Episode 1939 Scott Adams - Is The Democrat Party Basically An Ex-Wife? Hearing A Voice In Your Head

to find me uh yep we have zero well yay one person watching on You.

Tube that's all I need I only need one person that's all oh we got five all right they're fighting us well those You.

Tube people they're resourceful you're so resourceful yeah because they're streaming back in one of them is yay you think uh if I were yay I would be watching my I would be watching this today all right look at you they're almost back in so I'm going to talk about a few things here while they're coming back in I saw a I've heard this story before but I want to see how many of you fit into this category did you know that not everybody has a voice in their head that's themselves having a conversation with yourself huh apparently something like half or 75 percent of the public doesn't have a voice in their head so I need to ask you how many of you hear a voice in your head all the time I mean I do I continually have an actual conversation going in my head is but how many people don't why am I only saying yes I do I've seen very few no's so that doesn't make sense does it I feel like everybody would say yes to that question but yet the research acts like it's mostly no or half of them know yeah maybe we should just call on that I'm not sure that's even true is it because I don't know how you'd not have a voice in your head now I I do know that it is a thing so let me let me be clear I'm pretty sure it's a real thing that some people don't hear a voice but what I don't believe is that it's common yeah I don't believe it's common by the way if anybody's watching on locals because the You.

Tube feed died um You.

Tube is back up I just had to fire up a separate feed so it's working now there's just something wrong with it initially so you can see it on either one and I always appreciate that you come in all right there are over 600 people waiting on the Old Link what am I going to do about that there's nothing I can do about that right I can't kill the old leg because I've got a I've got a new one that's running and that it wasn't responsive when I clicked on it very well I guess I'll have to find it later I think they'll figure out in five minutes that that's not working um I can't give you a redo on the Sip because that would be traveling back in time but I'll give you a I'll give you an interim sip all right so I'm going to call on this whole uh half of the people who can't hear an internal voice in their head I don't think that's the thing now let me tell you about a um story that's in the Wall Street Journal not a story a opinion piece it was written by a Roland Friar who's a professor of Economics at Harvard so the two things you need to know about them is he's a professor of Economics at Harvard then the second thing you need to know about him because it's the context of the story is he had a black grandmother now I don't know if his parents were black but he seems to be identifying with uh the black experience at least somewhat and in his article he talks about studying for economics obviously he had a top level education because he was at Harvard and and he was doing research to find out how much discrimination and bigotry was behind the differences in salaries and what do you think he found out when he kept looking for the reason that there's a difference in salaries it was completely explained by the skill level apparently the free market did exactly what you expected and and there was no indication of any racism whatsoever the people had the same skills had the same pay period and and his article to his credit his article was about how he was blinded by confirmation bias and that he couldn't even see his own numbers like he was looking at his own data and he was not believing it because his grandmother had primed him that this racism is everywhere all the time he gave the story of his grandmother once it was some cashier who handed their money without wanting to touch her and the grandmother interpreted that as the cashier was such a racist she didn't want to have accidental like contact with a black person that was how the grandmother interpreted it and then the grandson wasn't so sure he was like I think maybe she had a cold and she didn't want to give you her germs so basically they had two completely different worlds based on you know what you were primed to believe so even with that little bit of priming uh Mr fryer got all the way to you know to adulthood and he's still still thought that the data would would agree with you know his interpretation of the world and it didn't now here's here's the important part of the story most of you knew that right is there anybody who didn't know that the free market does make salaries basically equal I knew it I I think every one of you do it here's what's interesting somebody who identifies as black I believe I don't want to over characterize it but that seems how he presented himself um he's got a major opinion piece in the Wall Street Journal he's got a economics degree from Harvard I'm sorry duh I am completely I mischaracterize him he was a professor of Economics at Harvard that's better than having a economics degree at Harvard I don't know where he got his degree but if he's a professor of Economics at Harvard that's even higher than being a student of Economics right so this is somebody who seriously knows what he's talking about and he got he got this opinion piece in the Wall Street Journal you know one of the big papers of record and it looks like just a good opinion like I don't think anybody's going to attack him I don't think the newspaper will be forced to retract it I feel like Society has reached the point where this opinion is now acceptable what do you think because it now agrees with observation the data and the observation are now aligned for at least some of the people in the world to me this data exactly matches everything I've observed to me I've never seen a I've never observed directly any salary difference for people have different who have similar skills male male female black white I've just never seen it so so maybe the world is getting past that I will say however that this doesn't help with the real source of of racial inequality which is the schools Because by the time you're an adult all the damage is done isn't it you know if you've got a bad lower education you don't have the choice of having equal skills and equal pay it's just not an option because you didn't get the the same the same boost when you were a kid so we still have to fix that um I'll bet uh I'll bet Mr fryer would agree with that here's some good news the federal FCC is going to ban new Telecom and surveillance equipment made by Chinese companies so they don't want to have Chinese surveillance cameras in American places because they're worried that the Chinese will maybe possibly use those cameras to spy on Americans or something uh is there anything missing in this story something maybe they overlooked a little bit uh maybe some related kind of story well number one the you know Trump tried to do this and got some resistance but number two uh Tick Tock is like a gazillion cameras that are literally in in citizens pockets how do you say these other companies are the risk and not tick tock Tick Tock literally has a camera in every phone is looking at you and listening to you and making decisions and influencing you this is a new close the fact that we can ban these companies I've never even heard of it's a good idea I mean I'm solidly in favor of banning them but tick tocks that's okay it's just it's absurd it's absurd but good job I would say from all the way back um to the Trump Administration and I'll give the Biden Administration credit for finishing the job and and you know blocking these companies but it's time to do Tick Tock people um I I'm seeing apparently somebody asked mosque if he gets if Twitter gets banned on the Apple and Google App Stores would he build his own phone and he said yes this is sort of uh that's a sort of threat slash Bluff that only Elon Musk can make try to think of one other person in the world who could tell you that things don't work out he'll make his own smartphone and you would believe it right Jeff Bezos tried it that didn't work out but do you believe that Jeff Bezos could make a real competitive phone well I don't know he's very capable but wouldn't you trust Elon Musk to make a smartphone in a way you wouldn't necessarily trust anybody else and what am I wrong I can't think of anybody who would be more ideally suited for making a smartphone because he could pair it with neurolink and he could pair it with his cars and he could pair it with his uh his satellites and and here's something that Elon Musk could do if he had a smartphone and satellites so let's say a smartphone goes through satellites just think about this someday Elon Musk could make a smartphone that's the only one that can make a long distance call to Mars that's like real now it's real if he makes the phone am I wrong there's nothing technologically that would stop you from making a phone call to Mars except the time lag right am I right yeah and so you'd say how are you and yeah you'd have to wait half an hour for a response but you could sort of make a phone call to Mars right like technologically that's within the realm of ordinary engineering yeah so I'm hearing people say there's a 20 22 minute time lag but if you send a voice message hey I hope your trip to Mars was good you know let me know you made it okay 20 minutes later ring yeah I made it okay isn't that oh and you could definitely text you could text Mars how you do how's that how's it feel up there pretty good 20 minutes later all right um Jerry Jones have I ever told you the famous people have a history of being famous ever since they were kids there are some people who seem to be around big events like all of their life yeah like famously Bill Clinton met John F Kennedy when Clinton was a kid I I don't feel like these are accidents I feel like famous people keep having famous experiences just over and over again so Jerry Jones it turns out uh not to his credit when he was 15 years old was one of the white men or boys I guess who blocked the uh the North Little Rock High School in Arkansas in Arkansas uh 65 years ago blocked it to prevent integration of the school so basically he was you know an overt racist and he was participating in an overtly racist act that was not just overtly racist is one of the most famous things that's happened in the United States now what are the odds that one of those people it was going to be Jerry Jones or would go on to be you know somebody who's a who's a common name but when he was challenged about it I guess the photo of him there just surfaced he hasn't mentioned it before then he never mentioned it which was a good move and I was interested in the way because he's a very high functioning successful entrepreneur right so he's somebody you'd expect to be able to handle something well and I'll just tell you how he did handle it you can judge whether this is handling well first of all he didn't defend it he he said well gosh that was 65 years ago now that's good framing so the first thing he says is gosh that's 65 years ago so that that was actually that that was the best way to start the conversation yeah that was what 65 years ago because as soon as you hear that you get a little bit more flexible right um and then he goes on to say that uh you know it really reminds us that we've come a long way something like that and I thought well that was pretty good because he's admitting that that was not the way to be and that we've come a long way and he's glad that we have but he's not running away from the fact that 65 years ago he was that kid which on some weird level I appreciate it I don't know why I mean I'm not agreeing with a 15 year old kid I'm saying that I appreciate he just owned it he just owned it yep I did that wish I hadn't done that now he stopped short of saying you know I'm sorry I wish I hadn't done it but it was sort of there like the the way that he dealt with it the implication was that was some other guy I'm not I don't even need to talk about it and I do I do I'm very much on board with not having to explain what you did when you were 15.

I couldn't do it could you could you defend your 15 year old self I couldn't do it but I'll tell you how the way I the way I would have handled it I don't know if it's better but let's say let's say I got accused of some heinous activity when I was 15.

and then somebody says explain it today here's how I would explain it you know I don't like that guy either that that 15 year old who did that thing I hate that guy that's it I agree with you yeah I don't like him any more than you do but I'm not going to defend I'm not not going to defend somebody I'm not I'll defend who I am today but if you want me to defend my 15 year old self no I'm on your side I don't like that guy and I would go further and here's The High Ground here's how you high ground that you say I'll tell you my view and this is my actual view so this is not this is not like weird sophistry this is my actual view that a life well lived is we where you start very imperfect and you try to improve and that you do the best you can to improve over the Arc of your life and I would say we all started from a low place you've got a picture of my my starting place the only thing I would defend is where I went I'm not going to defend where I started and I'm not going to ask you to defend where you started either I will ask you to defend how you doing how you doing are you improving did you learn anything are you the same person you were when you were 15.

I hope not but I'm not going to hate you for who you were when you were 15.

