Episode 1998 Scott Adams - Teach Me How To Recognize The Good COVID Data To Avoid The Same Mistake

to the highlight of civilization better than ever really today is going to be a burden a burner yeah and if you'd like to enjoy this at the maximum potential all you need is a copper mugger a glass of tanker chalice or Stein the canteen jogger flask of vessel of any kind fill it with your favorite liquid I like coffee and join me now for the unparalleled pleasure what got her with a microphone on the dopamine the other day the thing that makes everything better it's called the simultaneous sip it happens now go ah that's the best thing ever thank you Paul over on locals that little graphic you have of that so on the locals uh platform one of the members always puts up a little graphic to tell me if my sound is working on both platforms oh my God is that useful that is so useful I so appreciate that thank you Paul glider let's go privately over here on we're going to put the locals people private so when I turn off You.

Tube later they'll have their little special time now are you wondering why I'm in such a good mood are you wondering why I'm so damn happy this morning I mean I'm like crazy happy well number one the the rains have stopped and we've got a sunny California week now if you've not enjoyed a sunny California week they're pretty awesome but I haven't seen one in a while so all excited about that yesterday was amazing but it's even better I had a book deadline which is today actually and that meant I had to get all of my first round of edits done which are really hard because editing writing is hard but editing to an editor's changes when those changes involve moving parts around it becomes this huge Rubik's Cube so instead of writing which you're also doing as you're fixing stuff you're also holding in your mind the entire book hundreds of different sections and how like one phrase may have been more about this chapter than the other and so you have to hold all of it in your head and then then move it in different places like a it's almost like programming really you're moving like sections of code around to be in the right place it's the hardest thing I do period it's the hardest thing I ever do and the reason I'm so funny that I'm so uh happy today is that I finished it a few hours early and submitted it last night there is no better day in the life of an author there's no better day than the day you've submitted your stuff and you know it's a book now the next status will be a little more work but it's a book nothing can stop it like until you submit the you know the final or first round of edits really until you submit those you're not entirely sure you have a book you you've worked for a year you wasted it you know you could potentially waste a year of your life because it takes all of your free time all of it and today I know it's a book so somebody says what about the day your trophy wife left you was that supposed to be my best day I'm not sure what that cut there's somebody there's somebody who mentions my wife or ex-wife on on every topic so let me tell you my latest uh troll uh technique so you know I'm still of course every day I get you know loads of uh insults and yesterday I was looking through the uh the media stories about me you know there's a sub stack about me how terrible I am and there's uh and there's a whole bunch of yes last few days a bunch of media reports about me now here's the funny thing none of them were even close to accurate they were just so wildly mischaracterizing me in my situation what I'm thinking and what I've done it's all it's all just completely fiction and it's become so funny that I'm just going to do an LOL on all of it because there's nothing to say about it I mean you'd have to go back a year and fix like a hundred different you know misconceptions so it's all just LOL now so I'm having a great week just looking at all the all the stories about me that are just ridiculous Rasmussen as a poll 58 of people polled are considered important that a company shares their social and political values including 28 who think is very important this feels like a big problem now even though most people the vast majority according to the rasmic simple most people think that the product is the most important thing right so most people say yeah it's a product oh yeah 28 is very close to one quarter it's very close to one quarter yes I saw the uh the Trump um retweet of my endorsement on truth that was cool um so anyway here's my question as we become more awoke and when people are putting more pressure on companies to do stuff um don't you think we almost need like a new I feel like we almost need a new Constitutional Amendment because aren't we all better off the government and religion are separate well it wasn't that like one of the smartest things that we oh you say no well I mean we're based we're the Constitution is based on a sort of a Christian bias if you can say that so I suppose you could say that in some ways it is a religious document they just they just have some walls that say don't get your religion in with the workings of the government now I think I think that's worked I think that's worked but I wonder if we should do the same thing for business don't you think the worst thing you could do to the economy of a country is mix your politics and with the business because we already have laws right if the companies are following the laws I feel like I'm done I mean I can have my opinion and stuff but I don't want my opinion to put them out of business if they're following the law now I might want to change the law that's a thing I can see that I might want to ban some companies that are especially bad but should we really be trying to micromedage companies that feels like the worst thing you can do I I almost think like we need some kind of standard to keep our business out of it now I do like transparency so to the extent that the external pressure causes them to be more transparent that's probably good but I feel like there's a better way to get there so I don't like having more government regulations but separating religion from government I think worked and now we might at least think about it for separating politics and business because it's just crushing businesses am I wrong about that isn't the politics of it just crushing businesses that didn't need to get crushed now they should also stay out of it so if you if you've made an argument that says well if Disney for example let's say Disney decides to enter an argument that's a political argument well you know then then maybe then maybe they're you know they're putting themselves out there for a little pushback but if they're minding their own business and obeying all the laws I think we should stay away from them let them do what they want but you know it would probably help the businesses to make it illegal it would probably be a boon to business wouldn't it because let's say you're the CEO and your let's say your customers and your employees and stockholders are all yammering at you hey be more awoke or be more political or say something about climate change what's the CEO going to do pretty much bow to the pressure right but what if the CEO had backing backing them a law and the law said you you can't speak out as a company on a political item you can speak out personally personally of course but companies can have an opinions oh how about that companies can't have political opinions they can do what they want to do and the individuals can have any opinions they want how about that and how about at the same time we say you can't be fired for your political opinion how about that can't be fired for your political opinion even if you say something on social media that the company doesn't like yeah I feel like there are a few tweaks we could make to account for the fact that social media changed the balance of power because because I think the regular media you know had some balance with with business but social media is the wild west and now it's just forcing business to respond to basically the randomness of social media that's that can't be good in the long run anyway I don't have the I don't have the best idea for fixing that but something needs to be done um here's what I don't like to say we should have a national conversation about that I hate hearing that because I'm I'm actually criticizing myself at the moment for bringing up something I didn't have a better idea for like probably shouldn't do that I mean I'm just throwing out that Constitutional Amendment thing but even I don't think that's necessarily a good idea just put it down there all right let's talk about uh are you aware that China built a technology and it's got a user interface where China can control the minds of Americans actually through the interface did you know that how many of you knew that there's actually a user interface that China can control the the minds of Americans like literally no joke that's a real thing how many of you do that yeah it's called Tick Tock and people think it's something else now here's the thing why is it that Congress has enacted on tick tock because if you said to them do you know that the Chinese government literally not hyperbolically actually literally has built a tool that they can tweak very easily with the user interface to change the minds of Americans to change our minds on important political things now nobody nobody doubts that social media can do that right is there anybody who's had social media doesn't change anybody's mind no everybody does that everybody knows that China controls Tick Tock and now we know from article and Forbes The Tick Tock literally has a button that any employee I guess some employees can can touch it's called the heat heat button they touch one button and they can make any uh any content on Tick Tock go viral they can make it go viral with one button now let me ask you this I don't use tick tock is there anybody here who uses Tick Tock must be some of you bunch of you use tick tock all right so for the not very many of you actually that's good but for those who do let me ask this question have you seen a lot of anti-fentanyl content on tick tock you know a lot of content about the overdoses and a number of people dying and and specifically where it's coming from have you seen that is Tick Tock just full of the biggest issue for young people because Tick Tock skews younger right younger and what is the number one cause of death for young people it's actually drug overdose and guns but uh oh well actually that's a good comparison I'm assuming that since the two biggest problems for young people death wise would be guns an issue that the left likes um and then Sentinel right so those of you who use tick tock if you want to wonder hey is this Tick Tock already being weaponized against Americans it would be easy it would be easy to check is it a check all you'd have to do is see is there more viral content about mass shootings and how guns should be banned and does it roughly match the anti-fentanyl information especially mentioning that it comes from China all right right so so you could you could easily check could you um why somebody saying not guns I don't know what you I don't know what not guns means they must have plenty of content that's anti-gun am I wrong does Tic Tac have anti-gun content or not I'm just assuming that it leans left on that topic Am I Wrong give me a fact check on that I guess there's not enough Tick Tock users on here to to fact check me as I go but it's easy to check right now why why would Congress ignore this do you think China would ignore it if we built a user interface to control their youth and that was working it totally works nobody's questioning whether it works I don't think they would ignore it that's why the young people in China can't use tick tock they have a different version in China that's a safe version yeah so it's possible that Congress isn't doing nothing because they're all bought off but there's another possibility Congress is too old to understand the topic Congress is too old to understand the topic that's my current thinking and and I'll be a little more specific if if you had never been on Tick Tock or you'd never use let's say Instagram and most of them probably you know have somebody else send a tweet and maybe they know a little Twitter maybe they got some Facebook going on but they're not really social media consumers so much they're more like more like producers not consumers now if you're a consumer and you've done what I did which is you pick up Instagram you say oh I wonder if there's any good like Instagram stuff and then you spend about a second scrolling and you feel your entire body being taken over okay I'm actually a trained hypnotist and I know exactly what's happening to me right now and I can't stop scrolling kitten pictures and it's feeding me infinite Jordan Peterson videos and they're all good and what are these attractive women I like looking at I think I'm done doing the live stream because I Can't Take My Eyes Off of these reels now I understand social media at a cellular level a cellular level I understand social media with my I'm sorry I promise I wouldn't do that this year I understand social media with my body I didn't read an article about it if you read an article that says oh this this social media is pretty it's pretty sticky you know maybe people will be hooked on it like we all know logically it's addicting right but if you haven't used it you have no idea how addicting this would you agree with that that if you haven't used it yourself and experienced the the pull you you could feel Tick Tock or Instagram I in sort of a similar thing you can feel Instagram take over your body you can feel it taking over your body right if you can't if you've never experienced the feeling I don't think you would take it seriously because there are a number of members of Congress follow me on Twitter they've seen my they've seen all of my tweets for a lot of them and they know that people say hey Tick Tock is addictive and it can influence people if about if I did a quiz of all the members of Congress they would all get the right answer don't you think you know does does social media Influence People yes I'll bet every one of them would get the right answer does tick tock influence people yes right answer is Tick Tock controlled by China yes I believe that Congress would get all the right answers in the quiz every one of them probably every one of them but I'll bet there are very few who've used it if you used it you're going to kick it to the curb really fast because you feel it and you've also had the experience of you all ah just listen to this and you've all had the same experience so mine is not unique I have considered and talked with friends about maybe taking singing lessons vocal lessons because yeah I've learned the drums and tried to learn the guitar and I was just curious whether anybody could learn to sing and I have you know no skill or aptitude and so I was kind of curious I've never written it down I don't think I've never tweeted it and my and my my advertisements are full of vocal Essence being offered full of vocal Essence now do you have or is your feed full of vocal lessons no I never wrote that down never wrote it down but I said it out loud said it out loud now do you think that Congress you know the the 80 year old people in Congress do you think that they've experienced talking about something in the privacy of their home and then watching it show up on their feed do you think they've experienced that maybe a few the younger ones you know AOC has I'm sure but I don't think that Congress is young enough to have actually you know mind melded themselves with social media to know how powerful it is so I'm thinking it's actually an information problem as in you can't communicate to somebody What a Feeling feels like right like intellectually they all get it but I don't think they know what it feels like if they did it'd be over there would be no Tick Tock if if the if Congress used it for a week it would be gone that's my first that's my best hypothesis because it could be just corruption it could be exactly what it looks like China just owns the Congress it's possible well antifa is back and uh there's no reason they ever disappeared and there's not really a strong reason they came back but as Tucker Carlson uh conspiratorially suggests they're nothing but the military arm of the Democrats and they come whenever the Democrats want to tell the public that the country is falling apart and they need to trade out the leader so the first leader they got rid of was Trump and it started looking like they want to get rid of Biden so antifa might be a way to get rid of Biden because it just makes the country look unstable because they get so much news coverage now apparently antifa people uh instead of being executed which seems like you know the obvious play uh are being just released but in but I think in Atlanta they're going to be a little tougher on them the Atlanta police say they're going to charge them so we'll see um I think I'm going to agree with this take I'm going to agree with the stake antifa appears to be an entirely artificial Democrat Army I don't believe that all the members of antifa know what they are or why they're there I think a lot of them are in it for the lifestyle and to you know meet women it's the only way they can um but I think that the leaders the leaders are working for a paycheck and if we don't know who's paying them um I think classifying them as domestic terrorists and also Democrats is accurate now they wouldn't identify as Democrats because they're uh you know they're for chaos but consider the fact that they're not asking for anything just just that just that alone they're not asking for anything are we done there's nothing else you need to know about them if they're burning cities and not asking for like some specific demand and they're not asking for anything that could be provided right no it's obviously to create chaos and obviously somebody's paying them so it's a what if everything is exactly the way it looks all right more on that on that note it turns out that there is a FBI agent I don't I don't even know what to say about this story The the story is so mind-boggling that you just there's no comment on top of it they can do anything to make it more outrageous but so the federal prosecutors are going after the head of former head of the counterintelligence for the FBI New York office they're saying you laundered money from some Russian oligarch apparently was a same one who was giving money to uh manifer of course so sure