Episode 1534 Scott Adams： Lots of Cognitive Blind Spots in the News Today. Goes Well With Beverage
Episode Stats
Words per Minute
146.81541
Summary
This week, Scott Adams talks about a fake news story about a man who killed 5 people with a bow and arrow. Plus, the weirdest story of the day about tick-like behavior among teens, and where do they get them?
Transcript
00:00:00.000
Ba-ba. La-da-da-da-da. Whoa, look at that. YouTube didn't have a good picture, but now
00:00:08.300
that's fixed. It's showtime. Now, some people are saying I'm upside down, but I think that's
00:00:14.860
on the locals platform. But I think you move your machine around and you can fix that.
00:00:23.040
Yeah, other people are saying it's right side up, so I don't know what the deal is. Maybe
00:00:27.280
get out and refresh or something. Try doing that. Hey, EV33, what's that mean? Somebody's
00:00:36.200
telling me something about EV33. I don't know. Well, anyway, welcome to the best thing that's
00:00:43.700
ever happened in the history of things that happened. It's called Coffee with Scott Adams,
00:00:48.680
and you don't even have to have coffee to enjoy it in a way that, I don't know, a few things have
00:00:54.420
ever been enjoyed. I feel as if your pleasure capacity is being stretched a bit. That's
00:01:01.280
right. You started with whatever your existing capacity for pleasure was, and I stretched the
00:01:09.400
heck out of that thing. And now you can have a lot more pleasure. You'll notice it a little
00:01:13.860
bit later. But if you'd like to take it up a notch, all you need is a cup or mug or a glass,
00:01:18.840
a tank or chelsea, a canteen, a jug or a flask, a vessel of any kind, fill it with your favorite
00:01:22.780
liquid. I like coffee. And join me now for the unparalleled pleasure, the dopamine hit of
00:01:29.960
the day, the thing that makes, watch this, everything better. Just everything. It's called
00:01:35.800
the Simultaneous Sip, and you're going to enjoy it right now.
00:01:45.020
Ah. Well, I'm seeing some indications in the comments that there might be a story I missed.
00:01:52.180
Something about ballot auditing? Is there a headline that just popped up about ballot auditing or
00:02:00.760
something? Oh, wait, what is that feeling? Oh, oh, my God. Yeah. Antibodies surging.
00:02:12.020
Surging antibodies. All right. We will not be talking about the quality of the audio,
00:02:17.900
no matter how small you do. Let's start with the fake news. I always like to tell you the fake news.
00:02:26.360
Remember that bow and arrow attack in Norway, in which five people were allegedly slain by a bow and
00:02:36.440
arrow attacker? And what did I say? What did I say about that story when I first heard it?
00:02:44.920
Hmm. That's some really fine arrow shooting right there.
00:02:50.000
I feel like it's hard to kill somebody with an arrow. Am I wrong? Because I feel like you could
00:02:58.260
put an arrow right through somebody. And with our modern medical stuff, most of them would probably
00:03:07.160
live. But when I heard that he had slain, you know, cleanly slain five people with arrows.
00:03:12.860
Did that sound like it was real from the start? From the very start, did you say to yourself,
00:03:20.500
there's something wrong with this story? Do you know what was wrong with the story? He used a knife,
00:03:26.860
not bow and arrow. Small difference. Small difference. So apparently he just knifed people to death,
00:03:34.740
which, you know, once you start, I guess it's easier to finish the job. But it never made sense that
00:03:41.920
arrows could kill five people before people could, you know, figure out what was going on.
00:03:46.880
That never really made sense to me. So it turns out the news has said, no, he did have a bow and
00:03:52.560
arrow and he did fire a few, but those were not the things that killed people. He took out his knife
00:03:57.220
because, surprise, it's really hard to kill people with a bow and arrow. Turns out that the attacker,
00:04:03.820
it turns out that the attacker found out exactly the first thing I thought, which is, gosh, it seems
00:04:13.120
like it'd be really hard to kill multiple people with a bow and arrow. Sure enough, sure enough,
00:04:18.520
it was hard, so he didn't do it. Weirdest story of the day, but also predictable if you're a hypnotist.
00:04:24.780
Apparently, a number of teens, and I think more girls and boys, are getting tick-like behavior,
00:04:34.260
meaning that they'll shout out a word or they'll have, you know, something like a tick, you know, T-I-C.
00:04:43.260
And where are they getting these ticks? Let me ask you, since you know we're living in a simulation
00:04:51.380
with lots of code reuse, the answer to the question is going to be something in code reuse.
00:04:58.740
Where do teens get ticks? Where do they get ticks? TikTok. I'm not making that up. That's the actual
00:05:09.060
story today, that professionals are saying that people are being influenced by people who have
00:05:18.300
Tourette's syndrome on TikTok, and they watch the various clips of people who have actual Tourette's
00:05:26.160
and have ticks. And, by the way, does everybody know what a tick is? Everybody knows what a tick is,
00:05:34.740
right? It's one of those words that if you haven't dealt with it, it's like you have an emotion,
00:05:40.280
let's say a motion, you can't stop, like a, you know, your body is moving involuntarily.
00:05:45.180
Or it could be something you shout out. I think they all count as ticks.
00:05:51.920
So you've got these teens who are watching these TikToks and getting ticks. So they got
00:05:56.060
a TikTok tick. I mean, what are the odds, really? Seriously, what are the odds that TikTok would
00:06:04.940
give people ticks? None of this can be real, right? Is there any chance this thing we call
00:06:14.660
reality is not scripted? I mean, maybe. Can't rule it out. But it sure looks like it's written,
00:06:24.140
doesn't it? I mean, it looks exactly like it's scripted. It's the weirdest thing. Now,
00:06:30.240
I'm sure that's just a psychological phenomenon that it looks like it's scripted. But it sure
00:06:35.620
looks like it looks like it. And now what do you think? Do you believe that kids can actually give
00:06:43.640
themselves a medical condition to rats? Do you think you can give somebody a medical condition
00:06:50.040
just by watching it? Yup. If you didn't think this was possible, then there's a level of
00:06:58.800
understanding about people that you need to get to. Yeah, this is really easy. In fact, you could do
00:07:06.200
videos on any medical condition, and it would induce it in some percentage of the people watching it.
