Real Coffee with Scott Adams - Episode 2144 Scott Adams： Science Surrenders To RFK Jr. And Joe Rogan, Blink Fails In China, Trump

00:00:00.000 Good morning everybody and welcome to the highlight of human civilization.

00:00:08.540 It's called Coffee with Scott Adams.

00:00:10.660 Today the special Juneteenth edition.

00:00:14.620 Happy Juneteenth.

00:00:15.980 And if you'd like to take your Juneteenth up to all new levels of awesomeness,

00:00:20.680 all you need is a cup or a mug or a glass, a tank or gels or stein,

00:00:24.520 a canteen jug or flask, a vessel of any kind.

00:00:27.860 And fill it with your favorite liquid I like, coffee.

00:00:32.460 Join me now for the unparalleled pleasure, the dopamine of the day,

00:00:37.160 the thing that makes everything better.

00:00:39.600 It's called the Simultaneous Sip.

00:00:41.700 Go.

00:00:46.440 Ah, yeah.

00:00:50.780 Well, I have to admit, it was only a few short years ago that I learned what Juneteenth was.

00:00:56.320 Never heard of it.

00:00:57.860 It was not anything I learned about.

00:01:00.420 But, given now my understanding, it's the last day of slavery in the last state,

00:01:06.120 I think it was Texas, that had it.

00:01:08.360 I say that is very celebratable.

00:01:11.480 Freedom is always celebratable.

00:01:13.520 And that seems to me like a good celebration.

00:01:17.280 So let's celebrate freedom.

00:01:20.040 It is, however, not a work holiday for cartoonists.

00:01:23.340 Do any of you get today off?

00:01:26.200 Has anybody taken the day off?

00:01:29.360 Or does it not work that way?

00:01:30.720 It's not a national holiday, right?

00:01:35.080 Yet.

00:01:36.680 Probably will be.

00:01:37.440 I feel like June is a little light on holidays.

00:01:42.060 Are you with me?

00:01:43.360 Do you feel like June just, eh, they could use just a little bit more holidaying.

00:01:48.740 Not enough holidaying going on in June.

00:01:50.580 I mean, there's my birthday, and that does cover a lot of the month.

00:01:56.740 All right, let's talk about Blinken's trip to China.

00:02:00.580 A gigantic failure, of course.

00:02:03.520 Let's see.

00:02:04.120 He asked them if they would stop fentanyl, and they said nothing.

00:02:09.980 Asked them if he would, asked China if they would agree not to give deadly weapons to Russia, 0.62

00:02:15.980 which they've been saying all along, so that was nothing new.

00:02:20.380 And then he asked them if they'd like to have, like, an emergency deconfliction phone call,

00:02:25.280 sort of like the red phone or the hotline to the Kremlin.

00:02:29.660 And China said, nah, no, seriously, we should have, like, a special phone call for deconflicting

00:02:40.040 so we don't have an accidental nuclear war.

00:02:43.580 President Xi, eh, eh, you have my number.

00:02:50.000 Call me if you need anything.

00:02:53.120 So I would say that was a big old nothing.

00:02:55.720 But Blinken's concept, and apparently Biden's concept,

00:03:00.700 is that you need to be continually dealing with the Chinese 1.00

00:03:05.220 because there's a better chance of getting a good outcome if you're talking.

00:03:10.900 If you're talking.

00:03:12.180 I completely disagree with this, and I'll tell you what I would do.

00:03:17.040 I would close all of our embassies and send every Chinese student home 1.00

00:03:21.820 unless they fix fentanyl.

00:03:24.240 Because the problem here, let me explain how government works to the government,

00:03:30.080 is that they've treated fentanyl like it's just one other problem.

00:03:34.420 It's not.

00:03:36.500 It's not like any other problem.

00:03:39.420 We're acting like fentanyl is on our list of negotiating topics.

00:03:44.980 You know, when we go to talk to them about trade

00:03:48.120 and our trade situation, let's throw fentanyl in there 0.98

00:03:52.500 because that's just another thing to negotiate, right?

00:03:57.400 Just throw it in there with the list.

00:03:59.660 You got, oh, we got this and that and that,

00:04:01.900 and then a little fentanyl.

00:04:03.000 Let's talk about that too.

00:04:04.800 No.

00:04:06.200 No.

00:04:07.500 Fentanyl is not like anything else on the list.

00:04:11.340 It's not.

00:04:12.120 You don't go into a negotiation with somebody who's shooting your family members

00:04:16.580 while you're negotiating, do you?

00:04:20.100 No.

00:04:20.780 You say, first you stop shooting my family members,

00:04:23.680 and then we'll have something to talk about.

00:04:27.120 But you don't act like everything's business as usual

00:04:30.660 while they're killing your family. 0.62

00:04:32.480 But we are.

00:04:35.140 Now, I don't mind business as usual if we're worrying about, you know, a trade war.

00:04:41.880 That's, yeah, that's just business.

00:04:44.440 But if you're killing people right now,

00:04:48.360 no, you don't negotiate, nor do you keep your embassy open.

00:04:51.740 You close your fucking embassy, and you say,

00:04:54.480 we'd love to talk to you, but you're going to stop this first.

00:04:58.000 Period.

00:04:59.220 Period.

00:04:59.580 And the fact that this is just put on the list with other stuff.

00:05:04.300 It's like, oh, we'd like you to do this and that,

00:05:07.520 and we'll just throw that on the list too.

00:05:09.880 Maybe if we'd someday talk about all of it together

00:05:12.600 in some comprehensive way.

00:05:15.440 No.

00:05:16.520 No.

00:05:17.660 No, you close the embassy.

00:05:20.140 You just walk away and say, you want nuclear war?

00:05:23.620 You're on the way.

00:05:25.420 You're on the way.

00:05:27.500 Because it is a war.

00:05:28.560 It's a hot war.

00:05:29.580 And acting like it's not is ridiculous.

00:05:34.180 All right.

00:05:35.220 So, Blinken, total failure.

00:05:37.980 I'd like to also say this about his name.

00:05:40.940 When you're going to send somebody to negotiate

00:05:42.820 with your biggest adversary,

00:05:44.940 would you like the last name of the person

00:05:46.760 who does your negotiating

00:05:47.980 to be Trump,

00:05:50.520 Trump,

00:05:53.000 or Blinken?

00:05:53.940 He went into the negotiation

00:05:56.980 and he was,

00:05:57.980 well, he was Blinken.

00:06:00.620 But the other guy went into the negotiation

00:06:02.780 and Trump,

00:06:04.200 he trumped him.

00:06:05.600 He trumped him.

00:06:06.980 We should at least get the names right.

00:06:09.040 All right.

00:06:10.500 All right.

00:06:10.520 The big news everybody's talking about

00:06:12.040 on the internet today

00:06:13.080 is that Joe Rogan challenged

00:06:16.740 a noted vaccine,

00:06:19.900 pro-vaccine scientist guy

00:06:21.700 named Dr. Hotez, I think,

00:06:24.880 if I'm saying it right.

00:06:27.220 H-O-T-E-Z. 1.00

00:06:28.860 I think Hotez, maybe. 0.99

00:06:30.980 And Dr. Hotez,

00:06:33.700 who I'd never heard of before.

00:06:36.000 How many of you had ever heard of Dr. Hotez

00:06:38.480 prior to this situation with Joe Rogan?

00:06:44.280 A lot of you had.

00:06:46.020 All right.

00:06:46.780 This is a real good example of the news bubble

00:06:49.380 because I saw some compilation clips

00:06:52.520 of Dr. Hotez on CNN and MSNBC

00:06:56.660 where apparently he's been a number of times.

00:07:00.020 But I don't remember ever seeing him on Fox News.

00:07:04.820 So he's sort of a bubble situation, yeah.

00:07:07.940 So he's probably been one of the darling experts

00:07:10.220 of the political left,

00:07:11.980 but the political right probably just froze him out

00:07:14.620 because he wasn't really on message for them.

00:07:17.780 So the big story is that RFK Jr.

00:07:20.860 has a number of criticisms of vaccinations in general,

00:07:25.020 but also the COVID one specifically.

00:07:27.120 and would like to debate Dr. Hotez on Joe Rogan,

00:07:34.260 or at least Joe Rogan would like them to debate.

00:07:37.040 And a number of people were putting up money for charity

00:07:40.260 if they would debate.

00:07:42.080 And Dr. Hotez seemed to be hesitant,

00:07:45.080 but now he's speaking out about it.

00:07:47.520 And he tells us that a debate would be bad,

00:07:54.040 meaning it wouldn't be useful,

00:07:56.120 might even make things worse.

00:07:59.420 What do you think of that?

00:08:00.620 Do you think a debate...

00:08:01.980 See, his issue...

00:08:03.540 And let me give you more detail on his issue.

00:08:05.900 His issue is, among other things,

00:08:08.160 that debate doesn't work

00:08:10.480 because that's not how science works.

00:08:12.260 Science doesn't work on the best debater wins.

00:08:17.860 Would you agree?

00:08:19.620 That's not how science works.

00:08:21.760 And as he points out,

00:08:22.720 science works with peer-reviewed papers

00:08:25.500 and experimentation

00:08:26.620 and all the processes of science.

00:08:29.940 So he says, you know,

00:08:31.520 you should do the scientific stuff,

00:08:33.940 not the debate stuff,

00:08:35.380 because the debate stuff is about persuasion.

00:08:38.940 And as he points out,

00:08:40.760 well, what if the person who's wrong...

00:08:44.120 This is...

00:08:44.720 I'm not paraphrasing.

00:08:46.320 I'm boosting his argument.

00:08:48.280 What if the person who's wrong

00:08:49.760 is the most persuasive?

00:08:52.700 Does that serve you?

00:08:54.480 Would the public be served

00:08:56.000 by the person who is the most wrong

00:08:57.860 having the best argument?

00:09:01.320 It's an interesting point.

00:09:03.520 And he points out,

00:09:04.720 and Mark Cuban did as well,

00:09:06.820 that RFK Jr. is very persuasive

00:09:09.140 and that he's an expert

00:09:11.380 at persuading on this topic.

00:09:14.360 And he's so good

00:09:16.200 that he's in the conversation

00:09:18.280 to be maybe leader of the whole country.

00:09:21.460 Like, that's about his highest level

00:09:23.700 of persuasion as you could achieve.

00:09:26.260 And so if you're a scientist

00:09:28.040 who does work on TV,

00:09:30.280 but you're not really the media expert

00:09:33.500 like RFK Jr. is,

00:09:35.480 is it fair to put,

00:09:38.020 in his words,

00:09:38.720 the strong argument

00:09:39.620 with the less persuasive person

00:09:42.220 on the same venue?

00:09:44.180 Do you think that would serve the public?

00:09:47.680 I'm just going to go more with his argument

00:09:49.500 and then we'll talk about the other side.

00:09:51.020 And I think he makes a good point

00:09:54.560 that science is not about rhetoric

00:09:56.180 and persuasion, right?

00:09:59.020 That's not what science does.

00:10:00.480 It's not a persuasion field.

00:10:03.620 But I would argue,

00:10:04.800 as I have in the past,

00:10:05.880 that if it doesn't

00:10:07.620 also learn to persuade honestly,

00:10:10.280 not persuade dishonestly,

00:10:12.240 but if science doesn't learn

00:10:13.520 to persuade honestly,

00:10:15.840 it actually becomes useless.

00:10:17.440 What good is it

00:10:19.740 if you can't persuade anybody

00:10:21.420 to believe you?

00:10:22.620 It takes the entire value

00:10:24.060 of science off the table.

00:10:25.860 Yeah, it's a good study.

00:10:27.220 I don't believe it.

00:10:30.300 Let's see.

00:10:32.400 Then the other complaint

00:10:33.520 is that RFK Jr.

00:10:35.040 has a habit

00:10:37.320 of moving the goalposts,

00:10:40.040 meaning Dr. Hotez believes

00:10:41.700 that once he nails him down

00:10:43.060 and makes his good points,

00:10:44.820 that instead of just winning the debate,

00:10:47.620 then RFK Jr.

00:10:48.600 would just change it

00:10:49.320 to another thing.

00:10:49.960 And he gave some examples of that.

