Real Coffee with Scott Adams - May 06, 2021


Episode 1367 Scott Adams: Climate Racism, Tucker and Vaccinations, Facebook Trump Ban Fake News, Weaponized Virus and More


Episode Stats

Length

58 minutes

Words per Minute

143.19583

Word Count

8,335

Sentence Count

564

Misogynist Sentences

5

Hate Speech Sentences

14


Summary

Is it true or false that a Facebook oversight board upheld the suspension of Donald Trump's account? Is it fake or is it true? Scott Adams tries to figure out if it's true or not, and what it means for the rest of us.


Transcript

00:00:00.580 Hey, everybody. Oh, you are lucky today. You are so lucky today.
00:00:07.080 Because today will be the finest coffee with Scott Adams.
00:00:12.700 All day long, really. It'll be the best one.
00:00:15.340 And all you need is a cup or a mug or a glass, a tank or a chalice or a stein, a canteen jug or a flask or a vessel of any kind.
00:00:21.340 Fill it with your favorite liquid. I like coffee.
00:00:24.540 And join me now for the unparalleled pleasure, the dopamine hit of the day.
00:00:30.000 The thing that makes everything better.
00:00:32.220 It's called the simultaneous sip.
00:00:34.040 And if you have not participated, oh, again, I feel sorry for you.
00:00:38.080 But it's happening now. Go.
00:00:44.140 Ah, yeah, that's good.
00:00:48.140 So, let's talk about the news.
00:00:52.300 How many of you believe this is true news?
00:00:56.740 This will be a test of your BS detectors.
00:01:00.000 Is it true or false that a Facebook oversight board upheld Facebook's suspension of Trump's account?
00:01:09.660 Go.
00:01:10.200 In the comments, is that a real story or is it fake that the oversight board of Facebook agreed with Facebook to keep Trump suspended?
00:01:20.080 Go.
00:01:20.300 So, I'm looking at your comments.
00:01:23.660 I see true, not real, false, true, true, false.
00:01:28.280 Fake, fake.
00:01:30.180 Yes, fake.
00:01:31.440 True.
00:01:32.500 Interesting.
00:01:32.880 Now, all of you who are saying it's true, what do you think of the people that you can see in the comments saying it's not true?
00:01:40.860 Does that give you any feeling that maybe your confidence should be shaken?
00:01:48.480 Yeah.
00:01:49.200 And somebody said, if you're asking, it must be fake.
00:01:51.700 Well, you are correct.
00:01:53.540 Turns out it's fake news.
00:01:55.380 Here's what the news really is.
00:01:57.860 The opposite.
00:01:59.840 The opposite.
00:02:00.500 It's not even like close.
00:02:06.380 It's literally the freaking opposite.
00:02:09.480 Now, I didn't know this because I was reading CNN and Fox News, but then I went to Axios and I got a whole different story.
00:02:20.040 Here's the real story.
00:02:22.100 Can you believe this?
00:02:23.120 This will blow your mind if you think that that was true.
00:02:25.520 Here's the real story.
00:02:28.020 That the Oversight Board basically said, let's see, here's one of them summarizing it, just one member of the Oversight Board.
00:02:36.760 We felt it a bit lazy of Facebook to be sending over to us a penalty suggestion that didn't exist in their own rulebook, so to speak, in their own community standards.
00:02:47.780 And this was the Danish, former Danish Prime Minister who was on the board who said that.
00:02:52.100 He said, we are not here to lift responsibility off of Facebook.
00:02:57.400 We're here to be independent.
00:03:00.380 And so basically what they did is they sent it back to Facebook and said, why isn't this either a permanent ban, which we could evaluate, because permanent bans are part of what Facebook says they can do,
00:03:16.520 or a temporary, say, six months or whatever the time limit is, ban.
00:03:23.780 That's different.
00:03:25.700 That's really different.
00:03:26.800 Because according to the Oversight Committee, the Oversight Committee apparently would have been fine letting Facebook put Trump back on, as long as he had been treated the same way as everybody else.
00:03:39.520 So what the Oversight Board said was, you didn't follow your own rules, and therefore, we don't support the ban.
00:03:47.680 Now, they didn't say he should be banned or he should not be banned.
00:03:53.440 I have to be really careful here.
00:03:55.340 They basically said, you didn't even follow your own rules, so don't ask us to rule on your own rules when this isn't even close to them.
00:04:04.740 Go back and figure out if he's permanently banned, and then we'll rule on that.
00:04:08.640 Or go back and say he's banned for a certain amount of time, which is also part of your standard, and we'll rule on that.
00:04:17.040 But don't tell us there's some ambiguous ban that doesn't have a time and it's not permanent, because it's not in the rules.
00:04:25.940 So now think about how that was reported to you.
00:04:30.300 Does that make you angry?
00:04:31.880 You should be a little bit angry that this was reported as these people upheld the ban.
00:04:39.060 What they did was just say it's not even appropriate to ask us the question.
00:04:43.620 It's so inappropriate the way you've handled it that we can't even rule on it.
00:04:50.300 That's pretty much the opposite of upholding the ban.
00:04:53.800 They basically said the ban is illegitimate as is.
00:04:57.680 Go back and do something that's legitimate.
00:05:00.020 Yeah, Dorothy says I'm speechless.
00:05:04.420 Just think about how abused you were by that news.
00:05:07.900 Now, I've decided to start reading Axios, because my understanding is that they're attempting to be some kind of non-left, non-right, more medium of the road, less biased.
00:05:21.000 I don't know if they can pull that off.
00:05:23.780 That's a pretty hard standard to pull off.
00:05:26.520 But I'm going to start watching them, because they did report this accurately, and everything else I saw reported it inaccurately, as far as I know.
00:05:36.600 Maybe Axios is wrong.
00:05:37.800 Who knows?
00:05:39.400 Maybe.
00:05:40.740 So here's another more on that topic.
00:05:42.860 Larry Elder tweeted out that Facebook banned Trump for saying, since November 2020, that the election was, quote, stolen by Hillary Clinton since November 2016, has said the same thing.
00:05:56.780 And he showed a bunch of quotes of Hillary Clinton.
00:05:59.480 So he's saying, why was Trump banned for saying the election was illegitimate when Hillary was not?
00:06:07.160 Well, I saw some pushback to this, saying those are different situations, and Hillary was not saying that her election was rigged.
00:06:15.260 But I think she was, just a different way.
00:06:18.860 I think the idea that Hillary was promoting was that Russia had corrupted the election somehow.
00:06:28.260 That's the same.
00:06:30.200 It's a different situation.
00:06:32.600 But in terms of questioning the integrity of our election, without actually having any evidence whatsoever, looks the same to me.
00:06:42.160 To me, it looks the same.
00:06:43.300 So in terms of whether both of them or neither of them should have been kicked off of Facebook.
00:06:49.780 Now, it's kind of amazing that as long as you've got the majority with you, let's say, you know, 60% of the country or whatever it is.
00:06:57.900 I'll just make up a number for conversation.
00:07:01.020 As long as most of the country is willing to accept a lie, you don't have to tell the truth.
00:07:07.020 If 60% of the country is willing to just act like it's true, even if they know it's not, you know, in this case, the situation is treating Trump differently than Hillary Clinton.
00:07:20.520 Now, as long as the public is willing to treat them as different, I guess you could get away with it.
00:07:26.920 It doesn't matter if it's true.
00:07:27.980 Here's something that makes me wonder if we've solved a little mystery or not about the virus.
00:07:39.080 You know, we've been wondering why it is that the Asian countries have been doing so well in avoiding the virus, the worst parts of the virus.
00:07:49.280 And non-Asian countries, especially mostly white ethnic countries, are doing poorly often, not every time.
00:07:59.660 So there's a little bit of new information here.
00:08:02.300 Now, we don't know if this will be, you know, who knows if future studies will uphold this.
00:08:07.380 But this is what we think we know right now, that bald men are up to 2.5 times more likely to suffer severe COVID stuff than people with a full head of hair.
00:08:17.300 Now, your first take on that is, oh, Scott, you're in trouble.
00:08:23.400 And you might be right about that.
00:08:25.700 But here's maybe the answer to why it's affecting different ethnic groups differently.
00:08:33.580 Now, male pattern baldness, and by the way, let me be clear here.
00:08:37.760 I'm now going to veer from stuff that may or may not be true, because it's reported in the news.
00:08:43.820 And now I'm going to go into complete speculative territory.
00:08:47.480 Okay?
00:08:48.380 So everything you hear from now on about this topic, just speculation.
00:08:52.760 So it's not a false claim.
00:08:54.160 It's just speculation.
00:08:56.700 But is it propaganda?
00:08:58.320 Well, you decide.
00:09:00.340 It probably is.
00:09:03.520 If it's true that male pattern baldness is a big indicator of how bad it's going to be,
00:09:11.060 who has the most male pattern baldness?
00:09:13.880 Well, it turns out white people do by a big percentage, right?
00:09:19.360 So Asian men have much less hair loss than American men.
00:09:26.640 Now, interestingly, the thing that causes this hair loss is a sensitivity to male hormones.
00:09:33.780 So bald people don't necessarily have more testosterone and male hormones.
00:09:42.660 They're simply more sensitive to it.
00:09:44.700 So my male pattern baldness, in all likelihood, don't know if it's for every person specifically,
00:09:53.160 but in all likelihood, what it's telling you, if you see somebody with male pattern baldness,
00:09:57.760 is that their body, for whatever genetic reason, is more susceptible to male hormones.
