The Joe Rogan Experience - Joe Rogan Experience #441 - Brian Dunning

00:00:00.000 Pow Pow Pow and we're back.

00:00:02.000 This episode of the Joe Oregon Experience podcast is brought to you by LegalZoom.

00:00:07.000 To start the new year correctly, ladies and gentlemen, I believe it's a perfect time to get your life organized.

00:00:13.000 Organized?

00:00:14.000 How do you say it, Brian?

00:00:15.000 Organized.

00:00:15.000 Legal Zoom can help.

00:00:17.000 Legal Zoom is a way of dealing with very common and standard legal issues that you would ordinarily have to go to a lawyer and make an appointment and spend a lot of money.

00:00:29.000 You can get things done online for, like you can incorporate and form an LLC starting at $99.

00:00:35.000 You can protect your family with a last will for $69 or get a living trust power of attorney.

00:00:42.000 And the beautiful thing about LegalZoom is if you panic, if you're in the middle of it, you're like, oh, this can't be legal.

00:00:47.000 This is fucked.

00:00:48.000 LegalZoom will connect you with an independent attorney.

00:00:52.000 And the whole process can be easily sorted out.

00:00:56.000 They can help you with online support.

00:00:58.000 Their online process could not be much easier.

00:01:01.000 They take care of you from start to finish.

00:01:03.000 And now you get a special discount from listening to the podcast.

00:01:06.000 Make sure you enter Rogan in the referral box at checkout for more savings.

00:01:09.000 LegalZoom, they want you to know they're not a law firm, but they could connect you with a third-party attorney and provide you with self-help services.

00:01:17.000 The self-help services is easy to do.

00:01:21.000 It is how Onit was formed.

00:01:23.000 It is how Brian formed Desk Squad.

00:01:25.000 You can do legal stuff online in a way that was really, really difficult to do in the past.

00:01:30.000 You had to know what the fuck you're doing.

00:01:32.000 But now it's done for you.

00:01:33.000 And again, if you panic, LegalZoom takes care of you.

00:01:36.000 So legalzoom.com, use the code word Rogan at checkout.

00:01:41.000 We are also brought to you by stamps.com.

00:01:44.000 Stamps.com is another awesome way to deal with some tedious shit, which is going to the mail post office and giving them the fucking boxes that you want to send out and having them weigh and measure each one of them.

00:01:57.000 And then all the nonsense you have to deal with, the weight and the line, all the crap.

00:02:01.000 You can do all that at home.

00:02:02.000 And with stamps.com, you can print U.S. postage right from your desk using your own computer and printer.

00:02:08.000 Stamps.com always updates the postage rates for you automatically.

00:02:13.000 It's really sweet.

00:02:14.000 And unlike those postage meter companies, Stamps.com never charges a fee to do it.

00:02:18.000 So with Stamps.com, you always get the exact postage you need for any letter or package the instant you need it.

00:02:26.000 We have a special offer for podcast listeners.

00:02:29.000 If you click on the old school microphone in the upper right-hand corner and enter in the word J-R-E, you get a no-risk trial and a $110 bonus offer, which includes a digital scale and up to $55 of free postage.

00:02:41.000 A digital scale that Brian Dunning will not use to weigh mushrooms on because he knows that that's not right.

00:02:47.000 It's not nearly big enough.

00:02:48.000 It's not low.

00:02:50.000 He's a madman, ladies and gentlemen.

00:02:53.000 Go to stamps.com and before you do anything, click on the microphone at the top of the homepage and type in J-R-E.

00:02:59.000 Brian uses it to send those t-shirts from deskquad.tv.

00:03:03.000 Tom Segura and Christina Pazitski use it for your mom's house.

00:03:06.000 Burt Kreischer uses it.

00:03:08.000 It is a very easy way to send postage from your home.

00:03:12.000 Send postage?

00:03:13.000 Use postage.

00:03:14.000 Send packages.

00:03:16.000 But again, you measure it all yourself.

00:03:17.000 You do it all yourself, print it all yourself, and then the postman picks it up and you're done, son.

00:03:21.000 Use the code word J-R-E. 1.00

00:03:24.000 And that's it.

00:03:25.000 Oh, go to onit.com.

00:03:26.000 You know that one.

00:03:26.000 Blah, blah, blah.

00:03:27.000 You know that one already.

00:03:28.000 Go to O-N-N-I-T. 1.00

00:03:30.000 Use the code word Bergen.

00:03:31.000 Save yourself 10% off.

00:03:32.000 Any and all supplements.

00:03:33.000 Bah, ba, boom.

00:03:35.000 Brian Dunning's community.

00:03:38.000 The Joe Rogan experience.

00:03:40.000 Train my day.

00:03:41.000 Joe Rogan podcast by night.

00:03:43.000 All day.

00:03:45.000 Rejoice, ladies and gentlemen.

00:03:46.000 Brian Dunning.

00:03:47.000 Thank you, sir.

00:03:47.000 Thanks for coming on.

00:03:50.000 One of the cool things about the internet is that you can get connected to all these weird and unusual folks.

00:03:57.000 And you can also exchange a lot of information back and forth and find out a lot of things about each other.

00:04:03.000 And I read about you.

00:04:07.000 No, nothing's coming.

00:04:08.000 This is fun, friendly.

00:04:09.000 I read about you and I read some of the things.

00:04:11.000 And I didn't know when you had contacted me that you had included me in your...

00:04:18.000 It was the top ten most wanted celebrities promoting harmful pseudoscience.

00:04:23.000 And in that, I read about myself, and I was shocked to learn that I believe that 911 was created by the government.

00:04:30.000 I did not know.

00:04:32.000 I didn't know that I believed that.

00:04:33.000 I don't think you've ever said that.

00:04:35.000 I've never said that.

00:04:36.000 We can talk about the whole genesis of how this list came to be.

00:04:38.000 Well, but that one is poorly researched.

00:04:41.000 I've absolutely never said that I think that the government engineered 9-11.

00:04:45.000 Well, you know, this was an episode I did in 2008, which was, I don't know, five, six years ago now.

00:04:51.000 And so before coming here today, I wanted to make sure and get all my sources for all of these.

00:04:56.000 And unfortunately, back in 2008, I was not yet keeping very good records and saving my notes.

00:05:02.000 So for the things that I have listed here, unfortunately, I can't give you the source for any one of them.

00:05:07.000 But any one of them you want to tell me is not true, I will happily retract it.

00:05:11.000 Well, first of all, the 9-11 won 100%.

00:05:14.000 In fact, I was on the phone with Alex Jones the night that 9-11 happened.

00:05:18.000 The government engineered this, Joe Rogan.

00:05:20.000 We have the documents.

00:05:21.000 They've been planning this since Operation Northwoods.

00:05:25.000 I'm sure it didn't take him till that night to figure it out.

00:05:27.000 He would probably, well, I think he actually might have even predicted it.

00:05:31.000 But when you say that, like, people go, whoa, is he a psychic?

00:05:35.000 He predicted a billion things that never happened.

00:05:37.000 You know, every possibility.

00:05:39.000 FEMA camps.

00:05:40.000 They've got coffins, plastic coffins.

00:05:43.000 That doesn't mean that he's a clairvoyant.

00:05:46.000 It means he's a tightly strung, tightly wound-up fella.

00:05:50.000 Oh, do you think?

00:05:51.000 But we debated it online on the air.

00:05:56.000 I was like, how do you, you can't say that.

00:05:58.000 Like, there's no evidence that shows that the government did it.

00:06:01.000 Just because you suspect them of doing it, you can't say it.

00:06:03.000 There's also crazy shit that happens when planes fly into buildings.

00:06:07.000 And I have a doctor, not a real good doctor, but he's a pot doctor. 0.99

00:06:10.000 He's a doctor that hands you out medical marijuana prescriptions, but I guess he went to medical school.

00:06:15.000 I go to him the other day, and he hands me this book, and he's like, this is very important information.

00:06:20.000 And I go, okay.

00:06:21.000 So I start reading it, and it's about Tesla technology that they use to make the Twin Towers disappear.

00:06:27.000 Oh, my God.

00:06:28.000 That the Twin Towers, the reason why they turned into dust and they just didn't fall apart into big chunks is because Tesla tech, I thought he was like having a mental issue.

00:06:38.000 Like I thought something had blown a fuse or something.

00:06:41.000 I was so confused by the conversation.

00:06:43.000 I didn't know what he was saying.

00:06:44.000 Like, you're saying they used unknown technology to make the buildings disappear.

00:06:49.000 How did you know then?

00:06:50.000 He's got a thick book.

00:06:51.000 You see, the whole thing, Tesla mythology is a whole other area of BS, which is amazing.

00:06:58.000 So many of the things that Tesla's known for never happened.

00:07:03.000 He was certainly a very brilliant man, certainly an innovative engineer, but he didn't invent AC.

00:07:10.000 He didn't invent electric motors.

00:07:12.000 These are all things that already existed that he continued working on.

00:07:15.000 He never invented a death ray.

00:07:17.000 He was completely nuts by the time of his life.

00:07:18.000 He said he had a death ray.

00:07:20.000 He and Edison did have the competition or the competing ideas about alternating current and direct current, and he was an advocate of alternating current where Edison, in fact, did tests to show, or did displays, rather, demonstrations, to show the dangers of this.

00:07:35.000 And one of the things they did is they fried an elephant.

00:07:37.000 It's really fucked, man, if you watch it.

00:07:39.000 And he called it Westinghousing.

00:07:41.000 He called it, we're going to Westinghouse this elephant now.

00:07:44.000 He was hoping that that word would catch on.

00:07:45.000 That's hilarious.

00:07:47.000 So I don't know where you got the 9-11 thing from.

00:07:50.000 But if I had listened to me talk about the moon landing, I'd probably assume that I was also a non-believer in 9-11.

00:07:56.000 So, no, never said that and never believed that.

00:07:59.000 The only thing I've ever said that's controversial at all is that Tower 7, when you watch it fall, it looks like in controlled demolition.

00:08:05.000 And I don't think that's controversial because it looks like a controlled demolition.

00:08:08.000 Yeah, but when you look at just the top half of it, it does.

00:08:10.000 Well, you look at the whole thing.

00:08:11.000 The way the structure collapses.

00:08:13.000 There's no video of the whole thing.

00:08:14.000 You can only see the video of the top, really the top quarter of it as it disappears behind the building.

00:08:19.000 And I agree, it does look exactly like a controlled demolition.

00:08:21.000 Oh, I believe it's more than the top quarter.

00:08:24.000 Pull the video up of Tower 7 dropping.

00:08:26.000 There's some pretty, I mean, this is at least 30 floors, you're saying.

00:08:30.000 You're seeing a lot of it.

00:08:31.000 It's not really, I wouldn't say it's the top quarter.

00:08:33.000 It's a 48-foot building.

00:08:34.000 Correct.

00:08:35.000 I believe I can argue the fraction, but you don't see the bottom of it.

00:08:38.000 Well, that's true, but it is very unusual how it falls into its base instead of falls over.

00:08:44.000 It didn't.

00:08:45.000 It started to fall down straight, but then it almost destroyed two other buildings that it fell against.

00:08:49.000 It didn't fall into its own footprint.

00:08:51.000 Right, which any building that they were demolishing would probably do as well if they were that close to each other and it went wrong, right?

00:08:57.000 Yeah, watch it again.

00:08:59.000 Here, look at that.

00:09:00.000 Yeah, that's way more than a top quarter.

00:09:02.000 Okay, it's not.

00:09:03.000 You know what I mean?

00:09:04.000 That's almost the entire building.

00:09:05.000 No, it's not.

00:09:06.000 Okay, let's see it again.

00:09:07.000 Let's see it again because we caught that in the middle.

00:09:09.000 Let's see it again.

00:09:10.000 Let's see it from the top.

00:09:12.000 This is not the best angle of it either.

00:09:13.000 There's a bunch of different angles all the time.

00:09:15.000 Okay, let's see it again.

00:09:16.000 Pull that one back. 1.00

00:09:20.000 I mean, it disappears into the smoke before you can see much of it.

00:09:22.000 Right, but I think it's a bit disingenuous to say that that thing doesn't fall into its base.

00:09:26.000 Look at that.

00:09:27.000 It doesn't.

00:09:27.000 I mean, look at it.

00:09:28.000 It's already going at an angle.

00:09:29.000 Look at that.

00:09:30.000 Okay, but it all fell to the bottom.

00:09:32.000 I mean, let's look at that one again.

00:09:33.000 It's not going to fall to the top.

00:09:35.000 Okay, but you're being kind of silly.

00:09:36.000 That thing collapsed into its base. 0.92

00:09:38.000 Look at that.

00:09:39.000 Here it goes.

00:09:39.000 Watch.

00:09:40.000 That is most of the building vanishes out of sight.

00:09:44.000 Who knows what happens from then on?

00:09:46.000 And for sure, it ran into other buildings.

00:09:48.000 The point is, this had never happened before, and it looks like a controlled demolition.

00:09:52.000 I'm not saying it, but let me be clarify, because this is important.

00:09:56.000 I'm not saying it's a controlled demolition.

00:09:57.000 I know.

00:09:57.000 I have no idea.

00:09:58.000 But that's what it looks like.

00:09:59.000 To say it doesn't look like that is kind of silly.

00:10:01.000 No, I agree.

00:10:02.000 But if you want to see how it fell into its own base, quote unquote, just look at the aerial photographs that were taken the next day when all the smoke had cleared, and you can see that it didn't remotely fall into its own base.

00:10:12.000 It fell down the street and practically destroyed two other buildings.

00:10:16.000 Well, that's a matter of physics.

00:10:17.000 I mean, all that material has to go somewhere.

00:10:19.000 You had 48 floors of material.

00:10:21.000 It all comes down and collapses.

00:10:22.000 It's going to fly to the side of the side.

00:10:23.000 And I'm not saying.

00:10:24.000 Well, it didn't fly to the side.

00:10:25.000 It fell over.

00:10:27.000 It didn't fall down and then out to in all directions like it splattered.

00:10:30.000 It fell over.

00:10:31.000 It started going down, and then it went to an angle and fell off to the side.

00:10:36.000 But this is an interesting thing because this is a thing that a lot of people want the world to be very black and white.

00:10:43.000 And they want things like this to be really simple to categorize.

00:10:47.000 I don't think it is.

00:10:48.000 And I don't agree with you that that didn't fall into its base.

00:10:51.000 Sure, a lot of other shit happened, and Probably big chunks of it landed on buildings nearby, but that thing collapsed into its base.

00:10:57.000 Did it collapse into its base because of a gigantic diesel fire that had consumed the innards of the building and weakened the structure considerably?

00:11:04.000 Fuck, for sure that's possible.

00:11:05.000 I don't know a goddamn thing about it.

00:11:07.000 My dad's an architect.

00:11:08.000 You know, I asked him about it and he said, well, it's unusual, but you don't know what the hell was going on inside of it.

00:11:13.000 You don't know what kind of damage it sustained from having the building fall out of it.

00:11:16.000 You don't know what that diesel fuel burning, what it does to the structure.

00:11:19.000 You don't know how they built the inside of it.

00:11:21.000 Who knows?

00:11:21.000 It's weird, but weird things happen when things break.

00:11:25.000 That was his take on it.

00:11:27.000 But you can't say that that doesn't look like a controlled demolition.

00:11:30.000 And I didn't.

00:11:30.000 I said it does look like a controlled demolition, the property that you can see.

00:11:33.000 most controversial thing I've ever said about 9-11.

00:11:36.000 I've never said once that I think that the government engineered it or that it was, I think it's very possible that big events happen and then people capitalize on those events and then things happen like the invasion of Iraq.

00:11:48.000 They were probably looking for an excuse to do anyway, but the idea that it was all one big grand scheme to me seems ridiculously unlikely.

00:11:57.000 Let me, this, this is actually a good segue into what we started to talk about, which was this, this inclusion that I had of you back in this list of top celebrities promoting pseudoscience.

00:11:57.000 Okay.

00:12:11.000 Because what it's, if someone had just listened to our last five minutes here of the exchange, it sounded like you were trying to convince me that 9-11 was a hoax.

00:12:19.000 By who?

00:12:19.000 To who would say that?

00:12:22.000 I think anyone who, who listens to that five minutes, it would sound like you were trying to convince me Building 7 was a demolition.

00:12:27.000 No, it wouldn't.

00:12:29.000 It was very specific that I don't think it's a gray area.

00:12:31.000 I don't think it's a black and white issue.

00:12:33.000 I think it's a very gray area.

00:12:34.000 I think that that building looked like it was demolished.

00:12:37.000 Was it demolished?

00:12:38.000 I absolutely don't know.

00:12:39.000 I'm too dumb.

00:12:40.000 I have zero education when it comes to structural engineering, zero education when it comes to the damage that a fire can do to a structure and cause it to collapse and big chunks of buildings hitting it, what that can do.

00:12:51.000 I don't know.

00:12:52.000 But when I look at it, it looks like a controlled demolition.

00:12:54.000 That does not sound like I'm trying to convince you that 9-11 was a hoax.

00:12:57.000 Because I said very specifically that I don't think it is.

00:13:00.000 And then I think that it's ridiculous to assume that someone could be so organized that they could talk these guys into flying planes, into buildings, and that they can make it that these buildings are rigged with explosives secretly, you know, some clandestine operation with the banks and the NSA and the DEA and the CIA, everyone coordinating together so that we could invade Iraq.

00:13:21.000 It sounds ridiculous.

00:13:23.000 If you're a betting man, if you had to bet yes or no, was 9-11 orchestrated by the government, if you had to bet, would you bet yes?

00:13:29.000 I would bet on no.

00:13:30.000 I would 100% bet on no.

00:13:31.000 You bet 100% bet on no.

00:13:32.000 Yes, I would 100% bet on no.

00:13:34.000 But I wouldn't be surprised if two additional possibilities.

00:13:38.000 One, it was something that they knew possibly could happen and didn't prevent against because either of A, incompetence, or B, you have to look at things like Operation Northwoods.

00:13:50.000 You have to look at the Gulf of Tonkin.

00:13:51.000 You have to look at real events that took place or real plans that were separate questions.

00:13:57.000 Well, and then I would say there's always the possibility that there was some knowledge of it beforehand.

00:13:57.000 Those are separate questions.

00:14:04.000 But that's a separate question also, then they orchestrated it and caused it to happen.

00:14:07.000 I do not have enough faith that the government is so competent that they could pull off this amazingly intricate attack.

00:14:13.000 So if you're 100% betting no, then you're going to be aware of that.

00:14:16.000 Why wouldn't that mean it's a bet?

00:14:17.000 I mean, I might bet no, but it doesn't mean anything.

00:14:20.000 I'm asking for your personal level of confidence, your opinion, and your personal confidence.

00:14:23.000 If you're forcing me to bet, then I would bet no.

00:14:26.000 But I would never say I know one way or the other.

00:14:28.000 So if I asked you, what is your bet on whether Building 7 was a controlled demolition, are you still 100% no?

00:14:35.000 I certainly wouldn't bet.

00:14:37.000 I certainly wouldn't bet because I don't know enough.

00:14:39.000 But if I looked at it the way a person who's objective, a person who understands what they know and what they don't know in this life, I would have to say it would be pretty fucking difficult to rig a building with explosives and not have anybody know about it.

00:14:53.000 It would be pretty fucking difficult to make that building implode and have it be some sort of a secret that people kept.

00:14:58.000 It seems highly unlikely.

00:15:00.000 It seems more likely to me that there's some sort of a catastrophic structural failure.

00:15:06.000 But I would fucking sue the shit out of those people that built that movie, that building rather.

00:15:11.000 If I was Larry, what's his name?

00:15:14.000 Larry Silverstein, I would sue the fuck out of the people that built that building.

00:15:18.000 I was like, look at this building just fall down when it gets on fire.

00:15:20.000 Like, you assholes.

00:15:21.000 I guess he got paid, though, from insurance, right?

00:15:23.000 He didn't need to do that.

00:15:25.000 That's the other part of the conspiracy, is that money was made off the conspiracy.

00:15:28.000 The words, the wording, pull it.

00:15:30.000 Pull it.

00:15:30.000 You know, the fact that he said pull it.

00:15:32.000 It's my take that anytime there's any sort of a catastrophic event, whether it's a murder or an accident or anything, there's a bunch of people that look for patterns in the chaos.

00:15:43.000 There's a bunch of people that look for a following plot line and look for some sort of a nefarious connection between people that would profit off this event and just the randomness of chaotic, of being attacked, of death and about destruction.

00:15:59.000 I think it's more likely that.

00:16:01.000 It's more likely that people are looking at this and trying to make some sense out of it, about this crazy, chaotic event where there's a bunch of suicide bombers that flew planes into buildings.

00:16:11.000 You know, when Neil Tyson was here, how long ago was that?

00:16:14.000 Three, four months ago, something like that?

00:16:15.000 It's about a year ago.

00:16:16.000 He was making the point about how he tries very much to give people the tools to...

00:16:31.000 And he made some points about why that's a valuable thing to have, why it's good to have, to be able to make good decisions about the way the world works and to understand the way things really happen.

00:16:40.000 And it sounded to me like you pretty generally agreed with him.

00:16:42.000 Yes.

00:16:43.000 And I would too.

00:16:46.000 So in the case of this, 9-11, as an example, I mean, we've got 100 different conspiracy theories here, et cetera, et cetera, and not even conspiracy theories, but just plain up pseudosciences.

00:16:58.000 It makes sense to help people to come to the right conclusion, to come to a conclusion that's probably true, because that's symptomatic of all the other areas in their life where they're going to have to consider issues and make up a good, informed opinion that's probably more likely to be true.

00:17:13.000 Wouldn't you agree with that?

00:17:15.000 I mean, that's really the same thing he's saying.

00:17:17.000 So if it then makes sense for you to promote the idea that 9-11 was probably not a government conspiracy, then why would you spend five minutes showing me this video and bringing it to the attention of everyone on your show saying, hey, look at this, look how it was probably controlled demolition.

00:17:37.000 I'm sorry.

00:17:38.000 Look how much it looked like a controlled demolition.

00:17:40.000 Because it does, because it's interesting.

00:17:42.000 Yeah, but unless you're framing that within the context of, look how easy it is to be mistaken, which is not what you said.

00:17:50.000 Well, why do I have to do that to just observe something that's fascinating?

00:17:55.000 You don't have to do it, but what Neil WisTyson was trying to sell you on was the value of doing it.

00:18:00.000 Help giving people the tools to understand the way the world probably actually works.

00:18:04.000 Okay, how does that relate to you listening to me go on about how it looks like a controlled demolition?

00:18:09.000 You agree that it looks like a controlled demolition, and just because I'm expressing that, you're saying that if someone listened to that, they would think rather that I'm trying to convince you that 9-11 was a hoax.

00:18:18.000 I think that's a giant stretch.

00:18:21.000 An enormous stretch.

00:18:22.000 I think that's what it sounded like.

00:18:24.000 It didn't sound like that to me.

00:18:26.000 To most rational, objective people listening, they would have heard all the caveats that I threw in there, all the times that I said.

00:18:31.000 Now, I don't believe this.

00:18:33.000 I don't.

00:18:33.000 But looking at that and watching it collapse like that, it looks like a controlled Demolition.

00:18:38.000 I think you would be a fool to disagree.

00:18:40.000 It looks exactly like that.

00:18:42.000 Is it one?

00:18:43.000 That's not what I'm saying.

00:18:44.000 I don't know.

00:18:45.000 I've said very clearly, I know nothing about architecture.

00:18:48.000 I know nothing about engineering.

00:18:49.000 I know nothing about the impact of diesel fire on concrete and steel.

00:18:54.000 I don't know.

00:18:55.000 Okay, well, let me go back again to how this is a good segue to what I wrote back in 2008.

00:18:59.000 Okay.

00:19:00.000 Which hopefully the end result of me being here today will be I will get back to all my listeners and say I'm retracting your appearance on this list.

00:19:10.000 Okay, so just a paragraph.

00:19:11.000 Okay, if I read this?

00:19:12.000 Sure, please.

00:19:13.000 Okay, so I think you are number eight on my list of top 10 celebrities who promote harmful pseudoscience.

00:19:20.000 And here's the paragraph that I wrote on you.

00:19:22.000 Number eight, Joe Rogan.

00:19:23.000 Comedian Joe Rogan does what he can to promote virtually any conspiracy theory that he stumbles onto, apparently accepting them all uncritically with a wholesale embrace.

00:19:33.000 Now, I know you would disagree with that now.

00:19:35.000 Of course I would.

00:19:36.000 And I want to give you that chance.

00:19:37.000 So let me continue.

00:19:38.000 He believes the Apollo astronauts did not land on the moon.

00:19:42.000 He believes the U.S. government was behind the 9-11 terrorist attacks.

00:19:45.000 He believes the Oliver Stone version of the Kennedy assassination.

00:19:48.000 He believes aliens crashed at Roswell in 1947 and the government is covering it up.

00:19:54.000 He thinks men in black from Project Blue Book stole his friend's camera, even though Project Blue Book ended over 38 years ago.

00:20:01.000 My friend was 10.

00:20:02.000 He's 60, by the way.

00:20:04.000 And they didn't steal his camera.

00:20:05.000 I want to hear that story, but...

00:20:08.000 He took a photo of something.

00:20:09.000 Who knows what it was?

00:20:10.000 I never said it was Project Blue Book guys.

00:20:13.000 I told you what my friend, who's a flight surgeon, told me.

00:20:17.000 I wish to hell I had that reference for that.

00:20:19.000 But let me just call Steve and get him on the phone.

00:20:22.000 Steve Graham?

00:20:23.000 That would be fun, actually.

00:20:24.000 The worst part is that he promotes these ideas to the public at every interview opportunity, but gives himself the intellectual get-out-of-jail free card of not needing any evidence by hiding behind the childish debate technique of saying, hey, I'm just the guy asking questions.

00:20:39.000 God, this makes me sound like an asshole.

00:20:41.000 Well, it's just factually inaccurate on so many different levels.

00:20:44.000 I don't understand why you wrote it like that.

00:20:46.000 Like, there's things that you said that I believe that I don't, that I've never said that I do.

00:20:51.000 What I'm willing to do is look stupid.

00:20:54.000 And by talking about things and saying that looks like a controlled demolition, I know that puts you in the nutter camp, but I'm not saying it's a controlled demolition.

00:21:02.000 But I say that not being willing to debate it and being insecure, to discuss it rather, not debate it, but to discuss the reality of what you're viewing is silly.

00:21:11.000 It's preposterous.

00:21:12.000 It doesn't mean I'm promoting the idea that 9-11 was an inside job or that it was a plot by the government.

00:21:18.000 I've never thought that.

00:21:18.000 I don't think that.

00:21:20.000 But I do think that building looks like a controlled demolition.