00:10:51.860 He actually gave some specific examples

00:10:53.720 of where, in his mind,

00:10:55.820 RFK Jr. used to make a claim

00:10:58.440 of some element

00:11:00.140 of the vaccinations being bad,

00:11:01.860 but then he changed it to,

00:11:03.240 well, they're still bad,

00:11:04.180 but maybe it's something else.

00:11:05.500 Then still bad,

00:11:06.760 but maybe it's a different thing.

00:11:07.920 And then still bad,

00:11:08.960 but maybe it's for a different reason.

00:11:11.620 Which is a good point.

00:11:13.680 Perfectly good point.

00:11:14.460 Now, did Dr. Hotez make 1.00

00:11:16.600 good points which are true?

00:11:19.560 Good points which are true

00:11:21.380 and logical?

00:11:23.240 Yes, he did.

00:11:24.920 Those are true and logical points.

00:11:27.580 Yeah, those are true and logical.

00:11:29.420 It's true that people

00:11:31.800 like to move goalposts.

00:11:33.820 It's probably true 0.93

00:11:35.340 that RFK Jr.

00:11:36.480 has modified his opinion over time.

00:11:39.060 Probably true.

00:11:39.900 It's probably true 0.93

00:11:41.500 that the most persuasive person,

00:11:44.460 if they had the worst argument,

00:11:46.740 that would be a problem.

00:11:48.640 The most persuasive person

00:11:50.140 with the worst argument

00:11:51.000 definitely would not

00:11:51.880 move the ball forward.

00:11:54.000 But here's where

00:11:55.580 I have my problem

00:11:56.840 with Dr. Hotez's problem

00:11:58.800 with the debate.

00:11:59.860 You don't think you could

00:12:02.580 find a way to manage

00:12:03.660 that stuff?

00:12:05.560 You don't think you could

00:12:06.540 find any way

00:12:07.600 to structure

00:12:09.480 a conversation

00:12:10.480 where you take it,

00:12:11.820 take that into account?

00:12:13.180 Because I can.

00:12:14.780 It took me five seconds

00:12:16.160 to figure it out.

00:12:17.440 Here's how you do it.

00:12:19.060 You say,

00:12:19.900 RFK Jr.,

00:12:20.600 you're making some claims

00:12:22.060 that are, you know,

00:12:22.940 contrary to the

00:12:24.000 established science.

00:12:26.520 Make three claims.

00:12:27.880 No more than three.

00:12:30.260 Make three claims of fact

00:12:31.760 and we'll present them

00:12:34.140 to Dr. Hotez

00:12:34.980 with, you know,

00:12:35.600 a week or two in advance.

00:12:37.360 We're going to have him

00:12:38.600 collect all of his sources

00:12:40.340 that debunk it

00:12:41.360 and we're going to show him

00:12:43.320 all of your sources

00:12:44.140 that make the claim.

00:12:46.060 After he's collected

00:12:47.320 all of his sources

00:12:48.180 that, you know,

00:12:49.300 debunk yours,

00:12:50.520 before the debate,

00:12:52.340 he's going to show you

00:12:53.260 his sources

00:12:53.780 that debunk your sources.

00:12:55.520 So that when you both

00:12:56.660 go into the debate,

00:12:57.880 you've seen the sources

00:12:58.980 and you've also seen

00:13:00.540 the other sides

00:13:01.160 debunk of your sources

00:13:02.320 and maybe even

00:13:03.780 the response

00:13:05.140 to the debunk

00:13:06.000 before the debate.

00:13:08.420 You limit it

00:13:09.320 to three claims

00:13:10.240 and then you have

00:13:11.740 a Joe Rogan

00:13:12.660 or somebody

00:13:13.220 who could actually

00:13:13.940 handle an MMA,

00:13:15.780 calling an MMA fight,

00:13:17.920 which, by the way,

00:13:18.720 could that be more perfect?

00:13:20.640 That Joe Rogan

00:13:21.320 is literally,

00:13:22.300 part of his talent stack

00:13:23.640 includes

00:13:24.240 calling of fights.

00:13:26.000 who would be,

00:13:29.920 I mean,

00:13:30.180 it's just such

00:13:31.360 an interesting

00:13:32.000 talent to have

00:13:33.720 to go into

00:13:34.380 moderating a debate

00:13:35.580 that you're actually

00:13:36.440 an MMA,

00:13:37.680 you know,

00:13:38.000 fight announcer

00:13:38.760 type guy.

00:13:42.400 So the task

00:13:44.180 would be this,

00:13:45.680 that every time

00:13:46.600 either one of them

00:13:48.120 tried to move

00:13:49.160 the goal post

00:13:49.920 or either one of them

00:13:51.680 sort of got off topic

00:13:52.860 or did sort of a B2

00:13:54.380 or brought up

00:13:55.160 something else

00:13:55.720 about something else,

00:13:56.960 it would be

00:13:57.580 Joe Rogan's job

00:13:59.080 to just stop him,

00:14:00.140 stop him.

00:14:01.180 Just, okay, stop.

00:14:02.880 Stop.

00:14:04.340 You're outside

00:14:05.300 the rules now.

00:14:06.280 You're changing

00:14:06.660 the topic.

00:14:07.300 Go back to the topic.

00:14:09.640 Three points,

00:14:11.620 whatever RFK's

00:14:13.280 best three points are,

00:14:14.620 whatever they are.

00:14:15.920 Because remember

00:14:16.660 how I told you

00:14:17.820 to deal with

00:14:18.580 laundry list persuasion, 1.00

00:14:21.360 which is what

00:14:21.960 RFK Jr. does,

00:14:23.260 really well,

00:14:24.280 by the way.

00:14:25.260 You know,

00:14:25.900 it's a little bit,

00:14:27.900 I want to say

00:14:29.720 it's dishonest, 0.56

00:14:32.060 but not exactly

00:14:33.040 dishonest,

00:14:33.740 because there's

00:14:34.160 not necessarily

00:14:35.300 a lie involved.

00:14:37.840 It's persuasion

00:14:39.560 that's beyond

00:14:40.760 what it should be.

00:14:43.260 I guess that's

00:14:43.860 the way to say it.

00:14:44.780 A laundry list

00:14:45.760 of, oh,

00:14:46.420 all these reasons

00:14:47.300 is why I'm right,

00:14:48.060 like a long list

00:14:49.020 of reasons,

00:14:49.860 looks persuasive

00:14:51.240 before you've

00:14:51.840 looked at any

00:14:52.380 of the reasons.

00:14:53.740 Oh, my God,

00:14:54.380 there are 10 reasons.

00:14:55.760 10 reasons

00:14:56.360 is way more

00:14:56.980 than one,

00:14:58.040 so that must

00:14:58.880 be a good argument.

00:14:59.900 There are 10 reasons.

00:15:01.560 So that's why

00:15:02.340 people use

00:15:02.880 the laundry list.

00:15:03.900 It just automatically

00:15:04.900 looks true

00:15:05.520 before you even

00:15:06.100 look at it.

00:15:07.260 So I do believe

00:15:08.520 that RFK Jr.

00:15:09.520 has a laundry list

00:15:10.680 approach,

00:15:11.820 which is,

00:15:12.460 let me tell you

00:15:13.180 15 things I know

00:15:14.660 about 15 different

00:15:15.720 vaccinations,

00:15:16.900 therefore the 16th

00:15:18.140 one is bad.

00:15:19.600 Now,

00:15:19.840 he never said that.

00:15:21.240 But, you know,

00:15:21.900 you understand

00:15:22.720 that how the laundry

00:15:24.140 list could be then

00:15:25.020 sort of generalized

00:15:25.880 beyond what

00:15:27.180 it's supposed to do.

00:15:28.820 So,

00:15:29.700 as long as you

00:15:31.080 can say,

00:15:31.840 RFK Jr.,

00:15:32.540 make your three

00:15:33.340 best claims,

00:15:34.640 because if you

00:15:35.440 can't defend

00:15:36.020 your three best,

00:15:37.880 does anybody

00:15:38.400 need to look

00:15:39.040 at the others?

00:15:40.820 Right?

00:15:42.200 If he can't

00:15:43.120 defend his three

00:15:43.940 best claims,

00:15:44.900 his three

00:15:45.380 strongest claims,

00:15:46.860 if he fails

00:15:47.700 on those,

00:15:48.980 you don't really

00:15:49.560 need to listen

00:15:50.120 to the others.

00:15:51.980 Do you?

00:15:52.740 Now,

00:15:53.180 there might be

00:15:53.560 somebody else

00:15:54.240 who has a good

00:15:54.700 argument for the

00:15:55.400 others,

00:15:55.880 but if somebody

00:15:56.640 fails on their

00:15:57.340 top three,

00:15:58.780 their best points,

00:16:00.660 you don't need

00:16:01.320 to listen to

00:16:02.000 anything else.

00:16:03.660 So,

00:16:04.260 I would say

00:16:04.820 that the easy

00:16:06.520 way to go forward

00:16:07.360 is to say

00:16:08.680 three topics.

00:16:10.020 Make sure you've

00:16:10.680 both shared

00:16:11.220 all of your sources,

00:16:12.360 both the source

00:16:13.040 and the debunks.

00:16:14.260 Make sure you both

00:16:15.220 have seen all

00:16:16.000 of your URLs

00:16:16.860 and all of your

00:16:17.680 sources and

00:16:19.340 then come on

00:16:19.880 and talk to us

00:16:20.580 with no end

00:16:21.680 to the conversation

00:16:22.500 so you won't

00:16:23.240 have a timed

00:16:23.800 end,

00:16:24.540 you don't want

00:16:25.020 somebody to run

00:16:25.560 out,

00:16:26.100 and then you

00:16:27.460 might schedule

00:16:28.020 a follow-up.

00:16:29.860 Make sure it's

00:16:30.660 a two-event

00:16:31.820 situation.

00:16:33.340 One is the

00:16:33.920 event and then

00:16:35.460 maybe a faster

00:16:36.800 follow-up.

00:16:37.580 It's like,

00:16:37.920 okay,

00:16:38.840 people thought

00:16:39.740 you won or

00:16:40.400 people thought

00:16:40.840 you won or

00:16:41.620 the audience

00:16:42.860 really was

00:16:43.580 obsessed over

00:16:44.400 this one point

00:16:45.080 you made,

00:16:45.600 can you go

00:16:45.960 back to that?

00:16:47.480 Then I think

00:16:48.020 we'd have

00:16:48.300 something.

00:16:49.640 Now,

00:16:50.180 I agree that

00:16:51.080 debate is not

00:16:52.780 how you solve

00:16:53.700 science.

00:16:55.440 I get that.

00:16:56.820 I mean,

00:16:57.060 Dr. Hotez's 0.87

00:16:58.180 arguments are

00:16:59.300 logical and

00:17:00.640 true,

00:17:01.700 but they don't

00:17:03.400 really handle

00:17:04.080 the fact that

00:17:04.680 you could manage

00:17:05.600 those problems.

00:17:06.940 So that's

00:17:07.380 what's left

00:17:07.840 out.

00:17:08.840 It's true that

00:17:09.540 he's identified

00:17:10.140 the problems

00:17:10.860 quite accurately.

00:17:13.220 It's not true

00:17:14.280 that there's

00:17:14.880 no way to

00:17:15.280 handle those

00:17:15.760 problems to

00:17:16.420 minimize them

00:17:17.300 until you've

00:17:18.100 got something

00:17:18.540 useful to do.

00:17:20.080 Now,

00:17:20.540 suppose somebody

00:17:21.860 took all of

00:17:22.480 my excellent

00:17:23.120 ideas that I

00:17:23.860 just gave you,

00:17:25.100 put them

00:17:25.440 together,

00:17:26.300 they do the

00:17:26.860 event and it

00:17:27.440 just doesn't

00:17:27.900 work.

00:17:29.480 What would be

00:17:30.180 your conclusion

00:17:30.800 from that?

00:17:31.880 It just didn't

00:17:32.680 work.

00:17:34.960 No,

00:17:35.240 my conclusion

00:17:35.820 would be you

00:17:36.300 keep trying.

