Real Coffee with Scott Adams - Episode 1487 Scott Adams： Talking About All the Brainwashing and Propaganda That We Call Today's News

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. 0.85

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? 0.92

00:04:40.260 Wouldn't that be cool? Well, let's talk about our national disgrace, the Afghan pullout. 1.00

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. 1.00

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 0.98

00:06:16.640 mistake. But the Afghan thing looks like some intention involved, and that looks like a 0.78

00:06:24.920 disgrace. Fast and Furious? No. I don't really see that as being as big. Vietnam? That's more 0.99

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, 0.98

00:07:31.540 the Americans, and left, well, I guess the Afghans would be technically white people, 1.00

00:07:37.620 although in America we would refer to them as brown because we're all fucking racists. 0.99

00:07:44.340 That's why, right? There's no other reason. But in the United States, we would refer to the 1.00

00:07:50.200 Afghan people as brown because we're racist. There's no other reason, right? It's not because 0.95

00:07:56.880 they're brown. This is one of those moments you just realize what a damn racist you are, 1.00

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 1.00

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 1.00

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 0.95

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 0.94

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 1.00

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, 0.97

00:19:57.420 you know, they're praising the Taliban for being anti-gay and anti-Jew because they are too. Okay. 0.98

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 0.98

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 0.58

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 1.00

00:22:53.760 abortion, right? There's nobody who's going to say, oh, good, I can go there and have fewer 0.98

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 0.68

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 1.00

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 1.00

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 1.00

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 1.00

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 0.88

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.

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

Summary

Transcript