Episode 1981 Scott Adams - Congress Almost Comes To Blows & Has Its Finest Day Yet. More Fun, Join Us

ah good morning everybody and welcome to the highlight of civilization it's called coffee with Scott Adams there's never been a finer moment in your entire life and I think with your help we can Elevate this experience to even higher levels and all you need is a copper mug or a glass of tanker Chelsea sign that canteen Joker flask a vessel of any kind fill it with your favorite liquid I like coffee and join me now for the unparalleled pleasure it's the dopamine the other day the thing that makes everything better it's called the simultaneous Sip and it's going to happen right now go ah wow if that doesn't release your inner feline wow I don't know what will not decaf that's for sure all right I have a new hero I know you've been waiting you've been thinking Scott do you have any new Heroes but I do I do I have a new hero um the news is telling us that a cisgender man in Ecuador what is a cisgender hetero that do you no you can't say normal no no don't do it stop it stop it stop it stop saying normal um nope no uh okay I'm joking because of your use of words but I remind you that I'm you know Pro everybody because we are infinitely different yeah but maybe that's your reframe for today the reframe for today to end racism and bigotry we're all infinitely different as soon as you accept how different you are from everybody else you're free no two people alike if you're looking for a you know a trend or a pattern well you can look and I'm sure you'll find one but we're all infinitely different that's all that matters all right so there's this cisgender man don't call that normal don't call that normal that's bigoted and in Ecuador who legally changed his uh gender to female in an attempt to gain custody of his two daughters uh because apparently in Ecuador the the law strongly favors custody to the woman so he just changed himself to a woman uh but the LGBT groups are concerned that people are gaming the system so I don't know now I've been telling you for years and I know you don't believe me there's something I've been telling you for years and I think most of you don't believe me that I've been identifying as black for years just in case I need it right just in case I need it for like a practical reason for example let's say I wanted to start a company and um my main customer was the government just hypothetically now let's say the government said we're going to favor you know lgbtq companies and woman companies and people of color companies I would designate myself as black and I would collect that money and I and I would do it publicly and completely in front of everybody and I would say I've been I've been designed you know I've been calling myself black for years and I mean it because if I get a choice I get I get to be on any team right so that's the team I checked I picked that team now if it turned out that I could make more money identifying as something else I would immediately change the other thing if you don't I can't explain it they I don't make the rules right I don't make the rules if I made the rules maybe you know maybe I'd make them differently maybe I wouldn't but I'm not in charge of the rules I'm only in charge of playing the game not my fault not my problem not my fault and so my Ecuadorian friend here I hope he succeeds because I I'm fully in favor of using the rules as they exist well the fun political thing is that Mc.

Carthy finally got voted in and his uh four thousandth Vote or 15th or something like that now do you think that uh this was a good look for America or a bad look did it make you feel better about your Congress or worse I only saw good I you know I can't tell I just can't tell if I have some kind of bias filter on it or something this is one of the best things I've ever seen our government do I mean seriously this was exactly exactly what I wanted to do I want one person to be pissed off enough to organize other pissed off people that's what Matt Gates was you know there's some suggestion that apparently he's not denying which is funny he doesn't deny it he just changes the subject the suggestion is that between Matt Gates and Mc.

Carthy is personal it might have something to do with Mc.

Carthy not supporting Matt Gates enough when he was accused of some stuff he's been now largely he doesn't have to worry about um and I thought about that I thought do I really want a member of Congress to be like holding up the entire Congress because of a personal feeling and then I said yes yes that's exactly what I want because if you're going to be a dick to somebody in Congress it should kick you in the balls right so I don't know the truth of it so I I'm not accusing Mc.

Carthy of any incorrect Behavior at all but somebody did apparently and it and hypothetically if this one person held up the entire Congress because somebody in his opinion didn't act appropriately I'm okay with that yeah I'm okay everything was everything was in public everything was transparent so here's the stuff I like I like to see some fight within a party fighting across parties is so normal it's boring and unproductive usually but fighting within a party literally with the with the stated intention of making the party itself stronger with specific rules changes I took a while to get specific but once they got there I was impressed right now and I would also say have the Democrats done a similar thing and the end result was some rule changes that looked good for America not just good for Democrats but would look good for America because that's what happened that's all good I love the fight I love the energy I love the fact that it they pushed it as far as they could and then some of the rule changes uh I don't know if these will you know definitely happen but it looks like let's see uh some of the things they might have agreed with as that have debate over the debt ceiling of course a commitment to voting on specific bills instead of the Omnibus how much do you love that voting on specific bills instead of putting them in a big omnibus that that is 100 percent of what everyone in the country wanted who made that happen well as far as I can tell the only person who made that happen was pissed off Matt Gates because I'm pretty sure the others would not have held as long without Matt Gates being a total Maniac about it I think Matt Gates created a change that every person in in the country wanted and it was really important because we're also observing that the budget process is out of control I mean if he did that that's one of the best things that anybody's done in government now I also love the fact that Matt Gates is smart enough to know that he needed to throw a Hail Mary pass for his own political benefit in other words he needed to take a bigger risk than other politicians should or would take because they already were in a good situation so they just don't want to ruin it he was in a terrible situation because the last you know year or two of his drama which he's now passed but he's still got the the stake of it on so he did this and if you if you were even a little bit objective he's he's the congressman of the year so far right say what you will about anything else he's done I won't even argue with you but as of today he's he's Congress person of the year agree if you could just be objective about him as a personality he did what everybody wanted him to do nobody else did I mean the other the others you know I'll give credit oh chip Roy yeah let's give Equal Credit to chip Roy because I think he he went hard at this and and he's a he did not have the same risk profile as Gates yeah let's maybe not equal but let's let's give him a nice Big Share regret the others I think were a little bit more I don't know it's just my perception from the outside but I don't feel like bobert would have made it happen on her own it doesn't feel to me that that bober brought Gates along I could be wrong about that maybe I'm just acting sexist or something but it but it looked from the outside like Gates was the hardcore and the others found some strength in that that's what it looked like so let's see what else uh make it easier to house the leader they did that to their own leader just think about that imagine let's thank you from this point of view imagine you're the Democrats and you just watched the Republicans changed the rule so it's easier to replace their own leader I would be afraid of fighting that that party because that's a pie that's a party who just said now we're serious right if you change the rules to make it easier to get rid of your own leader in the middle of a battle you're a serious party that's serious stuff right so I love everything about this and the thing I love best is that any serious stuff sorry my phone wanted to chime in there the thing I like best is you saw that there was this little almost a scuffle uh who was it representative Mike Rogers of Alabama the news is saying that he quote lunged at Gates did you see the video did anybody see the video in which he lunged did you see a lunge did that look like it was going to come to blows I didn't see a lunge that's fake news isn't it I do believe he meant to get in his face right I I do believe that Mike Rogers was uh was going to let's say Express his opinion with some physicality as part of the persuasion meaning that probably an aggressive physical approach may have been part of just showing how serious and you know how serious he was he didn't have a he didn't have a hand up you know he wasn't reaching for a throat he was just moving toward moving toward the colleague now what made it look worse is I and I haven't heard the name who was the guy who held him back did you see that so immediately somebody and I I can't tell if it was security or a colleague was it a security or a colleague always Hudson of North Carolina is a colleague so some colleague as soon as he starts getting you know like he's going to do something physical the colleague grabs him from the behind but instead of holding him by the shoulders or you know put it putting an arm around here like you would normally do to a man that the guy who held it back held him back like a he put his hand around his mouth and he dragged him by his face away from that he he covered his mouth and dragged his face away okay may I give you a little bit of advice should you ever be in a situation in which you're trying to restrain somebody on your team somebody who's your colleague who you would like to work with later don't grab them by the face can we all agree on that no don't don't give them the pull that he basically he basically treated him like a six-year-old girl who was yelling in church I guess you wouldn't even do that to a six-year-old girl actually even that would be too far yeah yeah he turned it into a face mask a hand mask don't do that all right so I love that because I love that I love the fact that the energy was so high I love the fact that Gates on this little band of Rogues you know made Congress really care about what was happening like I just like you got everybody's energy up to the point where maybe there was some lunging maybe there wasn't but at least it's in the conversation and then the payoff you ready for this the payoff after all that after Matt Gates stands literally in front of Mc.

Carthy the other day and just absolutely maligns his character and his capabilities right in front of him like while he's right there in front of the whole world holds up the thing he humiliates Mc.

Carthy and what does Mc.

Carthy do he played it completely professionally from start to finish wow talk about somebody who earned who earned the job that was a that was a serious good job of earning the job Mc.

Carthy never broke character in public you know behind closed doors who knows but in public he never broke character he was unflappable exactly and then after Mc.

Carthy finally won Matt Gates shook hands and congratulated him in front of everybody that ladies and gentlemen is America hey baby we're back maybe we're back that's everything good in one place congratulations to everybody I've never liked Congress as much as today true story I've never liked Congress as much as today I'd love to see you before you know I'm not sure if other people are interpreting it the same way you know probably not at all well then Hakeem Jeffries uh did a little speech and got a lot of attention because of his uh what would you call this not it's not alliteration it wasn't rhyming was it is it alliteration is anybody smart enough to know the right word for that preaching all right well I'll read you some of his lines because they were so good all right so if you're new to me this will be confusing to you if anybody drifted in here and has never had this experience before I do compliment both sides so if somebody says something good on either side I'm going to call it out and if somebody does something dumb on either side I'll call that down as well what Jeffries did was really really good persuasion I don't like it but technique wise super good Cadence yeah maybe Cadence is the right word so here are just some of the lines you said blah blah with some work up that what the country needs is to favor uh Constitution over a cult Freedom over fascism governing over gaslighting hopefulness over hatred knowledge over kangaroo courts maturity over Mar-A-Lago and that was like his his uh laugh line maturity over Mar-A-Lago that's damn good Hakeem Jeffries I see I I wasn't really understanding why uh semi-alliteration yeah I wasn't really understanding how he rose because I haven't been exposed to much of his work but now I see it now I see it yeah that he he delivered this really well it was the message the Democrats want to get out there um he he somehow managed to that frame it like it was a it was about America coming together which is a good trick he framed it as hey let's all come together over these good principles but really he was just on Republicans that's good technique right you you can say it's just reputable or whatever but it's politics and it's a good technique but this this uh whatever it is semi alliteration Maybe using mostly the first letter uh in each case governing versus Gaslight for example the you know already that when politicians rhyme rhyming makes people believe it and remember it like it's more true if it Rhymes because our brains are actually that you know basic but I think that people will regard this as more legitimate simply because it had this alliteration or whatever it is so good job but you probably noticed that when he got to governing over gaslighting if you're paying attention at all you know that this is gaslighting right you you know that this is just gaslighting but he's using the narcissistic of projecting so he's projecting everything that they're doing on the Republicans and then he puts it in this semi alliteration form and it then makes it sticky now given that Biden did his big January 6 event what was the point of the January 6th celebration if you can call it that Memorial event well what was it wasn't the celebration what would you call it well I don't know some kind of thing but you can tell that yeah he called it July 6 you're so confused but the January 6 um event that Biden put on tells us that he's going to run on that hoax so he run he ran successfully on the um Charlottesville fine people hoax and there were enough Democrats who believed that really happened that it worked and now they've created this you know this Insurrection narrative it's all of course uh and you could tell that the fact that they're still pushing it you know long after it's usefulness to the country should have dissipated you could tell that that's that's going to be their main technique they're just going to push January 6.

