Real Coffee with Scott Adams - Episode 1594 Scott Adams： Proof We Live in a Simulation, and My Interview With Dale About January 6

00:00:00.000 Well, welcome to the best thing that's ever happened to you.

00:00:04.740 We call this Coffee with Scott Adams, in large part because I'm Scott Adams and there will be coffee.

00:00:12.560 But, I think we'd all agree that no matter what you're drinking here, this is the best thing that's ever happened to you and anybody, really.

00:00:22.500 I haven't done a complete survey, but it feels like common sense.

00:00:26.260 And if you'd like to take it up a notch, then boy, do we have a show for you today.

00:00:31.540 Do we have a show? Oh yeah, oh yeah.

00:00:34.900 And to enjoy it at its maximum capacity, all you need is a cup or a mug or a glass or a tank or a chalice or a stein, a canteen jug or a flask, a vessel of any kind.

00:00:43.680 Fill it with your favorite liquid, I like coffee.

00:00:46.320 And join me now for the unparalleled pleasure.

00:00:50.280 It's the dopamine hit of the day.

00:00:51.700 It's the thing that makes everything better, including the simulation.

00:00:57.360 It's called the simultaneous sip and it happens now, go.

00:01:05.060 Well, I don't have many rules in my household, but one of the most important rules is don't make loud noises from 7 to 8 in the morning.

00:01:15.360 So if you could hear that shower that's running in the wall right next to me, that would be somebody in my house who's violating the cardinal rule, the prime directive.

00:01:28.440 But it shouldn't last too much longer.

00:01:31.560 Well, today we learned that 75 members of Congress invested in companies that were related to the pandemic, companies that have a direct stake in the nation's response to the pandemic.

00:01:49.580 75 of your elected professionals, 75.

00:01:55.640 Are you as shocked by this as I am?

00:02:00.200 There are 75 members of Congress who bought stock in companies that were almost guaranteed to go up because of what the government was voting on.

00:02:09.640 Are you shocked?

00:02:11.240 Well, I'm shocked because I was hoping there were more than 75 smart people in Congress.

00:02:15.980 My God, are you telling me that out of 400 whatever of these assholes, it was completely legal, apparently, completely legal to invest in the very companies that they were guaranteeing were going to quadruple in value.

00:02:30.900 Completely legal.

00:02:32.340 And only 75 of these assholes did it.

00:02:35.660 What the hell is wrong with Congress?

00:02:38.280 Seriously.

00:02:40.280 Let's take a list of the 75, keep them, and get rid of all the other fucking idiots. 0.99

00:02:46.660 Because really, if it's legal, they should all be doing it, or it should not be legal.

00:02:52.720 Pick one.

00:02:53.760 But I don't want idiots running the country.

00:02:56.360 If it's legal, do it, document it, show it to us.

00:03:01.060 Then I might think you have some, you know, ability to predict.

00:03:04.380 But if you're not doing this, and it's totally legal, and it's obvious, and it's free money, and 435 members of Congress, 75 smart ones.

00:03:16.800 And I'm only kidding a little bit.

00:03:18.960 Now, I'd like to think that the other members resisted for ethical reasons.

00:03:25.760 What do you think?

00:03:27.060 Do you think the other members of Congress resisted for ethical reasons?

00:03:31.900 Maybe 3 or 4 of them.

00:03:37.380 I have a feeling they just aren't good at investing.

00:03:40.320 Because it's hard to explain otherwise.

00:03:43.320 All right.

00:03:45.260 Well, it's getting harder and harder to be a Democrat these days.

00:03:49.200 Now that the Democrats have decided that the Build Back Better bill might go on the shelf.

00:03:55.720 Let's just put that back on the shelf.

00:03:57.540 We tried, but we're going to have to put that back on the shelf.

00:04:03.320 So they thought instead of that, they'll try to pivot and try to get something done.

00:04:08.580 And they'll move that to the election reform.

00:04:12.220 Try to get something done.

00:04:13.440 A little election reform.

00:04:14.600 Does the election reform include the ability to fully audit our votes in real time, or very quickly,

00:04:25.760 so that we can have full transparency in our elections?

00:04:29.740 No.

00:04:30.800 Of course not.

00:04:32.560 Do you know why?

00:04:34.200 Because there's no politician who wants that.

00:04:37.280 Do you know why no politician wants actual good reform?

00:04:42.360 Because everybody who got elected, wait for it, wait for the big reveal.

00:04:50.120 Everybody who is currently elected, got elected under the current situation.

00:04:58.240 That's it.

00:04:59.700 Why would anybody want to change the thing that got them elected?

00:05:02.880 Nobody wants to change the thing that got them elected.

00:05:05.380 The people who should have nothing to do with election reform are people who got elected under the current system.

00:05:14.440 That's the people who should be recused.

00:05:17.540 We've actually delegated the job the most, I would say, is it too far to say a sacred mission?

00:05:27.100 Is that too far?

00:05:27.960 I mean, the core engine of the democratic republic in which we live, the driving engine of the most important country in the world, according to Americans.

00:05:42.100 And we've delegated it to the only people who should not be involved in that in any way.

00:05:47.040 Are we happy with that?

00:05:50.300 Yeah, we're acting like that's perfectly natural.

00:05:54.000 Has anybody brought that up but me?

00:05:56.080 That the only people who shouldn't be working on this are exactly the people we delegated it to?

00:06:01.020 Right?

00:06:01.280 Who else even said that out loud?

00:06:03.580 Nobody, right?

00:06:05.520 There's a shower running in the room next to me.

00:06:07.720 That's the noise you hear.

00:06:10.260 I'm sorry.

00:06:11.060 Somebody else did bring it up.

00:06:12.720 Matt.

00:06:13.680 Matt over on Locals.

00:06:14.920 Brought it up.

00:06:16.580 And I'm disappointed in all of you for not listening to Matt.

00:06:20.320 So good on you, Matt.

00:06:22.280 You were there early.

00:06:25.880 So I love the fact that Kyrsten Sinema is not supporting the filibuster reform.

00:06:32.820 Under the perfectly good theory that if you do that, it's just going to rip apart the republic, basically.

00:06:40.080 And everybody will just undo what the other party did and it'll just be a mess.

00:06:45.540 So good for her.

00:06:48.460 What are the odds that one of the people involved in two movies on one screen, her last name would be?

00:06:56.120 Cinema.

00:06:57.960 Cinema.

00:06:59.480 Involved in two movies on one screen.

00:07:02.580 Cinema.

00:07:03.020 Well, if you didn't think we lived in a simulation, there's a story coming up that will prove that we are.

00:07:14.320 Wait for that.

00:07:15.200 Okay, I have a new way to determine BS.

00:07:22.560 I'm going to add this to my bullshit detector.

00:07:26.560 Ways to determine if somebody is telling you the truth.

00:07:29.360 And I saw this example in the Joe Rogan interview with Dr. McCullough.

00:07:36.720 Now, I want to be very careful.

00:07:39.080 I'm not saying that Dr. McCullough is wrong about anything.

00:07:45.760 All right?

00:07:46.460 Can you hear that clearly?

00:07:48.080 I'm not saying he's wrong about anything.

00:07:51.040 I'm going to tell you that he flipped a switch that I consider a strong tell for lying or being wrong.

00:07:59.220 Lying is imagining I could read somebody's mind.

00:08:02.360 That's not what's happening.

00:08:03.180 So, I have no information that he would be lying about anything.

00:08:08.000 But, a strong indication that what he's saying is not necessarily true, which doesn't mean he's lying, right?

00:08:15.000 People could have opinions that don't pan out.

00:08:18.140 But here, it goes like this.

00:08:22.320 Scott, can you give me the evidence to support your point?

00:08:28.240 And I say, can I give you evidence?

00:08:30.280 There are thousands of citations in several books.

00:08:34.860 And it's all laid out there.

00:08:38.860 Is it true?

00:08:40.120 Am I telling you the truth?

00:08:41.820 Or am I bullshitting?