00:07:12.240
Now, it might not induce the real one. You know, they don't have actual Tourette's. But you could
00:07:18.360
induce people to believe they had it pretty easily. Now, the reason that you don't believe this is
00:07:24.900
possible is that you think, well, it wouldn't happen to me. I mean, it's not going to happen to me. You
00:07:30.300
might be right. Because you're talking about millions of people looking at something. If hundreds out of
00:07:36.520
the millions have an effect, you know, most people don't have the effect. So probably it wouldn't
00:07:41.560
affect you. Odds are that any one of you would have no effect by watching this material. But there
00:07:48.540
are a lot of people who would. I got a comment on my tweet about this from a doctor. Thomas Talbot,
00:07:58.100
MD, he said, yup, I'd get, quote, multiple personality girl whose parents are requesting an MRI
00:08:05.800
MRI in the ER every time cable shows the film Sybil. So there's an old movie about a woman
00:08:13.900
who allegedly have multiple personalities. Whenever that shows on cable, people come in
00:08:19.800
and say, hey, my teenage daughter got multiple personalities. Check this out. And apparently
00:08:26.320
this happens so often that it's just well known by medical professionals. Now, how many of you
00:08:32.780
were surprised by that? Because I wasn't, was not surprised at all. Yeah, you shouldn't be surprised.
00:08:45.580
So I think many of you are well, well trained on that by now. Now, let me ask you this. If you know
00:08:51.460
that TikTok can induce a medical condition in some number of people, and you know that China owns and
00:08:59.920
controls TikTok. You know, the Chinese government has enough control that they can make them do
00:09:04.300
whatever they want. It's a Chinese company. And doesn't this suggest that China can control our
00:09:11.620
politics? How could you listen to this story and know that TikTok, by its algorithm, can induce
00:09:20.360
Tourette's, or Tourette's symptoms, not actual Tourette's. But it can induce Tourette's symptoms
00:09:27.720
in enough people that it's a news story. You don't think they can influence our politics from
00:09:34.180
from China through TikTok? They can. Maybe not this generation. I mean, the voting generation.
00:09:42.100
But they're definitely getting the next one. The next generation is going to be the TikTok voters.
00:09:48.760
And whatever influence they've had on TikTok is going to go with them into the voting booth.
00:09:53.820
So yeah, the Chinese government can program you. They now have the technology. Not every
00:10:00.020
one of you, but enough to change an election. Ted Cruz continues to be magnificent. Now, I'm
00:10:08.340
not the biggest Ted Cruz fan in the world. And I did not support him for president in the last
00:10:16.080
election. But he has many awesome qualities, which I like to call out. And he's also really good
00:10:26.080
at figuring out what he needs to correct and then correcting it. How many times have I told you
00:10:31.720
what problems Kamala Harris has? You know, the giggling too much and acting like she's having an
00:10:37.480
orgasm when she talks. Have you ever seen that Kamala Harris? She acts like she's having an orgasm when
00:10:43.980
she starts to answer a question. She levels off after she starts talking. But the first sentence
00:10:51.060
or two from Kamala Harris on any question will look like the beginning of an orgasm. You watch
00:10:56.640
it. You watch it. Yeah, I will do a demonstration. Thank you for begging for it. Yes, I am going
00:11:04.720
to do my impression of Kamala Harris answering any question whatsoever. How happy are you now?
00:11:11.460
Yeah, here it comes. I now give you my impression of Kamala Harris answering a question. What's
00:11:24.180
the weather look like today, Kamala? Sunny with a chance of clouds? Tell me I'm wrong. You watch her
00:11:41.160
the next time she gives an interview, but watch the first answer. All right. It's the way she starts
00:11:47.220
to the answer. It's not the way she ends it. She ends it normal, but she starts it like...
00:12:02.940
All right. So Ted Cruz, I believe I was talking about Ted Cruz, not Kamala Harris and her involuntary
00:12:10.460
orgasms while answering questions, but rather Ted Cruz being awesome. So he's introduced a Stop
00:12:18.920
the Surge Act that would open up 13 new immigration processing centers in different communities across
00:12:26.680
the country. That's very enlightened of him. You really wouldn't expect that of Ted Cruz,
00:12:32.020
would you? You know, you think of Ted Cruz as sort of an anti-immigration, I mean illegal immigration,
00:12:39.420
not anti-immigration, not anti-immigration. Nobody's anti-immigration. People can be anti-illegal
00:12:44.960
immigration for sure. But that's very enlightened, and you don't really expect that from a Republican,
00:12:51.520
do you? Did I leave anything out? Is there any context missing from the story? Oh, yes. There's a
00:12:59.180
little context missing from the story. These 13 new immigration processing centers will not be
00:13:05.660
in places near the border who are getting completely screwed by their government. No, no, these new centers
00:13:14.500
will be in places like Martha's Vineyard. Martha's Vineyard, an excellent place to process hundreds of
00:13:22.860
thousands of illegal immigrants. Also, Governor's Island in New York, Palo Alto, New York, and I think
00:13:29.660
Bernie Sanders town in Vermont. So he picked 13 places where the elites don't ever have to worry
00:13:37.760
about too much immigration, and he wants to open up immigration centers in their towns.
00:13:44.280
Now, what are the odds that this act will be passed? Well, zero, right? I mean, there's no way it's going to
00:13:50.280
be passed, but that was not really the point of it, it wasn't. The point of it was to make a point.
