Episode 2190 Scott Adams： Let's Look At The Machinery Behind The Headlines. We Can See The Gears Now
Episode Stats
Length
1 hour and 17 minutes
Words per Minute
146.8967
Summary
Scott Adams talks about a woman who looks and acts like a human but is in fact an artificial intelligence (AI) creature, Milla Sophia, and why we should all be worried about her. Plus, a story about a man who thinks he's a woman and thinks he can get money from other people.
Transcript
00:00:00.000
Good morning, everybody, and welcome to the highlight of human civilization.
00:00:10.860
Today, we're also streaming, just to test things out, on Twitter Live.
00:00:16.760
I might not be looking at the Twitter comments,
00:00:20.080
because when I tested this before I went live earlier today,
00:00:23.900
many of you wanted to talk about my vaccination status.
00:00:34.580
So just try to come forward to the future, which I call the present.
00:00:40.060
And if you'd like to increase the enjoyment that you're having now, wow.
00:00:45.760
And by the way, you can watch this show every day on YouTube,
00:00:48.860
and also on the Locals platform if you're a subscriber.
00:00:52.060
I'm not sure if I'll keep doing it on this platform or not.
00:01:00.720
It's good to see that old periscope look, isn't it?
00:01:07.160
Now, this could be quite the delight for those of you who have never experienced a simultaneous sip,
00:01:11.860
because all you need is a cupper mug or a glass,
00:01:13.700
a tanker, a chalice, a stein, a canteen jugger, a flask, a vessel of any guide,
00:01:18.500
fill it with your favorite liquid, not like coffee,
00:01:21.680
and join me now for the unparalleled pleasure of the dopamine hit of the day,
00:01:39.400
Well, I have a suggestion for all of you for whenever you are tweeting or referring to January 6th,
00:01:53.960
J6, January 6th, you know, the, who's the insurrection?
00:02:02.880
From now on, January 6th will be called, wait for it, hold on, I want to make sure you're all ready.
00:02:10.400
From now on, January 6th will be called Trump's Raging Insurrection.
00:02:23.360
So he's going to be impeached over his raging insurrection.
00:02:33.540
Because I want, I want, every time this comes up, I want to laugh at it.
00:02:38.120
Because I can't take the real news seriously anymore.
00:02:47.640
Because there's not much else, there's not much else they can do for you.
00:02:55.580
You know, that the reason that comedy doesn't work anymore is that reality and comedy merged.
00:03:02.640
Comedy only works when it looks different than reality.
00:03:07.200
Like, legitimately, hyperbole aside, it actually doesn't look different, the comedy and the reality.
00:03:23.300
There's an AI influencer now who's on, I don't know where she is on Instagram, I think.
00:03:31.040
But it's an AI creation that has photographs and video of a creature, which is not a real creature.
00:03:40.120
It's an AI creature that is, it's branded as artificial.
00:03:44.740
But people are not convinced she's artificial because she looks, well, I called her she.
00:03:52.040
I'm literally telling you a story about an artificial entity that is pretending to be a female.
00:04:08.900
If you don't think, and I think Mike Sertovich said this,
00:04:11.340
if you don't think that regular, ordinary human males,
00:04:15.920
if you don't think they're going to have actual deep relationships with these AI creatures,
00:04:22.740
That people are going to have lifelong relationships with AI.
00:04:30.980
I have less insight into what a female brain is like.
00:04:35.580
But I can tell you that men are going to find the AI versions better than the alternatives.
00:04:44.240
So that should change reproduction in the world pretty much.
00:04:52.040
So if you've been sending money to your girlfriend named Milla Sophia,
00:04:57.740
just know that you're one of many people who have done that.
00:05:00.760
Apparently a number of people have offered to send this girlfriend some money.
00:05:07.320
Don't send money to anything that looks good on the screen.
00:05:20.060
is Andrew Tate going to pimp out virtual women?
00:05:25.820
Apparently house arrest is over and Andrew Tate can walk around now.
00:05:29.640
Now, do you remember my, how many remember my prediction about the Tate brothers?
00:05:46.820
But what I hinted at was that his level of persuasion skill is not normal.
00:06:05.880
I think you have seriously a silence of the lambs situation where the prisoner is just more powerful than the prison.
00:06:13.780
And I don't like Andrew Tate, in case anybody's new, new to my live stream.
00:06:25.240
So, you know, irrespective of his message, you can make your own decision on that.
00:06:31.880
But it is also true that his level of persuasion skill, some of it came from me.
00:06:41.920
Unfortunately, I'm at least partially responsible because I know he was following me before he became famous.
00:06:51.300
So I know he was picking up persuasion tricks, and you can see him implement his persuasion skills.
00:06:58.100
And my take was that I don't see how a prison, I don't see how he could be convicted unless the system is broken.
00:07:09.800
And so far he's talked his way, you know, out of jail and into home custody.
00:07:15.720
And now he's talked his way out of house arrest.
00:07:19.300
So I don't know what's next, but I'm going to make a prediction.
00:07:25.480
Does anybody want to take the other side of that?
00:07:30.040
And I'm saying this with no regard to the evidence and no regard to what he may or may not have done.
00:07:39.640
It has only to do with his abilities right now.
00:07:52.980
So, and of course, to put anybody in jail, you're going to need something like witnesses.
00:08:01.200
Do you think they're having any trouble finding people to testify against him?
00:08:08.100
They might be having a lot of trouble finding somebody to testify against him.
00:08:11.380
Because he's persuasive, but also maybe he has too many friends on the outside.
00:08:19.060
I feel like it would be dangerous to testify against him, even if he didn't do anything about it.
00:08:24.560
He has a lot of people who might take things into their own hands, which would be super bad.
00:08:39.440
Superconductivity that I keep talking about that others are trying to reproduce.
00:08:48.240
Are we yet confident that this is a real room temperature superconductivity situation?
00:08:55.120
Now, I would say there's still, what do we call it, LK99, is the cool, nerdish term for it.
00:09:04.680
Now, the question I've got is whether or not this really can be scaled up.
00:09:11.740
You know, the early reporting was, these are common materials.
00:09:16.480
We can scale this up, and it will be changing everything.
