Real Coffee with Scott Adams - Episode 1058 Scott Adams： Talking With Bjorn Lomborg About His Book False Alarm, Plus Ridiculous News

00:00:00.000 Bum bum bum bum bum bum bum bum bum bum bum bum bum bum bum bum bum bum bum hey everybody

00:00:10.700 come on in gather round it's gonna be a good one oh yeah i always say that but isn't it always right

00:00:20.200 yeah you know it is i always say it's gonna be the best one and and then it is so i guess you

00:00:28.860 got that going on um if everything works out i'm going to have author bjorn lomborg on here today

00:00:36.360 but i'm terrible on follow-up so uh if that doesn't work out we'll make sure it works out soon

00:00:44.020 but before i see if i can connect him uh i'll give him a few minutes if he's if he's up and around

00:00:51.060 to uh to connect on periscope before we do that what do we do first always the same thing always

00:00:58.120 the same thing the best thing ever it's a simultaneous sip and all you need is

00:01:01.820 a cup or mug or a glass of tank or chalice or stein a canteen jug or flask of a vessel of any

00:01:07.700 kind fill it with your favorite liquid i like coffee and join me now for the unparalleled pleasure the

00:01:16.320 dopamine hit of the day the thing that makes everything better including coronavirus global

00:01:22.980 warming climate change you name it it's all better with the sip join me now

00:01:29.680 ah i can feel the earth begin to cool i can feel people's fevers beginning to go down

00:01:41.320 just a little bit now bjorn is here yes let's make this work

00:01:49.060 please technology all right first try did not work bjorn if uh you can hear me

00:01:59.860 it's not unusual for the first try not to work

00:02:05.120 so um make sure that you're on a mobile device such as your smartphone i think you're back

00:02:13.060 let's try again all right bjorn please work oh the technology is not working

00:02:22.440 um i never know what the problem is when it doesn't work on the first few tries

00:02:28.540 but we'll get this watch this

00:02:31.100 i'm gonna make this work so i can see him uh continuing to try to connect

00:02:40.600 hey bjorn are you there

00:02:45.040 i can hear you success uh wonderful bjorn lomborg you are the author of false alarm this excellent

00:02:56.460 book that i'm holding up right now and can i describe you as the president of the copenhagen

00:03:03.080 consensus think tech would that be you certainly can yes and uh i'm looking at your uh your twitter

00:03:11.260 profile in which you say that that involves smart solutions through economic prioritization

00:03:17.600 which is you're talking my language now bjorn um and this is your new book false alarm when is this

00:03:25.600 out is this out now this is out from uh yesterday so just fresh off the press all right and your

00:03:32.460 topic of primary concern at least in terms of this book is climate change correct yes and

00:03:40.160 before i start asking you some questions i have to tell you that you and i have a weird thing in

00:03:44.860 common that you don't know about and uh correct me if this is wrong but i think i have a pretty good

00:03:50.920 memory of this the first time i ever saw you was on an appearance on bill maher's show do you remember

00:03:57.520 the first time you were on his show it was actually my second time i remember that i contacted you

00:04:03.740 afterwards uh okay yeah yeah yeah no yeah um and the thing i remembered was that you you put bill maher

00:04:12.040 into cognitive dissonance because of course he's a big climate change doomer and he normally the

00:04:19.280 doomers are talking to scientists not business people who are looking at both the costs and the

00:04:24.420 benefits and know how to project things into the future as people like you do and you you completely

00:04:31.100 destroyed his worldview to the point where he the only thing he could do was act like you didn't you

00:04:37.120 didn't just say something it was the damnedest thing i was watching and i said what just happened here

00:04:41.900 and then i you know you realize it was just cognitive dissonance he couldn't he couldn't process

00:04:47.700 how logically and obviously right you were because it didn't fit any of his worldview so we just

00:04:54.300 pretended it didn't happen and went on so enough about me um so in your book false alarm available

00:05:05.260 everywhere so i'm sure you can get it in everywhere the books are sold um you you're basically going

00:05:12.760 through the skept would you call it the skeptical argument on climate science or do you have a

00:05:17.260 term you prefer well i i would tend to think of it as the rational point of climate uh uh the

00:05:25.220 rational climate argument because look what i'm trying to say is it's actually a real problem but the way

00:05:32.400 that we've been presented with this is it's the end of the world and if you are being told this is the

00:05:38.900 end of the world and and and remember this is not just uh a uh a vague little sort of claim

00:05:45.060 kids around the world are scared witless you know washington post survey showed that 57 of all

00:05:52.180 american kids now are afraid of global warming and if you ask adults if you ask adults around the world

00:05:59.980 it turns out that almost half of all adults in the world now believe that it's likely that global

00:06:06.660 warming will lead to the extinction of the human race this is just this is just outrageously out

00:06:12.480 there this is a way beyond reasonable concern this is and so i try to say look that's not what the

00:06:21.200 un climate panel is telling us it is a problem about the end of the world and we should fix it

00:06:26.300 now uh we're having a little bit of connection problem i hope that'll resolve itself but walk us

00:06:34.000 through uh my understanding is that even the ippc the ultimate um international body that tells you

00:06:41.840 what's going to happen with climate change that if you actually look what they say their input the

00:06:47.500 impact on the you know the gdp in the future is trivial is that true it's well perhaps not trivial but

00:06:55.580 it's very small so to give you a sense of proportion uh the they've done estimates of what is the negative

00:07:02.140 impact on climate change in about 50 years so half a century from now the net impact of all climate

00:07:09.780 change if we do nothing will be equivalent to each person on the planet losing somewhere between 0.2

00:07:17.320 and 2 percent of his or her income but that's not nothing wait but hold on let's let's add a little

00:07:24.060 bit of context to that when you say losing it that's in that's an economic term right you don't actually

00:07:31.160 start with more and then you end up with less i think what you're saying is that instead of making

00:07:36.600 a hundred dollars over 50 years you only made 98 dollars exactly and which means which means you

00:07:45.060 wouldn't even know it you there would be nothing in your environment or your experience which would

00:07:51.260 tell you you didn't get that extra two percent right well it would be very hard for anyone to notice

00:07:57.560 just to give you a sense the u.n also expects that by 50 years time the average person on the planet

00:08:04.800 will be 2.63 times richer than we are today right so right you just point out that means

00:08:12.220 in the worst case instead of being 2.63 times rich by 2005 we will be 2.56 times less rich

00:08:22.040 yeah uh bjorn if you have someplace in your wherever you are that you've got a little

00:08:29.960 stronger signal that would be good your your signal is coming in and out but uh look for the the viewers

00:08:35.400 let me just uh the point is that you'll be 2.6 percent to 2.6 times richer by then so that little

00:08:45.800 bit you didn't get that maybe you could have gotten you won't even know the difference um and

00:08:52.460 the big problem with the climate change argument is that there are not enough people like you

00:08:59.000 who are who are looking at not just the um the science of it because people get stuck on the science

00:09:05.800 because it's not really a scientist who can tell you what the problem's going to be and people don't

00:09:11.000 get that the person who can tell you what the problem is going to be is the person who can tell

00:09:16.100 you what's going to happen to the economy because if the economy is still strong you can fix almost

00:09:21.100 anything would you say that's true that's absolutely true and but but but i i think we also need to

00:09:27.580 recognize it's not like this is an unheard of argument uh so the only climate economist to get the

00:09:34.540 nobel prize is bill nordhaus from yale university and this is exactly what he points out he's

00:09:40.980 says look global warming is going to be a problem it's going to cost us

00:09:44.620 yeah and and by the way as far as i know i've never heard a scientist argue with what you say

00:09:55.060 because you're sort of a slightly different domain than science but i don't think scientists say you're

00:10:00.440 wrong do they well a lot of scientists are not comfortable with this not being alarmist so i think a

00:10:07.960 lot of them will say that doesn't sound right but what is talking about real world impacts one of

00:10:16.600 the things that drive me up the wall and that's what i use uh pretty much the first third of the book

00:10:21.460 to talk about is how you are being scared the stories that are technically true but often dramatically

