Episode 1061 Scott Adams: Fake News, Fake Science, Fake Everything
Episode Stats
Length
1 hour and 3 minutes
Words per minute
153.94447
Harmful content
Misogyny
2
sentences flagged
Toxicity
15
sentences flagged
Hate speech
12
sentences flagged
Summary
In this episode of the Bitcoin and Cryptography podcast, Anton Nilsen talks about the latest fake news story about a fox who is delivering fake news, and why you should be careful what you say in any digital form. Recorded in Baltimore, MD!
Transcript
00:00:00.000
oh hey everybody good to see you come on in it has come to my attention that some people who watch
00:00:17.580
these live streams later on playback fast forward through the simultaneous sip can you believe it
00:00:25.140
oh well just in case you want permission the introduction and the simultaneous sip is for
00:00:34.000
the benefit of the live viewers who want to stream in and catch the beginning those of you watching
00:00:39.860
it on replay fast forward and i also recommend listening listening to me at 1.5 times speed i
00:00:49.220
hear that's the i hear that's the sweet spot but for those of you who are here live the special
00:00:55.060
people the good people the the punctual people the people who like to get it fresh to enjoy this
00:01:01.700
experience in the maximum way you know what you need it's called the simultaneous sip and it goes
00:01:06.340
like this you need a cup or mug or a glass a tank or chalice or stein a canteen jug or flask a vessel
00:01:11.460
of any kind fill it with your favorite liquid i like coffee and join me now for the unparalleled
00:01:21.860
pleasure the dopamine hit of the day the thing that makes everything better including
00:01:29.620
protests pandemics economics you name it it's all good go
00:01:33.860
well here's my favorite story of the day apparently the simulation is winking at us again
00:01:46.980
because there's a photo and a story about a fox an actual animal a fox who keeps stealing somebody's
00:01:55.620
washington post off of their porch or lawn i guess and so we have a literal story of fox delivering fake
00:02:06.500
news i i don't know what are the odds that these are just coincidences but it looks like the author
00:02:14.660
of the simulation is trying to send us a message do you get this one do you get it i'm sending a fox
00:02:23.140
to grab the washington post you get it right does everybody get this well it just feels like the
00:02:32.340
author of the simulation is trying to send us a message do you remember the story about the twitter
00:02:38.020
hackers who uh somehow they got into twitter systems and took over some accounts and tweeted some scams
00:02:46.260
about bitcoin well there are some conspiracy theorists uh and i'm not so sure that i'm not one of them
00:02:55.620
who think that maybe the whole bitcoin thing was a diversion and that the real purpose of the hack
00:03:04.740
wasn't really the bitcoin part although maybe they made some money too but rather they were trying to
00:03:10.500
cover up some deeper mischief which we may not yet know because once somebody has access to uh twitter's
00:03:20.980
innards what else can they do what other things can they discover seems like it would be uh quite a
00:03:29.620
playground there uh one possibility is that they have they had access to the direct messages of lots of
00:03:36.660
famous people and maybe those famous people will get blackmailed i don't know but uh let me suggest
00:03:43.860
that if you are leaving messages in a private place uh there's no such thing so be careful what you say
00:03:53.860
in any digital form because you're now at a place where you should assume you should assume
00:04:00.020
that somebody's looking at them um speaking of mary trump have you seen the latest uh
00:04:10.100
i guess trump's niece and i just i hate that we even have to talk about this because it's yet another
00:04:17.620
you know unverified claims from yet another book so so mary trump the niece her latest bombshell claim
1.00
00:04:26.340
which she was sort of badgered into saying on uh what's her name show on msnbc
00:04:35.140
and what mary trump said was that the i guess the trump family she didn't give a time frame but that
00:04:43.300
they may have used the n-word and that trump himself at some time in the distant past had also used it
00:04:50.820
now you know what's missing do you know what's missing from that story any kind of context
00:04:59.940
because let me make a statement in case this comes as a surprise to people
00:05:06.820
did did you know and i know this might come as a shock to some of you did you know that when people
00:05:12.500
speak privately quite often they will say all of the things you're not supposed to say in public
00:05:19.220
no not just some of them but all of them unless you have different friends than i do have have not
00:05:29.300
the people that you know personally at one time or another maybe not all in the same day
00:05:35.860
but have not your personal conversations used every bad word that could be used
00:05:41.380
surfaced every bad idea that could be surfaced and basically talked of every manner of bad thing
00:05:51.300
often in ways that if somebody heard you in public you would be cancelled
00:05:56.980
now in the old days you could say private things and maybe they would stay private because there's no
00:06:02.580
you know nobody's writing a book about you there's no digital record
00:06:06.740
and i would argue that people have two distinct lives one is the things they say privately
00:06:15.140
and the other is the things that they would be willing for the general public to hear
00:06:20.100
and i've suggested that if we were to have a digital bill of rights
00:06:24.820
that one of the rules we should at least consider is this that you should at least consider that if
00:06:31.860
somebody takes a private conversation and moves it into a public sphere that the person who moved it
00:06:39.460
into the other context becomes the author of it now this is a hard one right because you don't want
00:06:48.100
the person who's just reporting what happened to to become the author but i would suggest this if
00:06:54.420
somebody says something in public and then it's reported in public that's fair
00:06:59.460
right that's completely fair said in public reported in public but if somebody said something in
00:07:06.260
private it is universally true that we speak differently in private to people we trust often
00:07:13.460
saying things that are the worst possible thing you can say because that's what makes it funny
00:07:19.460
that's what makes it funny that you're not supposed to say it so people will say things in public
00:07:24.740
that are outrageously inappropriate because they can't they like their freedom it's not hurting
00:07:31.620
anybody nobody's going to hear it it may not be a reflection of their soul they just like to use
00:07:38.820
inappropriate words in private because it's more fun is there anybody who doesn't use inappropriate
00:07:45.380
words or talk about inappropriate things or at least things you wouldn't want other people to know
00:07:50.100
in public in private i doubt it it's pretty universal so i would say and of course this rule does not exist
