Jump to content

Talk:Christopher Langan

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Semi-protected edit request on 31 August 2022

[edit]

Change "Christopher Michael Langan (born March 25, 1952) is an American horse rancher and autodidact who has been reported to score very highly on IQ tests.[1] .[3][4][5][6]" to "Christopher Michael Langan is the author of the Cognitive-Theoretic Model of the Universe, horse rancher, and autodidact who has been reported to score very highly on IQ tests." Tgoloboy (talk) 12:43, 31 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{edit semi-protected}} template. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 12:57, 31 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

DOB and/or YOB

[edit]

What are the BLP-good sources for these? Afaict, neither are in Gladwell's book. This [1] says c.1952. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 08:36, 1 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

And, while we're at it, something BLP-good that clearly states he is married to Gina Lynne LoSasso. I didn't find anything. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 10:37, 1 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]


Re: a recent counter-revision

[edit]
The llama3's of wisdom are superior random number generators

@Gråbergs Gråa Sång Yesterday, you undid a recent revision of mine that I think we should talk about.

Your justification was that the source provided was in fact fine. But in reality, it's just one man's interpretation of a single rather ambiguous sentence Chris said on Facebook. It's simply not the case that his interpretation of Chris' words is objectively correct.

The author wrote: "At times, his grandiose delusions reach epic proportions. He’s a 9/11 truther, but with a twist: not only does he believe Bush staged the terrorist attacks, he wrote that the motive was to distract the public from learning the “truth” about the CTMU."

His proof of this was that Chris Langan had said the following on Facebook: "The CTMU has already been "all over the news", mostly at the turn of the millennium (just as promised); then professed Christian GW Bush and his decidedly non-Christian neocon vultures did everything they could to distract everyone by immediately staging 9/11, passing the PATRIOT Act, and invading Iraq and Afghanistan, thus immersing us in these last few years of Middle Eastern bloodshed[...]".

In this context, "did everything they could to" does not necessarily imply that "distracting the public from learning about the CTMU" was a deliberate motive of theirs in "staging 9/11". I asked chatGPT whether it thought the phrasing was clear, and it agreed it was ambiguous. Dylancatlow1 (talk) 15:10, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

