Episode 1598 Scott Adams - Mass Formation Psychosis, The Great Reset, Manchin and More

oh goodness what a day can you believe it you showed up on time for those of you who are alive and amazingly those of you watching this on a recorded basis uh you're on time too it's weird uh yeah something about space time i don't understand it either but all i know is this is the best thing that's ever happened to you it's called coffee with scott adams because of the scott adams part plus the coffee and we're going to enjoy that right now would you like to take it up a level anybody anybody take it up a level yes no i feel the yeses i feel the yeses and so all you need is a copper mugler glass a tanker jealous inside a canteen jerk flask a vessel of any kind fill it with your favorite liquid i like coffee and join me now for the unparalleled pleasure the dopamine to the day thing makes everything better it's called the 17th sip and this happens now go ah yeah some of you weren't ready were you see you've got to be ready let this be a cautionary tale those of you who are thinking i've got plenty of time to pour my warm cup of coffee no you don't always have time you've got to be ready well we've got a great show today let's start off with joe manchin killing the build back better bill so biden's build back better bill got blown to parts to bits that's right biden's and actually it's just shelved because joe mansion was a big no um now here's the thing how do you view this like what what is the way you interpret the situation well michael schellenberger had a interesting take on it which i agree with totally that it was progressive dogmatism that killed it progressive dogmatism progressive dogmatism would be the opposite of what would that be the opposite of science economics rational pragmatism right and i think that is that is accurate and specifically it's accurate because a lot of it was clean energy related and it was just the wrong analysis if if the buildback better build had included let's say expansions of nuclear and natural gas do you think that maybe they could have gotten a republican vote maybe not because it would still be inflationary but they'd be a lot closer because at least they'd be compatible with science you know if you're not even compatible with science and you're the pal you're the party of science now remember when i say hey be compatible with science you're the first thought you're thinking to yourself is scott scott's got they think they are they think they're compatible with science no they don't no they don't because even the democrats now understand that the only reason we are where we are is because we still have some nuclear we'd better get some more soon and that natural gas made a big difference in our on our co2 so anybody who actually looked at the data and looked at the science would not have put together a bill that looked this way there would have been much more focus on the the things that are scientifically and economically demonstrated nuclear being chief among them and so here's the story i see i see that joe manchin uh took his party seriously that was the problem joe manchin took his party seriously it's the party of science right and so he said well let's look at the science the party of not being you know all crazy like the republicans you know with all their conspiracy theories and whatever the republicans are blamed of today they're the party of being rational and empathetic you want empathy and science that would be the things that the republi the democrats would tell you that they're all about and so joe manchin apparently take calling their bluff said all right let's say those are our highest priorities science and empathy using science to be the best we can for citizens what would that look like and it doesn't look like the build back better bill and by the way how do yeah how do we how do we uh avoid noticing that his last name is mansion i mean somehow that's important i don't know in our simulated world somehow that should be a a signal that that he's a character in a play anyway goldman sachs lowered its growth gdp estimates and the stock markets taken ahead i think last i knew because the market is interpreting this is bad so in goldman sachs take they said well you know there won't be all this money going into the economy and then when they talked about inflation this is the only context they talked about inflation that because of inflation it would be harder for this build back better bill to ever get assigned in the future what's left out there's something sort of big left out right the effect of inflation on the economy this is goldman sachs did they forget inflation no they didn't forget it they talked about it in the wrong context the only context they talked about it was in a political context whether it be harder to pass a bill i think you're supposed to include what that would do to the actual economy if your goal is to talk about the economy so here's goldman sachs so obviously signaling that they're making a political decision and not not any kind of economic decision because an economic decision would look like this there would be a lot of stimulus added to the system that's on the positive side but on the negative side there would be extra inflation added to the system and we've looked at these two factors and we've decided that one of them is bigger than the other and therefore we're in favor of it or against it that's what that's what an honest analysis would look like did they do that no they said there won't be as much growth true and that the inflation will affect the politics true but you just left out the biggest factor the inflationary effect on the actual economy like like it didn't matter so if you ever thought that goldman sachs was an honest player that should talk you out of it so congratulations for joe manchin for calling the democrats bluff and actually being consistent with science and by the way did it matter that uh joe manchin got a education from michael schellenberger in person about you know the economics of climate change yeah it mattered i don't know if that changed the decision but yeah that matters when you have i'm arguing the strongest persuader in the country right now that would be schallenberger the strongest persuader in the country talked to this person and he stopped the whole deal by himself stopped the whole deal i mean not by himself he needed all the republicans to be against it too all right uh the first case of omicron variant in the united states that can't be true somebody's saying that in the comments uh we must have known it was here all right uh i'm gonna give a little kudos to joe biden now those of you who are not long time listeners i remind you of my technique if you want to criticize someone you should also protect yourself from confirmation bias and cognitive dissonance by saying as many good things as you can about the subject of your criticism because if you can't say anything good about them well i'm not going to take you seriously so here i'm going to say something good genuinely about joe biden uh he did something that is was really clever and i called it out when he did it in other words i said oh this is going to work out this is clever and it worked here's what it was there was a big call for packing the supreme court joe biden to his credit did not favor that but a lot of a lot of his party did so what you gonna do you you don't favor it and you have a pretty strong opinion about it but your party does and you've gotta you've gotta make them happy what do you do you put together a big old commission and you have them study it because that's how you kill something because he knew of course he knew that the commission would come back and not recommend packing the court don't you think he'd do that of course he did that because all you know there nobody's gonna recommend it if they're a serious academic and and so that's exactly what happened now they didn't recommend for or against they simply laid out the the argument but he got the same result he basically sent it to a committee to kill it i told you that on day one that's how you kill something you send it to the committee to take all the energy out of it because a lot of these things are about the people right it's about trump it's about biden it's about the personalities and kavanaugh and stuff but as soon as you take the personalities out of it and give it to a committee all the energy just drains out of it and then once all the energy is gone it's just a bunch of academics saying you know this would be a bad precedent because every single person who gets elected would just repack the court and therefore we wouldn't have we wouldn't have a system anymore it would literally eliminate the system because you wouldn't have the checks and balances so good move that this is a plus management i don't know if i've seen a cleaner kill than what biden did with this court packing idea that was a clean kill and you could see him set it up from day one it was obviously a plan obviously i mean i'm not a mind reader but you don't have to go too far into people's thinking to know this was an intentional play it's such a standard play corporations do it all the time so a plus good job um how many of you have listened to the no agenda episode a very uh popular podcast with adam curry and john dvorak and on episode 1409 i guess it's a new one they take me on how many of you have heard that they're they're criticisms of my opinions now the the take on this is that they destroyed me if you look at the comments um so let me give you some context and then i'll tell you why this is fascinating now it's not just fascinating because it's about me it makes a little more interesting for me i guess but here's what you need to know number one uh i like these guys curry and dvorak i've known dvorak for i don't know a thousand years or something and i like them a lot generally we're very close to the same opinion on all kinds of stuff not everything but generally so i would say that they would be closer to my i don't know view of life that a lot of people and that's a compliment of course anybody who agrees with you you think is smart right so this is important for the context remember these are not automatic binary people who are just against whatever i say right these are people who are inclined to agree with me because they've agreed with me enough in the past that they would not be biased against me now they took on my uh opinions on ivermectin vaccinations and about the mass formation psychosis but i want you to listen to it i'll play just uh one little part of it and i want you to listen to it so you can learn to spot cognitive dissonance now the first question is is it me because that's part of their claim is that the cognitive dissonance or the hypnosis is affecting me and that's why my opinions don't make sense to them so how would you know who is in cognitive dissonance and not i'm going to teach you this over and over again because you have to see examples of it before you're good at it the first thing you do is look for the tells all right here's one tell the over laugh mocking right an honest mocking would be somebody just you know laughing and you say oh that's this person is really amused it's pretty funny but the over laugh is this kind he says x ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha sort of like a larry david almost comic laugh so you'll see that tell in some of it and again it i'm sure they have genuine laughs but but it doesn't even sound genuine when you hear it it sounds like trying too hard does that make sense so listen for the trying too hard to laugh thing here's another tell mocking my credentials specifically the credentials as a hypnotist without actually having a specific complaint about it oh he's a hypnotist ho ho well i guess he keeps mentioning that all right but what does that have to do with the argument it's actually useful context because a lot of people are new to any live stream right you have to give the context so what's wrong with that so look for uh like oversized criticisms of things which are completely ordinary which is somebody telling you their credentials before they tell you