00:10:28.880 in this meeting let me give you one example uh last year uh washington told us how uh because of global warming

00:10:36.820 people see 187 million people being flooded by the end of the metric this way

00:10:42.660 let me uh bjorn because there's a little bit of problem with your connection i might break in and

00:10:49.540 just summarize what what i'm hearing you saying so the audience hears it clearly so you're saying there

00:10:54.060 was 187 million people projected to be uh victims of flooding is that what you said yes sorry i'm just

00:11:02.300 trying to move to another part of the house does this work better that's better yes okay uh so yes

00:11:08.960 187 million people would get flooded this was the book uh the washington post uh headline and

00:11:15.760 everywhere uh on the planet what that replied was that nobody would do anything in the next 80 years

00:11:25.060 so basically they'll see first lap off open their knees and then eventually take the problem

00:11:32.220 yeah we're having more uh audio problems but i think what you're saying is that the assumption is

00:11:39.060 that nobody would do anything about it that there would no there would be no remediation over 80 years

00:11:44.480 when in fact uh what is uh is it uh uh uh what's the country that's already underwater uh

00:11:53.760 holland all right so yeah uh so so we can see that the uh the ability to remediate against flooding

00:12:03.300 is pretty good if you have 80 years and you've got a lot of time now what what the what the study

00:12:09.780 actually showed was if you allow people to adapt which of course they will of course you will not

00:12:15.600 see 187 million people having to move you will see 305 000 people having to move so it was 600 times

00:12:24.700 exaggerated and of course remember every year more than twice that number move out just of california so

00:12:32.260 it's it's not something that the world can't adapt and handle we're simply being told stories that are

00:12:38.240 very scary but end up being very little representative of the real world because we forget adaptation is

00:12:44.740 give me an idea what's behind all the exaggeration in the sense that the the obvious thing is that the

00:12:51.780 the news model requires you to get worked up in order to click on things for them to get advertising

00:12:57.340 income so aside from the the media which has an incentive to exaggerate things for their business

00:13:04.860 model is there anything else behind the wrongness well i i think the the media part is an incredibly

00:13:12.220 important part of it and and and we we tend to forget that media exaggerates on all kinds of things

00:13:19.000 it's just that global warming turns out to be such an incredibly good generator of really scary stuff

00:13:25.700 but of course it's also because politicians love this setup look you can't really make a better setup than

00:13:33.200 what you're seeing with global warming politicians get to say the end of the world is made but i

00:13:39.140 can save you right and also we get to say i can save you and the cost will only come in the next election

00:13:46.600 so yeah well you know i i i used to do uh you know financial projections and stuff in my corporate job

00:13:54.360 long ago and the perfect situation for any corporate uh person is that you get to spend money today and be a hero for what you're

00:14:03.180 fixing but nobody will know it will work until you've already been promoted or left for another

00:14:08.440 job in other words exactly what you want to spend money today because that's how you get power and

00:14:13.800 influence and yay look at all these things i did and then you will never be responsible for the outcome

00:14:18.880 because that's in 80 years and oh absolutely and and you know the the fun thing is to see we've been

00:14:25.440 doing this for 30 years so you can actually look back and see how little we've achieved so last year the

00:14:32.280 u.n actually released a very surprisingly honest review of what we've achieved over the last 15

00:14:38.480 years and what they said was we cannot tell the difference after all the work up from obama and

00:14:44.800 everybody else around the world all the money we've spent on climate they cannot tell the difference

00:14:49.920 you know isn't there this feels like a subset of a problem that is plaguing basically every big

00:15:02.960 public decision which is our data is undependable and the people who are analyzing the data are not

00:15:10.420 qualified it feels like it's everything from coronavirus to you name it it just seems to be the

00:15:17.740 same problem the data is bad and we don't know how to look at it anyway i i would i'll probably

00:15:24.820 analyze it slightly differently because i think we you know we spent in in the order of what uh 50

00:15:30.560 billion dollars on on on climate research so it's not like we don't have a lot of good data

00:15:37.860 i think there is a lot of organizations that want to convince you this is the end of the world

00:15:44.020 because then they can get you to support really really expensive policies uh and i think we as

00:15:50.880 taxpayers need to fight back and say look i'm happy to spend money on on solving real problems that'll

00:15:58.840 actually have dramatic impact to better the world in the future but i'm not just going to spend my

00:16:04.160 money to do almost no good and waste most of it right and uh what do you think of uh if you had a

00:16:10.780 moment to look at i don't know if you follow american politics enough but uh joe biden's

00:16:15.300 two trillion dollar plan which i had to dig really hard uh i had to look through multiple articles to

00:16:22.660 find out if nuclear energy was even part of it so two trillion and and the most of the coverage

00:16:29.360 didn't even mention nuclear energy but i found one article that suggested he wants to go strong

00:16:36.220 at nuclear and especially the new and the new designs which yes the trump administration

00:16:42.880 doesn't talk about it but they're doing all of that stuff they're pushing for the the new test

00:16:48.760 facilities etc um is that a productive way to go does that this is nuclear on your uh on your good list

00:16:57.140 uh nuclear is definitely one of the solutions that we could envision for global warming i think the

00:17:04.200 big problem about nuclear is that right now nuclear is much more expensive than most other power

00:17:10.220 sources that's why we need a lot more research and development into you know the fourth generation

00:17:15.920 nuclear power plants so for instance bill gates and many others are spending lots of resources

00:17:20.560 to get that next generation that's going to be safer cheaper and also much more uh dependable

00:17:27.020 if we can do that that'd be amazing but again this is just one of the many ways that

00:17:33.220 we could fix climate you know innovation fundamentally is going to be the way that we will fix this

00:17:38.220 problem like basically every other problem yeah exactly and when i look at the nuclear situation

00:17:45.620 it's too expensive i don't know if you've uh dug into the the details of that enough to answer this

00:17:51.140 question but the the things that are stopping us is number one it's hard to iterate if you if you try

00:17:57.460 something it's really expensive to build a second nuclear energy plant and see if the second one is better

00:18:02.980 than the first one so it's not like building an iphone where you can just do it in the lab until

00:18:06.960 you get it right so that's one problem the other problem is that we don't standardize the big ones

00:18:12.760 so we've got multiple models and if you just built the same damn thing one after another even using

00:18:19.400 current generation three technology before you even get to the super safer safer stuff of generation four

00:18:25.960 could we do generation three let's call it current technology which has had uh zero deaths

00:18:34.340 historically is that true zero deaths from it's a very very low death yeah i think it's zero actually

00:18:41.240 if depending on how you count it and um are those the two problems you see iteration i guess uh government

00:18:50.020 regulation and how long that takes but iteration and standardization are those the two things that

00:18:55.420 will change the economics my understanding again from from nuclear technology is that that's really

00:19:01.600 what's been lacking we've been building masterworks uh each one of them instead of actually building

00:19:07.180 just a long stream of them and and indeed that is one of the points that they're trying to do with

00:19:12.320 fourth generation to say if we can standardize this and basically build it like uh uh uh uh uh a uh

00:19:20.500 what do you say a factory of uh uh a 4t sort of assembly plant sorry that was what i was looking for

00:19:28.300 an assembly plant where we just churn out all of these and you just assemble them like lego uh lego on

00:19:34.100 on on the spot and then you run it that will be enormously much cheaper but again it requires a lot of

00:19:41.480 research and development because we're not there you know when you look at the new power plants that

00:19:45.780 are nuclear power plants that build around the world they end up being fantastically expensive and

00:19:51.520 one of the reasons as you just pointed out is because there's all this regulation and i just find

00:19:56.860 it's going to be very hard to imagine that that regulation will go away yeah and the secondary problem

00:20:02.080 i understand is that if the nuclear power plant is are these one-offs then you don't have something that

00:20:08.640 you can export to other countries and if you're not the uh let's say the big brother of the smaller

00:20:14.760 nuclear program in the smaller country then somebody else is going to be and that could be china or china

00:20:20.980 or russia so you so simply by not having a robust nuclear energy program in this country we're giving up

