Real Coffee with Scott Adams - Episode 1798 Scott Adams： Let Me Tell You All The Things The News Isn't Telling You Today

00:00:00.000 Good morning, everybody, and welcome to the Highlight of Civilization.

00:00:10.820 Coffee with Scott Adams, and it doesn't have to be coffee.

00:00:13.760 It could be a beverage of your choice.

00:00:15.340 We're very flexible here.

00:00:17.840 Dare I say, progressive.

00:00:19.700 No, it's okay.

00:00:20.860 Don't worry about it.

00:00:21.900 You can have your coffee any way you like, conservatively or otherwise.

00:00:25.460 But you will need a cup or mug or a glass of tank or chalice or stein, a canteen jug or

00:00:30.260 flask, a vessel of any kind.

00:00:32.640 Fill it with your favorite liquid.

00:00:35.780 I like coffee.

00:00:37.540 And join me now for the unparalleled pleasure of the dopamine the other day, the thing that

00:00:40.700 makes everything better.

00:00:41.820 It's called the Simultaneous Sip.

00:00:45.700 Arjan says, how can I donate?

00:00:48.100 Go to the local site and subscribe.

00:00:51.920 Go.

00:00:55.460 Oh, that's the best ever.

00:01:03.080 Well, I'm going to start including headlines from the Babylon Bee, because it used to be

00:01:09.740 I would say, oh, I'm not going to talk about joke headlines, because those are just jokes.

00:01:15.320 Those are parodies.

00:01:16.620 I'm going to talk about the real stuff.

00:01:20.160 Not much difference anymore.

00:01:21.640 So I feel like I can give you Babylon Bee headlines just along with the others.

00:01:27.280 I'm not even going to mention where they come from.

00:01:29.860 So, I don't know.

00:01:30.720 Does this come from the Babylon Bee or from CNN?

00:01:33.220 You decide.

00:01:34.700 Here's the headline.

00:01:35.480 U.S.

00:01:35.800 A recently published study presented a worrying statistic regarding the masses of Californians

00:01:41.600 migrating to other states.

00:01:43.060 The study finds 92% of those fleeing the Golden State don't survive the first winter.

00:01:53.340 So, it's pretty tragic.

00:01:55.480 Don't survive the first winter.

00:01:56.820 If you were on my live stream yesterday from locals, you'd have to be a subscriber to see

00:02:04.260 it, you would have seen me discussing the fact that the word fleeing is a good word for

00:02:10.340 comedy.

00:02:11.880 Fleeing.

00:02:13.140 Notice it's like, study finds 92% of those fleeing the Golden State.

00:02:17.560 That's how you know it's the Babylon Bee and not CNN.

00:02:21.660 That one word is the only tip off.

00:02:24.340 Fleeing.

00:02:25.080 It's a comedy word.

00:02:26.220 Well, Boris Johnson resigned and Shinto Abe was murdered.

00:02:36.140 So, it's a bad day for, bad week for conservative leaders around the world.

00:02:41.780 Let's talk about Boris first.

00:02:45.440 Boris got fired.

00:02:47.740 He resigned, but let's say he got fired.

00:02:50.640 Boris Johnson got fired for partying too much.

00:02:54.700 That's sort of what happened, right?

00:02:56.220 Is that what happened?

00:03:00.780 He partied too much?

00:03:02.620 I mean, I feel like, you know, there was like, you know, scandals.

00:03:09.660 Yeah, COVID party restrictions he violated.

00:03:13.220 So, basically, he was a hypocrite, a liar.

00:03:15.740 And he looked too much like Donald Trump, his haircut.

00:03:20.540 I think that's unforgivable.

00:03:23.100 You know, I'm wondering if the way things work best is that you get a Boris Johnson or a Trump,

00:03:33.300 and they fix stuff, and then you let other people run it for a while until something breaks.

00:03:40.580 But when something breaks, you need somebody to come in and kick some ass again.

00:03:44.040 So, I feel like, I feel like maybe, you know, the people who can break things the best shouldn't be the people who are running things.

00:03:56.860 Because you need the demolition people to just come in and break everything.

00:04:02.140 And then you need the people who are just going to pick up the garbage.

00:04:05.040 So, it might not be bad that your Boris Johnson's come, and then they do the thing, and then they go.

00:04:11.780 Maybe that's the very best way it works.

00:04:14.040 Same with Trump.

00:04:15.280 But I wonder, I wonder, is the Boris Johnson situation the simulation sending us a signal about Trump?

00:04:25.500 Now, the way we usually talk about it is, is there some trend developing with this one point of data?

00:04:31.540 That's the way we usually talk.

00:04:32.720 And I don't know that it's a trend, but maybe the simulation is winking at us and saying,

00:04:40.380 hey, hey, we're moving on to a new upgrade, and it doesn't require people with non-standard haircuts.

00:04:48.480 Maybe.

00:04:49.980 The more tragic news, and this is really shocking.

00:04:54.140 You know, former Prime Minister Shinto Abe, am I saying it correctly?

00:05:00.620 Correctly?

00:05:02.500 Good friend of President Trump's, Shinzo.

00:05:06.960 Shinzo.

00:05:08.280 Abe.

00:05:10.280 Right?

00:05:11.380 Shinzo Abe.

00:05:12.820 I'm terrible at the pronunciations.

00:05:16.380 CERN destroyed Earth's shields.

00:05:18.220 Okay, that sounds like a story I don't know about.

00:05:20.060 So we don't know who killed him, right?

00:05:22.920 Or why?

00:05:24.680 But he was considered, I guess, NPR.

00:05:27.460 In their little story, they called him an arch-conservative.

00:05:31.680 And then they deleted it.

00:05:32.980 I guess people didn't like the way he was characterized.

00:05:38.520 It was a homemade gun, somebody says.

00:05:40.280 Is that confirmed?

00:05:40.940 Because it's very, you know, the gun control is very, you have the shooter, and a homemade

00:05:48.620 gun confirmed, somebody says.

00:05:51.200 He printed it.

00:05:53.000 Oh, my God.

00:05:55.280 Is that true?

00:05:58.380 Two pipes and a plank.

00:06:01.040 No, he didn't.

00:06:02.040 Was not printed.

00:06:03.240 Okay.

00:06:03.480 So apparently, you should not get the news from me reading comments as they stream by.

00:06:09.400 Turns out that's a very inaccurate way to get the news.

00:06:13.420 So it wasn't printed, but maybe he made it himself or something.

00:06:20.300 It's just a pipe shotgun from the looks.

00:06:23.000 Okay.

00:06:24.840 Home Depot gun.

00:06:26.560 Hardware store items.

00:06:27.860 Interesting.

00:06:29.500 Wow.

00:06:31.340 Ex-military, you think?

00:06:33.480 Or do we know that?

00:06:35.960 It was homemade.

00:06:37.400 Interesting.

00:06:38.880 Well, I don't know what we're supposed to take away from the story, because on one hand,

00:06:43.280 you know, it's notable that they have strict gun control and the most, probably the most

00:06:48.500 prominent politician in Japan just got murdered in public.

00:06:53.120 But I don't know that it's telling us anything, is it?

00:06:56.460 I mean, it's a horrible tragedy.

00:06:58.640 But what did we, did we learn anything from it?

00:07:01.620 I don't think so.

00:07:02.880 He's an ex-Navy, somebody says.

00:07:06.200 Yeah.

00:07:06.700 I don't know.

00:07:07.260 There's probably, I don't think there's necessarily anything to add to the story.

00:07:12.720 It's just horrible.

00:07:13.520 All right.

00:07:15.020 But I'm watching in, let's say, great interest as the COVID skeptics, you know, the rogue doctors,

00:07:25.840 et cetera, are still in the game.

00:07:28.800 And there's still studies coming out that, you know, support them or don't.

00:07:32.940 But Dr. Peter McCullough is back in the news.

00:07:36.760 He and two other doctors were on TV talking about a Swedish study that allegedly confirms that Pfizer does modify your DNA.

00:07:46.040 It causes your cells to produce the toxic spike protein.

00:07:49.420 So that was a news clip that I saw forwarded around.

00:07:55.940 So let me give you the following context so that when you see this clip, if you do, you'll know how to evaluate it.

00:08:03.820 Now, first of all, is it true that the Pfizer shot does something to modify your DNA?

00:08:11.480 Well, I don't know.

00:08:14.440 I don't know if it's true.

00:08:15.680 I'll tell you what we know.

00:08:20.780 We know that it's one study.

00:08:24.780 How reliable is one scientific study?

00:08:28.480 Just in general.

00:08:30.120 How reliable is one scientific study?

00:08:33.360 Probably less than half.

00:08:35.580 Would you say that less than half the time they would be confirmed?

00:08:39.820 Is that true?

00:08:40.240 Now, I know in the social sciences, they have a really bad reproduction problem.

00:08:46.660 25%?

00:08:47.600 25% of the time, it's reproducible.

00:08:50.000 Is that right?

00:08:51.140 Or is that only for the social sciences, where things are a little sketchier?

00:08:57.740 All right.

00:08:58.120 Well, so the fact that there's only one study, that should tell you it's not.

00:09:05.340 The majority likelihood is that it's not true.

00:09:08.180 Is that too strong?

00:09:11.660 If you see one study, and it even looks like a high-quality study, can you say, without even

00:09:17.660 knowing what the topic is, can you say that it's most likely not true?

00:09:22.560 I feel like that's statistically true, right?

00:09:27.040 Most likely not true if there's a high-quality study that says it is true.

00:09:32.540 Historically, most likely it's not, right?

00:09:35.420 If there's just one study.

00:09:37.040 Now, suppose there's a second study.

00:09:39.960 You know, also high-quality gets the same result.

00:09:42.660 Well, then you're much better, much better territory, right?

00:09:47.800 Much better territory.

00:09:49.020 I don't know what the percentages would be.

00:09:50.680 But two studies completely done separately.

00:09:54.140 Now you have my attention.

00:09:55.980 One study?

00:09:57.480 It's a flag.

00:09:59.360 But it's not quite news, is it?

00:10:02.000 It's just a flag.

