Episode 224 Scott Adams - False Memories, Kavanaugh, Peacocks, Lie Detectors, The Simulation

hey everybody come on in come on in we've got so much to talk about yes I am on the road savanah and Polly and Nicholas and Don Richard and Angela and Jeremy come on in here gather around we're going to be talking about a few things but not until we have the simultaneous imp it's time for coffee with Scott Adams and it's time for the solid simultaneous sip be it coffee beauty be it water be as a juice be it in a mug a vessel a cup it doesn't matter it's time now for the simultaneous up join me oh good good stuff so the big interesting news today is about the accusations against judge Cavanaugh will the accusations that come from decades ago thirty or forty years ago when he was in when Cavanaugh was a teenager there's a woman who alleges that while classmates at a drunken party he climbed on top of her and tried to have his way with her and he was pulled off by his friend what was the name of the friend who pulled judge Cavanaugh allegedly off of the accuser what was the friend's name judge his actual name so the friends last name is judge now what are the odds of that and I'll tell you why that actually matters in a minute so yes I'm on the road I'm in Las Vegas at the moment just for fun so let me let me give you some context because there are a lot of low information voters out there on the Left who don't understand a few things that you already understand or you're going to in a moment so whether you were a low information voters or not five minutes ago you're going to be the highest information voter of all the information voters I'm going to take you up to the height the height the height of information on this topic anyway so the first thing we must ask ourselves is what about the credibility of the accuser the evidence we have is a memory from 30 or 40 years ago while people were inebriated that's the first piece of information the second piece of information she says she took a lie-detector test and passed the third bit of information is that a reporter for the Washington Post claims that she came to him or she came to her the reporter in July so those who are saying hey why did she wait so long to come forward oh you can question how long it took her but she did come forward in July so that's the information we have let's look at the credibility of each of these lie detectors are they credible nope no lie detectors are not used in court and the reason they're not used is because they're not credible so they do they're not backed scientifically what they're good for is when somebody doesn't know they don't work and they're afraid that they might work you can get a reaction on the machine just because somebody's panicked that you've forced them into a lie so it can be a useful tool if you're let's say you're checking an entire department and you're trying to find the mole who leaked something you could probably find somebody in that department who if they knew who the leaker was they might panic a little bit and maybe you could convince them to give up their secrets because they thought they they thought they failed the polygraph so polygraphs do have a place they are useful in certain situations but only to narrow down things so if you get lucky and somebody panics because they think they're failing a polygraph you can sometimes well often get them to confess so it has that value but as a as a measurement of accuracy of truth that they don't have a purpose all right you got that as a measurement of truth they don't have a purpose polygraphs don't now there are several problems one is that people who believe their own lives can pass secondly we don't know what questions were asked if they were the right ones thirdly if she had a false memory she would also pass the polygraph because she would believe her own memory so the polygraph if that's all you had we should not tell you anything all right passing the polygraph doesn't mean anything failing a polygraph might tell you something it might help you narrow down who's telling the truth but passing one doesn't tell you anything I guess the only thing it tells you is you didn't fail now let's talk about two false memories and here's the point where all of you get to be the high information voters hey yay you're in the good group I call you super elite super elite and and here's the thing that you know that low information voters don't know how common false memories are now take this situation itself but how many people have read about this very situation the accusations against Kavanagh no to keep the current situation how many people read it and then walked away and had the facts wrong a lot there are a lot of people who are on social media talking about this very situation which they just read about and they already remember it wrong do you see how common this is just look on social media you'll see people all over who already remember this story wrong that's how common it is if you were to have a let's say yeah a fight on the street and then one hour later you gathered up all of the witnesses and individually so they're not they're not influencing each other individually you ask them what did you see who started the fight give us the details what were they wearing you would have stories that didn't even look like it was the same event it would look like people had watched completely different movies that's normal that's normal if you think it's abnormal you're a low information voters now what about when you and your siblings or your family get together and you talk about details from your childhood you know in for some of you that might have been 30 or 40 years ago as well how accurate are those memories from 30 or 40 years ago not those things you think our memories are not actually even memories which is hard to wrap your head around but it's true the things you think our memories of your childhood are not memories there are little illusions which you have created where you filled in the details of something you don't really remember you remember maybe the broad strokes you can remember you let's say you went to the zoo but you don't really remember what the animals look like you can't be sure who went with you you might have your your age wrong by three or four years so all that all of the important stuff the details are manufactured after the fact and I'm not saying and I'm not saying that it's about a specific situation or about you the normal way everybody has a sense of memory of the past as they invent it but that doesn't mean they're wrong about everything so there are certainly situations in which if you could go back and check you would find something true but are they reliable if somebody said I remember an event from 30 or 40 years ago if they say that how much credibility should you give it now let's say there was drinking involved and a traumatic event how likely is the memory accurate well if I had to put a likelihood on it certainly not more than 50% I don't think you could actually put a percentage on it but just in in a broad sense certainly not more than 50% likely to be true and it wouldn't matter who is telling the story and it wouldn't matter what it was about if it was 30 40 years ago we would have no way of knowing now if you're a low information voters you're going to say to yourself oh well when people have accusations most of the time most of the time those accusations are correct and that might actually be true because most accusation accusations are fresh and most accusations can be proven by other witnesses and evidence so it's probably true most accusations probably aren't you I don't know what percentage 80 percent 99 percent most are probably true but when you go back 30 or 40 years are most memories true I don't know if it's even most because it starts falling off really quickly when you don't have corroborating information and you're going back decades and you've been drinking so if you've noticed on social media that there's sort of a trap that's been set so already people are coming after me on social media and I've had to block a few people so just by talking about the existence of false memory and the fact that polygraphs are not credible technology for memory memory confirmation just talking about the science of it makes people say you misogynist woman-hating bastard yeah so you can see the forces already lining up against me as well so that's part of the the trap of it is you can't talk about it you can't even talk about the technology of it you can't talk about the likelihood it's true none of that now let me talk about a related topic I have proposed that in the context of I've proposed that in the context of politics because politics affects us all that we employ what I call the twenty year rule the 20 year rule goes like this if there's an accusation that's over 20 years old just ignore it even if it's true just ignore it and the reason is the several reasons number one you can never verify something that's twenty years old and number two were not really the same people we worked when of years ago yeah we share a history we share an ID with who we worked one years ago we share you know we share maybe the same house we had that there's a lot of stuff that's the same but people aren't really the same people they were 20 years ago and it's quadruple e true if you're comparing a senior citizen to a 17 year old I don't know how old Cavanaugh is not senior citizen probably but if you if you're comparing somebody is late 50s to his or her 17 year old self do I really care how horrible the 17 year old self was well I care if there was a victim if there's a victim involved we can care about the victim of course but it's not the same person it's just not the same person and before you say well Scott before you say this to me Oh Scott isn't that convenient that just when the the person that mr.

