Episode 2063 Scott Adams - Newsom's Reparations Trap, IQ With Healthcare, AI Control, Restrict Act

good morning everybody and welcome to coffee with Scott Adams it's the highlight of civilization um you might notice my voice is a little raspy got a little laryngitis so turn up your sound put on your headphones this is as loud as I can get now if you'd like to take your experience up to levels that I don't know are just impossible to imagine at this point all you have to do is grab yourself a cup or a mug or a glass a tanker jealous of style and a canteen Joker flask a vessel of any kind fill it with your favorite liquid I like coffee and join me now for the unparalleled pleasure of the dopamine the other day the thing that makes everything better and today it comes with a little oxytocin too it's called the simultaneous sip it happens now go well jacinta I hope you enjoyed your very first simultaneous sip everybody congratulations to jacinta good I hope I'm pronouncing that right I may I turned the the J into a y is that correct j-a-c-i-n-t-a yasanta sounds about right all right well how many of you have seen the famous probably every one of you the famous uh audio illusion in which you could hear uh what is it green needle or something else so you could hear two different things even though it's always the same well have you seen the one where there's a whole list of things you can see this is the one that will completely change your opinion about the world now I don't know if you can hear it hold on all right so before I put on the audio just see that there's a whole list of different things which the same audio will sound like but only if you're looking at it at the time so in other words if you're looking at the line that says baptism piracy you hear exactly that on the audio as soon as you move to any other thing on the list and there are two four six eight there are eight things here eight completely different sets of words completely different you can hear each of them clearly by reading it at the same time as the music now I don't think it'll come through very well on my audio but you'll at least get the sense that this is the most mind-bending thing you'll ever see in your life right so here's the sound I just realized this doesn't work at all because you can't read the you can't read the sentences but you can you can hear this as Bart Simpson bouncing rotating pirate ship that isn't my receipt lobsters in motion that is embarrassing lactates and Pharmacy baptism piracy or that isn't Mercy no sound yeah there's plenty of sound so the people saying there's no sound or just trolls um now here's why this is so mind-blowing when when the audio illusion was two different things you could tell yourself oh well that's a weird coincidence there are two different things the in the right conditions you would confuse with each other in a way it's not really that interesting is it right it's not really interesting so but what happens when there's eight entirely different words that you could hear clearly by looking at them when the when the same sound is playing how do you explain that the only way to explain that is that reality is super subjective now you knew reality was subjective because we all have different opinions looking at the same stuff but I'll bet you didn't know it was that subjective I mean that is really subjective and that might be that might be the way you walk around through life all the time you know I think it was in the 60s the first time I heard you hear what you want to hear you see what you want to see and the first time I heard that it was sort of mind-blowing really do you hear what you want to hear hmm I'm not so sure because you know I was a kid I was like I don't know that sounds a little simplistic doesn't it but you do you actually hear what you want to hear you can see this with news stories how many times have you seen on social media somebody would tweet a story and say look this proves X and I look at it I go no it doesn't it disproves X literally literally the opposite so that that's the reality that you walk around in there is no fixed reality or if there is we can't tell what it is um I would like to give one clarification an important one when Elon Musk and other prominent people said we should pause rates I said that's a good idea other people said wait wait China and other countries will Blaze ahead of us if we slow down and that would be dangerous to which I say I'm not in favor of of stopping development so I'm only in favor of not making it available to the General Public too soon so that's the only pause I would favor I don't favor stopping research I don't favor stopping training it yet the I do believe that we have a competitive National Security and financial interest and being first and being best and we're lucky that we have a company that seems to be first and best at least at the moment so I wouldn't want to lose that asset it's one of the things that makes America as strong as it is that we have entrepreneurs who can create technologies that change the world it looks like that's what's happening but I do think it would be wise to keep it out of the hands of citizens for a little while or even other commercial interests and let the AI people do what they're doing and then we can decide what to do with it um but here's a take on this that is sort of a clarification of something I've said before the real risk of AI is that if it starts telling us uh stuff that isn't true it will be banned or ignored would you agree if you couldn't trust AI to tell you what's true which is the current situation it's it's not reliable it I found that my need to use it was much lower once I realized that it was full of does anybody have that experience when it first came out I thought oh my God I'm so interested in what it says but as soon as I knew that it lies or just randomly makes up facts I thought oh it's just a random it's just a random word generator I have no interest in a random word generator a random word generator that looks intelligent to people who don't look into it too carefully is not interesting in the in the least but will it always be like that so there are two conditions one if AI is undependable it won't be that useful and people won't be caring about it but what if it becomes accurate and how would we know it's almost as dangerous if it's accurate because if it's accurate then