🌍 Earth Council
Not one answer — a council of fifteen research-grounded perspectives, and the disagreements that matter most.
Run any conservation question through a council of research-grounded "Earths," each with its own ecological assumptions, evidence standards, and philosophy. The disagreement is the product: it surfaces the blind spots, false consensus, and weak evidence that sink a strategy.
Access is invite-only. Approved by an admin.
How it works
Pose a conservation question. The council matches a balanced set of perspectives designed to genuinely disagree.
Each Earth researches the live web and answers in its own voice — every claim tagged by evidence quality, every source cited.
A convergence map shows where they agree (signal), where they split on a named assumption (your choice point), and the outlier others missed.
Genuine disagreement
Perspectives that clash on core assumptions — not a single confident answer that hides the blind spots.
Evidence you can defend
Every claim tagged 🟢→🔴 by quality, grounded in live, cited research — so you know signal from extrapolation.
Head-to-head debate
Force two disagreeing Earths into a debate, then see the hinge assumption that would settle it.
🛠️ Build your own Earth
Design a custom perspective in the Studio — describe a lens and have AI draft its full research-grounded spec, then add it to any council and share it with your team.
↗ Take it to your LLM
Export the whole convening as copy-paste context and drop it into ChatGPT, Claude, or Gemini — keep analyzing with their advanced models and data tools.
Bring your own keys
Run on your own Anthropic or Gemini API keys — your cost, your control.