00:17:38.180 So maybe one

00:17:39.640 of the participants

00:17:40.420 is weak for

00:17:41.720 whatever reason,

00:17:43.020 and then you

00:17:43.500 say,

00:17:43.680 all right,

00:17:44.120 well,

00:17:44.420 one of you

00:17:44.900 was strong,

00:17:45.480 one of you

00:17:45.900 kind of

00:17:46.380 couldn't handle

00:17:47.220 this debate

00:17:48.780 concept,

00:17:49.740 so we'll bring

00:17:50.600 in another one.

00:17:51.580 We'll bring in 0.99

00:17:52.180 your best champion

00:17:53.700 that isn't the

00:17:54.800 one who failed.

00:17:56.360 And that could be

00:17:56.920 on either one,

00:17:57.560 not just the

00:17:58.400 scientist.

00:17:59.440 Could be the

00:18:00.520 anti-vaccination

00:18:02.080 person is a

00:18:02.940 different person.

00:18:04.020 By the way,

00:18:05.000 let me correct

00:18:05.600 that.

00:18:06.760 It is unfair

00:18:08.180 to call RFK

00:18:09.180 Jr.

00:18:09.660 anti-vaccination.

00:18:11.280 You all get

00:18:11.760 that, right?

00:18:13.300 Everybody agree?

00:18:15.440 That is not an

00:18:17.480 accurate characterization

00:18:18.660 of him.

00:18:19.660 But we use that

00:18:20.780 as a shorthand

00:18:21.640 to say that he's

00:18:22.960 a critic of

00:18:23.980 much of what we

00:18:25.340 do with

00:18:25.900 vaccinations.

00:18:27.060 But very

00:18:27.680 important,

00:18:28.800 it's very important

00:18:29.520 to make that

00:18:30.000 distinction,

00:18:30.660 because if you're

00:18:31.480 just anti-vaccination,

00:18:33.060 you're probably

00:18:33.400 just an idiot. 0.71

00:18:34.000 That's probably

00:18:36.020 the whole story.

00:18:38.100 But if you're

00:18:38.800 saying,

00:18:39.120 well,

00:18:39.340 it looks like

00:18:39.800 some of this

00:18:40.260 worked,

00:18:41.980 but other stuff

00:18:42.780 I have questions,

00:18:44.320 then you're

00:18:44.940 talking to a

00:18:45.560 reasonable person

00:18:46.320 that you could

00:18:46.740 probably work

00:18:47.640 with.

00:18:48.860 But if somebody

00:18:49.620 is just like,

00:18:50.220 everything you

00:18:51.080 put in your

00:18:51.360 arm is bad,

00:18:52.520 his farm is bad,

00:18:54.180 you can't really

00:18:55.260 work with that.

00:19:00.720 RFK Jr.

00:19:01.520 is never going

00:19:01.900 to be satisfied

00:19:02.480 with vaccine

00:19:03.200 safety.

00:19:03.680 Good.

00:19:05.060 That sounds

00:19:05.480 like good news,

00:19:07.560 to have him

00:19:07.980 never satisfied

00:19:08.780 with,

00:19:09.480 don't you want

00:19:10.220 some people

00:19:10.640 out there

00:19:11.000 who are never

00:19:11.500 satisfied with

00:19:12.220 the safety?

00:19:13.500 That feels like

00:19:14.360 the best situation

00:19:15.140 of all.

00:19:17.340 Yeah,

00:19:17.720 so RFK Jr.

00:19:19.240 is apparently

00:19:20.740 a high-end,

00:19:22.340 good,

00:19:22.860 qualified lawyer

00:19:26.340 on these

00:19:27.080 various topics.

00:19:28.260 So I think

00:19:28.740 he's won

00:19:29.120 some cases.

00:19:30.400 He knows

00:19:30.700 how to dig

00:19:31.140 into the science

00:19:31.800 pretty well.

00:19:32.720 But he's

00:19:33.060 not a scientist.

00:19:34.040 I'd like to

00:19:34.460 see him talk.

00:19:35.860 Now,

00:19:37.720 let me

00:19:40.260 attest to you.

00:19:41.180 So you heard

00:19:41.840 my suggestion.

00:19:43.840 Three claims

00:19:44.860 and then let

00:19:45.560 them share 0.65

00:19:46.020 their sources

00:19:46.540 before they

00:19:47.100 even get

00:19:47.460 into the debate

00:19:48.140 and then make

00:19:49.080 sure there's

00:19:49.460 a follow-up

00:19:50.080 already scheduled

00:19:50.840 so that the

00:19:52.340 follow-up

00:19:52.780 cleans up

00:19:53.600 any problems.

00:19:54.120 How many

00:19:55.080 of you think

00:19:55.620 that that

00:19:56.060 would be

00:19:56.340 worth trying?

00:20:00.380 Let's see

00:20:00.960 your comments.

00:20:03.540 Right?

00:20:03.780 See a lot

00:20:04.160 of yeses

00:20:04.640 on the

00:20:04.980 Locals

00:20:05.300 platform.

00:20:06.240 A lot

00:20:06.460 of yeses.

00:20:07.580 Right?

00:20:08.220 And would you

00:20:09.200 agree with me

00:20:09.940 that if it

00:20:10.720 failed,

00:20:12.000 you should

00:20:12.420 try again?

00:20:13.920 Just tweak it

00:20:14.820 and try again.

00:20:15.580 Because this is

00:20:16.500 the model we

00:20:17.100 need.

00:20:17.840 The model we

00:20:18.880 need is some

00:20:19.660 version of this.

00:20:20.660 If the first

00:20:21.640 version doesn't

00:20:22.360 work, do not

00:20:23.720 throw out the

00:20:24.360 approach.

00:20:25.740 Because the

00:20:26.340 public is so

00:20:27.420 deeply underserved

00:20:28.860 in the both

00:20:30.720 sides situation.

00:20:32.380 If you could do

00:20:33.160 anything, just

00:20:34.600 anything that

00:20:35.700 would move you

00:20:36.260 a little bit

00:20:36.820 toward showing

00:20:37.960 two sides of

00:20:38.820 a story for

00:20:40.120 the first time

00:20:40.800 ever, it

00:20:42.520 would be

00:20:43.120 civilization

00:20:44.880 changing.

00:20:46.660 I mean, it

00:20:46.900 would be one of

00:20:47.380 the biggest,

00:20:49.140 you know, it

00:20:49.580 would be

00:20:49.700 interesting is

00:20:50.360 that,

00:20:50.660 if Musk

00:20:51.800 became the

00:20:52.920 agent of

00:20:54.360 why this

00:20:54.760 happens,

00:20:55.800 just because

00:20:56.320 he's influential,

00:20:57.320 he's in the

00:20:57.880 conversation,

00:20:58.820 if Musk is

00:20:59.640 the one who

00:20:59.980 made this

00:21:00.380 happen,

00:21:01.260 some kind

00:21:01.820 of an

00:21:02.260 understanding

00:21:02.920 of a

00:21:03.300 process to

00:21:04.820 show both

00:21:05.340 sides in a

00:21:06.160 public way,

00:21:07.800 it would be

00:21:08.320 his greatest

00:21:08.840 contribution to

00:21:09.880 civilization.

00:21:11.800 And you'd

00:21:12.700 never think of

00:21:13.320 it that way.

00:21:13.980 You'd always

00:21:14.320 think of going

00:21:15.420 to Mars or

00:21:16.260 building electric

00:21:16.940 cars.

00:21:17.600 But if he

00:21:18.060 did that one 0.89

00:21:18.680 thing,

00:21:19.920 just

00:21:20.200 taught us

00:21:21.020 a model

00:21:21.640 for getting

00:21:23.060 a little

00:21:23.320 closer to

00:21:23.960 understanding

00:21:24.440 both sides,

00:21:25.300 if that's

00:21:25.700 all he did

00:21:26.320 in his

00:21:26.860 whole life,

00:21:27.760 it would

00:21:28.300 be the

00:21:28.580 greatest

00:21:28.880 contribution

00:21:29.480 to

00:21:29.720 civilization.

00:21:31.260 It'd be

00:21:31.880 hard to

00:21:32.200 top.

00:21:32.480 But Mark

00:21:36.100 Cuban,

00:21:36.940 another

00:21:37.340 billionaire,

00:21:38.100 has gotten

00:21:38.420 into this

00:21:38.860 conversation,

00:21:40.180 and I'm

00:21:40.680 just going

00:21:40.960 to read

00:21:41.180 you Mark

00:21:42.200 Cuban's

00:21:42.760 statements,

00:21:43.600 his actual

00:21:44.040 words,

00:21:45.140 because it's

00:21:45.840 a little

00:21:46.020 hard to

00:21:46.320 paraphrase,

00:21:47.160 so I want

00:21:47.580 you to see

00:21:47.940 his actual

00:21:49.000 words.

00:21:50.100 He said,

00:21:50.520 trying to

00:21:51.280 bully Dr.

00:21:52.080 Hotez is 0.99

00:21:52.680 ridiculous.

00:21:54.260 Cuban

00:21:54.520 continued,

00:21:55.820 quote,

00:21:56.240 you have

00:21:56.640 producers that

00:21:57.420 will prepare

00:21:57.980 you and

00:21:58.600 and you

00:21:59.900 get to

00:22:00.240 control the

00:22:00.760 conversation,

00:22:01.700 meaning Rogan.

00:22:03.100 He would be

00:22:03.500 prepared by

00:22:04.100 producers,

00:22:04.820 as would

00:22:05.240 RFK Jr.

00:22:06.620 Kennedy also

00:22:07.320 has a staff

00:22:07.920 ready to

00:22:08.440 prepare him,

00:22:09.500 and those

00:22:10.200 topics are

00:22:10.800 what he

00:22:11.060 talks about

00:22:11.600 in every

00:22:11.940 speech.

00:22:12.980 You both

00:22:13.520 do this,

00:22:14.080 meaning Joe

00:22:14.700 Rogan and

00:22:15.800 RFK,

00:22:17.040 you both do

00:22:17.880 this on a

00:22:18.360 daily basis,

00:22:19.300 while Dr.

00:22:19.860 Hotez works 1.00

00:22:20.940 every day to

00:22:21.780 try to make

00:22:22.220 things,

00:22:23.460 find ways to

00:22:24.000 help people.

00:22:25.800 And then he

00:22:26.540 slammed Rogan

00:22:27.840 and Musk,

00:22:28.600 for worsening

00:22:30.020 the climate

00:22:31.040 on social

00:22:32.740 media.

00:22:33.740 And he

00:22:33.980 says,

00:22:34.740 Joe,

00:22:35.940 meaning Rogan,

00:22:37.780 Joe,

00:22:38.140 you and

00:22:38.460 Elon Musk's

00:22:39.280 Twitter are

00:22:39.780 the mainstream

00:22:40.780 online media,

00:22:42.080 and your

00:22:42.380 platforms have

00:22:43.240 become everything

00:22:43.920 supposedly wrong

00:22:44.980 with MSM.

00:22:46.460 You are

00:22:46.920 driven by

00:22:47.560 self-interest,

00:22:48.700 just like the

00:22:49.300 MSM always 0.76

00:22:50.140 has been

00:22:50.560 accused of,

00:22:51.680 Cuban wrote.

00:22:52.680 You both

00:22:53.280 have earned

00:22:53.640 that right.

00:22:54.400 You busted

00:22:54.760 your asses to 0.55

00:22:55.500 be great at

00:22:56.220 what you do,

00:22:56.760 and earned

00:22:57.320 all you have

00:22:57.760 accomplished.

00:22:58.120 But don't

00:22:58.920 lie to

00:22:59.240 yourself and

00:23:00.200 all of us

00:23:00.780 and tell us

00:23:01.780 you are

00:23:02.080 different.

00:23:03.080 You aren't.

00:23:04.200 Whoa.

00:23:05.700 Wow.

00:23:06.300 Somebody woke

00:23:07.040 up on the

00:23:07.460 wrong side

00:23:08.100 of the bed.

00:23:09.380 Don't tell us

00:23:10.220 you're different.

00:23:11.140 You're the

00:23:11.540 same.

00:23:12.820 Now, do I

00:23:13.580 agree with

00:23:14.200 Mark Cuban

00:23:14.900 or disagree?

00:23:15.940 What do you

00:23:16.220 think?

00:23:17.620 Do you think

00:23:18.040 I'm going to

00:23:18.440 agree with

00:23:19.000 Mark Cuban

00:23:19.640 or disagree?