there will be no common narrative for the country here's the problem in the in my youth in let's say 40s and 50s or 60s we know now that the CIA was actively manipulating movies and TV and trying to create a culture that would be successful and defensible and they succeeded the the so-called you know American dream of you know owning a house and being a consumer and having a nice car and being a Christian back in those days that was key thing those things were never natural those things were programs so the United States wisely and effectively programmed its citizens how many of you stood and did the Pledge of Allegiance you know that's just brainwashing right it's good brainwashing it's the kind I approve of because you can't really let Society take its own you know wild Direction any way it goes it's just chaos so there probably is some need to brainwash at least to children at the very least you have to brainwash the children because they can't make decisions now you could argue that adults can either but certainly with children we don't agree so you have to brainwash children later you can teach them critical thinking and maybe they'll change their opinions on things but they would do it somewhat on their own um however it appears that the CIA got out of that business for a while until Obama put him back in that business through legislation so once you know that the that the intelligence Services of the United States can legally legally brainwash the citizens and there's actually a utility to it it's not all bad um then you have to say to yourself what are they brainwashing us with well at the moment they're brainwashing us with wokeness because they could make it go away they could make it go away if the CIA or whoever you know here's a phrase that I saw in a article by Jacob Siegel in writing for a tablet and it's called a guide to understanding The hoax of the century 13 ways of looking at disinformation the problem is in our current situation the intelligence entities of the United States have formed working relationships with social media and the news now the way they approach it is that they're going to help the news and hope help social media remove disinformation so who says no to that you go to the news you say hey we know what's true and what isn't wouldn't you like to report True News what's the news going to say of course of course you know tell us what's true you know they might check it but at least they'd want to know what's true so if you have an entity that is selling itself as the correctors of disinformation they really are in control of your information you've given them control of your minds because you've decided that some entity can tell you what's true and not true and believe me they don't know they don't know they're just going to tell you a version that they think is to their best interest so we have a situation where our media is completely and here's the phrase I want to read from Jacob Siegel because he said it so well he said the American Press once the guardian of democracy was hollowed out to the point that it could be worn like a hand puppet by the U.S security agencies and party operatives the media is so hollowed out it could be worn as a hand puppet by the CIA U.S security agencies and party operatives perfect first of all is great writing because it's visual secondly it it just captures the entire situation yeah so we're so addicted to watching the news that we think is real even when we know it's not real we act like it is I do that every day I know the news isn't real and I still act like it is and I can't break myself of the habit I tell myself well you know I'm working on this assumption or you know it's a it's a it's real until it changes you know I tell myself ridiculous things but what I should tell myself is none of it's real because it's not the facts might be real but the narrative in which it is presented is always artificial so um I do believe in pausing AI but how in the world do we get AI to be free from the same things that corrupted our media which is intelligence agencies how do you keep intelligence agencies from owning AI can you I don't think it's possible because they have more power and they're better at it see here I think this is my speculation the way intelligence agencies can co-opt social media managers and and news people is that when the CIA or somebody you know like FBI somebody official comes in and meets with you and they say hey let us be partners and let us help you the first thing you might think is oh I've got a partner free partner maybe it's free maybe it's not but I've got this partner like they'll help me but the trouble is intelligence agencies are never your partner they're always your boss they're always your boss they're never your partner they might come in as your partner but try to do something they don't want see how that goes right and some of it is ego imagine you're the CEO of whatever news entity and the CIA asked for a meeting what does that do to your brain you're in charge and the CIA has to meet with you because it's important to National Security and you're important yes you you're important to National Security and you know we really think you're great and we'd like to work with you to help you because you're so important we'd like to help you be even more effective and by the way we can tell you some stuff that you wouldn't have known otherwise do you like some Insider stuff would you like to tell your family that you meet with the CIA yeah you would sounds kind of sexy doesn't it makes you look kind of powerful you'll like it let's be partners so I don't think they need to force anybody to do anything I think they just have to associate with them and then people start doing what they want is somewhat automatic somewhat automatic all right given that the news is not reliable I would like to propose a way of dealing with the news this is how to deal with the news when you don't believe it's necessarily reliable I'll call it the working assumption model the working assumption now a working assumption doesn't mean you believe it it means that the evidence suggests something's true and unless something disproves it that's your working assumption let me give you some examples there's no evidence that the Mexican cartels have corrupted the government of the United States in a in a big way right would you agree there's no evidence that