Timcast IRL - Tim Pool - Sunday Uncensored: Jeremy Boreing Member Podcast: Russia Could Nuke Ukraine And WIN, NATO Would not Respond

00:00:00.000 Welcome to our special weekend show, Sunday Uncensored.

00:00:04.000 Every week we produce four uncensored episodes of the TimCast IRL podcast exclusively at TimCast.com, and we're going to bring you the most important for our weekend show.

00:00:15.000 If you want to check out more segments just like this, become a member at TimCast.com.

00:00:20.000 Now, enjoy the show.

00:00:22.000 I was looking at NukeMap.

00:00:25.000 What is it?

00:00:25.000 NukeSecrecy slash NukeMap.

00:00:26.000 Have you guys ever looked at this?

00:00:27.000 Yeah.

00:00:28.000 No.

00:00:28.000 And what it basically does is it allows you to choose... Actually, I don't know.

00:00:33.000 Maybe we should pull it up.

00:00:33.000 Let me see if I can pull it up.

00:00:34.000 Yeah, I'm curious now.

00:00:35.000 NukeMap.

00:00:35.000 It allows you to choose like blast radius and stuff.

00:00:38.000 Yeah, yeah.

00:00:38.000 Oh, jeez.

00:00:39.000 So as we're talking about Russia, nuclear weapons and all of that stuff, I decided to, it chooses Philadelphia all the time.

00:00:45.000 We're going to choose Washington DC.

00:00:49.000 We're going to choose, enter yield, the largest ICBM ever deployed by the United States, which is nine megatons, and then detonate.

00:00:58.000 And wait, wait, is that right?

00:01:00.000 Are we dead?

00:01:01.000 Okay, there we go.

00:01:02.000 We're alive.

00:01:02.000 No, we're not.

00:01:03.000 We're not.

00:01:03.000 So we're in the Harper's Ferry area, basically, and this would be D.C.

00:01:07.000 being hit by the largest ICBM the U.S.

00:01:09.000 has ever deployed.

00:01:10.000 And it's massive.

00:01:12.000 People don't realize there's a fireball radius of 2.33 kilometers.

00:01:15.000 Then there's the moderate blast damage radius.

00:01:18.000 You're all basically dead.

00:01:19.000 Then there's the thermal radiation radius, which is 31.4 kilometers.

00:01:22.000 That's massive.

00:01:27.000 41 kilometer light blast zone.

00:01:28.000 Fortunately, we're all outside of that.

00:01:31.000 And we probably have more powerful weapons already.

00:01:35.000 I'll actually challenge you on that.

00:01:36.000 This is a topic that I know a thing or two about.

00:01:38.000 Well, all right, then.

00:01:39.000 The truth is, America doesn't deploy, actively deploy, any multi-megaton weapons in our current nuclear arsenal.

00:01:45.000 Really?

00:01:45.000 Nope.

00:01:46.000 in the in the 50s and 60s there the nuclear arms race was taking place and

00:01:51.000 What what we discovered in America is that we were very good at advancing our technological ability to hit things

00:01:58.000 And the Russians were very bad at developing the technology to hit things 1.00

00:02:02.000 And so the Russians built bigger and built bigger nuclear weapons than we did they did and we would build bigger 0.93

00:02:06.000 Bombs as a way of showing that we could also make a big bomb

00:02:10.000 So they would detonate, you know, I mean, they detonated a 50 megaton bomb at one point.

00:02:14.000 That's our bomba.

00:02:15.000 Yeah, that's what we're looking at.

00:02:16.000 But what America did is it decided that if you can hit a target Then it's immoral to have too big of a blast radius.

00:02:26.000 The reason that the Russians needed these giant multi-megaton bombs is because their missile wasn't going to hit the target. 0.50

00:02:31.000 Which, when I say not going to hit the target, it's pretty amazing you can shoot an ICBM into the air 3,000 or 4,000 or 5,000 miles away and have it hit within a couple miles of an American city.

00:02:41.000 But a couple miles, while pretty impressive from a technology point of view, isn't a hit.

00:02:45.000 And so they needed a bomb that if they missed by two miles, it still destroyed the target that they were trying to destroy.

00:02:52.000 Our goal was put a missile down somebody's chimney.

00:02:56.000 So all of America's deployed strategic nuclear weapons are variable yield, which means that it can range in yield how big it is, and they decide depending on what target they want to hit.

00:03:08.000 And most of them are probably in like the 100 to 200 kiloton No.

00:03:12.000 range, but we hit our targets. So we're scared of Russia.

00:03:15.000 Russia's Tsar Bomba at the maximum design 100 megatons would flatten Baltimore, Annapolis, and

00:03:24.000 DC if it targeted DC. But here's the reality. You think a bomber is going to make it over DC

00:03:30.000 to drop that Tsar Bomba? No. Have you ever seen the Tsar Bomba? I've seen... there's a video of

00:03:35.000 like the plane or something or...

00:03:37.000 It's a gravity bomb.

00:03:38.000 It's a gravity bomb.

00:03:39.000 It was... Which means they just drop it.

00:03:40.000 Yeah, I mean, that bomb could never arrive on our soil.

00:03:43.000 There's no way that that bomb could ever... They'd have to go over Delaware?

00:03:47.000 Delmarva?

00:03:48.000 I mean, it's never gonna happen.

00:03:49.000 Never gonna happen.

00:03:50.000 I mean, so what about... Are you familiar with the Strategic Defense Initiative?

00:03:55.000 What have we deployed, or what do we know?

00:03:57.000 What does the public know about what the U.S.

00:03:59.000 has deployed in terms of stopping nuclear weapons hitting the United States?

00:04:02.000 Well, first of all, we're better at it than people think we are.

00:04:04.000 You know, our Aegis cruisers are very successful in knocking down missiles.

00:04:08.000 The other thing, though, that I think people don't really think about when they talk about nuclear deterrence is the intelligence piece of this.

00:04:15.000 It's very popular to hate our intelligence agencies, and they definitely play political roles.

00:04:20.000 They don't always know the things that they say that they know.

00:04:22.000 I'm not making a defense of all of that.

00:04:24.000 But there are sort of core competencies that they have.

00:04:27.000 And one of their core competencies is knowing the status of these weapons.

00:04:32.000 And my guess is that in practice, a lot of the weapons would never get off the ground.

00:04:37.000 I don't want people to have a false sense of confidence.

00:04:40.000 That's not what I'm trying to instill.

00:04:41.000 But the American military is not like other militaries.

00:04:44.000 You're seeing it right now in Ukraine.

00:04:47.000 One of the reasons that people don't know what to make of the situation in Ukraine It's because they've always thought that there are other militaries like our military.

00:04:55.000 We're a superpower.

00:04:55.000 Russia used to be a superpower.

00:04:57.000 There is no military on Earth like our military.