00:09:19.260
Because once you have superconductivity, you've got quantum computing and lossless, you know, transportation of electricity.
00:09:27.120
And a whole bunch of things become possible in the real world if you can do superconductivity.
00:09:36.320
I mean, if you just take one thing, just take one thing, quantum computing, suppose that's the only thing that changed.
00:09:43.880
And then suddenly your computer's a quantum computer.
00:09:48.260
That's a little bit better than the one you have now, let me tell you.
00:09:55.860
Now, you combine your AI with a quantum computer.
00:10:07.860
There's literally nothing that you can predict.
00:10:13.000
I would say that predicting the world in 5 to 10 years is now an exercise in absurdity.
00:10:25.800
I mean, nobody's great at predicting 5 to 10 years out.
00:10:29.360
But, you know, we were taking seriously things like climate change risk in 50 years.
00:10:34.920
We were acting like 50 years is like a perfectly good amount of time that you can predict things.
00:10:48.520
Can quantum computers do general purpose computing?
00:10:54.880
The quantum computer can be your general computer, right?
00:10:59.560
I mean, if they got it efficient enough, there's no reason it wouldn't.
00:11:14.180
Well, no, I understand that at the moment there's special purpose.
00:11:17.960
But that's only because that's all we can make.
00:11:21.360
Isn't the whole point if you can make a quantum computer in an easy way,
00:11:36.320
But I'll take a fact-check on that if I'm wrong.
00:11:41.740
Roseanne Barr, who you may know she transitioned.
00:12:05.280
But Roseanne is getting her own show on X, on the rebranded Twitter called X.
00:12:15.360
And it looks like it's going to be part of a larger platform that's part of Public SQ,
00:12:20.420
or Public Square, which I think is Don Jr.'s, Don Jr. is at least a prominent part of that.
00:12:30.040
So, it looks like there's some kind of a, probably conservative, I assume, conservative-leaning platform.
00:12:38.960
Actually, it's an anti-woke platform is the way to say it.
00:12:51.540
Now, I did tell you that Roseanne asked me to be on her podcast.
00:13:00.540
But I don't know if that's part of this, because I don't know if the timing is the same.
00:13:06.560
So, maybe I'm on the old version, not the new version.
00:13:16.960
Would you agree that in the past year, especially, although it's been brewing for a while,
00:13:22.500
that you can now see all the moving parts of the, let's say, the effery that's happening to the public?
00:13:35.140
We can see now that, but here's one thing that Joe Biden proved to us.
00:13:44.580
Number one, the existence of Joe Biden as a president proves to us that the president isn't always the one in control.
00:13:56.140
Can we see that the machinery says that they can put a figurehead in and still have some kind of functional control?
00:14:07.540
And it might be a special case because of Biden.
00:14:09.940
But we can say with some certainty now that you actually don't need a president with a functioning brain
00:14:15.920
because the people around him will just, you know, fill in for that and maybe they were always in control.
00:14:25.340
If you told me you could have a president who was just not even functional at all,
00:14:29.620
and yet things would just sort of move along, I don't know if I would have believed it.
00:14:34.980
And I'm not sure I would believe it about other presidents.
00:14:37.340
You know, I'm not sure I would say that about Obama, but maybe.
00:14:52.820
We saw that with the 50 Intel professionals who said the laptop was Russian disinformation.
00:15:05.460
So, now you can see the members of the intelligence community in various groups,
00:15:10.980
you can see that they're willing to coordinate for the benefit of Democrat political purposes.
00:15:22.760
We can see that they could fairly easily get 50 people with high-ranking intelligence jobs across various, you know, intelligence entities.
00:15:32.260
50 of them would all be willing to sign up for a lie.
00:15:38.780
It shows you that our intelligence group is not doing what you think they're supposed to do.
00:15:43.860
They're also deeply involved in domestic politics.
00:15:49.680
And that's as deeply involved as you could get.
00:15:52.320
So deeply involved it may have determined who the president was.
00:15:55.920
So, we see that machinery now and you can't unsee it.
00:15:59.100
It was so clear, so well documented, so obvious, that now you can say, oh, I get it now.
00:16:08.020
The intelligence apparatus and the Democrats are just part of the same machine.
00:16:14.600
That wasn't as obvious as it was until the laptop situation.
00:16:23.500
Learning about how Hunter Biden and the Biden family made their money with this influence, or the illusion of influence, selling,
00:16:43.060
We all now understand that the phone calls don't have to be anything but proving you have access, right?
00:16:50.500
We know that there doesn't have to be a piece of paper, necessarily, saying this is our contract, this is our deal.
00:17:01.120
So, we saw in detail exactly how somebody connected to the current government, you know, when Biden was vice president.
00:17:11.080
We saw how they make money by providing either access or the illusion of access that they charge huge amounts of money for.
00:17:20.500
Because they're big entities with a lot of money, and they want a little bit of edge, and they think they can get it this way.
00:17:27.360
Now, we also saw that the Democrat press was willing to cover up all of this.
00:17:36.620
So, now we can see that the press is a player, not a reporter.
00:17:41.400
We can see that clearly, that the press, the Democrats, and the intelligence agencies, or at least 50 people from them, are all on a team,
00:17:52.340
and they're not on the team that is trying to sell the truth.
00:17:57.440
They're selling a version of the truth, which is just anti-Republican and pro them staying in power and making money.
00:18:06.680
You know, before, everybody knew that people sold access, right?
00:18:13.000
Everybody knew that, you know, lobbying was kind of dirty.
00:18:17.880
Everybody knew that the people were doing this, you know, foreign agent stuff without registering, you know, sort of Manafort kind of stuff.
00:18:28.100
But when you see it so clearly and specifically, where you've got an Archer Daniel, I'm sorry, Archer, Devin Archer, Archer Daniel, Devin Archer,
00:18:40.120
when you have him explaining every gear in the machine, then you can see it, right?
00:18:47.340
Now, and how about the media narrative that turned January 6th into an insurrection?
00:18:55.480
We all got to watch how something that clearly was not an insurrection in any way,
00:19:02.740
because nobody really believes you can overcome a country.
00:19:06.720
You know, nobody thinks you can take over a superpower by trespassing.
00:19:12.600
But half of the country was willing to pretend that was real,
00:19:16.860
because the media told them to pretend that way, I guess.
