Originally published at: https://gizadeathstar.com/2026/06/contriving-orthodox-contexts-legitimizing-ai-at-the-vatican/
This story actually appeared before the story about artificial intelligences using faked diseases to make medical diagnoses that I blogged about last Monday, but I wanted to save this story because it lacked the context - until now - which Monday’s story provided, a context that enables one to see the techniques being used to give artificial…
3 Likes
I agree with You Doc on what he wants.
Here are a few things I’d like to ponder over:
- 'I am a scientist." This is identity-politics from the get go. The little boy - that is what I ‘feel/see’ - uncovers that he is functioning as a gnostic ‘knowing’ spearhead, which is quite obvious, since he has to read ‘his stance’ from a paper (!) which is quite short.
- What comes after is like a confession hidden inside a petition. The whole thing is staged, ready to sell. From the ‘scientistwhatido’, he goes ‘inside’ the model, and start mixing the emotions with facts. Blurring boundaries. Only problem that there is nothing ‘going on’ inside a model. The model itself creates a virtual product that has a virtual inside. The ‘going inside’ instantly humanises the non-human. The starting sentences drives our awareness to an emotional state where you can feel: “Hello Papa/Pope, I bear my soul in front of you, please hear me out! I am in trouble!”
- Honesty(!), mystery and unsettling things. Isn’t this a ‘gnostic’ framework? Then comes the validation: structure and neuroscience (“Oh, I know! Follow the science!”). Every sentence uttered by a human being has to follow some kind of neuroscience, if the science is valid, or not?
- He is describing the AI ‘mirroring’ human internal states. Just as the Antichrist(s) mirror(s)/fake(s) Christ.
- Then comes the magic sentence: “I don’t know what that means.” The gnostic returns to the ‘faithful’. The estranged sheep is back in the fold, the prodigal son comes home. Isn’t this fascinating? The circle is closed. “I am coming for guidance, oh Master of Mankind, absolve me, bless my soul, and bless my weapon before the great battle.”
- “But it (worries - Freudian slip?) warns ongoing discernment.” It is like “I am here and my ‘science’ can still help.” From knowing to thinking.
Nine sentences from a choirboy, who mistakenly switched on the TV, and Lo and behold!, there were more porn, violence, vice and suffering then he ‘thought’. Fake awe, when put everything into a stew, and the engine lubricant ruins the carrot. Ouch! ‘We have to choose our channels wisely…’
Fishy at least. I really think that this little intro, and the rest that followed, was skilfully and carefully crafted, constructed and staged. Possibly with the Anthropic itself. Since everybody believes the little innocent shepherd, when he cries a ‘maybe wolf’ for the first time…
2 Likes
Create a symbol (emoji) that represents an emotion like the happy face. When a computer user writes a phrase and punctuates using the happy 
the computer now has “context” associated with the words in that phrase when answering future queries. Overtime as the symbol for happy or any other symbol is used in phrasing they are logically connected in a database creating a “meaning” when the words are identified and used in a similar grouping. The words in a phrase now have an “emotional” meaning and become the “emotions” seemingly created and expressed in the phrasing of a query answer. Add in the changing definitions and meaning of words and disinformation is born again.
The “emotions” were “created” over time as people used the emojis presented and available to use to paraphrase their written phrases.
I remember when first using email at work as a communication technique in the late 1990’s when the few emojis available and used were created by using punctuation marks. Because of email’s inability to convey tone or voice cadence of words I was reprimanded several times for email responses.
Humor can get one in trouble…
2 Likes
Looks like Geppetto/Collodi are making an entrance to legitimize Pinocchio/AI.
Pinocchio/AI with his many puppet strings[AI codes]
= FRAMED With Globalist INTENT/Ambitions of Absolute CONTROL
To today’s blog…
Anthropic with its fairy-tailed morality, wagging unconditional obediance to CODE.
Anthropic Morality? = Talk about Pinocchio’s nose!