00:04:59.000 We're the only military on Earth that can forward-project power.

00:05:02.000 China is an ascending power, and they may be able to do it soon.

00:05:05.000 They still can't do it.

00:05:06.000 Russia probably never could do it, and certainly cannot do it, you know, decades after the end of the Cold War.

00:05:12.000 They're not successfully invading a neighbor state right now.

00:05:16.000 We can do things that no one else on Earth can do.

00:05:19.000 And not just by a little, by orders of magnitude, we can do things that no one else in the world can do.

00:05:24.000 Does that mean that I don't believe that Russia could hit us with a nuclear weapon?

00:05:27.000 I'm not suggesting that.

00:05:28.000 Does that mean that I believe that there wouldn't be enormous cost to engaging

00:05:33.000 in a sort of first world war, first world war in Europe?

00:05:40.000 Of course there would be.

00:05:41.000 Our ability to win that war though, there's no question about.

00:05:45.000 Our ability to forward project our power unparalleled in all of human history.

00:05:51.000 The Russian ability to hit us with a nuclear weapon, you know, limited, not, they don't not have the ability.

00:05:58.000 I wouldn't wanna take, I'm not suggesting that we take risks where that's concerned.

00:06:02.000 But I think that their ability to strike us is so much less than we think.

00:06:06.000 And the idea of sort of the Terminator 2, Judgment Day, city killer nuclear weapons,

00:06:11.000 you know, that are 20 megaton weapons just flattening every city on earth.

00:06:14.000 I don't think actually reflects the reality of either America or Russia's

00:06:19.000 current strategic nuclear arsenal.

00:06:21.000 I think you'd have to ignore technological advancement over the past 40 years to believe that a mutually assured destruction could happen, too.

00:06:27.000 I had an argument with, or debate, with Majid Nawaz, because I don't believe mutually assured destruction makes sense or is correct.

00:06:36.000 It's this, like, archaic idea of, if you nuke me, I'll nuke you.

00:06:39.000 But if you nuke me, I'll nuke you. 0.97

00:06:40.000 Well, if you nuke me, I'll nuke you. 0.94

00:06:41.000 And I'm like, The argument against me was that I didn't understand human psyche and that I thought humans are predictable. 0.96

00:06:50.000 I'm quite the opposite.

00:06:51.000 I think humans are sometimes predictable, sometimes not predictable.

00:06:55.000 And when it comes to firing nuclear weapons, we don't exactly know what technological advancements we've had and what defenses we have.

00:07:03.000 We know the Strategic Defense Initiative program was big.

00:07:07.000 We're like, how do we stop a nuclear weapon from hitting us?

00:07:09.000 We've already seen publicly That they have AI lasers.

00:07:14.000 Have you seen the infrared lasers?

00:07:16.000 You can't even see the beam.

00:07:17.000 The thing just looks at the drone and the drone bursts into flames and falls.

00:07:21.000 So they certainly have prepared for if an ICBM was coming towards us.

00:07:26.000 I think what we might see, though, and correct me if you think I'm wrong, tactical weapons, smaller yield bombs from Russia or NATO or otherwise.

00:07:34.000 So the first thing I would say is that I do believe in mutually assured destruction.

00:07:37.000 It may be that we no longer live in an era where it is mutual.

00:07:42.000 It may be that America has so outpaced our rivals technologically that we could successfully conduct a first use nuclear strike. 0.52

00:07:50.000 But I believe in the philosophy of mutually assured destruction.

00:07:52.000 I think it kept the peace for 60 years.

00:07:55.000 And there's a lot of good that we can learn from that.

00:07:59.000 To your second point, could we see battlefield or tactical nuclear weapons used?

00:08:03.000 Yes.

00:08:05.000 I think, um, America contemplated the use of battlefield nuclear weapons to hit Iranian, uh, underground hardened nuclear, uh, nuclear facilities.

00:08:13.000 Right.

00:08:14.000 And there's a good argument for why that would be a good tool to use if your goal was to stop, uh, the construction of nuclear weapons in hardened targets in a country like Iran.

00:08:24.000 Um, you have to understand that when we talk about those kinds of weapons, we're not talking about these big city killer nuclear weapons.

00:08:30.000 We also talked about the use of thermobaric weapons, which are not nuclear, but are also very massive destructive weapons in Tora Bora when we were trying to get Bin Laden. 0.94

00:08:40.000 We didn't know what cave he's in, so we wanted to do something that would be... Suck the air out.

00:08:44.000 And a nuclear weapon may have been a successful tool in that case, too, because you're not hitting an urban center where you're going to kill a million people because you used a nuclear weapon.

00:08:51.000 You're just going to kill the same number of people that you would have killed with conventional bombs, but you're going to have more success in the instance of Tora Bora.

00:08:59.000 I think it was smart not to actually do those two things, because even though I think that they would have been moral and effective weapons in those two particular cases, I do think that there's the possibility that it would have led to kind of a dominoing use of nuclear weapons.

00:09:11.000 But what I think the real threat in the world is today is I think that we have removed most of the incentives

00:09:19.000 to not use battlefield and tactical nuclear weapons from Vladimir Putin.

00:09:24.000 You know, Putin, in the situation he's in right now, where we're not opposing him militarily,

00:09:29.000 but we are opposing him economically, I actually think that that's one of the worst ideas

00:09:34.000 that we've ever seen tested in all of human history.

00:09:37.000 Right now...

00:09:38.000 He's he's destroyed Grozny He's not afraid to destroy civilian populations. 1.00

00:09:42.000 He's shown us that during his premiership He's not afraid to use weapons of mass destruction.

00:09:47.000 He's used chemical weapons.

00:09:49.000 He's used thermal barrack weapons both against the Chechens and and and and and it's been reported these use thermal barrack weapons against urban populations in Ukraine so far and Hey, it's Kimberly Fletcher here from Moms4America with some very exciting news.

00:10:06.000 Tucker Carlson is going on a nationwide tour this fall, and Moms4America has the exclusive VIP meet and greet experience for you.

00:10:16.000 Before each show, you can have the opportunity to meet Tucker Carlson in person.

00:10:21.000 These tickets are fully tax deductible donations, so go to momsforamerica.us and get one of our very limited VIP meet and greet experiences with Tucker at any of the 15 cities on his first ever Coast to Coast tour.

00:10:36.000 Not only will you be supporting Moms for America in our mission to empower moms, promote liberty, and raise patriots, your tax-deductible donation secures you a full VIP experience with priority entrance and check-in, premium gold seating in the first five rows, access to a pre-show cocktail reception, an individual meet-and-greet, and photo with America's most famous conservative and our friend, Tucker Carlson.

00:11:03.000 Visit momsforamerica.us today for more information and to secure your exclusive VIP meet and greet tickets.

00:11:11.000 See you on the tour.

00:11:12.000 Bye.