00:13:55.680
How well did Ted Cruz make this point? National news? At least Fox News is covering it. I don't
00:14:04.260
think it's on CNN. So it's national news, and it absolutely makes the case. I'll tell you, I still
00:14:13.220
don't know, you know, I don't know if Ted Cruz would be a good or bad president someday. I expect you might
00:14:19.240
see a president, Ted Cruz. I feel like that's in the future. I don't know when, but I feel like he's
00:14:25.780
sort of an obvious one. He might get a turn. You know, there are half a dozen people you think,
00:14:30.660
well, they probably all get a turn. I think he's in the half dozen who might get a turn someday.
00:14:37.320
This is just awesome. I love watching Ted Cruz interrogate witnesses in Congress.
00:14:44.040
No matter what you think of him as a politician, watching him do his lawyer kind of talent stack
00:14:52.540
is just really fun, because he's so good at it. And this is just great. This is just great
00:14:59.320
persuasion, great communication, great politicking, great republicaning. Everything about this is good.
00:15:06.600
There's nothing bad about this. This is a 100% win for Ted Cruz, and obviously he doesn't expect it
00:15:13.820
to be passed. But here's the interesting thing. The midterms are coming up. The midterms are coming
00:15:23.020
up. And the prediction is, I think the Republicans only need to flip five seats, right, to get control
00:15:32.060
of Congress. And typically it flips 25 in an off year when you've got a president from the other
00:15:40.420
party, he is in power, blah, blah. So typically we'd expect 25. And a number of people have already
00:15:46.160
announced, a number of Democrats have already announced retirements. So we already have enough
00:15:52.100
people retiring that if things just sort of went normally, Republicans would take control.
00:15:57.520
Do you think Ted Cruz will circle back on this? Maybe take another run at it?
00:16:06.020
Because I kind of like to see this law get passed, like in a real sense. I realize he's doing it just
00:16:12.880
for persuasion and communication, but let's really do it. Because this really would change things.
00:16:19.820
He's not wrong. He's not wrong that the problem here is that the people who don't have to suffer the
00:16:25.080
problem are the ones making the decisions. So he's saying maybe get you a little closer to the
00:16:31.040
problem, and you would make different decisions. He's not wrong. If you get the decision makers
00:16:36.660
closer to the problem, they will make different decisions. We know that just watching them try to
00:16:41.400
wear masks, right? As long as the decision makers don't have to wear masks themselves, they're fine
00:16:47.220
making you do it. But what happens when they have to wear masks? Don't always put them on, do they?
00:17:00.060
More police are dying from coronavirus than from bullets. Like a lot.
00:17:05.040
Since the start of the pandemic, 476 police officers have died of COVID. That's a lot, isn't it?
00:17:20.820
Because it's not like the police have a ton of comorbidities compared to the regular public,
00:17:25.400
do they? I feel like police would be younger and on average more fit. You know, not all of them.
00:17:32.320
Somebody says they're overweight. But I don't think compared to the public. I don't know. So,
00:17:41.460
but only 94, which of course is still a tragically high number, died from gunfire in the same period.
00:17:49.560
So 476 died of COVID, 94 from gunfire. Now, is it fair to give us that context? Do you feel that
00:17:57.620
you learn something by that context? Well, I did. It's the first time I've sort of had a sense
00:18:05.300
of how many police officers are getting shot and killed and how many people are dying from COVID.
00:18:12.260
So I feel like it filled in, you know, some gaps. I'm not sure I needed it necessarily. It didn't
00:18:16.940
change any opinions. But here's my real question. Why are they only treating the police this way?
00:18:22.820
Why not do the same kind of context for, let's say, the black American public?
00:18:32.540
I'm kind of interested to see the same kind of treatment for black Americans.
00:18:38.420
Are more black Americans dying from COVID or from violence? Do you know? How many of you could
00:18:47.580
answer that question right now? Now, if you look in Chicago, it's probably more violence.
00:18:52.800
than COVID. But let's say you took the whole country. How many of you know the answer to that?
00:18:58.660
Are there more black citizens dying from COVID or from, let's say, gun violence?
00:19:10.360
Yeah, that's right. We. I remind you that I identify as black.
00:19:14.420
So we're talking about the group I identify with.
00:19:23.440
I'm seeing the comments. Nobody knows the answer to that question. Why not?
00:19:28.300
Why only the police we put in this context, but we don't put black America, which we know
00:19:36.300
Now, I'm not saying it would change any decisions or anything, but I feel like John Cook says
00:19:44.460
you're not black. People on Locals, the people who are watching right now on YouTube, they're
00:19:55.560
saying I'm not black. Where have you been? Do you get to decide what I identify as? When did
00:20:04.720
that happen? My understanding is I'm the one who gets to tell you what I am, and you don't
00:20:09.800
get to say anything about that. Those are the rules. I didn't make them up. I'm only using
00:20:14.280
the rules. I'm using the rules as they exist. And you know what? I'm serious. I'm serious.
00:20:22.780
I identify as black because I've been discriminated against for my race continuously for decades.
00:20:30.800
And so I just feel some connection to people who have their life defined by discrimination.
00:20:39.120
That's completely fair. Now, is it true that I'm discriminated exactly the same way and have the
00:20:45.200
same life experience? Of course not. But it's not up to you to decide how I identify, is it? It's not up
00:20:51.800
to you. That's the only rule. It's not up to you. So I appreciate that you have a different opinion
00:20:59.400
about what I am or what I should identify as, but it's just not up to you. That's it.
00:21:05.880
All right. A tragic story happened, but it only affects me. Tragedy. On Celebrity Wheel of Fortune,
00:21:19.100
actress Melissa Joan Hart, who is famous for the Sabrina the Teenage Witch series that ran years
00:21:27.120
ago. So she competed on the Celebrity version of Wheel of Fortune and became the first contestant
00:21:33.080
to win a million-dollar prize. I think first celebrity, but also first contestant to win
00:21:40.020
a million-dollar prize in Celebrity Wheel of Fortune. Why is this a tragedy to me? Anybody?