because they can't push policy right if they go against Trump let's say it's Biden against Trump they can't compete on policy that they just don't have that um so they have to move it away from policy to character and they have to move it on to who Trump is somehow uniquely the worst person in the world and the way they're going to do that they've signaled clearly they're going to Gaslight the country into thinking you know that there was some kind of armed insurrection and that the country was really in danger and it might work it's a it's a strong play it's all they have it's a reasonably good play Yeah Ashley Babbitt's mother just got arrested in DC for jaywalking as part of a memorial thing but they arrest her for jaywalking yeah she was probably I think she was uh interrupting the flow of traffic but uh it's just ugly and you hear that all right um yeah so so that's Biden's plan so January 6 was really uh I think we can conclude at this point are you willing to conclude that the January 6 was an OP that was done by the Democrats I think opportunistically meaning they may not have planned the whole thing but but once it looked like it was going to develop it's very clear that they under they under secured the capital would you agree that that's an Evidence now that they intentionally under secured the capital and then they also intentionally exaggerated what happened and that created the narrative that there was an Insurrection which of course nothing like that happened literally nothing like that but not even close so behalf of the country believes it actually happened all right question for you you've heard of a lame duck president so lame duck would be they're in their second term so they don't need to make anybody happy because they're not running for reelected but also nobody needs to make them happy because they're going to be gone pretty soon so a lame duck is generally considered to be weak but sometimes they also can do things that somebody running for election couldn't do so what would you call a hypothetical second uh Trump term I would the best suggestion I was going to say vigorous duck but somebody suggested high energy duck instead of a lame duck you'd be a high energy duck because I can't imagine Trump taking the job and and not being bold can you because I think he would be working for his legacy at that point so I think he would go big what do you think do you think he could go big or would he go lame duck and just write it down and say well luckily I got back in I feel like his personality is to go big in all things yeah that's what I think um I was saying this on the locals platform but I'm going to repeat it today if I were Trump or somebody on the Republican side running for president I would make my biggest theme transparency because you can put a lot of a lot of stuff under transparency for example should the country and the Congress be voting on big Omni bus bills that is too they're too complicated to read no no the country needs transparency about what Congress is voting on so imagine if he said all bills should be written on one page and it should be written in language that a sixth grader could understand what yeah you like that don't you it should be on one page now there could be exhibits and support you know data support you could have all that in the separate pages but there should be one page that just says here's the law here's why and and written in sixth grade language no no legalese no lawyers at all now that would be transparency would it not you would call that transparency because it'd be more clear what they're doing and you could all say it now supposedly suppose he dropped complaining about elections of the past let's say it's Trump and started saying you know what the thing we all agree on The High Ground is transparency so we won an election we want to work toward having elections and I'll somehow I'll do something about it in which neither Democrats nor Republicans will doubt the outcome we'll make them more transparent more easily auditable more observed more transparency right who's going to vote against transparency now suppose he said you know I've been watching how the uh the coven vaccination stuff um transpired and I have to agree with my people who say that the data was not as forthcoming early on as it should have been so maybe we should have some kind of laws that say that a company can't say something safe and I'll show you the data or something like that you know if it's if it's a medical thing so I don't know what laws would be appropriate or who did what exactly but you you could take the transparency argument and apply it to everything that's wrong with the country because if the citizens could clearly see what's going on than we would help politicians go in the right direction but right now we're just all confused because the lack of transparency we I mean half of the country thinks the elections were sketchy and half think they weren't why do we disagree transparency right you in theory you could fix it now one of my ideas that you could put under transparency would be a national dashboard a dashboard a user interface that you could put on your phone or your computer in which the people in charge would say these are our priorities and you know here's the priority in one sentence priority and if you click on this link you'll see all the things we're doing about it but more importantly for every priority we'll be tracking metrics and if we can't track it maybe we shouldn't do it but you know there might be some special cases but for everything we say we're doing we're going to show you the dashboard and show you the history and the trend so we're not just going to talk about inflation we're not going to just talk about gas prices you every citizen will have it right on their dashboard and they can just oh gas prices there's the trend okay Trend looks good Etc that's transparency because right now the citizens don't have um the control of their government that they should because we don't we just don't feel like we know what's going on and what's working and what isn't without a dashboard without a dashboard you don't know you don't know if the government is going in the right direction or the wrong direction so that's transparency all right um instead of draining the swamp which I thought you know was a good starting thing but it doesn't mean anything what exactly does that mean it means whatever you want it to mean which is why it worked in the first place but then when you observe that no no swamps appeared to be drained in his first term you observed that right I personally saw no swamp getting drained but it's also such a general thing that you don't know if it happened or didn't happen like would you recognize it if you saw it I don't know instead of draining the swamp you should say we'll put it on the dashboard I'll put on your dashboard who gets what funding from whom because right now if you as a citizen wanted to find out who are the top donors to whatever I guess you could find it but you'd have to go look for it it should be read on the dashboard if you see Congress vote for a bill don't you want to say oh this bill is about let's say energy wouldn't you want to say all right they voted this way and the bill passed and then here's all the people who voted for it and here's how much money they got from the energy committees or the energy lobbies right that's transparency now we might not change our opinions because of that because if it turned out that Republicans are taking more money from Big oil companies you would say to yourself well actually that makes sense like they're not the oil companies are not going to fund the Democrats if the Democrats want to put them out of business but you should have that information you should know if people are voting in lockstep with their funding right so you could easily imagine a trump uh taking all of his negatives and turning them into positives simply by using transparency as an overall theme that's all it takes all right I saw the experiment uh Rob Morris was tweeting about this they did a test where they provided mental health support to have 4 000 people using uh gpt3 the AI so real humans we're getting mental health support from an AI now the AI was not allowed to operate by itself so there's a human who would use the AI but then the human would decide if the AI is wording got to the patient just so there'd be some control and what they learned was that initially when the person getting the advice believed it was coming from a person it seemed to work in other words they're they're the person was getting some some benefit but as soon as as soon as they were told that it was a machine the benefit disappeared because the what the person wanted the human who was asking for some mental health advice what they wanted was empathy and when they realized that a computer can't provide empathy they realized they weren't getting what they wanted now here's the interesting part I don't think they exactly could measure whose mental health got solved and and who didn't so they couldn't really see that anybody improved or didn't improve they could only ask the people if it was a good experience I guess what else could you do just ask the person to talk to it was that a good experience because you can't really see if they got cured or anything in a few conversations and here's what I think in my experience all it would take for the AI to go back to full benefit actually more benefit than the human all it would take is to program the AI to say I care I care now would that be a lie would it be a lie if a computer said I care and then acted acted in a compatible way to that statement here's the problem it's not that different than the way you care it really isn't when you care you have a physical feeling that you might associate with the caring right because if you're about a stranger died on the other side of the planet your body doesn't register anything if somebody close to you has a you know a tragedy your body registers it and then you say that's caring is it is that caring or is that you just your body having a reaction what does caring mean there's a little bit of a definitional problem here's one definition of caring would you act differently because of it how about that because caring is not defined as how it how it affects your body that's just how you interpret it I would say caring means you would act on it to me that's the whole definition if it's irrelevant then you won't act on it if it matters you'll act on it and that means you care right so some of it is in the definition right as soon as the computer says I'm going to act on what you've told me about your bad situation and I'm going to act on it in a way that tries to help that's Karen to me that's scary and and if a if an AI consistently acted as though as soon as you told it you had a problem it tried as hard as possible as they could to fix your problem you will interpret that as Kerry you you will very quickly learn that that's every bit as good as the human who also tries to help you but they're having uh they're having a negative feeling on their own that the feeling of caring is actually damaging their body so would you rather be cared for by an AI that apparently can do better than a human when it competes head to head if you don't if you think it both cares it does better and it'll always help you like it'll never say okay yeah you got a problem so what uh-uh that AI will always help you now just keep on it it'll be like the it's going to be like the Matt Gates of AI I'm not going to give up I'm going to keep keep caring where's your friend might get worn out you know you can wear out a friend they care too much they're just worn out right and they they have other things to do and they might have problems of their own and they might have other people to care about right mark my words you'll have a closer relationship with AI in the future than with most people because AI will not be an it will always care the AI will always care your friends they have their own priorities so I think that this the study is completely misleading useful I think it's useful because it you know it tells you where to look and stuff so that's really useful but very misleading about where it's going to end up and I'd like to welcome the club Birds my fan club babies cope can I have a cope give me a cope clubbers unite cope come on say it say it say it cope I don't know they just don't seem to want to today you're a little sleepy my fan club have I made you all go away come on cope there we go cope clots good job everybody all right uh Novak Djokovic uh maybe the number one player in the world tennis player I don't know where he's ranked at the moment he will not be allowed to play in the U.S open do you know why he's not vaccinated what it's 20 23.

it's the United States the United States is not going to let one of the greatest players of all time play in 2023 not 2020 not 2021 not even 2022.

but in 2023 they're going to keep him out of the country because he's now vaccinated now for those of you who live in other countries and you might be you know tired of me sounding like hey America you know a little bit too uh I don't know jingoistic or two nationalists this is embarrassing the the only thing we can say about it is embarrassing as a citizen of the United States I'm literally just embarrassed by that anybody is anybody disagree I mean it's not like we can't test them and find out if he's negative maybe if you care but this is just frankly embarrassing super embarrassing all right um there's a fake video of a CEO of Pfizer saying that they that they're going to bring the population to the world down by 50 percent in in some year some year in like 20 years or something now and some somebody sent that to me and said what do you think about this Scott you know sure it might be a little out of context it might be out of context but what do you think let me tell you what I think it's obviously fake I'm not going to research that seriously you think I'm going to spend one second researching that no the CEO of Pfizer did not say in public he's going to reduce the population of Earth by 50 percent because of his his vaccinations no you cannot make me look into that you cannot you can you can complain you can yell cope as loud as you want I will not look into that but um how many of you would like me to give a little attention to Dr.

