More On Divine Name

This blog goes deep on current divine name work. This includes changes to options in the apps, our working theory, and some examples. Then notes on match dates, shop work and a headline review.

Divine Name Work

Over the past several blogs I have been giving updates on Ryan's current work dealing with the divine name. Last week's BRB update had some initial tooling. More new tooling and markup goes out with this blog.

Over the past several weeks this study has become some sort of fundamental lesson that is a precursor study to the audit and recovery work that we hope to begin next year.

BRB

The link here is to the BRB app. The permanent link for this app is off of paleo.in in the normal way. Most regular readers here probably have the app installed. 2 new options have been added into the menus. Let me explain.

God Keywords

The divine name study involves a limited set of words related to the divine name. "God" is the central word in this space. Then there is a family of personal names, like Joshua, Yahweh and Elohim. Finally there are related words like Messiah and other lessor words, like Father, which are also related.

To help quickly see these words, the Keywords option in the top right menu has a new choice. "God" keyword highlighting.

This option is disabled by default so as not to clutter the text. You can enable it if you are interested. This gives a quick and easy way to see divine names in the running text. Because there is already a green color divine voice found in the voice highlights, the God keyword highlight also uses a green color. This works in the BRB and also in the TT.

Translation

The BRB also has another completely new options category that has been added to the options menu. That category is called Translation. The option went out last week, but the markup is starting to follow in this week's release. You can find it in the top-right drop down menu as usual.

Currently, within that Translation category, there is only 1 choice, dealing with divine names. If you enable this option you will then be able to see some new notation that Ryan is using in his current divine names work. Let me explain the theory behind this new markup.

Assists In Translation

The standard Assist in Translation notation is a pair of square brackets, [], that surround any English words that are expressly added by the translator. Words marked this way are not actually found in the base text, but are implied. This usually comes by study of nearby words in the running text. These words are usually added by translators so readers can more easily and quickly understand what is going on in the flow of the text.

When we brought the Book of Tobit into the BRB, the English text we were using from the mid 1800s already included some assist in translation markup. So the use of these square brackets is not absolutely brand new to the BRB.

This assist in translation notation will now also be used in the BRB to show the implied original divine name. This new markup will follow the English translation of the actual words found in the Aramaic text.

The hidden divine name can be figured out by anyone who cares, but the steps are tricky. This notation gives a clear statement of the results of following the rules. It can be checked by readers who are also interested in this problem. It also lets Ryan check his own work in the future. It also gives the hints needed for expected results in the audit work. I will return to those rules below.

Dropping Some Filter Tags

Until the last several weeks the Filter tag system was used to work on problems related to the divine name. Filter tags only really deal with text thought to be an addition. Filter tags point at passages written by the editors, Solomon, Ahab/Jezebel, Nebuchadnezzar, Mordecai, Ezra and Ananias. Their additions are usually driven by their various personal and political motivations. So passages marked by Filter tags usually involve problems related to the plot of the narrative.

The divine names study is looking at a process of word substitution. So it is conceptually different. Both in terms of the length of the edit, usually just a few words, and then not a strict addition. Divine name changes often involved 1 or more steps in a word changing chain. The Hebrew Old Testament, where this editing took place, also still gives some clues that can help solve this family of riddles.

Conceptually, we have always done this sort of word changing work in the TT app, without any sort of special notation. The job of the TT is to show off what is currently thought to be the inspired text. The TT does not need any particularly new markup. The TT, though, is mostly driven by removing the text in the BRB that is marked out by the Filter family of tags that point at the editors. So by adding notation to the BRB, the clues needed to see the problem are still in the text.

Aramaic Base

The BRB is checked against the Aramaic texts of the Bible. We believe the ancient Aramaic texts stand the best chance of providing source material for a letter level audit and recovery pass that is still ahead. I see this as my own work item, and it waits until most of the current 3d design work is finished.

