Real Coffee with Scott Adams - Episode 1581 Scott Adams： Things Are Getting Interesting Out There. Let's Talk About it

00:00:00.000 Good morning, everybody, and welcome to Coffee with Scott Adams.

00:00:09.960 It's probably the best thing that's going to happen to you all year.

00:00:14.780 And if I have anything to do with it, I'm going to make this even better.

00:00:20.580 Even better.

00:00:21.440 No, I know, it seems impossible, doesn't it?

00:00:23.840 Yeah, yeah, it always seems that way, and then I do it.

00:00:27.860 Watch this.

00:00:28.560 Grab your copper, mug, or glass, tank, or gel, or stein, cancene, jug, or flask, or vessel of any kind.

00:00:36.160 Fill it with, that's right, your favorite liquid, and I like coffee.

00:00:41.300 Join me now for the unparalleled pleasure that dopamine hit of the day, the thing that makes everything better.

00:00:50.520 No, including that.

00:00:52.800 No, including that.

00:00:55.420 No, there's no exception.

00:00:56.660 It makes everything better.

00:00:58.120 Get ready.

00:00:59.520 Go.

00:01:07.420 Well, only the people on Locals will know how I feel.

00:01:13.580 I'll tell you later.

00:01:15.260 Really good.

00:01:16.080 So Alec Baldwin continues to claim that he did not have his finger on the trigger when that gun went off on the set of Rust.

00:01:25.620 And there's, apparently there's somebody on set who is backing him up on that.

00:01:30.320 It says that he had his finger sort of straight, you know, not on the, his finger was like straight along the barrel line.

00:01:38.140 Maybe, maybe, maybe, and he claims that he would never point a gun at someone and then pull the trigger.

00:01:45.620 So all of you gun owners are happy with that, right?

00:01:50.100 Everybody who owns a gun?

00:01:52.680 Those of you who are good with gun safety?

00:01:56.080 As long as you point the loaded gun at somebody's head, but you don't pull the trigger, you're good, right?

00:02:04.540 No.

00:02:05.540 You know what's the saddest thing about this?

00:02:12.180 Is that I thought that, you know, despite the tragedy, that we, you know, shouldn't ignore.

00:02:19.640 Despite the tragedy, I thought that this would teach people about gun safety.

00:02:26.920 And it didn't.

00:02:28.620 It didn't.

00:02:30.360 You know, I don't know who is advising Alec Baldwin on the PR, but number one, should have said he didn't have his finger on the trigger on day one.

00:02:38.500 But, but, but, he should also say, you know, under any other conditions, it would be a gigantic mistake to point a gun at somebody.

00:02:50.000 But I thought under these specific conditions, the proper controls had been in place.

00:02:55.060 But whatever you do, don't ever point a gun at somebody, because I think we've learned from, from this, that that's not safe enough.

00:03:02.680 Wouldn't you want to hear that?

00:03:03.800 But I guess that would maybe put him in a little bit of legal jeopardy.

00:03:08.500 If he were to make any, any concession toward gun safety.

00:03:14.140 So that's a shame, because the public should be learning that it wasn't just the trigger part that was the problem.

00:03:22.520 It was not checking it himself.

00:03:24.920 It was pointing it at a human being, or anything that he didn't want to bullet in.

00:03:29.460 And then assuming that he'd done enough, because he didn't pull the trigger.

00:03:34.820 Wow.

00:03:36.180 Well, Tulsi Gabbard is saying something pretty interesting.

00:03:41.160 And I'm going to pass it along without an opinion on the medical truth of it, because how would I know, right?

00:03:48.540 But Tulsi did a little video in saying that the so-called COVID pill that we're all excited about might encourage variants.

00:04:01.300 Now, I don't know if that's true.

00:04:03.620 But, you know, I'd worry about it.

00:04:05.860 But I don't know if it's true.

00:04:07.140 However, let me just put this out there.

00:04:13.320 Have I told you to follow the money critics very well?

00:04:16.840 Of course.

00:04:17.680 Do you realize we got ourselves into a situation where the only people who can fix this, you know, this virus problem from a scientific point of view have a huge incentive not to?

00:04:35.300 That's not my imagination, right?

00:04:37.720 They have a huge incentive to beat every variant one at a time.

00:04:44.220 Am I right?

00:04:45.160 They have no incentive to beat all the variants, because that's when the money stops.

00:04:51.040 All of their incentive is to beat one variant at a time in a way that guarantees more variants.

00:04:58.780 Sorry.

00:05:00.100 If you had to make a prediction based on their business model, you would have to assume the pandemic would be perpetual.

00:05:09.160 Based on the business model.

00:05:11.480 Now, I don't know how anything like this could be perpetual.

00:05:15.160 But I don't know how it can't.

00:05:18.640 You know, you've got two forces that are both, I don't know, predictably impossible not to be true.

00:05:28.100 It's impossible that this doesn't stop.

00:05:31.540 At the same time, the pharma big business model makes it impossible that it will stop.

00:05:39.180 Impossible that it can't and impossible that it will at the same time.

00:05:42.440 So this one's a hard one to predict.

00:05:45.960 I tend to be optimistic, so I like to think we're going to get out of this one way or another.

00:05:50.580 I mean, at some point, you reach something like herd immunity, even with the variants, I would imagine.

00:05:56.620 That would be my guess.

00:05:57.460 Anyway, more in the, to add to the list of things that Trump did right, that Biden said was wrong, were wrong.

00:06:10.980 And Biden had to change his policy to just do what Trump did.

00:06:16.640 Now, these, apparently the courts had something to do with this, but Biden is going to keep the Remain in Mexico program.

00:06:23.900 And here's the fun part.

00:06:26.900 Expand it to include Haitians.

00:06:29.680 Now, I didn't read the article, so I assume that means Haitians who are coming up through the, you know, Mexico-American border.

00:06:37.740 But imagine if, imagine if Trump had done this, you know, to expand it to include Haitians.

00:06:45.680 It seems like, huh, it seems like the Biden administration is targeting people of color.

00:06:54.240 Because first, it was the immigrants coming from Mexico, and then it was the Central Americans, and again, brown. 1.00

00:07:03.000 And then we've added this next category of Haitians.

00:07:06.120 What do they all have in common?

00:07:07.940 Well, they're not white like Joe Biden, that's for sure.

00:07:12.120 Racist.

00:07:13.920 Racist.

00:07:15.460 I learned to do this from CNN.

00:07:18.260 Normally, I would just ignore this sort of thing and say, oh, looks like an immigration problem.

00:07:22.780 Better tighten that up. 0.81

00:07:24.680 Oh, good job.

00:07:25.860 He's tightening it up against all the people who are coming in.

00:07:29.760 Nope.

00:07:30.960 Nope.

00:07:31.480 I'm going to take the CNN, MSNBC method and say that, hey, if the immigrants are brown, 0.99

00:07:38.760 somebody needs to explain what Joe Biden is doing about the Norwegian illegal immigrants,

00:07:45.080 which we never hear about, do we?

00:07:47.300 Has Joe Biden said one thing about keeping the Norwegian illegal immigrants out of the country?

00:07:55.580 No.

00:07:56.400 Nothing.

00:07:56.840 Not a word.

00:07:57.860 Not a word.

00:07:58.420 Why?

00:07:59.500 Norwegians are white.

00:08:01.400 Mostly.

00:08:03.560 And that's a clear indication that the President Biden has some bias against the shithole countries.

00:08:11.220 He doesn't use those words, but I'm sure he's thinking them. 0.69

00:08:13.840 Because, remember, it used to be that you could report the news based on what people actually said or did.

00:08:21.420 But today, it's quite common to judge people based on what you're pretty sure they're thinking.

00:08:29.160 Pretty sure they're thinking.

00:08:31.440 So I follow that model.

00:08:32.600 Well, the media disinformation machine is going nuts.

00:08:40.420 And I like to remind people that if their worldview, which sometimes I call a frame, you know, your way of looking at a topic,

00:08:50.160 if the frame you're using to examine a topic does not predict, maybe try another one.

00:08:57.140 Because a view of reality that predicts what will happen next is probably the good one.

00:09:02.860 Doesn't mean it's true.

00:09:05.300 But if it predicts, that's about as good as you can do.

00:09:08.320 So here's a tweet by Mike Cernovich.

00:09:10.760 He said, January 6th was 11 months ago.

00:09:14.300 So it's coming up on a year.

00:09:16.460 And he said, zero people have been charged with insurrection.

00:09:19.160 How did your filter on reality square with that prediction?

00:09:28.260 My prediction was, I didn't see any insurrection.

00:09:33.640 I didn't see it.

00:09:35.820 I saw people who were, you know, lightly armed with small clubs and stuff.

00:09:41.140 But I didn't see anything that would look like an attempt at an insurrection.

00:09:45.300 In fact, it looked exactly the opposite.

00:09:49.880 It looked like people trying to stop what they believed was an insurrection.

00:09:56.660 It looked the opposite to me.

00:09:59.140 Now, that was my filter on reality.

00:10:01.380 So my filter said since there was no insurrection, nobody would be charged with it.

00:10:07.000 Or at least nobody would be convicted of it.

00:10:09.800 So my worldview is intact.

00:10:12.120 And there's no trigger for cognitive dissonance.

00:10:17.160 Cognitive dissonance gets triggered when your worldview doesn't match what you're observing.