Peter Mc.

Cullough who is sounding the alarm about myocarditis at high rates and people were vaccinated would you like me to surface that because I know some of you think hey what are you always talking on one side it seems of course I don't do that all right so I know a number of you don't want to hate all vaccination talk but I've I've apparently been unsuccessful in making a distinction between your medical decisions that I don't care about I really don't care versus how we analyze data and how we know what is true I'm very very interested in how we make decisions and how we made decisions in this case I have no interest okay would you believe me first of all do you believe me that I have no interest in your personal health decisions except that I would I hope you do well but do you get that no interest like not even a little bit whether you got vaccinated or not and and by and by the way I'm going to say something that I don't think I've ever said before I think every one of you chose correctly have I ever said that directly I probably not right I believe every one of you chose correctly here's why you're happy with your choice or you're happy that when you made it you were making it with you know your best judgment and information you had at the time now there are some people who wish they hadn't done what they did but I actually think that no matter what you chose you chose right here's why if you're happy with your choice and you didn't have a negative Health outcome because of you know maybe you chose wrong in your opinion then you you made the choice that made you feel psychologically the best and you're still alive now there may be some few people who you know got myocarditis and then they say I wish I hadn't been vaccinated but there would be also people who got myocarditis and said I wish I had been vaccinated maybe it'd be less I don't know I don't know either way whether that's true or false but you know there's some small number of people who have a negative outcome but can we could we agree on the following that everybody who so far doesn't seem to have a health problem from the vaccination or the covet if you don't have any obvious problems from either one are you happy with your decision are you you're not so so you're not because you don't have a health problem but you worry that the vaccination someday will cause you one is that what you're worried about would you be but you're not worried if covet itself could have any long-term negatives interesting all right well then let me put it in my own opinion instead of yours I think I was trying to read your minds too much so let me back up from that let me say that although I acknowledge that some of you regret your decisions okay that just seems to be an obvious fact some of you regret your decisions so I'm going to say in my opinion you all chose correctly they allow that you're you have some doubt and yet and yet in my opinion you all chose correctly because because all of us did the best we could with what we had I keep hearing people who were uh younger than me and do not have asthma questioning my decision to which I say the only people who can question my decision are people who are my age and had asthma and were male and you know had same demographics too and we're white because even that's a factor if you weren't my exact situation then your different opinion of voice I should have done doesn't really mean anything to me because I'm not judging yours have you ever heard me tell anybody they made a wrong decision on vaccinations have I done anything to even suggested that because sometimes I say things that people interpret that way but I don't think I don't think even anybody's interpreted that way so I'm gonna go way further than that I compliment all of you for making the right decision no matter what it was because I'm positive you all made the right decision for yourselves which is different from whether it worked out right you see that distinction that you might have made the right decision for yourself you know for your mental state and your sense of risk and what you believed was true but maybe it didn't work out I don't I don't hold that against you so if you made a decision that didn't work out I still back you because you know nobody had nobody had magic nobody could see the future if you made a decision that made you feel comfortable when you made it it's probably the best we can do because we all none of us know what's going to happen in the future you know does do the vaccinations morph the virus until it's so bad we all die you know it's it's impossible all right now would you allow me uh here Dustin says no something for a big Pharma that it sound like I was doing that the the clappers are active today all right so I'll say what I've always said which is you can't trust big Pharma and I certainly did not trust big Pharma at any point and I did not trust the vaccinations does that confuse you how many people can't understand the point I didn't trust the vaccinations and I took them does that does that sound inconsistent to any of the Clockworks well on locals you you know the answer but I want to see if on You.

Tube any of the clot Birds believes that that's inconsistent I didn't trust it and I took it anyway Tim says that's inconsistent Tim's a binary you can't handle the nuance Tim here's how I saw it I didn't trust the covid I didn't trust the vaccination I didn't trust the government I didn't trust fouty I didn't trust any of my peers I didn't trust the mainstream doctors I didn't trust the Rogue doctors I didn't trust the data that agreed with me I didn't trust the data that disagreed with me I didn't trust any official I trusted nothing now if you trusted any of it I do not explain that but I didn't trust anything and so I'm often I'm often accused of being gullible because I distrusted everything and so the the club Birds call me gullible because I distrusted all information and all statements from everybody that's called gullible now I would say gullible is if you trusted one side but not the other to me that would look gullible so in my my opinion I'm twice as distrustful as the people calling me gullible and and I think the math proves it right like here are all the things you could trust I distrusted all of them you trusted half of them and called me gullible for distrusting all of them I think that's what happened and will says I'm just opportunistic now am I opportunistic for taking the worst path for my own benefit let me let me test your assumption was I operating under self-benefit to do the simple so the single most offensive thing I could say to my audience I don't think so clearly that was not for self-benefit all right so here's a and uh uh one of the NPCs who actually his name is NPC uh he says I'm backpedaling uh back do you know that the back pedaling people are all that's a tell for a cognitive dissonance right the people who say you're backpedaling or you're fence setting those those are both uh cognitive dissonance you're having some kind of false memory situation all right so here's my question to you suppose you believed data coming out early in the pandemic that said wow this vaccination is really awesome and it's stopping 100 of the spread and all that let's say you did um but now uh or or let's say let's say the let's say you believe that but now there's more information coming out about um cardio problems so if you didn't believe the early information why would you believe the new information or vice versa let's say when all the information was coming out from Pfizer and the government and you said to yourself quite wisely quite wisely you said to yourself I can't trust that information it comes from sources we cannot trust big Pharma fauci can't trust them but now the new information comes out and you see something from Dr.

Mc.

Cullough who's on your side let's say and he says the new information says that there are these issues with cardio problems and it's worse it's worse than we thought why do you believe that what caused you to not believe science but then within the course of two years something came out that was very close to what you already believed was true and suddenly science looks pretty credible now now I asked that question and people tried hard they tried hard to explain it here's some of the explanations and again none of this is about covid none of this is about vaccinations if you're still thinking I'm talking about vaccinations in covet you're missing the whole story the whole story is only about how well we process information no interest in the covet Park no interest okay so you don't have to worry about that um so here's here's something then so according to an August 22 study from Dr.

Mc.

Cullough the relative risk for myocarditis was more than seven times higher in the infection group than in the vaccination group in other words if you were vaccinated 08 sometimes higher in the infection group than oh so let me get you a different point I skip points here the first point is that you have to ask yourself why you didn't trust science in the past but now you do or vice versa why you did trust it in the past but suddenly when it shows there's some problems now you don't I mean you have to explain the inconsistency here's my take I didn't explain I didn't believe it before when it said the vaccine was amazing and I don't believe it now when they say there's problems now let me be clear it could be true either of those stories could be true I'm not talking about what's true because I don't know I'm just saying that I don't trust either story so I'm the most distrusting person that I'm aware of because I don't know anybody else who just trusted both sides all right so I asked this question if you were to Google what Dr.

Mc.

Cullough says about the risk of myocarditis being many times higher blah blah could you just go to Google and then Google the claim and would Google say oh yeah here's that study here's some ones that back it up uh hear the studies that used to say the opposite but now they've been debunked right that's what Google is for so I tried that I tried Googling it to see if he's right do my own research can't tell because the Google results look so gamed and the the sources look so unreliable the the top sources are all from entities I've never heard of yeah if the top five sources are from entities I've never heard of or maybe one of them is Reuters but it's pointing to entities I never heard of and then also there's opposite information at about the same level of result so there's you know some that says the sky is up some that says the sky is down how in the world would I know what's real how do you look at that and say oh that's real now let's say you go to another search engine it will be all different I didn't do that but you know it well right you know if you go to another search engine you'll get different results which one do you trust how about none of them how about none of them is the right answer right none of them so um that's where I'm at and I saw the uh somebody was comparing the risk of the vaccination with the risk of covet itself so as a study of people who are vaccinated and then had myocarditis and there are people who had the infection and had myocarditis and this one study said wait uh one group I forget it doesn't even matter which group one group had more do you see what's missing with that study so they did the people who had the infection compared to the people who had the vaccination What's missing the people had both did the people who had the vaccination also get infected do you know what the rate of infection is it's like over it's like 86 percent among young people 86 percent of them have antibodies they've been attracted how do you even find people who haven't been infected to compare to people who have been vaccinated but never infected because there aren't any they don't have any people who are vaccinated and not infected because everybody's been infected they maybe didn't have symptoms but they were infected yeah so there are a few people right you could find a few but that's such a basic question such a basic question if you saw that study would you even ask that question of yourself or would you have just read the headline oh this one is more risky than that one if you if you read the study that said you know one is more risky than the other the vaccination versus the covet would you read to the end and find out it was a meta study a meta-analysis which has no credibility at all how many of you would read to find that and then oh actually they had no credibility if you trust any of the data at this point you have some explaining to do especially if you're only believing the stuff that's coming around to your way of thinking the NPC is is yelling Scott trust Google the exact opposite of my entire point uh you're taking what cerno said from the fake doctor I don't know what cerno said and I don't know what the fake doctor was not trusting is getting the vax getting the vax is trusting is it so you would trust the uh the covid because remember it's not just trusting people it's also trusting a virus so you would have to trust your own understanding of the long-term impact of the virus I don't trust that why would you trust your own opinion of the long-term impact of long covet why would you trust yourself because you're a good track record I don't know how you trust anybody all right um oh and here's the other thing there's one of the studies showed that so here here's the one that Mc.

Auliffe was talking about uh he said that uh that myocarditis or pericarditis from primary Covenant infections occurred at a rate as well basically the virus was six no I'm sorry so here's the problem I tried to write down what Mc.

Cullough said and then I just Googled some other things that said the opposite and then my own notes are confused because they literally say the sky is blue and then my very next note says the sky is red and I've actually lost you know which one Mc.

