Real Coffee with Scott Adams - Episode 1688 Scott Adams： From Russian Hypersonic Missiles to Fertilizer. I Cover it All Today

00:00:00.000 Good morning, everybody, and congratulations on a good start to your day, because nothing

00:00:08.560 is better than making it live for Coffee with Scott Adams.

00:00:12.800 No, there's one thing that's almost as good, listening to it recorded, and pretending it's

00:00:19.100 live, just as good, because reality is subjective and don't ever forget it.

00:00:24.680 But let's say you wanted to take things to a stratospheric level, a level never achieved

00:00:30.200 in any live stream before.

00:00:32.220 Well, all you need is a cup or a mug or a glass, a tank or a chelsea, a canteen jug or a flask,

00:00:36.940 a vessel of any kind.

00:00:39.120 Fill it with your favorite liquid.

00:00:41.880 I like coffee.

00:00:43.340 And join me now for the unparalleled pleasure.

00:00:47.640 It's the dopamine here today, the thing that makes everything better.

00:00:50.840 It's called the simultaneous sip.

00:00:53.460 And watch how amazing it is.

00:00:56.440 Go.

00:01:00.900 Ah.

00:01:02.580 Yeah.

00:01:04.220 Wait, wait.

00:01:06.340 I don't do this often.

00:01:08.720 Perhaps I've never done it.

00:01:10.520 But there's going to be a second sip, because you need it today.

00:01:15.260 You need it.

00:01:16.580 Go.

00:01:16.920 Go.

00:01:20.840 Somebody's calling this tantric sipping.

00:01:23.460 I don't think that's far off.

00:01:26.780 Well, in the news today, progressive leader Jayapal, she's blaming corporate America for

00:01:32.660 raising gas prices.

00:01:34.520 What do you think?

00:01:35.520 Do you blame corporate America and their profiteering and price gouging?

00:01:41.440 Well, here's my take.

00:01:46.500 If you hear anybody tell you, doesn't matter who it is, Republican, Democrat, doesn't matter

00:01:51.940 who.

00:01:52.500 If anybody tells you that there's one reason for gas prices going up, don't listen to them.

00:02:01.420 That's a person you should never listen to.

00:02:03.200 You should not be allowed to talk in public if you think that gas prices went up for one reason.

00:02:10.000 There's more than one reason.

00:02:12.160 Pretty sure there's more than one.

00:02:14.120 And if you can't speak to all of them, you should just be considered a liar.

00:02:17.500 And maybe you should get on that list of 50 intel.

00:02:23.480 Well, we'll talk about the 50 intel liars in a moment.

00:02:28.140 All right.

00:02:30.600 So, let's see.

00:02:33.400 So, things that cause gas prices to change.

00:02:36.920 You've got the war in Ukraine.

00:02:39.120 You've got the uncertainty, which is partly because of that.

00:02:41.980 You've got the problems with the supply chain.

00:02:46.480 You've got the Biden administration tightening up on what we can do domestically.

00:02:54.540 And you've got, you know, green energy forces forever making nuclear less attractive up until now.

00:03:03.940 So, basically, almost everything is wrong.

00:03:07.240 So, essentially, everything, let me speak to the comment I'm seeing.

00:03:13.800 Somebody is saying that it all comes down to supply and demand.

00:03:19.080 In economics, generally speaking, price comes down to supply and demand.

00:03:25.520 No, it doesn't.

00:03:27.960 Is anybody who actually has a degree in economics believe that this is supply and demand happening here?

00:03:34.500 Let me ask you this.

00:03:35.360 Anybody who has a degree in economics, you have to have a degree for just this question.

00:03:40.900 If you have a degree in economics, do you think the price of oil and gas is being caused by supply and demand?

00:03:50.600 No, it's not.

00:03:52.960 It's not.

00:03:54.180 Not in the short run.

00:03:55.820 In the long run, in the long run, supply and demand, yes.

00:04:00.720 Not in the short run.

00:04:01.920 In the short run, all kinds of reasons change prices.

00:04:05.360 In the short run, somebody is going to say, I will gouge you because in the short run, I have no competition.

00:04:12.540 Right?

00:04:13.720 So, I mean, that is, I guess that's supply and demand.

00:04:16.460 But in the, but you have a psychology working and a lack of information.

00:04:21.740 So, what you're really seeing is a lack of information, not a supply problem.

00:04:26.420 So, if you have uncertainty about supply, that acts the same as a lack of supply.

00:04:33.980 Did that make sense?

00:04:35.560 If you have uncertainty, psychological uncertainty about future supply, it affects the price without the actual supply changing.

00:04:45.660 Do you understand that?

00:04:48.120 Now, in most, if not almost all cases, the psychology of what's going to happen matches the actuality, right?

00:04:57.160 So, lots of times the psychology and the actual thing move together.

00:05:00.060 But with the short term and the fog of war and so many big variables in motion at the same time, from pandemic to supply chains to Ukraine to God knows what, it is uncertainty, largely, that's driving prices.

00:05:17.260 Is there anybody with an economics degree who would disagree with my statement that, of course, supply and demand matters in the long run?

00:05:27.140 Of course.

00:05:28.060 That's the main thing in the long run.

00:05:29.980 But in the short run, it's psychology.

00:05:34.400 Anybody want to disagree?

00:05:37.400 Yeah, I think everybody with an economics degree just agreed with me, I think.

00:05:42.460 So, as soon as you think it's supply and demand, you're a little bit lost.

00:05:47.260 You'd be a little bit lost if you think that's all that's going on.

00:05:50.520 There's a whole bunch of stuff going on.

00:05:52.780 But it's mostly psychological.

00:05:55.440 Which could become real.

00:05:57.020 I mean, if people's guesses about the future are right, then it becomes real.

00:06:01.480 But they are guesses.

00:06:04.160 All right, I'm going to teach you how to evaluate studies.

00:06:08.720 Because there's a new study on, and I hate to go back to this, but it's just a little mop-up.

00:06:15.900 I swear I'll make it short.

00:06:19.140 There's a new, biggest, and best study on ivermectin that says it has no impact at all.

00:06:28.260 How does that make you feel?

00:06:30.820 Now, I'll talk about the flaws in a moment.

00:06:34.480 I'm not going to ignore the flaws.

00:06:35.720 But how does it make you feel?

00:06:42.200 I'm looking at your comments now, and we'll talk about those.

00:06:44.940 The comments are, who funded it?

00:06:48.120 They didn't include zinc.

00:06:50.840 Was the protocol right?

00:06:52.040 We'll talk about that.

00:06:53.680 All right.

00:06:54.280 Let me teach you how to determine if a study is correct or not.

00:06:59.300 Because it's also true, if you didn't know this, that the hydroxychloroquine studies largely stopped in 2020.

00:07:09.060 Because there was one big data set that said it wasn't working.

00:07:13.120 And then everybody stopped their tests.

00:07:15.580 But here's how to tell if any studies are effective.

00:07:18.620 Now, you're probably saying to yourself, well, if it's a peer-reviewed study, I'm going to believe it.

00:07:26.660 But we don't really live in a world where you can believe a peer-reviewed study.

00:07:31.400 So I'm going to teach you how to determine if a study is credible.

00:07:35.520 It's very simple.

00:07:37.860 Does the study agree with my opinion that I've already stated?

00:07:41.560 If yes, we call that a gold standard kind of a study.

00:07:48.620 If the new study disagrees with my prior opinion, that's an example of a flawed study.

00:07:59.040 So studies that disagree with you have methodological problems, which we'll discuss.

00:08:06.220 So if you use this guide, I don't think it's ever failed.

00:08:11.860 You know, there's some kinds of rules of thumb I give you, where the rule of thumb is, you know, 90% of the time it works, but you have to watch out for that 10%. 1.00

00:08:20.040 This isn't like this.

00:08:22.440 This is one of the few standards or rules that works every time.

00:08:27.460 In fact, I've lived a long time.

00:08:29.380 I've never seen this not work.

00:08:31.720 This has worked every time.

00:08:33.840 And if you don't believe me, just ask anybody who's evaluating any study.

00:08:40.200 Anybody who evaluates any study will agree that this standard works.

00:08:43.620 It works every time.

00:08:45.140 So when you're looking at the ivermectin study, you might have said something like this.

