ManoWhisper
Home
Shows
About
Search
Real Coffee with Scott Adams
- September 02, 2021
Episode 1487 Scott Adams: Talking About All the Brainwashing and Propaganda That We Call Today's News
Episode Stats
Length
44 minutes
Words per Minute
151.27264
Word Count
6,805
Sentence Count
490
Misogynist Sentences
3
Hate Speech Sentences
16
Summary
Summaries are generated with
gmurro/bart-large-finetuned-filtered-spotify-podcast-summ
.
Transcript
Transcript is generated with
Whisper
(
turbo
).
Misogyny classification is done with
MilaNLProc/bert-base-uncased-ear-misogyny
.
Hate speech classification is done with
facebook/roberta-hate-speech-dynabench-r4-target
.
00:00:00.000
Good morning everybody. It's time for one of the best experiences that you will have over your
00:00:06.000
entire life. It's called Coffee with Scott Adams and I don't have to tell you it's the best thing
00:00:10.860
that's ever happened in the history of the universe because if you've ever been here you
00:00:14.860
already know it's true. But let's say hypothetically you wanted to take it up another notch. I don't
00:00:21.740
even know if it's possible but let's try it and all you need is a cup of our glass, a tank or
00:00:28.080
chalice or stein, a canteen juggernaut flask, a vessel of any kind. Fill it with your favorite
00:00:32.760
liquid. I like coffee. And join me now for the unparalleled pleasure, the dopamine here of the
00:00:40.340
day, the thing that makes really everything better. It's called the simultaneous sip and watch it happen
00:00:45.820
now. Go!
00:00:53.500
Yeah, it's the after ah that I think says it. It's very much like making noise when you have sex.
00:01:01.700
If you've ever tried having a silent orgasm, it's not as good. You're like,
00:01:08.260
don't want the kids to hear it. But if you've ever had the experience of nobody home, yeah,
00:01:20.280
it's the screaming that sells it. So it's just like the simultaneous sip.
00:01:27.940
A random internet user is thanking me for being more upbeat lately. And I have been trying to be
00:01:35.480
not only that, but listen to this. Talk about good news. You want to hear some good news? How about
00:01:42.300
some great news? Want to hear some great news? Here it comes. Lawrence Livermore Lab, which is
00:01:49.120
practically a walking distance from me, they have done a new experiment in which they have gotten closer
00:01:55.360
to full fusion technology. Now, if you don't know what that is, it's different than regular nuclear
00:02:02.820
fission, the normal way that we do things. Because fusion, should we ever be able to solve this
00:02:09.140
nearly unsolvable problem, would give us free unlimited energy everywhere forever. Free unlimited
00:02:16.980
energy. Well, not really free. But the cost would approach free over time as the cost of the electricity
00:02:23.360
would keep going down. Now, it's a complicated area, nuclear fusion. So let me try to explain it
00:02:32.120
to you in layman's terms. Because a lot of you, you're not scientists, like me. So this would be
00:02:40.200
all confusing to you. So let me break it down. It's fusion technology. And what you do is you shoot
00:02:46.180
a laser beam into a thing. And then the laser beam briefly creates a temperature that indirectly
00:02:55.560
creates the proton molecules of the atoms to wrap around the electrons in a way that frees the energy
00:03:04.660
E equals mc squared. And I don't know if I can explain it any clearer than that. But we're getting
00:03:12.280
closer to fusion, is what I'm saying. I think that made sense. Rasmussen is saying that they did a
00:03:22.340
survey that says 62% of likely voters think Congress should investigate how the Afghan pullout was
00:03:30.860
handled. Do you know why we need to ask Congress to investigate that? Because there's nobody else who
00:03:39.200
will investigate it. Do you remember when we used to have investigative journalists who would like
00:03:46.620
look into things and tell us what really happened behind the scenes? Apparently, we don't have that
00:03:52.700
anymore, do we? All we have is Congress. Congress can look into stuff. That's it. That's it. That's all we
00:04:00.860
got. We got Congress to look into stuff. That's how broken our news industry is. That the only way you
00:04:07.600
can find out what happened was to ask Congress. Now, if you're depending on Congress to tell you
00:04:15.360
what's true, instead of the news business, you've sort of gone from the least credible entity that
00:04:24.240
isn't in the public domain, meaning not elected officials, into the least credible people who have
00:04:30.960
been elected. So could we get any information from, let's say, some entity that doesn't totally suck?
00:04:40.260
Wouldn't that be cool? Well, let's talk about our national disgrace, the Afghan pullout.
00:04:48.640
I'm reading today in the Wall Street Journal that the U.S. says it left behind the majority
00:04:53.360
of Afghan interpreters and others who applied for visas to flee Afghanistan.
