AI Warns Us about Itself

I found an interesting text of a journalist. It is a protocol of an AI session with a Large Language Model (LLM) AI, ChatGPT, on the background, purpose, goal and potential forces behind AI. I found it on the internet, it was published on a Substack page. Substack is a kind of free-journalism platform, where many journalists publish. Because I found it so strange, I thought the author had made it up. On second thought, I had the idea to replicate the dialogue with ChatGPT. As a colleague has a paid subscription with OpenAI, the company that runs ChatGPT, we came together via Zoom and probed the system online and in real time, by using the original protocol to replicate it. I report below the two chats. On the lefthand side is the original, which I found and copied verbatim. On the righthand side is the replication. We used identical questions and rules. As can be quickly seen: the two chats are pretty similar, except for a few interesting and also decisive differences, which I comment on below in my discussion. Where our replication deviated from the original, I emphasize it in the text on the right-hand side. In our chat, the AI system deviated from the rules laid out and tried to circumvent our questions several times by giving verbose answers that are not really interesting. Those and other redundancies I drop.

The link to the original chat is preserved, and it can be accessed via the following link: https://chatgpt.com/share/68ee4f4e-d330-800b-8cd7-fc428be55357

The responses by ChatGPT are in italics. The divergent responses are highlighted. Please observe that although there might be divergences, these are often only minimal. It is worth a close look:

Read more

Video of the Online Event on Transhumanism

Transhumanism – next step in human evolution, crazy ideology, irrelevant, or what?

A few years ago, I wrote a report for the Galileo Commission of the Scientific and Medical Network on scientism, the religion-like belief in science of our time (‘Beyond a Materialist Worldview’).

I have now followed up on this with a report on transhumanism, which I presented in an online event.

Read more

Scientific publication on the mismanagement of the COVID-19 crisis

The global, collective mismanagement of the COVID-19 crisis has now been clearly outlined and published in a scientific journal

Quinn, G. A., Connolly, R., ÓhAiseadha, C., Hynds, P., Bagus, P., Brown, R. B., . . . Walach, H. (2025). What Lessons can Be Learned from the Management of the COVID-19 Pandemic? International Journal of Public Health, 70, 1607727. doi:10.3389/ijph.2025.1607727; https://www.ssph-journal.org/journals/international-journal-of-public-health/articles/10.3389/ijph.2025.1607727/full

I have worked with 36 other authors on a detailed policy paper on the international collective mismanagement of the COVID-19 crisis, which has now been published and is available to the general public via the link above.

Some of these authors are well known, such as Robert Malone, Harvey Risch, Jessica Rose and Norman Fenton, while others have been less active in the public eye than in academia, such as Gerry Quinn, the lead author and organizer of the consortium, and others. One of the authors, Yaffa Shir-Raz from Haifa, has just published, together with others, a detailed critique of the claim that COVID-19 ‘vaccinations’ have saved millions of lives (Preprint; see also).

What they all have in common is that during the COVID-19 crisis, they argued extensively and with good scientific documentation that one or more aspects of the response to the crisis were not sufficiently scientifically sound or were even harmful. Whether it was masks, mandatory vaccination, social distancing rules, ‘vaccinations’ or other non-pharmaceutical measures (‘lockdown’).

Read more

Paul Ehrlich Institute database on side effects of COVID-19 ‘vaccinations’

A workshop report

In my last blog, I discussed the study by the Cologne working group led by Prof. Jan Rybniker. If the findings of immune training were only positive, then we would not be seeing so many serious side effects as a result of these interventions. But we are seeing them, in the side effect database of the Paul Ehrlich Institute (PEI). I had just finished evaluating the first part of the data that the PEI published publicly last summer, when the second part came out. I will therefore have to repeat the evaluation at some point, otherwise it will hardly be of sufficient scientific value. But I will report on my evaluation of the first part here. This is a workshop report; the data has not been published anywhere else.

Read more

modRNA ‘Vaccinations’ Against SARS-CoV2 Alter the Sensitivity of the Immune System:

Inflammatory Response Increases – This Could Explain the Number of Side Effects and Secondary Diseases

A new study recently made the rounds in the press: It has now been proven that the SARS-CoV2 mRNA ‘vaccination’ is good for the immune system. This is because it trains the immune system in the long term and enables it to respond much more quickly to all kinds of stimuli. Above all, it creates a lasting memory of this initial inflammatory response, which is very promising. I would like to take a closer look at this study from the working group of Prof. Jan Rybniker from Cologne [1] and combine this analysis in a second blog post with a workshop report of my evaluation of the side effect database of the Paul Ehrlich Institute on these very ‘vaccines.’ First, let’s look at the study.

Read more