what they tell you all right then here's the biggest one look for them to uh you could say straw man but i don't think that's what's going on i think they're actually hallucinating my opinions so uh and i want to play one for you so that you can you can hear it yourself if you don't hear it live you might think i'm misinterpreting this so i don't know how far i am into this it's 30 minutes into no agenda podcast number 1409 so if you're looking for it yourself and it's definitely worth listening to it's it's interesting stuff so it's the no agenda podcast you can find it everywhere just google it and it's show one four zero nine and it's at about the 30 minute mark and i'm going to play a little bit here is the kind of guy you want to spar against so they're talking about me smart and i'm disappointed no you hear what they're doing so they're starting by saying that they they're generally in favor of me which is exactly what i did with them which is also why i like them because that's exactly what they should be doing to set up the conversation because they need you to know they're not biased against me in some general way it's just this technique so that's actually good technique really with what he did but not surprised because i think i can prove that he in fact himself is trapped in the mass formation he's going to prove that i'm trapped in the mass formation in other words that i'm hypnotized uh have you ever heard of projection i used to think it wasn't a thing and now i've seen so many cases of it that is undeniable at this point so that doesn't mean they're wrong right so so far you just know that they're accusing me of being hypnotized essentially and i would accuse them of the same uh which i'm doing right now so so far it's a tie you wouldn't be able to tell anything one way or the other from this sorry it could be i think i think i can show it you'll show it and i also believe that you and i have heard the professor's explanation of mass formation as it pertains to covid well enough so that we comprehend it and can reiterate it and explain it and measure scott adams uh debunking versus how we believe it works um now this all came out of the uh i guess he watched dr peter mccullough on the rogan show and that's where mccullough brought up the mass formation now scott adams as you pointed out he is uh he's a trained hypnotist in fact uh we should probably say right off the bat we have proof that he is a very well trained hypnotist i mean if you've seen his wife you know this guy definitely is a hypnotist i'm not saying they don't make good points they do make good points unfortunately he didn't really do the research about the theory or refresh his memory which is a big uh incorrect i read about the theory before i commented go mistake and he starts off with uh one of my favorite things that that we talk about here just in general about dr peter mccullough i think he's not good at evaluating data so when he says that some countries have good experience with ivermectin that's just false okay john you want to weigh in on that do you want to weigh in on that or should we listen all right so you heard my claim right so the claim they played was me saying that there's no country we've identified that ivormectin has solved the problem right now some of you disagree but later i'll say if you research it you'll find that there are no countries that fit that now remember the claim the claim is there are no countries right now watch the response to my claim that there are no countries that seem to have a good result no much of a countries i mean there are uh again i've had this website that i keep referring to which has changed this basic url i used to be ibm meta.com but now it's i v9 something or other i but there's about 70 studies showing its effectiveness that have been peer reviewed and then the fda itself on their one webpage where they say oh you shouldn't use ivermectin because it's unproven did he hear it so what did i say and then what did he say he called it a whopper meaning that what i was saying was clearly wrong or a lie and then what was his response it was a different topic i said there are no countries that have demonstrated it's working he changed it to there no study that there are studies that are peer-reviewed did you hear me say in the clip he played that there are no peer-reviewed ivorbectin studies i've never said that i've said the opposite i've said there are lots of ivermectin studies that show it works but they all have you know certain limitations of size or no control or it was an observational stuff like that now you can see this clearly right because you're my judges you're the ones who are judging who's in cognitive dissonance did you clearly see that he changed the subject to debunk me while actually just being on the wrong topic did he ever debunk the claim that there are countries that that there are no countries or towns or anything that have solved their problem with ivermectin now if anybody's new to me i'm not telling you ivermectin doesn't work i'm not telling you that because i've actually said that you know if i got in this situation i'd probably take it risk management i think we're going to find out it probably doesn't work but that's just statistical you know prediction if i had to about my life on it i'd say there's a solid 10 chance it could make a difference i'd take it if my doctor agreed etc so they've hallucinated an entire opinion that i don't hold the that there's somehow no studies that show its works of course i've talked about it at length all right so that's that's the first tell uh let me give you a vote so far who's who's in cognitive dissonance so far is it me or is it them yeah it looks like them right i mean i'm not the one who can tell that's why i need a third party but of course you're biased for me so that's also a problem let's see what else they say so john says where there's smoke there's fire meaning that there's so many indications that it works how could it all be wrong that's not really a sophisticated analysis of anything is there because you know what else has lots of smoke everything that's not true everything that you thought was true for a while maybe from russia collusion to you name it they all have plenty of smoke but they're not true yeah how much smoke is there that hillary clinton has massively been executing people lots i don't think it's true personally i mean i could be surprised but i don't think it's true there are plenty of things that have tons of smoke that aren't true do you know why we do randomized control trials i don't think john devorak does now that's not fair i don't know what he thinks in his head but the argument for a randomized controlled trial is that you never want to say this you never want to say there's so much smoke there must be fire that's what you're trying to avoid with science science is trying to cure this problem of people saying they can see it with their own eyes i'm looking right at it look at all this evidence that's the problem that science cures right so he's in the problem instead of what science cures while claiming a scientific i don't know insight let's go out and then of course there's the uh the use and this discontinued use and then reuse and watching the numbers go up and down so so that is a bad thing to say yeah well let's see let's listen how he arrives and by the way and peter mccullough who used to was the editor of a couple of journals where all you did was look at data it just kind of belies it kind of overlooks that fact he was a uh a peer reviewer himself as it were i think he's all right so dvorak is saying that i'm overlooking the fact that dr mccullough is very experienced in peer review of looking at studies did i overlook that do you think i overlooked that no i'm saying that if you took somebody who was a data analysis expert and you sat them next to dr mccullough with all of his uh all of his experience looking at peer-reviewed or being a peer-reviewed person i would say it wouldn't be close those are different expertise that would be like me saying well i've been paying attention to medicine for a long time read a lot of articles so i'm as good as a doctor i mean i've been reading up on it i have experience with my own medical problems and stuff so i'm basically a doctor aren't i no no if you don't study data analysis you don't get there just by looking at studies you know you're gonna have to go a lot deeper than that not good at evaluating data all right so so that's the exaggerated laugh did he hear it so i said that the the doctor was talking about was you know highly skilled in his areas of expertise but they do not include looking at data and i i'll give the exact example that he's not aware that there's no country that's had good success and probably not aware of you know maybe some other stuff all right so but let me play the laugh again because you have to hear the laugh that was almost as if we scripted it john i love that so when he says that some countries see if i could play that why would you do that we got everything on a roll we know what to do we know exactly what actually we should talk about all right well i think i could go on too long with that so the point is they make some claims about uh that i think that ivermectin is nonsense nope nope that does not capture my claim and they said that i'm quote all in on vaccinations those of you who have been watching me since the beginning would you say that that is a good characterization of my opinion that i have been quote all in on vaccinations no it's not even close it's not even in the ballpark i'm literally the only person i know who predicted the vaccinations wouldn't work can do you know anybody else i mean some experts said it before i said it and that's actually what informed me the the reasoning that i use was the expert said uh we've been working on a corona virus vaccination for decades we're not even close there's nothing that's changed except the pandemic why in the world would we suddenly know how to make this thing that we haven't known how to make for 20 years and we've been trying hard and i listened to that i said yeah that's a pretty good point what are the odds that by coincidence the pandemic would hit it exactly the time we knew how to make a vaccination we never knew how to make i mean it's possible i i was i wanted to feel optimistic about it but i also predicted it wouldn't work and then it didn't as a vaccination now i do say that the vaccinations work in the sense that reducing the chance of of major illness that's the official word i mean i didn't do any studies myself but the official word is it reduces your risk so if you see the maniacal laugh and all that uh i don't know what happened to uh curry and dvorak but it looks like cognitive dissonance because i think they're watching their ivermectin opinion uh go to hell they probably thought binary about me that i was either for vaccinations or against them both of those are bad opinions in my opinion scott has gradually lost my respect on these issues i think his investments may be part of his blind spot investments what investments do i have i had an investment a little while in regeneron but i sold it so i don't have an and i just held it for like a few months um i don't think i i don't know of any investments i have that would have any bearing on this um but when you say that i've uh um actually let me let me respond to this directly i'm always open to you saying what you disagree with me but i've lost my respect you you just you and everybody who talks like that really uh i don't want to hear about you losing your respect for me because i didn't ask for your respect i asked for you to maybe engage in the argument so you i don't have any respect for you either zero zero all right um i mentioned that uh the publication revolver had a investigative story about the possibility that january 6 had some fbi operatives pushing what happened now i claimed that it looked like a credible reporting but somebody sent me a chart that showed the various media entities on a graph so that you could see um if they were credible or not it had revolver like way down in the not credible area with infowars according