00:21:22.000 That's all.

00:21:23.000 I don't think there's anything wrong with saying that.

00:21:26.000 I think at the time that I did this, I think you had, it was shortly after when you went on Penn Gillette's radio show and talked with Phil Plate about the Moonland.

00:21:37.000 You remember that?

00:21:38.000 Sure.

00:21:38.000 And you kicked his butt.

00:21:40.000 Well, unfortunately, look, I would not have handled that the way I handled it then today, but there's two unfortunates.

00:21:46.000 One was that I really wanted him when we first went on to give me a reason to not believe what this Fox documentary showed me.

00:21:55.000 But the more I talked to him, the more I realized that he was almost like talking in a religious sense, in that he wasn't willing to criticize any aspect of NASA or any aspect of what was going on during that time, including the point where he was trying to deny the fact that Werner Herzog, or Werner von Braun rather, and many other scientists were actually Nazis that would come over in Operation Paperclip.

00:22:18.000 And he's like, you know, he's trying to deny that they were Nazis.

00:22:21.000 I'm like, well, this is crazy.

00:22:22.000 Like, you're trying to deny historical fact because you think that historical fact shades NASA in a bad way.

00:22:27.000 And I don't think it does.

00:22:28.000 I think the NASA of 1969 or 63 when Kennedy was in office is not the NASA of 2013 or 14.

00:22:35.000 These people are long dead and gone.

00:22:37.000 And to deny that there was a bunch of Nazis involved seems to me that's not healthy.

00:22:42.000 It seems to me like it's fucking with the facts, and it doesn't support your argument.

00:22:46.000 In fact, it makes me question all the other stuff.

00:22:48.000 So then I started getting aggressive with him because I'm like, well, you're being silly because this isn't, you're not, you're not being honest about the Nazis.

00:22:54.000 You're not being honest about this connection.

00:22:56.000 Okay, well, I got to throw that back at you.

00:22:58.000 What the hell does whether they're Nazis or not have anything to do with whether we went to the moon?

00:23:02.000 Well, it doesn't.

00:23:03.000 But denying the fact that they were Nazis has something to do with what kind of information I'm getting from him.

00:23:08.000 I'm not getting unbiased information.

00:23:10.000 Well, I remember, I don't remember that part of the conversation, but I remember that Werner von Braun had gone to Antarctica to collect rocks, to collect meteors.

00:23:18.000 And you brought that up, and I think you said words to the effect of, you know, why the heck would he have done that unless it was part of some grander scheme to fake bringing rocks back from the moon?

00:23:27.000 Am I correct about that?

00:23:29.000 Well, I said Werner von Braun did go to Antarctica.

00:23:32.000 He did when they were preparing for the moon landing.

00:23:34.000 And Phil had no idea.

00:23:35.000 In fact, I think he said he had never even heard that fact.

00:23:38.000 Well, there's a lot of photos online of Werner von Braun and this big crew.

00:23:42.000 It was one of the few places where they could go that they could study meteors that were definitely from the moon.

00:23:47.000 Right.

00:23:47.000 And Phil was unaware.

00:23:49.000 Phil's an astronomer.

00:23:50.000 He's not a space historian.

00:23:51.000 I understand.

00:23:52.000 He'd have no reason to know that.

00:23:53.000 But why were you bringing that up?

00:23:55.000 What does that have to do with the question?

00:23:56.000 Well, the big conspiracy was, of course, that he had brought these rocks back from there, and then somehow or another, those were the ones they forged for the moon rocks.

00:24:04.000 When they talked about where did they get these rocks that were from the moon?

00:24:07.000 Well, there's absolutely meteors that came from the moon that are in Antarctica.

00:24:10.000 You can find them.

00:24:11.000 They can retrieve them.

00:24:12.000 They've documented them.

00:24:13.000 So that the idea is this, you have a chunk of the moon.

00:24:16.000 Here's the rocks we brought back from the moon.

00:24:19.000 We want to know what to look for.

00:24:20.000 We want to know what kind of mass they've got, things like that, how to make room for them in the spaceship.

00:24:25.000 Yeah, what they're made out of, what their contents are.

00:24:27.000 And as an alternative, that could be seen as being consistent with the moon landing was a hook.

00:24:32.000 Exactly.

00:24:34.000 Would you call it evidence, or would you call it consistent with?

00:24:37.000 Or would you say those are the same thing?

00:24:38.000 I wouldn't say it's evidence.

00:24:40.000 I mean, look, let's say that they could land on the moon, okay?

00:24:44.000 Let's say, which by the way, I believe now.

00:24:46.000 And let's say that they took spaceships and they went there and they brought back moon rocks.

00:24:51.000 I think if you knew for sure that there were some moon rocks in Antarctica, you would absolutely go there and study them.

00:24:57.000 I don't think it's a bad thing.

00:24:59.000 But I do think that if you were a guy looking for something that confirms your suspicions of a conspiracy, which I was, I would say, Well, look, they went to get moon rocks, and that's because that's the big thing they always say.

00:25:11.000 They brought back X kilograms of moon rocks.

00:25:13.000 Where'd they get those?

00:25:14.000 They went to Antarctica.

00:25:15.000 They got them from the Antarctica.

00:25:16.000 And look, here's a photo of Werner von Braun in Antarctica collecting moon rocks with a fucking cast on his arm for some strange reason.

00:25:22.000 How did he break his arm?

00:25:23.000 Do you know?

00:25:24.000 No.

00:25:24.000 I didn't know that he had.

00:25:25.000 Some old school cast, too, man.

00:25:26.000 Some fucking funky cartoon cast with like a bar in between.

00:25:30.000 Yeah, he must have really jacked his arm.

00:25:32.000 Well, they probably broke his arm to get him to lie about going to the moon.

00:25:34.000 I'm sure.

00:25:34.000 See?

00:25:35.000 Got it all locked up.

00:25:37.000 Yeah, look, like I said, I wouldn't have, I wasn't podcasting then, and I certainly wasn't watching as many documentaries, reading as many books.

00:25:46.000 I was in the middle of doing Fear Factor and working for the UFC, and I'd watch this documentary on the Fox documentary on conspiracy theory, Did We Really Go to the Moon?

00:25:56.000 And it was incredibly compelling, especially if you're a retard like me.

00:25:59.000 And you're watching Brian O'Leary, who's an astronaut saying that he could see that they could fake it.

00:26:04.000 And you're watching Bill Casing, who's the guy who worked at Rocket Die and who said that the engineers all agreed that no one could do this.

00:26:10.000 And then you look at the different backgrounds that they showed in different trips, and they were basically the same background, but they were nowhere near each other.

00:26:19.000 They had done a really good job of piecing together all this weirdness and then do it with a narrator and spell it out for you.

00:26:26.000 And I bought it hook, LottenSinker, for sure. 0.93

00:26:28.000 The real issue, there's a bunch of real issues with faking the Moonling, of course.

00:26:32.000 The numbers of people that would be involved, the amount of technology that you would have to discount where people could track the lunar module as it went, the lineage of creating the Saturn V and how the stages of detachment, all the different mathematical calculations they did to create the moon.

00:26:50.000 But if you break it down to an hour documentary for a dummy and you put some spooky music in it and you keep cutting back and forth to commercials, you're going to believe that we didn't go to the moon.

00:26:59.000 Yeah, it's the easiest idea in the world to sell.

00:27:02.000 Conspiracy theories are so just people want to believe them.

00:27:07.000 They satisfy so much.

00:27:09.000 They're fun.

00:27:10.000 It makes you feel like you've got some secret insider information.

00:27:13.000 But there's also, there was evidence that NASA did fake some publicity shots.

00:27:17.000 They did from the Gemini program, Michael Collins.

00:27:20.000 They used a photo of him where he was in a simulator, and they used it, and they blacked it out and had the exact same image and released it as a press photo.

00:27:30.000 So what is this deception?

00:27:32.000 Does that mean that there was deception across the board?

00:27:34.000 No, but I did this sci-fi show.

00:27:37.000 And in the middle of the sci-fi show, someone who was an editor took some footage and spliced in some sound and faked something and said that a user sent it in.

00:27:47.000 Not to my knowledge.

00:27:49.000 And I found out about it and freaked out.

00:27:51.000 And I said, well, when you fake one thing, like we spent this entire show trying to figure out the truth about something.

00:27:57.000 And you guys, for dramatic effect, faked one thing.

00:28:00.000 You fucked up the whole show.

00:28:01.000 Because what you did is you cast doubt on everything else this show is ever going to say ever.

00:28:06.000 Like literally it has to almost die right here.

00:28:09.000 Because the ethic of creating a completely honest show has already been gone.

00:28:15.000 It's already been washed away.

00:28:17.000 And when you watch, you know, something like the moon landing and you, you know, you look at these guys hopping around on the moon, you kind of almost want it to be bullshit.

00:28:28.000 Kind of like, what?

00:28:28.000 They got fucking, they got to, come on, man.

00:28:30.000 How the fuck are they?

00:28:31.000 You look up at the moon.

00:28:32.000 How the fuck are they getting up there?

00:28:33.000 And then you find shit like this where they show these images of Michael Collins in the simulator and then the exact image all blacked out background saying that he's actually in space.

00:28:43.000 Like, oh, he's in space.

00:28:44.000 Who's taking this picture of him in space?

00:28:45.000 Like, he's not in space.

00:28:46.000 This is the same image.

00:28:47.000 Like, you guys lied.

00:28:49.000 So because of that, NASA's, they're not perfect.

00:28:52.000 They weren't perfect in the fact that they hired a bunch of Nazis and brought them over from Germany. 0.92

00:28:58.000 They weren't perfect in the fact that, you know, I'm sure some people in the publicity department told some tall tales and spun some yarns.

00:29:05.000 And, you know, they had to make up for Gus Grisham dying in that simulator.

00:29:09.000 There's a lot of like horrible publicity snafus, terrible things that went wrong that eroded people's confidence in NASA.

00:29:16.000 I could easily see a fake here or there, a photograph that was staged here or there that they said happened on the moon or that they said happened in space.

00:29:29.000 I don't think that that means necessarily that the moon landing's fake, though.

00:29:33.000 Then I did.

00:29:35.000 Yeah, I mean, it's a pretty common piece of feedback that I'll get when I do an episode on any given conspiracy theory.

00:29:41.000 And let's say it's one like this that involves the government.

00:29:45.000 The feedback that I'll get is, so you believe the government loves us and is perfect in everything they do.

00:29:50.000 Of course.

00:29:50.000 It's like, well, that's false.

00:29:52.000 It's not necessary for NASA to be perfect for us to have gone to the moon.

00:29:56.000 It's not necessary for the government to be perfect for 9-11 not to have been an incident.

00:30:00.000 That's the classic straw man black and white argument.

00:30:04.000 And that's exactly what I said about the building collapsing.

00:30:06.000 It's basically the same thing.

00:30:08.000 It doesn't mean that the government is beautiful and perfect in every way because they managed to go to the moon.

00:30:13.000 Agreed.

00:30:14.000 Yeah.

00:30:15.000 So should we go through this checklist here and see which of these I can take off?

00:30:18.000 Yeah, what was the other one?

00:30:19.000 You had another one that I violently disagreed with.

00:30:24.000 It was the first one.

00:30:25.000 Oh, the first assassination.

00:30:27.000 Okay, he believes the Apollo astronauts who did not land on the moon.

00:30:29.000 That's gone.

00:30:29.000 Yeah.

00:30:30.000 Okay.

00:30:30.000 Yeah.

00:30:31.000 Okay, that's gone.

00:30:31.000 I'm checking it off.

00:30:32.000 I would love it if it was a hoax, though.

00:30:34.000 If I found out it was a hoax, I got to tell you right now, I would love it almost more than I love the fact that people went to the moon.

00:30:39.000 I would love it if it was a hoax.

00:30:40.000 Capricorn 1, best movie ever.

00:30:42.000 No, it wasn't.

00:30:43.000 It wasn't even close.

00:30:43.000 It was a good movie, but Alien was the best movie ever.

00:30:46.000 Alien 1, the first one, in my opinion.

00:30:48.000 But we're different, brother.

00:30:50.000 It had the evil corporate government conspiracy behind it.

00:30:53.000 I do not believe in Oliver Stone's version.

00:30:55.000 In fact, I've criticized that film on this podcast many times because Oliver Stone created in the Donald Sutherland character, that he used this vehicle for this general that's giving him this information in order to spell it all out to the Kevin Costner character.

00:31:11.000 I've never said that.

00:31:12.000 You know what I've said?

00:31:13.000 I said, if you look at that bullet, it doesn't look like it went through people.

00:31:15.000 That's what I've said.

00:31:16.000 Because if you look at the single bullet, it does not look like it penetrated bone.

00:31:20.000 See that bone, sir?

00:31:21.000 You see that skull?

00:31:21.000 I'm a hunter.

00:31:22.000 I'm an actual bona fide hunter.

00:31:24.000 I know what it looks like when bullets hit meat.

00:31:26.000 And that bullet does not look like it went through two people.

00:31:29.000 Did you eat it?

00:31:30.000 Yeah, I eat the fuck out of that thing.

00:31:31.000 Nice.

00:31:32.000 Did you save any?

00:31:33.000 I have some.

00:31:34.000 Yeah, I'll get you some.

00:31:35.000 Do you like venison?

00:31:36.000 I love it.

00:31:37.000 I just got one In Wisconsin last month.

00:31:39.000 Relatives in Austin, Oregon, they're sending us stuff all the time.

00:31:41.000 It's the best meat.

00:31:42.000 It's so delicious and so healthy.

00:31:44.000 And I like the fact that it's wild.

00:31:45.000 It's running around wild, and then you take it out of the mix.

00:31:49.000 But I've never said that Oliver Stone was right.

00:31:52.000 In fact, I liked the movie.

00:31:55.000 I think Kevin Coster knocked it out of the park.

00:31:57.000 I think it was an interesting movie.

00:31:58.000 But what I like about it is that it opens up this idea where people start to question what happened.

00:32:04.000 Okay, I think what I meant by that statement was you don't believe that Lee Harvey Oswald acted alone.

00:32:12.000 I do not believe Lee Harvey Oswald acted alone.

00:32:14.000 No, I think there's ample evidence that there was other people involved, but that doesn't mean that Lee Harvey Oswald wasn't involved.

00:32:19.000 There's another black or white thing.

00:32:21.000 Everybody wants an either or.

00:32:22.000 I think it's very possible that Lee Harvey Oswald was in cahoots with that murder.

00:32:26.000 First of all, Lee Harvey Oswald was on the scene.

00:32:29.000 Second of all, Lee Harvey Oswald was known to be in bed with all these fucking weirdo characters.

00:32:35.000 He had gone to Russia and brought back a woman and was allowed to re-enter the United States.

00:32:41.000 The fact that Jack Ruby got to Lee Harvey Oswald in a really high pressure situation.

00:32:49.000 She shot the fucking president and you just have him wandering through with this gangster can run up to him and put a bullet in him. 1.00

00:32:55.000 It plays out like a movie.

00:32:57.000 So you've got a lot of anomalies that are consistent with any conspiracy.

00:33:02.000 Yes.

00:33:03.000 But my take on it is not that I know or that I believe in Oliver Stone.

00:33:07.000 My take on it is what a colossal, strange event, a changing of U.S. history, a changing of the way we look at the power of being a president, a changing of the way we look at what can happen to someone in this lifetime when someone who is so beloved as John F. Kennedy disappears off the face of the earth and the world instantaneously changes.

00:33:28.000 I think it's a fascinating story.

00:33:30.000 And I also think it's fascinating how many enemies he had.

00:33:33.000 You can't discount when you're talking about people who were involved with people who have created wars, people who have absolutely been responsible for the death of untold thousands of people.

00:33:45.000 You can't discount the idea that they would organize a coup.

00:33:48.000 I don't know if they did, but I do know that that thing was one colossal clusterfuck, a crazy thing.

00:33:53.000 And that the fact that the film was held back until Geraldo Rivera, of all people, put it on television with Dick Gregory, who a lot of people don't even realize is a great comedian, was a great comedian and an activist at the time.

00:34:07.000 And it was way into the 70s that Dick Gregory played this on Geraldo Rivera's show.

00:34:12.000 And you get to see Kennedy's head snap back in the Sapruder film.

00:34:16.000 I don't think that that means that someone else did it.

00:34:19.000 I think it means there's probably more than one person involved.

00:34:22.000 And when you look at the Warren Commission report and you look at the inconsistencies in it, there's a great book about it called Best Evidence by David Lifton, who was actually an accountant and was hired to go over the Warren Commission report and found inconsistency after inconsistency over and over again and detailed these in great order.

00:34:41.000 Difference in the inconsistency of the autopsies, inconsistencies of the various reports of what went down, inconsistencies in the Warren Commission of their findings that would cancel out each other's findings.

00:34:50.000 He was one of the few guys, with the first guys, to go through the entire 900 volumes.

00:34:55.000 Fascinating, fascinating book that I read when I was living in New Jersey.

00:35:00.000 I was living in New York rather, and I was doing a gig on the road, and I read it and fucking bombed that night.

00:35:07.000 Oh my God.

00:35:08.000 I was in my hotel room all day reading this freaky conspiracy book, shit in my pants, and I was like 23 years old.

00:35:14.000 And then I went on stage that night and just I ate it.

00:35:16.000 It was terrible.

00:35:17.000 And I learned a very valuable lesson from that book.

00:35:20.000 Don't read or watch depressing shit right before you go on stage.

00:35:24.000 Did you break into big conspiracy mongering in the middle of your set?

00:35:30.000 For sure.

00:35:30.000 That book, Best Evidence, was what threw me over the top.

00:35:33.000 Well, you know, I did an episode on the JFK assassination about a month or two ago, and I'd been putting it off for years because there is so much BS and so much real information on that that I found it, this is impossible.

00:35:49.000 How am I going to distill this into a 12-minute show?

00:35:51.000 Because my show is keptoid is 12 minutes long every week.

00:35:55.000 That's insane.

00:35:56.000 You need to spread out.

00:35:57.000 So what I decided to do was not to address any of the conspiracy theories, but just talk about why in general the conspiracy theories, individual and myriad as they are, why they don't stand up to what we unfortunately call the official story, quote unquote, kind of a weasel word.

00:35:57.000 Yeah.

00:36:21.000 And really the thing is that what all conspiracy theories have in common is that they are united only in that they dispute the official story.

00:36:31.000 For example, you can say the Cubans killed Kennedy, or you can say the Russians killed Kennedy, or you can say the mob killed Kennedy, or you can say the Secret Serviceman running alongside accidentally shot him.

00:36:43.000 Whatever.

00:36:44.000 And all the people who promote those conspiracies, they consider themselves united as a group, even though their theories are absolutely factually exclusive of one another.

00:36:56.000 Almost like competing religions. 0.53

00:36:58.000 Yeah, exactly.

00:36:58.000 They cannot possibly be brought together.

00:37:03.000 The only thing they have in common is that they simply say the government's lying.

00:37:06.000 And as long as you say the government's lying, then, hey, you're okay.

00:37:09.000 You're in the club.

00:37:10.000 Your theory's all right.

00:37:11.000 Your theory is more likely.

00:37:12.000 Did you hear that?

00:37:12.000 That's the government.

00:37:13.000 They found out we're talking about this.

00:37:16.000 It's happened.

00:37:17.000 It's happened.

00:37:20.000 Yes, you're right.

00:37:21.000 You know, Ven Spugliosi's book.

00:37:23.000 I didn't like it.

00:37:23.000 Yes.

00:37:24.000 What was it called?

00:37:25.000 Case Closed.

00:37:27.000 Whatever.

00:37:28.000 Wasn't it called Case Closed?

00:37:28.000 Okay.

00:37:33.000 We don't have to accept anything.

00:37:34.000 This is Google.

00:37:36.000 He talked about one person that he interviewed who believed.

00:37:40.000 He was Posner.

00:37:41.000 Just Cyril Posner is case closed.

00:37:43.000 He believed one person he interviewed believed that Kennedy was still alive.

00:37:43.000 Okay.

00:37:49.000 That's most likely.

00:37:51.000 And that he had committed suicide?

00:37:53.000 I heard the Secret Service man shot him.

00:37:53.000 Yes.

00:37:57.000 I heard you could see him shoot him on the video.

00:38:00.000 I've heard that.

00:38:01.000 I've heard the driver shot him.

00:38:02.000 Yeah, yeah.

00:38:03.000 The driver turned around under his.

00:38:05.000 So Even one person having their own belief that is self-contradictory seems more likely than believing what the government says.

00:38:15.000 And the government, obviously, is not perfect, but you cannot say that just because the government agrees with one particular version of events, that that event is therefore wrong.

00:38:28.000 You're right.

00:38:28.000 And that's a huge, hugely popular argument that I get.

00:38:31.000 Reclaiming history, the assassinating.

00:38:34.000 I didn't read this.

00:38:35.000 I read the other one.

00:38:37.000 You're right.

00:38:38.000 However, it doesn't exclude the possibility that there was, in fact, some sort of a conspiracy.

00:38:42.000 No, it certainly doesn't.

00:38:43.000 But the fact that the government found one version of the events more compelling and wrote their official version on that doesn't make that version wrong.

00:38:51.000 You're right.

00:38:52.000 And that's the hardest point to communicate to the people who believe that.

00:38:55.000 It certainly doesn't.

00:38:56.000 The inconsistencies that are troubling in the Warren Commission's report are there's several, but one of the big ones is the single bullet theory or the need for the single bullet theory.

00:39:04.000 The reason why they needed to formulate the single bullet theory is because they had to account for three shots.

00:39:09.000 They had a new bullet that had hit ricochet against the curbstone under the overpass, and a guy had gotten hit by the ricochet.

00:39:17.000 So he was in the hospital, and they had seen the mark on the curbstone.

00:39:20.000 So they attributed that to a bullet.

00:39:22.000 So they say, okay, well, we know for sure someone was shooting from the direction of the Schoolbook Depository.

00:39:27.000 That's one thing then that confirmed actually supporting the idea that Oswald did it or that someone in Oswald's position did it.

00:39:33.000 So a bullet did come from there.

00:39:35.000 But now they had to account for all these wounds.

00:39:37.000 And so how did they do that?

00:39:38.000 Well, instead of saying, well, maybe there was more than one bullet, maybe there was more than three shots, maybe there was more than two people shooting, they had to come up with some sort of a reason why one bullet could do all this damage.

00:39:49.000 That, to me, seems a much less likely scenario than there's more than one shooter.

00:39:55.000 The more than one shooter, if you're going to kill the fucking president, and if there is a conspiracy, and we haven't proven that there's not, nor that there is, but if there's going to be a conspiracy, I would doubt you would give it to one guy named Lee Harvey Oswald, one guy, and give him a rifle that's not even that fucking good and put him in a window and give him this crazy shot that most people are not going to make.

00:40:14.000 That's not a good shot.

00:40:15.000 If you've ever shot at something, moving targets are incredibly difficult.

00:40:19.000 And moving targets, when you have this shitty bolt-action rifle and you've got to reload it, it's a long time to do that.

00:40:25.000 You can get it off if you're, I mean, I've seen the people that have pulled it off in a test where they've said try to reproduce it and they can do it.

00:40:33.000 You can get those shots off and you can do it, but you're not going to be accurate.

00:40:36.000 You need a couple of seconds to be accurate.

00:40:39.000 You're fucking shooting the president.

00:40:40.000 This is not some low-pressure situation.

00:40:43.000 This is the first person you've ever assassinated with a rifle.

00:40:46.000 My position is that it's more likely that they had a predetermined outcome that they were trying to reach.

00:40:52.000 That outcome is that they wanted to tie up everything with Lee Harvey Oswald.

00:40:58.000 And one of the best ways to do that is to attribute all these different wounds to one bullet.

00:41:01.000 Does it mean that all those wounds were not created by one bullet?

00:41:05.000 No, because it's one of the weird things that happens when you shoot things.

00:41:08.000 Things hit bone and they ricochet and they go weird directions and strange anomalies happen to bullets where a bullet will kill someone and you look at it.

00:41:16.000 It looks like it's virtually undisturbed.

00:41:18.000 Every now and then, shit gets weird.

00:41:21.000 But for the most part, when a bullet goes through two people and shatters bone in both of them, especially the wrist of Connolly on the end of it, and then winds up in the gurney in this pristine form like the single bullet theory did when they found that bullet, that's unlikely.

00:41:37.000 I've got a 50 caliber round that we found in Death Valley left over from the days when they would do fighter planes just shooting their machine guns over from China Lake.

00:41:47.000 And what it is is a completely flattened, smudged, irrecognizable piece of copper.

00:41:56.000 And protruding out from the center of it is this absolutely pristine tungsten missile that looks like it's fresh from the factory, absolutely sharp, completely undamaged, and it's inside this copper jacket that's been peeled away from it and completely smashed out to unrecognizable.

00:42:19.000 In fact, when I found it, we're looking at it going, what the heck is this?

00:42:22.000 Is this a bullet that somebody shot into something and it's still hanging on?

00:42:25.000 Yeah, so I understand what really, really weird stuff can go on with bullets.

00:42:29.000 Weird stuff can go on with bullets.

00:42:30.000 One of my favorite paperweights.

00:42:31.000 I love to talk about it.

00:42:32.000 Yeah, I'm really getting into ballistics lately.

00:42:35.000 I've been doing a lot of target shooting and talking to, I have a very good friend, my friend Justin, who is a complete gun nut.

00:42:43.000 And if I have any questions about ballistics and things, I will talk to him about it.

00:42:47.000 And he'll tell you, like, weird shit happens.

00:42:50.000 Sometimes you shoot a person and the bullet will come back at you through their eye.

00:42:53.000 Like, that's happened to guys.

00:42:55.000 Like, guys in special forces, they've assassinated somebody or shot, killed somebody, and the bullet hits bone and somehow or another figures out a way to pop out of their eye.

00:43:03.000 Like slides around the inside of the skull like a racetrack.

00:43:05.000 Somehow or another, somehow or another, ricochets in the...

00:43:13.000 So is it possible that a bullet went through Kennedy and then went into Connolly?

00:43:16.000 Yeah, 100%.

00:43:17.000 Weird shit happens.

00:43:18.000 But does it look like that bullet did that?

00:43:21.000 Not at all.

00:43:21.000 No, it looks like that bullet they fired into a tank of water.

00:43:24.000 That bullet doesn't look like it hit anything because it's a lead bullet that's jacketed.

00:43:29.000 And the jacket isn't bent.

00:43:30.000 It's not disturbed.

00:43:31.000 And to my knowledge, people have tried to recreate that.

00:43:35.000 I know Penn and Teller tried to do it.

00:43:36.000 I think MythBusters tried to do it.

00:43:38.000 They weren't able to do it when they hit bone.