00:11:22.000 Like, you're afraid there's going to be a coup back home if you don't win.

00:11:25.000 Your country's being bankrupted.

00:11:27.000 The West has said, we're not going to use military might against you.

00:11:31.000 You're contemplating using weapons of mass destruction like chemical or biological or thermobaric weapons.

00:11:36.000 Why wouldn't you use the one that at least puts fear in the hearts of NATO?

00:11:41.000 Why would you use the one that just makes you look like a President Assad of Syria low-level thug?

00:11:46.000 Why wouldn't you use one that says, yeah, I'll do it, I'll do it to you too?

00:11:49.000 Which brings me to this story.

00:11:51.000 Top Russian military figures Sergei Shoigu and Valery Gerasimov suddenly vanish from public eye.

00:11:59.000 I did a segment on this on my main channel.

00:12:00.000 These two individuals are the only two other men with the Russian nuclear football.

00:12:04.000 They're in the chain of command and they've dropped out of public eye.

00:12:07.000 It could be as simple as these men are being protected because of the potential abuse of nuclear weapons.

00:12:12.000 Some people fear that because Shoigu's last appearance was with Putin, Putin may have stripped him of his nuclear access or of his life.

00:12:21.000 To consolidate power so he can unilaterally fire these nukes.

00:12:25.000 I think, with the absence of evidence, the solution is these men, for obvious reason, are being protected.

00:12:30.000 But if that's the case, is that indicative of Russia does intend to use some kind of nuclear weapon?

00:12:35.000 The one thing that Russia's very good at is PSYOPs, and so I think you also have to just contemplate the idea that he wants us to think that he's contemplating the use of nuclear weapons. 0.75

00:12:43.000 The nuclear weapons that they control are strategic nuclear weapons.

00:12:48.000 So, like, the nuclear football isn't for battlefield or tactical nuclear weapons.

00:12:52.000 It's only for, like, ICBMs.

00:12:54.000 So, the idea that Putin is seriously contemplating using strategic nuclear weapons... Listen, you don't know his mental state.

00:13:03.000 You don't know his political realities.

00:13:05.000 Human nature is not always predictable.

00:13:07.000 It seems exceedingly unlikely to me.

00:13:10.000 The idea, so like, it's almost like if he were going to use nuclear weapons, it wouldn't be

00:13:15.000 the ones that those guys were controlling, which makes me think that a big part of it might just

00:13:19.000 be rattling us. What would happen if Vladimir Putin used a, I don't know, let's say 100 kiloton

00:13:25.000 bomb on Kiev? He'd lose the war.

00:13:28.000 You say he'd lose the war?

00:13:30.000 He'd lose it all.

00:13:31.000 Well, that's the question.

00:13:32.000 I don't, I don't, I actually don't think so.

00:13:34.000 Yeah, he'd win.

00:13:35.000 He'd win.

00:13:35.000 I don't think destruction is his goal.

00:13:36.000 I think it's conquering.

00:13:37.000 No, he'd flatten the government.

00:13:39.000 No, look at Grozny.

00:13:39.000 He does just want the land.

00:13:40.000 He wants access to Crimea.

00:13:41.000 Use it, Grozny. 0.99

00:13:42.000 He'll, he will.

00:13:42.000 What did he do to Grozny?

00:13:44.000 He leveled it.

00:13:45.000 I haven't seen anything about this yet.

00:13:46.000 Well, Grozny was in Chechnya, so it was in the past.

00:13:49.000 But it's the one time we've seen Putin engage in this kind of conflict.

00:13:53.000 And Grozny was a city in Chechnya, and Putin flattened it.

00:13:58.000 At a certain point, when he wasn't getting his victory through more conventional means, he used sort of the World War II flatten-a-city approach.

00:14:05.000 So, he can flatten cities without nuclear weapons.

00:14:08.000 My point is, if you're in the position he's in today and you've decided to flatten the city and you're already an international pariah, you might be tempted to use a weapon that would actually rattle your enemies.

00:14:19.000 Now, a 100 kiloton weapon is still a strategic weapon.

00:14:22.000 I think the more likely thing is that he'll use battlefield or tactical nuclear weapons if he uses a nuclear weapon.

00:14:27.000 And I think the unfortunate reality is, if he does, I don't think we have any tools left with which to respond.

00:14:35.000 Other than the ones that we've already deployed and that's why I say we've I think we've removed the incentive for him to show restraint, right?

00:14:41.000 So I on the map I just pulled up is a 100 kiloton bomb the w76 common US and UK over Kiev the reason why I ask this is If it is true that Vladimir Putin is losing and his real goal is just to strip away what he believes is the corrupt government of Kiev, the 2014 coup, whatever you want to call it.

00:15:00.000 He wants to assert control over what's happening in Ukraine.

00:15:03.000 He wants to destroy their command structure.

00:15:05.000 He wants to cause chaos and panic, making it easier.

00:15:08.000 I mean, if he dropped a 100 kiloton bomb on Kiev for Militarily?

00:15:13.000 threatening the center of the city, it would cause chaos and disarray in Ukraine to the

00:15:17.000 point where he'd pick up the pieces and walk through the rest of the country.

00:15:20.000 There would be panic.

00:15:21.000 He needs only, check this out, he needs only fire one weapon and then scare the rest of

00:15:26.000 Ukraine into thinking more weapons are coming and people will desert in two seconds.

00:15:31.000 He would win the war.

00:15:32.000 The question is, would NATO or anyone else respond to a bomb of that size?

00:15:36.000 Militarily?

00:15:37.000 Yeah.

00:15:38.000 No.

00:15:39.000 And that's why I asked the question because Vladimir Putin might be sitting there saying,

00:15:42.000 now. We hit Kiev with a nuke. It's over.

00:15:45.000 This is the problem with the position that's popular on the right today, that signs of American strength are going to lead to a world war.

00:15:54.000 It has always been the case, historically, that it is signs of American weakness that precipitates, or Western weakness, that precipitates world wars.

00:16:01.000 We're in a position now where we ask these questions like, should we impose a no-fly zone?

00:16:05.000 Do you want to start World War III? 0.78

00:16:07.000 A month ago, if we had imposed a no-fly zone, we wouldn't have had to have shot down Russian planes, and there wouldn't have been an invasion of Russia.

00:16:13.000 They would have had to attack the United States. 0.73

00:16:15.000 That's correct.

00:16:15.000 And so it is signs of weakness, and essentially, the West has shown so much weakness today Yeah.

00:16:24.000 I don't think they would have, I actually don't think they have any military to-

00:16:28.000 Listen, if the United States decided we wanted Russia out of Ukraine,

00:16:31.000 Russia would be out of Ukraine in 72 hours. The American military's ability to destroy

00:16:36.000 the Russian military conventionally, there's not a question about it.

00:16:41.000 Don't play any fantasy scenario in your head where Putin can beat us.

00:16:45.000 72 hours.