I'm not going to apologize it for it I'm not going to explain it I'm just going to say that was a different person same as you were a different person when you were 15.

we don't need to explain that person we are supposed to be better than that person now am I well I'll let you decide but that's the only thing I'll defend is who I am now and that's the only it's the only standard I'll hold you to see this helps too just to make sure that you're not a hypocrite that's the standard I'd hold you to I'm not going to blame you for anything you did when you were 15.

so but uh it's interesting and I do think this I think the Jerry Jones story is more positive than negative because it shows the evolution of thought it shows the evolution of you know America you can see it in one person and I have no no reason to believe that he thinks the same as he did back then all right so I've seen yeah I've said long ago that the Democrats were really the party of women but I'm seeing more people coming around to this point of view because it's so obvious at this point and uh I saw I saw a tweet by Jason Andrews he says the Democrat Party is America's ex-wife the Democrat Party is America's ex-wife have you ever have you ever heard a more perfect summary now here's what I believe have I ever told you that everything is about procreation of course I have everything you do the the clothes you choose to put on in the morning how much you eat whether you exercise the job you took where you live all of your decisions are based on your your procreation Instinct right everything from sex to success to just everything you know it's all about procreation now you don't think of it that way because you're going through your life saying oh I'm just you know rearranging my garage but somehow it all it all ties back to them it makes sense that if there were ever two parties see if see if you can follow me on this I may be going too far right yeah here's my overall thought if ever there's a situation with two parties the most predictable thing that would happen is that one of them would become the woman party and one would become the man party and that whenever you have a civilization with two main parties that's the most likely thing that will happen because our most Basic Instinct is procreation and the male and female strategies for procreation are different so that should cause that now that's exactly what we see in my opinion The Men Who were part of the Democrat Party some of it is just inertia you know your parents were Democrats you're you're Democrat but I think a lot of it is men with different um reproduction strategies the men in the Democrat Party believe their best chance of reproduction is to make women happy foreign which suggests that they'll eventually all become Republicans I've got a theory that there's a certain amount of marriage that turns anybody into a Republican just a theory I don't know how many years of marriage it takes to turn you into a republican but but it happens probably within five uh what is what is the reproduction strategy of Republican men what is the reproduction strategy of Republican men versus Democrat men I do believe the Democrat male strategy is to make women happy and that they're and then they'll have a name and the Republican strategy is what act like men their strategy is to act like men and then see if that works out for them it turns out it does because when they act like men they attract a certain kind of woman who wants somebody who acts like a man right doesn't want somebody who agrees with them all the time that's that's not exactly reproduction material there so so in my opinion everything is explained by that now as was also pointed out teachers unions are like three-quarters female the people who are doing Dei and people work in human resources and you know basically most of the groups they're active and really make a difference in the country they're female-run and so it really has become a you know male party versus a female party abortion being most the clearest distinction if if you didn't know what the the issue was let's say you you're an alien and somebody said well you don't even know what abortion is but we'll just tell you this there's one group that says we want it as one group that says you know we don't want that is the group that says they want it most likely the ones who are going to have it yes it makes sense that women would want options if I were a man if I were a man allegedly I'm male if I were a man who could have a baby I would want uh I would want I would want abortion to be legal not because I wanted to have one but because I want more rights not fewer every time you said Scott would you like more rights or fewer rights well I don't even know what the subject is but how about more how about more rights I'll always take more rights now if you're saying to me but Scott you would be killing children I'd say no no I didn't say I would get an abortion I didn't say that I would encourage you to get one I would say that every time you ask me do you want to have more options or fewer options I generally default to more options and I think people in general do people in general want more options now fewer so it makes sense to me that the the woman party the Democrats would move toward making giving themselves more options and it makes sense that the the male dominated party Republicans would be less likely to do that because to them it just looks like murder right so you don't want to give somebody the option of murder from their point of view but you could but you can sort of predict everything that's going to happen based on the mom and dad male and female procreation model now how much how seriously should you take this here's how seriously remember I told you there are only two things you can know the first thing you can know is that you exist because you're noodling with the question of who you are so there's something that exists you just don't know what that is the second thing that you can know is that it's your impression that some things are predictable that's it you know science in particular is more predictable than most people but if that's all you know and I and I give you the these various models of predicting does follow the money predict well it does doesn't it I don't know if it should but it seems to now here's the second thing does follow procreation as the the dominant way of understanding things to happen does that predict I think it does but I don't know if it predicts as well as follow the money if you ever got into a situation where it was one or the other I don't know does abortion follow the money sort of does because if you say to people uh you're going to have to have a baby that you will financially support for 18 years that's a pretty big expense you would expect that people would say I would like the option of not having that expense I would like the option of not having that expense so even abortion follows the money it's it's a very good predictive way now I don't know if there's a reason for it or as a coincidence it seems doesn't seem like a coincidence I mean you could you could come up with an obvious reason why money affects things so but follow this let's see if we can make a prediction if the if the uh Democrat Party is the woman first party would they nominate somebody like Joe Biden to lead them yes they would because he's not a strong male figure at the moment you know when he was younger he was but at the moment he's not a powerful male and they don't really like powerful male figures they want somebody who just looks like you know grandpa will watch the kids when you have a date night so that's what Biden is Biden is basically your grandparent parent who watches the kids while you have a date night he's very safe and where uh whereas uh Trump is you know scary to women all right let's see what else you could predict based on that model is there any uh is there any other thing that you could predict what about climate change could you predict that Democrats would be more concerned about it uh um maybe indirectly um no you're an idiot orange out orange out you're out so every time somebody imagines they know what's in my mind you get banned stop imagining you could just ask it's not like I don't tell you my opinion I'm the last person who you should have to try to read my mind I literally tell you every thing I think you don't have to guess I'll give you my reasons right and and uh and to be clear I'm not supporting Trump for re-election just just so you hear it as clearly as possible could I change my mind do you think I could change my mind yeah absolutely sure good I'm just saying at the moment it's not my choice at the moment but you know I have to make real world decisions as well all right is there any prediction you would make about what prediction would you make based on only the gender procreation model is there anything you would predict based on that socialism yeah I mean you would predict that the Democrats would want more socialism got in control yeah yep there was a story in the news of some woman who was getting carjacked and she just blew the head off of one of the carjackers and that the second one returned fire and she got wounded but survived and I thought you know when you see women taking men's heads off well we're in a whole different world but good for her um so uh Twitter amnesty is coming so I guess musk has said he did a poll and 72 percent said they wanted full amnesty you heard my opinion that if you were ever going to do full amnesty this would be the one best time to do it because then you don't say it's a precedent you're just saying it's a Once only new ownership and you know if you get banned again don't expect to come back it's a perfect time to do it now will the will the experiment work do you think Twitter will become a hell hole of you know racists and KKK and everything else I'm going to say a little bit a little bit you know so some of the bad people will come back and they'll they'll test the system the first thing some of the bad people are going to do is what they're going to try to get banned again so they're going to say some just to get banned again just and they're going to push the the envelope right so stuff will just get banned again and um I would be happy if all Twitter did was stick to its own guidelines for who to ban next time because those same people will disappear if they violate Twitter terms of service so I'm not really too afraid of it is anybody worried about it I I think there'll be a little uh you know a little churn and turmoil there for a little bit but yeah no big deal now if you're saying to yourself this is a good decision or a bad decision which one is right it's a good decision to bring them back or it's a bad decision who's right go in in the in the comments who's right go uh how could you fool for how did you fall for my trick okay if I told you that's a trick question it's a trick question now answer it again it's a trick question oh come on come on come on come on come on oh I I totally primed you so that you can't see it so so I created a cognitive blindness in you here's the cognitive blindness when I tell you the real answer you're gonna go oh how did I miss that this is going to piss you off now the real answer is he's a b testing rapidly there's no right or it's not it's not good or bad it's something he's going to try if it doesn't work he can immediately reverse it if you're talking about whether it's a good idea or a bad idea you're not even on the right page you're not even in the right conversation the question is is testing it smart or not smart and for that there's not really much debate of course testing it is smart of course now if you test it and it doesn't work what would be the smarter thing to do then reverse it reverse it okay or put in some rules that you know gradually reverse it or something so if you don't understand that what he's doing is moving fast breaking things and then adjusting then you're missing the show right the show is not the show is not Elon Musk doing correct things if you're looking for is that correct is that incorrect you're missing the whole show the whole show is that he doesn't know either none of us know nobody knows the right the right answer he's he's finding out you just put it out there completely transparent here it is did that work oh that didn't work I guess I'll do something else uh Scott waited for two years to speak up against Force masking and lockdowns jaina you stupid that's not true completely false never been in favor of mandates boom stupid all right um by the way that's something I couldn't say with full immunity before do you know why I can call called my trolls stupid and I don't get knocked off a social media do you know why not because of Elon no it's because I do it with respect the reason I could call women stupid is the same reason I could call men dicks because I respect their full Humanity like if you come at me I'm not going to take it easy on you I mean if it were a physical fight I'd take it easy on you but I'm not going to take it easy on you because you're a woman you don't get that not on not on Twitter on Twitter it's just you that's that's the whole conversation all right so uh what was I talking about oh the Twitter anime state so um yeah it's just a good idea to try it we'll we'll find out later if it's a good idea to keep them there but it's definitely a good idea to try it and all right let's talk about uh that Mar-A-Lago situation and um and uh Nick Fuentes and yay and uh Milo all right so in my opinion well first of all uh Trump um responded he said he basically had a good conversation with uh yay that went well according to Trump uh and that and and just at the end of his statement he goes and I didn't know who Nick Fuentes was do you believe that do you believe that the president didn't know who Nick Fuentes was I wouldn't have believed it except for axios's reporting so axios if you don't know they're not in the bag for the left or the right which is very unique people always ask hey why can't you have a news source that's neither bigoted left or bigoted right we have one axios actually does genuinely I think as follows where the news goes and axios reports that some verbatims from it and we do know from axios that Trump was asking Nick Fuentes who he was so if we know that that Trump asked him who he was and even asked him if he was represented the extreme part of his his party you could see that Trump was catching on who he had at the table right if if axios has the right reporting and they do it before you make fun of axios go go do your own research on that I think you'll find out that there they play us right if I'm wrong let me know but I think they try to place right anyway if it's true that Trump was asking who he was and asked him directly if he represented the extreme part of the party you can see that Trump was working through it and they didn't know exactly who he was so I believe that I believe he didn't know now do you think that Trump handled it well from your perspective by saying he didn't know he was so therefore it's not exactly a big crime or a big foul it was just dinner do you think so for from the perspective of Trump's base did he explain it sufficiently I think so from from the perspective of a voter that's kind of all you needed to know wasn't it he wasn't invited Trump uh trusted yay Trump trusted a black man which unfortunately is part of the story right so so the whole story is that Trump trusted the black guy and that didn't work out for him am I right that's one way to is that not an accurate interpretation Trump's problem was he trusted a black guy and he got screwed am I wrong now uh I don't think it's fair to call a Kanye a black guy because you you sort of these sort of uh transcended race in a lot of ways um but you could easily spin it that way to me it looks like a black guy screwed Trump and I like Yay by the way but it looks like he did that intentionally can't tell I can't read his mind but it looks intentional I mean from the outside how's that look so it looks like a black guy took Trump out or tried to and Trump's just brushing it off because now do you think people just forget this story in two weeks so it doesn't really matter the base will yeah the base will forget it in a day but here's what you're forgetting you're missing the biggest part of the story the biggest part of the story is it doesn't matter what Trump's base thinks it always did but it doesn't now do you know why do you know why it doesn't matter what the bass thinks of trump because the media already left him so Breitbart went at him hard I don't know if you noticed but Breitbart didn't pull any punches it's just Trump had dinner with a holocaust denier and a famous anti-semite according to Breitbart right Fox News is shutting Trump out so Fox News will not support him well which means you know other uh Rupert Murdoch assets will not support him and and now Breitbart is gone Breitbart isn't coming back from that like they're they're not going to call them anti-sem items and then change their minds I don't see that happening do you believe do you believe Trump could win without Fox News and without Breitbart yes or no Trump could win without breitbarton without Fox News mostly yeses yet there is a path there is a path and the path would look like podcasts only so if Trump just said he won't do any interviews with the major media and said I'll just do I'll do all the podcasts because Eddie if you say to yourself but wait nobody's going to watch the podcast because they're like low low volume no they're not the podcasts are much bigger than the network news and anything that Trump does that's an interesting interview will have greater greater traffic than ABC News would you don't think I could get more traffic for a trump interview like if I personally interviewed him on a podcast you don't think I would get more clicks than ABC News would get on the story about Trump I would yeah I would get more I would get more attention than ABC News just telling a story about him so he does have a path and there would be plenty of podcasters who would who would want to you know to benefit from the traffic so they do it he could start his own he could start his own network he could start his own network you know just a channel on You.