So by adding notation for likely original divine names we are indicating places where the given Aramaic is not likely ready for audit. Conceptually, audit cares about finding correct spelling and removing added words. The dogs on the Table Exhibit are the place were students learn this system.

Words which are flat out missing cannot simply be recovered, at least not at the letter level using the normal audit tools. This is a modern computer communications theory issue. It is not possible to error detect and correct a message which has not arrived at the receiver.

Since the divine names were being changed, what we have found these past few weeks is the conceptual system for estimating the original divine name. This is indicating how to recover a class of words that are completely missing from the texts passed by history. This is how we get around the theoretical problem of recovering text that no longer exists.

There has been enough prophetic dealing with Greek that we expect to also need to use the Greek texts for some of this work. We brought in Greek texts to our apps and can reference the Greek text for any verse across the Bible. We especially have the LXX, so the Greek OT, around in our systems for this work.

But, the Greek language does not fully cover the Paleo Alphabet like Aramaic and Hebrew. Greek lost several letters, including the Qu. It also gained many letters which have no obvious Paleo equivalent. So use of Greek may still be needed, but it is not as audit ready like Aramaic.

Greek, though, may be supplying better verse order, for example, it may also be supplying otherwise missing verses, not found in the Aramaic. It may also be supplying variant reads for verses found in the Aramaic.

The most ancient surviving whole versions of Tobit, for example, are also only in Greek. Greek may also tie in better to other ancient reference works, like ancient star names, which may eventually show up in additional volumes.

Our Manuscript Model

Our model is that the inspired text was written in the Paleo alphabet using an inspired Paleo language. Aramaic is likely the closest available language which directly links back to that inspired language. Greek was an early parallel language to Aramaic, going back to the same time in history as Aramaic, so Greek provides an important and ancient second witness and check on the Aramaic manuscript tradition.

The work of the editors was likely done in Hebrew, not Aramaic. This, at least, for the Old Testament. The keepers of the Aramaic and Greek texts were thus bringing in inspired Paleo writings as they were created across history and those same scribes were bringing in the Hebrew edits as they were being created.

Our working model is that the Aramaic scribes saw the work of the Hebrew editors as blasphemy, but they had to go along, probably for fear of their lives if they did not change their manuscripts to follow the work of the Hebrew editors.

So the Aramaic scribes adopted some conventions when dealing with the more elaborate set of false divine names found in Hebrew. We are learning those conventions by checking the Aramaic against the Hebrew.

We can use the existing Hebrew manuscripts of the Old Testament to check some of this work. But the rules we're learning apply even to New Testament Aramaic, even though there is no Hebrew New Testament. I will show you an important New Testament example below.

Hebrew Divine Names

One of Ryan's reference works, that he is consulting for this divine names study, lists around 70 different divine names found in the Hebrew Old Testament. This probably isn't surprising. I remember a christian music song years ago that gave a different divine name from each book of the Bible.

In surveying that reference work's list of divine names it turns out most of those are compound names. So they have a well known root, and then some additional word or phrase. They are also often used to name objects, like altars. So most of the names in that reference work are not that interesting right now. What does matter are those few important divine name root words.

But, part of Ryan's current heavy work load comes from working on that long list of the various divine name forms. He must mark up them all so he has control over all of them from within his new tool chain. This is taking time to setup. Probably several more weeks before this settles down.

Let me introduce the 2 main Hebrew root divine names here. But I need to show how they are covered in the Aramaic shorthand, since this is what we face in the New Testament and what we will face when we start a computerized audit.

Elohim

In the BRB, in English, we commonly see the English word god. This can be a reference to the 1 true god, Joshua, or else to any other god, which could be false or imagined. The Paleo word, likely inspired, is going to be spelled Wa-Lu. You probably know this as the "el" syllable that shows up at the end of words like Israel.

