Episode 1399 Scott Adams - Nothing But Goodness and Kindness. Possibly Cookies

ah one moment one moment don't go anywhere i'll be back and here i am well everybody good morning good morning the simultaneous sip will be coming in a moment but first the first item of the day are you ready i have some suggestions for how to know what to trust because we live in a world where sometimes you can't trust everything you hear can't trust everything you see and i made a list of eight things you should no longer trust and here's the list never trust number one scientist signing a letter scientists don't need to communicate by poll they don't need to communicate by signing a letter if science is real they might publish some papers they might give some talks maybe some interviews but one thing they usually don't do is sign a letter so if you see scientists getting together to sign a letter that's case in point uh the lancet article in which a bunch of scientists were duped into signing something that said well there's no way that virus could be coming from a lab must be a naturally occurring virus so don't trust anything that scientists sign a letter about number two don't trust any video clip if it involves trump now most video clips can be edited maliciously and maybe sometimes you could believe some but don't believe any video about trump do you know that yesterday there was a big big controversy about whether trump was wearing his pants backwards that's right much of the news cycle well not so much the news cycle but the social media was obsessed by a video that appeared to show trump wearing his pants backwards because the fly area was blank well it turns out that when you look at the still photography from that same moment he has his pants on correctly and there's a fly there and everything's fine but if you believed the video well you violated rule number two don't believe any video about trump number three don't believe any complicated prediction models do you know why you shouldn't believe any complicated prediction models because they're complicated prediction models and if there's one thing you can't trust it's a complicated prediction model sometimes they might be right but you don't know when that time is going to be you don't know if you're looking at one that's going to be right how do you know it's just a complicated prediction model so don't trust those even when they're right don't trust any graph or chart on twitter because twitter is not exactly the place you put your good information twitter is the place you take a chart without the source slap it up there without any context whatsoever and claim you found causality don't believe any charter graph on twitter number five don't believe anything written by a journalist i know it's a problem because most of your news is written by a journalist so it's kind of a problem if you can't believe the people who report the news but let me say this clearly don't believe the people who report the news that would be crazy there might have been a time when that made sense i don't know for sure maybe it made sense when i was a kid i don't know you know maybe maybe they were lying too and we just never found out but in 2021 if you believe something because you read it and it was written by a journalist that's not good thinking you should check yourself on that number six of things you should not believe in 2021 never believe any claim made by a government any government your government your enemies government your allies government governments are not in the business of telling the truth it's not even what they do it's like saying hey my lawnmower is failing to fly yeah yeah your lawnmower can't fly because it's not really meant for that your government is not meant to tell you the truth it's it's really not even i don't know if you looked at a list of what they do for for you i'll bet telling you the truth wouldn't be on the list you're defending the homeland that's on the list yeah yeah lots of stuff is on the list but telling you the truth it's not even on the list it's not even in the constitution find in the constitution the part about telling the truth it's not there right it's not even an expectation here's the seventh thing you should not believe in the year 2021 data data because data is usually wrong if the topic is interesting the data is probably wrong if the topic is boring and uninteresting and maybe unimportant well data might be right but as soon as the important as soon as the topic is important people take sides the data gets fudged don't believe data now that's not to say all data is wrong of course some of it is right but don't just believe it that's a bad that's a bad take and then number eight which is sort of overlapping with some of these don't believe your own eyes or ears if you find yourself saying this statement you've got a problem with your thinking has this come out of your mouth in the last year or five have you ever said i know it's true because i saw it with my own eyes or i heard it with my own ears or both if you're saying things like that you need to check yourself because you can't tell what's true by seeing it with your own eyes fake videos fake data fake graphs fake politicians you can't tell and you can't tell by listening to it because you might not hear it right and other people are interpreting it differently and you may you might not know the context so don't believe your eyes and your ears they're lying to you all day long so those are the eight things you should not believe in scientists signing a letter any video about trump complicated prediction models any graph or chart you see on twitter anything written by a journalist any claim made by a governed yours or any other government data and your own eyes and ears don't believe any of that stuff and now let's drink to that because i know you're on board all you need is a copper bungee glass up tanker tell us a sign that can t drive a flask a vessel of any kind hello with your favorite liquid i like coffee and join me now for the unparalleled pleasure the dopamine hit of the day the thing that makes what what yeah that's right everything better it's called the simultaneous sip and it's going to happen now go those of you who got here a little bit late aren't you happy that you didn't mess this up yeah of course you are well it turns out that uh in our land of uh fake news turns out that that old virus that virus that uh coveted 19 virus that pesky little virus which china told us was completely evolved from natural means probably some bat uh bit somebody or a pangolin or some damn thing but uh it turns out that there's uh this pesky little genome sequence in the covet 19.