00:08:52.640 Scott, no one ever claimed ivermectin worked alone.

00:08:55.920 You have to put the ivermectin with the other early treatment things to get an impact.

00:09:02.480 Scott, Scott, Scott, have you never heard of an AIDS cocktail?

00:09:06.200 It's the combination of things that make them work.

00:09:08.800 It's not the one thing by itself, Scott.

00:09:13.480 No, no.

00:09:14.960 So that's one of the complaints.

00:09:18.940 Someone said it's not peer-reviewed.

00:09:21.420 It's not peer-reviewed.

00:09:22.480 It's only been submitted for peer review.

00:09:24.100 That means something.

00:09:27.060 Do you know how much more credibility you will get if it gets peer-reviewed and passes?

00:09:33.480 What would be the extra credibility from something that's submitted versus peer-reviewed?

00:09:41.340 What's the extra bump you get after the peer review?

00:09:45.220 Fucking zero.

00:09:47.580 All right.

00:09:47.940 If you haven't been paying attention,

00:09:49.600 let me inform you that the peer review should add something.

00:09:55.640 It should.

00:09:56.480 I mean, on paper, it makes sense, right?

00:09:59.180 In reality, nothing.

00:10:01.160 So if your complaint is that it's not peer-reviewed,

00:10:05.660 you imagine the peer review adds something.

00:10:08.380 It should.

00:10:09.780 Like, logically, it should.

00:10:11.640 But in the real world, I don't think it actually does.

00:10:14.360 I think it's just somebody who's busy,

00:10:16.440 who looks at the top-line stuff,

00:10:18.040 looks at a couple numbers,

00:10:19.020 and says, yeah, I don't see anything obviously wrong with it.

00:10:21.740 That's about it.

00:10:22.320 Here are some other complaints.

00:10:27.780 Valid enough that it was only a three-day dose.

00:10:31.420 To which I say, I'm no doctor,

00:10:35.200 but if you couldn't see the difference in three days

00:10:37.840 for a drug which is supposedly from its proponents,

00:10:44.560 say that ivermectin is so darn effective

00:10:46.660 that three days would pretty much eliminate it in you.

00:10:49.100 But they saw no difference after three days.

00:10:52.320 It doesn't mean it's right.

00:10:55.300 I'm just telling you what the study said.

00:10:58.500 Someone else said that there's a separate study

00:11:00.700 that shows that when you combine ivermectin with antibiotics,

00:11:04.220 you do get a good effect.

00:11:06.160 So really, Scott, testing ivermectin alone

00:11:09.160 is really not a good test.

00:11:11.020 You should have tested it with the antibiotics.

00:11:14.020 To which I say, I'm no doctor,

00:11:16.400 but I'll bet you I could do a study

00:11:19.640 that showed the antibiotics and potato chips

00:11:22.140 give you a good result.

00:11:23.960 Does anybody want to doubt it?

00:11:25.720 If I did a study that said

00:11:28.160 if I gave you antibiotics and potato chips,

00:11:31.340 do you think that you would show a difference?

00:11:35.240 I think you would.

00:11:36.460 And not because the antibiotics work with COVID,

00:11:39.420 because apparently they don't.

00:11:41.220 It's because the antibiotics might work

00:11:43.060 on some other problem you have

00:11:44.400 because a lot of people have other problems.

00:11:45.920 And if it improves the other problem,

00:11:48.660 some bacterial problems, let's say,

00:11:50.900 it might make your immune system a little bit stronger

00:11:52.960 and you might get better results.

00:11:56.160 So yes, testing ivermectin and antibiotics,

00:11:59.480 I'm glad they tested it,

00:12:01.180 but I would expect exactly the same result

00:12:03.380 as potato chips and antibiotics.

00:12:06.860 That's what I'd expect.

00:12:08.620 I mean, I haven't tested it.

00:12:09.560 Now, remember that the...

00:12:16.660 Oh, and then somebody else said

00:12:17.880 it didn't include zinc.

00:12:19.380 But I don't believe that the proponents

00:12:21.480 of ivermectin ever claimed it required zinc.

00:12:26.940 And we don't...

00:12:28.560 And we haven't seen it...

00:12:31.720 You know, ivermectin being called

00:12:33.180 a delivery system for zinc.

00:12:34.800 We heard hydroxychloroquine.

00:12:38.700 So here's a general rule

00:12:40.800 I'm also going to give you.

00:12:43.500 It goes like this.

00:12:46.080 If there's something that you think is true

00:12:48.520 on day one,

00:12:50.880 but you don't have any way to test for sure,

00:12:52.900 it just has lots of indications

00:12:54.340 it might be true.

00:12:55.480 On day one,

00:12:57.180 is it reasonable to say,

00:12:58.920 well, I don't know for sure,

00:13:00.080 but let's treat it seriously?

00:13:02.720 Yes.

00:13:03.780 Yes.

00:13:04.100 If you have lots of indications

00:13:05.840 that are non-scientific

00:13:07.260 that something works

00:13:08.760 and it's important,

00:13:10.900 you know, there's a big problem,

00:13:12.640 you should take it pretty seriously.

00:13:15.240 Now, what happens

00:13:16.580 if months and months have gone by

00:13:19.440 and lots and lots of tests

00:13:20.680 and you get to the end of that

00:13:22.580 and there's still no proof?

00:13:24.820 Well, I would use the following standard.

00:13:27.860 Hello, all you clankers. 0.73

00:13:31.040 I would use the following standard.

00:13:34.100 That extraordinary claims

00:13:39.340 require extraordinary proof.

00:13:41.580 Would you all accept that,

00:13:43.540 the base before I go on?

00:13:46.120 That extraordinary claims

00:13:47.340 require extraordinary proof.

00:13:49.440 Now, on day one,

00:13:50.800 on day one,

00:13:51.560 when somebody makes an extraordinary claim,

00:13:53.680 can you realistically ask them

00:13:55.200 to produce proof?

00:13:56.420 Not really,

00:13:58.360 because it's brand new.

00:13:59.280 But if you've gone two years

00:14:01.580 and nobody can produce anything

00:14:04.440 that looks like proof,

00:14:05.860 what would you say

00:14:07.220 about the extraordinary claim?

00:14:09.000 I think it's an extraordinary claim

00:14:10.780 that there would be

00:14:11.880 an available,

00:14:12.940 widely available drug

00:14:14.180 that everybody could have

00:14:15.880 that would just basically

00:14:16.700 shut down the whole pandemic.

00:14:18.580 That's an extraordinary claim.

00:14:20.640 Right?

00:14:21.500 Well, would you disagree with me

00:14:22.840 that that's an extraordinary claim?

00:14:24.280 Whether it's true or false,

00:14:26.340 it's extraordinary.

00:14:28.100 Right?

00:14:28.700 So an extraordinary claim

00:14:30.120 requires an extraordinary proof.

00:14:32.260 It's been two years

00:14:33.280 and nobody's come close

00:14:35.120 and the most recent,

00:14:36.700 best quality proof

00:14:37.800 says it doesn't work.

00:14:39.920 What would you now give?

00:14:41.460 I'm going to ask you

00:14:42.080 a following question

00:14:42.820 and I want you to give it

00:14:43.760 in percentage is.

00:14:45.880 Right?

00:14:46.180 Everybody who says yes or no

00:14:48.280 is wrong.

00:14:50.920 Everybody who gives me

00:14:52.000 a percentage

00:14:52.520 might be wrong,

00:14:54.060 but at least you're

00:14:54.640 thinking right.

00:14:56.260 Right?

00:14:56.700 So given current information,

00:14:58.420 given two years

00:14:59.220 of not being able to show

00:15:00.320 that ivermectin works,

00:15:02.460 tell me what your odds are

00:15:04.580 that ivermectin does work.

00:15:06.240 And we just haven't

00:15:06.820 proved it yet.

00:15:07.940 What are the odds

00:15:08.820 that ivermectin does work?

00:15:11.440 I'm going to read your numbers.

00:15:12.560 They're from 5 to 50,

00:15:16.260 but you seem to be settling

00:15:17.660 in around a 20% range,

00:15:19.880 most of you.

00:15:21.240 If I average your numbers,

00:15:23.080 I'm just eyeballing them.