00:20:28.420 uh we're giving up influence over a lot of the planet but worse when you go to space it's going to be

00:20:35.840 nuclear power and if you don't own space you might as well just give up because whoever owns space owns

00:20:41.360 the planet that's the end of it that's that's my opinion uh yeah no but i i think i think the

00:20:49.260 fundamental point here and the insight is to recognize that unless we get cheap green energy

00:20:55.260 we're just not going to switch over because you're not going to convince most people around the planet to

00:21:00.080 say all right i'll get the same power slightly less effectively slightly less dependably and much

00:21:06.220 much more expensively that's just not a selling point except for you know a few percent for people

00:21:12.100 who are very very engaged in climate and so the reality is we need to invest a lot more into green

00:21:17.720 energy research and development to do that and actually you know to his credit that is part of

00:21:23.160 biden's plan so you know at least there's a lot of things in biden's plan a lot of them i i think are

00:21:28.000 going to be a waste of money but that actually turns out to be a really good idea yeah um and

00:21:33.960 there's also a weird thing that uh i can't get over which is the people who are most concerned about

00:21:39.960 climate change you know they tend to be focused on the political left i don't think that they

00:21:46.100 understand how racist it is because that's their other biggest issue to let's reduce racism but if you

00:21:52.900 say to the developing countries you can't use what we used to get here because it's too polluting

00:21:58.560 then are you basically just telling all the brown people that they can't have what white people have

00:22:04.160 now it's like oh no no we got here this way by using you know oil and coal but you can't do that

00:22:10.780 you're gonna have to wait why don't you just wait and we'll find something clean for you

00:22:15.800 we don't know how long it'll take but until then you'll have to starve would you mind waiting

00:22:20.540 it's the most freaking racist thing you've ever heard there's nothing there's no black lives matter

00:22:28.140 thing there's no i mean this is this is on a level literally with slavery in terms of uh how

00:22:36.440 prejudicial it is against people of other colors i mean it's it's massively destructive and yet the same

00:22:45.020 group are in favor of both of those things and we think this all the time you know we're basically

00:22:49.640 telling poor countries no you can't have uh coal power because it is going to make coal more worse

00:22:55.480 which is true but of course that coal power is ultimately going to make that country much much

00:23:00.480 richer so we work together with bangladesh government uh to look what would it take to put in

00:23:06.220 extra coal power plants it would dramatically increase life quality in bangladesh it would make the average

00:23:13.220 person in bangladesh that's 16 percent richer yeah and just yeah create global water problems but

00:23:22.180 just to give you a sense of proportion for every hundred dollars you produce for bangladesh you create

00:23:29.140 20 cents of climate problems yeah we're we're having a little audio problems again

00:23:36.500 so let me let me uh just uh do one more topic here and then we'll we'll let you get to the rest of

00:23:43.760 your day i'm sure uh with a new book out you've got a lot to do this week my guessing um so i'm

00:23:51.660 really interested in the uh the super storm and the natural disaster story where every time there's a

00:23:58.320 hurricane somebody on television will tell us that climate change is is what caused that darn hurricane

00:24:04.140 what's the more reasonable rational view of the big storms and natural national or natural disasters

00:24:12.420 so we're certainly not seeing more storms hitting the u.s actually if you look at landfalling hurricanes

00:24:19.820 and strong landfalling hurricanes they've slightly declined over the last 120 years for the u.s but in

00:24:27.380 general much much more importantly is that many more people live much closer to harm's way with much

00:24:34.960 more stuff so fundamentally the reason why you see dramatic impacts of hurricanes now is because

00:24:41.040 there's many more people you know look at florida coastal counties florida's popular coastal population

00:24:46.720 has increased over the last 120 years a 67 fold whereas the u.s population has only increased fourfold

00:24:54.640 so clearly they also have much more expensive homes so clearly you're going to get a lot more damage

00:25:00.440 and again if you want to help these people the way to do so is by getting better building code

00:25:07.400 and also by saying something you're going to get wiped out every five or one year

00:25:13.780 yeah yeah and you know i i always look at that situation and i ask myself who is it that lives on the

00:25:23.120 beach because it's not the poor people right uh no in the united states i mean it must be different

00:25:29.880 in other places but in the united states it feels like there's a pretty strong correlation between

00:25:35.020 being rich and being able to have a house on the beach and if i were to ask if i were to say what

00:25:40.280 would be the best thing for the economy of the united states i'm just joking here but just to make a

00:25:45.660 point the best thing for the economy of the united states would be for a big storm to come by

00:25:50.760 about every three years knock down all the rich houses and give the poor people not poor people

00:25:56.200 but the middle class people who do construction more work because because the rich people have

00:26:02.260 insurance insurance is priced to pay for itself the rich people live in their other house while the

00:26:07.840 you know the beach house is being repaired i mean you you could imagine that it would be a plus

00:26:12.580 to wipe out rich people's houses every few years just so people have enough to do to rebuild them

00:26:17.840 uh i'm just kidding on that but yeah it would certainly teach them to be better at producing

00:26:23.660 their houses well i mean and one of the big problems of course is that we're subsidizing

00:26:27.900 rich people because we're subsidizing much of their insurance uh so we should definitely not be doing

00:26:34.120 that and that of course would get fewer people to build close to harm's way right yeah subsidizing

00:26:39.600 people to build that that's just crazy uh all right so what is it that i uh i'll give you the

00:26:46.320 question that every author hates but uh since you're toward the beginning of your book tour

00:26:52.660 i'll get you ready for it okay so this would just be practice the worst question everybody wants to

00:26:58.580 hear as an author what is it i forgot to ask you in other words it's just a chance to mention

00:27:05.240 something that maybe you wanted to mention that sure so so i think i think the the rest of the book

00:27:11.160 really is about two things it's first of all talking about all the things that haven't worked so

00:27:16.500 you know we we promised the paris agreement uh it's going to cost one to two trillion dollars a year

00:27:22.780 and it'll do almost nothing to actually fixing climate change we're telling

00:27:27.700 all right we're losing you a little bit bjorn we're losing the audio a little bit um i think

00:27:42.660 we got the gist of that though uh would you mind if we uh if we end now uh just because the audio is

00:27:48.240 kind of sketchy i know sorry about that i don't know i'm not certain i can hear you perfectly oh

00:27:56.480 okay now you're you're cutting a little bit in now i'll make sure everybody knows uh your book i'm

00:28:01.340 holding it up i'll tweet about you and i thank you very very much for uh for coming on this you're

00:28:07.360 exactly the kind of author that my audience likes to hear from so thank you very much and good luck with

00:28:12.780 the book hey thank you very much scott all right take care everyone all right bjorn is one of my

00:28:20.580 favorite uh public figures has been for years because he he is one of the few people who look

00:28:28.640 at the costs and the benefits and know how to do it it's uh it's refreshing all right a few other

00:28:34.740 things um yesterday i was uh uh trying to change a light bulb and i ended up tweeting about it

00:28:44.760 because it was so hard it was one of those compact fluorescents and in in theory you just pull it out

00:28:50.720 straight and push it in straight but it didn't work and so i'd spent over a month trying to change

00:28:56.280 one light bulb i'd ordered different bulbs thinking maybe i had the wrong one i tried everything

00:29:02.000 and uh the funniest part about it was listening to the other people's comments because when i tweeted

00:29:08.420 it you know people waded with their comments but the funny part was how many people have thrown away

00:29:14.040 perfectly good lamps and and light fixtures just change the light fixture because they couldn't figure

00:29:20.260 out how to change the light bulb now if you've never tried to change a compact fluorescent light bulb

00:29:27.800 you don't know how hard it is and again this is let me let me explain this is the entire process

00:29:34.080 here's a hole here's the light bulb push it straight in if you want to take it out pull it straight out

00:29:42.920 and and i spent a month not being able to do it even trying that exact thing and apparently other people

00:29:52.100 have just thrown away their lamps changed their fixtures hired a handyman to just change the entire

00:29:57.900 light fixture because they couldn't change the light bulb and here's the point of this this was not just

00:30:03.440 to complain about my uh personal inability to do things the law the larger point is this and i'm going