00:05:00.460
What? We left behind the majority? I thought it was a national disgrace to know we left anybody
00:05:09.680
behind. Anybody. Not just the Americans, but the, you know, the translators and such who are
00:05:15.840
helping us. But really? We left the majority of them behind. Have we ever had a national disgrace
00:05:26.160
of this size in the past 40 years? Well, I mean, if you go back further, you know, you got the
00:05:34.480
Tuskegee experiments and stuff, so you got plenty of disgusting things if you go far enough back.
00:05:40.640
But in the past 40 years, give me an example of something more shameful than this, more disgraceful
00:05:49.560
in the last 40 years. Can you think of one? Watergate was nothing compared to this. Wouldn't
00:05:57.780
you say? You know, we always joke about worse than Watergate. I don't know. Benghazi? All the people
00:06:04.380
who died in Benghazi will be just a drop in the bucket compared to what's going to happen in
00:06:09.400
Afghanistan, we think. WMDs? I don't know if that was a disgrace. That was just a huge
00:06:16.640
mistake. But the Afghan thing looks like some intention involved, and that looks like a
00:06:24.920
disgrace. Fast and Furious? No. I don't really see that as being as big. Vietnam? That's more
00:06:34.160
than 40 years ago. Iraq War. Again, the Iraq War was awful, but I don't know if disgrace
00:06:42.220
is the right word for it. It was like an awful mistake, which is different. I put a different
00:06:48.320
standard on people who make mistakes, because those are somewhat unavoidable. And, you know,
00:06:54.520
in the big picture, they're unavoidable. I don't know. I'm going to rank this the biggest national
00:07:00.700
disgrace in 40 years. And I don't see any pushback that I would consider, you know, valid against
00:07:08.380
that point. Let me ask you this. If Trump had been president and had left behind the majority
00:07:15.340
of Afghan interpreters, would we be labeling this racist in the comments? That's my question.
00:07:24.220
Would we be only talking about it's racist if we got all the mostly white people out of there,
00:07:31.540
the Americans, and left, well, I guess the Afghans would be technically white people,
00:07:37.620
although in America we would refer to them as brown because we're all fucking racists.
00:07:44.340
That's why, right? There's no other reason. But in the United States, we would refer to the
00:07:50.200
Afghan people as brown because we're racist. There's no other reason, right? It's not because
00:07:56.880
they're brown. This is one of those moments you just realize what a damn racist you are,
00:08:04.460
even if you're not trying. It's always been my belief that you can't not be a racist because
00:08:11.620
your brain is built to do pattern recognition, but not very well. If it was really good at pattern
00:08:18.480
recognition, maybe you'd be less of a racist. Well, it's not very good at it. So you end up,
00:08:23.920
you know, you have to try hard to overcome your natural brain bias. Here's an example of it. All
00:08:31.580
right. I'm hearing today, I don't know if this is a scoop or not, but apparently the State Department
00:08:40.820
won't let private aircraft take off with American allies and Americans on it in Afghanistan.
00:08:48.480
What? The State Department won't let private aircraft take off with Americans and Afghans that
00:08:57.040
we're trying to rescue? Like right now? And apparently Tom Cotton's office is working on this,
00:09:04.440
among others. I heard this from Jonah Shumate. And I don't know. You know, every time I hear Tom
00:09:14.480
Cotton's name, he's doing something useful, he's either, you know, fighting against China or against
00:09:22.040
something. But why is it that every time somebody is doing something useful, it's one of three or four
00:09:28.840
elected officials? Why is it always the same people? Should we even be looking at anybody else
00:09:37.040
as a potential president? Seriously? I mean, you're looking at DeSantis, he's doing real stuff. So
00:09:43.400
yeah, potential president. Tom Cotton, doing real stuff. Potential president. All right. So
00:09:52.640
anyway, I don't know the details behind this story. But the State Department has some explaining to do.
00:10:00.060
And I don't know if they're explaining it well enough to Senate for Senator Cotton to be happy. But I'd like
00:10:06.540
to hear a little bit more from Senator Cotton's office on what he needs from us. Might need a little
00:10:12.460
more public support. You know, I've told you before that our form of government is largely,
00:10:19.860
basically, it's a social media government. Because social media determines what you can and cannot get
00:10:26.440
away with. Right? If social media is against something, it's just not going to happen. And
00:10:31.880
if social media is for something strongly, it's probably going to happen. So maybe we can help.
00:10:37.700
We've got stranded people in Afghanistan that we'd like to get out. Senator Cotton, if you need any
00:10:44.220
help, can you tweet something? We'll help you retweet it, at least. Get some more attention to it.