00:21:46.520
Anybody? Anybody? Why is this a personal tragedy to me? Why does this story affect me? Does anybody
00:21:54.400
know? All right. I'll tell you the story. I, too, have appeared on Celebrity Wheel of Fortune.
00:22:03.080
But it was a local affiliate version. So in the Bay Area, and it didn't, it was not broadcast
00:22:11.340
outside the Bay Area. Years ago, I don't know, 20 years ago, 15 years ago, I appeared as a contestant
00:22:19.040
on Celebrity Wheel of Fortune. And my partner, because we were playing partners, I guess they'd
00:22:24.740
played partners so they could get more celebrities on there. So my partner was Melissa Joan Hart.
00:22:30.280
So I was partnered with Melissa Joan Hart on Celebrity Wheel of Fortune. We lost like dogs. That's right.
00:22:41.420
We lost badly. Now, I think I did okay. But Melissa was not, let's say, a strong player, if I can be kind.
00:22:51.100
She was not what you'd call a strong player. And we lost like dogs. But then she went on to win the
00:22:59.760
most money anybody's ever won on this same thing. To which I must ask myself,
00:23:05.500
was the problem her? Did we lose because of her? And now she's gone on to win the largest prize
00:23:20.880
ever in the same contest. Maybe it was me. Now, in my defense, she was very young when she was
00:23:34.920
partnered with me. And if you put, you know, basically, it's a trivia contest. In a sense,
00:23:40.560
it was like a trivia contest. Because you had to answer to the clues as well as what letters were up
00:23:46.520
there. So I don't think it's unfair to say that a young person is going to do worse in a trivia
00:23:53.420
contest. Do we all agree on that? A young person, generally, will do worse on a trivia contest just
00:24:01.240
because they haven't been around this long. So when I was paired with her, I was paired with a young
00:24:05.760
person. And who won the trivia contest slash Wheel of Fortune contest? The oldest competitors.
00:24:12.060
No surprise, right? The people had been around the longest. One of them was an NBA player who
00:24:19.120
retired. So he'd been around a while. And I think his team won. So the team that had just been around
00:24:23.940
the longest won. But anyway, it made me feel bad. Not really. It was just a fun connection.
00:24:31.480
Well, the Adams Law of Slow-Moving Disasters, you've heard of this before, it says that whenever there's
00:24:36.840
some, you know, planetary disaster coming toward us, but we have plenty of time to prepare for it,
00:24:44.000
we do okay. And we invent our way out of it. Did we have population out of control? No. We figured
00:24:51.100
out how to do, you know, population control. Did we run out of food? No. We invented tractors and
00:24:58.220
fertilizers and better ways to farm. Did we run out of fuel? No. Because we had time. And so we just
00:25:05.980
learned how to frack and make, you know, solar panels and stuff like that. So whenever we've
00:25:11.740
got time, we do fix it. We're very good at that. And of course, I've always predicted that
00:25:16.020
climate change would be a perfect example of this. That somebody would invent something,
00:25:23.820
maybe more than one person, would invent things that would get us out of any climate change
00:25:27.840
catastrophes, and there would be plenty of time. Well, today we learned that SpaceX engineers,
00:25:35.980
SpaceX, Tesla's company, I'm sorry, Elon Musk's company. Some of them, when they, I guess they
00:25:45.040
were working on designing small nuclear reactors for Mars, you know, because you would need power
00:25:51.000
on Mars if you want to settle it. And they learned how to make cheap portable nuclear ones or enough
00:25:57.500
that they thought they could make a startup and finish the job. And they have designed these
00:26:02.120
portable nuclear reactors. Now, so far, it's only designed, I think, on paper, but they're pretty
00:26:08.100
confident they can make them with fuel that doesn't melt down. And it will power a thousand
00:26:14.100
homes, the electricity for a thousand homes. And it looks like it's portable enough you can put it on
00:26:19.000
a truck. I mean, that's how I interpret it. I think that's what they mean by portable.
00:26:22.960
It would be a big truck, of course. So what do you think of that? If this is true, and it works,
00:26:33.000
and there's a startup that can really make small, completely safe, portable nuclear reactors,
00:26:38.540
I guess they have to be refueled every four to eight years or something. Everything's different.
00:26:43.180
It's all different. It changes everything. Nothing would be the same if this works. I'm not sure if
00:26:52.520
you all understand how big a deal this is. Not only is it like one of the biggest deals in the history
00:26:58.040
of humanity, but apparently it's easy to build. Now, when I say easy, I mean the people who are doing
00:27:06.260
it seem to think they can make it. They're not saying we have to solve some problem. They're saying,
00:27:12.920
yeah, we've got some patents. Give us a couple of years. We'll slap these together and start
00:27:17.980
selling them. Everything's different because of this. Now, it might not be this startup that makes
00:27:25.540
it work. Do you think it's the only startup working on small nuclear reactors? Nope. There's a bunch of
00:27:31.700
them. And maybe, yeah, in the comments, I'm saying maybe fusion someday, but that would be a little
00:27:36.900
bit further behind. So that's your good news. That's coming up. I keep being asked on Twitter,
00:27:49.520
what side I'm on? Talking specifically about vaccinations and pandemic. People asking what side
00:27:56.740
I'm on. What side I'm on? What? As far as I can tell, it looks like the virus against human beings.
00:28:09.360
Am I wrong? That the war that's going on is virus versus human beings? What do you think? I'm on the
00:28:16.080
side of the fucking virus? No, I'm on the side of human beings. Humans. I know this confuses you,
00:28:24.200
but I can't be on the side of people against a virus. Don't be confused about this. I'm on your
00:28:30.760
side. Unless there's a virus watching right now. Get off of your virus. Just people. Only people are
00:28:39.280
invited to watch this. No viruses. Now, I know what you mean. You're saying, oh, is he pro this or
00:28:45.280
anti that because you're pro this or anti that. I'm not pro or anti anything. I'm just following the
00:28:51.820
data wherever it goes. And it's changing. If you're not changing your opinion as the data is
00:28:57.600
changing, you have some explaining to do. If the data is changing and your opinion is staying the
00:29:03.820
same, you need to explain that. It's not up to me to explain it. You need to explain why your
00:29:10.900
opinion isn't changing as the data changes. Now, a lot of people are saying that the government was
00:29:18.520
lying to them and baiting and switching about these vaccinations that are not real vaccinations.