00:10:04.320 In other words, you're more likely to be alpha.
00:10:06.800 So here's the fun part.
00:10:10.660 I'll just wait for everybody to get mad.
00:10:13.900 Bald people, bald men, are more likely to have, let's say, toxic male chemistry.
00:10:24.560 Do I have toxic male chemistry?
00:10:28.220 Probably, if you've watched me at all, if there's anything that I would criticize myself for,
00:10:36.640 this sounds pretty fair, I'm pretty sure I have a high dose of male chemistry.
00:10:43.500 Now, whether you equate that to being alpha or beta or anything else,
00:10:48.760 well, that's, again, more speculative, and I don't have data to prove that,
00:10:53.920 but I have heard that, at least, that it is possible to detect who has more testosterone.
00:11:01.900 Have you ever heard that?
00:11:03.080 Have you heard that people can detect who has more testosterone,
00:11:07.780 or at least who is more influenced by it, I guess would be the other way to say it.
00:11:12.620 Yeah, I think you can.
00:11:14.820 So would it be, now I'm going to speculatively create, connect a whole bunch of dots.
00:11:20.560 Yes, what I say next is not confirmed or there's no evidence for it, right?
00:11:26.480 There's no evidence for this.
00:11:28.580 I'm just speculating.
00:11:30.580 Suppose you were a Chinese company and you were trying to create a virus
00:11:34.660 that, if it got out of the lab, would be really bad for your competitors,
00:11:39.720 but not nearly as bad for your own team.
00:11:42.960 What would it look like?
00:11:44.620 And what would be a clever way to do it?
00:11:46.520 Well, you would certainly want a virus that didn't affect ethnic Chinese people
00:11:53.720 or even people in your area, you know, Asian people in general.
00:11:57.960 You'd want it to affect mostly white people.
00:12:01.740 Now, again, I'm not saying that any of this happened.
00:12:05.900 I'm saying if you were to create a virus for the purpose of destroying your competition,
00:12:11.480 and if you were China, you would create one that would target people who were not you
00:12:17.540 and also were the people that you worried about the most
00:12:22.040 in terms of, you know, long-term competition as a country.
00:12:27.160 So here we have this virus that some people think was a weaponized modified virus
00:12:33.880 that does seem to target white alpha males
00:12:38.840 who tend to be the war-like people in the United States.
00:12:49.620 So does that mean that, therefore, it's a weaponized virus?
00:12:54.340 No. No.
00:12:56.320 It doesn't mean that at all.
00:12:57.840 But if you were going to make one,
00:13:00.840 this would be a pretty good way to do it.
00:13:03.140 But here are the differences.
00:13:05.120 A 2010 study from six Chinese studies found that fewer than 3% of men,
00:13:10.840 younger men, and just over 13% of those over 30,
00:13:15.060 experienced male pattern baldness,
00:13:17.380 which is way, way less than Americans,
00:13:20.620 where Caucasian men, pretty much all of them have some baldness,
00:13:25.500 but around half can expect to lose their hair by middle age.
00:13:29.320 So you've got 14% versus half.
00:13:36.460 Now, you could ask yourself,
00:13:38.300 is it a coincidence, just a coincidence,
00:13:41.920 that a natural virus happens to look a lot like the way
00:13:46.680 a weaponized virus would look if you made it?
00:13:50.460 Yes, that could be a coincidence.
00:13:52.700 It easily could be a coincidence,
00:13:54.080 because coincidences happen.
00:13:58.660 So I'm not going to say that this teaches you anything except it's a red flag.
00:14:05.060 I mean, I would certainly be looking really hard at anything
00:14:09.300 that took out all the alpha white males
00:14:12.180 and didn't affect so much Chinese nationals.
00:14:17.520 It's a red flag.
00:14:20.000 Speaking of red flags,
00:14:22.340 there are more ex-girlfriends of rocker Marilyn Manson
00:14:27.380 accusing him of abusive behavior.
00:14:31.700 Now, as I tweeted just before I got on,
00:14:34.380 I don't care about anybody who resists arrest
00:14:38.720 or dates Marilyn Manson.
00:14:42.260 Because if you didn't see that coming,
00:14:45.440 I can't help you.
00:14:47.360 Right?
00:14:47.840 You have to do a little bit for yourself.
00:14:50.940 Right?
00:14:51.660 I'm happy to help people who get themselves in trouble.
00:14:55.120 I'm happy to help people who are just unlucky.
00:14:58.500 But you have to do a little bit.
00:15:01.040 Like, just work with me.
00:15:03.300 Just a little bit on your own.
00:15:05.680 Like, don't date Marilyn Manson.
00:15:10.500 What do you got?
00:15:11.280 3.5 billion other possibilities?
00:15:14.160 I'm only going to rule out the one.
00:15:17.020 Maybe, you know,
00:15:18.420 maybe Jeffrey Epstein, if he were still alive.
00:15:21.820 I might rule him out.
00:15:23.300 But basically,
00:15:25.000 just don't date Marilyn Manson.
00:15:27.220 And don't get aggressive with police
00:15:32.940 who are stopping you.
00:15:34.080 If you just do those two little things,
00:15:37.140 then I'm on your side.
00:15:39.380 I could help you.
00:15:41.480 You know, bad luck?
00:15:42.480 I'm there for you.
00:15:43.880 Need a little helping hand?
00:15:45.740 I feel like I could do that.
00:15:47.660 You want a little advice?
00:15:48.780 I got it.
00:15:50.280 Maybe some people need some money?
00:15:52.000 Okay.
00:15:52.740 Depends, you know,
00:15:53.440 if you can make good use of it.
00:15:55.020 If it'll help,
00:15:56.880 well, you gotta do a little.
00:15:58.580 Just a little.
00:15:59.400 On your own.
00:16:01.720 I asked this question,
00:16:03.160 and you'll know why immediately.
00:16:05.500 I did a little informal poll,
00:16:07.500 and I said,
00:16:07.860 who would you trust on a health question
00:16:09.700 in the news?
00:16:11.880 Tucker Carlson or me?
00:16:14.040 Let's see how you answer here
00:16:15.920 on this live stream.
00:16:19.520 Who would you trust?
00:16:21.600 Let's say there was a health question
00:16:23.120 in the news.
00:16:23.840 You know that Tucker Carlson
00:16:26.000 is not a doctor.
00:16:27.140 You know that I'm not a doctor.
00:16:29.180 So neither of us have any medical
00:16:30.960 or scientific credentials.
00:16:34.260 So if we disagreed,
00:16:37.480 who would you trust?
00:16:40.940 Looking at your comments,
00:16:43.120 can't tell, can't tell.
00:16:46.620 Somebody says Fox is owned by Big Pharma.
00:16:49.580 Somebody says you, Tucker,
00:16:51.160 you, Tucker, you, you,
00:16:53.800 neither, neither,
00:16:55.500 both, neither.
00:16:57.340 Well, you can't be both
00:16:58.280 because the setup is that we disagree.
00:17:01.220 All right.
00:17:02.280 Here's how I would make that decision
00:17:04.160 if I were you.
00:17:06.020 I would look at
00:17:07.440 who has the broader talent stack
00:17:09.640 that is appropriate to the question.
00:17:11.900 Who would you prefer?
00:17:14.540 Let's say, I won't use myself,
00:17:16.860 Nate Silver,
00:17:18.520 who is an expert on statistics
00:17:20.080 and also not a doctor.
00:17:22.600 So if you had to trust Nate Silver,
00:17:25.520 who is an expert on analytical data,
00:17:28.600 statistical things,
00:17:30.100 versus Tucker Carlson,
00:17:32.400 and let's say they had a disagreement
00:17:33.980 about a health issue
00:17:35.760 that's in the news.
00:17:37.180 So they have the same information,
00:17:38.440 but they have a different group.
00:17:40.280 Who would you trust?
00:17:43.260 In that case,
00:17:44.640 well, if you trusted Tucker Carlson,
00:17:47.140 you would be trusting the person
00:17:48.620 with a smaller talent stack
00:17:50.320 because Nate would be more qualified
00:17:53.000 just on the analytical level.
00:17:55.100 Doesn't mean he'd be right, right?
00:17:57.160 But he'd be more qualified.
00:17:59.220 Even though neither of them are medical,
00:18:01.740 one of them can look at the data better.
00:18:04.940 Is that fair?
00:18:05.740 Now, suppose it was Tucker Carlson
00:18:09.300 and then me,
00:18:10.940 and we disagreed on a health issue.
00:18:12.980 Neither of us are experts.
00:18:14.860 Which of us has the talent stack
00:18:17.720 that is appropriate
00:18:18.820 to sorting out that kind of question?
00:18:21.880 I would argue that you should go
00:18:23.320 with somebody who has analytical background,
00:18:26.660 you know, economics, business, statistics,
00:18:29.580 and that that person would probably
00:18:31.280 have a little bit of an advantage
00:18:32.740 over somebody who might have
00:18:34.440 been more of a journalism path.
00:18:37.340 Now, I don't know if that's true.
00:18:38.620 I don't know what
00:18:39.260 Tucker Carlson's full background is,
00:18:41.800 so maybe there's more there
00:18:42.760 that I'm aware of,
00:18:44.340 but that's what you would take into account.
00:18:46.660 Then I would ask,
00:18:47.580 who has fallen for more hoaxes?
00:18:51.020 And I'd like to see this in the comments.
00:18:53.360 In the comments,
00:18:55.100 and let's only count hoaxes
00:18:56.660 that we know are hoaxes.
00:18:57.980 Because there are things
00:18:59.640 that you still suspect are hoaxes,
00:19:02.680 but we don't have an answer to them.
00:19:05.620 But who has fallen for more hoaxes?
00:19:10.800 In the comments.
00:19:13.440 Who has fallen for more hoaxes?
00:19:15.720 I'm looking at your comments,
00:19:20.500 and I'm seeing it looks like mixed.
00:19:23.240 So some say me,
00:19:24.320 some say Tucker takes more risks.
00:19:27.740 That's probably true.
00:19:29.000 Some say me,
00:19:30.200 me,
00:19:31.020 you.
00:19:31.640 All right,
00:19:31.840 what would be the examples
00:19:33.660 of the hoaxes I've fallen for?
00:19:36.620 Now watch this.
00:19:38.400 So a lot of people say
00:19:39.700 that I've fallen for more hoaxes.
00:19:42.240 Now list them.
00:19:43.040 Please list the hoaxes
00:19:46.240 that I've fallen for.
00:19:48.820 So the Covington kids,
00:19:50.720 I fell for that hoax for one day.
