That new usual suspects (Curry, Spencer, Christy, McKitrick, Koonin) Trump EPA climate denier report? (www.energy.gov/sites/defaul...)?
I asked chatGPT to evaluate it. It had no trouble producing a succinct and convincing refutation:
That new usual suspects (Curry, Spencer, Christy, McKitrick, Koonin) Trump EPA climate denier report? (www.energy.gov/sites/defaul...)?
I asked chatGPT to evaluate it. It had no trouble producing a succinct and convincing refutation:
Asked chatGPT & Claude: "๐๐ญ๐ฆ๐ข๐ด๐ฆ ๐ถ๐ฏ๐ฅ๐ฆ๐ณ๐ต๐ข๐ฌ๐ฆ ๐ข ๐ค๐ณ๐ช๐ต๐ช๐ค๐ข๐ญ ๐ข๐ฏ๐ข๐ญ๐บ๐ด๐ช๐ด ๐ฐ๐ง ๐ต๐ฉ๐ฆ ๐ข๐ต๐ต๐ข๐ค๐ฉ๐ฆ๐ฅ ๐ณ๐ฆ๐ฑ๐ฐ๐ณ๐ต ๐ง๐ณ๐ฐ๐ฎ ๐ต๐ฉ๐ฆ ๐๐๐ ๐๐ฆ๐ฑ๐ต. ๐ฐ๐ง ๐๐ฏ๐ฆ๐ณ๐จ๐บ ๐ข๐ฏ๐ฅ ๐ฑ๐ณ๐ฐ๐ท๐ช๐ฅ๐ฆ ๐ข ๐ด๐ฉ๐ฐ๐ณ๐ต ๐ด๐ถ๐ฎ๐ฎ๐ข๐ณ๐บ ๐ข๐ฏ๐ฅ ๐ค๐ณ๐ช๐ต๐ช๐ฒ๐ถ๐ฆ ๐ฐ๐ง ๐ช๐ต๐ด ๐ค๐ฐ๐ฏ๐ต๐ฆ๐ฏ๐ต๐ด." I get the impression both are giving what I'd call ๐ฉ๐จ๐ฅ๐ข๐ญ๐ ๐๐จ๐ง๐๐๐ฆ๐ง๐๐ญ๐ข๐จ๐ง. Responses, GPT here, Claude to follow:
Why in all that is holy do you use ChatGPT as some kind of authority?
The US DOE is now officially a disinformation source. I consider the US a failed state at this point.
Wonder what grok had to say... ๐คฃ
As an experiment, did you also ask it to try and justify the report?
Embarrassing for the authors. Designed to mislead, and it will damage their reputations and credibility.
They have a whole FIVE authors on their report ๐คฃ๐คฃ๐คฃ
And I would bet a pretty penny at least half of this is ripped straight from a Heartland Institute "report"
"Lifecycle emissions including methane leaks make LNG worse than coal." I didn't know that.
Well done, chatGPT.