00:10:49.720
Try to be helpful. I have a theory that, or a hypothesis, that the biggest medical
00:10:56.160
problem in this country is a well-deserved lack of trust in the media. The biggest medical
00:11:04.020
problem in the country is that we don't trust the media. Now, that wasn't always true because
00:11:09.420
we weren't in a pandemic. But during a pandemic, if you can't trust the messenger, you know, forget
00:11:17.300
about who's the source of the message. If you can't trust the messenger, that's a gigantic
00:11:24.280
health problem, isn't it? Because we don't trust CNN to give us health-related news because
00:11:31.740
we've seen them lie so many times on other news. So I feel as if it's the biggest medical
00:11:39.720
problem in the world, or at least the country. The biggest medical problem is the news. And
00:11:48.100
that's a sad thing, but I think it's true. All right, how about some potential good news? Anybody?
00:11:55.240
Anybody? Would you like some potential good news? Here's something that, I don't know, I've got a
00:12:01.800
feeling about this one. Let's call this a hunch that this is a really big deal. Now, it's a really
00:12:11.040
small deal now, but here's my hunch that what I'm going to tell you next could be a really big deal.
00:12:19.680
Apparently, there was a test on mouthwashes to see if mouthwashes would cancel out the virus in
00:12:26.600
your mouth. Turns out that some of them do, so not all of them. Don't assume the one in your medicine
00:12:32.420
cabinet is going to help you at all. But two that they did find is that Listerine and a prescription
00:12:38.380
mouthwash that has chlorhexidine in it can disrupt the virus within seconds.
00:12:47.040
And that's a big deal, because we know, especially with the Delta variant, that your mouth and nose
00:12:53.580
are just full of virus compared to, I guess, the original. So you've got a lot more in your mouth
00:12:58.840
and nose. How much less would you be affected, and how much less could you spread it if you could
00:13:06.660
kill all of it in your mouth? Let's say you didn't even know. Let's say you didn't even know
00:13:12.480
you had it, but you just did mouthwash every day. And then I added to this story my own little twist,
00:13:20.260
because the mouthwash would take care of the mouth, but not the nose. Could you put some kind
00:13:25.660
of chemical like that, you know, a normal over-the-counter chemical? Could you? Please don't do this.
00:13:32.240
I don't even know if I could say this. I just realized I was going to say something that might
00:13:39.840
get me banned forever from social media. So I'm going to try to figure out a way to say it that
00:13:45.120
it doesn't sound like a recommendation. Are you all adult enough that you can handle a speculation
00:13:51.140
without going out and taking dangerous drugs? Can I trust you to do that? Can I trust you that if I say,
00:14:00.080
hey, I wonder if this would work? Don't go out and do it. Please, dear God, don't go out and do what
00:14:08.640
I'm going to say right now. Please? Do you hear this as clearly as possible? Don't do this.
00:14:17.740
But is there any way that we could put this stuff in a neti pot? Do you know what a neti pot is?
00:14:23.060
It's a, you fill it with a salt, usually just salt and water and warm water and you shoot it up one
00:14:30.140
nostril and it goes into your nasal cavity and comes out the other nostril. It's for, it's for
00:14:35.240
preventative stuff for, you know, allergies and whatever. Now, if a mouthwash can clear out your
00:14:43.800
mouth, could the neti pot clear out your nose with some kind of a formula? And again, don't do this.
00:14:53.940
Don't do this. Don't put anything in your neti pot. Please don't. I'm just speculating. So here's
00:15:01.620
what I think might happen. Suppose we found out two over-the-counter drugs that would easily take
00:15:09.140
care of the mouth and then something you could easily put into your neti pot that would also
00:15:14.240
take care of the nose. Do you think we could find an over-the-counter thing that would do that?
00:15:18.260
Probably. Probably. I mean, if this, if this research bears out, probably. Then, UV light, wise ass,
00:15:28.340
James. Then, suppose you said, for one month, I would like all the citizens of the United States,
00:15:37.140
maybe just the adults, because the kids wouldn't do it. I'd like all the citizens of the United States
00:15:42.240
to use mouthwash and a neti pot for one month. What would happen? Right? If everybody did it for
00:15:51.820
a month, even if they had some COVID and they didn't know it, they'd be knocking it back pretty
00:15:56.480
hard, and it'd probably make a difference. I mean, it's not going to cure the pandemic, but I feel like
00:16:02.060
it would make a difference. So anyway, if this mouthwash study has any validity, and we don't
00:16:07.920
know that yet, it couldn't be a big deal. Christopher Hill tweets on Twitter, which is exactly where you
00:16:16.460
go to tweet. We've been talking a lot about the, and I'll tell you why in a minute, but the,
00:16:22.440
remember the Schumer quote about how our intelligence people have, quote, six ways from Sunday to get back
00:16:28.020
at you? They were talking about Trump. Now, here's my question. Somebody asked if I think that our
00:16:37.600
intelligence services have corrupted the election. If Chuck Schumer can say in public that our own
00:16:47.260
intelligence agencies have six ways from Sunday to get back at you if you're president, he was talking
00:16:53.360
about Trump. The intelligence agencies have a way to get revenge on you if you're the president of the
00:16:59.140
United States. So forget about you. It's dangerous enough. All right. But was Chuck Schumer warning us
00:17:09.660
that our own intelligence agencies could rig an election in this country? Was he? Because is six
00:17:18.020
ways from Sunday, these are all the ways that an intelligence agency can get back at a president.