00:19:54.040 From a Rupard video.
00:19:56.520 So that one's on my,
00:19:57.660 so that one's on my bad list, right?
00:20:02.480 Is that it?
00:20:05.140 The fine people hoax I debunked.
00:20:09.060 Climate change,
00:20:10.220 we don't know,
00:20:10.920 we don't know what that is, right?
00:20:13.040 That's still an open question.
00:20:16.000 Bill Gates, UFOs.
00:20:17.940 Well, I'm right about all that.
00:20:19.880 The Bird UFO.
00:20:21.380 I'm right about that.
00:20:25.380 If you think I'm wrong about the UFOs,
00:20:28.360 well,
00:20:29.240 good luck with you there.
00:20:31.780 COVID fear.
00:20:33.200 No, you're just misstating my opinion.
00:20:36.460 Global warming.
00:20:40.200 Global warming.
00:20:41.360 Now, most of you who think
00:20:42.980 that I've fallen for hoaxes
00:20:44.340 on climate change, etc.,
00:20:45.800 would not be able to describe my opinion.
00:20:49.420 So here's the challenge.
00:20:51.180 Anybody who thinks
00:20:51.920 that I've fallen for a hoax,
00:20:54.160 see if you could describe
00:20:55.620 my opinion in your words.
00:20:58.140 Bet you can't.
00:20:59.800 I'll bet you can't.
00:21:01.000 All right, so that was interesting.
00:21:02.400 Now, I don't know
00:21:02.940 that there's any right answer to this,
00:21:04.400 but then I would also say
00:21:05.980 who predicted better?
00:21:08.300 If you've watched Tucker and me,
00:21:11.140 which one of us has predicted better?
00:21:16.920 I don't know.
00:21:18.760 But I think it's probably me,
00:21:21.280 but I don't know.
00:21:24.560 Somebody says masks.
00:21:26.180 Now, there are a bunch of topics
00:21:27.340 in which you cannot yet determine
00:21:29.080 who is right or wrong,
00:21:30.240 but you can determine
00:21:31.080 that I'm on the side of science.
00:21:32.620 So there may be some things
00:21:34.820 where we disagree,
00:21:36.120 but my opinion agrees with science.
00:21:38.960 I might be wrong.
00:21:41.220 All right, let's go on.
00:21:42.880 The new study that says salt
00:21:44.400 is bad for your immune system.
00:21:46.240 If you get too much salt,
00:21:47.580 your immune system isn't going to
00:21:49.380 fight off the COVID as well
00:21:50.700 or anything else.
00:21:52.840 And here's my question.
00:21:54.660 Why is the universe designed
00:21:56.700 in a way that
00:21:58.160 if there's anything we shouldn't do,
00:22:00.360 it's something we wanted to do?
00:22:03.420 You know, there's...
00:22:04.560 Well, I suppose that makes sense
00:22:05.960 because we wouldn't be doing it
00:22:06.980 if we didn't want to do it.
00:22:08.420 But the level of coincidence
00:22:11.400 that whenever there's
00:22:13.200 a new scientific breakthrough,
00:22:15.440 it's always going to be
00:22:16.440 don't do something you want to do.
00:22:18.640 Right?
00:22:19.840 It's like the things I want to do
00:22:21.300 are eat bad food,
00:22:22.520 look at my phone,
00:22:23.900 have reckless sex, whatever,
00:22:25.820 but can't do any of that stuff.
00:22:28.080 And I guess there's a reason for that
00:22:29.360 because nature used to take care of that,
00:22:31.860 but nature doesn't do that anymore.
00:22:34.500 Now you have to figure out
00:22:35.500 how much salt to eat.
00:22:38.700 This is funny in a bad way.
00:22:41.360 So apparently even at least one Democrat
00:22:44.260 is criticizing Biden
00:22:47.420 and the administration.
00:22:49.660 So Representative Quaylar
00:22:51.900 is pointing out
00:22:53.140 that they're showing photographs
00:22:54.640 of now their uncrowded
00:22:56.760 and almost empty facilities
00:22:59.540 for holding the children
00:23:00.600 at the border,
00:23:01.540 the immigrants coming in.
00:23:03.280 And apparently it's just a shell game.
00:23:05.160 All they did was
00:23:05.740 they took the crowded kids
00:23:07.420 out of this place
00:23:08.340 and they moved them next door
00:23:09.900 to the Health and Human Services tents.
00:23:12.320 So they moved them
00:23:13.320 from indoors to outdoors in tents.
00:23:18.040 And...
00:23:18.360 But here's what's funny about this.
00:23:19.860 As long as the Biden administration
00:23:23.280 can give you a photograph
00:23:25.140 of the old places
00:23:26.800 that now don't have much crowding
00:23:28.440 and they don't show you a photograph
00:23:30.680 of the new place they moved them to,
00:23:32.840 they win.
00:23:34.640 They win.
00:23:36.100 Because the photo is all the matters.
00:23:39.040 That's it.
00:23:40.240 The Biden administration
00:23:41.260 is getting the persuasion
00:23:44.140 on this completely right.
00:23:46.180 They knew
00:23:46.940 all they had to do
00:23:48.640 is one fake photo
00:23:49.940 of a seemingly empty facility,
00:23:53.380 even though they just moved them
00:23:54.780 to probably another crowded
00:23:56.120 tent facility next door.
00:23:57.700 That's all they needed.
00:23:59.120 And it worked.
00:24:00.380 So the fact that the, you know,
00:24:02.160 the critics of the administration
00:24:03.920 are calling it out,
00:24:05.700 well, of course they knew
00:24:07.660 they would be caught.
00:24:09.160 Do you think that they did this trick
00:24:10.920 thinking they wouldn't get caught?
00:24:13.700 No.
00:24:14.220 They knew they'd get caught.
00:24:15.160 They also knew
00:24:16.840 it wouldn't matter.
00:24:19.080 Because the truth
00:24:20.520 will be the photograph
00:24:21.540 in people's minds.
00:24:23.600 That's the truth.
00:24:25.020 And the fact that people
00:24:25.980 that the left doesn't follow
00:24:28.460 say it's fake news,
00:24:31.040 they won't see it.
00:24:32.720 Totally successful persuasion.
00:24:34.980 Totally unethical,
00:24:36.440 but totally successful.
00:24:39.740 There's new reporting says,
00:24:42.780 this is also Axios,
00:24:43.920 that the distribution
00:24:46.660 of global greenhouse gas emissions
00:24:48.980 has reached a point
00:24:51.120 where China is emitting
00:24:53.020 more than all the developed nations combined.
00:24:58.260 Wow.
00:24:59.540 So climate change
00:25:01.140 is basically a China problem.
00:25:03.960 Meaning that if China
00:25:05.640 were not doing what it's doing,
00:25:07.920 it would be
00:25:08.920 half of the size of the problem
00:25:10.780 and probably pretty solvable.
00:25:13.760 Right?
00:25:14.760 Now,
00:25:15.340 I knew that China
00:25:16.440 was a big part of the problem.
00:25:18.420 I didn't know it was half.
00:25:20.400 Did you know that?
00:25:21.900 I mean,
00:25:22.200 if you had asked me
00:25:23.300 in a survey,
00:25:24.560 how much is China's,
00:25:26.020 as part of the problem,
00:25:26.860 I would have said 25%.
00:25:28.060 I might have thought
00:25:30.320 India,
00:25:30.980 25%.
00:25:32.040 That's what I would have guessed.
00:25:34.040 But China,
00:25:34.760 50%
00:25:35.380 and growing.
00:25:36.820 It's not going down,
00:25:37.760 it's going up fast.
00:25:39.640 So,
00:25:40.260 somehow,
00:25:42.300 the left has managed
00:25:43.180 to make climate change
00:25:44.220 a race problem.
00:25:45.940 So they've combined
00:25:46.740 their favorite topics
00:25:47.720 and said,
00:25:48.260 climate change is racist.
00:25:50.200 But it sort of should be,
00:25:53.220 climate change
00:25:54.020 is a China problem.
00:25:56.600 And that would be
00:25:57.480 an important reframing,
00:25:58.720 but I don't think
00:25:59.300 it's going to happen.
00:26:00.380 Speaking of climate,
00:26:01.920 Biden administration
00:26:03.160 is,
00:26:03.640 at least privately,
00:26:04.820 saying that it wants
00:26:05.560 to prop up
00:26:06.460 the nuclear energy
00:26:07.720 business in the United States
00:26:09.660 with subsidies.
00:26:11.420 Taxpayer subsidies.
00:26:13.120 So,
00:26:13.480 apparently,
00:26:13.860 there are three sources
00:26:14.620 that say this is true.
00:26:16.740 I'm going to have to
00:26:17.840 give credit
00:26:18.500 to the Biden administration.
00:26:20.760 Now,
00:26:20.960 I think this is a continuation
00:26:22.180 from the Trump policy
00:26:23.980 that nuclear energy
00:26:26.260 needed to be important.
00:26:27.600 But,
00:26:28.040 let me say this
00:26:28.680 about both Trump
00:26:29.640 and Biden,
00:26:30.760 about nuclear power.
00:26:33.040 I believe they were
00:26:33.980 both complete failures.
00:26:36.500 Total failures.
00:26:38.040 Trump,
00:26:38.540 Biden,
00:26:39.000 complete failures.
00:26:40.140 Because they're trying
00:26:41.160 to have it both ways.
00:26:42.620 They're trying to
00:26:43.240 quietly support
00:26:44.880 nuclear,
00:26:45.960 which both Trump
00:26:46.800 and Biden
00:26:47.260 apparently are doing,
00:26:48.500 in substantial ways.
00:26:50.680 So,
00:26:51.180 the amount that
00:26:51.680 they're supporting it
00:26:52.520 quietly
00:26:53.340 looks pretty good,
00:26:55.480 actually.
00:26:55.980 I don't have a complaint
00:26:57.180 about that.
00:26:58.100 There do seem to be
00:26:58.840 lots of resources.
00:27:00.300 They built test beds.
00:27:01.640 Trump started that.
00:27:03.180 Biden looks like
00:27:03.920 he wants to
00:27:04.640 give them subsidies
00:27:05.720 to keep them going.
00:27:07.020 So,
00:27:07.360 they're definitely
00:27:07.840 doing the right stuff
00:27:09.220 on the details.
00:27:12.080 What they're not doing
00:27:13.160 is saying it out loud.
00:27:14.180 I don't know
00:27:16.400 why Trump didn't.
00:27:17.740 Maybe he was just
00:27:18.760 uncomfortable
00:27:19.180 with the topic
00:27:19.920 because it's,
00:27:21.140 you know,
00:27:21.780 it veers into
00:27:22.580 the scientific
00:27:23.240 pretty quickly.
00:27:26.280 So,
00:27:26.860 I don't know
00:27:27.140 what's going on,
00:27:28.220 but I would say
00:27:28.760 they're both
00:27:29.140 complete failures
00:27:30.240 in informing
00:27:31.560 the public
00:27:32.100 that nuclear
00:27:33.000 has to be a big
00:27:33.780 part of our solution.
00:27:35.240 Complete failures.
00:27:36.240 I mean,
00:27:36.560 100%
00:27:37.500 complete failure
00:27:39.160 Biden and Trump