and if you're familiar with it it's the cgg-cgg you all know what i'm talking about right yeah yeah i'm talking about the genome sequence cgg-cgg known you we talk about it all the time and it's one of um 36 sequencing patterns the covet 19 has it's one of the patterns but there's something about this pattern something about this pattern which we just learned something about it did you hear apparently there's something about this virus which has never occurred in nature never as in as far as we know the sequence this one sequence here has never occurred in nature but it has occurred it has occurred we are familiar with it do you know where it occurs only one way we know it occurs an engineered virus it's the only way it happens that we know of now we're still open to the slight possibility that this would be the first time it ever happened naturally but it would be really really really unlikely doesn't mean it didn't happen but really really really unlikely and so as of today based on what we know from additional unreliable sources because remember all of your sources are unreliable the ones you agree with they're unreliable the ones you disagree with they're unreliable too so you know you get good luck figuring out what's true but as of today i believe that the common wisdom by all the smart people is that we are now reversing our default assumption the default assumption is now i believe let's see how today develops right but i believe that as of today all of the smart people will say the default assumption is that it was an engineered virus and there was engineered in the lab and that it got out now nobody's saying it got out intentionally that i still think that's crazy talk but got out that wouldn't be a big surprise stuff gets out of labs it happens it's a fairly common thing unfortunately and so this puts the lie to everything we had been told and as you know there was a uh a letter signed by a bunch of scientists that's right there were a bunch of scientists who signed the letter saying that no no no this virus certainly was not engineered in any kind of a lab it's a naturally occurring virus how many of the scientists who signed the letter i think who appeared in lancet how many of those scientists who gave their opinion in public had studied the virus and are experts in this topic maybe none right maybe none how many of them had looked at all the genome sequences and would be uh qualified to know that if they looked at the cgg cgg sequence where apparently the tells for for being an ngo virus that's where they live just think about this for a moment there was a letter signed by a bunch of scientists saying oh this is definitely natural no doubt about it at the same time other scientists who apparently know what they're talking about which we'd be different than the people who signed the letter people who know what they're talking about they actually knew where to look to find out whether it was engineered let me say this again slowly and then i'm going to add a curse word because it needs that treatment send your children away the cursing is on the way so i'm going to say that say it again slowly so this fully sinks in there were people in our world who were experts in viruses who knew where to look on the sequence to find out if it was engineered they knew where to look and also what to look for always from the beginning these people existed people who knew where to look and what to look for they were always with us are you kidding me are you kidding me there were people who knew where to look and when they looked it was there is your head exploding right now my head is exploding is something so wrong about this whole story that i can barely handle it and certainly science has lost us now and it's not our fault it's not your fault if you're denying science from 2020 on believing science is stupid stupid so the next person who says hey i think you're a science denier you should say thank you oh my god i guess i've been paying attention i am a science denier and if you believe the science you are stupid you're a if you believe science just because a bunch of scientists told you they just told you so it must be true don't vote for though i believe my science you're a idiot if you believe science from 2021 on now before this before 2021 i would say you know maybe you hadn't been warned maybe you just were unaware that scientists could be this unreliable maybe you just didn't know i think that was reasonable but from this day on literally this day the day we find out that this letter signed by scientists was always always from this day on if you if you believe science because the bunch of scientists told you it was true you're a there's no there's no middle ground now that doesn't mean that the scientists will be wrong shawn says is there a deep state for the established establishment scientific community well i don't think so in terms of you know something controlling all of science i do think that each field of science in each pocket of science has its influential people so in in the specific sense yes but not in some big generic sense so that's the world we live in how about that um apparently according to rasmussen is reporting today that biden's approval is in a free fall since may 31st which is not that long ago thank you kevin i appreciate that um apparently independents have turned on biden so of course democrats still love him republicans have always disliked him but independents were sort of split and they just turned they just turned this week yeah michael says remember when twitter and facebook would ban you for telling the truth well you know to be fair nobody knew what the truth was to be fair twitter and facebook were also believing scientists and again i'm going to say that if you believed science scientists up until the year you know 2020 21 that was pretty reasonable pretty reasonable but if you believe them from now on you're just a idiot and you have no credibility whatsoever which doesn't mean they're wrong obviously many times they'll be right it's just that you can't tell the difference don't pretend you can um and they don't have credibility anymore credibility being different than being right or wrong right credible means that if they say something you're you're predisposed to thinking well it's probably true it's coming from a credible source but they are no longer a credible source and we need to recognize that so i'm wondering what topic was it that made bidens approval go into free fall with the independence do you know what would be your take on this what is it that caused biden's approval to suddenly drop in the last week what do you think it is somebody says inflation masks gas prices maybe something about china russia borders i don't know the debt tax rates i don't know if i had to guess i think maybe tax rates people are starting to worry about cyber security maybe is it just everything maybe it's just everything um so i don't know too much about that here's a fun topic um you're most of you are aware that logan paul just had a fight with uh what's his name remind me the name of the fighter he just fought one of the best uh why am i blanking on who logan paul just boxed what's the name what's the name of the boxer yeah floyd mayweather only only one of the greatest boxers of all time whose name i could remember so if you're not into boxing let me just tell you the basics logan paul was a youtuber but he trained very hard and it actually became a credible fighter changing careers and floyd mayweather is aging but one of the best boxers ever alive they just had an exhibition match and logan paul boxed them to uh to a tie and i guess in the exhibition match unless there's a knockout you don't get a winner so now i'm not sure that mayweather fought as hard as he could i don't know they both had a something like a 20 million dollar payday or some big number like that and um here's the interesting part about it it turns out that logan paul uh is an affirmations guy and i i don't know if he believes that we live in a simulation i haven't seen anything about that but he's very clearly talking about affirmations here's a tweet from logan paul in which he was getting ready for the match the boxing match and he said in his tweet he said in 2015 i moved to los angeles every morning and every night i look myself in the mirror and repeat 10 times quote i will be the biggest entertainer in the world i had no idea how or when it would happen but after six years of manifestation it's happening life is a wild ride do you believe that do you believe that in 2015 he literally every morning and every night looked in the mirror and repeated 10 times i will be the biggest entertainer in the world well maybe not every single day but i believe it i believe it would be sort of a weird lie to tell right did it work do you think he accomplished i will be the biggest entertainer in the world did he accomplish it you did you did if only for one day check your entertainment news for today he's the biggest entertainer in the world today all the stories are about him now he's not he won't be bigger than you know kanye or michael jackson you know in the long run right but today he's the biggest entertainer in the world he did it he did it you know unbelievable he did it and um you know you could argue whether he's the biggest entertainer in the world you could argue how long is it supposed to last but one of the things i've told you about affirmations is don't make them