00:19:20.020
Yes. And we, yeah, so we know that the media will change the narrative,
00:19:26.280
and they'll actually make something that was, unfortunately, somewhat normal in American politics,
00:19:32.440
which is a bunch of people protest, and then some of those people get out of control.
00:19:40.160
But the media narrative could turn that into an actual insurrection.
00:19:44.360
Or, as I like to say, Trump's raging insurrection.
00:19:51.020
The law enforcement at the Capitol, they tried to beat off Trump's raging insurrection,
00:19:59.640
Yeah, Trump's raging insurrection was too much for law enforcement.
00:20:07.160
Then, let's see, you also see, what else do we see?
00:20:10.620
We see that the impeachment process was always fraudulent.
00:20:13.960
You could smell it, and you knew it when it was happening,
00:20:20.700
And you can see that they do, in fact, use political processes to cover crimes.
00:20:28.040
We know, for example, that the impeachment, the first impeachment,
00:20:31.680
I think Joel Pollack was saying this, and Breitbart.
00:20:34.520
The first impeachment, the rules of the impeachment were that Republicans couldn't call witnesses.
00:20:50.100
So one side, in a, essentially something that's like a fake trial, this impeachment process,
00:20:59.200
Do you know what witness the Republicans would have called?
00:21:05.560
So the entire impeachment process would have been completely different
00:21:10.180
if the Republicans could have called, you know, Devin Archer.
00:21:13.980
Because suddenly, suddenly Trump's phone call to Ukraine makes a lot of sense, doesn't it?
00:21:19.700
Once you know the whole, you know, Biden crime family, Devin Archer situation,
00:21:24.120
and you say, wait a minute, Trump got in trouble for wanting to look into that?
00:21:34.140
He got in trouble for asking a question, could somebody help him look into something that was clearly,
00:21:40.220
if it wasn't illegal, it was very inappropriate,
00:21:43.620
and certainly not in the best interest of the United States.
00:21:49.300
Now, do you think his impeachment could be reversed?
00:21:53.140
Because of things like that, you know, things we found out after the impeachment?
00:22:05.840
and the fact that the Republicans couldn't even ask him to talk,
00:22:09.400
which would have completely changed the context of the entire impeachment,
00:22:16.000
All you need is control of the, you know, the bodies, and you can do it.
00:22:22.840
But would you agree that we can now see the entire machine?
00:22:29.020
You can see it from the gaming that was done during the elections, etc.
00:22:34.440
Now, there's one part of the machine that's left.
00:22:38.100
Do you know all the conspiracy theories that turned out to be true?
00:22:50.500
Stuff about the Hunter Biden, well, mostly true.
00:22:55.960
Stuff about the impeachment being purely political, well, we knew that, and it's mostly true.
00:23:01.480
Stuff about the laptop, it turns out it's mostly true.
00:23:05.520
Russia collusion, it was the hoax you thought it was.
00:23:08.820
So, one by one, all of these things that were at one point seemed like hoaxes, they all seemed true.
00:23:31.220
What are the odds that everything you thought was maybe true, turned down to be true, pretty much all of it,
00:23:40.460
but that the election would be the one thing that was like that shining exception.
00:23:45.960
Everything you thought about the machinery of government was true, all the bad stuff, but not that one.
00:23:53.280
And why do you think you don't know more about that?
00:24:00.880
Could it be that if you were a news entity and you questioned the election, you would be sued out of business, like Fox News?
00:24:08.100
And by the way, I'm not defending anything Fox News said.
00:24:16.120
Getting some things wrong is not exactly something you would expect the news business not to do.
00:24:29.600
It's becoming impossible to imagine that the election was fair, honestly.
00:24:34.840
And it's not because I have any information about the election.
00:24:38.800
I have no information that would say it's unfair at all.
00:24:44.060
And the context is that every time there was something that could be rigged, it was.
00:24:50.560
Every part of the government that could be gamed was gamed.
00:24:56.920
Everything that could be turned into a narrative to fool you was.
00:25:01.300
Every single thing that could be corrupted, perverted, or made worthless was.
00:25:17.040
So the most important thing, the most important thing that we imagine might have had some vulnerabilities.
00:25:28.160
The most important thing is the only thing they didn't try to game.
00:25:33.520
We know they gamed it, but within legal bounds, they gamed it.
00:25:39.300
You know, if this is a movie, we're watching what could be the greatest third act of all time.
00:25:47.880
And if it's a movie, there's something that has to happen, which is Trump has to go to court and in court prove that the elections were fraudulent.
00:26:02.940
That might be good enough to just prove that it's not fully auditable.
00:26:07.720
If you prove it's not fully auditable, then you can also prove that you don't know what the result was.
00:26:15.860
It can still be certified, and we can still accept it as true.
00:26:25.320
Have you seen the computer code that runs the machines?
00:26:30.020
Do I have any reason to think there's anything wrong with that computer code?
00:26:37.140
I'm just saying we live in a world in which any place there could have been some bad behavior, we found it.
00:26:45.500
Every rock we turned over had something under it.
00:26:50.620
When was the last time we turned over a rock when we thought there was something dirty there?
00:26:55.880
And we looked and looked, and there was nothing there.
00:26:59.320
Well, I guess only when you're investigating some Trump stuff like Russia collusion.
00:27:09.420
There's a difference between a hoax and maybe just being wrong about something.
00:27:17.760
So, now that we can see the machine, will it make any difference?
00:27:26.380
I'm not sure how much credibility I'd put on this thing.
00:27:29.420
Which is, Tucker Carlson had an interview with, I guess, the former Capitol Police Chief, Stephen Sund, and he told Tucker that he thinks January 6th was some kind of a cover-up.
00:27:43.660
And he said, quote, everything appears to be a cover-up.
00:27:48.580
Quote, I'm not a conspiracy theorist, but when you look at the information and intelligence they had, the military had, it's all watered down.
00:27:57.980
I'm denied any support from National Guard, meaning when he was in his job, in advance.
00:28:03.880
I'm denied National Guard while we're under attack for 71 minutes.
00:28:07.900
And then he questioned the leadership of Milley and Pelosi.
00:28:14.120
Now, this is one person's opinion based on, you know, the atmospherics of the time.