Tube and or Rumble I guess and uh and you can just interview other people imagine Trump running for office just imagine this imagine Trump running for office but he doesn't do any interviews he only interviews other people and that's his campaign think about it he doesn't do interviews he only interviews experts and Democrats who disagree with him and that's it and maybe some rhinos who disagree with it can you imagine how much you would like to watch Trump interview his critics seriously could you could you avoid watching that oh my God oh my God like it would be so watchable it would just blow everything else out of the water and and as soon as you heard and by the way here's a little trick a little trick for you for publicity this is the most important trick for getting publicity nobody cares that you did something well you can't get publicity because you did something really well I did a good job right unless it's like extraordinary here's how you get publicity you do something that other people have been doing forever but you do it a different way that looks like it could work that's what Trump could do you could say well the first time I ran for office I just did every media interview and it was different than the way other people did it I just sucked all the energy out of the room nobody ever did that before now he could say all right I'm going to do a brand new way again and the brand new way is I'm going to suck all the energy out of the major platforms and just starve them and just make my show the only thing that's interesting on TV because it would be nothing else would look interesting if you did that he would immediately like make everything else boring he has that power now what if he doesn't do that suppose he decides to be the the Trump of the last several years and he says I'm just going to go out there and do my thing and I'll do my rallies I'll uh I'll post things on true social I'll accept interviews when they're offered and I'll just do it the straight way can he win I don't think so because because you don't realize the extent to which opinions are assigned to the public it's easy for you to say you know I'm never going to change my mind because the media changed my mind I'm not going to change my mind because somebody else had a different opinion but that's not how it works your minds are changed every day by the media if the most influential people on the right decide not to back Trump they have enough influence to you know take 25 percent of his support away which makes him not viable so it doesn't matter what his base thinks it matters what the people who influence the base thinks and I think they've abandoned them I think they've abandoned him so um I mean I have yeah like I said he could win me back like I can imagine that but at the moment he's not offering me something I can support so I don't think that without the most influential voices and it's not always not always the people with the biggest audience right there are some people who are just influential cernovich would be again my Universal analogy like every example there's there's like a sort of a jungle to it I don't know why there's like everything has that musk angle or a sort of a jungle but cernovich is you know not pro-chomp at the moment and how much impact does he have a lot a lot you might not notice it you might not know how he does it you might not you know track his influence through other people but a lot Now by himself does that make a difference maybe not but there are enough other people who are let's say good influencers who are pulling out yeah uh certain eventually referred to himself as a a humble mom blogger which is one of the funniest things I've seen he's a mom blogger now you know he's a stay-at-home dad I guess I'm not sure if that's the right term but he's he's with his kids during the day most of the time and okay I've always loved how much do you love the fact that he had three daughters that's just the simulation talking to him isn't it what are the odds of having three daughters 12 percent by doing the math right I thought he had three wait he has two daughters of the son oh he's the newest one the son oh I did not even know that okay well there you go two daughters in the sun Kind of Perfect oh good you know I love I love following even though he's a mom blogger as he calls himself uh his mom blogging is actually good blogging like or good posting you know I follow him on Instagram and Twitter I like I like the personal stuff as much as I like his political stuff all right uh somebody says he's a good writer that's true he's a good persuasive writer all right what else is going on here let's see um how many of you have seen the Netflix series ancient apocalypse yeah Netflix series ancient apocalypse I recommend it so here's my uh strong recommendation for super entertaining series um that's the first this is the first series I've binge watched I'm actually carried my i.