to whoever put that chart together and i think to myself who in the world could put together a chart of media bias who could do that how in the world would you not have cnn and new york times as the least credible entities who gets to say was credible it's like if any of us knew what was true we wouldn't need the news we're all confused all right so but here's my question i haven't seen anybody debunk yet now keep in mind that revolver did not state the fbi was behind it they don't have that position they just said uh here's the guy who looks like the fbi here's a guy who's not indicted that looks suspicious here's another one who's not indicted who looks suspicious if you put him all together it does tell a pretty powerful story if the story is complete enough you know right if they didn't leave out any context and if what they reported was true and they show their sources so you don't have to wonder where they got it from they show you so has anybody seen a debunk of the revolver reporting because i haven't yet it could be i'm open to it um somebody says the january 6 looks like the charlotteville thing well you know um the charlottesville march uh they're they're i've got a lot of questions i don't think it was organic um clearly there were you know racists who organized it i mean that's all clearly in the record but who runs the racists do you think that the racists who organized that are completely devoid of any outside influence they're not they're not so to the to the extent that we don't know who was backing the racists we don't know even what happened nothing so and there's no curiosity about it i mean i can tell you what i know but i'm not going to uh let me just tell you that there's a little bit of a deeper mystery on you know what powers were behind that then that has come to light but maybe maybe someday we'll know uh elon musk says he'll be paying more than uh 11 billion dollars in taxes this year in response to all the people like elizabeth warren saying he's not doing enough and i'm wondering is that the most that anybody has ever paid in taxes certainly in one ear right did he just did he just break the world record in tax paying how would you like to be so rich that you can solve every problem if you think about it how many of you could have solved this problem of you know your somebody says you don't pay enough taxes and elon musk can say well how about i throw 11 billion dollars at it will that make you stop talking and you think to yourself well well it would make make me stop talking the same way so it's like all right if you're complaining about my taxes how about 11 billion dollars will i shut you up apparently not it didn't work that's the funny part and people will still say he doesn't pay enough taxes to me the funniest part will be that this won't work but it's a hell of a try um and i just love the fact that we we always forget that tesla doesn't do marketing i don't think spacex does and that that musk is their marketing so when he does something like this do you know what really happened do you know what the real story is what's the real story of why he sold stock anybody what's the real reason he sold his stock public relations publicity somebody says stock options to make a profit no i had to exercise options was that it we i i thought there was some voluntary part of that thank you diversification yeah if if you make if you're the richest person in the world but your wealth is entirely in a few different entities you need to get some of that out of there you need to get some of your money out of the things that have a specific risk because it could be that tomorrow somebody builds a you know fusion engine and puts it in a prius and next thing you know nobody's buying the tesla so any company has the odds of going to zero no matter how big or successful the company is it still has a chance of going to zero so the smart thing to do is to find an excuse to take money off the table and put it somewhere else where nothing can happen to you you're invulnerable so elon musk does a totally normal economic move which is to take some money off the table and diversify but he turns it into this public spectacle of paying more taxes than any human and and you know dunking on elizabeth warren and bernie sanders anytime you think that anything is done for one reason sometimes but it's very simple people who do that when elon musk does something there are probably five reasons right and we can think of three of them and two of them he thinks of and you haven't even thought of so yeah they're like five reasons to do this one of them was that you know he's responding to the criticism the others are even better but it was a perfect exit point because he can make it look like he's not cashing out he made cashing out look like he was paying taxes could you do that would you be smart enough to figure out how to make taking your money off the table and keeping it forever cashing out could you make cashing out look like you you're paying taxes no you're not that good he totally pulled this off this is one of the greatest persuasion plays you'll ever see i mean it's a plus all right as greg guffield said the other day and i love this phrase the public needs a hostage negotiator to help us get out of the mandates and lockdowns and whatever else is coming at us and the reason is because the government's the wrong tool but the public needs to weigh risk versus you know life and we weigh things differently so in almost every other situation it's better to let the government you know do the republic thing and represent us this is just a one unique situation where they're the wrong tool if a war breaks out you don't want the public voting on it you want the government to say well we got this you know let us handle this until we can sort out what's what's real and then the public can get involved but with the pandemic they were never the right tool except in the fog of war stage in which they were but at this point they're not the right tool anymore they were at the beginning and the trouble is that the public doesn't have any way to organize short of the government itself and the groups that might be resisting the mandates are too you know diverse so you've got the black americans might be resisting at some level you've got conservatives at some level and they tend not to join together there are some cases where they are joining together but i would i would say that we need a hostage negotiator um adam dopamine suggested indirectly suggested that maybe somebody like a trump somebody like a trump but he's i always say he's too divisive so it would be amazing if he did that it would be one of the greatest spectacles of all time if you played it if you just played a straight and literally said look let me just negotiate this and see if we can come up with a date or a metric that sets us free but here's what i think we need i think we need a hostage negotiator who's not too identified with one side or the other to simply pick a date and say we're all taking our masks off if you're in a state that has masks we're all going to take her masks off on whatever day and you know that's just the day we're we're just going to take our masks off on that day and maybe march first if i had to pick a time i'd say march 1st now you'd all like it to be sooner right but we do have the omicron we don't know everything that we need to know about it and of course we could change that date if something came up march 1st change it but i think we need to have a date and i think it would be responsible to have that date you know not right away give us a little time to sort out what's true and what's not uh yeah and anybody who says it should have been a year ago i i get what you're saying i get it um anyway if you can think of who'd be a good new hostage negotiator uh but please don't pick me because i feel like i'd be semi good at it but um i don't want it to be me sounds like a terrible job all right let's talk about the great reset you know you know before that let me clarify my thoughts about the uh the mass formation psychosis i don't think i've done a good job of telling you my objections to it so the idea behind the mass formation psychosis is that there are a set of conditions have happened that could lead to totalitarianism now one of the things that the no agenda podcast said is that since i was discounting that as being you know afraid of hitler they said no no it does it's not about hitler it's about totalitarianism to which i say okay okay it's not about hitler it's about totalitarianism which is about hitler all right i mean i get that there's a difference but we're not really talking about a real distinction here the the fear is that powerful people who don't have your interests will take control so here's what my take is on the mass formation psychosis it doesn't add anything to the understanding because we're always in it we're always in a mass formation psychosis in other words we're always confused we're we're always not sure what's happening we're always frightened about the future why why is that always the case it's because of the fake news did you catch this play all right you saw you heard about the suv that killed people it wasn't the person driving it was the suv you heard about this stone that threw itself right we keep hearing about all these things that are happening on its own there's no person happening doing and now we have the mass formation psychosis huh that's sort of like nobody's problem is it i mean nobody's nobody caused it there's no name you could put on that oh it just it just happened on its own here's my problem with it it's the fake news that is the problem there is a name to put on this if the fake news were telling us the truth or ultimately just one truth even if it were fake we'd all be on the same side and we wouldn't be so worried but the business model of the fake news is to keep you uneasy is to isolate you and divide you that's how the business model works once everybody worked up and clicking on stuff so when you say oh the problem is a mass formation psychosis you have shifted blame from the obvious guilty parties the guilty parties are the people running the fake news who have removed all confidence from the public and scared us to death if you scare us at the same time you're teaching us that all the the news is fake how is the public going to feel well it's going to be exactly the situation to create a mass formation psychosis so i'm not saying that the conditions don't exist because they clearly do i'm not saying that that doesn't contribute to the psychosis because it clearly does all i'm saying is it's a diversion it doesn't add anything we're basically adding water to the ocean and telling you it got wetter yeah you might be a little bit more confused now you might be a little bit more aware that the the facts are fake but we've always been here we always were confused and hypnotized we always were one inch away from totalitarianism do you know what prevents it do you know what preventative has prevented us so far from descending into totalitarianism in the united states do you know what partial credit for whoever is saying the second amendment which is a lot of people on the locals platform i was going to say the constitution second amendment being you know you could say that's the um the foundation of the constitution in a way you could make that argument so i'll take i'll take second amendment as a correct answer but i was looking for a constitution that we do have a set of checks and balances however imperfect that keep totalitarian at bay totalitarianism at bay now if we packed the supreme court totalitarianism is coming and and you know who knew that joe biden even joe biden knew you don't pack the supreme court because you get rid of your checks and balances and then yeah then the mass formation psychosis is going to eat you alive it'll eat you alive as soon as you take that protection away but the constitution has for a few hundred years provided us a weird protection against it it's like a self-correcting system which is what makes it so magic and um so i do not deny that there is a mass formation psychosis i simply add to it then