00:08:44.840 I'll do it again.

00:08:46.520 I'm being interviewed.

00:08:47.740 Scott, give me the evidence for your point of view.

00:08:51.240 Evidence? Are you kidding me?

00:08:52.580 There's so much evidence, we're swimming in evidence.

00:08:55.260 There's like thousands of studies and citations and details and footnotes.

00:08:59.960 They're across four different books, and you should read them all.

00:09:04.860 And if you do, you're going to see it too.

00:09:09.680 Would you believe me?

00:09:11.160 I hope not.

00:09:12.340 I hope that you're smart enough not to believe that.

00:09:15.260 Here's what the truth would look like, just hypothetically.

00:09:19.440 Scott, give me the evidence supporting your point of view.

00:09:23.080 All right, well, I'm saying there's a conspiracy.

00:09:26.420 There's an email that shows that person one talked to person two, who was in charge of this decision.

00:09:33.400 So we can see the email, it's been confirmed, it's real.

00:09:36.380 And this email says, go ahead and do this bad thing.

00:09:39.560 And then the person who did the bad thing replied to the email and said, I'm going to do the bad thing.

00:09:44.140 And then we measured the thing to see if it was bad, and sure enough, it happened.

00:09:47.400 And that's what an honest opinion looks like.

00:09:55.120 Do you want to see again what a not...

00:09:59.260 I don't want to say honest, because I have no evidence that the good doctor is saying anything he doesn't believe.

00:10:05.360 I do believe he's saying stuff he believes.

00:10:07.280 So, it's one thing to be wrong.

00:10:11.800 It's another thing to be lying, and nobody's accusing him of that.

00:10:16.800 At least I'm not.

00:10:19.500 So, for all of you who are pretty sure that Dr. McCullough has the goods,

00:10:24.740 and that Joe Rogan heard them, and you heard McCullough tell him to Joe Rogan,

00:10:29.960 can you explain for me why it can't be summarized?

00:10:34.200 Here's the other...

00:10:37.560 Basically, here's the summary of this bullshit detection point.

00:10:42.320 Anything that can't be summarized isn't true.

00:10:49.640 Watch for that. 0.62

00:10:51.220 Anything that can't be summarized isn't true.

00:10:58.520 Watch how often that's predictive.

00:11:01.120 All right.

00:11:01.360 Ted Cruz has an anti-critical race theory e-book,

00:11:07.180 had a fight back against teaching it in schools.

00:11:11.840 Wait.

00:11:12.920 Wait.

00:11:13.580 Are there any Democrats watching?

00:11:16.320 If there are any Democrats watching, what did you just say in your head?

00:11:19.940 CRT in schools?

00:11:22.200 Nobody's teaching CRT in schools.

00:11:25.280 Duh.

00:11:26.360 You idiots on the right.

00:11:28.020 You idiots.

00:11:29.400 You fools.

00:11:30.280 How many times do we have to tell you that CRT is a college-level course?

00:11:36.660 If that, it's based on some theories that are certainly not being taught in the K-12.

00:11:42.200 There is no critical race theory being taught in K-12.

00:11:46.060 Say, every Democrat who has been hypnotized by the news.

00:11:50.480 Is it true?

00:11:51.260 Is it true that CRT is not being taught in K-12 schools, period?

00:11:57.540 Not anywhere.

00:11:59.360 True or false?

00:12:01.360 True.

00:12:02.640 It's true.

00:12:05.180 It's 100% true.

00:12:06.380 How many Republicans disagree with that?

00:12:13.020 It is true.

00:12:13.980 There's no critical race theory being taught in any K-12 school.

00:12:19.600 Here's a second thing that's also true.

00:12:22.080 The concepts that are related to or come from critical race theory

00:12:26.320 are being taught in K-12 in a fairly widespread manner.

00:12:29.800 True or false?

00:12:34.580 Things that overlap with and are similar to and may be suggested by,

00:12:39.320 perhaps influenced in some sense by,

00:12:43.140 are being taught in K-12 in a fairly widespread way.

00:12:47.320 True.

00:12:47.760 So there's your two movies.

00:12:50.760 Or your two Kirsten cinemas, as I like to say.

00:12:54.620 Or Kirsten cinemas.

00:12:56.340 Sorry.

00:12:57.900 Yeah.

00:12:58.860 In one, there's no critical race theory in K-12.

00:13:02.100 And in the other one, there's plenty of it.

00:13:04.100 They just don't use that label because it's the wrong label.

00:13:08.440 So the Republicans are walking directly into the trap

00:13:12.120 that the Democrats have set for themselves

00:13:14.880 because they fall into their own trap.

00:13:17.220 by believing their own bullshit.

00:13:19.300 Here's what the Democrats, or the, I'm sorry.

00:13:22.080 This is what the Ted Cruz's of the world should do

00:13:24.660 if it is their intention to fight against the critical race theory stuff.

00:13:32.380 Yeah.

00:13:33.400 Yeah, Anthony, I see your point.

00:13:38.320 Here's what the Republicans should do.

00:13:40.260 Instead of saying we want to get rid of critical race theory in schools,

00:13:43.960 they should say we want to get rid of teachings that overlap with critical race theory

00:13:50.340 or teachings that are inspired by or teachings that are, let's say,

00:13:57.360 familiar or similar to in some ways.

00:14:00.560 So you need to go at it that way.

00:14:02.120 I'd add the modifiers.

00:14:04.020 Because if you don't add modifiers, people are just talking about the word choice.

00:14:07.680 And there's no argument there at all.

00:14:09.720 Ron DeSantis is also in this fight.

00:14:12.900 Have I mentioned that Ron DeSantis is like a frickin' success machine Republican-wise?

00:14:19.980 Right?

00:14:20.200 Democrats will disagree with that characterization.

00:14:23.180 But if you're a Republican, I'm not, so I'm just speaking as an observer here.

00:14:30.120 But if you're a Republican, Ron DeSantis is just a machine.

00:14:34.840 He's just pumping out one perfect move after another.

00:14:39.820 Am I wrong?

00:14:41.140 Does anybody disagree with that characterization?

00:14:43.780 I've never seen anything like it, to be honest.

00:14:46.540 I've never seen a politician just walk up to bat about once every two weeks

00:14:54.440 and just hit a, like a rope.

00:14:59.180 Like, he's just hitting, sorry, this is a baseball reference.

00:15:03.900 But it's like he's getting up to bat and he's hitting the first pitch

00:15:07.500 like a solid double into the outfield.

00:15:11.460 And then you think to yourself, well, that's something people can do

00:15:15.680 two out of ten times if they're really good.

00:15:18.300 Then he gets up to bat and he hits another one.

00:15:19.960 You're like, well, two in a row.

00:15:22.380 Anybody can get lucky.

00:15:24.040 And he's up to, like, what, 14 of these in a row or something?

00:15:28.440 Where he'll find some national topic that at least, you know, his party,

00:15:32.940 the Republicans, are worked up about.

00:15:34.800 And then just come up with the perfect response.

00:15:37.080 And so now he's got this, what is it called,

00:15:42.400 the anti-woke bill or something like that.

00:15:46.600 And so they're going to have some legislation proposed anyway

00:15:49.720 to make it possible for parents to sue, I think, the school

00:15:54.420 if there's any critical race theory-related stuff there.

00:16:01.000 Yeah, Scott's sports analogies are the worst.

00:16:03.780 It's true.

00:16:04.900 It's a frozen rope.

00:16:07.080 Yeah, so he's hitting frozen ropes into the gap.

00:16:13.480 How about that?

00:16:15.000 Yeah, he's hitting a frozen rope into the gap.

00:16:18.080 Okay.

00:16:19.460 If you like your sports analogies.

00:16:22.140 That's an analogy on an analogy.

00:16:24.540 The frozen rope and then it's sort of, yeah, it's a nested analogy.

00:16:30.140 Very difficult to do.

00:16:31.120 And so DeSantis is framing it as a no tax dollars to teach kids to hate each other.