The Aramaic uses this same Wa-Lu term to cover for a second Hebrew false divine name. In English you may recognize it as Elohim. It starts with the El term again, which is probably why the Aramaic scribes used Wa-Lu as a cover term for Elohim. The full Paleo spelling is Wa-Lu-Fe-Yo-Mo.

Elohim is a particularly complex term. I remember learning the basics of Hebrew grammar from a textbook. Volume 1 gave the standard rules that any school child would know. Volume 2 of that grammar went into exceptions to the normal obvious grammar rules from volume 1. This Elohim term was a key exception, and it can be used to illustrate the problem.

The Paleo form is Wa-Lu-Fe-Yo-Mo. You can see the Wa-Lu term for god at the front. But the Fe, in Hebrew, is normally a feminine word ending. Any Hebrew word ending in Fe is normally feminine. The Yo-Mo at the tail end of this word is the standard Hebrew plural ending. So try translating this word yourself.

OK, time is up. By strict Hebrew grammar, Elohim should be translated as god, feminine, plural. In English as "goddesses." But Hebrew grammar volume 2 simply decrees this word will always be translated as "god." We see this rule being followed with the Aramaic convention of using Wa-Lu where the Hebrew uses Wa-Lu-Fe-Yo-Mo.

My memory peg example for a use of this word comes from the creation story of Genesis. It begins with, "In the beginning Goddesses created the heavens and the earth." If I translated this way, I would fail advanced Hebrew grammar class, but I would be technically correct.

Ryan has been studying uses of this term very carefully. He went through reading example after example, and his conclusion is that this Elohim term will turn out to be the name of Ezra's important false god. Elohim marks the hand of Ezra.

The term will always show up when Ezra is editing the text to reflect Cyrus' god of the skies. In Ryan's survey, he noted how this term shows up when the text involves god doing something in or with the skies.

This includes stories like creating the heavens, but also, say, coming down on the mountain in Moses' day. Ezra's boss, Cyrus, the Persian, worshipped the god of the skies. Thus Elohim is involved with the skies.

Yahweh

The other term we see commonly in the BRB, so in the Aramaic, is the term "master." This term has a basic meaning that in English can be understood as the word "sir." It is a formal address to someone unknown. It may also be used to address someone in high authority or to whom the speaker wants to give respect.

Outside of the divine name studies, we could imagine using "sir" to translate this Aramaic word. Using "sir" would dis-entangle it from the divine name uses of this same term. A test, using English, is to ask could "sir" replace "master" in the English sentence and that sentence still make sense. If it does, then master is being used in the simple case as a form of address.

Beyond this simple use of the word, we are then looking at another Aramaic cover word for still other divine name references. We can figure this out by looking at the Old Testament Hebrew texts where master is showing up in Aramaic.

Normally we will find the Hebrew term Yahweh at those locations. So "master" is an Aramaic cover term, for Yahweh. The Aramaic scribes were not committing blasphemy when they chose the word "sir" instead of Yahweh. They gave this term respect, but not a name. But the grammar gives away that this is not just a polite form of address.

As I have explained in recent blogs, we see Yahweh in Hebrew in places where the true divine name Joshua was originally used. This would be the same personal name Joshua as used in the New Testament. This change would have been done by Solomon when he first started editing the text. It can also be caused later when a later inspired writer uses Joshua, so this is not strictly a Solomon issue all the way across the Old Testament.

So from the perspective of the Aramaic, as given, the term master may be covering over Solomon's use of his false god's name Yahweh, or else master may be covering over the term Joshua as used by inspired writers.

Because master can also mean sir, when we see master show up in Aramaic, there are 3 possible underlying inspired terms. Figuring out the correct term is the work that Ryan is doing now.

Others

In Ryan's survey so far there are a few other rare terms that may eventually play with this problem too. "Father" for example is used in conjunction with the divine name. Adoni is another name that may eventually matter. Messiah is another term found in the New Testament which is also involved in this system of divine names.