it's always here maybe a little worse like adding water to the ocean but not in a way that makes doesn't help you understand anything it doesn't tell you what to do about it doesn't predict better doesn't do anything so the the cleaner story is the fake news has so messed with us that we're looking for any kind of explanation and that causes psychosis so look at the fake news don't be diverted by a clever but accurate clever but accurate idea about the mass formula formation psychosis it's a diversion but true-ish there's nothing about it that's untrue let's talk about the great reset how many of you believe that the great reset is a clever plot by the elites to gain power and control how many of you believe that yes yes yes yep yup yup yes yes yes yes yes yes well the great reset in my opinion is nothing like that let me let me tell you what i think it is so it's based on apparently in june 2020 there was the great reset was the theme of this annual meeting of the world economic forum so the first part that's true is there was uh the elites did get together and talk about the great reset so that parts everybody agrees is true that that's just a fact um the topics uh it was convened by prince charles and blah blah blah and other people and uh some of the topics were uh um climate change stuff all right and so the idea was to use the current pandemic and all the chaos that it creates along with any chaos that comes from climate change itself to say let's rethink everything and see if this is a situation to fix things now is that a conspiracy if a bunch of people say hey we've got a situation to fix a bunch of things like climate and you know fairness and or things because it's completely over they're showing you their work they're doing it in public is that a conspiracy uh and is is what they want power and control i always reject that argument because again that's like adding water to the ocean everybody wants power and control everybody you want it over yourself some people want it over other people so that they can have a better life themselves but we all want power and control there's no exceptions to that so when you say that these uh great reset people are looking for power and control that's true but it doesn't say anything it doesn't add anything because the great reset isn't like one thing it's just a whole bunch of people doing things in in a condition which is rare which is we can stop and rethink everything i would say that the pandemic is a great reset we've rethought commuting we've rethought health care we've rethought pandemic stuff we've rethought everything so there it is a great reset in the sense that you can clear the slate and say all right all right if we were going to start today how would you build back better so to speak so i don't find anything even slightly alarming about the great reset because uh it's basically just a push for green technology and maybe some more socialism but that's already here it's just the same stuff we've been looking at and i don't think the great reset gave them any extra capability or power you know you just saw a mansion kill build back better so you know it was close it was close but it doesn't look like the great reset is going to reset too much here's some good news it was sort of uh underplayed on cnn's website but i hadn't seen it anywhere else they said thanks to multiple atmospheric river events which sounds very important atmospheric river events the average snowpack in california has gone from 18 to 98 in two weeks we just went from no snowpack we're going to have another drought because that's a big source of our water comes from that snowpack and and we're having you know yet again a drought this summer and uh looks like we just took a big step toward making that big problem go away now if you don't live in california this meant nothing to you but this is a big problem not having water because we're not doing enough to you know desalinate or anything else so we have to rely on nature to save us from bad government but it looks like nature stepped in at least for now i mean it'll still take a lot more water to to be secure in california but this is a big deal a big deal like on the on the list of all the good news that i could receive in my life this would be right at the top because you have to leave california if you don't have water that's this pretty much came over it's bad enough we barely have electricity all right in the twitter highlights you know where they they'll highlight a story that everybody's talking about yesterday they said they had this heading to the story on twitter said science and public health experts say that vaccines are safe for most people what most did they downgrade vaccines from hey everybody you know almost everybody needs to get one did they downgrade it all the way to most 51 51 i mean they're not saying it's 51 but the word most is a pretty wide space isn't it i don't think we can ignore this change in messaging i don't think you can ignore that i think this is a pretty clear statement that whoever wrote the headline anyway yeah twitter uh is is hedging and that's that is a big deal in our understanding of what's going on um apparently uh fauci was talking about we're going to make lots and lots of tests for the covenant available he said there are going to be 10 000 centers for free testing 10 000 centers and it's going to happen in just a few weeks so this is heading in the right direction of course we must ask the question why don't we have that already like what took so long and i think the answer is corruption all right i'm going to stick with that statement of what i consider obvious i don't think it's incompetence i don't think it's money it just looks like somebody in this mix was corrupt and stop something from happening for somebody's benefit but we don't know details all right china amazingly somehow got their chinese tennis star peng shui who disappeared because she claimed a communist party leader raped her and now she's saying in an interview that she that never happened she'd never accused anyone of sexually assaulting her nope nope it had been misunderstood sorry nope that never happened now would you see china disappear a story to take something you know is true and just make it disappear can they do that yeah yeah they could do that it works yeah because they can do it in the united states so certainly you can do it in china so certainly the people of china will just now hear that that never happened um just like stories disappear in the united states our media disappears stories all the time so yeah they can actually do this and it will work it's so bold and so obvious that you say to yourself well that's never going to work it's so bold and obvious that it's a lie who wants me at this time of day um anyway so anyway the testing might be good um i tweeted the other day a uh reference i think it came from wikipedia or something it talked about how uh galen's maxwell's dad who was a famous media mogul had at his funeral a lot of important people including six uh former or current heads of mossad israeli intelligence for that i was accused of being uh adjacent to or too close to being anti-semitic by a david hazzani and he called me out for apparently an old anti-semitic trope that the that israel or the jews are running some kind of a pedo ring which i'd never even heard of so my my weird my weird life is that i'm i'm getting pilloried by people who are literally hallucinating opinions for me i've never heard of that now i had heard that intelligence agencies would be very interested in what epstein knew and you know what kinds of salacious stories about important people he might know i mean that's just obvious right the ca cia would want to know russian intelligence would want to know you know mi6 would want to know and israel would want to know why wouldn't they who would not want to know that if you knew that epstein had the like sexual goods on a bunch of famous people every intel agency should want to know about that i never even heard this i've never even heard that is there some kind have anybody heard this have you heard some kind of anti-semitic thing that israel or jews were somehow behind some kind of a pedo ring is that even a thing is that anybody even i've never heard of that and now now i'm anti-semitic for something i've never heard of anyway i blocked him for being an clay travis had a good thread today i'm going to read you most of it um you said joe biden passed his entire 2020 or actually i'm sorry let me read it again joe biden based his uh election basically on uh trusting the science and beating covet and of course that didn't happen and uh clay asked us to do this one fundamental exercise uh imagine that it was trump in charge and that the pandemic went just the way it went you know same outcome now let's say trump did everything that biden did but trump was in charge uh clay says i believe the media would have vigorously covered the coven vaccine failure true it would have been the trump vaccine that failed that's all it would have been about uh but instead it's take the vaccine it's not as good as we thought but it's still good and trump would likely have already been impeached over his failures to take coven seriously could be blue states would shut down blah blah blah all kinds of stuff bad stuff would happen and then clay says the reality is almost nothing we have done has had any impact on covent at all do you believe that do you believe that nothing we've done has had any impact on covet at all that's not even close to true that that's not even the same universe is true it's true that we can't stop it but do you believe that the vaccines don't reduce the risk of serious outcomes is there anybody here who believes that the vaccines don't even do that that they don't reduce the risk of serious outcomes i'm saying yes now conclusive yes let's see leslie yes is on the locals platform how about on youtube how many of you believe the the vaccines don't at least reduce your risk now we're not talking about that they may have bring their own risk as well because that's real interesting anyway i don't think that is a statement that should be accepted on face value i think that face masks we don't know because there's no way to do a controlled trial so we don't know if they work or not i think that vaccines the science or the experts say it and all the data i think 100 of the data says it reduces risk right there's no data that says otherwise um that i'm aware of so i think clay goes too far um but he makes a good point that if it had been trump it would have been treated completely differently do you agree all right here's my updated list to know when i'm dealing with an npc somebody who can't do independent thinking if i see any of these phrases on the internet now some of these are specific to me but these phrases are my key not to have a debate with this person on twitter if they mention jumping the shark i'm really the pointy haired boss hahaha the matrix soylent green anybody being an apologist about anything i saw it with my own eyes or i heard it with my own ears sheep references 1984 movie or book hitler references fascism soyboy or scotty scotty so if you have any of those probably you're dealing with an npc that's my list now i think you'd agree this is the best show you've ever seen possibly the best thing that's ever happened in the history of the universe but we've come to the end of our of our time here and right on time yeah that's how i play right on time all right um and i will talk to you did i hear kamala what's this do you hear kamala harris said in the only times interview we didn't see delta coming apparently these viruses mutate well okay that's poorly stated um or here's a comment i don't understand the no agenda podcast was not a private conversation duh it was meant for public consumption duh when you subtract their persuasion efforts how much of what's left is cognitive dissonance i don't know how to answer that uh what about the great barrington declaration uh you know i just haven't been interested in it um all right um aspirations issue with vaccines aspiration issue all right that's all for now i will talk to you later