00:30:10.740 to hit this a lot who tested that this is a gigantic national standard who tested that how many times did they

00:30:20.980 have uh an average person come in and say hey can you see if you can change this bulb and then watch

00:30:28.400 them now if you try to remove a compact fluorescent you'll find that it breaks in your hand about half

00:30:36.020 of the time it breaks the glass part just breaks off in your hand when you're trying to just change

00:30:41.220 the bulb uh nobody tested that and so i submit to you that we have a gigantic problem in this country

00:30:51.640 in the world of products that were never tested and yet are now standard in all of our homes never tested

00:30:58.160 um have you heard a lot about uh uh mary trump's book no you know mary trump the niece of trump who wrote

00:31:09.880 anti anti anti donald trump book and apparently the worst thing that uh that came out of this because

00:31:17.800 it's the one that they pull from the book is that she alleges that uh donald trump paid someone to take

00:31:24.840 his sats that's it now first of all i doubt it's true i mean anything's possible it wouldn't change my

00:31:34.220 opinion of anything because i have that 20 year rule i just don't care what people did when they were 18

00:31:39.860 do you care what anybody did when they were 18 would you would you say we've got to impeach this

00:31:46.220 president because when he was 18 he did something clever that worked out well

00:31:50.420 i'm sure it wasn't you know if it happened and by the way i would say the odds of it being true are

00:31:58.080 not really that high but even if it is true that's it that's the best you have you're an insider you've

00:32:06.100 got all this access to the family and the best you have is that when he was 18 he did something that any

00:32:11.940 18 year old would have done if they could have gotten away with it ah that's pretty empty

00:32:18.340 apparently kanye is out he's out of the race but here's what's interesting

00:32:23.860 um he actually did try to get on the balance

00:32:27.860 so there is uh documented evidence that he put real money into trying to get on the balance so he

00:32:34.020 was serious uh some of you wondered if he was serious but i think that's been answered he was

00:32:40.160 serious now what do you make of the fact that he was in the race for you know less than two weeks

00:32:46.340 do you say to yourself well that proves he's a flake and he was never really that serious and

00:32:53.080 what kind of a president is he would he be if he didn't even plan the the you know getting

00:32:59.540 nominated and all that the way it should be and here's my answer to that he played it perfectly

00:33:06.220 i think kanye played it perfectly because here's what i always say there's nothing better

00:33:15.240 for improving your odds of becoming president than having run in the past

00:33:20.740 right uh trump had sort of flirted with running in the past and therefore because every time there

00:33:28.540 was an election for several elections before the time he actually got elected trump's name was always

00:33:34.580 in the top 10 because he put it there trump put his name in the top 10 for every future election

00:33:43.160 by simply making noise but not going very far in initial attempts or initial flirtations with running

00:33:50.560 initial talking about running etc kanye is using the same play you know people who have lost

00:33:58.180 elections then went on to win were you know quite a few right nixon reagan trump himself um it's fairly

00:34:06.460 common biden is has run before and that has a lot to do with why he's uh where he is although being

00:34:13.640 vice president was more of it and i would say that kanye's play of reminding us of kanye for president

00:34:22.180 letting us wrestle with the idea for a little while and then waiting until 2024 was exactly exactly

00:34:29.860 the right play exactly the right play because he didn't really have a chance of winning and everybody

00:34:36.620 would have been mad at him if he if he changed the election result which he would have it probably

00:34:41.640 would have caused uh trump to win sorry my cat's in the way so i don't think he could have played

00:34:48.300 that better honestly the get in and get out in 2020 if i could have advised him you know if and i

00:34:57.060 didn't by the way but if i could have advised him on the best way to play this i would have said this

00:35:02.140 i would have said flirt with it get in there get some noise but really you're getting ready for 2024

00:35:07.640 perfect um i am entering a voluntary coronavirus quarantine starting today i believe um which is

00:35:19.080 not because i have coronavirus as far as i know uh i do have a test scheduled but it's not because i may

00:35:26.820 or may not have coronavirus it's because i have some minor surgery scheduled so the current process in

00:35:33.360 case you didn't know for getting a surgery in this environment and by the way i expect the surgery

00:35:38.720 to get canceled it's in two weeks and i expect it to get canceled because of capacity but at the moment

00:35:46.080 it's scheduled and that means that i have to quarantine for two weeks and that means no christina

00:35:52.960 right i mean i'm talking about the serious kind of quarantine so that starts today i might get a little

00:35:58.600 squirrely uh and i might do some evening podcasts just because i'll be here all alone for two weeks

00:36:04.620 now the process is they'd like you to quarantine yourself for two weeks before surgery but one week

00:36:12.020 before surgery i'll have the actual test that takes about two days to get a result so something like

00:36:18.200 you know five days before surgery i'll have uh presumably a negative test and then i will uh go into

00:36:26.200 by surgery i think they test again just before you go into surgery but i'm not sure all right uh

00:36:33.400 there's a lot else going on today um i i always talk about stefan collinson who's an opinion person for

00:36:43.840 cnn uh and he i i start to think of him as triumph the insult dog so triumph the insult dog uh was on

00:36:55.580 uh uh what's his name uh tall redheaded guy uh uh you know you know the show you know the thing

00:37:04.980 oh my god i just turned into joe biden you know the thing uh tall redhead night show uh give me the

00:37:16.400 name why the hell am i blanking on his name you know this all right um and he writes that this is a

00:37:27.700 president who has tremendously failed to beat back the virus and has long since stopped trying to lead

00:37:34.100 the country out of the darkness he's saying that the president has failed to beat back the virus

00:37:40.480 and he stopped trying to lead the country out of the darkness now here's my question for cnn because

00:37:47.400 i have a lot of a lot of commentary about the president doing everything wrong here's my question

00:37:52.800 uh yeah conan o'brien thank you okay i don't feel bad that i can't remember a person named conan

00:38:00.000 because it's not exactly bob all right um and here's my question for cnn what is it that the

00:38:11.320 president should have done differently who whoever asked that question if the president is doing

00:38:18.660 everything wrong and as triumph the insult dog stephen collinson says um that he's he's he's stopped

00:38:27.860 trying to lead us out of the darkness and he's failed to beat back the virus what exactly should

00:38:33.120 he have done differently because all of the decisions about closing and opening are local

00:38:38.600 right uh the president i think did all the things that a president could do he closed international

00:38:46.360 travel from china and europe so those are things the president can do he made sure that uh we had

00:38:53.660 enough ventilators something a president could do and he you know uh did i think a good job or the

00:39:02.260 country did or somebody did in getting the ppe and the protective stuff uh although we may be running

00:39:08.240 out soon because of the new stuff what exactly is it that the president should have been doing

00:39:13.960 should he have followed the expert's advice well if he'd followed the expert's advice he wouldn't

00:39:21.040 have done the things that were right right he wouldn't have taken the virus seriously he wouldn't

00:39:27.180 have closed travel from china he wouldn't have done those things if he'd listened to the experts

00:39:32.800 and then what about the mask situation well that was complicated because there was a you know there

00:39:40.360 was an effort to save the masks for the health care professionals which i agree with i don't know if

00:39:46.700 that was the best way to do it but i'm not going to criticize i'm not going to criticize fauci uh or

00:39:52.680 others for lying about masks uh if the purpose was it was just the only way to protect them for the

00:39:59.860 health care people and i don't know another way if you said to me no scott the obvious way to do that

00:40:06.020 would be tell the public the truth and just ask them not to hoard these supplies well in the real world

00:40:12.400 that doesn't work in a pandemic people are going to hoard you can ask them not to hoard oh but people

00:40:17.980 are going to hoard so if you can tell them they don't need to hoard there's no purpose to it maybe

00:40:24.780 it's a better play so did fauci and other experts the surgeon general for example did they intentionally

00:40:33.480 lie to us about the value of masks i don't know if all of them did some of them might have believed the

00:40:39.680 other experts and just parroted them but if they did lie to us but the purpose of it was for our own good

00:40:47.060 i'm actually okay with that i don't know if you are but i do not mind my leaders lying to me under the

