Real Coffee with Scott Adams - Episode 1607 Scott Adams： Most of the News is Good Today. Hello Golden Age

00:00:00.000 Good morning, everybody.

00:00:01.760 Welcome to the best thing that ever happened to you.

00:00:04.260 Possibly the best thing that ever happened to anybody.

00:00:06.380 It's called Coffee with Scott Adams.

00:00:08.440 And today, mostly good news.

00:00:11.060 It's a weird day.

00:00:12.380 Now, it could be that I'm just in the mood

00:00:13.860 to hear some good news, so I'm filtering it differently.

00:00:16.160 But I'm going to put you in a good mood, too,

00:00:18.780 so that you can filter it the way I do.

00:00:21.300 Everything's looking good.

00:00:22.840 It really is.

00:00:23.820 And all you need to come to this higher level

00:00:26.620 of happiness and awareness is a copper mug

00:00:28.760 or a glass of pecker tails of stein,

00:00:30.520 a canteen jug, a flask, a vessel of any kind.

00:00:32.800 Fill it with your favorite liquid.

00:00:33.760 I like coffee.

00:00:35.440 And join me now for the unparalleled pleasure.

00:00:39.500 It's the dopamine hit of the day,

00:00:41.660 the thing that makes everything better.

00:00:43.380 And it's working.

00:00:44.760 It's called the Simultaneous Sipping Habits Now.

00:00:46.620 Go.

00:00:51.920 Ah, yes, coffee.

00:00:53.460 Well, I saw a tweet just before I got on

00:00:59.940 that rapper-actor Ice Cube

00:01:03.740 says that they offered Chris Tucker

00:01:07.080 $10 to $12 million

00:01:09.080 to be in their next movie, Friday-something, a sequel.

00:01:13.920 And Chris Tucker turned down $10 to $12 million

00:01:17.240 because of religious reasons.

00:01:19.360 And he apparently objected to being in another movie

00:01:23.140 in which he was smoking weed and cussing.

00:01:26.980 So Chris Tucker is out of the role.

00:01:30.540 $10 to $12 million

00:01:31.340 because he didn't want to be involved

00:01:33.880 with weed and cussing.

00:01:36.740 So I tweeted back to Ice Cube

00:01:38.380 and asked if auditions are still open

00:01:40.140 because if ever there was a role made for me,

00:01:45.280 I don't want to say born for the role.

00:01:49.240 That's going too far.

00:01:51.500 But lock, key, perfect fit, perfect fit.

00:01:58.540 Now, there was a day where a person who looked like me

00:02:01.080 would not be cast in an all-black movie,

00:02:03.220 but we don't live in backwards times anymore.

00:02:07.000 In the dark ages, no pun intended,

00:02:10.440 they would have been able to just cast their movie

00:02:12.780 and completely ignore other people saying,

00:02:15.120 hey, let me in that movie, but not now.

00:02:17.460 In our woke environment,

00:02:19.460 I believe I can pull off that role.

00:02:25.620 And a lot of it is acting.

00:02:28.960 You know, sometimes if you don't have

00:02:31.140 the perfect look for a role,

00:02:33.800 the audience won't matter if your acting is so good.

00:02:37.260 So I think I could get my acting up to a level

00:02:40.680 where I could take over this Chris Tucker role,

00:02:43.160 smoke some weed,

00:02:43.920 cuss on camera.

00:02:46.220 I might even practice a little of that today.

00:02:48.880 You don't know.

00:02:50.640 Because I don't like to go into an audition

00:02:52.240 unless I've got a lot of practice.

00:02:55.020 Well, did you see the picture of Romney's family?

00:02:57.980 I guess they took a holiday family picture.

00:03:01.460 And I've got to say,

00:03:03.320 it's jaw-dropping.

00:03:05.560 You know, I've never seen a family picture

00:03:07.460 that had that much impact on me

00:03:08.880 because it's the last thing that interests most of us.

00:03:12.380 Okay, that's your family.

00:03:13.720 I don't even know your family.

00:03:15.280 But you should see the size of Mitt Romney's family.

00:03:19.040 I think they're all, you know,

00:03:21.080 kids and grandkids and stuff.

00:03:23.120 It looks like it.

00:03:23.660 Now, they are shockingly white.

00:03:29.080 No big surprise, right?

00:03:30.720 It's the biggest group of white people

00:03:32.280 I've ever seen in one place.

00:03:33.720 Because in America,

00:03:34.820 you couldn't assemble that many white people

00:03:36.720 to take a picture.

00:03:38.420 I mean, we just don't live in a country

00:03:40.720 where that many white people are in the same place.

00:03:42.520 But in Utah, and in the Romney family...

00:03:47.260 Now, I'm not criticizing Romney's.

00:03:49.440 In fact, I would like to give them a holiday compliment,

00:03:53.460 which is, do you ever wonder what it is like

00:03:56.100 or what does it mean to win at life?

00:04:01.700 Like, what would that look like?

00:04:03.120 To be a winner at life.

00:04:04.940 Because we think of Romney as, you know,

00:04:06.740 a loser in the sense that he lost the presidency.

00:04:09.440 But, you know, he was very successful in his career

00:04:12.400 and all that.

00:04:14.020 But when you see a picture

00:04:14.820 of how he has spread his genes,

00:04:17.800 that looks like the winningest thing I've ever seen.

00:04:22.280 It's just, it's amazing.

00:04:24.060 He's got like a Genghis Khan light kind of mode there

00:04:28.360 where this mofo is spreading his genes

00:04:31.980 like nobody's business.

00:04:34.440 So I would think that from an evolutionary standpoint,

00:04:36.840 the more you spread your genes, the more winning you are.

00:04:40.800 So I've never seen anybody win that hard before.

00:04:45.220 He created a lot of clones.

00:04:48.760 Anyway, in more tragic news, John Madden died.

00:04:53.040 Most of you have heard that name, John Madden.

00:04:55.680 Famous football coach,

00:04:57.700 but also famous for living in my town.

00:05:01.660 So the entire time that John Madden has lived where I live,

00:05:07.020 and by the way, this is the second time

00:05:08.480 I've lived in his town.

00:05:10.800 I used to live in another town that he lived in,

00:05:14.100 and then he moved.

00:05:16.100 And then I moved when I got married

00:05:17.840 and, you know, moved to the town

00:05:19.540 where my wife lives with the kids.

00:05:23.000 And I ended up in his town twice.

00:05:26.860 Now, the weird thing about this

00:05:28.480 is it made me the second most famous person in town twice.

00:05:33.300 In both cases, it was because of him.

00:05:36.580 Now, there's nothing wrong

00:05:38.920 with being the second most famous person in your town,

00:05:41.380 but I've got to tell you

00:05:42.420 being the most famous person in your town

00:05:43.980 is a little bit better.

00:05:45.620 Now, of course, I don't want to detract

00:05:47.420 from the fact that it's a tragedy

00:05:49.260 that John Madden died,

00:05:51.020 but he did make it to 85,

00:05:53.440 and from what I know from him,

00:05:55.900 just from his public persona,

00:05:57.520 if you make it to 85 and you're going strong

00:06:00.860 and you go out on top,

00:06:03.480 I don't know.

00:06:04.940 I don't even think John Madden would be sad

00:06:06.580 about John Madden dying.

00:06:08.260 He did it so well.

00:06:09.700 So he lived his life well,

00:06:11.200 went out in style,

00:06:12.640 timing was good,

00:06:14.120 but like so many stories in the news,

00:06:16.160 they have a weird connection to me,

00:06:18.440 like personally.

00:06:19.480 Like this will have an effect on me personally.

00:06:21.880 It's weird.

00:06:22.560 All right.

00:06:26.020 There was an article in Medscape

00:06:28.980 suggesting that maybe the moderate alcohol benefits,

00:06:33.760 the health benefits of moderate alcohol,

00:06:37.300 look increasingly doubtful.

00:06:40.460 That's right.

00:06:41.960 So some in the medical scientific community

00:06:44.320 now believe that the common thing we used to believe,

00:06:47.940 that moderate drinking might actually be good for your health.

00:06:51.720 As if.

00:06:53.480 Yes, as if drinking just a little bit of poison

00:06:56.620 will be good for you.

00:07:00.200 But it looks like science is starting to bend the other way.

00:07:03.780 It's increasingly doubtful that it's good for you.

00:07:06.160 And how many of you remember me making the prediction

00:07:11.460 that someday we would learn

00:07:14.040 that the most common thing that we hear all the time,

00:07:17.260 moderate drinking is good for you,

00:07:19.060 that it was never true?

00:07:21.580 That's one of my predictions for years,

00:07:24.000 that eventually we would learn that was never true.

00:07:28.360 I'm not going to claim victory yet,

00:07:31.300 but so I'll keep my prediction alive

00:07:34.100 and just say it's unresolved at this point,

00:07:38.300 but it's going this way.

00:07:40.740 In the end, someday,

00:07:43.620 we are not going to say that moderate drinking was good for you.

00:07:47.900 There's nothing in my life experience

00:07:50.380 that suggests that could even happen.

00:07:52.800 I mean, anything could happen, I suppose.

00:07:54.980 But everything pushes the other direction about this.

00:07:58.760 If you're predicting it goes the other way,

00:08:01.380 I'd like to take that bet.

00:08:04.100 2022 is looking interesting,

00:08:08.660 but also will be a way to test our world theories,

00:08:12.700 which is very interesting to me.

00:08:14.660 Remember, I tell you that your worldview

00:08:16.240 is probably subjective just like everybody else's.

00:08:20.440 But the only thing you can tell about it

00:08:22.340 that is useful is whether it predicts.

00:08:25.420 So if your view of the world predicts accurately,

00:08:28.000 well, or better than other people's,

00:08:29.820 well, you have a pretty good worldview,

00:08:32.220 even if it's not true in some sense.

00:08:36.720 So we're going to get a test here.

00:08:38.720 It's coming up.

00:08:39.600 Here's what the test looks like.

00:08:41.380 In 2022, when we do the elections for Congress,

00:08:47.020 we know now that 23 Democrats are retiring

00:08:52.140 or bidding from another office.

00:08:54.600 So basically, 23 Democrats will be leaving the field

00:08:57.740 when the Republicans are only five down.

00:09:03.780 So Republicans only need to win five more seats

00:09:06.360 to take control,

00:09:07.460 and there are already 23 Democrats who are leaving the job.

00:09:11.740 Now, on top of that, you've got the polling

00:09:15.040 that would suggest that the Republicans are going to sweep.

00:09:17.980 You've got Biden not fixing the problems he promised to fix.

00:09:22.440 You've got a lot going on that would all...

00:09:25.040 Let's see if you agree with the starting assumption.

00:09:28.600 Is the starting assumption

00:09:29.820 that literally every expert is saying,

00:09:33.580 oh, the Republicans are just going to sweep?

00:09:37.520 Give me a fact check.

00:09:38.740 Is it true that every expert

00:09:41.240 says the Republicans are going to sweep?

00:09:44.940 Right?

00:09:45.580 Every one.

00:09:46.660 Even the Democrats say it.

00:09:48.640 Now, except for the politicians,

00:09:50.440 but the people who are, you know,

00:09:51.920 because they have to say it.

00:09:53.420 But the people and experts on both sides

00:09:55.780 just say, yeah, Republicans are going to sweep.

00:09:58.220 So here's how you get to test your worldview.

00:10:02.840 If your worldview is that

00:10:04.880 there is some shadowy group of Democrats,

00:10:07.820 that can change the elections

00:10:10.300 to anything they want,

00:10:12.780 the Democrats will hold Congress.

00:10:15.780 If you're right.

00:10:19.140 Would you agree?

00:10:20.720 That if the elections are, in fact, corrupt

00:10:24.100 in ways that we can't easily audit,

00:10:27.220 and if they robbed Trump

00:10:29.300 right in front of the public,

00:10:31.280 meaning that everyone who looked at it said,

00:10:34.340 you know, it really kind of looked like

00:10:36.060 Trump was going to win this,

00:10:37.540 and then surprisingly he didn't.