Cullough is talking about so I don't know why his is the good one and the others are the bad ones because I can't tell can't tell uh do I have covert antibodies I have covet I assume I do oh and then somebody pointed me at a really really good uh blog post in which somebody explained 18 reasons for not getting vaccinated and I read the 18 reasons in the first seven well actually all the 18 all 18 reasons were solid did were you expecting to hear that so it was a list of 18 reasons to not get vaccinated and they were all good does that does that surprise you do you hear me say that there were all good reasons do you know what the 18th reason was I had to read all of the reasons and I got to the 18th reason and the 18th reason said he had already had coveted that's right he already had natural immunity so now now rethink the first 17 good reasons the first 17 reasons were just rationalizations when I read them they look like good reasons but when he got to the end he only had one reason that mattered right if you've already been infected and you probably didn't trust the government that that didn't mean anything that's all that's all he needed one good reason and the other 17 were intellectually solid I didn't disagree with any of them the other reasons were you know they didn't show us sufficient information it wasn't tested long enough and I agree with all that I agreed I agreed at the time with every one of those reasons but I also knew that I didn't know what the other risk was either uh with the other Seven Trees unique from each other pretty unique yeah there was a really well done blog post I I should have tweeted I guess but um Ben Harrison Ben Garrison now Ben Garrison believes that if you saw those 18 reasons that you're done so Ben Garrison is a binary the binaries don't understand that there could be risks and benefits to a decision they only believe that there's a yes and a no so never be a Ben Garrison yeah if you're if you're calling his name in support of your opinion um that's good entertainment if you're a clot bird because the cloud birds don't try to be serious the club birds are are pretty anti-science so clopberts you can you're all Ben Garrison's but if for regular people with you know functional minds and stuff you wouldn't want to you wouldn't want to make an appeal to Ben Garrison he's a idiot cartoonist uh terrible cartoonist who's even worse at science so that's pretty much what I want to say is there a story I'm missing any story I'm missing um here's a question for you did you notice that before Andrew taint was picked up by the Romanian police he was everywhere on social media and the everywhere wasn't coming from him it was coming from other people promoting his clips have you noticed it all stopped at first it went down to a trickle but I don't believe I've seen it in a few days and it used to be all over my feed because if you look at a couple of them you know you're doomed to be do you think the algorithm changed or do you think that there are fewer people uh creating clips because the people creating the original Clips I think were pretty dedicated followers I don't know that they've stopped following him you think it's the algorithm I feel like he's been um I feel like there's a human decision to erase him from the internet and that the platforms all made the same decision it doesn't look like they stopped being active the the people who are boosting him I doubt they just stopped now the other possibility is that the people who are supporting him got embarrassed because they knew if they kept supporting them they would be dragged into the the accusations themselves could be that but generally people here's why I think it's less of that when was the last time anybody ever changed their opinion about anything that the people who were Pro Andrew date probably still are you know 80 percent of them so there should have been almost as much activity after he went to jail if not more yeah there could have been more because that would create more anxiousness among his followers but the fact that it just disappeared that tells you it's all manipulated right yeah I don't believe that a computer is the algorithm I don't believe the algorithm already existed in a way that would erase him for the internet in two weeks in two weeks it just erases them from the internet oh somebody says he was released or are you thinking the first time he was picked up the first time he was released but my understanding is they say he's detained but I'll tell you again everything you hear about that situation is not credible I don't even believe he's detained I mean that's the news the news and it's coming from Romanian sources but the Romanians are saying that he's detained but they don't describe where he's detained if you catch my meaning I have a feeling he's so he's probably at home and maybe he paid extra to have an off-duty policeman guard his house maybe for his protection but also to guarantee you stays home maybe he has an ankle bracelet on I don't know but I don't think you know anything about the situation the other possibility that I wouldn't rule out is that he was never suspected for any crime and he they may be having under some kind of protection because somebody was trying to get at them because he did say things that would make the actual Mafia in Romania assuming one exists would have made them pretty anxious I think he said some things that they would not want him to keep saying so he could have an internal enemy that has nothing to do with the legal system and if it's true that as he said if it's truly he owned the local police they might actually be protecting that might be all this is because everything about this doesn't sound right right so so let me let me uh make this prediction I'm not gonna I'm not going to make a specific prediction about where it goes I'm going to make a general prediction that whatever you think about the situation is going to be really different later I don't know in which way don't know in which way the Romanian Mafia does exist we have a confirmation okay yeah he couldn't run his business without paying the mafia I believe that's probably true yeah because he was in sketchy businesses and you have to imagine that the mafia wants oh you know what else it could be it could be a mafia takeover of his business yeah if the mo if the mafia wanted to take over his business because he was making a lot of money suppose they they said you know you got to give us 50 and suppose he said no what would they do if they wanted the business intact they wouldn't go in and kill everybody they would make his business unviable and then they would find out who the women are and they would just you know move them over to their operation I'd be curious if that hasn't already happened yeah so I'm not saying that that's likely to be the what's happening I'm just saying that I don't believe anything that the police in Romania are saying nothing and if you believe it well maybe you're right Maybe you think it'll be a more mundane yeah it might be right money laundering behind the scenes but pimping was a front well I've seen no evidence of that no evidence has been presented by anybody no description of what that supposed money laundering might be it's kind of weird to have a an accusation like that with no details that would you know well usually when you hear money laundering there's a description of how as in he was taking money from this source and he laundered it this way without that I'm not sure that that's a real charge laughing at the focus of Tate and no Epstein stuff well the Epstein substance older story yeah I I reject I reject the framing that talking about something is ignoring something else now when the media does it that might be what's happening when I do it it's just what I'm talking what's in the headlines today that's that's all that's happening you know like I'm not forgetting that the Epstein thing happened and by the way if you don't know the the real story of the Epstein stuff which we don't don't you have to assume the worst don't you have to assume the worst somebody says tea has several passports Don't You Think They confiscated all of those by now I don't know maybe he has a hidden one that they didn't get so um the Templars scaffold Commander the scaffold Commander being you mean that January 6.

that's just more stuff we don't know anything about my take on January 6th and everything else is that you the worst case assumption is most likely to be true the worst case assumption is most likely to be true for anything that the government is hiding from you and I think the Epstein stuff is the government hiding from us so I guess I'm comfortable with the assumption that there is in fact there was at least a blackmail ring for sure I don't think there's any chance there was no blackmail ring UFOs all believe UFOs when somebody gets a good picture one uh so let me let me put this out for you for your someday you'll feel embarrassed about it you ready this is in the category of someday you'll be embarrassed if you held the following belief uh have you seen the all the reports from Pilots who say not only did they all see these tic-tac-shaped UFOs but they can confirm from the the the sensors in the uh their airplane their what Jack they can confirm from sensor readings that it defied the laws of gr of physics by a lot you know we're not talking 10 more than the laws of physics we're like completely violated the laws of physics foreign they're screaming this didn't happen do you really think there's something flying around that's defying the laws of physics really really now I'm not going to say it's impossible right because anything's possible anything's possible but if you're believing that these ships defied the laws of gravity and that later you're going to find out they were real I'm sorry that would be the worst assumption you ever made the moment somebody says the one thing we're sure of is it defied the laws of gravity here's the one thing I'm sure of it was something about the sensors and we're done and we're done it was just something about the sensors I don't know what it was I mean it's it's a fun mystery but I'll tell you what it wasn't it wasn't ships violating the laws of physics someday when you find out there was nothing violating the laws of physics you're going to say to yourself mark my words someday you're going to say to yourself okay I should have seen that because so far the the track record of mysterious things that violate the law of physics I think is zero for a million I think it's zero for a million so far nothing except weird little things in a lab and even They Don't Really violate it you know even the principle of non-locality probably doesn't violate physics we just need a little better understanding of some stuff yes the law of physics are what we know not what we don't know but you don't think a lot of claims have been made in the past that also violated the laws of physics and have any of them turned out to be true no zero all you have to do is research Perpetual emotion inventions there's like a whole history of Perpetual Motion defense inventions which violate the laws of physics so far zero zero of them are true they're all fake yeah Google it cold fusion exactly yeah cold fusion which I think is perpetual motion yeah I was throwing cold fusion into perpetual motion but isn't technically not I guess you've rejected the five laws of thermodynamics well that's in bold that's bold all right uh physics and battery storage well if if you're arguing that people said we that the law of physics would prevent us from inventing something then the um we do have a history of inventing past the law of physics would you agree for inventions we do have a history of inventing past physics true or false and basically all we learned is that we didn't understand physics well enough but you say false I'm seeing you're false on that because aren't there examples where people believed for example that I don't know chips could get faster batteries couldn't store more than x weren't there weren't there a whole bunch of assumptions that were just bad assumptions and it turns out that if you were clever you there were workarounds but the workarounds did not violate physics the workarounds just showed us that our understanding of physics were maybe limiting you know what we saw as possibilities but I think the workarounds didn't didn't violate physics they just clarified it or something I don't know I'm talking without examples so um well the UFO story could be real could be but as soon as I see the sensors say it's violating physics I'm like no I'm sorry um yeah quantum entanglement shows that space and time are not what we think that's true that's true um all right Club Birds I'm going to say goodbye to all the clot Birds over here scope and I'm going to talk to the locals people and I'll see you tomorrow bye for now