president Trump likes gets accused of something now you say let's have the twenty year rule but that didn't happen some of you already know that I've had the twenty year rule for some time now and I say that Hillary Clinton benefits from it I don't care what she did with white water or anything else just don't care if it's twenty years old they're just different people if they've done anything in the last twenty years then I say throw it in the mix and let the voters decide but if it's more than twenty years ago I say it doesn't really matter if it's true it's just not the same person you're you're accusing somebody you know a third party for all practical purposes and then somebody says let's let Bubba off the hook yeah so I would apply the same standard to Bill Clinton to anybody now part of this is self-preservation because when it comes to politics if you didn't allow anybody into the job who had you know a spotty record from 40 years ago you just have to clean out the whole Congress and who knows how many you know accusations from that time would even be true so as a practical matter you can't really run a country that way you can't really run a country with twenty-year-old accusations against everybody who comes through because it's going to be everybody it's just gonna be everybody so I would say first of all I would apply the standard to Cavanaugh I would apply it to Bill Clinton article apply it to anybody you want to apply it to both sides 20 year rule here's the next thing you know I often talk about this simulation the idea that we're not real flashing blood but that we were created by some earlier species and we think were real but were actually some kind of a software simulation and you know the argument for that which is its if anybody could create one simulation they probably created lots of them so it's very unlikely that we're the the original when the odds of so many simulations being created by now is so high so here's the evidence you look for to find out if you're part of a simulation and I believe I think I'm the the author of this idea I've never heard it anywhere but every time I say I have a new idea somebody always says oh that's in that sci-fi book from 1984 you stole that idea so I don't know that this is an original idea but I'm pretty sure I didn't hear it anywhere so if you've seen it somewhere in the book let me know and the idea goes like this that there is a way for us to determine if we are real like an original species or a simulation and the way you could do that is by looking at how we alleged humans do software development in if our reality that we see around us yeah that we can touch and drink if that reality has the same limitations that a programmer would have built into a software simulation well then we're probably a simulation for example if you built a simulation you wouldn't let the characters see beyond the edges of it in other words you wouldn't let them get out of the simulation so they could look in and see it and sure enough we've had universe that's it infinite and you can't travel faster than the speed of light and the universe is expanding at the speed of light because the light itself is expanding or is moving in outward directions so so you know it fits that we can't get outside the simulation who incidentally we can't see the smallest part of the simulation in other words no matter how good your you're no matter how good your what do you call it microscope is you can't see the smallest thing oh yeah we can deduce that there are particles and we can split a particle but what's the particle made of nobody knows what this stuff is made of and if you could find out what the particles are made of what's that stuff made of in other words everything is made of something else but could you look good do you keep going down the list of what things are made of forever is everything made of something else and would it be an infinite progression because that makes no sense so that's one of your signs that you're in a simulation here's the other side the other side is that we would have lots of false memories because if you built if you built a simulation would you make a real history that existed like for every every single thing that happened in the universe would you have to create it and then store it so that in case anybody had a memory that was in conflict with another memory as we have with Kavanagh and his accuser two people have different memories would the person who made the simulation create would create a simulation that has in it every fact that's ever happened just in case there's ever a disagreement and then people could say okay one of those is true one of them is not let's figure it out you wouldn't really build it that way because it would take too much resource instead you would give people false memories for any situation that can't be confirmed that's the important part can't be confirmed so if there was an event in the past like the Kennedy assassination there's a video of it that video collapses the reality and makes that the actual shared reality and they can never change because there's a video proof of it but what about the memory that Cavanaugh did something bad that conflicts with the memory that he did not those are opposites it can't be true in in a normal normal universe it could not be true that he did something bad while simultaneously true that at the same time he wasn't there and didn't do anything can't be true but if we live in a simulation they can both be true so in other words as long as those two competing histories can never be fact-checked they both exist as true as true as anything else in the simulation because the simulation isn't true it's a it's a movie that's presented to us so in the simulation it can be true that the event happened at the same time it's true that it didn't happen and the only thing that would collapse those two those two competing memories the only thing that could turn them into one is independent and corroboration probably not from another person because another person just has faulty memory - it would have to be from a videotape maybe the mother finds a diary page that talked about it maybe there's you know I don't know some some weird situation where there's physical evidence but in my world the world that I actually see and perceive and go through life as if it's the real reality in my world which I do not suggest you share both are true that's the actual world that I exist in in other words my the perception that I have all the time is that both histories can be a hundred percent true because neither of them are true meaning we're a simulation there's nothing that's true but if one of them were ever confirmed it would harden into the history and if it's never confirmed without an outside corroboration the two histories just go on as true they're both true forever is this how you landed Christina well that plus my good looks alright now here's the question what are the odds let's go back to talking about false memories remember the coincidence I told you that this situation with Cavanaugh is about a judge who's trying to become an even more famous judge at the same time he's being accused of doing something when he was 17 that was stopped by his friend whose last name is judge think about that the last names friend who was the only other person in this reality who's named I think there were some unnamed people who were allegedly there but of the people who are named one is a famous judge and one is named judge now if you were going to create a false memory about a judge doing something to you and it just happened to be that there were two judges in the same story what does that do to the credibility of your memory well when memories are false they're often suggested by something so false memories are not created and of just nothing they're usually created end of some experience you've had something that's suggested in fact the main way that a false memory can be created is through questioning so if you were to take somebody in and the person who was a let's say saying they were accused of some crime or had some experience like a UFO let's say somebody comes and says I think I saw a UFO false memories can be implanted in that person the details of that can be implanted by the person asking the questions and this is very well-established there are studies that show you can easily implant false memories by putting him in a suggested form and the question so that so if a person came and said I think I saw a UFO here's how you would implant a false memory in that person you would say oh yeah a UFO was it was it football-shaped was a football-shaped or was it disc shaped you just implanted a false memory because the person who said they saw the UFO didn't say that they saw a shape and maybe it wasn't a distinct shape maybe it was a light but if a person says I saw a light and I think it was a UFO and then the person asking the questions about it says was his sheep like a football what was it more of a disc probably you just implanted a false memory that's the way it's done because the person who saw the light and was not registering it as a shape hears those two suggestions and says yeah I think it was more a little more football II than it was disc yeah it was it was football it was football shaped yeah yeah it was definitely football shaped and from that moment on they'll start remembering it as football shaped so this is very well demonstrated it's a known scientific process it does happen as fast as I just described it it's just like that a false memory can be implanted in