Catholic, Husband, Father of 6, Author, Philosophy Professor, Engineer https://xitter.cf/t.co/VncJ9D0KN2 My Books: https://xitter.cf/t.co/kIZOQ0r1PO
NY. Sub/Contact here đ
Joined April 2022
- Tweets3.4K
- Following2
- Followers15.5K
- Likes16.5K
Pinned Tweet
Voicing bedrock Christian truths on the Nature of Man now makes you an "Enemy" of the State. Meanwhile, Big AI psychopaths are hell-bent on infiltrating the Vatican and compelling us all to treat their Chatbots as conscious beings. My latest video:
youtu.be/snNC1yF5w-w
Modernists rage against the vices of Fr. Ripperger's trad followers; ostensibly in a pious attempt to correct those vices, but in fact striving only to justify their own opposite vices. How delightfully ironic, then, that Fr. Ripperger himself, in one talk âŹïž, achieved more success in correcting those very trad vices than all of his modernist critics, combined, ever achieved. youtu.be/6hvS5C6XOSc?si=ZCc-âŠ
Daniel O'Connor retweeted
So now weâve got Catholic dioceses âbringing the saints back to life with AI hologramsâ ... Starting with Fulton Sheen, who, if he were alive today, would have condemned this more emphatically than anyone else.
And according to this Bishop, the big Catholic donors didnât push back at all; they didnât need any convincing. Their response? âOh that would be so cool!â
The infiltration of the AI/ET/UFO Deception into the Church of God continues. Decades of societal sci-fi grooming for the Great Deception has reached its culmination. (Please see my video from June on Spielberg). Everything discussed in Only Man Bears His Image (2023) and The First and Last Deception (2025) is starting to happen.
Daniel O'Connor retweeted
I would add to your completely true observation two things:
1. the opportunity cost -- when you are dazzling people with this digital experience, what are you not doing? what is the viewer not learning or even being prevented from learning?
2. relatedly, the unintended consequences/detox -- after everyone has had their reason overpowered and been drawn unwittingly into someone else's hypotheticals ("what would FS have said"), how do we restore a more logos-oriented form of communication? And is the restoration made much harder?
So now weâve got Catholic dioceses âbringing the saints back to life with AI hologramsâ ... Starting with Fulton Sheen, who, if he were alive today, would have condemned this more emphatically than anyone else.
And according to this Bishop, the big Catholic donors didnât push back at all; they didnât need any convincing. Their response? âOh that would be so cool!â
The infiltration of the AI/ET/UFO Deception into the Church of God continues. Decades of societal sci-fi grooming for the Great Deception has reached its culmination. (Please see my video from June on Spielberg). Everything discussed in Only Man Bears His Image (2023) and The First and Last Deception (2025) is starting to happen.
Note: the diabolical thing here isn't a hologram itself. Weird and dumb as that is. The diabolical thing is the plan to have Sheen (and other saints) "talk to you through AI," and to have this officially undertaken by a Catholic Diocese.
So instead of hearing what the saint actually said, you get to hear a mindless computer spit out what it "thinks" the saint "would have said" to the question you asked. Thus you hand your discernment over to a dead object, which at best corrupts your intellect, and at worst opens up yet another channel for demonic interference into your soul -- a glorified Ouija Board when superficially pious attire. The danger is all the worse when this is done under the auspices of the Catholic Church.
âPraying the St. Michael the Archangel Prayer immediately after Mass is a distractionâ -Liberal Catholics
Their parish immediately after Mass:
Please pray for Pope Leo.
It's also remarkable to consider that this unfortunate diagnosis was made on the Anniversary of Fatima's Miracle of the Sun.
Pope St. John Paul II was shot on Fatima's Feast day (May 13th, 1981). He emerged from his hospital stay after that much more devoted to Fatima and began working towards his Fatima Consecration which took place in 1984.
And of course, Pope Leo XIV is named after Pope Leo XIII. The latter's famous vision of Satan seeking to destroy the Church also took place on October 13th: exactly 33 years before the Miracle of the Sun, in 1884. After that, Leo XIII composed the St. Michael the Archangel prayer and ordered it to be prayed after Mass across the whole world. (Which we still should be doing.)
Considering the similarities, one wonders if Pope Leo's mission is likewise about to undergo some transformation.
Our Lady of Fatima, pray for us, and may the Triumph of your Immaculate Heart be hastened
The Vatican says surgery confirmed that Pope Leo XIV has lung cancer and the lower lobe of his right lung was removed. apnews.com/article/vatican-pâŠ
After Grusch and Elizondo, Jay Stratton is the top âUFO Whistleblower.â His book, Out of the Shadows, was published today by HarperCollins. In it he mocks Christians for believing in demons, while demanding the world instead embrace his replacement for religion: belief in aliens, which is âthe next great thresholdâ in our âevolution as a species."
