Episode 2018 Scott Adams： America Repels Alien Armada Or Sends A Message Or Downs Weather Balloons
Episode Stats
Words per Minute
140.56384
Summary
Scott Adams talks about the Super Bowl and why he thinks Donna Brazile is the most important person in charge of the Democratic Party, and why she should be running for president. He also talks about why he doesn t like Rihanna.
Transcript
00:00:00.000
Good morning, everybody, and welcome to the highlight of civilization, as long as it lasts.
00:00:12.620
It's called Coffee with Scott Adams. There's never been a finer moment in your entire life.
00:00:17.960
And if you'd like to take it up to, I don't know, 20,000 feet, 40,000 feet,
00:00:24.200
can I get you 65,000 feet higher than a Chinese spy balloon?
00:00:28.700
All you need is a cupper, a mug, or a glass, a tank, or a chalice, or a stein, a canteen jug, or a flask, a vessel of any kind.
00:00:35.560
Fill it with your favorite liquid. I like coffee.
00:00:39.880
And join me now for the unparalleled pleasure of the dopamine of the day.
00:00:43.340
The thing that makes everything better. It's called the simultaneous sip.
00:00:55.860
Well, there was something called the Super Bowl yesterday.
00:01:09.500
And I think the reason I like it is that I know much of the country is sort of doing the same thing at the same time.
00:01:18.700
I just love that the country is doing the same thing at the same time.
00:01:22.900
So I didn't really, you know, care for the game so much.
00:01:31.800
But my prediction mechanism for determining who will win worked once again.
00:01:47.120
I look at the name of the team and I decide who would win.
00:01:51.820
If, for example, a Native American chieftain were to fight an eagle, because it was Kansas City Chiefs versus eagles, who would win?
00:02:14.500
But I'm going to allow that the chieftain has maybe a weapon, like a club or a spear.
00:02:20.140
And sure enough, the chief beat the eagle exactly as I predicted.
00:02:23.440
And the spectacular thing about this, the really, I don't know, inspirational thing, because the Super Bowl can be very inspirational.
00:02:36.200
These are athletes who have worked since they were young kids.
00:02:40.420
Their parents, you know, took them to practices.
00:02:44.440
They rose above all the rest to become NFL players and then rose above all of the NFL players to become the two teams in the Super Bowl, who, after all of that work, all that concentration, that sacrifice, that focus, that discipline, it was decided by a bad call by the refs.
00:03:11.440
But if you like that sort of thing, it was awesome.
00:03:14.440
I don't know why you would, but if you liked it, it would be awesome.
00:03:18.580
The halftime entertainment was Rihanna, who looked pregnant and admitted that she was pregnant.
00:03:37.060
Three things I really like more than I should, probably.
00:03:59.780
Another thing I like is to watch women dance suggestively.
00:04:16.440
But what I don't like is when you combine Rihanna, pregnancy, and sexy dancing.
00:04:23.400
When you put those three together, I would rather have a steak driven through my forehead than to be subjected to watching it.
00:04:48.520
I saw Donna Brazile say that she was a big supporter.
00:04:54.400
So Donna Brazile, if you don't know, is about the most inside insider of all insiders.
00:05:02.300
So if you want to know what Democrats who are actually in charge are thinking, Donna Brazile has the answer.
00:05:10.460
So there's only one person you need to look to to know what the secret opinion within the Democrat upper echelons is.
00:05:19.100
Just ask Donna Brazile, because she definitely knows the answer.
00:05:23.080
And she says that she wants to support Kamala Harris with her words.
00:05:28.420
And so the words that Donna Brazile chose was that she is standing in her own power.
00:05:51.660
What was the best thing that Donna Brazile, with all of her exceptional communication skills, which actually are exceptional,
00:05:59.740
her exceptional communication skills, and the best she could come up with for the vice president is,
00:06:12.260
And Donna Brazile says that Harris will either be the VP choice for Biden,
00:06:20.200
So she'll either be vice president or president, and you know that because she's standing in her own power.
00:06:36.680
Now, I'm going to put out a theory which you could call a conspiracy theory,
00:06:41.860
and it is that the vice president has a substance problem.
00:06:48.820
Now, I don't know that, so I'm not going to say, oh, she has a substance problem.
00:06:53.140
That would be creating a rumor that is unsubstantiated.