a normal person in a routine way that fast he happens just to do it all the time now if you had remembered a story about being attacked and you didn't remember all of the people there but you remembered that one of the people there was named judge let's say that's the only part you remembered and somebody says to you you know who else was there well there was somebody named judge and there were some who were his friends somebody else was there was it oh it was Mike Cavanaugh see what I just did there so the person they're asking the question planted to fell a false memory oh I'm sorry Brett Kavanaugh got his name wrong so what I just did was I implanted a false memory and let me let me say it again so you see how easily it is so if the victim says in high school this bad thing happened to me and I don't remember all the details I remember that were there were four I think there were four guys there can you remember any of them well yeah there was this guy named his last name was judge I can remember him who else was there now the name judge is in your mind because it's the only person you could remember and by the way he the friend whose name is judge is not he's not accused of doing anything I don't want to start any any false memories here so the friend is not accused of anything in fact in her telling of the story the friend is who took the attacker off of her so so the person who's named judge is being remembered as a hero not as an attacker I want to be clear about that but once that once that name of that person named judge is in her head and years have gone by and the other person she knew in that class who may have been at the party is an actual judge memories conflate so the fact that one person was named judge and that's the one she remembers for sure makes the odds of her miss remembering somebody who is also a classmate and also a judge the odds of that becoming a false memory skyrocket now did everybody understand that that because the friend's name was judge and you're you're dealing with a very false or not false memory but a vague memory that the person asking the questions if you got the the accuser to say the name judge and I'm not talking about the reporter she talked to this summer I'm talking about people she told the story to probably over the years so it could have been 20 years ago she told the story for the first time and she was telling her friend and she's just telling the friend you know hey it was these four guys I remember one of them one of them it was named judge who are the other ones and then suddenly the word judges in her head and she's thinking of the the group of guys and there's another one who happened to be a judge now he became a judge what are the odds that that association would cause her to have a false memory of an actual judge pretty good so if you don't understand how likely a false memory can be planted then you're a low information voters what are the odds it means nothing you mean what are the odds that it didn't happen the odds of some event happening to that the accuser was the odds that the accuser experienced an event it's probably closer to a hundred percent the odds of her remembering it accurate accurately are vanishingly small the ads of her getting the main parts important which is you know was it an attack who was involved the odds of getting those big facts right fifty-fifty maybe I'd say fifty-fifty yeah are hearing some stories about Cavanaugh's mom being a judge who was involved in a case that involved the accusers family for closing their house I don't know how true that is or how much that matters it's hard to know now it's also relevant as we're picking out you know what's likely and what's not what are the odds that the accuser would be a rabid Hillary supporter what are the odds well pretty good you know 50/50 or something but why is it never the other way you know it are we to believe that if a conservative had been sexually attacked that she would not come forward so are you wondering about that don't you wonder don't you wonder yeah had there been a conservative who had been attacked would that conservative come forward oh I need a hill but that's also ancient history I don't think you can take too much from Anita Hill because that's just too long ago in our current climate you know our current hyper-partisan climate what are the odds that it's always Hillary supporters who come forward Roy Moore is that accuser was a trump supporter okay that's a good counter counterexample I will accept you a counter example I don't know if it's true but I'm gonna accept that it probably was all right so you saw two examples there so if you're asking yourself what is the importance or the relevance of the fact that the accuser was a rabid I don't know how rabid she was don't want to read her mind but she seemed to be a strong supporter of Democrats and in the comments we saw two examples where it's not always the Democrat was making the accusation against the Republican so put that in your so put that into your confirmation bias machine yeah the whole Keith Ellison situation is surprising I don't know the reason for that do you do you have any idea why the Keith Ellison thing is not making a dent and yet have you had everything else seems to yeah let's started somebody made a comment that's a good one because people believe at least on the left people believe that they're on the side of good and that the other side is evil pretty much anything is allowed the you know the controls are off talk about your you know there's sort of a a check-in a control on human behavior because other people are watching you you're normally the fact that other people are watching you and you could go to jail for doing bad stuff to just the social control of people would cause them not to do terrible things but we've lost our social control because now people say that other side is a bunch of Nazis you can do anything you want to a Nazi there's no control on that so suddenly you've got a situation where the social controls are off Democrats can no longer control each other because they don't will see the world the way you see it Franken had to step down yeah so elephant well Al Franken didn't have to step down he just did step down if he had stayed who knows get to the Coast Guard story yeah there's you also the Coast Guard story there was a Coast Guard person in the background of a video story and who he appeared to give the white power symbol now I saw that and I could not for the life of me think of anything that could be that wasn't the white power symbol in other words whether I looked at it I thought to myself okay whatever that is it's certainly not it's not natural looking it doesn't look natural but the fact that I think it doesn't look natural how much does that matter doesn't doesn't mean anything the fact that I didn't think it'd look natural that doesn't tell me what another person is thinking or why they're doing anything it means nothing yeah it could be a troll it could be accidental it could not look like what it looked like could be anything so I think what you can conclude from it is that you can't really conclude anything from it session says that those who suppress free speech should be suppressed is he talking about the social media companies I saw the story that Jack Dorsey of Twitter admitted that conservatives would not feel comfortable at the company or don't feel comfortable at the company and I thought well that's an understatement but I think it's important that he I I think it's it's important that Jack Dorsey has said publicly he acknowledges the situation because that's the first step to doing something about him what has Q predicted do people still believe in Q is Q still a thing give me a sense on this periscope I know a lot of people who were huge supporters may have stopped watching me but say say yes or no how many do you believe q is real I'm lucky your comments so look at the comments so you can see your fellow through the filters so I'm seeing about does it look like two to one three to one against Q being real no all I see is nose now all the yeses went away well here's a interesting experiment how come all the yeses came first and now it's almost a solid wall of nose I saw one why Wow okay let me tell you what just happened because I don't think you just realized what happened somebody was passing around a story recently an article about us a study showing how easy it is to change people's opinions with essentially peer pressure in other words they've done studies where I think this study was they would show people two lines and they would say which line is longer and and if the person was alone they'd look at the two lines they'd see the one that's longer and they'd say okay this life is longer so when they were not influenced people could see the reality for what it was but as soon as you added some people who were working with the researchers and the people working with the researchers would say oh yeah that other line is the long one so the researchers would try to influence the person who didn't know they were trying that they were being influenced to say something that clearly wasn't was obviously not true the length of two lines and it turns out that you can very easily make somebody see two lines differently like right in front of their eyes they're looking at two lines if nobody is there to influence them they no one is bigger not the big one if somebody's there in it and they're they're pretending they think the other line is the long one something like a third of them will change their mind immediately