00:43:39.000 They were only able to do it if they passed just through the flesh.

00:43:42.000 You can pass through flesh and leave a bullet relatively undisturbed.

00:43:45.000 But if you hit bone and you shatter that bone, most likely you're making a mess out of that bullet.

00:43:49.000 Didn't they find pieces in the body also?

00:43:52.000 Absolutely.

00:43:52.000 And pieces in Connolly's wrist that did not match what was missing from the bullet.

00:43:56.000 There was more pieces in Connolly's body than were missing from the bullet.

00:43:59.000 Does that mean that he didn't get hit with some random shrapnel?

00:44:02.000 I mean, bullets are fucking flying and weird shit happens.

00:44:05.000 And there's a lot of weird shit that goes on when you're in a gunfight.

00:44:08.000 But I think you would probably have to attribute that to more than three bullets.

00:44:11.000 Aliens in Roswell.

00:44:13.000 Never said that.

00:44:14.000 In fact, have a joke goofing on it on my comedy special from 1999 where I say that people said the government actually printed in the paper they have recovered a crashed UFO and alien bodies.

00:44:30.000 And then the next day they made a mistake.

00:44:31.000 Oh, sorry, it was just a weather balloon.

00:44:33.000 Like, well, what about the aliens?

00:44:34.000 Those are Mexicans. 0.99

00:44:36.000 Apparently, they were on the balloon.

00:44:37.000 They were drinking.

00:44:37.000 Some shenanigans took place.

00:44:39.000 They mistook the balloon for a piñata.

00:44:40.000 It's very tragic.

00:44:42.000 You know, I never said that I think that.

00:44:44.000 What I did say that is an absolutely fascinating and fun thing to think about.

00:44:49.000 The fact that they could have found some crashed UFO from another planet and hushed everybody up and hid these bodies in little child's coffins and run away with them.

00:44:57.000 But everybody that I've talked to that has ever told me a story about being abducted by UFOs or taken aboard a craft or any of they're fucking crazy.

00:45:07.000 That's the one thing they all share.

00:45:09.000 They all share this nutty disconnect with reality.

00:45:14.000 I've talked to people that have told me some weird things about animals.

00:45:17.000 I talked to a woman that was very convincing that told me she had a Bigfoot sighting.

00:45:21.000 A very convincing Les Shroud, who's a survivor man, told me some animal was bipedals running through the woods.

00:45:28.000 But as far as UFOs, I'm still waiting for the one guy who tells me anything that makes sense.

00:45:35.000 I got in 100 arguments with people when I was filming the sci-fi show that were believers when I was asking them for evidence.

00:45:42.000 I was like, well, where's the evidence?

00:45:43.000 Like, we have sworn affidavits.

00:45:45.000 I go, that's not evidence.

00:45:47.000 He goes, that is evidence.

00:45:48.000 That's evidence in a court of law.

00:45:49.000 You can convict people for murder unless.

00:45:50.000 I go, that's not scientific evidence.

00:45:52.000 I go, you have a story.

00:45:53.000 That's all you have is a story.

00:45:54.000 Nobody wants there to be aliens more than me.

00:45:57.000 But all I see when I go looking for aliens is a bunch of unfuckable white dudes with stories about spaceships and flying saucers and all sorts of things that make their regular, mundane, boring life seem insignificant because of this greater threat, greater mystery, greater enigma, this huge thing that's going on where we're being observed by aliens. 0.97

00:46:19.000 It adds this excitement to an otherwise mundane life.

00:46:23.000 And does that mean that there are no aliens?

00:46:25.000 Absolutely not.

00:46:25.000 Does it mean that aliens aren't observing us?

00:46:27.000 Absolutely not.

00:46:29.000 What it does mean is that the consistency that I've found in talking to people that claim to have had alien experiences make me think that the aliens are so intelligent that they only pick dummies.

00:46:39.000 They're so intelligent that they pick people that were easily discounted.

00:46:43.000 So you would listen to their stories and go, go ahead, dude, tell somebody.

00:46:45.000 Who the fuck is going to believe you?

00:46:47.000 You're crazy.

00:46:47.000 So they find people that have a problem with the truth and then abduct them.

00:46:51.000 That's the only thing that makes sense.

00:46:54.000 Would you describe yourself as a science advocate?

00:46:56.000 100%.

00:46:57.000 Yes.

00:46:58.000 I'm a huge fan of science.

00:47:00.000 It's one of the things that I forgot to argue with Stefan Molyneux when he was on the podcast recently.

00:47:04.000 Not argue, but he argues against funding scientific research and space exploration.

00:47:09.000 To me, it fuels my day.

00:47:12.000 If I get up in the morning and I read about some new thing that they're doing where, I mean, even I'm been following this idea of putting a manned mission on Mars and these people that are going to have to go there on this one-way trip and my fucking hands sweat just thinking about it.

00:47:24.000 Those things fuel my day.

00:47:25.000 I'm fascinated by science.

00:47:27.000 Absolutely fascinated by science.

00:47:31.000 The thing that I love doing the skeptoid episodes, my favorite part of it is solving the mysteries that people usually leave unsolved because they stop at the paranormal explanation.

00:47:46.000 For example, the whole aliens in Roswell, take that as an example.

00:47:51.000 If you take the National Enquirer version of events, it's sensational and it's fun.

00:47:56.000 Aliens are here.

00:47:56.000 Aliens are visiting us.

00:47:57.000 The government's covering it up.

00:47:58.000 It's got all of that, all the compelling qualities of a story that we love.

00:48:02.000 But the fact is that those people haven't solved the mystery.

00:48:05.000 And what I enjoy most is completing the process, going all the way through it, actually finding the pot of gold at the end of the rainbow, actually finding the solution to what happened whenever possible.

00:48:16.000 Well, isn't what makes it exciting to these people that you never really can do that?

00:48:19.000 Unless you can get a time machine and go back to Roswell, New Mexico in 1940, what is it, seven?

00:48:23.000 1947, yeah.

00:48:23.000 Was it seven?

00:48:25.000 I have the actual front page of the Roswell Daily Record on my home framed.

00:48:30.000 Yeah.

00:48:30.000 Oh, do you?

00:48:31.000 It's fascinating.

00:48:31.000 Very cool.

00:48:32.000 What's also fascinating historically, just to look at all the other things that were in the news that were stories, try to picture yourself living at this time, you know, 70 years ago.

00:48:39.000 It's weird, 77 years ago.

00:48:41.000 But the other thing that's weird about it is that you can't go back.

00:48:45.000 So you can't know.

00:48:47.000 You've got a bunch of different people, and some of them tell you they saw aliens, some of them tell you they say bodies, and Max Roswell, you know, Max Brazil, whatever the fuck his name was, swears and all these different people.

00:48:55.000 And then you see the press conference where they have this stuff, look, it's just this stuff, you know?

00:48:59.000 It's so delicious to think in terms of conspiracy, to think in terms that the government has this unbelievable magical information that they're not sharing with us because they don't think that we can handle it.

00:49:10.000 And it becomes this thing that makes average everyday life more exciting.

00:49:15.000 And on that same vein, in the question of going all the way back to Building 7, for example, to me, let's say...

00:49:35.000 Let's say we're just going to leave that unsettled.

00:49:37.000 We don't know.

00:49:38.000 Maybe it was, maybe it wasn't.

00:49:39.000 But to me, what's really interesting about that is the underlying science is how would a building made of steel and covered with concrete or whatever it was made of, how would that melt?

00:49:50.000 Why would it collapse?

00:49:52.000 And understanding the actual science is to me far more interesting than simply doing this anomaly hunting that is so much more popular and trying to point fingers and turn it into a whole political ideological thing.

00:50:05.000 Absolutely.

00:50:05.000 What is your background?

00:50:06.000 What is your education in?

00:50:08.000 My background is in computer science, but I never really worked in the field.

00:50:15.000 I did software consulting, basically, for most of my career until I became a science writer about six, seven years ago.

00:50:22.000 How would you feel if someone with no software knowledge whatsoever started criticizing software development that you were involved with if they were, say, like an architect?

00:50:32.000 Since I was always really bad at it, I'd some problems.

00:50:37.000 Yeah, no, I would say I'd say just as you expect, I'd say, well, you know, I probably know better than you do.

00:50:43.000 Now, when you see architects and engineers for 9-11 Truth, when you see this group of people.

00:50:43.000 Right.

00:50:48.000 How many architects are involved, Brian?

00:50:50.000 Google that shit.

00:50:51.000 Architects and engineers for 9-11 Truth.

00:50:53.000 There's a substantial number of people.

00:50:54.000 Yeah, but unfortunately, it's something of the people who actually are in that field, and most of them are not, it's, you know, a tiny fraction of a percentage of all the people who work in that period overall.

00:51:04.000 Right.

00:51:05.000 So if you're trying to look at what do most architects and engineers say, overwhelmingly, they have no problem with, quote-unquote, the issue.

00:51:10.000 Do you think, honestly, that it's been studied by most architects and engineers?

00:51:14.000 And again, just for the record, again, I don't believe in a conspiracy for 9-11.

00:51:20.000 I never have, but I'm saying that, you know, this kind of throws in the face of what you said.

00:51:24.000 Like, these are educated people that are trained as architects and engineers, and they have this issue with building seven.

00:51:31.000 Yeah, I mean, 2,134 architects and engineers.

00:51:34.000 That's kind of a lot.

00:51:35.000 I will say this.

00:51:36.000 The people who have spent the most time on the question are overwhelmingly believers in the conspiracy.

00:51:43.000 Of course.

00:51:45.000 But where is the causal relationship there?

00:51:48.000 It's not that they spent most time, learned the most information, and then made a rational decision based on what they learned.

00:51:54.000 It's the other way around.

00:51:55.000 They spent time obsessing with it because they were ideologically married to the idea from the very beginning.

00:52:00.000 Well, if you say that, that dismisses them.

00:52:02.000 And that's a good thing to say if you're trying to dismiss them.

00:52:05.000 But I don't think you know them.

00:52:06.000 And I don't think you've really examined why they came to these conclusions or why they were interested in investigating it in the first place.

00:52:13.000 Well, this is what I do for a living is I talk to people.

00:52:16.000 I understand.

00:52:17.000 But what I'm saying is I know you didn't interview 2,000 people.

00:52:20.000 You didn't ask all those different guys.

00:52:21.000 So to say that in a blanket general statement, that this is the reason why they came to this conspiracy is a little disingenuous.

00:52:28.000 Absolutely.

00:52:29.000 Generalizations are always wrong.

00:52:31.000 That's an issue.

00:52:32.000 I think that's a real issue.

00:52:33.000 And I think that's what we're dealing with here, where you had this reluctance to accept the fact that I wasn't saying that 9-11 was an inside job just because I was saying Tower 7 looks like a demolition.

00:52:42.000 It's the same thing.

00:52:44.000 Well, if I listen to this, I would think that you're trying to convince it.

00:52:47.000 No, no.

00:52:49.000 It's not a black and white issue.

00:52:50.000 There's a lot of weirdness.

00:52:51.000 There's a lot of weirdness in the world.

00:52:53.000 And there's a lot of weirdness in perception.

00:52:55.000 There's a lot of weirdness in people that are educated but are also incorrect.

00:52:59.000 It's a common thing.

00:53:00.000 It happens all the time.

00:53:01.000 And you're absolutely correct that 2,000 people out of what number, vast number of architects and engineers there exist in the world.

00:53:08.000 The real question is, how many of those other people that exist have examined this as thoroughly as these people?

00:53:13.000 And you're right.

00:53:14.000 The ones that examine it, the ones who are looking to find some sort of a conspiracy.

00:53:17.000 Does that mean they're wrong?

00:53:19.000 Well, in this case, you and I both believe that they're wrong, but it doesn't mean they're wrong.

00:53:24.000 Well, there's not a lot of people, realistically, who work in the field of failure analysis for building structure.

00:53:30.000 But those who do, No one can call in.

00:53:37.000 We shouldn't guess.

00:53:37.000 Let's not go this way.

00:53:39.000 My supposition is that the people who work in failure analysis of buildings had no problem with what they saw happening on television.

00:53:48.000 I wouldn't guess that's going to go on.

00:53:49.000 Jesus, why would you guess?

00:53:50.000 Because I didn't need to.

00:53:51.000 Well, I mean, it's clear if you just watch any documentary on how the structure collapsed.

00:53:58.000 Well, if those people that believe in the engineers and architects from 9-11 Truth created a documentary, maybe it would be convincing in the other way.

00:54:06.000 You know, I mean, it really depends on what perspective you're coming from.

00:54:09.000 When you're as uneducated about the subject as you or I, we're kind of crazy in making a conclusion one way or another.

00:54:17.000 Okay, that's true.

00:54:18.000 But I mean, there's a certain amount of information that's widely available about how the building was constructed.

00:54:24.000 According to those guys.

00:54:26.000 According to the people who make it widely available.

00:54:28.000 Who knows who really built the building?

00:54:29.000 They built those buildings in New York.

00:54:31.000 That's a part of the problem.

00:54:31.000 They were skimping on the concrete and fucking Joey.

00:54:35.000 What's up with this old reball?

00:54:36.000 This thing's going to fall down.

00:54:38.000 I'm hearing a generalization about New Yorkers here.

00:54:39.000 It's about my people.

00:54:41.000 They're scum.

00:54:41.000 They're dirt.

00:54:42.000 They should stay down.

00:54:44.000 No, what my issue with all this is, is that you came to this instant conclusion that I probably would have reached as well about me, about certain subjects.

00:54:57.000 Well, if he believes this, he probably believes that.

00:54:58.000 If he's discussed this, then he believes that.

00:55:00.000 If he's discussed that, then he believes that.

00:55:02.000 He's promoting dangerous pseudoscience.

00:55:04.000 But I'm not.

00:55:05.000 I mean, I certainly have promoted a nonsensical idea in that we never went to the moon, but it was based on a lot of really fascinating, weird pieces of evidence that are really amazing once you start going down that rabbit hole and following them and watching the Neil Armstrong speech that he gives, the 25-year anniversary speech, where he talks about removing truth's hidden layers and all this weird cryptic shit that he did.

00:55:31.000 And then all the shit when you're looking at the videos of them bouncing around where it looks like they're on trampolines.

00:55:37.000 If you're inclined to be conspiratorial, it's all there for you.

00:55:40.000 The speech from President Clinton's book where he talks about when he was working with a carpenter when the first moon landings took place and the carpenter told him that he didn't believe anything those TV fellers said, that they could show, they could fake anything and put it on TV.

00:55:52.000 And he said, back then I thought that guy was a quack.

00:55:54.000 But during all my years in the White House, I started to think maybe he was just ahead of his time.

00:55:59.000 That's Bill Clinton in his book said that.

00:56:01.000 So if you're conspiratorially minded, you start looking, you know, confirmation bias.

00:56:05.000 You start looking for things that confirm your idea.

00:56:07.000 Look at these intersecting shadows, man.

00:56:09.000 You know, look at this.

00:56:10.000 That picture's fake.

00:56:11.000 Even if that picture's fake, it still doesn't mean people didn't go to the moon.

00:56:13.000 And consequently, if you're inclined to think that 9-11 was a government conspiracy, you're going to be one of the people who spends the most time, quote-unquote, studying it, which really means reading the same stuff that confirms your belief on the movie on the internet.

00:56:27.000 Most likely.

00:56:28.000 Or you could be someone who's absolutely obsessed with proving that 9-11 was not an inside job.

00:56:33.000 And you could chase that down and look at the conspiracy of confirmation bias that resulted in all these crazy books and documentaries and all these different things where people came to these erroneous conclusions.

00:56:45.000 Who spends the most time looking at pictures of UFOs?

00:56:48.000 I don't know.

00:56:49.000 Pilots, astronomers, or UFologists?

00:56:51.000 Mostly chicks. 0.99

00:56:52.000 Can I get into that anything?

00:56:53.000 Get a couple more of these.

00:56:55.000 Yeah, I would imagine it's people that are obsessed.

00:56:59.000 And I would imagine that a lot of those people are obsessed.

00:57:02.000 They're entertaining unhealthy ideas.

00:57:05.000 That's what I said, though, a minute ago when we were talking about architects and engineers on 9-11.

00:57:10.000 You kind of jumped on my logic.

00:57:12.000 But that's different.

00:57:13.000 We're talking about people that are observing it, not people who are trained in that field.

00:57:17.000 When you get 2,000 plus, 2,100 people that are trained in that field, me personally as a non-architect and non-engineer, I have to look at it a little bit differently.

00:57:26.000 There's nobody more trained in ufology than ufologists.

00:57:29.000 Me.

00:57:29.000 No, no, no.

00:57:30.000 I am the most trained in ufology.

00:57:33.000 You don't even know.

00:57:34.000 If you have any questions.

00:57:34.000 I'm the guy.

00:57:35.000 I'm going to use this because I just had it.

00:57:37.000 If you need a go-to guy, I will give those guys ecstasy and strippers, and we'll cure all this search in the skies.

00:57:45.000 A bunch of unfuckable white dudes.

00:57:47.000 That's what we're dealing with, Brian doing.

00:57:49.000 That's the real issue.

00:57:50.000 Well, you're right in some ways, you're right in some ways, and we agree in some ways.

00:57:54.000 And I absolutely agree with you that I've been 100% irrational in the past about certain things.

00:57:59.000 And also, I get caught up when I get into a discussion with something about like Phil Plate with the moon landings.

00:58:06.000 I'll get caught up in trying to be correct, or I'll get caught up in trying to counter his moves and treat it like it's a jiu-jitsu match.

00:58:13.000 You know what I mean?

00:58:14.000 Why didn't you just make it a jiu-jitsu match?

00:58:16.000 Well, we weren't even in the room together.

00:58:17.000 If we were in the room together, it probably would have worked out better.

00:58:19.000 He was on the phone, and I was on the phone once.

00:58:22.000 I was in studio once, he was in studio once, and we were on the phone once.

00:58:25.000 Let me ask you this question.

00:58:26.000 Are we on time, by the way?

00:58:27.000 I have no idea.

00:58:28.000 No, no, no, no, no.

00:58:28.000 We can go as long as we wanted.

00:58:30.000 We don't have a boss.

00:58:31.000 One of the things that I put in my paragraph about you, which I hope to, would love to completely retract, was a criticism of what you say so often is that I'm just the guy asking questions.

00:58:44.000 Shouldn't we be looking at this?

00:58:45.000 Shouldn't we be asking these questions?

00:58:47.000 Am I saying that?

00:58:48.000 Am I saying that right now?

00:58:49.000 I mean, I have said that.

00:58:50.000 I was saying that you're not going to be able to do that.

00:58:51.000 I'm just asking questions.

00:58:52.000 Joe Rogan questions everything.

00:58:53.000 Oh.

00:58:54.000 So, yeah.

00:58:54.000 Yeah.

00:58:55.000 Right, but when I'm, well, if you go, that's not a good example, because if you go over that, it's me destroying pseudoscience.

00:59:02.000 If you go over that show, it's like I got attacked by more people that fucking believe in chemtrails because of that show, explaining the actual science behind chemtrails.

00:59:08.000 I mean, it's the thing that I sent you with Roseanne, where I explained the science behind jet engines.

00:59:13.000 Great job, Metaway.

00:59:14.000 I thought you did a wonderful job going talking to Roseanne about the chemtrails.

00:59:18.000 Well, that's all credit to Mick West from Metabunk.

00:59:21.000 He was a software engineer and a brilliant guy, software engineer like yourself.

00:59:26.000 Software business.

00:59:27.000 What was the Tony Hawk?

00:59:28.000 You did Tony Hawk?

00:59:29.000 Tony Hawk, yeah.

00:59:30.000 Yeah.

00:59:30.000 He beat Epic Games, and he sold his share in that and just decided to debunk conspiracies.

00:59:37.000 And he's brilliant at it.

00:59:39.000 And he breaks it down so eloquently on the show.

00:59:43.000 We brought him on the show to sort of establish the science behind contrails and chemtrails.

00:59:49.000 So my point with the whole asking questions things and the validity of saying that, it goes a lot toward the idea of is it smart to debate questions of pseudoscience?

01:00:02.000 I guess right now what's happening is Bill Nye is, I'm not sure if it happened yet already, but Bill Nye is going to the Creation Museum to debate creationism.

01:00:11.000 I know, I heard about that.

01:00:12.000 Yeah, now that triggers a lot of pro and con thought in the science communication business because many of us, myself included, think that it does more harm than good because you're suggesting to anyone who might be on the fence, you're suggesting to them that there is a debatable question here.

01:00:30.000 When you have something that is clearly an established fact backed up by all available evidence and something that's crazy and has no possible evidence for it, we don't hold scientific debates about that.

01:00:45.000 We move forward with our lives.

01:00:47.000 And when you go out and you hold a debate, when you agree to have a debate, you're going to convince anyone who's on the fence, oh, maybe there is a question here that needs to be looked at.

01:00:56.000 And in fact, I think it's arguable that you do more harm than good.

01:01:01.000 And so by the same token, I say that it's really possible when you say, hey, I'm just the guy asking questions about Building 7 or whatever the subject is, that you're potentially doing more harm than good by suggesting that there is a questionable subject here.

01:01:15.000 Roswell, let's take, for example, hey, I'm just the guy asking questions.

01:01:19.000 Isn't it strange that there were three small bodies that needed coffins?

01:01:22.000 Well, let's just stop with the one example.

01:01:27.000 You think that potentially addressing a reality, a reality in the way something looks, that that could be dangerous, that somehow people could misconstrue that for being support for a conspiracy theory?

01:01:41.000 I think that when you ask questions and you make an argument that says, hey, shouldn't we ask questions about this, which is the answer is usually yes.

01:01:51.000 But when it's on a matter of basically settled science, I think you're doing more harm than good by suggesting, hey, shouldn't we question whether 2 plus 2 equals 4?

01:02:01.000 Isn't it okay to ask, does 2 plus 2 equals 5?

01:02:04.000 Well, you know that there's massive inconsistencies in the studies that were done about 9-11 that are disputed about the free fall speed of tower science.

01:02:11.000 I know there's a lot of anomalies that people have picked out, but I wouldn't say that there's any inconsistencies in the evidence when we're talking about testable evidence that you can hold in your hand.

01:02:21.000 Well, what I mean by inconsistencies is things that, anomalies is a better word.

01:02:25.000 Things that you don't usually find, like buildings falling at free fall speed and then saying that it's one second less than free fall speed.

01:02:31.000 All these things fuel the debate.

01:02:34.000 All these things get people excited about it.

01:02:36.000 But to deny that these things exist, I think, is silly.

01:02:39.000 Because then you fuel the conspiracy theories even more because you're denying something that seems obvious to the eye.

01:02:45.000 The average person that looks at that building says, yes, that does look like a controlled demolition.

01:02:49.000 Does that mean it is?

01:02:50.000 No, it doesn't.

01:02:51.000 But to pretend that it doesn't look like that is ridiculous.

01:02:54.000 To pretend that it's not odd that it falls at free-fall speed is...

01:02:57.000 I'm not sure anyone is denying that it looks like a...

01:03:05.000 So you criticize me for what you agree with.

01:03:07.000 You agree that it looks like a controlled demolition.

01:03:07.000 No, I don't know.

01:03:09.000 Discussing it.

01:03:10.000 No, that's not what I'm criticizing you for.

01:03:13.000 I agree that it looks like a controlled demolition.

01:03:14.000 That's not the question.

01:03:15.000 The question is whether it should be brought up?

01:03:18.000 Well, I mean, we're sticking on this one example of Building 7.

01:03:21.000 But it's because we haven't resolved it yet.

01:03:23.000 It's a good example, because it's an example that you use as an example of you thinking that if you listen to me just describe what I see with my eyes, that it sounds to me like I'm supporting some sort of a conspiracy theory when I'm 100% not.

01:03:36.000 Okay.

01:03:39.000 Would you?

01:03:41.000 It seems like you have topics that are off limits.

01:03:44.000 And that discuss something like that, even to look at the reality of the speed that it fell, just to even bring it up is off limits.

01:03:52.000 Even if you say, I don't believe in the conspiracy, but isn't it crazy that that building looks like a controlled?

01:03:59.000 The only reason that this is a difficult example to talk about is because it's one that's so ideologically charged.

01:04:05.000 Right.

01:04:05.000 As is Bill Nye talking about creationism.

01:04:10.000 There's really nobody who's on the fence about that.

01:04:14.000 You're either a creationist or you're not.

01:04:16.000 I mean, there might be some people who are on the fence, but I don't quite buy it.

01:04:20.000 Well, let's look at the numbers.

01:04:21.000 The Gallup poll, the most recent Gallup poll on the age of the Earth was more than 46%.

01:04:27.000 Come tell me.

01:04:27.000 More than 46% think the Earth is less than 10,000 years old.

01:04:30.000 I don't want to know.

01:04:31.000 It's shocking.

01:04:32.000 Well, we know exactly where it comes from.

01:04:34.000 First of all, how many of those people have been exposed to actual science, actual research, actual data?

01:04:39.000 Someone who's really chasmatic, like Anil deGrasse Tyson, who could break down what we know about science, what we've done, what great work has been shown that we can carbon date things. 0.88

01:04:51.000 We know about the date of stars.

01:04:53.000 We can follow the radio waves that we can measure in space and prove that there was a big bang 14 billion years ago.

01:05:00.000 All that stuff is so exciting that if it's done correctly by a guy like Neil Tyson, it can be unbelievably culturally valuable.

01:05:08.000 But those 46% of the people that believe that the Earth is 10,000 years old, I can almost guarantee that they haven't had that in their life.

01:05:16.000 They just haven't been exposed to a charismatic scientist or a documentary that was unbelievably compelling, that jived with their Christian ideology so much they could absorb it.

01:05:26.000 You know, they've been brainwashed.

01:05:27.000 They've been fucked over by their own culture. 0.70

01:05:29.000 They've been fucked over by their community.

01:05:31.000 They've been fucked over by these dummies that raised them and taught them this silly idea that's so easily disproven that it makes them a joke to anybody that's had any sort of formal education whatsoever.

01:05:42.000 And it's almost half the population.

01:05:45.000 Let me point out something that's kind of a surprising similarity between belief in creationism and belief in the Kennedy assassination.

01:05:56.000 There are, like we talked about, there are a dozen, well, there's hundreds, but let's say that there's a dozen different Kennedy conspiracies that are mutually exclusive.

01:06:06.000 Just for sake of argument, let's pretend it's a dozen.

01:06:09.000 You've got about just as many theories of creation that are completely incompatible, which is nothing existed until 6,000 years ago, everything poof appeared with exactly the appearance of age.

01:06:22.000 You've got the Earth is actually old, but life is a recent creation.

01:06:27.000 You've got all the other animals are old, and evolution happened in everything except humans, which were a special creation event.