00:07:59.700
but if it did i would say that mary trump is the only person responsible for making us think of the n-word
00:08:07.700
more than we need to um and one of the things that i've said this before but this bears repeating
00:08:16.420
you know that a third of the country doesn't have a sense of humor like actually literally doesn't
00:08:23.620
have a sense of humor in the same way that maybe about the same amount of the country doesn't have
00:08:29.220
musical talent i would be in that latter category so it's not an insult just people have different
00:08:36.500
skills or distributed all over the place but there are lots of people who literally don't have a sense
00:08:41.700
of humor and one of the things that they might not appreciate from people who do have a sense of
00:08:47.460
humor is uh what they don't appreciate is that sometimes the thing that is funny is the inappropriateness
00:08:56.660
of it so what you're laughing at is not at the subject of the joke let's say it mocks some group or
00:09:04.020
person or whatever if you laugh privately with an emphasis on the privately somebody privately tells
00:09:11.860
you a deeply inappropriate joke and you laugh you're not laughing at the target of the joke
00:09:18.340
if you have actual if you're unless you're a sociopath or you hate that person or something
00:09:23.300
but in general you're laughing at the fact that anybody would say that out loud to me that's hilarious
00:09:29.860
when anybody does something completely inappropriate i always laugh it's automatic
00:09:38.260
but here's the deeper question oh and i've also suggested that a digital
00:09:45.540
a digital bill of rights would include that if you did something more than 20 years ago it just
00:09:51.860
doesn't count it just doesn't count taking things from the past moving them to the present as if
00:09:58.740
as if our current sensibilities you know existed at the same time as the statement
00:10:04.820
it was just illegitimate to me so we should just ignore anything from 20 years ago but here's a more
00:10:11.060
interesting question has mary trump ever met the president there's that this is actually the hilarious
00:10:18.500
part apparently there's some question about whether they've even ever been in the same room
00:10:23.620
so we haven't seen a picture of them in the same room and uh that's funny now what's funnier is
00:10:32.420
uh the the physicality of the interview and i'm gonna have to go there you know you know they say
00:10:38.900
don't go there well i'm gonna go there i'm gonna go there now when you watch mary trump give the interview
00:10:46.180
uh she's not what you'd call a sympathetic character meaning that when you look at her she doesn't look
00:10:55.620
um emotionally stable which is different from saying that she is emotionally unstable the only thing
00:11:03.620
i know i'm not a psychiatrist right so i'm not medically diagnosing her but i have as a viewer i have
00:11:10.660
an impression so i'll just tell you my viewer impression because in the world of politics the
00:11:16.340
viewer impression matters it's not a medical diagnosis i wouldn't do that uh and what she looks
0.89
00:11:24.100
like is somebody who has severe mental problems you know emotional mental problems now i'm not saying
00:11:29.860
she does have them i'm saying she looks exactly like somebody who has severe emotional mental problems
00:11:37.380
so that i think works a little bit against her her credibility but here's here's the funniest thing
00:11:44.900
that works against her credibility are you ready for this and if you haven't thought of this yet
00:11:51.060
you're gonna laugh when i tell it to you now let me know if you've thought of this but here's the thought
00:11:58.340
when you're assessing her credibility consider that she looks like trump with a wig
00:12:04.740
she looks like a trump so she has the the face that looks like she looks like president trump
00:12:12.900
you know there's something about it that reminds you of him there's a familial uh you know something
00:12:19.780
recognizable and so you immediately think i feel like i'm listening to female trump talking about
00:12:27.060
the other trump and it's this weird disconcerting feeling that i think works against her credibility
00:12:35.060
for the very part of the segment that they would like to believe it so i think that part's just
00:12:41.620
funny i don't know if that really has any effect um and then as mike cernovich pointed out in a tweet
00:12:48.180
and i would agree that if you were going to say uh if you were just objectively looking at her as a
00:12:54.980
stranger and you didn't know anything about who she was what she was talking about and the only thing
00:13:00.180
you were doing is you turned off the sound and you watched her body language as she answered the
00:13:05.860
question would it look like she was telling the truth or would it look like she was concocting a lie
00:13:14.500
and i would agree with uh mike cernovich's view on that again we're not lie detectors we can't see inside
00:13:22.260
her brain but if i were to judge her from her mannerisms it looks exactly like somebody who's
00:13:28.180
making something up i don't know if she is making something up can't read her mind again it looks
00:13:36.180
exactly like somebody who's not credible so i'm fascinated to see if this story has any legs at all
00:13:43.220
you would think it would play into the whole uh you know the fake news view that the president's
00:13:49.060
a giant racist but i just don't know how much attention this story is going to get
00:13:54.100
because mary trump is so darn non-credible and it was a long time ago and i think everybody
0.98
00:14:01.300
probably something tells me that you know even the the black people watching this are saying to
0.98
00:14:07.300
themselves oh obviously everybody in the 60s and 70s in private conversations including all black
00:14:17.940
people including all every other kind of person including all people have said things that you
00:14:24.420
wish your your niece wouldn't tell people you said now that doesn't mean he said any of those things
00:14:29.300
uh and there's certainly evidence to suggest that he didn't and it's not credible but those are all
00:14:38.900
the factors i would take into consideration here's a question for you if uh you know i i tweeted the
00:14:49.380
other day that the closer society gets to being able to program a simulation of its own in other
00:14:56.740
words a software world where the characters in the world believe that they're conscious and real
00:15:02.500
people the closer you get to being able to do that the closer you get to understanding that that's what
00:15:09.300
you are now of course i talk about the simulation because it's fun but i will give you this following
00:15:16.500
thought to chew on and it goes like this why would anybody who could create a simulation create one
00:15:24.420
what would be the purpose of creating a software simulation of a world full of people who thought
00:15:31.060
they were real but were not why would you do it because the whole theory of the simulation is that
00:15:38.820