00:15:26.180 On the locals platform,

00:15:30.020 a lot of people are saying 75%,

00:15:31.960 but others are saying 5%.

00:15:34.560 200%.

00:15:38.080 100%.

00:15:39.600 The YouTube people

00:15:40.920 are not being useful

00:15:42.820 right now.

00:15:44.160 All right.

00:15:44.960 So,

00:15:46.280 I just leave you

00:15:48.380 with this standard,

00:15:49.380 and I'll let you

00:15:51.120 sort of wrestle

00:15:52.800 with this over time.

00:15:54.620 So remember,

00:15:55.140 the standard is,

00:15:56.140 and I'm not saying

00:15:56.720 the standard works every time.

00:15:59.540 You know,

00:15:59.840 I probably should say that

00:16:01.260 about everything I say,

00:16:03.040 which is,

00:16:03.740 this won't work every time.

00:16:05.380 That's just true of everything.

00:16:06.360 Almost everything.

00:16:09.020 All right.

00:16:10.920 I think it's fascinating

00:16:14.440 that we have this list

00:16:15.560 of 50 Intel,

00:16:17.340 prior Intel officials

00:16:18.480 who said that the Hunter laptop

00:16:20.740 was Russian disinformation,

00:16:22.760 and now that we know it wasn't,

00:16:24.860 and we know they had no evidence

00:16:26.260 to back their claim,

00:16:28.800 we have an actual list

00:16:30.160 of 50 Intel liars.

00:16:32.800 How useful is that?

00:16:35.260 You know,

00:16:35.900 usually you're wondering,

00:16:36.980 like, who to trust,

00:16:38.180 but how useful is it

00:16:40.140 that we have an actual list

00:16:41.400 of 50 people

00:16:42.720 who put their name

00:16:43.440 on a list

00:16:43.980 to prove beyond

00:16:45.620 a shadow of a doubt

00:16:46.680 that they will lie to you

00:16:48.060 in public

00:16:48.480 about the most important things?

00:16:50.920 That's kind of useful.

00:16:53.480 And you know

00:16:54.040 what's the funniest part?

00:16:55.920 The first four names

00:16:57.180 on the list

00:16:57.880 of known,

00:16:59.740 credentialed liars

00:17:00.840 are four of the most common people

00:17:04.460 you'd ever see on CNN,

00:17:06.300 Clapper, Hayden,

00:17:07.720 Leon Panetta,

00:17:08.560 and John Brennan.

00:17:10.440 In fact,

00:17:10.940 Panetta was on there yesterday.

00:17:14.000 CNN

00:17:14.600 had Leon Panetta

00:17:16.120 on there

00:17:16.600 right after

00:17:18.100 he had been proven

00:17:19.960 on a list

00:17:20.620 of 50

00:17:21.280 documented

00:17:23.060 gigantic liars. 0.99

00:17:24.760 And remember

00:17:26.580 the Hunter Biden

00:17:27.840 laptop lie

00:17:28.860 is a special

00:17:30.800 kind of lie

00:17:31.580 because it's so bold.

00:17:33.820 It's so bold.

00:17:34.800 You can't really,

00:17:35.780 I don't think you can wonder

00:17:36.960 whether they were just wrong.

00:17:39.160 Can you?

00:17:40.520 Does anybody think,

00:17:41.640 oh,

00:17:41.780 they were just,

00:17:42.820 they had an opinion

00:17:43.560 and they were just wrong?

00:17:45.400 Does anybody believe that?

00:17:47.860 That would be

00:17:49.060 pretty hard to believe.

00:17:50.860 I suppose

00:17:51.460 anything's possible.

00:17:52.600 There are 50 people.

00:17:53.420 there's somebody

00:17:54.660 on that list of 50

00:17:55.780 who just believed

00:17:56.840 they were right.

00:17:58.700 But it seems

00:17:59.340 very unlikely

00:18:00.140 that the top four,

00:18:02.000 Clapper,

00:18:02.560 Hayden,

00:18:03.020 Panetta,

00:18:03.500 and Brennan,

00:18:04.780 do you think

00:18:05.620 the top four

00:18:06.420 didn't know

00:18:07.820 it was real?

00:18:09.620 Really?

00:18:11.000 Really?

00:18:12.420 They didn't know

00:18:13.380 it was real?

00:18:14.680 Really?

00:18:16.060 They knew it was real,

00:18:17.320 of course.

00:18:18.260 And they just lied

00:18:18.980 to the public.

00:18:20.480 So,

00:18:21.480 it is just so

00:18:23.140 oh my God,

00:18:24.700 it's just so ballsy

00:18:25.920 for CNN

00:18:26.500 to put one of the people

00:18:27.520 on that list

00:18:28.200 ever on the air again.

00:18:29.920 How does John Brennan

00:18:31.120 ever get on the air again?

00:18:32.920 These are literally,

00:18:34.540 at least these top four guys,

00:18:36.860 correct me if I'm wrong,

00:18:37.880 but these are the

00:18:38.460 Russia collusion liars,

00:18:40.080 aren't they?

00:18:41.340 Aren't they the same liars

00:18:42.460 who said Russia collusion

00:18:43.480 was totally real?

00:18:44.300 How many times

00:18:46.520 do the same people

00:18:47.540 have to lie to us

00:18:48.460 get caught

00:18:50.040 in a way that's

00:18:51.740 unambiguously

00:18:53.140 you've proven

00:18:54.540 that they lied?

00:18:57.340 This is really

00:18:58.460 bad stuff.

00:18:59.900 Compare this kind

00:19:00.740 of lie

00:19:01.240 to anything

00:19:02.540 Trump ever lied about.

00:19:05.020 Do you see

00:19:05.720 the difference?

00:19:07.720 When Trump

00:19:08.700 quote lies,

00:19:11.860 and often it's

00:19:12.560 in the form

00:19:13.060 of hyperbole,

00:19:14.200 it's a little bit

00:19:15.320 transparent,

00:19:16.480 isn't it?

00:19:18.100 Like if you see

00:19:19.180 Trump talking about

00:19:20.260 you can't watch

00:19:21.640 television

00:19:22.180 because your windmill

00:19:23.160 isn't turning?

00:19:26.840 Is there any

00:19:28.640 actual lie there?

00:19:30.920 Well, yes.

00:19:32.100 Yes, there's a lie

00:19:33.320 in the sense

00:19:33.980 that clearly

00:19:35.720 Trump knows

00:19:36.500 that the TV

00:19:37.260 doesn't go off

00:19:37.980 when the wind

00:19:38.500 stops blowing.

00:19:40.140 I mean, not literally.

00:19:41.840 I mean, he knows that.

00:19:43.100 So yeah,

00:19:43.800 yeah, you could say

00:19:44.520 that was a lie,

00:19:45.920 or you could say

00:19:46.520 it's hyperbole,

00:19:47.320 or yeah,

00:19:47.680 you could say

00:19:48.080 it's just a joke.

00:19:49.920 But I don't think

00:19:52.020 that,

00:19:52.400 I really don't think

00:19:54.560 that Trump's lies

00:19:55.860 have the quality

00:19:57.860 that these lies do.

00:19:59.240 These lies were

00:20:00.120 a genuine attempt

00:20:01.120 to bamboozle

00:20:02.320 the country

00:20:02.780 on something

00:20:03.280 that really mattered.

00:20:05.720 I can't think

00:20:06.880 of an example

00:20:07.440 of a Trump lie

00:20:08.800 that had weight.

00:20:11.620 Let's see if you can.

00:20:13.700 By the way,

00:20:14.440 I'm just spitballing here

00:20:15.980 because there might

00:20:16.500 be an example.

00:20:17.300 I don't know.

00:20:18.060 Is there an example

00:20:18.800 of a Trump lie

00:20:20.520 that's documented

00:20:22.220 as a lie,

00:20:23.160 as well documented

00:20:24.260 as these are,

00:20:25.140 and also was important

00:20:27.200 to the country,

00:20:28.780 like it actually mattered?

00:20:34.600 Somebody's saying

00:20:35.320 that Trump didn't lie,

00:20:36.320 he exaggerated.

00:20:37.160 I think, you know,

00:20:38.360 80% of it is sales

00:20:40.000 and hyperbole

00:20:40.660 and exaggeration, yes.