01:06:34.000 You've got humans did evolve the way science tells us, but then suddenly we were given souls on the Adam and Eve Day.

01:06:44.000 So you've got all of these.

01:06:47.000 Now that we found out Columbus is an asshole, you can come up with science, and a lot of people have.

01:06:52.000 They've come up with quote-unquote science to support each one of these different theories.

01:06:56.000 Not really.

01:06:57.000 No, no, no.

01:06:59.000 What qualifies in their mind as scientific support for them?

01:07:02.000 So exactly like the people who support all these different versions of the Kennedy conspiracy, even though all of their theories are mutually exclusive, yeah, completely incompatible, they all consider themselves to be on the same page in that they reject the quote-unquote official explanation.

01:07:25.000 I find that to be a disingenuous argument because the argument for the Earth being billions of years old, the universe being billions of years old, is unbelievably, unfathomably overwhelming.

01:07:35.000 Genius after genius has broken down all the various particles of the fucking universe and the dark matter and the skies and the fact that inside every black hole may ultimately be another universe with hundreds of billions of galaxies inside of it with black holes in each one of them.

01:07:53.000 The number of people that have worked on provable conclusions about the age of things using carbon dating or what is the other way, radiocarbon dating and what's the new one that they're doing?

01:08:04.000 Oh, there's all sorts of them.

01:08:05.000 Yeah, but the sheer overwhelming numbers, to ignore that because you read some stupid old book, I think is way more ridiculous than to look at a guy who was murdered and know that someone shot him and that it might have been this guy that this other gangster came and shot and killed, but we'll never know because he's dead.

01:08:23.000 There's so many other pieces.

01:08:25.000 Vince Bugliosi could sit here and make exactly the same argument in reverse.

01:08:28.000 But he's chasing ghosts.

01:08:30.000 You're chasing ghosts.

01:08:31.000 You can't go back to 1963.

01:08:33.000 You know, how are you going to prove what happened to ghosts?

01:08:36.000 You can't go back to 6,000 years ago and see, were you there?

01:08:39.000 And did you see dinosaurs running around a billion years ago?

01:08:42.000 That's not compatible because you could take a piece of wood and you could carbon date that piece of wood and you could find out, well, this wood is 5,000 years old.

01:08:49.000 You can do that.

01:08:49.000 That's done.

01:08:50.000 That's a real thing.

01:08:51.000 What you're doing with the Kennedy assassination is, yeah, you've got some stories and yeah, you've got some facts and yeah, you've got some circumstances, but putting it all together is there's a very complicated series of events that took place in order to kill that guy and take his body and fly it to Bethesda, Maryland, and who got in front, how did Jack Ruby get in there and who benefited from all this?

01:09:11.000 There's a lot of variables that don't exist.

01:09:15.000 Hold on, but variables that don't exist when you're examining, say, like the core of the Earth, when you're examining the birth and death of stars, hypernovas, all these things that we can absolutely prove are a part of our natural world that we live in.

01:09:27.000 Okay, but again, you're talking down to ignoring the question of what constitutes evidence, because there are people who will make a compelling speech about why carbon dating is invalid.

01:09:41.000 Or maybe the Lord has changed the route, the speed at which elements decay over the centuries.

01:09:50.000 Now, that's something you can't argue with because it's what we call a special pleading.

01:09:54.000 It's this is in humans, we small humans are not able to understand this.

01:09:58.000 And that's an argument that can be used to defend just about any pseudoscience or just about any pseudo-history.

01:10:04.000 So, I mean, you can apply exactly the same thing.

01:10:09.000 Alternate versions of the Kennedy history are always going to be just as valid as alternate versions of the age of the earth and evolution.

01:10:17.000 And they're made invalid.

01:10:21.000 They are presented as being valid using evidence that cannot be argued against because it's theoretical.

01:10:27.000 Sort of.

01:10:29.000 Here's the problem with the government.

01:10:30.000 The government has been proven time and time and again to be full shit.

01:10:34.000 So when you look at official government stories and you say, Well, let's take this as our conclusion and then let's work backward from here and find out what took place.

01:10:44.000 Well, we know that Lee Harvey Oswald acted alone because the government says we know that Jack Ruby was a bad guy and he was very patriotic and he was really sad and so that's why he did what he did.

01:10:52.000 And case closed, wrap it up, tie, boom.

01:10:55.000 When you look at all that, it doesn't stand up to scrutiny.

01:10:58.000 It just doesn't.

01:10:59.000 It doesn't if you're dealing with a liar.

01:11:01.000 If a liar told you this crazy story, damn man, I was on your way over to your house, man, but a fucking asteroid came down and knocked my tire off and I need another tire so I had to wait in line and dude, I'm so sorry I'm late.

01:11:10.000 You're like, that guy's a liar.

01:11:11.000 He probably lied about this too.

01:11:11.000 He lies all the time.

01:11:13.000 Well, if you're dealing with something like the United States government that's shown itself over and over and over again to be full of shit, to be very convenient, to tell the people what they want the people to think rather than what is actually the truth.

01:11:24.000 And then you start citing instance after instance.

01:11:26.000 It's not just blind accusations, but instance after instance.

01:11:30.000 No longer do I think that it is not likely nor is it logical to assume that the, let's go official story, which is a douchey term.

01:11:38.000 It's a very loaded term, the official story.

01:11:39.000 Oh, I agree.

01:11:40.000 Because it makes it question.

01:11:41.000 But to assume that the story that we have been told in the mainstream media and the news is correct.

01:11:47.000 It doesn't make sense.

01:11:48.000 Why would you assume it was correct?

01:11:49.000 You're talking to a liar.

01:11:51.000 But scientists have told us that carbon dating works.

01:11:55.000 Right, but we're talking about the carbon dioxide.

01:11:56.000 It's a matter of faith.

01:11:58.000 We have to have faith in the scientists to accept carbon dating.

01:12:01.000 Oh, certainly not.

01:12:02.000 You read the science on it.

01:12:03.000 You read how they come up with the conclusions.

01:12:05.000 I'm an idiot, but I read about carbon dating when I was trying to figure out why they can figure out that dinosaurs existed 65 million years ago.

01:12:12.000 I'm unbelievably terrified and fascinated by asteroidal impacts.

01:12:15.000 It's one of my main obsessions when it comes to late-night freak outs, watching the Discovery Channel and watching just the idea that one day we could get hit by one of these 800 plus thousand near-Earth objects that are fucking gigantic stones flying through the Earth.

01:12:33.000 I'm fascinated by that shit.

01:12:34.000 So I got pretty deep into the whole idea of carbon dating and the whole idea, like how they figured it out.

01:12:40.000 And I read a bunch of articles on it and I watched documentaries on it.

01:12:43.000 It's pretty easy to figure out from an idiot's point of view, like how they're doing it.

01:12:47.000 Like I don't understand the science behind it.

01:12:48.000 I can't really replicate it.

01:12:49.000 But I listen to them describe it and it clicks with me and it makes sense.

01:12:53.000 Okay.

01:12:53.000 But I mean, so my argument is that disagreeing with carbon dating, disagreeing with the scientific view of the earth is very similar to disagreeing with kind of the standard model of history.

01:13:12.000 The standard model of the JFK assassination as told by the U.S. I hate to use the term official story because I don't care.

01:13:20.000 I've never read.

01:13:21.000 It's called the O.S. I've never read the Warren Commission report.

01:13:26.000 I've never read the 9-11 Commission report.

01:13:29.000 To be honest, I don't know what's in them.

01:13:31.000 But I can tell you what happened to Kennedy and I can tell you what happened on 9-11 according to what I would call our standard model of history, which probably agrees in most respects with the quote-unquote official story.

01:13:44.000 The issue with the standard model of history, though, is disseminated by the U.S. government, which people find easy to distrust.

01:13:50.000 No, it's not.

01:13:52.000 No.

01:13:52.000 It's not?

01:13:53.000 When you were watching it on that morning, when you had your TV on, you're watching the towers fall, and you got broadcasters with a microphone, they were not being influenced by the government.

01:14:02.000 They didn't have an earpiece in with someone from the CIA telling them what to say next.

01:14:06.000 You were pretty much watching it happen live through no government filter.

01:14:10.000 Well, right.

01:14:11.000 But wait a minute.

01:14:12.000 But when you're talking about the official story of it, it's not the news being told as the event goes down.

01:14:17.000 It's the explanation of why the event took place after the fact that people disagree with.

01:14:22.000 No one disagrees that the towers fell or that planes hit them.

01:14:25.000 Sure, they do.

01:14:26.000 There's people who think the planes were holograms.

01:14:29.000 Okay, you're getting really crazy, though.

01:14:31.000 Hey, I mean, there's all of these different theories.

01:14:35.000 Well, there's people that believe the Earth is hollow.

01:14:36.000 There's people that believe that life is but a dream.

01:14:39.000 Merrily, merrily, merrily, merrily, right?

01:14:41.000 Life is but a dream.

01:14:42.000 The hollow earth stories are awesome, buddy.

01:14:43.000 They're awesome.

01:14:44.000 They're all awesome.

01:14:45.000 I've talked to those people.

01:14:46.000 They're fucking crazy.

01:14:47.000 Well, look, people are nuts.

01:14:48.000 You know, there's people that walk down the street and talk to people that aren't there.

01:14:51.000 You know, that doesn't mean that the government is correct about Kennedy.

01:14:54.000 It doesn't mean that Lee Harvey Oswald acted alone.

01:14:57.000 It doesn't mean that there's nothing other than the reason to conclude that a single bullet inflicted all that damage is nothing other than the need to tie up the fact that they had committed to the idea of three bullets.

01:15:10.000 That that would be the only thing that would be logical that this guy could get off.

01:15:13.000 Nobody thought he could get off four bullets.

01:15:15.000 That was just like, it was too crazy.

01:15:16.000 Three, maybe he could fucking just shoon, shoom, spoon, and get off three bullets in five seconds with a, what is it, Milk Roller, Carkano shit rifle?

01:15:25.000 When we were talking about that before, I was desperately on my iPad here.

01:15:28.000 I was trying to look up, because at the beginning of my episode, I did a recreation of the time of the pouch, pouch, and then it's a long, hella long pause until the final shot.

01:15:39.000 Pouch, chch. 1.00

01:15:40.000 Short.

01:15:40.000 Because it's something like nine seconds or something.

01:15:42.000 And that's a long time.

01:15:43.000 I believe it's a little less than that, but I thought it was five.

01:15:47.000 But yeah, it can be done.

01:15:48.000 That's the space between the last two shots.

01:15:50.000 The number of seconds that you're usually told is the space between the last two shots.

01:15:53.000 Well, and also something against the conspiracy that I would like to point out that people keep pointing out was that the scope in that rifle was off.

01:16:00.000 That was one of the things that people kept saying, that the scope in that rifle was a bad scope.

01:16:05.000 As someone who's fucked up their scope before, you could just put a rifle down hard, you drop it, and it falls and the scope bounces off the ground, that scope's off.

01:16:14.000 So the chain of evidence between Lee Harvey, the idea that they found this scope and it was impossible for them to fire with this gun because the scope is off is preposterous.

01:16:21.000 Because anybody could have dropped that gun after Oswald left it there and fucked up that scope.

01:16:25.000 So the fact that who knows how many days or hours or whatever later they went to check that scope to see if it was sighted in, that's stupid.

01:16:32.000 Hunters have to site their scopes in after every trip. 0.95

01:16:35.000 Every time you put your stuff in luggage, packed in with all this cushioning and everything to make sure in hard cases, you still have to recite your scope when you get to a range.

01:16:44.000 You have to because to be ethical, to make sure that you hit the animal where you want to hit it, because they go off.

01:16:49.000 They bounce around and they move.

01:16:51.000 Same issue with telescopes.

01:16:52.000 The sights on those are very similar.

01:16:54.000 So, I mean, that doesn't mean, though, that the whole ball of wax, the whole government story is exactly what happened.

01:16:54.000 Yeah.

01:17:03.000 We're chasing ghosts.

01:17:04.000 We're talking about some shit from the 60s and trying to piece it together and Say, case closed.

01:17:09.000 I think it's preposterous.

01:17:10.000 I think it's ridiculous.

01:17:11.000 I do think it's fascinating, and I do think that people can lose their mind in chasing it down and in investigating it.

01:17:18.000 And I certainly did myself back in Pennsylvania when I was working at that fucking club, reading that stupid book all day, and then going on stage that night and just bombing.

01:17:27.000 I mean, I had two shows that night.

01:17:29.000 The first show, I just ate a plate of shit.

01:17:31.000 And then the second show, I pulled it together and got back.

01:17:34.000 But I was depressed.

01:17:35.000 I mean, what were you, were you forgetting your material?

01:17:35.000 Why?

01:17:39.000 No, no, no, no.

01:17:40.000 I've had two really distinctive times where the things that I saw before I went on stage fucked me up. 0.71

01:17:40.000 It's my mindset. 0.71

01:17:46.000 And that was a big one.

01:17:47.000 That was probably the first one.

01:17:49.000 Might have been the second one.

01:17:50.000 It was all the same time.

01:17:51.000 I was a slow learner.

01:17:52.000 But the other one was I went with this guy named JB Smooth.

01:17:57.000 You know JB Smooth?

01:17:58.000 Funny fucking.

01:17:59.000 He's hilarious.

01:18:00.000 And JB and I were doing a college together in New Jersey.

01:18:03.000 And JB was, it was really hard to find.

01:18:06.000 And JB was running late.

01:18:08.000 So they had me go on first.

01:18:10.000 And I wasn't prepared because I was sitting in the, they had a little rec room with a TV on.

01:18:14.000 And the TV was showing this documentary on the Malibu fires.

01:18:18.000 Oh, it was so fucking depressing.

01:18:21.000 It was in the early 90s.

01:18:23.000 And these people had lost everything.

01:18:24.000 And this guy was crying.

01:18:26.000 He was a fireman.

01:18:27.000 And he was crying and weeping.

01:18:28.000 His house was still there, but his neighbors had lost their houses.

01:18:31.000 And he was just crying and weeping.

01:18:33.000 This girl was looking for her dog.

01:18:35.000 And they're like, all right, Joe, JB is still late.

01:18:38.000 So what we're going to do is we're going to put you on, and you do your set, and then he'll go on after you.

01:18:43.000 I was like, oh, no.

01:18:44.000 So I went on stage thinking about this guy crying, not even for his own loss, but for his neighbor's loss.

01:18:50.000 And that girl looking for a dog. 1.00

01:18:51.000 And I just got so sad.

01:18:53.000 And I went on stage and a shit.

01:18:55.000 Yeah, that just the tidal wave in Japan really messed me up for a few days.

01:19:01.000 I'd been to Japan just a few years before.

01:19:04.000 And man, just seeing all that destruction.

01:19:06.000 And you just know, you know, watching those rivers washing down the streets and everything, you know it's full of people.

01:19:11.000 Oh, yeah.

01:19:13.000 I was messed up for days.

01:19:14.000 Yeah, it's horrible.

01:19:15.000 So those, I mean, comedy require, I mean, you know, people are paying to see you take them out of this reality and have them escape into some fun world.

01:19:24.000 You know, and I just, I wasn't good at it.

01:19:26.000 You know, I was only 20, maybe 23 or something at the time.

01:19:30.000 I just was clumsy.

01:19:31.000 I didn't know what the fuck I was doing.

01:19:32.000 And the idea of like reading this conspiracy book all day and freaking out, I just also was bad at perspective, at putting things into perspective.

01:19:39.000 Well, listen, listen, this took place in 63.

01:19:41.000 Here we are in, you know, 1990.

01:19:43.000 Why am I thinking about this?

01:19:44.000 You know, I didn't have that ability to switch gears.

01:19:48.000 Interesting.

01:19:49.000 Well, stand-up comedy is one of the careers that I have the most respect for because you can't not be smart and get away with it.

01:19:58.000 You've obviously never seen Brian on stage.

01:20:01.000 He kills and he's not smart at all.

01:20:04.000 You've got to be a great speaker.

01:20:06.000 You've got to be good on your feet.

01:20:07.000 I mean, I'm just impressed.

01:20:09.000 Yeah, he's not a good speaker.

01:20:10.000 He barely can talk.

01:20:11.000 He talks like he's got worms in his mouth.

01:20:12.000 Okay, my theory is disproven.

01:20:14.000 Well, he also has a cheat code.

01:20:17.000 He's got the God code.

01:20:19.000 He became famous and then he started doing comedy again.

01:20:22.000 I just do prop comedy without a prop.

01:20:25.000 The prop is his personality.

01:20:29.000 Well, thank you.

01:20:30.000 That's very nice of you to say.

01:20:33.000 My friend Joey Diaz says it best.

01:20:35.000 He says it's the hardest, easiest thing you'll ever do.

01:20:38.000 When you're good at it and you get good at it and you stay at it and you develop momentum, then it's easy.

01:20:42.000 But to get to that point, it's very hard.

01:20:45.000 And that was my birth or my entering into the world of conspiracies and the fascination with them came from that, from that one book.

01:20:56.000 100%, no doubt about it, that I can trace it back to that one book that made me start questioning the reality of what I had been taught.

01:21:04.000 Are there other roads you've gone down that you've since turned away from?

01:21:08.000 The moon landing is the most drastic.

01:21:10.000 Like again, I say, just as a caveat, I always wish the moon landing was fake.

01:21:17.000 And I would be much more happy if it turned out it was a giant hoax than if people went to the moon.

01:21:22.000 Why?

01:21:22.000 Because I'm a silly bitch.

01:21:24.000 And because I like silly things.

01:21:25.000 And I love, I think it'd be a greater accomplishment for people to fake that we went to the moon than it would almost even be to go to the moon.

01:21:33.000 That was what Neil said, yeah.

01:21:34.000 Well, that's also what, you know, I mean, a lot of people that have argued against it have said.

01:21:34.000 Yeah.

01:21:40.000 Yeah.

01:21:41.000 Even scientifically, that it would be more impressive.

01:21:43.000 It would.

01:21:44.000 And I think the point that the number of people who would be expected to keep a secret.

01:21:51.000 Well, okay, this is something that a road we went down with flight, was it flight 93 or flight 77?

01:21:57.000 Flight 93 was the one that got shot down over Pennsylvania.

01:21:59.000 Flight 93.

01:22:00.000 So I've got a friend who does not believe in any of the 9-11 conspiracies, except he believes that we did successfully shoot down that plane.

01:22:11.000 Well, I will tell you this, without saying anyone's name or speaking any further, that I know people that are in the military, and I asked them, is it possible that in a situation where a plane was going to be flown into the Pentagon, that they would have fighter jets shoot it out of the sky?

01:22:28.000 Do you think that would be possible?

01:22:29.000 And they said, 100%.

01:22:31.000 Yeah.

01:22:32.000 100% possible.

01:22:33.000 Oh, we'd love to do that.

01:22:33.000 Not only that.

01:22:34.000 They would do it.

01:22:35.000 We would do it.

01:22:35.000 We had planes on the way to do it.

01:22:37.000 They didn't get there in time.

01:22:39.000 Allegedly.

01:22:41.000 I have no problem with the fact that they were on the way to get it.

01:22:45.000 But the thing is, that's another case where you've got to look at the number of people involved because if a missile gets shot, a missile getting shot is a big deal because you've got all kinds of accounting that has to happen for that missile.

01:22:57.000 Not only do you have the ground crew and everyone who loads the missile launch and takes it off, you've got civilian oversight for all the supplies that happen.

01:23:03.000 Again, for a plane to shoot a missile that nobody knows about, that's, again, going to involve a pyramid of people.

01:23:11.000 100 people at the base, maybe at a minimum.

01:23:15.000 1,000 people in the civilian oversight contractors.

01:23:18.000 It just goes on and on and on.

01:23:21.000 The number of people that would have to do with the camera.

01:23:23.000 I could agree with that, but I can't.

01:23:25.000 Because of the fact that they have black-funded projects, because of the fact that they develop things in total, complete secrecy in Area 51 that involve billions and billions of dollars.

01:23:34.000 That's where the stealth technology came from.

01:23:36.000 That's where many different advanced technologies have come from without any knowledge whatsoever by the American people.

01:23:43.000 So, to say that it would be hard to hide a missile, it would certainly be an issue.

01:23:47.000 It would certainly be an issue.

01:23:49.000 But I don't think that a government that could make a fucking stealth bomber would have a hard time hiding a missile.

01:23:53.000 Well, okay, but these planes did not come from Area 51.

01:23:56.000 They couldn't matter.

01:23:56.000 They're just totally open bases that people walk on and off of every day.

01:24:00.000 That's true.

01:24:00.000 But if you can, well, people walk on and off of Area 51 every day, too.

01:24:03.000 They just come in by buses.

01:24:04.000 They just come in on planes and buses from Vegas.

01:24:08.000 But that doesn't necessarily mean that that's what happened.

01:24:12.000 But it does.

01:24:13.000 The idea of saying this could never happen because you would have too many people, not really.

01:24:18.000 Think about all the shit that they have designed, that no one knew they had until they had.

01:24:21.000 There's a lot of secrecy still in government.

01:24:24.000 When they do it right and they're really good at it, when it comes to national security, they can keep things secret for a long time.

01:24:29.000 But also those things weren't all that remarkable.

01:24:31.000 There was nothing, nothing that ever happened at Area 51 turned out to really be all that interesting.

01:24:35.000 Blackbird?

01:24:36.000 Yeah.

01:24:37.000 You don't think that that's remarkable?

01:24:38.000 These unbelievable jets?

01:24:40.000 You don't think that stealth technology is remarkable?

01:24:42.000 The fact that they look like UFOs and they can hide from radar?

01:24:46.000 God damn, you're hard to impress.

01:24:47.000 No, Google.

01:24:49.000 Yeah.

01:24:49.000 Did Google come out of that?

01:24:50.000 Yeah, that's where Google came from.

01:24:52.000 Really?

01:24:52.000 Area 51?

01:24:53.000 That's a joke.

01:24:53.000 Oh, you're joking.

01:24:54.000 No, I mean, there's...

01:24:57.000 Anyone.

01:24:58.000 That's how conspiracy gets started.

01:25:00.000 I'm a big aerospace nut, and I follow a lot of the aerospace reporting.

01:25:03.000 And anyone in that industry knows what goes on at Area 51 because it's basically the national test facility is what it's actually called.

01:25:12.000 They simply, that's where they're testing the next generation planes.

01:25:16.000 I wouldn't be surprised to see what they're testing there now because we pretty much have a pretty good idea of what it looks like.

01:25:23.000 And that was the case in the 1960s, was the case in the 1970s.

01:25:26.000 You've obviously never seen the interviews with Robert Lazar.

01:25:30.000 Our favorite guy.

01:25:32.000 Oh, my God.

01:25:33.000 Yeah, you have, huh?

01:25:34.000 Oh, I know all about Bob Lazar.

01:25:35.000 Yeah, I did a whole episode on his thing as well.

01:25:38.000 Well, he's a fascinating cat because he seems so smart, and then you find out he lied about his college education.

01:25:43.000 Oh, you might be crazy.

01:25:46.000 Yeah, that was really quite a wonder.

01:25:48.000 But I mean, anyone who was in the know was laughing at him from the beginning.

01:25:51.000 Oh, really?

01:25:52.000 He only fooled people in the UFO community.

01:25:54.000 Well, that sounds like an ad hominem attack, sir, and that doesn't do very much to support your arguments.

01:26:00.000 This is a terrible debating skill you have here, Brian Dunning.

01:26:04.000 He is wrong because of who he is.

01:26:05.000 Skeptic to the end.

01:26:07.000 Nobody wants UFOs to be real more than me.

01:26:09.000 Like, nobody wants Bigfoot to be real more than me.

01:26:12.000 I'm silly.

01:26:13.000 I'm a silly person.

01:26:13.000 I'm a comedian.

01:26:15.000 I don't have any vested interest in keeping the status quo and standard operational procedure in place.

01:26:21.000 I like it all falling apart.

01:26:22.000 I would love it if a UFO flew over the city and people started shitting their pants and throwing bedpans out the windows.

01:26:28.000 I would love it.

01:26:29.000 I told you when I first got here to the studio, I told you that Bigfoot is something that I believed in until five years ago.

01:26:37.000 Fairly recently.

01:26:38.000 Yeah.

01:26:38.000 Well, not just that.

01:26:40.000 You said you believed the Patterson-Gimlin footage.

01:26:42.000 Oh, yeah, no.

01:26:43.000 I always believed that the Patterson-Gimlage footage, did I just call it Patterson?

01:26:49.000 Gimlin.

01:26:49.000 Gimledge Gimledge.

01:26:51.000 I always believed that that looked incredibly good, and I still do now.

01:26:55.000 The people who say that's the worst fake I've ever seen, I think they're being disingenuous because I think it's a brilliant fake.

01:27:03.000 I think it looks great.

01:27:04.000 You're hilarious.

01:27:05.000 Now, I know the whole history of the film and everything.

01:27:07.000 Right.

01:27:09.000 Bob Hieronymous.

01:27:10.000 Bob Harony.

01:27:10.000 Yeah, the whole thing with, you know, when was the film where, when was the film purchased, when was it developed?

01:27:15.000 How did it get from A to B. And we know that pretty much everything he said about it was a lie, and we pretty much have a good picture of the film's history, and we know that it was faked.

01:27:25.000 We also know that he was arrested for larceny for writing a bad check.

01:27:29.000 The very camera that he used to film those Bigfoot photos.

01:27:32.000 And he had been paid, he was on a hunt to make a Bigfoot documentary, for God's sake.

01:27:37.000 Don't bring this up to Bobcat Goldwaite.

01:27:39.000 He will get fucking crazy.

01:27:40.000 He will get crazy with you.

01:27:42.000 We had on my show, I had, well, here's the video.

01:27:46.000 Let's watch the video real quick just so we can show how silly you are that you think that this looks real.

01:27:52.000 So get the stabilized version because this one's horrible.

01:27:55.000 Because this is how it was first released.

01:27:57.000 It was first released in this sort of like weird, shaky, shaky version.

01:28:02.000 This is actually probably stabilized.

01:28:05.000 I mean, I think that looks so stupid and fake.

01:28:09.000 How can you say it looks fake because it's so bad of quality?

01:28:11.000 Exactly.

01:28:12.000 If there was anything in there that gave it away, like a zipper, it wouldn't be visible because of the low graininess.

01:28:17.000 The way he walks, he walks like a person.

01:28:19.000 I mean, it doesn't mean that it's not a big giant person, but he walks like a person.

01:28:23.000 And I don't think when you watch an elephant walk, there's a reality to the weight that they carry around.

01:28:28.000 And that thing is not walking with the reality of the weight of an 800-pound, 1,000-pound animal.

01:28:33.000 That thing is walking like a person.