specific because when you make them specific you might get them exactly the way you've made them and he did he got exactly what he asked for he became the biggest entertainer in the world but what was missing is four years if he had said i'll be the biggest entertainer in the world for years well first of all that'd be harder and second of all it didn't happen i doubt he'll be the biggest entertainer in the world for years but he was today he actually hit his mark and you know when he talked about it after after he was he was quite inspirational actually talking about how you shouldn't believe the odds now do you think you should stay in your channel did logan paul take all the advice from all the losers in the world and say look and paul you're a youtuber yeah you had some wrestling experience i know you've worked out you boxed i know you've got a little you know weight and height advantage over floyd mayweather but really seriously seriously you know is this going to work out and he he changed lanes and he made i think 20 million dollars minus taxes minus you know managers and stuff so um wow i love this story i also love the sportsmanship you probably saw logan paul and mayweather you know going at each other before the fight after the fight after the fight floyd mayweather said wow he was much better than i thought gave him full respect full respect oh is it net 10 million somebody's saying ann marie is that net for each of them 10 million or are you just saying after taxes after taxes would be half that yes um all right well that's enough of that i was asked the other day if the simulation has a null hypothesis which in regular english means is there a way to prove it's false because if you can't disprove it maybe you can't prove it so uh i don't have that so in other words i i don't have a a way to approve it or to disprove it but i want to just put this thought out there for your observation it goes like this in my opinion my life has been so close to what a video game should be like that i can't ignore it anymore and one of the one of the things that is very video game like goes like this i have a theme my whole life starting when i was i don't know 10 years old there's a theme in my life and i'm sorry i'm not going to tell you what it is but it's a theme there's a specific problem that i have over and over and over again defeat you know going so far beyond so far beyond what chance could possibly deliver now you might say to yourself scott scott everybody thinks everything that happens to them is a coincidence because in a way it is everything's a coincidence in a sense explain it away with all your rational thoughts etc and maybe you're completely right but watch for the following pattern is there a theme in your life do you have a theme is there a specific let's say a character flaw you have or a or a challenge that just over and over and over seems to apply to you but as far as you know it's just not happening to other people now of all the problems that i could have it's infinite right there are infinite problems that could just arise that i don't know are out there just anything could happen but that doesn't happen instead my problems are clustered and have been since i was 11 years old one right after another and here's the freaky part each time i get a new challenge within within my theme and i beat it seemingly against the odds i beat it as soon as it's beaten within about no more than three days usually two a new problem that came that comes from nowhere will appear to replace the one that just got solved within the theme you know whatever your life theme is and this just happened to me again you know it's happened to me countless times but i've started predicting try this my my belief is that the most accurate view of reality is the one that predicts several days ago i predicted out loud privately but out loud that i had just solved my last problem in the theme and that a new problem in the theme was going to come out of nowhere and boy did it wow wow again you know you don't need to know the details of my little problems in life but i got i got the supernova of all problems solvable you don't have to worry about me i'm not gonna die or anything but oh my god and i predicted it a few days before it happened i predicted it so it's the predicting it that was the uh now your your guesses are amusing but you're not going to be able to guess it and no that's not it but watch watch this why are you all guessing the same thing no it's it's you're not going to be able to guess it so i'm just laughing at your guesses but the point is follow this in your own life and see if your problems follow a theme and if they do does the new problem appear as soon as the old one is gone because if it does you might be in a video game you might be in a video game here's another supposition if you play a video game with say a friend the two of you are inhabiting let's say different avatars and maybe the rest of the characters are npcs just robots how can you how can the two avatars that know each other in the outside world make sure they know each other in the inside world and they can tell the difference between a real player and an npc if we're a video game you probably would need to be able to tell the difference within the game so you know which ones are real have you ever noticed that there's some people that seem real in your life and there are others that are there but they don't seem real in other words there's some connection that you never make with them they're they're almost like scenery but there are other people that you know from the first moment you see them oh that's a real one come on you're on the team you know your teammate in the game as soon as you see him you know that's my teammate sometimes it looks like love at first sight sometimes it's meeting a friend and you say there's some reason i met this forever like there's something about this friend that's not like the other things there's there's just something about this person and your friends for life so i just put that out there nothing like a scientific proof but fun here's a uh update on the ivermectin dust up so i've accidentally created a little intellectual battle on twitter between brett weinstein and andres backhouse the topic is the effectiveness of ivermectin and brett recently did a very well well done and well viewed video with a doctor dr corey was it in which they talked about the many the many studies that show ivermectin is effective but each individual study might be flawed or too small or or have its issues but if you do a meta-analysis of all of them it becomes clear that ivormectin is overwhelmingly useful against the covet now uh that all sounds very convincing and as i said if you're just watching one point of view you walk away from that video saying well that's pretty good and i don't have anything to say about that it all looks like it's backed by data smart people did smart things with the data and now they've got a conclusion why would i doubt it and then andres backhouse comes along whose expertise is economics and that gives you the ability to compare things and essentially be good at analyzing data and situations like that and andres points out that meta analyses are not generally considered a gold standard i'm i'm paraphrasing here he didn't use those words but the point is that there are lots of smart people who would say some version of this and one expert said exactly this in an article i just read he said that if the signal is clear in other words if you've got a bunch of different studies that aren't that great in their design but they all say clearly the same conclusion let's say let's say your study showed 100 success no matter what kind of study you did well if every study you do showed 100 success no matter how poorly designed the study was well probably it works right and you don't need a meta-analysis because you can just look at it and say well it doesn't matter what we throw at it every single study no matter how poorly designed no matter what problems we put into it is such a strong effect that you still see it all right when that's the case you don't need a meta-analysis right so if the signal is so strong you can just see it by looking at it you don't need the meta-analysis but what if it isn't what if looking at it is like i don't know it's a little bit over the all over the map maybe the results are are not gigantic but they might be small we don't know if it's unclear then it turns out that when you do the meta-analysis what matters the most is what assumptions you made which which studies you said well we'll we'll either leave the preprint studies out or we'll include them in just one example of the many decisions you would make about oh this study well i did say we were going to include all the studies even if they had flaws but gosh i think this one is more flawed than the other ones so this one i'll keep out because it isn't the kind of flaw that the other ones have or something so the point is the meta-analysis is not something that all experts say oh yeah you got me with the meta-analysis some experts say i don't believe in meta-analysis because you had too many choices when you decided how to do it so it was your choices and your assumptions that created the outcome it wasn't the data it was the assumptions you made about which data to use that's all that's all that happened now um so there's been some back and forth i think andres just posted just when i was