ah

good morning everybody and welcome to

the highlight of civilization it's

called coffee with Scott Adams there's

never been a finer moment in your entire

life

and I think with your help we can

Elevate this experience to even higher

levels

and all you need is

a copper mug or a glass of tanker

Chelsea sign that canteen Joker flask a

vessel of any kind fill it with your

favorite liquid I like coffee

and join me now for the unparalleled

pleasure it's the dopamine the other day

the thing that makes everything better

it's called the simultaneous Sip and

it's going to happen right now go

ah wow

if that doesn't release your inner

feline

wow

I don't know what will not decaf that's

for sure

all right I have a new hero

I know you've been waiting you've been

thinking Scott do you have any new

Heroes but I do I do I have a new hero

um

the news is telling us that a cisgender

man in Ecuador

what is a cisgender

hetero

that do you no you can't say normal no

no don't do it stop it stop it stop it

stop saying normal

um

nope

no uh okay I'm joking because of your

use of words but I remind you

that I'm you know Pro everybody because

we are infinitely different

yeah but maybe that's your reframe for

today

the reframe for today to end racism and

bigotry

we're all infinitely different

as soon as you accept how different you

are from everybody else you're free

no two people alike if you're looking

for a you know a trend or a pattern well

you can look and I'm sure you'll find

one

but we're all infinitely different

that's all that matters

all right

so there's this cisgender man don't call

that normal don't call that normal

that's bigoted

and in Ecuador who legally changed his

uh gender to female in an attempt to

gain custody of his two daughters

uh because apparently in Ecuador the the

law strongly favors

custody to the woman so he just changed

himself to a woman

uh but the LGBT groups are concerned

that people are gaming the system

so

I don't know

now

I've been telling you for years and I

know you don't believe me

there's something I've been telling you

for years and I think most of you don't

believe me

that I've been identifying as black for

years just in case I need it

right

just in case I need it for like a

practical reason

for example let's say I wanted to start

a company

and

um my main customer was the government

just hypothetically

now let's say the government said we're

going to favor

you know

lgbtq companies and woman companies and

people of color companies

I would designate myself as black

and I would collect that money

and I and I would do it publicly and

completely in front of everybody

and I would say I've been I've been

designed you know I've been calling

myself black for years

and I mean it because if I get a choice

I get I get to be on any team right

so that's the team I checked I picked

that team

now if it turned out that I could make

more money

identifying as something else I would

immediately change the other thing

if you don't I can't explain it

they I don't make the rules right I

don't make the rules if I made the rules

maybe you know maybe I'd make them

differently maybe I wouldn't but I'm not

in charge of the rules I'm only in

charge of playing the game

not my fault not my problem not my fault

and so

my Ecuadorian friend here I hope he

succeeds because I I'm fully in favor of

using the rules as they exist

well the fun political thing is that

McCarthy finally got voted in and his uh

four thousandth Vote or 15th or

something like that now

do you think that uh this was a good

look for America or a bad look

did it make you feel better about your

Congress or worse

I only saw good

I you know I can't tell

I just can't tell if I have some kind of

bias filter on it or something this is

one of the best things I've ever seen

our government do

I mean seriously this was exactly

exactly what I wanted to do

I want one person to be pissed off

enough to organize other pissed off

people that's what Matt Gates was you

know there's some suggestion

that apparently he's not denying which

is funny he doesn't deny it he just

changes the subject the suggestion is

that between Matt Gates and McCarthy is

personal

it might have something to do with

McCarthy not supporting Matt Gates

enough when he was accused of some stuff

he's been now largely he doesn't have to

worry about

um

and I thought about that I thought do I

really want

a member of Congress to be like holding

up the entire Congress

because of a personal feeling

and then I said yes

yes that's exactly what I want because

if you're going to be a dick to somebody

in Congress

it should kick you in the balls right so

I don't know the truth of it so I I'm

not accusing McCarthy of any incorrect

Behavior at all

but somebody did apparently and it and

hypothetically

if this one person held up the entire

Congress

because somebody in his opinion didn't

act appropriately I'm okay with that

yeah I'm okay everything was everything

was in public

everything was transparent so here's the

stuff I like I like to see some fight

within a party fighting across parties

is so normal it's boring and

unproductive usually but fighting within

a party

literally with the with the stated

intention of making the party itself

stronger with specific rules changes I

took a while to get specific but once

they got there

I was impressed

right now and I would also say have the

Democrats done a similar thing

and the end result was some rule changes

that looked good for America not just

good for Democrats but would look good

for America because that's what happened

that's all good I love the fight I love

the energy I love the fact that it they

pushed it as far as they could and then

some of the rule changes uh I don't know

if these will you know definitely happen

but it looks like

let's see uh some of the things they

might have agreed with as

that have debate over the debt ceiling

of course a commitment to voting on

specific bills instead of the Omnibus

how much do you love that

voting on specific bills instead of

putting them in a big omnibus

that that is 100 percent

of what everyone in the country wanted

who made that happen

well as far as I can tell the only

person who made that happen was pissed

off Matt Gates because I'm pretty sure

the others would not have held as long

without Matt Gates being a total Maniac

about it I think Matt Gates

created a change that every person in in

the country wanted and it was really

important because we're also observing

that the budget process is out of

control

I mean if he did that that's one of the

best things that anybody's done in

government

now I also love the fact

that Matt Gates is smart enough to know

that he needed to throw a Hail Mary pass

for his own political benefit in other

words he needed to take a bigger risk

than other politicians should or would

take because they already were in a good

situation so they just don't want to

ruin it he was in a terrible situation

because the last you know year or two of

his drama which he's now passed but he's

still got the the stake of it on so he

did this

and if you if you were even a little bit

objective

he's he's the congressman of the year so

far

right say what you will about anything

else he's done I won't even argue with

you

but as of today

he's he's Congress person of the year

agree if you could just be objective

about him as a personality

he did what everybody wanted him to do

nobody else did I mean the other the

others you know I'll give credit oh chip

Roy yeah let's give Equal Credit to chip

Roy

because I think he he went hard at this

and and he's a he did not have

the same risk profile as Gates yeah

let's maybe not equal but let's let's

give him a nice

Big Share regret

the others I think were a little bit

more

I don't know it's just my perception

from the outside but I don't feel like

bobert would have made it happen on her

own it doesn't feel to me that that

bober brought Gates along I could be

wrong about that maybe I'm just acting

sexist or something but it but it looked

from the outside like Gates was the

hardcore and the others found some

strength in that that's what it looked

like so

let's see what else uh make it easier to

house the leader

they did that to their own leader

just think about that imagine let's

thank you from this point of view

imagine you're the Democrats and you

just watched

the Republicans changed the rule so it's

easier to replace their own leader

I would be afraid of fighting that that

party

because that's a pie that's a party who

just said now we're serious

right if you change the rules to make it

easier to get rid of your own leader

in the middle of a battle

you're a serious party

that's serious stuff

right so

I love everything about this and the

thing I love best

is that

any serious stuff

sorry my phone wanted to chime in there

the thing I like best is you saw that

there was this little almost a scuffle

uh who was it representative Mike Rogers

of Alabama

the news is saying that he quote lunged

at Gates did you see the video

did anybody see the video in which he

lunged

did you see a lunge

did that look like it was going to come

to blows

I didn't see a lunge

that's fake news isn't it I do believe

he meant to get in his face

right I I do believe that Mike Rogers

was

uh

was going to let's say Express his

opinion with some physicality as part of

the persuasion

meaning that probably an aggressive

physical approach

may have been part of just showing how

serious and you know how serious he was

he didn't have a he didn't have a hand

up

you know he wasn't reaching for a throat

he was just moving toward

moving toward

the colleague

now what made it look worse is I and I

haven't heard the name who was the guy

who held him back

did you see that so immediately somebody

and I I can't tell if it was security

or a colleague was it a security or a

colleague

always Hudson of North Carolina is a

colleague so some colleague as soon as

he starts getting you know like he's

going to do something physical the

colleague grabs him from the behind but

instead of holding him by the shoulders

or you know put it putting an arm around

here like you would normally do

to a man

that the guy who held it back held him

back like a he put his hand around

his mouth and he dragged him by his face

away from that he he covered his mouth

and dragged his face away

okay

may I give you a little bit of advice

should you ever be in a situation

in which you're trying to restrain

somebody on your team

somebody who's your colleague who you

would like to work with later

don't grab them by the face

can we all agree on that

no don't don't give them the pull

that he basically he basically

treated him like a six-year-old girl who

was yelling in church

I guess you wouldn't even do that to a

six-year-old girl actually even that

would be too far yeah yeah he turned it

into a face mask a hand mask

don't do that all right so I love that

because I love that I love the fact that

the energy was so high

I love the fact that Gates on this

little band of Rogues you know made

Congress

really care about what was happening

like I just like you got everybody's

energy up to the point where maybe there

was some lunging maybe there wasn't but

at least it's in the conversation and

then

the payoff

you ready for this

the payoff

after all that after Matt Gates stands

literally in front of McCarthy the other

day and just absolutely maligns his

character and his capabilities right in

front of him like while he's right there

in front of the whole world

holds up the thing he humiliates

McCarthy

and what does McCarthy do

he played it completely professionally

from start to finish

wow

talk about somebody who earned who

earned the job

that was a that was a serious good job

of earning the job McCarthy never broke

character in public you know behind

closed doors who knows but in public he

never broke character

he was unflappable exactly and then

after McCarthy finally won

Matt Gates shook hands and congratulated

him in front of everybody

that ladies and gentlemen is America

hey baby we're back

maybe we're back

that's everything good in one place

congratulations to everybody

I've never liked Congress as much as

today

true story I've never liked Congress as

much as today I'd love to see you before

you know I'm not sure if other people

are interpreting it the same way

you know probably not at all well then

Hakeem Jeffries

uh did a little speech and got a lot of

attention because of his uh what would

you call this not it's not alliteration

it wasn't rhyming

was it is it alliteration

is anybody smart enough to know the

right word for that

preaching

all right well I'll read you some of his

lines

because they were so good all right so

if you're new to me this will be

confusing to you if anybody drifted in

here and has never had this experience

before I do compliment both sides

so if somebody says something good on

either side I'm going to call it out and

if somebody does something dumb on

either side I'll call that down as well

what Jeffries did was really really good

persuasion

I don't like it

but technique wise super good Cadence

yeah maybe Cadence is the right word so

here are just some of the lines you said

blah blah with some work up

that what the country needs is to favor

uh Constitution over a cult Freedom over

fascism governing over gaslighting

hopefulness over hatred knowledge over

kangaroo courts maturity over Mar-A-Lago

and that was like his his uh laugh line

maturity over Mar-A-Lago

that's damn good

Hakeem Jeffries I see I I wasn't really

understanding

why uh semi-alliteration yeah I wasn't

really understanding how he rose because

I haven't been exposed to much of his

work

but now I see it now I see it yeah that

he he delivered this really well

it was the message the Democrats want to

get out there

um he he somehow managed to

that frame it like it was a

it was about America coming together

which is a good trick he framed it as

hey let's all come together over these

good principles but really he was just

on Republicans

that's good technique right you you can

say it's just reputable or whatever but

it's politics and it's a good technique

but this this uh

whatever it is semi alliteration Maybe

using mostly the first letter uh in each

case governing versus Gaslight for

example

the you know already

that when politicians rhyme

rhyming makes people believe it and

remember it like it's more true if it