00:23:21.200 Which way

00:23:21.900 am I going to

00:23:22.480 go?

00:23:22.880 Well, I'll

00:23:25.800 tell you in

00:23:26.260 general, I

00:23:27.420 hate to

00:23:27.840 disagree with

00:23:28.500 Mark Cuban.

00:23:29.600 It's just a

00:23:30.080 bad play.

00:23:32.260 Disagreeing with

00:23:32.800 people that are

00:23:33.320 smart isn't a

00:23:34.800 bad, it's not a

00:23:35.860 good strategy in

00:23:36.660 life, right?

00:23:37.580 So I like to

00:23:38.560 find ways to

00:23:39.200 agree with

00:23:39.640 smart people,

00:23:40.320 just generally

00:23:40.980 speaking.

00:23:42.460 I would say

00:23:43.140 the following.

00:23:43.540 I agree with

00:23:44.860 what Mark Cuban

00:23:45.840 says because I

00:23:47.700 agree with

00:23:48.160 follow the

00:23:48.740 money.

00:23:49.000 genetic

00:23:51.760 disposition to

00:23:54.860 vaccines.

00:23:56.260 It's an

00:23:56.860 interesting story

00:23:57.520 but I don't

00:23:57.960 want to get

00:23:58.220 off track right

00:23:59.140 now.

00:24:03.120 Except I

00:24:03.860 did, I got

00:24:04.360 off track.

00:24:05.200 What was I

00:24:05.580 saying?

00:24:08.680 See, that's

00:24:09.400 the problem

00:24:09.740 with the

00:24:10.200 super prompt

00:24:11.200 where you pay

00:24:12.520 money to make

00:24:13.600 a comment.

00:24:14.540 It's so

00:24:15.100 destructive to

00:24:15.940 the flow.

00:24:19.000 I think

00:24:20.080 YouTube should

00:24:20.980 remove that.

00:24:22.800 I mean, I

00:24:23.180 love it when

00:24:23.600 people give me

00:24:24.180 money.

00:24:25.360 That's cool.

00:24:26.220 But I'd rather

00:24:26.760 I didn't get the

00:24:27.460 money and I'd

00:24:28.520 rather that it

00:24:29.540 just wasn't

00:24:30.280 available as an

00:24:31.440 option.

00:24:32.160 That would be

00:24:32.720 better.

00:24:33.240 So I'd encourage

00:24:33.980 you not to give

00:24:34.720 me money for

00:24:35.620 that.

00:24:37.600 All right, so

00:24:39.200 I agree with

00:24:39.840 Cuban that both

00:24:42.360 Joe Rogan and

00:24:43.440 Elon Musk are

00:24:46.600 at the very

00:24:47.180 least part of a

00:24:48.460 process in

00:24:49.260 which following

00:24:49.980 the money is

00:24:51.400 going to be

00:24:51.820 the predictive

00:24:52.580 DNA.

00:24:55.440 All right, I

00:24:56.080 said that

00:24:56.460 terribly.

00:24:57.000 Let me try it

00:24:57.680 again.

00:24:59.160 It is true that

00:25:00.240 Joe Rogan is in

00:25:01.080 a job where he's

00:25:02.040 trying to make

00:25:02.500 money, although

00:25:03.800 on any given

00:25:05.340 topic he may not

00:25:06.380 be thinking of it

00:25:07.060 that way.

00:25:08.200 In other words,

00:25:08.700 on this topic he

00:25:09.440 probably is actually

00:25:10.260 just thinking what

00:25:11.100 would be good for

00:25:11.720 the country.

00:25:13.100 But have I told

00:25:14.060 you a million

00:25:14.500 times that people

00:25:16.280 do have lofty

00:25:17.260 goals?

00:25:18.360 That's a real

00:25:18.940 thing.

00:25:19.440 People often

00:25:20.020 have lofty

00:25:20.800 help the world

00:25:21.460 goals.

00:25:22.280 But what they

00:25:22.880 actually do is

00:25:24.940 coincidentally exactly

00:25:26.160 what makes them

00:25:26.840 money, which

00:25:29.100 doesn't make the

00:25:29.880 lofty goals not

00:25:30.780 real.

00:25:31.880 I think that

00:25:32.460 they're real in

00:25:33.140 the sense that

00:25:33.600 the person really

00:25:34.300 believes it's the

00:25:35.620 only thing they're

00:25:36.140 thinking about.

00:25:36.740 They're not

00:25:37.000 thinking about the

00:25:37.620 money.

00:25:38.540 But coincidentally,

00:25:40.160 people always seem

00:25:40.980 to do what's good

00:25:41.580 for their money,

00:25:42.180 don't they?

00:25:44.020 And Joe Rogan,

00:25:46.300 supporting the

00:25:47.620 Mark Cuban

00:25:48.060 argument, Joe

00:25:49.140 Rogan is doing

00:25:50.400 a job where the

00:25:51.260 more audience he

00:25:52.140 gets, the better

00:25:53.340 he does, the

00:25:53.980 better Spotify

00:25:54.540 does.

00:25:55.860 And so having a

00:25:57.140 debate would be

00:25:57.940 good for views.

00:26:01.200 So I like the

00:26:02.780 criticism so far

00:26:03.940 that Rogan is a

00:26:05.740 money-making

00:26:06.560 entity, and that

00:26:07.400 may not be fully

00:26:08.380 compatible with

00:26:10.340 trying to tell

00:26:10.940 people the truth.

00:26:12.940 You agree, right?

00:26:14.760 That there's a

00:26:15.480 little bit of

00:26:15.920 conflict, doesn't

00:26:16.740 have to be, not

00:26:18.200 necessarily, like

00:26:19.760 it's not guaranteed,

00:26:21.040 but you could have

00:26:21.740 a little conflict

00:26:22.520 between what makes

00:26:23.460 you money and

00:26:24.600 what's exactly

00:26:25.220 true.

00:26:26.720 And Musk, of

00:26:27.560 course, owns

00:26:28.020 Twitter.

00:26:29.320 So Musk also

00:26:30.820 likes big topics

00:26:32.520 with big, let's

00:26:35.260 say, event-related

00:26:37.200 stuff, because it's

00:26:38.440 a marketing

00:26:39.120 strategy.

00:26:40.000 Now, do you

00:26:40.800 think that Musk is

00:26:41.660 thinking of it

00:26:42.400 primarily as a

00:26:44.040 marketing strategy

00:26:44.980 for Twitter?

00:26:46.300 I would say

00:26:46.840 probably not.

00:26:48.220 Probably not.

00:26:49.700 All indications

00:26:50.660 are he'd actually

00:26:51.440 like to see the

00:26:53.140 debate.

00:26:53.900 He's probably

00:26:54.420 looking at it just

00:26:55.080 like you and I

00:26:55.720 are, which is,

00:26:56.820 wouldn't you like

00:26:57.300 to see that?

00:26:58.760 Now, I saw a

00:26:59.900 criticism from

00:27:00.660 somebody else

00:27:01.340 online that it's

00:27:02.980 all about creating

00:27:03.780 a spectacle, and

00:27:04.980 the spectacle

00:27:05.820 doesn't help us.

00:27:07.200 Everybody just

00:27:07.760 wants the

00:27:08.180 spectacle, to

00:27:09.780 which I say, we

00:27:10.580 love the

00:27:11.000 spectacle.

00:27:12.260 But if the

00:27:12.980 spectacle is what

00:27:13.720 draws you to the

00:27:14.520 information, very

00:27:16.240 good.

00:27:17.120 I mean, it's just

00:27:17.580 what Trump does,

00:27:18.280 right?

00:27:18.840 Creates the

00:27:19.400 spectacle, and

00:27:20.540 he draws you to

00:27:21.380 the information he'd

00:27:22.300 like you to act

00:27:23.820 on.

00:27:24.600 So I don't mind the

00:27:25.600 spectacle part if you

00:27:26.920 do it right.

00:27:27.900 If the only thing

00:27:28.820 you're doing is a

00:27:29.560 spectacle, it's a

00:27:30.300 waste of time.

00:27:31.560 But if you're a

00:27:32.220 spectacle to get

00:27:33.060 people and you do

00:27:34.200 it right, well, two

00:27:35.400 good things in a row.

00:27:36.200 So I would agree

00:27:39.960 that there's a

00:27:40.880 money motive, and

00:27:43.940 that imagining that

00:27:45.440 Joe Rogan or Elon

00:27:46.980 Musk are somehow 1.00

00:27:47.940 outside the influence

00:27:49.920 of, you know, the

00:27:51.400 money motive that

00:27:52.600 drives everything we

00:27:53.640 do, it's a good, I

00:27:56.720 would say it's sort

00:27:57.240 of a dickish thing

00:27:58.020 to say, but

00:27:58.840 philosophically, I'd

00:28:02.080 agree.

00:28:02.340 But what about

00:28:04.380 what about the

00:28:06.760 bullying part?

00:28:08.920 Is it bullying to

00:28:10.480 offer somebody a

00:28:11.840 huge amount of

00:28:12.460 money to the

00:28:13.100 charity of their

00:28:13.760 choice to come on

00:28:15.740 television to talk

00:28:16.680 about their own

00:28:17.500 area of expertise

00:28:18.520 on the most

00:28:20.280 important question

00:28:21.320 in America,

00:28:22.860 probably, you

00:28:23.940 know, trusting our

00:28:24.960 experts?

00:28:26.720 Does that seem like

00:28:27.840 bullying?

00:28:28.940 Because it's not

00:28:29.980 as if he's never

00:28:31.220 been on TV.

00:28:33.080 This is somebody

00:28:33.800 who goes on TV,

00:28:35.420 looks like every

00:28:36.180 time he's asked

00:28:37.220 by the major

00:28:38.060 networks.

00:28:39.620 So I'm not

00:28:42.460 buying that he's

00:28:44.380 incapable.

00:28:46.380 There's nothing to

00:28:47.700 suggest that he

00:28:48.580 wouldn't do a good

00:28:49.360 job representing

00:28:50.280 his side.

00:28:52.040 And I think it's

00:28:52.880 sort of insulting.

00:28:54.100 It's a little bit

00:28:54.820 insulting to imagine

00:28:55.860 that he couldn't.

00:28:56.580 I mean, he has

00:28:58.620 a PhD and an

00:28:59.720 MD, and he's

00:29:01.200 an expert in this

00:29:02.040 field.

00:29:03.240 So, and he's

00:29:04.120 been on TV lots

00:29:05.000 of times doing a

00:29:05.980 good job.

00:29:07.640 I mean, really?

00:29:08.400 Is it bullying to

00:29:09.260 say that that guy,

00:29:10.620 that that guy,

00:29:12.540 should talk to

00:29:13.180 somebody who's got

00:29:13.820 some questions?

00:29:15.120 That doesn't feel

00:29:15.860 like bullying at

00:29:16.460 all.

00:29:17.380 Like, I don't get

00:29:18.080 it.

00:29:19.640 Does anybody else

00:29:20.540 feel like bullying?

00:29:21.960 To me, that's

00:29:22.860 exactly the right

00:29:23.680 question.

00:29:24.300 I don't see it at

00:29:25.280 all.

00:29:26.600 All right.

00:29:27.100 Now, of course,

00:29:27.880 the Internet is

00:29:29.120 bullying him.

00:29:30.480 So, just to be

00:29:31.280 clear, I don't

00:29:32.480 think Musk, and

00:29:33.720 Musk is just

00:29:34.920 having a good time

00:29:35.680 with it, saying,

00:29:36.480 he said on

00:29:37.200 Twitter, I guess

00:29:37.820 he doesn't like

00:29:38.380 charity.

00:29:39.640 Is that bullying?

00:29:41.320 I mean, he's

00:29:41.700 certainly persuading

00:29:42.560 and cajoling, but

00:29:45.000 I don't see it as

00:29:46.220 bullying at all.

00:29:47.520 All right, so I

00:29:47.980 disagree on that

00:29:48.800 characterization.

00:29:50.540 But, you know,

00:29:51.320 again, Cuban is 0.65

00:29:52.700 talking with some

00:29:53.880 hyperbole.

00:29:55.280 So, calling it

00:29:56.460 bullying is not

00:29:57.340 really something you

00:29:58.100 fact-check.