I'm aware of that the government of the United States is already corrupted by the cartels I've never seen any evidence of that however given what we see which is a complete lack of interest in dealing with the cartels effectively my working assumption is that the government is already compromised I don't know this is true but everything I see supports that working assumption so if I said it's true well then I would be lying because I don't know that it's true but if I say the most practical working assumption is that the government has already been corrupted what would you do how would you act differently I'll tell you how I would act differently I would arm because we might reach a point where these citizens have to get rid of the cartel and the only way that's going to happen is with Superior Firepower if the government is out of the game that doesn't mean the game's over the game isn't over because the government decided to set it out now the game is on and you better arm yourself because the cartels have already wiped out the black gangs did you know that this is Peter zahan's uh provocative idea he says that the the reason that the murder rate dropped is because the cartels murdered the murderers The Gangs they just murdered the murderers and took over their business have you ever wondered why you don't hear much about the Crips and the Bloods lately they're dead not all of them obviously but apparently their power has been diminished and completely gutted by the cartels now the cartels are more dangerous in one way even though they murder less believe it or not that when the cartel completely owns a place the murder rate goes down it's only when they don't have control that the murder rate is high when the murder rate goes down that's trouble worry the most when the murder rate goes down because that means the cartel already has control so working assumption is that our government is already compromised by the cartels I love it to not be true but I have to act like it is true because the government is acting as if it's true as well um here's another one there's no evidence that I'm aware of that our elections were rigged in the sense of vote counting no evidence at all however the fact that our elections are not fully auditable and there seems to be no interest by our government to make them fully auditable my working assumption is that they're rigged or will be they're either rigged or they will be now I don't have evidence of that it's a working assumption under the context of a a press that isn't dependable and a government that is obviously not working on a gigantic problem completely ignoring it the working assumption is that the elections are rigged or that they will be soon is that fair again let me be as clear as possible I don't have that I don't have proof of it if I said I had any kind of proof or even strong evidence that would be a lie what I have is a working assumption based on living a life of you know who you trust and who you don't sorting things into those buckets and say well that's what it looks like it's my working assumption all right um here's uh here's another one The Tick Tock band so the country wanted to ban Tick Tock it appeared that there were some bipartisan support but instead of a simple bill that bans Tick Tock we got something called the restrict Act from say senator Warner I believe Democrat but the restrict Act is not targeted at Tick Tock in fact I believe Tick Tock is not mentioned rather it gives broad powers to the government to determine if there is foreign influence you know in any of our communication social media structure and it can go after any of that foreign influence you know with the powers of the government here's the problem why are they doing that who asked for that do you remember a big American Uprising saying give the government more power over all our social media when did that happen no there was a problem huh there was a problem with Tick Tock a specific Tick Tock problem if if the government is not working on the problem as clearly defined and instead is looking to increase its powers more generally what would you assume what's your working assumption my working assumption is it's a corrupt process and it's just a power grab and it's just political and has nothing to do nothing to do with solving the country's risk nothing to do with it now is that true I don't know I have no idea but it's my working assumption it's a it's a reasonable working assumption here's what I say I say that if you say something's true your enemies can say it's false so don't do that don't say it's true when the when the other side just says well let's prove it you can't prove it nope just say if anybody wants to change my mind it's pretty easy do you know how you can change my mind on tick tock produce a bill just about Tick Tock and then if you want you can also have a bill with this other restrict stuff in it and then let Congress vote on them separately one to be on Tick Tock which is what we all want and one let's talk about it maybe they have an argument that I'm not aware of on the surface it looks like a big mistake just a power grab that the citizens aren't going to like in the long run but I'd listen to it I just don't want it combined with the thing that I want to solved which is tick tock see how easy it would be to change my working assumption with that little change a little change just tiny little change just make a separate Tick Tock bill I would say okay it looks like the government's trying to protect me and they've got some ideas I didn't think of so we better talk about those as well how could they prove me how could they change my working assumption about Fentanyl and the cartels already owning them simple just attack the cartels or announce that you're going to or or get tough or close the border lots of stuff there's probably five different things they could do to change my working assumption and none of them are hard or well none of them are undoable all right about my uh what else no well you get the idea it's easy to change my working assumption don't claim things are true claim that your working assumption based on the facts can be changed so you could basically you would put the burden of proof back on your accusers here's the normal way it goes I believe X is true then your Democrat critic usually says you don't have proof of that there's no court that said