enough the FBI guy I think he was in charge of making sure this didn't happen was doing it himself so once again the the the Tucker Carlson theory that I thought was batshit crazy batshit crazy that the Democrats do whatever they're accusing you of every time every time it comes true this is exactly what they're accusing Republicans of they were doing it they were literally taking money this guy was literally taking money from Russia and probably using it in service of Democrats it was exactly what you thought yeah and the the you know the pandemic looks like it's going to be exactly what you thought your worst suspicions everything is exactly what you think it just seems exactly what you think so uh anyway I'm fascinated by that but let's take that concept that everything is exactly what you think to the fact that there are more classified documents that yet another Joe Biden home now let's discuss how it looks number one nobody can explain why Joe Biden has so many homes we should be done that that should be the end of his term right that he should be like immediately swept out of office with one sentence nobody knows how he got all those homes nobody knows there's there's no Theory there's no hypothesis we just decide not to talk about it what is the president we're not going to talk about how he mysteriously got a great wealth without having a job that provided that much income no nobody's curious well what if that's exactly what it looks like he's been on the take for decades that's what it looks like and so what if it's exactly what it looks like now apparently he had classified documents like a snail Trail wherever he went you know now I speculated that he was leaving the document so he could find his way back from wherever he went I don't know if that's true just speculation but three locations so far right three is a pattern one could be a mistake two could be a mistake three is a pretty clear pattern especially since it's documents that aren't predate his presidency now in these same homes we we presume that Hunter Biden had access to all three places correct Hunter Biden had easy access to all three places and we know that he was trying to sell at least influence to foreign countries so what it looks exactly like is that Joe Biden for decades has been a huge Criminal for decades a huge Criminal and that Hunter is part of monetizing it and that they've been offering or selling State secrets to other countries four decades if everything else is exactly why what it looks like why would this one be different it looks exactly like it and you would have to take a pro you'd need a crowbar to pry me off that opinion because there's no there's no information countering it at all now remember individuals are innocent until proven guilty so the bidens as individuals innocent until proven guilty but Joe Biden is also the government and the government is guilty until proven is so if you're going to walk around being my president and looking guilty as heck it took me that was hard to pull that one back guilty as heck well I'm gonna assume you are so as of today my operating assumption is the criminal the the president of the United States Joe Biden is and has been a major Criminal and a Trader for decades that's that's my working assumption because all information suggested now I'm open to I'm open to him opening his books and explaining how he got these homes I'm open to you know finding out that it's all a big lie and it's all some big conservative conspiracy theory and uh he doesn't even sniff girls hair that's all just a lie so I'm open to calendar evidence but as of now I think it's a safe statement of fact preliminary that were led by a major Criminal which would explain why he's not doing anything on the border useful and why he's not doing anything about Tick Tock and Fentanyl and it would explain everything so if it explains everything that should be your working hypothesis so we should all just assume it true just assume it's true and if he wants to prove it isn't I'm open to that all right one of my uh favorite things to watch on the internet is you know you're all watching the Crowder the Crowder versus The Daily wire you know where daily wire offered him a deal but in it was uh some Clauses to say if he got canceled on social media that he that they wouldn't pay him as much money some people called that a penalty I called it a normal business deal in which you're sharing Revenue a penalty I guess all of my contracts are penalties I guess my book deals a penalty because you know what if I don't sell enough books that publisher is not going to give me money can you believe it like if I don't produce money for both of us they won't give me my half I know I know it's like well not half but whatever it is but it's totally Criminal that if we make a deal that we'll both make money and then we don't make any money they're not going to pay me bastards wow anyway so uh here's my favorite thing is watching Mike serenovich disembowel Crowder's argument at all of his supporters and you know he's he's the only one who can see the whole field that's talking about it uh you know because you know I'm always a big fan of sirovich in general but you know he's an attorney he's a business person he's seen enough of the world that he knows what a business deal is supposed to look like and and he sees this entire thing for what it is with you know I don't think there's any hidden hidden uh you know like dark Corners I think he sees the whole field and he's calling he's calling the balls and Strikes here it's kind of hilarious so you should watch you should follow a certain image anyway but you should definitely look at his his crowded comments I'll tell you what he's saying uh so you know Crowder's claiming that um big Khan as he calls it the big conservative groups are working with big Tech so they're not exactly on the other side of big Tech they're working with them because they like to monetize you know through big Tech so they want to keep them on their side so his his take is that nobody is sort of working for the artist who doesn't want to get banned on social media because all the the big conservatives are just working with the platforms like everybody else now where certificate asked is give some details about he goes he goes how people keep saying daily wires in bed with big Tech examples and then he says he's not a daily wire you know Fanboy but can can anybody give an example of how the daily wire is doing something with big Tech that you wouldn't like like what would be that now why did we have to get to today and why did it have to be Mike cernovich to ask the question uh do you have even one example just just one example now maybe he does but why haven't we heard one example up until now no examples self-censorship no all right well I think it's up to uh Crowder to give us some examples and maybe he has them if he has them we'll talk about it because I'd like to know that wouldn't you I mean if his claim if his claim holds up I'd certainly like to know it so give us some examples maybe you can flip us to your side uh and then I guess we found out that uh Crowder says he wasn't about the money and then he was asked on Tim Poole's show Tim cast he was asked but didn't your agent uh ask for more money but it wasn't about the money but your agent countered and asked for more money and uh Crowder I think he acknowledged that his agent might have but he didn't but he didn't so what do you think Mike cernovich said that about that that Crowder didn't make an offer but his agent did it's exactly what you think exactly what you think all right foreign so let's talk about that border crossing I saw an Adam Shaw tweet he's a Fox News um journalist reporter I'm not sure what they're called These Days correspondent Maybe um and he says the Border numbers for December are out this is for one month for one month uh the number of border crossings uh 251 000 encounters that's how many encounters or we don't know how many crosstons didn't get counted that was just the number of encounters encounters how many do we stop one and four does anybody know how many we stop only one in three one in ten I have no idea my guess would be one in four like with no background information to back that up all right well so that's a pretty high run rate but again let me remind you how Trump can win both Republicans and Democrats on Border issue High Ground maneuver you say this it's not about stopping people coming in it's about having a system where we can let the good ones in and stop the stop the criminals for example so what we need is some independent group of economists to tell us what's the right number and mix of people to let in and let that all be public should be a bipartisan group you know maybe one more Republican just because if Republicans put it together everybody gets to have one more person if they're in charge um and then make it all public like the OMB you know one of the most surprising things to me is that the office management and budgets is actually deemed somewhat credible by both sides am I wrong about that give me a fact check on that is is it a fact that the OMB that always scores the the federal budgets aren't they considered credible I mean maybe not but I always thought they were because they work for both Administrations and they're I don't think that the people the staffers I don't think they're necessarily appointed are they maybe just the head the gbo or the CBO it's a CBO all right whatever it is so do you think that there could be a credible permanent organization and maybe maybe it's something that's already in the government that would tell us what is the number of uh immigrants and what types and from where to come in because I don't think the President should make that decision do you any president I don't think the President should decide on the mix that's that's way that's way outside outside their strike zone I think economists and business people should decide on the mix you know with input from business how many employees do you need that you can't get and and you know then then also there should be advocates for Americans right so if you've got some kind of a group doing that calculation you need at least somebody in that group who's gonna say okay but you got to consider you know how that's going to come out of the pockets of the poor directly or indirectly and all that stuff so I think Trump can take the high ground and say let's take the president enter the decision who comes in let's have a tight border but take the take the politics out of who comes in how does that not work I I think I think Trump just walks into the presidency if he says that I think you just walk right in because he if he just says you know I'll do the president thing of controlling the Border but separately let's take the who gets in out of politics and we'll create a bipartisan group you tell me he wouldn't get elected on that in a heartbeat he would yeah easily he would just walk into the office if he said that because the the border is where people put up the most resistance because they they feel the dog whistle just take the dog whistle out because it's not something Trump needed right he didn't need a dog whistle so just take it out all right um there was a weird story about uh Demar Hamlin the football player who collapsed in the field and I guess he is healthy enough to be walking around and he attended a game yesterday but he wore a mask and sunglasses and a hat and never showed his face so the videos of him don't show his face so of course of course of course people think it's not really him and he died okay I'm pretty sure we would know if he died like that would be a hard one to keep a secret so I don't think he died I think he might have you know more to do with who knows just didn't want to talk to people or whatever it was so you may have had some medical or other reasons but uh are you amazed that we've got to today and we don't we don't have a cause for his problem there's no official cause may we take the standard that we have been using up to this point today the standard is maybe it's exactly what it looks like what if it's exactly what it looks like because what it looks like is he may have been vaccinated recently am I right because if that were not the case I'm sure they would have told us that right up front if if you were I guess they all had to be vaccinated but but if he had been recently vaccinated let's say recently boosted it's got to be that am I right now they're now saying it so you can never be 100 sure but if your gut instinct is to say well if it looks exactly like it and they're not even bothering to deny it that should be your starting assumption your starting assumption is that you got the vaccination and fell down they don't want to tell you am I right now let me make a distinction I also was debunking some of those suddenly died athletes because a number of them actually were video people died before the pandemic and some of them didn't die and they were fine they just got up so a lot of the a lot of the video you've seen of athletes dying a lot of it was fake for sure but not all of it you know like the not all of it was debunked but there were just some obvious uh ones that were wrong but this is a different situation this is one specific person who is you know having a public medical situation and is not telling you the thing you would most want to know did you recently get vaccinated oh that's all you need to know clearly that's the problem here now I'm not saying that the vaccination injured it I want to be clear about that but it's pretty clear that they're not telling you he got vaccinated recently and does anybody disagree that we could conclude that with a pretty high degree of certainty that he was probably boosted recently and I think probably all of them were right don't don't all the all the professional athletes have to get boosted like boosted and boosted and boosted I think they do I think it's just required so yeah you should assume it's exactly what it looks like that would be a fair assumption all right um so so there's an update on Russia and Kiev by the way stay with me if you want to see me uh admit more about things I got wrong on the pandemic if anybody likes me to admit I'm wrong stick around we'll do that last um so there's some people speculating that uh Russia is going to mass forces in Belarus and then attack Kiev from there and you know destroy Kev and declare a victory or something does that sound like something that might happen do you think that's going to happen that feels unlikely to me yeah I'm not going to rule it out I I think that given the winter pause will you know it changes everything because you don't know which side did a better job of preparing for after the pause so I think at this point uh the war is a toss-up I don't think as of today you could say Ukraine or Russia are winning it looks like it looks like a toss-up to me what do you think I think it's now in solidly unpredictable territory not that it was ever super predictable admit defeat you mean that mint defeat that Ukraine will lose I'm always open to that I I I've predicted that Russia would be unsuccessful conquering Ukraine but if they wait long enough I I would acknowledge that if Russia wanted to you know risk everything and wait long enough that they could take Ukraine probably yes I'll give you that all right um it's a draw I think the most likely outcome is a draw with forever fighting in the you know some of those recently captured areas that's what I'm guessing so um there's a new study that says that vitamin D deficiency was found in 82 percent of covet cases but the general population is only 47 so the vitamin D deficiency was twice as profound um in the people who got covet and probably the outcomes as well now I would like to do a competition and I I did a little Googling and I couldn't determine I feel like I am the first person in the world to say in public I'm probably not so this is where you get to debunk me so if you like to embarrass me this is your opportunity I believe I'm the first person in the world who said that the country differences and the the demographic differences like black people having worse time with covet that that was a vitamin D pattern now hold on hold on let me be specific I'm not no I'm not the first person to say vitamin D was important to outcomes hear that clearly I'm definitely not the first person or even close to say that vitamin D was would help you recover would you agree that that everybody said that like doctor said it lay people said it early on like right away everybody said more vitamin D so that part I'm not I'm not claiming anything I was just one of a million people who said the obvious hey vitamin D is good for you all right so I'm not making any credit taking any credit for that I'm being very specific I believe I'm the first person who said it's the reason that you're getting different outcomes in different countries and different outcomes across uh black versus white Etc I believe I'm the first and and here's why because when it when it occurred to me I'd never heard it so the only thing I can know for sure is that when it occurred to me I hadn't heard it yet but it might be out there so so if somebody has a source because once I found out that Sweden um routinely gives people Vitamin D supplements and cod oil or something I don't know once I realized that the the reason that Sweden was an exception is that they had a lot of vitamin D and then if you ever figured out why Africa Africa never had a problem is that wild that Africa basically escaped the pandemic without doing much of anything do you know what the vitamin D rate is in Africa really good because they spend a lot of time outside in the sun it's really good so even though they're you know mostly black so they have tougher time absorbing on average they spend so much time Outdoors that they have good vitamin D now Africa is also young and thin right some people said oh they have lots of vibramectin but it's probably you know it can't be more than 10 percent of the population yeah I've removed in probably less than 10 percent I I would imagine that most people in Africa are on any kind of pharmaceutical drug at all yeah and I and maybe 10 for hydro hydroxychloroquine and stuff but um those things are definitely factors or could be but the the one that just jumped out was that every group that had low vitamin D was were the ones everybody said was getting hit the hardest so I put that out there that nobody made the Country Connection before I did do you want anybody want to fact check that yeah find somebody who said in public anybody who had a You.