00:10:03.740 But here are the other things you should say about this news,

00:10:06.740 to be an educated consumer of news.

00:10:10.560 And see how many of these you sort of automatically got on your own.

00:10:15.820 Number one, you should have said it's most likely not true,

00:10:19.280 because there's one study that says it's true.

00:10:21.760 How many got that right from the jump?

00:10:24.680 As soon as you heard there was one study,

00:10:26.920 how many of you said automatically, probably not true?

00:10:30.960 If you did, then you're a good consumer of news.

00:10:33.900 All right, here's some other things you should have thought about if you saw it.

00:10:38.320 Now, I haven't mentioned this,

00:10:40.260 but one of the doctors, Drs. Simone Gold,

00:10:43.780 who also has been very controversial as one of the rogue doctors,

00:10:48.520 maybe kicked off his social media?

00:10:51.340 Kicked off a Twitter, yes or no?

00:10:52.960 Can somebody give me a fact check on that?

00:10:55.400 Was she kicked off a Twitter?

00:10:58.220 Dr. Simone Gold.

00:11:01.200 Somebody says, very kicked off.

00:11:02.660 Somebody says she's still on.

00:11:04.580 All right, we can't confirm anything.

00:11:07.260 Today's the day we can't confirm anything.

00:11:10.400 But she's controversial.

00:11:12.260 Now, one of the things that she said was that if it's true that the DNA is altered,

00:11:19.880 she says that this might create new avenues for lawsuits

00:11:23.740 against the pharma companies or against somebody because it modifies your DNA.

00:11:32.920 And there's some law that says you can't discriminate against people with different DNA.

00:11:37.880 And so the idea was that because DNA is involved and you can't discriminate against people

00:11:49.760 who have different DNA, that gives you some kind of avenue for, I guess,

00:11:56.400 objecting to be banned if you're not vaccinated, I guess.

00:12:00.860 Now, that's stupid, right?

00:12:05.760 Am I right?

00:12:06.680 Are there any lawyers on here?

00:12:08.860 There always are.

00:12:09.760 There's always a few lawyers.

00:12:11.260 All right, she's not a lawyer, but correct me if I'm wrong,

00:12:15.900 her legal theory, she's a lawyer, somebody says.

00:12:20.480 She's not a lawyer, is she?

00:12:25.820 I think she's a doctor.

00:12:27.700 She is a lawyer.

00:12:29.520 No way.

00:12:30.640 Are you serious?

00:12:32.700 Is she a doctor and a lawyer?

00:12:35.380 She's both.

00:12:37.280 All right, so this is even more interesting.

00:12:40.480 This is even better than I thought.

00:12:42.640 In my opinion, as a non-lawyer, her legal take is stupid.

00:12:47.120 Like, I'm not a lawyer and I'm evaluating somebody who you say is a lawyer

00:12:52.520 and I'm not changing my opinion.

00:12:56.200 Do you think there's any existing law about, you know, discrimination based on DNA?

00:13:01.420 Do you think there's any law that this would apply to?

00:13:05.360 I don't see it.

00:13:12.140 I don't see it.

00:13:13.640 All right, here's the thing.

00:13:15.000 I see people complaining, and I'm not going to let this go, all right?

00:13:19.960 Usually I don't dump on people who are on the local platform because they're subscribers,

00:13:24.020 but I'm not going to let this go.

00:13:26.680 I'm seeing a complaint that I'm talking about a topic that I don't understand again.

00:13:32.300 That's the fucking show, right?

00:13:34.900 If you can't deal with that, don't watch.

00:13:37.940 This is the fucking show.

00:13:39.360 I deal with you, it's interactive, you correct me, I correct you, you correct me, I correct you.

00:13:45.420 That's how it works.

00:13:46.660 A lot of this is breaking news, we haven't looked into it, we're just trying to figure it out,

00:13:50.020 just like everybody else.

00:13:51.320 So if your complaint is that I don't understand thoroughly the topic,

00:13:55.320 you are so fucking in the wrong universe.

00:13:58.060 Because nobody understands any of these goddamn topics.

00:14:01.760 If there's anything I can teach you, it's that nobody understands them.

00:14:05.360 In fact, that's going to be the biggest theme today.

00:14:08.200 Even the experts don't know what the fuck they're doing.

00:14:10.900 So if you think the problem is I don't understand the topic, you're right.

00:14:15.520 But it's a dumb fucking comment, because nobody understands the topics.

00:14:19.980 Nobody.

00:14:20.980 That's the context of all of this.

00:14:24.220 Nobody understands the topics.

00:14:26.700 All right?

00:14:31.400 So I invite you to unsubscribe, please.

00:14:35.360 So, listen, here are the other reasons you should maybe be skeptical of this new information about the Pfizer shots.

00:14:47.200 First, the legal part sounded so dumb to me that it degraded my opinion of their medical opinions.

00:14:55.640 So maybe that sounded the same way to you, or maybe you know more about the law than I did and it doesn't.

00:15:00.480 Here's the part that was glossed over in the video that we saw.

00:15:05.900 One of the hosts asked directly, and this is the most important question, they asked, so what?

00:15:13.780 That's the big question, right?

00:15:15.000 So Dr. McCullough said, you know, that the study shows that, you know, the DNA is modified in this particular way.

00:15:26.160 The host correctly says, and, and what?

00:15:33.080 How would that make any difference, right?

00:15:35.820 That's the right question.

00:15:37.100 You're saying something got modified.

00:15:39.640 Okay, doctor.

00:15:40.720 So what?

00:15:42.040 Is that a modification that will matter?

00:15:44.780 Am I going to grow another leg?

00:15:47.180 Isn't that the big question?

00:15:48.980 What happened when she asked the so what question?

00:15:51.660 The most important question.

00:15:53.460 What happened?

00:15:53.960 Dr. Simone Gold cut her off to talk about something else.

00:16:02.600 They didn't want to answer the so what question because it might be a so what nothing.

00:16:08.700 It might be.

00:16:10.120 It could be that there's like a technical change to something that's technically your DNA.

00:16:15.620 But if you heard the other side, which you didn't, what would they have said?

00:16:24.080 What would the other side, what would Pfizer say?

00:16:26.680 They might say, oh, God, you're being so technical.

00:16:29.680 Yeah, in a technical way, you could say some DNA got modified.

00:16:34.180 But if you look at the details, you can see that the way it's modified is so trivial,

00:16:38.960 it would be more correct to say that nothing important happened.

00:16:41.660 Now, I don't know if they'd say that or anything close to it.

00:16:47.200 But did you hear the other side?

00:16:50.480 Nope.

00:16:51.560 So what credibility would you put in a study where you haven't heard the, let's say the,

00:16:59.620 you know, the offended party would be Pfizer, right?

00:17:03.080 They would be the offended party in this because the data goes against their best interests.

00:17:07.940 If you haven't heard from them, you really haven't heard the situation, have you?

00:17:14.000 Just remember that.

00:17:15.020 You haven't heard the other side.

00:17:16.760 So they glossed over the so what.

00:17:18.980 They made a legal pronouncement that, to my non-legal mind, just looks stupid.

00:17:24.240 It just doesn't look like it applies at all to me.

00:17:27.160 But I could be wrong.

00:17:29.080 And then scientific studies are not credible.

00:17:31.560 Here's another thing.

00:17:32.200 Who paid for the study?

00:17:34.020 Who paid for the study?

00:17:35.040 I don't know.

00:17:37.780 It wasn't presented.

00:17:39.440 What trust or credibility would you put in a scientific study that says one company in

00:17:46.520 a competitive field, that one company is a company you shouldn't use?

00:17:52.860 Well, who is the most likely entity that would fund a study like that?

00:18:01.100 Who would have a lot of interest in putting some money into that kind of a study?

00:18:05.900 They're competitors.

00:18:08.280 Now, if...

00:18:10.440 Right, the competitor.

00:18:12.380 So if the competitor funded the study, would you trust it?

00:18:19.040 You shouldn't.

00:18:20.820 Right?

00:18:21.360 Now, if they don't tell you who funded it, should you trust it?

00:18:25.400 You shouldn't.

00:18:26.380 Not telling you who funded it is the same as saying, well, don't trust it.

00:18:33.260 You don't even know who's behind it.

00:18:35.440 Right?

00:18:36.520 If you found out that China funded it, would it change your opinion?

00:18:40.700 How about Johnson & Johnson?

00:18:42.780 Suppose Johnson & Johnson funded it because they use different technology.

00:18:47.360 You don't know, do you?

00:18:48.200 Suppose it was somebody who funded it who has a large investment in J&J.

00:18:54.700 It's not even J&J.

00:18:55.720 It's just somebody who has a large investment in it.

00:18:57.940 How would you know?

00:19:01.060 All right?

00:19:01.580 And then why is no other major media covering it?

00:19:05.520 Now, you could explain that by saying they're all captured media.

00:19:09.100 By the way, that's the phrase I'm preferring lately.

00:19:13.380 The captured news.

00:19:14.800 Does that sound better?

00:19:18.760 So, fake news just turns into, you know, no, it's not.

00:19:22.940 It's not fake news.

00:19:24.280 So, you just argue about what's true and what's not.

00:19:28.560 If you say it's the corporate media, it's true, but it feels sort of cold and analytical

00:19:35.040 and it doesn't really have a persuasive punch.

00:19:38.400 But if you say the captured news, the captured news, not big media, not mainstream media,

00:19:47.040 they don't tell you enough.

00:19:48.320 Captured news.

00:19:49.780 Yeah.

00:19:50.560 So, this is borrowed from regulatory capture, if you know that topic.

00:19:54.980 Regulatory capture goes like this.

00:19:57.100 You have a regulated industry, let's say a phone company or the power company.

00:20:01.700 The regulators eventually get owned by the company they're regulating.

00:20:06.360 One way or another.

00:20:07.280 Over time, the company with the money finds a way to get people regulating them

00:20:13.120 who are more on their side than not, right?

00:20:16.160 So, that's called captured.

00:20:18.740 A captured industry.

00:20:20.680 So, to me, it seems that between the pharma advertising and the Democrat influence

00:20:25.740 and the probably CIA, it looks like it, that the news, most of the news is captured.