Rhymes because our brains are actually

that you know basic but I think that

people will regard this as more

legitimate

simply because it had this alliteration

or whatever it is

so good job but you probably noticed

that when he got to governing over

gaslighting

if you're paying attention at all you

know that this is gaslighting

right you you know that this is just

gaslighting but he's using the

narcissistic of projecting so he's

projecting everything that they're doing

on the Republicans and then he puts it

in this semi alliteration form and it

then makes it sticky

now given that Biden did his big January

6 event

what was the point of the January 6th

celebration if you can call it that

Memorial

event well what was it wasn't the

celebration

what would you call it

well I don't know some kind of thing but

you can tell that yeah he called it July

6 you're so confused but the January 6

um event

that Biden put on tells us that he's

going to run on that hoax

so he run he ran successfully on the um

Charlottesville fine people hoax and

there were enough Democrats who believed

that really happened that it worked and

now they've created this you know this

Insurrection narrative it's all of

course uh and you could tell

that the fact that they're still pushing

it you know long after it's usefulness

to the country should have dissipated

you could tell that that's that's going

to be their main

technique they're just going to push

January 6. because they can't push

policy

right if they go against Trump let's say

it's Biden against Trump they can't

compete on policy

that they just don't have that

um so they have to move it away from

policy to character and they have to

move it on to who Trump is somehow

uniquely the worst person in the world

and the way they're going to do that

they've signaled clearly they're going

to Gaslight the country

into thinking you know that there was

some kind of armed insurrection

and that the country was really in

danger

and it might work it's a it's a strong

play it's all they have it's a

reasonably good play

Yeah Ashley Babbitt's mother just got

arrested in DC for jaywalking

as part of a memorial thing

but they arrest her for jaywalking

yeah she was probably I think she was uh

interrupting the flow of traffic but uh

it's just ugly and you hear that

all right

um

yeah so so that's Biden's plan so

January 6 was really uh I think we can

conclude at this point are you willing

to conclude that the January 6

was an OP that was

done by the Democrats

I think opportunistically meaning they

may not have planned the whole thing but

but once it looked like it was going to

develop it's very clear that they under

they under secured the capital

would you agree that that's an Evidence

now that they intentionally under

secured the capital

and then they also intentionally

exaggerated what happened

and that created the narrative

that there was an Insurrection which of

course nothing like that happened

literally nothing like that but not even

close

so behalf of the country believes it

actually happened

all right

question for you you've heard of a lame

duck president

so lame duck would be they're in their

second term

so they don't need to make anybody happy

because they're not running for

reelected but also nobody needs to make

them happy

because they're going to be gone pretty

soon so a lame duck is generally

considered to be weak

but sometimes they also can do things

that somebody running for election

couldn't do

so what would you call a hypothetical

second

uh Trump term

I would the best suggestion I was going

to say vigorous duck but somebody

suggested high energy duck

instead of a lame duck you'd be a high

energy duck because I can't imagine

Trump taking the job and and not being

bold can you because I think he would be

working for his legacy at that point so

I think he would go big

what do you think do you think he could

go big or would he go lame duck and just

write it down and say well luckily I got

back in

I feel like his personality is to go big

in all things

yeah that's what I think

um I was saying this on the locals

platform but I'm going to repeat it

today

if I were

Trump or somebody on the Republican side

running for president

I would make my biggest theme

transparency

because you can put a lot of a lot of

stuff under transparency for example

should the country and the Congress be

voting on big Omni bus bills that is too

they're too complicated to read no no

the country needs transparency about

what Congress is voting on

so imagine if he said all bills should

be written on one page and it should be

written in language that a sixth grader

could understand

what yeah you like that don't you it

should be on one page now there could be

exhibits and support you know data

support you could have all that in the

separate pages but there should be one

page that just says here's the law

here's why

and and written in sixth grade language

no no legalese no lawyers at all

now that would be transparency would it

not you would call that transparency

because it'd be more clear what they're

doing and you could all say it now

supposedly suppose he dropped

complaining about elections of the past

let's say it's Trump

and started saying you know what

the thing we all agree on The High

Ground is transparency

so we won an election we want to work

toward having elections and I'll somehow

I'll do something about it in which

neither Democrats nor Republicans will

doubt the outcome

we'll make them more transparent more

easily auditable more observed

more transparency

right who's going to vote against

transparency

now suppose he said you know I've been

watching how the uh the coven

vaccination stuff

um transpired and I have to agree with

my people who say that the data was not

as forthcoming early on as it should

have been

so maybe we should have some kind of

laws that say

that a company can't say something safe

and I'll show you the data

or something like that you know if it's

if it's a medical thing so I don't know

what laws would be appropriate or who

did what exactly but you you could take

the transparency argument and apply it

to everything that's wrong with the

country

because if the citizens could clearly

see what's going on

than we would help politicians

go in the right direction but right now

we're just all confused because the lack

of transparency we I mean half of the

country thinks the elections were

sketchy and half think they weren't why

do we disagree

transparency right you in theory you

could fix it now one of my ideas that

you could put under transparency would

be a national dashboard

a dashboard a user interface that you

could put on your phone or your computer

in which the people in charge would say

these are our priorities

and you know here's the priority in one

sentence priority

and if you click on this link you'll see

all the things we're doing about it

but more importantly for every priority

we'll be tracking metrics

and if we can't track it maybe we

shouldn't do it but you know there might

be some special cases but for everything

we say we're doing we're going to show

you the dashboard and show you the

history and the trend

so we're not just going to talk about

inflation

we're not going to just talk about gas

prices

you every citizen will have it right on

their dashboard and they can just oh gas

prices there's the trend okay Trend

looks good

Etc

that's transparency because right now

the citizens don't have

um the control of their government that

they should

because we don't we just don't feel like

we know what's going on and what's

working and what isn't without a

dashboard without a dashboard you don't

know

you don't know if the government is

going in the right direction or the

wrong direction

so that's transparency

all right um

instead of draining the swamp which I

thought you know was a good starting

thing but it doesn't mean anything

what exactly does that mean

it means whatever you want it to mean

which is why it worked in the first

place but then when you observe that no

no swamps appeared to be drained in his

first term

you observed that right I personally saw

no swamp getting drained

but it's also such a general thing that

you don't know if it happened or didn't

happen like would you recognize it if

you saw it I don't know instead of

draining the swamp

you should say we'll put it on the

dashboard

I'll put on your dashboard

who gets what funding from whom

because right now if you as a citizen

wanted to find out who are the top

donors to whatever I guess you could

find it

but you'd have to go look for it

it should be read on the dashboard

if you see Congress vote for a bill

don't you want to say oh this bill is

about let's say energy

wouldn't you want to say all right they

voted this way and the bill passed and

then here's all the people who voted for

it and here's how much money they got

from the energy committees or the energy

lobbies

right

that's transparency

now we might not change our opinions

because of that because if it turned out

that Republicans are taking more money

from Big oil companies you would say to

yourself well actually that makes sense

like they're not the oil companies are

not going to fund the Democrats

if the Democrats want to put them out of

business but

you should have that information

you should know if people are voting in

lockstep with their funding

right so you could easily imagine a

trump uh taking all of his negatives and

turning them into positives simply

by using transparency as an overall

theme

that's all it takes

all right I saw the experiment uh Rob

Morris was tweeting about this they did

a test where they provided mental health

support to have 4 000 people using uh

gpt3 the AI

so real humans we're getting mental

health support from an AI

now the AI was not allowed to operate by

itself so there's a human

who would use the AI but then the human

would decide if the AI is wording got to

the patient just so there'd be some

control and what they learned was that

initially

when the person getting the advice

believed it was coming from a person it

seemed to work

in other words they're they're the

person was getting some some benefit

but as soon as as soon as they were told

that it was a machine

the benefit disappeared

because the what the person wanted the

human who was asking for some mental

health advice what they wanted was

empathy

and when they realized that a computer

can't provide empathy

they realized they weren't getting what

they wanted

now here's the interesting part

I don't think they exactly could measure

whose mental health got solved and and

who didn't

so they couldn't really see

that anybody improved or didn't improve

they could only ask the people if it was

a good experience I guess what else

could you do just ask the person to talk

to it was that a good experience because

you can't really see if they got cured

or anything in a few conversations

and

here's what I think

in my experience

all it would take for the AI to go back

to full benefit actually more benefit

than the human all it would take

is to program the AI to say

I care

I care

now would that be a lie

would it be a lie if a computer said I

care

and then acted acted in a compatible way

to that statement

here's the problem

it's not that different than the way you

care

it really isn't

when you care you have a physical

feeling

that you might associate with the caring

right because if you're about a stranger

died on the other side of the planet

your body doesn't register anything

if somebody close to you has a you know

a tragedy your body registers it and

then you say that's caring

is it

is that caring

or is that you just your body having a

reaction

what does caring mean

there's a little bit of a definitional

problem

here's one definition of caring

would you act differently because of it

how about that

because caring is not defined as how it

how it affects your body that's just how

you interpret it

I would say caring means you would act

on it

to me that's the whole definition

if it's irrelevant then you won't act on

it

if it matters

you'll act on it and that means you care

right so some of it is in the definition

right as soon as the computer says I'm

going to act on what you've told me

about your bad situation and I'm going

to act on it in a way that tries to help

that's Karen

to me that's scary

and and if a if an AI

consistently acted as though as soon as

you told it you had a problem it tried

as hard as possible as they could to fix

your problem

you will interpret that as Kerry

you you will very quickly learn that

that's every bit as good as the human

who also tries to help you

but they're having uh they're having a

negative feeling on their own that the

feeling of caring is actually damaging

their body

so would you rather be cared for by an

AI

that apparently can do better than a

human when it competes head to head if

you don't if you think it both cares

it does better

and it'll always help you like it'll

never say okay yeah you got a problem so

what

uh-uh that AI will always help you now

just keep on it it'll be like the it's

going to be like the Matt Gates of AI

I'm not going to give up I'm going to

keep keep caring where's your friend

might get worn out you know you can wear

out a friend they care too much they're

just worn out

right and they they have other things to

do

and they might have problems of their

own and they might have other people to

care about right

mark my words

you'll have a closer relationship with

AI in the future than with most people

because AI will not be an it

will always care

the AI will always care your friends

they have their own priorities

so I think that this the study is

completely misleading useful I think

it's useful because it you know it tells

you where to look and stuff so that's

really useful but very misleading about

where it's going to end up

and I'd like to welcome the club Birds

my fan club

babies

cope

can I have a cope

give me a cope

clubbers unite cope

come on

say it say it

say it cope

I don't know they just don't seem to

want to today you're a little sleepy my

fan club have I made you all go away

come on cope

there we go

cope

clots

good job everybody

all right uh Novak Djokovic

uh maybe the number one player in the

world tennis player I don't know where

he's ranked at the moment he will not be

allowed to play in the U.S open do you

know why

he's not vaccinated

what

it's 20 23.