00:29:23.360
Let's call them COVID shots because they're barely vaccinations at all, according to your
00:29:28.200
strict definition of the word. So I asked the question, how many people, this is just a Twitter
00:29:33.820
poll, so it's highly unscientific. How many people think the government knew all along that these,
00:29:39.860
quote, vaccinations were more like a therapeutic? How many people think the government knew all along
00:29:46.500
that they would not be full vaccinations like some vaccinations are? 68% of the people who
00:29:54.540
follow me and saw that and decided to use it, the poll, said that the government was lying
00:30:00.080
all along and knew that the vaccinations would not be like regular vaccinations. 26% think that
00:30:07.380
the government was honest, but they just were wrong and they're just sort of doing the best
00:30:11.740
they can. And 7% no opinion. Here's my take on this. If the government was lying all along,
00:30:20.940
where are all the whistleblowers? Because this alleged lying, as opposed to just being wrong,
00:30:29.940
this alleged lying would involve a lot of people. A lot of people would be involved with the trials,
00:30:37.840
the testing, looking at the data. You'd have the FDA, the CDC, the government, you know, scientists all
00:30:44.300
over the place. I would think thousands of people are looking at this stuff. So no whistleblower coming out
00:30:52.960
and saying, you know, behind closed doors, we always knew, we always knew behind closed doors that this
00:30:59.580
wasn't going to work. But we decided to say it would because, you know, we just wanted you to take
00:31:07.440
the vaccinations. No whistleblowers. All right. So my view is that the government was simply too
00:31:15.600
optimistic. They were wrong and they're doing the best they can to adjust. So we hoped it would be
00:31:23.080
100% effective. It's not, but it does keep you from dying most of the time. That's pretty good.
00:31:28.160
That's pretty good. Now, people are accusing me of some kind of moving the goalposts or being wrong.
00:31:36.360
And the common comment I see about myself is that I'm embarrassed at how wrong I was in some prediction
00:31:45.240
about vaccinations. And therefore, I'm, you know, trying to backpedal and make myself look right in some way.
00:31:52.060
I would remind you that I believe only one public pundit as opposed to a scientist. I believe only
00:32:02.220
one public pundit at the beginning of the pandemic said to you, even after warp speed had begun,
00:32:09.500
I believe that only one person said to you, I don't think the vaccines will work,
00:32:14.120
but we're going to surprise ourselves at how good the therapeutics are. Who else said that?
00:32:19.120
I think I'm the only one. I heard nobody else say that. Now, why did I say that the vaccinations
00:32:25.240
would not work? I said it for the following reason, that I was aware because I followed the news
00:32:32.740
and the scientists told us that they'd been working on a coronavirus vaccination for, I don't know,
00:32:39.460
decades, and they weren't even close. You all knew that, right? Did you all know from the very
00:32:47.480
beginning that science had been trying to make a coronavirus vaccination for decades? I think it's
00:32:53.640
decades. And we're not even close. So why would you believe they could do it in one year?
00:33:01.260
Why would you believe that? That is not credible on its surface. Unless they had said,
00:33:08.240
unless they had said, we did invent this new thing just the other day. And so now everything's
00:33:15.020
different because of this new thing we invented just the other day. I didn't hear that. Did you?
00:33:21.180
Did anybody say, but here's the game changer. We got this idea and now this idea might be the
00:33:28.020
thing that changes everything? No. No. Well, the mRNA stuff is new, but I didn't hear anybody say,
00:33:35.640
we have therefore figured out how to solve coronavirus. Nobody connected those two thoughts.
00:33:41.520
Yes, it's new. But I did not hear anybody who is an expert say, we have this new technology. And
00:33:48.200
while we have not been able to solve a vaccination for decades, this new technology will be able to
00:33:53.440
do it. I didn't hear anybody say that. Did you? I'm not saying nobody said it, but I didn't hear it.
00:33:59.140
Somebody says I did. All right. So my point is that in theory, I should not have cognitive dissonance
00:34:06.720
in this situation. And I might be alone. I might be the only one, except for the scientists who knew.
00:34:13.500
Apparently, a lot of scientists knew that this vaccination would not be a complete solution.
00:34:19.120
But so when it turns out that our optimism about the vaccinations didn't come in, and rather they're
00:34:26.980
just pretty good. They're pretty good in a therapeutic sense or in a pre-therapeutic sense,
00:34:31.540
I guess. A prophylactic sense. But I'm not surprised because this is what I thought would
00:34:38.520
happen. This is exactly what I predicted. So since I don't have any trigger for cognitive dissonance,
00:34:45.760
you should assume that my view is the least biased in a very narrow sense on this just narrow question,
00:34:52.900
because I don't have a trigger. Everybody who thought it was going to go one way and then was
00:34:57.560
surprised, you've got a trigger. So you might have cognitive dissonance because there's a reason
00:35:03.900
to trigger it. I don't have a trigger. Now, I would also say that a person who has a trigger
00:35:11.280
probably thinks they don't have one either. So you would be a better judge whether I have a trigger
00:35:15.440
here or not. The whole point of cognitive dissonance is the person who has it doesn't know it.