getting going live so he's making his point that maybe some of brett's data is more coincidence and that each time you see the the ivermectin come in and you see the the infection rate drop that in all or enough of those cases to to destroy the point in all or enough of those cases there are also other things going on and you can't untangle them meaning that there's always a change in the lockdown the weather is getting better the vaccinations are are pouring in our ability to do therapeutics is better we've vaccinated the and protected the most vulnerable we know we know how to treat these things blah blah blah blah so how do you know it was just the ivermectin because i don't know if this is true but i'll bet you could look for random variables that also correspond so you've got one view that says it's so obvious in the data that maybe you don't even need a meta-analysis but they did one and you've got at least one very smart person saying don't believe meta-analyses but this gets back to my original point right apparently the data is so strong meaning that basically every test says that ivermectin works do you need to do a meta-analysis if every study shows it works how is the meta-analysis going to show something different what what the hell kind of assumptions could you make if every study shows it works there's nothing you could deselect that would turn that into the wrong answer would it now again you need the gold standard randomized controlled trial you need a huge number of people to make sure that you have enough of them and we don't have that yet for ivermectin um and so here's the question uh and here's what uh brett said on a tweet um and he was concerned that i was that i'm being influenced maybe in the wrong direction on this topic and i asked him what he thought i got wrong and and brett responded and what i saw meaning watching the twitter back and forth and maybe maybe the live stream i'm not sure he said in what i saw you meaning me correctly found the reputation hazard issue but then allowed a credential to back you off the increasingly obvious pattern would you agree with his statement did i allow a credential and i assume he's meaning andre's uh backhouse uh did i allow andre's credentials to back me off an increasingly obvious pattern well i don't believe i backed off an obvious pattern because i never said the pattern doesn't exist did i i'm looking at your comments and you're agreeing with you're agreeing with them what does it mean to back off an obvious pattern define that what's the statement means that i i backed off an increasingly obvious pattern you know that doesn't mean anything right like you're agreeing with a statement that is neither true nor false it doesn't mean anything how do you back off an obvious pattern did did i say the pattern is not obvious anymore did i ever say that have i ever said that the pattern is not obvious the whole point of it is the pattern is obvious the only reason we're talking about it is that a hundred percent of the people who look at it say well the pattern is obvious the critics say the pattern is obvious the proponents say the pattern's obvious brett says the pattern's obvious andre says the pattern's obvious i say the pattern is obvious as far as i know the studies are very very very weighted toward it working and each study has some some issues where about where have i backed off so that's that's my view it's never changed tell me where i changed my view where did i evolve where am i wrong yeah you got a little you got pretty quiet didn't you so here's my point we can't even tell what somebody else is arguing right you don't even know what my point is half the time which is normal it's that's not a criticism big view it is completely normal for human beings not to even understand the point much less disagree with it much less have different data much less have a better analysis much less have better pattern recognition half the time you don't even know what the i'm saying all right and there's nothing wrong with you right that's not a criticism in the least same with me right it's just a thing people don't always fully understand what other people say it's the most common thing in the world so here's my point of view uh the the pattern is 100 obvious it's never been less than 100 obvious but people can be fooled by obvious patterns that's all keep that in mind let's talk about putin and biden apparently putin is uh putting the screws on on biden a little bit here um and uh i guess uh president putin on monday signed the law to officially end the country's open skies treaty with the us so that treaty allowed us to fly over russia and russia to fly over the u.s to build confidence that neither was doing things in a big way that would be you know militarily aggressive or something but i don't know if there was much value in that because who knows can the satellites see it all anyway does it matter if we have an open skies treaty does that really bias anything because probably between the you know the the cyber means and satellites i feel like we can see their and they can see our like i don't know if that if you talk to an expert would they say this even mattered this treaty but the fact that he's canceling now so soon to when putin and biden are going to meet it's kind of a little slap in the face it's a little bit telling him who's in charge interestingly last month i think fox news reported this that the biden administration told russia that had no plans to rejoin the arms control pact that trump abandoned so trump had canceled an agreement with russia on arms control and during the during the election candidate biden had said that it was short-sighted so biden criticized trump for canceling that deal and now biden agrees with trump that the deal should not be reinstated so add this to your growing list of times when trump was criticized for being wrong and has been proven right added to the list the list is getting pretty long the things that trump told us were true but the news and the democrats had to just disagree because it was trump and now they're just eating their their words so here's another example um all right so he's right again you know there was one thing that i was most worried about with this pandemic and it you know beyond the the danger and the economics of it of course we're all worried about the deaths and the economy but one of the things i was most worried about is that when it was done a significant number of the public would say it never happened because i could kind of see this coming from a mile away and when i say it never happened i mean that there will be a substantial amount of the public who will say as tucker carlson did last night that it was just a severe seasonal flu because the death rates were so low how many of you would agree that now it looks like we're seeing something like the end of it how many would you agree with this shocking statement that it was not a pandemic really we just treated it like one and that it was nothing more than a pretty bad seasonal flu how many of you agree with that i'm going to read off your statements agree agree disagree no no very bad flu i agree i agree yes hyperbole but was way over hyped not a pandemic yes no disagree don't agree no no no all right so you can see from that that there are plenty of people who agree with this statement that a pandemic didn't happen it makes me a little crazy so here's my context to help you out number one it's not a bad seasonal flu because the regular seasonal flu isn't real meaning the numbers that we get every year about people dying from the flu probably have never been real meaning that the real number of people who die from the flu is probably closer to nobody now the real seasonal flu numbers are collected by statistics they just say well it looks like more people died this season than usual so that must be the flu people they don't count with flu deaths and what about people who are old and have the flu and then die did they die of the flu well i don't know they had the flu and they were about ready to die so the first thing you need to know is that there was never a thing as far as i can tell it could be wrong right so i'm going to allow that i could be wrong about this but based on what i can see so far the regular flu was the hoax the regular flu this is not a bad version of the regular flu because the regular flu deaths were always a hoax they didn't exist and that means i'm going to have to run really fast but let me give you this comparison tucker points out that 99.5 of people under the age of 70 would survive covet 19 therefore it wasn't really a pandemic so 99.5 survive so you shouldn't be worried about that let me ask you this what percentage of americans all americans died in world war ii was world war ii a big deal anybody anybody was world war ii a big deal i think it was seems like a big deal it's in all the history books in world war ii how many americans died 0.3 percent in other words as a percentage of the whole country fewer americans died in all of world war ii than died in the pandemic now if you want to say that didn't happen then pick a side and say yeah and world war ii was no big deal vietnam nothing if that's your view support it just just tell me that the civil war was sort of a blip world war ii was an inconvenience and uh you know it's about the same if that's your view all right i have to run i wish i could stay but i do have to run and i will talk to you tomorrow