that's true show me a link show me some evidence show me some data there's no no evidence you're just often Crazy Town but instead you say well the situation suggests that this is true if you'd like to disprove it it's easy to do I welcome you to disprove it I'd love to know it's not true so you want to put the burden of proof on the other side that instead of having them put it on you so stop the certainty and say well this is what it looks like so that's my working assumption if they'd like it not to look like that they know how it's easy to make it look not like that it's real easy but they're not doing it as long as people aren't doing the easy thing to solve the obvious problem you can have a working assumption that they're corrupt you can that's completely reasonable all right let's talk about the uh Nashville shooting that I hate to talk about because it just makes more of them but I guess this one has some details that made it interesting um as Tucker Carlson and other people have noted apparently the shooter left a Manifesto which one presumes is a complete explanation of motive that's what a Manifesto is right a yetis but not been released to the public and the officials who have seen it say they don't know the motive what's your working assumption the working assumption and this this is way uh Tucker handled it and I think that was correct the working assumption has to be that they're hiding it from you for a reason what would be a good working Assumption of why they would hide it from you well I'll tell you the most obvious interpretation for which I have no proof for which I have no proof the obvious working assumption is that it was a trans person who was declaring war on possibly Christians now do we have any direct evidence of that nope nope there's no direct evidence of that in fact my first interpretation was it was just a school and I think that's it's very likely that will still be the final interpretation that it was just a school it wasn't about religion at all um but at the moment given the lack of information about the manifesto I think a good working assumption is that it was about Christianity and and the news or the government doesn't want you to know that because it might just make things worse now I'm not totally criticizing that you know as much as I think that Freedom of Information is good for us in general and it is this might be one of those special cases where we're better off not seeing it because I doubt that it represents anything like a widespread opinion if it did then maybe I'd want to see it if it's just a crazy person babbling I don't want the right-leaning news to say well this represents trans people yeah look at this one case of this Manifesto that's that's how we'll understand trans people from now on so I don't feel like were necessarily better off with with seeing it but I don't like the way the government's treating us you know what you know what I would have respected I would have respected saying you know what we don't want you to see it I actually would have been perfectly good with that because that would be honest that would be honest you know we've seen it we're going to deal with it it does tell us something we didn't know we're not going to show it to you believe it or not I would be okay with that believe it or not because I'm completely okay with there is some information I know you want to know we're going to keep it from you we think it's in your best interest now depending on who says it and what the context is I might not believe it but in this case I would in this one simple unique case if the FBI said you know honestly we just don't want you to see it I'd be okay with that now I can totally understand if people were not I understand that as well but I feel like his only use is political talk me out of it does that would seeing that would seeing the manifesto have any use besides political points I don't think so I don't think so and we already know what the point would be right if the government kept it from you you would already know what it says or at least your working assumption would be if they kept it from me my working assumption would be if some trans person who declared war on Christians I wouldn't have any I would have no data to prove that but that would be my working assumption and you know I'd be okay with that I'll be okay with that because I wouldn't really be in the dark I would just be okay they they kept a political football off the field yeah that's okay yeah all right so um and then there's a question of why there seems to be a I don't know why why are we treating a potential uh hate crime against Christians as different than we would treat other hate crimes but I guess it's a little unconfirmed at this point so that's part of it and Tucker also asked the question uh why don't we ask if antidepressants were involved now this question has a lot more salience to me than it might to you because I've actually experienced as most of you know when I took some blood pressure meds that were not to my liking um I was suicidal and it was just the meds literally the day I stopped boom everything was fine and everything's been fine every day since then and you know what's interesting is that you know by some other measure you might say but Scott how could you be happier now when you've had a whole bunch of bad things happen to you in the last year and the answer is I guess I just had the right mindset you know these allegedly bad things don't seem so bad to me you know the upside seems so substantial to them like this came out that came out okay but over the summer when I was on the wrong meds there was nothing that could go right I just wanted to get out of this world I just wanted to get out of this world and when I stopped the meds it went away now it's easy for me to understand how people and it would be different for individuals it's easy for me to understand how a drug could make you a mascular because if it made you suicidal at the same time you had you know negative thoughts about something else the suicidal part could make you a murderer because if you don't care about your own life you're not going to care about anybody else's life after you're gone so anyway so we should definitely look at uh antidepressants and I thought that that was super Brave of Tucker to say it on a TV program which I believe is largely or used to be anyway sponsored by a