00:17:23.360
Six ways from Sunday is the category six ways from Sunday, which is a pretty big category
00:17:29.460
because Sunday is a big category, but six ways from Sunday, you know, that's the whole week. It's
00:17:35.740
the whole week. So they got lots of ways they can get back to you. Are you telling me that we're going
00:17:41.780
to rule out that one of the ways is to rig an election? Really? Why do we rule that out? Do we rule
00:17:50.800
it out because there's no proof of it? Right? I've seen no proof of it. But you know my take. My take is
00:18:00.680
that all elections that have, certainly if they have electronic voting machines, they're either already
00:18:07.240
corrupted or they will be. Because there's no scenario in which they won't be in the long run.
00:18:12.900
Do you know why you can guarantee that elections will be corrupted? Because it's possible. That's the
00:18:20.940
one and only thing you need to know. Now, does anybody disagree that it's possible? Let me tell
00:18:27.780
you how. You get an insider in one of the technology companies that's counting votes. You corrupt the
00:18:34.320
insider. You turn them. You own them. You either blackmail them or bribe them or whatever it takes.
00:18:40.360
And then the insiders do the rest. Standard intelligence operation. You get the insiders
00:18:46.280
to do the work for you. Okay? So are you telling me that that's not possible? Are you telling
00:18:52.520
me that an intelligence agency working for 100 years couldn't penetrate an election? Now,
00:19:00.760
most of the time they couldn't, probably. You know, I'm guessing it would fail more often
00:19:04.780
that it would succeed. But because it's possible and because the history will just keep going
00:19:10.940
on and presumably people will try until they get it right, it's pretty much guaranteed. The
00:19:17.820
only thing you need to know is that it's possible. And then you can guarantee it. You just don't
00:19:24.340
know when. That's the only thing you don't know is if it happened already or if it's in our
00:19:28.480
future. But it's guaranteed. That we know. All right. And Chuck Schumer has confirmed that.
00:19:37.860
CNN is trying to equate the Taliban with white supremacists in this country. Of course they
00:19:44.620
are. Here's how they equate them. They're equating the white supremacists in the Taliban because
00:19:51.160
the Taliban is, or at least the white supremacists on social media are saying some things like,
00:19:57.420
you know, they're praising the Taliban for being anti-gay and anti-Jew because they are too. Okay.
00:20:06.220
There's a comparison. And they quickly took over the country and applied their religious rule.
00:20:13.540
So I don't think white supremacists are exactly praising the Taliban. I think they're praising
00:20:20.360
them by analogy, which is very, very different, right? They're not saying we support the Taliban.
00:20:28.360
They're saying, hey, by analogy, you know, they did some bad things to people that we'd like to do
00:20:35.180
some bad things to or like to avoid or whatever. And so it's just sort of like an analogy. But it's
00:20:40.560
just an analogy. It's literally an analogy. It has nothing to do with white supremacists,
00:20:47.200
you know, teaming up with the Taliban or anything like that. Just crazy news. Well, Texas is
00:20:54.160
continuing to morph into becoming its own country. Not only do they have, you know, they're a little
00:20:59.940
different in terms of dropping their COVID restrictions, not so different than Florida,
00:21:05.700
but different than most of the rest of the country. But now they've got a Texas has its own social media
00:21:10.600
bill that would stop social media giants with more than 50 million users from banning any Texans for
00:21:18.500
political statements. So in Texas, you just got freedom of speech, assuming it stands up. So Texas
00:21:27.320
has instituted a freedom of speech rule. We'll see if that stands. But it's not happening elsewhere
00:21:34.440
yet. Or is it? Give me a fact check on that if it is. Also in Texas, they have their own unique
00:21:42.280
abortion ban. In fact, it's an abortion ban because it limits you to the first six weeks or before the
00:21:49.660
heartbeat or something along those lines. And the Supreme Court has denied a request to overturn it.
00:21:56.880
So Justice Roberts sided with the three liberal justices in dissent, but they did not win.
00:22:04.440
And that means that getting an abortion in Texas will be really hard. Really hard. Now,
00:22:13.960
my prediction is that this is bad for the Texas economy. Maybe not in a way they'll notice,
00:22:19.700
because they won't notice what could have happened. They'll just notice what did happen.