00:16:38.460 How good is that?

00:16:40.040 How good is that framing?

00:16:42.020 No tax dollars to teach kids to hate each other.

00:16:45.220 It's perfect.

00:16:46.880 Yeah.

00:16:47.100 You couldn't approve on that.

00:16:48.520 I don't think so.

00:16:49.720 That is as good as it gets.

00:16:52.220 Simple.

00:16:52.720 Direct.

00:16:54.720 Now, is Ron DeSantis full of bullshit?

00:17:00.000 Well, remember what bullshit looks like?

00:17:03.380 It would have looked like, well, you know, there's a concept of the thing and it's in a book

00:17:08.060 and somebody talked about it and there are 15 citations and if you have the time you should go look into it.

00:17:14.600 Nope.

00:17:15.480 He said directly, no tax dollars to teach kids to hate each other.

00:17:19.580 Is that a fair characterization?

00:17:22.780 It is.

00:17:24.400 It is.

00:17:25.340 It's not the only thing that it teaches, right?

00:17:28.160 You know, let's give some credit to the intention.

00:17:32.500 The intention, I think, is to make the world a better place.

00:17:35.340 It just doesn't do it in a way that has greater benefits than costs, according to Republicans.

00:17:43.600 All right.

00:17:44.240 Watching CNN spin bullshit into gold is so entertaining.

00:17:50.060 Are you watching the January 6th coverage?

00:17:54.620 The coverage will produce absolutely nothing and CNN will treat it like there was something.

00:18:02.460 And I'm watching the opinion people try to, you know, try to cook this into something.

00:18:08.360 And it's basically they're cooking with water.

00:18:10.440 They've got a little cup of water and they're trying to make dinner with it.

00:18:15.240 And they're thinking, all right, where's the other ingredients for my soup?

00:18:19.560 And the network's saying, well, this time no ingredients.

00:18:24.540 We're just going to give you a cup of water.

00:18:27.280 But it's your job to make people who are watching think that cup of water is full of beef.

00:18:34.480 But it's just a cup of water.

00:18:37.520 And so I would like to, if I may, interview my Democrat operative.

00:18:43.500 His name is Dale.

00:18:44.780 Some of you know him.

00:18:45.900 Some of you may be new to him.

00:18:48.180 And Dale will explain to me the breaking stories, the blockbusters that just recently came out about January 6th.

00:18:58.060 Dale, are you busy?

00:19:00.920 Just come over here for a minute.

00:19:02.160 I would like to ask you a few questions about the January 6th blockbuster reports.

00:19:09.580 Glad to help.

00:19:10.660 Glad to help.

00:19:11.640 What's your question?

00:19:13.280 Well, I keep seeing there's some kind of blockbuster news.

00:19:17.840 But then I read the news and I'm not actually seeing the blockbuster.

00:19:22.800 Can you help me connect the dots, Dale?

00:19:26.500 Simple.

00:19:27.640 Simple.

00:19:28.480 Oh, Republicans.

00:19:30.400 Am I right?

00:19:33.680 Am I right?

00:19:35.020 They're all dumb.

00:19:36.260 They're all dumb.

00:19:37.040 Let me explain it to you in the simplest way so that even a Republican can understand it.

00:19:43.440 It goes like this.

00:19:45.340 There was an insurrection on January 6th.

00:19:48.400 It's now proven, and the proof positive is that there was an email from Hannity to Mark Meadows saying that the president should call off the riots and therefore insurrection.

00:20:06.120 Okay, Hannity sent an email, but that doesn't really seem to be in any way related to your point that there was an insurrection.

00:20:21.900 There are two facts, or there's a claim and then there's a fact.

00:20:26.280 Can you just, like, connect the claim to the fact?

00:20:31.240 I'm missing the connecting tissue there.

00:20:35.560 Republicans.

00:20:37.040 Am I right?

00:20:38.780 But I don't know if I can make this any simpler.

00:20:42.040 There was an email.

00:20:43.900 It's a blockbuster.

00:20:45.100 It's proof that President Trump is an insurrectionist because there's an email, and if one email isn't enough, there were three.

00:20:56.580 Three emails.

00:20:58.760 There were three emails, and President Trump is an insurrectionist.

00:21:03.500 Blockbuster proof.

00:21:05.000 He's a liar.

00:21:07.560 You get it now, right?

00:21:08.700 My problem is that the one email didn't seem connected to the point, but having three of those emails that are also not connected to the point you're making,

00:21:25.120 I'm not seeing how that bolsters the argument.

00:21:31.120 Is that because you're watching all the fake news on Fox News?

00:21:35.160 I call it faux news.

00:21:37.100 Faux news.

00:21:37.660 They don't even know it.

00:21:40.700 And scene.

00:21:44.960 I believe that's what's going on here.

00:21:49.080 Spinning bullshit into gold over on CNN.

00:21:53.280 All right, let me tell you a story that proves the simulation exists.

00:21:58.240 Was there a topic you were expecting me to talk about this morning?

00:22:01.420 Was there something that happened yesterday that you're thinking, I'll bet Scott's going to mention that today.

00:22:09.760 Anything?

00:22:10.680 Well, let me tell you a little story in case you missed it.

00:22:13.460 So yesterday, I said to myself, man, I am so overstimulated.

00:22:19.200 Talking about the news, I did two live streams yesterday, and my head was just full of stuff, and I had several issues I had to work on.

00:22:29.500 I had a whole bunch of scheduling things, and I just said to myself, I'm going to take a day off of Twitter.

00:22:35.500 So after I did my morning stuff, I thought, I'm going to go for a long walk.

00:22:42.500 And for the first time, and I don't remember how long, I'm just going to not check Twitter for maybe the rest of the night.

00:22:49.560 Very unusual.

00:22:50.300 I can't even think of a time I've ever done that.

00:22:53.900 And as I was walking, I was feeling great, because once the stimulation was behind me, I was just outdoors in the quiet.

00:23:02.080 So I'm taking a nice walk to clear my mind, and I had this distinct feeling, which I've had before, that I was in a simulation,

00:23:12.020 and that I was an avatar, and that I was being watched by perhaps the creator of the simulation, or the game player, or whatever's happening.

00:23:24.920 And so, I talked out loud to the creators of the simulation, and I said, this is actually true, by the way.

00:23:34.240 Everything I tell you is true.

00:23:36.320 I swear I wouldn't make this up.

00:23:38.240 And I'll tell you, I'm never going to lie to you if I tell you, I'm telling you the truth.

00:23:44.260 Like, if I say directly, you don't have to worry about it.

00:23:47.300 Like, this is real.

00:23:49.500 So, I said to my, I actually talked out loud, and I said,

00:23:55.780 if this is a simulation, I need some evidence.

00:24:00.860 And I said specifically, if it's really a simulation, I'm going to need to show that I can author it.

00:24:11.020 In other words, I can make something happen that only the simulation could explain.

00:24:18.520 So, that actually happened yesterday in the afternoon.

00:24:21.600 And I stayed off Twitter for a few hours, and I was feeling good about it, and I got a text

00:24:26.080 that directed me to look at Twitter.

00:24:32.160 How many times has that ever happened to me?

00:24:36.400 Almost never, right?

00:24:38.820 Almost never do I get a text telling me to look at Twitter.

00:24:43.580 Because usually, I'm on Twitter, so I've already seen it.

00:24:46.640 Somebody would just DM me on Twitter or something.

00:24:48.720 And so, I looked at the message, and it was a message that Elon Musk had added in the string of tweets

00:24:59.340 about Elizabeth Warren, where he was calling her Senator Karen.

00:25:03.080 We were all having a good laugh about that yesterday.

00:25:05.820 Somebody asked him something about, I don't know, me or Dilbert, and Elon Musk tweeted this.

00:25:12.740 He said, I love Dilbert!

00:25:14.260 You use it all the time to illustrate that we're doing something wrong at Tesla, SpaceX.

00:25:20.680 If it could be a Dilbert cartoon in real life.