00:29:59.500 He's using some

00:30:00.280 hyperbole.

00:30:00.960 So, we'll let him

00:30:01.460 get away with the

00:30:01.920 hyperbole.

00:30:02.440 I guess I will

00:30:04.080 withdraw my

00:30:04.760 objection to that,

00:30:05.960 because you don't

00:30:06.420 want to fact-check

00:30:07.360 hyperbole.

00:30:09.000 You know that,

00:30:09.860 right?

00:30:10.280 Don't fact-check the

00:30:11.480 hyperbole.

00:30:12.380 There's no point in

00:30:13.120 that.

00:30:16.300 But then, Mark

00:30:17.460 Cuban said that

00:30:18.340 Joe Rogan and

00:30:19.680 Kennedy both have

00:30:20.840 staffs to prepare

00:30:23.400 them.

00:30:24.580 Does that feel like

00:30:25.520 a good point?

00:30:27.420 That Kennedy and

00:30:28.860 Joe Rogan both have

00:30:29.760 producers and staff

00:30:31.140 to prepare them?

00:30:32.420 That doesn't feel

00:30:33.280 like a good point.

00:30:34.800 Because, first of

00:30:35.600 all, do you think

00:30:36.340 Joe Rogan would have

00:30:37.560 his producers prepare

00:30:38.860 him for that?

00:30:40.900 I think they would

00:30:41.640 just make sure he

00:30:42.280 knew when it was,

00:30:43.360 so he'd show up on

00:30:44.240 time, and the

00:30:45.340 cameras are rolling.

00:30:46.040 I do not get the

00:30:49.500 sense that Joe

00:30:50.540 Rogan's producers

00:30:51.500 are doing a lot of

00:30:52.440 producing in terms of

00:30:54.180 managing Joe Rogan.

00:30:56.940 Do you think that's

00:30:58.000 happening?

00:31:00.280 I mean, he does have

00:31:01.360 some one or more

00:31:03.080 producers.

00:31:03.740 I don't know.

00:31:04.400 I don't know what the

00:31:05.260 number is.

00:31:06.080 But I think they're

00:31:07.400 just there to make

00:31:08.100 sure that the show

00:31:08.760 happens.

00:31:09.460 I don't think they're

00:31:10.080 there telling what

00:31:10.840 the think or say.

00:31:12.680 And what about RFK

00:31:15.160 Jr.?

00:31:16.060 Do you think RFK

00:31:17.140 Jr. has anyone on

00:31:18.360 his staff who knows

00:31:20.020 more than he does

00:31:20.840 about the topic?

00:31:23.420 I kind of doubt it.

00:31:25.600 I doubt it.

00:31:26.920 The whole point is

00:31:28.060 that he is the topic.

00:31:29.720 He's like a walking

00:31:30.580 encyclopedia of this

00:31:31.740 topic.

00:31:32.620 It's been his life's

00:31:33.720 work.

00:31:34.980 So I don't think that

00:31:36.440 the staff argument

00:31:37.400 holds.

00:31:39.000 And it's so weak that

00:31:41.460 it makes me wonder

00:31:42.180 what's behind it.

00:31:44.140 I'll tell you what it

00:31:45.060 makes it look like.

00:31:46.920 It makes it look like

00:31:48.360 Mark Cuban doesn't

00:31:49.700 want the truth to

00:31:52.740 come out.

00:31:55.240 Now, obviously, he's

00:31:56.700 not thinking that in a

00:31:58.020 conscious way.

00:31:59.400 All right?

00:31:59.940 Because I would trust

00:32:00.940 Mark Cuban enough that

00:32:02.900 consciously he's not

00:32:04.180 thinking that.

00:32:04.840 I guarantee you he's

00:32:06.560 not consciously afraid

00:32:07.960 that it will go not

00:32:09.560 his way.

00:32:10.000 But the way he's

00:32:12.840 acting suggests there

00:32:14.940 might be a subconscious

00:32:16.100 concern that he might

00:32:18.000 be wrong.

00:32:19.180 And it would be very,

00:32:20.760 very bad for anybody

00:32:22.360 to be on the wrong

00:32:23.380 end of this conversation.

00:32:24.960 Believe me, when the

00:32:26.080 rumors started that I

00:32:27.760 was on the wrong end

00:32:28.540 of everything, when

00:32:29.680 4chan did their little

00:32:30.800 prank on me, it really

00:32:33.160 makes life difficult

00:32:34.220 when everybody thinks

00:32:36.060 you're a part of

00:32:36.740 wrecking the world.

00:32:37.760 So, I can see why

00:32:41.540 there's some prominent

00:32:43.980 people who are

00:32:44.880 pro-vaccination.

00:32:47.180 Again, that's not

00:32:48.240 exactly a good

00:32:48.940 characterization, but

00:32:50.000 you know what I mean.

00:32:54.140 I think it's a

00:32:55.120 dangerous conversation.

00:32:56.900 I think there are a

00:32:57.540 lot of people who are

00:32:58.500 worried that the

00:32:59.460 skeptics have a better

00:33:00.460 argument than has

00:33:03.380 been presented to the

00:33:04.380 public so far, the

00:33:05.360 wider public.

00:33:06.640 Those on the right,

00:33:07.760 have seen so much

00:33:08.500 skeptical content that

00:33:10.700 you wouldn't be

00:33:11.200 surprised if RFK Jr.

00:33:14.360 won the debate, if he

00:33:15.880 could say win.

00:33:17.020 You wouldn't be

00:33:17.680 surprised.

00:33:19.000 But there are people

00:33:19.680 on the left who would

00:33:20.780 be hearing things for

00:33:21.700 the very first time, and

00:33:23.580 they would be saying,

00:33:24.600 wait, what?

00:33:28.540 So, RFK Jr. could move

00:33:30.780 the needle.

00:33:31.900 He's persuasive enough,

00:33:33.160 and he would come well-armed

00:33:34.100 enough that there would be

00:33:35.760 people hearing stuff that

00:33:36.780 they'd never heard before,

00:33:38.300 and it would be kind of a

00:33:39.740 shock to their systems.

00:33:43.100 All right.

00:33:44.260 So, are Rogan and Musk

00:33:45.660 contributing to the

00:33:46.600 worsening climate?

00:33:49.800 I don't see that.

00:33:52.520 I do not see Rogan and

00:33:54.280 Musk contributing to a 0.93

00:33:56.040 worsening climate.

00:33:57.520 I see exactly the

00:33:58.560 opposite.

00:33:59.380 I mean, Musk is saying,

00:34:00.360 if you're running for

00:34:02.040 president, it doesn't

00:34:04.120 matter what side you're

00:34:04.940 on, I want you on

00:34:05.840 spaces.

00:34:08.120 How's that wrong?

00:34:10.580 Inviting everybody and

00:34:11.640 giving them a big

00:34:12.340 platform?

00:34:13.600 Trying to get rid of the

00:34:14.960 shadow banning?

00:34:17.060 I mean, to me it looks

00:34:18.760 like everything he does is

00:34:19.960 in a positive direction.

00:34:21.400 In a dad way.

00:34:23.180 Positive direction.

00:34:23.960 All right.

00:34:29.020 One of the claims about,

00:34:30.440 there's a little side

00:34:31.600 street I'm going to take.

00:34:32.740 One of the claims about

00:34:33.680 vaccinations by some

00:34:35.420 critics is that they

00:34:36.580 might be behind the

00:34:38.560 increase in autism.

00:34:42.280 You've heard that

00:34:43.040 argument, right?

00:34:43.700 There's some who believe

00:34:44.660 that some childhood shots

00:34:46.640 are behind autism.

00:34:47.960 Now, you've heard the

00:34:52.340 other explanation for

00:34:53.620 the rise in autism,

00:34:54.680 right?

00:34:57.220 I wouldn't rule that

00:34:58.500 down, by the way.

00:34:59.560 But there's another

00:35:00.360 explanation.

00:35:01.380 Have you not heard it?

00:35:03.300 It's not environment.

00:35:04.860 No, it's not environment

00:35:06.060 or pollution.

00:35:09.280 Have you heard?

00:35:09.880 It's not food.

00:35:12.560 Old dads is one. 0.90

00:35:13.840 Right.

00:35:14.120 The age of the parents 0.61

00:35:15.780 is one.

00:35:17.000 There's another one

00:35:17.720 that's related to that.

00:35:19.360 Not medications.

00:35:21.100 Not chemicals.

00:35:22.120 Not telomeres.

00:35:22.920 Not old sperm.

00:35:23.860 Well, the old sperm

00:35:24.560 we just talked about.

00:35:28.200 Wow.

00:35:29.400 I feel like,

00:35:31.360 no, there's another

00:35:32.340 reason.

00:35:35.040 How do you not all

00:35:36.060 know this?

00:35:37.400 So, I guess,

00:35:38.360 so, I'm going to give

00:35:39.500 you something to fact

00:35:40.360 check, okay?

00:35:42.600 Elon Musk says he has

00:35:44.180 two kids on the

00:35:44.960 spectrum.

00:35:45.320 And of seven?

00:35:47.460 Seven children?

00:35:48.480 Something like that.

00:35:49.220 Two out of seven.

00:35:51.060 Elon Musk says it's

00:35:52.740 inheritable.

00:35:53.940 So that he's the reason

00:35:55.180 two of his kids have it.

00:35:57.340 Do you think he's right

00:35:58.400 that it's inheritable?

00:36:01.060 Do you believe it is

00:36:02.240 inheritable?

00:36:03.180 Two of his kids?

00:36:05.240 I would say yes.

00:36:07.580 Yeah.

00:36:07.940 I feel we don't,

00:36:09.520 you know, I'm not a

00:36:10.280 scientist, but I feel

00:36:11.780 that's probably true.

00:36:13.080 All right.

00:36:14.000 Now, what would

00:36:14.860 happen if two Elon 0.93

00:36:16.360 Musks got married?

00:36:18.500 So there's a female 0.98

00:36:19.400 Elon Musk, let's say

00:36:20.920 unrelated, but basically

00:36:22.200 safe.

00:36:25.480 And he marries another

00:36:26.880 Elon Musk.

00:36:28.380 Do the odds of having

00:36:29.640 an autistic kid go up 0.99

00:36:31.560 if there are two

00:36:33.040 contributors instead of

00:36:34.080 one?

00:36:36.340 Logically, yes.

00:36:37.920 Right?

00:36:38.100 Again, I don't have a

00:36:40.420 study that proves it,

00:36:41.520 but logically, you'd

00:36:43.340 expect it.

00:36:44.360 Now, number two.

00:36:45.880 In our modern world,

00:36:47.680 can the Elon Musk male

00:36:50.000 and female find each 1.00

00:36:51.540 other more easily?

00:36:53.420 Do we have a

00:36:54.280 civilization in which

00:36:56.000 if you're a smart

00:36:57.180 Elon Musk type, you

00:36:58.980 could easily find your

00:37:00.420 matching female Elon

00:37:02.640 Musk? 0.97

00:37:03.680 Yes.

00:37:04.240 It's called going to

00:37:05.260 work.

00:37:05.540 Because if you go to

00:37:07.560 work at Microsoft, you

00:37:09.760 walk down the hallway

00:37:10.600 and there's all these

00:37:11.520 other Elon Musks.

00:37:14.500 You find a female one, 1.00

00:37:15.980 you marry him, and now

00:37:17.200 you've got two Elon

00:37:18.000 Musks. 0.83

00:37:19.100 Do they have more

00:37:20.020 autistic kids and kids

00:37:21.920 on the spectrum?

00:37:22.920 I believe the answer is

00:37:24.100 yes.

00:37:25.240 Now, this is what I need

00:37:26.280 to fact check on.

00:37:27.520 I thought that was

00:37:28.560 well established.

00:37:30.420 Is it not?

00:37:31.240 So am I wrong that

00:37:33.320 that's not so well

00:37:35.260 established?

00:37:35.920 It's just true?

00:37:39.900 But I was surprised

00:37:41.320 that most of you were

00:37:42.180 not aware of that,

00:37:43.360 at least claim.

00:37:44.380 Again, I'm not going

00:37:45.240 to say it's true.

00:37:46.320 But I'll say that the

00:37:47.340 claim has been out

00:37:48.180 there for 20 years.