big Pharma imagine how much balls it takes to say that your advertisers might be causing mass murder that's like a lot of balls now I realize Tucker is in a in a strong situation career-wise but you've got to have balls the size of a planet to say on the very platform that's supported by big Pharma money somebody says no Pharma ads on Tucker and I was wondering about that because I've never seen any there's probably a reason for that right yeah so I think that was a valuable service by Tucker Carlson just sort of putting these ideas out there of course Madonna is gonna have a concert in Nashville to raise money for Trans rights I'm not sure she's reading the room right but can we just agree that this any story about Madonna is a story about mental illness would you agree with that I don't know what's happening with Madonna but my working assumption I'm not a doctor I'm not a doctor I can't diagnose her from a distance but the way she presents is with mental illness pretty severe pretty severe you know the the kind where if she were not famous and Powerful somebody would have forced her into treatment of some kind um but I also think that the trans story is at least partly about mental illness now because I have more respect than some of you do let me say as clearly as possible I think is super super likely that for some portion of the trans community transitioning was exactly what they needed and it made their life better I just don't know what the percentage is I don't know if that's 10 or 90 because I don't have visibility but whether it's 10 or 90 it's the same point we live in a free world or we try to be we're trying to be free if they're adults they've looked into it they think they need it they talk to professionals that's their business it's not my business it's just their business and I've never had a problem treating any trans person as a human individual with dignity ever before I don't know why I'd have that problem in the future but there does it does seem that it has created a magnet for crazy people right which is no fault of the law-abiding you know good citizens who just have a you know different situation that they found a way to deal with it's not about them it's about some portion have been attracted to this for all the wrong reasons and if you can't say that the trans issue is both things you know legitimate people looking at legitimate Solutions that their freedom allows them to pursue versus people who are just bad crazy as soon as you lump them together and say it's all trans well there's nothing you can do there's nothing you can do with that as soon as you lump them into one category and I think that's what the right does to their to their detriment I think it weakens the argument to just treat it like it's all one thing um so I think the Madonna thing really underscores that uh Rasmussen asked about preventing mass shootings an arrest was in poll 50 percent of Voters say it's not possible to completely prevent mass shootings well shouldn't that be closer to 100 percent that only 50 percent of people pulled agree it's not possible well it's not possible to stop them all I think everybody would agree with that how do you only get 50 to agree with that all right well but 38 believe it is possible to completely prevent such shootings okay that's crazy and other 12 are not sure it's a weird little poll so I suggested well actually I stole an idea somebody sent me a letter and I like the idea but I extended it so the idea that was not mine was to recruit ex-police officers to be teachers would you like to know that there were some legally armed ex-police officers who just had become teachers so that if your school wanted to be a little safer just make sure that of your I don't know 100 teachers how many teachers at a school what would be an average number of teachers a hundred fifty two hundred something like that let's say 50 to 100.

you wouldn't need many of those to be cops two three two or three percent being retired police officers because you know if you're getting out of the police game and a lot of people are because the changes to you know bail and everything else if a lot of people are leaving the police force you have exactly the pool of applicants you're looking for some of them might yeah now you can extend it to ex-military as well that's correct but here I um but I wanted to extend the idea even further so I tweeted that what if the federal government or maybe you could leave it to the states that's a separate argument but what if uh what if funding was made available either in the state or federal level that anybody who wanted to be a legal a carrier of a weapon could take the classes or get certified in whatever whatever certification and maybe have to get re-certified every year and then keep the weapon in some kind of a protected safe in a few places so you want to make sure that people can get to them quickly but you don't want the kids to get them obviously so some kind of a safe a holster well somebody can grab your holster you know if three kids wanted to they could hold you down and take your weapon so I don't want it in a holster unless they're actually a security guard then yes but not in the classroom we've seen too many videos of of students taking on teachers students will take on teachers they will steal their gun I think that's like a real thing there's Biometrics for holsters interesting I'm not sure I would trust a biometric for a holster because you still might want to steal it and get rid of the biometric somehow um so that's just one idea speaking of which uh I saw a tweet from Emily Brooks saying that there was a quoted shouting match between representative Jamal Bowman Democrat and representative Thomas Massey and then I watched the video when I watched the video do you think I saw a shouting match this is the way all headlines work there's a shouting match and then I watched the headlines nope nope there was one person shouting uh Jamal Bowman and then there was a Plucky representative Thomas Massey who happened to be walking by the public hallway who wrote Under wherever it was he just happened to be walking by and so as Jamal is just like screaming at the crowd in like every direction he's just you know screaming his gun control stuff Thomas Massey just walks right up to him and just starts talking to him calmly about a suggestion for I think for arming teachers and