00:35:19.620
So if I really did, right. So Sandra says, you're deluded. That's a fair assessment if you can find
00:35:28.000
my trigger. So I don't deny that I'm deluded because it would feel exactly the same to me
00:35:34.780
as if I were not, right? I wouldn't know. I'm not the worst. The only person who can't tell
00:35:41.880
is the person who has the delusion. Everybody else can see it, maybe. So look for my trigger. If you can
00:35:48.840
find one, then maybe you have a point. But if you can't find one, the smarter way to look at this
00:35:54.880
would be that, holy shit. So $100 comment says, I say, quote, I'm on the side of science. Right now,
00:36:07.660
the FDA is recommending people not get their antibodies checked after the Pfizer whistleblower
00:36:11.740
confirmed the vaccine wasn't 100% effective. Telling people not to get their antibodies checked
00:36:15.420
isn't following the science. Yeah. I'll give you that. I will give you that. I think the reason
00:36:24.420
this is just my speculation. I think the reason the government isn't using the tests as a proxy
00:36:31.800
or a replacement for or a substitute for vaccinations is that it's not practical
00:36:37.020
for everybody to do it, I guess. I'm just guessing there.
00:36:46.520
Don, Don, in the comments over here on YouTube, is questioning why somebody spent $100 to, I guess,
00:36:55.520
tip me or whatever it is, to get me to read that comment. Don, let me explain something to you.
00:37:01.220
Although $100 does not change my lifestyle, etc., I am completely influenced by it. You just
00:37:08.920
watched it. You don't think he got $100 worth? I just stopped the show in the middle to read
00:37:14.780
the $100 comment. That was worth $100 to whoever spent it. Obviously, they had $100 they didn't need.
00:37:21.620
Right. And it used to be liberals were anti-vax. Yeah. And that all just changed for reasons that
00:37:33.400
aren't clear. Maybe it was Trump. All right. Let's see. Katie Couric is working hard to destroy
00:37:45.680
whatever's left of her reputation. So she's got a new book out. And one of the outrages in the book
00:37:52.680
is that when she interviewed Ruth Bader Ginsburg, she took out a comment where Ginsburg had said
00:37:59.800
that people who take the knee at sporting events like Kaepernick, etc., are, quote, showing contempt
00:38:05.300
for a government that has made it possible for their parents and grandparents to live a decent life.
00:38:09.940
And Couric said that she took that out, she edited it out, because she thought that the
00:38:15.660
Justice Ginsburg, who was 83 at the time, was, quote, elderly and probably didn't fully
00:38:21.880
understand the question. Katie, Katie, can I speak to you for a moment? Personally? Can we talk?
00:38:38.420
Katie, correct me if I'm wrong, but you are in the news business, you know, ish.
00:38:45.660
Wouldn't that be the biggest story in the world? If one of the Supreme Court justices
00:38:51.480
was mentally incompetent to the point of not understanding a simple question?
00:38:57.460
Katie, if you believed that she was mentally incompetent at that level, couldn't understand
00:39:03.360
the question, that was the story. That's the story. Not the part about Colin Kaepernick and
00:39:13.140
dealing. I think you buried the lead. The lead story is that Katie Couric believed one of the
00:39:19.180
Supreme Court justices was mentally incompetent. And somehow that isn't the story today. Like,
00:39:26.580
literally, have you heard anybody even mention that? I'm probably the first person who said,
00:39:30.920
wait a minute, there's a story here about, you know, a national figure, Katie Couric,
00:39:36.200
who believed enough that Ginsburg was mentally incompetent that she hid it from her public.
00:39:43.160
You've got two gigantic stories here. One is that she buried the incompetence when she
00:39:48.520
witnessed herself, in her opinion, of Boehner's competence. And the second part of the story that
00:39:55.480
she buried it. She hid it from the public. What? Now, she says this is common. It's common for the
00:40:04.600
news to, you know, edit out, I don't know, what? Inconvenient things? Things that make the person
00:40:11.580
look bad? Wow. That's quite a story. Well, have you heard that the infrastructure bill is still
00:40:20.400
stalled? Another prediction that I feel quite proud about is that I think I'm the only person who told
00:40:28.720
you, again, the only person, as far as I know, the only person who told you the infrastructure bill
00:40:33.120
just would never get signed. And it looks like that's going to happen. Because I think we're
00:40:38.280
going to blaze into 2022 with no infrastructure bill. At which point, the Republicans are back in
00:40:46.000
charge, theoretically. And at which point, it's dead. So I don't know if anybody else said it will
00:40:53.320
never get signed. I think I'm the only one. Check me on that. But a new CBS poll found that only 10%
00:41:03.640
of respondents said they knew, quote, a lot about the specifics of what's in the $3.5 trillion spending
00:41:10.220
package. Pelosi agreed that they could do a better job of selling it, because only 10% understand it.
00:41:17.080
And she said the media has not done justice to the list of items in the bill. And it's hard to break
00:41:24.740
through when you have such a comprehensive package. Well, what is it I always say about Republicans,
00:41:32.240
and Trump in particular, that I say as a criticism about the Democrats? It's always the same thing.
00:41:39.240
Democrats consistently don't understand how human beings work. They don't understand human nature.
00:41:50.260
Do you think that Trump ever would have tried to sell a super complicated $3.5 billion package of
00:41:57.460
anything? Of anything? Hell no. Do you know why? Because Trump understands human nature. And he knows you
00:42:06.900
can't understand this. Now, he might try to sell it, you know, if he was trying to, you know, just maybe
00:42:13.980
get a defense package through and figures nobody's going to look at the details too much. I'm sure he
00:42:19.080
did that. But if it came to something where the public was actually interested enough to know the
00:42:24.760
details, he would have known you can't sell this. The Democrats put together a package which cannot be
00:42:32.360
sold to human beings. Let me say it again. The Democrats, slowly and methodically, and with lots
00:42:41.040
of time to do it, put together a thing they tried to sell, which by its nature, cannot be sold to human
00:42:47.980
beings. Because we don't know what it is. It's too complicated. Can't say yes, can't say no.