once you could do it you would do it and maybe you would do it lots of times well i would suggest
00:15:45.860
that the creators of the simulation might do it for the same reason that we will do it in other words
00:15:51.380
the closer we get to being able to do it the more we will realize oh yeah there is a reason to do it
00:15:58.180
and that reason is a b testing their own choices in other words if you have let's say a problem you're
00:16:06.740
working through in your life and you're wondering how to deal with it you could create a simulation of
00:16:12.500
yourself in an artificial world testing a lot of different things seeing how it turns out
00:16:20.500
now you'd have to have a really good simulation to think that the things that were tested in the
00:16:25.380
simulation would then translate into your so-called real world but if you had enough simulations and
00:16:32.580
you ran the simulation enough times you might get closer to saying okay every time i do something like
00:16:38.900
this i get a better result than when i do something like this so i would suggest to you to keep this in mind
00:16:46.420
that if we game got to the point where we could create in our civilization a simulation that would
00:16:53.220
test what would happen if we personally act in different ways we'd do it so just think about it we'd
00:17:02.740
probably do it somebody says it would be cruel i wonder if it would be would it be cruel to create
00:17:10.500
software that felt pain what do you think that's a really interesting uh uh ethical and moral question
00:17:19.860
isn't it would it be ethical to create software that thought it was a real creature with real feelings and
00:17:26.980
felt pain maybe not i don't know anyway i put that out there and the other part of that is have you
00:17:35.540
noticed that uh in your life and maybe people you know people have the same kind of problem over and
00:17:41.940
over again have you noticed that that that in your life your entire life even though your situation
00:17:48.340
your relationships where you live the job all of these things are changing but have you noticed that
00:17:54.420
you will have just the same sort of problem over and over and over again whereas all the people
00:18:01.220
around you will have that problem zero times and you say to yourself how could i always have the same
00:18:07.700
problem where other people don't have this problem but yet other people also have a theme problem meaning
00:18:15.540
they have the same sort of problem over and over again but i never have that one what's up with that
00:18:20.100
and that again would suggest that we are simulations testing things for our creators meaning that the
00:18:28.580
challenges that i get seem to be very similar in nature i won't go into it but the similarity i've
00:18:35.220
noticed forever it was like really the moment i solved that problem a new thing jumped up to give
00:18:40.580
me the same problem back in a different way how could that be and uh makes me think that that that
00:18:46.980
that's how you know which problem you were simulated to work through because you keep beating on the
00:18:52.500
same problem in different ways all right um i've suggested uh a lot of people have also that the the
00:19:00.020
best slogan for uh trump's campaign would be jobs not mobs now that that was a slogan that came up in the
00:19:08.500
last campaign but i think it's more appropriate now because we're seeing more mobs
00:19:13.460
companies so that contrast between jobs and mobs is now so big that uh it's just the perfect
00:19:21.540
campaign slogan so i'd be interested to see if the campaign you know tries tries that out what if
00:19:28.580
if if they like it the what you should expect is to see somebody not the president trying it out first
00:19:35.140
just to see how it does that would be a normal way to do it although trump uh has you has tweeted it before
00:19:42.340
so in that case you could assume maybe it's already tested um now i tweeted this i'm no political expert
00:19:51.940
and i don't pretend to be an expert on politics but it seems to me that the democrat strategy
00:19:59.220
uh of effectively legalizing violent crime right before a national election is not the best strategy
00:20:07.380
because what it looks like to me and it looks exactly like this to me is that democrats are
00:20:16.340
removing the controls on crime going into a major election because that's really the whole story
00:20:24.020
about new york city right they the uh there's no uh bail so you commit a crime you can just be released
00:20:32.100
commit some more crimes get picked up get released you know if you have a court date i guess you can just
00:20:37.940
leave uh i don't know what happens um so couldn't you do that forever is there any limit to how many times
00:20:47.460
you can just say well thanks for arresting me i'll see you later and just walk away and i don't know the
00:20:52.100
details but it sounds like you could so i can't see any world in which the democrats even have a chance
00:20:58.820
in november in terms of the presidency because if you're running on a platform of increasing crime
00:21:06.580
and the news is showing non-stop images of increased crime
00:21:12.980
i just don't know how that gets you elected i i just don't see how that could possibly work
00:21:19.700
i've heard people say that the president is basically has no chance of re-election because
00:21:24.260
the polls are so uh slanted but how many people have you heard who have changed their mind from trump
00:21:34.260
to biden in your life are there a lot of people doing that because i i think i have encountered zero
00:21:41.780
people that i personally know although i don't know if they'd mention it to me but it doesn't feel
00:21:48.340
it doesn't feel like uh you know what i'm observing makes sense all right new topic uh kareem abdul jabbar
00:21:58.500
if you're young you don't know he was one of the great basketball players of all time and he's kind
00:22:04.100
of politically active and he he's written a few uh op-eds one of them was about systemic racism i think i may
00:22:11.700
have uh criticized him for that uh i forget what but there was something i i quibbled with but he wrote
00:22:20.180
another uh op-ed just recently and this one really got my attention and so i want to give a shout out
00:22:29.460
and a compliment to kareem abdul jabbar because he wrote uh if if you didn't know he's uh he's black which
00:22:39.060
is important to this story and he wrote an op-ed in which uh he called out hollywood and the sports
00:22:46.180
world for their anti-semitic stuff that hasn't been really pushed back on enough according to kareem
00:22:54.980
now i would consider this one of the great acts of leadership that we've seen lately all right so keep
00:23:04.260
in mind i'm not i'm not a big kareem abdul jabbar fan in fact i thought he ruined basketball for years
00:23:11.860
because he was so good and so tall that watching him play other teams just didn't seem fun
00:23:18.180
because it just didn't seem like you could beat a guy that big and that good
00:23:22.100
so uh to me he sort of ruined basketball for a while so it's not like i'm a fan uh yeah he's one