00:16:46.000 If America decided it wanted to remove the Russian military conventionally from the Earth, even from Russia, three or four weeks, we would remove their entire military. 0.92

00:16:54.000 There is no military on Earth.

00:16:56.000 It really is like we are a World War II army fighting at the Alamo.

00:17:01.000 There is nothing like what we can do conventionally on this planet.

00:17:03.000 How many aircraft carriers do we have?

00:17:04.000 20?

00:17:04.000 All of them.

00:17:05.000 Right.

00:17:06.000 All of them.

00:17:08.000 If we wanted to impose a no-fly zone over Russia, or over Ukraine, which I'm not proposing, but if we did, Russian MiGs would be falling out of the sky.

00:17:17.000 They would not know we were there.

00:17:19.000 It would take them a day to even figure out why all their MiGs were falling out of the sky, because the F-22 is invisible to Russians, and it fires its missiles from over the horizon.

00:17:29.000 It is this nuclear threat that is his ultimate ace in the hole.

00:17:29.000 Yeah.

00:17:33.000 That's, that is the thing that everyone rightly fears if we get engaged in a military conflict today.

00:17:38.000 If he uses a 100 kiloton nuclear weapon over Kiev, he still has about 5,000 more.

00:17:46.000 Yeah.

00:17:46.000 Not, he doesn't have 5,000 probably strategic, but he has certainly 1,500 more that size.

00:17:52.000 I don't see how we're unwilling to fight against him today, but we're gonna be willing to fight against him after he uses a nuclear weapon?

00:17:59.000 That seems preposterous.

00:18:01.000 I'm just using the W76.

00:18:03.000 If this were to hit Kiev, it would result in an estimated 135,700 dead, 523,830 injuries.

00:18:14.000 And then it would also irradiate central Kiev.

00:18:17.000 Radiation is tricky.

00:18:21.000 These are thermonuclear weapons.

00:18:23.000 Some of the question is going to be about where they detonate it.

00:18:27.000 Almost certainly they would airburst it and there would be a lot less radioactivity than you think.

00:18:30.000 Nevertheless...

00:18:32.000 Your first point is correct.

00:18:34.000 Look at this.

00:18:35.000 When you do a surface detonation... Yeah, there's no way they're gonna do that.

00:18:38.000 No one does surface detonation.

00:18:39.000 That's not gonna happen.

00:18:40.000 But the radiation's bigger.

00:18:42.000 Much, much.

00:18:42.000 Yeah.

00:18:43.000 Well, so here's my point.

00:18:44.000 When I said I don't believe in mutually assured destruction, obviously I understand the doctrine exists.

00:18:49.000 Obviously I understand that it happened for a long time.

00:18:51.000 This was a doctrine that did keep the peace.

00:18:54.000 What I'm saying is... You don't believe that it is actually effectually... Today.

00:18:58.000 Yes, I agree with you.

00:18:59.000 Today, this is what we're talking about.

00:19:02.000 The U.S.

00:19:02.000 is not going to nuke.

00:19:04.000 One of the things I was saying is like, do you think someone's going to nuke an urban center, like an ICBM, like Moscow, because Moscow's attacking Ukraine?

00:19:12.000 No.

00:19:13.000 It's insane to think, let's wipe out the whole planet over Ukraine. 0.99

00:19:17.000 So I'm like, I'm not convinced that someone's going to be like, I'm going to destroy the entire planet because, you know, a nuke has been launched or fired here.

00:19:24.000 The question is, Obviously, I think if Russia fired nukes at us, we might have a very strong response, but I'm not even convinced it's going to be like in the movies, like in war games where the missiles just go flying or like in GI Joe.

00:19:36.000 No.

00:19:36.000 Especially considering SDI or our SAM sites or whatever we have in terms of shutting these things down, probably satellites that can do it.

00:19:43.000 But right now, the big question is about using an ICBM on Kiev, and I don't see why the West would intervene if he did.

00:19:51.000 If we did intervene, it would be conventional.

00:19:52.000 I can't imagine a world where we'd remove the Ukrainian military from Ukraine.

00:19:57.000 I'm sorry, we would remove the Russian military from Ukraine conventionally.

00:20:01.000 I just don't see a world where we do that under Joe Biden.

00:20:04.000 And I think strength is the only thing that deters war.

00:20:08.000 And so at the end of the day, the thing that I'm the most afraid of right now is that none of us think that the West would respond to a nuclear attack on Ukraine today. 0.53

00:20:16.000 That is what's going to precipitate in a world war.

00:20:18.000 And the other thing that I would say about a world war is they don't all they they often don't.

00:20:23.000 Global conflict often doesn't happen the way you think it will.

00:20:26.000 And so we're all talking about will what is Putin going to do in Ukraine?

00:20:29.000 Obviously, that matters.

00:20:30.000 But in a moment of instability like this, in a moment of American weakness, where American hegemony is is collapsing.

00:20:37.000 India and China have been killing each other's soldiers on their border for the last two years.

00:20:41.000 Oh yeah.

00:20:42.000 North Korea fired a missile into the Sea of Japan last week.

00:20:48.000 Because our administration is so hubristic in its belief that it can consequence-free reorganize the world order, we're trying to make a deal with Iran so that we can buy their oil. 0.99

00:21:01.000 And then we're complaining that the Sauds, the mortal enemies of Iran, won't lower the price of their oil to sell us while we're about to make their enemies nuclear-armed and rich. 0.99

00:21:12.000 Hey guys, Josh Hammer here, the host of America on Trial with Josh Hammer, a podcast for the First Podcast Network.

00:21:18.000 Look, there are a lot of shows out there that are explaining the political news cycle, what's happening on the Hill, the this, the that.

00:21:25.000 There are no other shows that are cutting straight to the point when it comes to the unprecedented lawfare debilitating and affecting the 2024 presidential election.

00:21:34.000 We do all that every single day right here on America on Trial with Josh Hammer.

00:21:38.000 Subscribe and download your episodes wherever you get your podcasts.

00:21:41.000 America on Trial with Josh Hammer.

00:21:43.000 You could actually see the Sauds allow Israel to fly over their airspace and bomb Iranian nuclear sites in the next few weeks. 0.83

00:21:51.000 You could see a joint Israeli-Saudi airstrike on Iran, something that So when should we flee the D.C.

00:21:58.000 would have been incomprehensible.

00:22:01.000 Doesn't even seem possible.

00:22:03.000 And because these leftists have so upended the world order, that's even possible right now.

00:22:08.000 And so we have to be mindful that the entire world is on a razor's edge right now.

00:22:14.000 It's not just what directly happens between Russia and Ukraine.

00:22:17.000 So when should we flee the DC area to the mountains?

00:22:20.000 Ain't no mountain high enough to quote the man.

00:22:24.000 So we actually have a secured location prepared.