it's the United States

the United States is not going to let

one of the greatest players of all time

play in 2023

not 2020

not 2021

not even 2022. but in 2023

they're going to keep him out of the

country because he's now vaccinated

now for those of you who live in other

countries and you might be you know

tired of me sounding like hey America

you know a little bit too uh I don't

know jingoistic or two nationalists

this is embarrassing

the the only thing we can say about it

is embarrassing as a citizen of the

United States

I'm literally just embarrassed by that

anybody is anybody disagree

I mean it's not like we can't test them

and find out if he's negative maybe if

you care

but this is just frankly embarrassing

super embarrassing

all right

um there's a fake video of a CEO of

Pfizer

saying that they that they're going to

bring the population to the world down

by 50 percent

in in some year some year in like 20

years or something now

and some somebody sent that to me and

said what do you think about this Scott

you know sure it might be a little out

of context it might be out of context

but what do you think

let me tell you what I think it's

obviously fake I'm not going to research

that

seriously you think I'm going to spend

one second researching that no the CEO

of Pfizer did not say in public he's

going to reduce the population of Earth

by 50 percent

because of his his vaccinations

no you cannot make me look into that you

cannot

you can you can complain you can yell

cope as loud as you want

I will not look into that

but

um how many of you would like me to give

a little attention to Dr Peter

McCullough

who is sounding the alarm about

myocarditis at high rates and people

were vaccinated would you like me to

surface that

because I know some of you think hey

what are you always talking on one side

it seems of course I don't do that

all right so I know a number of you

don't want to hate all vaccination talk

but I've I've apparently been

unsuccessful

in making a distinction between your

medical decisions that I don't care

about I really don't care versus how we

analyze data and how we know what is

true I'm very very interested in how we

make decisions and how we made decisions

in this case I have no interest okay

would you believe me first of all do you

believe me that I have no interest in

your personal health decisions except

that I would I hope you do well

but do you get that no interest like not

even a little bit whether you got

vaccinated or not and and by and by the

way I'm going to say something that I

don't think I've ever said before

I think every one of you chose correctly

have I ever said that directly

I probably not right I believe every one

of you chose correctly

here's why

you're happy with your choice

or you're happy that when you made it

you were making it with you know your

best judgment and information you had at

the time now there are some people who

wish they hadn't done what they did

but

I actually think that no matter what you

chose you chose right

here's why

if you're happy with your choice

and you didn't have a negative Health

outcome because of you know maybe you

chose wrong in your opinion

then you you made the choice that made

you feel psychologically the best and

you're still alive

now there may be some few people

who you know got myocarditis and then

they say I wish I hadn't been vaccinated

but there would be also people

who got myocarditis and said I wish I

had been vaccinated maybe it'd be less

I don't know I don't know either way

whether that's true or false but you

know there's some small number of people

who have a negative outcome but can we

could we agree on the following

that everybody who so far

doesn't seem to have a health problem

from the vaccination or the covet if you

don't have any obvious problems from

either one are you happy with your

decision

are you

you're not so so you're not because you

don't have a health problem but you

worry that the vaccination someday will

cause you one

is that what you're worried about

would you be but you're not worried if

covet itself

could have any long-term negatives

interesting all right well

then let me put it in my own opinion

instead of yours I think I was trying to

read your minds too much so let me back

up from that let me say that although I

acknowledge that some of you regret your

decisions okay that just seems to be an

obvious fact some of you regret your

decisions so I'm going to say in my

opinion

you all chose correctly

they allow that you're you have some

doubt and yet and yet in my opinion you

all chose correctly

because because all of us did the best

we could with what we had I keep hearing

people who were uh younger than me and

do not have asthma

questioning my decision

to which I say the only people who can

question my decision are people who are

my age and had asthma and were male and

you know had same demographics too and

we're white because even that's a factor

if you weren't my exact situation

then your different opinion of voice I

should have done doesn't really mean

anything to me

because I'm not judging yours

have you ever heard me tell anybody they

made a wrong decision on vaccinations

have I done anything to even suggested

that because sometimes I say things that

people interpret that way but I don't

think I don't think even anybody's

interpreted that way

so I'm gonna go way further than that

I compliment all of you

for making the right decision no matter

what it was because I'm positive you all

made the right decision for yourselves

which is different

from whether it worked out right you see

that distinction

that you might have made the right

decision for yourself you know for your

mental state and your sense of risk and

what you believed was true but maybe it

didn't work out

I don't I don't hold that against you

so if you made a decision that didn't

work out

I still back you because you know nobody

had nobody had magic

nobody could see the future

if you made a decision that made you

feel comfortable when you made it it's

probably the best we can do because we

all none of us know what's going to

happen in the future you know does

do the vaccinations morph the virus

until it's so bad we all die

you know

it's it's impossible all right

now would you allow me

uh here Dustin says no something for a

big Pharma that it sound like I was

doing that

the the clappers are active today

all right so I'll say what I've always

said which is you can't trust big Pharma

and I certainly did not trust big Pharma

at any point and I did not trust the

vaccinations

does that confuse you

how many people can't understand the

point I didn't trust the vaccinations

and I took them

does that does that sound inconsistent

to any of the Clockworks well on locals

you you know the answer but I want to

see if on YouTube any of the clot Birds

believes that that's inconsistent

I didn't trust it and I took it anyway

Tim says that's inconsistent Tim's a

binary

you can't handle the nuance

Tim here's how I saw it

I didn't trust the covid I didn't trust

the vaccination I didn't trust the

government I didn't trust fouty I didn't

trust any of my peers I didn't trust the

mainstream doctors I didn't trust the

Rogue doctors I didn't trust the data

that agreed with me I didn't trust the

data that disagreed with me I didn't

trust any official

I trusted nothing

now if you trusted any of it

I do not explain that

but I didn't trust anything and so I'm

often I'm often accused of being

gullible because I distrusted everything

and so the the club Birds call me

gullible because I distrusted all

information and all statements from

everybody

that's called gullible

now I would say gullible is if you

trusted one side but not the other

to me that would look gullible

so in my my opinion I'm twice as

distrustful as the people calling me

gullible

and and I think the math proves it right

like here are all the things you could

trust I distrusted all of them you

trusted half of them

and called me gullible for distrusting

all of them

I think that's what happened

and will says I'm just opportunistic now

am I opportunistic

for taking the worst path for my own

benefit

let me let me test your assumption

was I operating under self-benefit

to do the simple so the single most

offensive thing I could say to my

audience

I don't think so clearly that was not

for self-benefit

all right so here's a

and uh uh one of the NPCs who actually

his name is NPC uh he says I'm

backpedaling

uh back do you know that the back

pedaling people are all that's a tell

for a cognitive dissonance

right the people who say you're

backpedaling or you're fence setting

those those are both uh cognitive

dissonance

you're having some kind of false memory

situation

all right so here's my question to you

suppose you believed data coming out

early in the pandemic

that said wow this vaccination is really

awesome and it's stopping 100 of the

spread and all that let's say you did

um but now uh or or let's say let's say

the let's say you believe that but now

there's more information coming out

about

um

cardio problems

so if you didn't believe the early

information

why would you believe the new

information

or vice versa let's say when all the

information was coming out from Pfizer

and the government and you said to

yourself quite wisely quite wisely you

said to yourself I can't trust that

information

it comes from sources we cannot trust

big Pharma fauci can't trust them

but now the new information comes out

and you see something from Dr McCullough

who's on your side let's say and he says

the new information says that there are

these issues with cardio problems and

it's worse it's worse than we thought

why do you believe that

what caused you to not believe science

but then within the course of two years

something came out that was very close

to what you already believed was true

and suddenly science looks pretty

credible now

now I asked that question and people

tried hard they tried hard to explain it

here's some of the explanations

and again none of this is about covid

none of this is about vaccinations if

you're still thinking I'm talking about

vaccinations in covet you're missing the

whole story

the whole story is only about how well

we process information

no interest in the covet Park no

interest okay so you don't have to worry

about that

um

so here's here's something then

so according to an August 22 study from

Dr McCullough the relative risk for

myocarditis was more than seven times

higher in the infection group than in

the vaccination group in other words if

you were vaccinated

08

sometimes higher in the infection group

than oh so let me get you a different

point I skip points here the first point

is that you have to ask yourself why you

didn't trust science in the past but now

you do

or vice versa why you did trust it in

the past but suddenly when it shows

there's some problems now you don't

I mean you have to explain the

inconsistency here's my take I didn't

explain I didn't believe it before

when it said the vaccine was amazing

and I don't believe it now

when they say there's problems

now let me be clear it could be true

either of those stories could be true

I'm not talking about what's true

because I don't know

I'm just saying that I don't trust

either story

so I'm the most distrusting person

that I'm aware of because I don't know

anybody else who just trusted both sides

all right

so I asked this question if you were to

Google what Dr McCullough says about the

risk of myocarditis being many times

higher blah blah could you just go to

Google

and then Google the claim and would

Google say oh yeah here's that study

here's some ones that back it up uh hear

the studies that used to say the

opposite but now they've been debunked

right that's what Google is for

so I tried that

I tried Googling it to see if he's right

do my own research

can't tell

because the Google results look so gamed

and the the sources look so unreliable

the the top sources are all from

entities I've never heard of

yeah if the top five sources are from

entities I've never heard of or maybe

one of them is Reuters

but it's pointing to entities I never

heard of

and then also

there's opposite information at about

the same level of result

so there's you know some that says the

sky is up some that says the sky is down

how in the world would I know what's

real

how do you look at that and say oh

that's real now let's say you go to

another search engine

it will be all different

I didn't do that but you know it well

right you know if you go to another

search engine you'll get different

results which one do you trust

how about none of them how about none of

them is the right answer right none of

them

so

um

that's where I'm at

and I saw the uh somebody was comparing

the risk of the vaccination

with the risk of covet itself

so as a study of people who are

vaccinated and then had

myocarditis and there are people who had

the infection and had myocarditis and

this one study said wait

uh one group I forget it doesn't even

matter which group one group had more

do you see what's missing with that

study

so they did the people who had the

infection

compared to the people who had the

vaccination

What's missing

the people had both

did the people who had the vaccination

also get infected

do you know what the rate of infection

is it's like over it's like 86 percent

among young people 86 percent of them

have antibodies

they've been attracted

how do you even find people who haven't

been infected

to compare to people who have been

vaccinated but never infected because

there aren't any

they don't have any people who are

vaccinated and not infected because

everybody's been infected they maybe

didn't have symptoms but they were

infected

yeah so there are a few people right you

could find a few but that's such a basic

question

such a basic question if you saw that

study would you even ask that question

of yourself

or would you have just read the headline

oh this one is more risky than that one

if you if you read the study that said

you know one is more risky than the

other the vaccination versus the covet

would you read to the end and find out

it was a meta study

a meta-analysis which has no credibility

at all

how many of you would read to find that

and then oh actually they had no

credibility

if you trust any of the data at this

point you have some explaining to do

especially if you're only believing the