00:23:29.220
of the great players of all time that's just a fact but he wasn't fun to watch in my opinion
00:23:34.740
and i've disagreed with him on some political stuff but i'm going to give him a plus plus plus
00:23:40.340
on leadership for taking what might have been a fairly unpopular stand i don't know
00:23:46.660
i'm not sure if he got any blowback for it but he came out strongly um against anti-semitism
00:23:53.460
in the middle of uh you know the black lives matter movement he he said hey let's i don't
00:24:01.140
want to say that he said all lives matter because he didn't but in effect kareem abdul jabbar was
00:24:09.300
saying let's not over focus on this one problem this anti-semitism thing is pretty big if you're
00:24:15.700
ignoring this you're not really credible that that's my paraphrasing of it and i appreciated
00:24:22.340
that i appreciated the fact that he stuck up for another group and i think the more of that you see
00:24:29.300
the healthier the country so thank you to kareem all right um people keep asking me why trump is not
00:24:37.220
uh promoting the wearing of masks why is trump not saying and this would be this is not my opinion
00:24:46.100
this is people talking to me they say you know these masks save lives we'll talk about the
00:24:52.900
controversy about whether they do or do not but people say to me they they save lives and it's obvious
00:24:59.460
say some people um why doesn't trump say you wear masks doesn't have to say that you have to doesn't
00:25:06.740
have to make it mandatory but if he just promoted it more people would say all right you know we like
00:25:13.380
trump he's saying wear masks we'll wear masks so why doesn't he do that if you know that people would
00:25:20.580
pick up on it i think that's safe to say if he promoted it more people would wear masks uh on the
00:25:26.660
republican side i think that's fair uh so why doesn't he do it is it a mistake of leadership
00:25:34.500
that he is not pushing masks here's my take on that because i had to think about it for a while
00:25:42.660
imagine if he did let's say he pushed masks what would happen if the president promoted the use of
00:25:50.420
masks it would be like hydroxychloroquine if the president said wear a mask cnn and msnbc would be running
00:26:00.500
non-stop pieces about how they don't work and it's making everything worse now if you don't think
00:26:07.700
that's true you have not been paying attention if you say to yourself scott scott scott the fake news
00:26:15.220
may be fake news but they're not going to run you know stories that would destroy the country with bad
00:26:22.020
medical advice just because the president had the opposite opinion they're not going to go opposite just
00:26:28.500
because he said it yeah they would that's exactly what they would do there's no chance if if the
00:26:35.700
president was promoting masks and if it was very persuasive let's say republicans just all masked up
00:26:43.220
from day one you wouldn't see democrats wearing masks they would say it was fake and he's anti-science and
00:26:50.580
they shouldn't wear a mask but here's the other part that i haven't seen a single person say
00:26:55.620
i have not seen a single person say this and it's the most important thing trump has been painted by
00:27:04.340
the opposition and the fake news as an authoritarian as a dictator if trump is being painted as an
00:27:14.020
authoritarian authoritarian and a dictator how would he be treated if he told everybody they had to wear
00:27:20.740
masks from the federal level he would be treated as an authoritarian dictator and even the republicans
00:27:31.460
would think so right so it would be the first time that the democrats would ever win a point
00:27:38.260
because mostly the two sides you know they send messages but they don't get through but one of the
00:27:43.460
messages the democrats have been trying to send is hey you republicans can't you see he's an authoritarian
00:27:50.820
dictator why can't you see it why is our message not penetrating your bubble get out of your fox news bubble
00:27:57.780
he's a dictator he's an authoritarian if trump told people to wear masks from the federal level that message
00:28:06.420
would completely penetrate the right and the right would say you know actually you got a point there
00:28:13.620
i think you got a point we don't want to hear this from the president now if the president does not
00:28:19.460
do it what happens well the states do it and and the cities do it now they don't all make the same decision
00:28:28.180
but what do you feel about the credibility of the decisions if they're made at the local level versus
00:28:35.700
the federal level it feels different doesn't it doesn't that feel different if your city has decided that you
00:28:44.020
should wear masks even if you don't like it doesn't that feel more legitimate than the president this is not
00:28:53.860
a president decision the fact that the president has stepped back from a little bit i wish he would
00:28:59.220
say it directly by the way the the best thing that the president could do is say you know i'm not your
00:29:04.180
dictator let your local let your local community work it out with you you see what the professionals
00:29:10.900
say you see that i wear a mask when i visit walter reed i'm not going to be the dictator work it out
00:29:17.780
locally but i hope you follow the medical advice that would be a good message i don't think
00:29:23.300
that he has done that uh well but when you're saying he's not doing it right you got to ask
00:29:30.020
yourself what would it look like if he did if he did it right according to the people who say masks
00:29:37.540
work he would have he would have made the democrats hate masks they would have questioned it and they
00:29:43.300
would have called him an authoritarian dictator and it just wouldn't have worked so it's sort of a trap
00:29:49.300
so um here's the other thing how do we judge all of the conflicting science about masks and whether
00:30:04.660
they work so i asked on twitter can somebody send me a good thread that that talks about them and here's
00:30:11.540
what i find uh and people will send me to an article that looks quite scholarly there's a phd or medical
00:30:19.140
doctor involved it'll be an article that says here's all the proof that masks do not work every every
00:30:26.580
study says they don't work and you say to yourself wow well that's pretty convincing it's a looks like some
0.60
00:30:33.380
publication that's respectable the person who wrote it looks respectable shows all of his sources
00:30:40.100
every one of them show that face masks don't work so that's it right good source credible person
00:30:48.340
every single every single cited study same direction masks don't work so we're done right except
00:30:58.500
you can go six inches down your twitter feed and find a credible person in a credible publication
00:31:12.900
that and so here's my greater point the old the people you should not believe in any conversation
1.00
00:31:20.820
are the ones who are sure those are the ones you should not believe in any conversation at least if