I think it's a it's a big number whatever it is so what I did here in this periscope was I asked you if Q is real or fake did you see how the how the answers went in the beginning when I first asked the question people gave their answer without influenced by other people because the other the other comments hadn't come in yet there's a lag so when I asked the question the people who believe that Q is real said yes and you saw a bunch of yeses yes yes yes no no yes yes yes yes yes no yes yes but the more nose you saw it very quickly collapsed reality until the only answer you were seeing was no at the end did you see that in real time it was exactly like the experiment as soon as the people who said yes could observe that the people that they would consider appears essentially were or two by a majority probably two to one were saying no as soon as they saw it was a two to one no it went to a hundred percent no you saw that right not a hundred percent but it went to something like 90 percent yeah you watch that in real time in real time you watch people's memories being faked because the reason the people think Q is real is that they they have false memory of it which is a perfect connection to the earlier topic let me explain to you why some people think you is real meaning that the predictions are accurate obviously there's people involved so the people are real but the the reason that people believe that Q is accurate yeah is why it's because they remember accurate predictions they remember it now is it a truth that Q has amazingly accurate predictions no it's not true and can be easily demonstrated as many people have they've shown all the examples of Q predictions that were not even close to true now the people who believe Q is accurate they simply don't remember the ones that were wrong those are false memories they have a false memory of Q so if you're asking yourself here's a perfect example if you're asking yourself how often do people have false memories ask yourself how many people believe in Q because everybody who believes in Q got there the same way they got there at first because it was interesting and people were talking about it and you know maybe they were a little open-minded at first but over time they came to believe that the predictions were spookily accurate and that hardened their belief that it was real but those were not real memories those were false memories they simply just didn't remember the ones that weren't real and when there was a vague one other people would say that's not vague that's right on that he'd nailed it he said something vague sure but once you see the real result you know it wasn't vague at all so Q is a false memory phenomenon you can tell how easily false memories are embedded by looking at the Q situation it's a false memory phenomenon I know those of you who are still pro-q or having a tough time with this I'm not making fun of you and this this has to be really clear I am NOT making fun of Q believers because having false memories in in this kind of a context is a hundred percent normal a hundred percent normal in fact if you would describe to me this situation and let's say I'd never been involved with it never heard of Q at all and just if somebody came to me said hey there's somebody who claims they're making predictions and they're making lots of predictions and some people say they're not coming true but other people are convinced that they are tell me what's happening if that's all I knew I would say oh that's a completely normal situation the you're talking about false memories the people who don't see it are always the ones with the better memories the people who do see something the accuracy in this case are almost always the ones with the hallucination the false memory okay so if you - if you see somebody claiming something is clearly true and somebody else looking at the same stuff and this is the important stuff the important point is they're looking at exactly the same evidence they're in the same room and one says there's a giraffe standing right in front of me and the person right next to you same room same time is looking around and saying there is no giraffe in this room which one of them is right it's always the one who doesn't see the giraffe q is a phenomenon where some people see it as clear as the nose on their face and other people look at the same stuff and they don't see it which is true it's always a wonder doesn't see it so now if you take the Cavanaugh story and compare it with the Q situation you can see that the the dominant element is common to both those stories false memory is so pervasive and so normal and it's so the context of our existence that when you see how many people believe in Q that tells you how easily people can have false memories and remember the Q false memories are all within the last three years whether or not the accuser has a false memory we cannot know but the the odds of it being a false memory go through the roof one year thirty years best all right will Cavanaugh get confirmed I say yes so here's my prediction Cavanaugh will get confirmed if Cavanaugh doesn't get confirmed there will never be another none other Supreme Court justice that's probably probably overstating it but if Cavanaugh doesn't get confirmed because of this there might be something else that comes up but if it's because of this then I don't think there will ever be another Supreme Court nomination that gets all the way through because there will there will always be something as good as this so I get I'm guessing that the adults in Congress will decide yeah I'm guessing that the adults will decide that they can't run a country with this standard and it is it is does it seem to you that it's a tremendous power shift from male to female I know most of you are saying duh because it's so obvious but this situation with Cavanaugh appears to me a tremendous power shift because now that it's clear that this can happen to essentially anybody it was male but probably can't happen to a woman it's sort of the the perfect attack for for women so if you're a woman and you think women don't have enough power in society and you'd like to see more of it and that probably explained that you know I think that describes a lot of people the this is the best way to do it because women are largely immune from this not a hundred percent but largely immune and so if if Cavanaugh goes down because of this independently of whether something really happened or not that almost won't matter it will make it'll make it impractical to be a male a male nominee to the Supreme Court you might actually have Supreme Court nominees for male who are aware of nothing that's a problem in their life just say I don't want to lose my marriage you know there might be people who are nominated for the Supreme Court or male and they talk to their family and the wife says look if you go through this nomination process our marriage is going to be just totally screwed because somebody is gonna come forward that's how it works now those are the new rules so I don't know I don't know if man can run for office I can tell you that in my case I would not run for president in the current situation I wasn't planning on it anyway but if I were let's say if I thought like well I would win if I ran for president I would definitely win but by the way how many of you think that if I ran for president I would win and let's say not against Trump because I couldn't possibly win against Trump how many of you think that after I ran in 2024 I could win if I was just all in I just wondered have him anything I could so it looks like you're I just split but a lot of people think I could so the reason that I I predicted that Trump would win was based on his skillset not on his policies my skill set is not as good as his but if I ran for president it would be better than whoever I ran against so I would have the best skill set in the competition by far it wouldn't even be close but that's not all it takes - it still need still need a lot of other qualities all right I'm not gonna run so it doesn't matter anyway I would say I hate to say this but I'm gonna say it anyway if you're a man and you're being considered for the supreme court or running for president it's probably a bad decision it's probably a bad decision because you're gonna be ruined Trump is a unique character because it doesn't seem to matter what we learn about his past it just doesn't make any difference I think Kanye would have the same quality now you if you found out things about his past you'd say well it wasn't a big surprise Oh me and Candice that would be an interesting package imagine be running for president with Candice Owens as my vice president candidate I think Candice would have one problem with that plan what would Candace's problem be what what problem would she have being on a ticket with me me as president and her as vice president because yeah it should be turned around she should be ready for president but it'll give her a few years before she's ready all right he would have to choose a party at what I would have to choose a party and I would and I could win and neither party now that's not true that used to be true but now it's not true I could win as a Republican but I couldn't win as a Democrat short and bold sorry those days are over you know the height and the hair used to make a bigger difference but now persuasion tools are more important I think all right that's all I've got to say for now I'm gonna let you go and get back to your day get back to your day nice talking to you bye for now