Pad with me from room to room because I couldn't stop watching it now here the basic idea of the show is that there are a number of um uh let's see ancient ruins this suggest that everybody learned from some kind of smart prior civilization that was destroyed after the Ice Age so let me say it better the Graham Hancock I guess is the journalist who is delving into let's say the archaeological domain and he's getting a lot of pushback because he's not an archaeologist but he put on a good show in terms of the production quality of the show it's really really good he takes you into all these ruins that are not are way better than ruins because you're learning stuff that wasn't obvious to you but the idea is that there must have been something like an Atlantis and that there there were let's say building techniques and um how to be had to be Farmers that was known to some Advanced civilization and then the Ice Age and some major apocalypse happened and that wiped out most of the smart people but some of them must have survived and were like missionaries that went to other civilizations and taught them the secrets of building monoliths and moving big rocks and how to how to do farming instead of huntering and Gathering now those of you who watched it did you find his thesis persuasive just the people who watched it did you find his and were you persuaded all right saying well wall of yeses um see mostly yeses but some knows some knows okay um here's what you need to know about documentaries number one documentary is the lowest level of credibility of all media did you know that if you had to pick one thing to not believe it should be a documentary documentaries are not designed to give you both sides they are designed to mislead you into thinking that the thesis is the only thing that matters do you think they show the other side half of the content of this series was the journalist talking about how he keeps being criticized by you know traditional archaeologists and that they're closed-minded and they refuse to accept other Alternatives you know what you didn't see what you didn't see is his critics in their own words telling you what they disagree with did you notice did you notice there was only one side of the story if you were convinced that's true because you watched that documentary you you're missing one of the most important things to know about how the world works the documentary is the lowest of all forms of credibility there's nothing lower than that it's the number one least reliable information that is produced by Humanity now you might say to yourself Scott Scott Scott fake news is worse than that no it isn't it's not even close fake news has a competing news business so if you want you can look at the fake news and you can see the other argument you can make your own decision and the other argument isn't hidden that much even within our bubbles you know you can just turn on Fox news or CNN and see the other side right but if you watch a documentary are you going to go do your own research probably not probably not now if you don't believe me that a documentary is the least credible type of content uh how many of the 2000 mules have you seen lately 2 000 mules not one of them came forward not one of them caught on film it was a very very convincing documentary wasn't it is an example not an analogy examples are good analogies are bad so if I give you several examples of where a documentary was convincing but doesn't seem to have been proven all right now let's say that you you're not convinced by that one you think that that 2000 mules maybe it's still to come out and it might be could be now I'm not saying that all documentaries are incorrect I'm not saying that surely some documentaries are totally correct I'm saying that you can't tell the difference so if you can't tell the difference it's the lowest level of credibility at the highest level of persuasion because they've got you for like an hour if I can persuade you on anything and make you pay attention for an hour I will convince you getting you to pay attention for an hour is the hard part if I can get that then the convincing is the easy part so I would say there were many signals of low credibility in the um in the presentation many many signals of low credibility and mostly the dog not barking situation you know the thing that you expect to hear you're like okay you brushed over that pretty quickly you know that sort of thing so I found it completely non-credible and I agree with them and both and that's not inconsistent I believe his argument was just filled with things that I'm like I don't know about that that's a little sketchy but his main point was this that there may have been higher technology back during the uh the Ice Age and that we lost the trail like we don't understand why people were built there's at least one site in his films in the series I guess there's at least one site where everybody seems to agree that they had the building techniques somewhere closer to the Ice Age like 9 000 years ago or something or 12 000 years ago um and that we don't know why they knew it that long ago that was a surprise to archaeologists now if somebody knew that stuff 12 000 years ago and then there was a big disruption which also people agree with so the two things that he doesn't have push back on I think is that there was that knowledge that somebody had at least one civilization had the knowledge 12 000 years ago and then there was this long period and then suddenly suddenly farming just like sprung up in one little era and all of all these groups seem to have a An Origin myth about um some kind of smart strangers who knew how to do things that came came from the sea and then taught them things and then went away like missionaries yeah and there does seem to be some evidence that there was a massive flood so it could be that the stories of Noah you know maybe are based on Ancient stories that actually had something to them so here's what I believe I believe it's very likely there were more advanced civilizations and that some members of them shared their knowledge and so it did make some hunter-gatherers kind of quickly evolve I think that's likely because I don't think we know much about the past I think we know about like five percent of the past that's about it so could lots lots be hiding in the 95 percent yeah sure but what are the odds that you know what are the odds that the exact era that you know your humans were in was the good one probably it was good and then it got bad maybe it got good again in terms of civilization that wouldn't be surprising at all so I think his basic idea that there was something that may or may not have been called Atlantis that may or may not have been an advanced civilization is proven because they found it they didn't find Atlantis but they found a place with building construction that was thousands of years ahead of of what happened later so I think the case is made I just don't think I think he added a lot more speculation than maybe I would have yeah so I think his basic theme sounds pretty solid but a lot of the specific details he forced into it now what did the media say about it can you guess just a wild guess without looking don't do any Googling what do you think the critics said about it other than whether it's true or false but beyond whether it's true or false what do you think the critics said about it super racist do you know why because those smart strangers from that advanced civilization were a little bit too white so apparently the various myths about these smart strangers they were not browned the the smart strangers were not were not super brown like nobody apparently nobody has a a story where like a black guy showed up and taught them how to farm and build stuff and then left but several of them have like a mysterious you know often they're Giants they're tall and stuff but they they feel a little not brown enough for what would make sense for the time so so apparently it's all just a racist yeah they're all bearded men who weren't Brown enough um what do you think of this story you're seeing all over the internet but not in the major news of uh these weird rubber-like clots and people who uh got the vaccination and then died from some reason or other have you seen those you see the doctors like they're taking the blood clots out of the veins and like it's clearly something you've never seen before it's almost like like an alien was in the body have you seen that you've seen that right how many of you believe that this is a real thing and that there are massive discoveries of rubber-like blockages in people's bodies I I saw a doctor on Twitter uh debunked this in one sentence and then I never thought about it again do you want to hear the one sentence here's the one sentence debunked I don't know if it's true by the way I don't know if the debunk is true but here's the one sentence from an actual doctor um every doctor knows that dead people's uh blood looks like that that's exactly what a dead person's blood will look like is all like this rubbery cloudy stuff so basically it's just every dead person just the way it looks right now I don't know if that's true but that would be the only reason it's not in the major news right you only see it on Twitter and then you know smaller Publications yeah the reason it's not in the major news is it would only take one doctor to say well that's the way it's supposed to look it always looks like that yeah I don't think I don't think the videos where the doctor is taking those are not I don't think those are real I don't know why they exist but I don't think it's based on anything real so even kim.com famous internet guy he believes that this should be looked into because he saw a documentary called died suddenly how many of you watched the documentary called died suddenly I guess that's where this claim is made and I'll bet if you watch the documentary you were completely convinced it was true right because you saw it in a documentary I'll bet if I watched the documentary it would look completely convincing so I'm not going to watch the documentary because do you know what you've learned if you watch a documentary that's completely persuasive nothing nothing yeah if you watch a documentary there's lots of facts and it's very persuasive you've learned nothing nothing documentaries are not to teach you the truth they're they're giving you a narrative and that's what they do so if you if you accepted the narrative that was presented in a documentary you're not doing a good job of being a a good consumer of information right if you haven't seen the whatever is the debunk how hard would it be to debunk that all right let's do a live experiment so I haven't done this yet but if you uh here's a good thing to do if there's anything in the news that looks sketchy type that thing into a Google search followed by the word debunk and you'll find it I'm going to do that so this is called uh died suddenly died suddenly and I'm going to say blood clots blood clots what do you think I'm going to find and then debunked do you think that there will be a real good debunk from a doctor saying that this is what do you think make your prediction because I haven't done this I've never done this so I'm going to find out the same time you do uh Forbes debunks it uh let's see BBC all right um did embalmers find vaccine-induced blood clots so here's affection now I'm not saying that the person fact checking this is necessarily believable either um so it goes let me just skim it yeah that these blood clots exist uh they say it's fake news uh number fact number one embalmers do not conduct autopsies and Bobbers do not know vaccination status well I don't know they might have asked it most of his data is not linked to vaccinations blood clots are common in refrigerated bodies there it is there it is blood clots are common in refrigerated bodies that's the whole story right now if you didn't know that I could Google this in one minute and find the debunk yeah the rubbery ones right if you didn't know that the debunk would pop up that easily then maybe you learned not to trust documentaries right now I want to be really clear what I'm telling you I'm not telling you that vaccinations are safe that's not what I'm saying how would I know the only thing I know for sure is I don't trust any information about vaccinations now I don't not the plot not the pro not the con I just don't trust any of it so I don't know so I'm not even sure I have a like I just don't have a dog in that race at the moment either way it goes if I could find out for sure I would accept it right I wouldn't have cognitive dissonance because if you told me the vaccinations were hurting people I'd say well not totally surprising so that there's no trigger for cognitive distance if you told me that they actually work great I would say excellent not totally surprising so neither of those would trigger me I'm I'm open to both possibilities so when I tell you that the debunk exists what I'm talking about is The credibility of documentaries the only point I want to make here is Stop Believing documentaries can I ask you to do that I'm going to ask you directly I'll just ask you please stop trusting documentaries now they might raise really important issues and they might be totally right I'm not saying every documentary is wrong I'm saying that you can't trust them because they were persuasive if you say I believe it's true because I saw a really persuasive documentary you're talking like a crazy person stop doing that I watched a documentary means you've been misled get that right I watched a documentary almost certainly 95 of the time that means you've been misled by a professional misleader it's what they do all right um and uh Rob Reiner I love Rob Ryder because he gets every story wrong it is like uh I don't know you're some kind of a symbol for the left that's perfect every time like he captures everything about the left so he tweeted uh uh he tweeted uh Nick Fuentes is an unabashed anti-semitic Holocaust denier Donald Trump invited him over for dinner enough said he didn't invite him to dinner he gets everything wrong right if he had invited him to dinner it would be a different story like very different right if he had invited him then I'd say well that really does tell you everything you need to know but of course he didn't invite him like that wasn't even the fact uh but as I tweeted it doesn't really matter if if Trump invited him or not because it's like the Charlottesville fine people hoax now has a life of its own and if you think that Trump can continually flirt with uh you know being on the edge of being anti-semitic without actually being anti-semitic because I don't believe he is if you think if you think that he'll have enough support to win the presidency in that strategy I don't see it I can't see it happening but could be surprised you never know if uh Trump came up with a good Sentinel plan or even if he ate it all bets are off no bets are off so we'll probably have uh 300 uh situations that tell us my God this changes everything before 2024 and then we'll find out it didn't change everything because there'll be another one tomorrow that changes everything all right um according to timcast Nick came with Milo and Milo is the person yeah does that change anything I mean if if Nick came with Milo you don't think he was a that Nick was brought along to destroy Trump does anybody think that now let's say it was Milo who did the invitation and made it happen and brought Nick Fuentes you don't think that Milo is smart enough to know that that would destroy Trump of course he is he's not a beginner Milo didn't start politics you know this week he kind of knows how this stuff works he's very experienced yeah of course he did so if you imagine that that was accidental like do you think that Milo or yay who knows what yay was thinking I mean he might not even known who who Nick Fuentes was but we don't know but don't you think Milo knew exactly what he was doing yay may or may not have known who Nick Fuentes was probably did but I don't know but certainly Milo knew right yeah so I mean some of this is more about you know maybe the individuals than it is about a big story all right that ladies and gentlemen concludes the planned part of my broadcast I'm going to go private over our locals we're going to close it down just for the subscribers for a few minutes but I'm going to say goodbye to You.