01:28:36.000 Maybe he's 5'6 ⁇ .

01:28:38.000 Well, they decided they were going to measure off all the different trees in that area and figure out how tall he was.

01:28:44.000 I didn't say 6-foot.

01:28:45.000 I thought it looked like he was over 6 feet tall.

01:28:47.000 I said it looked like a real animal to me.

01:28:49.000 Well, it doesn't to me.

01:28:50.000 It looks like a guy in a monkey suit.

01:28:51.000 It looks stupid as a titanium.

01:28:54.000 What I'm doing is I'm admitting where I have had, where I've been susceptible to.

01:29:00.000 I wanted Bigfoot to be real.

01:29:01.000 I understand.

01:29:02.000 And in finding yourself that you were indeed a silly bitch, now what you're doing is you're bouncing the other way and going, was, I'm sorry, excuse me, at the time. 0.92

01:29:10.000 And now you're bouncing completely the other way and hardcore skeptic.

01:29:14.000 Skeptic by, not just by choice, but by default.

01:29:19.000 Instantly, automatically lean towards the skeptic.

01:29:22.000 Shouldn't we all be?

01:29:23.000 I think we should be very objective, for sure.

01:29:25.000 And I think it can be very confusing if you're not.

01:29:27.000 You know, if you do go looking around for conspiracies, the better alternative is most certainly to be skeptical by default.

01:29:34.000 But I also think that you miss a lot of shit.

01:29:37.000 Like, okay, here's a perfect example.

01:29:39.000 And I use this one all the time.

01:29:40.000 Unfortunately, for people who listen to this podcast, do you believe that 9-11 happened?

01:29:44.000 Do you believe that planes flew into buildings?

01:29:47.000 Do you believe that happened?

01:29:48.000 Yes.

01:29:48.000 Then you believe in conspiracies.

01:29:51.000 Yes.

01:29:52.000 Yes.

01:29:52.000 Because they conspired to do that and they pulled it off.

01:29:54.000 A bunch of people hijacked planes simultaneously in different spots in the country.

01:29:59.000 They got control of the planes, flew those planes into buildings, caused those buildings to collapse.

01:30:03.000 Thousands of people died.

01:30:04.000 It was a conspiracy.

01:30:05.000 It was a successfully executed conspiracy And only one of many that we know of all throughout history.

01:30:10.000 So if you automatically take the skeptic point of view, you miss out on the possibility of exposing something that is a true conspiracy because they do exist.

01:30:20.000 Well, when you say the skeptic point of view, what do you mean?

01:30:22.000 I would say the null hypothesis.

01:30:25.000 The null hypothesis is that Lee Harvey Oswald acted alone?

01:30:28.000 The null hypothesis is that probably nothing remarkable happened.

01:30:34.000 But why would you say that?

01:30:36.000 Well, okay.

01:30:36.000 Remarkable things happen all the time, though.

01:30:38.000 Why would that be a default?

01:30:41.000 What I mean in that case is take the guy for a different example of a shooting, take the guy who shot all the people in the movie theater.

01:30:48.000 The null hypothesis is that a guy shot all the people in the movie theater as was reported by everyone who was there.

01:30:55.000 The null hypothesis in the Kennedy situation would be that Lee Harvey Oswald acted alone as discovered by the cops who chased him down and tackled him and arrested him in the movie theater.

01:31:07.000 The null hypothesis for 9-11 would be that what happened generally as we saw it on television and was reported by the people who were there is what happened.

01:31:16.000 That would be the null hypothesis.

01:31:18.000 And anything remarkable would be something that goes against what appears to have happened on that day.

01:31:24.000 So I would say that the null hypothesis is going to generally be right most of the time until we've got some remarkable evidence to prove it wrong.

01:31:33.000 Well, how do you factor in contradictory evidence from reputable online news sources?

01:31:38.000 Like, for example, like let's the NSA.

01:31:42.000 It's a perfect example.

01:31:44.000 Before it was revealed by Edward Snowden that the NSA was indeed spying on all these different Americans and detailing records of your phone calls and who were surprised by that.

01:31:54.000 Very few people were, but the people that were had argued against it vehemently.

01:31:58.000 And they had said there's no way it would be such a huge conspiracy.

01:32:02.000 You would have to hide that from so many people.

01:32:04.000 So many people would be in the know.

01:32:05.000 There's no way that that could be possibly true.

01:32:07.000 I heard that.

01:32:08.000 I witnessed Alex Jones having that discussion with a person where Alex Jones, who predicted this shit a long time ago, almost a decade before it actually happened, I believe it was 2003 or 4, Alex Jones was saying, if you don't think they're keeping detailed records of every phone call you make, everything you do, every email you send.

01:32:29.000 He was on it way before, and I thought it was crazy, nutty conspiracy talk.

01:32:34.000 Meanwhile, he was right.

01:32:35.000 They really were.

01:32:36.000 They really figured out how to do it.

01:32:37.000 They developed this technology.

01:32:39.000 They created this storage facility that they're in the middle of building right now in Utah that's going to be this massive warehouse of data and information.

01:32:46.000 That's a real conspiracy that turned out to be true.

01:32:49.000 I don't think that there was, well, I can't say that Alex, I don't give him credit for predicting that.

01:32:53.000 How dare you?

01:32:55.000 There's nothing that Snowden revealed that I don't think was pretty much generally suspected anyway.

01:33:02.000 We know that cell phone companies have always had all your cell phone records.

01:33:05.000 Therefore, the government has them.

01:33:07.000 That's not surprising to me.

01:33:08.000 Well, they could access that.

01:33:09.000 To me, it's surprising that someone would be surprised by that.

01:33:12.000 Really?

01:33:13.000 That's funny, because I thought it was a pretty big revelation, cause for alarm.

01:33:17.000 A lot of people were up in arms about it.

01:33:18.000 It was a pretty big deal.

01:33:20.000 I don't think you could downplay that.

01:33:21.000 I think people have always been up in arms about it.

01:33:24.000 There's been a lot of people saying, hey, privacy, the cell phone company shouldn't have any way to track my calls or to do it.

01:33:31.000 But they can.

01:33:32.000 And they own their cell phone company, so they can do whatever the heck they want.

01:33:35.000 And as long as those records exist, it's pretty naive to believe that nobody has access to them.

01:33:40.000 Well, that is not the issue.

01:33:40.000 Well, sure.

01:33:42.000 The issue is that they're doing it for every single American all the time.

01:33:45.000 They're constantly following you and constantly watching your emails and constantly.

01:33:49.000 It's not a matter of looking at suspicious people or people that have been accused of crimes.

01:33:54.000 It's a matter of people that are just law-abiding citizens that are taxpayers and doing nothing wrong, but yet they're being almost like held because they're checking all their information.

01:34:03.000 It's like this thing that they hold over your head and the idea that this could be used to intimidate political opponents or this could be used to intimidate business rivals.

01:34:12.000 You know, that was a huge conspiracy.

01:34:14.000 And I think to deny that that was pretty shocking to the American people when we found out that they not only did indeed have this power and capability, but they had been utilizing it for a long time.

01:34:25.000 Something's only shocking if you didn't have enough information to be aware that that was going on.

01:34:32.000 And I mean, I come from the Silicon Valley background.

01:34:41.000 With the formation of all the big search engines and things like that, having worked at enormous, ridiculously huge data centers and everything, and having a general idea of how the technology works, I mean, it's to me, it's nothing, nothing in that is surprising that data is being collected on that large of a scale or that anyone would have access to it.

01:35:05.000 Nothing I've heard coming from Snowden surprised me in any way and wouldn't surprise most of the people from a similar background as me, I think.

01:35:12.000 I think for a lot of people, it was quite shocking.

01:35:14.000 I'm sure it was.

01:35:16.000 But I think if you know anything about the way that technology works and about the whole data storage and collection industry, the null hypothesis has got to be that, hey, anyone who wants access to it has access to it.

01:35:29.000 But wasn't the null hypothesis when Obama gave that speech and said that we're not doing it and this is just metadata?

01:35:29.000 Right.

01:35:37.000 Didn't people believe that?

01:35:38.000 Wasn't that essentially what everyone was reporting in the news and everyone was saying, listen, this is a much ado-about nothing.

01:35:44.000 This is just metadata.

01:35:45.000 Don't worry.

01:35:45.000 And then it turned out that that wasn't the case at all.

01:35:48.000 Well, the null hypothesis also, I think, is that the government.

01:35:53.000 Yeah.

01:35:54.000 Maybe presidential press releases are not always exactly accurate.

01:35:59.000 But if that's the case, how do we apply that to everything else?

01:36:01.000 How do we apply that to the Kennedy assassination?

01:36:04.000 And how, I mean, the Nutters hear this, and they're going to apply it.

01:36:06.000 Sorry for calling you Nutters, folks.

01:36:08.000 But the 9-11 Truthers, how about that? 0.60

01:36:10.000 They apply that to 9-11 Truth.

01:36:11.000 They say this is, you're contradicting yourself.

01:36:15.000 The whole idea that what they're saying is not the null hypothesis?

01:36:22.000 What do you mean?

01:36:23.000 Well, you said that the government tends to be a liar when it comes to press conferences.

01:36:27.000 Oh, okay, okay, I got you.

01:36:29.000 The official story, as it were.

01:36:30.000 The official story is a lie because it's the official story because it's coming from the government compared to the null hypothesis Being that the government always lies about everything, or frequently is not completely truthful.

01:36:43.000 Well, no, wasn't it the null hypothesis that the story that's being produced in the media is the actual story?

01:36:49.000 That whatever, the conclusions that mainstream has accepted about Osama bin Laden and these hijackers from Saudi Arabia and all these different things that factor into the events of 9-11 are in fact exactly how it went down when you in fact just said that when it comes to the NSA and the Obama administration not being correct or being truthful about metadata and what was being collected, that, well, the United States government tends to lie.

01:37:13.000 Well, if they tend to lie, they tend to lie.

01:37:15.000 And if they tend to lie, why would you assume that there are other explanations for all the different things that have taken place were true at all?

01:37:21.000 That wouldn't be the null hypothesis.

01:37:22.000 It's a fascinating subject and obviously very complicated.

01:37:27.000 That's my point.

01:37:28.000 That's the point, yes.

01:37:29.000 But also, when you say the official story, when you're talking about what the government says, that's not necessarily the source of information that people are relying on.

01:37:41.000 Nobody has read the 9-11 report.

01:37:43.000 Nobody has read the Warren Commission report.

01:37:45.000 You and I, we don't even know what the government's position is on those.

01:37:48.000 We assume we do.

01:37:49.000 We assume that it's whatever's in those reports is what people generally believe about it.

01:37:53.000 But that's not our source of information.

01:37:55.000 We didn't go to the government for our information.

01:37:58.000 I don't think I've ever had a question about 9-11 that I've gone and Googled a government website to find out what should have happened, what I'm supposed to believe is that.

01:38:09.000 I don't even think there are government websites that spell out history.

01:38:12.000 Is there a government website that spells out history?

01:38:14.000 I don't think that exists.

01:38:15.000 Boy, they would fucking crush that thing.

01:38:16.000 The thing is you can't conflate the government's version of events with – The standard model is what probably most historians, whatever the field is, whatever the scientists are, whatever the historians are, if it's a historical, what most lawyers think, if it's a legal question, I don't know.

01:38:37.000 I would call it the standard model.

01:38:38.000 I would not use the term the official story because that suggests government involvement, which is not an authoritative source.

01:38:46.000 The government, quote unquote, is not an authoritative source on anything.

01:38:51.000 It's not where people get their 9-11 information.

01:38:53.000 We get that from basically from historians, from modern history.

01:38:59.000 It's not the official source on how many neutrons are in a boron atom.

01:39:04.000 We get that from the standard model of science.

01:39:07.000 So I don't think it's too much of a boy, I'm twisting myself into knots here.

01:39:18.000 I don't think it's hypocritical for me to say that when Obama says something that we shouldn't accept as the truth, that that conflicts with the government's official position on 9-11 or Snowden or what the NFL is.

01:39:32.000 Or the Kennedy assassination.

01:39:34.000 I think what I'm saying makes sense.

01:39:36.000 Well, the issue with that is, of course, the news outlets, especially in the Kennedy assassination, got all their information from the government.

01:39:42.000 They got all the reports from spokespersons that were assigned this position to give this press conference and explain what the details were.

01:39:51.000 The president was found in Bethesda, Maryland.

01:39:54.000 Where do you think that guy got his talking points?

01:39:55.000 Is he winging it?

01:39:56.000 You know, they're not winging it.

01:39:57.000 Those guys were told what to say and when to say it, and they were put on television because it was an easily controlled thing back then.

01:40:03.000 Weren't there reporters on the site?

01:40:05.000 Sure, but what do they know?

01:40:06.000 They know the president was dead, and then they took the president's body away.

01:40:06.000 What do they know?

01:40:09.000 Everything else is information from the government.

01:40:11.000 Well, I mean, what does that mean?

01:40:12.000 Were they handed a press release that says White House at the top and said told, report this?

01:40:17.000 Well, it depends on.

01:40:18.000 Well, where were they getting their information?

01:40:19.000 It depends on, I mean, there's many, many, many, many outlets.

01:40:23.000 There's different doctors who talked about it.

01:40:25.000 There's different people who were on the news.

01:40:26.000 There's Tom, who is the guy who explained it on television for the first time, that classic speech that the president has been shot.

01:40:34.000 God damn it.

01:40:35.000 Who was it?

01:40:35.000 That famous.

01:40:36.000 Dan Rat?

01:40:37.000 I don't believe it was Dan Rather.

01:40:38.000 I believe it was before his time.

01:40:40.000 I want to say.

01:40:41.000 It doesn't matter.

01:40:41.000 I don't know.

01:40:42.000 It's pointless.

01:40:43.000 The point is that where are they getting that information?

01:40:47.000 I don't see how the government fits in that loop.

01:40:49.000 Well, the government had Kennedy's body, and they release a press statement.

01:40:51.000 That's a fact.

01:40:52.000 I mean, they tell people that the president has been shot.

01:40:54.000 The president's dead.

01:40:55.000 This is what's going on.

01:40:56.000 And, you know, when the news outlets, whether it's local or national, ABC, NBC, whatever it is, they need to get the information from the official source.

01:41:04.000 The official source would be someone who's in the government that has a press conference that explains the events as they took place.

01:41:11.000 Okay, so we're kind of spinning around in circles here.

01:41:13.000 That might be annoying for people like me.

01:41:16.000 Yeah, I was basically going to circle around and say the same thing.

01:41:19.000 I think we agree on more than we disagree on.

01:41:21.000 And I think that what I'm trying to say is that there's weirdness to the world.

01:41:25.000 And that to automatically take the skeptical position is oftentimes just as silly as automatically taking the conspiratorial position.

01:41:33.000 Okay, what do you mean by the skeptical position?

01:41:35.000 What do you mean when you say from that, I'm getting the message that you think I tend to take a silly position.

01:41:43.000 No, no, no, skeptical.

01:41:45.000 That it is silly to take this I don't want to be fooled position, just as foolish as it is sometimes to take this double, double silly.

01:41:55.000 Either one fell.

01:41:56.000 Crazy.

01:41:56.000 Just as silly as it is to automatically knee-jerk take the conspiratorial position when we know for a fact that certain conspiracies have not just been planned out, but have been executed.

01:42:05.000 Whether it's the Gulf of Tonkin that led us into Vietnam, whether it's Operation Northwoods, which was a planned attack on American civilians and American military that was signed by the Joint Chiefs of Staff.

01:42:15.000 They were going to make a jetliner explode.

01:42:18.000 They were going to arm Cuban friendlies and have them attack Guantanamo Bay. 0.94

01:42:22.000 All this to blame on the Cubans so that we could go to war with Cuba.

01:42:26.000 When you know that that kind of information exists and was real and is provable and it's in the Freedom of Information Act releases, when you know about all that, that has to be factored into the spectrum of possibilities.

01:42:37.000 Okay, but you can't use the fact that there have been real conspiracies in history.

01:42:42.000 You can't use that to defend conspiracy theories.

01:42:47.000 Because conspiracy theories, as defined by the way you and I are discussing them, are future predictions.

01:42:53.000 The conspiracy theory about 9-11 having been an inside job, for example, predicts that one day it will be discovered that the government orchestrated 9-11.

01:43:04.000 It's a prediction of evidence that will someday exist in the future.

01:43:08.000 And future predictions really have never come true.

01:43:12.000 I say that there, I've said this in print many times, that there are no conspiracy theories that have ever come true.

01:43:20.000 A conspiracy theory being something that has existed as a theory among conspiracy theorists unknown to the general public, unknown to L.S. I'll dispute that right away.

01:43:29.000 I'll dispute that.

01:43:30.000 What about the LSD experiments they did on civilians?

01:43:33.000 That did not exist as a conspiracy theory until it was discovered.

01:43:37.000 It most certainly did.

01:43:39.000 It existed in my high school.

01:43:41.000 People talked about them doing LSD experiments on soldiers.

01:43:43.000 It was an urban legend.

01:43:44.000 It was a myth that they gave soldiers LSD and they drugged people to find out what the acid would do to them and it rotted their brain out.

01:43:51.000 We'd hear all these stories.

01:43:53.000 You'd hear about it from people that were in the military.

01:43:55.000 You're talking about MKUltra.

01:43:56.000 I'm not talking about MKUltra.

01:43:57.000 talking about Operation Midnight Climax, where the CIA drugged up people that were in brothels in New York and San Francisco so that they can study the effects of LSD on innocent civilians.

01:44:11.000 So I think that was part of MKUltra.

01:44:14.000 I mean, there was a lot of programs related to MKUltra.

01:44:16.000 Okay, hold on.

01:44:17.000 That's basically the same thing.

01:44:17.000 Operation Midnight Climax.

01:44:19.000 1950s.

01:44:21.000 1950s, that's pretty early.

01:44:23.000 Well, it was also the various things that they did to soldiers, many of them documented to this day.

01:44:27.000 Those were all legends at one point in time.

01:44:30.000 Those were all the mind control experiments that they did to Timothy, what's the fuck his name?

01:44:35.000 The Unibomber.

01:44:35.000 What's his name?

01:44:37.000 No, not Tim Excellent.

01:44:37.000 Timothy.

01:44:38.000 Ted Kaczynski.

01:44:39.000 Ted Kaczynski.

01:44:40.000 He was part of the Harvard LSD studies.

01:44:44.000 Ted Kaczynski, they fucking dosed that guy up with acid.

01:44:47.000 Yes, he was.

01:44:47.000 Rosie, I didn't know that.

01:44:48.000 That's very cool.

01:44:49.000 There was a documentary on it.

01:44:51.000 I think it was called The Net, and it was all about tracing back the roots of his insanity to these LSD experiments, and that he may very well have signed up for something that fried his fucking brain.

01:45:03.000 Okay, let me ask for something right now.

01:45:05.000 I'd like to ask your listeners, of whom you have, how many?

01:45:09.000 I don't know.

01:45:11.000 Eight?

01:45:11.000 What?

01:45:12.000 What are you talking about?

01:45:13.000 More than eight.

01:45:13.000 Definitely more than eight.

01:45:14.000 Okay, I'd like to ask, for all of Joe's listeners out there, if you have an example of a conspiracy theory that existed as a theory among conspiracy theorists before it became generally known by law enforcement, media, general public, whatever, please let me know.

01:45:31.000 Email me, brian at skeptoid.com.

01:45:34.000 Because I still maintain that there are none and I would love to be proven wrong about that.

01:45:38.000 Isn't what Alex Jones said, isn't that a conspiracy theory that turned out to be true, that the government is spying on your emails and listening to all your phone calls?

01:45:45.000 That wasn't something that was known only to conspiracy theorists.

01:45:47.000 That was something that's, I mean, that's the point.

01:45:53.000 From the people who were in that industry, that doesn't surprise anyone.

01:45:55.000 But from someone like me, it was very surprising.

01:45:58.000 And for people that were listening to the official government story, it was absolutely contradicting that.

01:46:03.000 Okay, and the first time you learned it.

01:46:05.000 16 conspiracy theories that turned out to be true.

01:46:06.000 Let's read that.

01:46:07.000 Yeah.

01:46:07.000 Oh, okay.

01:46:08.000 Ha ha, you're funny.

01:46:09.000 Oh, here, your voice is not objective, sir.

01:46:13.000 They put cancer viruses into other vaccines.

01:46:16.000 ATM machines will someday use facial recognition technology.

01:46:20.000 Yeah, but those are silly.

01:46:21.000 Those are not conspiracy theories.

01:46:22.000 That's just prognosticating projecting.

01:46:26.000 Well, there must be something there.

01:46:27.000 The U.S. government and Monsanto are teaming up against opponents of genetically modified food.

01:46:32.000 Hmm.

01:46:33.000 Is that a conspiracy theory?

01:46:34.000 It's not?

01:46:35.000 No.

01:46:36.000 It kind of is.

01:46:37.000 That the U.S. government and Monsanto are teaming up to make money?

01:46:40.000 Oh, pro-wrestling's fake.

01:46:42.000 Whoa, that's not real.

01:46:44.000 Shut the fuck up, dude. 0.98

01:46:45.000 Dude, don't break my world in half.

01:46:49.000 Scientists all over the world are creating extremely bizarre human-animal hybrids.

01:46:53.000 Okay, is this true?

01:46:54.000 Not long ago, Chinese scientists embedded genes for human milk proteins into a mouse's genome and have since created herds of humanized milk-producing goats.

01:47:02.000 Well, that's just ignorance.

01:47:03.000 They don't understand what's going on there.

01:47:05.000 They're not making human hybrids.

01:47:07.000 They're just utilizing genes for certain specific actions.

01:47:10.000 Using a cell phone could cause cancer?

01:47:13.000 Yeah, that's not been proven unless you talk to Cheryl Crowe.

01:47:16.000 Cheryl Crowe thinks she got a brain tumor from listening to the cell phone all the time.

01:47:20.000 Fluoride is harmful for your teeth.

01:47:22.000 Okay, is that true?

01:47:23.000 The Department of Health and Human Services and the Environmental Protection Agency are proposing the change because of an increase in fluorosis, a condition that causes spotting and streaking of children's teeth.

01:47:34.000 These are not conspiracy theories.

01:47:35.000 This is promotions of anti-science.

01:47:38.000 This is stupid.

01:47:38.000 Prescription drugs kill large numbers of Americans.

01:47:41.000 Fucking everything kills people.

01:47:42.000 No, but if someone out there does have a conspiracy theory that turned out to be true, please email me, brian at skeptoid.com.

01:47:50.000 I would love to be able to report on it.

01:47:54.000 One of the most common episode requests I get is for conspiracy theories that turned out to be true.

01:47:59.000 And I always answer that email with the same thing.

01:48:01.000 I say, great, give me a suggestion.

01:48:03.000 I've been looking for them.

01:48:04.000 A lot of the times they confuse incompetence with conspiracy as well.

01:48:09.000 Like, here's one.

01:48:10.000 The Federal Reserve is a perpetual debt machine that is designed to create inflation.

01:48:13.000 Then it goes on to show that the U.S. national debt has gotten more than 5,000 times larger and the value of the U.S. dollar has fallen by more than 96%.

01:48:20.000 I think that's more of an example of greed and incompetence and just fucking fools running things than it is a massive conspiracy to diminish the wealth of the United States.

01:48:29.000 Just people are stealing from the system.

01:48:31.000 They put cancer viruses in our vaccines?

01:48:31.000 That's all it is.

01:48:33.000 Did you know this, Brian Dunning?

01:48:35.000 I know that they've got all kinds of different things in vaccines for different purposes.

01:48:38.000 And a lot of the times what the things that people report, like there are aborted fetal tissue in vaccines, that's not completely untrue.

01:48:49.000 There are certain lines that can only be grown in human tissue.

01:48:55.000 And so there's two particular lines of fetal tissue that have existed for, boy, I think they're nigh on 40 or so years old now, these two particular lines.

01:49:04.000 And we grow the cultures in those tissues of human tissue.

01:49:10.000 And then the cultures are removed from the tissue.

01:49:13.000 Once in a while, a spare cell or something will get stuck in and be included with the vaccine, but it's not harmful in any way.

01:49:20.000 And it kind of misrepresents the way it happens to say that we include human fetal tissue in vaccines.

01:49:27.000 Right.

01:49:28.000 Someone sent me one that's legit.

01:49:29.000 The Gulf of Tonkin incident never happened.

01:49:31.000 That was a conspiracy theory long before it was ever proven true.

01:49:35.000 That's true.

01:49:38.000 I haven't done an episode on that.

01:49:39.000 That's been a frequent request.

01:49:42.000 I'll put that, bump that to the top of my list.

01:49:44.000 That's a real one.

01:49:45.000 But I have a feeling that you're going to somehow or another shade it so that everything's going to be okay.

01:49:50.000 You're going to dance around it and make it seem like, listen, enlighten me.

01:49:54.000 What about the Gulf of Tonkin was known only to conspiracy theorists before law enforcement slash media slash whoever got a hold of it?

01:50:01.000 That's a good question.

01:50:02.000 Well, how about the fact that it happened at all, that they actually did fake this incident?

01:50:08.000 You know, that is established historical fact.

01:50:11.000 Okay, but that's saying that a conspiracy happened, sure, but that's not the same thing as a conspiracy theory happened.

01:50:16.000 But no, it's a very important thing.

01:50:17.000 Who were the conspiracy theorists who were shouting about it on the street corners before it was discovered by the general public or by law enforcement?

01:50:24.000 I'm pretty sure that that was something that people had talked about.

01:50:28.000 I don't know.

01:50:29.000 I mean, obviously I'm too young to know, but the Gulf of Tonkin conspiracy before.

01:50:33.000 Yeah, I mean, that's the information I'm looking for.

01:50:35.000 Yeah.

01:50:35.000 When have conspiracy theorists who, you know, from their New York apartment basements or wherever they were figured out these things?

01:50:45.000 Yeah, I can't say people who should have known about them found out about them.

01:50:49.000 What about Watergate?

01:50:50.000 Well, that's not really a conspiracy theory.

01:50:52.000 What that is, is just standard operational procedure amongst crooks, and then one guy got busted.

01:50:57.000 I mean, there was...

01:51:00.000 Alex Jones was not on his radio show screaming about what happened about Watergate.

01:51:04.000 Well, he was a baby.

01:51:05.000 Bernstein and Woodward reported it.

01:51:07.000 He wasn't even a baby.

01:51:07.000 He wasn't even born then.

01:51:08.000 Alex is younger than me.

01:51:09.000 He looks like he's like 60, but he's like, I think he's 40.

01:51:12.000 Really?

01:51:13.000 Yeah, he's a young guy.

01:51:14.000 When I first met him, I believe he was 28.

01:51:15.000 He's actually younger than me, if I remember correctly.