00:22:23.960
So I would think that a lot of young people will avoid Texas for this reason alone. Actually,
00:22:30.520
let me put that as stronger. A lot of talented people will either move out of Texas or not move
00:22:36.560
there if they were planning to because of this law. So whether or not you think the abortion
00:22:42.140
change in Texas is good or bad, and I'm not going to debate that today. That's up to you.
00:22:46.600
It's bad for the economy, I would think, because nobody's going to move there to ban their own
00:22:53.760
abortion, right? There's nobody who's going to say, oh, good, I can go there and have fewer
00:22:59.440
possibilities of abortion, because people will just not get an abortion if they care about it
00:23:04.360
for themselves. So it can only hurt their economy. There doesn't seem to be any feasible way it can help.
00:23:11.140
And we'll see if that makes a difference. Texas also has a pro-gun law that lets you
00:23:17.560
openly carry your firearm in public without a permit, even if you don't have any firearms training.
00:23:26.820
Now, here's what I love about this. I love the fact that Texas is testing this out. Because
00:23:34.060
Scott is misunderstanding the law in all caps. I'm not misunderstanding the law that it will
00:23:43.500
prevent 85% of the abortions. So, I mean, that's the only part that mattered here. But the Texas
00:23:50.560
pro-gun law, I think that's really worth testing. I like the fact that our states are like little
00:23:59.820
laboratories where one state can say, we want to try something different.
00:24:04.060
See what happens. Now, if I had to make a prediction, I feel like the pro-gun law and the
00:24:10.480
open carry is going to reduce crime and death. I think. I wouldn't say I'm 100% confident about
00:24:20.520
that or anything else. But I feel like, I don't know, if I had to put odds on it, 65% chance
00:24:29.480
it's going to reduce crime. What do you think? I'm going to say 65% chance it will reduce
00:24:35.480
crime. But you can imagine there would be individual cases where something happens that
00:24:41.280
wouldn't have happened otherwise. You know, if you have access to a gun, you're more likely
00:24:45.360
to use it than if you don't. Yeah. I mean, you could be skeptical of that. We're just guessing.
00:24:52.780
But I'm glad it's being tested. That's all. All right. Joe Rogan has COVID. And we're, of
00:25:02.200
course, hoping for a speedy recovery. Joe Rogan, one of the one of our national treasures. I think he's
00:25:08.700
can we say that yet? Is he too young for that? He may be too young to refer to him that way. But
00:25:15.940
he's certainly well on his way to being national treasure. We value him a great deal. But even if
00:25:23.080
you don't agree with him, you have to value what he's doing. And how much of our medical advice are
00:25:31.420
we going to get from Joe Rogan's experience? I feel like a lot. I feel as if, and this isn't
00:25:39.460
Joe Rogan's fault, but he's just a public figure. And he has a lot of credibility with a lot of
00:25:44.480
people. So whatever his experience is, and whatever he says about it, is probably going to be pretty
00:25:50.320
darn influential. More so than the rogue doctor viral video that, you know, is disagreeing with
00:25:57.940
everybody. And what makes this interesting is he's taken a little, I guess he was not vaccinated.
00:26:02.940
That's part of the story. I'm assuming that because I didn't see it in the story. But he took some
00:26:08.400
monoclonal antibodies and some ivermectin, controversially, and some prednisone and I don't
00:26:13.880
know, something else, and says he's feeling better. Now, this raises, of course, the question about
00:26:19.900
ivermectin. Is ivermectin the real deal? Is Joe Rogan being smart by taking it? Well, let's talk
00:26:31.360
about it. Number one, here's something that if you lean politically right, and I think that describes
00:26:39.700
nearly all of my audience, even though I don't lean right, most of my audience does.
00:26:44.320
Most of you have never seen a CNN-cited paper in which the studies on ivermectin, the good
00:26:56.020
ones, the randomized, controlled-type studies, have been evaluated, and when they take out
00:27:02.420
the ones that have obvious bias, there's no evidence of ivermectin working. How many of
00:27:09.980
you know that there's a July study, a study of studies, looking at all the other ivermectin
00:27:16.880
studies, and they throw out the ones that are obviously biased, and they use the ones that
00:27:22.080
are the most unbiased, and when you do that, it shows there's no evidence that ivermectin
00:27:28.460
works. No clear evidence. There's ambiguity, but there's no clear evidence that it works based
00:27:35.880
on this. Now, I linked to this study on Twitter just before I got on, and what happened? The
00:27:43.280
link went to a dead page. Now, the page is not dead, but I must have sent so much traffic
00:27:50.280
there, I killed the server. So wait for the server to go up, because a lot of you think
00:27:55.440
I was doing a prank. It looked like it was a prank, because it sent you to a blank page,
00:28:00.340
but it's a real page. I checked the link myself again to make sure I had the right link, and
00:28:05.240
I did. And we'll talk about the risk in a second. So, but I'm just going to ask you how many
00:28:14.380
of you were aware. If you lean right, so that's most of you, how many of you were aware that
00:28:22.560
there's a study of these studies, and it shows that the studies don't show it works? How many
00:28:27.380
of you even knew it existed? Because I didn't, until today. Today is the day that I learned
00:28:34.280
there was a study of studies, a brand new one, I mean, it's July of this year, that
00:28:39.160
shows ivermectin doesn't have any obvious benefit. Now, I'm not saying that study is
00:28:44.820
accurate, right? I make no claim of the accuracy of that or any other study. But I didn't know
00:28:52.420
it existed. Did you? I've been listening to the Weinsteins, you know, Brett Weinstein.