00:37:51.200 20 years, I think.

00:37:52.980 And I don't see

00:37:53.860 anything wrong with it.

00:37:55.600 To me, that seems so

00:37:56.860 obvious, so obviously

00:37:58.900 true, that it would

00:38:00.540 take quite a bit of

00:38:01.720 science to talk me

00:38:02.680 out of it.

00:38:03.260 I could be talked

00:38:04.000 out of it if they

00:38:05.120 found some way to

00:38:05.980 test it and it was

00:38:07.380 reliable.

00:38:08.840 But it seems to me

00:38:09.840 that you don't need

00:38:10.980 any vaccinations to

00:38:12.140 explain it.

00:38:13.540 The rise of technology

00:38:15.600 companies brought

00:38:17.280 male and female

00:38:18.260 Elon Musks together.

00:38:19.840 They married and had

00:38:20.940 kids.

00:38:21.760 And that's the end

00:38:22.400 of the story.

00:38:23.860 And then there's also

00:38:24.900 the other part that

00:38:26.360 people are having

00:38:26.940 children older.

00:38:28.900 So if they're a 0.98

00:38:30.060 little bit older,

00:38:31.120 they're more likely,

00:38:33.620 I guess.

00:38:35.620 I saw a paid

00:38:37.000 comment go by that

00:38:39.700 Mark Cuban is also

00:38:43.120 an investor in or

00:38:45.080 owner of, I don't

00:38:46.100 know which it is,

00:38:47.300 of this male, what

00:38:50.640 would you call it,

00:38:51.360 drugs by male company?

00:38:52.900 I forget what it's

00:38:53.440 called.

00:38:53.940 So he's got cheap

00:38:54.780 drugs, generics, I

00:38:57.020 guess, that you can

00:38:58.340 get through him

00:38:59.020 that's competing

00:38:59.940 with the rest of

00:39:00.560 the industry.

00:39:01.700 So you should

00:39:03.420 understand that he's

00:39:04.400 in the business of

00:39:05.440 selling pharmaceutical

00:39:07.720 products.

00:39:12.560 And that might have

00:39:13.340 an impact on his

00:39:15.060 public opinion on

00:39:16.860 this stuff.

00:39:18.640 It's not directly

00:39:19.580 related, but you

00:39:21.620 should assume that

00:39:22.340 he's in that world,

00:39:24.100 that's part of the

00:39:24.620 story.

00:39:24.880 All right, I

00:39:28.020 always like it when

00:39:28.960 I see my

00:39:31.080 billionaire is

00:39:32.520 arguing.

00:39:34.040 It's always

00:39:34.520 productive to me

00:39:35.520 to see that.

00:39:38.600 All right, Jordan

00:39:39.000 Peterson is warning

00:39:40.380 Lex Friedman that

00:39:42.660 he could get kicked

00:39:44.980 off of YouTube for

00:39:46.820 doing certain kinds

00:39:47.620 of things, such as

00:39:48.700 talking to skeptics.

00:39:51.640 And these are the

00:39:53.700 things that Jordan

00:39:54.840 Peterson and I

00:39:56.560 guess the Daily

00:39:57.660 Wire Plus have

00:39:58.920 gotten in trouble

00:39:59.540 for recently.

00:40:01.400 They've removed

00:40:02.480 Jordan Peterson's

00:40:03.960 interview with

00:40:04.540 RFK Jr.

00:40:06.800 They took it off

00:40:08.660 of YouTube.

00:40:11.460 As a citizen of the

00:40:13.140 United States, it

00:40:15.200 has been judged

00:40:16.020 that you cannot see

00:40:17.460 Jordan Peterson

00:40:18.960 talking to a

00:40:20.460 major presidential

00:40:21.980 candidate.

00:40:25.320 I think my mind

00:40:27.280 is going to

00:40:27.700 explode.

00:40:29.320 How is that

00:40:30.520 possible?

00:40:32.820 What could RFK

00:40:34.220 Jr.

00:40:34.640 have said that

00:40:37.340 isn't the

00:40:38.300 public's not

00:40:39.940 just right to

00:40:41.040 know, but we

00:40:43.120 should have a

00:40:43.640 pretty big interest

00:40:44.420 in knowing?

00:40:45.140 What did he say

00:40:45.960 that's so horrible

00:40:46.880 that he had to

00:40:48.020 remove it?

00:40:48.960 Was it

00:40:50.360 vaccination

00:40:51.060 skepticism?

00:40:53.100 That's it.

00:40:54.140 And who decided

00:40:55.220 he was wrong?

00:40:57.060 Like, who at

00:40:57.580 YouTube was the

00:40:59.500 person who could

00:41:00.200 look at RFK's

00:41:01.140 argument and

00:41:02.040 Jr.'s argument

00:41:03.160 and know it's

00:41:03.700 wrong?

00:41:04.580 Which major

00:41:05.860 scientist did

00:41:06.680 that?

00:41:08.220 I mean,

00:41:08.540 everything about

00:41:09.200 this seems just

00:41:09.940 so, so wrong.

00:41:13.680 Now, I'm not

00:41:14.580 saying that

00:41:15.000 everything RFK

00:41:15.900 Jr.

00:41:16.140 said is

00:41:16.660 accurate.

00:41:17.060 I'm not

00:41:18.620 qualified to

00:41:19.400 judge.

00:41:20.420 But I'm

00:41:21.480 pretty sure

00:41:21.960 YouTube doesn't

00:41:22.800 know, and I'm

00:41:24.440 pretty sure he's a

00:41:25.260 major candidate for

00:41:26.220 president who has

00:41:27.480 an actual path to

00:41:28.500 the office, unlike

00:41:30.240 some who don't have

00:41:31.440 a path.

00:41:34.220 Yeah.

00:41:35.660 So, anyway.

00:41:37.380 also got kicked

00:41:39.180 off when Jordan

00:41:42.340 Peterson interviewed

00:41:43.740 Matt Walsh and

00:41:46.000 Helen Joyce.

00:41:47.120 I don't know who

00:41:48.060 Helen Joyce was.

00:41:49.340 Was she in the

00:41:49.980 trans...

00:41:51.400 Which field is she

00:41:52.380 in?

00:41:52.860 Helen Joyce?

00:41:54.220 I didn't see that

00:41:55.000 interview.

00:41:57.280 Well, whatever it

00:41:57.860 was, it was too

00:41:59.140 controversial for

00:42:00.260 YouTube.

00:42:02.260 And the weird

00:42:03.620 thing about this

00:42:04.380 is, it's like

00:42:06.520 they don't have

00:42:07.340 any idea who

00:42:08.200 Jordan Peterson

00:42:08.920 is, somehow.

00:42:11.760 Because, correct

00:42:12.660 me if I'm wrong,

00:42:14.300 but if Jordan

00:42:15.080 Peterson saw some

00:42:16.200 unscientific bullshit,

00:42:18.420 he'd be the one

00:42:19.020 to call it out.

00:42:20.660 Am I wrong?

00:42:22.580 Like, who would

00:42:24.080 be more qualified

00:42:25.040 to stop somebody

00:42:26.880 from saying some

00:42:27.620 just total bullshit

00:42:28.520 than him?

00:42:30.040 Like, I can't

00:42:32.760 imagine who I

00:42:33.960 would be happier

00:42:34.680 with, you know,

00:42:35.900 monitoring what

00:42:37.040 information is

00:42:37.820 considered credible

00:42:38.700 for me.

00:42:40.100 I mean, I would

00:42:40.940 trust him completely.

00:42:42.020 Which doesn't

00:42:42.720 mean he's right.

00:42:44.120 Doesn't mean he's

00:42:44.900 right.

00:42:45.720 But he's qualified

00:42:46.800 to understand what

00:42:48.480 looks like bullshit

00:42:49.260 in the scientific

00:42:50.600 realm.

00:42:51.600 And if he calls it

00:42:52.480 out, I'd say,

00:42:53.060 oh, okay.

00:42:53.980 There's somebody

00:42:54.480 who knows some

00:42:55.100 bullshit when he

00:42:55.720 sees it, and he

00:42:56.180 just called it out.

00:42:57.440 But if he doesn't

00:42:58.220 call it out,

00:42:58.980 I would like

00:43:00.580 to know that

00:43:01.080 too.

00:43:02.100 If somebody as

00:43:03.100 smart as Jordan

00:43:03.820 Peterson listens

00:43:04.600 to an argument

00:43:05.320 that's counter to

00:43:06.880 the mainstream

00:43:07.400 argument, and he

00:43:08.220 says, you know,

00:43:09.900 that's good enough

00:43:10.860 to be on my

00:43:11.480 podcast.

00:43:12.960 I don't know if

00:43:13.480 it's right, but

00:43:14.800 it's a good enough

00:43:15.340 point to be on my

00:43:16.080 podcast.

00:43:17.200 I'd like to know

00:43:18.060 that.

00:43:19.180 So, YouTube,

00:43:21.020 I get that you're

00:43:22.640 trying to, you

00:43:24.260 know, keep the

00:43:24.740 world safe.

00:43:26.180 I get that.

00:43:27.080 And if they

00:43:29.040 had demonetized

00:43:29.980 these things, I

00:43:30.940 understand that as

00:43:31.720 well, because the

00:43:32.820 advertisers do have a

00:43:34.580 preference of not

00:43:35.340 being associated with

00:43:36.340 certain kinds of

00:43:37.000 content.

00:43:38.200 That's just business.

00:43:39.640 So if they

00:43:40.100 demonetized it, that's

00:43:41.320 a whole different

00:43:41.740 argument.

00:43:43.480 But removing it?

00:43:45.260 Removing it.

00:43:47.780 That seems so far

00:43:48.980 over the line of

00:43:50.880 what society would

00:43:52.860 expect of you,

00:43:54.640 YouTube.

00:43:54.940 YouTube.

00:43:55.640 Now, maybe there's

00:43:56.280 a, you know, I'm

00:43:57.040 only hearing one

00:43:57.580 side of the

00:43:57.960 argument.

00:43:58.640 Maybe there's

00:43:59.120 something I don't

00:43:59.640 know about in

00:44:00.240 this, but I doubt

00:44:01.040 it.

00:44:03.500 All right.

00:44:05.320 CNN got fact

00:44:06.840 checked on Twitter,

00:44:08.360 which I love, the

00:44:09.120 community notes

00:44:09.900 thing.

00:44:12.440 CNN tweeted,

00:44:13.860 black fathers are

00:44:14.780 often portrayed as

00:44:15.760 absent or distant,

00:44:17.140 or distant, but that

00:44:18.720 isn't what most

00:44:19.560 people experience,

00:44:20.660 according to both

00:44:21.560 data and black

00:44:22.460 dads themselves.

00:44:23.240 articles, blah,

00:44:24.900 blah, blah, bias

00:44:25.600 portrayals.

00:44:27.560 And then community

00:44:28.840 notes, fact

00:44:29.840 checked them with

00:44:31.200 the following facts.

00:44:32.940 There's 64% of

00:44:34.220 black kids have 0.95

00:44:35.240 single parents,

00:44:36.780 single parent

00:44:37.240 homes, 42% of

00:44:39.420 Hispanic, 24% of

00:44:41.880 white, and 16% of

00:44:44.480 Asian have a single 1.00

00:44:46.060 parent home.

00:44:47.500 Does the order of

00:44:48.740 those things remind

00:44:49.800 you of the order of

00:44:50.960 any other thing?

00:44:53.440 What else is it that

00:44:54.800 has this exact order?

00:44:57.460 Black kids, Hispanic 0.99

00:44:59.380 kids, white kids,

00:45:02.020 Asian.

00:45:02.960 What has exactly that

00:45:04.280 order?

00:45:06.120 Crime and academics.

00:45:08.360 Crime and academics

00:45:09.460 and success, right?

00:45:11.420 They're all perfectly

00:45:12.800 correlated.

00:45:13.420 Now, since this is a

00:45:16.860 conservative audience,

00:45:19.100 can we conclude that

00:45:20.260 having the single

00:45:22.080 parent, some of this

00:45:22.940 might be a single

00:45:23.600 male parent, but can 0.92

00:45:25.020 we conclude that the

00:45:25.920 single parent is

00:45:26.940 causing all these

00:45:27.580 problems?