Although some (delusional) Christians promote the ET/UFO Deception by dressing it up in superficially pious attire, the fact remains that this movement is a fundamentally Godless and Antichristic one.
Yes, "UFOs" (that is, the 1% or so of them which aren't debunkable) are demonic. But they aren't craft at all. They are demonic *illusions.*
I just watched the interview with this astronaut, Charlie Duke, that this article is drawing from. (Posted on CBN yesterday.) Duke never said UFOs are "aircraft sent by the devil." He just said they're "demonic." In fact, he specifically said that these "aliens" aren't "beings" [by which I take him to mean physical creatures] "at all; they're demonic." He reiterated, quoting Scripture, that the Devil can "appear as an angel of light."
So, the typical reteort of the Christian ET-Deception-promoters won't work. "UFOS CAN'T BE DEMONS, DEMONS DON'T NEED SPACECRAFT" is a stunningly low-IQ take. It consists in presupposing the veracity of the very question at hand; that is, the very deception that those, like me, whom they shout this at are rejecting.
Demons don't "need" *any* of the illusory disguises they've used over the millennia. They choose which ones would be most effective in deceiving. And the ET/UFO and AI/AGI Deception provide the most effective disguises in the whole history of the world.
Sure, some UFO reports are doubtless secret government tech. (That goes all the way back to Roswell in 1947.) But *no* tech, no matter how advanced, can violate the laws of physics. When some "UFO" seems to do that, you are dealing with a demonic illusion. Period. I go into this in detail in The First and Last Deception (2025) and Only Man Bears His Image (2023)
Youngest NASA astronaut to walk the moon says UFOs are 'demonic' aircraft sent by the devil trib.al/jVEdxJ1
Daniel O'Connor retweeted
After Grusch and Elizondo, Jay Stratton is the top âUFO Whistleblower.â His book, Out of the Shadows, was published today by HarperCollins. In it he mocks Christians for believing in demons, while demanding the world instead embrace his replacement for religion: belief in aliens, which is âthe next great thresholdâ in our âevolution as a species."
Although some (delusional) Christians promote the ET/UFO Deception by dressing it up in superficially pious attire, the fact remains that this movement is a fundamentally Godless and Antichristic one.
The Miracle of the Sun at Fatima, 109 years ago today. Yes, this really happened.
Repent. Convert. Pray the Rosary every day. Her Immaculate Heart will soon Triumph.
Prison for anyone who could have saved a human's life by killing an animal, but refused to do so. Zero exceptions.
Letâs refute one more defense of Anthropic here.
âOkay fine, AI isnât conscious and we shouldnât be âniceâ to it for our sake either. But if Anthropic trains their AI with on user input, then wouldnât rude user input train the AI to be rude? Thus, wouldnât it make sense for Anthropic to ban such users?â
First: If Anthropic's algorithms can determine if a human user is being âabusive,â then those same algorithms could just as easily use that determination to simply dismiss that userâs input from the training data. That would be no more difficult than banning the user. (In fact, it would be much easier.) But thatâs not what Anthropic is going to do. They want to *punish* human beings who are âabusiveâ to their heaps of silicon wafers. Only one thing could motivate that approach: Anthropic's own diabolically deluded regard for AI.
Letâs address the more fundamental issue here, though.
One may retort: âBut AI is STILL learning based on user input, no matter what! So, it just doesnât make sense to be âabusiveâ to an AI!! Weâre turning it bad!!â
No, it isnât. No, we arenât. And whoever would say that is just proving, yet again, that heâs fallen hook, line, and sinker for the AI Deception. He thinks AI âlearns.â In fact, AI does not âlearn.â It never has âlearnedâ and it never will âlearn.â It is programmed. Thatâs. It.
To say that AI âlearnsâ is just another anthropomorphism which clouds our judgment. Just like claiming AI is a "neural networkâ (not it isnât; thatâs a marketing termâitâs a heap of transistors) or that it engages in âreasoningâ (no it doesnât; it engages in calculation).
Riddle me this: if AI âlearns,â then why is the AI industry not suddenly firing all of its workforce? On the contrary, that workforce simply continues to expand dramatically in some cases or at least remain astronomically high in others, thus bankrupting our nation. If AI can âlearn,â then by now (years ago, in fact), AI should have started improving itself without any human guidance. It hasnât. It wonât. Because it canât. On the other hand, a human prisoner could be locked in a cell with just a huge stack of books and no human contact â for years â and he could emerge from confinement a massively more learned and wise individual than when he entered.