ah one moment one moment don't go

anywhere

i'll be back and here i

am well everybody good morning

good morning the simultaneous sip will

be coming in a moment

but first the first item of the day

are you ready i have some suggestions

for how to know what to trust because we

live in a world where

sometimes you can't trust everything you

hear can't trust everything you see

and i made a list of eight things you

should no longer

trust and here's the list never trust

number one scientist signing a letter

scientists don't need to communicate

by poll they don't need to communicate

by signing a letter if science is real

they might publish some papers they

might give some talks

maybe some interviews but one thing they

usually don't do is sign a letter so if

you see scientists getting together to

sign a letter

that's

case in point uh the

lancet article in which a bunch of

scientists were duped

into signing something that said well

there's no way that virus

could be coming from a lab must be a

naturally occurring virus

so don't trust anything that scientists

sign a letter about

number two don't trust any video clip

if it involves trump now most video

clips can be

edited maliciously

and maybe sometimes you could believe

some

but don't believe any video about trump

do you know that yesterday there was a

big

big controversy about whether trump was

wearing his

pants backwards

that's right much of the news cycle well

not so much the news cycle but the

social media

was obsessed by a video that appeared to

show trump wearing his pants

backwards because the fly area was blank

well it turns out that when you look at

the still photography from that same

moment he has his pants on correctly

and there's a fly there and everything's

fine but if you believed

the video well you violated rule number

two

don't believe any video about trump

number three don't believe any

complicated prediction models

do you know why you shouldn't believe

any complicated prediction models

because they're complicated prediction

models

and if there's one thing you can't trust

it's a complicated prediction model

sometimes they might be right but you

don't know when that time is going to be

you don't know if you're looking at one

that's going to be right how do you know

it's just a complicated prediction model

so don't trust those

even when they're right don't trust any

graph or chart on twitter

because twitter is not exactly the place

you put your good information

twitter is the place you take a chart

without the source

slap it up there without any context

whatsoever and claim you found

causality don't believe any charter

graph

on twitter number five don't believe

anything written by a

journalist i know it's a problem

because most of your news is written by

a journalist

so it's kind of a problem if you can't

believe

the people who report the news but let

me say this clearly don't believe the

people who report the news

that would be crazy there might have

been a time when that made sense

i don't know for sure maybe it made

sense when i was a kid i don't know

you know maybe maybe they were lying too

and we just never found out

but in 2021 if you believe something

because you read it

and it was written by a journalist

that's not good thinking

you should check yourself on that

number six of things you should not

believe in 2021 never believe any claim

made by a government any government

your government your enemies government

your allies government governments are

not in the business of telling the truth

it's not even what they do it's like

saying

hey my lawnmower is failing to fly

yeah yeah your lawnmower can't fly

because it's not really meant for that

your government is not meant to tell you

the truth

it's it's really not even i don't know

if you looked at a list of what they do

for

for you i'll bet telling you the truth

wouldn't be on the list

you're defending the homeland that's on

the list

yeah yeah lots of stuff is on the list

but telling you the truth

it's not even on the list it's not even

in the constitution

find in the constitution the part about

telling the truth

it's not there right it's not even an

expectation

here's the seventh thing you should not

believe in the year 2021

data data

because data is usually wrong if the

topic is

interesting the data is probably wrong

if the topic is boring and uninteresting

and maybe unimportant

well data might be right but as soon as

the important

as soon as the topic is important people

take sides

the data gets fudged don't believe data

now that's not to say all data is wrong

of course some of it is right

but don't just believe it that's a bad

that's a bad take and then number eight

which is

sort of overlapping with some of these

don't believe your own eyes or ears

if you find yourself saying this

statement

you've got a problem with your thinking

has this come out of your mouth in the

last

year or five have you ever said

i know it's true because i saw it with

my own eyes

or i heard it with my own ears or both

if you're saying things like that

you need to check yourself because you

can't tell what's true by seeing it with

your own eyes

fake videos fake data fake graphs

fake politicians you can't tell and you

can't tell by listening to it

because you might not hear it right and

other people are interpreting it

differently

and you may you might not know the

context so don't believe your eyes and

your ears

they're lying to you all day long so

those are the eight things you should

not believe in

scientists signing a letter any video

about trump

complicated prediction models any graph

or chart you see on twitter

anything written by a journalist any

claim made by a governed

yours or any other government data

and your own eyes and ears don't believe

any of that stuff

and now let's drink to that because i

know you're on board

all you need is a copper bungee glass up

tanker tell us a sign that can t

drive a flask a vessel of any kind hello

with your favorite liquid i like coffee

and join me now for the unparalleled

pleasure

the dopamine hit of the day the thing

that makes

what what yeah that's right everything

better it's called

the simultaneous sip and it's going to

happen now

go

those of you who got here a little bit

late aren't you happy

that you didn't mess this up yeah of

course you are

well it turns out that uh in our land of

uh

fake news turns out that that old virus

that virus that uh coveted 19 virus that

pesky little virus

which china told us was completely

evolved from

natural means probably some bat

uh bit somebody or a pangolin or

some damn thing but uh it turns out that

there's uh

this pesky little genome sequence

in the covet 19. and if you're familiar

with it it's the

cgg-cgg you all know what i'm talking

about right

yeah yeah i'm talking about the genome

sequence

cgg-cgg

known you we talk about it all the time

and it's one of um 36 sequencing

patterns

the covet 19 has it's one of the

patterns but

there's something about this pattern

something about this pattern which we

just learned

something about it did you hear

apparently there's something about this

virus which has

never occurred in nature never

as in as far as we know the sequence

this one sequence here has never

occurred in nature

but it has occurred it has occurred we

are familiar with it

do you know where it occurs only one way

we know it occurs

an engineered virus

it's the only way it happens that we

know of

now we're still open to the slight

possibility

that this would be the first time it

ever happened naturally

but it would be really really really

unlikely

doesn't mean it didn't happen but really

really really unlikely and so as

of today based on what we know

from additional unreliable sources

because remember all of your sources are

unreliable

the ones you agree with they're

unreliable

the ones you disagree with they're

unreliable too

so you know you get good luck figuring

out what's true but

as of today i believe that the common

wisdom

by all the smart people is that we are

now reversing

our default assumption the default

assumption is now

i believe let's see how today develops

right

but i believe that as of today all of

the smart people will say

the default assumption is that it was an

engineered

virus and there was engineered in the

lab and that it got out

now nobody's saying it got out

intentionally that

i still think that's crazy talk but got

out that wouldn't be a big surprise

stuff gets out of labs

it happens it's a fairly common thing

unfortunately

and so this puts the lie to

everything we had been told and as you

know there was a

uh a letter signed by a bunch of

scientists

that's right there were a bunch of

scientists who signed the letter

saying that no no no this virus

certainly was not engineered in any kind

of a lab

it's a naturally occurring virus how

many of the

scientists who signed the letter i think