00:40:55.760 very unique circumstances that is in my best interest now usually that's not the case so you don't want

00:41:05.100 lying to be approved i just don't know that there are too many cases like this one where unfortunately

00:41:12.620 lying was maybe the only only good play for the benefit of the country i hate it i mean you could

00:41:19.120 be you could hate it but if you don't have a better idea just keep that in mind all right

00:41:25.440 and was there some expert who knew all the right answers and didn't tell the president

00:41:31.800 was there was there some smart thing that smart experts knew that if they'd only told the president

00:41:40.360 that he would have maybe implemented i haven't heard of any have you so when they say the president

00:41:48.480 is failing don't you have to ask yourself at what are not other countries also having problems

00:41:56.660 and is the president to blame for what happened with nursing homes not really now where you could

00:42:04.560 have room for disagreement would be the uh the president uh advocating going back to school

00:42:12.020 at the same time that um others would say that's a bad idea because it will increase infections i am

00:42:21.040 solidly on the president's side on going back to school but here's the thing we live in a world where

00:42:28.740 you're not allowed to tell the truth in public but i can watch this i'm going to tell the truth in public

00:42:35.980 ask me and ask yourself if you've ever heard this going back to school will kill teachers and it will

00:42:43.080 kill kids i'm in favor of it okay that's the first honest opinion you've ever heard in public

00:42:52.140 going back to school will kill teachers some of them will kill uh some students probably not too many

00:43:02.600 as a percentage will spread the infection will kill grandma when the kid comes home all of that's

00:43:09.840 going to happen and it's almost certainly better than the alternatives because we don't have a

00:43:15.720 better alternative we just don't so i think our best play is to do the best we can of protecting the

00:43:24.180 teachers etc here's my suggestion i understand that teachers are far less enthusiastic about opening

00:43:32.560 schools than parents are big surprise right who is surprised that the teachers many of them older

00:43:39.780 many of them susceptible who is surprised that they wouldn't want to go to work in a crowd

00:43:45.300 you know even with some social distancing its kids are not going to be that disciplined uh who

00:43:52.680 would be surprised the teacher doesn't want to go back to that environment you shouldn't be too

00:43:57.880 surprised all right and i don't think that we should abuse one professional class teachers who did not

00:44:06.740 sign up for danger duty all right people who decided to be teachers did not wake up one day and say i

00:44:13.620 think i'd like to be on the front line of a dangerous situation no no i have a different opinion about the

00:44:21.060 military and about health care professionals because they did sign up for that they did say i am going to

00:44:28.260 intentionally put myself into infectious and or dangerous situations this is the career i choose

00:44:34.340 there's there's a bigger benefit i take the risk if that's what we were talking about i'd say all

00:44:40.420 right all right you know we'll send the kids back to school and you've signed up for it but teachers

00:44:46.980 did not sign up for that risk it is completely unreasonable completely unfair for the rest of the

00:44:54.420 public to try to force them back to work into a situation that at least half of them think is too

00:44:59.940 dangerous given the costs and the benefits here's what i would suggest as a workaround you ready

00:45:08.980 the benefit of a teacher in the room as opposed to remote teaching is that it's it's just a first

00:45:16.180 of all it's a way to get the kids out of the house so the parents can go to work so there's certainly a

00:45:22.580 child you know watching process that you you need a physical school for secondly you need to hand out

00:45:30.980 things and discipline people and say stop doing that etc here is my hybrid solution that the that the

00:45:40.260 teacher uh only appears remotely if they prefer let's say the older teachers don't want to take the risk

00:45:47.780 they can prefer they can appear on a television remotely to their class but you would have a much

00:45:55.140 younger person let's say a college age type person who is the in-class um manager if you will

00:46:05.300 so let's put a name on it because they're not teaching the the young person who is the physical

00:46:10.500 presence and the authority in the room would simply be a manager of the situation

00:46:16.980 but the teaching would still come from the teacher who would be in a big old tv screen right in front

00:46:21.940 of the class they could still hear the teacher the teacher could still see the class and anything

00:46:27.460 physical that needed to be done could be done by the younger less risky you know person who's sitting

00:46:34.980 in now uh or how about let me give you another suggestion let's say you build uh separate

00:46:41.860 entrances and exits and bathrooms for teachers so they have a situation where the teacher is just

00:46:47.380 behind plexiglass the whole time just behind plexiglass and you never actually or physically

00:46:54.740 could touch a teacher you couldn't even get close to them if you wanted to because the teacher's in the

00:46:59.220 front of the class and there's just a big plexiglass thing here they couldn't get there if they wanted to

00:47:04.420 now you don't need plexiglass if you have enough space from the first row of desks

00:47:10.260 to the teacher i mean it could be just a fence so that nobody you know gets close but you could

00:47:16.420 probably figure ways around that one of the things i heard is that it's impossible to open up the

00:47:22.340 schools with social distancing in other words that the desks being six feet apart there's just not

00:47:29.460 enough physical space i would challenge that assumption because i think that in an emergency

00:47:35.540 situation you would use all of the space you might you might uh you know not use the gym for gym class

00:47:43.060 because maybe it's too dangerous to have an inside gym class anyway so you might use some of the the gym

00:47:48.420 floor you might use some of the cafeteria floor and while it's warm you make people eat outdoors you

00:47:54.420 probably want to do that anyway so probably you could get pretty close now some students might

00:48:01.700 want to still stay home and they could just tune in uh digitally just like anybody else

00:48:09.380 so i think that the president's instinct to push toward reopening is absolutely correct if you take all

00:48:17.060 the pluses and minuses of the economy etc into consideration but you have to protect the teachers

00:48:24.180 you have to protect the teachers that is completely unreasonable to send them back into this

00:48:31.380 virus petri dish i do not support that so if we don't have a solution that the teachers are okay

00:48:37.620 with i say don't do it keep the kids home because you can try harder all right if if your district

00:48:44.660 hasn't figured out a way to keep the teachers safe they should boycott or strike or something and i would

00:48:52.580 be on their side because we do have enough ways to keep them safe if we're not using it then they

00:48:59.300 should not go to work that's my opinion but we do want to solve that all right um so

00:49:10.500 so avanka trump is not getting enough attention in my opinion for her alternative career path effort

00:49:17.060 so she's working on uh a deal i don't know all the details but i think she's working with big

00:49:21.860 corporations to try to train and hire people who do not have college degrees so that you could say

00:49:28.820 well i i want to learn this specialty i don't need an english degree to do this job but if this corporation

00:49:35.380 will teach me that's a good solution i think that's one of the best things happening in the country right

00:49:41.300 now in terms of it makes sense on every level and it's just so obviously good for you know minority

00:49:47.700 people it's obviously good for low-income people it's obviously good for anybody who doesn't want a

00:49:53.220 college debt this is just one of the best things that's happening in the country and it gets this

00:49:58.340 little bit of coverage and then people mock it because it's avanka right i mean it's it's a crazy world

00:50:06.900 when the best things are ignored um joe biden had one of the most classic uh

00:50:17.140 gaffes i've ever heard and this one he didn't even stop to correct it and he he said in a sentence we

00:50:24.820 have to get our kids back to school and then he said in the same sentence we have to get our kids to

00:50:31.060 market swiftly we have to get our kids to market swiftly and he didn't even stop to correct it he

00:50:39.140 just went on what what are you kidding um are you kidding um so just add that to the list now again

00:50:53.300 i remind you that the hilarious thing to me is watching democrats act like there's nothing wrong

00:50:59.380 with biden i don't see it yeah yeah he misspeaks now then but nothing wrong uh of course the larger

00:51:06.580 context is the wayfair rumors are you aware of those all right the most ridiculous fake news

00:51:15.140 or fake i guess it's a rumor it's not news that the actual news people are not covering this because

00:51:21.220 it's not true uh which is strange for the news business usually they cover things whether they're true

00:51:27.140 or not but in this case uh i would agree with them not covering it and the the rumor on the internet

00:51:33.780 is that the the big company wayfair that sells furniture is a gigantic entity um has been secretly