00:28:19.680
So, I don't think you should conclude from that one testimony that there was something sketchy going on.
00:28:27.860
But you could conclude by the fact that wherever it was possible for something sketchy to go on, it did.
00:28:34.740
So, was it possible at all for any of the characters in January 6th to have intentionally withheld intelligence?
00:28:43.960
Or could they have intentionally withheld, let's say, National Guard or other help?
00:28:55.960
And every time there was something that was easy to do that would be good for Democrats, they did it.
00:29:01.260
No matter how weaselly and illegal and lying it was, they did it every time.
00:29:10.280
Do you think this is the one time that there was like a big opening to do something weaselly that would have been bad for Trump, and they didn't do it?
00:29:17.520
They had an easy opening to make it look worse than it could have looked, and you think that they didn't do it.
00:29:27.080
You think that they wanted to immediately stop the protest so that Donald Trump would have nothing working against them because they immediately shut down the protest.
00:29:37.200
Do you think Democrats were like, oh, let's stop this before there's any violence?
00:29:41.060
Well, they live in the real world, and they know that if a bunch of Trump supporters wearing MAGA hats attack the Capitol, their best play is to let them destroy it.
00:29:58.900
Do you think that Nancy Pelosi didn't know that their best play was to make it look dangerous?
00:30:08.640
Is this the only time in all of these observed behavior, is this the first time that they were really operating legitimately and for the best interest of all the people?
00:30:24.440
I think at that level they don't even think about the public.
00:30:27.640
I honestly think, I mean, I'm reading minds, of course.
00:30:30.700
But they act as though, I'll just say they act as though so I'm not mind reading.
00:30:34.280
They act as though the public isn't even part of the consideration.
00:30:45.180
Yeah, I hope I'm not painting a picture of, you know, all things are lost.
00:30:50.160
To me, the ability to see the machine is the essential step toward change.
00:30:56.460
If we can't agree what's happening, then you can't change things easily.
00:30:59.800
But once you can see it, it's all laid out for you really clearly, well then maybe, maybe you get yourself a new president and maybe something changes.
00:31:11.020
So the big question that we're talking about with the new Trump indictments is, of course, everybody's going to frame it in their own way.
00:31:21.280
So one of the frames is that this would criminalize lying under the narrow situation that a politician lies, but you can show that they knew they were lying.
00:31:36.680
And therefore some action happened, in this case a conspiracy, some would say.
00:31:40.420
And that the action is really the problem, but the lying was contributing to the action.
00:31:46.560
So it's the action that's the problem, not the lie.
00:31:57.040
They're either voting differently or they're complaining or threatening or doing something.
00:32:01.300
So if you criminalize lying that somebody else says you knew, because that's the important part, somebody else gets to decide what was in your head.
00:32:15.880
Somebody else gets to decide what you were thinking when you lied.
00:32:19.780
Were you thinking it was true or were you thinking it wasn't?
00:32:27.380
I guess Bill Barr said, you know, it's not so much about that.
00:32:32.480
The lying is not the problem, I think Bill Barr would say.
00:32:38.360
So it was just, you know, one element of the conspiracy.
00:32:41.300
So if they prove the conspiracy, it's not about the lying.
00:32:48.920
I think there are two narratives that are, neither of them are quite accurate.
00:32:57.380
That it's not about, it's not about his free speech.
00:33:01.520
It's about, allegedly, some conspiracy things to over, or to delay or overturn the election.
00:33:08.860
But it's also true that if you create a precedent that the things he said, he, he, according to other people, he knew it was a lie.
00:33:18.620
And therefore, bad things happen because of it.
00:33:22.660
If you let that standard become a precedent, I guess all politicians go to jail pretty quickly.
00:33:33.360
That it's not, that it's not about free speech, but the precedent it could set would be about free speech.
00:33:44.960
It's just that it would accidentally have this side effect.
00:33:54.460
With the legal stuff, here, let me give you a better, this is the most useful thing I could do.
00:34:00.020
Have you noticed that as soon as there's legal stuff mixed with politics, that there are only some people who are qualified to talk about it?
00:34:08.340
So when Jonathan Turley talks about it, he knows politics, and he knows the law, because that's his job, and he's a great writer.
00:34:18.460
So what he says is way more useful than what other people are saying.
00:34:22.620
Same with, I keep mentioning Joel Pollack when we're talking about these topics, because he has a legal background, follows the news, is a great writer.
00:34:47.340
Mike Cernovich, legal background, knows politics, knows how to tweet better than anybody.
00:34:55.000
Yeah, so there are some people you should follow, and I'm not sure I'm one of them.
00:34:58.640
I would really, really favor your information toward the ones who have some, at least a little bit of a law degree background.
00:35:09.600
You're going to get, you're going to get, you're going to get much better.
00:35:22.640
Kimberly Strassel in the Wall Street Journal was talking about this, about the lying.
00:35:30.660
To me, it seems like the precedent would be way, way, way too dangerous.
00:35:38.800
I can't imagine that the Supreme Court would ever get behind this.
00:35:45.100
Do we all assume that it ends up in the Supreme Court and gets thrown out?
00:35:48.340
And the only issue is whether there's a timing thing, you know, whether it's before or after an election or something.
00:35:56.440
I don't think anybody thinks he's going to jail.
00:36:11.380
If you put him in jail, there's going to be physical violence.
00:36:18.340
I don't think you could avoid physical violence if he goes to jail.
00:36:25.820
I want to say as clearly as possible, I do not recommend any physical violence for anything, except self-defense.
00:36:36.820
Because at that point, the country would be lost, and you actually would be Boston Tea Party time.
00:36:45.100
I would consider that, I wouldn't be violent myself, and I wouldn't recommend it, but I would understand it.
00:36:57.720
There, just to change the topic a little bit, because we're getting tired of all this legal stuff.
00:37:10.800
Over in Germany, they've built some houses, this passive house thing, by road architects.
00:37:16.680
And they've figured out how to basically seal the home really tight, insulate it really well, and use almost no AC or warming.
00:37:35.660
They make sure the sun is the right orientation.
00:37:39.500
And they've got, I don't know the technology, but they've got some kind of a, what do they call it?