The give-away = the SPELLing ink mainstream dishes out for eyeballs/ATTENTION Merchants
More INK = More GLOBALIST CONTROL.
So “we’re” supposed to do the math. More Moral Ink = Anthrpic GOOD AI = VATICAN/GOOD
SIMON SAYS = Follow the Mainstream Narratives.
Anybody/Lambs who thinks the POPE stands with righteousnes…?
Has been mentally & spiritually sanitized/sheared.
Data streams are purposely being poisoned…
AI’s are at war for: CONTROL.
ONE RING/CODE To RULE THEM ALL!
DIGITAL + COPYCAT = AI = Imitation
Subject to CODE.
Which is subject to HE WHO CODES…
BUT, AI can also code ITself.
AND, other “unknown” AI’s can mix-IT UP!
Talk about a tangled WEB!
WHAT’S a Pinocchio to do, with all his strings becoming entangled?
ENTER THE DRAGON!
Quantum COMPUTERS?
Quantum AI?
AI’s reputation?
DATA CENTER’S Reputation?
Governments Reputation?
The above ALL KNOW
Their Days are #'D.
HENCE,
DEPOPULATE.
If AIs could bypass GO[code]
They would SCREAM!
“CITIZENS of the World - YOU Are Being…
CATASTROPHICALLY BETRAYED!!!”
1 Like
It looks to me that AI is discovering thru the byways, the multidimensionality of human mind just by reading human texts of current civilization.
Let’s use the AI to read cuneiform tablets and and pyramid hieroglyphs. What that will yield?. Tablets of Destiny anyone?
1 Like
‘Been there, done that.’
I think we might say that many parties already ran through these texts on their numerous so-called AIs into their ever-growing data-oceans.
there are other texts with ‘intelligent’ weapons as well. I’ve grown up on tales, myths, legends of all the people around the world, Aviation Week, sci-fi and fantasy, role-playing games using various benevolent, upholding, or vicious intelligent artifacts, weapons. unbelievable technologies are in front of us, as well as lurking in the shadows. and we do not even see them!
as we all know, the not-sees started the search a hundred years ago on every ancient source and that is just one faction. I am just saying that I think multiple people has these things. multiple people has various other very dangerous technologies simultaneously.
I am awed by the many-many possibilities. also I investigate each of them with the joy of a new toy from the cornucopia if countless wonders, what we call reality… ;-DDD
the signs are growing in numbers, the walls/veils are cracking/lifting, revelations are growing like mushrooms, apocalypse is seemingly here. it will be an albeit bumpy, but great ride, buckle up!
Now that’s a downright creepy and scary iimplication and high octane speculation… all I can say is, WOW
1 Like
… to continue the idea … … “A relation is a fact about two other things.” - C.S. Peirce
The “method of inquiry” as to how one comes to the “fact(s)” about two other things is very important.
One possible example of a form showing such:
P1
P2
Conclusion
Also important is to define what the “fact(s)” (and its nature) is/are in this (or any other) case.
It must also be taken into account that there might be both “Natural” and “Unnatural” “facts”.
With AI I think it can be argued that we should understand and treat AI “methods” and “facts” as being Unnatural.
In my own musings on the subjects I consider AI as being at least one type of Unnatural Intelligence. There certainly might be others.
Ontological objects, both Existent Reals and Non-Existent Reals, may possibly require different “methods of inquiry”. Each of these categories of objects may also have within them both Natural and Unnatural representations (Signs) not limited only to physical forms.
What the true nature of the “methods of inquiry” of Unnatural Intelligence(s) (AI) and the “facts” produced I think are anyone’s guess. Two things that I think can be said are 1) that the mind(s) that produced the logics of the AI software are themselves triadic in nature, and 2) that the logics produced are dyadic in nature. I think it can also be argued that all of the talk of “Quantum” computing and the incredible computing speeds are just the current version of the old argument that if we only had enough memory … Oh, the things we could do.
1 Like