00:51:41.540 using their the pages of their website to sell children instead of products okay i could stop there

00:51:50.260 and you'd say okay that doesn't sound true and you'd be right because wayfair is not really selling

00:51:57.300 children but people have these fake pages and they've got their argument because it uses children's

00:52:03.620 names on the products and has a price that doesn't make sense and i don't know if they're photoshopped or

00:52:09.380 mistakes or what but what i can tell you with complete confidence wayfair is not selling children

00:52:17.540 they're not selling your children but in the context of these wayfair rumors which are all

00:52:24.020 over the internet and again i say it wayfair isn't doing anything none of none of that's true it's

00:52:29.700 ridiculous all right now if i'm wrong on this you should never listen to me again

00:52:35.700 okay if i'm wrong about this wayfair thing being ridiculously stupid and not true if it turns out

00:52:41.780 i'm wrong never listen to me again that's your deal you have permission to never listen to me again

00:52:49.860 but i'm pretty confident about that one i've decided that uh non-fiction writers are the most dangerous

00:52:57.940 people in the world uh because they don't know what they don't know but they think they know a lot

00:53:05.940 and so the more i see writers writing stuff and they don't know what they're talking about

00:53:13.540 they are seriously leading the world in the wrong place if you saw my bjorn lomborg uh conversation

00:53:20.740 just now you know that the information that you and i receive about climate change is from writers

00:53:28.660 mostly because i don't talk to scientists too much i just read what is written so really i'm reading

00:53:35.620 the opinion and the framing from a writer and it's so dangerously bad and uh you know unable to look

00:53:45.300 at costs and benefits and incapable of analyzing anything i want to give you an example of that

00:53:53.060 um well yeah okay i got a good example that coming up uh it's in a bloomberg opinion piece there's a

00:54:02.660 thread on it today that i tweeted but let listen to this one um this one sentence by an actual

00:54:11.540 professional writer who gets paid by bloomberg or actually i don't know if it's an opinion piece

00:54:17.300 do they get paid i don't know their business model but it's an opinion piece in bloomberg

00:54:21.940 and it said this and it was the this is one comment in a larger piece

00:54:26.180 about um all the the rich people complaining about cancel culture so this is a piece in favor of cancel

00:54:34.660 culture so we could stop right there you know you don't even need to know what the writer said if they're

00:54:41.860 writing in favor of cancel culture maybe you shouldn't listen to them but let me let me read this ridiculous

00:54:50.180 sentence quote could it be that increasingly diverse voices and rich conversations are a threat to their

00:54:58.740 free speech uh and she's talking about the rich people who wrote the uh there was some 30 some people

00:55:05.940 who signed a document against cancel culture so that's the context could it be that increasingly

00:55:11.940 diverse voices and rich conversations are a threat to their free speech or more accurately

00:55:18.820 the prerogative the prerogative i hate that word the prerogative of famous and powerful people

00:55:26.980 to speak at length on all sorts of things without interruption or disagreement so this writer is asking

00:55:34.740 the question if there's really a problem with cancel culture is there really is this really a bad

00:55:41.300 thing all you rich famous writers or are you just complaining about it to get more space for your

00:55:48.180 own ridiculous comments without any counter comments now i'm not even going to tell you what's wrong

00:55:55.220 with this opinion because it's so stupid i don't need to write i'm pretty sure that the people railing

00:56:01.220 against cancel culture do not have a secret agenda of silencing the rich and diverse voices and

00:56:10.340 conversations i'm pretty sure that zero people have ever had that thought in their head zero zero people

00:56:18.180 on the whole planet seven billion plus people not one person has ever had the thought because

00:56:25.300 it's a stupid one that this writer has assigned it to them could it be that they don't like diverse

00:56:33.380 voices and rich conversations uh no it could not be that and this is someone who's paid bloomberg

00:56:42.580 actually prints this stuff amazing amazing speaking of writers writer uh barry weiss barry b-a-r-i a woman's name

00:56:54.980 in this case barry was uh until recently she just quit a staff writer and editor for the new york times

00:57:00.900 and she was she describes herself as a centrist and in the world of new york times a centrist means

00:57:10.740 far right uh that's that's my own framing not anything that anybody else said and although she

00:57:18.100 does call herself a centrist but that means that she has some i would say as a centrist would be

00:57:24.100 somebody who has a little bit of appreciation or empathy for the opinions on the right may not share

00:57:31.060 them all but would have a little bit more appreciation for them but also for the left

00:57:36.740 without necessarily agreeing with them all so that's my understanding of a centrist somebody's

00:57:42.340 a little bit open to both sides but doesn't necessarily agree with either side on all things

00:57:46.900 she she quit because she said uh that it was just an unfriendly place to work and that because she

00:57:55.300 was not as left as the other people i'm paraphrasing this is not her words that she was basically it was

00:58:01.460 just such a toxic environment that she just had to get out of there but here's one of her one of her uh

00:58:07.300 comments in a lengthy uh resignation letter which is worth reading is that she said twitter is not on the

00:58:14.420 masthead of the new york times but twitter has become its ultimate editor weiss said uh and

00:58:24.100 she says she goes on stories are chosen and told in a way to satisfy the narrowest of audiences

00:58:30.340 rather than to allow a curious public to read about the world and then draw their own conclusions

00:58:36.660 and she says i was always taught that journalists were charged with writing the first

00:58:40.580 rough draft of history now history itself is one more ephemeral thing molded to fit the needs of a

00:58:47.540 predetermined narrative well barry the first thing you got wrong is to assume that history was ever

00:58:54.980 objectively written by anybody history is not objective history is written by the winners and

00:59:03.540 you know whoever gets to write about it so she was wrong on that but uh i love this framing of the

00:59:12.900 in this case the new york times the most let's say prestigious of all news organizations we might say

00:59:20.260 that even they according to this insider who just quit are basically just parroting twitter

00:59:27.460 now who is the first person who told you that influential people on social media are actually

00:59:36.260 the new government i did right so social media has effectively become the new government because

00:59:44.660 the media has to parent social media i don't know if they have to but their business model sort of

00:59:50.900 influences in that direction and and once the social media and the media have you know formed an opinion

00:59:59.860 the politicians fall in line so the politicians you know they may uh suggest a new idea but that is

01:00:07.700 sort of up to social media and the public and then the and then the uh regular media to support it or not

01:00:14.820 and then the politicians know what freedom they have to either go with it or not and of course when i

01:00:20.740 say the public supports it or not i mean their side so there are only things in our world that

01:00:26.580 are supported by the left and only things supported by the right and the few things in the middle we

01:00:31.380 don't hear much about because it's not fun all right here's some more cancellations uh viacom cbs

01:00:39.860 decided to can uh what's his name nick cannon because they allege he made anti-semitic comments in his

01:00:49.140 podcast and here's the funny thing about it uh when i read the comments that he made

01:00:57.620 i at least based i didn't hear the details maybe it's worse if you hear the the full thing but just the

01:01:03.540 surface reporting of the things he said i don't know it just sounded like an opinion to me

01:01:09.780 it did not sound like he was uh intentionally doing anything anti-semitic and indeed he considers

01:01:18.500 himself semitic in other words and even he said this how can i be anti-semitic when the whole thing

01:01:24.980 i was saying was that i'm semitic so you can't be anti yourself and i thought well okay you could argue

01:01:33.140 whether he's semitic or not but you can't argue the point that if he includes himself in the in the group

01:01:38.740 that he's criticizing then it's more like criticizing your own group it's a weird hybrid

01:01:46.260 because who is it that gets to say that nick cannon is or is not semitic and you know he's

01:01:53.060 got some story about black people being the real semitic people i don't know if it's true or false

01:01:58.180 but whether it's true or false or has any historical backing i have no opinion i don't

01:02:03.380 care doesn't matter doesn't sound right doesn't sound right right i mean it doesn't sound right

01:02:10.900 but that doesn't mean it's not right i just don't have any knowledge or information to argue it one way

01:02:15.540 or the other but because he did not apologize he got canned and i ask you should you apologize