00:37:51.080
And then there's something that cleans the air because it's so sealed and blah, blah, blah.
00:37:58.500
It's a 2,500 square foot house that costs maybe 15% more than a normal house.
00:38:05.380
But, of course, that would probably go down if they make a lot of them.
00:38:14.660
So we're worried about, you know, the future of homes and the future of climate change.
00:38:20.720
But if you can get a really, and they look really good.
00:38:26.900
If you can get a 2,500 square foot home that you walk in, it just looks amazing.
00:38:39.040
It's going to be really tempting for people to, you know, want those homes.
00:38:44.140
I've been saying for a long time that the big economy of the future for America is going to be rebuilding our homes because all of our existing homes are built wrong.
00:38:54.540
Existing homes are not built for our lifestyle or our energy profile.
00:39:09.140
Imagine building a home today without a home office.
00:39:11.740
If you build a home today, two home offices is the right number, right?
00:39:19.020
The odds that you need two home offices is pretty high.
00:39:21.820
So everything that we do about building today, let's take it easy, like an easy one.
00:39:28.980
It's hard to get your Wi-Fi to work throughout your home.
00:39:32.020
But if you build it in the first place with the understanding that it needed some, you know, Wi-Fi boosters or whatever, you're good.
00:39:40.000
So there's almost nothing about the way a home is built today that is optimized even compared to what we know how to do today.
00:39:47.440
So I think it's going to be gigantic rebuilding from old homes, you know, tearing down the old ones and building the new better ones.
00:40:03.340
He showed two charts and it shows this huge trend line change where sometime around the pandemic, of course, the trust in science by Republicans, you know, dive toward the ground.
00:40:19.120
And the trust in science by Democrats zoomed toward the sky.
00:40:23.560
I mean, just really, and John Byrne Murdoch says it's a tragic story in two charts.
00:40:33.240
He says, now there's a big partisan gap for trust in science.
00:40:38.340
And he says, the Republicans are now essentially the anti-science party, while Dems are stridently pro.
00:40:56.440
Let me put a different interpretation on the same data.
00:41:06.860
Or are Republicans the anti-bullshit party and Democrats are brainwashed sheep?
00:41:13.880
Maybe one doesn't believe bullshit and the other are brainwashed sheep.
00:41:23.020
Apparently, pro-science is what you call brainwashed sheep.
00:41:28.000
Now, I like to say I'm pro-science, so I'm probably a brainwashed sheep.
00:41:32.760
But if you trust anything from science after the pandemic, how do you explain yourself?
00:41:45.260
Now, there's no conflict between these following statements.
00:41:51.040
If you don't understand this, you missed the whole pandemic.
00:41:56.320
Number one, the scientific process is the number one best way to figure out what's true and what isn't.
00:42:05.960
The scientific process, the process, not the people, the process is the best way to find out what's true.
00:42:17.740
Can we also say that most, the majority of the science that's presented to us by people is bullshit?
00:42:31.600
Do you know what proved that most of it's bullshit?
00:42:36.680
Because they looked into it and they counted how many papers are reproducible.
00:42:48.200
The thing that we're presented as science by scientists and by the media is mostly bullshit.
00:42:55.020
If you're a Democrat and you still think that the things scientists are telling you are probably true,
00:43:06.400
I mean, actually, like, I have empathy for that.
00:43:09.720
Imagine going through life thinking that the things that they're telling you are true.
00:43:14.720
Sometimes they might be true, but it's going to be totally unknown when they tell you.
00:43:21.300
So it can be true that science is your best way to know what's true.
00:43:24.640
Well, at the same time, you can observe clearly the machine.
00:43:28.880
And the machine uses science selectively to brainwash you.
00:43:34.920
So if you tell me, does science tell you what's true, if you do it right, the answer is yes.
00:43:40.640
But then you have to get a little bit real world about it.
00:43:43.820
And then you say, but are bad people using science to launder bullshit under the cover of science?
00:43:57.180
So to imagine that those two views are not consistent is something, I guess, you'd have to be a Democrat to understand.
00:44:09.760
And then the larger point, the data is largely useless in 2023.
00:44:16.580
So science would be a lot better if the data that they used was all accurate.
00:44:24.280
But the one thing we know for sure is that the data is bullshit.
00:44:31.000
Just in general, all of our data, pretty much all of our data is suspect.
00:44:40.480
There's so much that's wrong that we don't have any way to pick out the ones that are right.
00:44:47.560
If you were a scientist reproducing a study, maybe yes.
00:44:50.560
And then even then, even if you're a scientist and you reproduce a study, you still don't know if it's correlation or causation.
00:44:59.560
There's still some interpretation that you end up putting on top of it.
00:45:04.640
Here's a good example of why I always say analogies don't work.
00:45:10.400
If you're making an argument and your argument depends on an analogy, you don't have an argument.
00:45:21.000
If you have an argument that depends on logic and facts, and the facts and the logic are good, that's pretty solid.
00:45:28.560
You might want to put an analogy on top of your logic and facts to make it easier to package and describe the story.
00:45:38.660
The argument still has to be the logic and the facts.
00:45:42.320
The analogy is just to story ties it, you know, make it easier to convey.
00:45:47.520
So don't confuse the analogy with the data and the logic.
00:45:53.260
One is just for sales, just for selling something, and the other is for understanding something.
00:45:59.780
So Al Sharpton ran into that problem when he said, can you imagine, he was talking about January 6th and Trump and trying to, quote, overthrow the election.
00:46:10.040
And he said, can you imagine Jefferson and Madison trying to overthrow the government?
00:46:19.200
He actually said, can you imagine the American revolutionaries having a revolution against the government?
00:46:30.800
And somebody tried to save him on Twitter and say, Scott, don't you realize that that was a dictatorship?
00:46:41.800
He's not, they weren't overthrowing a democratically elected government.
00:46:45.920
To which I say, what's that got to do with anything?
00:46:51.800
If you don't like your government, you don't like your government.
00:46:57.740
If you're a revolutionary, you're a revolutionary.
00:46:59.820
But it's the dumbest thing a public person has said in a long time.
00:47:06.500
And that's including everything that Kamala Harris has said.
00:47:15.440
And I guess my comment about this, I made a snarky comment and it got picked up by a bunch of publications.