00:31:27.620
there's complexity in science involved you and i don't know how to sort it through the science
00:31:33.140
science you do not know how to read those various studies and and say oh you know this is the good
00:31:40.180
one this is the bad one i trust this one i don't trust this we don't have those skills we do not have
00:31:45.780
those skills we only have experts telling us what they've seen because maybe they do have those skills
00:31:54.180
but here's the problem which expert are you going to listen to because they don't agree
00:31:59.860
if the experts don't agree how can you tell which is the good expert because it just takes your problem
00:32:07.300
of not being able to look at the science and come up with a good opinion all it does is transfer it to
00:32:14.580
well i can't also figure out which experts are credible it's all just stuff that you don't have
1.00
00:32:20.740
any ability to determine but you think you do the think you do part is the part that makes you stupid
0.96
00:32:29.540
if you can look at all these studies and say well looks like there's some people and some studies
0.86
00:32:34.660
that go the other way if your opinion is anything but i guess it's unclear that's the only opinion i
00:32:45.300
think you could have on it but you still have to make a decision right you don't get to say well it's
00:32:51.300
unclear so i'll just avoid this situation you're either going to wear a mask or not wear a mask
00:32:57.300
so you've got to pick so what do you do if you can't evaluate the science and you don't know who
00:33:03.460
which experts are credible you are left with some kind of a low information risk management decision
00:33:12.340
here's how i've made mine here are the mistakes that people make when they're looking yeah i'll work
00:33:20.020
into it here are the mistakes that the lay people are making when looking at the studies and even the
00:33:25.780
the question the first one is that they misunderstand the purpose of the mask the the masks for the
00:33:33.780
public are not about protecting the wearer it's about protecting other people all right so that's the
00:33:41.620
first thing so you see a lot of people who are very certain about things and they'll say nope mass will
00:33:47.540
not will not um protect you from getting the virus but that's not really the question so those people
00:33:55.460
don't understand the question because they're analyzing the wrong thing the other thing is some
00:34:00.900
people say the total quantity of air that comes out from around the masks is still the same because if you
00:34:09.300
exhale it's going somewhere so if it doesn't go straight out it's going out the side of the masks it
00:34:15.460
might even be going out in little jets because you're forcing the same amount of stuff out of
00:34:20.100
smaller openings and so some people say well it's the same amount of air that's going in it's all the
00:34:26.900
same this too is bad analysis because the point is not to reduce the quantity of air in the room nobody
00:34:36.500
said that's the point the point is to keep it local the point is that your exhalations are more likely to
00:34:44.260
stay stay local even if it's coming out of the edges to me that sounds reasonable and a lot of
00:34:51.620
experts say that it's reasonable too it is also not about the masks blocking viruses because people
00:35:00.500
will point you to a lot of science that says you know at the microscopic level that the holes of the
00:35:06.180
mask are this big and the particles the viruses are this big and even the smaller water drops are this
00:35:12.740
big and they fit through they fit through so if they fit through the mask the masks do nothing right
00:35:23.060
wrong because the air is what is mostly carrying the virus some of it you could imagine would get
00:35:30.420
stripped off some of it would be on smaller droplets etc but there really is no situation i can imagine
00:35:38.020
in which if you can't blow on a candle that's you know a couple feet away from you but you could
00:35:45.620
if you had the mask off it's doing something it's blocking some of the moisture that's carried in the
00:35:53.380
air and much of that moisture must have a virus attached you know the the worst argument i heard somebody
00:36:00.260
emailed me and said no what happened scott is that it's carried on the water uh droplets until it
00:36:06.980
reaches your mask and then the water is stripped off and then the free viruses go forward into the
00:36:13.380
universe now unburdened by the water droplets i feel like that's not what's happening again we're not
00:36:22.020
experts so we don't know but if virus travels on water droplets and water droplets are in any way
00:36:29.940
impeded or slowed down or kept more local i don't know any situation in which that isn't going to be
00:36:36.500
good in terms of transmission and then there's the question about um there's the question about uh
00:36:43.940
touching your face and a lot of people said if it if it makes you adjust your mask a lot
00:36:51.540
well that's just as bad as having no mask and it might be worse because your face your hand's
00:36:56.500
always going to be up around your face but i don't know about you but if i have a face mask on i do touch
00:37:03.540
my face a lot but i'm sort of touching my cheek with my finger you know i'm doing this and you know
00:37:10.260
maybe my chin once if i'm doing this isn't that like really different than touching the moist part
00:37:16.340
of your mouth because i would think it's sort of your your mouth and your nose and your eyes you know
00:37:22.900
your your moist parts that are the problem so if you cover this big moist mouth and you do touch your
0.93
00:37:30.660
cheek a little bit with your finger is that just as dangerous as all the times you touch your mouth
00:37:37.060
because people do touch their mouth a lot when they're not wearing a mask if you've watched
00:37:42.580
so anyway if you're totally certain about masks maybe you shouldn't be but you have to make a
00:37:47.540
decision anyway and i'm going to go with the uh the piss your pants model the piss your pants model
0.91
00:37:53.860
looks like this if you're standing next to somebody and they take a piss in their pants do you get as wet
00:38:02.740
as if they were not wearing pants and they were aiming at you now it's a bad analogy because the
00:38:09.620
virus there's no virus in the urine in that bad analogy but it's sort of how i'm thinking about
00:38:16.660
it it must be stopping some of the virus all right um today uh cnn did report on the number of
00:38:26.180
coronavirus deaths now i've been mocking them because they've been talking about the number
00:38:31.460
of infections but they leave out of that same story the number of deaths which is clearly the
00:38:37.460
more important part both important but deaths will always be more important but today they actually
00:38:43.140
reported it and and prominently why do you suppose they did that because it was a record all right
00:38:51.140
so as soon as the deaths were bad news it became part of the article when deaths were good news
00:38:59.060