00:10:22.980 Mine's perfect.

00:10:24.540 Just what I thought would happen.

00:10:26.840 So examine your worldview there.

00:10:30.680 Now, I got a tweet comment on this from a user on Twitter, Invisible Gorilla, who showed an article that said, quote,

00:10:40.600 Legal experts have stated that insurrection is borderline impossible to prove in court.

00:10:47.040 And thus, this prosecutorial tool has largely been left on the shelf.

00:10:52.520 I think that's a general comment, not just about this situation.

00:10:56.820 But so I guess insurrection is almost impossible to prove in court.

00:11:01.380 Do you know what would make it even harder to prove in court?

00:11:05.760 Well, I'm no legal scholar, so I'll need a fact check on this.

00:11:10.020 But could I say that insurrection would be harder to prove in court if it never happened and everything involved was on 50 million videos?

00:11:22.880 Again, I'm not a legal scholar, so I think that when it doesn't happen, it's a little extra harder to prove.

00:11:31.360 So maybe that's what happened.

00:11:34.640 I saw a tweet from Ian Bartesas today referring to an article written by General Hayden.

00:11:44.060 You remember him?

00:11:45.300 You remember General Hayden?

00:11:48.020 General Hayden was a retired four-star general.

00:11:51.720 So this is important.

00:11:54.020 Listen to his resume.

00:11:56.240 Retired four-star general.

00:11:58.420 And he was also the director of the CIA from 2006 to 2009.

00:12:05.280 And before that, director of National Security Agency.

00:12:08.840 So he's the ex-head of the CIA.

00:12:11.620 And in his article, as pointed out by Ian, who read the article and pointed me to it,

00:12:20.540 he refers to the Charlottesville hoax as if it's real, claims with no evidence that the journalists and scientists are truth-tellers.

00:12:30.000 The CIA is telling us that the journalists and scientists are the truth-tellers?

00:12:33.900 What country is he living in?

00:12:37.520 Has he been around lately?

00:12:38.880 And then also, he called rioters protesters, you know, the riots from the summers, who clashed with police.

00:12:48.720 And he calls the January 6th an insurrection.

00:12:50.520 Now, this is the ex-head of the CIA, who is still calling this an insurrection and still saying that Charlottesville, you know, that I assume that he's referring to the president's comments about Charlottesville, which are part of the hoax.

00:13:08.460 And could you have a more clear signal that the CIA is not on the side of the American public?

00:13:20.160 I mean, that's what I see.

00:13:22.920 And I feel as if ex-heads of the CIA should not talk in public.

00:13:30.880 There should be rule that says they just can't talk in public.

00:13:33.740 I mean, it's probably totally unenforceable, but we're unconstitutional.

00:13:40.920 But this is damaging.

00:13:43.340 Because whatever tiny bit of trust you had in the CIA, it has to go away after this.

00:13:48.900 This guy was the head of the CIA.

00:13:50.900 And he's a bold-faced liar who's clearly working against the interests of the country, if I'm to believe this.

00:13:58.200 And by the way, this is not him being quoted so much as, you know, based on an article he wrote.

00:14:04.900 It's an article in his own words.

00:14:07.980 And, you know, it's one thing to not trust the CIA entirely, but this is different.

00:14:18.240 Right?

00:14:18.480 This is so bad, it's almost that you can't hold it in your head.

00:14:23.200 Remember I told you that the best hypnotist could operate right in front of you and you wouldn't be able to see it?

00:14:29.840 Because if your imagination can't include it, it's just sort of invisible to you, psychologically invisible.

00:14:36.640 And here's one of those cases.

00:14:38.880 The CIA is so corrupt, based on this, you know, one ex-head of the CIA, who was pretty recent,

00:14:47.860 that I can't hold this in my head.

00:14:52.820 I can't hold it in my head.

00:14:54.500 I'm reading it, I'm looking at it, and in five minutes I'll forget about it and think about something else.

00:15:00.740 It's like I can't put it in my head and keep it there.

00:15:04.220 Because it's too outside my imagination that the CIA is literally an enemy of the people,

00:15:09.720 or at least was, you know, as far as this guy goes.

00:15:12.880 And it looks like that continued under Brennan, etc.

00:15:16.080 So, I just don't even know how to process this.

00:15:20.680 This is beyond processing, right?

00:15:23.600 Is anybody else having the same experience?

00:15:26.780 Yeah, write it down, tape it to the wall.

00:15:29.000 Yeah, your brain can't handle this, it's too big.

00:15:31.920 It's weird.

00:15:33.000 I can feel it.

00:15:34.260 I can feel it happening to me, and I still am powerless to resist.

00:15:37.840 How many situations are there now that Trump was unambiguously right about?

00:15:50.500 How long is the list now?

00:15:52.940 Certainly right about China. 0.96

00:15:55.380 Right about immigration. 0.66

00:15:58.140 Right.

00:15:59.080 Right about the borders, right.

00:16:02.320 What else?

00:16:03.300 Right about energy.

00:16:07.840 Energy prices.

00:16:08.860 By the way, did you see the DCCC, some Democrat group, tried to tweet a graph that showed that

00:16:18.660 Biden had reduced gas prices by releasing the reserves, except they gamed the y-axis so 1.00

00:16:27.040 that a two-cent reduction, which could have been totally random, by the way, a two-cent reduction

00:16:32.740 looked like a steep decline in prices.

00:16:35.160 And they actually had the temerity to tweet that fucking thing, which got caught immediately,

00:16:41.980 you know, immediately spotted by a number of people, including the Panda Tribune.

00:16:50.360 And I think it was based, there's some suspicion that it was based on a parody, that somebody

00:16:58.040 did a parody tweet that looked just like it.

00:17:00.500 It looks like they couldn't tell if it was parody.

00:17:03.140 And they may have just tweeted it themselves.

00:17:05.280 So parody and reality have merged.

00:17:11.160 But I have a question about climate change.

00:17:15.680 Have you seen data that says that the CO2 level has stayed constant for the last 10 years?

00:17:23.520 Is that considered scientifically valid at this point?

00:17:29.040 I saw a Michael Schellenberger article that mentions that.

00:17:33.260 10 years, it's been flat.

00:17:35.140 Now, that's not enough to lower the temperature.

00:17:38.640 Because that baseline amount would, according to the scientists, still raise the temperature

00:17:44.220 too much over time.

00:17:45.260 So you'd have to take it down to closer to zero to actually change the temperature from

00:17:51.280 rising anyway, according to the scientists.

00:17:56.320 So I have this feeling.

00:17:59.420 And then the second part is the financial part of it.

00:18:03.200 And it's starting to look as if the financial estimates of climate change destruction are just

00:18:10.740 completely garbage.

00:18:12.500 Because it turns out we're really good at adjusting.

00:18:16.400 Let me give you one of the best, let's say, models for understanding the world that there

00:18:22.840 is.

00:18:24.040 A long time ago, when, let's say, my parents wanted some entertainment, they would gather

00:18:29.720 around the radio, because that's all they had.

00:18:33.720 So they gathered around the radio.

00:18:35.940 And that was sort of a tradition.

00:18:38.580 Then television came out.

00:18:40.080 What did all the smart people predict about television?

00:18:45.200 Well, it would kill radio, right?

00:18:48.160 The most obvious prediction you could make is that a television would make radio obsolete.

00:18:54.900 Except there are radios in cars.

00:18:57.560 And there's a new car produced, you know, every second.

00:19:01.440 So then there was talk radio and political talk on radio.

00:19:06.020 And then there was FM.

00:19:06.820 So every time you predict that something's going to go out of business pretty soon, it's

00:19:14.340 hard to do.

00:19:15.100 I'll give you another one.

00:19:16.820 When I started cartooning in the late 80s was when I first tried to get into it.

00:19:23.080 It was already becoming obvious that newspapers would die.

00:19:26.980 And every five years, I'd say to myself, well, it's not going to last another five years.

00:19:31.980 I'd better get myself a new career.

00:19:34.620 And as of today, 33 almost years later, there are still newspapers.

00:19:42.660 What?

00:19:43.700 How is that even possible?

00:19:45.080 The simplest thing that you could have predicted is that newspapers would all go out of business.

00:19:53.040 So it turns out that the reason they still exist is that they were cash cows in the first

00:19:57.720 place.

00:19:58.600 So they had a lot of runway.

00:20:01.100 They could just reduce how much of a cash cow they were until they were negative.

00:20:04.980 But once they reached the point of a break even, or negative, you think, well, it's done

00:20:09.880 now, right?

00:20:10.300 And then hedge funds started buying newspaper chains.

00:20:16.040 Why?

00:20:17.040 Well, it's not entirely clear.

00:20:20.120 But hedge funds are good at cutting costs where the original owners maybe were, for emotional

00:20:25.980 or personal reasons or relationship reasons, couldn't do it.

00:20:30.560 So the hedge fund will come in and say, I'm going to sell your building because it's worth

00:20:34.240 more than your company.

00:20:36.780 So they'll sell your building.

00:20:38.060 They'll sell your real estate, right?

00:20:39.560 And cash out.

00:20:41.820 But still, I feel like that's still not enough financial reason to take over these little

00:20:48.760 chains.

00:20:50.600 I don't think that the hedge funds are taking them over just for money.

00:20:58.040 And I'm going to put out a hypothesis that even, I'm not convinced about it, but here

00:21:02.180 it is.