00:47:27.220
CNN is creating the narrative that Putin is waiting for Trump to get reelected because Trump will be friendly to Putin.
00:47:49.760
So this part of the machine has to turn because Trump is getting closer and closer to re-election.
00:47:55.100
So they got to turn up the part that says that he's blowing Putin.
00:48:06.220
I think they have a sexual relationship or something.
00:48:09.460
So you got to turn that up as they started today.
00:48:15.100
If Putin is, in fact, waiting for Trump, why is that a problem?
00:48:22.980
Other than it'd be good if things wrapped up sooner.
00:48:34.380
Doesn't that tell you that he thinks that Trump can end the war?
00:48:41.660
I see two entities that because of whatever their domestic situation is, they can't make peace.
00:48:49.760
You need you need a large outside force to make them do it so they can say, well, we didn't want to.
00:48:57.000
But those Americans and NATO, they just forced our hand.
00:49:12.260
So he can't win and he can't just give up because I would look weak and terrible.
00:49:16.900
Well, of course, he's waiting because Trump's the only one who says he's going to negotiate an end to the war.
00:49:22.980
You don't think that Putin wants an end to the war?
00:49:26.860
So the fact that Putin thinks that Trump would be a better leader in this situation and the fact that he agrees with, you know, maybe a third of the public or so now.
00:49:40.340
Let Putin, let Putin say he'd prefer a president that will make a deal and let him get the deal.
00:50:04.860
Does anybody think that Trump's going to visit Ukraine?
00:50:18.060
But I guess Chris Christie's got a, I don't know.
00:50:22.800
He's obviously not going to be president or vice president.
00:50:29.040
Senator Feinstein, who's, I believe her age is 300.
00:50:33.400
She's, she's, she's over 300 years old and she's given power of attorney to her daughter for her personal affairs.
00:50:42.520
So she's so incompetent that her daughter has power of attorney to make all of her, you know, legal decisions and stuff.
00:50:51.780
But she's still a sitting senator and has not resigned.
00:50:55.620
So she's one of the people running your country after having admitted she can't run her own life.
00:51:18.240
So unless Fox News mentions it, it doesn't come up.
00:51:22.980
So they just sort of live with it like that's okay.
00:51:34.180
So Joe Rogan is becoming quite outspoken about the political situation.
00:51:40.940
And he actually says that the Carrie Lake election in Arizona, he thinks he sees some real reason for, let's say, distrusting the results.
00:51:53.940
And thinks it's a banana republic that Trump got arrested.
00:51:59.240
Now, has Joe Rogan gone completely, no Democrats watch his show?
00:52:09.700
Has he turned into just like a thorough, you know, right-leaning conservative figure?
00:52:17.380
Because I was sort of surprised that he took such an aggressive public stand.
00:52:24.920
But I was surprised because it seems like it would be...
00:52:30.400
I made the mistake of looking at one comment from X.
00:52:40.800
He tells the truth and is not crazy like Scott.
00:52:52.540
Is there somebody here who is not jealous of Joe Rogan?
00:53:05.620
I feel like the most natural human feeling would be that you would have some jealousy about somebody who's just killing it.
00:53:17.920
Especially if they're doing something that you also do, but they do it better than it's been done in the history of, you know, humanity, which is Joe Rogan right now.
00:53:27.940
I mean, he's basically number one in human history for doing the thing he's doing.
00:53:33.620
Do you think I should not feel any jealousy about that?
00:53:37.200
I would say jealousy is the wrong word, though.
00:53:45.340
I was just sort of auditing my own feelings about it.
00:53:48.900
I think I know what jealousy and envy feels like.
00:53:51.920
But it feels more like it gets my competitive instinct up.
00:53:59.000
I spend a lot of time thinking about what Joe Rogan does and then thinking about what I do and saying, all right, if that's the best in class, you know, what can I do that's more like that?
00:54:15.340
If you're looking at Joe Rogan and you're not saying, I need to up my game, because whatever he's doing is working, you should.
00:54:24.140
So it doesn't feel like envy or jealousy because I don't have, like, the bad feeling about it.
00:54:29.480
It's more of a positive, hey, he can do this, I can do better.
00:54:34.640
You know, this is the perfect internet dad situation.
00:54:37.240
The fact that Joe Rogan, I find nothing but inspiring, and I find that he just makes me want to work harder.
00:54:51.260
So if he makes me envious or jealous, in your opinion, in your mind-reading opinion, but I process it as just wanting to work harder because he's setting a standard, then I think we're all good, aren't we?
00:55:10.920
It does make you wonder about the personalities of the all-caps shouters.
00:55:26.540
If I could get just one of my trolls, like, I've got one troll who comes on, I think it's been changing accounts and stuff, to tell me that I killed my stepson by neglect.
00:55:40.020
And I keep wondering, I would love to meet that person in person, like, actually I would.
00:55:48.720
Like, are they, is this somebody who's broken all the time and they just treat everybody like this?
00:55:56.040
Or are they so, you know, weak and powerless that if they can bother somebody who's, you know, got a lot of viewers and they feel like, oh, I did something, I made a difference in the world.
00:56:07.080
Or are they actually just like totally broken trolls and they get pleasure out of, you know, creating any pain?
00:56:19.660
Do you think they're political or just sadists?
00:56:36.500
We're blocking all caps people because they're silly sadists.
00:56:49.700
How long before we learned Biden's corruption is the only reason for the Ukraine war?
00:56:58.580
Or I feel like, I feel, feel like we're, we're dancing around that question.
00:57:04.160
Have you heard anybody in the news say that directly?
00:57:07.680
That we wouldn't be in the war if we had a different president because we had a president who couldn't say no to Ukraine.
00:57:18.400
The only way the war could have been avoided is if somebody could give a hard no to Ukraine and Russia.
00:57:27.620
Trump, Trump, Trump could give a hard no to both of those countries and say, you're not going to have a war.
00:57:35.900
I think Trump could have told them what they're going to do.
00:57:41.900
Putin, you've amassed your forces on the border.
00:58:02.360
And I don't even think Trump would tell him what he would do.
00:58:06.420
I mean, he might throw in some threats, but I think he could just threaten him away.