meaning that the number of deaths were low compared to the number of people infected that actually looked
00:39:04.820
kind of like good news because it made it look like no matter whether you get infected or not we've
00:39:09.860
got something going on don't know what maybe the way we treat it maybe hydroxychloroquine who knows
00:39:15.940
maybe it's vitamin d i don't know but it looked like death was good news while infections were bad
00:39:23.460
news death rate falling being the good news not the deaths and as soon as the death count became bad
00:39:30.180
news because it's a record that's obviously bad news it became a headline and it's just so disgusting
0.53
00:39:37.860
138 138 000 people dead so far from coronavirus allegedly some princeton professors uh very cleverly
00:39:48.740
wrote an article in which they said maybe we should change uh july and august change the months because
00:39:56.500
july and august are named after julius augustus caesar and if julius caesar was a slave owner which he was
00:40:06.020
don't you have to change the name of those two months now it was a little bit of a more of a
00:40:11.060
challenging thought they weren't actually in favor of changing them and then they went on to say that
00:40:16.580
you'd really have to change the name of the democratic party because the democratic party up to the 1960s
00:40:23.300
when i was alive you know my actual lifetime uh was was the party of you know segregation and ku klux klan and
00:40:32.820
and all that other stuff so is there an argument that democrats must change their name from democrats
00:40:41.620
i would say yes i mean why would you be a member of a party with the same name as the party that was in
00:40:48.740
favor of all these racial bad things uh one of my other favorite stories in the news is jake tapper
0.84
00:40:56.820
having to call uh call bullshit on cnn's own pundits for spreading fake news
0.85
00:41:03.540
so kaylee mckinney was misinterpreted when she was talking about school openings she said that the
0.63
00:41:12.660
science should not stand in the way of going back to school and then she went on to say that the science
00:41:19.460
and she referred to a study credible study saying that the risks for children were low and therefore
00:41:27.300
the science would not stop us from going to school because the science supports it of course jim acosta
00:41:34.180
and some other people at cnn decided to interpret that as we're going to ignore the science and go to
0.80
00:41:42.100
school exactly the opposite of what she said jake tapper to his credit called bullshit on it and even
0.97
00:41:49.940
tweeted it bullshit so even he was not willing to accept the narrative which his own network had
0.98
00:41:57.060
immediately adopted that the uh the fake news that kaylee mckinney was in favor of ignoring science
1.00
00:42:05.540
and putting children back in school so they will die because orange man bad
0.91
00:42:10.820
uh and uh so i will give uh uh props to jake tapper for fact checking his own network which isn't easy
00:42:21.940
you know there's no there's no way of any no way anybody thinks that's easy to do and um i will give
00:42:28.820
him a second shout out by saying he's the only one who said about the charlottesville find people hoax
00:42:36.100
he's the only person who said that the context should include that the president um explicitly
00:42:44.100
disavowed the people that the rest of cnn was saying he was talking about as fine people so jake
00:42:50.340
is the only person i know who has called bullshit on his own network for misinterpreting
00:42:56.340
quotes in a fairly obvious way they're misinterpreted so credit him for that
0.91
00:43:01.460
that there's a story about portland because there are these uniformed scary looking people in
00:43:09.460
camouflage who are showing up in rented minivans and stuff and grabbing protesters off the street
00:43:16.900
and taking them away now the rumor uh or the way it's being treated on social media is that these are
00:43:24.820
unmarked unnamed unannounced we don't know who these um camouflage military looking people are
00:43:32.980
they have masks on they're just grabbing people off the street it's like the gestapo it's it's like
00:43:39.300
death squads it's like gestapo so that's how the left is uh framing it but they also of course have no
00:43:48.500
access to news from the right so they don't real see real news if they did they would be following
00:43:55.940
jack posavic on uh twitter who would tell you uh they have dhs patches on their uniforms
00:44:04.500
now it's hard to see because it's at night but i think he you know he's just better as spotting the
00:44:09.140
stuff from experience and we know that the department of homeland security said they were going to be
00:44:16.660
operating there they said they would be operating there and people with dhs um you know identification
00:44:25.060
on their uniforms did show up there so there shouldn't be too much mystery about who they were
00:44:32.820
and it should not surprise you that they were in non-military vehicles because you don't want to bring
00:44:38.980
in tanks and humvees and stuff like that it just makes it look too military but here's the part i
00:44:44.660
loved about it it is scaring the living out of the protesters which to me is hilarious let me read
00:44:52.660
this one quote um let's see uh so there was this protester who was frightened uh and he said he was
00:45:02.500
one of the ones that they they they nabbed and they took him somewhere but then they they let him go
00:45:07.540
and after he was let go he said this uh he didn't this is from a news reporter he did not know whether the
00:45:12.580
the men were police or far-right extremists who frequently don military-like outfits and harass
00:45:19.940
left-leaning protesters in portland and the 29 year old resident said he made it about half a block
00:45:26.980
before he realized there would be no escape because he tried to run from them and gave up then he sank to
00:45:33.220
his knees hands in the air and he said quote i was terrified pettibone told the washington post it seems like
00:45:40.420
it was out of a horror sci-fi like a philip k dick novel it was like being preyed upon
00:45:48.420
to which i say good good excellent excellent because i think it's useful for the protesters to feel
00:46:01.300
how the citizens of the city that they're abusing feel about them how happy are you that a protester
00:46:09.460
was afraid of somebody in a mask it's kind of perfect right the fact that the department of
00:46:16.820
homeland security wear masks so you can't see their faces it's really funny because uh we've been saying
00:46:25.060
that one of the things that you know has fueled these protests is the fact that people can wear masks if
00:46:31.300
you can wear a mask because of the coronavirus it's recommended then you can get away with stuff
00:46:37.940
because you figure well nobody's got a picture of me i'm wearing a mask so the masks have so far been
00:46:44.020
only to the benefit of the protesters well it looks like department of homeland security just took their
00:46:50.660
advantage away because if the department of homeland security who do not live in the city for the most part