00:20:31.980 Meaning that there's somebody controlling it who is not interested in you hearing the total truth

00:20:37.820 truth all the time.

00:20:39.860 About the fleeing media?

00:20:41.820 Well, that's funnier.

00:20:44.940 Yeah.

00:20:45.980 So, what do you think of that?

00:20:47.160 The captured news or the captured media?

00:20:50.560 Because captured gets right down to what's happening, right?

00:20:56.120 When you say corporate, it doesn't really describe the problem.

00:21:00.580 It just gives you a vague unhappiness about corporations.

00:21:04.780 If you say captive, captive's not bad.

00:21:11.120 But the captive media, as opposed to captured, I'm liking that upgrade.

00:21:17.980 Who else wants to go with the upgrade?

00:21:19.940 Captive instead of captured.

00:21:22.600 Which is stronger?

00:21:24.940 Captive?

00:21:26.580 I think captive, right?

00:21:27.960 Yeah, I like captive.

00:21:32.100 All right, so change is made.

00:21:34.320 My new term is captive media.

00:21:36.720 All right.

00:21:40.740 The President Biden gave out 17 Presidential Medals of Freedom.

00:21:46.460 I guess that's the highest honor a civilian could get.

00:21:49.900 The Presidential Medal of Freedom, including one for Denzel Washington.

00:21:53.640 And the bigger news, this might be just me, but the bigger news in all of this is that

00:22:02.340 I've been passed over again, but not Denzel Washington.

00:22:08.280 Now, I ask you this.

00:22:11.400 I love Denzel Washington.

00:22:13.880 Like, I like every movie he's in.

00:22:16.420 I think he makes like $60 million a year.

00:22:19.300 I just checked to find out.

00:22:21.680 And I think he's actually a solid citizen as well.

00:22:28.560 I mean, I don't know.

00:22:29.440 I mean, something could come out later.

00:22:31.280 But he does seem like a solid citizen, like the kind of person you want to listen to.

00:22:35.760 You know, the kind of person who would give you dad advice you should actually pay attention to.

00:22:41.580 You need to...

00:22:43.440 I'm not going to read that.

00:22:45.000 But for all of his many qualities, of which I think Denzel Washington should be complimented,

00:22:53.420 he has quite a set of qualities that I like.

00:22:57.000 Character, etc.

00:22:59.640 Empathy.

00:23:02.300 But I ask you this.

00:23:04.920 Did he do more for the country this year than I did?

00:23:07.100 Seriously.

00:23:09.900 I mean, seriously.

00:23:11.300 Did he do more for the country than I did?

00:23:15.740 No.

00:23:16.860 Not even close.

00:23:18.360 And it's not even just me.

00:23:20.620 Yeah, I could give you six names of people who seem to have moved the needle,

00:23:25.340 but none of them would be Denzel Washington.

00:23:28.080 Now, maybe he did some awesome things.

00:23:30.060 You know, I don't want to degrade his worthiness,

00:23:33.180 because he probably was totally worthy.

00:23:34.520 But there might be some other people who got passed over.

00:23:38.520 That's all I'm saying.

00:23:44.880 The Libs of TikTok account, if you're not following that on Twitter.

00:23:49.820 So there's a Twitter account called Libs of TikTok,

00:23:52.580 where they take TikTok videos and put them on Twitter.

00:23:55.520 And they're the ones that make the people on the left look the worst.

00:24:00.160 So you should look at them as humor more than news.

00:24:03.020 Because they're hilariously too far.

00:24:08.300 You know, I say this a lot.

00:24:10.440 When you argue against wokeness,

00:24:13.240 and like, hey, everything's too woke,

00:24:15.180 and I don't want to use your pronouns, and all that stuff.

00:24:17.660 I'm not with you on that.

00:24:19.420 The reason I'm not with you on the anti-wokeness stuff

00:24:22.260 is because, to me, it's just an extension of politeness.

00:24:26.060 Like, I'm fine with people telling me what they would feel comfortable being called,

00:24:32.220 what pronouns they want.

00:24:33.400 It's just hard to do.

00:24:35.760 Now, the fact that people are making somewhat reasonable requests,

00:24:40.020 in many cases, I'm all on board for that.

00:24:43.160 Yeah.

00:24:43.600 And, you know, times change.

00:24:44.960 If you want to use this word or that, I'm willing to update.

00:24:48.400 I'm happy to boss me and you lost me.

00:24:54.180 Yeah.

00:24:54.740 The question of demanding it is different, right?

00:24:59.580 But the question of, do I want to call people by the names that they would feel most comfortable with?

00:25:06.060 Yes, I do.

00:25:06.660 But there's no good idea that isn't taken too far.

00:25:11.860 And when people look at my work, you know, with Dilbert,

00:25:14.820 they often misinterpret what it is I'm making fun of.

00:25:18.660 And they'll say, you're making fun of all the bad things that corporations do.

00:25:23.200 Almost.

00:25:24.460 That's almost true.

00:25:25.600 It's actually a little more subtle than that.

00:25:27.860 What I make fun of is good ideas that went too far.

00:25:33.360 You'll see that throughout my work.

00:25:35.040 For example, I used to make fun of something called re-engineering.

00:25:40.560 It was a big buzzword in the 90s.

00:25:42.780 And the idea was, instead of tweaking things to improve them in your corporation,

00:25:47.080 you would, you know, just tear them down and build them up from scratch.

00:25:50.880 In other words, re-engineer them.

00:25:52.540 Re-imagine the whole thing instead of just fixing them on the edges.

00:25:56.640 Now, weirdly, that was like a new idea in the 90s.

00:26:01.920 Isn't that weird?

00:26:02.500 That somebody had to introduce the idea.

00:26:06.780 Consultants and books.

00:26:08.400 I think it was Michael Hammer who did it.

00:26:11.000 So they had to introduce the idea that maybe sometimes you should, you know,

00:26:14.740 start and completely re-engineer.

00:26:17.140 So was that a good idea?

00:26:19.440 Or a bad idea?

00:26:20.920 Because I made fun of it.

00:26:22.700 It was a good idea.

00:26:24.240 Completely good idea.

00:26:25.220 But the corporations, like they always do, took it too far.

00:26:30.360 So they took a perfectly good thing and then they took it too far and it turned crazy and then it became bad.

00:26:36.620 So the woke stuff is exactly like that to me.

00:26:39.680 It starts out as a perfectly good idea.

00:26:42.540 Let's treat everybody with respect.

00:26:45.200 How about we talk to people the way they'd feel comfortable being talked to?

00:26:49.040 You know, within reason.

00:26:49.720 And then it goes to, it goes all the way to, if you don't use my right pronoun, you're going to lose your job.

00:26:56.180 I'm like, hold on.

00:26:58.140 Hold on.

00:26:59.320 I think that's a little too far.

00:27:01.660 A little too far.

00:27:03.020 Now, somebody's saying you're wrong because you're saying that wokeness is a larger category than just pronouns.

00:27:09.980 And that's my point as well.

00:27:11.920 My point is that this stuff always starts as something you could defend.

00:27:15.640 And then it grows and becomes this, you know, horrible, stupid thing.

00:27:20.600 So anyway, there's this therapist on TikTok, a young, well, I don't want to, I don't want to label him.

00:27:29.320 I would say that it's a they.

00:27:32.940 So the they says that it's all, you're going to think I'm saying this wrong.

00:27:42.060 It's so outrageous that you're going to think you heard it wrong.

00:27:47.060 The therapist is saying that the mass shooters don't have mental illness, but a lot of the people they shoot do.

00:27:53.400 That there's more chance that there are mentally ill people in the victim groups than in the shooter groups.

00:28:00.840 And not only that, but this therapist, this is somebody who does this for a living.

00:28:04.540 This therapist is quite exasperated because we all know this.

00:28:08.880 We all know that thinking that the mass shooters have mental illness is just a distraction from the gun issue, he says.

00:28:16.920 And that the real problem here is the patriarchy.

00:28:20.240 The problem is the patriarchy.

00:28:23.000 It's not mental illness.

00:28:24.680 It's obviously guns and the patriarchy, says this therapist on TikTok.

00:28:30.260 And there you go.

00:28:31.320 And it's funny how much of, well, it's hilarious that somebody's opinion on the left can be used as entertainment for the right.

00:28:46.020 Think about that.

00:28:47.660 When you look at this, you don't say to yourself, well, here's a political opinion I need to argue against, do you?

00:28:53.600 You just laugh at it.

00:28:55.560 Am I right?

00:28:56.420 It's literally entertainment.

00:28:58.080 You just laugh at it.

00:28:59.100 So, when you get to the point where somebody's, I think it's a serious political opinion, you can't even debunk it.

00:29:07.960 It's beyond the point where debunking even makes any sense.

00:29:11.700 You just go, all right.

00:29:14.280 Okay.

00:29:15.580 All right.

00:29:16.260 Fine.

00:29:17.220 Okay, Keith.

00:29:18.760 All right.

00:29:19.320 Here's a take on the Russia-Ukraine thing that I thought was worthy of passing along from Armchair Warlord on Twitter.

00:29:27.840 So, I don't know anything about Armchair Warlord, but I'm going to tell you his, or they, opinion.

00:29:37.320 And he talks about his idea now is that the Russia has basically a total lock on winning, and all they have to do is grind it out.

00:29:46.660 Now, you've heard that before, but here's the specific to it.

00:29:50.100 Apparently, the Ukrainian military would be quite capable if the Russian military met it, you know, military to military in a big old confrontation.

00:30:02.020 But modern militaries don't do that so much anymore.

00:30:05.260 So, they're standing at a great distance and shooting artillery at each other.

00:30:09.860 The problem is, the Russian artillery reaches the Ukrainians, and the Ukrainian artillery does not reach the Russians.

00:30:17.700 And it doesn't look like that's going to change.

00:30:20.020 So, apparently, the Russians can just, you know, let's shoot off another thousand artillery shells.

00:30:31.280 They'll shoot off a thousand artillery shells, and like, all right, time for bed.