These other terms will get more attention in future weeks. The task right now is to reformat the BRB markup so it uses assist in translations instead of Filter Tags in order to mark up how this divine name problem is presented. This also means other tooling to handle how that markup is transformed when the BRB text is used in the other apps, like the TT.

We have spent time this week making tweaks to the fundamental configuration files that drive how these problems are solved. How to transform the inbound terms is now specified in a single file that handles both the BRB and TT. These 2 texts that Ryan actively manages should now not get out of sync going forward. Those tooling changes should be ready for whatever else may be found as this work progresses, especially as Ryan works through those 70 divine names.

Same Aramaic Rules For New Testament

To understand the steps that follow, we need to remember that the New Testament is supplied by history to us in Aramaic and Greek. For the reasons I spelled out above, the Aramaic is going to be the primary text for recovery. There may need to be some references to the Greek, for the same reasons as Greek might be needed in the Old Testament.

There is no Hebrew New Testament passed to us by history, so we have no choice but to use Aramaic as the basis of recovery.

Because there is no Hebrew New Testament, we do not have the ability to figure out different versions of any theoretical Hebrew to Aramaic conventions.

This looks to ultimately not be a problem. All we need to do is use the SAME CONVENTIONS used by Aramaic scribes against the Old Testament Hebrew. By learning and using these Aramaic conventions, we can figure out what divine name terms were used by the inspired writers of the New Testament. We have never had this ability before.

With those conventions in hand, we can now start to find the places where the inspired New Testament writers were telling us directly about those false gods, especially Yahweh and Elohim, and the men who followed them.

Luke 1

Last week I used an example from Luke 1, where Gabriel shows up.

The rules I have spelled out in this blog provide a slight modification to that story. The Aramaic term "god" is a cover term for the generic "god" or else it is a cover term for the false god "Elohim." We, as readers of the Aramaic, must decide which term was likely inspired. We figure that out based on the context. We will eventually use the audit to confirm this work.

Luke 1:8-9 reads, "It came to pass when he was ministering in the order of his ministry before God, according to the custom of the priesthood, his turn came to burn incense and he entered the temple of the Master."

OK, so use the same rules as the Aramaic uses in the Old testament. God covers a reference to Elohim, and master covers a reference to Yahweh. Let me show what will happen in the BRB... "It came to pass when he was ministering in the order of his ministry before God [Elohim] according to the custom of the priesthood, his turn came to burn incense and he entered the temple of the Master [Yahweh].

We can continue and look at Luke 1:11. It begins with "A king of the Master appeared to Zechariah..."

So what is the inspired word behind the Aramaic "Master?"

Check Sir, then check Solomon's Yahweh, then check Joshua.

Using the assist in translation markup, that passage likely originally read "A king of Master [Joshua] appeared to Zechariah."

In the TT, which applies the assist in translation directly inline, we would expect to see "It came to pass when he was ministering in the order of his ministry before Elohim according to the custom of the priesthood, his turn came to burn incense and he entered the temple of Yahweh."

And then at verse 11, "A king of Joshua appeared to Zechariah..."

What this divine names work is doing is providing the evidence chain needed to establish the most likely inspired divine name terms used in both the Old Testament, but especially in the New Testament. This is telling us where we need to start with audit work here in another few months.

These verses at the start of Luke are the fundamental context for the New Testament itself. With the correct words inserted back into the text, we can see the fight between the true god and the gods who occupy the attention of the rulers of Jerusalem. In particular the false gods Elohim and Yahweh are being defeated by Joshua. In history, it took about 70 years and Zechariah's temple of Yahweh was gone.

There is another particularly interesting example of this near the start of 1 Corinthians 12. Let me show you.

1 Corinthians 12

The link here is to 1 Corinthians 12 in the BRB. The topic is the start of Paul's discussion on Spiritual gifts. The interesting verse in question is verse 3.

I am going to quote the verse here in full and break it down.