00:20:46.500 the stolen election.

00:20:50.240 Trump is not lying

00:20:51.840 about the stolen election.

00:20:53.520 It's a belief.

00:20:56.000 And is that different

00:20:59.160 than the 50 intel people

00:21:00.660 who said they are sure

00:21:02.660 that the laptop

00:21:05.700 was disinformation?

00:21:07.540 Maybe it's not

00:21:08.100 that different

00:21:08.520 because in a sense

00:21:10.140 the 50 intel people

00:21:11.240 were saying

00:21:11.620 it's their opinion,

00:21:12.800 but they didn't really

00:21:14.200 present it like opinion,

00:21:15.340 did they?

00:21:15.620 I don't know,

00:21:17.040 it does seem different.

00:21:17.900 Here's why it seems different.

00:21:19.680 We do distinguish

00:21:20.880 between experts

00:21:21.920 and politicians.

00:21:24.080 Am I right?

00:21:25.620 If an expert says

00:21:27.140 the election was stolen,

00:21:30.240 or a lot of experts,

00:21:31.480 you'd say,

00:21:31.760 oh, that seems pretty serious.

00:21:33.240 If a politician says

00:21:34.640 an election was stolen,

00:21:36.120 you don't give that

00:21:36.860 too much weight, do you?

00:21:39.320 I think it's different.

00:21:41.480 So I would say that the,

00:21:42.980 you know,

00:21:43.360 if you just say lies are lies,

00:21:45.620 and I can see why

00:21:46.960 somebody would have

00:21:47.560 that philosophy,

00:21:48.220 but if you just say

00:21:49.420 all lies are equal,

00:21:51.360 I don't think you're

00:21:52.240 understanding the situation

00:21:53.360 correctly.

00:21:54.660 These 50 intel people

00:21:56.120 lied in a way that's,

00:21:59.040 I mean,

00:21:59.840 it's just jaw-droppingly,

00:22:02.020 outrageously dangerous

00:22:04.120 to have people like this

00:22:05.580 have any impact

00:22:06.480 on the country.

00:22:08.200 Whereas Trump

00:22:09.380 was more entertaining.

00:22:10.280 You know,

00:22:11.400 his lies usually

00:22:12.420 were funny,

00:22:13.680 and they made a point.

00:22:16.020 You know,

00:22:16.280 it's a whole different

00:22:17.140 standard.

00:22:19.120 So Russia fired

00:22:19.880 a hypersonic missile.

00:22:21.460 I was not fully aware

00:22:22.920 of how good

00:22:23.800 their hypersonic stuff is.

00:22:25.720 So the Russian military

00:22:26.860 equipment seems to be

00:22:28.260 poorly maintained

00:22:29.360 and maybe not

00:22:30.080 the best stuff,

00:22:31.080 but I guess they have

00:22:32.040 actually some advantages

00:22:33.500 in hypersonic missiles.

00:22:35.720 So they've got

00:22:36.540 these hypersonic missiles

00:22:37.740 that you can't see

00:22:38.960 until it's too late,

00:22:40.480 and they're way

00:22:41.080 too fast to stop.

00:22:43.580 Basically,

00:22:44.220 they're invulnerable.

00:22:45.700 So they have a missile

00:22:46.520 that if it wants

00:22:47.720 to carry a nuclear warhead,

00:22:49.360 it's going to get you.

00:22:51.400 All right?

00:22:52.140 Now,

00:22:52.680 so you've got

00:22:53.160 mutually assured destruction,

00:22:54.800 and Russia used it

00:22:56.400 to take out some arms,

00:22:58.080 alleged arms bunker

00:22:59.420 or something in Ukraine.

00:23:01.520 But there's a little bit

00:23:02.640 of a disagreement

00:23:03.580 about whether Russia

00:23:04.740 was just proving

00:23:05.780 they have the weapon

00:23:06.680 and could have done

00:23:08.140 the same attack

00:23:08.900 with lesser weapons.

00:23:10.320 Or did they actually

00:23:12.720 need that weapon

00:23:13.460 because it was a bunker?

00:23:15.200 So I saw one expert say,

00:23:16.820 yeah,

00:23:17.060 they probably thought

00:23:17.860 they needed that weapon

00:23:18.840 because it was a bunker

00:23:20.220 and the hypersonic missile

00:23:22.000 has enough kinetic energy

00:23:23.480 to penetrate it.

00:23:25.140 So you have to penetrate it

00:23:26.260 before you blow up

00:23:27.200 or it's not that good.

00:23:28.840 Maybe.

00:23:29.820 I don't know.

00:23:31.520 I'm not so sure

00:23:32.740 that a mother-of-all bomb

00:23:35.400 kind of bomb

00:23:35.980 wouldn't take in a bunker.

00:23:36.980 I think it would.

00:23:39.120 I don't know.

00:23:40.020 I think it would.

00:23:41.300 Can somebody answer

00:23:42.000 that question?

00:23:43.100 If a mother-of-all bombs

00:23:44.740 type of bomb

00:23:45.540 is dropped on a bunker,

00:23:47.980 no matter how deep

00:23:49.500 the bunker is

00:23:50.340 in a reasonable sense,

00:23:51.640 you know,

00:23:51.840 a reasonable wartime bunker,

00:23:53.620 it's going to take it out,

00:23:54.720 right?

00:23:56.580 Am I wrong?

00:23:58.680 I might be wrong.

00:24:01.360 Somebody says no,

00:24:02.320 that it wouldn't take it out.

00:24:03.160 Is that because

00:24:05.680 the explosion

00:24:06.480 would be limited

00:24:07.160 to the surface

00:24:08.300 whereas the missile

00:24:09.120 would penetrate

00:24:09.680 before it explodes?

00:24:12.680 They're called,

00:24:13.700 well, we do have

00:24:14.400 bunker-busting bombs, yes.

00:24:16.580 I assume Russia has those.

00:24:19.660 Huh.

00:24:20.820 All right.

00:24:21.600 So that's an open question.

00:24:22.900 What else we got here?

00:24:28.920 So I told you about

00:24:30.160 there was a long thread

00:24:31.200 on Twitter

00:24:31.660 that was excellent

00:24:32.460 from Trent Telenko

00:24:34.120 talking about

00:24:35.500 truck tire maintenance

00:24:37.500 because he was

00:24:38.260 somebody who did

00:24:39.420 this kind of work

00:24:40.040 in the U.S. military

00:24:40.960 and he was noting

00:24:42.260 that the tires

00:24:43.180 and the tire maintenance

00:24:44.420 on the Russian equipment

00:24:45.940 seems poor

00:24:46.900 and that that was

00:24:48.120 going to be

00:24:48.380 a huge problem.

00:24:49.500 Their equipment

00:24:50.220 would be breaking down.

00:24:51.200 Well, he's got a new thread.

00:24:53.320 I'm not going to detail it

00:24:54.480 but the bottom line

00:24:55.560 is lots more

00:24:57.460 lots more evidence

00:24:59.780 that the Russian army

00:25:01.540 is becoming

00:25:02.300 operationally stuck

00:25:05.300 and there's something

00:25:06.940 called operational attrition

00:25:08.440 which is that

00:25:09.800 your stuff breaks

00:25:10.840 just by being in use

00:25:12.560 and it's hard

00:25:13.680 to replace it fast.

00:25:15.480 So this guy

00:25:17.620 who's an expert

00:25:18.880 on maintenance

00:25:20.540 of big military equipment

00:25:21.780 he estimated

00:25:23.940 that we might be

00:25:24.960 just a few weeks away

00:25:26.500 from the Russian army

00:25:28.220 just collapsing

00:25:28.980 because their equipment

00:25:30.780 would just be

00:25:31.440 just garbage

00:25:32.220 in about three weeks.

00:25:33.520 Now part of this

00:25:34.100 is that they are

00:25:34.680 poorly maintained.

00:25:35.960 The claim here

00:25:36.620 is that the U.S. military

00:25:38.440 is obsessive

00:25:39.400 about maintenance

00:25:40.240 and we have

00:25:41.180 like an entire

00:25:41.800 you know

00:25:42.740 an entire organization

00:25:44.120 just to do maintenance

00:25:45.240 and they maintain

00:25:46.520 regularly.