hey everybody come on in come on in

we've got so much to talk about

yes I am on the road

savanah and Polly and Nicholas and Don

Richard and Angela and Jeremy come on in

here gather around we're going to be

talking about a few things

but not until we have the simultaneous

imp it's time for coffee with Scott

Adams and it's time for the solid

simultaneous sip be it coffee beauty be

it water be as a juice be it in a mug a

vessel a cup it doesn't matter it's time

now for the simultaneous up join me

oh good good stuff so the big

interesting news today is about the

accusations against judge Cavanaugh will

the accusations that come from decades

ago thirty or forty years ago when he

was in when Cavanaugh was a teenager

there's a woman who alleges that while

classmates at a drunken party he climbed

on top of her and tried to have his way

with her and he was pulled off by his

friend what was the name of the friend

who pulled judge Cavanaugh allegedly off

of the accuser what was the friend's

name judge his actual name so the

friends last name is judge now what are

the odds of that and I'll tell you why

that actually matters in a minute

so yes I'm on the road I'm in Las Vegas

at the moment just for fun so let me let

me give you some context because there

are a lot of low information voters out

there on the Left who don't understand a

few things that you already understand

or you're going to in a moment so

whether you were a low information

voters or not five minutes ago you're

going to be the highest information

voter of all the information voters I'm

going to take you up to the height the

height the height

of information on this topic anyway so

the first thing we must ask ourselves is

what about the credibility of the

accuser the evidence we have is a memory

from 30 or 40 years ago while people

were inebriated that's the first piece

of information the second piece of

information she says she took a

lie-detector test and passed the third

bit of information is that a reporter

for the Washington Post

claims that she came to him or she came

to her the reporter in July so those who

are saying hey why did she wait so long

to come forward oh you can question how

long it took her but she did come

forward in July so that's the

information we have let's look at the

credibility of each of these lie

detectors are they credible nope no lie

detectors are not used in court and the

reason they're not used is because

they're not credible so they do they're

not backed scientifically what they're

good for is when somebody doesn't know

they don't work and they're afraid that

they might work you can get a reaction

on the machine just because somebody's

panicked that you've forced them into a

lie so it can be a useful tool if you're

let's say you're checking an entire

department and you're trying to find the

mole who leaked something you could

probably find somebody in that

department who if they knew who the

leaker was they might panic a little bit

and maybe you could convince them to

give up their secrets because they

thought they they thought they failed

the polygraph

so polygraphs do have a place they are

useful in certain situations but only to

narrow down things so if you get lucky

and somebody panics because they think

they're failing a polygraph

you can sometimes well often get them to

confess so it has that value but as a as

a measurement of accuracy of truth that

they don't have a purpose all right you

got that as a measurement of truth they

don't have a purpose polygraphs don't

now there are several problems one is

that people who believe their own lives

can pass secondly we don't know what

questions were asked if they were the

right ones thirdly if she had a false

memory she would also pass the polygraph

because she would believe her own memory

so the polygraph if that's all you had

we should not tell you anything all

right passing the polygraph doesn't mean

anything failing a polygraph might tell

you something it might help you narrow

down who's telling the truth but passing

one doesn't tell you anything I guess

the only thing it tells you is you

didn't fail now let's talk about two

false memories and here's the point

where all of you get to be the high

information voters hey yay you're in the

good group I call you super elite super

elite and and here's the thing that you

know that low information voters don't

know

how common false memories are now take

this situation itself but how many

people have read about this very

situation the accusations against

Kavanagh no to keep the current

situation how many people read it and

then walked away and had the facts wrong

a lot there are a lot of people who are

on social media talking about this very

situation which they just read about and

they already remember it wrong do you

see how common this is just look on

social media you'll see people all over

who already remember this story wrong

that's how common it is if you were to

have a let's say yeah a fight on the

street and then one hour later you

gathered up all of the witnesses and

individually so they're not they're not

influencing each other individually you

ask them what did you see who started

the fight give us the details what were

they wearing

you would have stories that didn't even

look like it was the same event it would

look like people had watched completely

different movies that's normal that's

normal if you think it's abnormal you're

a low information voters now what about

when you and your siblings or your

family get together and you talk about

details from your childhood you know in

for some of you that might have been 30

or 40 years ago as well how accurate are

those memories from 30 or 40 years ago

not those things you think our memories

are not actually even memories which is

hard to wrap your head around but it's

true the things you think our memories

of your childhood are not memories there

are little illusions which you have

created where you filled in the details

of something you don't really remember

you remember maybe the broad strokes you

can remember you let's say you went to

the zoo but you don't really remember

what the animals look like you can't be

sure who went with you you might have

your your age wrong by three or four

years so all that all of the important

stuff the details are manufactured after

the fact and I'm not saying and I'm not

saying that it's about a specific

situation or about you the normal way

everybody has a sense of memory of the

past as they invent it but that doesn't

mean they're wrong about everything so

there are certainly situations in which

if you could go back and check you would

find something true but are they

reliable if somebody said I remember an

event from 30 or 40 years ago if they

say that how much credibility should you

give it now let's say there was drinking

involved and a traumatic event how

likely is the memory accurate

well if I had to put a likelihood on it

certainly not more than 50% I don't

think you could actually put a

percentage on it but just in in a broad

sense certainly not more than 50% likely

to be true and it wouldn't matter who is

telling the story and it wouldn't matter

what it was about if it was 30 40 years

ago we would have no way of knowing now

if you're a low information voters

you're going to say to yourself oh well

when people have accusations most of the

time most of the time those accusations

are correct and that might actually be

true because most accusation accusations

are fresh and most accusations can be

proven by other witnesses and evidence

so it's probably true most accusations

probably aren't you I don't know what

percentage 80 percent 99 percent most

are probably true but when you go back

30 or 40 years are most memories true I

don't know if it's even most because it

starts falling off really quickly when

you don't have corroborating information

and you're going back decades and you've

been drinking so if you've noticed on

social media that there's sort of a trap

that's been set so already people are

coming after me on social media and I've

had to block a few people so just by

talking about the existence of false

memory

and the fact that polygraphs are not

credible technology for memory memory

confirmation just talking about the

science of it makes people say you

misogynist woman-hating bastard yeah so

you can see the forces already lining up

against me as well

so that's part of the the trap of it is

you can't talk about it you can't even

talk about the technology of it you

can't talk about the likelihood it's

true none of that now let me talk about

a related topic I have proposed that in

the context of I've proposed that in the

context of politics because politics

affects us all that we employ what I

call the twenty year rule the 20 year

rule goes like this if there's an

accusation that's over 20 years old just

ignore it

even if it's true just ignore it and the

reason is the several reasons number one

you can never verify something that's

twenty years old

and number two were not really the same

people we worked when of years ago yeah

we share a history we share an ID with

who we worked one years ago we share you

know we share maybe the same house we

had that there's a lot of stuff that's

the same but people aren't really the

same people they were 20 years ago and

it's quadruple e true if you're

comparing a senior citizen to a 17 year

old I don't know how old Cavanaugh is

not senior citizen probably but if you

if you're comparing somebody is late 50s

to his or her 17 year old self

do I really care how horrible the 17

year old self was well I care if there

was a victim if there's a victim

involved we can care about the victim of

course but it's not the same person it's