00:06:57.580
But I'm going to play you from her recent speech about electric buses.
00:07:11.080
Now, I don't know if it would be alcohol or anything.
00:07:22.620
And it sounds so inebriated that I think she should be drug tested.
00:07:34.160
Now, you listen to this, and you tell me that you don't think she's inebriated.
00:07:52.080
You can charge your phone on your way home from work.
00:08:04.520
A little bit too happy about USB ports on a bus.
00:08:12.980
Now, there are lots of things to be happy about in this world.
00:08:15.940
USB ports on a bus, which is not exactly bleeding-edge technology.
00:08:23.800
She was so happy about it, it looked like she might cry.
00:09:04.860
I've probably seen more inebriated people than you have.
00:09:15.480
Most of you, stop commenting for just a moment.
00:09:19.160
Let's just pause commenting before I ask my next question.
00:09:24.560
So my next question is only for people who have experienced drug addiction.
00:09:36.320
If you've experienced your own addiction, does she seem inebriated?
00:09:46.380
Now, remember when I, you know, I've said things about Hillary Clinton being unhealthy
00:09:52.520
and seemingly inebriated, and people on, you know, the pro-Trump side were demonized
00:10:03.800
I think you can bring it up if somebody acts high, don't you?
00:10:08.880
If somebody acts inebriated in public and they're an elected official,
00:10:16.800
And if you don't think that looked high to you, just look at all the people who said yes.
00:10:24.380
You can't just look at somebody and know what's in them.
00:10:27.440
But I've looked at a lot of high people, and that looked stoned to me.
00:10:36.220
But she does have an interesting, laughy kind of a personality, and she does love buses.
00:10:45.520
But if that's natural, I don't want any of that.
00:10:50.440
I don't want that in my government, if that's natural or drunk.
00:10:55.920
Rasmussen did a poll on Biden's job performance on fentanyl.
00:11:03.940
Now, I don't know how many times I have to show you how smart my audience is.
00:11:10.700
But without even knowing the answer, because this hasn't even been released,
00:11:16.020
Nobody knows the answer to this, but watch this.
00:11:19.740
What percentage of voters say Biden is doing a good or excellent job on the fentanyl?
00:11:42.040
It's like every time I ask you a poll question, you know the answer before the...
00:12:02.600
What would be the budget, hypothetically, for the special forces in the U.S. Air Force
00:12:13.660
You know, we're going to put $100 billion into Ukraine, but what do you think taking out
00:12:25.820
I think it's somewhere between, you know, $1 and $20 billion.
00:12:38.160
Because my experience says when you think it's $5 billion, it's going to be $20.
00:12:51.980
If we could take out the cartels or, let's say, degrade them seriously for $20 billion,
00:13:05.100
Because we'd, you know, lose fewer people and, you know, all the other problems.
00:13:23.780
What's it called when I make you think about the budget for attacking them?
00:13:30.500
Thinking, yes, I'm making you think past the sale.
00:13:35.640
The sale is would we do anything military with the cartels?
00:13:43.200
I'm asking you to think past the question to how much it would cost.
00:13:47.540
The reason I'm doing that is that when you're thinking about what it costs,
00:13:51.480
you sort of unconsciously accept that this is a serious thing that could happen.
00:13:56.400
So we're going through the slow process of getting Congress to understand what's at stake
00:14:04.700
and what it would cost and what it would take to fix it.
00:14:08.020
So if you hear anybody in Congress or the news pick up the question of what it would cost,
00:14:17.880
then you're probably on your way to it happening.
00:14:19.800
If nobody ever talks about the budget, nothing's happening.
00:14:27.220
The only thing that matters in this world is, is there a budget for any big operation?
00:14:40.380
And if you're not even talking about the budget, it's not going to happen.
00:14:43.560
So we have, we have to move, we have to move the conversation at least to the budget question.
00:14:54.280
We have to be talking about the budget to make, to have any chance that something real will happen.
00:15:00.640
If you let them just talk about yes or no, that's nothing.
00:15:06.280
You have to have a conversation about what it costs.
00:15:10.580
The moment that budget is introduced as a conversation piece,
00:15:16.260
then everybody in the military-industrial complex says,
00:15:27.640
Because that's who, you know, we presume controls the government.
