In this episode of the podcast, we talk about some science, politics, and why you should be thankful you don't have a bad mental attitude. Plus, we discuss a new invention that could change the world.
00:00:38.740If people reading the news see your headline and they understand what all the words mean, they're more likely to click it.
00:00:46.220If they don't understand what you're trying to say in the headline or it's a little too clever, they won't click it because why would they?
00:00:53.740Now, who could have told you that without the research?
00:00:59.840Who could have told you that if you understand what the topic is of the story, you're more likely to click it versus not knowing what the story is about because they use big, confusing words?
00:01:17.820Scott, we're thinking of doing this study to see if dumbass, big, frickin' academic-looking titles get as many clicks as clear, fun, short ones.
00:01:28.800And I would have said, whoa, good thing you asked me.
00:01:40.200How many of you remember back in 2015 and 2016 when Donald Trump was considered the dumbest person in all of public life because when he talked, he talked like he had a sixth-grade vocabulary?
00:01:57.520I mean, my goodness, how could he possibly be president with a sixth-grade vocabulary?
00:02:52.140Because at this point, everybody figured out that was the better way to communicate because the world is not as smart as writers and people who make headlines.
00:03:01.440The people who make headlines went to college, and the college told them to use big words, and so they do, to impress their editors and their friends.
00:03:07.920And then the people who read it, who necessarily maybe didn't go to such a good college, they look at it and say, I don't know what those words mean.
00:03:17.620So I really could have helped you there.
00:03:19.160But once you understand that Trump is arguably the best public communicator of all time, even with his flaws, nobody's ever been more persuasive or more clear about what they want than he has.
00:03:39.160There's a medical study saying that it's published in the JMA, J-A-M-A psychiatry publication.
00:03:49.220Anyway, shows that kids who had persistent inflammation as kids, body inflammation, were far more likely to develop serious mental health disorders, including psychosis and depression.
00:04:02.240Now, to their credit, the article about it says very clearly that they have not established that the inflammation causes the other problems.
00:04:15.200It could be either related or associated.
00:04:18.660So the first thing I'll say is congratulations for clearly writing about science in a way that makes sense.
00:04:25.060But at what point in the article did they tell you that it wasn't necessarily causation?
00:04:56.240So I'm only going to give them partial credit because the reason that you would click it and read it is that you thought that they had established some causation.
00:05:05.660And if you knew that they did not establish any causation because they don't have the data to do that yet, maybe you would have read it differently or not read it.
00:05:17.040But here's my hypothesis that I've been working on for a long time.
00:05:21.780The other day, I had a very bad mental attitude.
00:05:28.180I woke up just feeling this sense of dread and doom that wasn't really connected to anything happening in the world that was different than the day before when I felt fine.
00:05:39.660You know, surely there are problems in the world, but why did I feel fine yesterday?
00:05:43.940And then I wake up one day and then I feel like dread and doom.
00:06:11.940If you think that your brain and your, well, let's put it another way.
00:06:16.020If you think that your body is not a component of your mind and that it's only that little brain thing that's inside your skull that's part of your mind, oh, you're not going to succeed at anything.
00:06:35.300How did I, how did I, how did I solve the problem that I, I felt a sense of doom and dread and, you know, I would have even called it like a mild depression.
00:06:44.860It was because my body didn't feel good.
00:08:58.280Their claim is that when you reach a certain level, which we have already reached, that the science is very clear that the CO2 will stop having that same warming property.
00:09:11.480In other words, we've already reached peak CO2 warming potential.
00:09:18.320Adding more won't make any difference at all.
00:09:21.260So, uh, their claim is, let's see if I can get it in their words, that, uh, the physics of carbon dioxide is that CO2's ability to warm the planet is determined by its ability to absorb heat.
00:09:35.540So, if it doesn't absorb heat, it doesn't warm the planet, but its ability to absorb heat, this is the CO2, decreases rapidly as CO2 concentration increases.