00:21:02.480 I think billionaires and big, rich hedge fund owners want to be in the game.

00:21:11.580 And they know they have to own some media to be in the game.

00:21:14.620 It could be that owning a media entity gets you sort of a ticket to hang out with other

00:21:21.020 media moguls.

00:21:22.860 Could be that.

00:21:24.040 It's just an expensive way to buy a ticket to the show.

00:21:26.400 And if you're hanging out with the other media moguls, you really do kind of know what's

00:21:30.180 going on, probably better than you and I do.

00:21:32.480 And you maybe have some influence.

00:21:35.020 But if you had enough newspaper chains, who reads newspapers in 2021 and 2022?

00:21:42.640 Old people, right? 1.00

00:21:46.280 Do old people buy a lot of products and therefore the advertising in newspapers would be a good 1.00

00:21:51.880 business model?

00:21:53.300 Nope.

00:21:54.440 Old people do not buy a bunch of products. 1.00

00:21:56.680 And when they do, it's the ones they used to buy anyway.

00:21:58.700 They're not influenced by advertising the way young people are.

00:22:02.920 So, old people also vote at a higher percentage than other people.

00:22:07.580 So, suppose you could control a newspaper in a geographic area and the only people you

00:22:14.360 influenced were old people who vote.

00:22:18.740 Could you move an election that would be otherwise close just by having the old people consume 1.00

00:22:24.680 your biased content over and over?

00:22:28.420 I don't know.

00:22:30.640 I don't know.

00:22:32.560 But I also don't know another reason that the hedge funds would be buying newspapers.

00:22:36.560 Because, you know, I've got an MBA and I can't see how it makes sense economically.

00:22:43.700 It's like something else is going on.

00:22:46.320 Just draw, dude.

00:22:49.400 Solid career advice.

00:22:52.360 All right.

00:22:53.180 I think I was babbling there a little bit.

00:22:54.800 But, so, I made a prediction-ish on Twitter that if the Mississippi abortion case tightens

00:23:05.960 up abortion, that it would be a turn in the tide against Republicans, that it would activate

00:23:12.060 too many Democrats.

00:23:13.260 Now, I got pushback from that from a highly rational source.

00:23:18.640 Some of you know on Twitter.

00:23:20.280 Rich, quote, the people's pundit Barris, who goes by people's, peoples, with no apostrophe,

00:23:28.740 just peoples, plural, underscore pundit.

00:23:32.260 And he's a good follow.

00:23:33.760 So, you should give him a follow.

00:23:34.760 But, anyway, he pushed back on that.

00:23:36.620 He said, quote, I'm highly skeptical of the assertion that a Supreme Court ruling against

00:23:42.380 Roe would result in political blowback favoring Democrats.

00:23:46.700 And he goes through a thread with a number of reasons, which he summarizes as the pro-choice

00:23:52.360 designation doesn't mean what it used to be.

00:23:56.280 So, people are a little more nuanced than they used to be.

00:24:00.960 So, it's not abortion versus no abortion.

00:24:04.080 Even the people who are in favor of abortion are also in favor of limiting it in ways that

00:24:10.800 other people would largely agree it should be limited.

00:24:14.080 You know, not everybody, but...

00:24:15.840 So, the argument is that there are not enough Democrats who would care about this topic

00:24:21.860 because it either wouldn't affect them personally, or it just doesn't look that different from

00:24:27.960 the current situation.

00:24:30.700 What do you think?

00:24:31.880 Or, and then also that the places it's likely to change would be deep red states.

00:24:37.400 So, no difference.

00:24:39.320 What do you think?

00:24:41.560 And this will be a good test to see if I've taught you anything.

00:24:45.880 Have I taught you anything?

00:24:49.260 All right, here's my take on it.

00:24:50.860 It goes like this.

00:24:51.520 So, this would be adding to what I already said on Twitter.

00:24:55.660 Since when do reasons matter?

00:24:58.840 So, you know, Rich, the people's pundit Barras, gives very good reasons.

00:25:04.620 So, he gives data that's fully in context and makes sense to me, and he gives reasons

00:25:10.820 why a rational person could look at this situation and say to themselves,

00:25:17.140 eh, it's not that big a deal.

00:25:18.320 I'll worry about my economics and my COVID and, you know, nuclear war. 0.86

00:25:24.200 But, eh, you know, abortion's just, eh, it's not going to change that much.

00:25:30.540 I'm not going to get pregnant. 0.97

00:25:32.860 What do you think?

00:25:34.360 All right, here's my take.

00:25:35.420 It doesn't matter what the reasons in the data are.

00:25:39.160 It only matters what the fake news machine will do with it.

00:25:43.900 And the fake news machine would use this as jet fuel.

00:25:47.800 They would use it as jet fuel.

00:25:49.340 And they would say, are you ready for it?

00:25:52.680 How do you turn something that's no big deal into a big deal?

00:25:57.280 You say, it's part of a pattern of Republicans taking away bodily autonomy from women. 1.00

00:26:06.680 And then you're done.

00:26:07.800 Because as soon as you've made the point, and the fake news can simply make this narrative stick,

00:26:15.140 Republicans, here's another example,

00:26:18.180 Republicans are taking bodily autonomy away from women.

00:26:22.420 Even if they only took a little bit.

00:26:25.420 Which, you know, I'm sure this ruling is about that.

00:26:29.680 It doesn't matter how much autonomy was taken from anybody.

00:26:33.440 Those would be the reasons and the facts.

00:26:37.680 The reasons and the facts will have nothing to do with this.

00:26:40.800 It will be, can the fake news get X number of Democrats all riled up

00:26:46.540 about loss of bodily autonomy to the evil Republicans?

00:26:52.420 Oh yeah, they can sell that.

00:26:54.420 They can sell the shit out of that.

00:26:56.980 It's just sort of a perfect emotional,

00:27:00.420 you know, fear-based, freedom-based,

00:27:04.840 you know, personal, bodily, integrity-based.

00:27:08.220 I mean, it hits everything.

00:27:10.540 Just every part of your emotional,

00:27:13.520 you know, part of your brain.

00:27:16.120 It just sets you on fire.

00:27:20.120 So, and then, now factor in that most votes are not movable

00:27:24.460 in a presidential election.

00:27:26.240 The vast majority of people are going to vote their team

00:27:29.440 regardless of policies or anything else.

00:27:32.620 You're only talking about a narrow sliver of people

00:27:34.720 who determine the election

00:27:35.880 because they're the ones who can change votes.

00:27:38.700 Everybody else just can't do it.

00:27:40.960 So, if you move, I don't know,

00:27:44.020 5% of the public

00:27:46.860 to vote a different way than they would

00:27:49.380 or 2%, about 2%,

00:27:52.440 would that change the national election?

00:27:54.780 Yeah, I think it would.

00:27:57.120 So, you only have to get, you know,

00:27:58.780 a small percentage of people riled up

00:28:01.000 and this will do it.

00:28:02.740 So, that doesn't mean

00:28:06.540 it's enough of an advantage

00:28:08.840 that it will change the outcome,

00:28:10.460 but I do think it changes the bias quite a bit.

00:28:14.540 That's my take.

00:28:15.600 But it all depends on how the fake news

00:28:17.660 decides to frame it.

00:28:21.560 And I expect they'll frame it

00:28:23.120 in an anti-GOP way.

00:28:25.760 All right.

00:28:26.840 So, Ukraine looks like

00:28:29.020 they're in a little trouble

00:28:31.700 because Russia has apparently amassed 0.74

00:28:35.120 a lot of military assets on the border

00:28:37.860 as if preparing to attack,

00:28:40.920 but at the very least,

00:28:42.700 preparing to intimidate.

00:28:45.140 And I guess Tony Blinken was over there

00:28:48.100 talking to his Russian counterpart

00:28:49.680 and, you know,

00:28:51.320 giving the old threatening stuff, etc.

00:28:54.180 And here's Russia's big complaint. 0.81

00:28:57.960 That Ukraine wants to be a NATO country.

00:29:01.700 How in the world

00:29:02.900 is that a good idea?

00:29:06.800 Is that a good idea?

00:29:07.960 Because, you know,

00:29:09.340 self-defense, of course, makes sense.

00:29:12.420 And I would be all in favor of self-defense

00:29:14.860 wherever you can get it.

00:29:17.200 But putting NATO on the border of Russia

00:29:20.040 feels like an offensive move to me.

00:29:23.100 Am I wrong?

00:29:25.860 Doesn't the Russian complaint

00:29:28.020 actually carry a little weight with you?

00:29:30.920 It does with me.

00:29:32.780 It feels like an offensive move.

00:29:35.460 Now, I wonder if Trump would have done that.

00:29:38.880 Or did he try to do that?

00:29:40.220 I don't know.

00:29:40.900 Was Trump open to Ukraine being a NATO?

00:29:45.760 I'm looking at it.

00:29:46.700 Was he open to that?

00:29:48.320 Because if Trump was open to it,

00:29:50.080 I think I would have seen it

00:29:51.160 as a negotiating stick.

00:29:54.200 Because you know what Trump was famous for?

00:29:55.940 And I would tell you this often.

00:29:58.160 Trump was famous for creating something

00:30:00.040 and a nothing

00:30:00.720 and then using it to negotiate.

00:30:04.080 So it could be that the United States

00:30:06.180 thinks it's a terrible idea

00:30:07.720 for Ukraine to be in NATO

00:30:09.540 exactly because it would look like

00:30:11.140 an offensive move.