who appeared in lancet

how many of those scientists who gave

their opinion in public

had studied the virus and are experts in

this topic

maybe none right

maybe none how many of them had looked

at all the genome sequences

and would be uh qualified to know

that if they looked at the cgg cgg

sequence where apparently the tells

for for being an ngo virus that's where

they live

just think about this for a moment there

was a letter signed by a bunch of

scientists

saying oh this is definitely natural no

doubt about it

at the same time other scientists who

apparently

know what they're talking about which

we'd be different than the people who

signed the letter

people who know what they're talking

about they actually knew where to look

to find out whether it was engineered

let me say this again slowly

and then i'm going to add a curse word

because it needs that treatment

send your children away the cursing is

on the way

so i'm going to say that say it again

slowly so this fully sinks in

there were people in our world who were

experts in viruses

who knew where to look on the sequence

to find out if it was engineered

they knew where to look

and also what to look for

always from the beginning

these people existed people who knew

where to look

and what to look for they were always

with us

are you kidding me

are you kidding me

there were people who knew where to look

and when they looked it was there

is your head exploding right now

my head is exploding is something

so wrong about this whole story

that i can barely handle it

and certainly science has lost us now

and it's not our fault

it's not your fault if you're denying

science

from 2020 on believing science

is stupid

stupid so the next person who

says hey

i think you're a science denier you

should say

thank you oh my god i guess i've been

paying attention

i am a science denier and if you believe

the science

you are stupid you're a

if you believe science just because a

bunch of scientists told you

they just told you so it must be true

don't vote for though

i believe my science you're a

idiot if you believe science from 2021

on

now before this before 2021 i would say

you know maybe you hadn't been warned

maybe you just were unaware that

scientists could be this unreliable

maybe you just didn't know i think that

was reasonable

but from this day on literally this

day the day we find out that

this letter signed by scientists

was always always

from this day on if you

if you believe science because the bunch

of scientists told you it was true

you're a there's no

there's no middle ground now that

doesn't mean that the scientists will be

wrong

shawn says is there a deep state for the

established establishment

scientific community well i don't think

so in terms of

you know something controlling all of

science i do think that each

field of science in each pocket of

science

has its influential people so in in the

specific sense

yes but not in some big generic sense

so that's the world we live in how about

that um

apparently according to rasmussen is

reporting today that biden's approval is

in a free fall

since may 31st which is not that long

ago

thank you kevin i appreciate that

um apparently independents have turned

on biden

so of course democrats still love him

republicans have always

disliked him but independents were sort

of split

and they just turned they just turned

this week

yeah michael says remember when twitter

and facebook would ban you for telling

the truth

well you know to be fair nobody knew

what the truth was

to be fair twitter and facebook were

also believing scientists

and again i'm going to say that if you

believed science

scientists up until the year you know

2020

21 that was pretty reasonable

pretty reasonable but if you believe

them from now on

you're just a idiot and you have

no credibility whatsoever

which doesn't mean they're wrong

obviously many times they'll be right

it's just that you can't tell the

difference don't pretend you can

um and they don't have credibility

anymore

credibility being different than being

right or wrong right

credible means that if they say

something

you're you're predisposed to thinking

well it's probably true

it's coming from a credible source but

they are no longer a credible source

and we need to recognize that so i'm

wondering what topic was it

that made bidens approval go into free

fall with the

independence do you know what would be

your

take on this what is it that caused

biden's approval to

suddenly drop in the last week

what do you think it is somebody says

inflation masks gas prices

maybe something about china russia

borders i don't know the debt

tax rates i don't know if i had to guess

i think

maybe tax rates people are starting to

worry about cyber security maybe

is it just everything maybe it's just

everything

um so i don't know too much about that

here's a fun topic um you're most of you

are aware

that logan paul just had a fight with

uh what's his name remind me the name of

the fighter he just

fought one of the best uh why am i

blanking on

who logan paul just boxed what's the

name what's the name of the boxer

yeah floyd mayweather only only one of

the greatest boxers of all time whose

name i could remember

so if you're not into boxing let me just

tell you the basics logan paul was a

youtuber but he trained very hard and

it actually became a credible fighter

changing careers and floyd mayweather is

aging but one of the best

boxers ever alive they just had an

exhibition match

and logan paul boxed them to uh to a tie

and i guess in the exhibition match

unless there's a knockout you don't get

a winner

so now i'm not sure that

mayweather fought as hard as he could i

don't know they both had a

something like a 20 million dollar

payday or some big number like that

and um here's the interesting part about

it

it turns out that logan paul uh

is an affirmations guy and

i i don't know if he believes that we

live in a simulation

i haven't seen anything about that but

he's very clearly talking about

affirmations here's a tweet

from logan paul in which he was getting

ready for the match

the boxing match and he said in his

tweet he said in 2015 i moved to los

angeles every morning and every night i

look myself in the mirror and repeat 10

times

quote i will be the biggest entertainer

in the world

i had no idea how or when it would

happen

but after six years of manifestation

it's happening

life is a wild ride do you believe that

do you believe that in 2015 he literally

every morning and every night looked in

the mirror and repeated 10 times i will

be the biggest entertainer in the world

well maybe not every single day but i

believe it

i believe it would be sort of a weird

lie to tell right

did it work do you think he accomplished

i will be the biggest entertainer in the

world

did he accomplish it you did

you did if only for one day

check your entertainment news for today

he's the biggest entertainer in the

world

today all the stories are about him

now he's not he won't be bigger than you

know kanye or michael jackson

you know in the long run right but today

he's the biggest entertainer in the

world he did it

he did it you know

unbelievable he did it

and um you know you could argue

whether he's the biggest entertainer in

the world you could argue how long is it

supposed to last

but one of the things i've told you

about affirmations

is don't make them specific

because when you make them specific you

might get them

exactly the way you've made them and he

did

he got exactly what he asked for he

became the biggest entertainer in the

world

but what was missing is four years

if he had said i'll be the biggest

entertainer in the world

for years well first of all that'd be

harder

and second of all it didn't happen i

doubt he'll be the biggest entertainer

in the world for years but he was today

he actually hit his mark

and you know when he talked about it

after after he was he was

quite inspirational actually talking

about how you shouldn't believe the odds

now do you think you should stay in your

channel

did logan paul take all the advice from

all the losers in the world

and say look and paul you're a youtuber

yeah you had some wrestling

experience i know you've worked out you

boxed i know you've got a little you

know

weight and height advantage over floyd

mayweather but really seriously

seriously you know is this going to work

out

and he he changed lanes and he made

i think 20 million dollars minus taxes

minus

you know managers and stuff so

um wow i love this story

i also love the sportsmanship you

probably saw logan paul

and mayweather you know going at each

other before the fight

after the fight after the fight floyd

mayweather said wow he was much better

than i thought gave him full respect

full respect oh is it net 10 million

somebody's saying ann marie

is that net for each of them 10 million