00:25:48.020 so they're just

00:25:48.700 maintaining

00:25:49.180 maintaining

00:25:49.540 like crazy.

00:25:50.680 But the Russian army

00:25:51.760 basically doesn't

00:25:52.500 even have that organization.

00:25:54.300 They've just got

00:25:54.820 conscripts that are

00:25:55.780 told to change the oil.

00:25:57.540 I'm exaggerating

00:25:58.520 but you know

00:25:59.080 something like that.

00:26:00.260 So they don't have

00:26:01.020 as a professional

00:26:02.160 a maintenance group

00:26:03.860 and it seems to be showing.

00:26:05.640 And it looks like

00:26:06.560 they don't have

00:26:07.020 the ability

00:26:08.880 to resupply

00:26:10.580 etc.

00:26:10.920 and at this point

00:26:12.980 if Ukraine

00:26:13.840 can hold

00:26:14.520 for

00:26:15.060 I don't know

00:26:16.080 five or six weeks

00:26:18.240 do you think

00:26:19.840 Kiev can hold out

00:26:21.060 for five or six weeks?

00:26:22.440 Because it's looking

00:26:23.320 like they can.

00:26:24.940 But if they hold out

00:26:25.820 for five or six weeks

00:26:26.780 the entire Russian army

00:26:27.980 will start

00:26:28.920 becoming

00:26:30.560 immobile.

00:26:32.540 It just

00:26:32.760 it won't have supplies

00:26:33.780 it won't be maintained

00:26:34.780 it just won't be able

00:26:36.020 to move.

00:26:36.660 The roads will be bombed.

00:26:37.560 So as soon as

00:26:39.200 the Ukrainians

00:26:39.800 have them completely

00:26:40.660 trapped in country

00:26:41.800 here's what I predict

00:26:43.160 that

00:26:44.740 day after day

00:26:46.160 the Ukrainians

00:26:47.440 will

00:26:47.880 you know

00:26:48.660 being quite aggressive

00:26:49.460 and having great weapons

00:26:50.660 they will

00:26:51.740 surround and destroy

00:26:53.100 one

00:26:54.520 mechanized unit

00:26:55.620 after another

00:26:56.340 until Russia 0.58

00:26:58.060 can't handle

00:26:58.640 the pain anymore.

00:27:00.220 Now I think

00:27:01.200 the Ukrainians

00:27:02.360 have already

00:27:02.920 discounted

00:27:03.860 all destruction

00:27:05.500 of their country.

00:27:07.560 that's what I think.

00:27:09.320 Now there's no way

00:27:09.860 to know this.

00:27:10.660 I'm just making

00:27:11.380 a mental leap

00:27:13.480 and a lot of

00:27:14.280 mind reading

00:27:14.940 but I believe

00:27:17.100 that the Ukrainians

00:27:17.960 have sort of

00:27:18.860 factored into

00:27:20.080 their decision

00:27:20.760 that they will

00:27:21.860 lose every building

00:27:22.920 and infrastructure

00:27:23.640 in Ukraine

00:27:24.340 and they're still

00:27:26.160 going to fight.

00:27:27.900 Am I right?

00:27:30.020 I mean I could be

00:27:31.120 wrong about this

00:27:31.880 but it feels like

00:27:33.320 the Ukrainians

00:27:34.880 have just said

00:27:35.680 okay the thing

00:27:36.860 you're going to do

00:27:37.400 to us

00:27:37.740 is kill a lot

00:27:38.480 of us

00:27:38.860 and destroy 0.82

00:27:39.940 everything that

00:27:40.800 we own.

00:27:41.580 Is that right?

00:27:42.940 And Putin would say

00:27:43.940 that's damn right.

00:27:45.260 If you don't surrender

00:27:46.120 I will kill

00:27:47.280 a lot of you

00:27:48.060 and I will destroy

00:27:49.160 every building

00:27:50.040 in your country

00:27:51.320 and every infrastructure.

00:27:52.480 and the Ukrainians

00:27:54.300 just said

00:27:54.920 bring it on.

00:27:58.440 They just said

00:27:59.220 bring it on.

00:28:00.640 And I think

00:28:01.440 they meant it.

00:28:02.020 Now

00:28:02.900 as Naval

00:28:04.280 pointed out

00:28:05.080 not too long ago

00:28:06.020 on Twitter

00:28:06.400 that a

00:28:07.980 motivated

00:28:08.680 motivated

00:28:10.360 defenders

00:28:10.860 with

00:28:11.440 really good

00:28:12.780 supply lines

00:28:13.740 are unbeatable.

00:28:15.760 As long as

00:28:16.900 you have supply lines

00:28:18.100 and somebody's

00:28:19.340 willing to keep

00:28:19.920 supplying it

00:28:20.520 indefinitely

00:28:20.980 and you're

00:28:22.500 motivated

00:28:22.960 you just can't

00:28:23.940 be beaten

00:28:24.300 because you

00:28:25.440 can't kill

00:28:25.900 everybody

00:28:26.400 and there's

00:28:27.800 still going to

00:28:28.160 be plenty

00:28:28.520 of people

00:28:28.900 who will pick

00:28:29.360 up a shoulder

00:28:29.940 mounted thing

00:28:31.460 and keep

00:28:32.360 fighting.

00:28:33.580 So I think

00:28:34.320 the thing

00:28:34.660 that Putin

00:28:35.100 miscalculated

00:28:35.980 is how much

00:28:37.360 pain the Ukrainians 1.00

00:28:39.120 were willing to

00:28:39.800 take to get

00:28:40.600 what they want.

00:28:41.980 Am I right?