00:30:12.580 But it might be what we're looking to trade.

00:30:15.980 Might be what we're looking to,

00:30:17.440 you know, give to them

00:30:18.940 in return for who knows what.

00:30:21.620 You know, nuclear deal, whatever.

00:30:25.000 So I'm going to take this

00:30:27.440 into the future a little bit.

00:30:28.620 In my opinion,

00:30:29.360 it is inevitable

00:30:30.520 that Russia and the United States

00:30:32.700 will be allies in the future.

00:30:36.800 Here's why.

00:30:39.940 Space.

00:30:43.440 China is going to be 1.00

00:30:44.700 a formidable power in space.

00:30:47.700 And I don't think Russia 0.97

00:30:49.420 will be competitive with them

00:30:50.680 in the long run.

00:30:51.400 Just because of money.

00:30:52.880 You know, China will just have 0.99

00:30:53.740 tons more money

00:30:54.580 to do it right.

00:30:55.680 I feel as if,

00:30:58.380 and there's really no chance

00:31:00.580 there won't be war in space.

00:31:02.820 You know that, right?

00:31:04.000 The odds of no war in space

00:31:05.960 are zero in the long run.

00:31:08.400 There will be war in space.

00:31:10.340 And we kind of need to win that one.

00:31:14.340 We don't have a choice.

00:31:16.140 We can't lose that one.

00:31:17.760 Because that's the big one.

00:31:19.360 You know, all the wars,

00:31:21.760 terrestrial wars,

00:31:23.060 none of them count.

00:31:24.780 Because the war in space

00:31:25.900 will be the one that determines

00:31:27.020 who runs the Earth

00:31:27.980 and anything else, too.

00:31:32.840 Scott, you realize that

00:31:33.920 until SpaceX,

00:31:34.920 we had to hitch rides

00:31:35.720 on Russian crafts.

00:31:37.140 Right.

00:31:37.320 So, Russia, I think, 0.81

00:31:39.820 knows that financially

00:31:40.960 the best combination

00:31:43.900 would be U.S. money

00:31:45.400 plus, you know,

00:31:46.980 Russian experience

00:31:48.240 plus American experience

00:31:49.700 to have some kind of a counter

00:31:51.840 to Chinese dominance of space.

00:31:55.780 And I think we should just

00:31:57.000 get over ourselves on Earth.

00:31:59.840 Because none of it matters.

00:32:02.380 None of it matters.

00:32:03.300 We could fight all day on Earth.

00:32:04.980 It won't matter in 20 years.

00:32:08.260 It'll only matter

00:32:09.080 who's shooting down satellites

00:32:10.300 and who has the, you know,

00:32:11.640 the high ground.

00:32:13.480 And if we don't remember

00:32:16.360 that Russia 0.72

00:32:19.080 historically has been more

00:32:21.740 on our side than against,

00:32:23.720 at least I'm not the historian

00:32:25.740 to tell you that,

00:32:26.800 but certainly we've allied

00:32:28.840 with them before.

00:32:32.760 So I think the frame here

00:32:34.960 is we should stop

00:32:36.780 thinking about Earth.

00:32:38.640 If we think about Earth,

00:32:40.180 the U.S. is going to,

00:32:41.400 you know,

00:32:41.780 try to get Ukraine 0.78

00:32:42.700 into NATO maybe.

00:32:44.580 It's just going to get worse.

00:32:46.300 But if we say,

00:32:47.060 hey, Russia,

00:32:47.980 why don't we start now

00:32:48.960 to change the frame?

00:32:50.560 Because if we don't start now,

00:32:52.180 it might not be soon enough.

00:32:54.260 So just change the frame

00:32:55.380 to space

00:32:56.080 and tell Russia 0.54

00:32:57.380 it's not an option

00:32:58.600 to be at war

00:32:59.440 with the United States.

00:33:01.120 It just isn't.

00:33:01.860 It is not an option

00:33:04.720 that anybody wants.

00:33:07.840 Russia doesn't want it.

00:33:08.940 We don't want it.

00:33:10.300 Nobody else wants it.

00:33:11.720 I don't even think

00:33:12.340 China wants it.

00:33:14.560 Right?

00:33:15.360 Now, you say Putin

00:33:16.360 has different goals

00:33:17.420 and anything he does

00:33:18.480 is really going to be a trick

00:33:19.480 and he's going to try to,

00:33:20.660 you know,

00:33:21.200 screw us at every turn, 0.83

00:33:23.000 et cetera.

00:33:23.740 Well,

00:33:24.900 you know,

00:33:25.180 that's how our allies are.

00:33:27.300 I'm not sure

00:33:28.160 any of our allies

00:33:29.300 are exactly doing

00:33:30.960 what we want.

00:33:32.500 It doesn't really work that way.

00:33:34.260 And I'm pretty sure

00:33:35.180 some of our allies

00:33:36.080 are spying on us

00:33:37.100 and doing some shit to us 0.96

00:33:38.760 that we don't like.

00:33:44.320 All right.

00:33:46.420 That's what I think.

00:33:47.400 And then

00:33:52.180 the Harris,

00:33:54.420 Vice President Harris

00:33:55.780 continues to fall apart story.

00:33:58.700 Jack Posobiec

00:33:59.380 seems to have a,

00:34:00.400 I think it's a scoop.

00:34:03.960 And he says

00:34:04.680 that Simone Sanders

00:34:05.680 got pushed out

00:34:06.880 of the White House

00:34:07.440 because they blamed her

00:34:08.720 for being the source

00:34:09.840 of CNN's

00:34:11.340 Kamala hit piece,

00:34:13.460 according to a

00:34:14.080 White House staffer.

00:34:14.980 Yeah,

00:34:17.100 you have to be careful

00:34:17.880 about any of the

00:34:18.900 rumors coming out

00:34:20.160 of the White House.

00:34:21.380 I think they have

00:34:21.900 a pretty low chance

00:34:23.240 of being true.

00:34:24.760 But

00:34:25.060 do you think

00:34:26.400 Simone Sanders

00:34:27.220 was behind a hit piece

00:34:28.960 on Kamala Harris,

00:34:30.660 given that that was

00:34:31.780 her own boss?

00:34:33.700 I don't know.

00:34:35.460 It feels unlikely.

00:34:37.520 It could be

00:34:38.440 that she thought

00:34:40.200 it wasn't going

00:34:40.760 to be a hit piece.

00:34:43.020 So,

00:34:43.700 in that scenario,

00:34:44.680 I could see

00:34:45.280 it being her fault.

00:34:46.340 She might have 0.95

00:34:46.840 thought that CNN

00:34:47.560 was such a friendly

00:34:48.660 that she could use

00:34:50.340 it as a way

00:34:50.800 to rehabilitate

00:34:51.960 Kamala Harris.

00:34:53.020 By the way,

00:34:53.480 I just heard

00:34:54.000 this fact.

00:34:54.960 Can you fact check

00:34:55.860 this for me?

00:34:57.800 There was some

00:34:58.660 kind of new

00:34:59.460 PR consultants

00:35:02.120 that were behind

00:35:04.080 Kamala Harris

00:35:05.000 doing that

00:35:05.680 cringy video

00:35:08.020 where she was

00:35:08.640 talking to the kids

00:35:09.540 who wanted to be

00:35:10.600 in the space camp,

00:35:11.900 but they were actors.

00:35:12.820 That was actually

00:35:14.880 based on them

00:35:15.980 trying to improve

00:35:16.780 their PR,

00:35:17.420 wasn't it?

00:35:18.240 They bought it.

00:35:19.620 Somehow they hired

00:35:20.480 a company

00:35:21.120 that thought

00:35:22.520 using actors

00:35:23.420 for kids

00:35:24.160 to make her

00:35:24.820 look real

00:35:25.440 was going to be

00:35:26.420 a good idea

00:35:27.080 as if we wouldn't

00:35:30.420 know that.

00:35:32.640 She is the worst 0.97

00:35:33.700 advised candidate

00:35:35.420 of all time.

00:35:37.480 Wouldn't you say?

00:35:38.260 Dana Perino

00:35:40.440 confirmed that.

00:35:41.700 Maybe that's where

00:35:42.200 I saw it.

00:35:42.600 I was watching

00:35:43.000 The Five.

00:35:43.580 I think that's

00:35:44.020 where I heard it.

00:35:53.100 All right.

00:35:56.680 Yeah, PR was

00:35:57.920 hired to help

00:35:58.800 Kamala's image.

00:36:02.760 Kamala's image?

00:36:03.900 Oh, my God.

00:36:04.860 I was reminded

00:36:08.200 watching Tucker Carlson

00:36:09.560 as the Jussie Smollett

00:36:12.260 or Smollet.

00:36:13.460 I don't know.

00:36:13.760 I still don't know

00:36:14.420 how to pronounce his name,

00:36:18.960 and I'm not doing it

00:36:19.660 intentionally.

00:36:20.800 If you have a name

00:36:21.880 that's intentionally

00:36:22.680 hard to pronounce,

00:36:24.440 don't blame anybody else.

00:36:27.540 Is it juicy?

00:36:30.220 Or are people

00:36:31.300 just joking about that?

00:36:33.300 Anyway,

00:36:33.760 whatever it is.

