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

Length

46 minutes

Words per Minute

141.26672

Word Count

6,556

Sentence Count

289

Misogynist Sentences

1

Hate Speech Sentences

17


Summary

In this episode, Scott Adams talks about why gas prices are going up, and why it's not down to supply and demand, but rather a combination of more than one thing that's causing the price of gas to go up.


Transcript

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%.
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.
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.
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
00:37:44.220 the chef was the
00:37:48.060 oligarch who is very
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
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
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