just not the same person and before you

say well Scott before you say this to me

Oh Scott isn't that convenient that just

when the the person that mr. president

Trump likes gets accused of something

now you say let's have the twenty year

rule but that didn't happen

some of you already know that I've had

the twenty year rule for some time now

and I say that Hillary Clinton benefits

from it I don't care what she did with

white water or anything else just don't

care if it's twenty years old they're

just different people if they've done

anything in the last twenty years then I

say throw it in the mix and let the

voters decide but if it's more than

twenty years ago I say it doesn't really

matter if it's true it's just not the

same person you're you're accusing

somebody you know a third party for all

practical purposes and then somebody

says let's let Bubba off the hook yeah

so I would apply the same standard to

Bill Clinton to anybody now part of this

is self-preservation because when it

comes to politics if you didn't allow

anybody into the job who had you know a

spotty record from 40 years ago

you just have to clean out the whole

Congress and who knows how many you know

accusations from that time would even be

true so as a practical matter you can't

really run a country that way you can't

really run a country with

twenty-year-old accusations against

everybody who comes through because it's

going to be everybody it's just gonna be

everybody so

I would say first of all I would apply

the standard to Cavanaugh I would apply

it to Bill Clinton article apply it to

anybody you want to apply it to both

sides 20 year rule here's the next thing

you know I often talk about this

simulation the idea that we're not real

flashing blood but that we were created

by some earlier species and we think

were real but were actually some kind of

a software simulation and you know the

argument for that which is its if

anybody could create one simulation they

probably created lots of them so it's

very unlikely that we're the the

original when the odds of so many

simulations being created by now is so

high so here's the evidence you look for

to find out if you're part of a

simulation and I believe I think I'm the

the author of this idea I've never heard

it anywhere but every time I say I have

a new idea somebody always says oh

that's in that sci-fi book from 1984 you

stole that idea so I don't know that

this is an original idea but I'm pretty

sure I didn't hear it anywhere so if

you've seen it somewhere in the book let

me know and the idea goes like this that

there is a way for us to determine if we

are real like an original species or a

simulation and the way you could do that

is by looking at how we alleged humans

do software development in if our

reality that we see around us yeah that

we can touch and drink if that reality

has the same limitations that a

programmer would have built into a

software simulation well then we're

probably a simulation for example if you

built a simulation you wouldn't let the

characters see beyond the edges of it in

other words you wouldn't let them get

out of the simulation so they could look

in and see it and sure enough we've had

universe that's it infinite and you

can't travel faster than the speed of

light and the universe is expanding at

the speed of light because the light

itself is expanding or is moving in

outward directions so so you know it

fits that we can't get outside the

simulation who incidentally we can't see

the smallest part of the simulation in

other words no matter how good your

you're no matter how good your what do

you call it microscope is you can't see

the smallest thing oh yeah we can deduce

that there are particles and we can

split a particle but what's the particle

made of nobody knows what this stuff is

made of and if you could find out what

the particles are made of what's that

stuff made of in other words everything

is made of something else but could you

look good do you keep going down the

list of what things are made of forever

is everything made of something else and

would it be an infinite progression

because that makes no sense so that's

one of your signs that you're in a

simulation here's the other side the

other side is that we would have lots of

false memories because if you built if

you built a simulation would you make a

real history that existed like for every

every single thing that happened in the

universe would you have to create it and

then store it so that in case anybody

had a memory that was in conflict with

another memory as we have with Kavanagh

and his accuser two people have

different memories would the person who

made the simulation create would create

a simulation that has in it every fact

that's ever happened just in case

there's ever a disagreement

and then people could say okay one of

those is true one of them is not let's

figure it out

you wouldn't really build it that way

because it would take too much resource

instead you would give people false

memories for any situation that can't be

confirmed that's the important part

can't be confirmed so if there was an

event in the past like the Kennedy

assassination there's a video of it that

video collapses the reality and makes

that the actual shared reality and they

can never change because there's a video

proof of it but what about the memory

that Cavanaugh did something bad that

conflicts with the memory that he did

not those are opposites it can't be true

in in a normal normal universe it could

not be true that he did something bad

while simultaneously true that at the

same time he wasn't there and didn't do

anything can't be true but if we live in

a simulation they can both be true so in

other words as long as those two

competing histories can never be

fact-checked they both exist as true as

true as anything else in the simulation

because the simulation isn't true it's a

it's a movie that's presented to us so

in the simulation it can be true that

the event happened at the same time it's

true that it didn't happen and the only

thing that would collapse those two

those two competing memories the only

thing that could turn them into one is

independent and corroboration probably

not from another person because another

person just has faulty memory - it would

have to be from a videotape maybe the

mother finds a diary page that talked

about it

maybe there's you know I don't know some

some weird situation where there's

physical evidence but in my world the

world that I actually see and perceive

and go through life as if it's the real

reality in my world which I do not

suggest you share both are true that's

the actual world that I exist in in

other words my the perception that I

have all the time is that both histories

can be a hundred percent true because

neither of them are true meaning we're a

simulation there's nothing that's true

but if one of them were ever confirmed

it would harden into the history and if

it's never confirmed without an outside

corroboration the two histories just go

on as true they're both true forever is

this how you landed Christina well that

plus my good looks

alright now here's the question what are

the odds let's go back to talking about

false memories

remember the coincidence I told you that

this situation with Cavanaugh is about a

judge who's trying to become an even

more famous judge at the same time he's

being accused of doing something when he

was 17 that was stopped by his friend

whose last name is judge think about

that the last names friend who was the

only other person in this reality who's

named I think there were some unnamed

people who were allegedly there but of

the people who are named one is a famous

judge and one is named judge now if you

were going to create a false memory

about a judge doing something to you and

it just happened to be that there were

two judges in the same story what does

that do to the credibility of your

memory

well when memories are false

they're often suggested by something so

false memories are not created and of

just nothing they're usually created end

of some experience you've had something

that's suggested in fact the main way

that a false memory can be created is

through questioning

so if you were to take somebody in and

the person who was a let's say saying

they were accused of some crime or had

some experience like a UFO let's say

somebody comes and says I think I saw a

UFO false memories can be implanted in

that person the details of that can be

implanted by the person asking the

questions and this is very

well-established

there are studies that show you can

easily implant false memories by putting

him in a suggested form and the question

so that so if a person came and said I

think I saw a UFO here's how you would

implant a false memory in that person

you would say oh yeah a UFO was it was

it football-shaped was a football-shaped

or was it disc shaped you just implanted

a false memory because the person who

said they saw the UFO didn't say that

they saw a shape and maybe it wasn't a

distinct shape maybe it was a light but

if a person says I saw a light and I

think it was a UFO and then the person

asking the questions about it says was

his sheep like a football

what was it more of a disc probably you

just implanted a false memory that's the

way it's done

because the person who saw the light and

was not registering it as a shape hears

those two suggestions and says yeah I

think it was more a little more football

II than it was disc yeah it was it was

football it was football shaped yeah

yeah it was definitely football shaped

and from that moment on they'll start

remembering it as football shaped so

this is very well demonstrated it's a

known scientific process it does happen