oh goodness

what a day

can you believe it you showed up on time

for those of you who are alive and

amazingly those of you watching this on

a recorded

basis

uh you're on time too it's weird uh yeah

something about space time i don't

understand it either

but

all i know is this is the best thing

that's ever happened to you it's called

coffee with scott adams

because of the scott adams part plus the

coffee and we're going to enjoy that

right now

would you like to take it up a level

anybody anybody

take it up a level yes no

i feel the yeses

i feel the yeses and so all you need is

a copper mugler glass a tanker jealous

inside a canteen jerk flask a vessel of

any kind fill it with your favorite

liquid i like coffee and join me now for

the unparalleled pleasure the dopamine

to the day thing makes everything better

it's called the 17th sip and this

happens now go

ah

yeah some of you weren't ready were you

see

you've got to be ready

let this be a cautionary tale

those of you who are thinking

i've got plenty of time to pour my

warm cup of coffee no you don't always

have time you've got to be ready

well we've got a great show today let's

start off with joe manchin killing the

build back better bill

so biden's build back better bill

got

blown to parts to bits

that's right

biden's

and actually it's just shelved because

joe mansion was a big no

um

now

here's the thing

how do you view this

like what what is the way you interpret

the situation well

michael schellenberger had a interesting

take on it which i agree with totally

that it was progressive dogmatism that

killed it

progressive dogmatism

progressive dogmatism would be the

opposite of

what would that be the opposite of

science

economics

rational

pragmatism

right and i think that is that is

accurate

and specifically

it's accurate because

a lot of it was clean energy related and

it was just the wrong analysis

if if the buildback better build had

included let's say

expansions of nuclear and natural gas

do you think that maybe they could have

gotten a republican vote

maybe not because it would still be

inflationary

but

they'd be a lot closer

because at least they'd be compatible

with science

you know if you're not even compatible

with science and you're the pal you're

the party of science

now remember when i say hey be

compatible with science you're the first

thought you're thinking to yourself is

scott scott's got

they think they are

they think they're compatible with

science no they don't no they don't

because even the democrats now

understand

that the only reason we are where we are

is because we still have some nuclear

we'd better get some more soon and that

natural gas made a big difference in our

on our co2

so anybody who actually looked at the

data and looked at the science

would not have put together a bill that

looked this way

there would have been much more focus on

the

the things that are scientifically and

economically demonstrated nuclear being

chief among them

and so

here's the story i see i see that joe

manchin

uh took his party seriously

that was the problem

joe manchin took his party seriously

it's the party of science right

and so he said well let's look at the

science

the party of not being you know all

crazy like the republicans you know with

all their

conspiracy theories and whatever the

republicans are blamed of today

they're the party of being rational and

empathetic

you want empathy and science that would

be the things that the

republi the democrats would tell you

that they're all about

and so

joe manchin apparently take calling

their bluff

said all right let's say those are our

highest priorities science and empathy

using science

to be the best we can for

citizens what would that look like

and it doesn't look like the build back

better bill

and by the way how do

yeah how do we

how do we uh

avoid

noticing that his last name is mansion

i mean somehow that's important i don't

know

in our simulated world somehow that

should be a a signal that

that he's a character in a play

anyway

goldman sachs

lowered its growth gdp

estimates and the stock markets taken

ahead i think last i knew

because

the market is interpreting this is bad

so in goldman sachs take they said well

you know there won't be all this money

going into the economy

and then when they talked about

inflation

this is the only context they talked

about inflation

that because of inflation

it would be harder for this build back

better bill to ever get assigned in the

future

what's left out

there's something sort of big left out

right

the effect of inflation on the economy

this is goldman sachs

did they forget inflation

no they didn't forget it they talked

about it

in the wrong context

the only context they talked about it

was in a political context whether it be

harder to pass a bill

i think

you're supposed to include what that

would do to the actual economy

if

your goal is to talk about the economy

so here's goldman sachs

so obviously signaling that they're

making a political decision and not

not any kind of economic decision

because an economic decision would look

like this

there would be a lot of stimulus added

to the system that's on the positive

side

but on the negative side there would be

extra inflation added to the system and

we've looked at these two factors and

we've decided that one of them is bigger

than the other and therefore we're in

favor of it or against it

that's what that's what an honest

analysis would look like

did they do that

no they said there won't be as much

growth true

and that the inflation will affect the

politics

true

but you just left out the biggest factor

the inflationary effect on the actual

economy like like it didn't matter

so if you ever thought that goldman

sachs was an honest player that should

talk you out of it

so congratulations for joe manchin for

calling the democrats bluff and actually

being consistent with science and by the

way

did it matter that uh joe manchin got a

education from michael schellenberger

in person

about you know the economics of climate

change

yeah it mattered

i don't know if that changed the

decision but yeah that matters

when you have

i'm arguing the strongest persuader in

the country right now that would be

schallenberger the strongest persuader

in the country

talked to this person and he stopped the

whole deal by himself

stopped the whole deal i mean not by

himself he needed all the republicans to

be against it too

all right

uh the first case of omicron

variant in the united states that can't

be true somebody's saying that in the

comments

uh we must have known it was here

all right uh

i'm gonna give a little kudos to joe

biden

now those of you who are

not long time listeners

i remind you of my technique

if you want to criticize someone you

should also protect yourself from

confirmation bias and cognitive

dissonance

by saying as many good things as you can

about the subject of your criticism

because if you can't say anything good

about them

well i'm not going to take you seriously

so here i'm going to say something good

genuinely about joe biden

uh he did something that is was really

clever

and i called it out when he did it

in other words i said oh this is going

to work out this is clever and it worked

here's what it was

there was a big call for packing the

supreme court

joe biden to his credit

did not favor that but a lot of a lot of

his party did

so what you gonna do

you you don't favor it and you have a

pretty strong opinion about it but your

party does and you've gotta you've gotta

make them happy

what do you do

you put together a big old commission

and you have them study it

because that's how you kill something

because he knew of course he knew that

the commission would come back and not

recommend packing the court

don't you think he'd do that of course

he did that because all you know

there

nobody's gonna recommend it if they're a

serious academic

and

and so that's exactly what happened now

they didn't recommend for or against

they simply laid out the the argument

but he got the same result he basically

sent it to a committee to kill it

i told you that on day one that's how

you kill something you send it to the

committee to take all the energy out of

it because a lot of these things are

about the people right it's about trump

it's about biden

it's about the personalities and

kavanaugh and stuff but as soon as you

take the personalities out of it and

give it to a committee all the energy

just drains out of it and then once all

the energy is gone it's just a bunch of

academics saying you know this would be

a bad precedent

because every single person who gets

elected would just repack the court and

therefore we wouldn't have we wouldn't

have a system anymore it would literally

eliminate the system because you

wouldn't have the checks and balances

so

good move

that this is a plus management

i don't know if i've seen a cleaner kill

than what biden did with this court

packing idea that was a clean kill

and you could see him set it up from day

one

it was obviously a plan obviously i mean

i'm not a mind reader but you don't have

to go too far into people's thinking to

know this was an intentional play it's

such a standard play corporations do it

all the time

so a plus

good job

um how many of you have listened to the

no agenda episode a very

uh popular podcast with adam curry and

john dvorak

and on episode

1409 i guess it's a new one they take me

on how many of you have heard that

they're they're criticisms of my

opinions

now the the take on this is that they

destroyed me

if you look at the comments

um

so let me give you some context and then

i'll tell you why this is fascinating

now it's not just fascinating because

it's about me it makes a little more

interesting for me i guess

but here's what you need to know number

one

uh i like these guys

curry and dvorak i've known dvorak for i

don't know a thousand years or something

and i like them a lot

generally

we're very close to the same opinion on

all kinds of stuff

not everything but generally so i would

say that they would be closer to my

i don't know view of life that a lot of

people

and that's a compliment

of course anybody who agrees with you

you think is smart right

so

this is important for the context

remember these are not automatic binary

people who are just against whatever i

say right these are people who are

inclined

to agree with me

because they've agreed with me enough in

the past that they would not be biased

against me

now they took on my uh opinions on

ivermectin

vaccinations

and about

the mass formation psychosis

but i want you to listen to it i'll play

just uh one little part of it and i want

you to listen to it so you can learn to

spot cognitive dissonance

now the first question is

is it me

because that's part of their claim is

that the cognitive dissonance or the

hypnosis is affecting me

and that's why my opinions don't make

sense to them

so

how would you know

who is in cognitive dissonance and not

i'm going to teach you this over and

over again because you have to see

examples of it before you're good at it

the first thing you do is look for the

tells

all right here's one tell

the over laugh

mocking

right

an honest mocking would be somebody just

you know laughing and you say oh that's

this person is really amused it's pretty

funny but the over laugh

is this kind

he says x

ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha

sort of like a larry david almost comic

laugh

so you'll see that tell in some of it

and again

it

i'm sure they have genuine laughs

but but it doesn't even sound genuine

when you hear it it sounds like trying

too hard

does that make sense

so listen for the trying too hard to

laugh thing

here's another tell

mocking my credentials

specifically the credentials as a

hypnotist

without actually having a specific

complaint about it

oh he's a hypnotist ho ho

well

i guess he keeps mentioning that

all right but what does that have to do

with the argument it's actually useful

context

because a lot of people are new to any

live stream right you have to give the

context

so what's wrong with that so look for uh

like oversized criticisms of things

which are completely ordinary

which is somebody telling you their

credentials before they tell you what

they tell you

all right

then here's the biggest one look for

them to uh you could say straw man but i

don't think that's what's going on i

think they're actually hallucinating my

opinions

so

uh and i want to play one for you so

that you can you can hear it yourself if

you don't hear it live you might think

i'm misinterpreting this

so i don't know how far i am into this

it's 30 minutes into

no agenda podcast number 1409

so if you're looking for it yourself and

it's definitely worth listening to it's

it's interesting stuff so it's the no

agenda podcast you can find it

everywhere just google it and it's show

one four zero nine and it's at about the

30 minute mark

and i'm going to play a little bit here

is the kind of guy you want to spar

against so they're talking about me

smart

and i'm disappointed

no you hear what they're doing so

they're starting by saying that they

they're generally in favor of me which

is exactly what i did with them which is

also why i like them

because that's exactly what they should

be doing to set up the conversation

because they need you to know

they're not biased against me in some

general way it's just this technique so

that's actually good technique really

with what he did but not surprised

because i think i can prove that he in

fact himself is trapped in the mass

formation

he's going to prove that i'm trapped in

the mass formation in other words that

i'm hypnotized

uh have you ever heard of projection

i used to think it wasn't a thing and

now i've seen so many cases of it that

is undeniable at this point

so

that doesn't mean they're wrong right so

so far you just know that they're

accusing me of being hypnotized

essentially and i would accuse them of

the same uh which i'm doing right now

so so far it's a tie you wouldn't be

able to tell anything one way or the

other from this

sorry

it could be

i think i think i can show it you'll

show it

and i also believe that you and i have

heard the professor's explanation of

mass formation as it pertains to covid

well enough so that we comprehend it and

can reiterate it and explain it and

measure scott adams uh debunking versus

how we believe it works

um

now this all came out of

the

uh i guess he watched dr peter

mccullough

on the rogan show and that's where

mccullough brought up the mass formation

now scott adams as you pointed out he is

uh he's a trained hypnotist in fact

uh we should probably say right off the

bat we have proof that he is a very well

trained hypnotist

i mean if you've seen his wife you know

this guy definitely is a hypnotist

i'm not saying they don't make good

points

they do make good points

[Music]