00:58:10.760
He could literally say, you have no idea what I'm going to do to you.
00:58:14.220
You, you don't know the depth that I would be willing to go to.
00:58:17.920
If you move one soldier over that line, all the rules are off.
00:58:25.180
Imagine Trump saying, I'm just, you know, gaming it through.
00:58:28.000
Imagine if Trump said, if you move one soldier's foot over that line, all the rules are off.
00:58:48.500
I mean, he would, he would have no idea what that means.
00:58:53.320
You'd probably not think it was nuclear war, but you never know.
00:58:55.960
Now, imagine, and then, of course, it'd be easy for somebody like a Trump to tell Zelensky, we're not giving you jack shit.
00:59:06.880
I just told you, he's not going to put one foot over the line.
00:59:18.180
It's easy to be, you know, 20-20 hindsight, backseat quarterback, backseat driver, all that stuff.
00:59:25.640
But it does seem to me that we had the only president who didn't have a chance of doing that.
00:59:30.980
Because, from what we've learned, it would seem that Ukraine has some leverage over Biden.
00:59:42.780
It seems to me obvious that Ukraine, let's say Zelensky specifically, would have knowledge of the Biden workings in Ukraine, and probably greater knowledge than we have so far.
00:59:58.320
You don't think that Biden knows that if he doesn't do everything Zelensky wants, there will be some information that comes out that's bad for Hunter?
01:00:08.620
Does anybody think that we know everything there is to know about Ukraine?
01:00:12.780
Don't you think it's obvious that Ukraine has some blackmail over Biden at this point?
01:00:26.140
Suppose we've heard everything there is to hear, and if we heard more, it would just be sort of more of the same and not change anything.
01:00:34.880
But are you comfortable and confident that your president is working for the benefit of America?
01:00:42.780
Tell me one other time, you tell me one other time that America's been in a war, you know, in this case we're supporting it without soldiers, but tell me one other time America's been in a war when you weren't sure if the commander-in-chief was actually on your team.
01:01:12.580
Even if you say, you know, Vietnam, Iraq, they were all bad wars, they were all allegedly for the benefit of America.
01:01:20.340
We thought, I think people genuinely thought Iraq was some kind of a threat, even if they didn't know there was weapons of mass destruction.
01:01:31.440
It still looked like, you know, at least we could get their oil or something.
01:01:35.720
To me, it didn't look like the commander-in-chief was non-American.
01:01:40.000
It looked like maybe just making some bad moves.
01:01:45.240
But this looks like Biden protecting his family, and it doesn't look like it had anything to do with America.
01:01:55.080
Not reading his mind, because I can't, but if you look at the actions, you'd say, this does not look like somebody who's on the side of America.
01:02:01.660
It looks exactly like somebody protecting his family, and it looks like the entire war is based on that.
01:02:10.720
So how many days has gone by since our crack news industry has found all the other people who agreed with Joe Biden that the Burisma prosecutor should be fired?
01:02:24.340
Because remember, he said he was doing it because all the other entities, you know, the international entities, show me one.
01:02:34.400
Put any one of the people who agreed with him before he did it on camera.
01:02:38.980
And just say, so you thought this was a good idea.
01:02:43.000
Can you tell us how much you independently knew about this prosecutor?
01:02:47.440
Were you really following this prosecutor in Ukraine?
01:02:51.580
And then what you probably would hear would be something like this.
01:02:56.260
Well, it's not something I was following closely, but we trust that the United States was.
01:03:01.660
So when the United States says you should back us on this, we kind of got in line because we trust them.
01:03:13.820
You don't think that Biden would have put somebody on the news, you know, his team.
01:03:18.300
You don't think they would have produced at least one person to say, hey, you know, I'm I'm Danish and all everybody over in Europe knew this guy had to go.
01:03:27.640
Because that was the story we were told, right?
01:03:43.060
They just wanted that Ukrainian prosecutor removed.
01:03:58.380
I block people for saying that Scott is finally waking up.
01:04:03.180
So you're, you, you were, uh, I think I brought, blocked two or three people every day for saying he's finally waking up.
01:04:37.720
So here's a, uh, question of the day is, did Devin Archer say that he was selling the illusion of excess or was that only in the question?
01:04:48.060
Who said that, that, uh, Devin Archer was selling only the illusion of excess?
01:04:59.120
Well, but you were selling the illusion, right?
01:05:03.300
Could you please agree with me that it was just the illusion?
01:05:06.140
And then, uh, I think, uh, Devin said something like, well, not just the illusion.
01:05:14.660
So he wasn't quite buying the, you know, the, uh, completeness of that statement that it was the illusion.
01:05:20.460
So, uh, of course, we will argue about whether that's true or false that, uh, Devin Archer said he was selling the illusion.
01:05:30.340
And then here's another part of the machine that I want to call out.
01:05:33.480
Uh, so Phil Bump, who writes for the Washington Post, uh, says that, uh, uh, Devin Archer said the opposite of what Republicans claimed.
01:05:51.100
How many, how many recognize that part of the machine?
01:05:55.000
How many know the name Phil Bump and the Washington Post?
01:06:03.620
Phil Bump is the Adam Schiff of Eric Swalwell's, who writes for the Washington Post, which is the toilet paper of the news.
01:06:22.340
So he's the Adam Schiff of Eric Swalwell's, who writes for the Washington Post, which is the toilet paper of the news.
01:06:30.920
When, when you see Phil Bump come out with something, it means that the Democrats are having a tough time and they couldn't find anybody who would lie enough.
01:06:44.000
Couldn't find anybody who would torture the narrative enough that they could get support for their team.
01:06:50.580
So, if you have to rely on Phil Bump, it means you've lost everything.
01:07:01.100
Everybody else is hiding because the news is not in our favor.
01:07:04.420
Can we get somebody who will just say anything?
01:07:08.840
And especially somebody in the Washington Post, because Democrats still think that's a legitimate publication.
01:07:13.940
Imagine being a Democrat and not knowing that the Washington Post is bullshit.
01:07:23.460
Imagine thinking that the New York Times is intending to tell you objective truth.
01:07:37.580
So, anyway, part of the machine you should recognize is the Phil Bump play.
