When AI videos look real, should even moving stories about extraordinary connections still be assessed?

A realistic video is not necessarily genuine. I saw a cat bowing before a Bodhisattva and initially found it extraordinary. A student later explained it was AI and made a version using our own cat, showing me how convincing it can now be.

I also shared a moving story of a man meeting a pregnant woman in a lift. His voice prompted a fetal response, and a name matched his late mother’s, reminding me of extraordinary connections. But I explicitly said I had not confirmed whether the video was true, and some editing sequences seemed strange.

So believing unusual connections exist differs from verifying a particular internet video. We can retain the feeling of being moved without abandoning judgment. More information and realistic images make it especially important to understand what we actually know, rather than rush to treat a story as a confirmed event.

I also saw videos presented as family members sharing experiences. I believed the first, but similar tones and expressions across many later examples made me wonder about marketing arrangements. I did not verify them individually and said marketing need not be bad; the content may still be true. My suspicion cannot become proof that everyone was an actor.

Also distinguish an AI recreation of someone’s appearance from words actually spoken by that person. Especially with an image of a deceased teacher, a video labelled a tribute does not establish that every statement reflects the teacher’s original meaning.