00:25:23.660 This happens more often than I'd like.

00:25:25.980 Sigh.

00:25:27.620 Now, of course, when the richest person tweets something about you, in this case about Dilbert,

00:25:36.100 a lot of people noticed it and called it out to me.

00:25:39.960 Now, you are aware that the person most famous for promoting the idea that we live in a simulation

00:25:49.140 is Elon Musk, right?

00:25:51.640 He's never tweeted at me before.

00:25:54.400 And the one day that I'm waiting for a sign that we live in a simulation,

00:25:59.300 Elon Musk tweets at me.

00:26:00.960 Now, that by itself wouldn't be the biggest coincidence in the world, right?

00:26:06.480 I mean, coincidences happen.

00:26:09.780 But it gets better.

00:26:11.720 Twitter user Prane Pathol, I hope I'm pronouncing that somewhere close to the name.

00:26:19.700 He tweets this at Elon.

00:26:22.440 He says, do you sometimes feel like you're living in a Dilbert cartoon simulation?

00:26:27.820 Elon tweets back, yeah.

00:26:31.020 Exclamation mark.

00:26:34.640 So the person most famous for saying we live in a simulation

00:26:39.540 is tweeting in front of the world that he feels like he's living in a simulation that I created.

00:26:48.820 This has really happened.

00:26:51.620 I'm not making up any of this.

00:26:53.540 This actually happened.

00:26:54.420 So after I saw Elon's tweet, I think it was like, I don't know, some, it was in the middle

00:27:01.900 of the morning, which you call the night.

00:27:05.160 Those of you who like to sleep in, you call it night.

00:27:08.200 But I think people like Elon Musk and people like me who hate sleep, we call that the morning.

00:27:15.920 I think I got up this morning at 12.30.

00:27:19.220 A little earlier than usual.

00:27:22.980 So I was up tweeting and stuff, working.

00:27:26.740 And so I tweeted back at Elon when he said that he does feel like he lives in a Dilbert cartoon simulation.

00:27:33.360 I tweeted this back.

00:27:35.080 I said, too soon.

00:27:36.660 You aren't scheduled to become self-aware until after I finished drawing the Mars colony.

00:27:43.240 So that's out there now.

00:27:44.540 I don't even know what to say about this story.

00:27:51.580 You know, this is one of those stories where you just put it out there and you just have

00:27:55.380 to sort of accept that it really happened.

00:28:00.560 So that was pretty weird.

00:28:02.980 Anyway, that was the favorite story of the day.

00:28:09.720 So there's a graph on Twitter.

00:28:16.000 Now, if it's a graph and it's on Twitter, what do you know about it?

00:28:20.000 Let's see.

00:28:20.520 It's information about the pandemic and it's a graph and it's on Twitter.

00:28:27.480 So therefore, it's totally true, right?

00:28:33.200 Because it's a graph.

00:28:34.860 I don't know if I mentioned it's on Twitter, but it's not just a graph.

00:28:39.040 It's a graph on Twitter.

00:28:41.120 So that's completely credible.

00:28:44.740 And this graph was something I'd been wanting to see for a long time, which is the difference

00:28:50.320 in the death rates from COVID between Republicans and Democrats.

00:28:54.980 And somebody found a way to do that, actually, which was to use the voting records of different

00:28:59.940 counties as the proxy and then look at the infection rates in those counties versus

00:29:04.880 Bloor counties, et cetera.

00:29:06.520 And it showed that most recently, the Republican line of COVID deaths is way above, way above

00:29:15.400 the Democrats.

00:29:17.340 What's that tell you?

00:29:20.200 What does that tell you?

00:29:24.600 Did I mention that it's a graph?

00:29:26.700 It's a graph, but it's not just a graph.

00:29:28.860 It's on Twitter.

00:29:31.360 So I hope you're not doubting the credibility of it.

00:29:35.720 What?

00:29:36.860 Oh, my God, you're so skeptical.

00:29:39.520 Did I tell you it's a graph and it's on Twitter?

00:29:42.520 I mean, if you hear those two things, we should be done here.

00:29:46.180 That is a fact, my friends.

00:29:48.480 Even Snopes will tell you.

00:29:50.600 They just give up.

00:29:51.560 If they see it's a graph on Twitter, they're, oh, that's true.

00:29:54.380 It's probably true.

00:29:55.160 It's a graph.

00:29:55.780 It's on Twitter.

00:29:57.080 Well, here are a few things that might be wrong with that graph on Twitter.

00:30:00.480 Number one, if you monkey with the y-axis, you can make small differences look like really

00:30:08.660 big ones.

00:30:10.200 Do you remember the Democrats telling us that the gas prices have dropped precipitously?

00:30:16.160 Well, if you monkey with the y-axis, it looks like that. 0.99

00:30:20.380 Two cents.

00:30:22.040 You know, only went down, I guess, a dime so far.

00:30:25.080 So you can make anything look bigger.

00:30:27.420 So that's the first thing you need to know.

00:30:29.380 Second thing you need to know is they didn't adjust for age.

00:30:33.680 There's no adjustment for age.

00:30:36.300 And at least in one state, I saw some data.

00:30:39.920 I think it was Texas.

00:30:41.000 But let's say this isn't too far from the rest of the world.

00:30:43.580 The Republican voters are close to eight years older on average than Democrat voters.

00:30:50.700 Would eight years, if that were the only difference, eight years of difference, would that explain

00:30:56.460 a substantial difference in outcomes?

00:31:01.460 Well, eight years wouldn't be the biggest difference, would it?

00:31:05.280 You know, 20 years would be pretty noticeable for sure.

00:31:07.440 But eight years would be a smaller difference, you would predict.

00:31:13.320 But you could make that look pretty big, couldn't you?

00:31:15.760 Just adjust the y-axis until it looks big.

00:31:20.300 How about weight?

00:31:24.520 We know that weight is a comorbidity.

00:31:27.040 Somebody said nine out of ten of the red states are, you know, the fattest in the country.

00:31:31.960 If the only thing you were measuring was how people did by weight, would that graph look

00:31:41.520 exactly the same?

00:31:43.540 It might, especially if you play with the y-axis, right? 1.00

00:31:48.220 So, I would love to see, and then I asked, in response to that tweet, I asked, I'd like

00:31:55.720 to see the same graph except by race.

00:31:58.540 Suppose they did the same thing except by race, and do it the same way, you know, use

00:32:04.400 representative voting clusters or something, or just, I guess, census data, to find out

00:32:11.520 if the areas with the most black population have higher infections or lower.

00:32:16.540 Now, what do you expect they would find?

00:32:19.740 Now, if I'm right about this, and I believe you get kicked off of Twitter if you say this

00:32:23.940 wrong, so if I say something that's not true here, my understanding is that I could get

00:32:29.700 kicked off of Twitter or blocked or something.

00:32:33.920 And one of the things that I think is not allowed is to suggest that any ethnic groups have a different

00:32:40.940 outcome, which I don't entirely understand because I need a fact check on this, but my understanding

00:32:48.040 is that it was mainstream understanding that there was a different outcome, and that black

00:32:54.220 Americans were having a worse time of it.

00:32:57.200 I thought that was just well understood, but give me a fact check, so I have to act like

00:33:02.000 I don't know that's true, or else I'll get bumped off of Twitter, I think, according to the

00:33:06.860 guidelines, if I understand them right.

00:33:08.580 So, what would happen if you saw two graphs, hypothetically, they're graphs on Twitter,

00:33:18.080 they're both graphs on Twitter, one of them is just the one you saw, the Republicans versus

00:33:22.720 Democrats, showing that Republicans have worse outcomes, according to that graph.

00:33:27.040 That's a graph on Twitter, so you know it's very, very credible.

00:33:29.620 But suppose you did that side-by-side with one by race, and specifically compared just black

00:33:38.540 and white, just to keep it simple, and suppose it showed a similarly appalling difference,

00:33:46.680 like an alarming difference in outcome, where the black Americans were dying at, you know,

00:33:51.560 twice the rate or something.

