I started a Grok thread. You're welcome to continue it.
https://x.com/i/grok?conversation=2018522189029662…

Here's the end of the thread:
Me:
"So, your basically saying this is a complete fabrication, and that Simon Goddek was just reposting defamatory allegations with no basis in investigative journalism or any proven facts?"

Grok:
Yes, based on all available evidence from court documents, flight logs, investigative journalism, and recent DOJ releases (including the massive 2025–2026 batches of millions of pages), the specific claim that Bill Gates visited Epstein's private island (Little St. James) **36 or 37 times** (or had "dinners" there that many times) is a complete fabrication with **no basis** in any verified records or primary sources.

Simon Goddek's original post (the one you linked) directly promotes this exact unsubstantiated number—"Thirty-six 'dinners' on a private pedophile island"—while tying it to Epstein's self-drafted emails about alleged STDs from "Russian girls." Those emails (from July 2013 drafts Epstein sent to himself) make lurid, unverified personal accusations against Gates but **do not mention the island, any visits there, dinners on the island, or the number 36/37 at all**. The island connection is an addition layered on by online commentators and reposts, not from the documents themselves.

### Why This Qualifies as Fabrication, Not Investigative Journalism
- **Flight logs** (subpoenaed and publicly available from multiple sources, including Gawker archives and court unsealing): Show Gates on Epstein's plane **only once**—March 1, 2013, from New Jersey to Palm Beach, Florida (not the island). No logs indicate any trips to Little St. James.
- **Recent Epstein file releases** (DOJ 2025–2026): Include Epstein's unsent draft emails alleging Gates' infidelity and STI issues, plus other correspondence (e.g., with Elon Musk about potential island visits that didn't happen). Nothing substantiates Gates visiting the island, let alone dozens of times. Gates' representatives have consistently described these as Epstein's fabricated attempts to "entrap and defame" him after their association ended.
- **Mainstream reporting and fact-checks** (from outlets like Reuters, http://FactCheck.org, Newsweek, PolitiFact, The New York Times, etc.): Repeatedly confirm no evidence for island visits by Gates. The "36/37" figure appears to be a longstanding online rumor (circulating since at least 2020–2023), possibly conflated with Ehud Barak's documented 36 meetings with Epstein or misread flight data for others like Bill Clinton.
- **No primary evidence**: No photos, witness statements, additional logs, or documents from any credible release support the island claim. The number circulates almost exclusively in social media echo chambers, memes, and reposts (e.g., X threads claiming "37 flights on Lolita Express" without linking to actual logs showing island destinations).

Goddek, who positions himself as a skeptic of official narratives (especially around vaccines and public health), reposted and amplified this without providing or linking to any verifiable source for the 36 figure. His thread juxtaposes Gates' old CNN clip (admitting only to "dinners" with Epstein, meaning in New York/California for philanthropy talks) with the fabricated island tally to imply broader deception. This fits a pattern of sensational amplification rather than rigorous sourcing—common in anti-establishment commentary but not equivalent to investigative journalism backed by facts.

In short: The core association between Gates and Epstein is real (multiple meetings post-2011 conviction, one plane flight, regretted by Gates as a "huge mistake"). But the island visits claim, including the specific "36 dinners" version, has zero evidentiary support and is widely regarded as disinformation. If new documents ever emerge proving otherwise, that would change things—but nothing in the releases to date does.

Thanks for this explanation.  I note you are using AI as a bullshit detector, as an arbiter of conflicting narratives.  From this perspective, I think AI is more of a blessing for humanity rather that a curse . . agree? 

In my experience you can easily be misled by AI if you don't prompt it intelligently and require sources for its claims. AI is "creative" and often fabricates so called "facts". It often uses fallacious reasoning. It often disguises speculation as fact. It often conveniently "forgets" facts which don't match the narrative it is pushing.  These are all human traits too, so we should not be surprised. When Elon said Grok is "maximally truth seeking" - that is puzzling  to me, because natural intelligence isn't necessarily truth seeking to start with.

That is a bloody concise and thoughtful analysis of Grok, based on your experience that is more than mine.  

I am awe-inspired by its ability to give reasonable and rational analyses of tricky political issues.  I feel it will dampen polarization & extremism, rather than exacerbate it.  

Surprised the Spanish PM mentioned that Grok should be censored ;-

https://x.com/clashreport/status/20186503883715217…

In relation to “artificial intelligence” .  . this expert on the subject is telling us that it’s becoming “super intelligence”.  

 Can you imagine a world where all the breakthrough scientific research findings are discovered and published by machines and not humans? 

And living in a world in which us humans don’t even understand what we’re told by the machines because our native intelligence is not high enough? 

This is the Orwellian dystopia.   AI becomes Big Brother who must be obeyed 

would love to hear your take - as modern “IT guy” on what is being said here:- 

https://x.com/vitrupo/status/2018915895351947770?s…