Tube for now I'll talk to you tomorrow

to find me

uh yep we have zero well yay one person

watching on YouTube that's all I need

I only need one person that's all

oh we got five all right they're

fighting us

well those YouTube people

they're resourceful

you're so resourceful yeah because

they're streaming back in

one of them is yay you think

uh

if I were yay I would be watching my I

would be watching this today

all right look at you

they're almost back in so

I'm going to talk about a few things

here while they're coming back in I saw

a I've heard this story before but I

want to see how many of you

fit into this category

did you know that not everybody has

a voice in their head that's themselves

having a conversation with yourself

huh apparently something like half or 75

percent of the public doesn't have a

voice in their head

so I need to ask you

how many of you

hear a voice in your head all the time

I mean I do

I continually have an actual

conversation going in my head

is but how many people don't

why am I only saying yes I do

I've seen very few no's

so that doesn't make sense does it I

feel like everybody would say yes to

that question

but yet the research acts like

it's mostly no or half of them know

yeah maybe we should just call

on that

I'm not sure that's even true is it

because I don't know how you'd not have

a voice in your head

now I I do know that it is a thing

so let me let me be clear

I'm pretty sure it's a real thing that

some people don't hear a voice but what

I don't believe is that it's common

yeah I don't believe it's common

by the way if anybody's watching on

locals because the YouTube feed died

um

YouTube is back up I just had to fire up

a separate feed so it's working now

there's just something wrong with it

initially

so you can see it on either one

and I always appreciate that you come in

all right

there are over 600 people waiting on the

Old Link

what am I going to do about that

there's nothing I can do about that

right

I can't kill the old leg because I've

got a I've got a new one that's running

and that it wasn't responsive when I

clicked on it very well I guess I'll

have to find it later

I think they'll figure out in five

minutes

that that's not working

um I can't give you a redo on the Sip

because that would be traveling back in

time but I'll give you a

I'll give you an interim sip

all right

so I'm going to call on this

whole uh half of the people who can't

hear an internal voice in their head I

don't think that's the thing now let me

tell you about a

um

story that's in the Wall Street Journal

not a story a opinion piece it was

written by a Roland Friar

who's a professor of Economics at

Harvard

so the two things you need to know about

them is he's a professor of Economics at

Harvard then the second thing you need

to know about him because it's the

context of the story is he had a black

grandmother now I don't know if his

parents were black but he seems to be

identifying with uh the black experience

at least somewhat

and in his article he talks about

studying for economics

obviously he had a top level education

because he was at Harvard and

and he was doing research to find out

how much discrimination and bigotry was

behind the differences in salaries

and what do you think he found out when

he kept looking for the reason that

there's a difference in salaries

it was completely explained by the skill

level

apparently the free market did exactly

what you expected

and and there was no indication of any

racism whatsoever the people had the

same skills

had the same pay

period

and and his article to his credit

his article was about how he was blinded

by confirmation bias

and that he couldn't even see his own

numbers like he was looking at his own

data and he was not believing it because

his grandmother had primed him that this

racism is everywhere all the time

he gave the story of his grandmother

once it was some cashier who handed

their money without wanting to touch her

and the grandmother interpreted that as

the cashier was such a racist

she didn't want to have accidental like

contact with a black person that was how

the grandmother interpreted it and then

the grandson wasn't so sure

he was like I think maybe she had a cold

and she didn't want to give you her

germs

so basically they had two completely

different worlds based on you know what

you were primed to believe so even with

that little bit of priming

uh Mr fryer got all the way to you know

to adulthood and he's still still

thought that the data would would agree

with you know his interpretation of the

world and it didn't

now here's here's the important part of

the story

most of you knew that right

is there anybody who didn't know that

the free market does make salaries

basically equal

I knew it I I think every one of you do

it here's what's interesting

somebody who identifies as black

I believe I don't want to over

characterize it but that seems how he

presented himself

um

he's got a major opinion piece in the

Wall Street Journal

he's got a economics degree from Harvard

I'm sorry duh I am completely I

mischaracterize him he was a professor

of Economics at Harvard

that's better than having a economics

degree at Harvard

I don't know where he got his degree

but if he's a professor of Economics at

Harvard that's even higher than being a

student of Economics right

so this is somebody who seriously knows

what he's talking about

and he got he got this opinion piece in

the Wall Street Journal you know one of

the big papers of record

and it looks like just a good opinion

like I don't think anybody's going to

attack him I don't think the newspaper

will be forced to retract it I feel like

Society has reached the point

where this opinion is now acceptable

what do you think

because it now agrees with observation

the data and the observation are now

aligned for at least some of the people

in the world

to me this data exactly matches

everything I've observed

to me I've never seen a I've never

observed directly

any salary difference for people have

different who have similar skills male

male female black white I've just never

seen it

so so maybe the world is getting past

that I will say however

that this doesn't help with the real

source of

of racial inequality which is the

schools

Because by the time you're an adult all

the damage is done isn't it

you know if you've got a bad lower

education you don't have the choice of

having equal skills and equal pay it's

just not an option because you didn't

get the the same the same boost when you

were a kid

so we still have to fix that

um I'll bet uh I'll bet Mr fryer would

agree with that

here's some good news the federal FCC is

going to ban new Telecom and

surveillance equipment made by Chinese

companies so they don't want to have

Chinese surveillance cameras in American

places

because they're worried that the Chinese

will maybe

possibly use those cameras to spy on

Americans or something

uh is there anything missing in this

story

something maybe they overlooked a little

bit uh maybe some related kind of story

well number one the you know Trump tried

to do this and got some resistance but

number two

uh Tick Tock is like

a gazillion cameras that are literally

in in citizens pockets

how do you say these other companies are

the risk and not tick tock Tick Tock

literally has a camera in every phone is

looking at you and listening to you and

making decisions and influencing you

this is a new close

the fact that we can ban these

companies I've never even heard of it's

a good idea I mean I'm solidly in favor

of banning them but

tick tocks that's okay

it's just it's absurd it's absurd but

good job I would say from all the way

back

um

to the Trump

Administration and I'll give the Biden

Administration credit for finishing the

job and and you know blocking these

companies but it's time to do Tick Tock

people

um

I I'm seeing apparently somebody asked

mosque if he gets if Twitter gets banned

on the Apple and Google App Stores

would he build his own phone and he said

yes

this is sort of uh that's a sort of

threat slash Bluff that only Elon Musk

can make

try to think of one other person in the

world

who could tell you that things don't

work out he'll make his own smartphone

and you would believe it

right Jeff Bezos tried it that didn't

work out but do you believe that Jeff

Bezos could make a real competitive

phone

well I don't know he's very capable

but wouldn't you trust Elon Musk to make

a smartphone in a way you wouldn't

necessarily trust anybody else

and what am I wrong I can't think of

anybody who would be more ideally

suited for making a smartphone

because he could pair it with neurolink

and he could pair it with his cars and

he could pair it with his uh his

satellites

and and here's something that Elon Musk

could do if he had a smartphone

and satellites so let's say a smartphone

goes through satellites

just think about this

someday

Elon Musk

could make a smartphone

that's the only one

that can make a long distance call

to Mars

that's like real

now it's real if he makes the phone

am I wrong

there's nothing technologically that

would stop you from making a phone call

to Mars except the time lag right

am I right yeah and so you'd say how are

you and yeah you'd have to wait half an

hour for a response

but you could sort of make a phone call

to Mars right like technologically

that's within the realm of ordinary

engineering yeah so I'm hearing people

say there's a 20 22 minute time lag

but if you send a voice message hey I

hope your trip to Mars was good you know

let me know you made it okay

20 minutes later ring yeah I made it

okay

isn't that oh and you could definitely

text

you could text Mars

how you do how's that how's it feel up

there pretty good 20 minutes later

all right

um

Jerry Jones

have I ever told you the famous people

have a history of being famous ever

since they were kids

there are some people who seem to be

around big events

like all of their life

yeah like famously Bill Clinton met John

F Kennedy when Clinton was a kid

I I don't feel like these are accidents

I feel like famous people

keep having famous experiences

just over and over again

so Jerry Jones it turns out

uh not to his credit when he was 15

years old was one of the white men or

boys I guess who blocked the uh

the North Little Rock High School in

Arkansas in Arkansas

uh 65 years ago

blocked it to prevent integration of the

school

so basically he was you know an overt

racist and he was participating in an

overtly racist

act that was not just overtly racist is

one of the most famous things that's

happened in the United States

now what are the odds that one of those

people

it was going to be Jerry Jones

or would go on to be you know somebody

who's a who's a common name

but when he was challenged about it I

guess the photo of him there just

surfaced he hasn't mentioned it before

then he never mentioned it which was a

good move

and I was interested in the way because

he's a very high functioning

successful entrepreneur right so he's

somebody you'd expect to be able to

handle something well

and I'll just tell you how he did handle

it you can judge whether this is

handling well first of all he didn't

defend it

he he said well gosh that was 65 years

ago

now that's good framing so the first

thing he says is gosh that's 65 years

ago

so that that was actually that that was

the best way

to start the conversation yeah that was

what 65 years ago because as soon as you

hear that

you get a little bit more flexible right

um and then he goes on to say that uh

you know it really reminds us that we've

come a long way

something like that and I thought well

that was pretty good because he's

admitting that that was not the way to

be and that we've come a long way and

he's glad that we have but he's not

running away from the fact that 65 years

ago he was that kid

which on some weird level I appreciate

it

I don't know why I mean I'm not agreeing

with a 15 year old kid I'm saying that I

appreciate he just owned it he just

owned it yep I did that

wish I hadn't done that now he stopped

short of saying you know I'm sorry I

wish I hadn't done it but it was sort of

there

like the the way that he dealt with it

the implication was that was some other

guy I'm not I don't even need to talk

about it

and I do

I do I'm very much on board with not

having to explain what you did when you

were 15.

I couldn't do it could you

could you defend your 15 year old self

I couldn't do it but I'll tell you how

the way I the way I would have handled

it I don't know if it's better

but let's say let's say I got accused of

some heinous activity when I was 15. and

then somebody says explain it today

here's how I would explain it

you know I don't like that guy either

that that 15 year old who did that thing

I hate that guy

that's it I agree with you yeah I don't

like him any more than you do

but I'm not going to defend I'm not not

going to defend somebody I'm not

I'll defend who I am today

but if you want me to defend my 15 year

old self no I'm on your side I don't

like that guy

and I would go further and here's The

High Ground

here's how you high ground that you say

I'll tell you my view and this is my

actual view so this is not this is not

like weird sophistry this is my actual

view that a life well lived

is we where you start very imperfect and

you try to improve

and that you do the best you can to

improve over the Arc of your life and I

would say we all started from a low

place

you've got a picture of my my starting

place the only thing I would defend is

where I went I'm not going to defend

where I started

and I'm not going to ask you to defend

where you started either I will ask you

to defend how you doing

how you doing

are you improving did you learn anything

are you the same person you were when

you were 15.

I hope not but I'm not going to hate you

for who you were when you were 15.