01:02:23.300 for insulting your own group as you see it

01:02:30.420 somebody says it was anti-white that's what it was could be i didn't see the details did not see

01:02:36.260 the details and there was something about the the rothschild in there that you know makes your eyebrow

01:02:41.380 go up what what do you say about the rothschild because there might be a little conspiracy theory in

01:02:47.300 there so i don't know what he said but i just note that that happened and he didn't apologize

01:02:53.940 and i'm not sure that you should apologize if it's your actual opinion do you apologize

01:03:00.500 if it's your opinion and you still hold it because that doesn't seem like an apology situation

01:03:06.580 that seems like i just have an opinion and somebody didn't like it so they fired me

01:03:10.500 i don't know i'm not supporting his opinion and i'm not attacking it uh it's just a weird hybrid

01:03:19.220 that he did not have bad intentions whatsoever i think i think can't tell what people are thinking

01:03:26.980 really but it looked like that all right um here's something i did that hasn't gotten me canceled and i

01:03:35.140 think that that is hilarious uh i i tweeted this yesterday and wait will you see how much attention

01:03:42.900 it got i tweeted this i said have you ever seen an engineer scientist or statistician argue that police

01:03:50.420 are killing black citizens at an alarming rate ask yourself why now do you see what i did there

01:03:58.820 uh let me explain it because i think you see the general idea but there's a little bit more to it

01:04:03.940 the natural frame for our conversations about big stuff and the black lives matter stuff is big

01:04:11.540 stuff our natural frame is either the left versus the right or maybe black versus white or you know

01:04:20.340 black versus non-black but our our natural inclination is to just put things in this this group versus that

01:04:27.860 group which is terribly unproductive and also makes you stupid because you're not really

01:04:33.860 using reason you're just saying well what team am i on so i guess i support the team

01:04:38.500 but what i did was reframe that instead of thinking of as black versus non-black or left versus right

01:04:45.060 how about people who know how to look at data versus people who don't

01:04:51.140 how about that that's my frame people who are trained to understand data and to analyze it versus

01:04:58.900 people who don't and so i put this on here and you would think that i would get canceled immediately

01:05:04.340 for this but uh unlike nick cannon i think people are afraid of me meaning afraid to give attention to

01:05:14.020 this point of view because you know if you gave attention to the point of view that the black lives matter

01:05:23.940 the the primary trigger the the primary trigger not the only topic they have they have general topics

01:05:29.620 about systemic racism etc but the trigger the primary thing that the the protests have been about the

01:05:37.620 george floyd situation is complete bullshit it's complete bullshit and i gave myself enough freedom by

01:05:47.860 setting the groundwork in the things that i've done up to this point that i might be the only

01:05:53.060 person in the world who can say that out loud do you know anybody else who's saying this that the

01:05:59.300 black lives matter uh the trigger of it i'm not saying racism doesn't exist i'm not talking about the

01:06:04.900 the larger questions that's another topic but just the question of police killing black people at a

01:06:12.900 at an oversized alarming amount it just isn't true now when i changed the frame to why is it that you

01:06:20.740 you don't hear any engineers scientists or statisticians uh being on the same side as the black lives matter

01:06:27.700 protest the reason is these are all the groups that know how to look at data

01:06:32.820 and there's a very simple data analysis mistake which caused all these protests and it's this they looked

01:06:40.500 at the percentage of black people killed versus the percentage of white people killed by police

01:06:46.820 and that's just a data analysis error because when you look at the percentage of black people killed

01:06:53.700 by police you're not really looking at police violence against black people what you've done is

01:06:59.940 you've accidentally studied how many black people commit crimes or how many black people live in a

01:07:06.900 neighborhood that's a high crime neighborhood you've accidentally looked at the wrong thing because

01:07:12.180 police are stopping black citizens at a higher rate why well most of it because it's the neighborhood

01:07:19.700 they live in is higher crime and you know certainly there's it's a separate issue of whether uh too

01:07:27.700 many black people are being stopped and frisked the stop and frisk part is a i think its own topic but

01:07:34.180 the correct way to look at it is in the total number of stops police encounters what percentage of them

01:07:41.140 the black people were stopped were killed versus the percentage of white people killed

01:07:46.660 when they were stopped by police now that would be the correct way to look at the data and when you

01:07:51.300 do there's not much difference in fact white people are killed a little bit more often but not statistically

01:07:57.540 so so the entire protests are built on this weird little lie that can only be supported so long as you

01:08:07.380 never have in the news an engineer a statistician an economist uh or what's the third thing a scientist

01:08:18.180 somebody who actually knows how to look at data you will never see somebody who knows how to look at data

01:08:26.660 talk about this data because it would ruin the whole thing as soon as as soon as you talked about

01:08:32.820 data now what that means and if you take this to the larger thing compare the issue of uh black people

01:08:40.580 being killed by police which i think we'd all agree we want less of it right so if there's anything we

01:08:46.180 can do to make less of that i'm all on board all right i'm completely on board with looking at new ways to

01:08:52.820 do policing without police i think that's actually a really good uh path to explore but the only way i would

01:09:01.380 do it is by testing it small to make sure it doesn't blow something up right so if if you wanted to

01:09:08.180 replace police and the way that you wanted to do it uh is uh with some alternate methods let's test them

01:09:19.700 totally let's test them see see what happens but do it small see if find out if it works but here's my

01:09:26.500 issue with the black lives matter protests over police killing police killing might be not might

01:09:32.260 be probably is not probably is absolutely is i'm going to go for full certainty on this the smallest

01:09:38.900 problem in the black community it's the smallest problem why are they protesting over their smallest

01:09:45.380 problem the total number of people killed by police in general it's your smallest problem do you know what's

01:09:52.020 a big problem how about uh health care for black people in general how about that yeah that's a way

01:10:00.260 bigger problem health care for black people in general on a scale of one to ten that's like a ten

01:10:07.860 if you were to say on the scale of one to ten where is number of people killed by the police

01:10:13.700 black people killed by the police during police stops that's a two one or a two

01:10:19.860 on the scale of one to ten just because there's so few people involved how about a good education

01:10:28.180 for black people you know better education especially in the inner cities areas where is

01:10:33.380 that on a scale of one to ten ten ten that is ten and if the scale was higher it would be higher

01:10:43.780 it's not anywhere close to the problem of police killing black people during stops not even close

01:10:51.460 you know that one's a two education is a ten what are the democrats trying to do reduce the ability

01:11:00.340 of black people to get a good education by removing school choice which is literally the only way to fix

01:11:06.340 nobody even has another idea really it's the only way so the black population that has

01:11:15.620 by um and i think that the illegitimate press is largely to blame for this imagine a world in which

01:11:22.900 uh there were the protests were happening just the way they're happening now but if you turned on cnn

01:11:29.380 they would say you know this is actually your smallest problem statistically if you're just to

01:11:34.980 look at the numbers this is by far your smallest problem because all of the crime etc is coming

01:11:41.540 from the same one thing you know bad education uh there's there are questions about family structure

01:11:47.380 etc which i don't fully understand what's behind all of that i've got some real questions there uh about

01:11:53.300 you know what is actually exactly behind the number of single parents etc i'd like to know more about

01:11:59.860 that but um anyway if the news accurately reported things in the size that they should be reported

01:12:10.740 the protests wouldn't be happening because every every time they turned on the news they'd be watching

01:12:15.860 their own news source and their own news source would say okay they're working on the smallest

01:12:21.140 problem and ignoring the big ones again and then all the protesters would say well that's not any

01:12:27.060 fun why are we out here working on our smallest problems again uh did you know this was our smallest

01:12:33.860 problem you didn't know either okay but now we know because it's on both the left and the right

01:12:39.860 news sources which is usually more dependable if it's reported both ways so in my opinion the protests

01:12:48.020 and all that come with it including the extra coronavirus if in fact there is any that comes

01:12:53.620 out of it is entirely the illegitimate press's problem when i told you that non-fiction writers are the

01:13:00.500 biggest risk to the country i mean this this is all non-fiction writers who are writing fiction