00:15:31.780
So you've got to get the money talk out there so that the people who can make money from it
00:15:36.800
can start moving the government in the direction of what will make them money.
00:15:41.780
And I don't mind if our, I don't mind at all, I don't mind at all,
00:15:46.600
if the military industry makes some money at the same time we solve the fentanyl problem.
00:16:16.680
Apparently it's been destroyed in a toxic vinyl chloride cloud of deadly gas.
00:16:31.280
There is part of it that you wouldn't want to live in for a long time.
00:16:55.380
All right, let's talk about giant balloons and stuff.
00:17:02.540
Before we talk about that, I've got to talk about TikTok.
00:17:04.560
I predicted that the Chinese spy balloon drama would make it more likely that Congress would ban TikTok.
00:17:18.360
I thought I saw something encouraging in the news, but I'm totally wrong.
00:17:26.300
So what was encouraging was that Fox News was putting pressure on Governor Whitmer, I mean, because she was still using TikTok, but she claims that she only uses it on a device that has nothing on it but TikTok.
00:17:45.680
Does that suggest that she should be in government?
00:17:49.840
That sort of suggests that you're not qualified to be the governor.
00:17:54.640
If you believe TikTok is so dangerous that you won't even use it unless it's a dedicated device, and yet you're not in favor of banning it everywhere, you can't be in government.
00:18:11.340
And if you're going to be stupid right in front of us, you can't be our leaders.
00:18:26.000
There's no extra data that has to be collected for you to have a full opinion about this situation.
00:18:31.540
If it's too dangerous for the government, that's all you need.
00:18:49.500
But apparently Senator Schumer has said it's worth looking into, banning it, banning TikTok.
00:18:57.780
And I guess the Commerce Department is looking into it.
00:19:00.560
And of course, you know, he being a major Democrat, but also Sarah Huckabee Sanders, is that her last name?
00:19:08.920
And she's also in favor of banning TikTok as well, because she's basically, is it Sarah Huckabee, is her last, does she have a married name on the end of that?
00:19:28.180
So Sarah Huckabee Sanders continues to say basically every right thing.
00:19:33.020
Isn't it funny that if you take somebody who's a very capable spokesperson for a president, and then you put them in the job where they have to say the right things and not the wrong things?
00:19:56.520
And youngest, youngest governor or youngest female governor, I can't remember.
00:20:01.020
But at that age, at that age, she's operating really at a pretty high level.
00:20:07.740
Not just a governor level, but she's operating above governor level.
00:20:11.460
She's operating at a federal level of effectiveness, but she's a governor at the moment.
00:20:20.340
Which is, you know, different from saying I wouldn't necessarily agree with every policy, but as a Republican who's trying to make a dent in the system, she's certainly doing it.
00:20:31.160
All right, but neither Sarah Huckabee Sanders nor Schumer seem to understand the TikTok threat.
00:20:39.020
So while I thought this Chinese spy plane would get us closer, especially since both sides seem to be at least open to the question,
00:21:03.560
But the real risk is they have a button, literally labeled heat, in whatever language, and they can make anything trend by pushing that button.
00:21:15.380
They literally, literally, this is a proper use of literally, have a user interface for American brains.
00:21:28.160
It's actually a user interface to control a human brain in the United States.
00:21:39.020
The data security is way down the list of risks.
00:21:46.600
It's not even close to that stupid little heat button, where they can make anything important to Americans, or anything unimportant, by not touching the heat button.
00:22:03.260
So then, I thought it was useful that Schumer said, oh, yes, it's worth looking into banning it.
00:22:15.560
And then he says that the Commerce Department is looking into it.
00:22:24.820
How long does it take the Commerce Department to say, do they have a heat button?
00:22:40.500
Here's the Commerce Department trying to decide whether TikTok should be banned.
00:22:46.620
Do they have a button, one button that they can push to make something trend?
00:23:16.160
It's designed to do exactly what we don't want it to do.
00:23:23.520
If the Commerce Department can't figure that out, who's in charge of the Commerce Department?
00:23:31.600
Get me a name of who's in charge of the Commerce Department.
00:23:38.820
Because whoever's in charge of the Commerce Department is either dragging or is a communist agent.
00:23:48.040
There's either massive incompetence or somebody has gotten to him.