00:10:39.940 And then what happened?

00:10:41.540 Well, there was a little event at the Capitol,

00:10:44.500 which there is a strong argument

00:10:48.160 that suggests that it was not an organic event,

00:10:51.700 at least the most dangerous parts about it

00:10:54.380 when they breached the actual, you know,

00:10:57.460 trespassing territory and got violent.

00:10:59.340 And it would seem as if the country has been set up

00:11:04.960 to make it unlikely that there would be an insurrection

00:11:08.240 because the insurrectionists,

00:11:10.980 quote, insurrectionists who weren't really insurrectionists,

00:11:14.060 have been punished so severely,

00:11:16.320 or it looks like they will be.

00:11:18.340 Many of them still in jail.

00:11:20.480 And so we have a situation where

00:11:22.400 if the worst-case scenario is correct

00:11:24.880 and the elections are rigged,

00:11:27.000 I'm not saying this is true, by the way.

00:11:28.880 I'm saying we'll get to test that worldview

00:11:30.700 versus the worldview that everything was fine.

00:11:34.220 But if the worldview that things are rigged is true,

00:11:37.660 we do have a situation where they could steal

00:11:40.100 the election right in front of you

00:11:43.700 in a way that everybody would sort of think

00:11:47.120 maybe it happened

00:11:47.900 because it didn't go the way everybody thought,

00:11:51.480 and nothing would happen

00:11:52.720 because there wouldn't be a second insurrection.

00:11:57.340 They've already pre-stopped a revolution in the future

00:12:00.880 by making it seem like one already happened

00:12:03.680 and then stopping the one that was fake

00:12:05.940 to make it, like, really clear

00:12:08.300 you don't want to try marching on the Capitol.

00:12:12.160 So, there are no...

00:12:13.560 You know, obviously this would not be 100% proof,

00:12:16.660 but I'll make...

00:12:18.980 I'm not even sure which way I would predict.

00:12:24.920 You know, I think I have to do a split prediction

00:12:28.340 for this one, which was very unsatisfying.

00:12:31.100 I'd like to do something like this.

00:12:33.300 Republicans will sweep in 2022.

00:12:36.880 Right?

00:12:37.300 Nice, clean, consistent prediction.

00:12:41.300 But we can only depend on the votes.

00:12:43.680 We can't really depend on the vote count.

00:12:48.120 Now, let me say my view of the election integrity.

00:12:54.100 I am aware of no evidence of massive fraud in 2020.

00:12:59.780 I want to say that as clearly as possible.

00:13:02.080 I'm personally, just personally,

00:13:05.080 not aware of anything that would look like massive fraud

00:13:09.200 that has been determined.

00:13:10.140 It is also true that we can't fully audit our system.

00:13:15.240 So, if, in fact, massive fraud happened,

00:13:17.660 it's unclear that we could know that.

00:13:20.940 Number three,

00:13:22.180 if you have a system that can't be audited,

00:13:25.020 there will always be massive fraud.

00:13:27.380 You just don't know if it's happened yet.

00:13:30.100 Could be next time.

00:13:31.560 Could be the time after.

00:13:32.780 But there's no way it doesn't happen.

00:13:35.060 It would be like dropping a ball

00:13:36.720 and expecting that sometimes the gravity won't work.

00:13:41.680 No, the gravity will work every time.

00:13:44.160 If you create a system that's not transparent

00:13:46.980 and the advantage of being able to control

00:13:50.380 that non-transparent system

00:13:52.140 is essentially controlling the planet,

00:13:55.260 the greatest payoff you could ever have.

00:13:58.160 I think if I change this software,

00:14:00.720 I'm in charge of the planet.

00:14:02.080 Biggest stakes you could ever have

00:14:05.020 in a non-transparent system.

00:14:08.240 100% of the time you get massive fraud.

00:14:11.200 Not sometimes.

00:14:13.140 It's not one of like,

00:14:14.400 oh, we're surprised there was some massive fraud.

00:14:16.500 No, it's just like gravity.

00:14:18.440 If you make it that easy for massive fraud,

00:14:20.900 you'll get it every time.

00:14:22.080 You just have to wait.

00:14:23.860 That's all it is.

00:14:25.120 Just a matter of time.

00:14:26.220 So, I certainly would not be one

00:14:30.480 who can say to you,

00:14:31.900 because we don't have an auditable election system,

00:14:34.600 I can't say to you

00:14:35.520 that this won't be a rigged election in 2022.

00:14:39.060 I can't say that with any confidence.

00:14:42.340 It's like a coin flip.

00:14:44.320 50-50, maybe.

00:14:46.300 And only 50-50 because I don't have information.

00:14:49.340 If I had information,

00:14:50.520 maybe I'd change that a lot.

00:14:52.280 Yeah, the COVID elections

00:14:57.000 are always going to add some sketchiness to the outcome.

00:14:59.280 That's true.

00:15:00.500 But if your worldview is that

00:15:02.760 some shadowy figures aligned with Democrats

00:15:06.480 can steal everything and get away with it,

00:15:09.820 let's see if they do the midterms.

00:15:12.860 If they don't steal the midterms,

00:15:15.480 you're going to have to rethink

00:15:17.120 if they stole the Trump versus Biden election.

00:15:22.300 Alas, we found there was some loophole there

00:15:26.960 that got closed in the meantime.

00:15:29.280 I don't know what that would be.

00:15:31.800 All right, I know a lot of Republican-managed states

00:15:35.040 are trying to tighten things up, so we'll see.

00:15:37.500 Here's an interesting little positive thing.

00:15:41.200 Came out of Sandia National Laboratories.

00:15:43.180 One of the Sandia labs is bicycle distance from me,

00:15:47.400 just down the road, because everything is about me.

00:15:49.780 And one of the things that California gets right,

00:15:55.280 I'm going to defend my state slightly.

00:15:57.940 California gets a lot of grief,

00:15:59.920 and I give it a lot of grief, too.

00:16:02.500 But there is one thing that California does right,

00:16:04.740 is it puts a lot of smart people in the same place.

00:16:07.780 And a lot of good things happen

00:16:09.500 when you put your smartest people in the same place

00:16:12.240 and say, ah, this little piece of territory,

00:16:14.940 we're going to put all the smartest people.

00:16:16.200 You just start companies and do whatever you're doing.

00:16:19.600 Well, here's what some smart people

00:16:20.940 at Sandia National Labs do.

00:16:22.740 I don't know if this came out of the local one,

00:16:24.360 or there's an Albuquerque version of this.

00:16:27.260 But they found out how to turn coal ash

00:16:29.560 into rare-earth metals.

00:16:32.660 What?

00:16:34.020 So one of the biggest waste problems from coal

00:16:38.660 is the coal ash.

00:16:39.960 But apparently now they can take that coal ash

00:16:42.960 and change it into rare-earth minerals.

00:16:45.400 But you say to yourself, well, that sounds expensive.

00:16:48.800 Except here's how you do it.

00:16:51.320 They use a harmless food-grade solvent.

00:16:55.020 In other words, some of you basically buy it off the shelf,

00:16:58.500 I think, right?

00:17:00.900 And that's it.

00:17:02.840 You just mix it with some chemicals

00:17:04.940 that are sort of available, you know, everywhere.

00:17:08.220 And it turns it into rare-earth materials

00:17:11.500 if you wait a day.

00:17:15.520 And I don't know what kind of rare-earth materials

00:17:17.840 you get out of this,

00:17:18.840 but this seems like a pretty big deal

00:17:20.680 that we weren't expecting.

00:17:22.200 Now, the pushback on this is that apparently

00:17:23.940 there is already some technique

00:17:25.640 for recovering rare-earth minerals from coal ash.

00:17:30.420 And some think that the existing technique

00:17:32.660 gets a higher percentage of it

00:17:34.720 and might be more economical.

00:17:35.920 But it's hard for me to imagine

00:17:37.720 that anything would be more economical

00:17:39.460 than pouring some over-the-counter juice on it

00:17:42.440 and waiting a day.

00:17:44.100 You know, even if you get a lower percentage

00:17:46.300 of, you know, gain from that,

00:17:49.620 I feel as if it's so easy

00:17:52.320 that it's still going to be economical

00:17:53.680 relative to the alternatives.

00:17:55.480 So I don't know if every pile of coal ash

00:17:58.320 is going through the existing process,

00:18:00.540 but I doubt it, or else this would be a story.

00:18:02.480 So there must be some economical advantages to this.

00:18:07.100 However, we should always be aware

00:18:08.940 that every story of good news is fake

00:18:10.600 when it comes to science.

00:18:14.440 Right?

00:18:15.520 Now, I'm exaggerating a little bit.

00:18:18.160 A little bit.

00:18:19.440 But wouldn't you say,

00:18:20.380 based on your life experience,

00:18:23.040 99% of what you hear about great news

00:18:26.440 coming out of science,

00:18:27.320 and that's not true.

00:18:28.620 About 99% of the time.

00:18:29.980 So I'm not going to say this is an exception,

00:18:32.800 but it's fun to read about.

00:18:34.780 Michael Mina, who is famous for being,

00:18:37.760 at least on Twitter and elsewhere

00:18:39.580 and with the government,

00:18:41.140 the most notable and loudest,

00:18:45.520 most effective voice on rapid testing.

00:18:49.140 He, apparently he's been so successful,

00:18:52.560 or events have changed people's minds as well,

00:18:55.820 he tweeted this.

00:18:56.740 He says,

00:18:57.020 you know things have come full circle

00:18:58.920 when people are starting to tell me,

00:19:01.680 remember,

00:19:02.300 he's the king of promoting rapid testing.

00:19:06.840 He said,

00:19:07.400 when people are starting to tell me

00:19:08.920 that PCR tests take a long time

00:19:12.940 to turn negative,

00:19:14.220 and we should be using rapid antigen tests

00:19:16.260 to test out of isolation.

00:19:18.160 So in other words,

00:19:20.400 if what you're trying to do

00:19:21.860 is get out of isolation,

00:19:23.300 what matters most

00:19:24.380 is if you're still infected.

00:19:26.520 And the rapid tests

00:19:27.940 that are less sensitive

00:19:29.820 do a better job.

00:19:34.120 Now, I think I'm saying this right,

00:19:35.960 but let me explain that.

00:19:37.320 If the rapid test

00:19:38.600 is very effective

00:19:40.220 at finding out

00:19:41.080 if you have a lot of viral load,

00:19:43.400 and it can do it quickly and cheaply,

00:19:45.100 then you can get out of quarantine

00:19:47.400 a little faster,

00:19:48.820 not with perfect certainty,

00:19:50.780 but really, really good.

00:19:52.860 Whereas if you wait for the PCR test,

00:19:55.060 which might be longer

00:19:56.380 to get an appointment,

00:19:58.040 then you've got to wait a day

00:19:59.320 to get a result,

00:20:01.560 you probably have to leave home

00:20:03.080 to do it, right?

00:20:05.200 So that the right answer

00:20:06.880 always was the rapid tests.

00:20:09.480 That was always the right answer

00:20:10.880 for getting out of quarantine.

00:20:11.920 Not necessarily the right answer

00:20:14.220 for maybe testing

00:20:16.340 ahead of a trip, perhaps.

00:20:18.000 I don't know.

00:20:18.540 There might be some differences there.

00:20:20.560 But for getting out of quarantine,

00:20:22.440 where less than 100% effectiveness

00:20:25.380 is pretty much guaranteed,

00:20:28.720 I think Michael Mina's claims

00:20:30.600 have been validated at this point.

00:20:32.700 History has moved in his direction

00:20:34.420 just as he would like, I'm sure.

00:20:37.120 All right.

00:20:37.680 Here's your test of the press.

00:20:44.860 In the Jerusalem Post this week,

00:20:48.120 there's a story that Iran

00:20:49.620 is very close,

00:20:51.080 just months away

00:20:51.900 from a breakout ability

00:20:53.900 to create a nuclear weapon.