or are you just saying after taxes

after taxes would be half that yes um

all right well that's enough of that

i was asked the other day if the

simulation has a null hypothesis

which in regular english means

is there a way to prove it's false

because if you can't

disprove it maybe you can't prove it

so uh i don't have that so in other

words i

i don't have a a way to approve it or to

disprove it

but i want to just put this thought out

there

for your observation it goes like this

in my opinion my life has been

so close to what a video game should be

like

that i can't ignore it anymore and one

of the

one of the things that is very video

game like goes like this

i have a theme my whole life

starting when i was i don't know 10

years old

there's a theme in my life and i'm sorry

i'm not going to tell you what it is

but it's a theme there's a specific

problem

that i have over and over and over again

defeat you know going so far beyond

so far beyond what chance could possibly

deliver

now you might say to yourself scott

scott everybody thinks everything that

happens to them is a coincidence

because in a way it is everything's a

coincidence in a sense

explain it away with all your rational

thoughts etc and maybe you're completely

right

but watch for the following pattern is

there a theme in your life

do you have a theme is there a specific

let's say a character flaw you have or a

or a challenge that just over and

over and over seems to apply to you but

as far as you know it's just not

happening to other people

now of all the problems that i could

have it's infinite right

there are infinite problems that could

just arise that i don't know are out

there

just anything could happen but that

doesn't happen

instead my problems are clustered

and have been since i was 11

years old

one right after another and here's the

freaky part

each time i get a new challenge within

within my theme

and i beat it seemingly against the odds

i beat it as soon as it's beaten

within about no more than

three days usually two a new

problem that came that comes from

nowhere

will appear to replace the one that just

got solved

within the theme you know whatever your

life theme is

and this just happened to me again you

know it's happened to me countless times

but i've started predicting try this

my my belief is that the most accurate

view of reality is the one that predicts

several days ago i predicted out loud

privately

but out loud that i had just solved my

last problem in the theme

and that a new problem in the theme was

going to come out of nowhere

and boy did it wow

wow again you know you don't need to

know the

details of my little problems in life

but

i got i got the supernova of all

problems

solvable you don't have to worry about

me i'm not gonna die or anything

but oh my god

and i predicted it a few days before it

happened

i predicted it so it's the predicting it

that was the uh now your

your guesses are amusing but you're not

going to be able to guess it

and no that's not it but

watch watch this why are you all

guessing the same thing

no it's it's you're not going to be able

to guess it so

i'm just laughing at your guesses but

the point is

follow this in your own life and see if

your problems follow a theme

and if they do does the new problem

appear as soon as the old one is gone

because if it does you might be in a

video game

you might be in a video game here's

another

supposition if you play a video game

with say a friend

the two of you are inhabiting let's say

different avatars

and maybe the rest of the characters are

npcs just robots

how can you how can the two avatars that

know each other

in the outside world make sure they know

each other in the inside world and they

can tell the difference

between a real player and an npc

if we're a video game you probably would

need to be able to tell the difference

within the game

so you know which ones are real have you

ever noticed

that there's some people that seem real

in your life and there are others that

are there but they don't seem real

in other words there's some connection

that you never make with them they're

they're almost like scenery but there

are other people

that you know from the first moment you

see them oh

that's a real one come on you're on the

team

you know your teammate in the game as

soon as you see him

you know that's my teammate sometimes it

looks like

love at first sight sometimes it's

meeting a friend and you say there's

some reason i met this forever

like there's something about this friend

that's not like the other things

there's there's just something about

this person and your friends for life

so i just put that out there nothing

like a scientific proof

but fun here's a uh update on the

ivermectin

dust up so i've accidentally created a

little intellectual battle on twitter

between brett weinstein

and andres backhouse the topic is the

effectiveness of ivermectin

and brett recently did a

very well well done and well

viewed video with a doctor

dr corey was it in which

they talked about the many the many

studies that show ivermectin is

effective but each individual study

might be flawed or too small

or or have its issues but if you do a

meta-analysis of all of them

it becomes clear that ivormectin is

overwhelmingly

useful against the covet

now uh that all sounds very convincing

and as i said if you're just watching

one point of view

you walk away from that video saying

well that's pretty good and i don't have

anything to say about that

it all looks like it's backed by data

smart people did smart things with the

data and now they've got a conclusion

why would i doubt it

and then andres backhouse comes along

whose

expertise is economics and

that gives you the ability to compare

things and essentially be good at

analyzing data and situations like that

and andres points out that meta analyses

are not generally considered

a gold standard i'm i'm paraphrasing

here he didn't use those words

but the point is that there are lots of

smart people who would say

some version of this and one expert said

exactly this

in an article i just read he said that

if the signal is clear

in other words if you've got a bunch of

different studies that aren't that great

in their design but they all say clearly

the same

conclusion let's say let's say your

study

showed 100 success no matter what kind

of study you did

well if every study you do showed 100

success no matter how poorly designed

the study was

well probably it works right

and you don't need a meta-analysis

because you can just look at it and say

well it doesn't matter what we throw at

it

every single study no matter how poorly

designed

no matter what problems we put into it

is such a strong effect that you still

see it

all right when that's the case you don't

need a meta-analysis right

so if the signal is so strong you can

just see it by looking at it you don't

need the meta-analysis

but what if it isn't what if looking at

it is like i don't know

it's a little bit over the all over the

map maybe the results are

are not gigantic but they might be small

we don't know

if it's unclear then it turns out

that when you do the meta-analysis what

matters the most

is what assumptions you made

which which studies you said well we'll

we'll either leave the preprint studies

out or we'll include them in

just one example of the many decisions

you would make

about oh this study well i did say we

were going to include all the studies

even if they had flaws but

gosh i think this one is more flawed

than the other ones

so this one i'll keep out because it

isn't the kind of flaw that the other

ones have

or something so the point is

the meta-analysis is not something that

all

experts say oh yeah you got me with the

meta-analysis

some experts say i don't believe in

meta-analysis

because you had too many choices when

you decided how to do it

so it was your choices and your

assumptions

that created the outcome it wasn't the

data it was the assumptions you made

about which data to use that's all

that's all that happened

now um so there's been some back and

forth i think andres

just posted just when i was getting

going live

so he's making his point that maybe some

of brett's data

is more coincidence and that each time

you see the

the ivermectin come in and you see the

the infection rate drop that in

all or enough of those cases to

to destroy the point in all or enough of

those cases there are also

other things going on and you can't

untangle them

meaning that there's always a change in

the lockdown the weather is getting

better the vaccinations are

are pouring in our ability to do

therapeutics is better

we've vaccinated the and protected the

most vulnerable

we know we know how to treat these

things

blah blah blah blah so how do you know

it was just the ivermectin

because i don't know if this is true

but i'll bet you could look for random