I'm not going to apologize it for it I'm

not going to explain it I'm just going

to say that was a different person same

as you were a different person when you

were 15. we don't need to explain that

person we are supposed to be better than

that person now

am I well I'll let you decide but that's

the only thing I'll defend is who I am

now and that's the only it's the only

standard I'll hold you to

see this helps too just to make sure

that you're not a hypocrite that's the

standard I'd hold you to I'm not going

to blame you for anything you did when

you were 15.

so

but uh

it's interesting and I do think this I

think the Jerry Jones story

is more positive than negative

because it shows the evolution of

thought

it shows the evolution of you know

America you can see it in one person

and I have no no reason to believe that

he thinks the same as he did back then

all right so I've seen yeah I've said

long ago that the Democrats were really

the party of women

but I'm seeing more people coming around

to this point of view because it's so

obvious at this point and uh I saw I saw

a tweet by Jason Andrews he says the

Democrat Party is America's ex-wife

the Democrat Party is America's ex-wife

have you ever have you ever heard a more

perfect summary

now here's what I believe

have I ever told you that everything is

about procreation

of course I have everything you do the

the clothes you choose to put on in the

morning how much you eat whether you

exercise the job you took where you live

all of your decisions

are based on your your procreation

Instinct right everything from sex to

success to just everything

you know it's all about procreation now

you don't think of it that way because

you're going through your life saying oh

I'm just you know rearranging my garage

but somehow it all it all ties back to

them

it makes sense that if there were ever

two parties see if see if you can follow

me on this I may be going too far right

yeah here's my overall thought if ever

there's a situation with two parties the

most predictable thing that would happen

is that one of them would become the

woman party and one would become the man

party

and that whenever you have a

civilization with two main parties

that's the most likely thing that will

happen because our most Basic Instinct

is

procreation

and the male and female strategies for

procreation are different so that should

cause that now

that's exactly what we see

in my opinion The Men Who were part of

the Democrat Party

some of it is just inertia you know your

parents were Democrats you're you're

Democrat but I think a lot of it is men

with different

um reproduction strategies

the men in the Democrat Party

believe their best chance of

reproduction is to make women happy

foreign

[Laughter]