00:45:28.900 That a single parent

00:45:29.840 environment is

00:45:31.580 causing crime, low

00:45:34.360 academics, maybe

00:45:36.020 affecting IQ, all that

00:45:38.860 stuff?

00:45:39.060 Somebody is

00:45:41.140 clarifying that the

00:45:42.160 single mothers have 0.93

00:45:43.700 been identified as

00:45:45.120 more correlated.

00:45:47.700 I think that's true,

00:45:48.480 by the way.

00:45:48.940 I did see a study that

00:45:50.020 said the single

00:45:50.620 fathers were doing a

00:45:52.060 better job.

00:45:52.800 I don't know, but I

00:45:53.940 saw a study.

00:45:56.520 So most of you would

00:45:59.480 say this is pretty

00:46:00.340 strong evidence, given

00:46:02.700 that the rate of

00:46:04.060 single parenthood in

00:46:05.440 these groups seems to

00:46:07.500 almost identically

00:46:08.740 match their

00:46:10.020 performance and

00:46:10.860 output in a variety

00:46:12.080 of ways.

00:46:13.460 So it's the cause.

00:46:16.560 Is that your, does

00:46:18.040 your logic says that

00:46:19.160 this is the cause?

00:46:21.120 No, they're

00:46:21.800 definitely correlated.

00:46:24.300 They're correlated.

00:46:25.480 But is it a

00:46:26.000 causation?

00:46:28.580 I don't see it.

00:46:31.980 I don't see it.

00:46:33.800 I think there's a

00:46:34.920 cause that causes the

00:46:36.740 single parenthood that

00:46:38.640 causes everything else.

00:46:40.720 Isn't it more likely

00:46:41.720 that whatever is

00:46:42.680 causing this is

00:46:43.480 causing everything?

00:46:44.800 That they all have

00:46:45.820 the same cause.

00:46:46.660 It's not that the

00:46:47.240 one thing caused the

00:46:48.160 others.

00:46:51.020 Right.

00:46:52.540 So I've never quite

00:46:54.900 agreed with the

00:46:55.920 single parent simplicity

00:46:58.580 right-leaning opinion.

00:47:01.480 So the right just says,

00:47:02.820 look, the correlation is

00:47:03.820 really clear.

00:47:05.240 Single parenthood, you're 0.99

00:47:06.680 going to do poorly.

00:47:07.820 Period.

00:47:08.640 So stop having those

00:47:09.740 single parent houses.

00:47:11.100 If you just stop having

00:47:12.720 the fatherlessness, you'll

00:47:14.600 do fine because the

00:47:15.680 facts just show that.

00:47:17.360 High correlation.

00:47:18.760 I don't buy it.

00:47:20.700 I don't buy it.

00:47:21.700 I think that whatever

00:47:22.520 causes the single

00:47:25.500 parent situation is

00:47:27.940 probably causing all the

00:47:28.980 other problems.

00:47:31.080 It's just one thing,

00:47:32.200 whatever it is, it's just

00:47:33.720 causing everything.

00:47:34.700 Now, it may not be one

00:47:35.720 thing.

00:47:36.140 It might be like a

00:47:37.140 basket of things, you

00:47:38.840 know, not just one

00:47:39.600 item.

00:47:40.680 But whatever it is, it's

00:47:41.840 probably causing

00:47:42.380 everything.

00:47:45.860 All right.

00:47:47.780 Let me ask you

00:47:48.600 something.

00:47:48.960 Is this the first time

00:47:50.140 anybody ever said in

00:47:51.300 front of you that the

00:47:53.100 single parent thing might 1.00

00:47:54.380 be just another thing

00:47:55.380 that's caused by some

00:47:56.940 other thing?

00:47:57.380 Is it the first time

00:47:59.120 you've heard that?

00:48:00.340 Because that would be

00:48:01.180 very sad.

00:48:03.540 Now, and let me be

00:48:05.440 clear.

00:48:06.400 I'm not ruling out that

00:48:09.020 the single parent thing

00:48:10.020 is actually the cause of

00:48:11.320 the other things.

00:48:12.000 I'm not ruling it out.

00:48:13.380 I'm saying it's just not

00:48:14.560 demonstrated.

00:48:16.160 It's just correlation.

00:48:17.880 It's just not

00:48:18.400 causation.

00:48:19.260 It might be.

00:48:20.560 Might be.

00:48:21.020 Let me give you a

00:48:24.720 different way to look

00:48:28.860 at it.

00:48:31.140 Now, this is not, I'm

00:48:32.740 not saying this is true.

00:48:34.500 This is not a claim of

00:48:35.620 truth.

00:48:36.520 This is just so you

00:48:37.460 could think of it like a

00:48:38.340 mental experiment.

00:48:40.120 Suppose the way mothers 1.00

00:48:41.700 act is completely

00:48:43.560 different among the

00:48:44.880 three entities.

00:48:47.300 If you married an Asian 1.00

00:48:48.860 woman, do you think she 1.00

00:48:50.800 would treat her man 0.54

00:48:52.220 better than if you

00:48:54.100 married a black or

00:48:55.260 Hispanic woman? 1.00

00:48:57.800 Now, again, again, in

00:49:01.440 each of these cases, I'm

00:49:02.640 not making a claim

00:49:03.420 there's something

00:49:03.880 different about the

00:49:04.700 people.

00:49:05.500 So I'm not making that

00:49:06.380 claim.

00:49:07.160 I'm just walking you

00:49:08.480 through a mental

00:49:08.980 experiment where you

00:49:10.520 could imagine that

00:49:12.320 there's something causing

00:49:14.180 all of it to happen.

00:49:16.680 So, anecdotally, most

00:49:20.720 men would say the Asian 0.99

00:49:22.060 woman treats the man 1.00

00:49:23.140 better.

00:49:24.260 So is a man more likely 0.98

00:49:25.900 to stay married if he's

00:49:27.440 treated well?

00:49:30.280 What do you think?

00:49:33.100 Yes.

00:49:34.400 So the problem is not the

00:49:36.880 single stuff.

00:49:38.140 Maybe the problem is

00:49:39.360 whatever caused you to be

00:49:40.580 single in the first place.

00:49:42.940 Maybe, maybe the mom is

00:49:45.580 defective.

00:49:48.220 Maybe.

00:49:51.120 So, and when I say

00:49:52.580 defective, I don't mean

00:49:53.940 DNA.

00:49:55.320 I'm not saying that.

00:49:57.000 I'm saying that maybe

00:49:58.100 there's a difference in how

00:49:59.240 people act, for whatever

00:50:01.060 reason.

00:50:01.980 You know, you could have

00:50:02.840 your own reason for why

00:50:03.740 they act that way.

00:50:04.880 But they do act different.

00:50:07.140 Right?

00:50:07.700 Do you think an Asian

00:50:08.760 American kid stopped by the

00:50:10.140 police acts exactly the same

00:50:12.440 as the black 19-year-old

00:50:14.660 stopped by the police?

00:50:16.260 Does anybody believe that?

00:50:18.300 Does anybody believe that?

00:50:20.100 No.

00:50:21.560 No, you're not allowed to

00:50:22.680 say it.

00:50:23.580 I mean, I can say it because

00:50:24.580 I got disgraced and

00:50:26.120 canceled.

00:50:26.840 So I can just say it out

00:50:27.880 loud.

00:50:28.460 There's nobody in the world

00:50:29.600 who believes that a 19-year-old

00:50:31.020 black kid, on average,

00:50:32.760 right?

00:50:33.600 Individuals, yes.

00:50:35.260 Anything you say about a

00:50:36.440 group doesn't apply to the

00:50:37.580 individuals.

00:50:38.060 But as a group, there's

00:50:40.360 nobody in the world, nobody

00:50:42.240 black, nobody Asian, who

00:50:44.180 thinks the average Asian 1.00

00:50:45.260 kid acts just the same in a

00:50:47.440 police stop as the average

00:50:50.260 black kid.

00:50:50.820 Nobody believes that.

00:50:52.340 Now, I don't know why.

00:50:54.420 I actually don't know why.

00:50:56.000 If I did, I'd give you some

00:50:57.300 speculation.

00:50:58.060 I don't know why.

00:50:59.260 But it's just obvious.

00:51:02.680 So why would they get the

00:51:03.980 same outcome?

00:51:05.440 If you act differently, how

00:51:06.880 could you possibly get the

00:51:07.860 same outcome?

00:51:08.900 As somebody said the other

00:51:10.020 day, why do we talk about

00:51:12.580 culture, you know, this is my

00:51:15.020 culture, and I want to

00:51:16.020 protect my culture, if you

00:51:17.800 don't act different?

00:51:20.080 Isn't the whole point of a

00:51:21.220 culture is that you act

00:51:22.480 different?

00:51:24.120 So if you're acting different

00:51:25.500 and getting different

00:51:26.400 outcomes, it's supposed to

00:51:28.740 work that way.

00:51:29.860 That's exactly how it's

00:51:31.120 supposed to work.

00:51:32.220 You act different, you get

00:51:33.520 different outcomes.

00:51:35.700 So to me, none of this is

00:51:37.300 too surprising.

00:51:39.400 Culture would explain it.

00:51:41.240 I don't know if that is the

00:51:42.340 explanation, but it would

00:51:43.840 explain it.

00:51:44.860 I mean, it fits the facts.

00:51:47.640 But then you have to go back

00:51:48.800 another level.

00:51:50.340 What causes the culture?

00:51:52.460 What causes the culture?

00:51:53.460 I would say density as much as

00:51:57.360 anything.

00:51:57.620 If you looked at the culture of

00:52:01.280 low-income black people living in

00:52:04.200 high-density areas, does it look

00:52:06.840 just like the low-income black 1.00

00:52:09.940 people who are living in less

00:52:11.700 dense areas in the countryside,

00:52:13.960 for example?

00:52:15.160 Probably not.

00:52:16.180 I mean, they might like to say

00:52:17.660 music.

00:52:19.240 That's about it.

00:52:23.060 So I think density might be the

00:52:25.460 under-looked, the under-appreciated

00:52:28.740 variable.

00:52:29.500 Nobody ever talks about that.

00:52:31.040 Density.

00:52:31.880 Population density.

00:52:34.300 Mushrooms are all the zeitgeist now.

00:52:36.860 Everybody seems to be talking about

00:52:38.080 it at the same time.

00:52:39.660 So Australia is the first nation 0.83

00:52:41.860 to approve psychedelics as

00:52:43.680 treatment for conditions such as

00:52:46.860 PTSD, so various mental conditions.

00:52:50.540 But apparently, according to the

00:52:51.840 story, a patient will still have to

00:52:54.460 jump through hoops to get it,

00:52:56.700 which is not a...

00:52:58.340 You know, you would expect that,

00:52:59.520 right?

00:53:00.140 You'd have to do a lot of process

00:53:01.580 to be eligible to get it.

00:53:03.660 But that's the beginning.

00:53:05.560 Now, at the same time that

00:53:07.720 Australia is legalizing it

00:53:09.460 in a limited way,

00:53:11.780 there's a story on CNN where

00:53:13.400 the CNN correspondent went to,

00:53:16.060 I think it was Jamaica,

00:53:17.100 where it's legal,

00:53:18.300 and did a story in which he was

00:53:20.620 observed doing mushrooms.

00:53:23.200 Can you imagine any world in which

00:53:26.380 CNN would have their own host

00:53:29.140 go to another country, 1.00

00:53:31.320 so that it's legal,

00:53:32.740 and take an illegal drug,

00:53:35.780 illegal in this country,

00:53:36.920 and then just do a story about

00:53:39.680 like how it felt and what he

00:53:41.940 learned and stuff.

00:53:43.780 Doesn't that seem amazing to you?

00:53:46.380 And it was a positive story.

00:53:48.740 So the bottom line was,

00:53:50.520 you know, nothing bad about

00:53:51.700 mushrooms.

00:53:53.100 But the fact that CNN is,

00:53:54.880 you know, really the representative

00:53:56.380 of the mainstream in many ways,

00:53:58.280 they're basically saying

00:53:59.560 mushrooms, yes.

00:54:01.420 Did you see that coming?