Tube or a tweet or something that the country difference not and I I know you're just going to send me people who said vitamin D D is good do not send me anything that just said I said vitamin D is good stipulated I get that we all agree with that just the country difference I think that was first I think I was first in the world actually but could be wrong all right um here's I used to work in big corporations and if you've worked in a big Corporation you know there's a process that they like to do in the big company if something doesn't work you make a big mistake a bad product or whatever uh your your project fails they like to do a postmortem to find out what they learned right so I would like to find out how so many of you got the right answer about the vaccinations whereas I didn't so I'm going to try to figure out and maybe you can help me figure out what heuristics what rules of thumbs what what sort of common sense but also data did you look at and one of the things that people most complained to me when I said that I I was giving the win to the unvaxed people so I gave them the win because they definitely got to the right place and I'd like to learn how they did that because I got to the wrong place because now I have a vaccination in me but I'm not worried about covid so now I just have to worry about the vaccination right so I lost right so having said that and be very clear that the winners of the people who use some different system to analyze stuff I wanted to find out what I did now I made the mistake of saying all the data is unreliable so I didn't believe the data from the official sources but I also didn't believe the data from anybody who has disagreed with the official sources and so to me it was a data free environment but it was a data free environment for many of you but a lot of people said no Scott you're wrong there was a lot of good data and I've been sending a number of people said they've been sending it to me and I've been ignoring it so let's fix that right wouldn't you say that was a big mistake on my part that there was in fact good data it was presented to me I didn't have to go look for it and then I discounted it and then I made the wrong decision because I discounted it would you agree that's an accurate statement so we're going to try to correct whatever the hell is wrong with me with your help and there will be a little whiteboard here so I asked people I asked people how they did it on Twitter this morning like how did you do it like how did you know what was the good data and what was the bad data I'll give you some answers um and then you can add some answers if anything is left out right so here are all my problems the things I didn't do right uh see James pop these are people on Twitter who responded I said for me it was just pragmatic how could something so new talk about the vaccination how could something so new be remotely ready for human use in such a good time short time good that's a good starting place isn't it would you agree that that's a good solid common sense no dispute about the facts there's nobody who's going to question that the vaccination was rushed relative to what we would all expect or like right good point and yeah sorry I I like that point so I I responded I have a lot of respect this I tweeted back I have a lot of respect for the people who were smart enough to avoid a hastily prepared vaccination is that fair I I do have a lot of respect for people who were smart enough to avoid a hastily prepared vaccination in favor of a relatively the relative safety of an engineered bioweapon that escaped from the lab so the people who were smart enough not to take the hastily prepared vaccination and rather you know go to the relative safety of an unknown bioengineered weapon made the right call and so I'm trying to learn from them all right I I put too much weight on an unknown bioengineered virus that looked like it might have been a weapon of mass destruction with God knows what kind of future impact but I put a little too much emphasis on that whereas I should have been focusing more on the fact that the uh and I knew this I knew the vaccination was not tested as much as others all right so um then there were people who send me good data and I kept saying but how did I know it was good you see the problem because people were saying I have the good data and I send it to you and I saw it in many cases I saw it but how was I supposed to determine that that was the good data and so I asked people how did you know because I couldn't tell to me it all looked sketchy like it all looked bad I didn't see any good data nothing that I trusted but other people did and they say they could sort out the good data from the bad so I was asking how they did that and here's some more answers on that um here here's how some people did it um some people said you should trust the people who were banned that that's like a flag of credibility that the people who are banned were more credible than the people who are not banned and you know I'm not trying to live in the past I'm trying I'm trying to prepare for the next you know the next situation so I wondered if that's a standard we could always use was that a standard that only worked for that one pandemic or would it be true for the next one and I'm not aware of all the people who got banned but is the argument that everybody who got banned had the right answer was there anybody who got banned who had the wrong answer or was it only it was Banning like a really good signal for the right person what do you say well if you had to put a percentage on it is and let's say for the next situation forget about the pandemic for the next situation whatever that is should I should I say if they're if you're banned you're like 80 likely to be right and the people who are saying things that don't get them banned are most likely to be wrong or lie about 80 percent what would you say well 25 doesn't help me because if they're only 20 25 likely why are you believing them I mean it's got to be over it's got like 80 90 right all right so we're getting some 80s and some 90s all right good so so I'm seeing some agreement that you can uh see what data has been banned and also what people so that falls for people as well right the people who were banned were very much most likely to be right and you could tell because they were banned is that right you could tell they're the good ones because they're banned right okay so I'll look more to band people next time as opposed to people who say things that don't get them banned um and then other people said they're just some people you can trust more it's more about trusting the right people so you know I acknowledge my weakness that I can't tell the difference between good data and bad because it all looks bad to me so if I can't tell what data is good then I could rely on what people are good right because they're reliable people are most likely to have the reliable data that makes sense so the people who were you know banned and ostracized the Alex berensons and Brett Weinstein and uh let's see a fat Emperor and bori quagato and some other people uh so those are the ones we trusted so rather than trusting the medical professionals a lot of people said I'm going to trust a journalist now does that always work or did it only just work on this pandemic so the people who trust a journalist Berenson over let's say the the bulk of the medical community and we know Berenson got the right answer so obviously he knows something they didn't but here's the question will the journalist who disagrees with the medical community generally be right or only if they're also banned are they only right if they're banned so what what if it's a journalist who disagrees with the mainstream but is not banned are they still more likely to be right and what if there are two journalists and one says the mainstream is wrong and one says it right because two journalists would be roughly equal in credibility right so how would you sort that out because you have one journalist who's on one side but another journalist who's on another and since journalists are better than medical professionals at medical stuff so we could ignore the medical people but which of the journalists would I pick the banned one right the one so so somebody like a Doctor Drew who did not get banned I should sort of minimize his influence and look for the people who are the most most banned to get my credibility does that make sense I'm looking for your guidance all right here's some other things that people said um will say uh some people said that the data that they were hiding tells you everything you need to know and I thought oh that's pretty insightful because if the it once it's once you can tell that somebody's hiding some data or that there's a lack of data the lack of data tells you more than the actual data you good with that does that make sense the data that you don't have is telling you more than the data you have right I mean that's a pretty big signal if they're going to hide that data so I'm wondering in general again because I'm I'm not living in the past trying to prepare for the next one in general should I use the lack of data to make my decisions versus the data should I go with the the non-information to base my decisions up all right um and then let's say um then somebody was ostracizing me or criticizing me not ostracizing um saying that I gave you two pretty clear examples of how to do it one you want well credentialed peer-reviewed people prior to covet so do you do you agree with that you should believe the people who are well credentialed and peer-reviewed even before covet that makes sense doesn't it believe the people because like Dr.