00:23:53.000
Because there's no way, there is no way in the world that the head of the Commerce Department understands TikTok and it takes him more than 10 minutes to make a decision.
00:24:03.920
It can't be possible that that person even understands the issue.
00:24:14.040
I will bet any amount of money that all of the delay is in conversations about how to keep the data in the United States and not let the CCP see it.
00:24:25.340
That probably, that's probably complicated and it depends.
00:24:29.560
You have to negotiate with who's doing what and who would hold it and there might be some lawyers involved.
00:24:37.620
But that also suggests they don't understand the threat.
00:24:43.940
All of that data security stuff you should ignore because you're going to ban the whole thing.
00:24:51.200
You don't need to ban just the data and spend all your time trying to keep the data safe when the entire platform should be banned for obvious reasons.
00:25:03.100
It's the user interface for brains and it's pointed at American brains by an adversary.
00:25:13.940
I mean, I'm preaching to the choir at this point.
00:25:16.580
So Gina Raimundi is the one who's either incompetent or bought off already, right?
00:25:32.540
I want to find out if she even knows what the risk is.
00:25:35.240
I will bet you, I'll bet you she doesn't even know the risk.
00:25:40.340
I'll bet you also that there's nobody at Fox News who's going to get her on the TV and ask her the question.
00:25:49.660
The most obvious thing that Fox News should do, or anybody who's right-leaning news,
00:25:54.760
they should get the head of the Commerce Department on and say,
00:26:00.620
And then when they say data, data, data, the Fox News host says,
00:26:04.880
you know they have a heat button and they can program our minds directly,
00:26:10.900
How are you the one who's looking into it and you don't even know what the risk is?
00:26:14.380
How many fucking months did it take you to figure out what the risk is and you couldn't get it?
00:26:40.540
I'm not really, you know, nearly as concerned if Instagram does it.
00:26:44.500
I mean, well, that's a separate battle, but it's different.
00:27:08.840
Did you know that the U.S. has been launching its own surveillance balloons
00:27:15.300
Our own balloons to look for criminals and stuff since 2019.
00:27:25.900
The U.S. has been creating surveillance balloons for the U.S.
00:27:37.320
The Pentagon does not know what is keeping these objects aloft.
00:27:44.040
They've seen them and they don't know what's keeping them aloft.
00:27:49.500
So they don't want to rush to say balloon because they can't see a propulsion system
00:28:02.580
They're either space garbage or space balloons.
00:28:08.520
And the military is just lying to you when they say they don't know what's keeping it aloft.
00:28:13.200
Apparently, they've not ruled out UFOs or something.
00:28:21.700
They also told us that they changed the sensitivity of their radar, I guess.
00:28:27.260
And once they changed the sensitivity, which they had intentionally kept less sensitive
00:28:34.000
because all of this little garbage stuff that they would detect,
00:28:38.460
they would have to spend all their time finding out if it's important.
00:28:41.980
But little things that don't move very fast tend not to be that important.
00:28:49.940
So apparently, we had a system in which we just didn't look at anything that was too small,
00:28:58.220
Now, they're seeing these smaller things and they can't identify exactly what they are.
00:29:05.320
Because we probably want to look tough and decisive.
00:29:09.120
Now, here's my best hypothesis of what's happening.
00:29:14.860
I think we're blowing up defective weather balloons or surveillance balloons,
00:29:23.840
I think we're blowing up our own assets, maybe some foreign assets that were irrelevant.
00:29:30.980
But I think we're just blowing up stuff to show that we can blow up stuff.
00:29:38.060
oh, that Chinese balloon is proving that we can't defend our airspace, right?
00:29:43.340
What would be the best thing you could do to prove that you really could defend your airspace?
00:29:49.160
Well, you would pretend to be blowing up tiny little things that you saw far away.
00:29:54.600
Because if we can spot these tiny little things from far away,
00:29:58.580
and so far, are you impressed that we're four for four?
00:30:13.960
Now, do you think you would know it if the first five missiles missed?
00:30:19.240
You think the military would say, you know, it took us six missiles
00:30:26.880
This looks to be entirely a military propaganda operation.
