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

Length

53 minutes

Words per Minute

139.12091

Word Count

7,456

Sentence Count

475

Misogynist Sentences

6

Hate Speech Sentences

32


Summary

Alec Baldwin continues to defend himself, and Tulsi gabbard has a theory about the best way to get rid of Pandemic Flu. Scott Adams also talks about the recent shooting of a woman in Las Vegas, and why he thinks the government should have done more to prevent it.


Transcript

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.
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.
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,
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.
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.
00:15:55.380 Right about immigration.
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
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?
00:21:46.280 Do old people buy a lot of products and therefore the advertising in newspapers would be a good
00:21:51.880 business model?
00:21:53.300 Nope.
00:21:54.440 Old people do not buy a bunch of products.
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
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.
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.
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.
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
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.
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
00:30:44.700 a formidable power in space.
00:30:47.700 And I don't think Russia
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
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,
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
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
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
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,
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
00:48:56.700 straight
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
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
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
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