00:30:36.960 Get up tomorrow, shoot off another thousand artillery shells.

00:30:40.760 Now, when they're done, and it looks like they're not going to run out of artillery, there won't be anything left of the Ukrainian army, and there won't be any battle, right?

00:30:52.640 That's it.

00:30:54.520 So, I said this about Russian artillery over a month ago.

00:30:59.240 Yeah, the thing that's, I guess, that we would add to it is that it doesn't seem to be a counter strategy to it.

00:31:06.700 But, the Vietnamese strategy, which I also read about on this thread from Armchair Warlord, the Vietnamese used to call it getting between the belt buckle and the person.

00:31:20.860 So, in other words, if you're at a place where their artillery can get to you, but you can't get to them, you've got to get closer.

00:31:32.260 Getting further away isn't going to help you, because then they just move toward you.

00:31:36.700 So, basically, the only strategy that the Ukrainians have is basically to attack a stronger military, get closer to them, so that their weapon's worth both ways.

00:31:48.840 Do you see that happening?

00:31:50.360 I don't see that happening.

00:31:52.340 So, you know, war is completely unpredictable, most of the time.

00:31:58.080 And so, I don't know, you know, I don't know if this is the steady state and how we can predict how it goes.

00:32:05.620 It looks like it.

00:32:06.840 But I would also expect the Ukrainians to counter with different kind of weaponry and tactics and something.

00:32:12.440 So, we'll see.

00:32:13.300 But I think this is a worthy point of view that we might already see the end point, which is Ukraine just gets ground up and they can take as long as they want, because Russia's got time.

00:32:24.800 So, is there any theories yet about why Shinzo Abe was killed?

00:32:36.200 Does the news have an update on that?

00:32:38.200 Because it was such breaking news, I didn't see anything before I got on.

00:32:42.080 Any breaking news on that?

00:32:43.980 Just speculation, right?

00:32:45.060 He was based, he's a crazy guy, yeah, who knows.

00:32:55.480 Right, yeah, maybe because of China, I don't know.

00:32:59.380 It doesn't, I don't feel like China assassinates people in foreign lands.

00:33:06.260 Do you?

00:33:07.500 That feels as non-China-ish as anything could feel.

00:33:11.340 Yeah, and believe me, I'm as anti-China as anybody.

00:33:15.600 But I don't think they do things that are that on the nose.

00:33:18.280 That's more of a Putin play.

00:33:20.460 You know, Putin might just kill his adversary on foreign ground.

00:33:25.500 The CIA does.

00:33:27.940 Somebody says.

00:33:28.960 Maybe.

00:33:30.820 All right.

00:33:31.460 So, apparently, Germany is already rationing hot water, dimming its street lights, and shutting down swimming pools,

00:33:40.100 because the energy crisis is, you know, sweeping the country.

00:33:43.660 And how many different ways do we have to say that Trump was right about that?

00:33:47.740 If you were on the left, and you saw how many times Trump said something that was just outrageous,

00:33:58.300 and then it turned out to be true,

00:34:00.660 wouldn't you be a little bit worried about your stance on climate change?

00:34:07.200 Right?

00:34:07.640 Every time Trump gets one right, that even, you know, even, I have to admit, even at the time when he said it,

00:34:16.620 I didn't make too much note of it.

00:34:18.700 I wasn't quite sure it would make a big difference.

00:34:21.240 You know, I thought things were stable with Russia and Germany,

00:34:25.020 and I wasn't really sure it would make any difference.

00:34:28.100 But he did.

00:34:29.240 Trump did.

00:34:30.340 And now I would say, well, he was definitely right.

00:34:33.900 Definitely right.

00:34:34.780 And the rest of the world seems to have been wrong on that.

00:34:39.180 But when you see him do that time after time, including running for president,

00:34:44.300 how many people thought Trump could win the presidency?

00:34:47.120 I'm not even sure Trump knew it, actually.

00:34:49.940 But when you see him get one like that right, that the smartest people were getting wrong,

00:34:57.540 what else has he gotten right?

00:35:01.900 Trump says the election was rigged.

00:35:03.860 He doesn't have solid evidence of that.

00:35:06.900 But what do you think of his instincts?

00:35:09.560 See, here's the trouble.

00:35:12.000 His instincts are crazy.

00:35:15.380 Crazy good.

00:35:17.720 His, you know, fact-checking, not so good.

00:35:21.500 His command of the details of, you know, topics, I don't know.

00:35:26.340 You know, maybe good enough, maybe not.

00:35:27.920 Who knows?

00:35:28.300 Depends on the topic.

00:35:29.140 But his instincts are crazy good.

00:35:33.760 And his instinct is that the election was rigged.

00:35:37.200 So what would you judge as more credible?

00:35:40.700 Trump's instinct, which weirdly has been correct in times when you thought it wouldn't be,

00:35:46.440 or the fact that there's no evidence that stands up.

00:35:54.460 I don't know.

00:35:55.960 I would be uneasy if I were on the left because the more times Trump is proven right about something that's, you know,

00:36:03.700 a complicated topic, the more you have to wonder if he's right on the other one.

00:36:08.180 You can't prove it one way or the other.

00:36:11.500 All right.

00:36:11.980 How many of you think this so-called red wave of Republican electoral victories is really going to happen?

00:36:19.740 Because I think Rasmussen is still confirming there's a big gap, eight-point gap at the moment.

00:36:25.280 And so the trouble is nothing seems predictable anymore.

00:36:32.460 Does it?

00:36:33.140 Does it?

00:36:38.180 Thank you for the $10.

00:36:43.700 Should make a list of things Trump got right.

00:36:46.360 Yeah.

00:36:47.180 That would be interesting.

00:36:50.360 I'm a little bit concerned that I'm not worried about complacency.

00:36:56.120 You know, everybody mentions that.

00:36:59.560 But I'm a little bit concerned that there will be another surprise.

00:37:01.980 And that the insurrection, the January 6th hoax may not be working as well as the Democrats wanted.

00:37:11.680 They have to kind of roll out another hoax, don't they?

00:37:15.120 So I feel like there's a master hoax brewing.

00:37:20.520 Now, it could be they thought they had all they needed in the January 6th stuff.

00:37:24.380 It could be that there's some sub-hoaxes within the January 6th thing.

00:37:27.540 But we know some hoaxes are coming because that's their only play.

00:37:33.060 It's all they have.

00:37:36.400 Well, here's the funniest part of all of this.

00:37:43.160 Now, let's say things go the way most of the pundits expect

00:37:46.320 and that the Republicans, you know, sweep Congress and even win the White House in 2024.

00:37:52.000 Do you know what the best part about that would be?

00:37:57.600 Not the part where Republicans are in charge.

00:38:00.600 I know some of you like that.

00:38:02.280 That's not the best part.

00:38:03.960 Do you know what the best part will be?

00:38:06.620 The best part will be watching the Democrats complain that the elections were rigged

00:38:10.800 because there's no way that they could have lost that badly in fair elections.

00:38:14.980 That's actually going to happen and they're going to do it shamelessly

00:38:21.000 as if they had not spent the prior four years complaining that you shouldn't say elections are rigged.

00:38:28.200 They're going to do it right in front of you and it won't matter

00:38:30.700 that they spent the prior year telling you it's not a thing.

00:38:33.880 It will not matter.

00:38:36.140 Mark my words, it will not matter that they argued the opposite for four years.

00:38:41.900 It won't matter.

00:38:42.340 They'll just act it like they had never existed four years ago.

00:38:47.540 So that's my prediction.

00:38:50.060 All right.

00:38:51.100 Here, how many of you think that...

00:38:53.760 I'm going to do a little straw poll here.

00:38:56.900 How many think the next president will be Trump?

00:39:01.880 So just say Trump if you think it's Trump.

00:39:04.900 Trump.

00:39:06.840 All right.

00:39:07.700 A lot of no's.

00:39:08.740 A lot of no's.

00:39:09.700 Interesting.

00:39:10.800 All right.

00:39:11.040 How many say...

00:39:13.340 I'll wait for those to go by.

00:39:15.200 How many say DeSantis?

00:39:17.160 And just use his name.

00:39:18.280 Just use DeSantis or Trump.

00:39:20.760 DeSantis.

00:39:21.820 Now, this is not necessarily who you're backing.

00:39:24.260 This is who you're predicting.

00:39:25.860 Right?

00:39:26.180 Predicting, not backing.

00:39:27.880 Predicting, not preferred.

00:39:30.600 A lot of DeSantis.

00:39:32.180 All right.

00:39:32.480 What happens if DeSantis decides not to get in because Trump does?

00:39:41.420 Let's play it through.

00:39:43.380 Do you think that that's a thing?

00:39:45.080 That if Trump is in the primary...

00:39:48.080 Yeah.

00:39:48.360 If Trump announces...

00:39:50.180 Do you think it's a thing that DeSantis will stay out?

00:39:55.160 Most say yes.

00:39:56.520 All right.

00:39:57.100 I would agree with that.

00:39:58.580 I would say he'd stay out.

00:39:59.600 Now, because he's young enough, right?

00:40:01.680 He's young enough, he can wait another four years.

00:40:05.060 Or eight.

00:40:07.900 Now, here's the fun part.

00:40:10.980 If Trump runs, but DeSantis does not,

00:40:15.420 is anybody else going to primary Trump?

00:40:17.840 Do you think Trump will get primaried?

00:40:26.660 Some are saying yes.

00:40:27.980 Some are saying no.

00:40:30.360 Who would be the strongest primary challenger?

00:40:34.480 Strongest challenger for the primaries?

00:40:37.260 Somebody says Tulsi.

00:40:41.300 Liz Cheney.

00:40:43.720 I can't tell if you're joking.

00:40:46.280 Josh Hawley.

00:40:48.460 Somebody says.

00:40:52.840 The answer is Tom Cotton.

00:40:56.260 Now, I don't think Christy Noem is probably going to run.

00:41:00.080 So if she did, that'd be interesting.

00:41:02.200 But of the people who are likely to have an interest,

00:41:06.020 who is better than Tom Cotton?

00:41:08.500 Because I don't think he has any baggage, does he?