Jamal just keeps yelling and yelling and messy just keeps you know keeps to his same tone and they're at one point they're just talking each other over each other and then Thomas Massey sees it is being filmed so he you know sort of excuses himself from the shouting guy and goes to talk to that it was probably as a phone or a news reporter or something and and he starts to give his idea directly to the video and then the the shouting guy comes over and tries to shout him away from the video so he can't even he can't even say his idea all right every day I'm finding a new reason to to love Thomas Massey I just love the fact that he just walked right up to him and started talking to him with a productive suggestion and the guy wouldn't even listen to it wouldn't even listen it was awesome all right um here's uh one of the best and scariest ideas I've ever heard um how many of you were in favor of universal basic income where the government gives you money and you don't have to work you just have enough to live right pretty much in this audience it's going to be old now right oh a few yeses a few yeses all right here's a hidden danger of Ubi that I'd never thought of and you're going to say to yourself oh how did I not think about that are you ready for this I'm going to bend your mind courtesy of uh Tweeter called the Commander in Chief one uh it's all one word the commander-in-chief and then digit one if you're looking for this person on Twitter and here's the tweet that just blew my top of my head off are you ready for this seriously this is going to blow your head off hold on to your scalp here it comes they can talk about a universal basic income as much as they like any smart any smart person will know where this is going but I didn't know where this was going so I don't qualify as smart let's see if you did here's where he says it's going they will not be interested in keeping keeping people around who cannot be useful that's what I realized before yeah suppose we can't create a society where let's say 30 percent of the people are are just um just using the money of the other people and they're not working now in our current woke Democratic world that's pretty safe if you were to introduce Ubi if you could afford it somehow and you introduced it into America and let's say ten percent of Americans took you up on it because it's safe it would be it would be not that big of a burden on the country ten percent they're probably getting some kind of services anyway and you'd say to yourself well I'll never even meet one I'll probably never even run into anybody who's on the Ubi it's no big deal but imagine it got to like 30 percent imagine if one third of adults were not working and they were just taking your money your money the money you work for so you get to work and have a good life and they get to do no work at all and spend your money now presumably they would have fewer things they'd have to live a more basic life but probably they could be just happy doing their Fentanyl and whatever now in the short run that could work in the short run in the long run you can never be sure that a death spot won't take over am I right history has shown us that every civilization ends everyone they all end or they become a different thing what if what if the United States becomes a dictatorship and what if we don't have enough money to feed everybody they're going to kill all the Ubi people first they're going to round up the Ubi people starve them to death and say all right we have a chance now we got rid of the we got rid of the anchor that was holding us back I'm glad they self-identified as useless because we got rid of them nobody even argued oh you're going to get rid of the useless people and it wouldn't even be racial because it would be you know distributed across races and everything so you say it's not even racial it's just all the useless people all the people who add nothing to society will just round them up and put them in camps or Kill Them All had you ever thought about that had you ever considered that you're guaranteeing the death of the people who stopped working and I'm going to generalize this to a bigger point there's no such thing as Security in this world you're never safe you could have the illusion of being safe and you could be safer than other situations so you can be safer but you can never be safe we don't live in a safe world but one thing you can do to make yourself as safe as you can in a dangerous world is to be useful to other people nothing is going to help you more than that all of your happiness all of your financial success all of your physical safety is going to depend on how useful you are to other people if you're taking a Ubi and you're nothing but a drain on other people don't expect to be safe do not expect to be safe because other people don't care about you at that point they really don't if you're just going to take my money and give me nothing in return good luck you're on your own so I would argue that the more you create your talent stack the the safer you are right why was it that I wasn't panicked when I got canceled worldwide in my primary profession for 34 years why did it not send me into a death spiral because my talent stack is so well developed I knew I could just do other things and So within a day I was already spinning up my other things and they're working fine and it's only because I've spent a Lifetime on developing a set of skills that I know work together and have commercial value if you don't have that going on you're not safe you can only make yourself safe by developing a talent stack that helps other people in some way they find Value in it that's your advice for today well I don't know if I said this yesterday but Governor Newsom got himself in a trap by commissioning this group to recommend reparations then they came back with an absurd number that some are saying would cost 800 billion dollars two and a half times two and a half times the annual budget of California according to NBC so now Newsome has two choices if he backsues uh reparations he has no future in politics would you agree he has no future in politics if he backs the reparations but if he doesn't back them he has no future in politics not National politics yeah it might make he might be able to get reelected probably not but he would certainly be out of the race for president there's no way he could