Mc.

Cullough Dr.

Malone peer-reviewed very credible so you should believe them but what happens if what happens if the people on the other side are also credentialed and peer-reviewed do I so if they're all credentialed and peer-reviewed but they have different opinions should I take the ones that are in the extreme minority because the the minority is usually right on medical stuff or should I use that as the base the base and just say all right but which one's more banned so if they have equal credentials I should favor the one that's banned right next time all right um also the people who risked livelihood basically they put their careers on the line so I should trust the people who who knew they were going to lose money in this right because they don't have a financial incentive so that would be like Dr.

Mc.

Cullough Dr.

Malone because they they risked their careers didn't they so that does make you more credible if you're willing to you know put some skin in the game so Dr.

Mc.

Cullough for example definitely put some risk on his medical future we can only hope that he makes his money back on his book because he did he did do a book probably does some speaking tours so uh Dr.

Malone has a book and Brett Weinstein has a podcast I think it's monetized but you don't want to look at any of those people because they put their entire Financial Futures on the line and all they got out of it was best-selling books and top rated podcasts that are monetized so that's a that's a that's a group you want to believe in because they're not influenced by money in any way so that was a good good idea um then also all right what else uh I had some other oh oh this is important you should not you don't trust any study where the people running the study were funded by you know like big Pharma or somebody wants to make money from it you'd agree with that right you can't trust any study that somebody's got a money motivation but here's here's my issue and I know you can do this because you did it but I did it wrong so you're gonna have to teach me how to do this there are some there are some studies where you can tell who funded it and so I would be with you and say oh if it was funded by those people you can't trust it but what happens if it's a study where you don't know if it was funded or here's the tough part what if let's say there's a Doctor Who's the head head person of the study and that doctor did not get money from any big Pharma but the doctor does a lot of speaking engagements for big Pharma and let's say somebody who's you know close to the decision that we're trying to make would you know that would you know if a doctor who led a study that was not funded by big Pharma but would you know if the doctor individually and privately gave a highly paid talks as seminars paid for by the same company that he's doing the research for would you know that I don't think you would I mean I wouldn't so you have to teach me how you know that because I wouldn't it's my understanding that everybody's working for money but apparently some people are not all right so I put it all together on a whiteboard so I could try to understand how you made the decision correctly it looks like this um I was using bad data and other people were using good data and they could tell the difference so the best data is stuff that's banned and the best experts are the ones who who risked it all and were unpaid unpaid except for their best-selling books and podcasts and then this was the important part because I got this because I asked people okay if you do all this how do you know the data is right like ultimately how do you know data is right and the best answer I got is that somebody compared it to what they already knew and when you compare it to what you already know um you you do your own assessment so you don't just trust the data I was told you do your own assessment of whether it looks reasonable now a day ago I would have said this is confirmation bias and that it just looks like people had confirmation bias and they worked backwards to who the right data was and who the experts are that was my old model of the world but since this process got to the right answer I have to revise that and apologize because I was in wrong I'm being told that there's a different doctor who's more credible somebody called Dr.

Lee now I don't know anything about Dr.

Lee but I'm sure he's not writing a book or monetizing his his opinion anyway just like the other experts although they did write best selling books and and probably doing speaking engagements and are very very famous people now but they didn't have any monetary no no monetary interest just books and podcasts and stuff uh which are probably paying more than their medical medical stuff but um so this used to be confirmation bias but now I know this is actually just a you know Common Sense kind of approach so then uh the last step is the part that I was totally wrong about this is the part where I really screwed up um but so once you've got your good data and your good experts which you can tell because you're comparing it to your own assessment of the data and the experts um so you know that's good because it's all compatible then you you take that because that's just your assessment on one side that's just the vaccine and you compare it to the unknown risk of a bioengineered weapon of mass destruction and it's obvious that this is a bigger risk so so this is as close as I can get to trying to improve my game and I think what happened was ultimately I got lost in the weeds I was I was on the weeds I you know I couldn't see the trees for the forest kind of thing but it was all kind of obvious if I just go and use the good data with the good experts and it's easy to tell who the good ones are because they're banned and then just use my own assessment to decide what was the good date of the good experts and then compare it to the unknown risk of a bioengineered weapon of mass destruction and I could have gotten the right answer too during the fog of War and on top of that one thing I was also getting wrong was certainty I I kept I kept like being on the fence I don't know if I got a lot of criticism for that because I was like I'm on the fence I don't know which is the bigger risk I I don't know is it the the vaccine or the virus I don't know so I was like all over the place and I can't apologize enough for that you know I'm sorry that I misled you and I was totally wrong the unvaccinated were the winners they got the right answer from the start and impressively they got it with heuristics which beat the heck out of my poor analytical abilities and you have my respect for that all right I don't understand this comment my inability to be wrong how much more can I agree with you you won't take yes for an answer why can't you take yes for an answer I'm literally telling you you got the right answer and I'm accepting I'm accepting your analysis what's the problem seriously what's the problem no no no uh I may have misled you somebody says was I certain it was a bio weapon now let me be clear I didn't know what the virus was I also didn't know what the so-called vaccination was I didn't know what either one of them so I I was a complete unknown I should have listened to I should have listened to the good experts who knew from the start what the virus was and what the vaccination was and I should have known who the good experts were because I should have used my own assessment and like like you say there were a lot of you who were right from the start and I certainly wasn't would you agree with that statement there are a lot of you who through this improved let's say sort of a model for understanding the world and now we want tribunals yeah I think the people who did not use this method probably need jail time would you agree I'm wondering if I should go to jail do you know how many people I probably killed with my analyzes let me think I have to live with that for the rest of my life those of you who um were the Smart Ones you know you don't you have you have clean conscience now I used to worry about all the people who were you know use this analysis and then uh died of covid because they were unvaccinated but and that actually was one of my biggest decision-making criteria because I was under the mistaken impression that there was like some coven pandemic that swept through the country and recently I'm learning that nobody died so I mean I thought I was believing the government the government idiot I don't know how dumb I could be I believe in the government that people were dying of covet and and the government was saying that the unvaccinated were dying at a much higher rate and now we know that that was all made up because all data is made up except for this if I'd known the good Experts of the good data I wouldn't have made that mistake that's for sure all right so next time I'm going to try harder to use my own assessment to know what the good data is and who the good experts are and I won't be making that mistake again of distrusting all of the data I'm getting there yeah so I'm getting I'm getting a lot of support on the You.

Tube platform from people who say finally finally you're understanding what's going on all right well thank you very much I'm going to say goodbye to You.

Tube and talk to the people and locals whoops we've got a little problem here talk to the people on locals and I will see you tomorrow bye for now