00:42:54.500
Well, you know, basically, you would just retreat to your side and say, well, my side seems to like
00:42:58.700
this, or my side seems to hate it. But it's so consistent that Democrats don't understand human
00:43:04.460
nature. It's almost a defining characteristic of the party. Yeah, you could have done a better job
00:43:11.880
of selling that by not making it that. Brian Stelter continues to be humorously, let's say humorously,
00:43:24.380
what would be the word? Brian Stelter continues to be humorously,
00:43:31.700
I don't want to say incompetent, because he isn't incompetent. Humorously clownish or something? I don't
00:43:41.020
know. But apparently, his show that's about the media, you know, it's called, what's the name of his
00:43:50.480
show? Reliable sources, which is funny. So apparently, they don't cover stories that are,
00:43:58.740
he doesn't cover any stories that are embarrassing to the liberals. And it's getting kind of noticeable.
00:44:06.020
He just sort of leaves it out, doesn't cover it. And if your whole job is covering what the media
00:44:11.580
does right or wrong, and it's about reliable sources, and you just ignore stories that are
00:44:16.140
sort of embarrassing to your network, not too cool. Now, on the Fox network, Howard Kurtz has a show
00:44:25.940
that you could say is a rough equivalent. You know, it's also about the media and the media's
00:44:32.000
activities during the week. And I think, correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't Howard Kurtz criticize
00:44:39.200
everybody and cover every story? I think he does, right? Is there anybody who would push
00:44:45.560
back on that? That Howard Kurtz just covers the actual news, whereas Brian Stelter is only
00:44:54.420
covering the stuff that isn't embarrassing? I'm right about that, right? I mean, I'm not sure
00:44:59.320
I've watched every show, but it feels like that. All right. Speaking about Trump was right,
00:45:09.760
I guess the statue of Thomas Jefferson is being removed from city council chambers in New York
00:45:15.100
because Jefferson was a big old slave owner. Here's something I didn't know that this story
00:45:22.580
told me, that not only was he a slave owner, but he owned more slaves than any of the other
00:45:29.740
presidents who we know to have owned slaves. He owned over 600 of them. Plus, he fathered about
00:45:37.580
six, and a whole bunch of them were, like, related, which was kind of weird. And to which I say,
00:45:44.320
to which I say, I don't have a problem with this. I don't have a problem with us updating our heroes.
00:45:54.080
And I know this is going to make you have a heart attack, some of you. But I'm not really afraid
00:45:58.900
to change. And I'm not afraid of, I'm not afraid of changing who we decide as a hero.
00:46:09.340
I'm not afraid of changing that. And I also think that maybe we should put a little more
00:46:13.900
attention on what was done versus the personalities. If you look at what Jefferson did in terms of,
00:46:22.240
you know, his accomplishments, those accomplishments are amazing.
00:46:29.700
Oh, here's a comment from Dracus. Understanding human nature is empathy. Republicans have empathy,
00:46:35.540
but lack sympathy. Democrats have sympathy, but lack empathy.
00:46:39.760
I'm not sure I can sign off on that, but I like where you're going on that. I'm not sure I see what
00:46:47.700
you're seeing, but I do like the quality of that thought. So here's my thing. If the point of heroes
00:46:58.040
is to make you, you know, appreciate their character, that's the point of heroes, right?
00:47:05.280
The point of heroes is that we appreciate their character, not just their accomplishments.
00:47:10.980
And to me, it seems perfectly fair that the person who owned the most slaves,
00:47:16.060
you don't necessarily want to show as your character hero. Now, could we still treat Jefferson as a,
00:47:27.340
let's say, a hero in terms of some of the things he got done? Yes. Yes. I mean, the best writer
00:47:33.240
maybe ever, maybe ever. I mean, the writing in the Declaration of Independence, it's hard to know
00:47:38.700
who wrote exactly what in that. But some of the best writing I've ever seen, and I'm a fan of good
00:47:45.840
writing. So he was amazing in a lot of ways. But the other thing about Jefferson, did you know he
00:47:51.760
died in debt? Apparently Jefferson was always poor. But somehow Jefferson found a way to live like a rich
00:47:59.160
person, while just being in debt. He left a massive debt when he died. I believe that's true. Fact
00:48:04.680
check me on that. So he, so Jefferson obviously had some, what we would consider massive character
00:48:12.000
flaws judged by 2021 standards. Now I hear people saying, Scott, Scott, Scott, stop judging people
00:48:19.220
by 2021 standards, because they were products of their time. To which I say, well, that's a true
00:48:26.520
statement. But why should I, why should I be limited by that? Why should that affect me?
00:48:35.640
Because I live in 2021. In 2021, I would rather have a role model whose character is suggestive
00:48:43.360
of the character you would want in 2021. Why would I want a role model who doesn't quite apply?
00:48:49.220
Because he's from the wrong period. Now I understand the point. The point is well taken.
00:48:54.340
That it's hard to judge people in a different time period. That's fair. But if you're deciding
00:49:00.800
who's your role model, it could be whoever you are. You can change your mind whenever you
00:49:05.260
want. Why can't you change your mind? There's no limit on that. Now I hear what you're saying
00:49:11.680
about, and I know you're thinking this, that if you start tearing down the traditions, you end
00:49:17.740
up tearing down the whole country. I hear that. And that's a risk. I feel like there's something
00:49:23.180
to that. But I don't think, I just don't think we're a healthier country holding a slave, a
00:49:29.280
massive slave owner as our character hero. Accomplishment hero, yes. He can still be an
00:49:37.380
accomplishment hero. But character hero? I think we're, I think we've outgrown that, haven't
00:49:42.780
we? Now I realize it's painful to watch your heroes get uprooted. But keep in mind, I'm
00:49:50.300
also anti putting up a statue of George Floyd. All right. Taking down, if you take down the
00:49:58.460
statue of Jefferson and you put up a statue of Floyd, you did not improve the situation.
00:50:04.380
We have to be a little bit consistent here. Well, we don't have to be, but wouldn't it be
00:50:08.480
nice to be consistent? If somebody has a sketchy character, it doesn't matter what else happened
00:50:15.580
to them. You know, if you're choosing heroes. A hero, a character hero has to have a good
00:50:21.420
character. Otherwise, why are you putting them on a statue?