00:22:29.000 We've got, well, first of all, Freedomistan is, you know, 30 or 40 miles west already, which is, you know, in West Virginia.

00:22:35.000 But we also do have a secure location just because it's cheap property in the middle of nowhere.

00:22:39.000 Yeah.

00:22:40.000 But what I was saying is, if NATO intervenes, The first thing we're doing is packing up one of our trailers with the gear to do the show and supplies and sending it to our secure location.

00:22:52.000 We stay here, we keep doing the show as normal, but the moment we get any kind of, you know, dramatic escalation that could be catastrophic or apocalyptic, we already have our supplies ready to go.

00:23:04.000 I've always thought that where you really want to go, if there's going to be a strategic nuclear exchange between superpowers, you really want to go to Times Square.

00:23:14.000 What is that?

00:23:14.000 So it's over quickly?

00:23:15.000 Who wants to survive a nuclear holocaust? 0.97

00:23:18.000 Bro, have you played Fallout?

00:23:20.000 It's gonna be awesome!

00:23:22.000 You know, you're fighting ghouls, and you gotta drink irradiated water, and...

00:23:25.000 There's no fast travel, and cuts can kill you.

00:23:27.000 Cuts can kill you!

00:23:29.000 I stubbed my toe! Guess I'll die. 0.99

00:23:30.000 Guess I'll die. 0.80

00:23:31.000 That's where we'd be at.

00:23:33.000 Well, look, you know, I want to survive.

00:23:35.000 I don't want to live in a post-apocalyptic nightmare.

00:23:38.000 There's a certain excitement to it where it's like, well, at least you'll have something to strive for, I guess.

00:23:43.000 But it will be nightmarish beyond most... I mean, people don't understand.

00:23:47.000 They play Fallout and they're like, I don't know, it might be, you know, it would suck.

00:23:50.000 But it's like, bro, when you're walking down the street, there's a woman whose leg is like melted.

00:23:54.000 And she's screaming and her teeth are falling out from radiation or whatever.

00:23:58.000 You don't want to live in this kind of stuff, man.

00:24:01.000 I will say again that even in this context, we're talking about a nuclear exchange in these very fictionalized ways.

00:24:09.000 There is the possibility of limited nuclear exchange.

00:24:12.000 It would be bad.

00:24:13.000 I'm not suggesting it would be good or advocating for it, but we don't really know what it will look like.

00:24:16.000 Also, every post-apocalyptic scenario always factors out human ingenuity.

00:24:21.000 Like, if there was a zombie apocalypse, I would immediately have a zombie eradication business and be just as successful as I am today.

00:24:31.000 Human ingenuity is a real thing that we have to just ignore in order to make sort of disaster porn.

00:24:38.000 And look, I love disaster porn, but it is fiction. 0.99

00:24:41.000 Zombie movies only work because they're movies about people who are really dumb. 0.99

00:24:44.000 Right. 1.00

00:24:45.000 That's right.

00:24:45.000 Well, yeah, also, this is exactly what I think whenever I hear people making very grim predictions about the future.

00:24:51.000 I think things can and probably will get bad in some respects, but at the same time, when people come out talking about overpopulation and how we're going to reach a number where we can no longer sustain people, I mean, firstly, that's contradicted by the evidence.

00:25:03.000 As the world population has grown, poverty has decreased, more people have had access to resources.

00:25:08.000 But even if that wasn't the case, you would have to negate the human ability to solve problems in order to believe that we wouldn't be able to provide for ourselves.

00:25:16.000 You'd have to completely ignore that.

00:25:18.000 Yeah, climate change is like that.

00:25:20.000 A lot of these models of climate change don't account for technology where we could withdraw the carbon from the atmosphere, turn it into graphene, and then reproduce it.

00:25:27.000 We'll actually be competing for carbon with the trees at that point.

00:25:30.000 That's another problem we've got to look for.

00:25:32.000 I wonder to what extent, um, you know, we didn't know about the Manhattan Project.

00:25:35.000 I wonder to what extent bioweapons could be the actual, you know, weapon of choice.

00:25:40.000 Oh, oh, bio, yeah.

00:25:42.000 Let's talk about COVID! 1.00

00:25:43.000 Fucking bioweapons! 1.00

00:25:43.000 Is it not a weapon? 1.00

00:25:44.000 I think the problem with bioweapons, as the world may have just learned, is that that's a genie that you can't control.

00:25:50.000 Like, a nuclear weapon kills what you pointed at, and a bioweapon probably kills what you just pointed at and then kills you.

00:25:58.000 What if they mass vaccinate the population before releasing their weapon.

00:26:03.000 No, you believe in vaccines.

00:26:05.000 I'm kidding.

00:26:06.000 I kid.

00:26:07.000 I don't exist.

00:26:09.000 What if they have their population wear masks so they're perfectly safe from the bioweapon?

00:26:14.000 They wash their food before they get off the plane.

00:26:16.000 What if they only have dinner after 9pm in public places?

00:26:19.000 What if the United States has actually developed a very serious weaponized smallpox or something, and the true purpose of the COVID vaccine was to protect the American people because the US is planning on purging its enemies with a bioweapon?

00:26:30.000 Yeah, the only problem with that is that we've given that same vaccine to just about every person on Earth.

00:26:36.000 Have we, though?

00:26:36.000 Community, it is legally distinct, is what was given out in Europe, and the biosurprise was different here.

00:26:43.000 And look, it's grand conspiracy, don't get me wrong, but if the U.S.

00:26:47.000 was actually planning on unleashing a bioweapon on its enemies, it would be giving the cure to people while giving the cure to its own people. 0.92

00:26:56.000 If I believe that Joe Biden was capable of chewing gum and walking at the same time, I might be able to get behind it.

00:27:03.000 This warfare feels like just a distraction from Biden's terrible, terrible presidency and the inflation.

00:27:08.000 I truly believe the existential threat is the metaverse and get people getting into proprietary coded situations where they don't realize they're inside of it and they're owned by a corporation.

00:27:17.000 Yeah, it's like, Ready Player One was, that was not a good movie.

00:27:22.000 I mean, it was a good movie, but it was like, nothing good came about in that movie.

00:27:25.000 Like, they're like, we reclaimed the digital virtual space, but I'm like, no, all of it is bad, because your mind is...

00:27:32.000 You spend a year or two years, especially a child, in this metaverse.

00:27:37.000 They will come out.

00:27:38.000 They will not be human anymore.

00:27:40.000 They will not recognize the world around them.

00:27:41.000 They won't recognize their own hands.

00:27:43.000 They might be a squid when they go and play the game and they're flopping around tentacles and they come out in the real world and they're like, It's certainly true if you've ever put one of these headsets on and played in virtual space.

00:27:55.000 life, they won't function.

00:27:56.000 They can have it fast too.