01:51:18.000 That's depressing.

01:51:18.000 Yeah, he does look pretty bad, doesn't he?

01:51:20.000 Fucking burns at both ends.

01:51:22.000 Alex, I'm sorry if you're listening.

01:51:23.000 He's a sweetie.

01:51:24.000 Jesus.

01:51:25.000 He's a sweetie, but yeah, he's fucking, look, if your whole day was doom and gloom and new world order, you'd be shitting your pants too.

01:51:32.000 I don't know if we got anywhere with any of this talk, but we still have plenty of time.

01:51:36.000 So let's continue.

01:51:39.000 I think I could shed light on faulty thinking that I have had myself.

01:51:43.000 And I think that confirmation bias and that you can go online and find fringe sites and all these different things that support your ideas and then not objectively look at it, like completely objectively.

01:51:43.000 Please.

01:51:57.000 We all get attached.

01:51:58.000 We get our egos attached to statements and we get our egos attached to positions that we've taken.

01:52:03.000 And I think that those egos and those statements and positions that we've taken oftentimes can be the enemy of objectivity.

01:52:11.000 And I agree with you that there are most, I don't want to say most things, but when you're looking at information online, what you should do is look at all the different arguments, pro and con, and then look where the intelligence is.

01:52:27.000 Look where the smart people are leaning.

01:52:28.000 Look where the educated people are leaning.

01:52:29.000 Look where the experts are leaning.

01:52:31.000 And try to figure it out.

01:52:32.000 And also know that no matter what there is in this world, if you haven't been there and you're reading someone's take on it, there's going to be a bunch of different opposing opinions that make no fucking sense.

01:52:44.000 There's going to be some that are close.

01:52:46.000 There's going to be the full range from fucking whackadoodle.

01:52:50.000 The planes were holograms.

01:52:52.000 There was explosions that were, look at this is not a civilian plane.

01:52:57.000 They took the people to the moon.

01:52:58.000 There's this whackadoodle shit on every subject, everything that exists.

01:53:03.000 And some of it you have to wonder, we know that there's techniques and tactics of disinformation.

01:53:08.000 Well, they'll take a bunch of things that are absolutely true, then attach them to one thing that's blatantly ridiculous.

01:53:14.000 And that one thing sort of diminishes all the other things.

01:53:18.000 One thing that I always tell people, and I always get criticized for it, is if you have a question on any given matter, go to the experts in that subject.

01:53:28.000 If you want to know how old the Earth is, go to the people who actually work in that field.

01:53:34.000 You're not always going to be right, but you're going to be right far more often than you're wrong.

01:53:38.000 So no matter what the question is, what the pseudoscience is, for example, cancer, bullshit cancer remedies.

01:53:46.000 If you want to know whether this works, go to the experts in cancer.

01:53:52.000 Go to the American Cancer Society, et cetera, et cetera.

01:53:55.000 You won't always be right, but you'll be right far more often than you're wrong.

01:53:59.000 We had a real problem with that on our show with Peter Duisberg.

01:54:02.000 Peter Duisberg, who's a professor of biology at the University of California, Berkeley, esteemed scholar who also believes that HIV doesn't cause AIDS.

01:54:12.000 And we had him on the podcast, and it was unbelievably baffling.

01:54:16.000 And my statement was, it's very frustrating when you're too dumb to know who's stupid.

01:54:20.000 But it was listening to him and listening to the absolute outrage of all the actual scientists that work in the field of HIV research and how angry people were about it.

01:54:30.000 And unfortunately, I couldn't get anybody to debate him.

01:54:33.000 And I think that much like people are criticizing Bill Nye of visiting the Creation Museum, it's almost like people don't want to debate Holocaust deniers.

01:54:41.000 They did not want to debate this guy because it somehow or another gives his ideas credence.

01:54:46.000 Yeah, and I agree with that.

01:54:48.000 I would say just let him hang out in the wind.

01:54:51.000 For anyone with any credibility to spend time on that, you're communicating to the general public that there's a question here that needs to be looked at, and that's not right.

01:55:00.000 Yeah, well, it's baffling, though.

01:55:02.000 It's really confusing when you have this guy who's this incredibly intelligent man who's very well respected and educated and has done some amazing work on cancer research as well, even since then.

01:55:12.000 So it's baffling.

01:55:14.000 Okay, let me ask you something else.

01:55:16.000 I want to kind of call you out a little bit on something else.

01:55:20.000 This call you out is some new shit that people are doing in the last 10 years.

01:55:22.000 Notice that?

01:55:23.000 Yeah, right on.

01:55:23.000 There was no calling out before that.

01:55:26.000 You know, nobody ever had a problem.

01:55:27.000 But did any conspiracy theorists believe that they were calling you out?

01:55:30.000 No.

01:55:31.000 So, okay, you had a guy on your show a couple of weeks ago.

01:55:34.000 When I come on a show, I try to listen to some recent episodes.

01:55:36.000 You had a guy on who was a doctor, doctor something or other.

01:55:40.000 Gordon Mark.

01:55:41.000 Mark.

01:55:41.000 Mark Gordon.

01:55:42.000 Okay.

01:55:44.000 I listened to that episode.

01:55:46.000 I turned it off in a rage at nine minutes because I couldn't take any more.

01:55:50.000 He came on, and I believe you said you'd had him on several times before.

01:55:53.000 Is that right?

01:55:54.000 No, no, no.

01:55:54.000 He's my friend.

01:55:55.000 Okay, you know the guy.

01:55:56.000 He came on, and he starts promoting his miracle supplement that you take and you can drink as much alcohol as you want and not get drunk.

01:56:03.000 Well, he's talking about glutathione.

01:56:05.000 It was a meal.

01:56:06.000 He was selling a product that you can take and sell it.

01:56:09.000 No, he doesn't sell it.

01:56:10.000 He doesn't sell glutathione.

01:56:13.000 I beg to differ.

01:56:15.000 That was the central thrust of the first nine minutes of the episode that I listened.

01:56:18.000 Really?

01:56:19.000 I'm not incorrect.

01:56:20.000 I'm not incorrect.

01:56:21.000 What I want to discuss with you is something you said to him.

01:56:24.000 You said, that sounds too good to be true.

01:56:27.000 I wish I knew enough to call you out on your bullshit.

01:56:30.000 Right.

01:56:34.000 You should have known enough to call him out on your bullshit.

01:56:36.000 I didn't know he was going to bring that up.

01:56:38.000 Well, I mean, okay.

01:56:39.000 That wasn't like the topic of conversation.

01:56:41.000 Like, when I have someone on the show, the idea of having people on the show is just a conversation, just with you.

01:56:46.000 There's no, we didn't discuss much.

01:56:47.000 We said, let's just have fun.

01:56:48.000 Let's just talk.

01:56:49.000 The same thing with Mark.

01:56:50.000 I mean, Mark is a friend of mine, and he's an interesting guy, and he can ramble on forever and relay all sorts of information.

01:56:56.000 He's also an expert in traumatic brain injury.

01:56:58.000 He's helped a lot of soldiers, helped a lot of athletes, helped a lot of football players, mixed martial arts fighters, boxers.

01:57:04.000 He's helped a lot of people understand the delicate balance of the human mind.

01:57:08.000 And here's the thing.

01:57:10.000 He came on your show and told people that here's a supplement they can take and drink all they want and not get drunk.

01:57:16.000 That gets people killed.

01:57:17.000 I agree.

01:57:18.000 I said that.

01:57:19.000 Is he right, though?

01:57:20.000 No, he's not right.

01:57:22.000 What happens when you take glutathione if you're drunk?

01:57:23.000 Does it have any effect?

01:57:24.000 The body is a lot more complicated than that.

01:57:27.000 A great example that I like to give of this is the idea of oxidation and antioxidants.

01:57:33.000 Oxidation causes aging, it causes bad things, so take an antioxidant.

01:57:37.000 And that sounds really simple, but it's far more complex than that.

01:57:41.000 And in fact, it's so complicated that statement doesn't even mean anything.

01:57:44.000 It's one of these things that's so wrong, it's not even wrong, as the saying goes.

01:57:48.000 You can't just take something that's produced in your liver and counteract the effects of drinking alcohol.

01:57:55.000 There is no direct line from anything you eat to any part of your body.

01:58:02.000 If you're working out, if you're trying to get buff and you take a protein supplement, you're thinking, hey, protein coming in, that's going to go to my muscles and help them get strong.

01:58:12.000 That's something that is incredibly wrong, but it sounds so simplistically true.

01:58:20.000 It's not correct.

01:58:21.000 That's not the way the body works. 0.94

01:58:23.000 That's not the way the digestion system works. 0.67

01:58:25.000 You cannot take something orally and have it go as a direct line to any given part of your body.

01:58:30.000 That's not the way our digestive system and our blood works.

01:58:34.000 And when you say that there's a supplement that can prevent you from getting drunk, you're I'm sorry, you are against all reasonably established science.

01:58:43.000 And you're trying to make a buck off of people potentially getting killed.

01:58:47.000 And I had a huge problem with that to the point that I had to turn the show off.

01:58:50.000 I was just getting mad driving in my car.

01:58:54.000 Okay, keep going.

01:58:55.000 And I think that as someone with a huge audience, as you have, I think you have more of a responsibility to make sure that people like that are called out on it.

01:59:07.000 If he surprises you with it, then say, okay, then I've got to get someone on next week.

01:59:12.000 I've got to go and get Stephen Novella or someone like that, someone who is a promoter of science-based medicine, to counteract that.

01:59:20.000 Because I think you could have left some of your listeners with the impression that, hey, they can now buy something and drink all they want and then drive home safely.

01:59:28.000 Okay, I'm looking online and immediately I find articles that discuss glutathione and its role, vital role in alcohol detoxification.

01:59:38.000 In the liver, it binds to the toxin acetyl, which acetyl dehyde, I don't know, whatever.

01:59:45.000 Acetaldehyde.

01:59:46.000 Which is a product of alcohol and is 10 to 30 times more toxic than the alcohol itself.

01:59:46.000 Thank you.

01:59:51.000 Glutathione then transforms, say it again, acetaldehyde.

01:59:56.000 What?

01:59:56.000 What acetaldehyde into compounds that can be excreted?

01:59:59.000 Alcohol therefore depletes our store of glutathione.

02:00:03.000 When depleted by excessive alcohol consumption, glutathione becomes unavailable for normal and natural antioxidant effects, leading to a host of health problems.

02:00:12.000 And this article is actually saying that you should take glutathione when you drink.

02:00:16.000 What you're talking about is reducing the effects of a hangover, getting over the hangover quickly.

02:00:21.000 It does not, underscored, does not prevent you from getting drunk or in any way mitigate the intoxication.

02:00:29.000 So it doesn't diminish it or shrink it like as if he said.

02:00:32.000 That's the belief one of his statements were, is that when you were drunk, you could take this stuff and it would bring you back to baseline rather quickly.

02:00:38.000 That is not true.

02:00:39.000 You can reduce the effects of a hangover, but you cannot prevent yourself from getting drunk.

02:00:43.000 Have you ever tried this?

02:00:44.000 Do you know this for a fact?

02:00:46.000 I've never tried his product.

02:00:47.000 No, no, no.

02:00:48.000 I mean, it's not his product.

02:00:49.000 Glutathione is available pretty much everywhere.

02:00:51.000 You can buy it in health food stores.

02:00:52.000 You can buy it online.

02:00:53.000 I have never tried anyone's product that was intended as a miracle drunk cure.

02:00:58.000 But, I mean, it would make sense, though, that if alcohol and alcohol consumption and the reaction that it has in the body is a chemical reaction, that there could be possibly something that could counterbalance it or swing it in one way or another, just like many other chemical reactions and symbiotic reactions that we have to things inside the body.

02:01:15.000 Now, when you read something about this, it seems like what your dispute is that he said that it could diminish the effects of alcohol while you're drunk.

02:01:24.000 And you're saying that's not true.

02:01:26.000 It just helps with the hangover.

02:01:27.000 Yes.

02:01:28.000 Okay.

02:01:28.000 If it helps with the hangover, it's still really potent and pretty interesting.

02:01:32.000 I would like to do a test on it.

02:01:34.000 I would like to see two people's blood alcohol levels measured.

02:01:37.000 I think if you don't do that test, yeah, you're fucking saying something kind of irresponsible, which he did.

02:01:42.000 I don't know if that test has been done, though.

02:01:44.000 Do you?

02:01:46.000 I have not searched the literature for it.

02:01:48.000 But what if it has been done and he's right?

02:01:51.000 Then that would have been all over the literature.

02:01:54.000 But as someone who follows the literature fairly closely, I can tell you that it has not been all over the literature, that you can now drink and not get drunk.

02:02:02.000 Well, I mean, maybe he was exaggerating.

02:02:04.000 I think he was exaggerating because he was selling a product.

02:02:07.000 Do you think that's what it was?

02:02:08.000 Because he doesn't have a store.

02:02:09.000 He doesn't have anything.

02:02:11.000 When you say selling a product, where's he selling it out of?

02:02:14.000 He doesn't have a store.

02:02:15.000 I don't remember.

02:02:16.000 Look, this was the nine minutes of his episode.

02:02:17.000 He was talking about what he sells.

02:02:19.000 If I'm wrong about that, then I'm damn wrong about it, and I'm surprised.

02:02:24.000 This is another thing.

02:02:25.000 There's a thing that's talking about saving you from being too drunk is taking glutathione before you drink.

02:02:32.000 Where are you seeing it?

02:02:34.000 Some fucking journal.

02:02:37.000 It's a long, Look, it's impossible to have a conversation and Google things at the same time.

02:02:42.000 But it's also on, there's a scientific article on Reddit about large amounts of glutathione have the potential to sober people up in a very short time.

02:02:53.000 They're researching a chemical drug.

02:02:55.000 This is, listen, man, he's not the only one that's talking about this.

02:02:59.000 This is being discussed in many different forms.

02:03:02.000 I don't know if he's right or wrong, but I don't think you do either.

02:03:05.000 I would like to have him on with someone who disputes it and find out.

02:03:09.000 That's what I would recommend.

02:03:10.000 He's a very smart guy, and he wasn't saying that many outlandish things where I'd have to pull him down like the towers were destroyed by Tesla technology.

02:03:19.000 That's not the same doctor.

02:03:21.000 He's a pretty reasonable guy.

02:03:22.000 He's a little bit out there.

02:03:24.000 He's kind of wacky.

02:03:25.000 What is he out there on?

02:03:26.000 Oh, he's out there on.

02:03:30.000 It's a good thing you say he's out there on.

02:03:32.000 I'd have to listen to it and go over it.

02:03:32.000 I don't know.

02:03:34.000 I like the guy a lot.

02:03:35.000 I'm very biased when it comes to him.

02:03:37.000 He's a fun guy.

02:03:38.000 He's very, very smart.

02:03:40.000 But I'm looking at more than one thing that's showing that you could advance your sobriety.

02:03:45.000 You could sober up quicker by taking glutathione.

02:03:49.000 I don't know if they're right or he's right or you're right, but I don't know that you should be saying that if you're not a doctor.

02:03:55.000 What if it turns out that is true?

02:03:56.000 I'm not a doctor, but I'm a science writer, and I do Google this.

02:04:00.000 I do follow this stuff.

02:04:01.000 I've written on Google.

02:04:02.000 I did an episode, oh, probably three, four months ago on hangover.

02:04:08.000 What exactly is the cause of a hangover?

02:04:11.000 What's the nature of the toxicity?

02:04:13.000 He could use that information.

02:04:13.000 Why don't you hook us up?

02:04:14.000 What does that mean?

02:04:15.000 It's a really complicated subject.

02:04:17.000 It's an immunosuppressant, the dehydration.

02:04:20.000 There's a lot of factors, right?

02:04:21.000 Yeah, and it basically comes down to, yeah, it's a depletion of glutathione and your body can't keep up with it.

02:04:28.000 Oh, snap. 0.99

02:04:29.000 Sounds like Dr. Gordon's right.

02:04:30.000 No, it's not as simple as that.

02:04:32.000 That's the thing, is it's easy to sell products by giving an oversimplified description of it.

02:04:36.000 I'm telling you, though, you're pinning it on this guy.

02:04:39.000 He doesn't have a store.

02:04:40.000 Like, you're saying he's selling products.

02:04:42.000 He's not selling anything.

02:04:43.000 Okay.

02:04:44.000 He was certainly talking about a product that's available there.

02:04:47.000 Yeah, because he takes it.

02:04:48.000 But he was talking to me about it even before the podcast, that he takes it.

02:04:53.000 I know Dave Asprey from the Bulletproof Exec, he takes glutathione, but he never brought up anything about it doing anything for alcohol.

02:05:02.000 Okay, well, I would just like to leave you with my opinion that since listeners got the impression that here's something that they can take and drink all they want and not get drunk is potentially lethal advice.

02:05:14.000 Guess who else got that information?

02:05:17.000 Who?

02:05:17.000 Me.

02:05:18.000 I don't know if it's right either.

02:05:19.000 Me and the listeners got fed some information that we don't know it's right.

02:05:23.000 I don't have any obligation other than to talk to people.

02:05:26.000 My obligation is to ask questions if I'm curious.

02:05:29.000 But in broadcasting these things, I make the very clear distinction that I'm not an expert.

02:05:34.000 I don't know what the fuck I'm talking about when I'm talking about things like health and medicine.

02:05:39.000 But I'm fascinating.

02:05:40.000 So if I'm talking to someone and they're an expert and they bring up something that I didn't prepare for, I'm going to ask them questions about it.

02:05:46.000 And I will say, I wish I knew if you're full of shit.

02:05:49.000 But that's about as good as I can do.

02:05:52.000 The reason I initially did this episode five years ago about celebrities who promote harmful pseudoscience is because when you have a large audience, I believe you do have an obligation to not give harmful information.

02:06:07.000 But I'm not giving it.

02:06:08.000 I don't think for a minute that you've ever knowingly given any harmful information.

02:06:12.000 I'm not accusing you of anything at all.

02:06:14.000 But if it has been given by one of your guests and you are in the position of having to say, that sounds too good to be true, I wish I knew enough to call you out on your bullshit.

02:06:25.000 It seems to me like a reasonable step to follow that up with would have been to find out with, get somebody on who can address the other side of that question.

02:06:37.000 Perhaps I could turn this around on you and say it would be so easy for you to research all those different things on that list that you accused me of, many of them which are not true at all and never have been true, but yet you printed them.

02:06:49.000 I did.

02:06:50.000 So why did you do that if you're a man of science?

02:06:52.000 What information would you possibly have had?

02:06:54.000 Because I was using the internet in 2008.

02:06:56.000 And look, every probably three, four months or so, I do an episode that is nothing but corrections.

02:07:03.000 It's corrections of things I've been wrong about in the past.

02:07:06.000 I think that's a great plan.

02:07:08.000 I think it's great that I do that.

02:07:10.000 I want to continue doing it.

02:07:11.000 I need more things to be wrong about so I can produce those episodes more often.

02:07:14.000 But what you wrote is very specific.

02:07:17.000 And what I came here today to do was to find out which of those are wrong and so that I will correct them.

02:07:23.000 Yeah, but even this one thing you just said, he wasn't selling it, but you got that wrong, but you're saying that he was selling it.

02:07:28.000 That wasn't on my show.

02:07:29.000 I was listening to this show.

02:07:30.000 Yeah, but you still got it wrong and you're saying it's true. 1.00

02:07:33.000 And so now you're sending it out to the world that this guy sells a product that he doesn't.

02:07:37.000 You're doing the exact same thing that you're blaming Joe for.

02:07:42.000 No, I'm not.

02:07:45.000 You are, though.

02:07:46.000 You're saying this guy sells something when he doesn't.

02:07:48.000 Yeah, you're saying he's pitching his product.

02:07:50.000 That's hardly the salient point.

02:07:51.000 The salient point is that information is being given that could potentially kill people.

02:07:55.000 Right, but you're saying that he's giving this information as a medical expert, which he is, under the guise of selling a product, which is erroneous.

02:08:02.000 Okay, but I've also said that I don't know whether it's his store or someone else's store, but it's a product that he's talking about.

02:08:08.000 That's the salient point.

02:08:09.000 Whether it's his store or someone else's store doesn't really make a lick of difference compared to the fact that it's potentially deadly advice.

02:08:18.000 And what he's saying is that he uses it.

02:08:20.000 He doesn't sell it.

02:08:21.000 And you're saying that he's saying that because he sells it.

02:08:24.000 That was very specific.

02:08:25.000 You had taken this very cynical approach to why he's disseminating this information.

02:08:29.000 And right now, if I said that, I was wrong.

02:08:29.000 Fair enough.

02:08:32.000 Oh, the sweetie.

02:08:33.000 You apologize.

02:08:34.000 And that's to say that these are dumb people that can't realize that they're drunk and they're taking a pill and they're going to go drinking.

02:08:39.000 Well, I said to him why it was going on.

02:08:41.000 I was like, that sounds like horseshit.

02:08:43.000 You did.

02:08:44.000 But I don't know.

02:08:45.000 I mean, he's a fucking smart guy.

02:08:46.000 Like, I know for a fact that that guy has helped a lot of people with traumatic brain injury.

02:08:51.000 That's a different subject.

02:08:51.000 He talks about it.

02:08:52.000 But he's a doctor.

02:08:52.000 He travels around.

02:08:53.000 He's a legit scientist and a doctor.

02:08:56.000 I mean, he's a really brilliant guy.

02:08:57.000 So when he talks to me about the issues with pituitary gland and impacts and his expertise on the human mind, that relays to me that he has a very vast understanding of The human body itself.

02:09:08.000 When he tells me something like this, and then I start reading that there's more than one different article that sort of confirms what he's saying, I don't know if you're right.

02:09:16.000 You might have gotten harsh on my friend Dr. Gordon for no reason.

02:09:19.000 What if he's right?

02:09:20.000 I think it's a very good reason.

02:09:24.000 If he's giving advice that's potentially killing people, I think that's a very good reason to err on the side of this information should be checked.

02:09:33.000 That's true.

02:09:33.000 But if you're so dumb that you're just pounding alcohol and trusting that glutathione is gonna do it and it's gonna kill you, that's a Darwin Award winner.

02:09:41.000 Yeah, you'll puke before you die.

02:09:43.000 You're using glutathione to fucking, I mean, he never said that.

02:09:50.000 He never said there's no risk involved.

02:09:52.000 What he was saying is it can help you get sober quicker.

02:09:54.000 I don't know if he's right, but I don't think you do either.

02:09:57.000 That's not what I heard.

02:09:59.000 What did you hear?

02:10:00.000 I heard him say you can drink and not get drunk.

02:10:03.000 We could listen to it.

02:10:03.000 We have the internet.

02:10:04.000 Okay, see if you could pull it up.

02:10:06.000 If there's a very small sample that we could find.

02:10:10.000 I think we're kind of splitting hairs here.

02:10:13.000 I could see why you would be upset, and I could see why you would think that I have the responsibility to call someone out.

02:10:19.000 I would have to be the expert on a million different things, and then I would have to have people on and have people counteract them and have people go back and forth in debates.

02:10:27.000 And that's all well and good in the real world if you can organize those debates and if you can get those people together.

02:10:34.000 But for the most part, I'm lucky to get someone to sit down once.

02:10:37.000 I'm lucky to get someone who can fit into a time that I have and have them on the show.

02:10:41.000 And I just want to have a conversation with them.

02:10:43.000 I didn't have any idea that guy was going to bring up glutathione.

02:10:45.000 In fact, we wanted to highlight his work on traumatic brain injury because there's a big issue with mixed martial arts these days.

02:10:52.000 And the big issue is, there's twofold.

02:10:56.000 One, traumatic brain injury, and two, the depletion of testosterone because of traumatic brain injury.

02:11:01.000 It's been shown in people that have come back from war and suffered head injuries.

02:11:06.000 And it's been shown from boxers and people that have sustained long-term, even sub-concussive impacts to the head that the pituitary gland gets fucked up.

02:11:15.000 And he's trying to sort of spread this information and keep fighters from taking testosterone to counteract that and then competing to, and continuing to compete, continuing to damage the brain.

02:11:27.000 And it's an issue in mixed martial arts.

02:11:30.000 And it's one of the reasons why I had him on because he's a brilliant guy.

02:11:34.000 And he is very troubled by this idea that we're going to put a band-aid on traumatic brain injury by giving these guys testosterone use exemptions.

02:11:42.000 He thinks it's wrong.

02:11:43.000 He thinks if your body is producing less testosterone because of impacts, you shouldn't give it testosterone and continue receiving impacts.

02:11:51.000 That was the whole premise for him coming on the show in the first place.

02:11:54.000 So for me, I felt like he's the smartest person I know in regards to this particular subject.

02:12:01.000 So I felt it was kind of important to discuss it with him.

02:12:04.000 I had no idea this glutathione shit was going to come off this week.

02:12:06.000 We're going to put it over after you drink and you take this.

02:12:06.000 But here's what he said.

02:12:09.000 What is this?

02:12:10.000 What is it?

02:12:11.000 Glutathione.

02:12:11.000 Unbelievable.

02:12:12.000 Pull that thing closer to your face so people hear you better.

02:12:15.000 Glutathione.

02:12:17.000 And that helps your liver when you drink alcohol?

02:12:20.000 Well, it helps you with just about anything that the liver is responsible for digesting or metabolizing.

02:12:29.000 As you metabolize certain drugs, chemicals, and so forth, the liver uses up its ability to continue the process, so it spills over into the blood, and that's how you get drunk, because your liver can only deal with a certain amount.

02:12:42.000 So if you replenish or replace the glutathione in the liver, you get incredible benefits of it.

02:12:48.000 Not only does it help with metabolism, but it's an incredible antioxidant for the brain and for the eyes and for the heart.

02:12:54.000 What is it made out of?

02:12:55.000 It's three amino acids that are together.

02:12:57.000 It's in our body, but we don't have enough of it to really generate the metabolism that we need if we're drinking.

02:13:04.000 Now, where do they get that?

02:13:05.000 Where do they get glutathione?

02:13:06.000 Because I know Dave Asprey's really into that stuff, too.

02:13:08.000 He has a version of it.

02:13:09.000 Yeah, it's manufactured.

02:13:11.000 But how do they make it?

02:13:11.000 What is it?

02:13:12.000 Well, it's three amino acids that they put together.

02:13:15.000 And the products that we interact with are, it's a delivery technology where you wrap the vitamins or you wrap the supplement in a, what's called a liposome, which is like a cell wall.

02:13:30.000 It's from lecithin, it's from soy, and it protects whatever it is that you're ingesting.

02:13:35.000 Because a lot of the things that you take, like I think I shared with you, if you take 1,000 milligrams of vitamin C by mouth, you only absorb 19%.