unfortunately he didn't really do the

research

about the theory or refresh his memory

which is a big

uh

incorrect

i read about the theory before i

commented go

mistake and he starts off with uh

one of my favorite things that that we

talk about here just in general about dr

peter mccullough i think he's not good

at evaluating data so when he says that

some countries have good experience with

ivermectin that's just false

okay john you want to weigh in on that

do you want to weigh in on that or

should we listen all right so you heard

my claim right

so the claim they played was me saying

that there's no country we've identified

that ivormectin has solved the problem

right now some of you disagree but later

i'll say if you research it you'll find

that there are no countries that fit

that now remember the claim

the claim is there are no countries

right now watch the response to my claim

that there are no countries

that seem to have a good result no

much of a countries i mean there are

uh again i've had this website that i

keep referring to which has changed this

basic url i used to be ibm

meta.com but now it's i v9 something or

other i

but there's about

70 studies showing its effectiveness

that have been

peer reviewed and then the fda itself on

their one webpage where they say oh you

shouldn't use ivermectin because it's

unproven

[Music]

did he hear it

so what did i say

and then what did he say he called it a

whopper meaning that what i was saying

was clearly wrong or a lie

and then what was his response

it was a different topic

i said there are no countries that have

demonstrated it's working

he changed it to there no study that

there are studies that are peer-reviewed

did you hear me say

in the clip he played that there are no

peer-reviewed ivorbectin studies

i've never said that i've said the

opposite

i've said there are lots of

ivermectin studies that show it works

but they all have you know certain

limitations of size or

no control or it was an observational

stuff like that now you can see this

clearly right

because you're my judges

you're the ones who are judging who's in

cognitive dissonance did you clearly see

that he changed the subject

to debunk me while actually just being

on the wrong topic

did he ever debunk

the claim that there are countries

that that there are no countries or

towns or anything that have solved their

problem with ivermectin now if anybody's

new to me i'm not telling you ivermectin

doesn't work

i'm not telling you that

because i've actually said that you know

if i got in this situation i'd probably

take it

risk management

i think we're going to find out it

probably doesn't work but that's just

statistical you know prediction

if i had to about my life on it

i'd say there's a solid 10 chance it

could make a difference i'd take it

if my doctor agreed etc

so they've hallucinated an entire

opinion

that i don't hold

the that there's somehow no studies that

show its works of course i've talked

about it at length

all right so that's that's the first

tell uh let me give you a vote so far

who's who's in cognitive dissonance

so far

is it me or is it them

yeah it looks like them right

i mean i'm not the one who can tell

that's why i need a third party but of

course you're biased for me so that's

also a problem let's see what else they

say

so john says where there's smoke there's

fire meaning that there's so many

indications that it works

how could it all be wrong

that's not really a sophisticated

analysis of anything is there because

you know what else has lots of

smoke

everything that's not true

everything that you thought was true for

a while maybe

from

russia collusion to you name it they all

have plenty of smoke

but they're not true

yeah how much smoke is there that

hillary clinton has massively been

executing people

lots

i don't think it's true personally

i mean i could be surprised but i don't

think it's true

there are plenty of things

that have tons of smoke that aren't true

do you know why we do randomized control

trials

i don't think john devorak does

now that's not fair i don't know what he

thinks in his head but

the argument for a randomized controlled

trial is that you never want to say this

you never want to say there's so much

smoke there must be fire that's what

you're trying to avoid

with science

science is trying to cure this problem

of people saying they can see it with

their own eyes i'm looking right at it

look at all this evidence

that's the problem

that science cures

right

so he's in the problem instead of what

science cures while claiming

a scientific

i don't know insight

let's go out and then of course there's

the uh

the use and this discontinued use and

then reuse and

watching the numbers go up and down so

so

that is a bad thing to say yeah well

let's see let's listen how he arrives

and by the way and peter mccullough who

used to

was the editor of a couple of journals

where all you did was look at data it

just kind of belies it kind of overlooks

that fact he was a uh

a peer reviewer himself as it were i

think he's

all right so dvorak is saying that i'm

overlooking the fact that dr mccullough

is very experienced in peer review of

looking at studies

did i overlook that

do you think i overlooked that

no i'm saying that if you took somebody

who was a data analysis expert and you

sat them next to dr mccullough with all

of his uh all of his experience

looking at peer-reviewed or being a

peer-reviewed person

i would say it wouldn't be close those

are different expertise

that would be like me saying well i've

been paying attention to medicine for a

long time read a lot of articles so i'm

as good as a doctor

i mean i've been reading up on it i have

experience with my own medical problems

and stuff

so i'm basically a doctor aren't i

no

no if you don't study data analysis you

don't get there just by looking at

studies

you know

you're gonna have to go a lot deeper

than that

not good at evaluating data

all right so so that's the exaggerated

laugh did he hear it

so i said that the

the doctor was talking about was you

know highly skilled in his areas of

expertise

but they do not include looking at data

and i i'll give the exact example that

he's not aware that there's no country

that's had good success

and probably not aware of you know maybe

some other stuff all right so but let me

play the laugh again because you have to

hear the laugh

that was almost as if we scripted it

john i love that

so when he says that some countries

see if i could play that why would you

do that

we got everything on a roll

we know what to do we know exactly what

actually we should talk about

all right well

i think i could go on too long with that

so the point is they make some claims

about uh that i think that ivermectin is

nonsense

nope

nope

that does not capture my claim

and they said that i'm quote all in on

vaccinations

those of you who have been watching me

since the beginning

would you say that that is a good

characterization of my opinion that i

have been quote all in on vaccinations

no

it's not even close

it's not even in the ballpark

i'm literally the only person i know

who predicted the vaccinations wouldn't

work

can do you know anybody else i mean some

experts said it before i said it and

that's actually what informed me

the the reasoning that i use was the

expert said uh

we've been working on a corona virus

vaccination for

decades

we're not even close

there's nothing that's changed except

the pandemic why in the world would we

suddenly know how to make this thing

that we haven't known how to make for 20

years and we've been trying hard and i

listened to that i said yeah

that's a pretty good point

what are the odds that by coincidence

the pandemic would hit it exactly the

time we knew how to make a vaccination

we never knew how to make

i mean it's possible

i i was i wanted to feel optimistic

about it but i also predicted it

wouldn't work

and then it didn't as a vaccination

now i do say that the vaccinations work

in the sense that reducing the chance of

of

major illness

that's the official word i mean i didn't

do any studies myself but the official

word is it reduces your risk

so

if you see the maniacal laugh and all

that uh i don't know what happened to uh

curry and dvorak but it looks like

cognitive dissonance because i think

they're watching their ivermectin

opinion uh

go to hell they probably thought

binary about me that i was either for

vaccinations or against them

both of those are bad opinions in my

opinion

scott has gradually lost my respect on

these issues

i think his investments may be part of

his blind spot

investments

what investments do i have i had an

investment a little while in regeneron

but i sold it

so i don't have an and i just held it

for like a few months

um i don't think i i don't know of any

investments i have that would have any

bearing on this

um but when you say that i've uh

um

actually let me let me respond to this

directly

i'm always open to you saying what you

disagree with me

but i've lost my respect

you

you

just you and everybody who talks

like that really

uh i don't want to hear about you losing

your respect for me because i didn't ask

for your respect

i asked for you to maybe engage in the

argument

so you i don't have any respect for

you either zero

zero

all right

um i mentioned that uh the publication

revolver had a

investigative story about

the possibility that january 6 had some

fbi operatives

pushing what happened

now

i claimed that

it looked like a credible

reporting

but somebody sent me a chart that showed

the various

media entities

on a graph so that you could see

um if they were credible or not it had

revolver like way down in the not

credible

area with infowars according to whoever

put that chart together and i think to

myself

who in the world could put together a

chart of media bias

who could do that

how in the world would you not have cnn

and new york times as the least credible

entities

who gets to say was credible

it's like if any of us knew what was

true we wouldn't need the news

we're all confused

all right

so but here's my question i haven't seen

anybody debunk yet now keep in mind that

revolver did not

state

the fbi was behind it they don't have

that position

they just said uh here's the guy who

looks like the fbi here's a guy who's

not indicted that looks suspicious

here's another one who's not indicted

who looks suspicious

if you put him all together

it does tell a pretty powerful story if

the story is complete enough you know

right if they didn't leave out any

context

and if what they reported was true

and they show their sources

so you don't have to wonder where they

got it from they show you

so

has anybody seen a debunk of the

revolver reporting

because i haven't yet it could be i'm

open to it

um

somebody says the january 6 looks like

the charlotteville

thing well you know

um

the charlottesville march

uh they're they're i've got a lot of

questions

i don't think it was organic

um

clearly there were you know racists who

organized it i mean that's all

clearly in the record

but who runs the racists

do you think that the racists who

organized

that

are completely devoid of any outside

influence

they're not

they're not

so

to the to the extent that we don't know

who was backing the racists

we don't know even what happened

nothing

so and there's no curiosity about it

i mean i can tell you what i know

but i'm not going to uh let me just tell

you that there's a little bit of a

deeper mystery on

you know what powers were behind that

then that has come to light

but maybe maybe someday we'll know

uh elon musk says he'll be paying more

than uh 11 billion dollars in taxes this

year in response to all the

people like elizabeth warren saying he's

not doing enough

and i'm wondering

is that the most that anybody has ever

paid in taxes

certainly in one ear right

did he just did he just break the world

record in tax paying

how would you like to be so rich

that you can solve every problem

if you think about it

how many of you could have solved this

problem of you know your

somebody says you don't pay enough taxes

and elon musk can say well how about i

throw 11 billion dollars at it will that

make you stop talking

and you think to yourself

well

well it would make make me stop talking

the same way

so it's like all right

if you're complaining about my taxes how

about 11 billion dollars

will i shut you up

apparently not it didn't work that's the

funny part and people will still say he

doesn't pay enough taxes

[Laughter]

