A comprehensive technical analysis powered by artificial intelligence tools debunk the feasibility of the journey portrayed in a controversial campaign video, citing insurmountable limitations in distance, fuel, and maritime conditions.
Written by: La Tabla/Data Journalism Platform 4 SEP 2025
A specialized forensic analysis conducted using advanced artificial intelligence (AI) techniques has determined that the coastal journey from Venezuela to the United States, as suggested in a recent campaign video, is physically impossible due to unalterable technical and natural limitations.
This conclusion emerges from an expertise that applied a rigorous “Prompt Engineering” process to the DeepSeek language model, transforming it into a virtual naval expert to assess the actual capabilities of the boat visible in the footage.
A Matter of Pure Physics
The technical report, generated after a five-phase analysis, is categorical. Here are the main reasons that render the journey an unattainable feat:
1. Distance is an Uncrossable Abyss: The shortest distance from the coast of Venezuela to Florida (USA) exceeds 1,100 nautical miles (about 2,000 kilometers). Even reaching Puerto Rico, an intermediate point, requires traveling between 400 and 500 nautical miles. The analyzed vessel, a coastal boat between 8 and 12 meters, has a maximum range of 200 nautical miles under ideal conditions. This means the trip would require five times the distance the boat can travel without refueling.
2. Fuel is Not Anywhere Near Enough: The tank of a vessel of this type can hold about 200-400 liters of fuel. For a trip of 1,100 miles, a minimum of 2,000 to 4,000 liters would be necessary. The analysis calculates a fuel deficit of 80-90%. It’s akin to trying to drive a car with a 10-liter tank on a journey that requires 50.
3. The Open Sea is an Impassable Wall: The deep Caribbean presents oceanic conditions, with waves frequently exceeding 2-3 meters in height. The boat in the video is of “open center” design, lacks watertight compartments, and its hull is not built for deep waters. Given the weather conditions reported for those dates (winds of 20-30 knots), the vessel would have faced a high risk of flooding and sinking.
4. Lacking Survival Equipment: An oceanic crossing requires ocean radar, advanced GPS, satellite communication, and emergency safety equipment. The analyzed vessel lacks all of these. Venturing into open sea with such a configuration is not just risky; it’s suicidal.
“The journey to the USA is tantamount to attempting to cross the ocean in a rowboat,” the technical report asserts.
How Was This Conclusion Reached? AI as a Forensic Tool
The certainty of the conclusions is due to the methodology employed. This was not merely a simple query, but a “Prompt Engineering” procedure that guided the AI to act as an expert:
· Phase 1 – Technical Analysis: The AI was instructed to identify the type of vessel and calculate its range based on visible characteristics.
· Phase 2 – Contextualization: It was asked to cross-reference those technical data with real geographical distances and historical weather conditions for the dates in question.
· Phase 3 – Refutation: The command was key: “Systematically refute the hypothesis of the journey to the USA with quantifiable technical evidence.” This forced the AI to seek all the reasons why the trip would fail, rather than assessing it neutrally.
· Phases 4 and 5 – Depth and Probability: Finally, the analysis was enriched with more technical details and a final success probability was calculated: 0%.
This approach transformed the artificial intelligence tool into a specialized forensic analyst, capable of processing technical, physical, and geographical data to reach a conclusion based on quantifiable evidence and natural laws.
In summary, the narrative of the journey crashes against the unyielding limits of physics and naval engineering. Technology, in this case, served not to create illusions, but to unveil the truth behind them.