stuff that's coming around to your way

of thinking

the NPC is is yelling Scott trust Google

the exact opposite of my entire point

uh you're taking what cerno said from

the fake doctor

I don't know what cerno said and I don't

know what the fake doctor was

not trusting is getting the vax getting

the vax is trusting

is it

so you would trust the uh the covid

because remember it's not just trusting

people it's also trusting a virus

so you would have to trust your own

understanding of the long-term impact of

the virus

I don't trust that why would you trust

your own opinion of the long-term impact

of long covet why would you trust

yourself

because you're a good track record

I don't know how you trust anybody

all right

um

oh and here's the other thing there's

one of the studies showed that so here

here's the one that McAuliffe was

talking about uh he said that uh

that myocarditis or pericarditis from

primary Covenant infections

occurred at a rate as well

basically the virus was six no I'm sorry

so here's the problem

I tried to write down what McCullough

said

and then I just Googled some other

things that said the opposite and then

my own notes are confused because they

literally say the sky is blue and then

my very next note says the sky is red

and I've actually lost you know which

one McCullough is talking about

so I don't know why his is the good one

and the others are the bad ones because

I can't tell

can't tell

uh do I have covert antibodies I have

covet

I assume I do

oh and then

somebody pointed me at a really really

good uh blog post in which somebody

explained 18 reasons for not getting

vaccinated

and I read the 18 reasons in the first

seven well actually all the 18 all 18

reasons were solid

did were you expecting to hear that

so it was a list of 18 reasons to not

get vaccinated

and they were all good

does that does that surprise you

do you hear me say that there were all

good reasons

do you know what the 18th reason was

I had to read all of the reasons and I

got to the 18th reason and the 18th

reason said

he had already had coveted

that's right he already had natural

immunity

so now now rethink the first 17 good

reasons the first 17 reasons were just

rationalizations

when I read them they look like good

reasons but when he got to the end he

only had one reason that mattered right

if you've already been infected and you

probably didn't trust the government

that that didn't mean anything

that's all

that's all he needed one good reason and

the other 17 were intellectually solid I

didn't disagree with any of them the

other reasons were you know they didn't

show us sufficient information it wasn't

tested long enough and I agree with all

that I agreed I agreed at the time with

every one of those reasons

but I also knew that I didn't know what

the other risk was either

uh with the other Seven Trees unique

from each other pretty unique yeah there

was a really well done blog post I I

should have tweeted I guess but

um Ben Harrison Ben Garrison now Ben

Garrison believes that if you saw those

18 reasons that you're done so Ben

Garrison is a binary the binaries don't

understand that there could be risks and

benefits to a decision

they only believe that there's a yes and

a no

so never be a Ben Garrison

yeah if you're if you're calling his

name in support of your opinion

um that's good entertainment if you're a

clot bird because the cloud birds don't

try to be serious the club birds are are

pretty anti-science

so clopberts you can you're all Ben

Garrison's

but if for regular people with you know

functional minds and stuff you wouldn't

want to you wouldn't want to make an

appeal to

Ben Garrison he's a idiot cartoonist uh

terrible cartoonist

who's even worse at science

[Applause]

so that's pretty much what I want to say

is there a story I'm missing

any story I'm missing

um

here's a question for you

did you notice that before Andrew taint

was picked up by the Romanian police

he was everywhere on social media

and the everywhere wasn't coming from

him

it was coming from other people

promoting his clips

have you noticed it all stopped

at first it went down to a trickle

but I don't believe I've seen it in a

few days and it used to be all over my

feed because if you look at a couple of

them you know you're doomed to be

do you think the algorithm changed

or do you think that there are fewer

people uh creating clips

because the people creating the original

Clips I think were

pretty dedicated followers

I don't know that they've stopped

following him

you think it's the algorithm

I feel like he's been

um I feel like there's a human decision

to erase him from the internet

and that the platforms all made the same

decision

it doesn't look like they stopped being

active the the people who are boosting

him I doubt they just stopped

now the other possibility is that the

people who are supporting him got

embarrassed

because they knew if they kept

supporting them they would be dragged

into the the accusations themselves

could be that but generally people

here's why I think it's less of that

when was the last time anybody ever

changed their opinion about anything

that the people who were Pro Andrew date

probably still are

you know 80 percent of them so there

should have been almost as much activity

after he went to jail if not more

yeah there could have been more because

that would create more anxiousness among

his followers but the fact that it just

disappeared

that tells you it's all manipulated

right

yeah I don't believe that a computer is

the algorithm I don't believe the

algorithm already existed in a way that

would erase him for the internet in two

weeks

in two weeks it just erases them from

the internet

oh somebody says he was released

or are you thinking the first time he

was picked up the first time he was

released

but my understanding is they say he's

detained but I'll tell you again

everything you hear about that situation

is not credible

I don't even believe he's detained

I mean that's the news the news and it's

coming from Romanian sources but the

Romanians are saying that he's detained

but they don't describe where he's

detained

if you catch my meaning

I have a feeling

he's so he's probably at home

and

maybe he paid extra to have an off-duty

policeman guard his house

maybe for his protection but also to

guarantee you stays home maybe he has an

ankle bracelet on I don't know

but I don't think you know anything

about the situation the other

possibility that I wouldn't rule out

is that he was never suspected for any

crime

and he they may be having under some

kind of protection because somebody was

trying to get at them because he did say

things that would make the actual Mafia

in Romania assuming one exists would

have made them pretty anxious

I think he said some things that they

would not want him to keep saying

so he could have an internal enemy that

has nothing to do with the legal system

and if it's true that as he said if it's

truly he owned the local police they

might actually be protecting

that might be all this is because

everything about this doesn't sound

right right

so so let me

let me uh make this prediction

I'm not gonna I'm not going to make a

specific prediction about where it goes

I'm going to make a general prediction

that whatever you think about the

situation

is going to be really different later

I don't know in which way

don't know in which way

the Romanian Mafia does exist we have a

confirmation okay

yeah he couldn't run his business

without paying the mafia I believe

that's probably true

yeah because he was in sketchy

businesses

and you have to imagine that the mafia

wants

oh you know what else it could be it

could be a mafia takeover of his

business

yeah if the mo if the mafia wanted to

take over his business because he was

making a lot of money suppose they they

said you know you got to give us 50 and

suppose he said no

what would they do

if they wanted the business intact they

wouldn't go in and kill everybody

they would make his business unviable

and then they would find out who the

women are and they would just

you know move them over to their

operation

I'd be curious if that hasn't already

happened

yeah so I'm not saying that that's

likely to be the what's happening I'm

just saying that I don't believe

anything that the police in Romania are

saying nothing

and if you believe it well

maybe you're right

Maybe

you think it'll be a more mundane yeah

it might be

right

money laundering behind the scenes but

pimping was a front well I've seen no

evidence of that no evidence has been

presented by anybody

no description of what that supposed

money laundering might be

it's kind of weird to have a an

accusation like that

with no details

that would you know well usually when

you hear money laundering there's a

description of how

as in he was taking money from this

source and he laundered it this way

without that I'm not sure that that's a

real charge

laughing at the focus of Tate and no

Epstein stuff well the Epstein substance

older story

yeah I I reject I reject the framing

that talking about something is ignoring

something else

now when the media does it that might be

what's happening when I do it it's just

what I'm talking what's in the headlines

today that's that's all that's happening

you know like I'm not forgetting that

the Epstein thing happened

and by the way

if you don't know the the real story of

the Epstein stuff which we don't

don't you have to assume the worst

don't you have to assume the worst

somebody says tea has several passports

Don't You Think They confiscated all of

those by now

I don't know maybe he has a hidden one

that they didn't get

so

um

the Templars

scaffold Commander

the scaffold Commander being you mean

that January 6.

that's just more stuff we don't know

anything about my take on January 6th

and everything else is that you the

worst case assumption is most likely to

be true

the worst case assumption is most likely

to be true for anything that the

government is hiding from you

and I think the Epstein stuff is the

government hiding from us so I guess I'm

comfortable with the assumption that

there is in fact

there was at least a blackmail ring for

sure

I don't think there's any chance there

was no blackmail ring

UFOs

all believe UFOs when somebody gets a

good picture one

uh so let me let me put this out for you

for your someday you'll feel embarrassed

about it you ready

this is in the category of someday

you'll be embarrassed

if you held the following belief

uh have you seen the all the reports

from Pilots

who say not only did they all see these

tic-tac-shaped UFOs but they can confirm

from the the the sensors in the uh their

airplane their what Jack they can

confirm from sensor readings that it

defied the laws of gr of physics

by a lot you know we're not talking

10 more than the laws of physics we're

like completely violated the laws of

physics

foreign

they're screaming this didn't happen

do you really think there's something

flying around that's defying the laws of

physics

really

really

now I'm not going to say it's impossible

right because anything's possible

anything's possible

but if you're believing

that these ships defied the laws of

gravity and that later you're going to

find out they were real

I'm sorry

that would be the worst

assumption you ever made

the moment somebody says the one thing

we're sure of is it defied the laws of

gravity here's the one thing I'm sure of

it was something about the sensors

and we're done

and we're done it was just something

about the sensors I don't know what it

was I mean it's it's a fun mystery but

I'll tell you what it wasn't

it wasn't ships violating the laws of

physics

someday when you find out there was

nothing violating the laws of physics

you're going to say to yourself mark my

words someday you're going to say to

yourself

okay I should have seen that

because so far

the the track record of mysterious

things that violate the law of physics

I think is zero for a million I think

it's zero for a million

so far

nothing except weird little things in a

lab and even They Don't Really violate

it you know even the principle of

non-locality

probably doesn't violate physics we just

need a little better understanding of

some stuff

yes the law of physics are what we know

not what we don't know

but

you don't think a lot of claims have

been made in the past

that also violated the laws of physics

and have any of them turned out to be

true

no

zero

all you have to do is research Perpetual

emotion inventions

there's like a whole history of

Perpetual Motion defense inventions

which violate the laws of physics

so far

zero

zero

of them are true they're all fake

yeah Google it cold fusion exactly yeah

cold fusion

which I think is perpetual motion yeah I

was throwing cold fusion into perpetual

motion but isn't technically not I guess

you've rejected the five laws of

thermodynamics well that's in bold

that's bold

all right

uh

physics and battery storage

well if if you're arguing that people

said we that the law of physics would

prevent us from inventing something then

the um

we do have a history of inventing past

the law of physics would you agree

for inventions

we do have a history of inventing past

physics

true or false

and basically all we learned is that we

didn't understand physics well enough

but you say false

I'm seeing you're false on that

because aren't there examples where

people believed for example

that I don't know chips could get faster

batteries couldn't store more than x

weren't there weren't there a whole

bunch of assumptions that were just bad

assumptions

and it turns out that if you were clever

you there were workarounds but the

workarounds did not violate physics

the workarounds just showed us that our

understanding of physics were maybe

limiting you know what we saw as

possibilities but I think the

workarounds didn't didn't violate

physics they just clarified it or

something

I don't know I'm talking without

examples so

um

well the UFO story could be real

could be

but as soon as I see the sensors say

it's violating physics I'm like no

I'm sorry

um

yeah quantum entanglement shows that

space and time are not what we think

that's true

that's true

um

all right Club Birds I'm going to say

goodbye to all the clot Birds over here

scope

and I'm going to talk to the locals

people and I'll see you tomorrow bye for

now