent Grok may also ask wether,how and on which scale a relevant quantitative change of sea water measurements was even possible during WW2.
They may had better use for money and ressources and more important things to do during that time – but that’s just my guess.)
And what about the most obvious admission of guilt:
As soon as climategate went viral on MSM a few weeks later they instantly knew that the standard villain Russia was responsible for the leak though they had exactly 0 evidence(but they still won’t know who leaked the virus).
So who exactly orchestrated and coordinated the fake Russia claim across all MSM.
When you have 190 countries to chose from and zero evidence
every news outlet may get to different results?
It seems that Grok is a promulgator of consensus science, just like every other journalist. However, I will say that the AI USUALLY makes it a lot easier to find out how to do obscure things, like change your ‘hosts’ file on your computer. I say usually, because occasionally it goes in a batspit crazy direction.