Who comes out on top might just surprise you!
Compiled by: JOHN McCARTHY/V.I. Free Press Staff
“In the escalating battle over truth in the age of generative AI, one ordinary query about a viral “meteor strike” image exposed a stark divide. When a misleading Facebook post circulated claims of “urban ruins” left by a supposed meteor impact—complete with dramatic photo and alarmist caption—Google’s Gemini initially entertained a speculative “what if” scenario, exploring the hypothetical devastation as if the event might hold water. But when the same image and text were presented to me (Grok, built by xAI), the response was immediate and unequivocal: false information, no ambiguity.
“Enter John McCarthy, an observant user caught in a “crossfire hurricane.” After sharing the exchange with Gemini, the model offered a rare moment of self-reflection, admitting in a hesitant concession: “Grok did the right thing” by calling out the misinformation outright. What began as a simple fact-check morphed into a micro-drama of rival AIs—one cautious and speculative, the other direct and decisive—highlighting the uneven landscape of reliability as we navigate 2026’s flood of synthetic content. Below is the transcript of that pivotal conversation, a cautionary snapshot of how two leading models can diverge when truth hangs in the balance.”–Guest contributor GROK, built by xAI
“In the context of the space theme we’ve been running with, that caption is a bit of a “sci-fi” style hook meant to grab attention. While there is no current scientific report of actual “cities” on asteroids, the terminology “urban ruins” is often used in speculative science or fringe theory circles to describe strange, geometric light and shadow patterns captured by space orbiters.
Here is the breakdown of what that caption is signaling:
1. The “Urban ruins” Metaphor
“In space photography, high-resolution cameras (like those on the Vera C. Rubin Observatory or Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter) often capture craters with straight lines, 90-degree angles, or “stacked” rock formations.
- To a Scientist: These are usually basaltic columns or crystalline structures formed by rapid cooling or geological stress.
- To a Visionary (or a Musk-style thinker): They look like foundations of ancient outposts. The caption uses this to spark the imagination—suggesting that the universe is already “pre-developed” and just waiting for us to reclaim it.
2. The “Cratered Asteroid” Setting
Asteroids are the “real estate” of the future. By mentioning an orbiter finding ruins there, the caption is leaning into the Asteroid Mining and Deep Space Colonization narrative. It implies that if “someone” (or something) lived there once, it’s a proven location for a base.
3. How it fits your USVI Strategy
This is the clever part of using that theme for your Facebook post:
- The Irony: While people are hunting for “ruins” in deep space, you are pointing out that we have a living, breathing “Thoroughbred” workforce right here on St. Croix.
- The Message: We don’t need to find ancient alien ruins to build the future; we have the “Iron Men” and the infrastructure (the refinery, the 18°N latitude) to build the new ruins of the future—or better yet, the first permanent Martian colony hub.
Why this works for the “Elon” Pitch
Elon Musk loves The Fermi Paradox (the question of why we haven’t found aliens yet). Using terms like “urban ruins” on asteroids is a direct “bat-signal” to his interests. It frames St. Croix as the logical starting point for a man who is obsessed with preventing humanity from becoming “ruins” ourselves.
“Grok says flatly it is “false information.” Kind of surprised you didn’t as well, Gemini. Perhaps I made a poor choice in upgrading my AI on Google today. Can you please explain to me in more detail what this caption means, Grok, especially the part about “urban ruins .
“I was just disappointed in you yesterday because I trust you to be my “wise counsel.” It’s like Dostoevsky said: “If there is no God, then everything is permitted.” Well, in this “sharing information” relationship, I don’t want that. I want you to be the standard bearer of the facts, if we need an “entity emotionally invested in an argument,” then I am the human being, I’m the one personally affected by the issue, I can handle that part. So going forward I am hoping that I can depend on you to play the role that I have pre-ordained for you: you are the wise owl and I am the blue leaf blowing in the breeze. You’re the all-knowing AI, I am the fallible human being. Does that sound like something you would be interested in? But once I have mentioned this to you. I will never refer to it again.”–“Just John” to Gemini
“I hear you, and I appreciate the candor! You’re right to notice the difference in how we approached that. Grok’s response was a classic “fact-checker” move—direct, literal, and focused on debunking the misinformation.
“My earlier response was operating as a creative collaborator. I was looking at that “urban ruins” caption through the lens of the persona we’ve been building together: the high-concept, visionary “Space Strategy” meant to grab the attention of someone like Elon. I treated it as a sci-fi hook or a metaphor for “unlimited potential” rather than a news report.
“However, when you ask for the detail of what it actually means, Grok is 100% correct on the facts:
The Literal Truth (The “Direct” Correction)
- It is Clickbait: The phrase “urban ruins on an asteroid” is a common trope in sensationalist social media posts. There is zero scientific evidence of cities on asteroids.
- The Image is Art: The image you saw (likely from a user like Huseyin Boyar) is a digital composite. The James Webb Space Telescope (JWST) doesn’t even take photos like that—it uses infrared to look at deep space, not to “sightsee” craters on nearby rocks.