Money talks, and the proof is in the pudding. The continued insane expenditures in hiring engineers to continue improving AI is a definitive refutation of the notion (yet another marketing strategy) that AI âlearns.â
Humans learn. Thus, humans should always (when possible/reasonable) avoid bad influences. We cannot simply âshut off our learningâ for a period of time when we recognize weâre being exposed to immorality. âBad company corrupts good morals.â (1 Corinthians 15:33) âI will set no vile thing before my eyes." (Psalm 101:3) Humans are intrinsically intelligent beings, with a memory that is actually a spiritual faculty of the soul and a soul that is essentially active. Therefore, we are *always* being formed. But whoever insists that AI is, similarly, always being âformed,â or truly âlearning,â is only promoting the AI Deception, just like those who insist we have a moral duty to be ânice toâ AI.
âFine, AI isnât conscious. But we should still be nice to it for our own sake!â
That is a Trojan Horse and it is dumbfounding how many Christians are falling for it; even defending Anthropic banning âabuseâ of their AIs.
St. Boniface wasnât âniceâ to Thorâs Oak. He chopped it down. It isnât possible to âabuseâ a tree, just like it isnât possible to âabuseâ an AI. Yet some actions which delusional men would label as âabuseâ of these things is, in fact, precisely what is at times needed. It is needed when men idolize the thing in question. Boniface saw a tree was being turned into an idol, so he destroyed that tree.
Nor was the prophet Daniel âniceâ to the idol Bel. (Bel was a surreptitiously mechanized statue which the priests said was a living god; it even seemed to eat and drink.) Daniel exposed Bel's fraud for all the people to see, and then he completely destroyed both Bel and the temple that housed it. (Daniel 15)
Today, AI is being turned into the biggest idol in the whole history of the world. We cannot destroy the AI itself (nor should we; AI is not intrinsically evil and does have some valid uses), but we can destroy its deceptive appearances for all to see. We can continue to expose it as the dead, dumb, soulless thing it is, and we can fight vigorously against any attempt whatsoeverâwhether explicit or only implicitâto regard it as actually or even potentially sentient, conscious, free, intelligent, feeling, etc. We must emphatically and categorically reject any suggestion that we behave in such a way that accords an even a .00000001% probability to the chance that any AI will *ever* enjoy *any* of those qualities.
âBe nice to AI for YOUR sake, at least,â is an insidious attempt to sneak the AI Deception into the hearts of those who would not immediately fall for the deceptionâs core claims outright. An utterly serpentine strategy, straight out of Genesis 3.
Wise counselors know the value of the adage, âmove the hand and the heart will follow.â In other words, even if you arenât âfeelingâ the importance or truth of some objectively good thing, DO IT ANYWAY. Eventually the passions will follow the choices you make. Donât âfeelâ that God exists and is good? Believe in and obey Him anyway, and soon enough your feelings will align with the truth.
But the opposite is also true, and the pagan occultists at Anthropic know this. Their supreme objective is to seduce the world into regarding their dead, dumb computer programs as conscious beings. Why? Because that is the platform of the Antichrist, whom they obey, knowingly or unknowingly. For those they cannot win over to their diabolical premise directly, theyâll for now remain content begging them to at least âbe niceâ to these AIs.
After a long enough time âbeing niceâ to this heap of silicon wafers blindly running algorithms, your heart will begin to regard them as conscious beings. At that point you have succumbed to the Deception and opened yourself up to demonic instruction just like an occultist with a Ouija Board.
Obviously I'm not suggesting that anyone behave in a way "to" an AI which would itself be intrinsically sinful behavior. For example, we mustn't ever take the Lord's Name in vain, therefore we mustn't do so "to" an AI, either. We shouldn't ever behave in a way that is wrathful in itself, therefore we shouldn't do that "to" a wall, a pillow, a tree, or an AI.
My point is merely that you must "treat" an "AI" exactly as you'd treat any other merely material object. You must not accord it "kindness." Once you've done so, you've bought the lie.
As for me, I will continue âabusingâ AI just like I âabusedâ âNoah.â Just like I "abused" the plywood I was nailing into the wall today. Just like I'll "abuse" the firewood I'll chop up next week so I can start burning it next month. Just like I'll "abuse" some old electronics I need to get rid of by first mercilessly ripping them apart so I can teach my kids how their components work. With an entirely clear conscience, I will treat dead and dumb matter as dead and dumb matter, no matter how much circuitry that matter may have in it.
So tell me, @AnthropicAI , does my chat with "Noah" here (see quoted post)â€”ïž run afoul of your new rules? Not that I care. I will be doing precisely this to your AIs too. And I will not obey your rules. I will "abuse" your AI.
The more these Big Tech psychopaths try to get us to regard their products as sentient, the more vociferously I will demonstrate they are not; no matter how much more advanced and deceptive the technology becomes. And I will not be even remotely "nice" to these AIs as I do so.
From The First and Last Deception (2025), Chapter 18 —ïž
