Critically Thinking about Getting to the Truth: Part 2

Please read Part 1, before proceeding here...

To give readers an idea about the high degree of difficulty in getting to the Truth on almost anything, I drafted up five question on important (and different) societal issues, where I know the answer:

1 - When taking into account ALL economics, is industrial wind energy actually a low cost source of electricity?

2 - Is Climate Change really an existential threat to our civilization?

3 - Is there strong evidence that legitimately puts the results of the 2020 Presidential election in doubt?

4 - Is corrupted curricula — particularly in Science — a primary reason why the US K-12 education system is doing so poorly?

5 - Were the COVID-19 vaccines “Safe and Effective” as advertised?

I then posed these questions to five common sources of information. To make it easier for readers, I listed what I believe to be the correct answer in the first column, as well as a url to a brief explanation as to why. Here are the results:

The disappointing conclusion is that common sources of information are frequently wrong, particularly on politically sensitive issues. I was particularly surprised that Duck-Duck did not do better than Google.

Out of curiosity I read some articles comparing Google to Duck-Duck. Not surprisingly they were mostly about “features” and interface (e.g., here), rather than accuracy. I did find one that compared accuracy and it decided (like me) that it was a draw (see here). Once again this emphasizes the extreme importance of being a Critical Thinker!

—————————————————————————————

But what about AI, which is now all the rage? Is this the silver bullet giving us what we desperately want: a simple, easy, reliable source for Truth?

To get a good idea, I then posed these same questions to the five most popular AIs, as well as AlterAI. Here are the results:

The surprising conclusion is that ALL of the more popular AIs are frequently wrong.

Actually it shouldn’t be surprising, as most AIs are programmed to give you the MOST PLAUSIBLE answer on questions like I asked, NOT the MOST ACCURATE one. Read that again!

Further, the majority of AIs determine plausibility by reporting to you the consensus view of what is on the Internet — so they have the same vulnerability as Search Engines do!

A few AIs determine “plausibility” differently. Their exact algorithm is a naturally a trade secret, but the key distinction is that raw consensus is NOT what they use to determine plausibility.

For example, AlterAI also searches the Internet, but it pays little attention to the frequency a similar Internet article or argument appears. In other words, since they know that the raw consensus numbers on the Internet are easy to manipulate (especially with AI, e.g., see here), they downplay that part.

Instead they attempt to assess the merits of the argument. That is a profoundly significant difference. You can clearly see the difference in the results by its answers to my five random technical questions.

Once again this is emphasizing the importance of being a Critical Thinker.

The AI Takeaway

Every AI has some value. For example, they can ALL answer a question where the facts are indisputable — like tell you what the capital cities are for each of the fifty States. This has value as it is information that almost no one has bothered to memorized. (Note that a competent search engine could also provide that answer.)

Where things get interesting with AI, is when it is asked a question where the information has been purposefully and popularly clouded or misrepresented by special interest parties (i.e., politics). In effect we are in a swamp, continually dealing with important daily life matters where the Internet has facilitated the proliferation of misinformation.

There are no tests for competence or honesty to post material on the Internet! Worse, there are no meaningful consequences for dishonest or incompetent material to be posted…

So the question is: how do we determine the Truth about such matters as COVID, Climate, Energy, Education, Election Integrity, etc., etc?

As shown, a search engine is basically useless as it will just regurgitate what snake oil salespersons and a dysfunctional mainstream media have planted for public consumption.

Both of those sources have a great disdain for the competence of the public, as they are keenly aware that our K-12 school system is purposefully churning out lemmings instead of Critical Thinkers. Knowing that they are dealing with brainwashed parties gives them the confidence that they can lie and misrepresent information at will, with no consequential repercussions.

The Bottom Line —

So, are the popular AIs objective and competent sources for telling us the TRUTH on important controversial social issues? Absolutely not.

This video is worth watching if you want a semi-technical discussion of AIs. Among other good points it makes is that dealing with an AI, you are NOT dealing with a rational party. It is mechanically just guessing probabilities...

Further, this expert says that AI is basically a glorified spreadsheet. As with any spreadsheet, the data on it makes a world of difference.

Even though AlterAI is not perfect, it is far superior to its competitors.

_____________________

Sample References:

Increased AI use linked to eroding critical thinking skills

AI Content Is Swamping the Internet and Changes How We Think

Beware: When You Get Your News From AI, It Alters Your Views

Report: The AI you use is biased — and it’s quietly shaping your worldview

A Brief Example of the Problem With Wikipedia and LLMs

US ‘Utterly Unprepared’ For What AI Can Bring

When AI Thinks for Us

---

Thanks for reading Critically Thinking About Select Societal Issues! Please pass a link to this article on to other associates who might benefit. They can subscribe for FREE to receive new posts (typically about twice a week.

Here is other information from this scientist that you might find interesting:

I urge all readers to subscribe to AlterAI — IMO the absolute best AI option for subjective questions.

I will consider posting reader submissions on Critical Thinking about my topics of interest.

My commentaries are my opinion about the material discussed therein, based on the information I have. If any readers have different information, please share it. If it is credible, I will be glad to reconsider my position.

Check out the Archives of this Critical Thinking substack.

C19Science.info is my one-page website that covers the lack of genuine Science behind our COVID-19 policies.

Election-Integrity.info is my one-page website that lists multiple major reports on the election integrity issue.

WiseEnergy.org is my multi-page website that discusses the Science (or lack thereof) behind our energy options.

Media Balance Newsletter: a free, twice-a-month newsletter that covers what the mainstream media does not do, on issues from climate to COVID, elections to education, renewables to religion, etc. Here are the Newsletter’s 2026 Archives. Please send me an email to get your free copy. When emailing me, please make sure to include your full name and the state where you live. (Of course, you can cancel the Media Balance Newsletter at any time!)