00:54:02.580 That's the most unusual outcome

00:54:06.180 that the mainstream is seeing

00:54:09.580 mushrooms as it's time to go,

00:54:12.300 time to legalize them.

00:54:14.960 It's quite a surprise.

00:54:16.900 Because I think a lot of people

00:54:18.100 on the right have been there

00:54:19.000 for a long time.

00:54:21.200 Just in terms of freedom.

00:54:23.220 Why don't I have the freedom

00:54:25.040 to put in my body what I want?

00:54:27.400 Not all the people on the right,

00:54:29.900 but, you know,

00:54:30.480 the freedom-loving ones.

00:54:33.780 All right, I saw an argument

00:54:34.780 on also CNN

00:54:36.400 that Trump's declassification

00:54:39.620 argument is bunk.

00:54:42.040 And the idea is that

00:54:43.340 Trump is claiming that

00:54:44.660 he can declassify anything

00:54:46.500 just by removing it.

00:54:48.480 I agree with that.

00:54:49.540 So I agree with Trump's take

00:54:51.660 that if there's no written law

00:54:56.280 and it's up to the president,

00:54:58.600 then he can do what he wants.

00:55:01.160 But, apparently,

00:55:02.880 during the Obama administration,

00:55:05.720 there was an executive order

00:55:07.620 that was created

00:55:09.080 that did give some guidelines

00:55:10.560 about how to handle

00:55:11.460 classified stuff.

00:55:12.920 And apparently,

00:55:13.720 Trump did not follow

00:55:14.640 those guidelines.

00:55:15.980 But here's my question.

00:55:17.480 Not being a lawyer,

00:55:19.540 does a president

00:55:20.300 have to follow

00:55:21.020 an executive order?

00:55:25.420 How does that work?

00:55:27.420 It's an executive order.

00:55:28.720 It's like the president's order.

00:55:30.620 Now, if it comes

00:55:31.220 from a prior president,

00:55:32.980 like, I get it,

00:55:33.900 that stays in place

00:55:35.240 until it gets changed.

00:55:37.340 But if you're talking

00:55:38.320 about the president,

00:55:39.320 does the president

00:55:41.480 have to do

00:55:42.140 what another president ordered,

00:55:45.000 which the new president

00:55:46.060 could reverse

00:55:47.980 just by writing

00:55:48.900 a piece of paper?

00:55:50.780 Because if Trump

00:55:51.940 didn't follow

00:55:52.540 those executive orders,

00:55:54.540 it's just a paperwork problem.

00:55:57.260 Because he could have

00:55:57.880 simply written

00:55:58.440 on a piece of paper,

00:55:59.880 I rescind this executive order.

00:56:03.300 Right?

00:56:04.140 He had the full power

00:56:05.300 to rescind it.

00:56:06.720 I think.

00:56:07.940 It's an executive order.

00:56:10.240 Yeah, they're not laws.

00:56:11.240 And so if Trump ignored it,

00:56:15.120 would that be

00:56:16.520 breaking a law?

00:56:18.160 Or is it

00:56:18.920 ignoring an executive order

00:56:21.200 that he could have

00:56:22.140 made go away

00:56:23.260 with a stroke of a pen?

00:56:25.520 It looks like

00:56:26.220 he just cut a corner.

00:56:27.260 It doesn't look like

00:56:27.820 the worst problem

00:56:28.480 in the world.

00:56:32.500 Yeah.

00:56:33.380 All right.

00:56:34.140 Well, I just wanted you

00:56:35.260 to hear that argument

00:56:36.140 unless it comes up,

00:56:37.380 because you're never

00:56:37.800 going to hear it

00:56:38.320 in the right-leaning press.

00:56:40.020 But it doesn't look

00:56:42.120 convincing to me.

00:56:44.600 So here's my bottom line.

00:56:46.720 You can't put my president,

00:56:48.880 whether it's Biden or Trump

00:56:50.600 or anybody else,

00:56:51.680 you can't put my president

00:56:52.980 in jail

00:56:53.540 when lawyers can't agree

00:56:55.960 what the law is.

00:56:58.280 You can't.

00:56:59.720 Will not happen.

00:57:01.920 Will not happen.

00:57:04.160 And

00:57:04.520 furthermore,

00:57:08.140 if the public

00:57:09.120 isn't allowed

00:57:09.760 to see these documents,

00:57:12.020 I get

00:57:12.560 I get

00:57:14.140 why we're not

00:57:14.840 allowed to see them.

00:57:16.720 But you can't

00:57:17.440 put them in jail

00:57:18.040 if we can't see them.

00:57:20.180 Now,

00:57:20.680 I would be willing

00:57:21.560 to allow that

00:57:22.900 if Republicans

00:57:24.000 had access to it,

00:57:25.380 people who had

00:57:25.880 security clearance,

00:57:27.280 and it was a set

00:57:28.300 of Republicans

00:57:28.880 you could trust,

00:57:30.740 you know,

00:57:30.920 if you let your,

00:57:32.380 you know,

00:57:33.780 let your Thomas Massey's

00:57:36.060 in there

00:57:36.560 or your Tom Cotton's

00:57:38.180 or people basically

00:57:39.280 you would trust

00:57:40.120 if they said,

00:57:40.800 yeah,

00:57:40.960 this is bad.

00:57:42.040 You know,

00:57:42.360 I hate to say it,

00:57:43.240 but,

00:57:44.100 you know,

00:57:44.820 we've looked at

00:57:45.320 these documents

00:57:45.940 and it's way worse

00:57:47.400 than we thought

00:57:47.880 they would be.

00:57:48.820 Got to admit,

00:57:49.460 they're bad.

00:57:50.420 I believe that

00:57:51.220 the Republicans

00:57:51.820 would do that.

00:57:53.060 I would trust them.

00:57:53.940 Not everyone.

00:57:55.940 Not everyone.

00:57:57.480 But there is

00:57:58.180 a handful of Republicans

00:57:59.740 that could have

00:58:00.360 the right clearance

00:58:01.180 that I would say,

00:58:02.460 all right,

00:58:02.780 I don't need to know,

00:58:03.940 but you know,

00:58:04.560 and I'm going to

00:58:05.160 take your word for it.

00:58:06.380 I would go with that.

00:58:08.040 But I'm definitely

00:58:08.660 not going to listen

00:58:09.260 to Democrats

00:58:10.300 who say it's bad

00:58:11.120 and they can't

00:58:11.820 show it to me.

00:58:13.640 Right?

00:58:14.140 So you can't put

00:58:15.140 my president in jail

00:58:16.180 over documents

00:58:17.240 that at least

00:58:18.000 people I believe

00:58:19.480 haven't seen

00:58:20.340 and lawyers

00:58:23.280 can't even decide

00:58:24.180 if a law is broken.

00:58:28.760 Andrew,

00:58:29.420 you're very dumb,

00:58:31.320 but I'd like to

00:58:32.140 mock you for a minute.

00:58:32.940 Andrew says,

00:58:34.760 Scott Adams says,

00:58:35.860 never voted.

00:58:37.360 Facts.

00:58:38.620 All right,

00:58:38.800 first of all,

00:58:39.280 that's not true.

00:58:40.160 I have voted.

00:58:41.520 Yet last week,

00:58:42.500 he said,

00:58:42.960 we all need to vote.

00:58:44.400 LOL.

00:58:46.220 Did I say

00:58:46.940 you all need to vote?

00:58:49.180 I don't even

00:58:49.840 remember saying that.

00:58:51.140 I think you got

00:58:51.780 two or three

00:58:52.520 hallucinations

00:58:53.280 going there at once.

00:58:55.180 But yeah,

00:58:55.500 I voted.

00:58:56.400 The reason I don't vote

00:58:57.500 is that I have voted.

00:58:59.280 Did I tell you

00:58:59.920 who I voted for

00:59:00.660 when I voted

00:59:01.920 for president?

00:59:02.500 Jimmy Carter.

00:59:06.600 Jimmy Carter.

00:59:08.580 And do you know

00:59:09.320 what I learned

00:59:09.880 after I voted

00:59:10.680 for Jimmy Carter?

00:59:12.820 What did I learn?

00:59:14.960 Tell me.

00:59:15.800 Tell me,

00:59:16.100 what did I learn

00:59:16.700 when I voted

00:59:17.240 for Jimmy Carter?

00:59:20.440 That I don't know

00:59:21.480 enough to vote.

00:59:23.580 Yeah.

00:59:24.240 I learned that

00:59:25.100 I'm bad at voting.

00:59:27.100 Didn't help.

00:59:28.500 Did I make anything

00:59:29.440 better by my vote?

00:59:31.360 No,

00:59:31.980 I made the world

00:59:32.560 worse,

00:59:33.260 if anything.

00:59:38.320 And Dapper Dale

00:59:39.340 believes the 4chan

00:59:40.680 hoax about

00:59:41.780 my pandemic

00:59:42.580 opinions.

00:59:44.820 Dapper Dale,

00:59:46.160 you're very gullible.

00:59:50.460 He just wants

00:59:51.300 to say the same

00:59:51.960 thing over and

00:59:52.500 over again.

00:59:54.300 We'll hide you.

00:59:55.920 You are now

00:59:56.480 hidden,

00:59:56.920 Dapper.

00:59:57.740 Goodbye.

00:59:58.080 Goodbye.

00:59:58.160 Goodbye.

00:59:58.180 Goodbye.

00:59:58.200 Goodbye.

00:59:58.220 Goodbye.

00:59:58.240 Goodbye.

00:59:58.260 Goodbye.

00:59:58.280 Goodbye.

00:59:58.300 Goodbye.

00:59:58.340 Goodbye.

01:00:00.340 Goodbye.

01:00:01.560 Good.

01:00:02.360 He's gone.

01:00:03.860 Poor Dapper.

01:00:06.940 Alright.

01:00:09.700 That, ladies and gentlemen,

01:00:11.520 is all I wanted to tell you today.

01:00:14.060 And thanks for joining.

01:00:18.460 And just remember,

01:00:20.800 debates are good.

01:00:22.400 And if science won't

01:00:23.460 go to your debate,

01:00:24.940 science gets to lose.

01:00:27.560 Science loses.

01:00:28.220 I think the last credibility of science was removed today.

01:00:34.060 Now, if the debate or something like it happens,

01:00:36.840 then I'll change my mind.

01:00:38.960 But Dr. Hotez destroyed science completely today.

01:00:44.120 I feel like one person destroyed science.

01:00:48.320 Because when I see that he's unwilling to debate,

01:00:51.680 I get his, you know, like I said,

01:00:53.300 I understand his objections to it,

01:00:55.320 but they're not good enough.

01:00:57.680 They're not good enough.

01:00:58.840 If science can't defend itself, then we can ignore it.

01:01:02.480 If it's so weak that it can't defend itself,

01:01:05.300 you can ignore it.

01:01:07.480 Which would be terrible, of course.

01:01:10.620 So, all right.

01:01:12.900 Is there a video or transcript of my meltdown at Starbucks?

01:01:18.120 Probably.

01:01:19.080 They probably have internal security.

01:01:21.780 But it wasn't as spectacular.

01:01:24.520 I didn't raise my voice.

01:01:26.680 When I say it was a meltdown,

01:01:29.540 I wasn't shouting.

01:01:32.660 I was just getting in his face with some truth.

01:01:37.900 All right.

01:01:39.380 That's all we've got now.

01:01:41.220 And I will talk to you tomorrow, YouTube.

01:01:44.300 Bye.

01:01:46.500 Bye.

01:01:47.160 Bye.

01:01:55.560 Bye.

01:01:56.980 I got up.

01:01:59.240 Bye.

01:02:00.940 Bye.

01:02:03.500 Bye.

01:02:03.680 Bye.

01:02:04.400 Bye.

01:02:04.760 Bye.

01:02:05.340 Bye.

01:02:06.040 Bye.

01:02:06.560 Bye.

01:02:09.040 Bye.

01:02:10.100 Bye.

01:02:10.680 Bye.

01:02:11.020 Bye.

01:02:11.500 Bye.

01:02:12.420 Bye.

01:02:12.680 Bye.

Real Coffee with Scott Adams - June 19, 2023

Episode 2144 Scott Adams： Science Surrenders To RFK Jr. And Joe Rogan, Blink Fails In China, Trump

Episode Stats

Summary

Transcript