02:13:43.000 The rest of it is destroyed by the acid that's in the stomach.

02:13:46.000 But if you wrap it in this protection called the liposome, you'll be able to absorb 93%.

02:13:52.000 So taking something like glutathione, which normally when you take it in its natural form, it's destroyed.

02:13:58.000 Most of it is destroyed and then absorbed and then remanufactured in the blood.

02:14:02.000 But if you wrap it in this protective outer coating, a liposome, you can absorb it more readily.

02:14:07.000 And the effects are unbelievably positive.

02:14:09.000 For instance, a gentleman who went out drinking three high balls and five shots of tequila went home and subsequently was very dizzy, nauseous.

02:14:19.000 He forgot that I gave him a sample of this glutathione.

02:14:22.000 And he used four puffs under the tongue, held it for 30 seconds, and then 30 minutes later, clear as a bell, woke up the next day, went out partying again, couldn't get drunk.

02:14:32.000 What?

02:14:33.000 That sounds like nonsense.

02:14:35.000 It isn't nonsense.

02:14:36.000 I wish I was smart enough to call you on your bullshit.

02:14:39.000 Talk to my office.

02:14:40.000 Aaron will tell you everything.

02:14:42.000 That sounds crazy.

02:14:42.000 Maybe that guy was.

02:14:43.000 Cut it off right there. 0.98

02:14:44.000 That was actually at the beginning of the podcast, I remember.

02:14:46.000 That was about where I got mad and drinking.

02:14:47.000 That was right in.

02:14:49.000 I don't buy the, he says he couldn't get drunk the next day.

02:14:51.000 That's very anecdotal, though.

02:14:53.000 And what he was saying was just hard science.

02:14:55.000 A good doctor is not going to go and tell people anecdotes like, you can take this product and not get drunk.

02:15:01.000 Maybe he was nervous being on a podcast, and he probably shouldn't have said it, knowing that a million people plus are going to listen to it.

02:15:01.000 I agree.

02:15:06.000 However, what he said was all hard science.

02:15:09.000 What he said was, okay, here's the things he said that led me to believe that it was his product, at least remembering.

02:15:18.000 But obviously, here you watch it again, it wasn't his product.

02:15:20.000 He wasn't selling it.

02:15:21.000 He said, I gave him the supplement, and he said, here's the delivery thing that we're working on.

02:15:24.000 So maybe I misinterpreted that.

02:15:26.000 Let me tell you something about this guy.

02:15:27.000 He's a very generous guy, and he gives people vitamins all the time.

02:15:30.000 He's like, here, try this out.

02:15:31.000 I've been taking this.

02:15:32.000 This is an incredible amino acid.

02:15:34.000 It's blah, blah, blah, grape seed.

02:15:36.000 And he's just a, He gives things out to people.

02:15:40.000 He said it has all of these amazing effects.

02:15:43.000 Your heart, your brain, your eyes.

02:15:45.000 Antioxidants.

02:15:46.000 And he's using language like extraordinary and amazing.

02:15:50.000 And in my experience, in my experience dealing with many quacks of many different duck species, if it looks in the quacks like one, it's usually a quack. 1.00

02:16:00.000 And he was using very quack-like language and making very quack-like points.

02:16:04.000 I don't know what he's doing.

02:16:05.000 You could accuse him of hyperbole.

02:16:06.000 You could accuse him of hyperbole, but what he's saying is essentially hard science about the liposomal, the digestion of nutrients using the liposomal method as opposed to just normally being broken down by stomach acids.

02:16:18.000 All the things he's saying, it's not that ridiculous.

02:16:20.000 Yeah, I mean, if you usually take something, if you take some kind of an enzyme or something in your mouth, your saliva is going to start breaking it down into the constituent amino acids right away.

02:16:30.000 And you're right.

02:16:32.000 What he said was great.

02:16:33.000 It's not going to get used as glutathione in your body.

02:16:36.000 Those amino acids are going to go their separate ways and become used for whatever else your body actually is looking for at the time.

02:16:42.000 I don't know about his particular delivery method that he's talking about, but when he says… I guarantee you're not the particular delivery method he's talking about.

02:16:52.000 But when he says you can take 1,000 milligrams of vitamin C and your body's going to absorb 93% of it, that's, in my experience, medically nonsensical.

02:17:02.000 Your body doesn't need that much.

02:17:03.000 Well, your body doesn't use that much.

02:17:05.000 93% of what, though?

02:17:07.000 The vitamin C you took in your 1,000 milligrams.

02:17:08.000 No, no, no, no, no.

02:17:09.000 But what?

02:17:10.000 If it's a small amount.

02:17:11.000 If he's saying that your body absorbs 93% of vitamin C, he's not saying that you need 1,000 milligrams and your body absorbs 93%.

02:17:17.000 But he's saying that if you deliver it in a liposomal form, you get a 93% bioavailability.

02:17:23.000 He's not giving a specific number that you should take.

02:17:26.000 He was saying that if you take vitamin C, most of it gets destroyed unless you use it liposomally, which I think is correct.

02:17:33.000 But your body doesn't have any use for 93% of 1,000 milligrams of vitamin A. But he didn't say that.

02:17:39.000 He didn't say you need 1,000 milligrams and then 93% of it is absorbed.

02:17:43.000 What he said is if you take it liposomally, it's a higher rate of bioavailability and it's up to 93%.

02:17:49.000 He didn't say you have to take 1,000 milligrams.

02:17:51.000 Do you think he was implying that it's better to do that?

02:17:53.000 He didn't give a dosage.

02:17:54.000 He was trying to say that it's better to have liposomal vitamin C because it's more bioavailable.

02:17:58.000 That's all hard science.

02:17:59.000 Well, how is it better?

02:18:00.000 If it's going to give you more than you can use, how is it better?

02:18:03.000 No, you're adding that.

02:18:04.000 He didn't say that you have to have 1,000 milligrams.

02:18:07.000 What he said is that if you take it, 19% is going to get absorbed.

02:18:10.000 You take it through the traditional method.

02:18:11.000 If you take it liposomally, then you get 93% absorption.

02:18:15.000 He didn't give you a dosage.

02:18:16.000 He wasn't suggesting or implying that you're going to be able to do it.

02:18:18.000 You're trying to find them to be wrong, Zyron.

02:18:21.000 This is not cool.

02:18:21.000 Look, I'm just saying it looks and quacks like a damage.

02:18:24.000 It's disingenuous.

02:18:25.000 What you're saying is disingenuous because that's not what he's saying.

02:18:27.000 What he's saying there was that the bioavailability of liposomal nutrients is better.

02:18:32.000 And that's true.

02:18:33.000 You're saying that he's saying 1,000 milligrams, and your point of contention is you don't need 1,000 milligrams.

02:18:37.000 He never said you need 1,000 milligrams of liposomal vitamin C. All he said was that when you take vitamin C liposomally, your body absorbs it better.

02:18:47.000 Whether it's really 93%, okay, yeah, it is.

02:18:50.000 Look at this.

02:18:51.000 Fuck.

02:18:52.000 They're saying on live and labs, liposomal science, saying a bioavailability of 98%.

02:19:02.000 There's another one that says over 90%.

02:19:05.000 So what he's saying is true. 0.80

02:19:07.000 What he's saying is fact.

02:19:08.000 And you're shitting on him because you don't want him to be right about what I think you're correct about is this idea, this anecdotal story of a guy taking this stuff, feeling better 30 minutes later, and then the next day he couldn't get drunk.

02:19:20.000 That sounds like bullshit to me, too.

02:19:22.000 But all that other stuff that he said, that's all science.

02:19:26.000 I'm shitting on anyone who is selling snake oil, basically.

02:19:30.000 Oh, come on, man.

02:19:30.000 Or pitching snake oil to be bought or suggesting that buying supplements and things that you don't need is a good way to spend your money.

02:19:38.000 But wait a minute.

02:19:39.000 If someone likes to drink, isn't it a smart thing to take glutathione after you drink to shorten your hangover?

02:19:44.000 Isn't it effective?

02:19:46.000 I would have to look at the research before I would tell you that.

02:19:48.000 You said it.

02:19:49.000 You said it before.

02:19:50.000 You said that it aids in reducing hangover.

02:19:54.000 Okay, yes.

02:19:55.000 So why wouldn't you take that?

02:19:57.000 You're saying that he's selling something that you don't need.

02:20:00.000 And why wouldn't you need it?

02:20:01.000 It's not as simple as that.

02:20:02.000 But wait a minute, wait a minute.

02:20:03.000 None of these issues are as simple as that.

02:20:05.000 No one's saying it is.

02:20:06.000 But you're saying that you take glutathione when you're hungover and it reduces the length of your hangover.

02:20:12.000 He's saying take glutathione.

02:20:14.000 You're saying saying to take glutathione is unnecessary.

02:20:17.000 You're saying that you don't need it.

02:20:18.000 Well, neither.

02:20:19.000 You don't need nutrients.

02:20:20.000 You could live on cheeseburgers and get to be fucking 60 years old just eating shitty food.

02:20:24.000 That doesn't mean that your life holds...

02:20:26.000 It doesn't mean that your life isn't enhanced by raw vegetables and nutrients and having a balanced diet.

02:20:31.000 You saying that you don't need glutathione is pretty ridiculous.

02:20:35.000 If you can get glutathione into your liver, your hangover will be reduced.

02:20:40.000 Whether this method of taking a supplement will get glutathione into your liver is something that I don't know, and I would have to look at the research before I would tell you that.

02:20:40.000 So why don't you?

02:20:49.000 But you're already accusing him of being wrong.

02:20:52.000 I'm accusing him of being wrong that you can take a product and not get drunk after trying to get drunk and not able to get drunk.

02:21:00.000 I'm saying that that's wrong and it borders on being really, really unethically wrong.

02:21:05.000 We agree on that, but you've set up all sorts of strawman arguments for why he did it and what he's doing and what he's saying and the bioavailability of vitamin C. Those all fall apart under scrutiny.

02:21:15.000 Let's have him come on and correct it then.

02:21:17.000 He's not going to come on and debate you.

02:21:18.000 He doesn't know you.

02:21:19.000 I wouldn't say that.

02:21:20.000 He's not going to want to.

02:21:21.000 I'd get someone who knows the business.

02:21:23.000 Look, he's a silly guy, and sometimes he might speak in hyperbole, but what he's saying that you corrected, you're wrong about.

02:21:30.000 About the bioavailability.

02:21:32.000 You attributed him to this erroneous number of 1,000 milligrams.

02:21:36.000 He didn't say that.

02:21:37.000 He did.

02:21:37.000 You want to play it again?

02:21:38.000 Let's play it again.

02:21:39.000 Let's play it again the liposomal indication of the business.

02:21:41.000 We don't need to play Jackson.

02:21:42.000 If you take 1,000 milligram vitamin C and you take it liposomally, you'll absorb 93%.

02:21:48.000 That's not what he said.

02:21:50.000 What he said was, if you take 1,000 milligrams of vitamin C, your body only absorbs 19%.

02:21:55.000 And he said, if you take vitamin C liposomally, your body absorbs a giant amount of it.

02:21:59.000 He said 93%.

02:22:00.000 19% and 93%.

02:22:02.000 That's what he said.

02:22:03.000 He didn't say you take 1,000 milligrams.

02:22:05.000 You're saying you don't need that much vitamin C, and That's why he's wrong.

02:22:05.000 No.

02:22:08.000 But high levels of vitamin C, that's debatable as well.

02:22:11.000 Because high levels of vitamin C have been shown to be potent antioxidants that can prevent against certain types of diseases.

02:22:17.000 A lot of people think it boosts your immune system.

02:22:19.000 It helps fight off various pathogens.

02:22:21.000 There's a lot of research, hard data, that shows that high levels of vitamin C is probably pretty good for you.

02:22:26.000 In my research, all of that has turned out to be nonsense.

02:22:29.000 Your research on vitamin C is extensive?

02:22:31.000 Yes.

02:22:32.000 What's your research on vitamin C?

02:22:33.000 God, I can look up my episode for you.

02:22:35.000 I mean, it was a few years ago.

02:22:36.000 We talked mostly about – it was invented by, of course, Linus Pauling, who by this time in his career was something of a crank and came up with this notion that vitamin megadosing would cure cancer.

02:22:50.000 And he wrote the book called – But that's essentially what started off the whole vitamin supplement movement that still exists very strongly to this day.

02:23:03.000 And what we have found by testing is that vitamin C does not significantly affect cancer, the length or duration or severity of a cold, et cetera, et cetera.

02:23:12.000 All of these things that we take it for.

02:23:15.000 This caused a great rift between him and science, and he spent most of the rest of his career, which was fairly short because he was quite elderly by that time, basically widening that rift and debating with the medical profession and trying to defend his vitamin mega-dosing idea.

02:23:32.000 And what you'll find now, I mean, this is pretty much everywhere in recent scientific literature, is the idea that vitamins really don't do anything for you.

02:23:40.000 Because very few people have vitamin deficiencies.

02:23:43.000 National Institute of Health published evidence demonstrating that vitamin C's anti-cancer properties, that high levels of vitamin C kills cancer.

02:23:51.000 This is the National Institute of Health.

02:23:53.000 And read the whole thing.

02:23:54.000 I bet you all that's talking about in vitro.

02:23:57.000 In vitro or IV?

02:24:00.000 You mean?

02:24:01.000 In vitro means if you put something in a Petri dish and you put some cells in there and you pour something in it and it kills the cells, that's in vitro.

02:24:07.000 It's got very little to do with in situ, which means actually doing some tests in your body.

02:24:13.000 So would it be IVC?

02:24:15.000 Is that what they would call it?

02:24:16.000 High-dose IVC?

02:24:17.000 Is that in vitro?

02:24:19.000 No, it would be just that.

02:24:20.000 It would be written out in vitro.

02:24:21.000 No, it's not saying that.

02:24:22.000 It's saying high-dose IVC, a non-toxic chemotherapeutic agent that can be given in conjunction with conventional cancer treatments.

02:24:29.000 Based on the work of several vitamin C pioneers before him, Dr. Riordan was able to prove that vitamin C was selectively toxic to cancer cells if given intravenously.

02:24:38.000 This research has recently reproduced and published by Dr. Mark Levine at the National Institute of Health.

02:24:45.000 So meaning that the bioavailability is at its highest because it's intravenously introduced, meaning that what he was saying about the bioavailability because of liposomal science, that that would also be a higher absorption rate than eating it normally.

02:25:01.000 So what he's saying is, I mean, what this article is saying is that there's benefit to taking high-level vitamin C. Look, I don't have that article in front of me, but I will tell you in my experience that you can find an article making any point you want to very easily about anything.

02:25:16.000 But does that mean that having researched this extensively myself and being very familiar with science writers and science journalists in virtually every field, I can tell you that the current thinking is not that vitamin C has any beneficial effect on cancer.

02:25:36.000 I have no idea what this article is that you're looking at.

02:25:38.000 Okay.

02:25:39.000 I think it's complicated, man.

02:25:40.000 You know, I think there's a lot of work being done that shows that there are benefits to taking in nutrients.

02:25:47.000 There was a study NBC.

02:25:49.000 Well, the various various vitamins, supplementing various vitamins.

02:25:54.000 There was an interesting one that I'm looking at right now.

02:25:58.000 They were talking about the prevention of vitamin C. Here's one, infectious illness prevention.

02:26:09.000 And this is an NCBI website.

02:26:12.000 It's a National Health Institute, National Institute for Health.

02:26:15.000 Mood and stress, cognition, and they've shown that it's actually that you could take high level, that vitamin C and different antioxidants and multivitamins have been shown to decrease juvenile delinquency.

02:26:28.000 Like I said, you can find an article.

02:26:30.000 What did you search for, by the way?

02:26:31.000 What was your search term?

02:26:32.000 I don't remember.

02:26:33.000 Benefits of vitamin C?

02:26:34.000 Suck dick, vitamins. 1.00

02:26:37.000 Threw that all together.

02:26:38.000 You know, man, I see where you're going with all this, and I see your point of view.

02:26:42.000 You're a no-nonsense guy.

02:26:44.000 And I agree with you for the most part.

02:26:46.000 And I think that, you know, in the case of Dr. Gordon and his description, it's probably rather unfortunate that he decided to give that anecdotal story along with this very interesting aspect of research and nutrition.

02:27:00.000 Fair assessment.

02:27:01.000 I'll agree with that.

02:27:02.000 But it would never make me angry enough to shut it off and yell at him.

02:27:06.000 And your descriptions of even what he said in the event is off.

02:27:10.000 And I think that's from this hard stance, no-nonsense approach you have.

02:27:15.000 And I don't blame you.

02:27:16.000 If you look in the world that we live in, it's filled with bullshit.

02:27:19.000 And a no-nonsense guy gets fucking tired of dealing with bullshit on a regular basis all day long.

02:27:25.000 And I think you're a bit knee-jerk in your reactions there, fella.

02:27:29.000 Okay.

02:27:31.000 You're certainly not the only person to have said that.

02:27:34.000 Well, you used to believe in Bigfoot five years ago, man.

02:27:36.000 Lighten up.

02:27:39.000 The best definition of skepticism is the intersection of science education and consumer protection.

02:27:46.000 If people have better science literacy, they are less likely to take advantage of products that are worthless.

02:27:54.000 Okay, that is a way of looking at it.

02:27:56.000 It aids in consumer protection.

02:27:58.000 That is my motivation.

02:27:59.000 I believe that information aids in consumer protection.

02:28:03.000 All information.

02:28:04.000 Eventually, right now we're dealing with this rudimentary sort of a way of assimilating it and distributing it.

02:28:11.000 And I think ultimately all the bullshit that we're dealing with in this world will stop to be valid.

02:28:17.000 I think what we're dealing with right now is like we Google things when we have an answer about something.

02:28:22.000 I think one day we're going to have an unstoppable base of knowledge.

02:28:28.000 And I think that it's probably sooner than later.

02:28:31.000 But right now, when we do have these discrepancies and these issues, Any gray area, anywhere that you're wrong and you take this hard stance, this hard no-nonsense stance, it actually does more harm than it does good.

02:28:47.000 Because if we could show that you're wrong, then even though your message is correct, I agree with your message.

02:28:53.000 I said it at the time, and he's my friend.

02:28:55.000 I wish I could call you out and you're bullshit.

02:28:57.000 I wished I could because I know him and he's kind of crazy.

02:29:00.000 But you saying all those things diminishes your initial point because your initial point was very valid.

02:29:07.000 He was being irresponsible and saying that you could take this stuff and not get drunk.

02:29:11.000 It seems ridiculous.

02:29:13.000 He shouldn't have told that anecdotal story.

02:29:15.000 But you shouldn't have insisted that he had said 1,000 milligrams and that it's 93% bioavailability.

02:29:21.000 And then you're trying to find some way that he's wrong.

02:29:23.000 So you're going, well, why do you need that much?

02:29:25.000 And he didn't say that.

02:29:26.000 He's trying to sell this stuff.

02:29:27.000 He's not selling shit.

02:29:28.000 He doesn't have a store.

02:29:29.000 He's not selling a goddamn thing.

02:29:30.000 Okay.

02:29:31.000 Well, agree to disagree on whether he said that.

02:29:33.000 Oh, we played it.

02:29:35.000 We played it back, and I heard it.

02:29:36.000 We played it again.

02:29:37.000 Okay, let's hear it again.

02:29:38.000 Play his 1,000 milligrams.

02:29:39.000 Well, and you've given me some great advice as far as health and fitness and exercise and all sorts of different things.

02:29:45.000 Scoot ahead a couple of minutes because it's always the whole thing.

02:29:48.000 Every conversation, you go, I know I forgot something.

02:29:50.000 I know I forgot to scoot ahead to the vitamin shit that helps your liver after you drink and you take the scoot ahead.

02:29:54.000 What is this?

02:29:55.000 Unbelievable.

02:29:55.000 What is it?

02:29:56.000 Glutathione.

02:29:57.000 No, but go a little bit ahead because we want specifically glutathione.

02:30:03.000 And the products that we interact with are, it's a delivery technology where you wrap the vitamins or you wrap the supplement in a, what's called a liposome, which is like a cell wall.

02:30:18.000 It's from lecithin, it's from soy, and it protects whatever it is that you're ingesting because a lot of the things that you take, like I think I shared with you, if you take 1,000 milligrams of vitamin C by mouth, you only absorb 19%.

02:30:31.000 The rest of it is destroyed by the acid that's in the stomach.

02:30:34.000 But if you wrap it in this protection called the liposome, you'll be able to absorb 93%.

02:30:40.000 So taking something like glutathione, which normally...

02:30:43.000 He didn't say you take 1,000 milligrams of vitamin C. He said if you do, you absorb 93%.

02:30:51.000 He's saying, if you take 1,000 milligrams of vitamin C, he's not recommending that as a dose.

02:30:55.000 He's saying, if you do, your body absorbs 19%.

02:30:58.000 That's true.

02:30:59.000 He's saying if you wrap it in a liposomal structure, your body absorbs 93%.

02:31:03.000 He's right.

02:31:04.000 kind of stunned on what you're saying I got wrong.

02:31:06.000 I said, he said, a thousand milligrams of vitamin C and you'll absorb 93% of it if you take his...

02:31:16.000 He wasn't telling you to take anything.

02:31:18.000 What he's saying is if you take a thousand milligrams of vitamin C, your body will only absorb 19%.

02:31:25.000 If you wrap it in this liposomal structure, your body will absorb 93%.

02:31:29.000 He's not recommending that as a daily allowance.

02:31:29.000 I know.

02:31:32.000 He's not telling you to take it.

02:31:33.000 You're trying to find a way to be right here.

02:31:35.000 It's kind of weird.

02:31:36.000 I think I'm repeating exactly what you just said.

02:31:39.000 I'm just kind of stunned that you're pointing out what I said was wrong.

02:31:42.000 I said, I mean, this is kind of, we're deteriorating in the containment quality here.

02:31:50.000 No, no, this is explaining where you err in the way you cast judgment and that you're incorrect about what he was saying.

02:31:57.000 But your main point where he's wrong is why do you need that much vitamin C in the first place?

02:32:01.000 What's the big deal about this liposomal thing?

02:32:03.000 You were trying to diminish him.

02:32:04.000 You're trying to find ways to diminish his point.

02:32:06.000 But he's correct.

02:32:07.000 All he gave you, he gave you a number.

02:32:09.000 If he didn't give you a number of 1,000 milligrams, what if he said 100 milligrams?

02:32:12.000 What if he said 500 milligrams?

02:32:13.000 His point was your body, he came up with a number for a point of reference.

02:32:17.000 But his point was your body only absorbs 19%.

02:32:20.000 He said then if you take it liposomally, your body absorbs 93%.

02:32:24.000 He didn't mean that you have to take 1,000 milligrams.

02:32:27.000 He doesn't tell you to take 1,000 milligrams.

02:32:29.000 He just gave you a point of reference for explaining the bioavailability of liposomal products as opposed to the standard form of digesting.

02:32:39.000 Can I just summarize my position and we can move on?

02:32:43.000 Just in two points.

02:32:44.000 Point number one is he used very quack-like language throughout the nine minutes that I listened to.

02:32:50.000 By saying it's amazing?

02:32:51.000 And I became sweetie?

02:32:52.000 Yes.

02:32:53.000 What do you say?

02:32:54.000 Which made me very skeptical of his motivations and of the quality of his information.

02:33:01.000 Number two, you do not need to take 1,000 milligrams of the music.

02:33:05.000 He didn't say that.

02:33:06.000 He didn't say you do.

02:33:07.000 This is a straw man.

02:33:09.000 Not a straw man.

02:33:10.000 This is summarizing my point.

02:33:12.000 My point, not his point, my point is that you do not need to take doses of any doses of vitamins or other supplements unless you're one of the rare people who for some reason has a vitamin deficiency, which is, you know, you need to be pretty sick or have some problem to have any need for any supplements.

02:33:27.000 But you were criticizing him for saying you need 1,000 milligrams, which is in fact not what he said.

02:33:32.000 Okay.

02:33:33.000 I don't think he would have said that unless he was trying to imply or suggest that he's going to be able to do that.

02:33:36.000 No, he's coming in with a point of reference.

02:33:37.000 He's going to take vitamin C. I'm sure he thinks it's a good thing to take vitamin C. As a matter of fact, that's the reason why people don't get scurvy, right?

02:33:43.000 Take vitamin C. It's good for you.

02:33:45.000 Keeps that from happening.

02:33:46.000 If you go on a long boat trip with a bunch of assholes who are eating dried meat, take your vitamin C. Look, there's nothing wrong with vitamin C. What he's saying is he gave a point of reference.

02:33:54.000 He started with 1,000 milligrams.

02:33:56.000 If you take that, it's a figure of speech.

02:33:58.000 You absorb 19%.

02:34:00.000 If you take it liposomal, you absorb 93%.

02:34:02.000 We're beating a dead horse.

02:34:03.000 You're wrong here.

02:34:06.000 I am flabbergasted that you're saying I'm wrong, but let's just move on.

02:34:10.000 I mean, this is just going around in circles.

02:34:12.000 Well, it is, but it is.

02:34:13.000 But it's highlighting the way you think.

02:34:16.000 And one of the things about the way you think is this desire to be right.

02:34:20.000 And you have a very strong desire to, when you're criticizing him, to be right.

02:34:25.000 And I think you're wrong.

02:34:26.000 And I think you're wrong about a couple of things.

02:34:27.000 You're wrong about your initial description of the way he described things as wrong.

02:34:32.000 And you don't like the way he used adjectives or hyperbole.

02:34:35.000 You said it was very important.

02:34:36.000 Okay, that's not exactly what you're talking about.

02:34:38.000 His type of language was what I was criticizing.

02:34:40.000 I think your real good point is that he said that you could not get drunk or that his friend wasn't drunk.

02:34:47.000 That's a real good point.

02:34:48.000 That sounds like nonsense to me.

02:34:49.000 Still sounds like nonsense.

02:34:52.000 I think he exaggerated.

02:34:53.000 Or I think he told an anecdotal story of someone who's bullshitting him.

02:34:56.000 Or it's one of those nights where you drink and drink and drink and you just can't get drunk.

02:35:00.000 You've had that.

02:35:01.000 He's had that experience.

02:35:02.000 He gets fucked up.

02:35:03.000 What I'm saying is, man, you're a hardline dude.

02:35:05.000 You don't smoke any weed at all, do you?

02:35:07.000 No.

02:35:07.000 There you go.

02:35:08.000 You need a little pot cookie and a massage.

02:35:08.000 That's what you need.

02:35:11.000 You ever get a Thai massage?

02:35:12.000 They pull your arms back, they walk on your back.

02:35:15.000 You need to relax, man.

02:35:18.000 There's a lot of merit in what you're doing, and there's a lot of merit in what you're saying.