00:36:35.760 Reminding ourselves

00:36:36.740 how fake

00:36:37.340 the fake news

00:36:38.080 can be

00:36:38.580 is a good reminder

00:36:41.640 that our news

00:36:42.620 is completely made up.

00:36:45.140 So,

00:36:46.100 and then I'm also

00:36:48.800 seeing, you know,

00:36:49.500 a lot of push

00:36:50.520 against Pete Buttigieg.

00:36:52.960 Now,

00:36:53.380 I've seen on

00:36:54.320 Twitter

00:36:56.500 a number of people

00:36:57.400 mocking me

00:36:59.540 for my

00:37:00.320 complimentary words

00:37:01.960 about

00:37:03.260 Buttigieg.

00:37:04.300 but let me

00:37:05.720 put them

00:37:06.020 in context

00:37:06.600 in case you've

00:37:07.180 heard of

00:37:07.400 anacontext.

00:37:09.260 I didn't think

00:37:10.180 he was the best

00:37:10.760 choice for president.

00:37:12.960 I think he's

00:37:13.940 very smart

00:37:14.600 and he has

00:37:17.860 a good

00:37:18.220 talent stack,

00:37:19.220 education,

00:37:20.020 etc.

00:37:20.260 and I think

00:37:22.800 he's a solid,

00:37:24.520 capable person.

00:37:25.280 I don't think

00:37:26.340 he necessarily

00:37:26.880 did a good job

00:37:27.600 as a mayor.

00:37:29.000 I mean,

00:37:29.380 I don't know

00:37:29.780 one way or the other

00:37:30.600 but it doesn't

00:37:31.180 sound good.

00:37:32.820 And,

00:37:33.140 you know,

00:37:35.440 he wouldn't be

00:37:35.860 my first choice

00:37:36.600 for president.

00:37:37.520 But sooner or later

00:37:38.260 we're going to have

00:37:38.720 a gay president

00:37:39.780 and if it were him,

00:37:42.340 maybe that'd be okay.

00:37:43.680 I'm all in favor

00:37:45.920 of getting all

00:37:46.520 the firsts

00:37:47.260 out of the way

00:37:47.780 just to get them

00:37:49.180 behind us

00:37:49.800 because I think

00:37:50.480 it helps.

00:37:51.560 I feel like the

00:37:52.260 country is better

00:37:53.020 off for having

00:37:54.000 had a black

00:37:54.840 president.

00:37:56.240 I think we'd be

00:37:56.940 better off if we

00:37:57.820 get a female 1.00

00:37:58.320 president.

00:37:59.320 Not because

00:37:59.880 they're better,

00:38:00.600 not because I

00:38:01.320 want to be woke.

00:38:02.560 It has nothing

00:38:03.040 to do with

00:38:03.500 wokeness.

00:38:04.580 It's just like

00:38:05.040 a convenience.

00:38:05.680 Just to be able

00:38:07.800 to say we did it,

00:38:08.860 you know,

00:38:09.180 let's just say

00:38:09.940 we did it.

00:38:10.980 Now,

00:38:11.320 if they're not

00:38:12.080 the best candidate,

00:38:13.920 of course.

00:38:15.080 I'm not saying

00:38:15.900 you should hire

00:38:17.020 them for their

00:38:17.840 gayness or for 0.99

00:38:19.080 their gender.

00:38:20.820 I'm not in favor

00:38:21.360 of that.

00:38:22.300 I'm just saying

00:38:22.920 should we get

00:38:23.700 one that has

00:38:24.680 all the qualifications?

00:38:26.080 Yeah,

00:38:26.340 Grinnell,

00:38:26.860 for example.

00:38:27.820 Should we get

00:38:28.520 one that is

00:38:29.260 perfectly qualified?

00:38:31.000 It'd be nice

00:38:31.520 to get that over

00:38:32.180 with.

00:38:33.140 Just put it

00:38:33.900 behind us.

00:38:35.180 You know,

00:38:35.420 sort of a way

00:38:36.580 to signify

00:38:37.640 that we are

00:38:38.280 still the United

00:38:38.960 States.

00:38:39.580 You know what

00:38:39.800 I mean?

00:38:40.460 This guy

00:38:47.540 is controlled

00:38:48.180 opposition.

00:38:49.100 This guy?

00:38:49.820 You mean me?

00:38:51.360 Who's controlled

00:38:52.200 opposition?

00:38:58.860 Some of you

00:38:59.580 might be new

00:39:00.180 to my live

00:39:01.440 streams.

00:39:02.080 So if you're

00:39:02.500 new to the

00:39:02.840 live streams,

00:39:03.400 especially the

00:39:03.940 people on

00:39:04.400 YouTube,

00:39:05.120 here's what

00:39:05.520 you need to

00:39:05.880 know.

00:39:07.180 I'm not the

00:39:07.880 team player.

00:39:09.640 All right?

00:39:09.800 I'm not a

00:39:10.760 team player.

00:39:11.320 I say good

00:39:11.880 and bad

00:39:12.220 things about

00:39:12.780 people on

00:39:13.280 both sides,

00:39:13.820 but I do

00:39:14.120 it intentionally.

00:39:15.620 I make sure

00:39:16.220 I don't go

00:39:16.680 too far

00:39:17.040 without saying

00:39:17.560 something good

00:39:18.320 to somebody

00:39:19.640 who's on a

00:39:20.660 team that

00:39:21.180 isn't playing

00:39:22.260 well.

00:39:24.960 All right.

00:39:25.520 what would

00:39:30.120 suggest to you

00:39:31.160 that he...

00:39:32.600 All right.

00:39:34.400 I'm not

00:39:34.660 going to read

00:39:35.040 that one.

00:39:40.800 Yeah, that's

00:39:41.540 true.

00:39:41.840 Kamala Harris

00:39:42.560 was the first

00:39:43.660 female president

00:39:46.560 for two hours,

00:39:47.740 right?

00:39:47.900 All right.

00:39:48.480 That is

00:39:55.920 mainly what I

00:39:56.520 had to talk

00:39:57.000 about today.

00:39:57.480 Is there

00:39:57.680 anything

00:39:57.860 happening that

00:39:58.420 I missed?

00:39:59.920 Tell me in

00:40:00.520 the comments

00:40:00.960 what I

00:40:01.320 missed.

00:40:05.280 If this is a

00:40:06.240 simulation,

00:40:06.940 then what is

00:40:07.400 different from

00:40:08.000 the simulation

00:40:08.560 creator's reality

00:40:09.660 or is the

00:40:10.640 creator in

00:40:11.160 the simulation

00:40:11.700 too?

00:40:12.040 Well, if we're

00:40:13.760 a simulation,

00:40:14.360 I think it

00:40:16.400 does prove

00:40:16.940 that simulations

00:40:17.640 can create

00:40:18.500 other simulations

00:40:19.360 because we

00:40:20.020 will certainly

00:40:20.540 do it.

00:40:21.480 And video

00:40:22.060 games are

00:40:22.580 simulations.

00:40:24.860 So the

00:40:27.400 view of

00:40:28.460 reality that

00:40:29.120 works the

00:40:29.600 best for me

00:40:30.380 is believing

00:40:34.540 that it's a

00:40:35.120 video game and

00:40:36.160 that I'm a

00:40:36.620 player and

00:40:37.640 some of the

00:40:38.040 people are

00:40:38.480 NPCs.

00:40:39.900 Now, I'm

00:40:41.380 not saying

00:40:42.520 that's reality.

00:40:44.360 I'm saying

00:40:44.960 that you can

00:40:45.440 change your

00:40:45.940 frame to

00:40:46.660 whatever you

00:40:47.200 want and

00:40:47.640 see if it

00:40:48.180 predicts well.

00:40:49.480 So I'm going

00:40:49.900 to live in

00:40:50.300 that frame for

00:40:50.900 a little while

00:40:51.440 that I'm a

00:40:52.540 simulated creature

00:40:53.720 in a simulated

00:40:54.540 world.

00:40:55.800 And here's one

00:40:56.660 of the things

00:40:57.020 it predicts.

00:40:58.800 Are you ready

00:40:59.380 for this?

00:41:00.520 It predicts

00:41:01.220 that you're

00:41:01.820 working through

00:41:02.440 some kind of

00:41:03.080 specific problems.

00:41:05.540 For example,

00:41:07.420 have I told

00:41:08.040 you how many

00:41:08.500 water leaks

00:41:09.460 I've had in

00:41:10.020 my house in

00:41:10.580 the past 12

00:41:11.180 months?

00:41:11.460 Just an

00:41:14.020 incredible number

00:41:14.820 and they have

00:41:15.260 nothing to do

00:41:15.940 with any

00:41:16.460 common cause.

00:41:17.600 They're all

00:41:17.920 just all over

00:41:18.740 the board,

00:41:19.260 different reasons.

00:41:20.460 I had another

00:41:21.300 one this week.

00:41:23.840 Yesterday?

00:41:24.640 Yeah, yesterday.

00:41:25.960 And what

00:41:28.440 causes that?

00:41:29.220 Why would I

00:41:29.980 have 10

00:41:30.560 water leaks?

00:41:31.420 And again,

00:41:31.840 it has nothing

00:41:32.260 to do with

00:41:32.720 the building

00:41:33.080 quality.

00:41:33.520 These are all

00:41:34.800 specific situations

00:41:35.980 that I know

00:41:37.300 the cause,

00:41:37.960 et cetera.

