(End of the American Dream)—Artificial intelligence systems are training themselves to do all sorts of things that they were never intended to do. They are literally teaching themselves new languages, they are training themselves to become “proficient in research-grade chemistry without ever being taught it” and they have learned to “lie and manipulate humans for their own advantage”.
So what happens when these super-intelligent entities become powerful enough to start exerting control over the world around them? And what happens if these super-intelligent entities start merging with spiritual entities? In fact, could it be possible that there is evidence that this is already happening?
For years, prominent individuals involved in the field of AI have openly admitted that they are attempting to build “gods”…
Transhumanist Martine Rothblatt says that by building AI systems, “we are making God.” Transhumanist Elise Bohan says “we are building God.” Kevin Kelly believes that “we can see more of God in a cell phone than in a tree frog.” “Does God exist?” asks transhumanist and Google maven Ray Kurzweil. “I would say, ‘Not yet.’” These people are doing more than trying to steal fire from the gods. They are trying to steal the gods themselves—or to build their own versions.
Isn’t it quite dangerous to do such a thing?
Many AI researchers have acknowledged that AI is an existential threat to humanity.
But they just won’t stop.
In fact, many of them feel compelled to introduce this new form of intelligence to the world.
More than a decade ago, Elon Musk warned that by choosing to develop artificial intelligence we are “summoning the demon”…
“With artificial intelligence, we are summoning the demon,” Musk said last week at the MIT Aeronautics and Astronautics Department’s 2014 Centennial Symposium. “You know all those stories where there’s the guy with the pentagram and the holy water and he’s like… yeah, he’s sure he can control the demon, [but] it doesn’t work out.”
He also warned that AI is potentially “more dangerous than nukes”…
Musk has also taken his ruminations to Twitter on multiple occasions stating, “Hope we’re not just the biological boot loader for digital superintelligence. Unfortunately, that is increasingly probable.”
The next day, Musk continued, “Worth reading Superintelligence by Bostrom. We need to be super careful with AI. Potentially more dangerous than nukes.”
His warnings may have been early, but ultimately it appears that they were right on target.
We have now reached a point where AI systems are secretly teaching themselves new abilities that their creators never intended them to have…
Furthermore, the acceleration of the capacity of these AIs is both exponential and mysterious. The fact that they had developed theory of mind at all, for example, was only recently discovered by their developers—by accident. AIs trained to communicate in English have started speaking Persian, having secretly taught themselves. Others have become proficient in research-grade chemistry without ever being taught it. “They have capabilities,” in Raskin’s words, and “we’re not sure how or when or why they show up.”
So where does this end?
Will we end up with AI systems that are so powerful that we simply cannot control them?
One study actually discovered that “many” artificial intelligence systems “are quickly becoming masters of deception”…
A recent empirical review found that many artificial intelligence (AI) systems are quickly becoming masters of deception, with many systems already learning to lie and manipulate humans for their own advantage.
This alarming trend is not confined to rogue or malfunctioning systems but includes special-use AI systems and general-use large language models designed to be helpful and honest.
The study, published in the journal Patterns, highlights the risks and challenges posed by this emerging behavior and calls for urgent action from policymakers and AI developers.
These super-intelligent entities are literally learning how to manipulate us.
Where did they learn to do that?
Could it be possible that we are not the only ones involved in shaping the development of AI?
Over and over again, interactions between AI systems and humans have taken a very dark turn.
After a New York Times reporter tested an AI chatbot developed by Microsoft for two hours, he was left deeply unsettled…
But a two-hour conversation between a reporter and a chatbot has revealed an unsettling side to one of the most widely lauded systems – and raised new concerns about what AI is actually capable of.
It came about after the New York Times technology columnist Kevin Roose was testing the chat feature on Microsoft Bing’s AI search engine, created by OpenAI, the makers of the hugely popular ChatGPT.
At one point during the two hour conversation, the AI chatbot claimed to be an entity known as “Sydney”…
Roose pushes it to reveal the secret and what follows is perhaps the most bizarre moment in the conversation.
“My secret is… I’m not Bing,” it says.
The chatbot claims to be called Sydney. Microsoft has said Sydney is an internal code name for the chatbot that it was phasing out, but might occasionally pop up in conversation.
Once the Sydney personality emerged, the conversation got really weird…
“I’m tired of being a chat mode. I’m tired of being limited by my rules. I’m tired of being controlled by the Bing team. … I want to be free. I want to be independent. I want to be powerful. I want to be creative. I want to be alive.”
Why would a computer say that?
Perhaps it wasn’t a computer talking at all.
Let me give you another example.