to the highlight of civilization better

than ever really today is going to be a

burden a burner yeah and if you'd like

to enjoy this at the maximum potential

all you need is a copper mugger a glass

of tanker chalice or Stein the canteen

jogger flask of vessel of any kind fill

it with your favorite liquid I like

coffee

and join me now for the unparalleled

pleasure what

got her with a microphone on

the dopamine the other day

the thing that makes everything better

it's called the simultaneous sip

it happens now

go

ah that's the best thing ever

thank you Paul over on locals that

little graphic you have of that so on

the locals uh platform

one of the members always puts up a

little graphic to tell me if my sound is

working on both platforms oh my God is

that useful

that is so useful I so appreciate that

thank you Paul glider let's go privately

over here on

we're going to put the locals people

private so when I turn off YouTube later

they'll have their little special time

now

are you wondering why I'm in such a good

mood

are you wondering why I'm so damn happy

this morning I mean I'm like crazy happy

well number one

the the rains have stopped and we've got

a sunny California week

now if you've not enjoyed a sunny

California week they're pretty awesome

but I haven't seen one in a while so all

excited about that yesterday was amazing

but it's even better

I had a book deadline which is today

actually

and that meant I had to get all of my

first round of edits done which are

really hard

because editing writing is hard

but editing to an editor's changes when

those changes involve moving parts

around

it becomes this huge Rubik's Cube so

instead of writing

which you're also doing as you're fixing

stuff you're also holding in your mind

the entire book

hundreds of different sections and how

like one phrase may have been more about

this chapter than the other and so you

have to hold all of it in your head and

then

then move it in different places like a

it's almost like programming really

you're moving like sections of code

around to be in the right place it's the

hardest thing I do

period it's the hardest thing I ever do

and the reason I'm so funny that I'm so

uh

happy today

is that I finished it a few hours early

and submitted it last night

there is no better day in the life

of an author

there's no better day than the day

you've submitted your stuff and you know

it's a book

now the next status will be a little

more work but it's a book

nothing can stop it like until you

submit the you know the final or first

round of edits really until you submit

those

you're not entirely sure you have a book

you you've worked for a year

you wasted it you know you could

potentially waste a year of your life

because it takes all of your free time

all of it

and today I know it's a book

so somebody says what about the day your

trophy wife left you

was that supposed to be my best day I'm

not sure what that cut there's somebody

there's somebody who mentions my wife or

ex-wife on on every topic

so let me tell you my latest uh

troll uh technique

so you know I'm still of course every

day I get you know loads of uh insults

and yesterday I was looking through the

uh the media stories about me you know

there's a sub stack about me how

terrible I am and there's uh and there's

a whole bunch of yes last few days a

bunch of media reports about me now

here's the funny thing

none of them were even close to accurate

they were just so wildly

mischaracterizing me in my situation

what I'm thinking and what I've done

it's all it's all just completely

fiction

and it's become so funny

that I'm just going to do an LOL on all

of it

because there's nothing to say about it

I mean you'd have to go back a year and

fix like a hundred different you know

misconceptions

so

it's all just LOL now so I'm having a

great week just looking at all the all

the stories about me that are just

ridiculous

Rasmussen as a poll 58 of people polled

are considered important that a company

shares their social and political values

including 28 who think is very important

this feels like a big problem now even

though most people the vast majority

according to the rasmic simple most

people think that the product is the

most important thing right

so most people say yeah it's a product

oh yeah 28 is very close to one quarter

it's very close to one quarter

yes I saw the uh the Trump

um retweet of my endorsement on truth

that was cool

um

so anyway here's my question

as we become more awoke and when people

are putting more pressure on companies

to do stuff

um

don't you think we almost need like a

new

I feel like we almost need a new

Constitutional Amendment

because

aren't we all better off the government

and religion are separate

well it wasn't that like one of the

smartest things

that we oh you say no well I mean we're

based we're the Constitution is based on

a sort of a Christian

bias if you can say that so I suppose

you could say that in some ways it is a

religious document they just they just

have some walls that say don't get your

religion in with the workings of the

government now I think

I think that's worked

I think that's worked but I wonder if we

should do the same thing for business

don't you think the worst thing you

could do to the economy of a country

is mix your politics and with the

business because we already have laws

right if the companies are following the

laws

I feel like I'm done I mean I can have

my opinion and stuff but I don't want my

opinion

to put them out of business

if they're following the law

now I might want to change the law

that's a thing I can see that I might

want to ban some companies that are

especially bad but should we really be

trying to micromedage companies that

feels like the worst thing you can do I

I almost think like we need some kind of

standard

to keep our business out of it

now I do like transparency

so to the extent that the external

pressure causes them to be more

transparent that's probably good but I

feel like there's a better way to get

there

so I don't like having more government

regulations but

separating religion from government I

think worked and now we might at least

think about it for separating

politics and business because it's just

crushing businesses am I wrong about

that

isn't the politics of it just crushing

businesses that didn't need to get

crushed now they should also stay out of

it

so if you if you've made an argument

that says well

if Disney for example let's say Disney

decides to enter an argument that's a

political argument well

you know then then maybe then maybe

they're you know

they're putting themselves out there for

a little pushback

but if they're minding their own

business and obeying all the laws

I think we should stay away from them

let them do what they want

but you know it would probably help the

businesses to make it illegal

it would probably be a boon to business

wouldn't it because let's say you're the

CEO

and your let's say your customers and

your employees and stockholders are all

yammering at you hey be more awoke or be

more political or say something about

climate change what's the CEO going to

do

pretty much bow to the pressure right

but what if the CEO had backing backing

them

a law

and the law said you you can't speak out

as a company on a political item you can

speak out personally

personally of course but companies can

have an opinions oh how about that

companies can't have political opinions

they can do what they want to do

and the individuals can have any

opinions they want

how about that and how about at the same

time we say you can't be fired for your

political opinion

how about that

can't be fired for your political

opinion

even if you say something on social

media that the company doesn't like yeah

I feel like there are a few tweaks we

could make to account for the fact that

social media changed the balance of

power

because because I think the regular

media you know had some balance

with with business but social media is

the wild west and now it's just forcing

business to respond to basically the

randomness of social media that's that

can't be good in the long run anyway I

don't have the I don't have the best

idea for fixing that but something needs

to be done

um here's what I don't like to say

we should have a national conversation

about that

I hate hearing that

because I'm I'm actually criticizing

myself at the moment for bringing up

something I didn't have a better idea

for

like probably shouldn't do that I mean

I'm just throwing out that

Constitutional Amendment thing but even

I don't think that's necessarily a good

idea just put it down there

all right let's talk about uh

are you aware that China built a

technology

and it's got a user interface

where China can control the minds of

Americans

actually through the interface did you

know that

how many of you knew that there's

actually a user interface that China can

control the the minds of Americans like

literally no joke that's a real thing

how many of you do that

yeah it's called Tick Tock and people

think it's something else now

here's the thing

why is it that Congress has enacted on

tick tock

because if you said to them do you know

that the Chinese government literally

not hyperbolically actually literally

has built a tool that they can tweak

very easily with the user interface to

change the minds

of Americans to change our minds

on important political things

now nobody nobody doubts that social

media can do that

right is there anybody who's had social

media doesn't change anybody's mind no

everybody does that

everybody knows that China controls Tick

Tock and now we know from article and

Forbes The Tick Tock literally has a

button

that any employee I guess some employees

can can touch it's called the heat heat

button they touch one button and they

can make any uh any content on Tick Tock

go viral

they can make it go viral with one

button

now let me ask you this

I don't use tick tock is there anybody

here who uses Tick Tock must be some of

you

bunch of you use tick tock

all right so for the not very many of

you actually that's good but for those

who do let me ask this question

have you seen a lot of anti-fentanyl

content on tick tock

you know a lot of content about the

overdoses and a number of people dying

and and specifically where it's coming

from

have you seen that is Tick Tock just

full of the biggest issue for young

people because Tick Tock skews younger

right younger and what is the number one

cause of death for young people

it's actually drug overdose and guns but

uh oh well actually that's a good

comparison I'm assuming that since the

two biggest problems for young people

death wise would be guns

an issue that the left likes

um and then Sentinel

right so those of you who use tick tock

if you want to wonder hey is this Tick

Tock already being weaponized against

Americans it would be easy it would be

easy to check is it a check all you'd

have to do is see is there more viral

content

about mass shootings and how guns should

be banned

and does it roughly match the

anti-fentanyl information especially

mentioning that it comes from China

all right

right so so you could you could easily

check could you

um why somebody saying not guns

I don't know what you I don't know what

not guns means

they must have plenty of content that's

anti-gun am I wrong

does Tic Tac have

anti-gun content or not

I'm just assuming that it leans left on

that topic Am I Wrong give me a fact

check on that I guess there's not enough

Tick Tock users on here to to fact check

me as I go but it's easy to check right

now why why would Congress ignore this

do you think China would ignore it if we

built a user interface to control their

youth and that was working it totally

works nobody's questioning whether it

works

I don't think they would ignore it

that's why the young people in China

can't use tick tock they have a

different version in China that's a safe

version yeah

so

it's possible that Congress isn't doing

nothing because they're all bought off

but there's another possibility

Congress is too old to understand the

topic

Congress is too old

to understand the topic

that's my current thinking and and I'll

be a little more specific

if if you had never been on Tick Tock or

you'd never use let's say Instagram and

most of them probably you know have

somebody else send a tweet and maybe

they know a little Twitter maybe they

got some Facebook going on but they're

not really

social media consumers so much they're

more like more like producers not

consumers

now if you're a consumer

and you've done what I did which is you

pick up Instagram you say oh

I wonder if there's any good like

Instagram stuff

and then you spend about a second

scrolling and you feel your entire body

being taken over

okay I'm actually a trained hypnotist

and I know exactly what's happening to

me right now and I can't stop scrolling

kitten pictures and it's feeding me

infinite Jordan Peterson videos and

they're all good and what are these

attractive women I like looking at I

think I'm done doing the live stream

because I Can't Take My Eyes Off of

these reels

now

I understand social media

at a

cellular level

a cellular level I understand social

media with my I'm sorry

I promise I wouldn't do that this year I

understand social media with my body

I didn't read an article about it if you

read an article that says oh this this

social media is pretty

it's pretty sticky you know maybe people

will be hooked on it like we all know

logically it's addicting right

but if you haven't used it

you have no idea how addicting this

would you agree with that

that if you haven't used it yourself and

experienced the the pull you you could

feel Tick Tock or Instagram I in sort of

a similar thing you can feel Instagram

take over your body

you can feel it

taking over your body

right if you can't if you've never

experienced the feeling I don't think

you would take it seriously

because there are a number of members of

Congress follow me on Twitter

they've seen my they've seen all of my

tweets for a lot of them and they know

that people say hey Tick Tock is

addictive and it can influence people

if about if I did a quiz of all the