01:13:09.060 ironically um the the news business is just non-fiction writers that's what they do they write about

01:13:15.940 non-fiction and if they wrote correctly and if they were good at their job in other words if their

01:13:22.180 talent stack included the ability to look at data they would not be putting us in this position do you

01:13:29.460 know what they'd be doing supporting things that would give black people a better education

01:13:35.300 right because that would be the top priority not even close not even close to any of this other stuff

01:13:42.020 all right um we found out recently that uh mark levin you know him from fox news and he's got a radio

01:13:52.580 show i believe and other things and apparently a former wikipedia wikipedia editor and if you know the

01:13:59.700 the model of wikipedia you have all these volunteer editors so for every topic you could have multiple

01:14:06.340 editors who have been sort of approved i guess to be able to change things but the editors can get in

01:14:12.580 battles so somebody could change something then another editor can come in and change it back

01:14:19.460 but they do have rules about what is uh right to change and what is not right to change and one of the

01:14:28.180 rules is if you point to a source then you can keep it in there like you don't want to remove something

01:14:34.020 that has a legitimate source uh but if you put something in there that's a claim without a source

01:14:41.060 then another editor can successfully get rid of that but apparently there was this a huge battle over

01:14:48.420 mark levin's page in which somebody kept filling it with untruths and the other editors would try as

01:14:55.220 hard as they can to scrub it out but i guess it was just like a raging multi-year battle in which

01:15:01.860 somebody continued to put smears on there and other people continued to try to get rid of them

01:15:08.100 i don't know where it ended up i'm not sure if it's back to the smear or back to gone

01:15:14.900 all right um

01:15:18.660 uh oh i accidentally talked about that before all right there's a tweet that says that uh from uh

01:15:25.940 dr uh kolvinder kaur so dr kaur i think i'm pronouncing it right k-a-u-r uh tweeted that there

01:15:37.140 are 53 plus published hydroxychloroquine studies for covid 19 uh showing strong efficacy as a prophylaxis

01:15:46.980 and as treatment in early covid um so that's the claim the claim that there are 53 plus published studies

01:15:56.420 showing that hydroxychloroquine works and that the government is sort of you know blocking it from

01:16:03.380 being used and then on top of that uh dr zelinski who most of you know he was the doctor who is using

01:16:10.100 hydroxychloroquine with all of his patients in new york and claimed a much better much better rate of

01:16:18.580 recovery than other people like much much better so he's one of the leading proponents of hydroxychloroquine

01:16:24.180 now here the first thing the first thing you need to know is in my understanding there is no

01:16:30.340 gold standard test of this drug yet so you can fact check me on that but i don't believe there is

01:16:37.380 any controlled clinical uh you know gold standard study using it as a prophylaxis but there do seem

01:16:46.660 to be studies showing that if you give it to people when they're almost ready to die it doesn't help

01:16:52.100 much so we've seen those uh as someone suggested and i think i have to agree it has the look of

01:17:00.420 intentional failure the studies on hydroxychloroquine look to the untrained eye just an observer looking on

01:17:09.540 like they were designed to fail because from day one the the uh the potential of the drug was always

01:17:17.460 about giving it to you early that was always the claim but what got tested first what got tested

01:17:24.740 first is giving people uh toxic doses more than you would ever give somebody when they were at the

01:17:31.140 end of their life and it was just too late now if you were going to design a study to test the claim

01:17:38.180 that a drug given early as a as a preventative prophylaxis or at least to catch things early

01:17:44.340 if you were going to test that claim would you do it by a toxic dose given to people who are near death

01:17:53.060 you wouldn't but suppose you were a big drug company and you wanted to make sure that people

01:17:57.940 did not think hydroxychloroquine would work what would what kind of study would you fund

01:18:03.940 if you wanted the public to think hydroxychloroquine which is cheap and widely available is not the way

01:18:11.220 to go well if i were a drug company i would immediately fund a trial that i knew wouldn't work

01:18:19.540 and it would look exactly like the trials that we saw now this is not uh i'm not claiming

01:18:26.100 that's what happened i don't have any information that would suggest that that happened but i'm saying

01:18:31.060 that if you're looking at it from the outside and you're even a little bit objective it looks like

01:18:36.660 doesn't mean it happened looks like it was designed to get you the wrong result i know what i know what

01:18:44.260 a trial would look like if somebody's trying to get an accurate good useful result and it's the opposite of

01:18:51.140 that right yeah i'm seeing in the comments that you say it sounds like that's exactly what happened we can't

01:18:59.060 say that's what happened but we can say it looks exactly like it so but i want to make a comment on

01:19:07.300 zelinski as well he tweeted out recently uh some data showing the different outcomes the death rates

01:19:15.620 for various countries and he had them sorted by whether they use hydroxychloroquine early or they

01:19:21.780 didn't now at the bottom of the list was the united states where it is not commonly used early it's only

01:19:28.660 used too late and the death rate was very high and then the one at the top of the list they were using

01:19:34.900 it early and the death rate was very very low compared to the united states not even close i mean way way

01:19:40.820 difference and then as you go down the list you get down to countries that also use hydroxychloroquine

01:19:48.740 early they also have way lower death rate than the united states so so far that's consistent right so all the

01:19:57.380 people with hydroxychloroquine are having good results according to this one chart and the united

01:20:03.380 states isn't it's getting bad results but here's the problem if you look at the best people using

01:20:10.420 hydroxychloroquine compared to the ones who are getting the worst results but are also using it in

01:20:16.980 the same way early there's a gigantic difference it's like a 10 times difference so even the even the

01:20:24.180 countries that reportedly are using it early there's something like a 10 times difference in their

01:20:30.100 outcomes what does that tell you it tells me it's not the hydroxychloroquine but that chart was supposed

01:20:38.500 to tell you that it's hydroxychloroquine which one of us is right so dr zielinski obviously knows more

01:20:46.420 about all of this than i do but the chart that he presented to make his case to me because i spend

01:20:54.980 more time looking at data you know i used to do it for a living i've got a economics background etc but

01:21:00.980 when i look at the data that he presented it says to me it's not the hydroxychloroquine

01:21:05.860 um it says that if you can have a 10 times difference using it there's something else going

01:21:13.060 on there's probably something that some of these countries have in common beyond that

01:21:19.700 so that doesn't mean it doesn't work i'm just saying that i i'm not convinced and i'm going to

01:21:25.140 stick with my 30 chance it's a game changer which is a strong chance you know 30 is a pretty solid chance

01:21:32.660 but it's less than half all right so i'm still on the side that if we were to do a controlled

01:21:39.940 clinical style a gold standard scientific test that there's a two to one chance you won't find it

01:21:46.820 works all right but a 30 chance you will now if it turns out that it works um will you say that i was

01:21:55.860 wrong you should not because you should remember that i just put odds on it and if something goes

01:22:02.580 the 30 way versus the 60 something percent way it doesn't mean i'm right or wrong because the only

01:22:08.740 thing i could be right or wrong about was assigning the percentages and i've given room for it to go

01:22:14.580 either way all right i've talked too much i've gone too long so i think i'll end it here somebody says

01:22:24.020 you mess it up bro about what yeah i see in your comments you're asking about whether zinc

01:22:29.860 is included or not included i've seen lots of contradictory studies i've seen studies that say

01:22:36.580 it's not the zinc i've seen studies that say it is the zinc i've seen studies that say no no it's not

01:22:43.060 the zinc it's the azithromycin and so there are studies that have both zinc and azithromycin and

01:22:49.860 hydroxychloroquine and then you say well that worked but was it the azithromycin that some people say is the

01:22:56.500 active ingredient or was it the zinc or was it the combination of the two or the combination of the

01:23:01.380 three those are all the things we don't know and it's a lot all right and i will talk to you tomorrow

Real Coffee with Scott Adams - July 15, 2020

Episode 1058 Scott Adams： Talking With Bjorn Lomborg About His Book False Alarm, Plus Ridiculous News

Episode Stats

Length

Words per Minute

Word Count

Sentence Count

Misogynist Sentences

Hate Speech Sentences

Summary

Transcript