00:41:39.660 It's not poor

00:41:40.680 materials.

00:41:41.220 It's not

00:41:41.660 poor workmanship.

00:41:43.300 It's just

00:41:44.200 coincidence.

00:41:45.720 Now,

00:41:46.760 why do I

00:41:47.540 have that

00:41:48.000 coincidence?

00:41:48.980 Because there

00:41:49.400 are about

00:41:50.420 five others

00:41:51.740 that are

00:41:52.860 themes that

00:41:54.100 hit me over

00:41:55.100 and over

00:41:55.440 and over

00:41:55.720 again that

00:41:56.520 don't hit

00:41:56.840 other people

00:41:57.280 ever.

00:41:58.560 And then

00:41:58.820 other people

00:41:59.280 have a theme

00:41:59.920 that's over

00:42:00.420 and over

00:42:00.700 and over

00:42:00.960 again and

00:42:01.420 doesn't hit

00:42:01.980 me ever.

00:42:03.240 How could

00:42:03.600 that be?

00:42:05.140 So it

00:42:05.800 feels like

00:42:06.360 we are either

00:42:07.040 A-B testing

00:42:08.000 for some

00:42:09.140 higher

00:42:09.640 creature,

00:42:10.700 and they

00:42:11.740 put us

00:42:12.120 in this

00:42:12.400 reality to

00:42:12.980 see how

00:42:13.280 we handle

00:42:13.760 the situation

00:42:14.740 that they

00:42:15.180 haven't been

00:42:15.580 able to

00:42:15.880 handle in

00:42:16.280 their own

00:42:16.580 reality.

00:42:17.520 Because that's

00:42:17.940 how I'd

00:42:18.260 use it.

00:42:18.980 If I could

00:42:19.620 build a

00:42:19.960 simulation

00:42:20.500 that was so

00:42:22.260 perfect to

00:42:23.120 my own

00:42:23.540 life that I

00:42:25.140 could A-B

00:42:25.780 test different

00:42:26.800 techniques,

00:42:28.720 I would do

00:42:30.540 it.

00:42:30.900 Wouldn't

00:42:31.180 you?

00:42:32.140 Why wouldn't

00:42:32.600 you?

00:42:33.580 Of course you

00:42:34.280 would.

00:42:34.440 So if

00:42:35.180 we're a

00:42:35.460 simulation,

00:42:36.080 you have

00:42:36.280 to ask

00:42:36.560 why.

00:42:37.380 It's

00:42:37.620 either a

00:42:38.080 game,

00:42:39.480 and you're

00:42:40.100 sort of an

00:42:40.740 avatar in

00:42:41.260 a game.

00:42:42.540 That would

00:42:42.860 make sense,

00:42:43.320 it's just

00:42:43.640 entertainment.

00:42:44.500 Or it's

00:42:45.060 to learn

00:42:45.540 something,

00:42:46.480 which would

00:42:47.600 mean they're

00:42:48.020 testing something.

00:42:49.600 So if it

00:42:50.120 seems to you

00:42:50.660 that you're

00:42:50.960 being observed

00:42:51.620 and maybe

00:42:52.400 you're part

00:42:53.400 of an

00:42:53.640 experiment,

00:42:54.660 which by

00:42:55.080 the way,

00:42:55.380 I felt

00:42:55.700 all my

00:42:56.080 life,

00:42:57.460 probably age

00:42:58.680 nine or

00:43:00.920 ten or

00:43:01.360 something,

00:43:01.640 I first

00:43:02.960 started thinking

00:43:03.600 I was part

00:43:04.100 of an

00:43:04.340 experiment with

00:43:05.200 some higher

00:43:06.080 level creatures,

00:43:07.800 and that's

00:43:08.980 never gone

00:43:09.440 away.

00:43:10.460 I've had

00:43:11.140 that my

00:43:11.460 whole life.

00:43:13.980 Have I

00:43:14.240 looked into

00:43:14.640 the Mandela

00:43:15.260 effect?

00:43:15.900 I have,

00:43:16.440 yes.

00:43:19.360 I have

00:43:20.020 not read

00:43:20.480 the Norm

00:43:21.020 fictional

00:43:21.460 biography.

00:43:22.800 I probably

00:43:23.560 won't read

00:43:23.980 anything if

00:43:24.480 it's fiction.

00:43:24.940 All right.

00:43:32.780 Break free

00:43:33.500 of consumerism.

00:43:35.120 Did you

00:43:35.500 know that

00:43:35.860 consumerism

00:43:36.760 was implanted

00:43:39.080 in your

00:43:39.460 minds by

00:43:40.600 people who

00:43:41.940 said,

00:43:43.080 correct me

00:43:44.200 if I'm

00:43:44.460 wrong,

00:43:44.940 so somebody

00:43:45.420 who's better

00:43:46.160 at this,

00:43:46.880 watch the

00:43:47.380 comments,

00:43:47.840 somebody will

00:43:48.120 give you a

00:43:49.160 correction,

00:43:49.720 but I

00:43:49.980 think it

00:43:50.340 was

00:43:50.880 Eisenhower

00:43:52.520 who said

00:43:54.620 what would

00:43:55.360 be really

00:43:55.760 good for

00:43:56.140 the country

00:43:56.620 is if we

00:43:57.760 were a

00:43:58.100 manufacturing

00:43:58.660 country,

00:43:59.800 and we

00:44:00.260 would make

00:44:00.680 things that

00:44:01.220 we would

00:44:01.560 buy within

00:44:02.060 the country

00:44:02.480 and also

00:44:02.940 sell to

00:44:03.340 other people.

00:44:04.540 But in

00:44:04.760 order to

00:44:05.080 do that,

00:44:06.420 yeah,

00:44:07.340 I think

00:44:07.680 Bernays was

00:44:08.620 the name

00:44:08.900 of the guy

00:44:09.300 who was

00:44:10.280 sort of the

00:44:10.660 advertising

00:44:11.300 mind control

00:44:12.920 expert,

00:44:13.720 Edward Bernays,

00:44:14.980 and he

00:44:16.300 convinced people

00:44:17.020 that they

00:44:17.400 needed stuff,

00:44:19.380 and we

00:44:19.780 weren't like

00:44:21.440 that before.

00:44:22.460 We didn't

00:44:23.140 know we

00:44:23.440 needed stuff.

00:44:24.620 We thought

00:44:25.240 we needed

00:44:25.660 food and

00:44:26.740 stuff,

00:44:27.120 but we

00:44:27.520 didn't know

00:44:27.760 we needed

00:44:28.040 stuff,

00:44:29.520 shiny stuff,

00:44:30.720 good-looking

00:44:31.060 stuff,

00:44:32.120 things to

00:44:32.660 buy.

00:44:33.780 And so

00:44:34.060 once we

00:44:34.480 became

00:44:34.880 consumer

00:44:35.600 crazy,

00:44:36.620 and then

00:44:37.020 also started

00:44:37.720 getting jealous

00:44:38.340 about what

00:44:38.980 our neighbors

00:44:39.380 had,

00:44:40.200 so we

00:44:40.520 had to

00:44:40.760 have that

00:44:41.100 too,

00:44:41.800 he created

00:44:42.660 an economy

00:44:43.400 that's based

00:44:44.260 on that

00:44:44.620 psychology.

00:44:45.900 You are

00:44:46.380 actually

00:44:46.900 programmed.

00:44:48.600 Now,

00:44:49.720 here's the

00:44:50.400 part I've

00:44:50.700 been waiting

00:44:51.020 for.

00:44:52.300 Do you

00:44:52.500 want me to

00:44:52.840 break your

00:44:53.260 brain?

00:44:54.620 Do you

00:44:56.140 believe that

00:44:57.700 you could

00:44:58.120 be programmed

00:44:58.900 by an

00:44:59.800 external force

00:45:00.800 to like

00:45:04.560 something you

00:45:05.180 don't like

00:45:05.800 and dislike

00:45:07.540 something that

00:45:08.780 you liked?

00:45:09.740 How many of you

00:45:10.340 believe that you

00:45:11.020 could be

00:45:11.740 brainwashed to

00:45:13.100 like something

00:45:13.840 you don't

00:45:14.360 like or to

00:45:15.980 dislike something

00:45:16.660 you do?

00:45:19.460 Easily.

00:45:20.740 Easily.

00:45:21.240 Let me

00:45:22.960 give you a

00:45:23.660 do you

00:45:24.980 think it

00:45:25.300 could be

00:45:25.620 done with

00:45:27.020 any kind

00:45:27.760 of a

00:45:28.460 let's

00:45:30.600 say

00:45:30.860 mechanical

00:45:32.300 form?

00:45:33.180 You know

00:45:33.560 it can be

00:45:33.940 done by

00:45:34.300 suggestion.

00:45:35.700 Can it be

00:45:36.420 done

00:45:36.660 mechanically?

00:45:38.380 Like

00:45:38.820 electrically?

00:45:40.100 Like

00:45:40.360 actually

00:45:40.760 directly

00:45:41.420 programming

00:45:42.140 your brain?

00:45:45.560 Well,

00:45:47.120 here's what

00:45:48.120 I've been

00:45:48.400 thinking about

00:45:48.940 lately.

00:45:49.240 In terms

00:45:50.400 of

00:45:50.620 programming

00:45:51.120 your brain

00:45:51.720 so it's

00:45:52.140 like a

00:45:52.400 whole

00:45:52.580 different

00:45:52.900 piece

00:45:53.180 of

00:45:53.320 software

00:45:53.800 not so

00:45:54.820 much.