which suggests that they'll eventually

all become Republicans

I've got a theory that there's a certain

amount of marriage that turns anybody

into a Republican

just a theory

I don't know how many years of marriage

it takes to turn you into a republican

but but it happens probably within five

uh what is what is the reproduction

strategy of Republican men

what is the reproduction strategy of

Republican men versus Democrat men I do

believe the Democrat male strategy is to

make women happy

and that they're and then they'll have a

name

and the Republican strategy is what

act like men

their strategy is to act like men

and then see if that works out for them

it turns out it does because when they

act like men

they attract a certain kind of woman who

wants somebody who acts like a man

right doesn't want somebody who agrees

with them all the time that's that's not

exactly reproduction material there

so

so in my opinion everything is explained

by that now as was also pointed out

teachers unions are like three-quarters

female the people who are doing Dei and

people work in human resources and you

know basically

most of the groups

they're active and really make a

difference in the country they're

female-run

and so it really has become a you know

male party versus a female party

abortion being most the clearest

distinction

if if you didn't know what the the issue

was let's say you you're an alien and

somebody said well you don't even know

what abortion is but we'll just tell you

this

there's one group that says we want it

as one group that says you know we don't

want that

is the group that says they want it most

likely the ones who are going to have it

yes it makes sense that women would want

options

if I were a man if I were a man

allegedly I'm male

if I were a man who could have a baby

I would want uh I would want

I would want abortion to be legal

not because I wanted to have one

but because I want more rights not fewer

every time you said Scott would you like

more rights or fewer rights well I don't

even know what the subject is but how

about more how about more rights I'll

always take more rights

now if you're saying to me but Scott you

would be killing children I'd say no no

I didn't say I would get an abortion I

didn't say that I would encourage you to

get one

I would say that every time you ask me

do you want to have more options or

fewer options

I generally default to more options and

I think people in general do people in

general want more options now fewer so

it makes sense to me that the the woman

party the Democrats would move toward

making giving themselves more options

and it makes sense that the the male

dominated party

Republicans would be less likely to do

that because to them it just looks like

murder

right

so you don't want to give somebody the

option of murder from their point of

view

but you could but you can sort of

predict everything that's going to

happen based on the mom and dad male and

female procreation model

now how much how seriously should you

take this

here's how seriously remember I told you

there are only two things you can know

the first thing you can know is that you

exist

because you're noodling with the

question of who you are

so there's something that exists you

just don't know what that is the second

thing that you can know is that it's

your impression

that some things are predictable

that's it you know science in particular

is more predictable than most people

but if that's all you know

and I and I give you the these various

models of predicting does follow the

money predict well

it does doesn't it

I don't know if it should but it seems

to

now here's the second thing does follow

procreation as the the dominant way of

understanding things to happen does that

predict

I think it does but I don't know if it

predicts as well as follow the money if

you ever got into a situation where it

was one or the other

I don't know

does abortion follow the money

sort of does

because if you say to people uh you're

going to have to have a baby that you

will financially support for 18 years

that's a pretty big expense you would

expect that people would say I would

like the option of not having that

expense

I would like the option of not having

that expense so even abortion

follows the money

it's it's a very good predictive way now

I don't know if there's a reason for it

or as a coincidence it seems doesn't

seem like a coincidence I mean you could

you could come up with an obvious reason

why money affects things

so but follow this

let's see if we can make a prediction

if the if the uh Democrat Party is the

woman

first party

would they nominate somebody like Joe

Biden to lead them

yes they would

because he's not a strong male figure at

the moment you know when he was younger

he was but at the moment he's not a

powerful male and they don't really like

powerful male figures they want somebody

who just looks like you know grandpa

will watch the kids when you have a date

night

so that's what Biden is Biden is

basically your grandparent parent who

watches the kids while you have a date

night he's very safe

and where uh whereas uh

Trump is you know scary to women all

right let's see what else you could

predict

based on that model is there any uh is

there any other thing that you could

predict

what about climate change

could you predict that Democrats would

be more concerned about it

uh

um maybe indirectly

um

no you're an idiot

orange out orange out you're out

so every time somebody imagines they

know what's in my mind

you get banned

stop imagining you could just ask it's

not like I don't tell you my opinion

I'm the last person who you should have

to try to read my mind

I literally tell you every thing

I think

you don't have to guess I'll give you my

reasons right

and and uh and to be clear

I'm not supporting Trump

for re-election

just just so you hear it as clearly as

possible could I change my mind

do you think I could change my mind

yeah absolutely

sure good

I'm just saying at the moment

it's not my choice at the moment

but you know I have to make real world

decisions as well

all right is there any prediction you

would make about

what prediction would you make based on

only the gender procreation model is

there anything you would predict based

on that

socialism

yeah I mean you would predict that the

Democrats would want more socialism

got in control yeah

yep

there was a story in the news of some

woman who was getting carjacked and she

just blew the head off of one of the

carjackers

and that the second one returned fire

and she got wounded but survived

and I thought

you know when you see women taking men's

heads off

well we're in a whole different world

but good for her

um

so uh Twitter amnesty is coming

so I guess musk has said he did a poll

and 72 percent said they wanted full

amnesty you heard my opinion that if you

were ever going to do full amnesty this

would be the one best time to do it

because then you don't say it's a

precedent you're just saying it's a Once

only new ownership

and you know if you get banned again

don't expect to come back it's a perfect

time to do it now will the will the

experiment work

do you think Twitter will become a hell

hole of you know racists and KKK and

everything else

I'm going to say a little bit

a little bit you know so some of the bad

people will come back and they'll

they'll test the system

the first thing some of the bad people

are going to do is what

they're going to try to get banned again

so they're going to say some just

to get banned again

just and they're going to push the the

envelope right so stuff will just get

banned again

and

um I would be happy if all Twitter did

was stick to its own guidelines for who

to ban next time

because those same people will disappear

if they violate Twitter terms of service

so I'm not really too afraid of it

is anybody worried about it

I I think there'll be a little uh

you know a little churn and turmoil

there for a little bit but yeah no big

deal

now

if you're saying to yourself

this is a good decision or a bad

decision which one is right

it's a good decision to bring them back

or it's a bad decision who's right go in

in the in the comments who's right

go

uh

how could you fool for how did you fall

for my trick

okay if I told you that's a trick

question

it's a trick question now answer it

again it's a trick question

oh come on

come on come on come on come on

oh I I totally primed you so that you

can't see it

so so I created a cognitive blindness in

you here's the cognitive blindness when

I tell you the real answer you're gonna

go oh how did I miss that this is

going to piss you off

now the real answer is he's a b testing

rapidly there's no right or it's not

it's not good or bad it's something he's

going to try if it doesn't work he can

immediately reverse it

if you're talking about whether it's a

good idea or a bad idea

you're not even on the right page you're

not even in the right conversation

the question is is testing it smart or

not smart

and for that there's not really much

debate of course testing it is smart of

course now if you test it and it doesn't

work

what would be the smarter thing to do

then

reverse it

reverse it okay or put in some rules

that you know gradually reverse it or

something so if you don't understand

that what he's doing is moving fast

breaking things and then adjusting

then you're missing the show

right the show is not the show is not

Elon Musk doing correct things

if you're looking for is that correct is

that incorrect you're missing the whole

show

the whole show is that he doesn't know

either

none of us know

nobody knows the right the right answer

he's he's finding out

you just put it out there completely

transparent here it is did that work oh

that didn't work I guess I'll do

something else

uh Scott waited for two years to speak

up against Force masking and lockdowns

jaina you stupid that's not true

completely false never been in favor of

mandates boom

stupid

all right

um by the way that's something I

couldn't say with full immunity before

do you know why I can call called my

trolls stupid and I don't get

knocked off a social media do you know

why

not because of Elon

no it's because I do it with respect

the reason I could call women stupid

is the same reason I could call

men dicks

because I respect their full Humanity

like if you come at me

I'm not going to take it easy on you I

mean if it were a physical fight I'd

take it easy on you but I'm not going to

take it easy on you because you're a

woman

you don't get that not on not on Twitter

on Twitter it's just you

that's that's the whole conversation

all right

so uh what was I talking about oh the

Twitter anime state

so

um yeah it's just a good idea

to try it

we'll we'll find out later if it's a

good idea to keep them there but it's

definitely a good idea to try it

and all right let's talk about uh

that Mar-A-Lago situation and

um and uh Nick Fuentes and yay and

uh Milo

all right

so

in my opinion well first of all uh Trump

um responded he said he basically had a

good conversation with uh yay that went

well

according to Trump uh and that and and

just at the end of his statement he goes

and I didn't know who Nick Fuentes was

do you believe that

do you believe that the president didn't

know who Nick Fuentes was

I wouldn't have believed it except for

axios's reporting

so axios if you don't know they're not

in the bag for the left or the right

which is very unique people always ask

hey why can't you have a news source

that's neither bigoted left or bigoted

right we have one axios actually does

genuinely

I think

as follows where the news goes

and axios reports that some verbatims

from it and we do know from axios that

Trump was asking Nick Fuentes who he was

so if we know that that Trump asked him

who he was and even asked him if he was

represented the extreme part of his his

party you could see that Trump was

catching on

who he had at the table right if if

axios has the right reporting and they

do it before you make fun of axios go go

do your own research on that I think

you'll find out that there they play us

right

if I'm wrong let me know but I think

they try to place right

anyway if it's true that Trump was

asking who he was and asked him directly

if he represented the extreme part of

the party you can see that Trump was

working through it and they didn't know

exactly who he was

so I believe that I believe he didn't

know now do you think that Trump handled

it well

from your perspective

by saying he didn't know he was so

therefore

it's not exactly a big crime or a big

foul it was just dinner

do you think so for from the perspective

of Trump's base did he explain it

sufficiently

I think so

from from the perspective of a voter

that's kind of all you needed to know

wasn't it he wasn't invited

Trump uh trusted yay

Trump trusted a black man

which unfortunately is part of the story

right so so the whole story is that

Trump trusted the black guy

and that didn't work out for him

am I right

that's one way to is that not an

accurate interpretation

Trump's problem was he trusted a black

guy and he got screwed

am I wrong

now uh I don't think it's fair to call a

Kanye a black guy

because you you sort of

these sort of uh transcended race in a

lot of ways

um

but you could easily spin it that way to

me it looks like a black guy screwed

Trump

and I like Yay by the way but it looks

like he did that intentionally can't

tell I can't read his mind but it looks

intentional I mean from the outside

how's that look so it looks like a black

guy took Trump out or tried to

and Trump's just brushing it off because

now do you think people just forget this

story in two weeks so it doesn't really

matter

the base will

yeah the base will forget it in a day

but here's what you're forgetting

you're missing the biggest part of the

story

the biggest part of the story is it

doesn't matter what Trump's base thinks

it always did

but it doesn't now do you know why

do you know why it doesn't matter what

the bass thinks of trump

because the media already left him

so Breitbart went at him hard I don't

know if you noticed but Breitbart didn't

pull any punches it's just

Trump had dinner with a holocaust denier

and a famous anti-semite according to

Breitbart

right Fox News is shutting Trump out

so Fox News will not support him well

which means you know other uh Rupert

Murdoch assets will not support him

and

and now Breitbart is gone

Breitbart isn't coming back from that

like they're they're not going to call

them anti-sem items and then change

their minds I don't see that happening

do you believe do you believe Trump

could win without Fox News and without

Breitbart

yes or no

Trump could win without breitbarton

without Fox News

mostly yeses yet

there is a path there is a path

and the path would look like podcasts

only

so if Trump just said he won't do any

interviews with the major media and said

I'll just do I'll do all the podcasts

because Eddie if you say to yourself but

wait nobody's going to watch the podcast

because they're like low

low volume no they're not the podcasts

are much bigger than the network news

and anything that Trump does that's an

interesting interview will have greater

greater traffic than ABC News would

you don't think I could get more traffic

for a trump interview like if I

personally interviewed him on a podcast

you don't think I would get more clicks

than ABC News would get on the story

about Trump

I would yeah I would get more I would

get more attention than ABC News just

telling a story about him so he does

have a path

and there would be plenty of podcasters

who would who would want to you know to

benefit from the traffic so they do it

he could start his own he could start

his own network

he could start his own network you know

just a channel on YouTube and or Rumble

I guess and uh

and you can just interview other people

imagine Trump running for office just

imagine this

imagine Trump running for office but he

doesn't do any interviews

he only interviews other people

and that's his campaign

think about it

he doesn't do interviews he only

interviews experts and Democrats who

disagree with him

and that's it and maybe some rhinos who

disagree with it

can you imagine how much you would like

to watch Trump

interview his critics

seriously could you could you avoid

watching that

oh my God

oh my God

like it would be so watchable it would

just blow everything else out of the

water and and as soon as you heard and

by the way here's a little trick a

little trick for you for publicity

this is the most important trick for

getting publicity

nobody cares that you did something well

you can't get publicity because you did

something really well I did a good job

right unless it's like extraordinary

here's how you get publicity you do

something that other people have been

doing forever

but you do it a different way that looks

like it could work

that's what Trump could do

you could say well the first time I ran

for office I just did every media

interview and it was different than the

way other people did it I just sucked

all the energy out of the room nobody

ever did that before

now he could say all right I'm going to

do a brand new way again

and the brand new way is I'm going to

suck all the energy out of the major

platforms and just starve them

and just make my show the only thing

that's interesting on TV because it

would be

nothing else would look interesting if

you did that he would immediately like

make everything else boring

he has that power

now

what if he doesn't do that

suppose he decides to be the the Trump

of the last several years and he says

I'm just going to go out there and do my

thing and I'll do my rallies I'll uh

I'll post things on true social I'll

accept interviews when they're offered

and I'll just do it the straight way can

he win

I don't think so because because you

don't realize the extent to which

opinions are assigned to the public

it's easy for you to say you know I'm

never going to change my mind because

the media changed my mind

I'm not going to change my mind because

somebody else had a different opinion

but that's not how it works

your minds are changed every day by the

media

if the most

influential people on the right

decide not to back Trump

they have enough influence to you know

take 25 percent of his support away

which makes him not viable

so it doesn't matter what his base

thinks it matters what the people who

influence the base thinks and I think

they've abandoned them

I think they've abandoned him

so

um I mean I have

yeah like I said he could win me back

like I can imagine that but at the

moment he's not offering me something I

can support

so I don't think that without the most