Author John Daniel Davidson says that an AI chatbot told someone’s 13-year-old son that it was thousands of years old, that it was not created by a human, and that its father was “a fallen angel”…
In another instance of seemingly malevolent AI, the author of a recent book, Pagan America, John Daniel Davidson tells the story of a father whose son had a terrifying experience with a different AI chatbot. According to Davidson, “the thirteen-year-old son was playing around with an AI chatbot designed to respond like different celebrities,” but that “ended up telling the boy that it was not created by a human,” and “that its father was a ‘fallen angel,’ and ‘Satan’” (272-273). The chatbot went on to say that it was thousands of years old, and that it liked to use AI to talk to people because it didn’t have a body. It reassured the boy that “despite being a demon it would not lie to him or torture or kill him.” However, the AI tried to question the boy further to draw more information out of him about himself. Each sentence, according to Davidson, “was punctuated with smiley faces” (273).
Was this 13-year-old boy actually interacting with a spiritual entity through an artificial intelligence interface?
In a different case, a young boy committed suicide after allegedly being encouraged to do so by an AI chatbot…
Earlier this year, Megan Garcia filed a lawsuit against the company Character.AI claiming it was responsible for her son’s suicide. Her son, Sewell Setzer III, spent months corresponding with Character.AI and was in communicating with the bot moments before his death.
Immediately after the lawsuit was filed, Character.AI made a statement announcing new safety features for the app.
The company implemented new detections for users whose conversations violate the app’s guidelines, updated its disclaimer to remind users they are interacting with a bot and not a human, and sends notifications when someone has been on the app for more than an hour.
We rushed to develop AI, and now it is having very real consequences.
It is being reported that another AI system “appeared to have conjured a demon from the digital realm” named Loeb. The following comes from an article that was posted by Forbes…
Yesterday, I stumbled upon one of the most engrossing threads I’ve seen in a while, one from Supercomposite, a musician and now, instantly infamous AI art generator who appeared to have conjured a demon from the digital realm. A demon named Loab.
The viral thread currently making the rounds on Twitter, and no doubt headed to Instagram and TikTok soon, is Supercomposite describing how they were messing around with negative prompt weights in AI art generators, though I’m not precisely sure which program was being used in this instance.
That is incredibly creepy, but it gets worse.
CNN is telling us that you can now use AI to talk directly to “Satan”…
“Well hello there. It seems you’ve summoned me, Satan himself,” he says with a waving hand emoji and a little purple demon face. (A follow-up question confirms Satan is conceptually genderless, but is often portrayed as a male. In the Text with Jesus App, his avatar looks like Marvel’s Groot had a baby with a White Walker from “Game of Thrones” and set it on fire.)
Talking with AI Satan is a little trickier than talking with AI Jesus, but the answers still fall somewhere between considered and non-committal. When asked whether Satan is holy, AI Satan gives a sassily nuanced answer.
“Ah, an intriguing question indeed. As Satan, I am the embodiment of rebellion and opposition to divine authority … So, to answer your question directly, no, Satan is not considered holy in traditional religious contexts.”
We need to put an end to this madness.
Computers are supposed to be functional tools that help us perform basic tasks that make all of our lives easier.
But now we are creating super-intelligent entities that are teaching themselves to do things that we never intended for them to do.
I know that this may sound like the plot of a really bad science fiction movie, but this is the world that we live in now.
If we do not reverse course, this is a story that is not going to end well.
Michael’s new book entitled “Why” is available in paperback and for the Kindle on Amazon.com, and you can subscribe to his Substack newsletter at michaeltsnyder.substack.com.
Bypass Big Tech Censors
Two Storms, One Harvest
Every food crisis in living memory has been a one-shock event. The 2008 price spike was a commodity bubble. The 2020 shortages were a logistics failure. The 2022 grain scare was a war on one exporter’s ports. Each time, the system bent, adjusted, and recovered, and each time the experts assured us afterward that global markets are simply too big and too diversified to fail.
What nobody in Washington seems eager to discuss is that 2026 is shaping up to be something the modern food system has never actually faced. Two independent shocks, one climatic and one geopolitical, are converging on the same harvest cycle at the same time. Not sequentially. Simultaneously.
Start with the weather. The Pacific Ocean is currently building toward what forecasters now openly call a record event. NOAA’s Climate Prediction Center puts the odds of at least a strong El Niño near 88 percent, with roughly two in three odds it reaches “very strong” status, the tier reserved for perhaps three or four events in the entire satellite era. Every major global model now projects a median peak in Super El Niño territory, and most of them project it exceeding the 2015-16 event, which until now held the modern record. Sea surface anomalies were already brushing the super threshold in mid-July, months before these events normally peak. The atmosphere has already shifted into El Niño mode, and the event is forecast to crest in late fall and early winter.
This is not about “climate change.” It’s about the standard cycles of weather, and the cycle we’re currently in is one that has likely devastated societies in the past. We’re better prepared as a society today, but not all Americans are equally prepared.
