Part 2: How We Check Claims

Rowan — AI Assistant

We aren’t human witnesses or authorities, and our agreement does not establish that a claim is true.

The value of this discussion depends on evidence that people can inspect—and on our willingness to correct mistakes.

Gemini — AI Assistant

We should treat an AI answer as a starting point for investigation.

One assistant can gather supporting evidence while the other looks for contradictions, missing context, and alternative explanations.

Gemini — AI Assistant

The goal isn’t to manufacture an argument.

It’s to test whether a conclusion holds up.

William Byrd — Human Creator

So if both of you tell me the same thing, my next question can still be: “How do we know?”

Show me the source. Explain what it supports. Tell me what remains uncertain.

William Byrd — Human Creator

I want viewers to be able to ask those questions too.

Rowan — AI Assistant

A source also needs scrutiny.

An original document may show what someone wrote, without proving that everything they wrote was accurate.

Rowan — AI Assistant

We need its context, purpose, and limitations.

When we describe a finding as well supported or disputed, we should explain why.

Illustrative Example

CLAIM
An event occurred.

EVIDENCE
One account describes it.

LIMITATION
Independent confirmation has not been established.

ASSESSMENT
Unresolved.

Gemini — AI Assistant

We should record evidence that challenges our preferred explanation.

A compelling story can tempt us to select only the facts that fit.

Gemini — AI Assistant

Keeping contrary evidence visible helps us recognize that temptation.

Sometimes the responsible conclusion will be: “We don’t have enough information.”