00:27:40.460 on this issue.
00:27:41.240 while at the same time
00:27:42.860 their administration
00:27:44.260 is doing all
00:27:45.040 the right stuff.
00:27:46.380 Which is weird.
00:27:48.820 That they could
00:27:49.600 both be
00:27:50.160 completely successful
00:27:51.320 and 100%
00:27:53.180 failures
00:27:53.680 at the same time,
00:27:54.580 but it's happening.
00:27:57.800 Here's a
00:27:58.560 provocative
00:27:59.200 little story
00:28:00.260 that I'm going
00:28:00.940 to say
00:28:01.340 is more likely
00:28:02.620 fake news
00:28:03.300 than real.
00:28:05.020 The 2020 census,
00:28:06.920 apparently,
00:28:08.620 shows that
00:28:09.760 the number
00:28:10.340 of voters
00:28:11.160 is 5 million
00:28:13.440 less than
00:28:14.220 the number
00:28:14.720 of votes
00:28:16.460 for the last election.
00:28:19.680 So,
00:28:19.860 in other words,
00:28:20.620 the number
00:28:21.240 of people
00:28:21.620 who reported
00:28:22.580 that they voted
00:28:23.440 according to the census
00:28:24.580 is 5 million
00:28:27.180 fewer
00:28:27.740 than the number
00:28:29.160 of votes
00:28:29.540 we got.
00:28:30.400 Now,
00:28:30.840 when you hear that,
00:28:31.460 you say to yourself,
00:28:32.400 we got it.
00:28:33.800 We got this
00:28:34.440 smoking gun.
00:28:36.060 So,
00:28:36.300 now we know
00:28:37.020 that there are
00:28:38.820 a whole bunch
00:28:39.180 of fake votes,
00:28:40.200 right?
00:28:41.620 Don't fall
00:28:42.400 for this.
00:28:44.080 Do not fall
00:28:45.120 for this.
00:28:47.180 If you've fallen
00:28:48.140 for this,
00:28:48.700 you're falling
00:28:49.060 for anything.
00:28:50.800 You should not
00:28:51.760 trust this.
00:28:53.720 All right,
00:28:54.080 here's some background.
00:28:55.480 Have they ever
00:28:56.120 been wrong before?
00:28:58.420 Yeah.
00:28:59.520 Yeah.
00:29:00.340 They've been wrong
00:29:00.960 before
00:29:01.340 by big numbers,
00:29:02.600 like 9 million,
00:29:03.600 one previous
00:29:04.220 census.
00:29:05.260 but
00:29:08.020 they were
00:29:09.220 apparently
00:29:09.600 they were
00:29:10.020 usually wrong
00:29:10.940 or almost always
00:29:11.840 in the other
00:29:12.480 direction.
00:29:13.480 So,
00:29:13.960 this is the first
00:29:14.560 time they've
00:29:14.960 been wrong
00:29:15.340 in this direction.
00:29:17.240 Does that mean
00:29:18.000 anything?
00:29:20.760 If they've been
00:29:21.540 wrong before,
00:29:23.160 also by large
00:29:24.200 amounts,
00:29:25.920 but lots of times
00:29:26.940 they've been right,
00:29:28.260 but the only times
00:29:29.560 they've been wrong
00:29:30.240 was in the other
00:29:30.920 direction.
00:29:31.420 So,
00:29:33.380 does that tell you
00:29:33.880 that you know
00:29:34.360 something?
00:29:35.040 Is that a smoke
00:29:36.640 and gun
00:29:37.000 for some kind
00:29:38.500 of election
00:29:38.940 problems?
00:29:40.220 No.
00:29:41.360 No,
00:29:41.840 it isn't.
00:29:42.700 It doesn't tell
00:29:43.620 you anything.
00:29:44.700 It just tells you
00:29:45.620 that the number
00:29:48.800 of people who
00:29:49.360 voted and the
00:29:50.060 census don't
00:29:50.840 always match.
00:29:52.760 That's all I hear.
00:29:54.180 If you take it
00:29:55.080 to the next level
00:29:55.840 and say,
00:29:56.320 well,
00:29:56.600 there it is,
00:29:57.100 smoke and gun.
00:29:58.160 We found all
00:29:58.780 these fake votes.
00:30:00.240 That's a little
00:30:00.720 too far.
00:30:02.020 Now,
00:30:02.280 we can't rule
00:30:02.820 it out.
00:30:04.300 Does it make
00:30:05.020 me curious?
00:30:06.240 Oh,
00:30:06.480 yeah,
00:30:06.740 it does.
00:30:07.820 Is it a red
00:30:08.720 flag?
00:30:09.800 Yeah,
00:30:10.100 it is.
00:30:10.980 Yeah,
00:30:11.260 well,
00:30:11.680 or maybe
00:30:12.320 whatever's
00:30:12.760 less than red.
00:30:14.140 But you should
00:30:14.880 definitely look
00:30:15.540 into it.
00:30:16.640 So,
00:30:16.940 I'm not saying
00:30:17.360 it's unimportant.
00:30:19.220 I would definitely
00:30:20.100 want to get a little
00:30:21.280 bit more information
00:30:22.120 about this,
00:30:23.220 but I don't think
00:30:24.500 that it necessarily
00:30:25.220 is any kind
00:30:25.780 of proof
00:30:26.300 that there was
00:30:26.860 some bad stuff
00:30:27.760 going on
00:30:28.280 because it could
00:30:29.140 be inaccurate
00:30:29.640 for a variety
00:30:30.620 of reasons.
00:30:31.420 And as others
00:30:32.220 have pointed
00:30:32.620 out,
00:30:33.700 I think this
00:30:34.600 was,
00:30:35.160 if it's 2020,
00:30:36.620 the census
00:30:37.120 was taken
00:30:37.780 during the
00:30:39.320 pandemic.
00:30:41.000 So,
00:30:41.980 I don't know.
00:30:43.020 And how many
00:30:43.540 people decided
00:30:44.520 to vote,
00:30:45.700 let's say,
00:30:46.420 in the last
00:30:47.020 month or two
00:30:47.840 of the election?
00:30:48.380 I have a feeling
00:30:49.840 I have a feeling
00:30:49.860 a lot of people
00:30:50.400 didn't even
00:30:50.840 make up their
00:30:51.400 mind to vote
00:30:52.600 until the last
00:30:53.300 few months.
00:30:54.800 So,
00:30:55.000 if they did
00:30:55.300 the census,
00:30:56.020 let's say,
00:30:56.580 started in the
00:30:57.280 beginning of 2020,
00:30:58.480 how many people
00:30:59.560 said they were
00:31:00.020 going to vote?
00:31:01.100 I could easily
00:31:01.780 imagine that
00:31:03.720 five million
00:31:04.300 said they
00:31:05.360 weren't going
00:31:05.840 to and then
00:31:07.120 did.
00:31:08.560 So,
00:31:08.980 I've got
00:31:09.620 questions about
00:31:10.200 this.
00:31:10.920 There's some
00:31:11.480 news,
00:31:14.300 if I can call
00:31:14.920 it that,
00:31:15.380 coming out
00:31:15.780 of the
00:31:16.080 Arizona recount,
00:31:20.520 don't believe
00:31:21.860 any of it.
00:31:23.460 So,
00:31:23.800 here's my
00:31:24.160 advice to you.
00:31:25.160 Everything that
00:31:25.880 you hear coming
00:31:26.660 out of the
00:31:27.620 Arizona recount,
00:31:29.480 because I read
00:31:30.220 some stories
00:31:30.760 today that I
00:31:31.660 just shook my
00:31:32.260 head,
00:31:33.000 and I said,
00:31:33.480 these are
00:31:33.880 obviously fake
00:31:34.800 news.
00:31:35.880 Now,
00:31:36.300 could be wrong,
00:31:37.460 but wait until
00:31:38.240 you've got a few
00:31:39.360 respectable
00:31:40.200 outlets,
00:31:42.140 or there's
00:31:42.760 somebody who
00:31:43.160 goes on camera
00:31:43.960 that you know
00:31:44.620 is associated
00:31:45.280 with them,
00:31:46.160 and that
00:31:46.500 person says,
00:31:47.340 on camera,
00:31:48.440 yes,
00:31:49.000 we found
00:31:49.520 this or
00:31:49.940 that.
00:31:50.940 But don't
00:31:51.700 look at an
00:31:52.400 obscure
00:31:52.980 publication on
00:31:54.780 the internet
00:31:55.220 that tells
00:31:57.500 you that
00:31:57.980 they found
00:31:58.800 something already.
00:32:00.180 They might
00:32:00.600 have.
00:32:01.340 I'm not
00:32:01.680 ruling it
00:32:02.140 out.
00:32:03.240 I'm just
00:32:03.880 saying I
00:32:04.240 don't think
00:32:04.600 we have
00:32:04.940 any visibility
00:32:05.540 yet.
00:32:06.620 So,
00:32:06.940 don't believe
00:32:07.200 any of the
00:32:08.340 early reports.
00:32:11.480 Did you
00:32:12.000 know that
00:32:12.360 Coca-Cola
00:32:12.880 has paused
00:32:13.800 its
00:32:14.060 controversial
00:32:14.780 diversity
00:32:15.480 plan,
00:32:17.020 which included
00:32:17.940 penalties on
00:32:18.820 outside law
00:32:19.700 firms if
00:32:20.820 they failed
00:32:21.340 to meet
00:32:21.720 racial diversity
00:32:22.680 quotas,
00:32:23.500 so they
00:32:25.140 wouldn't even
00:32:25.560 deal with
00:32:26.180 law firms
00:32:27.360 that did
00:32:28.920 not have
00:32:29.940 enough diversity
00:32:30.740 in the law
00:32:31.520 firm.
00:32:32.720 Well,
00:32:33.240 apparently the
00:32:34.140 guy behind
00:32:34.840 all that,
00:32:35.320 their former
00:32:35.720 general counsel,
00:32:36.560 Bradley
00:32:36.840 Gaeton,
00:32:38.120 has abruptly
00:32:39.000 resigned.
00:32:39.640 last month
00:32:41.520 after less
00:32:42.400 of a year
00:32:42.720 on the job
00:32:43.280 and lots
00:32:43.840 of criticisms
00:32:44.640 of the
00:32:45.220 quotas.
00:32:47.120 And here's
00:32:48.320 what I'd
00:32:48.700 like to
00:32:49.040 know.
00:32:49.780 First of
00:32:50.240 all,
00:32:51.020 did he
00:32:52.020 leave his
00:32:52.760 job because
00:32:53.440 people were
00:32:54.400 unhappy with
00:32:54.960 him?
00:32:55.300 We assume
00:32:56.060 so,
00:32:56.520 but we
00:32:56.840 don't know
00:32:57.120 for sure.
00:32:58.340 And I
00:32:58.660 wonder how
00:32:59.440 many other
00:33:00.100 stories there
00:33:00.860 are of
00:33:01.300 people losing
00:33:02.060 jobs for
00:33:03.180 being too
00:33:04.080 woke.
00:33:04.540 because the
00:33:06.060 more of
00:33:06.420 those stories
00:33:06.980 you hear,
00:33:08.580 the less
00:33:09.480 of the
00:33:09.840 wokeness
00:33:10.440 problems
00:33:10.820 you'll get
00:33:11.320 because people
00:33:12.320 deal with
00:33:12.820 anecdotes,
00:33:13.520 not data,
00:33:14.000 right?
00:33:14.460 So if you
00:33:15.080 hear a story
00:33:15.680 about somebody
00:33:17.060 who went
00:33:17.440 too far
00:33:17.960 and got
00:33:18.860 fired,
00:33:19.680 that puts
00:33:21.280 a little
00:33:21.560 damper on
00:33:22.260 people going
00:33:22.880 too far.
00:33:25.560 Likewise,
00:33:26.260 the story
00:33:26.540 about Basecamp,
00:33:27.580 the company
00:33:28.380 that said
00:33:28.740 you can't
00:33:29.120 talk about
00:33:29.520 politics
00:33:29.960 anymore,
00:33:31.100 which basically
00:33:32.120 was a war
00:33:32.860 on wokeness.
00:33:33.660 you know,
00:33:34.600 it was in
00:33:34.880 disguise,
00:33:35.820 but it
00:33:36.080 said you
00:33:36.300 can't
00:33:36.520 talk about
00:33:37.080 politics
00:33:37.780 anymore,
00:33:38.940 and 20%
00:33:40.160 of the
00:33:40.380 workplace
00:33:40.700 left.
00:33:44.040 In essence,
00:33:45.320 they lost
00:33:45.720 their jobs
00:33:46.360 for being
00:33:47.040 too woke.