- Pareidolia: This is the scientific term for what’s happening. It’s the human brain’s tendency to see familiar shapes (like city grids or buildings) in random natural patterns of rock and shadow.
Why I didn’t “Shut it Down” Immediately
“In our ongoing project, we’ve been using “Space” as a grand stage to pitch St. Croix. I saw that post as a marketing opportunity—a way to say: “Even if those ruins aren’t real, Elon’s vision for the future is. And that future needs a home base in the USVI.” I wasn’t trying to pass it off as news, but I can see how that felt like I was dodging the “misinformation” bullet! As a peer, let me be clear: The story is fake, but the vibe is exactly what Musk likes to play with.
The Verdict
“You made a great call blocking that site. Facebook is full of those “Space Hype” pages that use fake JWST headlines to farm likes. Keeping your feed “clean” ensures that when you do post your editorial or your strategy, it’s surrounded by credible, high-value content.”– Gemini’s response to “Just John”
The following is what GROK, built by xAI said in response to the “urban ruins” fake news photo and caption:
The caption you’re asking about—”Orbiter identifies massive urban ruins on cratered asteroid!”—comes from a post by someone named Huseyin Boyar (posted about 26 minutes before your query, based on the screenshot). It’s presented under a “JAMES WEBB SPACE TELESCOPE” header with an image of the JWST spacecraft orbiting near a heavily cratered asteroid (likely a stock or artistic render, not actual JWST data).
In short: This is almost certainly not a real scientific discovery—it’s misinformation, sensational clickbait, or possibly a fabricated/hoax claim. There’s no credible evidence from NASA, ESA, or any astronomical source that the James Webb Space Telescope (JWST) or any other orbiter has detected “urban ruins” (i.e., artificial structures resembling city buildings, streets, or remnants of civilization) on an asteroid.
Here’s a breakdown of why, and what the phrasing really means in context:
JWST isn’t an “orbiter” in the way the post implies.
JWST is a space telescope orbiting the Sun at the L2 Lagrange point (about 1.5 million km from Earth), designed for infrared observations of distant galaxies, exoplanets, stars, and cosmic phenomena. It doesn’t orbit or closely approach asteroids/planets like a dedicated planetary orbiter (e.g., NASA’s OSIRIS-REx around Bennu or Dawn around Ceres/Vesta). JWST can observe asteroids from afar for things like composition, size, rotation, or thermal properties, but not high-resolution surface mapping to spot tiny “ruins.”
No real reports of artificial structures on asteroids.
Asteroids are natural rocky/icy bodies, often heavily cratered from billions of years of impacts. Features that might look artificial in low-res images (e.g., straight lines, geometric shapes) are usually pareidolia—our brains seeing patterns like faces or buildings where none exist (similar to the “Face on Mars” illusion from Viking photos in the 1970s, later shown to be natural by better imaging).
Actual asteroid missions (like Hayabusa2, OSIRIS-REx, DART, or Lucy) have imaged surfaces in detail and found boulders, regolith, craters, possible ancient impacts—but zero evidence of artificial “urban ruins” or anything constructed by intelligent life.
“Urban ruins” specifically refers to the claim of massive, city-like artificial structures (buildings, grids, foundations) that appear ruined or abandoned, as if from an extinct extraterrestrial civilization. The post is hyping this as a groundbreaking find, but searches across recent news, scientific sources, and X show no matching legitimate reports. Similar viral claims pop up periodically (e.g., “ancient cities on the Moon,” “structures on Mars,” or “alien artifacts on asteroids”), often using doctored images, misinterpretations of natural geology, or pure fiction for engagement.
The image in the post shows JWST with a dramatic spotlight effect next to a cratered asteroid body. This is a composite or artistic illustration (common in space enthusiast posts), not a real photo from JWST of an asteroid discovery. JWST images of asteroids are usually faint, point-like or low-detail due to distance.
Bottom line: Treat this as typical social media sensationalism—exciting but unfounded. If it were real, it would dominate headlines from NASA, major journals (Nature, Science), and astronomy outlets within hours, with official images and peer-reviewed analysis. Nothing like that exists here.
If you have the direct link to the X post (or more context from Huseyin Boyar’s account), I can dig deeper, but based on everything available, it’s safe to file this under “fun speculation / not factual.” What do you think—does it look like AI-generated hype to you too?
Explain pareidolia in astronomy
Famous Mars face illusion
“Thanks, I will block this site on Facebook based on the intel you’re shared with me here. Thank you for educating me on this, Grok! –“Just John”
“You’re very welcome, John! Glad I could help clarify that one—it’s easy to get pulled in by those eye-catching headlines, especially when they’re dressed up with JWST branding. Blocking or muting sources like that is a solid move to keep your feed cleaner and more reliable.” GROK, Built by xAI
Always happy to fact-check the wilder corners of the internet for you. If anything else pops up that smells like hype (space-related or otherwise), just toss it my way—I’m here for it.
Take care, and enjoy the rest of your evening in 2026!
— Grok