to me the funniest part will be that

this won't work but it's a hell of a

try um and i just love the fact

that we we always forget that tesla

doesn't do marketing

i don't think spacex does

and that that musk is their marketing

so when he does something like this

do you know what really happened do you

know what the real story is

what's the real story of why he sold

stock

anybody

what's the real reason he sold his stock

public relations

publicity somebody says

stock options

to make a profit no

i had to exercise options

was that it

we i i thought there was some voluntary

part of that

thank you diversification

yeah if if you make if you're the

richest person in the world but your

wealth is entirely in a few different

entities

you need to get some of that out of

there

you need to get some of your money out

of the things that have a specific risk

because it could be that tomorrow

somebody builds a you know fusion engine

and puts it in a prius and next thing

you know nobody's buying the tesla so

any company has the odds of going to

zero

no matter how

big or successful the company is it

still has a chance of going to zero

so

the smart thing to do is to find an

excuse

to take money off the table and put it

somewhere else where nothing can happen

to you you're invulnerable

so elon musk does a totally normal

economic move which is to take some

money off the table and diversify

but he turns it into this public

spectacle of paying more taxes than any

human

and

and

you know dunking on elizabeth warren and

bernie sanders

anytime you think that anything is done

for one reason

sometimes but it's very simple people

who do that

when elon musk does something there are

probably five reasons

right and we can think of three of them

and two of them he thinks of and you

haven't even thought of so yeah they're

like five reasons to do this one of them

was that you know he's responding to the

criticism

the others are even better but it was a

perfect exit point because he can make

it look like he's not cashing out

he made cashing out look like he was

paying taxes

could you do that

would you be smart enough to figure out

how to make

taking your money off the table and

keeping it forever

cashing out

could you make cashing out look like you

you're paying taxes

no you're not that good

he totally pulled this off this is one

of the greatest

persuasion plays

you'll ever see i mean it's a plus

all right as greg guffield said the

other day and i love this phrase the

public needs a hostage negotiator

to help us get out of the mandates and

lockdowns and whatever else is coming at

us

and the reason is because the

government's the wrong tool

but the public needs to weigh risk

versus you know life and we weigh things

differently so

in almost every other situation it's

better to let the government you know do

the republic thing and represent us

this is just a one unique situation

where they're the wrong tool if a war

breaks out

you don't want the public voting on it

you want the government to say well we

got this you know let us handle this

until we can sort out what's what's real

and then the public can get involved

but with the pandemic they were never

the right tool except in the fog of war

stage in which they were but at this

point they're not the right tool anymore

they were at the beginning

and the trouble is that the public

doesn't have any way to organize

short of the government itself

and the groups that might be resisting

the mandates are too you know diverse

so you've got the black americans might

be resisting at some level you've got

conservatives at some level and they

tend not to join together there are some

cases where they are joining together

but i would i would say that we need a

hostage negotiator

um adam dopamine

suggested indirectly suggested that

maybe somebody like a trump

[Laughter]