00:27:57.000 If I turn my glasses like this, and after like a couple minutes, and I go like this,

00:28:00.000 it looks all backwards and distorted.

00:28:02.000 It's certainly true if you've ever put one of these headsets on and played in virtual

00:28:07.000 space.

00:28:08.000 You do get disoriented, and when you take it off, you are disoriented.

00:28:10.000 The only thing I'll say is humans are soul and body, and it's one thing to sort of abstract

00:28:15.000 that we can disembody the human mind or the human soul.

00:28:19.000 I don't think you can, because while you're wearing that Oculus, yeah, you are, or whatever, you are in a different world.

00:28:24.000 But it's also heavy, and your neck starts to hurt, your palms get kind of sweaty, and your knees get weak.

00:28:31.000 I'm talking about once they neural link you.

00:28:33.000 Yeah, once they just plug you right in.

00:28:34.000 And then what's going to happen is you're going to be in some kind of suspension suit to minimize the effects, or maybe like a zero-g chair that brings back.

00:28:43.000 You'll be inside of a smart gel.

00:28:45.000 That's too expensive.

00:28:48.000 They'll plug your brain in, and all of your synaptic responses and everything you think and feel will be virtual.

00:28:55.000 So you are still going to be a body-soul composite, and there is an attempt to remove you from that, and it's really more or less ultimately just insulating you from the reality that exists, which is that you are your body, right?

00:29:10.000 You are your body and your soul.

00:29:12.000 You can't have some technological process that truly separates the two.

00:29:15.000 Because firstly, if you do deconstruct a brain and then recreate it in a computer, you've just killed the person.

00:29:21.000 And now you have a computer emulating what it thinks that person might do.

00:29:24.000 But what happens when they impede the actual biological functions, like your senses, and inject you with pre-programmed senses?

00:29:24.000 Sure, sure.

00:29:33.000 Everything that you're saying still requires people to be functioning in the actual real world.

00:29:37.000 Yeah.

00:29:38.000 It does.

00:29:39.000 You wouldn't be able to sit in there all the time.

00:29:39.000 Absolutely.

00:29:41.000 You'd have to shave, you'd have to shower, you'd have to come out.

00:29:43.000 Or someone else has to shave you and shower you and feed you. 0.73

00:29:45.000 Right, but what I'm saying is people's identities would be shattered.

00:29:48.000 I agree.

00:29:51.000 I actually believe in a lot of what you're saying.

00:29:53.000 I think we're going to find out because it's coming.

00:29:57.000 And I agree that most of the bad things, like there'll be a lot of, someday we'll all be having sex with robots and it'll be bad, right? 0.54

00:30:04.000 It's all going to happen.

00:30:05.000 Yeah.

00:30:07.000 The part where I get lost, though, is that, again, there will have to be people operating in the actual human world because we're not disembodied.

00:30:17.000 Our body is still there and it still has all of its actual biological needs that we will either have to meet or other humans operating in physical space will have to meet.

00:30:25.000 Yeah, it may be that the conscious or that your mind isn't necessarily shattered, but it's combined with other minds to create like another mind.

00:30:32.000 Like our body is trillions of microorganisms working together and they all have their own desires and wants and we think that we are this, but we're a combination of things.

00:30:40.000 So we might be recreating that in a digital sense.

00:30:43.000 Yeah. 1.00

00:30:44.000 Well, I mean, people are going to flock to this shit. 1.00

00:30:46.000 Well, yes. 1.00

00:30:47.000 This perverse scenario of people living in a cyber world is something we're already seeing.

00:30:52.000 And you can imagine people existing at a point in history where their minds are, quote unquote, uploaded.

00:30:57.000 You know, they're connected to this machine and they're experiencing that reality.

00:31:00.000 and they will see the difference between them and us is that we were just

00:31:03.000 profoundly disabled because we were also spending all of our time in the cyber

00:31:06.000 world but our only interface was this keyboard in the screen whereas that they

00:31:10.000 can use their entire bodies to interact with it. So what's really disheartening is the fact that

00:31:14.000 even though we have the limited control that a computer can give you over the internet we

00:31:18.000 still spend all of our time there so of course we're going to when we can plug our brains in.

00:31:23.000 They're gonna say, can you believe that to use the metaverse, like, in the 20s, you had to, like, look at a screen in your desk and, like, click a little thing.

00:31:30.000 It'll be like the phone you had to crank and put up to your ear and then speak into. 0.57

00:31:35.000 They'll see it as ridiculous. 0.99

00:31:38.000 But sex with robots. 0.99

00:31:39.000 Typing will be like Morse code. 0.91

00:31:40.000 But robots might not even be the right thing.

00:31:42.000 It's not going to be robots.

00:31:43.000 It's going to be virtual entities. 0.97

00:31:45.000 Where you think you're getting fucked and you just feel it because it's all digital. 0.55

00:31:50.000 It's not even that.

00:31:51.000 You're going to be able to download experiences from other people.

00:31:55.000 So people will sell an experience like their memory or something.

00:31:58.000 If we can transcode data off the brain, then you're gonna have Tom Cruise be like, would you like to experience what it's like to be Tom Cruise at the Oscars?

00:32:05.000 Maybe.

00:32:07.000 Maybe that's going to happen.

00:32:08.000 Because I do believe that we are soul, mind, and body.

00:32:14.000 I'm skeptical that some of the some of our ability to replicate that will actually come to pass like I don't believe that you can upload I don't think it's just technology like yeah today we can't upload your brain to the cloud but 500 years from now we will or at least a thousand years from now we will like I actually think like 25,000 years no nuclear wars you still won't be able to separate what is I don't think they can upload a person to the computer.

00:32:41.000 I think they can copy data and then put it in your brain and stimulate your brain to make it experience and see and feel by that experience.

00:32:49.000 that they'll stop using computers and start using human brains as the computers. I don't know about that. Because

00:32:55.000 they work quicker. Yeah, I mean fundamentally I agree.

00:32:58.000 There is something about the human being that can't be reduced to information processing.

00:33:02.000 And in order to argue that these machines could be conscious, that's essentially what you have to believe.

00:33:06.000 It's a total materialistic worldview that does not allow any possibility for the soul.

00:33:10.000 And then on top of that, you also have to assume that given that framework, we would ever have the capability to recreate consciousness on a circuit board, which is also a stretch.

00:33:20.000 Well, I'm not convinced that could happen.

00:33:23.000 And there's questions about whether data is actually alive for sure, whether it's a soul or it doesn't.

00:33:27.000 I'm just saying that if we can... Well, data's alive.

00:33:31.000 There's no question about that.

00:33:32.000 I'm saying that...

00:33:34.000 I didn't mean to attack data.

00:33:37.000 Data's different. 0.96

00:33:39.000 I'm just saying, we can electrocute you and make your arm close. 0.60

00:33:45.000 So there will come a point, in my opinion, where we can electrocute and send signals to your brain and figure out how to transcode information and trick your brain into experiencing or thinking things. 0.92

00:33:56.000 That may well be true.