00:41:12.060 Somebody says, you know, he doesn't have the charisma.

00:41:14.280 Is that going to matter for the coming election?

00:41:18.820 Does the next Republican candidate need charisma?

00:41:22.660 I don't think so.

00:41:24.400 I don't think the next Republican needs charisma.

00:41:27.120 You know what?

00:41:27.560 A lot of people might say a little less charisma would be good this time.

00:41:31.240 Am I right?

00:41:32.360 A little less charisma might be exactly what we need this time.

00:41:35.780 So here's my little semi-prediction.

00:41:42.520 It's sort of a conditional.

00:41:43.680 So conditional upon the following.

00:41:46.600 DeSantis not getting in.

00:41:48.840 Don't know if that's true.

00:41:51.040 Trump getting in.

00:41:52.200 And then Tom Cotton primarying him.

00:41:56.660 Do you think Tom Cotton could beat Trump in a primary?

00:42:04.960 I see almost all knows.

00:42:08.800 How about on locals, almost all knows.

00:42:11.380 On YouTube, almost all knows.

00:42:17.340 Somebody says he supported the war in Ukraine.

00:42:19.660 Well, we'd have to look at what that means.

00:42:22.200 I'm going to give you an ulterior, let's say, a competing prediction.

00:42:33.980 He might be able to win a primary against Trump.

00:42:39.160 He might.

00:42:41.040 And here's why.

00:42:43.400 I believe his policies are Republican enough.

00:42:46.580 Am I right?

00:42:47.680 There's no Republican who's going to say Tom Cotton's not Republican enough.

00:42:52.420 Confirm this for me, please.

00:42:54.600 Correct.

00:42:55.440 He is as Republican as you need to be.

00:42:58.040 Does he have the experience?

00:43:00.680 Senators generally do.

00:43:02.740 So he has the experience.

00:43:04.360 He's Republican enough.

00:43:06.120 Does he make mistakes?

00:43:09.320 Is he a big mistake guy?

00:43:11.100 You know, blunders and gaffes?

00:43:13.280 Not so much.

00:43:14.500 Not really.

00:43:15.080 I don't think I've ever seen one.

00:43:17.740 In fact, I can't think of any video I've ever seen in which he's talking and the idea is, you know, he said something silly, so we're all joking about it.

00:43:26.880 I don't think so.

00:43:27.840 So if you put somebody in there who's error-free, totally Republican, very smart, totally qualified, and he's running against Trump, what are you going to do?

00:43:39.120 What are you going to do?

00:43:40.080 Because you do think to yourself, well, I think Trump has more wattage.

00:43:45.880 And he does.

00:43:46.520 He has more wattage.

00:43:48.360 But do you want it?

00:43:50.340 Do you want it?

00:43:51.600 Because the wattage works two ways, right?

00:43:53.640 It does break down some doors.

00:43:56.460 But it also breaks down some houses.

00:44:00.120 You know?

00:44:00.680 Like, sometimes it's a little too much.

00:44:02.640 So I think Tom Cotton could take Trump out, because a lot of Republicans are going to say to themselves, I want to win, but I don't want a repeat of having somebody in office who's just going to be, you know, the subject of all this controversy.

00:44:23.520 Somebody's saying Pompeo, and if Pompeo is in there, that would be interesting, because he'd be primary Trump.

00:44:30.140 But it would also divide the vote, right?

00:44:36.740 So presumably that would help Trump.

00:44:39.020 If the not-Trump vote gets divided, Trump still sails through as one who has the most votes, right?

00:44:47.680 And yes, I will not ignore the fact that Tom Cotton has a very unfortunate last name.

00:44:55.260 Pompeo would hold his own in a debate.

00:44:57.180 Yeah, Pompeo would be good in a debate.

00:44:58.640 He's a smart guy.

00:45:00.720 But so is Cotton.

00:45:03.140 All right.

00:45:04.200 I believe that if Tom Cotton had the right campaign help, he could take Trump out.

00:45:14.680 That's what I think.

00:45:16.340 There is a situation where that could happen.

00:45:18.820 And I feel like calling it a long shot would be too far.

00:45:25.940 I don't think it's a long shot.

00:45:27.780 I think it's unlikely.

00:45:29.920 So let me be clear about my prediction.

00:45:32.460 It's unlikely.

00:45:34.100 The main thing that would happen would be Trump gets in, Trump gets the nomination.

00:45:38.840 That's the most likely scenario.

00:45:41.220 But here's what you can't rule out.

00:45:44.980 That when you hear Tom Cotton talk, you think to yourself, wait a minute.

00:45:49.560 Is he selling me the Trump benefits without the Trump costs?

00:45:53.880 How many Republicans would take that proposition?

00:45:57.060 I'll give you Trump-like policies, but without the Trump-like problems.

00:46:00.800 You don't think Republicans would find that attractive?

00:46:06.720 Because he could say it directly.

00:46:09.560 You know, Tom Cotton could say directly, look, my policies are not that different from Trump's.

00:46:14.980 But with me, you don't get all that problem.

00:46:18.140 What Republican is going to say no to that?

00:46:20.000 I mean, if the proposition is given to you that cleanly, same policies or very similar policies, a little bit more research, don't worry about the drama.

00:46:31.560 I'm not going to bring any drama.

00:46:34.100 Republican policies without the drama.

00:46:37.680 I don't know.

00:46:39.160 You give me a, you tell me, imagine this, all right, mental experiment.

00:46:44.940 I'm walking down the street, and I randomly stop a Republican voter, just randomly.

00:46:52.080 They say, who are you going to vote for?

00:46:53.660 And the voter says, give me Donald Trump.

00:46:57.240 And I say, all right, great.

00:47:00.220 Would you be even happier if you could get Trump's policies in a candidate who wouldn't be as much trouble and maybe make you look bad as a voter?

00:47:11.880 Would you prefer that?

00:47:12.980 How many Republicans could I not convince to change the vote to one that's better for them as a voter, because I get all the right policies, but they're not smeared by the reputation that comes with being a Trump supporter?

00:47:29.200 Who would not take that deal?

00:47:32.480 See, I think it's entirely how it's presented.

00:47:36.040 Don't you?

00:47:36.640 If Tom Cotton just runs sort of an independent race where he says, I have good ideas, I don't think that's enough.

00:47:45.740 But if Tom Cotton says directly, look, I'm going to give you Trump policies or Trump-like policies, but without all the drama, how do you not vote for that?

00:47:56.140 Remember, he doesn't have a weakness.

00:47:57.380 You know, if you're saying his weakness is charisma, I say, well, that might make him less fun, but is that what you care about now?

00:48:06.800 Is that your top priority when the, you know, the world's at war, kind of, in Ukraine, and you've got big issues?

00:48:14.340 Is your biggest criteria that he's not entertaining?

00:48:19.160 Could be.

00:48:19.900 I don't think anybody understands the strategic petroleum reserves.

00:48:30.120 There's a story out that some of the oil got sold to a Chinese company that has, that Hunter Biden had some financial investment in.

00:48:39.720 Now, would you be worried about that?

00:48:41.460 If our strategic petroleum reserves, that's the oil that we keep stored for an emergency, it was released for the purpose of increasing the supply of oil, which should have decreased the price.

00:48:55.200 So that was the purpose of it.

00:48:58.820 But some of it got sold to a Chinese company.

00:49:01.320 Now, what I learned as I was dealing with this on Twitter, nobody understands the strategic petroleum reserves.

00:49:10.020 I don't.

00:49:12.080 I wanted to come on here and explain it to you and say, well, let me explain to you.

00:49:16.480 This is the way that works.

00:49:18.300 But do you know what you're hearing in the news?

00:49:20.440 You're hearing that the oil was released.

00:49:24.340 What?

00:49:25.940 How do you release oil?

00:49:27.700 Was it in jail?

00:49:29.440 It's not really an economic term, is it?

00:49:31.780 So I don't know how to evaluate it.

00:49:33.520 It got released.

00:49:34.920 Does release mean that they gave it away?

00:49:36.620 Does release mean they sold it as a discount?

00:49:41.560 Does release mean they sold it at spot market prices, market prices?

00:49:46.340 Or does released mean they sold it only to domestic companies, or should have?

00:49:53.780 Or does released mean it goes into the world?

00:49:56.980 I saw before I came on a statistic.

00:49:59.440 Give me a check on this.

00:50:00.440 Does America use 20 million barrels a day, but the Strategic Reserve was going to release

00:50:08.540 1 million barrels a day?

00:50:11.420 Are those numbers correct?

00:50:13.260 Give me a fact check.

00:50:14.900 Does the U.S. use 20 million?

00:50:17.900 20 million, yeah.

00:50:19.440 20 million a day, but we released an extra one, which would be 5%, right?

00:50:24.780 Now, if all of that happened within a world which was just the United States, shouldn't

00:50:32.640 a 5% increase in supply have something like, it's not an exact correlation, but something

00:50:40.300 like a 5% decrease in the price at the gas station, right?

00:50:46.760 But what if it's released into the global economy?

00:50:52.500 Because I don't know how it's released, or if it's bought or sold or given away.

00:50:56.360 I don't know anything about it.

00:50:57.880 And the people I talked to on Twitter seemed to have pretty strong opinions, but also didn't

00:51:03.260 know anything about it.

00:51:05.360 So I suggested on Twitter that maybe the Fed should buy everything in the Strategic Petroleum

00:51:13.900 Reserves to bring down inflation.

00:51:16.760 Anybody on board with that?

00:51:20.020 The Fed, let's just have the Fed buy the entire Strategic Petroleum Reserve to bring down inflation.

00:51:27.060 Anybody good with that?

00:51:29.540 I don't even know what that means.

00:51:32.740 It doesn't mean anything.

00:51:34.560 I don't even know what the Fed does.

00:51:37.680 I hope you heard that.

00:51:39.500 I have a degree in economics.

00:51:41.940 I've got an MBA from a top school.

00:51:44.700 I don't know what the Fed does.

00:51:46.760 Somehow I made it through economics without anybody being able to explain it to me.

00:51:52.120 I mean, I could repeat the surface-level stuff, right?