as fast as I just described it it's just

like that a false memory can be

implanted in a normal person in a

routine way that fast

he happens just to do it all the time

now if you had remembered a story about

being attacked and you didn't remember

all of the people there but you

remembered that one of the people there

was named judge let's say that's the

only part you remembered and somebody

says to you you know who else was there

well there was somebody named judge and

there were some who were his friends

somebody else was there was it oh it was

Mike Cavanaugh see what I just did there

so the person they're asking the

question planted to fell a false memory

oh I'm sorry Brett Kavanaugh got his

name wrong

so what I just did was I implanted a

false memory and let me let me say it

again so you see how easily it is so if

the victim says in high school this bad

thing happened to me and I don't

remember all the details

I remember that were there were four I

think there were four guys there can you

remember any of them well yeah there was

this guy named his last name was judge I

can remember him who else was there

now the name judge is in your mind

because it's the only person you could

remember and by the way he the friend

whose name is judge is not he's not

accused of doing anything I don't want

to start any any false memories here

so the friend is not accused of anything

in fact in her telling of the story the

friend is who took the attacker off of

her so so the person who's named judge

is being remembered as a hero

not as an attacker I want to be clear

about that

but once that once that name of that

person named judge is in her head and

years have gone by and the other person

she knew in that class who may have been

at the party is an actual judge memories

conflate so the fact that one person was

named judge and that's the one she

remembers for sure makes the odds of her

miss remembering somebody who is also a

classmate and also a judge the odds of

that becoming a false memory skyrocket

now did everybody understand that that

because the friend's name was judge and

you're you're dealing with a very false

or not false memory but a vague memory

that the person asking the questions if

you got the the accuser to say the name

judge and I'm not talking about the

reporter she talked to this summer I'm

talking about people she told the story

to probably over the years so it could

have been 20 years ago she told the

story for the first time and she was

telling her friend and she's just

telling the friend you know hey it was

these four guys I remember one of them

one of them it was named judge who are

the other ones and then suddenly the

word judges in her head and she's

thinking of the the group of guys and

there's another one who happened to be a

judge now he became a judge what are the

odds that that association would cause

her to have a false memory of an actual

judge pretty good so if you don't

understand how likely a false memory can

be planted

then you're a low information voters

what are the odds it means nothing you

mean what are the odds that it didn't

happen

the odds of some event happening to that

the accuser was the odds that the

accuser experienced an event it's

probably closer to a hundred percent the

odds of her remembering it accurate

accurately are vanishingly small the ads

of her getting the main parts important

which is you know was it an attack who

was involved the odds of getting those

big facts right fifty-fifty maybe I'd

say fifty-fifty

yeah are hearing some stories about

Cavanaugh's mom being a judge who was

involved in a case that involved the

accusers family for closing their house

I don't know how true that is or how

much that matters it's hard to know

now it's also relevant as we're picking

out you know what's likely and what's

not what are the odds that the accuser

would be a rabid Hillary supporter what

are the odds well pretty good you know

50/50 or something but why is it never

the other way you know it are we to

believe that if a conservative had been

sexually attacked that she would not

come forward so are you wondering about

that don't you wonder don't you wonder

yeah had there been a conservative who

had been attacked would that

conservative come forward

oh I need a hill but that's also ancient

history I don't think you can take too

much from Anita Hill because that's just

too long ago in our current climate you

know our current hyper-partisan climate

what are the odds that it's always

Hillary supporters who come forward Roy

Moore is that accuser was a trump

supporter okay that's a good counter

counterexample I will accept you a

counter example I don't know if it's

true but I'm gonna accept that it

probably was

all right so you saw two examples there

so if you're asking yourself what is the

importance or the relevance of the fact

that the accuser was a rabid I don't

know how rabid she was don't want to

read her mind but she seemed to be a

strong supporter of Democrats and in the

comments we saw two examples where it's

not always the Democrat was making the

accusation against the Republican so put

that in your so put that into your

confirmation bias machine yeah the whole

Keith Ellison situation is surprising I

don't know the reason for that do you do

you have any idea why the Keith Ellison

thing is not making a dent and yet

have you had everything else seems to

yeah let's started somebody made a

comment that's a good one because people

believe at least on the left people

believe that they're on the side of good

and that the other side is evil

pretty much anything is allowed the you

know the controls are off talk about

your you know there's sort of a a

check-in a control on human behavior

because other people are watching you

you're normally the fact that other

people are watching you and you could go

to jail for doing bad stuff to just the

social control of people would cause

them not to do terrible things but we've

lost our social control because now

people say that other side is a bunch of

Nazis you can do anything you want to a

Nazi there's no control on that so

suddenly you've got a situation where

the social controls are off Democrats

can no longer control each other because

they don't will see the world the way

you see it Franken had to step down yeah

so elephant well Al Franken didn't have

to step down he just did step down if he

had stayed who knows get to the Coast

Guard story

yeah there's you also the Coast Guard

story there was a Coast Guard person in

the background of a video story and who

he appeared to give the white power

symbol now I saw that and I could not

for the life of me think of anything

that could be that wasn't the white

power symbol in other words whether I

looked at it I thought to myself okay

whatever that is it's certainly not it's

not natural looking it doesn't look

natural but the fact that I think it

doesn't look natural

how much does that matter doesn't

doesn't mean anything the fact that I

didn't think it'd look natural that

doesn't tell me what another person is

thinking or why they're doing anything

it means nothing yeah it could be a

troll it could be accidental it could

not look like what it looked like could

be anything so I think what you can

conclude from it is that you can't

really conclude anything from it

session says that those who suppress

free speech should be suppressed is he

talking about the social media companies

I saw the story that Jack Dorsey of

Twitter admitted that conservatives

would not feel comfortable at the

company or don't feel comfortable at the

company and I thought well that's an

understatement but I think it's

important that he I I think it's it's

important that Jack Dorsey has said

publicly he acknowledges the situation

because that's the first step to doing

something about him

what has Q predicted do people still

believe in Q is Q still a thing

give me a sense on this periscope I know

a lot of people who were huge supporters

may have stopped watching me but say say

yes or no how many do you believe q is

real

I'm lucky your comments so look at the

comments so you can see your fellow

through the filters so I'm seeing about

does it look like two to one three to

one against Q being real no all I see is

nose now all the yeses went away well

here's a interesting experiment how come

all the yeses came first and now it's

almost a solid wall of nose I saw one

why Wow okay let me tell you what just

happened because I don't think you just

realized what happened somebody was

passing around a story recently an

article about us a study showing how

easy it is to change people's opinions

with essentially peer pressure in other

words they've done studies where I think

this study was they would show people

two lines and they would say which line

is longer and and if the person was

alone they'd look at the two lines

they'd see the one that's longer and

they'd say okay this life is longer so

when they were not influenced people

could see the reality for what it was

but as soon as you added some people who

were working with the researchers and

the people working with the researchers

would say oh yeah that other line is the

long one so the researchers would try to

influence the person who didn't know

they were trying that they were being

influenced to say something that clearly

wasn't was obviously not true the length

of two lines and it turns out that you

can very easily make somebody see two

lines differently like right in front of

their eyes they're looking at two lines

if nobody is there to influence them

they no one is bigger not the big one if

somebody's there in it and they're

they're pretending they think the other

line is the long one something like a