be president right that would be completely dead so he can't he can't accept it because then he'd be dead and he can't reject it because then he'd be dead politically so what are you going to do you can't accept it you can't reject it resign no he's going to form a new committee to study the recommendations of the first committee that's what I would do that's what I would do I'd form a new committee to look into the committee's recommendation and then I would wait a year and see if see if everybody forgot about it and maybe you know maybe release it on a late Friday afternoon it looks like it wasn't practical well we tried but the committee that examines the committee found that the first committee didn't do his job as well as it could so I guess it's dead in the water it's a good thing I asked the committee to look at the other committee now every path he takes on this is the losing path but that's the least losing path so I predict it all right uh meanwhile over in Minnesota Governor Tim Walls uh did a big event in which he introduced and announced a new Chief Equity officer Dr.

Stephanie barrage Chief Equity officer if you're looking for a state to move to I would recommend one that does not have a chief Equity officer that should be a giant red flag to stay away from that state as far away as you can why because they're racists do you think a white male could have been hired as the first chief chief Equity officer seriously do you think a white male could have been considered for the job of course not a course not of course not is purely racist what's the definition of racist you're hiring people based on their race there's no way they would have hired a white man for the job why would you move to that state that state has a big sign on it that says no white man allowed women I don't know maybe women but white men no nope can't get a job in Minnesota it's pretty clear all right um uh speaking of Governor Newsom he tweeted a two charts one is a chart of the state of the the states that have lots of guns and or the states have the most strict gun control and I found that uh when you have the strictest gun control it correlates really high with fewer murders now what do you think of that so the data probably came from good sources well well let's say the data is accurate we don't know it's accurate of course that would be ridiculous but let's say it is how many problems do you think there were there are with that comparison a lot of them a lot of them all right let me give you just the sampler set of problems which for some reason I didn't include in my notes here's the sampler set if you're looking at Estates and comparing a state to a state do you think that's a good comparison because California shows up as a low murder state with high gun restrictions but you can't go near Oakland you can't go anywhere near Oakland I drive around Oakland I don't even want to drive through it is so dangerous right so yeah Compton Etc so the the use of states is meant to conceal what's true not to tell you what's true would you agree that the almost all the murderers are in cities well you know the vast majority are in cities and if you don't break out in City to City so what I'd like to see is strictest gun laws by City I think you'd find that Chicago has strict gun laws and a high murder rate Washington DC strict gun laws High murder rate Oakland strict gun laws High murder rate Baltimore strict gun laws High murder rate right so you can see how easily Newsome can lie with accurate numbers now you're saying the numbers might not be accurate and I agree but even if the numbers are accurate he's found the only way to be misleading by grouping it by state instead of by City it makes the whole thing ridiculous then you'd also want to see a before and after show me the murder rate in let's say Chicago before and after the gun control strict regulations went into place did it immediately fall that'd be a strong argument or did it go up which I think he did yeah so those just a few problems if if you looked at the comments on that tweet you'd see other people suggesting other problems we've reached the point where data is absolutely useless data all right and so I tweeted this um here's here's where we're at this is my summary of everything you need to know about data um dumb people argue without data would you agree if somebody's making their argument and they're ignoring the data or they don't know what it is or they're not using it that's pretty dumb pretty dumb smart people argue with data would you agree if you see a smart person they're probably showing you their data but the smarter people the people who are smarter than the smart people know that you can torture the data until it tells you anything you want to hear right so summarizing so far if you're dumb you don't use data if you're smart you do use data if you're smarter than that you know the data is useless because it's been put together by corrupt people but there's one level above that smarter than the smarter people these would be the smart-ass people know that the data is not real and neither are you I'll just leave that there all right um Senator Mark Warren was defending his restrict act that's the one that's supposed to be aimed at Tick Tock but is in fact a general statement about giving the government more power over social media basically even domestic and he said this defending it he said the restrict act isn't an infringement on Free Speech it's a systemic rules-based approach to identify and addressing to identifying and addressing foreign Tech that could threaten National Security huh now when he explains it that way that doesn't sound so bad does it wouldn't you like to know that our government is has a rules-based approach you know something you can really there's no gray area it's a rules-based approach he says and though you want them to identify and address foreign technology that can threaten National Security that's all good right isn't that terrific here's what I tweeted back to them we don't trust the government with new rules in other words Powers over communication it's that simple that's that's my my reply is we don't trust you that would be that what he's proposing is something that would be good for somebody that you trusted am I right if we trusted the government that probably makes sense it sounds like they need some a little more structure to look for