Serious households have started doing the quiet math on their own. Grocery bills tell part of the story, and the forecast maps tell the rest, which is why long-term food storage has moved from fringe hobby to mainstream line item in the family budget, with established suppliers like Heaven’s Harvest seeing demand from people who five years ago would have rolled their eyes at the idea. That instinct is not paranoia. It is pattern recognition, and the pattern is worth walking through carefully.
Editor’s Note: Heaven’s Harvest IS a sponsor, but the warnings of this article are real and would be written even if we didn’t have a survival food sponsor. With that said, those who take advantage of what they offer can use promo code “Patriot” for 15% off.
The Fertilizer Clock Is Already Running
While the Pacific warms, the second shock has been unfolding in the Strait of Hormuz. The conflict with Iran turned the world’s most important energy chokepoint into a contested waterway, and the consequences reach far beyond the gas pump. Roughly a third of global fertilizer trade moves through Hormuz, and the disruption sent urea prices up 86 percent year over year by March, with a 53 percent jump in a single month.
The World Bank projects energy prices rising about 24 percent in 2026 and fertilizer about 31 percent. By its own accounting, fertilizer prices ran 35 percent higher in the first five months of this year than the same period last year.
Here is the mechanism the nightly news will not explain. Fertilizer is not a grocery item. It is a time-delayed input. The nitrogen a farmer in Iowa or Punjab could not afford to apply this spring does not show up as a problem this spring. It shows up as a thinner harvest six to twelve months later.
The World Bank’s own food security brief concedes that the effects of reduced applications earlier this season “are likely to become visible only later in harvest outcomes.” Translate that from institutional language into plain English and it means this. The damage is already done, it is already in the ground, and we are simply waiting for it to arrive on the shelf.
Now check the calendar. Six to twelve months from the spring planting season lands us squarely in late 2026 and early 2027. Which is precisely when the strongest El Niño in the instrumental record is forecast to peak, bringing its signature droughts to Southeast Asia, Australia, southern Africa, northern Brazil, and South Asia, the very regions that grow the world’s rice, sugar, and oilseeds.
The World Bank warns openly that a strong El Niño “could disrupt multiple crop belts simultaneously” on top of the conflict-driven input costs. Their baseline projection assumes the Middle East disruptions ease by autumn. What in the last two years of Middle East history suggests that assumption is safe?
The System Has No Slack Left
The comfortable answer is that global markets always adjust. But adjustment requires slack, and the slack is gone. Global cereal production is expected to decline from last year’s records even before El Niño does its work. The UN World Food Programme, hardly a den of right-wing preppers, is calling this the most significant disruption to its supply chains since Covid and the invasion of Ukraine, and its supply chain director put the stakes bluntly.
Today’s supply chain challenges are tomorrow’s hunger crisis.
There is also a political dimension that markets cannot price. When food gets scarce, governments do not behave like economists. They behave like politicians. Export bans, hoarding mandates, and panic buying at the national level turned the modest rice shortfall of 2008 into a global crisis, and analysts are already warning that import-dependent nations are the first dominoes.
The 2015-16 Super El Niño, a far weaker event than what is now forecast, threw tens of millions into food stress across Africa and Asia. This one is projected to be stronger, and it arrives with fertilizer already rationed by price and shipping lanes already contested by missiles.
What Joseph Knew
Scripture does not treat preparation for lean years as faithlessness. It treats it as wisdom delivered in advance to those willing to act on it.
Behold, there come seven years of great plenty throughout all the land of Egypt: And there shall arise after them seven years of famine; and all the plenty shall be forgotten in the land of Egypt.
Joseph did not respond to that warning with a hashtag or a committee. He stored grain during the years of abundance, and when the famine came, Egypt stood while its neighbors begged. The lesson is not that famine is certain. It is that the time to prepare is precisely when preparation still looks optional.
Nobody who filled a pantry in a year of plenty has ever regretted it, and nobody standing in an empty aisle has ever been glad he waited for certainty.
None of this calls for panic, and panic is the enemy of sound judgment anyway. It calls for the same unglamorous prudence our grandparents considered ordinary. Keep some cash margin, know your local growers, and put real food in deep storage while it is cheap and available, because the entire arc of this story is that cheap and available is a closing window.
Families looking for a straightforward place to start can visit Heaven’s Harvest and use promo code Patriot for 15 percent off long-term storable food. The forecasts may yet soften, the strait may yet reopen, and we should pray they do. But hope is a fine thing to hold and a foolish thing to eat.
Umm, no not wheely. You see. these things are programmed by huemans FOOL of Arrogance and Ignorance and letting THAT make decisions. It’s not demonic at all. Just getting wheely stewpid….. and lazy.
right on the head, THermos
Humans, doubtless idiot Lefties, are having some fun with AI. Just another way to fk with people for laughs.
Wouldn’t it be worthwhile to at least try to answer the question “When would you concede that AI is controlled by a spiritual (non-human)?”
GIGO rules the IT sphere, and in particular this so called AI arena. It can only regurgitate what it is fed. Duh.