somebody like a trump

but he's i always say he's too divisive

so it would be amazing if he did that it

would be one of the greatest spectacles

of all time if you played it if you just

played a straight and literally said

look let me just negotiate this

and see if we can come up with a date or

a metric

that sets us free

but here's what i think we need i think

we need

a hostage negotiator who's not too

identified with one side or the other

to simply pick a date

and say we're all taking our masks off

if you're in a state that has masks

we're all going to take her masks off on

whatever day

and you know

that's just the day

we're we're just going to take our masks

off on that day

and maybe march first

if i had to pick a time i'd say march

1st

now you'd all like it to be sooner right

but we do have the omicron we don't know

everything that we need to know about it

and of course we could change that date

if something came up march 1st change it

but

i think we need to have a date

and

i think it would be responsible to have

that date you know not right away

give us a little time to sort out what's

true and what's not

uh

yeah and

anybody who says it should have been a

year ago i i get what you're saying

i get it

um

anyway if you can think of who'd be a

good new hostage negotiator

uh

but please don't pick me

because i feel like i'd be semi good at

it

but um i don't want it to be me

sounds like a terrible job

all right

let's talk about the great reset

you know you know before that let me

clarify my thoughts about the uh

the mass formation

psychosis i don't think i've done a good

job of telling you my

objections to it so the idea behind the

mass formation psychosis

is that there are a set of conditions

have happened that could lead to

totalitarianism

now one of the things that the

no agenda podcast said

is that since i was discounting that as

being you know

afraid of hitler

they said no no it does it's not about

hitler it's about totalitarianism to

which i say

okay

okay it's not about hitler it's about

totalitarianism which is about hitler

all right i mean i get that there's a

difference

but we're not really talking about a

real distinction here the the fear is

that

powerful people who don't have your

interests will take control

so here's what my take is on the

mass formation psychosis

it doesn't add anything

to the understanding

because we're always in it

we're always in a mass formation

psychosis in other words we're always

confused

we're we're always not sure what's

happening we're always frightened about

the future

why

why is that always the case

it's because of the fake news

did you catch this play

all right you saw you heard about the

suv that killed people

it wasn't the person driving it was the

suv you heard about this stone that

threw itself

right we keep hearing about all these

things that are happening on its own

there's no person happening doing

and now we have the mass formation

psychosis huh

that's sort of like nobody's problem is

it i mean nobody's nobody caused it

there's no name you could put on that oh

it just it just happened on its own

here's my problem with it

it's the fake news

that is the problem there is a name to

put on this

if the fake news

were telling us the truth or ultimately

just one truth even if it were fake we'd

all be on the same side and we wouldn't

be so worried

but the business model of the fake news

is to keep you

uneasy

is to isolate you and divide you

that's how the business model works once

everybody worked up and clicking on

stuff

so when you say oh the problem is a mass

formation psychosis

you have shifted blame

from the obvious guilty parties

the guilty parties are the people

running the fake news

who have removed all confidence from the

public

and scared us to death

if you scare us

at the same time you're teaching us that

all the the news is fake

how is the public going to feel

well it's going to be exactly the

situation

to create a mass formation psychosis

so i'm not saying that the conditions

don't exist because they clearly do

i'm not saying that that doesn't

contribute

to the psychosis because it clearly does

all i'm saying is

it's a diversion

it doesn't add anything

we're basically adding water to the

ocean and telling you it got wetter

yeah you might be a little bit more

confused now you might be a little bit

more aware that the the facts are fake

but we've always been here we always

were confused and hypnotized we always

were one inch away from

totalitarianism

do you know what prevents it

do you know what preventative has

prevented us so far

from descending into totalitarianism in

the united states

do you know what

partial credit for whoever is saying the

second amendment which is a lot of

people on the locals platform

i was going to say the constitution

second amendment being you know you

could say that's the

um the foundation of the constitution in

a way

you could make that argument so i'll

take i'll take second amendment as a

correct answer but i was looking for a

constitution

that we do have a set of checks and

balances however imperfect

that keep totalitarian at bay

totalitarianism at bay

now if we packed the supreme court

totalitarianism is coming

and and you know who knew that

joe biden

even joe biden knew you don't pack the

supreme court because you get rid of

your checks and balances and then yeah

then the mass formation psychosis is

going to eat you alive

it'll eat you alive as soon as you take

that protection away but the

constitution has

for a few hundred years provided us a

weird protection against it

it's like a self-correcting

system which is what makes it so magic

and

um so i do not deny

that there is a mass formation psychosis

i simply add to it then it's always here

maybe a little worse like adding water

to the ocean but not in a way that makes

doesn't help you understand anything it

doesn't tell you what to do about it

doesn't predict better doesn't do

anything

so the the cleaner story is the fake

news has so messed with us

that we're looking for any kind of

explanation and that causes psychosis so

look at the fake news don't be diverted

by a clever

but accurate

clever but accurate

idea about the mass formula formation

psychosis it's a diversion

but true-ish

there's nothing about it that's untrue

let's talk about the great reset

how many of you believe that the great

reset

is a clever plot by the elites

to gain power and control

how many of you believe that

yes yes yes yep yup yup yes yes yes yes

yes yes

well the great reset in my opinion is

nothing like that

let me let me tell you what i think it

is

so it's based on apparently in june 2020

there was the great reset was the theme

of this

annual meeting of the world economic

forum

so the first part that's true is there

was uh

the elites did get together

and talk about the great reset so that

parts

everybody agrees is true that that's

just a fact

um the topics

uh it was convened by prince charles and

blah blah blah and other people and uh

some of the topics were uh

um climate change stuff

all right and so the idea was to use the

current pandemic

and all the chaos that it creates along

with any chaos that comes from climate

change itself

to say let's rethink everything and see

if this is a situation to fix things

now

is that a

conspiracy

if a bunch of people say hey we've got a

situation to fix a bunch of things

like climate and

you know fairness and or things because

it's completely over they're showing you

their work they're doing it in public

is that a conspiracy

uh

and is is what they want power and

control

i always reject that argument because

again that's like adding water to the

ocean everybody wants power and control

everybody you want it over yourself

some people want it over other people so

that they can

have a better life themselves

but we all want power and control

there's no exceptions to that so when

you say that these uh great reset people

are looking for power and control

that's true but it doesn't say anything

it doesn't add anything

because the great reset isn't like one

thing it's just a whole bunch of people

doing things

in in a condition which is rare

which is we can stop and rethink

everything

i would say that the pandemic is a great

reset

we've rethought commuting

we've rethought health care we've

rethought pandemic

stuff we've rethought

everything

so there it is a great reset in the

sense that you can clear the slate and

say all right all right if we were going

to start today

how would you build back better so to

speak

so

i don't find anything even slightly

alarming about the great reset because

uh it's basically just a push for green

technology and maybe some more socialism

but that's already here

it's just the same stuff we've been

looking at and i don't think the great

reset gave them any extra

capability or power

you know you just saw a mansion kill

build back better

so you know it was close it was close

but it doesn't look like the great reset

is going to reset too much

here's some good news it was sort of uh

underplayed on cnn's website but i

hadn't seen it anywhere else

they said thanks to multiple atmospheric

river events which sounds very important

atmospheric river events

the average snowpack in california has

gone from 18 to 98

in two weeks

we just went from

no snowpack we're going to have another

drought because that's a big source of

our water comes from that snowpack

and

and we're having you know yet again a

drought this summer

and uh looks like

we just took a big step toward making

that big problem go away

now if you don't live in california this

meant nothing to you

but this is a big problem

not having water because we're not doing

enough to you know desalinate or

anything else so we have to rely on

nature to save us from bad government

but it looks like nature stepped in

at least for now i mean it'll still take

a lot more water to to be secure in

california but this is a big deal

a big deal like on the on the list of

all the good news that i could receive

in my life

this would be right at the top because

you have to leave california if you

don't have water that's this pretty much

came over

it's bad enough we barely have

electricity

all right

in the twitter highlights you know where

they they'll highlight a story that

everybody's talking about

yesterday they said

they had this heading to the story on

twitter said science and public health

experts say that vaccines are safe for

most people

what

most

did they downgrade vaccines from

hey everybody you know almost everybody

needs to get one

did they downgrade it all the way to

most 51

51

i mean they're not saying it's 51 but

the word most

is a pretty wide space isn't it

i don't think we can ignore

this change in messaging

i don't think you can ignore that i

think this is a pretty clear statement

that whoever wrote the headline anyway

yeah twitter uh is

is hedging

and that's

that is a big deal

in our understanding of what's going on

um

apparently uh fauci was talking about

we're going to make lots and lots of

tests for the covenant available he said

there are going to be 10 000 centers

for free testing

10 000 centers and it's going to happen

in just a few weeks

so this is heading in the right

direction of course we must ask the

question

why don't we have that already

like what took so long and i think the

answer is corruption

all right i'm going to stick with that

statement of what i consider obvious

i don't think it's incompetence i don't

think it's money

it just looks like somebody in this mix

was

corrupt

and stop something from happening for

somebody's benefit but we don't know

details

all right

china amazingly

somehow got their chinese tennis star

peng shui

who disappeared because she claimed a

communist party leader raped her

and now she's saying in an interview

that she

that never happened she'd never accused

anyone of sexually assaulting her

nope

nope it had been misunderstood

sorry nope that never happened

now would you see china disappear a

story

to take something you know is true and

just make it disappear

can they do that

yeah yeah they could do that

it works

yeah because they can do it in the

united states

so certainly you can do it in china

so certainly the people of china will

just now

hear that that never happened

um

just like stories disappear in the

united states

our media disappears stories all the

time

so yeah they can actually do this and it

will work it's so bold and so obvious

that you say to yourself well that's

never going to work it's so bold and

obvious that it's a lie

who wants me at this time of day

um anyway

so anyway the testing might be good

um

i tweeted the other day a uh

reference i think it came from wikipedia

or something it talked about how uh

galen's maxwell's dad who was a famous

media mogul

had at his funeral a lot of important

people including six

uh former or current heads of mossad

israeli

intelligence for that i was accused of

being uh adjacent to or too close to

being anti-semitic

by a david hazzani

and he called me out for

apparently an old

anti-semitic trope

that the

that israel or the jews are running some

kind of a pedo

ring

which i'd never even heard of

so my my weird my weird life is that i'm

i'm getting pilloried by people who are

literally hallucinating opinions for me

i've never heard of that

now i had heard

that intelligence agencies would be very

interested in what epstein knew and

you know what kinds of salacious stories

about important people he might know i

mean that's just obvious right the ca

cia would want to know russian

intelligence would want to know

you know mi6 would want to know and

israel would want to know why wouldn't

they

who would not want to know that

if you knew that epstein had the like

sexual goods

on a bunch of famous people

every intel agency should want to know

about that i never even heard this i've

never even heard that

is there some kind have anybody heard

this have you heard some kind of

anti-semitic thing that israel or jews

were somehow behind

some kind of a pedo ring is that even a

thing

is that anybody even i've never heard of

that

and now now i'm anti-semitic for

something i've never heard of anyway

i blocked him for being an

clay travis had a good thread today i'm

going to read you most of it

um you said joe biden passed his entire

2020 or actually i'm sorry let me read

it again joe biden based

his uh election basically on uh trusting

the science and

beating covet and of course that didn't

happen

and uh clay asked us to do this one

fundamental exercise

uh imagine that it was trump in charge

and that the pandemic went just the way

it went

you know same outcome

now let's say trump did everything that

biden did

but trump was in charge

uh clay says i believe the media would

have vigorously covered the coven

vaccine failure

true

it would have been the trump vaccine

that failed that's all it would have

been about

uh but instead it's take the vaccine

it's not as good as we thought but it's

still good

and

trump would likely have already been

impeached over his failures to take

coven seriously

could be

blue states

would shut down blah blah blah all kinds

of stuff bad stuff would happen

and then clay says the reality is almost

nothing we have done has had any impact

on covent at all do you believe that

do you believe that nothing we've done

has had any impact on covet at all

that's not even close to true

that that's not even the same universe

is true

it's true that we can't stop it

but

do you believe that the vaccines don't

reduce the

risk of serious outcomes

is there anybody here who believes that

the vaccines don't even do that

that they don't reduce the risk of

serious outcomes i'm saying yes

now conclusive

yes let's see leslie yes is on the

locals platform how about on youtube

how many of you believe the the vaccines

don't

at least

reduce your risk

now we're not talking about that they

may have bring their own risk as well

because that's real

interesting

anyway i don't think that is a statement

that should be accepted on face value i

think that face masks we don't know

because there's no way to do a

controlled trial so we don't know if

they work or not

i think that vaccines

the science

or the experts say it and all the data i

think 100 of the data says it reduces

risk right there's no data that says

otherwise

um

that i'm aware of

so i think clay goes too far

um but he makes a good point that if it

had been trump it would have been

treated completely differently

do you agree

all right here's my updated list to know

when i'm dealing with an npc somebody

who can't do independent thinking if i

see any of these phrases on the internet

now some of these are specific to me

but

these phrases are my key not to have a

debate with this person on twitter if

they mention jumping the shark

i'm really the pointy haired boss hahaha

the matrix soylent green anybody being

an apologist about anything i saw it

with my own eyes or i heard it with my

own ears sheep references 1984 movie or

book

hitler references fascism soyboy or

scotty

scotty

so if you have any of those

probably you're dealing with an npc

that's my list now i think you'd agree

this is the best show you've ever seen

possibly the best thing that's ever

happened in the history of the universe

but we've come

to the end of our

of our time here

and

right on time yeah that's how i play

right on time

all right um

and i will talk to you did i hear kamala

what's this

do you hear kamala harris said in the

only times interview we didn't see delta

coming

apparently these viruses mutate well

okay that's poorly stated

um

or here's a comment i don't understand

the no agenda podcast was not a private

conversation duh

it was meant for public consumption duh

when you subtract their persuasion

efforts how much of what's left is

cognitive dissonance

i don't know how to answer that

uh what about the great barrington

declaration

uh

you know

i just haven't been interested in it

um

all right

um aspirations issue with vaccines

aspiration issue

all right that's all for now i will talk

to you

later