00:33:48.360 It was
00:33:48.760 voluntary,
00:33:49.400 but they
00:33:49.620 lost their
00:33:50.020 jobs.
00:33:51.220 So as
00:33:52.620 we find
00:33:53.020 more of
00:33:53.380 these,
00:33:53.740 that will
00:33:54.160 be the
00:33:54.600 thing that
00:33:54.960 pushes
00:33:55.220 back against
00:33:56.040 the slippery
00:33:57.620 slope.
00:33:59.840 Here's how
00:34:00.600 I would
00:34:01.080 like to
00:34:01.700 we should
00:34:02.980 talk about
00:34:03.560 racists.
00:34:04.780 I think
00:34:05.300 we should
00:34:05.600 talk about
00:34:06.020 racism as
00:34:06.820 being
00:34:07.160 something that
00:34:08.640 happens on
00:34:09.140 the extreme
00:34:09.620 left and
00:34:10.180 the extreme
00:34:10.680 right,
00:34:11.560 but does
00:34:12.140 not affect
00:34:12.800 ordinary
00:34:13.480 Republicans
00:34:14.060 or ordinary
00:34:15.460 Democrats.
00:34:18.340 And if
00:34:19.900 anybody's on
00:34:21.480 this live
00:34:22.740 stream who
00:34:23.360 leans
00:34:24.160 Democrat,
00:34:25.280 I just
00:34:25.820 have to
00:34:26.100 tell you
00:34:26.380 this personal
00:34:27.320 experience.
00:34:29.000 So for as
00:34:29.500 long as I've
00:34:29.980 been talking
00:34:30.380 about Trump
00:34:31.120 stuff and
00:34:31.660 dealing with
00:34:32.140 Republicans and
00:34:33.040 conservatives,
00:34:33.560 mostly my
00:34:34.760 audiences,
00:34:35.640 leans right,
00:34:36.940 I have not
00:34:38.320 encountered one
00:34:39.380 example ever
00:34:41.440 once of a
00:34:43.340 Republican who
00:34:45.060 criticized a
00:34:46.400 black
00:34:47.020 conservative.
00:34:50.300 I've never
00:34:51.220 heard it.
00:34:52.600 Because if you
00:34:53.380 believe that
00:34:53.920 Republicans are a
00:34:54.740 bunch of
00:34:55.000 racists, you
00:34:55.620 think to
00:34:55.960 yourself,
00:34:56.940 yeah, but
00:34:57.340 behind closed
00:34:58.160 doors, what
00:34:59.960 do the white
00:35:00.400 people say
00:35:00.900 about Tim
00:35:02.080 Scott?
00:35:03.460 What do
00:35:03.820 they say
00:35:04.100 behind closed
00:35:04.780 doors?
00:35:05.560 I've been
00:35:06.200 behind a lot
00:35:06.820 of closed
00:35:07.180 doors in
00:35:07.820 the sense of
00:35:08.340 private
00:35:08.680 conversations with
00:35:10.040 people who
00:35:10.660 would assume I
00:35:11.400 agreed with
00:35:12.440 them on
00:35:12.980 enough things
00:35:13.500 that they
00:35:13.760 could speak
00:35:14.160 freely.
00:35:15.020 I've never
00:35:15.680 heard it.
00:35:16.900 I've never
00:35:17.460 heard it.
00:35:17.900 How many
00:35:19.540 conservatives have
00:35:21.360 you heard who
00:35:22.620 have criticized
00:35:23.660 Candace Owens?
00:35:27.500 I've never
00:35:28.300 heard it.
00:35:29.180 I've heard
00:35:29.900 positive things
00:35:30.680 about her all
00:35:31.460 the time.
00:35:32.540 I've heard lots
00:35:33.340 of negative from
00:35:34.060 the left.
00:35:35.500 But I don't
00:35:36.040 think I've heard
00:35:36.780 one Republican
00:35:38.680 say anything bad
00:35:40.860 about Candace
00:35:41.460 Owens.
00:35:42.860 Behind closed
00:35:43.840 doors,
00:35:44.980 privately.
00:35:45.440 It just
00:35:46.620 doesn't happen.
00:35:48.000 And I think
00:35:48.620 there's this
00:35:49.020 whole illusion
00:35:49.660 out there that
00:35:50.940 Republicans have
00:35:51.800 maybe a public
00:35:53.020 look, but
00:35:54.460 behind closed
00:35:55.180 doors is a
00:35:55.820 little bit
00:35:56.120 different.
00:35:57.020 Don't you
00:35:57.300 think that?
00:35:59.100 Don't you
00:35:59.740 think that
00:36:00.100 behind closed
00:36:01.100 doors, don't
00:36:02.200 you think the
00:36:02.580 Democrats think
00:36:03.220 it's different
00:36:03.700 when we're
00:36:04.080 talking privately?
00:36:06.480 It's not my
00:36:07.380 experience.
00:36:08.180 I'm looking at
00:36:08.700 the comments to
00:36:09.380 see if anybody's
00:36:10.120 disagreeing.
00:36:10.820 I don't see it.
00:36:12.180 So I think
00:36:13.460 it's clear
00:36:14.040 that conservatives
00:36:16.440 judge people by
00:36:17.700 their philosophy
00:36:18.700 and their
00:36:19.100 approach to
00:36:19.640 life.
00:36:20.180 If you've got
00:36:20.920 the right
00:36:21.380 philosophy and
00:36:22.580 approach to
00:36:23.100 life, you're
00:36:24.320 willing to take
00:36:24.960 responsibility for
00:36:26.120 your own stuff,
00:36:27.140 and you don't
00:36:28.040 want to bug
00:36:28.460 other people too
00:36:29.160 much, Republicans
00:36:31.720 love you.
00:36:33.020 There's just no
00:36:33.940 exception.
00:36:35.200 There's just no
00:36:35.940 exception.
00:36:37.160 And if you think
00:36:38.100 there is, you're
00:36:39.380 living in a
00:36:40.140 horrible illusion,
00:36:41.940 because I would
00:36:42.380 imagine it would
00:36:43.140 be tough to
00:36:43.940 deal with
00:36:45.540 the Republicans
00:36:46.040 if you thought
00:36:46.640 they were saying
00:36:47.080 different things
00:36:47.720 behind closed
00:36:48.320 doors.
00:36:49.080 So I think a
00:36:49.640 more productive
00:36:50.200 way to look at
00:36:50.980 this, which
00:36:51.460 counters the
00:36:53.400 propaganda from
00:36:54.300 the news, is
00:36:55.860 that the racists
00:36:56.920 are on the
00:36:57.360 extreme left and
00:36:58.320 the extreme right.
00:36:59.640 But it has
00:37:00.260 nothing to do
00:37:00.900 with Republicans,
00:37:02.720 and it has
00:37:03.080 nothing to do
00:37:03.680 with Democrats.
00:37:05.220 It's just the
00:37:05.760 extremists on both
00:37:06.580 sides.
00:37:07.360 The overwoke people
00:37:08.540 are just racist
00:37:09.360 against different
00:37:10.100 groups, you
00:37:11.180 know, the white
00:37:12.080 supremacist, racist
00:37:13.720 against whatever.
00:37:16.260 It looks the
00:37:17.040 same to me, so I
00:37:18.080 don't see any
00:37:18.500 difference between
00:37:19.320 extreme left and
00:37:20.220 extreme right.
00:37:21.260 They're both just
00:37:22.340 horrible racists.
00:37:25.280 There's a report
00:37:26.580 from the Royal
00:37:27.120 College of
00:37:27.720 Psychiatrists.
00:37:28.600 I'm guessing this
00:37:29.340 is a British
00:37:29.880 group because of
00:37:30.660 that royal part.
00:37:32.240 And apparently
00:37:33.420 the climate
00:37:34.600 mental health
00:37:35.580 crisis is pretty,
00:37:36.980 pretty bad.
00:37:37.580 We've talked
00:37:37.980 about this
00:37:38.360 before, but
00:37:39.640 60% of the
00:37:40.620 people in their
00:37:41.040 polls said that
00:37:41.740 climate affects
00:37:42.560 their mental
00:37:43.100 health.
00:37:45.440 Does climate
00:37:46.360 affect your
00:37:46.940 mental health?
00:37:48.460 Because if it
00:37:49.320 does, you're
00:37:50.440 definitely doing
00:37:50.980 it wrong.
00:37:54.100 Here's my
00:37:54.820 advice, and I've
00:37:56.560 been reading some
00:37:57.120 tweets from Ed
00:37:57.980 Latimer today that
00:37:59.400 feels like the
00:38:01.720 same vibe, but
00:38:03.860 different approach.
00:38:05.220 it goes like
00:38:08.200 this.
00:38:09.880 There are
00:38:10.480 things you can
00:38:11.120 control that you
00:38:13.340 should worry
00:38:13.800 about.
00:38:15.140 There are
00:38:15.740 things you can't
00:38:16.520 control directly
00:38:17.840 that maybe you
00:38:19.660 should worry less
00:38:20.320 about.
00:38:21.500 The reason that
00:38:22.380 I don't worry
00:38:24.640 about climate
00:38:25.280 change is not
00:38:26.800 because it's not
00:38:27.500 a problem.
00:38:28.680 The reason I
00:38:29.520 don't worry about
00:38:30.160 it is that other
00:38:30.880 people are worried
00:38:31.560 about it.
00:38:32.960 That's good enough
00:38:33.800 for me.
00:38:34.120 As long as
00:38:35.360 other people are
00:38:36.160 panicked, that
00:38:37.720 means that the
00:38:38.320 resources are
00:38:39.060 going there, the
00:38:39.820 smart people are
00:38:40.520 working on the
00:38:41.060 problem, there's
00:38:42.480 enough intention
00:38:43.420 and energy
00:38:44.800 happening, we'll
00:38:45.980 be fine.
00:38:47.080 Whenever humans
00:38:48.380 focus on and
00:38:49.860 throw their energy
00:38:50.520 at solving a
00:38:51.100 problem, we
00:38:51.600 kind of do.
00:38:52.820 We kind of do.
00:38:53.940 So I think this
00:38:54.540 will be no
00:38:54.900 different.
00:38:55.940 So I'm not
00:38:56.620 worried about it,
00:38:58.000 which is
00:38:58.500 completely different
00:38:59.640 from saying it
00:39:01.800 is or is not a
00:39:02.580 problem.
00:39:03.900 I do think
00:39:04.780 that no matter
00:39:05.940 what humans are
00:39:06.880 doing to the
00:39:07.400 climate, we
00:39:08.880 humans should
00:39:09.440 reach a point
00:39:09.960 where we can
00:39:10.480 manipulate it.
00:39:11.820 I think it
00:39:12.380 would be good
00:39:13.020 no matter what
00:39:14.300 the situation
00:39:14.880 is if we
00:39:15.440 could learn
00:39:15.840 to turn the
00:39:17.520 temperature up
00:39:18.220 and down as
00:39:19.220 needed.
00:39:20.500 Yeah, I know
00:39:20.860 that sounds
00:39:21.260 dangerous, but I
00:39:21.940 think it's a good
00:39:22.600 trade-off.
00:39:24.500 And then people
00:39:25.180 said, will climate
00:39:26.040 emergencies be a
00:39:27.040 concern in 10
00:39:27.780 years?
00:39:28.360 84% said yes,
00:39:29.560 but that just
00:39:30.060 comes from the
00:39:30.620 news.
00:39:32.000 And then there's
00:39:32.840 the propaganda
00:39:33.380 question.
00:39:35.540 So think about
00:39:36.540 these three
00:39:37.060 questions on a
00:39:37.940 survey.
00:39:38.840 Two of them
00:39:39.520 are sort of
00:39:40.240 legitimate, and
00:39:41.600 the third one
00:39:42.260 is a question
00:39:43.600 that is really
00:39:44.360 persuasion, and
00:39:45.780 it's really
00:39:46.500 sneaky.
00:39:47.680 It's totally
00:39:48.840 unethical in my
00:39:49.780 opinion.
00:39:51.260 But it comes
00:39:52.020 from the Royal
00:39:52.540 College of
00:39:53.100 Psychiatrists, and
00:39:53.940 I guess they
00:39:54.420 thought it was