00:20:56.900 All right, so that's today.

00:20:58.680 Iran is two months away

00:21:00.320 from a nuclear weapon.

00:21:02.460 That's 2021.

00:21:03.500 Reuters reported the same thing

00:21:06.980 in 2012.

00:21:09.420 L.A. Times reported

00:21:10.880 the same thing in 2003.

00:21:14.540 And the New York Times

00:21:15.800 reported the same thing

00:21:17.080 in 1995.

00:21:20.880 And here's the fun part.

00:21:22.840 The public is now so well-trained

00:21:25.060 that when I saw the tweet

00:21:26.560 about, you know,

00:21:27.900 there was a story

00:21:28.580 that Iran was close

00:21:30.960 to a nuclear weapon,

00:21:31.780 you should see the comments.

00:21:33.740 The comments are just vicious.

00:21:35.900 Yep, just like every year

00:21:37.520 since I was born.

00:21:40.620 And the problem is

00:21:43.120 that with technology,

00:21:46.320 it's like the flying car.

00:21:48.080 Yes, it's true

00:21:48.860 we don't have a flying car.

00:21:50.880 But I'm not going to bet

00:21:51.940 against a flying car

00:21:52.860 100 years from now,

00:21:53.980 are you?

00:21:54.380 I mean, some things

00:21:56.540 are guaranteed to happen.

00:21:58.200 You just have to wait

00:21:59.020 a little bit longer.

00:21:59.700 So I would say

00:22:01.020 it's largely guaranteed

00:22:02.700 that Iran will get

00:22:03.900 nuclear bomb capabilities

00:22:05.560 because it'll be just easier

00:22:08.240 in the future

00:22:08.800 and, you know,

00:22:09.960 they have lots of time

00:22:10.940 and capability

00:22:12.120 and it's a high priority.

00:22:14.860 So it seems like

00:22:15.660 if you wait long enough,

00:22:17.260 one of these stories

00:22:18.040 will be true.

00:22:19.000 So you've got

00:22:19.680 the little boy

00:22:20.360 crying wolf problem

00:22:21.440 that the press

00:22:22.700 has been crying wolf

00:22:23.580 since 1995

00:22:24.660 and the public

00:22:26.260 is just sort of

00:22:27.520 tired of it.

00:22:28.880 It just doesn't feel

00:22:29.700 real anymore.

00:22:31.580 Even though it probably is.

00:22:33.160 It probably is real.

00:22:35.480 Israel?

00:22:37.240 Israel?

00:22:38.520 That's interesting.

00:22:41.180 This is the first time

00:22:42.460 I've ever thought

00:22:43.340 that the country of Israel

00:22:45.160 is spelled Israel.

00:22:47.340 How did I not notice

00:22:49.860 that before?

00:22:53.660 Am I like the last person

00:22:55.640 on earth

00:22:55.980 to make that connection?

00:22:57.800 That's weird.

00:23:00.380 Huh.

00:23:01.600 Simulation is

00:23:02.280 winking at us.

00:23:04.040 All right.

00:23:04.460 Now those of you

00:23:06.680 who think

00:23:07.240 that this is all

00:23:08.940 Israel influencing

00:23:10.260 the U.S. press

00:23:11.580 to get what they want,

00:23:13.500 well,

00:23:14.200 this story came

00:23:15.180 from the Jerusalem Post.

00:23:16.480 So, I mean,

00:23:17.860 this is Israel

00:23:18.680 influencing itself.

00:23:20.240 But of course,

00:23:21.240 these articles

00:23:22.640 do get picked up.

00:23:24.260 Now,

00:23:24.700 can Israel

00:23:26.060 influence the press

00:23:27.740 in the United States?

00:23:29.100 What do you think?

00:23:30.800 Can Israel,

00:23:31.660 the country,

00:23:33.300 influence stories

00:23:34.440 that appear

00:23:34.960 in the United States?

00:23:37.980 Oh,

00:23:38.600 you anti-Semitic

00:23:40.180 bastards.

00:23:42.720 They're so anti-Semitic.

00:23:44.940 Would you say that

00:23:45.700 about some other group

00:23:46.600 if they weren't Jewish?

00:23:48.080 Would you say

00:23:48.620 that they could

00:23:49.060 control the media?

00:23:51.280 Yeah, you would.

00:23:52.120 Because they can.

00:23:53.760 Almost everybody

00:23:54.620 can control the media.

00:23:56.280 It's actually

00:23:56.780 pretty easy.

00:23:58.740 So,

00:23:59.400 does Israel

00:24:00.500 control the media

00:24:01.500 or at least

00:24:02.200 plant stories

00:24:03.520 that are beneficial

00:24:04.380 to Israel?

00:24:05.160 Do they do that

00:24:05.860 in America Press?

00:24:07.500 I don't know.

00:24:08.520 But everybody else does.

00:24:09.800 Don't you assume

00:24:10.400 they do?

00:24:11.120 Why wouldn't they?

00:24:12.720 Literally everybody does.

00:24:14.700 How hard is it

00:24:15.380 to get a journalist

00:24:16.100 in a major publication

00:24:17.220 to write your story?

00:24:20.000 Really easily.

00:24:21.640 As we've seen.

00:24:23.000 Russia collusion hoax.

00:24:24.920 Really easy

00:24:25.520 to get people

00:24:25.960 to write that.

00:24:27.000 You can get people

00:24:27.900 to write things

00:24:28.540 that are obviously hoaxes.

00:24:30.500 Fine people hoax,

00:24:31.840 drinking bleach hoax.

00:24:32.840 There's no shortage

00:24:34.300 of journalists

00:24:35.680 who will write

00:24:36.180 anything you want

00:24:37.360 in major publications.

00:24:40.020 So,

00:24:40.320 it used to be

00:24:40.920 that I think

00:24:41.560 that if you said,

00:24:42.260 oh,

00:24:42.460 there's a Jewish

00:24:44.260 conspiracy theory

00:24:45.660 to control the news,

00:24:46.860 you'd sound like

00:24:47.440 a crazy person.

00:24:49.020 But now it's just

00:24:49.680 every group

00:24:50.200 can do that.

00:24:51.560 Israel just happens

00:24:52.320 to be on the list

00:24:53.120 of groups.

00:24:54.900 The only thing

00:24:55.660 about Israel

00:24:56.220 is that it's a group

00:24:57.420 because every group

00:24:58.780 can do it.

00:24:59.620 It's easy.

00:25:00.060 Rasmussen has a poll.

00:25:03.840 Asked this question

00:25:04.680 which might sound

00:25:05.420 familiar to you.

00:25:06.600 I wasn't,

00:25:07.280 I didn't have anything

00:25:08.080 to do with this,

00:25:08.760 but asked,

00:25:10.580 is Russia more like

00:25:11.620 an ally

00:25:12.160 or an enemy

00:25:12.880 of the U.S.?

00:25:14.060 How do you think

00:25:15.360 it came out?

00:25:16.980 Just guess

00:25:17.760 before I tell you

00:25:18.360 the answer.

00:25:19.020 What percentage

00:25:19.680 of people

00:25:20.360 of likely voters,

00:25:21.960 that's who

00:25:22.360 they usually poll,

00:25:23.760 of U.S.

00:25:24.460 likely voters,

00:25:25.600 what percentage

00:25:26.280 of them would say

00:25:27.220 that Russia

00:25:29.060 is an ally?

00:25:31.320 What percent?

00:25:33.980 I'm saying

00:25:34.960 25, 25.

00:25:37.280 Okay, you're being funny.

00:25:39.300 40, 50.

00:25:40.980 Yeah, the real answer,

00:25:42.540 according to the poll,

00:25:44.080 is that

00:25:44.880 43%

00:25:49.620 said that we're

00:25:51.540 somewhere in between

00:25:52.540 an ally and enemy.

00:25:53.980 And 5% said

00:25:54.980 an outright ally.

00:25:56.100 So if you add

00:25:57.460 the ones who said

00:25:58.260 we're sort of allies,

00:25:59.700 the 43%,

00:26:00.660 to the ones who

00:26:02.260 say we are allies,

00:26:03.840 you get up to

00:26:04.360 48%

00:26:05.460 say,

00:26:07.120 yeah,

00:26:07.260 we're sort of

00:26:07.940 ally-ish.

00:26:09.800 And then you've got

00:26:10.620 another 8%

00:26:11.540 that aren't sure.

00:26:13.240 But I feel like

00:26:14.140 you'd be sure

00:26:14.740 if they were an enemy.

00:26:16.300 So I feel like

00:26:17.180 I'd throw them in

00:26:17.980 with the,

00:26:18.860 you know,

00:26:19.140 must be somewhere

00:26:19.800 in between.

00:26:21.340 So

00:26:21.780 I've been telling you

00:26:23.620 forever that

00:26:24.180 the arc of history

00:26:25.680 is bending

00:26:26.360 undeniably

00:26:28.040 toward the U.S.

00:26:29.860 and Russia

00:26:30.300 being allies

00:26:30.960 in the future.

00:26:32.320 Maybe not this year,

00:26:33.700 maybe in 10 years,

00:26:34.760 but it's going to happen.

00:26:35.960 It's because of space.

00:26:37.640 We have to be allies

00:26:38.900 in space

00:26:39.520 because there's just

00:26:40.600 no way we want

00:26:41.300 to be fighting

00:26:41.740 Russia in space.

00:26:43.240 We've got China

00:26:44.100 to deal with

00:26:44.780 and so does Russia.

00:26:46.960 We're going to want

00:26:47.800 to have at least

00:26:48.620 the U.S.

00:26:49.260 and Russia

00:26:50.040 on the same side

00:26:50.940 because I doubt

00:26:52.160 we'll be on the same

00:26:52.940 side with China.

00:26:53.620 So

00:26:55.180 the public

00:26:56.960 is not terribly

00:26:58.540 disagreeable

00:27:01.500 with that idea.

00:27:02.520 45% do say

00:27:03.980 that Russia

00:27:04.420 is an enemy

00:27:04.960 but that's less

00:27:05.580 than half.

00:27:06.720 So less than half

00:27:07.800 of the country

00:27:08.380 considers Russia

00:27:10.640 an enemy.

00:27:12.440 Now if you

00:27:13.340 changed it to

00:27:14.200 something like

00:27:14.840 a competitor

00:27:16.900 or something

00:27:17.560 then I think

00:27:18.660 you'd get more

00:27:19.080 people agreeing.

00:27:20.780 If you use

00:27:21.360 the word enemy

00:27:21.860 it's, I don't know.

00:27:24.160 I'm not sure

00:27:24.820 that's justified

00:27:25.620 but what's happening

00:27:26.300 it looks like

00:27:26.760 just countries

00:27:27.460 pursuing their

00:27:28.260 own interests.

00:27:29.380 It's like

00:27:29.620 they're a competitor.

00:27:32.040 It doesn't feel

00:27:32.860 like it's personal.

00:27:34.380 Does it?

00:27:35.700 You know

00:27:35.980 there are things

00:27:36.520 that feel personal

00:27:37.320 like terrorism

00:27:38.780 you know

00:27:40.520 Osama bin Laden

00:27:42.580 that felt personal

00:27:43.620 but whatever

00:27:45.220 problems we have

00:27:45.820 with Russia

00:27:46.180 they don't really

00:27:46.720 feel personal.

00:27:47.920 It just feels like

00:27:48.540 government

00:27:48.920 versus government.

00:27:50.460 So there's a story

00:27:51.420 about monoclonal

00:27:52.460 antibodies being

00:27:53.440 Florida having

00:27:55.860 less access to them

00:27:57.120 and they're blaming

00:27:57.700 the federal government

00:27:58.540 for that

00:27:59.080 and apparently

00:27:59.820 there's a big shortage

00:28:00.680 of these

00:28:01.320 monoclonal antibodies.