00:09:50.980So, it's basically the opposite of all of climate change.
00:09:55.260That it does, it does correlate with an increase in temperature at lower rates, but when you reach about where we are now, it should plateau.
00:10:03.920So, they're saying, basically, it's not going to add any warming, because it, it, it can't.
00:10:10.240As soon as you have a, enough concentration of CO2, which is where we're at, you could add more, but it won't get any warmer.
00:10:23.940But, these are two very qualified, well-known, you know, even I know these names.
00:10:28.780I'm not in the scientific field, but I'm well aware of these two, two scientists.
00:10:33.920So, if they're right, then everything about the climate models is wrong.
00:10:39.340And they've made a, they've made a fairly simple claim, one that you think could be tested.
00:10:47.540Now, I'm not going to claim that these scientists are right and all the other scientists are wrong.
00:10:51.600I'm going to claim that we don't know anything about anything.
00:10:55.280Like, all of our sense of certainty is all artificial.
00:10:59.480It's, you know, we imagine that the data is never going to change, and nobody's lying, and all the assumptions they made are true, and, and that it's actually possible to predict the future based on a multi-variable model.
00:11:12.300Well, it's not, it's not, it's not, it's not even close to possible, and everybody in the field knows it, but you don't.
00:11:43.980I'm pretty sure I've seen tests where in the laboratory, if you introduce CO2 to a little closed environment, you can demonstrate that it causes warming.
00:11:53.640So, if the claim is that at a certain saturation level, it stops doing that instead of infinitely creating more warming, that would be easy to test, wouldn't it?
00:12:06.680Couldn't you just build a little terrarium or something that looks like Earth in a box or, you know, in a sealed, in a sealed environment, introduce some CO2, measure the temperature?
00:12:18.940Sure enough, we added CO2 and the temperature went up.
00:12:22.000Now keep adding it until you get to the concentration we're at today in the real world.
00:12:27.980Does it keep going up as you keep adding to it?
00:12:32.080Or does it plateau, as these two scientists would suggest?
00:12:37.320So, the fascinating thing about this is it seems so testable.
00:12:44.920I'm not going to tell you that, you know, these scientists are right and the others are wrong, because I have no way to know that.
00:12:50.000But I love the fact that they're very qualified people and they've got a very different idea of what's going on.
00:12:57.320But at least the rest of the climate model stuff is all pretty solid.
00:13:02.720You know, it's only that one assumption that they have to test.
00:13:06.200You know, the one assumption that drives everything, that's the only one they're questioning.
00:13:11.380The one assumption that makes everything different.
00:13:15.040But are there any other assumptions in these climate models, huh?
00:13:19.860Well, it turns out that there have been some new studies of ice.
00:13:24.440And they can melt the ice in a special scientific way and figure out what kind of gases and stuff are in the ice.
00:13:32.600And then they can reconstruct things about the past to know if their climate models today, you know, would have worked in the past as well.
00:15:02.760I'm just saying that one part of science that should be taken as credibly as the rest, probably, is saying that they got that big variable opposite.
00:15:13.060So suppose there were only two problems with the models that have lots of variables.
00:15:19.820And suppose the only two problems were they got this biomass thing backwards, and they got the CO2 doesn't eat anything after it reaches a certain saturation.
00:15:30.860What if they got those two things wrong?
00:15:33.200Well, then the entire models are nothing.
00:16:02.900But all this stuff that really has big dollars involved, it's never real.
00:16:09.780You can't have data collection and big dollars involved at the same time.
00:16:15.560But unfortunately, that's the only way anything happens.
00:16:18.620Because the only people willing to spend all the money it would take to collect data on something as big as the climate would be people who have a lot of money involved.
00:16:26.520So there isn't actually a system in place in the world to get accurate data about anything that matters.
00:16:41.680It's not like, well, we looked at this data and it turns out that somebody involved was gaming the system.
00:16:47.900But then we looked at some other data, it turned out there was something wrong with that data too.