00:51:56.620 But there's something about it I just don't understand, right?

00:52:00.480 I understand some of its functions, but that's very different from understanding it.

00:52:06.240 And I've tried to read up on it a number of times.

00:52:09.060 And when I read up on it, I'm like, why does this not make sense?

00:52:13.800 Does anybody have that same experience where you try to educate yourself and say, I keep

00:52:19.000 hearing about the Fed, but I don't hear it.

00:52:21.700 What does it do?

00:52:22.520 And then you look into it, and you don't quite understand what it does.

00:52:26.800 The other thing like that is the strategic petroleum reserves.

00:52:33.760 I don't know.

00:52:34.260 Do we sell it, give it away, do something domestically?

00:52:37.520 Is it only for the refineries in the United States?

00:52:40.140 What happens if there's more oil than the United States could use because of refinery capacity?

00:52:44.740 Do we sell it?

00:52:45.540 Is it spot prices or a restriction on who buys?

00:52:48.120 I don't know.

00:52:48.740 I don't know any of that.

00:52:50.840 So when I said, why don't you take the thing you don't know about, the Fed, and use it to

00:52:55.960 buy the other thing you don't know about, or you don't understand, the strategic petroleum

00:53:00.700 reserves, and reduce inflation, which is the third thing you don't know anything about.

00:53:05.900 Those are three things that economists don't understand.

00:53:09.040 The Fed, strategic petroleum reserves, and inflation in general.

00:53:13.580 Because the experts were all confused.

00:53:19.060 Remember when we had stagflation in the 70s, or whatever it was?

00:53:23.760 And then later, all the experts said, well, we're going to get stagflation again.

00:53:28.460 And then we didn't.

00:53:29.840 We got inflation without the stag part.

00:53:33.080 So the thing you need to know when you see any story about strategic petroleum reserves,

00:53:40.040 or the Fed, or inflation, literally nobody understands them.

00:53:46.200 That's my opinion.

00:53:48.060 Now, it's not a fact.

00:53:49.920 It's just an opinion.

00:53:51.100 But I haven't seen anybody who can explain it.

00:53:54.120 I did a micro lesson that I wasn't sure I was going to release, but I'm going to talk

00:53:57.260 about it right now.

00:53:59.440 I tried to learn music, specifically playing the drums.

00:54:04.240 And I got experts and looked at, you know, talked to people who got to music.

00:54:09.720 And here was the thing I couldn't understand.

00:54:11.960 If I look at drum music written on a music sheet, and then I go to play it, it doesn't

00:54:18.820 sound good.

00:54:19.680 If I play it exactly like the music is written, it doesn't really sound like anything you'd

00:54:24.220 want to listen to.

00:54:25.320 And likewise, if you took a drum machine, and you just programmed it to play the notes

00:54:30.760 exactly as written, you wouldn't want to hear it.

00:54:34.240 Because it wouldn't have any soul.

00:54:36.340 You know, it wouldn't have any, right?

00:54:39.020 So when somebody teaches me to play the drums, and I play it exactly as it's written and exactly

00:54:45.620 as taught, but it doesn't sound good, I say, why doesn't it sound good?

00:54:50.720 You know, why is this famous drummer sounding good?

00:54:53.180 I'm playing the same notes off the same sheet.

00:54:55.340 Why does mine not sound good?

00:54:56.340 And the answer is that the artist is actually adding something, right?

00:55:01.680 So the artist is modifying the notes in small ways, a little emphasis, maybe a little space

00:55:08.800 that they make up for by compressing the next one, something like that, whatever it is.

00:55:14.320 So here's the question I asked.

00:55:16.880 Well, if the good drummers are doing that, can't you just listen to them and then rewrite

00:55:23.060 the music so that a new drummer could look at how the other person played it in a pleasing

00:55:28.440 way and then just imitate it?

00:55:30.780 So why couldn't my computer simply listen to Keith Moon or some other famous drummer and

00:55:37.860 just say, oh, this drummer is not playing it the way it shows on the sheet?

00:55:41.960 They're either consistently making this kind of change, which would be easy to program, or

00:55:47.560 they're somewhat randomly adding things to it that your ear is picking up subtly, but

00:55:54.200 a computer can randomly add things to it.

00:55:56.740 So there's no reason that your computer can't make this music better than an artist except

00:56:01.160 one reason.

00:56:04.320 Do you know what that is?

00:56:05.180 That the people who do it for a living, the artists, don't know what they're doing.

00:56:12.740 That's the only way any of this makes sense.

00:56:15.380 And the way you can confirm that is by talking to them.

00:56:18.440 Let me give you my impression of a very good artist who really knows music explaining to

00:56:25.580 Scott why his drumming doesn't sound good.

00:56:29.740 Why can't I just put this in a computer and it would sound great?

00:56:32.960 And the artist says, no, no, it's not going to have the soul.

00:56:36.880 You know?

00:56:37.480 It's not going to have the oomph, the oomph.

00:56:39.340 You know what I'm talking about?

00:56:40.480 Because, you know, if the computer does it, it's just going to be to-t-t-t-t-t-t-t-t-t-t-t-t-t-t-t-t.

00:56:47.260 Nobody wants to hear that.

00:56:48.500 But if a human does it, it's going to be cho-ch-ch-ch-ch-ch-ch-ch-ch-ch-ch-ch-ch-ch-ch-ch-ch-ch-ch-ch-ch-ch-ch-ch-ch-ch-ch...

00:56:52.580 Do you see?

00:56:53.880 And then I say, no.

00:56:55.960 No, I don't see.

00:56:57.360 because what you're describing, if you understand it,

00:57:01.760 would be something you could write on this piece of paper,

00:57:04.740 and you say, look, don't play it the way it's written normally.

00:57:07.880 Make sure this is modified a little, this is modified.

00:57:10.280 Now do that, and watch how good it sounds.

00:57:13.160 And I'd say, oh, okay, so that's a little modification.

00:57:16.560 I'll do that modification. I'll do it.

00:57:21.020 Now that would work, but that will never happen.

00:57:23.860 But instead, instead of saying, okay, modify your sheet music

00:57:28.280 so it's more like what they actually play that sounds good,

00:57:31.220 do you know what the artist will say?

00:57:33.100 Oh, no, you just got to put a little, umph into it.

00:57:37.380 Like, umph, got a little stank into it.

00:57:41.860 The experts don't know why the thing they're doing works.

00:57:47.680 They really don't.

00:57:49.980 Economists don't know why shit happens.

00:57:52.880 But it's their job to act like it.

00:57:56.120 So you get a lot of experts explaining to you things,

00:58:00.480 and you think it's your problem, don't you?

00:58:03.020 Do you know what I don't think?

00:58:05.440 This will be the cockiest thing I've ever said,

00:58:07.340 and I've said some cocky things.

00:58:09.440 This will be the cockiest thing you've ever heard,

00:58:11.980 but it's my, it's also my advice to you.

00:58:17.940 Right, so I'm going to say something about myself,

00:58:20.900 but put yourself in that position, because it's about you too.

00:58:24.380 The reason I can't understand the Fed is not my fault.

00:58:30.500 It's not.

00:58:31.820 It's because the people whose job it is to understand it

00:58:34.440 don't understand it.

00:58:36.260 If they did, they could explain it to you.

00:58:39.040 If they did, they could explain it to you.

00:58:45.140 When the experts can't explain something to you,

00:58:48.280 it's not always because you're dumb.

00:58:50.640 20% of the time it is.

00:58:53.040 80% of the time it's because they don't understand it.

00:58:56.540 And when they do, they can understand it well.

00:59:00.440 Let me give you another example.

00:59:01.500 When I started writing humor,

00:59:05.720 I naturally wondered if there's some way to do it better.

00:59:08.940 Is there a formula to add, you know, something's funny.

00:59:11.800 And it didn't exist.

00:59:13.500 And if you asked anybody who wrote humor for a living,

00:59:17.520 and you said, all right, what makes it funny?

00:59:19.820 And they say, well, surprise,

00:59:21.940 or it's, you know, tragedy happening to somebody else.

00:59:24.980 And those would be in there.

00:59:26.480 But if that's all you knew, could you reproduce it?

00:59:28.980 Could you take that and then go write some humor?

00:59:32.340 Nope.

00:59:33.460 And the reason is that the people who made humor

00:59:35.860 didn't know how they did it.

00:59:37.480 They didn't understand their own area of expertise.

00:59:41.260 But, because I don't come from sort of an artistic background,

00:59:44.980 I come from more of an engineering mindset.

00:59:47.260 I'm not an engineer, but, you know,

00:59:48.980 I spend so much time with them, you pick up the mindset.

00:59:53.600 When I started doing humor, I started saying,

00:59:56.380 well, there's got to be some formula underlying all this.

00:59:59.680 And then I discovered it.

01:00:01.380 It's the two of six formula.

01:00:03.860 That if you write what you want to be a joke,

01:00:06.800 and use two of these six dimensions, it's funny.

01:00:11.880 So that's an example of me as an expert

01:00:14.820 actually understanding my field.

01:00:18.460 Because I can explain it to you in a formula

01:00:20.540 that you can completely understand.

01:00:22.240 I'll do it right now.

01:00:23.480 You have to use two of these six things.

01:00:25.320 And help me out if I forget two of my own things.

01:00:27.760 It's got to be cute, clever, absurd, recognizable, mean, or naughty.

01:00:35.720 All right?

01:00:36.060 Now, you understand what all of those words mean.

01:00:38.280 You would know what a cruel situation would look like.

01:00:41.300 You would know what an absurd situation would look like.

01:00:43.220 So there's no definition that really needs to be given there.

01:00:47.160 And all you do is follow that rule.

01:00:49.580 If you use two of those dimensions in your joke,

01:00:52.420 people will laugh at it.

01:00:54.440 It actually is a formula.

01:00:55.800 Now, musicians can't do what I just did.

01:01:00.520 Tell you how to do it with some detail

01:01:03.080 that you could just put into an objective form.

01:01:06.160 And when people can't put it that simply,

01:01:09.060 they don't understand their field.

01:01:10.720 Somebody says the good ones can.