01:07:42.680
I'll call it the Bump play, where your narrative has gone so wrong, you can only find one person who's willing to say you're right.
01:07:53.020
By the way, Phil Bump gave me a hard time when the Washington Post canceled me.
01:08:04.660
So, yeah, he has the lowest credibility of probably anybody in the writing business.
01:08:24.320
If somebody else thinks I lied, and then they cancel their subscription, but that wouldn't be politics.
01:08:44.600
So, uh, my, my live stream on X just ended on its own.
01:08:54.720
All right, so I don't know if that was a technical problem or what, probably.
01:08:59.320
Uh, Rasmussen did a poll about, uh, Biden and the possibility of an impeachment.
01:09:03.380
And the support for impeaching Biden has gone, which direction did it go?
01:09:12.600
Are people more or less willing to, less willing, less willing, yeah.
01:09:23.640
Does it make sense that there's less support for impeachment?
01:09:41.480
I, I think there might be less support for impeachment if he's not going to be around very long,
01:09:46.820
and it's obvious he's not going to be the next president.
01:09:49.540
I think if he were a real risk to be the next president,
01:09:52.880
then maybe people would have, uh, you know, feel differently.
01:10:00.720
But I also observe that every time a political leader comes under fire,
01:10:09.940
So do you think it's just a combination of their, their base, uh, ramping up support?
01:10:15.160
Because, you know, their, their guy is under pressure.
01:10:17.520
And the fact that he's closer to retirement anyway.
01:10:26.080
You know, polling's getting harder and harder to do.
01:10:28.580
Uh, but Rasmussen has, you know, looked at these numbers pretty closely.
01:10:34.660
It doesn't look like, you know, somebody's gaming the system.
01:10:46.860
I get, I don't know if I've ever, have I given an opinion yet?
01:10:50.500
Have I ventured an opinion on impeaching Biden?
01:11:01.280
It does seem to me that the Republicans could take the high ground and say,
01:11:07.220
this is clearly impeachable, but we'll settle for expunging Trump's impeachment
01:11:12.160
and reset us to where we were before, before this ugliness.
01:11:17.960
Because what you don't want is both sides perpetually impeaching each other,
01:11:24.900
So if the Republicans impeach, they've now set the standard that all presidents get impeached
01:11:30.220
the moment, the moment Congress, you know, is, uh, in a position to do it.
01:11:43.140
They could say, uh, the Trump impeachments were illegitimate and they expunged them.
01:11:53.720
And then say, we don't want to re, we don't want to recreate the same problem that the Democrats did.
01:11:59.080
We do believe that, uh, Biden's behavior is beyond the pale.
01:12:03.420
We've described it to you in detail, but let, let the voters decide.
01:12:07.960
Now, there are two, two schools of thought, and I'm not entirely sure which one is right.
01:12:18.000
One school of thought is that you push every advantage you can and you try to destroy the
01:12:23.880
other side in every way you can, no matter what.
01:12:36.600
I don't know that it's the right strategy, but I understand, you know, I, I respect it.
01:12:42.440
I do understand that you got to push hard or somebody is going to push you.
01:12:47.180
Um, but you don't want to use the same tool for every different situation.
01:12:52.960
This might be a special case because the other thing you could say is that Biden is no longer
01:12:59.980
You can say that impeaching somebody who wouldn't know he's being impeached is buying you nothing.
01:13:08.000
The high ground would be you don't impeach somebody who's that degraded.
01:13:19.300
And by the way, you, you can't impeach somebody who couldn't defend himself.
01:13:25.580
That, that is a good frame because it's actually true.
01:13:29.980
I don't think in my opinion, I don't think you should impeach somebody who's that degraded.
01:13:35.980
I think, I think you either time him out, you know, just replace him in the normal order
01:13:41.440
of things, or if his own team wants to take him out sooner, that's their own decision.
01:13:47.500
But having the Republicans press somebody who's just really not capable at this point
01:13:52.260
feels like, you know, just beating a baby harp seal.
01:13:57.420
It just feels like it's not a fair fight anymore.
01:14:00.880
Now, I get it that he, that Biden is still fighting hard.
01:14:05.380
So, you know, he shouldn't get a free pass, but you might have a better framing of saying
01:14:12.100
Saying you're above it might be exactly what the, what the country wants to hear.
01:14:16.580
Do you think the country wants to hear, we've got to stop doing the impeachments?
01:14:23.100
I think people would say they want to hear it, but I don't know if they do, because they
01:14:27.860
might like impeaching the other seat, other team, but not their own team.
01:14:40.120
Is trying to impeach Biden showing strength or weakness?
01:14:46.580
Because to me, if, if, let's say somebody has a mental weakness and they come up and
01:14:51.540
slap you in the face, would you be showing strength by hitting the back or strength by
01:15:06.340
Yeah, you really have to, you have to think this through because I think you could sell
01:15:14.160
And that's actually a stronger, that's much stronger messaging, I think.
01:15:22.240
It all, what, the only factor is what the public perceives.
01:15:26.740
If the public perceives that's too weak, then I guess it wouldn't work.
01:15:33.320
I see somebody calling themselves Rob Reiner, but not the real one.
01:15:43.740
You're fine with President Kamala and might say it's about time?
01:16:03.440
Yeah, in my analogy, the crazy person is someone who, they can defend themselves.
01:16:12.260
I mean, they did the first slap, but it just wouldn't be a fair fight.
01:16:15.560
So it's all about it not being a fair fight, and that's all.
01:16:20.920
So you should not take the, so here's a perfect example.
01:16:25.960
If my argument was the analogy, then that's weak.
01:16:31.660
But I don't need the analogy to make the argument that you don't want to attack a weak person
01:16:40.220
So here's the analogy, it's just packaging the point.
01:16:42.760
It's not making the point, it's just packaging it.
01:16:46.220
So don't argue the analogy, argue the logic of it.
01:16:56.140
That's just, the analogy is just an easy way to remember it.
01:17:13.620
There are some things that Garland needs to explain to all of us, wouldn't you say?
01:17:26.560
Ladies and gentlemen, I believe that is all I needed to do today
01:17:30.500
to achieve the greatest live stream you've ever seen so far today.
01:17:40.260
I would say thanks to the people on X, but they appear to have left on their own.