00:46:58.340
they don't live in that city and if they're wearing masks you're not going to be able to find out who
00:47:03.220
they were because they probably don't have name tags if they do they ought to get rid of them they need
00:47:08.020
to get rid of the name tags so it's reminded me somewhat of the untouchables do you remember the
00:47:14.500
untouchables uh they were people who did not live in i think it was chicago who were brought in from the
00:47:20.740
outside and people didn't know i think people didn't know their identities because then they could work on
00:47:26.500
organized crime and they would not get bribed because it's hard to bribe somebody if you can't
00:47:32.100
find them you don't know their name and they're from out of town but it's easy to bribe let's say a
00:47:38.260
police officer who lives in your town especially if you're threatening their family if they don't take
00:47:43.940
your bribe so it looks like the department of homeland security are the untouchables the people coming in
00:47:51.940
who don't have an obvious identity and you can't get back on them and they're scary super super scary
00:48:00.340
right so i can't think of a better solution than to bring in masked super scary people with unknown
00:48:08.020
identities to clear things out of portland and you have to appreciate that as a strategy
00:48:12.980
but of course their counter strategy is to say you're you're uh gestapo um people worry about
00:48:23.140
we might enter world war three with any of our you know international foes china or russia etc but
00:48:32.180
i don't think you realize we're already in world war three world war three if you count war with russia
00:48:40.180
and china simultaneously as a world war we're in it we're in the middle of it let me give you a
0.70
00:48:49.140
a shocking statistic if you added together the number of overdose deaths from fentanyl in the
00:48:56.980
united states and the fentanyl we know comes from china chinese fentanyl has killed x number of people
00:49:03.620
if you add that number to the number killed by the coronavirus those two numbers together both
00:49:10.260
both caused by china have killed more american citizens than died in world war ii that's right
00:49:20.420
so if you believe that chinese fentanyl is intentional meaning they could stop it if they wanted to but
00:49:26.900
they don't and i believe that it's intentional and if you believe that they didn't tell the rest of the
00:49:33.220
the world about the coronavirus intentionally then we have already lost more um people to china's
00:49:43.860
aggression than we lost in all of world war ii think about it now if you're telling me that we're not
00:49:51.700
in a world war i would say you don't know what our cyber uh security people are doing you don't know how
00:49:58.500
much china is doing espionage and cyber stuff attacks against us and you don't know how much
0.88
00:50:04.980
we're doing to them because i'm pretty sure it's a lot so at the moment we're in a full-out war
00:50:12.980
that's just a weird war that it's it's being fought in ways that you don't see you know bodies you just
00:50:19.220
see uh in some cases you might see some protests or something that were caused by these this mischief
00:50:26.260
but uh the war is on the war is completely on and we're right in the middle of it it's just a
00:50:33.620
war like none we've seen before pompeo uh told congress that he says hong kong is no longer to be
00:50:43.460
considered autonomous now that doesn't come as a big surprise right the day that great britain decided
00:50:50.340
okay you know the lease is up and hong kong will be returned to some kind of chinese situation with
0.99
00:50:58.020
autonomous rule pretty much everybody smart said oh so it'll just be china because eventually
0.94
00:51:07.540
just because of geography and because china would want control over it it was obvious that hong kong
0.91
00:51:13.140
would lose its independence there's probably nothing that can be done about that but apparently there's
00:51:19.380
a hidden reason for pompeo to tell congress that hong kong is no longer its own autonomous thing
00:51:26.660
and it has to do with the fact that hong kong is a major worldwide uh financial center
00:51:34.020
and the implication is this that if hong kong is not autonomous you can't use it as a financial center
00:51:42.660
and if hong kong loses its role as one of the world's big financial centers and it looks like
00:51:49.140
that's guaranteed now because we're not the the free um the free markets of the world
00:51:55.300
the free uh yeah i guess markets is the right world they're not going to use china as their
00:52:02.020
financial center it just wouldn't feel safe so if hong kong is no longer autonomous as pompeo says
00:52:10.580
then um hong kong is going to lose their status as a financial center that's really big that's big
00:52:18.180
big big big big big big so that's a big deal so that's part of world war three we're in it
0.66
00:52:26.180
somebody asked me to rank trump's visual persuasion i guess he had a white house event with a red truck
00:52:33.220
and a blue truck and he put these uh fake weights on them to represent all of the regulations he was
00:52:40.420
going to cut and had the crane pull you know the weight out of one of the trucks etc and i didn't even see
00:52:47.940
that on the news i only saw it when it was sent to me on social media so i would say it was a real
00:52:54.500
good visual presentation but i don't know if it worked because it was sort of standard so i don't
00:53:01.540
know if it got the attention that they wanted to get because i didn't see it but maybe it did
00:53:06.820
um and that is what i wanted to talk about if you missed my uh special podcast last night i did a
00:53:18.180
live stream last night sort of spontaneously um on how to have a socialist system within the confines
00:53:27.380
of our capitalized capitalist system so that everybody can live the way they want and they
00:53:32.500
would not interfere with each other so you don't have to have one system for everybody so it's not
00:53:37.460
a good idea it's just an interesting idea and you might want to check that video out on replay everywhere
00:53:43.460
that my videos are found um so you can see it on youtube etc but if you'd really like to have some fun
00:53:51.300
you want to go to locals uh where my content in addition to this i do a lot of other uh content on
00:54:00.020
locals locals.com it has an app as well as website and don jr has uh moved on to locals which is a big
00:54:08.420
deal uh oh by the way i should tell you that i'm a a very small stockholder uh investor i guess not
00:54:16.260
stockholder but investor in locals so full disclosure i'm on locals i have a small investment in it
00:54:24.740
uh and uh don jr coming over is probably going to give it a lot of attention so
00:54:32.820
um somebody wants me to talk about the double counting and the bad counting of the coronavirus
00:54:40.260
stuff i'm not too interested in that actually because we know stuff is being counted wrong
00:54:47.220