00:28:43.440 The big

00:28:44.120 miscalculation

00:28:45.080 I think

00:28:46.040 aside from

00:28:48.020 how well

00:28:48.620 the Ukrainians

00:28:49.460 would be

00:28:49.780 equipped

00:28:50.140 I think

00:28:50.480 that was

00:28:50.740 a miscalculation

00:28:51.580 but the

00:28:52.380 other

00:28:52.500 miscalculation

00:28:53.200 is that

00:28:53.720 the Ukrainians

00:28:54.520 they don't

00:28:55.660 seem like

00:28:56.120 regular people

00:28:56.820 to me

00:28:57.320 and it

00:28:59.080 could be

00:28:59.380 that the

00:28:59.740 propaganda

00:29:00.280 is catching

00:29:00.760 up with me

00:29:01.260 I think

00:29:01.560 that's

00:29:01.820 happening

00:29:02.400 but it

00:29:04.080 looks

00:29:04.700 like the

00:29:06.120 Ukrainians

00:29:06.780 would fight

00:29:07.520 to the

00:29:07.840 last

00:29:08.180 brick

00:29:09.780 it looks

00:29:10.980 like it

00:29:11.460 I mean

00:29:12.160 if the

00:29:12.800 only thing

00:29:13.140 they're doing

00:29:13.480 is sending

00:29:13.860 that message

00:29:14.600 that they're

00:29:15.380 going to

00:29:15.600 fight for

00:29:15.980 the last

00:29:16.340 brick

00:29:16.700 that's

00:29:17.620 pretty good

00:29:18.020 persuasion

00:29:18.560 but they

00:29:19.420 certainly

00:29:19.700 sent that

00:29:20.120 message

00:29:20.500 here's the

00:29:24.160 biggest thing

00:29:24.740 I'm worried

00:29:25.260 about

00:29:25.700 and have

00:29:26.680 been for

00:29:27.240 a number

00:29:27.860 of years

00:29:28.260 even before

00:29:28.800 the Ukraine

00:29:29.300 thing

00:29:29.560 there is a

00:29:30.940 big problem

00:29:32.440 with a

00:29:32.900 shortage of

00:29:33.440 fertilizer

00:29:33.920 so

00:29:36.080 and I've

00:29:37.540 known about

00:29:37.940 this for

00:29:38.640 maybe seven

00:29:39.620 years or so

00:29:40.840 that

00:29:41.680 that the

00:29:42.920 world was

00:29:43.400 running out

00:29:43.800 of fertilizer

00:29:44.460 materials

00:29:45.080 and we

00:29:45.740 didn't have

00:29:46.180 a way

00:29:46.740 to fix

00:29:47.280 it

00:29:47.520 now I

00:29:48.180 usually

00:29:48.580 employ the

00:29:50.260 Adams rule 0.63

00:29:51.000 of slow

00:29:51.640 moving

00:29:51.980 disasters

00:29:52.560 and they

00:29:53.520 say yeah

00:29:54.060 we think

00:29:55.080 we're going

00:29:55.340 to run

00:29:55.560 out of

00:29:55.800 fertilizer

00:29:56.200 but somebody

00:29:56.900 will figure

00:29:57.260 out how

00:29:57.620 to make

00:29:57.900 more

00:29:58.220 we'll figure

00:29:59.780 it out

00:30:00.100 because we

00:30:00.480 have enough

00:30:00.840 time and

00:30:01.300 everybody

00:30:01.540 sees it's

00:30:02.040 a problem

00:30:02.420 but then

00:30:03.660 you have

00:30:03.900 a war

00:30:04.380 and the

00:30:05.440 war happens

00:30:06.000 to affect

00:30:06.740 the fertilizer

00:30:07.680 development

00:30:09.740 or manufacturing

00:30:11.120 in one

00:30:11.540 country

00:30:11.920 and it's

00:30:12.520 a pretty

00:30:12.740 big deal

00:30:13.240 so suddenly

00:30:14.460 you took

00:30:15.880 a problem

00:30:16.720 that was

00:30:17.020 already

00:30:17.380 a sort

00:30:18.360 of brewing

00:30:18.980 big problem

00:30:19.720 and you

00:30:20.100 add a war

00:30:20.660 on top

00:30:21.100 of it

00:30:21.320 and shoot

00:30:22.240 you add a

00:30:23.560 fertilizer

00:30:23.940 and then

00:30:24.480 everything

00:30:24.920 falls apart

00:30:25.600 fertilizer

00:30:26.760 kind of

00:30:27.320 holds the

00:30:27.700 world

00:30:27.900 together

00:30:28.320 and

00:30:30.620 I tweeted

00:30:32.660 now this

00:30:33.160 is not a

00:30:33.560 solution

00:30:33.940 but it's

00:30:34.420 the sort

00:30:34.780 of thing

00:30:35.000 that can

00:30:35.300 happen

00:30:35.580 there's a

00:30:36.420 company

00:30:36.680 that's

00:30:36.980 taking

00:30:37.240 CO2

00:30:38.000 from

00:30:38.960 generators

00:30:39.540 you know

00:30:39.860 capturing

00:30:40.240 it at

00:30:40.560 the source

00:30:41.040 at the

00:30:42.160 waste

00:30:43.560 source

00:30:44.080 and turning

00:30:45.180 it into

00:30:45.620 sustainable

00:30:46.200 fertilizers

00:30:46.880 so you

00:30:48.260 can actually

00:30:48.680 turn CO2

00:30:49.760 into

00:30:50.280 fertilizer

00:30:51.420 now it

00:30:53.560 didn't say

00:30:54.180 they could

00:30:54.720 do the

00:30:55.020 same thing

00:30:55.480 by sucking 0.99

00:30:56.600 CO2

00:30:57.220 out of the

00:30:57.600 air

00:30:57.880 and I think

00:31:00.420 you'd get

00:31:00.700 more of it

00:31:01.100 that way

00:31:01.380 but maybe

00:31:01.780 you'd get

00:31:02.040 more of it

00:31:02.440 just attaching

00:31:03.180 it to the

00:31:03.600 stack

00:31:04.000 you know

00:31:04.440 the smoke

00:31:04.860 stack

00:31:05.140 or whatever

00:31:05.500 I don't

00:31:05.920 know

00:31:06.120 but in

00:31:08.400 the case

00:31:08.840 of an

00:31:09.500 emergency

00:31:10.040 which I

00:31:10.980 believe we've

00:31:11.580 entered

00:31:11.860 fertilizer

00:31:12.540 wise

00:31:12.900 and I

00:31:15.620 don't think

00:31:16.000 that this

00:31:16.340 company

00:31:16.740 let's see

00:31:17.200 what's the

00:31:17.460 name of

00:31:17.660 the company

00:31:17.960 CCAM

00:31:19.220 technologies

00:31:19.920 I don't

00:31:20.840 know that

00:31:21.160 they've

00:31:21.400 proven they

00:31:21.880 can do

00:31:22.120 it

00:31:22.240 economically

00:31:22.820 but they

00:31:23.800 have

00:31:24.160 proven

00:31:24.620 they have

00:31:25.880 proven

00:31:26.260 they can

00:31:27.160 turn CO2

00:31:27.800 into

00:31:28.000 fertilizer

00:31:28.440 now what

00:31:29.700 would happen

00:31:30.200 if our

00:31:30.680 two biggest

00:31:31.180 problems

00:31:31.620 solved each

00:31:32.180 other

00:31:32.440 that might

00:31:35.140 be happening

00:31:35.700 wait a

00:31:37.140 minute

00:31:37.300 if you put

00:31:37.860 CO2

00:31:38.640 on plants

00:31:40.740 as fertilizer

00:31:41.520 does that

00:31:43.880 just reduce

00:31:44.580 does that

00:31:46.680 are you

00:31:47.780 going to

00:31:48.100 end up

00:31:48.620 just releasing

00:31:49.540 the CO2

00:31:50.160 alright so

00:31:51.400 here's the

00:31:51.720 question

00:31:52.040 could you

00:31:53.200 solve the

00:31:53.640 fertilizer

00:31:54.300 problem and

00:31:55.220 the climate

00:31:55.740 change problem

00:31:56.360 at the same

00:31:56.820 time

00:31:57.200 could you

00:31:58.760 can you

00:32:00.040 suck CO2

00:32:01.180 out of the

00:32:01.600 air and

00:32:01.900 turn it

00:32:02.220 into

00:32:02.420 fertilizer

00:32:02.920 I'm starting

00:32:05.340 to think

00:32:05.760 you can

00:32:06.220 now I

00:32:07.660 don't know

00:32:07.860 if you

00:32:08.020 could do

00:32:08.280 it

00:32:08.400 economically

00:32:08.940 but if

00:32:10.020 if the

00:32:10.800 world runs

00:32:11.300 out of

00:32:11.600 fertilizer

00:32:12.120 then the

00:32:13.200 economics

00:32:13.700 change

00:32:14.160 completely

00:32:14.660 if

00:32:15.700 so he

00:32:17.460 says

00:32:17.660 climate

00:32:18.040 change

00:32:18.360 is

00:32:18.540 bullshit

00:32:18.860 so they

00:32:20.140 don't need

00:32:20.460 any more

00:32:20.780 fertilizer

00:32:21.220 okay I

00:32:22.540 get it

00:32:23.000 I get

00:32:24.260 your joke

00:32:24.780 now I

00:32:25.760 was I'm

00:32:26.080 not not

00:32:26.900 going to

00:32:27.380 predict that

00:32:27.900 this is the

00:32:28.460 solution to

00:32:28.940 everything but

00:32:29.360 it's the

00:32:29.620 kind of

00:32:30.120 ways that

00:32:31.720 you can go

00:32:32.240 from doing

00:32:32.900 to a good

00:32:33.720 situation and

00:32:34.700 a war can

00:32:35.280 get you

00:32:35.580 there if

00:32:36.780 there were

00:32:37.100 no war I

00:32:38.920 doubt we'd

00:32:39.740 put as much

00:32:40.220 attention into