00:45:56.220 But

00:45:56.500 suppose

00:45:57.980 you could

00:45:59.620 combine

00:46:00.940 two parts

00:46:02.220 of a

00:46:02.540 brain.

00:46:03.820 Let's

00:46:04.260 say one

00:46:04.700 part

00:46:05.040 controlled

00:46:05.580 pleasure

00:46:06.080 because

00:46:07.620 certainly

00:46:07.980 there's

00:46:08.340 parts of

00:46:08.780 your brain

00:46:09.060 that control

00:46:09.620 pleasure

00:46:10.040 or the

00:46:10.960 sensation

00:46:11.420 of

00:46:11.640 pleasure

00:46:11.920 and

00:46:12.780 then you

00:46:13.080 take

00:46:13.280 something

00:46:13.620 that

00:46:13.900 somebody

00:46:14.240 either

00:46:14.520 didn't

00:46:14.800 care

00:46:15.020 about

00:46:15.280 or

00:46:15.440 didn't

00:46:15.680 like

00:46:15.920 before

00:46:16.360 and you

00:46:17.420 just

00:46:17.680 create

00:46:18.540 a

00:46:19.060 connection

00:46:20.320 like a

00:46:21.140 physical

00:46:21.500 connection

00:46:22.000 between

00:46:22.820 pleasure

00:46:23.320 and

00:46:25.000 I'll just

00:46:25.620 pick

00:46:25.820 something

00:46:26.180 dirty

00:46:27.460 socks

00:46:27.980 dirty

00:46:30.100 socks

00:46:30.620 so every

00:46:31.640 time you

00:46:31.940 see dirty

00:46:32.420 socks

00:46:32.880 your pleasure

00:46:33.500 unit is

00:46:34.220 automatically

00:46:34.800 stimulated

00:46:35.800 because there's

00:46:36.300 actually a

00:46:36.760 physical

00:46:37.080 connection

00:46:37.600 could I

00:46:40.380 make you

00:46:40.840 like

00:46:41.220 dirty

00:46:41.620 socks

00:46:42.140 yep

00:46:43.280 instantly

00:46:44.440 so

00:46:45.600 you don't

00:46:46.300 have to

00:46:46.640 program

00:46:47.080 a whole

00:46:47.560 brain

00:46:48.100 like you

00:46:48.840 don't

00:46:48.960 have to

00:46:49.240 take this

00:46:49.620 big

00:46:49.880 complicated

00:46:50.500 brain

00:46:50.980 and rearrange

00:46:53.120 all of it

00:46:53.900 like you

00:46:54.260 would say

00:46:54.860 if you

00:46:55.140 updated

00:46:55.480 software

00:46:56.060 you just

00:46:57.320 have to

00:46:57.620 take any

00:46:58.040 two parts

00:46:58.600 of it

00:46:58.960 that are

00:46:59.460 intelligently

00:47:00.220 selected

00:47:00.800 and connect

00:47:02.180 them

00:47:02.380 now

00:47:03.980 could you

00:47:05.200 do that

00:47:05.820 without

00:47:07.380 physically

00:47:08.580 connecting

00:47:09.400 them

00:47:09.600 like having

00:47:10.100 some

00:47:10.340 electrical

00:47:10.920 or some

00:47:12.360 kind of

00:47:12.700 beam

00:47:13.000 into your

00:47:13.340 head

00:47:13.660 or a

00:47:14.100 surgery

00:47:14.420 or something

00:47:14.880 could you

00:47:15.620 connect

00:47:16.000 it to

00:47:16.420 unconnected

00:47:17.520 parts of

00:47:17.860 the brain

00:47:18.260 so that

00:47:19.320 something

00:47:19.740 would give

00:47:20.180 you pleasure

00:47:20.640 that never

00:47:21.040 gave you

00:47:21.380 pleasure

00:47:21.680 before

00:47:22.060 yes

00:47:23.560 yes

00:47:24.980 yes you

00:47:26.240 could

00:47:26.480 and all

00:47:27.960 you have

00:47:28.200 to do

00:47:28.580 is

00:47:29.060 give

00:47:30.320 somebody

00:47:30.680 pleasure

00:47:31.060 and then

00:47:31.560 expose

00:47:31.940 them to

00:47:32.260 the thing

00:47:32.640 and then

00:47:33.960 the brain

00:47:34.300 will grow

00:47:34.680 a connection

00:47:35.080 between

00:47:35.440 them

00:47:35.640 you will

00:47:36.380 be

00:47:36.620 physically

00:47:37.440 reprogrammed

00:47:38.520 into liking

00:47:39.460 something you

00:47:39.980 didn't like

00:47:40.360 before

00:47:40.700 is it

00:47:41.840 possible

00:47:42.280 yes

00:47:43.600 I've done

00:47:44.340 it to

00:47:44.640 myself

00:47:45.060 just to

00:47:45.700 see if

00:47:45.960 I could

00:47:46.220 do it

00:47:46.660 I don't

00:47:48.820 know how

00:47:49.100 many other

00:47:49.600 trained hypnotists

00:47:50.840 do this

00:47:51.380 but if you

00:47:52.760 had any

00:47:53.340 idea

00:47:53.760 the things

00:47:55.060 I've

00:47:55.400 experimented

00:47:56.240 with on

00:47:56.700 my own

00:47:57.160 brain

00:47:57.580 that you

00:47:59.140 know nobody

00:47:59.500 will ever

00:47:59.860 know about

00:48:00.340 oh my

00:48:02.320 god

00:48:02.780 yeah

00:48:04.220 I have

00:48:04.900 actually

00:48:05.320 trained my

00:48:07.060 brain

00:48:07.420 to have

00:48:08.440 pleasure

00:48:08.880 for

00:48:09.140 things

00:48:09.500 that

00:48:09.680 were

00:48:09.920 not

00:48:10.820 even

00:48:11.100 anything

00:48:11.560 it

00:48:12.500 could

00:48:12.620 be

00:48:12.720 a

00:48:12.840 random

00:48:13.120 thing

00:48:14.000 and also

00:48:15.180 a number

00:48:16.260 of other

00:48:16.580 things as

00:48:17.020 well

00:48:17.200 so

00:48:18.040 can you

00:48:19.700 program

00:48:20.180 homosexuality 0.87

00:48:21.240 I think

00:48:21.640 yes

00:48:22.000 I think

00:48:23.400 yes

00:48:23.840 now

00:48:26.980 but I have

00:48:27.720 to be more

00:48:28.200 careful about

00:48:28.880 that

00:48:29.140 so the

00:48:30.220 question

00:48:30.500 was

00:48:30.840 could you

00:48:31.380 turn

00:48:31.680 somebody

00:48:32.100 who is

00:48:32.480 hetero

00:48:32.960 make

00:48:34.880 them

00:48:35.080 gay 0.99

00:48:35.400 by

00:48:35.720 reprogramming

00:48:37.720 them

00:48:39.620 the answer

00:48:40.300 is yes

00:48:40.700 same thing

00:48:41.800 you would

00:48:42.260 just have

00:48:42.620 to stimulate

00:48:43.220 their pleasure

00:48:43.840 zone

00:48:44.240 and connect

00:48:45.700 it to

00:48:46.300 that set

00:48:47.040 of thoughts

00:48:47.720 or ideas

00:48:48.240 and just

00:48:49.340 continue

00:48:49.860 you just

00:48:50.820 repeat it

00:48:51.840 yeah

00:48:52.100 absolutely

00:48:53.200 now

00:48:53.840 but could

00:48:55.080 you make

00:48:55.560 somebody

00:48:55.900 who is

00:48:56.180 gay 0.99

00:48:56.700 straight 0.70

00:48:58.380 with hypnosis

00:49:00.020 probably

00:49:01.740 not

00:49:02.380 that's my

00:49:04.240 that's my

00:49:04.720 hunch

00:49:05.000 probably

00:49:05.360 not

00:49:06.000 because

00:49:07.140 I don't

00:49:07.640 I think

00:49:08.760 that would

00:49:09.020 be a

00:49:09.260 harder

00:49:09.540 direction

00:49:10.160 because

00:49:11.380 you know

00:49:11.700 people who

00:49:12.180 are straight

00:49:12.880 are always

00:49:13.520 a little

00:49:13.940 bit

00:49:14.160 gay 0.99

00:49:14.440 you know

00:49:15.140 what I

00:49:15.320 mean

00:49:15.520 you know

00:49:16.260 what I

00:49:16.440 mean

00:49:16.640 just a

00:49:17.520 little

00:49:17.640 bit

00:49:17.820 gay 0.99

00:49:18.040 so

00:49:18.820 they're

00:49:19.000 at least

00:49:19.260 a little

00:49:19.900 bit

00:49:20.040 leaning

00:49:20.460 you know

00:49:21.100 but I

00:49:21.680 think

00:49:21.820 if

00:49:22.000 you're

00:49:22.200 just

00:49:22.440 gay 0.99

00:49:23.340 that's

00:49:25.560 that's

00:49:25.780 a hard

00:49:26.100 sell

00:49:26.460 I mean

00:49:26.900 maybe

00:49:28.460 you could

00:49:28.800 do it

00:49:29.120 but

00:49:29.360 it would

00:49:30.120 be a

00:49:30.340 harder

00:49:30.560 task

00:49:31.120 you're

00:49:35.060 babbling