00:30:33.180
Meaning that I think we're just showing that we can blow up and detect small things,
00:30:46.700
I don't think they're even necessarily from China,
00:30:56.080
Twitter Spaces, where you have audio conversations,
00:30:59.280
and I was listening to Tom Fenton being quite convinced
00:31:02.780
that these were Chinese assets, the additional ones that were shot down,
00:31:07.360
based on the fact that we took them so seriously, we shot them down.
00:31:11.600
At least one of them didn't look like it had a payload,
00:31:22.820
So Tom Fenton's take, and some other expert types on that call,
00:31:28.180
were saying that the most likely thing is that they're Chinese balloons,
00:31:41.840
but it would mean figuring out where all their targets are,
00:31:45.020
because there's no point in having nuclear weapons
00:31:48.760
But do you think China didn't know where to put their nuclear weapons?
00:31:57.980
They know they can't take care of all of our missile silos,
00:32:06.240
So I don't buy the story that China is doing targeting runs.
00:32:18.700
but I don't believe that whatever the smaller ones are doing the same thing.
00:32:23.520
Now, China says that the U.S. has sent 10 spy balloons over them
00:32:32.120
Do you believe that the U.S. has sent 10 spy balloons over China
00:32:35.720
because our other assets can't see what we want to see?
00:32:47.740
I would say 100% of what we find out about this story is likely to be untrue.
00:32:53.100
One of the structures that was blown up was reportedly octagonal.
00:33:13.720
He likes to be inside octagons, is what I'm saying.
00:33:19.080
All right, so he got one shot down by an F-16 over Lake Huron.
00:33:23.300
An F-22 took one around at 40,000 feet over Canada.
00:33:36.600
How many weather balloons do you think are launched per year?
00:33:41.520
How many weather balloons are launched per year?
00:33:57.860
It's like every day weather balloons will go down.
00:34:02.940
Now, some of the weather balloons will reach a certain height,
00:34:11.520
Do you remember those things that seem to defy...
00:34:21.340
and then they'd, like, immediately go in the other direction.
00:34:26.180
If you saw a balloon in the wind and it was where it could run into, let's say, big gusts and just, like, change directions,
00:34:35.800
if you believed it was a solid metal ship and you saw it go...
00:34:41.760
and suddenly in the other direction, wouldn't you think it defied physics?
00:34:46.060
But if it were a plastic bag or a balloon and it just hit a real, you know, violent wind pattern,
00:34:57.660
wouldn't it look like it defied physics because it just went in the opposite direction really quickly?
00:35:07.280
Yeah, it doesn't defy the physics of a balloon.
00:35:09.880
All right, so I will not rule out Tom Fitton's argument
00:35:17.240
that China is sending stuff over here to target us for a potential attack.
00:35:27.600
I just think that the far more likely explanation
00:35:30.760
is that we're all worked up over space garbage.
00:35:41.220
And I think the pilots are probably having a great time.
00:35:45.480
Wouldn't you love to be a pilot and you get to shoot down a plastic bag?
00:35:54.000
I mean, I don't know what it's like to be a fighter pilot,
00:35:56.420
but I feel like going on a little flight to shoot down something that isn't shooting at me
00:36:02.880
just to see if I could get it, that'd be kind of fun.
00:36:08.740
So my bottom line is I think that they are nothings,
00:36:14.900
They're not necessarily Chinese, but they could be.
00:36:18.900
And that we're just shooting them down to show that we can shoot things down.
00:36:32.360
All we have to do is tune our radar and you'll never get through our net.
00:36:40.600
Well, I was watching CNN to see if they're still unbiased.
00:36:48.700
who apparently never got the memo from CNN's new management,
00:36:55.600
So there's still some leftovers in the CNN who didn't get the memo
00:37:03.900
And she was saying that the moment that the GOP hearing
00:37:09.200
on the weaponization of the FBI and social media and stuff,
00:37:14.780
she's saying that the GOP hearing on that backfired
00:37:17.420
and totally fell apart based on the news that Trump had once asked,
00:37:24.660
had once asked for an insulting Christy Teigen tweet to be taken down.
00:37:38.280
that the entire hearing about the weaponization of the FBI
00:37:55.060
Was everybody worried about the FBI talking to Twitter
00:38:06.320
I remember a story about them trying to influence elections.
00:38:12.260
But I don't remember the one about them fighting social media
00:38:47.720
Now, am I wrong that that's CNN being bad CNN, right?
00:39:02.820
This is not even close to being a balanced approach.