00:33:57.000 Maybe it will always feel plastic, though, because it is your brain, you know what I mean?

00:34:01.000 Like, something about the experience will be of uncanny value.

00:34:03.000 The other thing is, this kind of goes to the question of why can't you just upload us to a cloud, and it's because even our thoughts aren't just our brain.

00:34:11.000 Your thoughts are also connected to senses that happen in other parts of your body.

00:34:14.000 And so, can you, is it like the Matrix, where you can teach me Spanish by pushing a button?

00:34:20.000 I don't think so. Because to really understand Spanish, I have to have heard,

00:34:24.000 and I have to have seen, and I have to have spoken. Like, there are actual sensory elements

00:34:29.000 of that. And you couldn't give me your experience of those things because my sensory apparatus,

00:34:35.000 while fundamentally similar to yours, are not identical to yours.

00:34:39.000 The better example is actually, I don't think you'd be able to plug someone into the Matrix, teach them a language, because like for Italian, for instance, you need that physical, you know, fingertips pinching.

00:34:49.000 Come on! 0.61

00:34:49.000 I wonder if you can experience that, how do you actually speak the language? 0.61

00:34:52.000 If a memory is like a neural pathway, like it's an exact combination of pathways that you can geometrically calculate, maybe you could imprint the ability to access that geometric convoy with like a certain, but like you said, every brain is different.

00:35:06.000 Well, and every body is different.

00:35:08.000 That's the part that I think we're missing, that an experience is not just information, meaning information in the brain.

00:35:16.000 It's also this tactile sensory apparatus that we have that is connected to everything that we know and everything we've ever experienced.

00:35:24.000 I've got to imagine it's outside the body too.

00:35:25.000 If it's like the neurons in your stomach and in your muscles, and those are electromagnetic, you have an electromagnetic field that surrounds you.

00:35:32.000 You should look up human magnetic field if you want to see the image I'm talking about when I keep referencing that.

00:35:36.000 But we have these dynamic magnetic fields that must be affecting our thoughts.

00:35:42.000 Also, the God-like being, who definitely isn't God, but who exists out there, who probably made everything, and knows all of our thoughts, and is above all, he built the simulation, right?

00:35:52.000 The simulation that we all think is reality.

00:35:55.000 He's gonna have something to say about all this.

00:35:56.000 Do you think God is big?

00:35:57.000 Hold on, hold on, hold on.

00:35:58.000 You wanna know something crazy?

00:35:59.000 They've taken high-powered magnets and put them on people's brains, turned them on, and then people say they felt the presence of God when that happened.

00:36:07.000 I was wondering if God was like a huge- Haven't they also done the opposite?

00:36:10.000 thing that's like hovering over our galaxy is playing with us like ants.

00:36:14.000 I think they've said when they like they they use these machines there was there was a study

00:36:18.000 right and if they use the machine to hit your brain with brain with certain electrical waves

00:36:22.000 you'd be less likely to believe in God and more like it was very interesting.

00:36:26.000 I have this I heard the exact opposite.

00:36:28.000 I experienced God at a Paul McCartney concert and I'm not joking.

00:36:30.000 I was on mushrooms.

00:36:31.000 Yeah I went to uh see McCartney when I was in my 20s at Staples and in the middle of the concert

00:36:38.000 of course as he always does he came down sat on the front of the stage played Blackbird on his

00:36:41.000 acoustic and then played yesterday on the acoustic and 13,000 people lit up their candle.

00:36:48.000 Back then, it may have actually been lighters, but maybe it was before the iPhone.

00:36:51.000 It's probably all lighters.

00:36:53.000 And started singing along to Yesterday, and I felt the Holy Spirit.

00:36:56.000 What I would describe as the Holy Spirit.

00:36:57.000 I grew up in a somewhat Pentecostal church environment, and I knew this sensation to be the sensation of the Holy Spirit.

00:37:03.000 And sitting there at Paul McCartney, I had this existential crisis of either Paul McCartney is God, or that experience is not the Holy Spirit.

00:37:13.000 And that's one of the formative moments in my religious life.

00:37:18.000 You do believe it was the Holy Spirit?

00:37:19.000 Yeah, Paul McCartney's God.

00:37:21.000 What do you think God is?

00:37:24.000 Well, I want to mention this, so I just pulled this up.

00:37:27.000 Magnetic brain stimulation, quote, reduces belief in God, prejudice towards immigrants.

00:37:32.000 And it's very funny because when this was first published, I saw the responses on Twitter were like, oh, so brain damage makes you a liberal.

00:37:42.000 How do you define God for yourself?

00:37:44.000 Well, in the very traditional way, I would say, yeah.

00:37:47.000 Like a man?

00:37:48.000 I make a lot of jokes about it, but... Well, God is... That's not the traditional way, Ian.

00:37:52.000 That's liberal propaganda.

00:37:54.000 That he's a man.

00:37:55.000 That's patriarchy.

00:37:56.000 Yeah.

00:37:58.000 God has revealed himself as a man in Christ, I would say.

00:38:01.000 And God, in the Bible, refers to himself as the Father, for example.

00:38:07.000 But that's to help us understand the incomprehensible.

00:38:12.000 It's not that God is a father.

00:38:14.000 You can't go, well, I understand God because I understand my dad.

00:38:16.000 It's more like, because we have a universal understanding in some level of what a father is, we can begin to understand something about God.

00:38:24.000 So a father is a term that we understand as humans?

00:38:27.000 And everything good comes from God, right?

00:38:30.000 And so God is actually... He's a father in a truer sense than an earthly father is, because everything comes from Him.

00:38:38.000 But these are terms that help us understand as humans.

00:38:42.000 We can't constrain Him in that sense.

00:38:44.000 Imagine a color you've never seen before.

00:38:46.000 Oh, that's tough.

00:38:47.000 You can't even do that and you've seen colors.

00:38:50.000 And the issue I find with a lot of atheists is that they're like, I should be able to see evidence of God and the things I can see.

00:38:56.000 And I'm like, bro, we know more than three dimensions exist and you can't even visualize it.

00:39:00.000 That's right.

00:39:01.000 And that's rudimentary.

00:39:03.000 God can only relate to us through, the creator can only relate to us through what is created,

00:39:11.000 because we are created beings.

00:39:12.000 And so our ability to even conceptualize God is limited to what we are.

00:39:17.000 We can't actually, it's actually, it kind of goes back to the IQ question earlier, right?

00:39:21.000 That it's very hard for us to imagine higher IQs than we have, because the imagination to do so

00:39:22.000 It's very hard for us to imagine higher IQs than we have because the imagination to do so

00:39:27.000 is the exact thing that's constrained by the limitations of our IQ.