influential voices and it's not always

not always the people with the biggest

audience right there are some people who

are just influential

cernovich would be again my Universal

analogy like every example there's

there's like a sort of a jungle to it I

don't know why there's like everything

has that musk angle or a sort of a

jungle but cernovich is you know not

pro-chomp at the moment

and how much impact does he have

a lot a lot you might not notice it you

might not know how he does it you might

not you know track his influence through

other people but a lot

Now by himself does that make a

difference maybe not

but there are enough other people who

are let's say good influencers

who are pulling out

yeah uh certain eventually referred to

himself as a a humble mom blogger which

is one of the funniest things I've seen

he's a mom blogger now you know he's a

stay-at-home dad I guess I'm not sure if

that's the right term but he's he's with

his kids during the day most of the time

and okay

I've always loved

how much do you love the fact that he

had three daughters

that's just the simulation

talking to him isn't it

what are the odds of having three

daughters 12 percent

by doing the math right

I thought he had three

wait he has two daughters of the son

oh he's the newest one the son

oh I did not even know that

okay

well there you go

two daughters in the sun Kind of Perfect

oh good you know I love I love following

even though he's a mom blogger as he

calls himself uh his mom blogging is

actually good blogging like or good

posting you know I follow him on

Instagram and Twitter I like I like the

personal stuff as much as I like his

political stuff

all right uh

somebody says he's a good writer that's

true he's a good persuasive writer

all right what else is going on here

let's see

um how many of you have seen the Netflix

series ancient apocalypse

yeah Netflix series ancient apocalypse

I recommend it

so here's my uh strong recommendation

for super entertaining series

um that's the first this is the first

series I've binge watched

I'm actually carried my iPad with me

from room to room because I couldn't

stop watching it now

here the basic idea of the show is that

there are a number of

um

uh let's see ancient

ruins this suggest that everybody

learned from some kind of smart prior

civilization that was destroyed after

the Ice Age so let me say it better the

Graham Hancock I guess is the journalist

who is delving into let's say the

archaeological domain and he's getting a

lot of pushback because he's not an

archaeologist but he put on a good show

in terms of the production quality of

the show it's really really good he

takes you into all these ruins that are

not are way better than ruins because

you're learning stuff

that wasn't obvious to you but the idea

is that there must have been something

like an Atlantis

and that there there were let's say

building techniques and

um how to be had to be Farmers that was

known to some Advanced civilization and

then the Ice Age and some major

apocalypse happened and that wiped out

most of the smart people

but some of them must have survived and

were like missionaries that went to

other civilizations and taught them the

secrets of building monoliths and moving

big rocks and how to how to do farming

instead of huntering and Gathering now

those of you who watched it did you find

his thesis persuasive

just the people who watched it did you

find his and were you persuaded

all right saying well wall of yeses

um see mostly yeses but some knows some

knows

okay

um

here's what you need to know about

documentaries

number one

documentary is the lowest level of

credibility of all media

did you know that

if you had to pick one thing to not

believe it should be a documentary

documentaries are not designed to give

you both sides they are designed

to mislead you into thinking that the

thesis is the only thing that matters

do you think they show the other side

half of the content of this series was

the journalist talking about how he

keeps being criticized by you know

traditional archaeologists and that

they're closed-minded and they refuse to

accept other Alternatives you know what

you didn't see

what you didn't see is his critics in

their own words telling you what they

disagree with

did you notice

did you notice there was only one side

of the story if you were convinced

that's true

because you watched that documentary you

you're missing one of the most important

things to know about how the world works

the documentary is the lowest of all

forms of credibility there's nothing

lower than that it's the number one

least reliable information that is

produced by Humanity

now you might say to yourself Scott

Scott Scott fake news is worse than that

no it isn't it's not even close

fake news has a competing

news business so if you want you can

look at the fake news and you can see

the other argument you can make your own

decision and the other argument isn't

hidden that much even within our bubbles

you know you can just turn on Fox news

or CNN and see the other side right

but if you watch a documentary are you

going to go do your own research

probably not probably not now if you

don't believe me that a documentary is

the least credible

type of content

uh how many of the 2000 mules have you

seen lately

2 000 mules not one of them came forward

not one of them caught on film

it was a very very convincing

documentary wasn't it

is an example not an analogy examples

are good

analogies are bad

so if I give you several examples of

where a documentary was convincing but

doesn't seem to have been proven

all right now let's say that you you're

not convinced by that one you think that

that 2000 mules maybe it's still to come

out and it might be could be now I'm not

saying that all documentaries are

incorrect I'm not saying that

surely some documentaries are totally

correct I'm saying that you can't tell

the difference

so if you can't tell the difference

it's the lowest level of credibility at

the highest level of persuasion because

they've got you for like an hour if I

can persuade you on anything and make

you pay attention for an hour I will

convince you

getting you to pay attention for an hour

is the hard part if I can get that then

the convincing is the easy part

so

I would say there were many signals of

low credibility in the um in the

presentation

many many signals of low credibility and

mostly the dog not barking situation you

know the thing that you expect to hear

you're like okay you brushed over that

pretty quickly you know that sort of

thing

so I found it completely non-credible

and I agree with them

and both and that's not inconsistent

I believe his argument was just filled

with things that I'm like I don't know

about that that's a little sketchy but

his main point was this

that there may have been higher

technology back during the uh the Ice

Age

and that we lost the trail like we don't

understand why people were built there's

at least one site in his films

in the series I guess there's at least

one site where everybody seems to agree

that they had the building techniques

somewhere closer to the Ice Age like 9

000 years ago or something or 12 000

years ago

um

and that we don't know why they knew it

that long ago that was a surprise to

archaeologists now

if somebody knew that stuff 12 000 years

ago

and then there was a big disruption

which also people agree with

so the two things that he doesn't have

push back on I think

is that there was that knowledge that

somebody had at least one civilization

had the knowledge

12 000 years ago and then there was this

long period and then suddenly suddenly

farming just like sprung up in one

little era

and all of all these groups seem to have

a An Origin myth about

um some kind of smart strangers who knew

how to do things that came came from the

sea and then taught them things and then

went away

like missionaries yeah and there does

seem to be some evidence that there was

a massive flood

so it could be that the stories of Noah

you know maybe are based on Ancient

stories that actually had something to

them so here's what I believe I believe

it's very likely

there were more advanced civilizations

and that some members of them shared

their knowledge and so it did make some

hunter-gatherers

kind of quickly evolve

I think that's likely

because I don't think we know much about

the past

I think we know about like five percent

of the past that's about it so could

lots lots be hiding in the 95 percent

yeah sure but what are the odds that

you know what are the odds that the

exact era that you know your humans were

in was the good one

probably it was good and then it got bad

maybe it got good again in terms of

civilization

that wouldn't be surprising at all so I

think his basic idea that there was

something that may or may not have been

called Atlantis that may or may not have

been an advanced civilization is proven

because they found it

they didn't find Atlantis but they found

a place with building construction that

was thousands of years ahead

of of what happened later

so I think the case is made I just don't

think I think he added a lot more

speculation than

maybe I would have

yeah so I think his basic theme sounds

pretty solid but a lot of the specific

details he forced into it now what did

the media say about it

can you guess just a wild guess without

looking don't do any Googling what do

you think the critics said about it

other than whether it's true or false

but beyond whether it's true or false

what do you think the critics said about

it

super racist

do you know why

because those smart strangers

from that advanced civilization

were a little bit too white

so apparently the various myths about

these smart strangers

they were not browned

the the smart strangers were not were

not super brown

like nobody apparently nobody has a a

story where like a black guy showed up

and taught them how to farm and build

stuff and then left

but several of them have like a

mysterious you know often they're Giants

they're tall and stuff but they they

feel a little

not brown enough for what would make

sense for the time

so so apparently it's all just a racist

yeah they're all bearded men who weren't

Brown enough

um what do you think of this story

you're seeing all over the internet but

not in the major news of uh these weird

rubber-like clots and people who uh got

the vaccination and then died from some

reason or other

have you seen those you see the doctors

like they're taking the blood clots out

of the veins and like it's clearly

something you've never seen before it's

almost like like an alien was in the

body

have you seen that you've seen that

right

how many of you believe that this is a

real thing and that there are massive

discoveries of rubber-like blockages in

people's bodies

I I saw a doctor on Twitter uh debunked

this in one sentence

and then I never thought about it again

do you want to hear the one sentence

here's the one sentence debunked I don't

know if it's true

by the way I don't know if the debunk is

true but here's the one sentence from an

actual doctor

um

every doctor knows that dead people's uh

blood looks like that

that's exactly what a dead person's

blood will look like is all like this

rubbery cloudy stuff so basically it's

just every dead person

just the way it looks right

now

I don't know if that's true

but that would be the only reason it's

not in the major news right you only see

it on Twitter and then you know smaller

Publications yeah the reason it's not in

the major news is it would only take one

doctor to say well that's the way it's

supposed to look it always looks like

that

yeah I don't think I don't think the

videos where the doctor is taking those

are not I don't think those are real

I don't know why they exist but I don't

think it's based on anything real

so even kim.com

famous internet

guy he believes that this should be

looked into

because he saw a documentary called died

suddenly how many of you watched the

documentary called died suddenly I guess

that's where this claim is made

and I'll bet if you watch the

documentary you were completely

convinced it was true right

because you saw it in a documentary

I'll bet if I watched the documentary it

would look completely convincing

so I'm not going to watch the

documentary

because do you know what you've learned

if you watch a documentary that's

completely persuasive

nothing nothing

yeah if you watch a documentary there's

lots of facts and it's very persuasive

you've learned nothing

nothing

documentaries are not to teach you

the truth

they're they're giving you a narrative

and that's what they do

so if you if you accepted the narrative

that was presented in a documentary

you're not doing a good job of being a a

good consumer of information

right if you haven't seen the whatever

is the debunk

how hard would it be to debunk that

all right let's do a live experiment so

I haven't done this yet but if you uh

here's a good thing to do if there's

anything in the news that looks sketchy

type that thing into a Google search

followed by the word debunk

and you'll find it I'm going to do that

so this is called uh died suddenly

died

suddenly

and I'm going to say blood clots

blood

clots what do you think I'm going to

find

and then debunked do you think that

there will be a real good debunk from a

doctor saying that this is

what do you think

make your prediction because I haven't

done this I've never done this so I'm

going to find out the same time you do

uh Forbes debunks it

uh let's see BBC

all right

um did embalmers find vaccine-induced

blood clots

so here's affection

now I'm not saying that the person fact

checking this is necessarily believable

either

um so it goes let me just skim it

yeah that these blood clots exist

uh they say it's fake news uh number

fact number one embalmers do not conduct

autopsies

and Bobbers do not know vaccination

status well I don't know they might have

asked it

most of his data is not linked to

vaccinations blood clots are common in

refrigerated bodies there it is there it

is blood clots are common in

refrigerated bodies that's the whole

story

right now if you didn't know

that I could Google this in one minute

and find the debunk

yeah the rubbery ones right

if you didn't know that the debunk would

pop up that easily

then maybe you learned not to trust

documentaries

right now I want to be really clear what

I'm telling you

I'm not telling you that vaccinations

are safe

that's not what I'm saying

how would I know the only thing I know

for sure is I don't trust any

information about vaccinations now I

don't not the plot not the pro not the

con I just don't trust any of it so I

don't know so I'm not even sure I have a

like

I just don't have a dog in that race at

the moment either way it goes if I could

find out for sure I would accept it

right I wouldn't have cognitive

dissonance because if you told me the

vaccinations were hurting people I'd say

well not totally surprising

so that there's no trigger for cognitive

distance if you told me that they

actually work great

I would say

excellent not totally surprising

so neither of those would trigger me I'm

I'm open to both possibilities

so when I tell you that the debunk

exists what I'm talking about is The

credibility of documentaries

the only point I want to make here is

Stop Believing documentaries

can I ask you to do that I'm going to

ask you directly I'll just ask you

please

stop trusting documentaries now they

might raise really important issues and

they might be totally right

I'm not saying every documentary is

wrong I'm saying that you can't trust

them because they were persuasive

if you say I believe it's true because I

saw a really persuasive documentary

you're talking like a crazy person

stop doing that

I watched a documentary means you've

been misled

get that right I watched a documentary

almost certainly 95 of the time that

means you've been misled by a

professional misleader

it's what they do

all right

um

and uh Rob Reiner

I love Rob Ryder because he gets every

story wrong

it is like uh I don't know you're some

kind of a symbol for the left that's

perfect every time like he captures

everything about the left

so he tweeted uh

uh he tweeted uh Nick Fuentes is an

unabashed anti-semitic Holocaust denier

Donald Trump invited him over for dinner

enough said

he didn't invite him to dinner

he gets everything wrong right if he had

invited him to dinner it would be a

different story

like very different right if he had

invited him

then I'd say well that really does tell

you everything you need to know

but of course he didn't invite him like

that wasn't even the fact

uh but as I tweeted it doesn't really

matter if if Trump invited him or not

because it's like the Charlottesville

fine people hoax now has a life of its

own

and if you think that Trump can

continually flirt with

uh you know being on the edge of being

anti-semitic without actually being

anti-semitic because I don't believe he

is if you think if you think that he'll

have enough support to win the

presidency

in that strategy

I don't see it I can't see it happening

but could be surprised you never know

if uh Trump came up with a good Sentinel

plan or even if he ate it

all bets are off

no bets are off so we'll probably have

uh 300 uh

situations that tell us my God this

changes everything before 2024 and then

we'll find out it didn't change

everything because there'll be another

one tomorrow that changes everything

all right

um

according to timcast Nick came with Milo

and Milo is the person yeah

does that change anything

I mean if if Nick came with Milo

you don't think he was a that Nick was

brought along to destroy Trump

does anybody think that now let's say it

was Milo who did the invitation

and made it happen and brought Nick

Fuentes

you don't think that Milo is smart

enough to know that that would destroy

Trump

of course he is

he's not a beginner

Milo didn't start politics you know this

week

he kind of knows how this stuff works

he's very experienced yeah of course he

did so if you imagine that that was

accidental like do you think that Milo

or yay who knows what yay was thinking I

mean he might not even known who who

Nick Fuentes was but we don't know but

don't you think Milo knew exactly what

he was doing

yay may or may not have known who Nick

Fuentes was probably did but I don't

know

but certainly Milo knew right

yeah

so

I mean some of this is more about you

know maybe the individuals than it is

about a big story

all right that ladies and gentlemen

concludes

the planned part of my broadcast

I'm going to go private over our locals

we're going to close it down just for

the subscribers

for a few minutes but I'm going to say

goodbye to YouTube

for now I'll talk to you tomorrow