variables that also

correspond so

you've got one view that says it's so

obvious in the data that maybe you don't

even need

a meta-analysis but they did one

and you've got at least one very smart

person saying

don't believe meta-analyses but

this gets back to my original point

right

apparently the data is so strong meaning

that basically

every test says that ivermectin works

do you need to do a meta-analysis

if every study shows it works how is the

meta-analysis going to show something

different

what what the hell kind of assumptions

could you make

if every study shows it works there's

nothing you could deselect

that would turn that into the wrong

answer would it

now again you need the gold standard

randomized controlled trial you need

a huge number of people to make sure

that you have enough of them

and we don't have that yet for

ivermectin

um and so here's the question

uh and here's what uh brett said on a

tweet um and he was concerned that i was

that i'm being influenced maybe in the

wrong direction on this topic

and i asked him what he thought i got

wrong and and brett responded and what i

saw

meaning watching the twitter back and

forth and maybe

maybe the live stream i'm not sure he

said in what i saw you

meaning me correctly found the

reputation hazard

issue but then allowed a credential to

back you off the increasingly obvious

pattern

would you agree with his statement did i

allow a credential

and i assume he's meaning andre's uh

backhouse

uh did i allow andre's credentials

to back me off an increasingly obvious

pattern

well i don't believe i backed off an

obvious pattern

because i never said the pattern doesn't

exist did i

i'm looking at your comments and you're

agreeing with you're agreeing with them

what does it mean to back off an obvious

pattern

define that what's the statement means

that i

i backed off an increasingly obvious

pattern

you know that doesn't mean anything

right

like you're agreeing with a statement

that is neither true nor false it

doesn't mean anything

how do you back off an obvious pattern

did did i say the pattern is not obvious

anymore

did i ever say that have i ever said

that the pattern is not

obvious the whole point of it is the

pattern is obvious

the only reason we're talking about it

is that a hundred percent of the people

who look at it say well the pattern is

obvious

the critics say the pattern is obvious

the proponents say the pattern's obvious

brett says the pattern's obvious andre

says the pattern's obvious

i say the pattern is obvious as far as i

know

the studies are very very very weighted

toward it working and each study has

some some issues

where about where have i backed off so

that's

that's my view it's never changed tell

me where i changed my view

where did i evolve where am i wrong

yeah you got a little you got pretty

quiet didn't you

so here's my point we can't even tell

what somebody else is arguing

right you don't even know what my

point is half the time

which is normal it's that's not a

criticism big view

it is completely normal for human beings

not to even understand the point

much less disagree with it much less

have different data

much less have a better analysis much

less have better pattern recognition

half the time you don't even know what

the i'm saying all right

and there's nothing wrong with you right

that's not a criticism in the least

same with me right it's just a thing

people don't always fully understand

what other people say

it's the most common thing in the world

so here's my

point of view uh the the pattern is

100 obvious it's never been less

than 100 obvious but

people can be fooled by obvious patterns

that's all keep that in mind let's talk

about putin and biden

apparently putin is uh putting the

screws on

on biden a little bit here um and

uh i guess uh president

putin on monday signed the law to

officially end the country's open skies

treaty with the us

so that treaty allowed us to fly over

russia and russia to fly over the u.s

to build confidence that neither was

doing things

in a big way that would be you know

militarily

aggressive or something but i don't know

if there was much value in that

because who knows can the satellites see

it all anyway

does it matter if we have an open skies

treaty does that really bias anything

because probably between the you know

the the cyber

means and satellites i feel like we can

see their and they can see our

like i don't know if that if you talk to

an expert would they say this even

mattered this treaty

but the fact that he's canceling now so

soon to when

putin and biden are going to meet it's

kind of a little slap in the face

it's a little bit telling him who's in

charge

interestingly last month i think

fox news reported this that the biden

administration

told russia that had no plans to rejoin

the arms control pact

that trump abandoned so trump had

canceled

an agreement with russia on arms control

and during the

during the election candidate biden had

said that it was short-sighted

so biden criticized trump for canceling

that deal

and now biden agrees with trump that the

deal should not be reinstated

so add this to your growing list

of times when trump was criticized for

being wrong

and has been proven right added to the

list

the list is getting pretty long the

things that trump told us

were true but the news and the democrats

had to just disagree because it was

trump

and now they're just eating their their

words so here's another example

um all right so

he's right again you know there was one

thing that i was most worried about with

this pandemic

and it you know beyond the the danger

and the economics of it

of course we're all worried about the

deaths and the economy

but one of the things i was most worried

about

is that when it was done a significant

number of the public would say it never

happened

because i could kind of see this coming

from a mile away

and when i say it never happened i mean

that there will be a substantial

amount of the public who will say as

tucker carlson did last night that it

was just a severe

seasonal flu because the death rates

were so low

how many of you would agree that now it

looks like we're seeing something like

the end of it

how many would you agree with this

shocking statement that it was not a

pandemic

really we just treated it like one and

that it was nothing more than a pretty

bad

seasonal flu how many of you agree with

that

i'm going to read off your statements

agree agree disagree

no no very bad flu i agree i agree

yes hyperbole but was way over hyped

not a pandemic yes no disagree don't

agree

no no no all right so you can see from

that

that there are plenty of people who

agree with this statement

that a pandemic didn't happen

it makes me a little crazy so here's my

context

to help you out number one

it's not a bad seasonal flu because the

regular seasonal flu

isn't real meaning the numbers that we

get every year

about people dying from the flu probably

have never been real

meaning that the real number of people

who die from the flu

is probably closer to nobody now

the real seasonal flu numbers are

collected by

statistics they just say well it looks

like more people died this season than

usual

so that must be the flu people they

don't count with flu deaths

and what about people who are old and

have the flu and then die

did they die of the flu well

i don't know they had the flu and they

were about ready to die

so the first thing you need to know is

that

there was never a thing as far as i can

tell

it could be wrong right so i'm going to

allow that i could be wrong about this

but based on what i can see so far the

regular flu

was the hoax

the regular flu this is not a bad

version of the regular flu

because the regular flu deaths were

always a hoax

they didn't exist

[Music]

and that means i'm going to have to run

really fast but let me give you this

comparison

tucker points out that 99.5 of people

under the age of 70 would survive covet

19

therefore it wasn't really a pandemic so

99.5

survive so you shouldn't be worried

about that let me ask you this what

percentage of americans

all americans died in world war ii

was world war ii a big deal anybody

anybody

was world war ii a big deal i think it

was

seems like a big deal it's in all the

history books in world war

ii how many americans died 0.3 percent

in other words as a percentage of the

whole country

fewer americans died in all of world war

ii

than died in the pandemic now if you

want to say that didn't happen

then pick a side and say yeah and world

war ii was no big deal

vietnam nothing if that's your view

support it just just tell me that the

civil war was sort of a blip

world war ii was an inconvenience and

uh you know it's about the same if

that's your view

all right i have to run i wish i could

stay but

i do have to run and i will talk to you

tomorrow