01:01:22.760 Yeah, everything has an exception.

01:01:25.380 And by the way,

01:01:26.300 there is nothing more annoying

01:01:28.800 than dealing with what I call

01:01:30.100 the absolute people on Twitter.

01:01:33.720 So if I say inflation's gone up,

01:01:39.780 somebody's going to say,

01:01:40.900 hmm, that's not true.

01:01:42.560 The price of my whatever went down yesterday.

01:01:45.680 All right?

01:01:46.360 And then I want to say,

01:01:48.120 well, mostly, it went up.

01:01:50.420 All right?

01:01:50.880 I'm not really talking about every single situation.

01:01:54.240 I'm generally talking.

01:01:55.940 So the other day when I was saying that

01:01:57.520 I thought genetics were far more important

01:02:00.400 than parenting,

01:02:01.660 a lot of people said to me,

01:02:04.200 why do you say parenting is completely useless?

01:02:08.340 And I say, hmm, no.

01:02:10.340 I'd say parenting is maybe 10 to 20% of the outcome.

01:02:14.460 And genetics is probably 80 to 90.

01:02:19.160 And then people say to me,

01:02:21.080 but why are you saying that genetics is everything?

01:02:23.960 And I say, I don't know.

01:02:26.280 Did you just listen to the last 10 seconds?

01:02:28.580 I just said it's 90%.

01:02:30.380 And then people say,

01:02:32.340 well, then you're saying it's worthless

01:02:33.920 to try to have good parents.

01:02:36.020 And I say, are you listening to any of this?

01:02:39.460 If you could improve, you know,

01:02:41.660 a 10% likelihood of outcomes for your children,

01:02:44.680 you'd be all over that.

01:02:46.260 10% is a lot

01:02:47.400 when you're talking about the life of your children.

01:02:50.520 So of course you want the best parents.

01:02:52.840 Of course you want the best advice,

01:02:55.300 the best techniques,

01:02:56.340 because it is going to affect 10 to 20%.

01:02:58.920 But for some reason,

01:03:00.760 I couldn't get that across.

01:03:03.620 Isn't that interesting?

01:03:04.980 That that concept I could not explain.

01:03:07.520 And I don't know why.

01:03:09.320 But you consistently see it across all topics.

01:03:13.400 People will interpret what you said as an absolute.

01:03:16.660 Do you know why they will do that?

01:03:18.640 Why will people interpret what you clearly don't mean

01:03:23.800 to be an absolute?

01:03:25.340 They'll interpret it as an absolute to debunk it.

01:03:27.620 Why do they do that?

01:03:28.580 It's cognitive dissonance.

01:03:30.860 Cognitive dissonance says,

01:03:32.640 I know I was right,

01:03:34.460 but I don't have a reason.

01:03:36.980 So my brain is going to create one

01:03:38.500 that doesn't make any sense,

01:03:40.340 and then I'm going to act like it made sense.

01:03:41.960 That's what cognitive dissonance is.

01:03:43.280 So if I say to you,

01:03:45.380 it's 90% genetic,

01:03:49.040 but you've spent your whole life believing,

01:03:51.060 oh, it's 90% parenting,

01:03:53.180 even if I make my case,

01:03:54.980 and even if it's well made,

01:03:56.400 which I think it is,

01:03:57.860 what you should say

01:03:58.960 is you should hear me saying,

01:04:01.140 it's 100% genetic,

01:04:03.320 which I've never said.

01:04:05.080 And then you'll debunk the 100% part.

01:04:09.500 Not what I said.

01:04:10.520 So when you hear the absolutists weigh in,

01:04:14.280 are you saying so?

01:04:16.320 And I got this exactly.

01:04:18.280 So you're saying every single,

01:04:21.080 no, no, of course not.

01:04:29.460 Anything else happening?

01:04:33.260 So people couldn't tell it was a joke

01:04:35.360 when I said the Fed should buy

01:04:36.440 the Strategic Petroleum Reserves.

01:04:38.340 Literally, it doesn't make any sense.

01:04:39.720 It's just random economic terms

01:04:42.020 that's slapped together.

01:04:43.760 But we'll have to figure out

01:04:46.400 what release means

01:04:47.800 when we release the Strategic Reserves.

01:04:50.840 Do we buy it or what?

01:05:01.280 Germany is making it illegal

01:05:03.040 to change thermostats.

01:05:04.360 The Fed has been captured.

01:05:09.560 Release means sell, Gary says.

01:05:12.360 Sell it to whom

01:05:13.780 and at what price?

01:05:18.360 Now, here's what I do know about things.

01:05:22.060 Does somebody have a number

01:05:22.860 of how many barrels of oil

01:05:24.860 are used per day

01:05:25.800 by the entire world?

01:05:27.680 Does somebody give that number?

01:05:28.880 How many barrels of oil are used,

01:05:31.960 not produced, are used?

01:05:34.100 Actually, it's probably going to be

01:05:35.300 exactly the same as produced, right?

01:05:38.600 Is that right?

01:05:40.420 Roughly speaking,

01:05:41.420 the world would end up using

01:05:43.420 about the same as they produce every day?

01:05:46.040 Because it's not like

01:05:47.040 the world is piling it up.

01:05:48.760 It's selling it as it makes it, right?

01:05:50.680 Somebody says 100 million barrels a day.

01:05:56.800 88 million?

01:05:57.840 So if the United States was 20,

01:05:59.660 that sounds about right.

01:06:01.520 The U.S. is about 20% of the oil use.

01:06:05.440 Let's say that's right.

01:06:07.100 So if Biden released 1 million

01:06:10.280 to the global world,

01:06:13.540 1 million barrels per day,

01:06:15.440 but he uses 100,

01:06:17.120 there should be a 1% difference-ish.

01:06:20.140 You know, it's not one for one,

01:06:22.140 but somewhere in that neighborhood

01:06:23.800 would be the most

01:06:25.180 it could have affected

01:06:26.060 the price of the pump, right?

01:06:28.240 Like, it couldn't be a 10% improvement

01:06:30.480 if there's only a 1% change in supply.

01:06:41.500 When they release U.S. crude,

01:06:42.920 it may as soon make you attractive.

01:06:45.700 All right, so release means sell,

01:06:47.100 but we still don't know

01:06:48.180 sell to whom.

01:06:50.140 And at what price?

01:06:52.060 And that's, it was big.

01:06:56.800 Now, here's another complaint I have.

01:06:59.640 People said that we shouldn't use

01:07:01.180 the strategic petroleum reserves

01:07:03.700 unless it's an emergency.

01:07:06.300 To which I say,

01:07:08.180 isn't this an emergency?

01:07:11.340 If, if,

01:07:12.640 now,

01:07:13.300 there's two things happening.

01:07:15.500 One is,

01:07:16.120 one is that it doesn't work.

01:07:18.680 Can we all agree on that?

01:07:21.000 Increasing the,

01:07:21.800 the supply of oil

01:07:22.700 by 1%

01:07:23.540 globally?

01:07:26.540 It doesn't make it,

01:07:27.520 it shouldn't make any difference,

01:07:28.600 right?

01:07:29.280 1%.

01:07:29.680 So if we agree

01:07:32.240 it doesn't work,

01:07:33.740 I want to back up

01:07:34.520 to a more of a

01:07:35.280 philosophical question.

01:07:36.460 On a,

01:07:36.640 on a practical level,

01:07:37.720 it just doesn't work.

01:07:38.640 But on a philosophical level,

01:07:42.060 isn't an economic crisis

01:07:44.560 a defensive problem?

01:07:47.420 See,

01:07:47.940 I think a lot of people

01:07:48.900 think that military

01:07:50.360 and economy

01:07:51.520 are two different categories,

01:07:53.360 but it's only because

01:07:54.080 we choose to talk about them

01:07:55.520 that way.

01:07:56.540 In reality,

01:07:57.320 they're so merged.

01:07:59.380 You know,

01:07:59.700 if you look at

01:08:00.520 Ukraine

01:08:01.260 and Russia,

01:08:02.400 we're talking

01:08:03.840 as much about

01:08:04.700 their economic ability

01:08:05.960 to wage war

01:08:06.700 as their physical ability.

01:08:08.860 You know,

01:08:09.040 do they have the money

01:08:09.900 to keep resupplying

01:08:11.300 and staying in business?

01:08:12.980 So,

01:08:14.120 if,

01:08:14.780 if

01:08:16.080 you had a situation

01:08:17.960 where using

01:08:19.240 the strategic oil reserves

01:08:20.840 was going to benefit

01:08:21.740 only your economy,

01:08:23.740 but it actually

01:08:24.340 made a difference,

01:08:25.400 I would say

01:08:26.000 that's an emergency.

01:08:27.240 And I would,

01:08:27.580 I would say

01:08:28.000 that would be a,

01:08:29.280 an appropriate use

01:08:30.460 of an emergency fund.

01:08:32.400 to,

01:08:32.920 to put off a recession.

01:08:35.180 Because a recession

01:08:36.020 can really damage

01:08:36.920 your ability

01:08:37.440 to fund your military

01:08:39.580 and rebuild it

01:08:40.860 and keep it modern

01:08:41.820 and,

01:08:42.200 and all that.

01:08:44.020 However,

01:08:44.760 the reality of this situation

01:08:46.160 is it doesn't look like

01:08:47.040 it'd make any real difference

01:08:48.120 in the real world.

01:08:49.040 In which case,

01:08:50.700 it's just a political signaling.

01:08:57.060 And if we believe,

01:08:59.120 here's,

01:08:59.600 here's the best economic analysis

01:09:00.980 I've seen today

01:09:01.720 from Jersey CY,

01:09:03.860 a Twitter user.

01:09:06.980 Now,

01:09:07.340 he's,

01:09:07.560 he's weighing in

01:09:08.600 on the question

01:09:09.080 of releasing

01:09:09.720 the strategic petroleum reserves.

01:09:12.160 If that lowers gas prices

01:09:13.460 and it works,

01:09:14.980 if that works,

01:09:16.720 this question makes sense.