In 1 Corinthians 12:3 we read, "Therefore, I want you to understand that there is no man who by the spirit of God speaks and says, Accursed is Joshua, and that no man can say that, The Master is Joshua, but by the holy spirit."

So far, the only difficult term in this passage is "Master." Remember the rules above. It can be "sir" if it is used to address someone where the speaker does not otherwise know the name. It can be Yahweh, because it is dealing with Solomon's false god. Or, finally, in can be Joshua himself.

The term "sir" does not work here for "master" because it is not used as some form of address. You can test this case by mentally reading master as sir, and you can see this does not work here. We can rule out that choice easy enough.

The term "Joshua" does not work for "master" here either because in this case the term "Joshua" follows immediately in the same sentence.

So the only remaining possible inspired term here is going to be Yahweh.

So the verse is saying 2 things that anyone lead by the spirit cannot say, neither that "accursed is Joshua" nor that "Yahweh is Joshua."

But if you read the sentence again it appears to not make sense. This is because there is still an edit in this sentence. Ananias absolutely wanted Yahweh to be Joshua. Ananias was accursed. So he added a tail to reverse the meaning of the second clause in this sentence. Ananias added "but by the holy spirit."

The likely original text for 1 Corinthians 12:3 reads like this. "Therefore, I want you to understand that there is no man who by the spirit of God speaks and says, Accursed is Joshua, and no man can say that, Yahweh is Joshua."

No one who ever claimed Joshua had anything to do with Solomon's temple to Yahweh was speaking by the true spirit of God.

Psalms 23

The link here is to Psalms 23 in the BRB. There was some feedback this week on this Psalm. I said I would address this in the blog because readers here are going to want to see this problem too.

This Psalm is a good illustration of another family of related issues that is showing up from this divine names study.

It helps to understand this Psalm by turning on all of the Address related options in the Address choice in the top right menu. This markup allows study of passages where the audience for the writing is not normal readers of the text itself. This is a different aspect of the text, and is different than that normal voice related coloring that we have had around for years. Since it is a specialized study, and because it can be a distraction, it is normally not shown unless the related Address options are actually turned on.

This Psalm is written in normal narrator's voice and initially it is written with readers as the intended audience. So it is addressed to readers by default. There is no special address markup at the start of this Psalm nor in the tail.

In verses 4, 5 and the first half of 6, the address changes. Those verses are written to, or addressed to, presumably Joshua himself.

Change in address, apparently mid Psalm, is a peculiar feature of the text and is probably showing off an edit. As I write this there are no Filter related tags. Ryan has not yet decided what to do with this Psalm. It remains whole, even in the TT. This Psalm, even with trouble, is in the TT so the Psalm itself can be studied in the Table of 400. Perhaps it grids in some interesting way to help figure out what is going on here.

But, this strangely addressed interior part of this Psalms suggests some sort of editor related trouble.

The very bottom of the Psalm returns to normal voice and it indicates that the previous content is how the writer intends to live in the "house of Master" forever. Note that verse 1 also has the term Master.

So the feedback this week was on the TT. This Master term, in the TT, is being substituted to Yahweh. This is a mistake as correctly noted by the feedback. But the whole Psalm has a complex problem.

Let me step through our understanding so you can see what may be going on with this Psalm.

The Aramaic term Master is either, Sir, Yahweh, or Joshua. We can test these terms by reading the Psalm in order to see which term was likely inspired, if any. Since there are 2 different uses of this term, we need to check both uses.

In neither case does Sir fit the grammar as a possible original term. So we are looking at either Joshua or Yahweh. It is not likely inspired if it is written to Yahweh. So you would expect Joshua to be the divine name when this Psalm shows up in the TT.

But note, Ryan's tool chain defaults Master to Yahweh. Ryan must take action to convert Master to Joshua. He must agree with the logic of why this would be Joshua for some inspired reason.