02:35:23.000 And I understand your arguments for this hard stance.

02:35:27.000 I totally understand it.

02:35:28.000 But I also think that sometimes it diminishes your actual point, which can many times be very valid.

02:35:35.000 Well, this, this whole shit we're doing, this dance about vitamin C. Why do you think he brought it up?

02:35:35.000 Such as?

02:35:40.000 Why do you think he talked about it?

02:35:41.000 He wanted to talk about glutathione.

02:35:51.000 And he, you know, goes into depth.

02:35:53.000 He's a very interesting and very charitable guy.

02:35:59.000 He's not a bad guy at all.

02:36:01.000 So I was confused as to, I could see how you would get upset at that statement, absolutely.

02:36:07.000 But all that other stuff leading up to the statement to sort of flavor the statement and make it even worse and grander turned out to not be true.

02:36:15.000 Anytime you're suggesting, selling, promoting miraculously easy solutions to complicated problems, that should raise a huge red flag.

02:36:25.000 And all of the language he was using suggested a miraculously easy solution.

02:36:30.000 Words like, you know, the words he was using, the being.

02:36:35.000 I think he actually, in his defense, he used a lot of those words just to describe its effects as an antioxidant, which are pretty much universally accepted online.

02:36:47.000 Effects as an antioxidant?

02:36:48.000 It's a strong antioxidant.

02:36:49.000 What has been...

02:36:55.000 The antioxidants that you get from your normal diet are more than enough that your body can, will, needs to use.

02:37:01.000 Supplementation has no benefit.

02:37:03.000 Well, how do they enlighten me?

02:37:06.000 How do they test to see the benefit of antioxidants and antioxidant supplementation?

02:37:11.000 This goes back to the whole, the question of oxidation versus antioxidant.

02:37:15.000 Sounds like it's a really simple question, good versus bad.

02:37:19.000 Oxidation is part of so many different parts of your metabolism.

02:37:24.000 Converting your energy in cell to, converting your chemical energy in cell to kinetic energy, that's oxidation.

02:37:31.000 You can't just simply say antioxidants good, oxidation bad.

02:37:36.000 It's not as simple as that.

02:37:37.000 Okay, but no one's saying that.

02:37:41.000 What you're saying is antioxidants have no benefit if you take them as a supplement.

02:37:44.000 Supplementation of antioxidants has been found to have no benefit.

02:37:48.000 Where is that?

02:37:49.000 Is that published somewhere?

02:37:52.000 If you Google that sentence, I'm sure you'll find it.

02:37:55.000 Supplementation of antioxidants.

02:37:57.000 But how do they know the difference between the benefits of taking it with food and the benefits of taking it as a supplement?

02:38:03.000 Well, because we can chemically measure what's in food.

02:38:06.000 We can chemically measure what's in a supplement.

02:38:08.000 We know how much your body uses.

02:38:10.000 And the number of tests that have been done are all going to use different methodologies, and I'm sorry I did not memorize them.

02:38:19.000 Well, that's okay.

02:38:20.000 I can't tell you.

02:38:21.000 I'm honestly curious.

02:38:22.000 What I do as a science writer is summarize the available research.

02:38:27.000 So this is what I'm confused about.

02:38:30.000 If you are taking it in food, there's a benefit from it.

02:38:34.000 The amount of oxidation that you get in a normal diet, yes.

02:38:37.000 If you don't eat a normal diet, then I presume that if you were going on a water starvation diet or something, then I suppose you'd probably want to take a multivitamin.

02:38:47.000 You'd at least get your vitamins.

02:38:49.000 You wouldn't be getting anything else you need, but you'd be getting vitamins.

02:38:53.000 I suppose the same is true of just about any supplement if you're going to starve yourself.

02:38:57.000 But the best advice of all is to simply eat a normal, healthy diet.

02:39:02.000 Because those things, those aspects of nutrition are available in that normal, healthy diet, and they're bioavailable.

02:39:10.000 There's six basic things that you get in food.

02:39:13.000 Number one is water.

02:39:15.000 Number two is amino acids.

02:39:18.000 Number three is carbohydrates, sugar.

02:39:22.000 Number four is fats.

02:39:24.000 Number five, number six, what am I missing here?

02:39:27.000 Oh, five is vitamins.

02:39:28.000 And six is minerals.

02:39:30.000 So these are all the different classes of things that you need.

02:39:33.000 And any normal, healthy diet has all of those that your body is going to use.

02:39:36.000 Because actually you need quite tiny amounts of all of those things.

02:39:40.000 Your body actually uses very tiny amounts.

02:39:42.000 Any normal diet, the reason you poop and pee is because you ate more than you needed.

02:39:47.000 Supplementation is trying to pour water on a bucket that's already overflowing.

02:39:51.000 Wait a minute, wait a minute, wait a minute.

02:39:53.000 The reason you poop and pee is not because you ate more or drank more than you needed.

02:39:56.000 You're going to poop and pee if you just drink the exact right amount, too.

02:39:59.000 You can poop and pee all the way to starvation.

02:40:03.000 No, you can't.

02:40:04.000 You'll stop pooping at least.

02:40:05.000 You stop eating.

02:40:06.000 If you keep drinking water, like you're, when the water passes through your body, it's not because you drank too much water.

02:40:15.000 If you drink a glass of water, okay, and that water goes through is exactly what your body needed, in a few hours you're going to need it as a waste eliminator.

02:40:23.000 Your kidneys are going to continue producing urine until there is until you're dehydrated.

02:40:29.000 Right, but there's not a balance enact where you could hit the certain sweet spot where you eat exactly what you need or drink exactly what you need.

02:40:35.000 Look, I'm not talking about finding a sweet spot.

02:40:37.000 What I'm saying is that you're saying pooping and peeing is because you ate too much or drank too much.

02:40:42.000 That's not true.

02:40:43.000 You're taking my words too literally.

02:40:44.000 Well, that's a very literal statement, isn't it?

02:40:49.000 I mean, come on, that's a ridiculous medical statement.

02:40:51.000 A doctor would listen to that.

02:40:52.000 I'm just calling you out on the same shape.

02:40:55.000 What are you saying then?

02:40:56.000 What is it?

02:40:57.000 What I'm saying is supplementation of any of these things is pouring water on a bucket that's already overfull.

02:41:03.000 You don't need more sugar than your body's going to use.

02:41:06.000 You don't need more minerals than your body's going to use.

02:41:09.000 You don't need more vitamins than your body's going to use.

02:41:13.000 Anything that you'd eat of those that is more than you're going to use is going to get excreted from your body somehow or other sooner or later.

02:41:20.000 That makes sense?

02:41:21.000 That's what I'm saying.

02:41:22.000 Okay.

02:41:25.000 I would love to know what studies they did on antioxidants and what they know the benefits of.

02:41:30.000 I mean, they absolutely have measured the benefits of it from food, the individual nutrients of antioxidants and what sort of effect they have on the human body.

02:41:37.000 And what I'd really be curious to find out what studies disprove that or prove that.

02:41:42.000 Okay, here.

02:41:43.000 If you're on Google right now, Google skeptoid antioxidants.

02:41:47.000 I'm not going to read your stuff, silly.

02:41:49.000 If I'm going to Google stuff, I'm going to Google people that disagree with you.

02:41:52.000 But there's a lot of people that do agree with you, in all fairness, online.

02:41:56.000 If you want to find out, if you want to ask what my sources were, where I got the information, that's where you'll find it.

02:42:01.000 The reference is at the bottom of the episode.

02:42:03.000 I just wonder what the motivation of these studies were, what the protocol was.

02:42:07.000 I mean, there's a lot of variables.

02:42:09.000 Like this new study that came out that said case closed, you know, multivitamin researchers came out and said that multivitamins don't work.

02:42:16.000 Well, if you know what the study was, that they actually studied, the protocol that they used and what they actually tried to do, it's a kind of irresponsible statement to say vitamins don't work case closed.

02:42:28.000 What they did was they gave multivitamins, these hard multivitamins, to physicians over age 65, and they showed no improvement in cognitive decline.

02:42:38.000 So they took people that were already declining, they gave them vitamins that were these hard fucking synthetic vitamins, and they showed no decline, no ceasing in the declining of their cognitive function.

02:42:50.000 Another one, high-dose multivitamins had no effect on the progression of heart disease and heart attack survivors.

02:42:56.000 So these people were already fucked.

02:42:57.000 They already had a heart attack.

02:42:58.000 They give them high levels of these, again, synthetic multivitamins, these compressed pill form, you know, centrum one-a-day jammies that nobody digests.

02:43:07.000 And then another one, the third study, which actually is fairly positive, concludes that limited evidence supports any benefit from vitamin and mineral supplementation for the prevention of cancer or cardiovascular disease.

02:43:19.000 Two trials found a small borderline significant benefit from multivitamin supplements on cancer in men only and no effect on cardiovascular disease.

02:43:28.000 So that's a small, barely measurable effect from these shitty synthetic vitamins on people who are fucked, people who are already sick, people who their bodies are already dying.

02:43:39.000 To say that vitamins don't work based on those three components is ridiculous.

02:43:44.000 Well, you know, a really unfortunate aspect of the world of science reporting, something that I've come to learn over and over again, and it's pretty depressing, is how news makes it from the lab into people's computers.

02:44:00.000 The gotcha aspect of the title, right?

02:44:03.000 Yeah.

02:44:04.000 The fact is that universities where so much research is done, they have PR departments, and they are responsible for keeping attention on this university, keeping the money flowing.

02:44:16.000 And the PR department at a university is going to spend what they see as the most reportable aspect of the research being done.

02:44:24.000 They send out the press release, and then the press does exactly the same thing.

02:44:29.000 They look at it and look for the most reportable aspect of this.

02:44:31.000 And it's often completely wrong by the time it gets to the presses because they'll report the sensational aspect of it.

02:44:40.000 And what you'll often see, I follow a lot of science writers who do this a lot, is they kind of reverse engineer these headlines that have become so prominent.

02:44:51.000 And it's always some, you know, scientists find that this will kill you.

02:44:54.000 Scientists find that this is a miracle cure.

02:44:56.000 And when you reverse engineer those headlines and go back and look at the original research that was done, you'll find often it said exactly the opposite of what the headline says.

02:45:05.000 It's really difficult to come up with kind of a journeyman's interpretation of science news by reading mass media.

02:45:13.000 Yeah, they did publish the study, though.

02:45:16.000 I mean, the title of the study is Enough is Enough.

02:45:18.000 Stop Wasting Money on Vitamin and Mineral Supplements.

02:45:22.000 I mean, this is the title of the article that was released.

02:45:24.000 I think they took an inflammatory position that I don't think is supported by the evidence and the research that they presented.

02:45:31.000 And it's very short-sighted.

02:45:33.000 There's many, many aspects to health.

02:45:36.000 And when you're dealing with someone who is already really fucking sick, which is all three of the people that they described, that they tested these things on, all groups of the people, you know, you're dealing with a situation.

02:45:47.000 I mean, to try to, like, the rate of decline in people that have Alzheimer's and the rate of decline in people with cognitive decline, we don't have anything that's going to stop that.

02:45:57.000 Like, what makes you think that vitamins are going to stop it?

02:45:59.000 Because if vitamins don't stop it, things that would be beneficial for health are not stopping something that we've never been able to stop.

02:46:06.000 That seems preposterous to say vitamins don't work based on that evidence.

02:46:12.000 It seems to me like this is something that was a predetermined conclusion or the most inflammatory response, which, look, we're talking about it, so it's effective in that sense.

02:46:20.000 Sure.

02:46:21.000 So 10 minutes.

02:46:23.000 We turn into a pumpkin and three hours in.

02:46:23.000 We're almost out.

02:46:26.000 Well, there's a really unfortunate word, and it's consensus.

02:46:32.000 And the word consensus, I describe it as unfortunate because it has a very different meaning in popular usage than it has in scientific fields.

02:46:41.000 In scientific fields, we describe a consensus as something not merely that most scientists generally agree on, although that's often true.

02:46:51.000 What a scientific consensus really means is that this is research that has been repeated in other labs and the results have been confirmed, the results have been scrutinized, people have tried to disprove them, people have tried to find alternate explanations, and it has truly passed a certain level of scientific rigor.

02:47:08.000 Then we say we have a scientific consensus.

02:47:10.000 In science circles, consensus means a lot more than it does in popular usage.

02:47:15.000 And you will find that the consensus is that supplementation has no benefit among healthy people who don't have a deficiency due to some strange cause, whatever that might be.

02:47:27.000 I think you're not.

02:47:28.000 You will always find articles to the contrary.

02:47:32.000 Or articles like this that sensationalize that into something that it's not.

02:47:36.000 Sensationalize the negative aspects of it.

02:47:38.000 I don't think there's really a consensus about supplementation because in order to really totally completely monitor the variations between two human beings, you'd have to have two people that were exactly the same genetically, exactly the same as far as their life experiences, their life stress, all the different factors that add up to health.

02:47:57.000 There is a massive range of factors that come into play when you're dealing with a person's health.

02:48:02.000 If you measure a bunch of people with very good diets, rich in green leafy vegetables and live foods and all these different healthy things and no bullshit and processed foods.

02:48:12.000 And then you measure people who have the typical American fast food diet, I think you're going to see that these nutrients are certainly beneficial.

02:48:19.000 The people that eat healthy food are certainly going to have a greater instance of being healthy.

02:48:26.000 But to really break it down and figure out how much of an effect a nutritional supplement would have based on that would be like you would have to take the exact same people living the exact same lives and one of them would take a supplement and one of them wouldn't.

02:48:41.000 I mean, it'd be really hard to figure out.

02:48:42.000 And then you'd have to say like, well, if you eat healthy, it's the best way.

02:48:46.000 Everybody agrees on that.

02:48:47.000 I don't think I've heard a single person who knows about health and nutrition that says that you could eat shitty food and just take vitamins.

02:48:53.000 It doesn't work that way.

02:48:53.000 It's impossible.

02:48:55.000 There's certain aspects of food that's just missing in pill form.

02:48:58.000 You're always better off getting fresh, leafy vegetables that are right out of the ground.

02:49:03.000 But taking supplements as well with a varied diet, especially if your diet doesn't balance out, as long as we're aware of the bioavailability of those supplements, and then we're also aware that your body can absorb some of those supplements, it seems to me like you're hedging your bets.

02:49:18.000 It seems like it's a good idea to take a good, strong, natural, food-based supplementation program.

02:49:27.000 I think generally there's no harm in them.

02:49:29.000 No harm in them.

02:49:30.000 Except to the wallet.

02:49:31.000 Right.

02:49:31.000 They're just unnecessary.

02:49:32.000 I don't know if they're unnecessary if your diet is not totally balanced.

02:49:35.000 Well, that's what I'm saying.

02:49:36.000 But I think it may be able to make up some slack.

02:49:38.000 And if it can make up some slack, then I think that they're beneficial.

02:49:43.000 I think if you have a healthy diet, you're right.

02:49:44.000 You don't need it.

02:49:45.000 But there's a lot of shit that you get from vitamin supplementation.

02:49:50.000 There's certain, like 5-HCP, like 5-HCP, which produces serotonin.

02:49:55.000 If you're trying to get that from food, you got to eat like a fucking garbage bag full of grass.

02:50:02.000 The amount that you could take in a couple of pills, the extracted form of the active nutrients, fuck, you'd have to eat a lot of stuff to get that.

02:50:09.000 And I think that that's science.

02:50:11.000 These people have figured out how to extract these things.

02:50:14.000 They're not just guessing.

02:50:15.000 They're not just guessing what the effects are on the body or guessing how to get this stuff out of food or what contains it.

02:50:21.000 They know, and that is science as well.

02:50:23.000 It always amazes me how the human race managed to survive until this decade before all these things were invented.

02:50:28.000 Well, we survived.

02:50:29.000 But that's not the idea.

02:50:30.000 The idea is, are we optimized?

02:50:33.000 And many times, no.

02:50:34.000 Many times we're not optimized.

02:50:36.000 You know, we're optimized when we add supplements sometimes.

02:50:39.000 You know, sometimes supplements can, if you are in a situation where you're not getting all the beneficial nutrients, but you add them and then try to balance out your diet as well, I think it can aid you.

02:50:48.000 I don't think it's an either or.

02:50:50.000 I think undeniably, healthy food is the number one thing for health.

02:50:54.000 Healthy food, your body is what, I was talking to these hunters yesterday and they were talking about how bears that eat certain foods are not good to eat.

02:51:01.000 Like if bears eat rotten fish and you eat them, like you literally taste the rotten fish.

02:51:05.000 But if bears eat blueberry, they're delicious.

02:51:08.000 And they actually had a hunting episode about catching bears, blueberry bears that come out of the dens and just feast on these huge hills of blueberries and they get fat with blueberry fat.

02:51:19.000 It's amazing because as they're cutting this fat off, it's like a bluish fat.

02:51:23.000 Like the dye from the blueberry actually makes it into their cells.

02:51:27.000 Unbelievable.

02:51:28.000 But it just stands to reason that we are also what we eat.

02:51:32.000 And if we eat a ton of healthy foods, that our flesh is enriched with nutrients.

02:51:37.000 Our tissue is enriched with this purified water and these healthy vegetables and good lean proteins and all these different things that are good for us.

02:51:47.000 If you could take a little bit of that in pill form as well, I don't think it's a bad thing for you.

02:51:51.000 Like I say, I agree.

02:51:52.000 It's not a bad thing for you.

02:51:54.000 It's just almost always unnecessary.

02:51:56.000 If you lead a super balanced diet.

02:51:58.000 No, I think if you have any kind of a diet and if you don't live in Chad or Somalia, you're doing pretty well. 0.96

02:52:07.000 So you think that it's not worth it?

02:52:09.000 Your call is that it's not worth it.

02:52:11.000 Like the amount of money you spend for vitamins is pretty expensive.

02:52:14.000 Oh, huge.

02:52:15.000 It's tremendous in that.

02:52:16.000 Multivitamins, if you're going to buy the, I buy these packs, these men pure packs, these athlete pure packs, because it's easy for me to do.

02:52:23.000 And I think they cost, I forget what it costs.

02:52:25.000 It's probably like a dollar a pill pack or something like that.

02:52:28.000 And over time, yeah, that could add up.

02:52:28.000 Maybe a little bit more.

02:52:31.000 But for me, I think of it as hedging my bet.

02:52:34.000 I want to make sure I get as much nutrients in my body as I can.

02:52:37.000 If I started to get a lot of stuff, there's a lot more substantial things to worry about in life.

02:52:41.000 There's also things, though, that the average person doesn't need that athletes do.

02:52:45.000 And I think that that's another issue when it comes to supplementation.

02:52:49.000 Athletes find a lot of benefit in food and supplementation.

02:52:53.000 I can't always have more food, depending on what you're in.

02:52:55.000 Some athletes have to watch their weight.

02:52:58.000 Got to watch their girlish figure.

02:53:00.000 So they just need to make sure they get some exercise, too.

02:53:03.000 Hopefully they do.

02:53:04.000 You and I agree on more than we disagree.

02:53:05.000 Oh, certainly.

02:53:07.000 I'm sorry if I was rough with you about certain things, like defending my friend Mark, but if I didn't, he would have fucking killed me next time I saw him.

02:53:12.000 And I would have had to deal with glutathione talk for an hour and a half.

02:53:15.000 I just want to review the tweets and how many people have called me an asshole over the last few years.

02:53:19.000 Oh, you can't.

02:53:20.000 Listen, if anybody's calling Brian an asshole, he's not an asshole.

02:53:24.000 And I think that your ideas, essentially, the hard stance that you take is because you know there's so much bullshit out there, and I think it's a good stance.

02:53:32.000 I think it's the right stance most of the time.

02:53:34.000 And I think that, you know, by being this, you know, hard-edged no-nonsense guy, though, it does eliminate some of the flexibility of this world.

02:53:45.000 The real conspiracies are automatically dismissed for the standard, you know, official report.

02:53:52.000 You know, I think that's not always good either.

02:53:55.000 Yeah, I mean, the old saying, extraordinary claims need extraordinary evidence.

02:53:59.000 Sure.

02:54:00.000 If you go around questioning, you know, whether this table's real or whether it's an illusion, obviously that's silly, but you got to draw the line somewhere.

02:54:07.000 I had Dr. Amit Goswami, the theoretical physicist, and he made me question everything, man.

02:54:07.000 I don't know.

02:54:12.000 I started talking about string theory and fucking particles in the state of superposition where they're moving and still at the same time they appear and disappear.

02:54:22.000 Well, his name is Dr. Amit Goswami.

02:54:25.000 Oh, oh, I'm sorry.

02:54:26.000 Don't get all racist, man.

02:54:27.000 Dude happens to be Indian.

02:54:29.000 They'll come down on you hard, son.

02:54:30.000 There's a billion of them.

02:54:32.000 I want to thank you for coming on the podcast, first of all, and I want to thank you for Just discussing all this stuff with me.

02:54:39.000 It's fascinating.

02:54:40.000 And like I said, I think we agree more than we disagree.

02:54:43.000 And I'm glad we cleared up, hopefully, some of the misconceptions about how I approach things.

02:54:48.000 Because I certainly am easy to criticize, and I'm certainly easy to categorize as well, as a lot of my ridiculous comments on various things have suggested.

02:54:57.000 Well, I will certainly be following this up on skeptoid.com.

02:55:00.000 What does that mean?

02:55:02.000 The battle continues?

02:55:03.000 That sounds like a warning, man.

02:55:05.000 Battle?

02:55:06.000 Come on, this is a little bit of a battle.

02:55:08.000 Thank you very much.

02:55:09.000 And people can find you on Twitter.

02:55:11.000 It's Brian Dunning on Twitter.

02:55:14.000 Brian with an I and D U N N I N G. And Skeptoid is a podcast. 0.97

02:55:20.000 Please download and subscribe to that.

02:55:22.000 Anything else people should go to to check you out?

02:55:24.000 Go to to check me out.

02:55:25.000 I mean, your stuff, you know, information.

02:55:28.000 Tender.

02:55:29.000 What do you want to say before we wrap this pitch up?

02:55:30.000 I'm on Facebook, but it's a very unfortunate page name.

02:55:33.000 It's Brian Dunning fan page.

02:55:35.000 Ah, the fan page.

02:55:37.000 Humiliates the hell out of me.

02:55:38.000 Did you enjoy this conversation or was it frustrating?

02:55:40.000 I had a great time.

02:55:41.000 Thank you.

02:55:41.000 Okay, good.

02:55:42.000 It makes me feel much better.

02:55:43.000 I hate when people leave you're in their mouth. 0.97

02:55:45.000 I don't want anybody mad.

02:55:46.000 I think I would love to do this again.

02:55:48.000 We'll talk again, and maybe we can address some of the things that people have said online and the mean things they're going to call you and me.

02:55:54.000 We're going to have some fun.

02:55:55.000 All right.

02:55:56.000 Thanks for tuning into the podcast.

02:55:56.000 Thank you, everybody.

02:55:58.000 We'll be back Friday with the one and only Stephen Rannella, who is taking me pig hunting this weekend, sir.

02:56:07.000 I'm very excited.

02:56:07.000 I can't wait.

02:56:09.000 And as far as dates, tomorrow, it is going live on Twitter.

02:56:15.000 I'm going to be in Dallas at the Verizon Theater.

02:56:20.000 And that is in March.

02:56:22.000 I think it's March.

02:56:24.000 Hold on a second.

02:56:25.000 March 14th.

02:56:26.000 Friday at 10 a.m.

02:56:27.000 No, no, no, no, no.

02:56:28.000 Pre-sales tomorrow.

02:56:29.000 Pre-sales tomorrow.

02:56:30.000 Friday a.m. is regular sale, but tomorrow the pre-sale is at 10 a.m.

02:56:36.000 And the ticket password is first.

02:56:40.000 So if you type in the word first, you can buy tickets tomorrow.

02:56:45.000 And it's at the Verizon Theater.

02:56:46.000 I don't know who's coming with me.

02:56:47.000 I'm putting it all together right now.

02:56:50.000 And that's it.

02:56:50.000 Anything else?

02:56:51.000 Oh, Chicago, we're at the Chicago Theater on January 24th.

02:56:56.000 It's me and the renegade Jew, Ari Shafir.

02:56:59.000 That's his new nickname.

02:57:00.000 Call him that from now on.

02:57:02.000 My goal is to have the TSA meet him and go, oh, it's the renegade Jew. 1.00

02:57:07.000 Come on through, sir.

02:57:08.000 Just immediately recognize that he's a silly man.

02:57:10.000 You don't have to frisk him.

02:57:11.000 He's not blowing anything up.

02:57:12.000 So that's January 21st, 24th, rather, at the Chicago Theater.

02:57:16.000 And that's it.

02:57:17.000 Thank you to our sponsors.

02:57:19.000 Thank you to Squarespace.

02:57:20.000 To enter into the Squarespace competition, go to hashtag, put this up on Twitter, hashtag J-R-E Squarespace.

02:57:30.000 And by this Friday, or is it Saturday the 17th?

02:57:34.000 What's the 17th?

02:57:35.000 456.

02:57:36.000 17th.

02:57:38.000 Is it Friday or Saturday?

02:57:40.000 Friday.

02:57:40.000 This Friday, we're going to decide the winners.

02:57:42.000 So this Friday is the last day to send them in.

02:57:45.000 I'll decide the winners over the weekend.

02:57:47.000 And I will give away four free years to Squarespace.

02:57:52.000 Four different people will get a free year.

02:57:53.000 And also, I will give away a higher primate t-shirt to all four winners as well.

02:57:57.000 And then Squarespace has a bunch of other swag that goes along with that.

02:58:01.000 Ting, is that what the other one today?

02:58:02.000 And Ting is one of our all-time favorite.

02:58:05.000 ZeagelZoom? 0.91

02:58:06.000 Well, Ting, too. 0.95

02:58:07.000 Let's give a little love to Ting. 1.00

02:58:08.000 Rogan.ting.com.

02:58:09.000 Go get yourself a phone, son.

02:58:10.000 And LegalZoom, of course.

02:58:12.000 LegalZoom is one of our favorite sponsors because Brian has used it.

02:58:16.000 Onit was formed with LegalZoom.

02:58:19.000 It is something that we absolutely believe in.

02:58:23.000 It's an awesome way to deal with a lot of legal issues that are otherwise very difficult and costly.

02:58:28.000 Go to legalzoom.com and enter Rogan in the referral box at checkout for more savings.

02:58:34.000 And go to Onit, O-N-N-I-T, use the code word Rogan and save 10% off any and all supplements.

02:58:40.000 Much love, you super freaks, and we'll see you on Friday.

The Joe Rogan Experience - January 15, 2014

Joe Rogan Experience #441 - Brian Dunning

Episode Stats

Summary

Transcript