01:09:19.240 And Jersey CY asks,

01:09:21.500 would,

01:09:22.240 quote,

01:09:22.340 release the hounds,

01:09:23.880 make the price of dogs

01:09:25.120 go down?

01:09:25.680 And I think it would.

01:09:28.240 I think it would.

01:09:29.480 Because if you release the hounds,

01:09:31.460 there would be more hounds

01:09:32.380 on the market

01:09:32.940 and then the average price

01:09:36.180 per hound

01:09:37.040 should go down.

01:09:38.940 So yes,

01:09:39.880 release the hounds

01:09:40.820 to lower the cost of hounds.

01:09:43.880 Thank you for that joke.

01:09:44.940 That's pretty good.

01:09:46.100 All right.

01:09:46.380 Dutch farmers,

01:09:49.760 yes,

01:09:50.100 the Dutch farmers

01:09:50.800 are rebelling

01:09:51.880 quite effectively,

01:09:52.940 it looks like.

01:09:54.560 Now,

01:09:55.100 let me ask you this.

01:09:56.880 Where's that food shortage?

01:10:00.120 Now,

01:10:00.620 you say to yourself,

01:10:01.440 oh,

01:10:01.740 that's working its way

01:10:02.620 through the system.

01:10:03.480 We're not seeing it yet,

01:10:04.600 but we sure will.

01:10:07.400 Really?

01:10:09.440 Now,

01:10:09.980 I get that there's a lag.

01:10:11.540 I get that.

01:10:12.980 And that we should not

01:10:14.120 have seen it yet.

01:10:15.460 Do you all agree?

01:10:16.680 But here's what

01:10:17.280 we should have seen.

01:10:19.100 A lot more reporting.

01:10:23.600 And I feel as if

01:10:25.220 the food shortage

01:10:27.300 might be in a mirage.

01:10:30.300 What do you think?

01:10:31.760 I think I'm going to bet

01:10:32.960 against it.

01:10:35.720 Yeah,

01:10:36.300 I guess the cost of groceries

01:10:37.480 is already going up,

01:10:38.460 but that's with

01:10:39.640 everything else going up.

01:10:41.300 We do know that,

01:10:42.280 you know,

01:10:42.740 transportation,

01:10:43.800 every part of farming

01:10:44.940 is going to be

01:10:45.500 more expensive

01:10:46.160 because of energy.

01:10:49.540 Okay.

01:10:51.480 Do you think

01:10:52.180 Africa's going to

01:10:52.920 run out of food?

01:10:54.460 I feel like

01:10:55.300 they just might

01:10:55.820 run out of grain

01:10:56.820 and that

01:10:58.620 there'll just be

01:10:59.660 other replacements.

01:11:00.460 tulips are up 300%.

01:11:03.340 All right.

01:11:08.980 The fertilizer shortage

01:11:10.280 is probably

01:11:10.780 the biggest deal

01:11:11.880 that we have

01:11:12.440 and we don't talk

01:11:13.060 about it too much.

01:11:15.660 All right.

01:11:16.100 Well,

01:11:16.460 keep an eye on that.

01:11:17.780 Here's the thing,

01:11:18.500 is that I feel like

01:11:19.300 the Adams Law

01:11:20.140 of slow-moving disasters

01:11:21.780 is going to take care

01:11:22.780 of the food shortage

01:11:24.040 because the market

01:11:26.320 saw way in advance

01:11:28.600 that it needed

01:11:29.260 other alternatives.

01:11:30.720 So I think anybody

01:11:31.500 who could have grown

01:11:32.300 an alternative

01:11:33.000 or planted

01:11:34.400 an extra field

01:11:35.460 where they can

01:11:37.420 probably did.

01:11:39.620 Remember when,

01:11:40.820 do we still do this?

01:11:41.900 Do we still pay farmers

01:11:43.080 to not plant?

01:11:45.520 Can somebody

01:11:45.980 give me a fact check?

01:11:47.500 And is that

01:11:48.300 a big deal?

01:11:48.980 Could the government

01:11:51.560 just say,

01:11:52.360 change their minds,

01:11:54.520 you're going to have

01:11:55.000 to plant those fields?

01:11:57.120 And wouldn't that be

01:11:57.880 a one-season problem

01:11:59.060 and couldn't we probably

01:12:00.320 get by for one season?

01:12:09.220 Don over on YouTube

01:12:11.100 has a comment

01:12:12.240 I'd like to weigh in

01:12:13.560 on this.

01:12:14.820 Talk about the Dutch farmers

01:12:16.320 and Don wants you to know

01:12:17.640 that the Dutch

01:12:18.600 blondes are so hot though.

01:12:20.920 They're so hot.

01:12:22.340 It's true.

01:12:23.700 The Dutch blondes,

01:12:25.040 so hot.

01:12:26.280 And I think that's

01:12:26.900 a valuable contribution

01:12:28.020 to the conversation.

01:12:31.360 And

01:12:31.660 AI is making

01:12:35.400 its own patents.

01:12:36.560 Uh-oh.

01:12:39.080 Yeah, what happens

01:12:40.040 when AI applies

01:12:41.200 for a patent?

01:12:44.620 Yeah, I saw

01:12:45.420 the AR-15 commercial.

01:12:47.380 I don't know,

01:12:47.680 I wasn't too interested.

01:12:48.600 I get it.

01:12:50.080 You had a KKK

01:12:51.040 hat on.

01:12:53.660 So the CERN AI,

01:12:56.860 is that why

01:12:57.580 you keep saying CERN

01:12:58.560 to me?

01:12:59.820 Or are you talking

01:13:00.380 about it

01:13:00.860 destroying the planet?

01:13:05.980 Oh.

01:13:07.080 The CERN questions

01:13:08.460 are all about AI.

01:13:09.460 All right.

01:13:09.760 All right.

01:13:12.820 The AI will

01:13:13.880 immediately patent itself.

01:13:15.360 CERN is a conspiracy theory

01:13:21.900 involving timeline shifts.

01:13:25.320 Is that the story?

01:13:27.180 Is the story

01:13:27.800 that CERN

01:13:28.620 did something

01:13:29.200 that changed

01:13:30.340 the timeline?

01:13:32.000 Well, if you told me

01:13:38.220 this earlier,

01:13:38.980 I would have looked

01:13:39.620 into it.

01:13:45.480 What if the UFOs

01:13:47.000 are actually

01:13:47.580 us from the future?

01:13:49.640 Do you ever think

01:13:52.700 about that?

01:13:54.060 One explanation

01:13:54.980 for UFOs

01:13:55.940 is that it's just us.

01:13:57.420 It's just us

01:13:58.000 from the future.

01:13:59.020 And the reason

01:13:59.620 that you don't get

01:14:00.200 a good picture of it

01:14:01.200 and they don't land

01:14:02.660 and introduce themselves

01:14:04.040 is that they can't

01:14:05.240 change the timeline.

01:14:07.520 Because we know

01:14:08.360 we don't want to change

01:14:09.100 our own past,

01:14:10.460 so we make sure

01:14:11.620 that when we go back

01:14:12.460 to it,

01:14:12.780 we stay in the ship

01:14:13.600 and the ship

01:14:14.980 can observe things

01:14:16.040 and maybe sometimes

01:14:17.380 it gets caught,

01:14:18.500 but nobody knows

01:14:19.420 what it is,

01:14:19.820 so it doesn't change

01:14:20.440 our timeline.

01:14:22.860 Here's another possibility.

01:14:24.880 If you live

01:14:25.740 in a simulation,

01:14:27.880 it could be

01:14:28.400 that these UFOs

01:14:29.540 are just really

01:14:30.660 the hosts

01:14:32.100 of the simulation.

01:14:33.220 You know,

01:14:33.360 whoever built it,

01:14:34.500 it may be just

01:14:35.120 their mechanism

01:14:36.200 for getting inside

01:14:37.140 and looking at things.

01:14:39.760 That's all you're seeing.

01:14:43.600 It's the warden.

01:14:46.680 All right.

01:14:47.100 Yeah, maybe.

01:14:49.680 What are the chances

01:14:50.620 we have a future

01:14:51.420 we don't want to change?

01:14:52.580 Well, that's true.

01:14:53.840 We want it.

01:14:57.600 Yeah, it's sort of

01:14:58.460 a Rick and Morty program.

01:15:01.360 All right.

01:15:05.240 CERN is a programmer

01:15:06.440 in the simulation.

01:15:09.980 I don't think

01:15:10.760 they're military drones

01:15:11.780 because they're turning

01:15:13.240 so quickly thing.

01:15:14.700 That's why I think

01:15:15.380 it's either a software

01:15:16.660 or an illusion

01:15:17.480 or it's us

01:15:18.860 from the future

01:15:19.560 or some damn thing.

01:15:26.260 Thank you for this

01:15:27.100 wonderful message today.

01:15:28.860 I can't tell

01:15:29.700 if you're kidding.

01:15:31.120 Are you kidding?

01:15:32.580 So I'm looking

01:15:33.060 at a comment that says,

01:15:34.100 Scott, thank you

01:15:34.800 for this wonderful message today.

01:15:36.480 You know,

01:15:36.620 we needed it.

01:15:37.540 And I'm thinking,

01:15:38.880 what message?

01:15:40.560 I can't even tell

01:15:41.340 if you're serious.

01:15:43.240 All right.

01:15:49.360 I'm on top of my game.

01:15:51.080 Thank you.

01:15:52.340 Great show,

01:15:53.420 do you think?

01:15:54.560 Yeah, I think so.

01:15:55.520 Probably one of the best

01:15:56.360 shows ever.

01:15:57.520 And on that note,

01:15:59.480 on that note,

01:16:03.400 I'll talk to you tomorrow.

01:16:04.200 you

01:16:17.880 I'll talk to you tomorrow.

01:16:19.420 You

01:16:22.700 you

01:16:23.620 you

01:16:27.580 you

01:16:28.200 you

Real Coffee with Scott Adams - July 08, 2022

Episode 1798 Scott Adams： Let Me Tell You All The Things The News Isn't Telling You Today

Episode Stats

Length

Words per Minute

Word Count

Sentence Count

Misogynist Sentences

Hate Speech Sentences

Summary

Transcript