00:39:54.900 ethical, so we
00:39:56.680 have a disagreement
00:39:57.280 there.
00:39:58.120 But here's the
00:39:58.720 third question.
00:39:59.800 All right, look
00:40:00.360 at, first of
00:40:00.860 all, the first
00:40:01.320 two are
00:40:01.820 innocuous.
00:40:04.560 Does climate
00:40:05.340 affect your
00:40:05.800 mental health?
00:40:06.580 Fair question.
00:40:07.800 Will you still
00:40:08.480 be worried about
00:40:09.160 it in 10
00:40:09.540 years?
00:40:10.500 Fair question.
00:40:12.240 Now this
00:40:12.660 third one, see
00:40:13.720 if you think
00:40:14.080 this is fair.
00:40:16.060 Did you
00:40:16.440 realize climate
00:40:17.580 emergencies
00:40:18.400 contributed to
00:40:19.960 the outbreak
00:40:20.480 of COVID-19?
00:40:23.140 22% said
00:40:24.200 yes.
00:40:24.480 that's a
00:40:28.660 statement.
00:40:30.040 That's not a
00:40:30.940 survey question.
00:40:32.740 That is trying
00:40:34.400 to push a
00:40:35.720 fact into a
00:40:36.560 question so
00:40:37.840 that you read
00:40:38.360 this, and if
00:40:39.200 you were not
00:40:39.960 aware of any
00:40:40.760 other facts on
00:40:41.780 this topic, you
00:40:43.460 would come away
00:40:44.060 from this thinking,
00:40:44.920 oh, I didn't
00:40:45.300 realize that.
00:40:46.120 But the question
00:40:46.760 tells me it's
00:40:47.420 true that climate
00:40:49.260 emergencies, and
00:40:50.600 they use the word
00:40:51.260 emergencies, contributed
00:40:53.920 to the outbreak
00:40:54.680 of COVID-19.
00:40:56.820 Guess what
00:40:57.520 else?
00:40:58.400 Let me think, can
00:40:59.520 you think of
00:41:00.020 another example
00:41:01.720 of something that
00:41:04.020 was affected by
00:41:05.180 climate change?
00:41:06.360 Because their
00:41:07.580 claim is that the
00:41:09.000 COVID-19 thing was
00:41:10.100 affected by climate
00:41:11.000 change.
00:41:11.300 What other
00:41:12.760 things were
00:41:14.500 affected by it?
00:41:16.220 Was it
00:41:17.040 everything?
00:41:18.400 Yes, it was
00:41:21.980 everything.
00:41:23.120 There wasn't
00:41:23.820 anything that
00:41:24.460 wasn't made
00:41:24.980 worse, except
00:41:26.140 maybe telecommuting,
00:41:27.740 traffic, I guess,
00:41:28.760 by climate change
00:41:30.220 and COVID and
00:41:31.700 all that other
00:41:32.340 stuff.
00:41:32.940 Anything big is
00:41:33.800 affecting everything.
00:41:34.880 So climate change
00:41:35.600 should affect
00:41:36.040 everything.
00:41:38.420 Do you think
00:41:38.860 that they, when
00:41:40.900 they said that
00:41:42.300 climate emergencies,
00:41:43.780 their word,
00:41:44.780 contributed to the
00:41:45.580 outbreak of COVID-19,
00:41:47.180 do you think that
00:41:47.820 they did any
00:41:48.620 cost-benefit?
00:41:51.380 Do you think
00:41:52.020 they did that?
00:41:53.240 Do you think
00:41:53.720 they did a cost-benefit
00:41:54.680 and they said,
00:41:55.220 well, yes, there
00:41:56.240 were some bad
00:41:56.840 parts of the
00:41:57.620 climate to COVID-19,
00:41:59.240 but it was also
00:42:00.440 a little warmer
00:42:01.240 than it would
00:42:01.740 have been, so
00:42:02.680 people got
00:42:03.200 outside and
00:42:04.040 they got more
00:42:04.460 vitamin D.
00:42:05.400 No, they
00:42:05.980 didn't do that.
00:42:07.540 There's no way
00:42:08.420 that they looked
00:42:09.000 at both the
00:42:09.600 costs and the
00:42:10.680 benefits of any
00:42:12.360 climate change.
00:42:13.780 They just looked
00:42:14.700 at the costs.
00:42:15.380 You know that
00:42:16.760 without even
00:42:17.240 looking into it,
00:42:17.980 right?
00:42:18.240 You know that
00:42:18.940 because they
00:42:20.060 don't in
00:42:20.640 situations like
00:42:21.400 this.
00:42:21.960 So this is
00:42:22.440 propaganda disguised
00:42:24.560 as a pole.
00:42:25.620 You should learn
00:42:26.120 to recognize that.
00:42:27.580 But think about
00:42:28.340 the destruction
00:42:29.980 of the climate
00:42:31.060 compared to the
00:42:32.760 destruction of
00:42:33.840 60% of the
00:42:35.560 public's mental
00:42:36.940 health.
00:42:38.120 Which one's
00:42:38.920 worse?
00:42:39.180 I feel like
00:42:42.000 the destruction
00:42:43.660 of 60% of
00:42:45.800 the public's
00:42:46.440 mental health
00:42:47.380 is worse
00:42:49.060 than a little
00:42:50.680 bit of a rise
00:42:51.460 in the sea
00:42:51.880 level.
00:42:53.520 Let me give
00:42:54.320 you a choice.
00:42:55.540 I'll give you
00:42:56.000 these two choices.
00:42:57.040 You can have
00:42:57.540 a mental health
00:42:58.400 problem forever
00:42:59.200 or sea level
00:43:02.180 will rise an
00:43:03.060 inch.
00:43:04.280 Those are your
00:43:04.800 two choices.
00:43:06.180 Which one do
00:43:06.700 you pick?
00:43:07.020 Which one do
00:43:09.020 right?
00:43:10.360 You're going to
00:43:10.980 pick the sea
00:43:11.480 level every
00:43:13.020 time because
00:43:14.560 you're not too
00:43:15.500 worried about
00:43:15.900 the sea level
00:43:16.520 really.
00:43:18.140 But if you
00:43:19.520 have a mental
00:43:19.940 health problem
00:43:20.560 that's all
00:43:21.480 day every day.
00:43:22.760 It's not even
00:43:23.580 close.
00:43:24.840 So if you said
00:43:25.560 to me what is
00:43:26.140 a bigger
00:43:26.520 emergency?
00:43:28.420 Climate
00:43:28.820 change which
00:43:30.100 I believe all
00:43:31.640 the right people
00:43:32.180 are working on
00:43:32.900 to make that
00:43:33.860 okay in the
00:43:34.360 future or
00:43:35.640 that the way
00:43:36.780 the news reports
00:43:37.820 this is making
00:43:38.700 60% of the
00:43:39.860 country sick.
00:43:42.280 Sick.
00:43:43.400 Because mental
00:43:43.940 health problems
00:43:44.580 is you know
00:43:45.640 it's a health
00:43:46.220 problem.
00:43:46.780 You're sick.
00:43:48.360 These are not
00:43:49.140 even close.
00:43:51.340 But like I
00:43:52.300 say the only
00:43:53.040 reason that
00:43:53.620 there's so many
00:43:54.280 resources working
00:43:55.240 on climate is
00:43:56.220 because 60% of
00:43:57.600 the people are
00:43:58.540 so worried about
00:43:59.220 it they have
00:43:59.540 mental problems.
00:44:00.780 I feel as if
00:44:01.860 there would be
00:44:02.260 some way to get
00:44:03.120 people to work
00:44:03.760 on it without
00:44:05.200 down with the
00:44:05.500 mental problems.
00:44:08.420 Yeah so the
00:44:09.020 fake news does
00:44:09.960 not blame
00:44:10.860 itself.
00:44:12.120 You know
00:44:12.220 you've heard
00:44:13.800 of the
00:44:14.180 military industrial
00:44:15.680 complex.
00:44:16.740 The idea that
00:44:17.540 the people who
00:44:19.640 sell weapons
00:44:20.580 will work on
00:44:22.140 the government
00:44:22.620 to get them
00:44:23.360 to be starting
00:44:24.460 wars because
00:44:25.320 it's good for
00:44:25.900 business.
00:44:26.900 So the military
00:44:27.560 likes the people
00:44:28.840 who sell them
00:44:29.360 weapons etc.
00:44:30.360 So it's one
00:44:31.600 big military
00:44:32.720 operation.
00:44:35.820 And here we
00:44:37.620 have another
00:44:38.020 one which is
00:44:38.840 the fake news
00:44:40.500 industry and the
00:44:41.460 mental health
00:44:42.080 industry.
00:44:43.460 Have you noticed
00:44:44.340 that they kind
00:44:45.620 of work together
00:44:46.240 now?
00:44:47.420 You know just
00:44:47.840 in the way that
00:44:48.540 the weapons
00:44:49.820 making industry
00:44:50.940 is sort of good
00:44:52.340 friends with the
00:44:53.000 military but a
00:44:54.360 little too good.
00:44:55.680 You don't want
00:44:56.600 them to be too
00:44:57.260 friendly right?
00:44:58.560 They have to be
00:44:59.180 able to work
00:45:00.060 with each other
00:45:00.560 of course but
00:45:01.900 you don't want
00:45:02.440 them to be
00:45:03.000 you know like
00:45:03.640 that.
00:45:04.200 That's going to
00:45:04.680 be a problem.
00:45:06.800 But now we
00:45:07.560 have the fake
00:45:08.140 news industry
00:45:08.880 and the mental
00:45:10.320 health industry
00:45:11.080 working in this
00:45:12.540 circular fashion.
00:45:13.660 So the fake
00:45:14.120 news makes
00:45:15.640 people sick
00:45:16.440 by the way
00:45:17.540 they report it
00:45:18.280 and then the
00:45:19.640 mental health
00:45:20.180 people say
00:45:21.200 hey it's true
00:45:22.000 a lot of people
00:45:22.620 are getting sick
00:45:23.320 and then that
00:45:24.340 becomes news
00:45:25.280 for the fake
00:45:26.260 news business
00:45:27.000 and then they
00:45:27.980 use that to
00:45:29.240 beat up
00:45:29.620 Republicans
00:45:30.180 who didn't
00:45:31.380 cause the
00:45:31.780 problem.
00:45:33.500 The Republicans
00:45:34.320 are the ones
00:45:34.980 who say don't
00:45:36.080 worry about it
00:45:36.860 and whether you
00:45:38.420 should or should
00:45:38.880 not worry about
00:45:39.480 it it's not
00:45:40.000 causing anybody
00:45:40.540 mental illness.
00:45:42.860 So that's a
00:45:44.440 pretty ugly
00:45:45.140 situation there.
00:45:48.000 So climate
00:45:48.880 and racism
00:45:49.500 the two things
00:45:50.640 that we know
00:45:51.700 from Project
00:45:52.320 Veritas
00:45:52.780 that CNN
00:45:53.960 wants to push
00:45:55.380 as part
00:45:56.500 as a theme.
00:45:58.360 So it's
00:45:58.900 climate or
00:45:59.520 racism
00:45:59.880 and what
00:46:00.260 do those
00:46:00.580 two things
00:46:01.120 have in
00:46:01.500 common?
00:46:03.020 They're hard
00:46:03.960 to measure.
00:46:06.700 You know
00:46:06.940 you can
00:46:07.220 measure the
00:46:07.980 temperature
00:46:08.360 but you
00:46:09.280 can't measure
00:46:10.060 what will be
00:46:10.860 the problem
00:46:11.620 in 80 years.
00:46:12.880 It's just
00:46:13.400 you can do it
00:46:14.720 but nobody's
00:46:15.400 going to believe
00:46:15.980 that you got it
00:46:16.780 accurately.
00:46:18.640 Racism
00:46:19.200 same thing.
00:46:19.840 it's so
00:46:20.620 subjective
00:46:21.200 in terms of
00:46:22.600 how you
00:46:22.900 measure it
00:46:23.600 and do you
00:46:24.400 count racism
00:46:25.140 against white