00:28:04.560 But it seems

00:28:05.460 to be a real shortage.

00:28:07.380 It's not clear

00:28:08.100 if Florida

00:28:08.540 is being punished

00:28:09.340 by the federal government

00:28:10.480 for being

00:28:11.900 Republican led

00:28:12.980 versus Democrat led.

00:28:15.380 I don't know

00:28:16.160 about that.

00:28:16.680 but it's kind

00:28:19.600 of important

00:28:20.000 because at the same

00:28:20.780 time that the

00:28:21.380 federal government

00:28:21.960 said they're going

00:28:22.620 to restrict

00:28:23.800 these antibodies

00:28:24.680 the CDC revised

00:28:27.680 their Omicron

00:28:28.400 estimate

00:28:29.220 down from

00:28:30.320 73% of the

00:28:31.500 new cases

00:28:31.980 to 59.

00:28:34.300 So remember

00:28:34.940 when I was

00:28:35.800 telling you

00:28:36.120 Omicron was

00:28:36.880 almost three

00:28:37.720 quarters of our

00:28:38.420 cases in the

00:28:39.120 United States

00:28:39.720 it turns out

00:28:41.280 that CDC

00:28:42.380 says no

00:28:43.080 when they check

00:28:44.160 it again

00:28:44.600 or some

00:28:45.180 different way

00:28:45.720 it's 59%

00:28:47.660 of cases

00:28:48.160 now wait

00:28:48.860 hold on

00:28:49.680 wait

00:28:50.500 Omicron

00:28:52.040 is 59

00:28:52.780 wait

00:28:53.540 that's reduced

00:28:55.240 from 73

00:28:55.920 hold on

00:28:57.040 hold on

00:28:57.720 okay

00:28:58.380 it's up

00:28:58.720 to 73

00:28:59.260 again

00:28:59.600 because you

00:29:01.600 see the

00:29:01.940 Omicron

00:29:02.440 spreads fast

00:29:03.500 am I wrong

00:29:05.220 that in the

00:29:05.740 time it takes

00:29:06.300 them to do

00:29:06.860 this study

00:29:07.440 and tell

00:29:08.640 us about

00:29:09.100 it

00:29:09.300 there's no

00:29:10.080 way

00:29:10.400 that that

00:29:11.020 59

00:29:11.460 hasn't

00:29:11.960 already

00:29:12.240 gone

00:29:12.440 to 73

00:29:13.100 am I

00:29:14.720 right

00:29:14.960 because it

00:29:16.120 doesn't take

00:29:16.560 long to go

00:29:17.000 to 50

00:29:17.400 from 59

00:29:18.120 to 73

00:29:18.820 it takes

00:29:20.800 about the

00:29:21.220 time it

00:29:21.540 takes them

00:29:22.100 to do

00:29:22.340 a study

00:29:22.740 so they

00:29:24.420 should have

00:29:24.720 said we

00:29:25.140 studied it

00:29:25.680 at 59

00:29:26.240 so it

00:29:26.820 probably is

00:29:27.280 73 by

00:29:27.960 now

00:29:28.220 or something

00:29:30.060 like that

00:29:31.120 all right

00:29:32.780 interesting

00:29:34.420 story in the

00:29:35.300 Wall Street

00:29:35.800 Journal

00:29:36.220 hmm

00:29:37.800 now the

00:29:39.140 fact that

00:29:39.520 this is in

00:29:40.020 the Wall

00:29:40.360 Street

00:29:40.600 Journal

00:29:40.940 on top

00:29:42.840 of the

00:29:43.080 fact that

00:29:43.580 we saw

00:29:43.900 Jennifer

00:29:44.320 Rubin

00:29:44.800 seeming to

00:29:46.100 do a

00:29:46.380 turn on

00:29:46.900 the lockdowns

00:29:48.600 or the

00:29:48.940 mandates

00:29:49.480 so even

00:29:50.920 Jennifer

00:29:51.340 Rubin

00:29:51.780 who is

00:29:52.200 famously

00:29:54.260 associated

00:29:55.280 with the

00:29:55.660 Democrats

00:29:56.200 but even

00:29:57.560 more famously

00:29:58.440 associated

00:29:59.240 with being

00:29:59.860 sort of

00:30:01.160 the person

00:30:02.200 that the

00:30:02.800 people in

00:30:03.660 power go

00:30:04.220 to

00:30:04.540 to be

00:30:05.440 their

00:30:05.660 messenger

00:30:06.060 now

00:30:07.700 so I

00:30:09.180 don't get

00:30:09.520 sued

00:30:09.860 I'll say

00:30:10.340 I don't

00:30:10.700 know if

00:30:10.920 any of

00:30:11.140 that's

00:30:11.320 true

00:30:11.560 allegedly

00:30:13.180 but

00:30:15.120 people would

00:30:16.220 look to

00:30:16.800 to see

00:30:17.620 her change

00:30:18.240 of opinion

00:30:18.780 as being

00:30:19.720 not her

00:30:20.160 opinion

00:30:20.520 per se

00:30:21.040 but an

00:30:21.960 approved

00:30:22.380 opinion

00:30:22.820 so she

00:30:24.880 is signaling

00:30:25.440 whether or

00:30:26.240 not this

00:30:26.540 is true

00:30:26.920 this is

00:30:27.380 just

00:30:27.580 speculation

00:30:28.080 but the

00:30:29.280 change

00:30:29.660 in her

00:30:30.140 let's

00:30:30.520 say

00:30:30.820 mode of

00:30:32.760 attack

00:30:33.220 when talking

00:30:33.960 about the

00:30:34.620 pandemic

00:30:35.580 has

00:30:36.380 conspicuously

00:30:37.220 changed

00:30:37.760 closer to

00:30:39.880 the

00:30:40.220 let us

00:30:40.860 free

00:30:41.260 model

00:30:41.920 which

00:30:42.880 suggests

00:30:43.360 that the

00:30:44.020 powers

00:30:45.540 behind the

00:30:46.380 power

00:30:46.680 whoever they

00:30:47.320 may be

00:30:47.760 are also

00:30:48.820 in that

00:30:49.300 frame of

00:30:49.820 mind

00:30:50.100 meaning

00:30:51.220 that

00:30:51.640 both

00:30:52.260 sides

00:30:52.720 seem to

00:30:53.140 be moving

00:30:53.620 toward the

00:30:54.020 same place

00:30:54.640 but the

00:30:55.680 right is

00:30:56.400 already there

00:30:57.060 and the

00:30:57.920 left has

00:30:58.360 to have

00:30:58.960 a reason

00:30:59.680 to be

00:31:00.000 there

00:31:00.240 in other

00:31:01.020 words

00:31:01.180 they want

00:31:01.520 to be

00:31:01.700 there

00:31:01.900 too

00:31:02.180 but they

00:31:03.300 need a

00:31:03.660 because

00:31:04.400 could be

00:31:05.860 a fake

00:31:06.160 because

00:31:06.580 but you

00:31:06.960 need some

00:31:07.500 reason to

00:31:08.100 give why

00:31:08.440 you changed

00:31:08.920 so the

00:31:10.900 Jennifer Rubin

00:31:11.620 signal seems

00:31:12.580 to be a

00:31:13.420 signal that

00:31:14.160 the left

00:31:14.600 wants to

00:31:15.280 get there

00:31:15.760 and is

00:31:16.920 trying to

00:31:17.660 get there

00:31:18.080 but at the

00:31:19.540 same time

00:31:20.040 in the

00:31:20.460 Wall Street

00:31:20.840 Journal

00:31:21.220 an article

00:31:22.260 that I

00:31:22.660 found

00:31:23.020 surprising

00:31:24.260 and it's

00:31:26.000 surprising

00:31:26.420 because we

00:31:27.080 had the

00:31:27.700 hydroxychloroquine

00:31:28.800 experience

00:31:29.480 and we

00:31:30.260 had the

00:31:30.580 ivermectin

00:31:31.220 experience

00:31:31.820 meaning

00:31:32.500 things that

00:31:33.220 many smart

00:31:34.000 people thought

00:31:34.680 totally

00:31:35.220 definitely

00:31:35.600 work

00:31:36.060 but the

00:31:37.520 powers that

00:31:38.180 be said

00:31:38.880 totally

00:31:39.740 definitely

00:31:40.160 unproven

00:31:40.800 don't use

00:31:41.680 them

00:31:41.880 and now

00:31:43.820 we've got

00:31:44.080 a new

00:31:44.300 one

00:31:44.600 fluvoxamine

00:31:46.040 existing

00:31:47.020 medication

00:31:47.680 used for

00:31:48.920 things such

00:31:49.800 as OCD

00:31:51.240 which is

00:31:53.440 interesting

00:31:53.800 because as

00:31:54.300 it modulates

00:31:55.840 inflammation

00:31:56.320 I think

00:31:57.180 that's the

00:31:57.580 same as

00:31:57.920 reducing

00:31:58.340 inflammation

00:31:58.940 but maybe

00:31:59.900 modulate

00:32:00.400 has a

00:32:00.840 little more

00:32:01.120 nuance

00:32:01.460 to it

00:32:01.980 and so

00:32:03.460 this drug

00:32:04.200 which works

00:32:04.800 for OCD

00:32:05.300 modulates

00:32:05.980 inflammation

00:32:06.460 which makes

00:32:08.000 me wonder

00:32:08.520 is OCD

00:32:09.580 actually

00:32:11.020 inflammation

00:32:11.740 of the

00:32:12.040 brain

00:32:12.280 is that

00:32:13.280 what causes

00:32:13.760 it

00:32:14.020 and then

00:32:15.760 I googled

00:32:16.840 that

00:32:17.200 and sure

00:32:17.680 enough

00:32:17.960 there are

00:32:18.320 smart people

00:32:18.880 who think

00:32:19.300 that inflammation

00:32:19.920 in the brain

00:32:20.720 is what

00:32:21.160 causes

00:32:21.640 OCD

00:32:23.560 and then

00:32:24.960 I thought

00:32:25.260 to myself

00:32:25.760 is

00:32:26.740 inflammation

00:32:27.280 everything

00:32:27.840 like is

00:32:28.680 everything

00:32:29.040 inflammation

00:32:29.560 if we

00:32:30.460 could find

00:32:30.900 a way

00:32:31.200 to manage

00:32:31.780 our

00:32:31.960 inflammation

00:32:32.440 or even

00:32:32.920 find out

00:32:33.360 what's

00:32:33.620 causing

00:32:33.960 us

00:32:34.240 to be

00:32:35.000 so much

00:32:35.820 more easily

00:32:36.600 inflamed

00:32:37.200 I think

00:32:37.900 it's chemicals

00:32:38.500 and pollution

00:32:39.160 in the environment

00:32:39.920 or our diet

00:32:41.140 I feel

00:32:42.100 I feel like

00:32:42.260 there's something

00:32:42.880 environmental

00:32:43.660 that humans

00:32:44.900 have created

00:32:45.460 for themselves

00:32:46.120 that is

00:32:47.660 making us

00:32:48.540 be inflamed

00:32:49.180 all the time

00:32:49.840 because you

00:32:50.640 feel people

00:32:51.580 are being

00:32:52.000 just consistently

00:32:53.340 having problems

00:32:54.660 with inflammation

00:32:55.300 it doesn't matter

00:32:56.420 what your problem

00:32:57.160 is

00:32:57.420 you also have

00:32:58.640 inflammation

00:32:59.180 now I get

00:33:00.160 that inflammation

00:33:00.620 is a sign

00:33:01.360 of a problem

00:33:01.900 so that I might

00:33:03.380 just be thinking

00:33:04.080 backwards

00:33:04.580 oh if you have

00:33:05.500 a problem

00:33:06.020 that causes

00:33:07.860 inflammation

00:33:08.420 or associated

00:33:09.200 with it

00:33:09.460 it's not

00:33:09.780 that the

00:33:10.060 inflammation

00:33:10.600 causes

00:33:11.780 the condition

00:33:12.680 or does it

00:33:14.720 or does it

00:33:15.980 because it's

00:33:16.820 easy to imagine

00:33:17.620 that OCD

00:33:18.800 is a

00:33:19.640 brain that's

00:33:21.460 not functioning

00:33:22.520 as smoothly

00:33:23.480 as it should

00:33:24.220 and inflammation

00:33:25.740 one would imagine

00:33:26.940 would be a reason

00:33:27.840 that would cause that

00:33:28.600 somebody says

00:33:30.100 Jack Chellum

00:33:30.920 called it

00:33:31.480 decades ago

00:33:32.260 somebody says

00:33:33.560 sugar is everything

00:33:34.500 that could be

00:33:36.320 could sugar

00:33:37.580 be the thing

00:33:38.080 that's causing

00:33:38.560 us to

00:33:39.060 experience

00:33:39.800 more inflammation

00:33:40.520 yeah anyway

00:33:44.380 these are just

00:33:44.940 speculations

00:33:45.640 and questions

00:33:46.220 but this

00:33:47.340 drug that exists

00:33:48.680 doctors could

00:33:49.620 recommend this

00:33:50.500 off label

00:33:51.840 because

00:33:52.480 initial trials

00:33:54.560 with it

00:33:55.020 that are not

00:33:56.460 randomized

00:33:56.820 controlled trials

00:33:57.660 so they don't

00:33:58.140 have the gold

00:33:58.660 standard test

00:33:59.400 for this

00:33:59.780 surprise

