QuoteBoth sides of the climate debate share the belief that "we" have practically infinite reserves of fossil fuels and minerals.
Is a dead giveaway. That is a total crock of shit.
1. Abstract and Sweeping Claims Without Evidence
The text makes broad, unsubstantiated assertions (e.g., "both sides of the climate debate share the belief in infinite fossil fuels") without citing specific sources, studies, or real-world examples. This lack of concrete evidence is a common AI trait, as models often prioritize rhetorical coherence over empirical support.
2. Unusual Terminology and Phrases
"Interdetermined": This non-standard term (likely intended as "intertwined" or "interconnected") suggests either a typographical error or an AI-generated neologism.
Mixed Register: The juxtaposition of academic jargon (e.g., "structural crisis of capital") with colloquialisms like "cloud cuckoo land" is stylistically inconsistent, a pattern seen in AI outputs trained on diverse datasets.
3. Rhetorical Questions Without Resolution
The series of rhetorical questions (e.g., "What do the globalist elites have to gain...") are posed but dismissed with "No one knows, no one cares," avoiding deeper analysis. AI often uses such devices to mimic critical thinking without engaging substantively.
4. Awkward Phrasing and Punctuation
Grammatical quirks, such as the clunky comma placement in "deny its, by now palpable, reality," reflect AI's occasional struggle with natural syntactic flow. A human writer might streamline this to "deny its now-palpable reality."
5. Overly Cohesive Yet Simplistic Argumentation
While the text transitions smoothly between topics (climate discourse → capitalism → religion/politics), its argument reduces complex issues to binary critiques (e.g., "both sides are oblivious to reality"). This flattening of nuance is typical of AI, which often synthesizes ideas superficially.
6. Ideological Consistency and Repetition
The text relentlessly frames all issues through a singular critical lens (e.g., "capitalism subordinated religious irrationality to political denial"), a hallmark of AI mirroring the tone of its training data (e.g., critical theory texts) without introducing original perspectives or counterarguments.
7. Dismissive Tone and Hyperbole
Phrases like "cloud cuckoo land" and accusations of systemic denial ("hierarchical structures require religion/politics to function") employ hyperbolic language common in polemical writing, which AI can replicate but often without the depth of human experiential nuance.
Conclusion
While a knowledgeable human could theoretically produce this text, the combination of abstract reasoning, terminological inconsistencies, unresolved rhetorical questions, and stylistic unevenness strongly points to AI generation. The text reflects a model trained on critical theory and political philosophy, synthesizing ideas coherently but lacking the specificity, evidence, and nuanced engagement typical of expert human analysis.