members of Congress they would all get

the right answer don't you think you

know does

does social media Influence People

yes I'll bet every one of them would get

the right answer

does tick tock influence people yes

right answer is Tick Tock controlled by

China

yes

I believe that Congress would get all

the right answers in the quiz every one

of them probably every one of them

but I'll bet there are very few

who've used it

if you used it

you're going to kick it to the curb

really fast because you feel it and

you've also had the experience of you

all

ah

just listen to this and you've all had

the same experience so mine is not

unique

I have considered

and talked with friends about maybe

taking singing lessons

vocal lessons

because yeah I've learned the drums and

tried to learn the guitar and I was just

curious whether anybody could learn to

sing and I have you know no skill or

aptitude and so I was kind of curious

I've never written it down I don't think

I've never tweeted it

and my and my

my advertisements are full of vocal

Essence being offered

full of vocal Essence now do you have or

is your feed full of vocal lessons no I

never wrote that down

never wrote it down but I said it out

loud

said it out loud

now do you think that Congress you know

the the 80 year old people in Congress

do you think that they've experienced

talking about something in the privacy

of their home and then watching it show

up on their feed

do you think they've experienced that

maybe a few the younger ones you know

AOC has I'm sure

but I don't think that Congress is young

enough

to have actually you know mind melded

themselves with social media

to know how powerful it is

so I'm thinking it's actually an

information problem

as in you can't communicate to somebody

What a Feeling feels like

right

like intellectually they all get it but

I don't think they know what it feels

like if they did it'd be over there

would be no Tick Tock if if the if

Congress used it for a week it would be

gone that's my first that's my best

hypothesis because it could be just

corruption it could be exactly what it

looks like

China just owns the Congress it's

possible

well antifa is back and uh there's no

reason they ever disappeared and there's

not really a strong reason they came

back

but as Tucker Carlson uh

conspiratorially suggests

they're nothing but the military

arm of the Democrats

and they come whenever the Democrats

want to tell the public that the country

is falling apart and they need to trade

out the leader

so the first leader they got rid of was

Trump

and it started looking like they want to

get rid of Biden

so antifa might be a way to get rid of

Biden

because it just makes the country look

unstable because they get so much news

coverage

now apparently antifa people uh instead

of being executed which seems like you

know the obvious play uh are being just

released

but in but I think in Atlanta they're

going to be a little tougher on them the

Atlanta police say they're going to

charge them so we'll see

um

I think I'm going to agree with this

take

I'm going to agree with the stake

antifa appears to be an entirely

artificial Democrat

Army

I don't believe that all the members of

antifa know what they are or why they're

there

I think a lot of them are in it for the

lifestyle

and to you know meet women it's the only

way they can

um

but I think that the leaders the leaders

are working for a paycheck and if we

don't know who's paying them

um I think classifying them as domestic

terrorists and also Democrats is

accurate

now they wouldn't identify as Democrats

because they're uh you know they're for

chaos but

consider the fact that they're not

asking for anything

just just that just that alone they're

not asking for anything

are we done

there's nothing else you need to know

about them

if they're burning cities and not asking

for like some specific demand

and they're not asking for anything that

could be provided right no it's

obviously to create chaos and obviously

somebody's paying them

so it's a what if everything is exactly

the way it looks

all right more on that

on that note

it turns out that there is a FBI agent

I don't I don't even know what to say

about this story The the story is so

mind-boggling

that you just there's no comment on top

of it

they can do anything to make it more

outrageous

but so the federal prosecutors are going

after the head of former head of the

counterintelligence for the FBI New York

office they're saying you laundered

money

from some Russian oligarch apparently

was a same one who was giving money to

uh manifer

of course so sure enough

the FBI guy I think he was in charge of

making sure this didn't happen

was doing it himself

so once again

the the the Tucker Carlson theory that I

thought was batshit crazy batshit crazy

that the Democrats do whatever they're

accusing you of

every time every time it comes true this

is exactly what they're accusing

Republicans of they were doing it they

were literally taking money this guy was

literally taking money from Russia and

probably using it in service of

Democrats

it was exactly what you thought

yeah and the the

you know the pandemic looks like it's

going to be exactly what you thought

your worst suspicions

everything is exactly what you think

it just seems exactly what you think

so

uh anyway I'm fascinated by that but

let's take that concept that everything

is exactly what you think to the fact

that there are more classified documents

that yet another Joe Biden home

now

let's discuss

how it looks

number one nobody can explain why Joe

Biden has so many homes

we should be done

that that should be the end of his term

right that he should be like immediately

swept out of office with one sentence

nobody knows how he got all those homes

nobody knows

there's there's no Theory there's no

hypothesis

we just decide not to talk about it

what

is the president we're not going to talk

about how he mysteriously got

a great wealth without having a job that

provided that much income

no nobody's curious

well what if

that's exactly what it looks like

he's been on the take for decades that's

what it looks like

and so what if it's exactly what it

looks like now apparently he had

classified documents like a snail Trail

wherever he went

you know now I speculated that he was

leaving the document so he could find

his way back from wherever he went I

don't know if that's true just

speculation

but

three locations so far right

three is a pattern

one could be a mistake

two could be a mistake three is a pretty

clear pattern especially since it's

documents that aren't predate his

presidency

now in these same homes

we we presume that Hunter Biden had

access to all three places correct

Hunter Biden had easy access to all

three places

and we know that he was trying to sell

at least influence to foreign countries

so what it looks exactly like is that

Joe Biden for decades has been a huge

Criminal

for decades a huge Criminal

and that Hunter is part of monetizing it

and that they've been

offering or selling

State secrets to other countries

four decades

if everything else is exactly why what

it looks like why would this one be

different

it looks exactly like it and you would

have to take a pro you'd need a crowbar

to pry me off that opinion

because there's no there's no

information countering it at all

now remember

individuals are innocent until proven

guilty

so the bidens as individuals innocent

until proven guilty but Joe Biden is

also the government

and the government

is guilty until proven is

so if you're going to walk around being

my president and looking guilty as

heck

it took me that was hard to pull that

one back

guilty as heck

well I'm gonna assume you are

so as of today my operating assumption

is the criminal the the president of the

United States Joe Biden is and has been

a major Criminal

and a Trader for decades

that's that's my working assumption

because all information suggested

now I'm open to

I'm open to him opening his books and

explaining how he got these homes

I'm open to you know finding out that

it's all a big lie and it's all some big

conservative conspiracy theory and uh

he doesn't even sniff girls hair that's

all just a lie so I'm open to calendar

evidence but as of now I think it's a

safe statement of fact preliminary

that were led by a major Criminal

which would explain why he's not doing

anything on the border

useful and why he's not doing anything

about Tick Tock and Fentanyl and it

would explain everything

so if it explains everything that should

be your working hypothesis

so we should all just assume it true

just assume it's true and if he wants to

prove it isn't I'm open to that

all right one of my uh

favorite things to watch on the internet

is you know you're all watching the

Crowder

the Crowder versus The Daily wire you

know where daily wire offered him a deal

but in it was uh

some Clauses to say if he got canceled

on social media

that he that they wouldn't pay him as

much money

some people called that a penalty

I called it a normal business deal in

which you're sharing Revenue

a penalty

I guess all of my contracts are

penalties

I guess my book deals a penalty because

you know what if I don't sell enough

books that publisher is not going to

give me money

can you believe it

like if I don't produce money for both

of us they won't give me my half

I know I know it's like well not half

but whatever it is but it's totally

Criminal

that if we make a deal that we'll both

make money and then we don't make any

money they're not going to pay me

bastards

wow anyway

so uh here's my favorite thing is

watching Mike serenovich

disembowel Crowder's argument at all of

his supporters

and you know he's he's the only one who

can see the whole field that's talking

about it

uh

you know because you know I'm always a

big fan of sirovich in general but you

know he's an attorney he's a business

person he's seen enough of the world

that he knows what a business deal is

supposed to look like and and he sees

this entire thing for what it is with

you know I don't think there's any

hidden hidden uh

you know like dark Corners I think he

sees the whole field and he's calling

he's calling the balls and Strikes here

it's kind of hilarious so you should

watch you should follow a certain image

anyway but you should definitely look at

his his crowded comments I'll tell you

what he's saying uh

so you know Crowder's claiming that

um big Khan as he calls it the big

conservative

groups are working with big Tech

so they're not exactly on the other side

of big Tech they're working with them

because they like to monetize you know

through big Tech so they want to keep

them on their side so his his take is

that nobody is sort of working for the

artist

who doesn't want to get banned on social

media because all the the big

conservatives are just working with the

platforms like everybody else

now where certificate asked is give some

details about he goes he goes how

people keep saying daily wires in bed

with big Tech

examples

and then he says he's not a daily wire

you know Fanboy but

can can anybody give an example of how

the daily wire is doing something with

big Tech that you wouldn't like like

what would be that now why did we have

to get to today

and why did it have to be Mike cernovich

to ask the question

uh

do you have even one example

just just one example

now maybe he does but why haven't we

heard one example up until now no

examples

self-censorship no

all right well I think it's up to uh

Crowder to give us some examples and

maybe he has them if he has them we'll

talk about it because I'd like to know

that wouldn't you

I mean if his claim if his claim holds

up

I'd certainly like to know it so give us

some examples maybe you can flip us to

your side

uh and then I guess we found out

that uh Crowder says he wasn't about the

money

and then he was asked on Tim Poole's

show

Tim cast he was asked but didn't your

agent

uh ask for more money

but it wasn't about the money but your

agent countered and asked for more money

and uh Crowder I think he acknowledged

that his agent might have but he didn't

but he didn't

so what do you think Mike cernovich said

that about that

that Crowder didn't make an offer but

his agent did

it's exactly what you think

exactly what you think all right

foreign

so

let's talk about that border crossing

I saw an Adam Shaw tweet he's a Fox News

um journalist reporter I'm not sure what

they're called These Days correspondent

Maybe

um and he says the Border numbers for

December are out this is for one month

for one month

uh the number of border crossings uh

251 000 encounters that's how many

encounters or we don't know how many

crosstons didn't get counted

that was just the number of encounters

encounters

how many do we stop

one and four does anybody know how many

we stop only one in three one in ten I

have no idea

my guess would be

one in four

like with no background information to

back that up

all right well

so that's a pretty high run rate

but again

let me remind you how Trump can win both

Republicans and Democrats on Border

issue

High Ground maneuver

you say this it's not about stopping

people coming in it's about having a

system where we can let the good ones in

and stop the stop the criminals for

example

so what we need is some independent

group

of economists

to tell us what's the right number and

mix of people to let in and let that all

be public should be a bipartisan

group you know maybe one more Republican

just because if Republicans put it

together everybody gets to have one more

person if they're in charge

um

and then make it all public

like the OMB

you know one of the most surprising

things to me is that the office

management and budgets is actually

deemed somewhat credible by both sides

am I wrong about that give me a fact

check on that

is is it a fact

that the OMB that always scores the the

federal budgets

aren't they considered credible

I mean maybe not but I always thought

they were because they work for both

Administrations

and they're I don't think that the

people the staffers I don't think

they're necessarily appointed are they

maybe just the head

the gbo or the CBO