00:34:00.460 but the

00:34:02.100 ones that they

00:34:03.060 do have

00:34:03.540 which are

00:34:03.860 lower quality

00:34:04.620 kind of

00:34:05.160 evidence

00:34:05.640 are really

00:34:07.040 strong

00:34:07.620 really strong

00:34:10.140 but

00:34:11.640 so was

00:34:13.020 ivermectin

00:34:13.800 so was

00:34:16.200 hydroxychloroquine

00:34:17.560 but

00:34:19.780 apparently

00:34:20.980 the Wall Street

00:34:21.680 Journal

00:34:22.020 and they

00:34:23.100 call that out

00:34:24.520 as a problem

00:34:25.120 so listen to this

00:34:25.940 so although

00:34:27.320 it's generally

00:34:27.920 legal to do

00:34:28.800 off label

00:34:29.640 prescriptions

00:34:30.420 so doctors

00:34:31.740 could

00:34:32.300 legally

00:34:33.920 prescribe it

00:34:36.100 for anything

00:34:36.720 they wanted

00:34:37.200 as long as

00:34:37.640 it made sense

00:34:38.300 as long as

00:34:39.620 their medical

00:34:40.060 judgment

00:34:40.540 they had a

00:34:41.680 reason for it

00:34:42.520 totally legal

00:34:43.740 even if it's

00:34:44.820 not approved

00:34:45.280 for that use

00:34:45.940 but

00:34:47.640 what happened

00:34:49.220 to the doctors

00:34:49.960 who prescribed

00:34:50.980 ivermectin

00:34:52.160 was that good

00:34:54.000 for their

00:34:54.340 careers

00:34:54.740 forget about

00:34:56.340 whether ivermectin

00:34:57.260 worked or

00:34:57.760 didn't work

00:34:58.300 separate question

00:34:59.120 was it good

00:35:00.340 for the careers

00:35:01.040 of the doctors

00:35:01.780 to recommend it

00:35:02.780 and then get

00:35:03.680 demonized

00:35:04.360 not so much

00:35:06.280 not so much

00:35:07.320 and here we have

00:35:08.520 a problem where

00:35:09.080 the national

00:35:10.380 what is it

00:35:11.160 the NIH

00:35:11.760 doesn't

00:35:15.460 doesn't recommend

00:35:16.320 it

00:35:16.620 so you've put

00:35:18.120 doctors in a

00:35:18.860 position where

00:35:19.500 they would be

00:35:19.980 giving something

00:35:20.660 that is

00:35:21.540 specifically

00:35:22.380 not forbidden

00:35:24.580 but unrecommended

00:35:25.860 I don't know

00:35:29.140 if there's a

00:35:29.480 better way to

00:35:29.840 say that

00:35:30.240 it would be

00:35:31.160 one thing to

00:35:31.720 use something

00:35:32.220 for off label

00:35:33.060 use

00:35:33.520 if everyone

00:35:34.680 else in the

00:35:35.200 world had been

00:35:35.720 silent about it

00:35:36.860 that's just

00:35:38.040 you and your

00:35:38.480 doctor making

00:35:39.200 a good

00:35:39.600 judgment

00:35:40.460 you hope

00:35:42.140 but

00:35:43.200 if the

00:35:44.620 national

00:35:45.300 institute of

00:35:45.960 health

00:35:46.280 is saying

00:35:47.080 don't do

00:35:47.580 this

00:35:48.020 because it's

00:35:48.880 unproven

00:35:49.420 then the

00:35:50.800 doctors

00:35:51.180 are a little

00:35:51.680 bit more

00:35:52.400 than the

00:35:56.120 doctors

00:35:56.440 yeah I know

00:35:57.780 you've been

00:35:58.080 telling me

00:35:58.440 about fluvoxamine

00:35:59.420 but the

00:36:00.720 there's a lot

00:36:01.320 there's a lot

00:36:01.940 of these

00:36:02.300 drugs that

00:36:03.440 I guess I

00:36:04.200 could have

00:36:04.420 talked about

00:36:04.800 more

00:36:05.040 but the

00:36:06.020 fact that

00:36:06.400 the

00:36:06.660 Wall Street

00:36:07.300 Journal

00:36:07.600 is certainly

00:36:08.480 presenting this

00:36:09.200 as a

00:36:09.620 solution

00:36:10.040 and here's

00:36:11.880 the

00:36:12.080 here's the

00:36:12.780 payoff

00:36:13.240 it would

00:36:14.400 cost you

00:36:15.400 like four

00:36:17.600 dollars for

00:36:18.500 your entire

00:36:19.160 ten day

00:36:19.760 course of

00:36:20.440 fluvoxamine

00:36:21.120 four dollars

00:36:23.600 so there is

00:36:25.820 now a

00:36:26.320 basically a

00:36:27.140 four dollar

00:36:27.960 pill

00:36:28.440 you know you

00:36:29.640 get a number

00:36:30.120 of them but

00:36:30.700 four dollars

00:36:31.600 that smashes

00:36:33.880 covid if you

00:36:35.080 take it early

00:36:35.760 compare that

00:36:37.540 to the new

00:36:38.480 pills that are

00:36:39.180 being approved

00:36:39.840 that will be

00:36:40.380 thousands of

00:36:41.220 dollars

00:36:41.700 compared to

00:36:44.480 monoclonal

00:36:45.120 antibodies which

00:36:45.760 apparently

00:36:46.640 monoclonal

00:36:47.360 antibodies are

00:36:48.000 becoming less

00:36:48.840 useful because

00:36:50.460 the new

00:36:51.260 variants aren't

00:36:51.960 responding as

00:36:52.640 well so I

00:36:53.300 think Omicron

00:36:53.940 doesn't care so

00:36:55.440 much about your

00:36:56.000 monoclonal

00:36:56.600 antibodies that's

00:36:58.100 one of the

00:36:58.420 reasons the

00:36:58.880 government was

00:36:59.460 using for

00:37:00.020 reducing their

00:37:01.300 use which

00:37:03.000 may have been

00:37:03.400 a lie you

00:37:03.900 don't know

00:37:04.240 so do you

00:37:07.680 think that

00:37:08.360 fluvoxamine could

00:37:09.340 ever break

00:37:09.920 through assuming

00:37:11.600 it works in

00:37:13.060 the face of

00:37:13.700 the pharma

00:37:14.120 companies would

00:37:15.540 lose let's

00:37:17.200 say if

00:37:17.440 fluvoxamine works

00:37:19.080 the way these

00:37:20.780 unreliable tests

00:37:22.260 say it would

00:37:22.820 the big pharma

00:37:25.240 would lose

00:37:26.120 give me a

00:37:27.560 number how

00:37:28.600 much money

00:37:29.020 would big

00:37:29.460 pharma lose

00:37:30.280 in vaccinations

00:37:31.060 and covid

00:37:31.880 pills if this

00:37:33.300 existing little

00:37:34.140 I imagine it's

00:37:35.920 I don't know

00:37:36.500 is it generic

00:37:37.540 by now fluvoxamine

00:37:39.140 it's so cheap

00:37:40.100 it looks like

00:37:40.540 it must be

00:37:40.920 generic but I

00:37:41.640 could be wrong

00:37:42.200 about that

00:37:43.020 three trillion

00:37:45.660 I don't think

00:37:47.680 it's billions

00:37:48.180 I think we're

00:37:49.300 into trillions

00:37:49.860 aren't we

00:37:50.280 I think we're

00:37:51.620 talking about

00:37:52.220 the pharma

00:37:53.320 companies having

00:37:54.680 three trillion

00:37:55.600 dollars of

00:37:56.420 you know over

00:37:57.180 years of

00:37:58.220 potential loss

00:37:58.960 do you think

00:38:00.240 the pharma

00:38:00.680 companies would

00:38:01.380 allow a

00:38:02.320 four dollar

00:38:03.040 drug to wipe

00:38:04.680 them out of

00:38:05.320 their trillions

00:38:05.880 of dollars

00:38:06.380 and what would

00:38:07.480 they do to

00:38:07.960 stop that from

00:38:08.560 happening how

00:38:09.860 much would

00:38:10.280 they spend

00:38:10.900 to protect

00:38:11.800 a revenue

00:38:12.880 stream of

00:38:13.600 three trillion

00:38:14.160 dollars or

00:38:14.860 something like

00:38:15.460 that billions

00:38:17.800 billions you

00:38:20.180 would just

00:38:20.640 open the

00:38:21.060 wallet and

00:38:21.500 it would just

00:38:21.820 scream out

00:38:22.640 so I don't

00:38:25.300 know if you

00:38:25.720 can you can

00:38:27.020 trust any of

00:38:28.100 this apparently

00:38:29.060 there was a

00:38:29.600 study of a

00:38:31.440 whole bunch of

00:38:31.880 people who got

00:38:32.600 it at a one

00:38:33.600 of the local

00:38:34.120 racetracks here

00:38:34.980 near me because

00:38:36.580 everything's about

00:38:37.260 me and the

00:38:39.160 people who took

00:38:39.720 the fluvoxamine

00:38:40.640 had zero

00:38:41.340 problems in

00:38:42.460 terms of death

00:38:42.980 and major

00:38:43.580 hospitalization and

00:38:45.020 the control

00:38:45.520 group although

00:38:46.760 it's not a

00:38:47.220 randomized control

00:38:47.880 group the

00:38:48.680 control group had

00:38:49.500 a number of

00:38:50.180 problems so

00:38:51.640 every time it's

00:38:52.420 tested they get

00:38:53.040 the same result

00:38:53.800 which is the

00:38:54.780 fluvoxamine is

00:38:55.620 nearly 100%

00:38:56.460 effective and the

00:38:58.200 control group has

00:38:59.280 trouble but

00:39:01.140 again I'm sorry

00:39:05.600 Shaki reminds me

00:39:06.740 it's not about

00:39:07.320 me it's about

00:39:07.800 Shaki and I

00:39:08.860 think you're

00:39:09.160 right Shaki

00:39:09.560 Scott said

00:39:12.460 last week that

00:39:13.160 big pharma is

00:39:13.820 not trying to

00:39:14.440 stop ivermectin

00:39:15.400 nope never

00:39:16.140 said that

00:39:16.620 Dr. Johnson

00:39:17.420 will hide you

00:39:18.780 again he comes

00:39:20.140 back every day

00:39:20.840 I don't know if

00:39:21.940 it's a new

00:39:22.300 account or what

00:39:23.000 never said

00:39:24.480 that

00:39:24.820 here's my

00:39:29.800 thing that's

00:39:30.520 bothering me

00:39:31.120 lately at the

00:39:32.540 beginning of the

00:39:33.020 pandemic a lot of

00:39:33.840 people made

00:39:34.340 predictions and

00:39:35.560 said hey let's

00:39:36.580 just ignore this

00:39:37.320 pandemic and it'll

00:39:38.120 go away and it's

00:39:39.020 just a cold and

00:39:39.940 other people said

00:39:40.940 it's the worst

00:39:41.420 thing in the world

00:39:42.000 and millions are

00:39:43.780 dying they can't

00:39:44.700 both be right but

00:39:46.760 we're at this point

00:39:47.920 now where we're

00:39:49.260 we're saying that

00:39:50.460 our experts were

00:39:51.560 lying to us about

00:39:52.840 vaccines who was

00:39:55.880 lying I want to see

00:39:58.340 your opinions because

00:39:58.940 I know a lot of you

00:39:59.580 have this opinion who

00:40:01.180 exactly was lying about

00:40:02.860 vaccines pharma

00:40:06.360 Fauci I'm saying

00:40:07.460 Fauci Trump

00:40:08.960 and media I

00:40:19.860 know do you

00:40:21.520 think do you

00:40:22.820 think that the

00:40:23.720 data that came

00:40:24.840 out of the big

00:40:26.760 vaccine trials

00:40:28.160 showed that the

00:40:30.140 vaccine wears off

00:40:31.940 do we have a

00:40:34.420 smoking gun because

00:40:35.720 I haven't seen it

00:40:36.300 yet so I'm going

00:40:38.400 to push the

00:40:39.140 innocent until

00:40:39.980 proven guilty

00:40:40.760 standard because I

00:40:42.220 think somebody

00:40:43.120 needs to for the

00:40:45.720 pharma companies as

00:40:46.740 well now I'm not

00:40:48.040 I'm not pro pharma

00:40:49.300 in the sense that

00:40:50.860 it's unambiguously

00:40:52.500 clear that the

00:40:53.960 industry is criminal

00:40:55.980 lots of the time

00:40:57.140 I think we'd all

00:40:58.660 agree with that

00:40:59.300 but it doesn't

00:41:00.080 mean it's all

00:41:00.520 criminal all the

00:41:01.240 time right there's

00:41:02.700 got to be like real

00:41:04.140 scientists doing real

00:41:05.200 work somewhere there

00:41:06.060 I think I don't