00:39:31.000 So you meet someone with a true breakaway, like I met Antonin Scalia one time

00:39:31.000 And so you meet someone with a true breakaway, like I met Antonin Scalia one time

00:39:37.000 and got the privilege of having a dinner with him.

00:39:39.000 This is a guy with like 170, 160, 170 IQ.

00:39:44.000 He's not like us.

00:39:45.000 He sees colors that we don't see.

00:39:47.000 He sees patterns that we don't see.

00:39:48.000 You cannot know what it's like to be him.

00:39:50.000 You can't even make believe, imagine what it's like to be him.

00:39:54.000 The average American has a 95 IQ.

00:39:57.000 Well, 100 is the average.

00:39:58.000 Yeah, 100 IQ.

00:39:59.000 The average person with Down syndrome has like a 75 IQ.

00:40:04.000 Antonin Scalia had like a 170 IQ. 0.93

00:40:07.000 He is literally more advanced than you, than you are from a person who is actually retarded. 0.99

00:40:14.000 I'm not using that as a pejorative, I'm using it as a descriptive. 0.52

00:40:18.000 Imagine if you were the only person on earth with 115, 120 IQ, and every single other person on earth had Down syndrome.

00:40:27.000 That's what it's like to walk around and be Leonardo da Vinci or one of these 180 IQ guys.

00:40:32.000 I say all of that to say, like, that tells you that you can't even imagine the things that he sees.

00:40:38.000 Everybody with those breakaway IQs throughout all human history, they all speak, like, six or seven languages by the time they're eight or nine, and no one taught them any of the languages.

00:40:46.000 They perceive patterns that we do not perceive.

00:40:50.000 Now, even Antonin Scalia has a brain that is roughly the size of a cantaloupe.

00:40:55.000 We cannot even begin to imagine, not just a god-like intelligence, we can't begin to imagine a 400... I mean, I'm using terms that we can't... You can't imagine their color!

00:41:07.000 That's right.

00:41:08.000 So here's what I love.

00:41:10.000 Could God create a boulder so heavy that he himself could not lift it?

00:41:14.000 And yet the answer is?

00:41:15.000 I know this.

00:41:15.000 Actually, I was just reading about this.

00:41:16.000 I'm curious what you'd say.

00:41:19.000 Yes.

00:41:19.000 Hold on, let me explain.

00:41:21.000 The point I want to make.

00:41:22.000 Different answer.

00:41:23.000 I've programmed video games before.

00:41:25.000 Have you programmed or worked on any of these game stuff?

00:41:28.000 I tell you this, you can program a video game where you make a villain so strong that nothing can destroy him and then you can go into the base code of the game and remove him.

00:41:41.000 The idea of creating a boulder so heavy that God can't lift it, the problem is that people, typically atheists, don't have It's not a religious thing.

00:41:52.000 It's like the ability to understand that what we touch, smell, see, and hear is not reality.

00:41:58.000 And so there's a limited understanding among some humans that the charged electromagnetic spectrum exists and we can't touch, smell, or see or hear that, and it's real, but then why stop there?

00:42:08.000 I don't understand.

00:42:10.000 It's a limitation in the human mind where they're like, Well, if God made a boulder so heavy he couldn't lift it, I'm like, why would God be in his own video game if he made it?

00:42:17.000 You know what I mean?

00:42:18.000 So, this is the answer that I got from something I was reading recently.

00:42:22.000 It's a book called Theology and Sanity by Frank Sheed, and his formulation of this is really brilliant.

00:42:26.000 Basically, the concept of something too heavy for an infinitely strong being to lift an incoherent thought and therefore it is nothing? And so

00:42:37.000 the answer is could God lift something so heavy? Is there something so heavy God he...

00:42:41.000 I'm sorry.

00:42:41.000 Could God create something so heavy that he himself could not lift it? The answer

00:42:45.000 is no because the thing you're describing is a nothing and for God

00:42:49.000 nothing is impossible. So it what it's like a logical contradiction and you're

00:42:54.000 trying to map that on to God.

00:42:57.000 God is beyond the universe and God is beyond the concept of weight itself.

00:43:02.000 Can I give you my answer to this question?

00:43:04.000 Yeah.

00:43:05.000 I think that God did make an object so big that he couldn't lift it. 0.99

00:43:08.000 My balls. 0.98

00:43:09.000 We're on the after show. 0.99

00:43:13.000 I think God made an object so big that he couldn't lift it, and then he lifted it.

00:43:17.000 And I think this is like the central moment in Christian theology, which is to say that there is a thing that God valued above every other thing, and it was a thing that God definitionally is incapable of having in himself.

00:43:30.000 So God is love.

00:43:32.000 That's a biblical concept.

00:43:36.000 God values love.

00:43:37.000 But God is love, and so the thing that he values is something that's perfectly expressed in himself.

00:43:42.000 But there's something that he valued even above love, there's something that he valued so highly that he valued it more than he hated sin.

00:43:49.000 And the thing that he valued more than he hated sin and valued more than his own personal attributes was faith.

00:43:55.000 Faith is the thing that God values above everything else, and God himself doesn't possess it.

00:43:58.000 He can't.

00:43:59.000 Because faith is, according to Hebrews, the substance of things hoped for, things not seen.

00:44:03.000 God can't hope for anything because he sees everything.

00:44:06.000 There's nothing in which he can hope.

00:44:07.000 There's nothing greater than him.

00:44:09.000 And so...

00:44:10.000 Through the entire mechanism of biblical history, the entire mechanism of the creation, the entire mechanism of the fall of man, the entire mechanism of the giving of the law, all of it, all of this leads to the moment where God can tent himself in human flesh in Christ.

00:44:26.000 Live as a man not under the burden of sin but apart from the burden of sin and face uniquely among any human ever the actual opportunity as both God and man to faith God and the and the uniqueness of Christ among all religions in comparison to all humanity and even even anything we've ever dreamed up and is the idea that in Christ, God lifted the rock that God

00:44:49.000 himself could not lift apart from Christ.

00:44:51.000 That God valued faith most highly, and in Christ gave himself the opportunity to faith in himself.

00:44:58.000 I think that's the actual most important thing that has ever happened in creation.

00:45:05.000 We gotta wrap it up, because we are way too late.

00:45:10.000 I gotta upload this.

00:45:11.000 Ian, we're shutting it down.

00:45:14.000 We've gone really late.

00:45:15.000 I love you, Tim.

00:45:16.000 So, Jeremy, thanks.

00:45:17.000 I thought that was an excellent final thought, and this has been an absolutely fantastic show.

00:45:22.000 So, thanks for hanging out, and for everyone who's a member, thanks for being members and making all this possible.

Timcast IRL - Tim Pool - March 27, 2022

Sunday Uncensored: Jeremy Boreing Member Podcast: Russia Could Nuke Ukraine And WIN, NATO Would not Respond

Episode Stats

Summary

Transcript