but i think the direction of stuff is all that really matters and if the you know and over time
00:54:53.620
all these irregularities get worked out you know they'll get scrubbed out of the system in time
00:54:58.820
as long as we know the general direction that's probably good enough
00:55:10.500
how many cases would the u.s have to get for the majority of people to say okay let's all try
00:55:16.180
masks well the problem is that um people have convinced themselves that there is strong science
00:55:23.380
that's saying masks don't work so in theory as long as they believe that masks definitely don't
00:55:29.140
work and we've seen the science and you know i'm not saying that but people say that as long as they
00:55:34.820
think they don't work or that it makes things worse it wouldn't matter how many people died
00:55:41.460
um when policies are being implemented based on wrong numbers we should all care yes we should
00:55:48.740
but i don't think the wrongness that we're talking about is directionally wrong i don't think the
00:55:55.540
numbers are changing the direction of things and if they did they would only do it temporarily
00:56:02.580
um should cdc go to the white house though i don't know what that means
00:56:11.460
all right i'm just looking at your comments see if i missed anything
00:56:15.540
somebody says locals needs to move to a single fee for all access models don't like subscribing to
00:56:22.420
individuals yeah i think that's actually on the uh the board right now so they're actively looking
00:56:28.100
at that model now that model has some implications for creators for example if the the main reason that
00:56:36.500
you joined um locals was for one creator uh sort of unfair because your money would be distributed to
00:56:44.820
the other creators who are not the reason that you were there so it's hard to work that out and make it fair
00:56:50.340
um who won navarro or fauci you know i'm not too interested in the uh palace intrigue stuff that's just
00:57:01.140
somewhat predictable and uh doesn't really change anything
00:57:07.700
talk about new zealand and how well they've done with it well let's talk about uh countries in general
00:57:14.180
that have done well are you amazed that we don't yet know why some countries are successful and some
00:57:20.740
are not oh you think you know you think you know because you saw the chart that said the ones that
00:57:26.020
use hydroxychloroquine early that they all have good results right so that's it i mean you saw the chart
00:57:32.740
all all the countries with hydroxychloroquine early good result all the ones that don't so that's
00:57:38.580
it right that's the whole little thing well except you may have also seen the chart that shows that
00:57:45.300
vitamin d pretty much explains everything so could vitamin d explain everything we're seeing in the
00:57:54.100
other countries when in fact hydroxychloroquine use explains everything we see in the country
00:58:01.540
but also the graphs show that vitamin d does so those are two different theories except that oh wait
00:58:10.740
there are also graphs that show that the degree of mask use is the main variable and it very clearly
00:58:18.340
shows that the ones you use mass got better results
00:58:24.660
so what the hell is going on you'll so my take on this is that we don't know
00:58:30.180
exactly how much is masks how much is better treatment how much is hydroxychloroquine how much
00:58:37.460
is vitamin d that's in the atmosphere but also might be part of the treatment we really don't know
00:58:44.660
and on top of that you really yet and also somebody says immunity we don't know about immunity we don't
00:58:51.380
even know exactly the nature of the virus in terms of how it's spread there's so much we don't know
00:59:00.260
that um yeah correlation is not causation let me here's a here's a uh a brain test i was going to
00:59:08.340
give you so those of you who feel you are good at analyzing the stuff you see in social media so you
00:59:15.460
feel like you have a pretty strong decision on masks or hydroxychloroquine or vitamin d whatever it is
00:59:22.580
you've got a strong opinion let me ask you this this is a thought experiment if i told you there's a city
00:59:31.860
that has um the most strong locks on their doors they have the most bars on the windows they have
00:59:40.820
the most locks on the doors they have the strongest defense of the house and they even have a lot of
00:59:46.820
firearms and they also have the highest burglary rate what does that tell you they do the most to
00:59:56.100
protect their house but they have the highest burglary rate so that proves that protecting your
01:00:01.860
house doesn't work right right is that the conclusion if you have tons of locks and it's the most locked
01:00:10.100
up definitely lock your doors bars on the window and still the highest burglary rate well that proves
01:00:18.100
that locks don't work it proves that bars on the window don't work right no it doesn't prove that
01:00:27.620
it proves that if you have a lot of crime people are going to improve their locks
01:00:34.340
in fact the dumbest thing that people say about chicago gun control is that well it has the tightest
0.81
01:00:41.540
gun control and the worst murders so obviously gun control doesn't work no they have the tightest gun
0.98
01:00:48.580
control because they have the most murders cause and effect is backwards now did it help
01:00:56.820
how do you know how many murders would there have been if things were different you don't know so if
01:01:04.740
you don't know how things would have been in the alternative situation you don't know anything
01:01:09.700
and we think we do though so we think that well there's a correlation there i guess i guess locks on
01:01:16.900
doors don't work there's still burglaries and that actually as ridiculous as that sounded
01:01:22.500
that's most of the way people are analyzing stuff most of it is reversing cause and effect most of it
01:01:35.220
who are we talking about i know no one who has that situation
01:01:43.700
somebody says proves you don't understand burglars very well proves you can't think
01:01:48.420
because what you're accusing me of is to say that burglars would not
01:01:54.020
prefer to burglarize the less protected house of course they would so we assume that those locks
01:02:02.260
did decrease some amount of burglaries for the ones with the best defenses there's nobody questioning
01:02:08.580
that friction works friction works but correlation and causation are still backwards
01:02:15.940
um do people get murdered with legal or illegal guns well if you looked at the uh the kinds of murders
01:02:25.940
you would find that gun control wouldn't have as big an impact on those murders as you'd like for
01:02:32.900
example gun control probably would not make any difference to gang violence right probably wouldn't make any
01:02:40.020
difference uh what about the hurricanes i don't know what you're talking about all right um but the gun
01:02:50.980
control is ineffective it only stops the law abiding yeah maybe i i don't know if we've actually studied
01:03:00.180
that all right that's it for now and i will talk to you later