00:41:07.920 think it's a complete

00:41:08.600 criminal organization

00:41:09.580 making mock

00:41:11.280 treatments that

00:41:12.220 they're trying to

00:41:12.740 convince you worked

00:41:13.620 some of the time

00:41:14.980 but not most of the

00:41:16.300 time and so my

00:41:17.640 question is this

00:41:18.460 where's the smoking

00:41:20.160 gun where's the

00:41:22.340 data that says they

00:41:23.900 knew that these

00:41:25.100 would wear off or

00:41:26.500 that their

00:41:27.020 effectiveness would

00:41:29.000 wane because I

00:41:31.020 feel like it

00:41:31.560 probably exists

00:41:32.420 don't you do you

00:41:34.540 remember at the

00:41:35.060 beginning of the

00:41:35.580 pandemic the

00:41:36.480 experts who worked

00:41:37.460 in this field said

00:41:38.920 we've been trying to

00:41:39.700 get a vaccine for

00:41:40.560 coronavirus for

00:41:41.540 decades and we're

00:41:43.140 not even close

00:41:43.920 because there's

00:41:45.520 something about it

00:41:46.340 that we haven't

00:41:46.800 figured out how to

00:41:47.980 do it and then

00:41:49.780 suddenly we had

00:41:50.600 vaccines after

00:41:52.440 decades of the

00:41:53.340 experts working

00:41:54.080 there saying yeah

00:41:54.780 we don't we're

00:41:55.840 not even close

00:41:56.440 so were the

00:41:59.380 experts who said

00:42:00.520 we don't know how

00:42:01.800 to make a vaccine

00:42:02.740 and we're not even

00:42:03.620 close did they

00:42:05.900 know that if you

00:42:07.760 tried the

00:42:09.000 effectiveness would

00:42:09.900 wear off or did

00:42:11.740 they not even know

00:42:12.500 how to make the

00:42:13.020 vaccines that we

00:42:13.820 ended up making in

00:42:14.740 less than a year

00:42:15.540 were those experts

00:42:17.580 aware of the

00:42:19.860 let's say mRNA

00:42:20.800 technique and

00:42:22.100 whatever J&J

00:42:23.300 used were they

00:42:24.680 aware of those

00:42:25.340 techniques and

00:42:26.160 did they know

00:42:26.640 from their own

00:42:27.320 experiences that

00:42:28.980 if somebody made

00:42:29.920 a vaccine its

00:42:31.280 efficacy would

00:42:32.260 trail off too

00:42:33.180 quickly show me

00:42:35.420 that document or

00:42:37.560 show me any

00:42:38.700 investigative

00:42:39.360 journalist who's

00:42:40.140 looking for it

00:42:40.880 here's where I'd

00:42:42.440 start find the

00:42:44.420 people who said in

00:42:45.440 the beginning it

00:42:46.720 should be just a

00:42:47.360 Google search

00:42:48.000 because I saw it

00:42:48.920 publicly just do a

00:42:50.160 Google search find

00:42:51.580 the experts who

00:42:52.340 said in the

00:42:52.900 beginning there's

00:42:53.500 no way to do

00:42:54.100 it it can't be

00:42:55.180 done this this

00:42:56.040 quickly find those

00:42:57.840 experts and ask

00:42:59.420 them this one

00:42:59.980 question were you

00:43:01.760 aware from all of

00:43:02.920 your experience that

00:43:04.760 you could make

00:43:05.580 something that would

00:43:06.260 make a difference

00:43:07.060 like our current

00:43:08.300 vaccines do but

00:43:09.700 that it wouldn't

00:43:10.400 necessarily stop

00:43:11.380 transmission and

00:43:13.040 that it wouldn't

00:43:13.760 necessarily have the

00:43:14.880 efficacy that makes

00:43:16.380 it a good vaccine

00:43:17.240 were the experts

00:43:19.620 aware of that at

00:43:20.860 the very beginning

00:43:21.700 then you'd have to

00:43:24.140 find one at say

00:43:25.900 Pfizer or what is

00:43:30.120 it the other

00:43:32.420 company that you'd

00:43:34.160 have to find some

00:43:34.740 document that says

00:43:35.660 yeah we can't do

00:43:36.700 this but we're going

00:43:37.380 to put on a vaccine

00:43:38.440 anyway because the

00:43:39.740 vaccine will do

00:43:40.400 something it just

00:43:42.020 won't do what people

00:43:43.980 expect it to do do

00:43:45.560 do you think such a

00:43:46.880 data trail exists

00:43:47.920 because here's the

00:43:49.920 problem and Dr. Drew

00:43:51.480 was reminding me of

00:43:52.740 this in a different

00:43:53.560 context the other

00:43:54.440 day that people are

00:43:57.380 true believers of

00:43:58.520 things that aren't

00:43:59.180 true and you can

00:44:01.620 easily become a true

00:44:02.620 believer because all

00:44:04.160 of the incentive is

00:44:05.060 for you to believe

00:44:05.600 something imagine you

00:44:07.100 work for a big pharma

00:44:07.900 company and the

00:44:11.260 experts said you can't

00:44:12.200 make this vaccine but

00:44:13.840 you try anyway it's

00:44:15.180 sort of a patriotic as

00:44:16.880 well as commercial

00:44:17.980 thing that makes

00:44:18.840 sense you try anyway

00:44:20.320 how easy would it be

00:44:22.400 to convince yourself

00:44:23.420 that you had succeeded

00:44:24.380 when you hadn't in

00:44:27.160 other words even if

00:44:28.240 you're looking at your

00:44:28.900 own data would you be

00:44:31.620 lying necessarily or

00:44:33.200 would you actually see

00:44:34.220 it as working even if

00:44:36.100 the data didn't quite

00:44:37.180 say that as clearly as

00:44:39.160 you are saying you

00:44:41.220 know there's this weird

00:44:41.900 gray area where people

00:44:43.460 actually talk themselves

00:44:44.760 into the lie and then

00:44:47.380 you have to ask

00:44:47.900 yourself oh wait is it

00:44:48.960 a lie if they believe

00:44:49.760 it because if they

00:44:51.240 believe it it's just

00:44:51.980 being wrong or you

00:44:54.000 know being brainwashed

00:44:54.780 themselves so it's a

00:44:57.360 weird gray area and I

00:44:58.880 think it's unproductive

00:45:00.200 to imagine that all of

00:45:01.480 it is an intentional lie

00:45:03.040 because I suspect the

00:45:05.300 people who knew it

00:45:06.180 wouldn't work that

00:45:07.980 knowledge may have died

00:45:09.360 between the people who

00:45:11.260 have been trying for

00:45:12.080 years and the people

00:45:13.200 who actually developed

00:45:14.100 these vaccines that

00:45:15.640 there may have been a

00:45:16.860 like a communication

00:45:18.920 gap or far more likely

00:45:22.040 because I imagine the

00:45:22.900 industry talks to each

00:45:23.940 other a lot far more

00:45:25.680 likely there was a

00:45:26.840 cognitive thing that

00:45:28.040 happens with the

00:45:28.700 scientists to think that

00:45:30.560 they had you know done

00:45:32.320 the thing you even see

00:45:33.940 it on you see it on

00:45:34.840 Twitter people will say I

00:45:36.700 have the answer this

00:45:37.700 that saves the world here

00:45:39.480 it is it's vitamin D

00:45:40.820 even I've done that so

00:45:43.120 the the the draw to be

00:45:46.100 the savior you know the

00:45:47.680 one who came up with the

00:45:48.720 thing that saved the

00:45:49.500 world is so strong it

00:45:51.700 just bends your brain

00:45:52.780 and maybe not everybody

00:45:54.800 you have to have a

00:45:55.380 certain personality type

00:45:56.500 which I have so I'm

00:45:59.020 especially susceptible to

00:46:02.340 illusions of my own

00:46:04.520 success

00:46:05.100 everybody I want you to

00:46:08.860 hear that clearly that

00:46:10.740 my personality type is

00:46:12.800 extra sensitive to this

00:46:14.620 mistake which is to

00:46:16.720 think that I figured out

00:46:17.780 the solution to the

00:46:18.760 world because I want to

00:46:20.400 believe that my

00:46:21.660 personality is so wired

00:46:23.440 toward I want to be

00:46:24.980 useful and make a

00:46:25.880 difference and you know

00:46:26.760 especially a big

00:46:27.420 difference that if I

00:46:29.120 thought I were close to

00:46:30.300 it my brain would say I

00:46:32.180 got it

00:46:32.660 right I know that I

00:46:36.100 know that about myself

00:46:37.000 because I've like I've

00:46:38.420 experienced it I know my

00:46:40.000 brain will push me from

00:46:41.160 hey this looks like a

00:46:42.520 good thing to work into

00:46:44.000 oh yeah this is going to

00:46:45.580 save the world I think it

00:46:46.920 happened to lots of

00:46:47.940 people with hydroxychloroquine

00:46:49.400 they wanted it to work but

00:46:52.540 they also wanted to be the

00:46:53.600 one who said it works

00:46:54.720 right it happened with

00:46:57.200 ivermectin people definitely

00:46:59.360 wanted it to work but they

00:47:01.240 also wanted to be the one

00:47:02.840 who said it would work and

00:47:05.540 and I'm I'm more

00:47:06.920 susceptible than any of

00:47:08.660 you I think to that

00:47:11.120 cognitive error so if

00:47:13.640 you're keeping me honest

00:47:14.720 that's where you should

00:47:16.480 look especially hard because

00:47:18.900 if if I'm deluded this is

00:47:22.200 an area I know in advance I

00:47:23.640 could easily be deluded in so

00:47:26.080 just you know keep me honest

00:47:28.220 that's that's your job keep

00:47:30.540 me honest on that all right

00:47:32.020 so I'm not so sure people

00:47:36.220 lied to us I think there's

00:47:37.180 something else deeper than

00:47:38.100 going on

00:47:38.820 here's some basic things

00:47:43.120 about the pandemic that are

00:47:44.600 going to be so frustrating

00:47:45.740 when it's over

00:47:46.600 that we have these two movies

00:47:50.300 right one one movie that

00:47:53.020 there wasn't much of anything

00:47:54.440 that happened if we'd ignored

00:47:55.920 it we would have been fine

00:47:56.960 and then the other movie is

00:47:59.120 that we we save millions of

00:48:01.080 lives they can't both be true

00:48:03.620 we either save millions of

00:48:06.340 lives or we didn't and

00:48:09.040 here's a question that also is

00:48:11.000 in this category did

00:48:13.020 flattening the curve work now

00:48:15.480 let me give you some context

00:48:16.640 before you answer just hold

00:48:18.100 the question but don't answer

00:48:19.180 it yet right because I know you

00:48:20.820 have an answer but wait till I

00:48:22.280 give you new information because

00:48:24.380 the new information might modify

00:48:26.200 what you think okay as Ian

00:48:30.920 Bremmer is tweeting yesterday

00:48:32.500 we have nearly 450,000 known

00:48:35.460 COVID cases in the US it's a new

00:48:37.200 record by a long margin so the

00:48:39.620 number of new COVID cases just new

00:48:42.380 record that is in the context of

00:48:45.960 having no availability of tests so

00:48:49.420 we reach a record number of

00:48:50.900 infections but the real record is I

00:48:55.700 don't know some multiple that

00:48:57.340 because how many people have it and

00:48:59.200 they couldn't test so it's not

00:49:00.580 confirmed or how many people

00:49:02.500 tested at home do have it but