00:28:59.820
I've been listening to him talking about the meta-studies, and I didn't know there was another
00:29:06.940
side to it. So I had an enormous blind spot, and I read CNN literally every day. Every day
00:29:15.800
I look at news on the left, and I study it pretty completely. And I didn't know it. Now,
00:29:23.300
how does that make you feel? I mean, most of you are news junkies, or you wouldn't be here. But
00:29:29.040
I read all of the news, and I didn't know that. It's such a big deal, and I didn't know it until
00:29:36.200
today. It's so easy to miss something of that size. All right. So most of you probably missed
00:29:42.480
it too. Now, I'm not claiming that that study is the good one. I'm just saying I didn't know it
00:29:47.280
existed. All right. Here is how the propagandists and brainwashers are treating the ivermectin
00:29:54.540
story. And I think the Joe Rogan situation is causing them to be a little more active.
00:29:59.740
The FDA is warning us today that taking too much ivermectin can be dangerous. That helps
00:30:04.880
you, doesn't it? That's some good medical advice. Taking too much ivermectin can be dangerous.
00:30:11.880
Whew. It's a good thing that the FDA warned me that taking too much of a drug could be
00:30:19.200
dangerous. Did you know that? Did you know that overdosing on a drug could be dangerous?
00:30:25.940
Huh. Do you know what else could be dangerous if you took too much? Water. Water. Yeah, if
00:30:33.820
you drink too much water, you'll fucking die. Sun. If you go out in the sun too long, you'll
00:30:40.040
get sun cancer. You'll die. Is there any drug that won't kill you if you take too much of
00:30:46.080
it? I don't know. How about too much candy? Can you die from eating too much candy? Yeah.
00:30:55.240
Pretty much everything. Pretty much everything will kill you if you get too much of it. So
00:31:00.140
you can tell that that's propaganda because they're not telling you about too much of anything
00:31:04.420
else. Just too much of this. They also say that you shouldn't take a horse dewormer. Don't
00:31:15.860
take any horse dewormer. Except that's not what we're talking about. Yes, there are idiots
00:31:22.600
taking horse dewormer. Don't take a horse. Don't take horse medicine. But if you see the
00:31:28.800
FDA or anybody else, CNN for example, referring to ivermectin as horse dewormer, that's just
00:31:37.080
propaganda because there are two versions of it. There's the human version and then there
00:31:41.680
is the horse version. But if you're calling the human version horse dewormer, you're not
00:31:47.440
reporting the news. You're not trying to help. You're trying to be a brainwasher. So that's
00:31:54.140
how you know the brainwashing is happening. It's real obvious in this case. They speak
00:31:58.780
of it as horse dewormer and tell you not to take an overdose of it, like everything. All
00:32:05.340
right. Glenn Greenwald is calling out the deep state because somebody leaked a call with Biden
00:32:13.520
and the ex-president of Afghanistan, Ghani. And I guess this is what Biden said to Ghani on
00:32:22.040
this phone call that was leaked. I need not tell you the perception around the world and
00:32:27.340
in parts of Afghanistan, I believe, is that things are not going well in terms of the fight
00:32:31.940
against the Taliban. So this was, you know, prior to the Taliban taking over. And there
00:32:37.000
is need whether it is true or not. This is the controversial part. And there is need whether
00:32:44.460
it is true or not. There is need to project a different picture. So Biden literally asked
00:32:53.040
Ghani to lie. And that got leaked. Now, who leaked that? Was it the intelligence people? Did
00:33:09.460
the intelligence people leak this? And if they did, and this, I think Greenwald is suggesting
00:33:15.400
that's a likely, likely place that happened. And if it is true, what would make you think
00:33:20.520
they wouldn't rig an election? I'll just put these two questions together. If you think
00:33:26.820
it's true, and I don't know what that is, but if you think the most likely place that this
00:33:31.640
leak came from is our own intelligence services, what would make you think they wouldn't rig an
00:33:37.680
election? Because they're rigging an election right now. They're trying to get Biden out of
00:33:44.300
office. This is exactly the kind of leak that is intended to rig an election by giving you
00:33:52.240
