November 24, 2022

All knowledge is abstract, which means nonperceivable, because knowledge is a human construct for reducing complex relationships to a manageable form. Being nonperceivable, knowledge cannot be programed as algorithms. No knowledge; no artificial intelligence. The misnomer is a fraud upon the public.

The pretense of machines thinking like humans or better is so ridiculous that it looks like joking. But a lot of power mongers are investing their own money and time in the project, indicating that they believe in it.

But that is the end-point of a process that began decades ago, as the universities attempted to describe thought in terms of the mechanical functions of computers. No one needed to take them serious at that time, since the academic circles were above outside criticism. But that process evolved into present concept of artificial intelligence, which means a lot of dupes took that garbage seriously.

It's beyond ridiculous to assume the brain functions like a computer. Computers need a clock and switches. A clock means a high frequency square wave that can be channeled in various directions by opening and closing switches. There is no clock in the brain nor switches.

There is some attempt to portray nerve-cell junctions as switches; but the stretch is too ridiculous to even be described in detail. The function of neurotransmitters is to adjust response levels. Knowing that or not, there is no way to get switching out of that process. If total blockage of signals is created, the person goes into some sort of crazed stupor or dies. Botulism toxin kills people by blocking neurotransmitters. In computers the switches choose between alternative directions for sending the signal, which is out of the question for neurotransmitters.

From that mess, artificial intelligence picks up the concept that machines can think. With that starting point, the goal is to get the machines to think as well as or better than humans.

It's more than ridiculous to assume machines can think based on the arguments that were made. That means the origins of brains functioning like computers points to ulterior motives by conspirators. Incompetent corrupters in science are trying to railroad realities away from the rationality which exposes them as the incompetent corrupters that they are. They created relativity for that purpose. It puts physicists to the test of their willingness to perpetrate fraud, as physics is reduced to nonfunctional mockeries.

It's therefore surprising that anyone could fall for the machinations of claiming brains are like computers or machines can produce thought. Since a lot of power mongers invest a lot of their own money and time into such efforts, it seems to indicate that their error is stupidity. But there is also the possibility that after they reach a high degree of success, they invest in conspiracy against rationality as a method of giving back to the conspiring power mongers who made them successful.

The expectations for artificial intelligence are focussed on self-driving, where the claim is that accidents will be reduced by machines replacing human thought. Besides the fact that the vision is awful poor for self-driving, awareness is replaced by pre-programmed assumptions. To assume human awareness can be replaced by pre-programming is beyond stupidity.

Beyond stupidity means the origins are created by conspirators who try to reduce human rationality to the rubbish that they can prevail with. Why then do so many persons go along with it? The go-alongs are largely persons who get snowed by the complexities and are just trying to make a living. Believe it or not, that includes a lot of engineers who should know better. Engineers are not scientists.

A computer has to have programmed into it every possibility. So several years ago, the fools were sending cameras around to photograph every element of highway structure. Obviously that didn't work; but it shows the mind-frame of equating thought with pre-programmed alternatives.

Even if the assumption is that humans learn from their experiences, to equate learning with pre-programming makes a mockery of all that neurotransmitter switching. Where is the experience in blocked neurotransmitters?

The promoters might say that the neurotransmitter story is not relevant to artificial intelligence. Just keep increasing computer complexity until it surpasses human capabilities. Some persons are so stupid that a computer would not make the mistakes that they make. But that logic is irrelevant. Computers can do a lot of things humans can't do; but it isn't a question of intelligence; it's a question of complexities.

So the promoters of the cause try to equate intelligence with managing increased complexities. That isn't what intelligence is. Predicting and evaluating are not improved with increasing complexities. Complexities distract from good judgement.

There is a reductionistic logic applied to artificial intelligence which says, there is nothing we are leaving out. Just multiply everything to infinity, and intelligence will be the product. The most obvious thing wrong with that logic is that the infinity is too far from the range of possibilities with molecules storing imagery. There aren't enough molecules in a galaxy to get to the needed infinity.

Then there is the tertiary requirement of sorting through the imagery to pick the right images. Human minds sort through their stored images and experiences based on their values and purposes. What replaces values and purposes in a computer? Images don't have values and purposes.

Creating a sorting process for the images stored in a computer is not even being considered by the promoters of artificial intelligence. Picking the images with certain characteristics doesn't even get to the starting point of the sorting that thought processes do.

If someone on the side of a road is waving, does it mean the vehicle is supposed to stop, or does it means they know someone they are waving hi to? Sorting those questions out is an evaluation process. Storing images doesn't tell how to evaluate complexities.

From the context, the appearance is that the promoters of artificial intelligence can't imagine what they are leaving out. What they are leaving out is all of the contradicting evidence to their schemes. It takes a perverted form of communication to railroad a subject by leaving out the contradictory evidence. The schemers can be identified by their perverse communication standards.

Conspirators promote such schemes in their attempts to eradicate human rationality from social existence. They want to operate in a void without the complexities of rationality or social structures getting in their way and exposing them as the incompetent corrupters that they are.