The challenging part of this Psalm is actually in verse 6.3. Note how it is referencing the "house of Master." Can this be house of Yahweh? So Solomon's house?

If an editor wrote this then yes, this could be Yahweh's house. But the text around this verse starts to create trouble. The story is now messed up because having that house to stand in, forever, is probably not going to happen. The house of Yahweh, in Jerusalem, has certainly not stood forever, at least so far.

So what about the word Master becoming the word Joshua in that 6.3 verse? So the "house of Joshua?" Is that someplace where someone could stand forever?

Seeing this possible substitution is what stopped Ryan from doing any more work on this Psalm. He left the substitution as Master to Yahweh in the TT, the default, which is what triggered the feedback this week.

If Solomon's temple is NOT Joshua's house, and if at least the bottom of this Psalm is inspired, then what, or where, is Joshua's actual house?

Joshua himself had a house at Capernaum. That Capernaum house did not stand forever. So is there yet somewhere else that could be called Joshua's house?

Does Joshua have a house? Never before have we seen Joshua having an eternal house, a place where someone could stand forever.

If in fact Joshua does have such a house, then Solomon's house seen in other passages might be a repurposing of text originally dealing with Joshua's house.

This is getting complicated.

You can see why Ryan stopped working on this. He has several thousand other places to work on too, so he moved on to other, easier, passages.

Joshua's House

I've delayed a little here so readers might be able to guess Joshua's house.

It has another name, Eden. Anyone who is a walk-off believer goes there. It is an eternal house. It can, in time, even escape the Solar system. It has an inter-stellar propulsion system. It is a place where people can live forever.

As a general rule, nearly everything in the text, including names of the exhibits, has more than 1 name. Why would Eden be any different?

So how should this Psalm 23 actually read?

The part of the Psalm in the center, so verse 4, 5, and the front of 6, all with the screwy form of address, are likely added by an editor, famous as those verses may be.

The editor's purpose was to change the reference to Joshua's house, so Eden, at the bottom of the psalm, so it would instead seem to be a reference to Solomon's temple.

The Psalm is explaining how following the paths that Joshua has laid out for us has a goal of living in Eden forever.

More Work

There are some more steps of this divine names work that have become more obvious over the past week. The first major step is to survey all of the exact Hebrew terms used behind the Aramaic terms for God and Master. This is in part to make sure we are not missing anything in some dusty corner of the text.

We need to ensure that these Aramaic terms are only hiding the terms as I've suggested in this blog. We need to make sure there are no other surprises there. The divine name story is complex and there are compound forms hidden away in the Old Testament. So there is well known complexity here.

That Hebrew textual information needs to be connected through into the BRB. Likely this becomes part of the new assist in translation notation that Ryan is working on. That Hebrew data, when available, provides more visibility to the logical chain being used to reach the conclusion about what term is likely inspired.

The Old Testament Hebrew has the whole chain, the New Testament is simpler. So as I've described above, the Old Testament needs to be completely surveyed so we know the field of play for problems in the New Testament. The New Testament passages related to the divine name then need to stay within the bounds of the Old Testament.

This is much more work to do, but it is the path to solving a whole family of textual riddles that matter in many ways, both for understanding the text as given, and for any sort of future audit and recovery work.

Match Dates

This past Monday we had a mild watch date dealing with the start of David's reign. We did not expect a heavy headline. Plagues related stories start in January of 2026. But, there was a little interesting headline.

10 Downing St

The previous week had been a flurry of work dealing with a multi point peace plan being prepared by the USA for Europe and Russia in order to end the war in Ukraine.

The problem with the plan was obvious to essentially everyone in the alternative media space. Russia must have a security buffer to protect it from NATO attack. This was promised to Russia as early as 1991. Ukraine is the territory of that buffer. This buffer is needed because the Europeans, really their Zionist bankers, are still planning a future war with Russia.