00:16:53.560And you say to yourself, wow, I'm sure all the rest of the data in the world is good, but these two look like they were wrong.
00:17:02.060No, there is no way that it's even possible for data to be correct about anything important.
00:17:11.320Because the people presenting it have an interest and they're only going to show it to you if they can make that data look whatever it is that they need it to look.
00:17:21.920So, no, there's no such thing as accurate data about anything that matters.
00:17:29.120And don't be confused by the data on things that don't matter.
00:17:33.480There's probably plenty of data on things that don't matter to anybody politically or monetarily.
00:17:38.040But if it matters and there's money involved, it's never real.
00:19:15.560Have you heard about the jobs reports that are being revised by over 800,000 because they were all fake?
00:19:22.160Turns out it's way worse than that because we might be looking at jobs that were created as fake jobs to get PPP money during the pandemic.
00:19:30.960So there's some suggestion that there might be 5 million fake jobs because people pretended they had employees so they could get money from the government and pretend that they had companies.
00:19:44.740So some people think that our jobs numbers are completely just ridiculous and just made up, and now they're being revised.
00:19:52.120So that's exactly what you would expect to happen if, in fact, your design of how you collect data was wrong and delegated to the people who had the most interest in lying to you.
00:20:08.460The gold standard of online casinos has arrived.
00:20:11.300Golden Nugget Online Casino is live, bringing Vegas-style excitement and a world-class gaming experience right to your fingertips.
00:20:18.440Whether you're a seasoned player or just starting, signing up is fast and simple.
00:20:23.440And in just a few clicks, you can have access to our exclusive library of the best slots and top-tier table games.
00:20:29.620Make the most of your downtime with unbeatable promotions and jackpots that can turn any mundane moment into a golden opportunity at Golden Nugget Online Casino.
00:20:39.100Take a spin on the slots, challenge yourself at the tables, or join a live dealer game to feel the thrill of real-time action, all from the comfort of your own devices.
00:20:47.380Why settle for less when you can go for the gold at Golden Nugget Online Casino?
00:21:29.880And even when they're not made up, they put it in the wrong context, like comparing to the pandemic versus not the pandemic, which is no comparison at all.
00:21:38.100So, we don't have jobs numbers that are real.
00:21:43.300And we don't have crime numbers that are real.
00:21:46.760And it's because the government is in charge of those numbers.
00:21:49.720And there is no scenario in which the government wants you to have real numbers.
00:21:54.920Every scenario, no matter who's in charge, they want it to look like it's good for their team.
00:22:00.960So, if you were to ask private companies to get you information, let's say drug companies to do drug studies, what should you expect?
00:22:11.960If you were going to design that system on paper, all right, the people who could make a billion dollars if the drug is safe are in charge of telling you that the data says it's safe.
00:23:13.400Female doctors, another study says female doctors have a far greater risk of taking their own life than even male doctors, but, you know, higher than other professions.
00:23:26.880Now, when I used to be a banker, it was my job to make loans to doctors and dentists and professionals like that for a while.
00:23:36.380And one of the risks of making loans to medical professionals, especially dentists, is that they had unusually high rates of taking their own lives.
00:23:47.260Dentists in particular have, like, career-wise are right at the top of taking their own lives.
00:23:53.120I'm not surprised that doctors may be a little higher and that female doctors are the highest.
00:23:57.960And I have a hypothesis to add to this.
00:24:02.680You know, the obvious things would be that being a doctor isn't as good as it used to be and, you know, you don't have the same prestige and, you know, the work is terrible.
00:24:12.680And a lot of the time you're just doing work that's just busy work to make sure you stayed up all night.
00:24:18.300Because for some reason, the medical field wants to torture you when you're a new doctor.
00:29:39.900So there's a report that Osama bin Laden once said, and it must be in a document somewhere that we've captured after bin Laden got taken down.