00:33:54.700 How would the news interpret those two outcomes?

00:33:57.440 Well, let me tell you, they would look at the Republicans versus Democrat, and they'd

00:34:01.180 say, well, that's proof that Republicans are stupid, because they're not getting the vaccine.

00:34:06.440 This would be the Democrat spin, right?

00:34:08.380 Well, all those Republicans are dying, because they're not getting the vaccination, because

00:34:13.080 they're anti-science, right?

00:34:15.020 That's how the Democrats would spin it.

00:34:17.120 How would they spin the one that showed that the black Americans are less vaccinated than

00:34:21.880 white Americans?

00:34:23.280 They would spin that as less access.

00:34:30.020 They would spin that as racism.

00:34:32.360 Why is it so racist that we can't get more vaccinations to black Americans?

00:34:37.180 Right?

00:34:38.380 Those two things would just be interpreted completely differently.

00:34:41.960 I don't know that either of them would be right, but you know that that's the way it

00:34:45.660 would look.

00:34:45.920 All right, that is all the excitement that I had planned for today.

00:34:54.720 I feel like there was one other thing that was happening that I'm forgetting about.

00:34:59.240 Is there anything else happening?

00:35:00.660 Is there anything else happening?

00:35:02.260 Spot on today.

00:35:11.760 Thank you.

00:35:14.500 Please review remdesivir.

00:35:17.140 Why?

00:35:17.720 Don't we know it doesn't work?

00:35:19.280 Is there anything to review about remdesivir?

00:35:22.000 They thought it might work.

00:35:24.120 It doesn't, right?

00:35:25.100 Isn't that the whole story?

00:35:27.800 All right.

00:35:28.160 How many of you think ivermectin works against COVID?

00:35:37.080 And how many of you have heard the hypothesis from pretty smart people that it may look like

00:35:46.100 it worked because of a combination of some large studies that were actually fraudulent or

00:35:51.520 didn't exist, plus the experience with countries where they had some internal worms?

00:35:59.720 So I guess if you've got a parasite in your stomach and you've got COVID, you're more likely

00:36:04.380 to die.

00:36:05.640 So the people who took the ivermectin probably were getting rid of a comorbidity, if that's

00:36:10.460 the right word for it, instead of getting rid of the virus.

00:36:14.080 But that would give you the same improvement in life expectancy.

00:36:17.920 So how many of you knew that, that there is an explanation of why it would appear that

00:36:26.480 ivermectin works while it doesn't?

00:36:29.600 Now, I'm not saying it doesn't.

00:36:30.940 I'm saying that's the official take on it right now.

00:36:34.900 How many of you are aware of that?

00:36:36.320 So I'm just checking your bubble.

00:36:38.680 In the comments, how many of you had heard that ivermectin might look like it works and

00:36:43.940 that those are the reasons?

00:36:44.840 It's a couple of big fake studies that are skewing the rest, along with the ivermectin

00:36:52.840 cleaning up the comorbidity of the parasites in the stomachs.

00:36:57.880 Seeing a lot of no's.

00:37:00.300 A lot of no's.

00:37:00.980 I only heard this a few days ago.

00:37:05.280 So I think Scott Alexander apparently was talking about it.

00:37:09.440 And I tend to listen to him.

00:37:13.920 He's one of the smartest people on the internet.

00:37:21.840 So it must be true.

00:37:23.260 Well, I'm not saying I know it's true.

00:37:25.820 I'm saying that now we have a pretty reasonable-sounding hypothesis for why it could look like it's

00:37:33.460 working and not.

00:37:34.340 Because here's the thing.

00:37:37.080 The longer we go without even one city or municipality completely getting rid of COVID

00:37:43.680 with either hydroxychloroquine, with some other stuff, or with ivermectin,

00:37:50.620 the longer we go without even one example of a city, a county, somebody just squashing it.

00:37:57.520 And the odds of it really being effective against COVID, specifically, are pretty low.

00:38:06.860 I would say I'd put the odds of both of them at 10%.

00:38:11.720 I wouldn't go to zero.

00:38:14.080 I could be surprised.

00:38:15.400 But I'd say the odds that either hydroxychloroquine or, in any confrontation with anything else,

00:38:20.360 or ivermectin works against coronavirus, I started down at well over 50% when we were first hearing about it.

00:38:31.780 When I heard that there were lots of studies and that the meta-analysis would make it look good,

00:38:37.320 I said, you know, I don't really trust meta-analysis.

00:38:41.580 But I'd give it a 50% chance.

00:38:44.660 Certainly enough that I would have tried it.

00:38:46.240 You know, if I'd gotten COVID when Joe Rogan got COVID, oh, I'd take the ivermectin.

00:38:54.840 That was the right risk management decision.

00:38:58.100 I think his doctor advised him correctly.

00:39:00.380 That doesn't mean it worked.

00:39:02.620 But it was the right decision, you know, from the perspective of looking back.

00:39:08.400 Now, if it happened to me today,

00:39:11.080 and I'd heard this stuff about, well, it doesn't look like the indications of it working are true,

00:39:19.500 would I take it today if there's only a 10% chance?

00:39:26.980 I don't know.

00:39:28.480 I don't know.

00:39:29.160 There's still almost zero side effects, right?

00:39:32.100 So if there's almost zero side effects and 10% chance it might work,

00:39:36.780 and I'm not saying it would work 10%, like it would work a little bit.

00:39:41.240 I'm not saying that.

00:39:42.240 I'm saying there's only a 10% chance it has any effect that you'd notice.

00:39:48.860 I don't know.

00:39:50.060 That'd be a toss-up.

00:39:51.500 You know, at 10%, I guess maybe if my doctor said so, I'd probably try it,

00:39:58.260 just because there's no downside.

00:40:00.000 But I wouldn't be counting on it, that's for sure.

00:40:05.000 I definitely wouldn't be putting the Regeneron off.

00:40:07.980 Oh, by the way, an update on my friend who had a bad turn with COVID.

00:40:16.000 He was denied Regeneron until about 10 days into it

00:40:21.340 because there was some guideline about when you can give it early and when you can't.

00:40:25.700 But they bent the rules, and he got the Regeneron.

00:40:30.360 And I don't know if it was the Regeneron that regenerated him,

00:40:33.800 but that was about the turning point, and now he's on the mend.

00:40:39.760 You know, he got a little lingering symptoms, but I think the virus is cleared.

00:40:45.600 Yeah, that was Regeneron.

00:40:48.100 All right.

00:40:50.400 What about hydroxychloroquine?

00:40:52.120 Was there any research with zinc?

00:40:53.660 Well, I am aware, we talked about this extensively in the beginning,

00:40:57.860 that it looked like the studies were intentionally done to fail.

00:41:02.360 Would you agree with that?

00:41:04.300 And you can imagine if you were a big vaccine company

00:41:07.040 and you didn't want these things to succeed,

00:41:10.000 you would actually fund tests that you knew would fail.

00:41:13.340 So you'd look for somebody who had a test structure

00:41:16.820 that by its nature it was going to show it didn't work,

00:41:20.280 and you would fund that one.

00:41:22.980 That's what I'd do.

00:41:24.060 If I were a dirty trickster, you know, pharma, big pharma company,

00:41:28.340 that's what I'd do.

00:41:29.480 Now, if you're wondering,

00:41:31.140 would big pharma do a horrible, horrible thing,

00:41:33.800 you have to watch the special Dope Sick

00:41:36.440 about the Sackler family and Purdue and OxyContin.

00:41:41.240 If you think there's anything they wouldn't do,

00:41:43.960 there's nothing they wouldn't do.

00:41:46.500 They meaning there's somebody in that universe

00:41:49.360 that would do almost anything.

00:41:51.300 Right?

00:41:52.140 So that doesn't mean it happened.

00:41:55.660 I'll tell you my current best opinion about the vaccinations.

00:41:59.180 Are you ready?

00:41:59.460 So this is a modified sort of evolving opinion.