By the prophetic date in question, there was a meeting at 10 Downing Street, the house of the Prime Minister in the UK. At that meeting Trump's plan was rejected and World War III was back on.

Note the best alternative histories for World War II suggest Germany was being lead by London, especially London bankers. History is repeating.

King David was originally from the Tribe of Judah, which became modern Russia. David looks to be getting his way, especially at this time. The ball was back in Russia's court, they need to conquer most of Ukraine as soon as they can.

Shop Work

At the start of this past week the 3d printers were continuing to print out tiles for the Tiles exhibit.

The complete set of tiles was finished this week. But I have delayed printing of the case for those items. There is a question of the curriculum when using those tiles. There may need to be a few more duplicates within the set in order to make them easier to use when teaching aspects of the 3d models. I will return to that exhibit when I have the inspiration on how to handle this problem.

So the printer that had been running the tiles is now running a reprint of the ladder exhibit. Ryan had suggested using links instead of rope for these parts. This means no need for calling out hard to specify decorative rope. Now, everything just gets 3d printed. The use of links causes the ladder rungs to naturally square to each other. Watch for pics on Telegram, this is turning out nice.

The reprints for the chests is also continuing to run this week. The first full chest was assembled. The printers are now working on the 2nd chest.

This reprint includes serious changes in the artwork for the "orange" chest. It now exactly follows artwork from the Megiddo Mosaic floor. I can now explain the strange branching path we saw on that floor. It was never the alphabet path around the Qu Map. That strange path is now rendered in plastic with reasonable coloring as per the rest of the exhibits. Watch for pics on telegram.

Headline Review

The following caught my attention this week.

Fact Checking Grok

When Musk first started talking up Grok he was boasting that the goal of Grok is to be maximally truth seeking. At the time it was clear that even trivial questions asked of Grok were returning stupid to idiotic answers. The best response for real world users was to just wait, and give the Grok team time to fix their mess.

OK, so it has been maybe a year. I have been watching for anyone who has been running current, simple, technical, tests against Grok to see how truthful it might be now.

The link above is by Tony Heller on his Youtube channel where he fact checks Grok on the issue of global warming. Tony is perhaps a world expert on the problem. Global warming is actually a massive fabricated hoax. Because that hoax is used to justify various types of slavery, I suspect it is a Zionist hoax, but I digress.

The trick behind this modern fiction is normally to ignore actual climate data from before about 1960. More generally, the United States was significantly hotter during the 1930s than it is now. Also worth noting is the summer high temperature trend in the USA has been tracking downward since the 1890s when widespread record keeping first started.

So the video above asks Grok various questions about climate. The video then shifts to actual queries against a real climate database and shows Grok to still be an uneducated dolt. Grok has been trained to believe the climate hoax. Even worse, Grok berates the question. Grok should be considered a religious platform, not a truth seeking platform, as are apparently all the other major AI platforms.

We must presume if Grok cannot get basic historical data correct, then it cannot be trusted on anything else. We will need to try again in another year.

SpaceX to go Public

The link here is to the Farzad channel on Youtube. It is a video that goes into recent news that Elon Musk's SpaceX is expected to go public in the second half of 2026. Farzad is my favorite tracker of all things Elon, especially Tesla. Now he has SpaceX to track too.

This is expected to be the largest Initial Public Offering (IPO) in history, larger than the Aramco IPO, which was the Saudi Oil Company. Key drivers of this includes progress on the Star Ship rocket development, massive expansion of the Star Link internet service and soon a direct satellite to cell phone voice service.

Star Link internet service is still signing up something approaching 15,000 new customers each day. Key future businesses include satellite based AI data centers, cheap delivery of massive cargo tonnage to low earth orbit as well as high volume transit to Mars.

Elon deserves high praise for this amazing company.

If SpaceX can survive the war, it may become the main driver for Mars colonization. The big problem is that most of their key development facilities are in areas not likely to survive.

More Later,

Phil