00:49:05.160 didn't report it to anybody now I

00:49:06.960 guess they can do this from some

00:49:08.640 kind of statistical way but I

00:49:11.440 can't imagine that we're capturing

00:49:12.740 all the infected people it doesn't

00:49:15.220 seem possible to me but as Ian

00:49:19.040 Bremmer points out if Omicron had hit

00:49:21.220 a year ago because a lot of this

00:49:22.540 spike is Omicron it would be

00:49:25.020 apocalyptic how many of you would

00:49:27.580 agree that if we had this rate of

00:49:30.280 infection like through the roof

00:49:31.640 infections but it had been at the

00:49:33.620 beginning of the pandemic with the

00:49:35.120 the worse or variant the things

00:49:38.500 would have been much worse that

00:49:39.600 seems fair right now here's the

00:49:41.780 question did we delay long enough to

00:49:46.600 get us to Omicron while keeping the

00:49:49.420 number of deaths lower than it would

00:49:50.900 have been because if we did I would

00:49:53.160 say flattening the curve not in two

00:49:55.160 weeks of course but that the idea of

00:49:57.740 flattening the curve actually worked

00:49:59.240 but I don't know if you can really

00:50:02.600 conclude that can you because you

00:50:04.100 don't know what the other situation

00:50:05.680 would look like exactly there's no

00:50:07.240 control but my feeling is that

00:50:11.980 flattening the curve worked because it

00:50:15.120 bought us time to get to the better

00:50:17.840 understanding of therapeutics I'll call

00:50:21.100 the vaccines a therapeutic so you

00:50:22.880 don't argue with me and it got us to

00:50:25.520 the point where we had another variant

00:50:27.200 but the counter argument would be the

00:50:29.940 variant would have come sooner if we

00:50:33.200 just let it spread through the

00:50:34.420 population so if we'd taken our million

00:50:36.520 deaths early you know maybe we'd be

00:50:39.820 done instead of spreading out our

00:50:41.920 million deaths but if what we did was

00:50:45.160 spread out the deaths that were going

00:50:46.680 to happen anyway and kept our

00:50:49.240 hospitals somewhat functioning I feel

00:50:52.620 like flattening the curve sort of

00:50:53.900 worked how many of you would push back

00:50:57.260 against that now I'm not talking about

00:50:58.620 the two weeks to flatten the curve I'm

00:51:00.920 talking about the idea of flattening it

00:51:03.880 until you you you had new tools didn't

00:51:06.740 didn't we succeed flattening it until

00:51:08.780 we had better tools it looks like that

00:51:11.440 but I don't think I don't think you can

00:51:12.940 conclude it yeah the people say no I

00:51:15.440 respect that opinion because I don't

00:51:18.360 think there's any way to prove it this

00:51:19.760 is sort of like you have to take your

00:51:21.540 life experience and put that filter on

00:51:23.980 it and say well I don't know I feel

00:51:26.320 like it worked now you have to to be fair

00:51:29.420 you have to throw in all of the deaths

00:51:31.000 that happen because of the restrictions

00:51:33.160 and all the mental health problems and

00:51:35.820 that's not nothing that's a lot so if

00:51:38.560 you're doing a real cost-benefit analysis

00:51:40.320 I don't know if you could ever

00:51:41.600 untangle this but I'll let me go this

00:51:45.220 far I would say you can't tell if the

00:51:48.080 flattening the curve thing worked

00:51:49.940 entirely it looks like it did to me but

00:51:53.520 I'm open to the possibility that just

00:51:55.400 looking at shit doesn't really tell you

00:51:57.340 a lot you know that's why you have

00:51:59.040 randomized controlled trials you can

00:52:01.000 easily be fooled but I do think that

00:52:04.500 it's ambiguous enough that I would give

00:52:07.940 the leaders at least a little bit of

00:52:09.800 credit for having tried because we don't

00:52:14.860 know if it worked but it looks like it

00:52:18.520 was a good try you know even though it

00:52:20.680 was deeply expensive that's that's what

00:52:23.680 leadership is doing stuff that you

00:52:25.300 wouldn't have done on your own and

00:52:27.020 talking you into it so I point out I

00:52:31.040 like to point out that leaders talk

00:52:33.800 uncertainty whereas experts can have the

00:52:36.540 comfort of talking in probability so

00:52:39.180 your scientists could say well we're 90%

00:52:41.260 sure that this is a good path but if

00:52:44.040 your leader said 90% then people would

00:52:48.000 say 10% is a lot I'm not going to go

00:52:49.760 that direction you want your leaders to

00:52:51.800 say this is the way to go well shouldn't

00:52:54.540 we consider nope this is the way to go

00:52:56.560 but you know there's still some risk

00:52:58.680 nope this is the way to go but you know

00:53:00.700 the scientists are saying maybe nope

00:53:02.580 this is the way to go now is that lying

00:53:05.800 would the leaders be lying by giving you

00:53:09.540 certainty where there is no certainty

00:53:12.520 and the answer is yes that would be

00:53:15.440 definitely lie it also is the the the

00:53:20.120 foundation of all leadership the

00:53:22.860 foundation of leadership is acting

00:53:24.660 confident more than you are because if

00:53:27.540 you don't act confident people aren't

00:53:28.940 going to follow you and the fact is that

00:53:32.000 the leaders are guessing and you know

00:53:34.020 estimating and predicting and stuff so

00:53:36.140 they're not going to be right all the

00:53:37.120 time but they need to convince you that

00:53:38.920 they are right all the time you're not

00:53:40.360 you're not going to you're not going to

00:53:41.980 follow them into battle with a 50% chance

00:53:44.220 of winning you want them to lie to you

00:53:46.340 yeah we're winning this thing we got

00:53:47.960 this so if you can't get comfortable

00:53:52.000 with the fact that leaders have to talk

00:53:57.500 uncertainty and it's a lie it's a lie

00:54:01.340 anytime they talk uncertainty but they

00:54:03.940 have to if you can't handle that you

00:54:07.520 know if you can't handle those two

00:54:08.860 things simultaneously then nothing makes

00:54:10.900 sense you'll be confused by the world

00:54:12.960 Machiavelli's underbelly one of my

00:54:16.020 favorite follows on Twitter points out a

00:54:19.040 story in the new scientists so they took

00:54:21.640 some human brain cells and put them in a

00:54:23.380 petri dish and taught those human brain

00:54:26.380 cells how to play pong what what they took

00:54:33.500 human brain cells that didn't know

00:54:34.960 anything and trained it to play pong and

00:54:39.660 then they put it in a competition against AI and

00:54:43.720 they found out that although AI can pong

00:54:46.900 faster the human brain cells were quicker to

00:54:51.200 learn on their own so the human brain cells

00:54:54.500 organized and learned how to play pong better

00:54:57.720 than artificial intelligence but once

00:55:00.880 artificial intelligence got there it could

00:55:02.420 operate faster

00:55:03.260 now here's a Machiavelli's underbelly's comment on

00:55:10.060 this and I want you to like just let this settle in

00:55:14.000 for a minute all right I'm going to tell you

00:55:16.440 something that won't maybe instantly make sense

00:55:19.720 just let us settle in all right it goes like this

00:55:23.040 based on this experiment this is what the tweet

00:55:27.680 was we now know with 100% certainty that at least

00:55:31.740 one brain he's talking about the brain essentially

00:55:34.920 the brain cells in the petri dish he's calling that

00:55:37.980 one brain we now know with 100% certainty that at

00:55:41.220 least one brain is trapped in a simulation

00:55:43.720 all but guaranteeing that we too are living in a

00:55:48.640 simulation

00:55:49.140 I let that sink in the the brain cells in the

00:55:56.420 petri dish effectively since they're operating in a

00:55:59.220 coordinated manner are a form of human brain that

00:56:03.820 believes it lives in the universe in which the only

00:56:06.220 thing that exists is pong and this brain cell does not

00:56:13.200 know that there's a universe that created this situation

00:56:17.200 and and taught it to play pong the brain cell thinks pong

00:56:23.480 is reality and knows nothing else and it's a human

00:56:26.460 brain now and then do you like the second part of

00:56:32.920 this all but guaranteeing that we too are living in a

00:56:35.720 simulation now the way it guarantees that is simply if

00:56:39.420 you can prove that it's true in one case then you've

00:56:44.400 removed the biggest obstacle to understanding that there's a

00:56:48.120 trillion to one chance that we are a simulation because

00:56:52.240 because you first have to believe it's possible it's possible

00:56:56.600 that a brain could be in a simulation and not know it we have

00:57:01.320 one we actually have a brain in a simulation that doesn't know

00:57:04.700 it so once it's possible then you're just looking at the odds

00:57:09.360 okay well it's possible but what are the odds that's where

00:57:12.280 elon musk comes in to help you with the odds i don't know if you

00:57:15.500 know this but he's good at calculating the odds of things

00:57:18.780 and he's especially good when he gets them wrong because he

00:57:23.940 calculated the odds of succeeding at tesla is very low and then

00:57:27.500 he did it anyway and the odds of spacex succeeding he thought

00:57:31.540 were very low and then he did it anyway so he's really good at

00:57:35.620 calculating odds and then ignoring them

00:57:37.960 and succeeding anyway so i don't know what that means but his

00:57:42.860 argument is that if any simulation could be created people would create

00:57:47.960 them and here we did it could be done and there we did it so those are the

00:57:53.500 two biggest conditions they get you to a vastly greater likelihood that

00:57:58.480 we're a simulation it's possible and if possible humans will do it proven it

00:58:04.940 was possible humans did it well do you think we'll do more of these do you

00:58:12.000 think that ever again anybody will do an experiment in which there is brain cells

00:58:16.920 trying to do something in a petri dish of course and then once you have the

00:58:21.220 second experiment you would have two humanish brains living in a let's say just

00:58:29.780 for simplicity a pong reality compared to one original species so if we're the

00:58:39.320 original species and we created two simulations if you were to transport into

00:58:44.380 the center of any of the simulations that exist there's a two to one chance

00:58:49.020 you're in a fake one by the time you create the second one there's a two to one