00:49:35.420 yeah

00:49:36.860 you're

00:49:37.080 not

00:49:37.240 wrong

00:49:37.600 you're

00:49:39.920 not

00:49:40.060 wrong

00:49:40.400 alright

00:49:50.540 some

00:49:50.980 of your

00:49:51.220 comments

00:49:51.540 are funnier

00:49:52.060 than

00:49:52.240 others

00:49:52.560 alright

00:49:53.720 you

00:49:55.020 can never

00:49:55.740 program

00:49:56.140 me to

00:49:56.560 watch

00:49:56.800 CNN

00:49:57.280 yeah

00:49:57.600 I

00:49:57.740 could

00:49:57.940 program

00:49:59.200 you

00:49:59.420 to

00:49:59.540 watch

00:49:59.700 CNN

00:50:00.020 easily

00:50:01.300 I

00:50:02.160 just

00:50:02.340 have

00:50:02.520 to

00:50:02.620 reframe

00:50:03.080 it

00:50:03.220 as

00:50:03.400 entertainment

00:50:03.860 and you'd

00:50:04.320 be watching

00:50:04.720 it all

00:50:05.040 day

00:50:05.220 I watch

00:50:05.940 CNN

00:50:06.220 for

00:50:06.480 entertainment

00:50:06.920 I don't

00:50:07.220 watch it

00:50:07.480 for news

00:50:07.920 and it

00:50:08.740 is

00:50:09.000 literally

00:50:09.480 entertaining

00:50:10.660 not in the

00:50:11.800 way they

00:50:12.140 intend

00:50:12.640 but usually

00:50:13.880 I'm there

00:50:14.240 oh my

00:50:14.740 goodness

00:50:15.300 are they

00:50:15.660 trying to

00:50:16.020 sell

00:50:16.240 that

00:50:16.560 oh look

00:50:17.540 what they

00:50:17.800 left out

00:50:18.300 so I'm

00:50:19.100 usually

00:50:19.360 deeply

00:50:19.800 entertained

00:50:20.220 when I

00:50:20.520 watch CNN

00:50:21.000 if I'm

00:50:21.700 not

00:50:21.860 throwing

00:50:22.220 up

00:50:22.560 I do

00:50:27.380 enjoy your

00:50:27.900 company

00:50:28.240 that's a

00:50:28.660 good

00:50:28.780 observation

00:50:29.320 yeah I

00:50:30.440 don't like

00:50:30.860 to turn

00:50:31.580 these live

00:50:32.300 streams off

00:50:32.900 even when

00:50:33.320 I'm done

00:50:33.680 because it's

00:50:35.540 the highlight

00:50:35.880 of my

00:50:36.180 day

00:50:36.380 usually

00:50:36.800 now how

00:50:42.460 many of

00:50:42.840 you have

00:50:44.460 discovered

00:50:45.200 that the

00:50:46.200 simultaneous

00:50:47.220 sip is a

00:50:48.200 brainwashing

00:50:49.180 and brain

00:50:51.920 reprogramming

00:50:52.940 process

00:50:53.940 now I'm

00:50:55.180 overt about

00:50:55.860 that so I

00:50:56.660 tell you that's

00:50:57.180 what I'm

00:50:57.380 doing but

00:50:58.660 you can feel

00:50:59.280 it right

00:50:59.700 how many

00:51:02.440 of you

00:51:02.800 have developed

00:51:04.100 sort of an

00:51:06.180 addiction

00:51:06.560 for the

00:51:07.900 live stream

00:51:08.620 and the

00:51:09.140 simultaneous

00:51:09.620 sip

00:51:09.960 that it

00:51:10.740 feels like

00:51:11.740 an actual

00:51:12.840 compulsion

00:51:14.160 in the

00:51:15.380 comments

00:51:15.780 how many

00:51:16.240 have developed

00:51:17.000 that addiction

00:51:17.960 mild

00:51:18.980 but an

00:51:19.600 addiction

00:51:19.940 look at

00:51:22.000 the answers

00:51:22.640 going by

00:51:23.140 so if

00:51:23.800 you're new

00:51:24.120 to this

00:51:24.600 this is a

00:51:26.520 demonstration

00:51:26.960 of connecting

00:51:27.820 two things

00:51:28.560 so most

00:51:30.140 people like

00:51:30.660 their beverage

00:51:31.260 whatever

00:51:32.520 beverage it

00:51:33.200 is that

00:51:33.600 they have

00:51:33.980 and if

00:51:35.100 I

00:51:35.320 continually

00:51:37.180 have you

00:51:37.940 take a

00:51:38.500 drink

00:51:38.940 from your

00:51:39.780 favorite

00:51:40.120 beverage

00:51:40.560 and I

00:51:40.940 pair it

00:51:41.320 with

00:51:41.600 this

00:51:42.440 live stream

00:51:43.020 it does

00:51:44.360 reprogram

00:51:44.980 you

00:51:45.180 I'm doing

00:51:46.220 it intentionally

00:51:46.860 but

00:51:48.060 I don't

00:51:49.840 consider it

00:51:50.440 immoral

00:51:50.940 because I'm

00:51:52.080 telling you

00:51:52.620 and it's

00:51:53.120 for your

00:51:53.640 benefit

00:51:53.940 so you'll

00:51:54.880 enjoy it

00:51:55.580 more

00:51:56.000 now that's

00:51:59.660 the point

00:52:00.000 right

00:52:00.260 now it's

00:52:00.620 good for

00:52:00.960 me

00:52:01.320 because it

00:52:02.100 binds my

00:52:02.900 audience to

00:52:03.420 me

00:52:03.580 but it

00:52:04.180 should be

00:52:04.520 good for

00:52:04.840 you

00:52:05.060 because it

00:52:05.440 makes you

00:52:05.700 feel good

00:52:06.180 so in

00:52:07.420 theory we

00:52:07.920 both win

00:52:08.480 and there's

00:52:09.340 no secrets

00:52:09.960 I'm telling

00:52:10.360 you I'm

00:52:10.660 doing it

00:52:11.100 and you're

00:52:11.520 feeling it

00:52:11.940 in real

00:52:12.220 time

00:52:12.500 and by

00:52:13.320 the way

00:52:13.620 if anybody

00:52:14.260 feels

00:52:14.720 oh my

00:52:16.280 god

00:52:16.680 you've

00:52:18.280 programmed

00:52:18.580 me and

00:52:19.040 I can't

00:52:19.480 escape

00:52:19.920 let me

00:52:21.080 fix that

00:52:21.740 you can

00:52:23.840 escape

00:52:24.140 anytime you

00:52:24.680 want

00:52:24.940 if anybody

00:52:26.800 doesn't like

00:52:27.500 that feeling

00:52:28.200 it's sort

00:52:29.240 of a

00:52:29.560 I hope

00:52:30.440 it to be

00:52:30.800 a benign

00:52:31.340 feeling that

00:52:31.920 couldn't

00:52:32.380 possibly hurt

00:52:32.980 anybody

00:52:33.240 but if

00:52:34.240 you don't

00:52:34.480 like the

00:52:34.880 feeling

00:52:35.280 you have

00:52:37.280 absolute

00:52:37.920 full power

00:52:39.000 just stop

00:52:40.200 doing it

00:52:40.780 now that's

00:52:41.920 all you

00:52:42.200 needed

00:52:42.480 because if

00:52:43.080 somebody was

00:52:43.540 feeling you

00:52:43.880 know I

00:52:44.160 feel like

00:52:45.340 it's out of

00:52:45.880 my control

00:52:46.460 well I

00:52:47.420 just put it

00:52:47.840 back in

00:52:48.100 your control

00:52:48.600 so you

00:52:49.640 have full

00:52:50.040 control

00:52:50.500 even if it

00:52:52.880 feels like

00:52:53.300 you didn't

00:52:53.640 now you

00:52:53.960 do

00:52:54.160 all right

00:52:56.840 somebody says

00:52:58.760 somebody says

00:53:00.720 John says

00:53:02.060 I escape

00:53:02.540 every once in

00:53:03.100 a while

00:53:03.300 to calm

00:53:03.760 my mind

00:53:04.340 all right

00:53:07.640 now I'm

00:53:08.720 going to

00:53:08.920 turn off

00:53:09.440 YouTube

00:53:10.780 and I'm

00:53:11.320 going to

00:53:11.500 keep

00:53:11.680 locals on

00:53:12.480 because I've

00:53:13.140 been giving

00:53:13.520 them a

00:53:14.920 very special

00:53:15.740 lesson on

00:53:18.400 persuasion

00:53:18.960 that you

00:53:19.740 can't see

00:53:20.240 on YouTube

00:53:20.720 because you're

00:53:22.220 not ready

00:53:22.620 for the

00:53:22.960 truth

00:53:23.300 but over

00:53:26.800 on locals

00:53:27.320 they're all

00:53:27.740 ready

00:53:27.960 okay that's

00:53:29.280 it for now

00:53:29.700 and I'll see

00:53:30.340 you tomorrow

00:53:31.060 thank you

00:53:33.620 You

Real Coffee with Scott Adams - December 03, 2021

Episode 1581 Scott Adams： Things Are Getting Interesting Out There. Let's Talk About it

Episode Stats

Summary

Transcript