00:29:53.900But apparently there's some document in which he was saying it would be okay for al-Qaeda to try to assassinate Obama during Obama's term.
00:30:05.600But they wanted to make sure that they didn't assassinate Joe Biden, the vice president.
00:30:10.800Do you know why bin Laden thought it would be acceptable and desirable to assassinate the president of the United States, but not the vice president?
00:30:22.080Do you know what his reasoning is for that?
00:30:25.080Well, allegedly, his reasoning is that Joe Biden was incompetent, and it would be really good luck for al-Qaeda if he ever became president of the United States, because he would destroy the United States with his own bumbling incompetence.
00:31:24.240But so I'm going to use the it's a little too close to exactly what some people would want to hear to make me believe it happened just that way.
00:31:57.820You literally can't spell bin Laden without Biden.
00:32:00.840I don't know if this simulation is telling us something, but there it is.
00:32:08.580Anyway, there's a story that one of the officials in the government nuclear weapons departments is trying to make the nuclear weapons group way gayer.
00:32:26.000So it's the National Nuclear Security Administration's special assistant named N, A, N, A, I, R.
00:32:40.200Anyway, made it clear that she wants to get rid of all the white supremacy in the nuclear weapons group, get rid of the white supremacy in the nuclear field.
00:32:53.000And she wants to, you know, gay up the nuclear weapons as part of the diversity, equity, and inclusion.
00:32:59.760So there's actually somebody who's feeling that the important thing about nuclear war is to make sure that diverse people launch them so that when we all die in a giant nuclear fireball, we can say,
00:33:17.620Ah, I'm melting, but at least diversity was achieved.
00:33:25.400That's my impression of dying after a nuclear blast.
00:33:52.380What I'm saying is if you design a system where one of the top priorities is not, oh, let's say, avoiding a nuclear war or winning one if you have to be in one.
00:34:05.060If your top priority of any individual who's got power in that organization is to make sure you have more diversity,
00:34:11.540you've designed a system for failure and almost guaranteed nuclear war.
00:34:17.180If you said to me, what would be a good way to create a nuclear war, I'd say, well, stop hiring based strictly on merit and make sure you got a good diversity in there.
00:34:28.520Again, no complaints about anybody's genes or gender preference or gender or any of that.
00:34:35.220That has nothing to do with any of my points.
00:34:37.780My point is that if you force a certain population, no matter who they are, and you force them into the city or into the system, you're going to get incompetence.
00:34:49.020So there's somebody whose job is to inject incompetence into our nuclear operation.
00:34:57.760You know, you'd think there'd be some limit to how stupid we could be, but apparently not.
00:35:04.240There's no limit to how stupid we could be.
00:40:42.380It was different from the testosterone-filled, you know, macho Republican people.
00:40:50.160And so both MSNBC and CNN's, the women, the female pundits and observers, were saying that the Democrats have this new model of male, optimal male behavior, which is supporting a woman being your boss.
00:41:06.420And that if you could be more, let's say, less macho Hulk Hogan and less Dana White and more Doug Emhoff and more Tim Walz, that that's the model that the Democrats want to put forward as modern male leadership.
00:41:26.480And then RFK Jr. comes along, he's just like bristling with muscles, and he's willing to skin a dead bear.
00:41:39.060And he just doesn't, he just doesn't fit their model.
00:41:46.700So I'm going to say again, do you think, no, I'm making an assumption here, that if we assume that he's at least friendly with the Trump campaign, do we think that he would have any chance of endorsing or working with Trump if he had not boosted his testosterone?
00:42:05.440Which, if I haven't told you this before, your body and your brain are the same organ.
00:43:08.160There's a story, I guess the government's probably saying this, that both Russia and Iran are, quote,
00:43:14.820waging operations to influence the U.S. elections.
00:43:17.720All right, so the idea is that professional trolls from Russia and from Iran are trying to spread disinformation or put their finger on the scales for our election.
00:43:34.420Do you see anything about that story that is funny?