00:32:40.960 turning CO2

00:32:41.960 into fertilizer

00:32:42.700 so it

00:32:44.760 could be that

00:32:45.280 the war in

00:32:45.760 Ukraine solves

00:32:47.840 climate change

00:32:48.680 and also

00:32:49.940 solves the

00:32:50.700 fertilizer

00:32:51.180 shortage in

00:32:52.840 my opinion

00:32:53.480 possibly the

00:32:55.240 two biggest

00:32:55.640 problems in

00:32:56.120 the world

00:32:56.460 we could have

00:32:58.320 solved them

00:32:58.700 both right

00:33:00.420 I mean it's

00:33:01.380 possible I

00:33:02.260 don't think

00:33:02.560 the economics

00:33:03.140 would be

00:33:03.460 easy to

00:33:03.800 work out

00:33:04.240 but it's

00:33:05.020 possible

00:33:05.380 oh interesting

00:33:11.520 so John

00:33:12.220 Carroll is

00:33:12.820 saying he

00:33:13.720 has a farm

00:33:14.420 where he

00:33:15.880 basically

00:33:17.240 fertilizes the

00:33:18.060 plants with

00:33:18.620 the animal

00:33:19.320 waste and

00:33:20.180 it all

00:33:20.560 works out

00:33:21.000 maybe that

00:33:23.800 maybe that's

00:33:24.340 the trick

00:33:24.760 maybe the

00:33:25.340 trick is to

00:33:25.920 get the

00:33:26.400 animal farms

00:33:27.320 and the

00:33:27.700 plant farms

00:33:28.300 closer together

00:33:29.100 maybe that's

00:33:31.200 a lot of

00:33:31.500 the trick

00:33:31.820 all right

00:33:33.480 I think it

00:33:36.920 was Ian

00:33:37.560 Bremmer

00:33:38.020 suggesting that

00:33:39.440 maybe Biden

00:33:40.100 should go to

00:33:40.700 Kiev because

00:33:42.280 there were

00:33:42.940 three NATO

00:33:43.580 leaders that

00:33:44.080 went to

00:33:44.360 Kiev Kiev

00:33:45.140 Kiev Kiev

00:33:45.600 Kiev and

00:33:47.640 are you

00:33:49.060 surprised that

00:33:50.160 anybody can

00:33:51.000 go into

00:33:51.380 Kiev how the

00:33:52.860 hell do you

00:33:53.220 get there

00:33:53.680 how in the

00:33:54.960 world could

00:33:55.440 you get a

00:33:55.820 president of

00:33:56.300 the United

00:33:56.600 States into

00:33:57.460 the middle

00:33:57.900 of a war

00:33:58.380 zone into

00:33:58.960 a surrounded

00:33:59.600 city fly

00:34:02.420 you know I

00:34:03.160 get it you

00:34:03.680 fly he's not

00:34:04.780 going to walk

00:34:05.260 but is that

00:34:09.180 safe and I

00:34:11.840 use a green

00:34:12.740 screen right

00:34:13.380 I here's my

00:34:18.160 opinion I do

00:34:19.420 think Biden

00:34:20.040 should go to

00:34:20.700 Kiev but he's

00:34:22.680 not the only

00:34:23.120 one I think

00:34:24.820 Jussie Smollett

00:34:25.680 should go to

00:34:26.720 Kiev I

00:34:28.740 think that

00:34:29.320 all of the

00:34:33.500 criminals in

00:34:34.120 Seattle should

00:34:35.800 go to Kiev I

00:34:37.520 think I think

00:34:38.080 there are

00:34:38.280 actually lots of

00:34:38.900 people I'd like

00:34:39.420 to see to go

00:34:39.900 to Kiev but

00:34:40.940 not anybody that

00:34:42.920 we want to

00:34:43.400 save no

00:34:45.460 nobody that we

00:34:46.380 want to save

00:34:47.020 but Biden

00:34:47.900 sure you know

00:34:50.420 I'm starting to

00:34:51.220 think that cyber

00:34:52.100 war is a 0.92

00:34:53.100 overrated

00:34:54.180 how could we

00:34:56.400 be this far

00:34:57.120 into the

00:34:57.760 Russia Ukraine

00:34:58.940 situation and

00:35:00.720 not seeing any

00:35:01.520 serious cyber

00:35:02.440 attacks what's

00:35:04.500 going on here

00:35:05.160 is it possible

00:35:07.260 that we're better

00:35:08.180 at defending

00:35:08.720 against cyber

00:35:09.380 attacks than we

00:35:10.020 thought maybe

00:35:11.000 especially during

00:35:11.800 war maybe they 0.75

00:35:13.060 watch it closer

00:35:13.720 or is somebody

00:35:17.380 holding out on

00:35:18.280 the good stuff

00:35:19.000 or are there

00:35:21.500 cyber attacks that

00:35:23.500 are working and

00:35:24.140 we're not hearing

00:35:24.660 about it now I

00:35:26.560 know that

00:35:26.860 anonymous the

00:35:27.700 hacker group

00:35:28.280 anonymous has

00:35:30.120 been doing a lot

00:35:30.720 of denial of

00:35:31.400 service attacks on

00:35:32.300 Russia but they 0.99

00:35:33.820 had one notable

00:35:34.680 success some

00:35:36.480 hacker or hackers

00:35:37.660 hacked into a

00:35:38.920 Russian TV network

00:35:39.980 and put on a

00:35:40.820 short video clip

00:35:41.780 that replaced the

00:35:43.620 normal programming

00:35:44.400 to tell people

00:35:45.460 what's really

00:35:45.920 happening in

00:35:46.440 Ukraine so 0.66

00:35:47.940 somebody a hacker

00:35:48.880 actually got

00:35:49.560 control of like

00:35:51.600 I think it was

00:35:53.180 20 minutes of

00:35:54.980 live airtime

00:35:55.760 how do you do

00:35:57.860 that that sounds

00:35:59.540 like something with

00:36:00.180 an insider doesn't

00:36:01.200 it I don't think

00:36:02.580 you could do that

00:36:03.220 without an insider

00:36:04.140 how in the world

00:36:06.000 could you do that

00:36:07.720 that that just

00:36:09.460 doesn't sound like

00:36:10.120 something a hacker

00:36:10.800 could do I think

00:36:13.120 I'm going to go

00:36:13.580 further and say

00:36:14.360 there's no way that

00:36:15.160 that happened

00:36:15.700 externally I think

00:36:17.240 that was an

00:36:17.680 internal thing in

00:36:19.300 other words somebody

00:36:20.380 involved with the

00:36:21.200 station must have

00:36:22.220 pushed a button I

00:36:23.260 don't think you

00:36:23.780 could hack that into

00:36:24.660 being but maybe

00:36:25.940 maybe they did

00:36:28.440 that to one of 0.50

00:36:29.180 Giuliani's broadcast

00:36:30.360 too was Giuliani's

00:36:32.420 broadcast on a

00:36:34.220 network was on a

00:36:36.860 network or was on

00:36:38.180 like a streaming

00:36:39.060 service yeah I

00:36:41.560 guess I have some

00:36:42.200 questions

00:36:43.180 where's Q and

00:36:52.700 what does Q say

00:36:53.520 Fox News audio

00:36:58.160 keeps cutting out in

00:36:59.200 Canada interesting

00:37:00.080 that one was

00:37:06.000 proven false

00:37:06.820 somebody says

00:37:07.580 oh is it proven

00:37:10.000 false that somebody

00:37:10.940 hacked the TV

00:37:11.960 station because

00:37:13.080 yeah I

00:37:16.120 because I don't I

00:37:16.660 don't feel like

00:37:17.360 that story is too

00:37:18.900 credible even

00:37:20.100 though it had it

00:37:21.000 actually happened I

00:37:21.740 think we do have

00:37:22.340 information that it

00:37:24.420 was hacked but I

00:37:25.100 don't think it was

00:37:25.480 necessarily anonymous

00:37:26.440 so am I wrong

00:37:32.740 that maybe the

00:37:33.340 cyber attacks from

00:37:34.240 Russia either are 0.93

00:37:35.360 not being they're not

00:37:37.320 happening or they

00:37:38.100 don't really work

00:37:39.020 the chef is back in

00:37:42.920 Ukraine oh is he 0.99

00:37:44.220 the chef was the

00:37:48.060 oligarch who is very 0.98

00:37:50.560 close to Putin right

00:37:51.840 and and he he had

00:37:54.960 the troll farm I 1.00

00:37:56.520 think that's who the

00:37:57.200 chef was but I don't

00:38:00.580 know if he's really in

00:38:01.260 Ukraine that's just a 0.99

00:38:02.260 comment all right

00:38:04.060 servant of the people

00:38:09.660 all right that is a

00:38:13.720 let me check my notes

00:38:15.480 checking notes

00:38:16.400 that's about all those

00:38:18.920 happening today and

00:38:21.300 is there anything else I

00:38:23.480 missed so who shut down

00:38:26.080 the East Coast pipeline

00:38:27.340 last year now those were

00:38:29.600 blackmail hackers and so

00:38:35.680 here's a question I

00:38:36.500 have if you're a

00:38:38.420 blackmail kind of a

00:38:39.600 hacker where you're

00:38:41.360 trying to shut down

00:38:42.160 something and blackmail

00:38:43.180 and we know that happens

00:38:44.260 and we know that they