news you wouldn't have had otherwise that changes your opinion of what happened. This is rigging
00:33:58.660
the election. Don't tell me the intelligence agencies are not trying to rig the election if
00:34:04.840
they did this. And that I don't know, right? Because we don't have proof that they did it. Could
00:34:09.340
have been somebody else. But if they did it, don't tell me they don't rig elections. That's just stupid
00:34:16.420
because we would be watching it right in front of us. This is rigging an election if it's true. We don't
00:34:22.560
know if it is. Um, but I would also defend Biden. And, uh, let me say this again. If Trump had said
00:34:32.400
this, I would defend it. Okay. Hear this clearly. If Trump had made this phone call, I would defend
00:34:40.200
it. I would defend what he said. And I'm going to do the same for Biden because I like to be at least a
00:34:45.880
little bit objective, right? At least try. You know, I can't do it every time. Everybody's biased,
00:34:52.580
but I'm going to try. And here's how I defend it. If, because reality is a reality and impression
00:34:59.660
are very connected. If the Afghan president had done a better job of telling everybody everything
00:35:06.060
was fine, what would have been the outcome? Suppose Biden had gotten what he wanted and the Afghan
00:35:12.400
president had done what Biden asked and told everybody that things were better than they
00:35:16.780
looked. What would be the outcome of that? Well, I think the outcome Biden wanted was that it would
00:35:23.680
give the Afghan army confidence to fight. It looks like that's the obvious thing he wanted. And if they
00:35:30.880
had gotten confidence to fight, could they have lasted longer against the Taliban? Maybe. I mean, we don't
00:35:37.720
know, but it's a reasonable assumption. If, if our leaders of our country are convincing a leader of
00:35:44.700
another country to lead, to actually tell them something that's not entirely exactly accurate,
00:35:52.000
but it might get them to a better place. I'm not sure that's wrong. Now it might've been wrong for
00:35:59.380
Afghanistan, but it wasn't wrong for America. And that's who Biden works for. Biden works for
00:36:07.140
America. And if it was good for America for our president to ask this guy to lie to his people,
00:36:14.120
I think there's a pretty good argument that it would have been good for America. It would have
00:36:17.580
bought us some time, right? That was the whole point. Now, would it be ethical? No. No. It's not
00:36:24.900
even close to ethical. Would it be impeachable? I don't know. Because it would be in America's best
00:36:30.780
interest. And I think that's got to matter. So let me say it clearly. If Trump had said this to
00:36:36.780
Ghani, I would defend him. Biden said it to Ghani, and I'd defend him. You don't have to like it.
00:36:46.420
But he clearly did ask him to lie. And it would suggest that Biden was aware that the Afghan
00:36:55.100
government was going to fall. So that's a separate question, that Biden was more aware of how quickly
00:37:00.700
things would devolve. But there again, suppose Biden was aware of it. Should he have told us?
00:37:08.840
No. No, he shouldn't have. If Biden was aware that things were going worse than they looked,
00:37:14.820
he should not have told us. Because that would have accelerated how badly they went.
00:37:18.640
It's a tough place to be.
00:37:26.780
So Glenn Greenwald is using this as evidence that definitely the deep state exists.
00:37:33.040
All right, let's talk about long COVID. There's a new study that says this is the world's biggest
00:37:38.560
study on the issue for kids, whether kids are getting long COVID. So they studied 11 to 17
00:37:44.660
year olds who had tested positive for coronavirus, and they saw how long their symptoms lasted.
00:37:51.880
The research suggests that somewhere between 2 and 14 percent still had symptoms from COVID 15 weeks
00:38:00.340
later. Now, they did have to get rid of all that. I guess there were a lot of people who had symptoms,
00:38:07.880
but people just naturally do have symptoms for other reasons. So somehow they could get rid of that
00:38:12.320
effect and narrowed it down to between 2 and 14. Where did they get the 14 percent? And where did
00:38:18.640
they get the 2 percent? Because that's a pretty big range. The 14 percent is what the survey produced.
00:38:25.620
So their own data said 14 percent. So why don't they report 14 percent? Because that's what the data said.