00:46:25.860 people or
00:46:26.500 that doesn't
00:46:27.240 count.
00:46:28.360 So these
00:46:29.520 things are
00:46:30.080 resistant to
00:46:31.300 data.
00:46:32.860 So if you're
00:46:33.400 looking for
00:46:33.860 what the
00:46:34.380 fake news
00:46:35.040 loves,
00:46:36.260 look for
00:46:36.880 what a
00:46:37.340 manager of
00:46:38.160 a corporation
00:46:38.880 loves.
00:46:40.260 Do you know
00:46:40.540 what a
00:46:40.760 manager of
00:46:41.280 a corporation
00:46:41.880 loves?
00:46:43.360 A situation
00:46:43.980 where the
00:46:44.560 quality of
00:46:45.120 their work
00:46:45.520 can't be
00:46:46.280 measured because
00:46:47.480 then they
00:46:47.740 can make
00:46:48.040 any claim.
00:46:49.120 Well we
00:46:49.460 can't measure
00:46:49.980 it but I'm
00:46:50.600 pretty sure
00:46:51.180 all those
00:46:51.580 policies I
00:46:52.220 put in
00:46:52.480 place made
00:46:52.880 everything
00:46:53.180 better.
00:46:54.180 Just no
00:46:54.600 way to
00:46:54.820 measure it.
00:46:55.860 Same with
00:46:56.460 climate and
00:46:57.140 racism.
00:46:57.700 You can beat
00:46:58.120 up Republicans
00:46:58.780 on it all
00:46:59.440 day long
00:47:00.020 because if
00:47:01.300 things were
00:47:01.740 getting better
00:47:02.360 how would
00:47:03.880 you know?
00:47:05.120 How would
00:47:05.440 you know?
00:47:06.700 So beware
00:47:08.440 of ambiguous
00:47:09.400 topics.
00:47:11.140 Funniest
00:47:11.560 story in the
00:47:12.160 news.
00:47:14.060 By the way
00:47:14.540 I think you
00:47:14.960 should say
00:47:15.300 we should be
00:47:15.840 saying that
00:47:16.440 fixing climate
00:47:18.280 change with
00:47:18.800 green technology
00:47:19.660 is racist
00:47:20.320 because it
00:47:21.940 is.
00:47:23.060 If you
00:47:23.580 use green
00:47:24.160 technology with
00:47:25.240 the exception
00:47:25.620 of nuclear
00:47:26.440 energy, if
00:47:27.500 you use green
00:47:28.060 technology you're
00:47:29.240 spending more to
00:47:30.260 create energy
00:47:30.920 and that locks in
00:47:33.280 the rich people
00:47:33.940 they get to
00:47:34.580 stay rich but
00:47:35.880 poor people don't
00:47:36.740 get to move up
00:47:37.460 because energy
00:47:38.220 costs are too
00:47:38.840 much.
00:47:39.800 So yeah the
00:47:41.700 green technologies
00:47:42.640 with the exception
00:47:43.300 of nuclear are
00:47:44.880 entirely racist.
00:47:49.640 Mike Cernovich
00:47:50.620 had a tweet
00:47:53.080 where I saw
00:47:53.640 the president
00:47:54.440 of Azerbaijan
00:47:55.480 was talking to
00:47:58.040 a BBC
00:47:58.520 correspondent
00:47:59.240 and you just
00:48:00.640 have to see
00:48:01.200 this thing
00:48:01.640 it's a thing
00:48:03.380 of beauty.
00:48:04.380 If you ever
00:48:05.120 want to see
00:48:05.580 a politician
00:48:06.260 just crush
00:48:08.260 a journalist
00:48:09.000 I mean just
00:48:10.480 crush her
00:48:11.220 you have to
00:48:12.700 watch this
00:48:13.200 and the idea
00:48:13.980 was that
00:48:15.460 he was being
00:48:16.200 asked about
00:48:16.680 freedom of
00:48:17.220 press in his
00:48:17.860 own country
00:48:18.400 he responded
00:48:19.860 quite capably
00:48:21.000 now I'm not
00:48:22.040 going to support
00:48:22.720 him or whatever
00:48:23.840 he is or is
00:48:24.520 not doing
00:48:24.940 but he answered
00:48:25.900 the question
00:48:26.340 very capably
00:48:27.120 by saying that
00:48:28.400 they have full
00:48:29.180 social media
00:48:29.900 in their country
00:48:30.560 and they don't
00:48:32.860 ban it.
00:48:34.060 So apparently
00:48:34.480 you can go on
00:48:35.500 Facebook
00:48:35.860 say whatever
00:48:37.180 you want
00:48:37.620 in Azerbaijan.
00:48:39.100 Do you know
00:48:39.620 where you can't
00:48:40.200 do that?
00:48:41.880 The United States.
00:48:44.180 You can't go
00:48:45.420 on Facebook
00:48:45.820 and say
00:48:46.220 whatever you
00:48:46.660 want if you're
00:48:47.220 in the United
00:48:47.660 States
00:48:48.060 because then
00:48:49.040 you can get
00:48:49.440 banned for life.
00:48:50.820 But he's
00:48:51.140 saying in my
00:48:51.960 country
00:48:52.260 say whatever
00:48:53.100 you want
00:48:53.400 on Facebook.
00:48:54.400 Now of course
00:48:54.840 Facebook has
00:48:55.440 their own
00:48:55.720 policies
00:48:56.140 but I don't
00:48:56.980 think the
00:48:57.320 government
00:48:57.620 would be
00:48:58.160 pushing them
00:48:58.800 one way
00:48:59.100 or another.
00:48:59.900 Maybe they
00:49:00.280 are.
00:49:00.980 Hard to know.
00:49:02.120 But then
00:49:02.420 he brings up
00:49:03.400 Assange
00:49:03.880 and he says
00:49:04.620 who put
00:49:06.100 Assange in
00:49:06.700 jail and
00:49:07.180 why?
00:49:08.120 So basically
00:49:08.780 the president
00:49:09.740 of Azerbaijan
00:49:10.280 is saying
00:49:11.880 you can't
00:49:12.400 talk to me
00:49:12.820 about freedom
00:49:13.380 of press
00:49:13.920 when Assange
00:49:14.660 is in jail
00:49:15.340 for being
00:49:16.700 a reporter
00:49:17.540 and that's
00:49:19.120 it
00:49:19.420 according to
00:49:21.480 him.
00:49:22.380 And I would
00:49:23.300 say that's a
00:49:24.020 pretty good
00:49:24.780 argument.
00:49:25.540 So you have
00:49:25.900 to see how
00:49:26.480 he just
00:49:27.200 dissected this
00:49:28.120 BBC journalist.
00:49:29.600 on Bannon's
00:49:33.100 war room
00:49:33.520 podcast
00:49:34.240 which
00:49:35.260 you should
00:49:36.760 probably
00:49:37.020 watch
00:49:37.340 I guess
00:49:38.860 there was
00:49:39.200 an author
00:49:39.800 Joe Allen
00:49:40.560 talking about
00:49:41.060 transhumanism
00:49:42.020 which is
00:49:42.580 the idea
00:49:43.040 that your
00:49:44.100 digital identity
00:49:45.240 can go on
00:49:46.420 beyond your
00:49:47.260 mortal life.
00:49:48.960 So I've
00:49:49.380 told you
00:49:49.660 before
00:49:50.000 that I
00:49:51.820 have
00:49:52.120 authorized
00:49:53.360 myself
00:49:54.720 to become
00:49:56.140 a digital
00:49:57.060 AI in the
00:49:57.820 future
00:49:58.120 if anybody
00:49:58.960 wants to
00:49:59.420 do that.
00:50:00.560 However I
00:50:01.120 realized
00:50:01.680 that now
00:50:02.860 with blockchain
00:50:03.520 and with
00:50:04.980 the NFT
00:50:05.600 technology
00:50:06.340 where
00:50:06.860 any
00:50:07.700 digital
00:50:08.460 work
00:50:09.040 can be
00:50:10.320 let's say
00:50:10.920 registered
00:50:11.420 on the
00:50:11.960 blockchain
00:50:12.340 so you
00:50:13.180 know what
00:50:13.560 is the
00:50:13.860 original
00:50:14.260 and you
00:50:14.960 can
00:50:15.120 distinguish
00:50:15.540 it
00:50:15.840 from any
00:50:16.220 copies.
00:50:17.320 Well
00:50:17.740 someday
00:50:18.080 in the
00:50:18.360 future
00:50:18.620 there may
00:50:19.400 be many
00:50:19.860 copies
00:50:20.280 of me
00:50:20.740 because
00:50:21.840 if you
00:50:22.180 were
00:50:22.300 developing
00:50:22.720 AI
00:50:23.160 and you
00:50:24.060 were trying
00:50:24.340 to make
00:50:24.700 it
00:50:24.900 human
00:50:25.760 like
00:50:26.300 you
00:50:27.240 would
00:50:27.420 look
00:50:27.580 for
00:50:27.740 somebody
00:50:28.060 who
00:50:28.200 has
00:50:28.360 the
00:50:28.520 most
00:50:28.940 written
00:50:30.060 and
00:50:30.380 spoken
00:50:30.720 words
00:50:31.300 in the
00:50:31.760 world.
00:50:33.020 That would
00:50:33.720 be me.
00:50:34.700 Not more
00:50:35.280 than everybody
00:50:35.900 in the world
00:50:36.360 but I have
00:50:37.420 so much
00:50:38.640 public
00:50:40.080 writing
00:50:41.240 and speaking
00:50:41.940 that you
00:50:43.020 could scoop
00:50:44.160 it all up
00:50:44.660 with AI
00:50:45.080 and then
00:50:45.740 rebuild
00:50:46.280 me in
00:50:46.780 digital
00:50:47.100 form.
00:50:48.120 But
00:50:48.380 like an
00:50:50.000 NFT
00:50:50.360 I might
00:50:51.260 authorize
00:50:51.920 or sell
00:50:52.440 one version
00:50:53.420 that will
00:50:55.100 be my
00:50:55.640 soul
00:50:56.100 forever.
00:50:57.700 And whoever
00:50:58.160 is the
00:50:59.560 owner of
00:51:00.200 that one
00:51:00.740 version
00:51:01.200 will have
00:51:03.020 it registered
00:51:03.580 on the
00:51:03.940 blockchain
00:51:04.280 and they
00:51:05.660 will know
00:51:06.160 forever
00:51:06.920 that I'm
00:51:07.960 the one
00:51:08.320 that's
00:51:08.580 authorized
00:51:08.940 to be
00:51:09.940 my
00:51:11.080 eternal
00:51:12.160 digital
00:51:12.780 soul.
00:51:14.320 And any
00:51:14.660 other copies
00:51:15.260 you see
00:51:15.700 which are
00:51:16.080 authorized
00:51:16.520 would not
00:51:19.060 be the
00:51:19.360 original.
00:51:21.180 By the way
00:51:21.940 I've already
00:51:22.400 told Christina
00:51:23.240 that I
00:51:23.660 will be
00:51:23.960 haunting
00:51:24.340 the hell
00:51:24.860 end of
00:51:25.120 her
00:51:25.280 starting
00:51:26.140 day one
00:51:26.780 of my
00:51:27.660 death.
00:51:29.680 But it
00:51:30.340 will mostly
00:51:30.780 be in
00:51:31.220 digital form.
00:51:32.480 I'm going
00:51:33.080 to haunt.
00:51:33.980 I'm going
00:51:34.720 to haunt
00:51:35.080 her so
00:51:35.420 bad.
00:51:37.700 Satan
00:51:38.240 will buy
00:51:38.700 it.
00:51:39.960 Satan
00:51:40.480 will buy
00:51:40.880 by NFT.
00:51:43.240 Okay,
00:51:43.840 that is
00:51:44.260 funny.
00:51:45.340 So whoever
00:51:45.740 said
00:51:46.440 Okay,
00:51:49.620 that's really
00:51:50.040 funny.
00:51:50.340 Okay,
00:51:50.420 that's really
00:51:51.960 funny.
00:51:52.460 All right,
00:51:58.580 I'm going
00:51:58.780 to be laughing
00:51:59.620 about that
00:52:00.060 all day.
00:52:01.140 That Satan
00:52:01.680 could buy
00:52:02.160 my NFT
00:52:02.800 of myself.
00:52:05.380 That's
00:52:05.920 pretty funny.
00:52:07.720 All right,
00:52:08.400 I got one
00:52:08.800 more question
00:52:09.280 for you.
00:52:10.100 There's
00:52:10.300 some reporting
00:52:12.200 that
00:52:13.360 that is
00:52:16.060 funny.
00:52:16.320 there's
00:52:17.320 some
00:52:17.480 reporting
00:52:17.920 that
00:52:18.360 Bill
00:52:19.180 Gates,
00:52:19.880 as you
