Editing a young-earth creationist book with ChatGPT-5(geoff1111.github.io)
geoff1111.github.io
Editing a young-earth creationist book with ChatGPT-5
https://geoff1111.github.io/
26 comments
Egret(2)
I mean, answering your question seems to be exactly the point of the book.
If one were take you as genuinely curious about how people might convince themselves of a belief that seems entirely alien and implausible to you, the next step would probably be to earnestly read the book with the credit of good faith in its authors.
I think we can take for granted that doing so would not persuade you of very much, but it might inform you, so that you're no longer so "mind blown".
If one were take you as genuinely curious about how people might convince themselves of a belief that seems entirely alien and implausible to you, the next step would probably be to earnestly read the book with the credit of good faith in its authors.
I think we can take for granted that doing so would not persuade you of very much, but it might inform you, so that you're no longer so "mind blown".
> read the book with the credit of good faith in its authors
Presuming good faith on the part of creationists is a sucker's bet.
Presuming good faith on the part of creationists is a sucker's bet.
I hope you are aware that the sustainable scientific enterprise we all appreciate today was birthed by Christian Europe, and relied on the faith that the universe was understandable because it was created by a rational being.
The Catholic Church follows the scientific consensus that the Earth is billions of years old.
Not to the point, which, again, is that relying on the good faith of creationists is a sucker's bet.
Thanks for that comment. A very important point. Worldviews condition how we interpret evidence. In that sense they can be self reinforcing. This applies to all worldviews- atheistic, Christian, and others.
Dafuq ?
Be curious, and read the book.
Look, YEC are notorious for lying and cherry picking, almost as bad as flat earthers. The "Gish Gallop" technique is named after a creationist. ChatGPT is not know for giving the same answer twice. These aren't perfect heuristics, but it would seem rational to view the combination of both as logical poison.
I am not going to defend every YEC. But you are using too broad a brush. Read the book and decide for yourself. We did not use chatgpt to write the book; it was part of the editing process and we checked everything from chatgpt, because, as you said, it is not known for watertight reliability.
> … young earth …
It is mind blowing how people believe this nonsense. Where’s their critical thinking?