it's a CBO all right whatever it is so

do you think that there could be a

credible permanent organization and

maybe maybe it's something that's

already in the government that would

tell us what is the number of uh

immigrants and what types and from where

to come in

because I don't think the President

should make that decision

do you any president

I don't think the President should

decide on the mix

that's that's way

that's way outside outside their strike

zone

I think economists and business people

should decide on the mix you know with

input from business how many employees

do you need that you can't get and and

you know then then also there should be

advocates for Americans right so if

you've got some kind of a group doing

that calculation you need at least

somebody in that group who's gonna say

okay but you got to consider you know

how that's going to come out of the

pockets of the poor directly or

indirectly and all that stuff

so I think Trump can take the high

ground and say let's take the president

enter the decision who comes in

let's have a tight border but take the

take the politics out of who comes in

how does that not work

I I think I think Trump just walks into

the presidency if he says that I think

you just walk right in because he if he

just says you know I'll do the president

thing of controlling the Border but

separately let's take the who gets in

out of politics and we'll create a

bipartisan group you tell me he wouldn't

get elected on that

in a heartbeat he would yeah easily he

would just walk into the office if he

said that because the the border is

where people put up the most resistance

because they they feel the dog whistle

just take the dog whistle out

because it's not something Trump needed

right he didn't need a dog whistle so

just take it out

all right

um there was a weird story about uh

Demar Hamlin

the football player who collapsed in the

field and I guess he is healthy enough

to be walking around and he attended a

game yesterday

but he wore a mask and sunglasses and a

hat

and never showed his face

so the videos of him don't show his face

so of course

of course

of course people think it's not really

him and he died

okay I'm pretty sure we would know if he

died like that would be a hard one to

keep a secret so I don't think he died I

think he might have you know more to do

with

who knows just didn't want to talk to

people or whatever it was so you may

have had some medical or other reasons

but uh are you amazed that we've got to

today and we don't we don't have a cause

for his problem

there's no official cause

may we take the standard that we have

been using up to this point today

the standard is maybe it's exactly what

it looks like what if it's exactly what

it looks like because what it looks like

is he may have been vaccinated recently

am I right

because if that were not the case I'm

sure they would have told us that right

up front

if if you were I guess they all had to

be vaccinated but but if he had been

recently vaccinated let's say recently

boosted

it's got to be that

am I right

now they're now saying it so you can

never be 100 sure but if your gut

instinct is to say well if it looks

exactly like it and they're not even

bothering to deny it that should be your

starting assumption

your starting assumption is that you got

the vaccination and fell down they don't

want to tell you am I right

now let me make a distinction

I also was debunking some of those

suddenly died athletes because a number

of them actually were video people died

before the pandemic and some of them

didn't die and they were fine they just

got up so a lot of the a lot of the

video you've seen of athletes dying a

lot of it was fake for sure but not all

of it

you know like the not all of it was

debunked but there were just some

obvious uh ones that were wrong

but this is a different situation this

is one specific person

who is you know having a public medical

situation

and is not telling you the thing you

would most want to know

did you recently get vaccinated

oh that's all you need to know

clearly that's the problem here now I'm

not saying that the vaccination injured

it

I want to be clear about that

but it's pretty clear that they're not

telling you he got vaccinated recently

and does anybody disagree

that we could conclude that with a

pretty high degree of certainty that he

was probably boosted recently

and I think probably all of them were

right don't don't all the all the

professional athletes have to get

boosted

like boosted and boosted and boosted I

think they do I think it's just required

so yeah you should assume it's exactly

what it looks like that would be a fair

assumption

all right um

so so there's an update on Russia and

Kiev by the way stay with me if you want

to see me uh admit more about things I

got wrong on the pandemic if anybody

likes me to admit I'm wrong

stick around we'll do that last

um so there's some people speculating

that uh Russia is going to mass forces

in Belarus and then attack Kiev from

there and you know destroy Kev and

declare a victory or something

does that sound like something that

might happen

do you think that's going to happen

that feels unlikely to me

yeah I'm not going to rule it out I I

think that given the winter pause will

you know it changes everything because

you don't know which side did a better

job of preparing for after the pause

so I think at this point

uh the war is a toss-up

I don't think as of today you could say

Ukraine or Russia are winning

it looks like it looks like a toss-up to

me what do you think

I think it's now in solidly

unpredictable territory

not that it was ever super predictable

admit defeat you mean that mint defeat

that Ukraine will lose

I'm always open to that

I I I've predicted that Russia would be

unsuccessful

conquering Ukraine

but if they wait long enough

I I would acknowledge that if Russia

wanted to you know risk everything and

wait long enough that they could take

Ukraine probably

yes I'll give you that

all right

um

it's a draw I think the most likely

outcome is a draw with forever fighting

in the you know some of those recently

captured areas

that's what I'm guessing

so

um

there's a new study that says that

vitamin D deficiency was found in 82

percent of covet cases

but the general population is only 47

so the vitamin D deficiency was twice as

profound

um

in the people who got covet and probably

the outcomes as well

now I would like to do a competition

and I I did a little Googling and I

couldn't determine

I feel like I am the first person in the

world

to say in public

I'm probably not so this is where you

get to debunk me so if you like to

embarrass me this is your opportunity I

believe I'm the first person in the

world

who said that the country differences

and the the demographic differences like

black people having worse time with

covet that that was a vitamin D pattern

now hold on hold on let me be specific

I'm not no I'm not the first person to

say vitamin D was important to outcomes

hear that clearly I'm definitely not the

first person or even close

to say that vitamin D was would help you

recover would you agree

that that everybody said that like

doctor said it lay people said it

early on like right away everybody said

more vitamin D so that part I'm not I'm

not claiming anything I was just one of

a million people who said the obvious

hey vitamin D is good for you all right

so I'm not making any credit taking any

credit for that I'm being very specific

I believe I'm the first person who said

it's the reason that you're getting

different outcomes in different

countries

and different outcomes across uh black

versus white Etc

I believe I'm the first

and and here's why because when it when

it occurred to me I'd never heard it so

the only thing I can know for sure is

that when it occurred to me I hadn't

heard it yet but it might be out there

so so if somebody has a source

because once I found out that Sweden um

routinely gives people Vitamin D

supplements and cod oil or something I

don't know once I realized that the the

reason that Sweden was an exception is

that they had a lot of vitamin D

and then if you ever figured out why

Africa

Africa never had a problem

is that wild

that Africa basically escaped the

pandemic without doing

much of anything

do you know what the vitamin D rate is

in Africa

really good

because they spend a lot of time outside

in the sun

it's really good so even though they're

you know mostly black so they have

tougher time absorbing on average they

spend so much time Outdoors that they

have good vitamin D now Africa is also

young and thin

right

some people said oh they have lots of

vibramectin but it's probably

you know it can't be more than 10

percent of the population

yeah I've removed in probably less than

10 percent

I I would imagine that most people in

Africa are on any kind of pharmaceutical

drug at all

yeah and I and maybe 10 for hydro

hydroxychloroquine and stuff but

um those things are definitely factors

or could be

but the the one that just jumped out

was that every group that had low

vitamin D was were the ones everybody

said was getting hit the hardest

so I put that out there that nobody made

the Country Connection

before I did

do you want anybody want to fact check

that

yeah find somebody who said in public

anybody who had a YouTube or a tweet or

something that the country difference

not and I I know you're just going to

send me people who said vitamin D D is

good do not send me

anything that just said I said vitamin D

is good

stipulated I get that we all agree with

that just the country difference I think

that was first

I think I was first in the world

actually

but could be wrong

all right

um

here's

I used to work in big corporations and

if you've worked in a big Corporation

you know there's a process that they

like to do in the big company if

something doesn't work you make a big

mistake a bad product or whatever uh

your your project fails they like to do

a postmortem to find out what they

learned right so I would like to find

out

how so many of you got the right answer

about the vaccinations

whereas I didn't

so I'm going to try to figure out and

maybe you can help me

figure out what heuristics what rules of

thumbs what what sort of common sense

but also data did you look at and one of

the things that people most complained

to me when I said

that I I was giving the win to the

unvaxed people

so I gave them the win because they

definitely got to the right place and

I'd like to learn how they did that

because I got to the wrong place because

now I have a vaccination in me but I'm

not worried about covid so now I just

have to worry about the vaccination

right so I lost

right

so having said that and be very clear

that the winners of the people who

use some different system to analyze

stuff I wanted to find out what I did

now I made the mistake of saying all the

data is unreliable

so I didn't believe the data from the

official sources

but I also didn't believe the data from

anybody who has disagreed with the

official sources

and so to me it was a data free

environment

but it was a data free environment for

many of you but a lot of people said no

Scott you're wrong there was a lot of

good data

and I've been sending a number of people

said they've been sending it to me and

I've been ignoring it so let's fix that

right wouldn't you say that was a big

mistake on my part

that there was in fact good data

it was presented to me I didn't have to

go look for it and then I discounted it

and then I made the wrong decision

because I discounted it would you agree

that's an accurate statement so we're

going to try to correct

whatever the hell is wrong with me

with your help

and there will be a little whiteboard

here so I asked people I asked people

how they did it

on Twitter this morning like how did you

do it like how did you know what was the

good data and what was the bad data I'll

give you some answers

um and then you can add some answers if

anything is left out right so here are

all my problems the things I didn't do

right

uh see James pop these are people on

Twitter who responded I said for me it

was just pragmatic how could something

so new talk about the vaccination how

could something so new be remotely ready

for human use in such a good time short

time

good that's a good starting place isn't

it

would you agree that

that's a good solid

common sense

no dispute about the facts there's

nobody who's going to question that the

vaccination was rushed relative to what

we would all expect or like right good

point and yeah sorry I I like that point

so I I responded I have a lot of respect

this I tweeted back I have a lot of

respect for the people who were smart

enough to avoid a hastily prepared

vaccination

is that fair I I do have a lot of

respect for people who were smart enough

to avoid a hastily prepared vaccination

in favor of a relatively the relative

safety of an engineered bioweapon that

escaped from the lab so the people who

were smart enough not to take the

hastily prepared vaccination and rather

you know go to the relative safety

of an unknown bioengineered weapon

made the right call

and so I'm trying to learn from them

all right I I put too much weight on an

unknown bioengineered virus that looked

like it might have been a weapon of mass

destruction

with God knows what kind of future

impact but I put a little too much

emphasis on that whereas I should have

been focusing more on the fact that the

uh and I knew this I knew the

vaccination was not tested as much as

others

all right so

um then there were people who send me

good data and I kept saying

but how did I know it was good

you see the problem because people were

saying I have the good data and I send

it to you and I saw it in many cases I

saw it but how was I supposed to

determine

that that was the good data and so I

asked people how did you know because I

couldn't tell to me it all looked

sketchy like it all looked bad I didn't

see any good data nothing that I trusted

but other people did and they say they

could sort out the good data from the

bad so I was asking how they did that

and

here's some more answers on that

[Applause]