third of them will change their mind

immediately I think it's a it's a big

number whatever it is

so what I did here in this periscope was

I asked you if Q is real or fake did you

see how the how the answers went in the

beginning when I first asked the

question people gave their answer

without influenced by other people

because the other the other comments

hadn't come in yet there's a lag so when

I asked the question the people who

believe that Q is real said yes and you

saw a bunch of yeses yes yes yes no no

yes yes yes yes yes no yes yes but the

more nose you saw it very quickly

collapsed reality until the only answer

you were seeing was no at the end did

you see that in real time it was exactly

like the experiment as soon as the

people who said yes could observe that

the people that they would consider

appears essentially were or two by a

majority probably two to one were saying

no as soon as they saw it was a two to

one no it went to a hundred percent no

you saw that right not a hundred percent

but it went to something like 90 percent

yeah you watch that in real time in real

time you watch people's memories being

faked because the reason the people

think Q is real is that they they have

false memory of it which is a perfect

connection to the earlier topic let me

explain to you why some people think you

is real meaning that the predictions are

accurate

obviously there's people involved so the

people are real but the the reason that

people believe that Q is accurate yeah

is why it's because they remember

accurate predictions they remember it

now is it a truth that Q has amazingly

accurate predictions no it's not true

and can be easily demonstrated as many

people have they've shown all the

examples of Q predictions that were not

even close to true now the people who

believe Q is accurate they simply don't

remember the ones that were wrong those

are false memories they have a false

memory of Q so if you're asking yourself

here's a perfect example if you're

asking yourself how often do people have

false memories ask yourself how many

people believe in Q because everybody

who believes in Q got there the same way

they got there at first because it was

interesting and people were talking

about it and you know maybe they were a

little open-minded at first but over

time they came to believe that the

predictions were spookily accurate and

that hardened their belief that it was

real but those were not real memories

those were false memories they simply

just didn't remember the ones that

weren't real and when there was a vague

one other people would say that's not

vague that's right on that he'd nailed

it he said something vague sure but once

you see the real result you know it

wasn't vague at all so Q is a false

memory phenomenon you can tell how

easily false memories are embedded by

looking at the Q situation it's a false

memory phenomenon

I know those of you who are still pro-q

or having a tough time with this I'm not

making fun of you

and this this has to be really clear I

am NOT making fun of Q believers because

having false memories in in this kind of

a context is a hundred percent normal a

hundred percent normal in fact if you

would describe to me this situation and

let's say I'd never been involved with

it never heard of Q at all and just if

somebody came to me said hey there's

somebody who claims they're making

predictions and they're making lots of

predictions and some people say they're

not coming true but other people are

convinced that they are tell me what's

happening if that's all I knew I would

say oh that's a completely normal

situation the you're talking about false

memories the people who don't see it are

always the ones with the better memories

the people who do see something the

accuracy in this case are almost always

the ones with the hallucination the

false memory okay so if you - if you see

somebody claiming something is clearly

true and somebody else looking at the

same stuff and this is the important

stuff the important point is they're

looking at exactly the same evidence

they're in the same room and one says

there's a giraffe standing right in

front of me and the person right next to

you same room same time is looking

around and saying there is no giraffe in

this room which one of them is right

it's always the one who doesn't see the

giraffe

q is a phenomenon where some people see

it as clear as the nose on their face

and other people look at the same stuff

and they don't see it which is true it's

always a wonder doesn't see it so now if

you take the Cavanaugh story and compare

it with the Q situation you can see that

the the dominant element is common to

both those stories false memory is so

pervasive and so normal and it's so the

context of our existence that when you

see how many people believe in Q that

tells you how easily people can have

false memories

and remember the Q false memories are

all within the last three years whether

or not the accuser has a false memory we

cannot know but the the odds of it being

a false memory go through the roof one

year thirty years best all right will

Cavanaugh get confirmed

I say yes so here's my prediction

Cavanaugh will get confirmed if

Cavanaugh doesn't get confirmed there

will never be another none other Supreme

Court justice

that's probably probably overstating it

but if Cavanaugh doesn't get confirmed

because of this there might be something

else that comes up but if it's because

of this then I don't think there will

ever be another Supreme Court nomination

that gets all the way through because

there will there will always be

something as good as this so I get I'm

guessing that the adults in Congress

will decide yeah I'm guessing that the

adults will decide that they can't run a

country with this standard and it is it

is does it seem to you that it's a

tremendous power shift from male to

female

I know most of you are saying duh

because it's so obvious but this

situation with Cavanaugh appears to me a

tremendous power shift because now that

it's clear that this can happen to

essentially anybody it was male but

probably can't happen to a woman it's

sort of the the perfect attack for for

women so if you're a woman and you think

women don't have enough power in society

and you'd like to see more of it and

that probably explained that you know I

think that describes a lot of people the

this is the best way to do it because

women are largely immune from this not a

hundred percent but largely immune and

so if if Cavanaugh goes down because of

this independently of whether something

really happened or not

that almost won't matter it will make

it'll make it impractical to be a male a

male nominee to the Supreme Court you

might actually have Supreme Court

nominees for male who are aware of

nothing that's a problem in their life

just say I don't want to lose my

marriage you know there might be people

who are nominated for the Supreme Court

or male and they talk to their family

and the wife says look if you go through

this nomination process our marriage is

going to be just totally screwed because

somebody is gonna come forward that's

how it works now those are the new rules

so I don't know I don't know if man can

run for office I can tell you that in my

case I would not run for president in

the current situation I wasn't planning

on it anyway but if I were let's say if

I thought like well I would win if I ran

for president I would definitely win but

by the way how many of you think that if

I ran for president I would win and

let's say not against Trump because I

couldn't possibly win against Trump how

many of you think that after I ran in

2024 I could win if I was just all in

I just wondered have him anything I

could so it looks like you're I just

split but a lot of people think I could

so the reason that I I predicted that

Trump would win was based on his

skillset not on his policies my skill

set is not as good as his but if I ran

for president it would be better than

whoever I ran against so I would have

the best skill set in the competition by

far it wouldn't even be close but that's

not all it takes - it still need still

need a lot of other qualities all right

I'm not gonna run so it doesn't matter

anyway I would say I hate to say this

but I'm gonna say it anyway if you're a

man and you're being considered for the

supreme court or running for president

it's probably a bad decision

it's probably a bad decision because

you're gonna be ruined

Trump is a unique character because it

doesn't seem to matter what we learn

about his past it just doesn't make any

difference

I think Kanye would have the same

quality now you if you found out things

about his past you'd say well it wasn't

a big surprise Oh me and Candice that

would be an interesting package imagine

be running for president with Candice

Owens as my vice president candidate I

think Candice would have one problem

with that plan

what would Candace's problem be what

what problem would she have being on a

ticket with me me as president and her

as vice president because yeah it should

be turned around she should be ready for

president but it'll give her a few years

before she's ready all right he would

have to choose a party at what I would

have to choose a party and I would and I

could win and neither party now that's

not true that used to be true but now

it's not true I could win as a

Republican but I couldn't win as a

Democrat short and bold sorry those days

are over

you know the height and the hair used to

make a bigger difference but now

persuasion tools are more important I

think all right that's all I've got to

say for now I'm gonna let you go and get

back to your day get back to your day

nice talking to you bye for now