00:42:06.360 My current best opinion,

00:42:08.520 and there seemed to be, you know, a binary going on here,

00:42:11.500 one that the risks of the vaccines are not worth it,

00:42:15.540 and the other is that the risks are low

00:42:17.460 compared to the COVID itself,

00:42:19.060 so they're not just worth it,

00:42:20.560 they're really, really worth it.

00:42:22.200 So the binary is it's worthless, 1.00

00:42:24.380 or it's pretty great even though it's not a true vaccine.

00:42:27.520 It still has many benefits.

00:42:30.080 Here's my take.

00:42:32.180 I think it might be the most dangerous vaccine we've ever had,

00:42:36.720 but I think the people who did the science

00:42:39.660 probably thought it worked.

00:42:41.840 That's what I think.

00:42:43.420 I think that the actual scientists who did the studies

00:42:47.100 for these big companies,

00:42:49.180 I think they believed it worked,

00:42:50.960 meaning that the benefit was far greater than the risk.

00:42:54.280 I do think they may have.

00:42:57.120 They may have underplayed the risks.

00:43:00.940 Is there anybody who would disagree with that,

00:43:03.920 that the pharma companies would or have underplayed the risk?

00:43:08.440 What do you think?

00:43:10.780 I think that could be almost certainly true,

00:43:14.280 because that would be every company acting exactly like every company acts.

00:43:18.540 It's not even an indictment of the pharma industry.

00:43:21.680 That would just be a statement of what companies do.

00:43:24.320 They minimize their problems and they exaggerate their benefits.

00:43:28.880 I don't think it could be that different with pharma.

00:43:31.680 They must be exaggerating their benefits and hiding to some extent.

00:43:35.820 You know, there's a limit beyond which it becomes purely criminal.

00:43:41.600 Here's what I don't think happened.

00:43:46.280 I don't think that anybody was involved

00:43:49.920 in a money-making big pharma scheme

00:43:53.580 that could be easily detected later.

00:43:58.780 That part is a stretch for me,

00:44:00.980 although people do crazy stuff,

00:44:02.880 so they do things that are not good for themselves.

00:44:04.880 But it would be unlikely.

00:44:08.480 Generally speaking, when somebody does something underhanded,

00:44:12.960 when there are shenanigans,

00:44:14.940 they at least do things that they think they can get away with.

00:44:18.440 Would you agree with the premise

00:44:19.720 that at least if you're talking about not career criminals

00:44:23.800 who can do some crazy stuff,

00:44:25.560 but I'm talking about people who wear science jackets and neckties,

00:44:31.780 that group of people,

00:44:34.200 you know, the educated segment of the society,

00:44:37.180 if they're going to do something that's a huge crime,

00:44:40.060 they're going to try pretty hard

00:44:41.500 to make sure nobody ever finds out, right?

00:44:43.380 That's sort of important in the crime.

00:44:47.940 You don't steal a bunch of stuff

00:44:49.520 that you know you're going to get caught at.

00:44:51.600 You don't murder somebody on video, right?

00:44:54.940 At the very least, you're going to try pretty hard

00:44:57.560 not to do a crime that you know you're going to get caught for.

00:45:01.940 Now, suppose a bunch of the people

00:45:04.280 at one of these big pharma companies knew,

00:45:08.240 and I don't think this is the case,

00:45:10.180 but hypothetically,

00:45:11.080 suppose they knew that the vaccines were worse

00:45:13.060 than the COVID itself,

00:45:14.920 or at least, you know, not that much better.

00:45:16.680 Do you think that they could have made their billions of dollars,

00:45:22.040 because even the employees are making, you know,

00:45:23.960 bank with their 401ks and everything.

00:45:26.320 So everybody at the big pharma companies

00:45:28.220 are making a lot of money, that's for sure.

00:45:30.900 You know, even the lower employee level,

00:45:33.520 because of stock.

00:45:36.000 So, do you think

00:45:38.520 that there was somebody who would do that kind of crime

00:45:42.540 with the odds of detection being,

00:45:45.580 I think, close to 100%,

00:45:47.440 if you wait long enough?

00:45:50.140 Now, they might not get caught this year.

00:45:53.040 You know, hypothetically,

00:45:54.460 if anything underhanded happened.

00:45:56.580 Well, maybe not next year.

00:45:58.400 But what are the odds that they could go five years

00:46:00.820 without somebody uncovering the crime?

00:46:05.460 I don't think so.

00:46:06.620 I feel like there would be too many people involved,

00:46:10.480 too many potential whistleblowers,

00:46:13.040 too many people looking at the same data

00:46:15.000 with different, you know, different ways in.

00:46:17.640 I feel like you would know for sure

00:46:19.860 you couldn't get away with that.

00:46:22.060 So I don't think anybody would steal a billion dollars

00:46:24.740 if they knew they were going to get caught.

00:46:28.080 A lot of people would steal a billion dollars

00:46:30.140 if they thought there was a good chance

00:46:31.460 of not getting caught.

00:46:32.880 You know, you'd find lots of volunteers for that.

00:46:35.300 But if you knew you were going to get caught?

00:46:37.820 And I think they would have to know

00:46:39.420 that if they literally fake the data,

00:46:42.600 that's going to bite them in the ass. 0.91

00:46:44.940 And so I say,

00:46:46.840 if we ever find out that anybody in the, you know,

00:46:50.380 vaccine universe

00:46:51.740 did something literally illegal

00:46:54.420 to make it look like it was safer than it was,

00:46:58.360 that's got to be the death penalty.

00:47:01.020 Would you agree?

00:47:02.900 That, now, some of you just may disagree

00:47:06.480 with the death penalty on principle.

00:47:07.980 That's a different question.

00:47:09.420 But in terms of the maximum penalty

00:47:12.080 that the United States gives to anybody,

00:47:14.780 what would be bigger than that?

00:47:17.200 I think it would be criminal in itself

00:47:20.140 to be executing, you know,

00:47:22.880 low-income people who've done, you know,

00:47:25.540 equally heinous things,

00:47:27.300 or actually not even close.

00:47:28.980 There's probably nobody on death row

00:47:30.620 who's done anything close to that

00:47:32.020 in terms of body count,

00:47:33.940 if it happened, right?

00:47:35.280 And my guess is that it didn't happen.

00:47:40.060 So if you want a prediction

00:47:41.560 that you can take, you know,

00:47:44.640 you can hold me to,

00:47:46.460 here's my prediction.

00:47:48.600 That nobody did a crime

00:47:50.460 that will be easily detectable.

00:47:54.520 There could be crime.

00:47:56.620 In fact, almost certainly.

00:47:58.060 The odds that all of these big pharma companies

00:48:01.560 did everything legally

00:48:02.660 and there was no employee who broke a crime,

00:48:05.900 or broke a law in some way, zero.

00:48:08.500 I mean, you know, big companies sometimes,

00:48:11.680 you know, they'll cross some lines

00:48:13.040 to get things done.

00:48:14.420 So definitely there was some shenanigans.

00:48:17.280 But my personal opinion is

00:48:19.040 we won't find

00:48:20.140 the hidden, like, obvious fraud

00:48:25.460 that somebody did to make a billion dollars

00:48:28.020 because nobody does that crime.

00:48:33.360 Now, I say nobody like it's an absolute,

00:48:36.920 but it's never an absolute.

00:48:38.140 So if I give you a prediction,

00:48:39.320 you should just, in your mind,

00:48:40.660 you should say that's not 100%

00:48:42.240 because nothing is.

00:48:43.780 But I'd say the odds are,

00:48:45.540 I'm going to go 80%.

00:48:49.400 I'll give you an 80% chance

00:48:52.140 that no matter how good or bad

00:48:55.020 the vaccines are in reality,

00:48:57.540 that there won't be somebody

00:48:58.600 that you find just hid the bad data

00:49:00.780 to make a bunch of money

00:49:02.420 because they would definitely

00:49:05.020 go to jail for that.