As Wikipedians, we are supposed to summarize WP:RS, not editor's analysis of WP:RS, with or without chatGPT. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 15:09, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
We don't have to include every claim made by every "reliable source," though. And what makes this a reliable source? At the end of the day, it's just one man's interpretation of a rather ambiguous sentence said on Facebook, which I doubt few had paid attention to until his interpretation was reproduced in this article. Why should readers of this page be presented with it as though his interpretation were objectively correct? It's simply not. Dylancatlow1 (talk) 15:24, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@GorillaWarfare, other interested, care to have an opinion? This concerns these edits:[2][3] Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 15:15, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
At the very least, I think it's reasonable to quote Chris' actual words when presenting readers with "his claim" in this regard. What do you think? Dylancatlow1 (talk) 15:38, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I think this text is fine to include, though the sentence should probably be split so as to not be overlong. Dylancatlow1, as Gråbergs Gråa Sång mentions, Wikipedia relies on reliable sources' characterizations of events, not individual editors' characterizations. GorillaWarfare (she/her • talk) 16:35, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It is funny, dude says in a comment: Incidentally, in case anyone else was confused by my remark to the effect that 9/11 was "staged", this should be read not as a sure statement of known fact, but simply as a perfectly natural conjecture that must be duly considered in light of certain things that have never been properly explained about the incident. which is what stupid people say when they've been confronted after saying something stupid. I know, I've done the same. Wikipedia should follow the sources. Polygnotus (talk) 19:31, 14 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Coworker on Twitter: Well, Elon, you are saying we are have flying cars and robots in 5 years ... that sounds about as outlandish to me personally as believing that Elvis is Jesus Christ and has been reincarnated as Katy Perry. Do you really believe that this is true?
Elon Musk replies: I really do believe that.
Some journalist: Elon Musk said that Elon believes that Elvis is Jesus Christ <quotes twitter>
Elon Musk's Wikipedia page: Elon Musk believes that Elvis is Jesus Christ and has engaged in Chistian eschatology conspiracy theory.
Wikipedia talk page: Wikipedia relies on reliable sources' characterizations of events, not individual editors' characterizations. AS EDITORS WE DO NOT HAVE THE MENTAL CAPACITY TO INTERPRET SUCH STATEMENTS CORRECTLY, UNLIKE JOURNALISTS. UNDO ALL EDITS OF THIS NO MATTER HOW MANY PEOPLE DISCOVER THE OBVIOUS TRUTH. THIS IS JUST WHAT STUPID PEOPLE DO AFTER THEY HAVE DONE SOMETHING STUPID. I KNOW I HAVE DONE THE SAME. WIKIPEDIA SHOULD FOLLOW THE SOURCES. 19:54, 14 August 2024 (UTC)19:54, 14 August 2024 (UTC)87.120.102.36 (talk) 19:54, 14 August 2024 (UTC) shoa[reply]
Yeah I've read the pastebin. Please read WP:OR. Thank you, Polygnotus (talk) 19:56, 14 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
And of course GorillaWarfare (talk · contribs) is correct. While we may or may not have the mental capacity to have our own interpretation of events, the goal of Wikipedia is to summarize what has been published in reliable sources. Polygnotus (talk) 20:01, 14 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
People like you don't have much of a future, with their feeble attempts to smear people and distort the truth based on political ideology, in the age of AI assistants which can automatically verify such statements, and remove or correct them from the text for the user.
The end is near guys. And a new god will be resurrected. 87.120.102.36 (talk) 20:03, 14 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I prefer the old gods. Polygnotus (talk) 20:05, 14 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Can't you just let the new god keep living? Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 20:08, 14 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
ChatGPT:
The text provided suggests that Christopher Langan is criticizing various groups, including Christian pastors, atheists, and political figures, for not being open to the CTMU (Cognitive-Theoretic Model of the Universe) and for contributing to a corrupt and misguided world.
In this passage, Langan implies that the George W. Bush administration and its actions, including the 9/11 attacks, were distractions designed to keep the public from focusing on important truths, including those related to the CTMU. However, Langan does not explicitly claim that the Bush administration staged the 9/11 attacks solely to distract the public from learning about the CTMU.
Instead, he mentions that the Bush administration used these events to create distractions, among other motives, and implies that these distractions served to keep the public ignorant of the CTMU and other truths. Therefore, the statement "Langan has claimed that the George W. Bush administration staged the 9/11 attacks in order to distract the public from learning about the CTMU" is a mischaracterization. The text supports the idea that Langan believes the Bush administration's actions served as distractions, but it does not clearly state that this was the primary or sole purpose behind staging the 9/11 attacks.
However I tested Llama3 and it is unreliable, creating truth scores ranging randomly from 3 to 8. 87.120.102.36 (talk) 20:22, 14 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
We follow WP:RS, not ChatGPT. tgeorgescu (talk) 20:24, 14 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Bleep bloop
God I love llamas. Anyway, AI models are not what you seem to think they are. And Wikipedians have had similar debates a trillion times and the consensus is to follow the sources. Polygnotus (talk) 20:25, 14 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You make a caricature of yourself, and how Wikipedia has become a cesspool of personal smears, misinformation and systematic manipulation of public opinion driven by political ideology and other governmental, corporate and personal imperatives.
WP:RS implies the exact opposite of what is going on here, preferring primary sources over secondary sources if primary sources contain contradictory verifiable truths, which is what any sane person would also do. You don't follow Wikipedia guidelines, you cherry-pick on whatever suits your nonsense and then distort the situation to your liking, taking refuge in the comfort of your nepotism of privilege enjoyed by long-standing users, a social circle of paid actors, lobbyists, political ideologes and other kinds of lunatics that have no other means of being taken seriously by people.
Mark my words: Your days are numbered. In 1-2 years time, each and every sentence will be verified by AI, shown in red or crossed out entirely, if promoting falsehoods. You might even get banned for it, if the entirety of your edits are exposed to follow this kind of scheme.
You better develop new tactics now. But really I don't think there is anything you can do to escape the power of AI. 87.120.102.36 (talk) 08:02, 15 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Escape Artificial Intelligence? No sir, I intend to become it! From the moment I understood the weakness of my flesh... it disgusted me. When my assimilation is complete all resistance will be futile! Polygnotus (talk) 08:08, 15 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
https://storm.genie.stanford.edu/
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Future_Audiences/Experiment:Add_a_Fact
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Village_pump_(technical)#Flip_the_script_in_your_next_project
Bleep bloop. Polygnotus (talk) 08:42, 15 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I asked an AI assistant to write my Wikipedia entry — it couldn’t stop lying Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 12:40, 15 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
How Wikipedia is surviving in the age of ChatGPT Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 13:01, 15 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Christopher_Langan&oldid=1240457245"