00:58:54.780 chance that if you are randomly assigned to a simulation a two to one chance you're in a

00:59:01.300 simulation and that's just with the second experiment after the millionth

00:59:07.200 experiment you can be pretty sure your simulation that's where we're having kind

00:59:15.160 of a mind bender there well Anderson Cooper was getting some internet hate because he did

00:59:21.840 an interview with Bill Gates and in the context of asking about what kind of

00:59:26.940 let's say penalties could be put on the public to make them get vaccinated

00:59:31.780 Anderson floated the suggestion which I doubt was his own suggestion I think it was

00:59:37.080 on you know the list of things that maybe people are talking about he asked Bill

00:59:42.100 Gates about withholding people's social security should they refuse vaccinations now

00:59:47.840 part of the story is that Gates laughed nervously at that and then people people

00:59:53.040 interpreted his nervous evil looking laugh as you know being in favor of something I would

01:00:00.420 like to defend Bill Gates first as I often do by saying I'm I'm sort of the king of the

01:00:07.320 inappropriate laugh when something is awful or just non-standard I laugh at it and I

01:00:16.800 shouldn't but I always do and so if I had been in this interview and Anderson Cooper had asked me

01:00:24.300 if it was feasible or I thought it was a good idea to take away people's social security in other

01:00:30.600 words their own money you know ish and that's not quite true but been paying into social security

01:00:37.160 all your life and then they take it away from you because you don't get a vaccination if somebody

01:00:41.960 suggested that to me on national TV I don't know if I could not smile at that could you I think I would

01:00:51.060 giggle at that because it's so outrageous and and what I saw in Gates reaction was sort of a reaction to the the

01:01:01.460 maybe the extremism of it like it's just kind of funny it's so extreme I don't I didn't recognize that as Bill Gates saying oh yeah let's do some of that

01:01:11.460 I mean I could be wrong maybe later he will say that but I didn't interpret it that way and only because you know

01:01:18.060 everybody everybody generalizes from themselves so if you said to yourself if I were in that situation I wouldn't have laughed

01:01:26.020 probably true you know yourself right and if you know you wouldn't have giggled or smiled in that situation you're probably right

01:01:34.920 but I'm telling you that if I were in that situation I would have giggled and smiled and it wouldn't have meant to anything

01:01:41.320 it just would have meant as an awkward concept it just would trigger me

01:01:45.720 so just be careful about uh generalizing from yourself I won't assume that I can read Bill Gates mind

01:01:52.760 but I'll only ask you to do the same all you know is that he had a reaction you didn't understand

01:01:57.860 that's all you know I wouldn't assume anything beyond that but let's get to Anderson Cooper it

01:02:03.840 was suggested by people that Anderson Cooper might be in favor of this idea of withholding

01:02:08.900 social security if you don't get vaccinated but indeed there is no evidence of that and so the AP

01:02:14.200 did a fact check and said no he was just saying you know what do you think of the idea he wasn't saying

01:02:20.120 he thought it was a good idea and I accept that fact check however as I was about to tweet it

01:02:25.280 and defend Anderson Cooper because I like to defend everybody from fake news right it doesn't matter

01:02:32.080 what team you're on if you're a victim of fake news I think it's useful to point it out only so you can

01:02:37.440 learn it you know see the examples and you know build a bigger build a bigger library in your head of

01:02:42.980 where all this fake news comes from and how they do it and so I was about to jump in and defend

01:02:48.080 Anderson Cooper's against this fake attack against him when I realized he's the one who spreads the

01:02:57.240 fine people hoax the drinking bleak chokes the Russia collusion hoax and you could name a few others

01:03:01.760 and I thought to myself you know sometimes when the universe demands justice you have to get out of

01:03:09.420 the way and I felt like I don't want to be fighting the universe if the universe has decided that he's

01:03:16.500 spread so many dangerous hoaxes that the universe is going to take him out with a hoax I thought well

01:03:23.000 who am I to fight the universe and so I decided and so I decided that I would remove myself from that

01:03:33.500 fight at least on Twitter but I I'm explaining it to you here most people I would have defended

01:03:41.120 I think I would have defended Jake Tapper I know I would have defended Smirkanish I know I would have

01:03:49.400 offended Sanjay Gupta and the same situation and a few others you know I'm leaving out a few but I

01:03:57.200 wouldn't have defended Don Lemon and I wouldn't defend Anderson Cooper because they're hoax spreaders

01:04:04.400 so if they get taken out by hoax well maybe the universe has some kind of a compensating quality

01:04:12.080 we don't know about you could call it karma if you wish speaking of karma have I ever told you that

01:04:21.480 being free of the sense of embarrassment and shame is a superpower I tell you that all the time and it's a

01:04:30.260 superpower which I have who would be texting me at this time of the day

01:04:35.540 let's see if something's blowing up nope but Jim Cramer I think has this superpower the ability to be

01:04:45.240 wrong in public and not let it crush you how many times have you seen me being wrong in public a lot

01:04:53.180 right but I keep coming back in order to do this kind of job you know one of the talents in your

01:04:59.920 talent stack has to be a thick skin which seems ironic I know because I am always fighting on

01:05:06.440 Twitter but that has more to do with you know managing the the brand and some of it's just for fun

01:05:12.420 but I probably handle embarrassment and shame better than you know 99 percent of the public because I

01:05:20.380 practice it's one of those skills that you could practice believe it or not it's a weird skill but

01:05:25.900 if you get shamed and embarrassed enough yeah you just get over it because none of it kills you the

01:05:32.160 the shame and embarrassment is largely an illusion and the illusion is that the thoughts you have of shame

01:05:38.220 and embarrassment are going to translate into the real world and actually affect something they

01:05:43.480 hardly ever do and once you've been shamed and embarrassed enough and you wake up in the morning and

01:05:49.140 your your bagel tastes the same you're like well that's weird I got all shamed and embarrassed

01:05:54.980 yesterday and today I woke up and nothing's different if you do that enough then you can learn to bring

01:06:01.840 that feeling into the present so you get shamed and embarrassed it just seems funny

01:06:06.220 uh Chrisfield says yes our simulation could have started millions of years ago and we're just

01:06:15.100 catching up that is true so anyway back to Jim Cramer he uh tweeted a photo of empty shelves

01:06:20.940 shelves at a store uh and the implication was and he said he just said suboptimal meaning that it looks

01:06:28.760 like a supply chain problem but internet sleuths were quick to notice that every one of the shelves

01:06:35.960 that was empty was labeled for valentine's uh product meaning that it was the shelves where they took off

01:06:42.100 the christmas stuff after christmas and they had not yet put the valentine's stuff on in other words

01:06:47.360 there was no supply chain problem whatsoever least in evidence it was just they were changing out the

01:06:52.980 shelves so Jim Cramer imagining that those empty shelves were telling him something about supply chain

01:06:59.000 i guess tweeted that and then he just got shat upon yeah the the entire internet opened up and started just

01:07:07.760 peeing on him now here's my question did that ruin Jim Cramer's day we don't know what do you think

01:07:18.040 i'm gonna say nah nope nope would it have ruined my day if i had done that because when i saw it i said

01:07:28.780 oh god that's exactly the sort of thing i would have done in fact i did something like this the other day

01:07:33.800 by tweeting something that was actually an old story so you know tweeting old stories or uh you know

01:07:41.240 taking a picture of a empty shelf and thinking it was meaningful when it wasn't that's exactly what i do

01:07:46.540 i do that all the time right uh and you know i get over it and every day my bagel tastes the same

01:07:54.560 so my only lesson on this is be Jim Cramer right you know when i see all these people dumping on Jim

01:08:03.280 Cramer and then i know he's just going to go to work the next day and still be Jim Cramer be Jim

01:08:08.320 Cramer let let the whole world piss on your head and then just get up and go to work you'll be amazed

01:08:15.620 how much it doesn't matter other people's opinions are just things that happen inside their heads it's

01:08:23.760 just electrical signals in the heads of strangers that's what you're worried about think about it

01:08:31.020 just just think about it right now let's do a little experiment here's a there's a public hypnosis

01:08:35.440 experiment but don't worry there's nothing nothing bad or strange going on it'll all be transparent

01:08:40.640 just go through this imaginary situation every one of you probably right now is thinking about

01:08:48.640 somebody else's opinion of you directly or indirectly other people's opinion of whether

01:08:54.480 you're good or bad or right or wrong or awesome or not awesome is always in our heads

01:08:59.460 but imagine those heads just think of all the people who are thinking something about you

01:09:06.540 that you don't like that's bad those are electrical currents firing inside a piece of organic matter

01:09:15.620 in the skull of somebody that you don't see and you know they're at some distance from you

01:09:21.000 none of that matters to you the electrical impulses firing in the stranger's head just don't matter

01:09:28.920 and if you think that like like their thoughts are like right on you that their thoughts are getting

01:09:36.860 in you and it's it's like an infection like oh the shame the embarrassment it's it's like in my body

01:09:43.680 like I can feel it just remember the only place it's happening is in the electrical signals

01:09:51.120 somewhere else you you could just ignore it and it's not easy to do but if you think of it in

01:09:59.500 those terms as just something happening in another person's head it's easier so that's a reframe so

01:10:06.040 reframe it from something that's like attacking your body there's just something that's happening at a

01:10:11.180 distance it's not even touching you there's no physical connection

01:10:14.400 so um you'll find that that's a useful reframe that ladies and gentlemen is all I had to talk

01:10:24.300 about another terrific show one of the best ever no no the best ever best ever and uh I'd like to

01:10:32.440 think that I made all your worlds a little bit better today uh I'm gonna get serious about writing

01:10:37.160 a book about how to reframe things because I there just are so many examples where this is good

01:10:41.460 um one example with the simulators a comment one example with the simulation it's the stupidest thing

01:10:49.700 I've ever heard yeah

01:10:52.440 Scott how many electrical signals go off in your pants when you hear anything about Bill Gates

01:10:59.960 well here's the uh here's my take on Bill Gates um from from the moment he started getting rich

01:11:08.860 he said someday I'm gonna use all of my money for philanthropic purposes and that he did

01:11:15.400 like there's no doubt about it he's putting his vast uh wealth as well as his time and energies into

01:11:22.840 making the world a better place now does he have evil intentions I've never seen any evidence of it

01:11:28.980 now I've seen lots of rumors that are out of context and and all that but I've never seen anything

01:11:35.280 that look credible now should there be someday something credible do you think I wouldn't tell

01:11:42.540 you if there were a credible report that was just really bad about Bill Gates do you think I wouldn't

01:11:50.920 tell you of course I would why wouldn't I because I'm I'm defending innocent until proven guilty

01:11:58.720 I'm not defending Bill Gates you know if you think I'm defending Bill Gates you're missing the larger

01:12:05.080 point I told you I almost defended Anderson Cooper yeah but he was a special case because he's a hoax person

01:12:12.220 but I will defend uh Joe Biden even though I think he's a poor president but if something is a fake attack

01:12:20.420 or he does something well and I think he did something well with court packing for example

01:12:25.100 I'm going to say it remember my entire context is is saying both sides of every argument so if you

01:12:33.720 if you've imagined that I have a pure love for Bill Gates that cannot be shaken by data or any kind of new

01:12:41.560 information well that's completely wrong I'm just talking about what we know right now and I'm leaving

01:12:48.020 out what we don't know that's not fair that does that mean I want to kiss him you need to take

01:12:55.080 your take your analysis out of grade school if I say something nice about a public figure it doesn't

01:13:02.060 mean I want to marry them it really doesn't all right um bromancing

01:13:09.100 anyway uh that's all for today and I'll talk to you tomorrow

Real Coffee with Scott Adams - December 29, 2021

Episode 1607 Scott Adams： Most of the News is Good Today. Hello Golden Age

Episode Stats

Length

Words per Minute

Word Count

Sentence Count

Misogynist Sentences

Hate Speech Sentences

Summary

Transcript