00:49:06.840 And by the way,

00:49:07.680 I'm not even sure if they could live a life

00:49:09.660 in the United States,

00:49:11.760 you know, even if they didn't go to jail for it,

00:49:13.640 if somehow they got off on it.

00:49:15.540 I don't even know if they could live

00:49:17.000 in the United States

00:49:17.900 because they wouldn't be responsible

00:49:19.720 for, you know, countless deaths

00:49:21.440 and under this scenario

00:49:23.060 would have known about it,

00:49:24.320 would have known they did it.

00:49:26.100 Yeah, so when you see the 75-year thing,

00:49:28.720 you have to assume criminal activity,

00:49:30.760 don't you?

00:49:31.060 I mean, seriously.

00:49:35.840 If a company says,

00:49:37.060 we'll show you our data in 75 years,

00:49:39.680 you should just shut them down.

00:49:42.200 You should just take that

00:49:43.420 as proof of criminal intent.

00:49:46.380 You don't even know what the crime is.

00:49:48.480 You say,

00:49:48.920 I don't even know what the crime is,

00:49:51.680 but you're committing one.

00:49:53.460 Like, if there could be

00:49:54.940 a clear indication of a crime,

00:49:56.820 I've never heard of one.

00:49:59.740 So I think it's just the fact

00:50:01.260 that they asked for the 75 years.

00:50:03.800 I mean, I'm joking,

00:50:05.060 but I feel like you should

00:50:06.080 shut them down for that.

00:50:07.900 You should shut down

00:50:08.660 the whole vaccination.

00:50:10.440 Basically, I would have withdrawn

00:50:11.820 the vaccination at that point.

00:50:14.100 Let me say it directly.

00:50:15.180 If Pfizer or whoever

00:50:18.280 requires 55 years or 75,

00:50:21.940 I think they're still negotiating

00:50:23.020 some of that.

00:50:24.000 But if they require that

00:50:25.160 and there's no explanation

00:50:26.840 for why that makes sense,

00:50:28.500 I think you have to withdraw the vaccine.

00:50:32.980 Don't you?

00:50:34.840 I mean, I think that's a no-brainer.

00:50:37.520 Now, you want to get mad?

00:50:41.700 This will be easy.

00:50:43.300 Watch me trigger you.

00:50:45.180 As obvious as that is to you

00:50:47.400 and to me,

00:50:48.880 which one of our politicians

00:50:50.400 is even suggesting that?

00:50:53.760 Right?

00:50:55.060 Did you hear any Republicans suggest it?

00:50:57.180 I didn't.

00:50:58.320 Did you hear any Democrats suggest it?

00:51:00.060 I didn't.

00:51:01.520 No.

00:51:02.120 And let me tell you

00:51:03.240 that unless there's more to the story,

00:51:05.520 and there might be,

00:51:06.680 it could be that

00:51:07.480 if you listen to Pfizer's side,

00:51:10.020 they would give you some reason

00:51:11.180 that you'd never even thought of.

00:51:12.340 It's like, oh, God, yeah,

00:51:13.380 that would take 75 years.

00:51:14.680 I can't imagine what that would be.

00:51:17.120 But I think until we hear that,

00:51:19.260 in other words,

00:51:19.840 oh, Rand Paul?

00:51:21.400 Did Rand Paul say that directly?

00:51:24.100 That because of the 75 years,

00:51:26.300 that's reason enough to withdraw the vaccine?

00:51:28.960 To me, that's reason enough.

00:51:30.520 And not only is it reason enough,

00:51:32.640 it's more than reason enough.

00:51:35.120 I mean, that's beyond the best reason

00:51:37.060 anybody ever gave for anything, right?

00:51:39.040 Can you think of anything

00:51:40.820 that anybody's ever done

00:51:42.620 in any domain

00:51:43.840 that would be a better reason

00:51:45.780 than pulling vaccinations

00:51:48.080 when the company won't give you

00:51:49.580 data about their safety?

00:51:51.560 No.

00:51:52.100 No, no.

00:51:52.520 There's nothing more obvious

00:51:53.840 and easy to make

00:51:54.920 than that decision,

00:51:56.420 assuming that you have enough

00:51:57.640 of the other vaccinations.

00:51:59.480 Now, some of it might be that,

00:52:01.880 you know,

00:52:02.200 if you don't have it,

00:52:03.680 fewer people will get vaccinated,

00:52:05.360 so there may be some calculation there.

00:52:10.500 Is it Pfizer or the FDA

00:52:12.240 that's withholding the data?

00:52:14.020 Either way,

00:52:15.580 it doesn't matter.

00:52:16.860 If the data is being withheld

00:52:18.600 from the public

00:52:19.300 and from the rest of

00:52:20.420 the scientific community,

00:52:23.900 it doesn't matter

00:52:25.360 who's withholding it.

00:52:26.600 You still have to pull the vaccination.

00:52:29.780 And by the way,

00:52:30.660 is our government

00:52:31.720 even talking about it

00:52:33.100 except for Rand Paul?

00:52:34.080 I mean,

00:52:35.600 Biden should be saying out loud,

00:52:38.640 well,

00:52:39.140 we've got a problem with Pfizer.

00:52:41.680 I think Trump would do that,

00:52:43.920 wouldn't he?

00:52:44.900 Can you imagine Trump

00:52:46.380 in the same situation

00:52:47.540 where Pfizer told them

00:52:50.340 they couldn't give the data

00:52:51.220 for X years?

00:52:53.020 Don't you think Pfizer

00:52:54.200 would tell them,

00:52:54.960 are we going to pull the,

00:52:55.840 we're going to pull your approval?

00:52:58.760 The most obvious thing in the world.

00:53:00.460 I think he would say,

00:53:02.020 okay,

00:53:02.560 you've got a week

00:53:03.600 and then we're going to pull

00:53:04.780 your emergency approval.

00:53:06.600 It's the most obvious play.

00:53:08.560 What's going on?

00:53:09.780 Now,

00:53:10.060 keep in mind,

00:53:10.980 this might be a news problem.

00:53:13.360 It could be that the news

00:53:14.500 is serving us so poorly

00:53:15.780 that we don't even understand

00:53:17.420 this issue about the documents

00:53:18.960 in the 75 years

00:53:20.000 because there's something

00:53:20.880 about it we don't understand.

00:53:22.780 I have trouble believing

00:53:24.140 it's as cut and dried

00:53:26.240 as they're hiding data from us.

00:53:29.040 Is it really?

00:53:29.880 That's it?

00:53:30.840 Is that the whole story?

00:53:31.820 They are intentionally

00:53:33.240 hiding data from us

00:53:34.700 until they die?

00:53:35.940 I mean,

00:53:36.280 if that is the whole story,

00:53:38.080 then the management of it

00:53:40.520 is just moronically simple.

00:53:42.560 You pull the authorization.

00:53:44.600 You have to.

00:53:46.620 I mean,

00:53:46.960 how could the public

00:53:48.140 have any confidence

00:53:49.180 in its government

00:53:50.080 if they don't pull

00:53:51.320 the authorization

00:53:52.260 or,

00:53:53.940 or,

00:53:54.420 just as happy,

00:53:56.200 or,

00:53:56.860 explain the reasoning

00:53:58.500 in a way that makes sense?

00:53:59.460 There might be an explanation.

00:54:01.960 In fact,

00:54:02.380 I would say

00:54:02.720 there's at least

00:54:03.240 a 50% chance

00:54:04.560 there's some reason

00:54:05.880 that we don't even understand.

00:54:07.780 It could be that

00:54:08.740 it takes,

00:54:10.080 you know,

00:54:10.360 years to produce

00:54:11.740 new data

00:54:13.500 that goes in these documents,

00:54:15.180 something like that.

00:54:16.240 I mean,

00:54:16.500 if you consider

00:54:17.220 that almost every other story

00:54:18.460 we hear is fake,

00:54:20.080 in some way,

00:54:21.760 fake,

00:54:22.840 it's hard to believe

00:54:24.020 this one's the one

00:54:24.700 that's clean.