00:38:45.060 get into serious stuff

00:38:46.120 how long does it take

00:38:47.680 that kind of attack to

00:38:50.020 develop in other words

00:38:51.440 do you have to develop

00:38:52.240 sources within the

00:38:53.560 company could in the

00:38:59.580 context of war and

00:39:01.840 let's say you had two

00:39:02.620 months to do something

00:39:03.640 could you figure out how

00:39:05.260 to hack something major

00:39:07.180 in two months or here's

00:39:10.380 my question or do the

00:39:12.520 the blackmail ransomware

00:39:14.520 hackers do they just try

00:39:16.380 to hack everything they

00:39:17.340 can until they find

00:39:18.480 something because they're

00:39:20.620 not really hacking

00:39:21.420 government stuff they tend

00:39:24.920 to be getting into

00:39:25.520 private stuff right so

00:39:27.660 they aren't targeted

00:39:30.460 yeah so right so if you

00:39:33.600 have every company and

00:39:34.760 every system in the world

00:39:35.820 to choose from and you

00:39:37.580 try to attack as many as

00:39:38.780 possible and you get lucky

00:39:39.900 and you get into one the

00:39:41.580 law of large numbers is of

00:39:43.120 course if you're trying to

00:39:44.140 attack everything that

00:39:45.060 exists you're going to

00:39:45.960 find some weaknesses but if

00:39:48.800 you're Ukraine and you know

00:39:50.240 you're going to get cyber

00:39:51.380 attacked on your electrical

00:39:53.040 grid just to pick an

00:39:54.240 example couldn't you protect

00:39:56.140 that completely if you knew

00:39:58.500 it was a target and an

00:39:59.800 imminent target probably

00:40:02.420 you could somebody says

00:40:04.740 no I guess it would depend

00:40:06.080 on the vulnerability right

00:40:07.560 it would depend on the

00:40:09.440 vulnerability but at the

00:40:10.740 very least you think they'd

00:40:11.880 have some kind of a system

00:40:12.880 that would you know wipe

00:40:14.240 out its own software and

00:40:15.520 reinstall it if it had a

00:40:17.060 problem or something like

00:40:18.240 that ransomware works by

00:40:21.980 phishing mostly interesting so

00:40:24.940 that the phishing if ransomware

00:40:27.460 works by phishing the idea

00:40:29.660 that you send fake emails to

00:40:31.460 employees and ask them for

00:40:33.400 their you know ask them for

00:40:35.100 their credentials to hack into

00:40:36.520 something I think that's what

00:40:38.080 you're talking about that would

00:40:40.120 that would require a length of

00:40:42.680 time because you might not get

00:40:44.640 that kind of thing on the first

00:40:45.660 try might take you two tries

00:40:48.800 so it probably doesn't work so

00:40:53.360 well in the context of war when

00:40:55.840 you're working on one target and

00:40:57.640 you're in a hurry the the

00:41:00.320 phishing thing doesn't seem like

00:41:01.740 that works fast it worked on

00:41:05.720 podesta yeah but that wasn't

00:41:07.940 also a podesta didn't have you

00:41:10.800 know credentials to the

00:41:12.580 infrastructure you know the

00:41:14.260 electric grid it was just an

00:41:16.300 email credential all right that

00:41:19.720 is all I have for today I'm

00:41:21.600 pretty sure that this changed

00:41:23.040 your life in a positive way

00:41:24.320 and now that you have this

00:41:28.180 standard for knowing how to

00:41:29.540 interpret scientific studies

00:41:31.720 you're in good shape because

00:41:33.360 before you were just wandering

00:41:34.620 blind in the desert but now if

00:41:37.640 the study agrees with you that's

00:41:39.640 good science and I'm going to go

00:41:43.780 do some other stuff important

00:41:45.740 things and I would like you to

00:41:49.820 enjoy the beginning of the golden

00:41:52.800 age I actually do think this is

00:41:56.600 the beginning of the golden age

00:41:57.660 let me let me summarize that for a

00:41:59.220 moment the war in Ukraine as

00:42:03.140 awful as it is should be the the

00:42:07.280 takeaway from this I think is going

00:42:09.740 to be that you can't attack an

00:42:11.340 industrialized country because if

00:42:14.020 you do you're not going to win

00:42:16.340 it's going to blow your economy

00:42:18.280 up and the economic sanctions will

00:42:20.900 take you apart I do think you can

00:42:23.260 still attack a lesser developed

00:42:25.520 country and get away with it but I

00:42:29.120 don't think you can attack a

00:42:30.640 Ukraine or anything like it and I

00:42:33.660 think that the this is going to

00:42:35.300 prove it that's good that's really

00:42:38.840 good in the same way that dropping

00:42:41.900 nuclear bombs on Hiroshima and

00:42:44.760 Nagasaki was incredibly bad for the

00:42:49.520 people who got bombed and for maybe

00:42:51.900 humanity's soul but it probably kept

00:42:56.840 us out of some other nuclear wars

00:42:58.640 because people got to see just how bad

00:43:00.580 these weapons were so the golden age

00:43:03.540 interpretation is that the Ukraine war

00:43:06.380 will be horrible for now but will prove

00:43:09.780 maybe forever that that kind of war can

00:43:12.760 never work that's good what happens if

00:43:16.680 our shortage of fertilizer because of

00:43:18.740 the war increases the energy put into

00:43:22.180 taking CO2 out of the air and turning

00:43:24.260 it into fertilizer that'd be really

00:43:26.700 good

00:43:27.040 oh it never went through the networks

00:43:33.320 somebody said the hacker attack was kind

00:43:36.020 of overrated that makes sense

00:43:38.240 here's some other good news it is

00:43:45.680 entirely possible that crypto becomes

00:43:49.380 more powerful because of the forces

00:43:51.500 that we've seen recently that could be

00:43:53.220 good especially the blockchain stuff it

00:43:56.180 could be that we now know how to handle

00:44:00.680 pandemics in the future one of the

00:44:02.800 biggest risks to humanity could be in

00:44:05.300 much better shape now that's good it

00:44:08.400 could be that not only do we learn how

00:44:11.940 to take CO2 out of the air and fix

00:44:13.840 climate change but it turns into

00:44:17.320 valuable products etc and so it seems to

00:44:23.520 me that everything bad that's happening

00:44:25.360 now is a clear incentive for the good

00:44:30.900 thing to replace it take for example

00:44:34.020 NASA was a mess and then we get in a war

00:44:37.760 with Russia and Russia would no longer be

00:44:41.880 seen as a good source for sending stuff to

00:44:46.020 the International Space Station but

00:44:49.000 there's SpaceX there's Elon Musk so his

00:44:52.560 business gets a pop that's good too so it

00:44:57.440 seems to be that although the news looks

00:45:00.900 pretty darn bad every one of those bad

00:45:03.960 news is every one of those bad pieces of

00:45:08.220 news is very closely matched with a

00:45:12.100 probable solution that would be a

00:45:14.340 beneficial to society forever so if we

00:45:19.300 can get past the inflation which won't be

00:45:22.040 easy and we can figure a way past the

00:45:24.400 fertilizer I think everything else is

00:45:27.240 going to work out and those two things I

00:45:29.320 think we can fix or at least we can we

00:45:31.960 can weather them I live in a time when we

00:45:37.560 could put a helicopter on Mars it's true

00:45:40.040 we did and so I say to you that we're in a

00:45:51.780 pretty good place but we're not quite

00:45:55.400 there yet so that is all I've got for

00:45:58.500 today and that upbeat thought and thank

00:46:02.320 you Christo and I'll see you on YouTube

00:46:04.740 tomorrow

00:46:05.160 tomorrow

00:46:20.140 so

Real Coffee with Scott Adams - March 20, 2022

Episode 1688 Scott Adams： From Russian Hypersonic Missiles to Fertilizer. I Cover it All Today

Episode Stats

Summary

Transcript