00:50:29.540
Jefferson did many good things at his economic expense. I don't know that. I don't know that.
00:50:35.100
All right. But I would like to point out that there are two presidents that did not own slaves
00:50:40.520
back in those days. Does anybody know the two presidents who did not own slaves back in the
00:50:46.620
days when a lot of them did? Who were they? John Adams, correct. Who's the other one? His son,
00:50:55.020
John Quincy Adams. Only the Adams family was on the correct side of history. In fact, John Adams,
00:51:02.860
famously, as a lawyer, defended a slave from some famous case. So not only was John Adams
00:51:12.060
anti-slavery, he was actively giving a fair defense to at least one notable case that I know of.
00:51:19.620
Now, you're probably wondering if I'm related to the Adams presidents. We did look into that. The
00:51:28.960
family looked into that at one point because we didn't know. We thought, well, maybe. We're not
00:51:33.460
descended from. So that part we're pretty confident about. We did not descend from directly from that
00:51:40.540
line. But we do connect back in England. So if you go back far enough, you know, my line goes back to
00:51:49.500
England as well as other places, other European places as well. But we're probably, probably connected
00:51:56.060
somewhere. Probably connected somewhere. All right. The rest were Virginians. Somebody says, oh, that's a good
00:52:05.940
point. The rest were Virginians, so they were more likely to be slave owners. Fair comment. Fair comment.
00:52:12.680
All right. That is my program for today. Well, we're still talking about Colin Powell. Yeah. I saw Tucker Carlson
00:52:26.320
gave a very, very fair and, I thought, respectful account of Colin Powell's accomplishments.
00:52:36.680
Scott, do you think the old statues in the South should come down? Well, number one, it's not my call.
00:52:49.980
All right. So the local people should decide what statues they have. So it's not up to me. That's
00:52:54.880
number one. Number two, if I were a local person, I would be open to the argument that they're offensive
00:53:00.380
to enough people that they really should be seen as a decoration and not a historical thing. If you
00:53:07.720
want to preserve the history, put it in the historical context. You know, don't put it in the park and say,
00:53:13.820
hey, everybody, this is awesome. We'll put it in the park. So I do agree with the people who say
00:53:20.120
putting up offensive statues to people who are pro-slavery is not cool. It makes us feel
00:53:26.660
uncomfortable and comfortable and let's get rid of these. I'm okay with that. I'm not afraid to
00:53:31.940
change unless the change is to replace it with a statue of George Floyd, in which case the whole
00:53:39.240
thing is just ridiculous. You either care about the whole character of the person you're putting in
00:53:45.660
the statue or you don't. If you care, you don't do either one. And if you don't, well, then you can do
00:53:52.660
both. You're not local to New York. That's right. So it is not up to me. And my opinion should carry
00:54:01.760
no weight in the case of the New York. So I don't think I'm disagreeing with you. I think I'm agreeing
00:54:07.600
with you that I can have internal thoughts and I can share them with you, but not my decision.
00:54:13.580
You're right. Same thing I say about abortion, by the way. The same thing I say about abortion.
00:54:18.860
I can have an internal opinion, but I'm going to keep it there because I'd rather that women
00:54:25.080
collectively have, you know, more of the influence on that decision. That's the world I want to live
00:54:29.780
in. I want to live in a world where women, far more than the men, are making the decisions on what's
00:54:36.600
legal, what's appropriate with abortion. Now, remember, we're not going to get the right answer
00:54:40.760
because half of the world is going to be mad no matter which way those laws go.
00:54:44.920
But at least they're a little bit more credible when women are behind the law. So that's my simp.
00:54:55.920
Miles, let me talk to you here for a moment. So over on the locals platform, somebody's calling me
00:55:02.140
a simp. I assume for just supporting women on that question instead of having my own opinion.
00:55:07.460
That is my opinion. I'm not giving women what they want just because they want it. That's my
00:55:15.160
opinion. My opinion is I don't want to be part of the decision. I'm making my own opinion. I don't
00:55:23.040
care what your opinion is. And I don't care if it makes women happier or less happy. You get that,
00:55:30.380
right? The point is not to make women happy. I assume that the point of a simp is somebody who's
00:55:41.000
making, you know, a woman happy at their own expense, right? That's sort of the definition. I have no
00:55:47.780
interest in this topic to just make women happy. I'm just saying that the way you make decisions
00:55:56.720
is you put the people who have the most skin in the game, give them a little more control over the
00:56:03.020
decision. It's just a better system. It's about the system. It's not about any of that stuff.
00:56:09.840
Put up a statue of Colin Powell. He's got some things to explain about weapons of mass destruction,
00:56:16.720
and I don't think we can overlook that. Yeah, all women don't agree exactly, but I shouldn't be
00:56:24.420
biasing their decision. The decision to procreate was made together. I agree. Yeah, I mean, it's not
00:56:34.300
a clean argument. This is not the kind of debate where all of the, you know, all of the good points
00:56:39.900
are on one side. If all of the good points were on one side, I'd give you an opinion. And I'd feel
00:56:46.020
like, oh, this is easy. All of the good points are on the same side. But it's so subjective
00:56:59.820
And by the way, I appreciate and respect all of your opinions on that topic. And that is all.
00:57:10.060
We have a call from Charlie here. He wants more naked statues. I think I'm down for that.
00:57:15.940
I think our statues should be more naked. No reason. But I like naked statues just as much
00:57:23.640
as the next person. He at least apologized for that mistake.
00:57:31.740
Who is S-Lax that everybody is thanking? So there's some user over there that's being,
00:57:38.660
is it a user? Whoever S-Lax is, is being very popular.
00:57:46.920
All right. I got to run. And I think you will agree that this live stream
00:57:52.360
highlighted your day. Yeah. Wait till tomorrow. It's going to be so good tomorrow.