00:54:25.220 privacy issues

00:54:29.400 or something.

00:54:31.500 Oh,

00:54:31.780 that's interesting.

00:54:33.220 Privacy issues.

00:54:34.520 I don't see

00:54:35.340 any way

00:54:36.000 that you couldn't

00:54:36.680 remove identities.

00:54:38.920 That doesn't sound real.

00:54:44.560 Redactions take time.

00:54:46.220 Well,

00:54:46.480 if they're redacting things,

00:54:47.620 I got questions.

00:54:48.420 it's the FDA

00:54:53.880 is asking

00:54:54.900 for 75 years

00:54:56.040 to clear out

00:54:56.760 patient data,

00:54:58.400 meaning that

00:55:00.360 we would

00:55:01.620 remove the way

00:55:02.660 to identify

00:55:03.400 which patient it is.

00:55:05.620 So are we waiting

00:55:06.480 for the patients

00:55:07.300 involved

00:55:07.820 to die

00:55:09.320 of natural causes?

00:55:12.160 Let me just say

00:55:13.140 that isn't

00:55:13.520 a good enough reason.

00:55:15.440 Like,

00:55:15.760 I hear it as a reason,

00:55:16.700 but I want to invite

00:55:17.380 Dale back

00:55:18.080 because it's not

00:55:19.480 connecting with

00:55:20.180 the problem.

00:55:22.200 I don't see

00:55:22.940 how you can't

00:55:23.600 remove

00:55:24.060 identifying information

00:55:25.520 unless that's

00:55:27.100 the only,

00:55:27.800 maybe it is

00:55:28.440 the identities

00:55:29.720 of the people

00:55:30.320 that's the only

00:55:30.860 thing that'll

00:55:31.260 take 75 years.

00:55:32.760 I mean,

00:55:32.960 if that's the case,

00:55:33.760 then it's irrelevant,

00:55:34.560 isn't it?

00:55:36.920 So I'm going

00:55:37.640 to keep my 50% odds

00:55:39.420 that there's nothing

00:55:40.380 to this story.

00:55:42.100 How do you like that?

00:55:43.500 50% odds

00:55:44.680 that there's actually

00:55:45.320 nothing to the story

00:55:46.320 and that the thing

00:55:47.920 that's being withheld

00:55:48.700 wasn't anything

00:55:49.340 that everybody

00:55:49.720 needed anyway,

00:55:50.860 such as the actual

00:55:52.080 identities of the people.

00:55:56.740 All right,

00:55:57.140 but I'll keep with

00:55:58.340 that if we don't have

00:55:59.740 a good explanation

00:56:00.480 from the government,

00:56:02.280 we can't live with that.

00:56:03.380 All right.

00:56:06.740 That is all I have

00:56:08.460 to talk about today.

00:56:10.040 I think you'll agree

00:56:11.160 this is the best

00:56:12.640 live stream

00:56:13.260 that's ever happened

00:56:14.220 in the history

00:56:14.860 of the United States,

00:56:16.320 possibly the entire world,

00:56:18.720 maybe the rest

00:56:19.740 of the solar system,

00:56:20.960 and could be

00:56:23.200 the universe.

00:56:26.260 Scott,

00:56:26.700 ban me your 0.68

00:56:27.420 shilling

00:56:27.900 if you believe 50%.

00:56:29.940 Will do,

00:56:30.620 Ken.

00:56:30.960 You are banned.

00:56:33.600 I'd use it

00:56:34.240 on this channel.

00:56:37.160 Yes,

00:56:37.640 if you think

00:56:38.240 that you can

00:56:38.800 detect shilling

00:56:40.240 by my opinions,

00:56:43.720 you're not smart

00:56:45.160 enough to be

00:56:45.580 on this live stream.

00:56:47.760 Goodbye,

00:56:48.420 Ken.

00:56:51.580 Get a ban hammer.

00:56:52.660 What time do you

00:56:55.600 go to bed?

00:56:57.440 Well,

00:56:58.520 last night,

00:56:59.860 10 p.m.,

00:57:01.880 and then I woke up

00:57:04.220 two and a half hours

00:57:04.940 later,

00:57:05.860 and I said to myself,

00:57:07.320 you know,

00:57:08.460 I'm tired of sleeping.

00:57:10.360 So I just got up.

00:57:12.540 One of the things

00:57:13.800 that I teach you

00:57:15.380 when I do my micro lessons,

00:57:17.840 I think one of them

00:57:18.980 is on sleep.

00:57:20.620 One of the sleep tricks

00:57:22.260 is if you can't

00:57:23.220 get back to sleep,

00:57:24.260 don't try.

00:57:26.020 You know,

00:57:26.300 you can try

00:57:26.660 for a little while,

00:57:27.700 but if you know

00:57:28.200 it's not going to happen,

00:57:29.340 you get up.

00:57:30.820 And then tonight,

00:57:32.580 I'll go to bed

00:57:33.180 at 10 o'clock,

00:57:34.120 and I'm going

00:57:34.580 to be exhausted.

00:57:36.160 And tonight,

00:57:37.000 I'll get back

00:57:37.540 on track.

00:57:39.300 But don't stay up

00:57:40.800 torturing yourself.

00:57:41.740 Just get up

00:57:42.180 and do something

00:57:42.640 you wanted to do anyway.

00:57:44.260 Clean the house,

00:57:45.240 do some work,

00:57:46.520 you know,

00:57:47.120 take a walk.

00:57:48.480 Just get up

00:57:49.060 and do something.

00:57:50.220 That's what I've been

00:57:50.780 doing for years,

00:57:51.380 and I enjoy it

00:57:52.740 quite a bit.

00:57:55.140 Scott's writing

00:57:55.800 The Coattails

00:57:56.440 of Dale's Fame.

00:57:57.660 Well,

00:57:57.960 that's one way

00:57:58.380 to do it.

00:58:05.660 All right.

00:58:08.280 Somebody says

00:58:08.980 all Indians

00:58:09.580 have worms

00:58:10.340 is a fallacy.

00:58:11.980 Well,

00:58:12.160 I don't think

00:58:12.560 anybody was claiming

00:58:13.380 all Indians

00:58:13.880 have worms.

00:58:15.980 I think that

00:58:17.180 there may have been

00:58:18.240 enough people

00:58:19.440 in some areas

00:58:20.720 that it could

00:58:23.300 show up

00:58:23.760 in the data.

00:58:25.000 That's a big

00:58:26.340 distance from

00:58:27.240 all Indians

00:58:28.400 have worms.

00:58:31.100 All right.

00:58:32.160 That's all for now.

00:58:33.460 And I will talk

00:58:34.300 to you.

00:58:35.820 Jimmy Dora

00:58:36.660 and RFK

00:58:37.420 Jr.

00:58:37.960 last night

00:58:38.420 was better.

00:58:39.000 Was it?

00:58:40.420 Did they tell you

00:58:46.800 in a way

00:58:47.720 that you can

00:58:48.240 summarize

00:58:48.660 what RFK

00:58:51.040 said?

00:58:52.940 Because here's

00:58:53.860 the test.

00:58:54.900 If you can

00:58:55.480 summarize it

00:58:56.400 like, you know,

00:58:57.820 direct sentence,

00:58:59.200 somebody did this

00:59:00.420 and caused this,

00:59:02.020 then maybe

00:59:02.720 there's something

00:59:03.960 to it.

00:59:04.960 But if you

00:59:05.760 can't summarize

00:59:06.520 it,

00:59:07.900 there might not

00:59:08.500 be anything

00:59:08.940 there.

00:59:10.720 Anyway,

00:59:11.200 that's the test.

00:59:12.200 And I'll talk

00:59:12.660 to you tomorrow.

00:59:13.780 Thank you.

Real Coffee with Scott Adams - December 16, 2021

Episode 1594 Scott Adams： Proof We Live in a Simulation, and My Interview With Dale About January 6

Episode Stats

Summary

Transcript