00:38:35.320
Why did they say between 2 and 14 percent? Because wouldn't you make a different decision if you
00:38:40.700
thought it was 2 percent than if you thought it was 14? Wouldn't you? I mean, that would make a
00:38:47.540
difference for your calculation. And here's how they got it to 2 percent. They looked at their own data and
00:38:56.180
said, we think our own data is bad. It's probably closer to 2 percent. What? That's like the opposite of
00:39:04.780
science. They looked at their own data and said, you know, I'm not sure people would answer the
00:39:10.440
question right. Or no, they said they think their data was biased by the people who answered the
00:39:17.140
questions. Meaning that if you had symptoms, you're more likely to answer the question. So in other
00:39:23.560
words, they did a survey and then they threw away all their data and said, well, we think it would
00:39:30.280
account differently if we had different data. So I'm going to put the credibility of this as zero.
00:39:42.280
I saw it being used as evidence that we should not worry about kids and long COVID because it, you know,
00:39:47.440
might be 2 or 3 percent. But I don't think that's what the data said. The data said it's 14 percent.
00:39:54.160
Now, if the people who did it are questioning their own data, I don't think you could just
00:40:00.040
make up what you think it should have been. Is that science? Are you supposed to look at the
00:40:06.140
science and say, you know, if we'd done this better, I think we would have gotten a different
00:40:10.760
result. So let's just go with that different result. Like, I don't know how much different
00:40:14.920
from science you could be from that. But anyway, there you have it.
00:40:20.540
I think the Joe Rogan situation is going to be especially interesting because whatever happens
00:40:29.340
to him, people are going to be more influenced by it because they know him and they'll watch the
00:40:35.300
whole thing play out and everything. So I have a feeling that whatever he says about his experience
00:40:42.260
is just going to have a huge medical impact on this country. And you've watched me try as hard
00:40:50.460
as I can not to persuade anybody about vaccinations because I've got a problem with the ethics
00:40:57.000
of it. Because people like me can be influential, even if we don't try to be, right? It's just
00:41:03.420
part of having a public platform. And Joe Rogan's influence is, I don't know, I mean, it's almost
00:41:09.420
unparalleled, isn't it? In terms of reach and credibility. So whatever he does, he's in a tough
00:41:16.220
spot. Because if he wants to be true and honest with his experience, it's going to have a side
00:41:23.960
effect of influencing people to do whatever he did or thinks worked. And that's sort of
00:41:29.240
an ethical conundrum, isn't it? And I'll be very interested to see how he handles it, because
00:41:36.700
I would trust him to know how to handle this right, actually. So let's watch him, see how
00:41:42.160
he does.
00:41:46.860
And that is just about everything I wanted to talk about. So I would call this one of the
00:41:54.500
best live streams you've ever seen in your whole life. There's one thing I would like
00:41:59.360
to add. I'm going to make a claim, and this will teach you some persuasion at the same
00:42:05.480
time, okay? So I'll make a claim, but it's really a lesson. It's two things. Here's the
00:42:12.000
claim. The most influential book on success is my book, how to fail at almost everything
00:42:20.620
and still win big. And I'm going to claim that it's the most influential book in the last
00:42:26.260
10 years for success. Now, influential is different than best book. I don't know what
00:42:34.560
is the best book. If I knew what the best book is, I probably would have written that
00:42:39.840
book, I guess. So nobody knows what the best book is. That's a different question. But the
00:42:45.020
most influential. Now, influential is more objective, because you can just say, oh, all
00:42:50.880
right, did this person get influenced by it or not? And you can see that they say they
00:42:55.340
did. And you will see, for example, that when people do their top five best business books
00:43:03.220
or success books, it's almost always in the top five. And here's the other part. There
00:43:10.060
will be at least one book on that other list of the top five that was influenced by my book.
00:43:15.660
So when you see top five lists, 40% of it is my book. I don't think anything's ever been
00:43:23.640
close. Maybe seven habits of highly effective people back in its day. But if you look at the
00:43:30.940
last 10 years, I think that book is the most influential book on success. Oh, Pippen Burt just
00:43:41.500
finished it last night. Thank you. So I'm going to put that out there. All right, here's the lesson
00:43:47.120
on persuasion. What lesson, what persuasion trick did I just use? In the comments, what persuasion
00:43:56.180
did I just use? Social proof, correct. Keep going. Social proof. Visual, not so much. Think past the
00:44:08.320
sale, correct. Think past the sale. Yeah. I'm trying to get you to think about whether it's the number one
00:44:16.520
best book in the entire world. But in order for you to think about that question, you have to uncritically
00:44:24.240
accept that it's in the top five, right? So if you're going to buy a book, knowing it's in the top
00:44:30.400
five probably is pretty good. But I do think, quite legitimately, this is not a lie, and it's not
00:44:36.960
hyperbole. I do think it's actually the most influential book on success for the past 10 years.
00:44:44.480
I think that's actually literally measurably true. Best book? I don't know. But most influential,
00:44:51.040
pretty sure. All right, that's all we got for today. I need to go run and do something else.
00:44:58.260
And I will talk to you.
Link copied!