um here here's how some people did it

um some people said you should trust the

people who were banned

that that's like a flag of credibility

that the people who are banned

were more credible than the people who

are not banned and

you know I'm not trying to live in the

past I'm trying I'm trying to prepare

for the next you know the next situation

so

I wondered if that's a standard we could

always use

was that a standard that only worked for

that one pandemic

or would it be true for the next one and

I'm not aware of all the people who got

banned but is the argument that

everybody who got banned had the right

answer

was there anybody who got banned who had

the wrong answer

or was it only it was Banning like a

really good signal for the right person

what do you say well if you had to put a

percentage on it

is and let's say for the next situation

forget about the pandemic for the next

situation whatever that is

should I should I say if they're if

you're banned you're like 80 likely to

be right

and the people who are saying things

that don't get them banned

are most likely to be wrong or lie

about 80 percent

what would you say well 25 doesn't help

me because if they're only 20 25 likely

why are you believing them

I mean it's got to be over it's got like

80 90 right all right so we're getting

some 80s and some 90s all right good

so

so I'm seeing some agreement that you

can uh see what data has been banned and

also what people

so that falls for people as well right

the people who were banned

were very much most likely to be right

and you could tell because they were

banned is that right

you could tell they're the good ones

because they're banned right okay

so I'll look more to band people next

time as opposed to people who

say things that don't get them banned

um

and then other people said they're just

some people you can trust more

it's more about trusting the right

people

so you know I acknowledge my weakness

that I can't tell the difference between

good data and bad because it all looks

bad to me

so if I can't tell what data is good

then I could rely on what people are

good right

because they're reliable people

are most likely to have the reliable

data that makes sense so the people who

were you know banned and ostracized the

Alex berensons and Brett Weinstein and

uh let's see a fat Emperor and bori

quagato and some other people

uh

so those are the ones we trusted so

rather than trusting the medical

professionals a lot of people said I'm

going to trust a journalist

now does that always work

or did it only just work on this

pandemic so the people who trust a

journalist

Berenson over let's say the the bulk of

the medical community and we know

Berenson got the right answer so

obviously he knows something they didn't

but here's the question

will the journalist who disagrees with

the medical community generally be right

or only if they're also banned

are they only right if they're banned

so what what if it's a journalist who

disagrees with the mainstream

but is not banned

are they still more likely to be right

and what if there are two journalists

and one says the mainstream is wrong and

one says it right because two

journalists would be roughly equal in

credibility right

so how would you sort that out

because you have one journalist who's on

one side but another journalist who's on

another and since journalists are better

than medical professionals at medical

stuff so we could ignore the medical

people but which of the journalists

would I pick

the banned one right

the one so so somebody like a Doctor

Drew

who did not get banned I should sort of

minimize his influence

and look for the people who are the most

most banned

to get my credibility

does that make sense

I'm looking for your guidance all right

here's some other things that people

said

um

will say

uh some people said that the data that

they were hiding tells you everything

you need to know

and I thought oh that's pretty

insightful because if the it once it's

once you can tell that somebody's hiding

some data

or that there's a lack of data

the lack of data tells you more than the

actual data

you good with that

does that make sense the data that you

don't have

is telling you more than the data you

have

right I mean that's a pretty big signal

if they're going to hide that data so

I'm wondering in general

again because I'm I'm not living in the

past trying to prepare for the next one

in general should I use the lack of data

to make my decisions versus the data

should I go with the the non-information

to base my decisions up

all right

um

and then let's say

um

then somebody was ostracizing me or

criticizing me not ostracizing

um saying that I gave you two pretty

clear examples of how to do it one you

want well credentialed peer-reviewed

people prior to covet

so do you do you agree with that you

should believe the people who are well

credentialed and peer-reviewed even

before covet

that makes sense doesn't it believe the

people because like Dr McCullough Dr

Malone

peer-reviewed very credible so you

should believe them

but what happens if what happens if the

people on the other side are also

credentialed and peer-reviewed

do I so if they're all credentialed and

peer-reviewed but they have different

opinions

should I take the ones that are in the

extreme minority

because the the minority is usually

right on medical stuff

or should I use that as the base

the base and just say all right but

which one's more banned

so if they have equal credentials

I should favor the one that's banned

right

next time

all right

um also the people who risked livelihood

basically they put their careers on the

line

so I should trust the people who who

knew they were going to lose money in

this right

because they don't have a financial

incentive

so that would be like Dr McCullough Dr

Malone because they they risked their

careers

didn't they

so that does make you more credible if

you're willing to you know put some skin

in the game

so Dr McCullough for example definitely

put some risk on his medical future

we can only hope that he makes his money

back on his book

because he did he did do a book probably

does some speaking tours so uh Dr Malone

has a book

and Brett Weinstein has a podcast I

think it's monetized but you don't want

to look at any of those people because

they put their entire Financial

Futures on the line

and all they got out of it was

best-selling books and top rated

podcasts that are monetized so that's a

that's a that's a group you want to

believe in because they're not

influenced by money in any way

so that was a good

good idea

um

then also

all right what else uh I had some other

oh oh this is important you should not

you don't trust any study

where the people running the study

were funded by you know like big Pharma

or somebody wants to make money from it

you'd agree with that right you can't

trust any study that somebody's got a

money motivation

but here's here's my issue

and I know you can do this because you

did it but I did it wrong so you're

gonna have to teach me how to do this

there are some there are some studies

where you can tell who funded it

and so I would be with you and say oh if

it was funded by those people you can't

trust it

but what happens if it's a study where

you don't know if it was funded or

here's the tough part

what if let's say there's a Doctor Who's

the head head person of the study

and that doctor did not get money from

any big Pharma

but the doctor does a lot of speaking

engagements

for big Pharma and let's say somebody

who's you know close to the decision

that we're trying to make

would you know that would you know if a

doctor who led a study that was not

funded by big Pharma but would you know

if the doctor individually and privately

gave a highly paid talks as seminars

paid for by the same company that he's

doing the research for would you know

that

I don't think you would I mean I

wouldn't so you have to teach me how you

know that because I wouldn't it's my

understanding that everybody's working

for money but apparently some people are

not all right so I put it all together

on a whiteboard so I could try to

understand how you made the decision

correctly

it looks like this

um I was using bad data and other people

were using good data and they could tell

the difference

so the best data is stuff that's banned

and the best experts are the ones who

who risked it all and were unpaid

unpaid except for their best-selling

books and podcasts

and then this was the important part

because I got this because I asked

people okay if you do all this

how do you know the data is right

like ultimately how do you know data is

right and the best answer I got is that

somebody compared it to what they

already knew

and when you compare it to what you

already know

um

you you do your own assessment so you

don't just trust the data I was told you

do your own assessment of whether it

looks reasonable

now

a day ago I would have said this is

confirmation bias and that it just looks

like people had confirmation bias and

they worked backwards to who the right

data was and who the experts are that

was my old model of the world

but since this process got to the right

answer

I have to revise that and apologize

because I was in wrong

I'm being told that there's a different

doctor who's more credible

somebody called Dr Lee now I don't know

anything about Dr Lee

but I'm sure he's not writing a book or

monetizing his his opinion anyway just

like the other experts although they did

write best selling books and and

probably doing speaking engagements and

are very very famous people now but they

didn't have any monetary

no no monetary interest just books and

podcasts and stuff uh which are probably

paying more than their medical medical

stuff but um so this used to be

confirmation bias but now I know this is

actually just a you know Common Sense

kind of approach so then uh the last

step is the part that I was totally

wrong about

this is the part where I really screwed

up

um

but so once you've got your good data

and your good experts which you can tell

because you're comparing it to your own

assessment of the data and the experts

um so you know that's good because it's

all compatible

then you you take that because that's

just your assessment on one side that's

just the vaccine and you compare it to

the unknown risk of a bioengineered

weapon of mass destruction and it's

obvious that this is a bigger risk

so

so this is as close as I can get to

trying to

improve my game and I think what

happened was ultimately I got lost in

the weeds

I was I was on the weeds I you know I

couldn't see the trees for the forest

kind of thing but it was all kind of

obvious if I just go and use the good

data with the good experts

and it's easy to tell who the good ones

are because they're banned

and then just use my own assessment to

decide what was the good date of the

good experts and then compare it to the

unknown risk of a bioengineered weapon

of mass destruction and I could have

gotten the right answer too

during the fog of War

and on top of that one thing I was also

getting wrong was certainty

I I kept I kept like being on the fence

I don't know if I got a lot of criticism

for that because I was like I'm on the

fence I don't know which is the bigger

risk I I don't know is it the the

vaccine or the virus I don't know so I

was like all over the place

and I can't apologize enough for that

you know I'm sorry

that I misled you

and I was totally wrong

the unvaccinated were the winners they

got the right answer from the start and

impressively they got it with heuristics

which beat the heck out of my poor

analytical abilities and you have my

respect for that

all right I don't understand this

comment my inability to be wrong

how much more can I agree with you

you won't take yes for an answer

why can't you take yes for an answer

I'm literally telling you you got the

right answer

and I'm accepting I'm accepting your

analysis

what's the problem

seriously what's the problem

no no no uh I may have misled you

somebody says was I certain it was a bio

weapon now let me be clear I didn't know

what the virus was

I also didn't know what the so-called

vaccination was

I didn't know what either one of them so

I I was a complete unknown I should have

listened to

I should have listened to the good

experts

who knew from the start what the virus

was and what the vaccination was and I

should have known who the good experts

were because I should have used my own

assessment

and like like you say there were a lot

of you who were right from the start

and I certainly wasn't

would you agree with that statement

there are a lot of you

who through this

improved

let's say

sort of a model for understanding the

world

and now we want tribunals yeah I think

the people who did not use this method

probably need jail time

would you agree I'm wondering if I

should go to jail do you know how many

people I probably killed with my

analyzes

let me think I have to live with that

for the rest of my life

those of you who

um

were the Smart Ones

you know you don't you have you have

clean conscience

now I used to worry about all the people

who were you know use this analysis and

then uh died of covid because they were

unvaccinated but

and that actually was one of my biggest

decision-making criteria

because I was under the mistaken

impression that there was like some

coven pandemic that swept through the

country and recently I'm learning that

nobody died

so I mean I thought I was believing the

government the government

idiot

I don't know how dumb I could be I

believe in the government that people

were dying of covet and and the

government was saying that the

unvaccinated were dying at a much higher

rate

and now we know that that was all made

up

because all data is made up except for

this

if I'd known the good Experts of the

good data I wouldn't have made that

mistake that's for sure

all right so next time I'm going to try

harder

to use my own assessment

to know what the good data is and who

the good experts are and I won't be

making that mistake again of distrusting

all of the data

I'm getting there yeah

so

I'm getting I'm getting a lot of support

on the YouTube platform from people who

say finally

finally you're understanding what's

going on

all right

well thank you very much I'm going to

say goodbye to YouTube and talk to the

people and locals whoops we've got a

little problem here

talk to the people on locals and I will

see you tomorrow bye for now