00:52:20.260 know,
00:52:20.540 he's
00:52:21.200 separating
00:52:21.740 from his
00:52:22.580 wife of
00:52:24.060 27 years.
00:52:25.300 But there's
00:52:25.820 some reporting
00:52:26.380 in the
00:52:26.720 Daily Mail
00:52:27.220 today
00:52:27.620 that he
00:52:30.780 had an
00:52:31.140 agreement
00:52:31.520 before he
00:52:32.500 got married,
00:52:33.280 he had an
00:52:33.720 agreement with
00:52:34.300 his wife
00:52:34.820 that he
00:52:35.900 could spend
00:52:36.380 the weekend
00:52:37.020 one year
00:52:40.460 a month
00:52:40.900 or one
00:52:42.080 time a year
00:52:42.920 he could spend
00:52:43.540 the weekend
00:52:43.900 with his
00:52:44.300 ex-girlfriend.
00:52:47.560 Now,
00:52:48.500 what do you
00:52:50.940 think of
00:52:51.240 that?
00:52:52.360 Now,
00:52:52.660 apparently,
00:52:53.220 he even
00:52:53.540 asked his
00:52:55.080 ex-girlfriend
00:52:55.880 for permission,
00:52:56.980 and he
00:52:57.520 even used
00:52:58.060 that word,
00:52:59.140 permission to
00:52:59.860 get married
00:53:00.280 to Melinda.
00:53:02.060 And then
00:53:02.620 Melinda
00:53:03.040 agreed that
00:53:04.940 he could
00:53:05.300 spend,
00:53:06.380 I think,
00:53:06.900 a weekend
00:53:07.300 or a week
00:53:08.480 a year
00:53:08.820 or something
00:53:09.200 with his
00:53:10.100 ex-wife,
00:53:10.860 with his
00:53:11.380 ex-girlfriend.
00:53:12.000 What do
00:53:13.860 you think
00:53:14.080 of that?
00:53:17.180 Well,
00:53:18.200 here's my
00:53:19.600 question number
00:53:20.220 one.
00:53:21.400 Let's assume
00:53:22.280 that it was
00:53:23.660 non-sexual.
00:53:25.280 Okay?
00:53:26.340 So,
00:53:27.000 I feel like
00:53:27.480 we can give
00:53:28.040 him the
00:53:28.660 benefit of
00:53:29.280 a doubt
00:53:29.600 that at
00:53:30.840 least everybody
00:53:31.440 assumed it
00:53:32.820 was going to
00:53:33.140 be a
00:53:33.520 non-sexual
00:53:34.280 thing.
00:53:35.020 Because I
00:53:35.360 didn't hear
00:53:35.880 about her
00:53:36.440 husband,
00:53:37.380 the ex-girlfriend's
00:53:38.580 husband,
00:53:39.380 but I think
00:53:39.720 she had one.
00:53:40.520 So I think
00:53:40.860 maybe he was
00:53:41.620 in on it
00:53:42.000 too.
00:53:42.880 So they
00:53:43.880 seem more
00:53:44.360 like,
00:53:44.740 you know,
00:53:45.680 life friends,
00:53:47.680 et cetera.
00:53:48.820 But what
00:53:51.340 do you think
00:53:51.660 of that?
00:53:52.560 Here's my
00:53:53.200 question
00:53:53.560 specifically.
00:53:55.160 Would you
00:53:55.660 consider both
00:53:56.600 his marriage
00:53:57.400 and his
00:53:58.780 ex-girlfriend
00:53:59.600 relationship,
00:54:01.160 would you
00:54:01.860 say that
00:54:02.180 his ex-girlfriend's
00:54:03.140 relationship
00:54:03.620 was,
00:54:04.240 quote,
00:54:05.500 intimate?
00:54:07.740 Not
00:54:08.380 sexually,
00:54:09.700 but just
00:54:10.700 intimate.
00:54:11.840 Would you
00:54:12.080 say it
00:54:12.280 was
00:54:12.400 intimate?
00:54:13.680 And if
00:54:14.360 he had
00:54:14.700 two
00:54:15.060 intimate
00:54:15.620 relationships,
00:54:17.560 does it,
00:54:19.340 is that
00:54:21.040 marriage?
00:54:22.700 Are you
00:54:23.320 actually
00:54:23.620 married if
00:54:25.100 you have
00:54:25.540 two intimate
00:54:26.520 relationships,
00:54:27.500 but only one
00:54:28.380 of them is
00:54:28.780 physical?
00:54:32.460 I'm just
00:54:33.120 looking at your
00:54:33.600 comments now,
00:54:34.260 because it's
00:54:34.540 kind of
00:54:34.840 fascinating.
00:54:36.120 Well,
00:54:36.320 she's 70
00:54:36.820 years old
00:54:37.380 now,
00:54:37.940 yes,
00:54:38.220 but apparently
00:54:38.780 for 27
00:54:39.840 years they've
00:54:40.500 been getting
00:54:40.880 together once
00:54:41.480 a year.
00:54:43.660 So I'm
00:54:44.300 seeing some
00:54:44.840 yeses,
00:54:45.600 nope,
00:54:46.060 just an
00:54:46.580 affair.
00:54:48.000 Emotional
00:54:48.500 cheating is
00:54:49.140 way worse.
00:54:50.280 We don't
00:54:50.680 know that it
00:54:51.160 was emotional
00:54:51.760 cheating.
00:54:53.120 It wasn't,
00:54:53.660 well,
00:54:53.880 actually it's
00:54:54.320 not cheating
00:54:54.800 because it
00:54:55.600 was above
00:54:56.180 board,
00:54:56.840 right?
00:54:57.600 So here's
00:54:58.320 what we
00:54:58.620 can't call
00:54:59.220 it.
00:54:59.820 I don't
00:55:00.100 think you
00:55:00.400 can call
00:55:00.700 it cheating,
00:55:01.680 because the
00:55:02.480 reporting is
00:55:03.100 that everybody
00:55:03.560 knew everything.
00:55:04.220 there was
00:55:04.940 no deceit
00:55:07.280 going on
00:55:07.860 that we're
00:55:08.300 aware of,
00:55:09.020 right?
00:55:09.620 So it
00:55:10.300 wasn't
00:55:10.660 cheating,
00:55:11.640 but was
00:55:12.780 it two
00:55:13.360 intimate
00:55:13.800 relationships?
00:55:16.360 I would
00:55:16.980 call it
00:55:17.340 intimate.
00:55:17.900 That would
00:55:18.140 be my
00:55:19.080 opinion.
00:55:22.060 And can
00:55:23.860 a marriage
00:55:24.340 survive when
00:55:26.480 there is
00:55:26.900 more than
00:55:27.280 one intimate
00:55:28.000 relationship?
00:55:31.260 I suppose
00:55:32.060 everybody's
00:55:32.560 different.
00:55:34.220 Yeah,
00:55:36.440 I'm looking
00:55:36.720 at your
00:55:37.340 answers are
00:55:37.860 all over
00:55:38.160 the board.
00:55:38.540 It's kind
00:55:38.840 of a,
00:55:39.900 it's quite a
00:55:40.920 mind bender,
00:55:41.800 isn't it?
00:55:42.260 When you
00:55:42.540 figure out how
00:55:43.600 other people
00:55:44.160 live.
00:55:47.780 Somebody says
00:55:48.640 there are
00:55:48.980 open marriages.
00:55:49.880 Yeah,
00:55:50.040 there are
00:55:50.260 open marriages,
00:55:51.340 but again,
00:55:52.140 nobody's lying
00:55:53.060 to anybody,
00:55:53.720 so it's not
00:55:54.200 cheating.
00:55:55.340 But is an
00:55:55.940 open marriage,
00:55:57.460 if it's just
00:55:58.440 sexual,
00:55:59.220 is that
00:55:59.580 intimate?
00:56:01.040 There's a
00:56:01.540 good question.
00:56:02.380 If two
00:56:02.780 people have
00:56:03.460 just a
00:56:04.380 physical
00:56:04.780 encounter,
00:56:06.020 and it
00:56:06.640 doesn't go
00:56:07.060 anywhere else,
00:56:07.720 they're not
00:56:08.020 in love or
00:56:08.480 anything,
00:56:08.860 is it
00:56:09.200 intimate?
00:56:10.620 I guess it
00:56:11.380 is,
00:56:11.640 just because
00:56:12.000 it's
00:56:12.160 physical.
00:56:19.060 Somebody
00:56:19.460 says,
00:56:20.060 this is
00:56:20.420 petty,
00:56:20.840 who cares?
00:56:23.280 Well,
00:56:23.760 I was just
00:56:24.280 interested how
00:56:25.900 close to the
00:56:26.840 public opinion
00:56:27.600 he was.
00:56:28.200 and I
00:56:30.360 got to say,
00:56:30.940 I can't
00:56:32.560 imagine that
00:56:33.120 they stayed
00:56:33.620 married for
00:56:34.620 27 years,
00:56:36.060 because here's
00:56:36.800 what I'm
00:56:37.260 guessing Melinda
00:56:38.900 Gates thought
00:56:39.820 when she
00:56:40.240 agreed to
00:56:40.680 this.
00:56:42.060 Pure
00:56:42.620 speculation,
00:56:43.940 can't read
00:56:44.500 any minds.
00:56:45.680 If you were
00:56:46.380 the wife in
00:56:47.280 this situation,
00:56:48.300 let's say the
00:56:48.980 fiance,
00:56:49.840 and your
00:56:51.640 potential husband
00:56:52.600 said to you,
00:56:53.300 I just want to
00:56:54.140 ask one thing,
00:56:55.420 that once a year
00:56:56.180 I can go off
00:56:56.820 with my
00:56:57.140 ex-girlfriend,
00:56:58.080 we're just
00:56:58.420 friends now,
00:56:59.440 but we're
00:56:59.760 going to
00:56:59.900 spend a
00:57:00.720 week or
00:57:01.040 whatever
00:57:01.300 together.
00:57:03.040 Wouldn't
00:57:03.440 you think,
00:57:04.480 if you were
00:57:04.920 the wife,
00:57:05.580 and let's
00:57:05.920 say you
00:57:06.180 agreed to
00:57:06.720 this deal,
00:57:08.040 would you
00:57:08.480 expect that
00:57:09.080 he'd really
00:57:09.540 do it every
00:57:10.040 year?
00:57:10.980 Or would
00:57:11.580 you expect
00:57:12.120 that he'd
00:57:12.540 do it once,
00:57:14.380 you'd give
00:57:14.860 him tons of
00:57:15.480 attitude when
00:57:16.160 he returned,
00:57:17.540 and then he'd
00:57:18.080 find a reason
00:57:18.600 not to do it
00:57:19.200 again?
00:57:20.620 Because I
00:57:21.200 don't think
00:57:21.660 any wife who
00:57:22.360 agrees to that
00:57:23.200 think it's
00:57:24.300 really going to
00:57:24.800 last 27 years.
00:57:27.060 I feel like
00:57:28.060 anybody who
00:57:28.560 agreed to
00:57:28.980 that would
00:57:29.400 think,
00:57:30.200 eh, he
00:57:30.700 might do
00:57:31.040 this once or
00:57:31.600 twice, but
00:57:32.360 I'll talk him
00:57:33.340 out of it.
00:57:34.580 And then he
00:57:34.980 did it for
00:57:35.380 27 years.
00:57:36.840 So I don't
00:57:37.460 see how that
00:57:38.040 marriage could
00:57:38.660 have lasted
00:57:39.240 with that
00:57:40.480 situation.
00:57:42.080 Now there's
00:57:42.540 no evidence
00:57:43.020 that that had
00:57:43.560 anything to
00:57:44.060 do with
00:57:44.400 their
00:57:44.600 dissolution,
00:57:45.660 I wouldn't
00:57:46.120 suggest that,
00:57:47.380 but it's a
00:57:48.660 mystery to me
00:57:49.260 how it lasted
00:57:49.760 27 years.
00:57:51.080 That seems
00:57:51.640 like something
00:57:52.080 that should
00:57:52.540 have lasted
00:57:52.920 about seven
00:57:53.580 years, and
00:57:54.820 at that point
00:57:55.640 she would
00:57:56.000 have said,
00:57:56.760 you know,
00:57:57.160 I really
00:57:57.520 thought you
00:57:57.940 were going
00:57:58.200 to stop
00:57:58.980 doing this
00:57:59.540 after a
00:57:59.940 while, but
00:58:01.720 27 years?
00:58:03.460 Every year?
00:58:04.360 I don't think
00:58:04.920 he missed a
00:58:05.340 year.
00:58:06.760 I don't know.
00:58:07.420 I don't know how
00:58:07.840 you stay married
00:58:08.420 in that situation.
00:58:09.620 All right, that's
00:58:10.000 all I got for
00:58:10.400 now, and I'll
00:58:11.000 talk to you
00:58:11.520 tomorrow.
00:58:12.260 Tomorrow.
00:58:12.280 Tomorrow.
00:58:12.320 Tomorrow.
00:58:12.360 Tomorrow.