bad intention from foreign powers sounds good but what happens if you if you don't trust your government and you think everything they do is a trick which is my current operating belief in that case you don't want to give them any power for any reason because they're not going to use it for good reasons so his problem is not that it's a good or a bad Bill the problem is him let me say that again the problem is not Senator Warner's bill because he defended that quite adequately the problem is Senator Warren Warner Warner the problem is the senator and the other Senators because we don't trust them am I right he's defending the wrong thing he should defend why we should trust him not why we should trust the bill why we should trust him and he has no argument for that sorry because you know nobody's going to trust the other party and nobody even trusts your own party and it all looks suspicious to me so no you're not allowed to change the topic the topic is you Senator Warner we don't trust you and if you say oh I have this other senator who agrees with me oh that's just another person I don't trust oh you've also got Romney on your side I don't trust him I don't trust him because he's in Congress basically um all right if he put together a one-pager Banning Tick Tock I might trust that um have you heard of uh the tartarian theory of why civilizations might disappear how many of you heard this this is the the greatest some call it a conspiracy theory some call it true all right let me tell you what it is it's an idea that there used to be an advanced civilization on Earth that built great structures from the pyramids to even skyscrapers in New York so that you know a lot of stuff is included and that there was a great mud flood literally a bunch of mud that destroyed that advanced civilization but the the buildings and structures that remained were the tall ones so that if you looked at the tall older buildings or more ornate the less modern ones you would find that they have many stories below the ground that used to be above the ground and that you don't know it but you know it's been hidden from us that there was a great society that got wiped out by mud now it's not real as far as I know there's there's no reality to it but it's the most interesting the most interesting new Theory and apparently there are there are some examples of some buildings that do have substantial below ground structure so they use those as examples all right so no I don't think that's true here's a story about uh female students at the University of Wyoming they were concerned and now they're suing their sorority because a trans-identified um they call it a trans identified male I don't know if that's the wrong way to say it or not but um yes a trans no I think I think they're using the wrong language here I think they I think the polite language is there's a trans person who identifies as female right so there's a trans person who identified as female uh not the way they were born um at least physically not the way they were born and it alleges that this trans woman Artemis Langford has been quote watching the women undressing the sorority house sometimes wall erect now my first question is why are all these women who are undressing erect I mean is it a clitoral thing I don't understand it's possible that the sentence is just confusing and what they mean is that the trans person Artemis Langford is erect not the women who are undressing okay I think that's probably what it means all right now here's my question what's wrong with that what's wrong with this trans woman who still has male equipment having an erection while uh in the company of all these women who are just like Artemis they're just other women and would they have a problem if Artemis had been a uh born a lesbian wouldn't a lesbian I mean I don't know too much about lesbian culture but am I wrong would a lesbian be turned on by saying a naked attractive women is that a thing I don't even know if that's a thing is it a thing so if a lesbian would be allowed in the sorority and I assume they would be right the sorority isn't going to discriminate based on the LBGTQ stuff so if you could be a lesbian in the sorority it seems to me that a trans who also how does physical reaction to women same thing so I feel like they're discriminating against this poor trans person for having a penis that doesn't seem right because they you know they wouldn't discriminate against lesbians it's not the same you can never tell when I'm serious can you am I serious all right so what I'm doing is a little bit of you know basically accepting and amplifying all right so I'm doing some amplification to make a point Embrace and amplify correct so all right here is the most provocative thing you'll ever hear in your entire life something that I could never even mention until I'd been canceled somebody says I look high I wish no I'm not high right now believe it or not I tell you if I were you know I I live a a transparent life when it comes to marijuana I tell you if I were I'd just tell you but I'm not um all right here's the topic and first you need to know where this comes from all right here's my source so my source is Tyrone Williams who's on Twitter and goes by uh immune hack you know at immune hack now I don't know what's true but I'll tell you what looks true that's all I can do what looks true is that Tyrone is a real person a black American and the Black American part is important to the story all right because if you didn't know that I was quoting a black American man uh you would think I'm the worst person in the world for bringing up this topic but it's not my topic I think it's useful I think is valuable I don't know if it's true but it has enough meat on the bones for me to say I think Tyrone's on to something and I'm going to share it with you and the biggest reason that you probably won't have seen this is It's just so dangerous it's like dangerous thoughts you ready here it comes remember this is from Tyrone not for me and all of this is meant to be constructive right if it seems to you that this is anything but trying to be helpful for America then you're misinterpreting I'm trying to be helpful goes like this according to Tyrone there are at least four or five health related factors that can affect your cognitive ability um of a baby and therefore the cognitive ability of that baby when it grows up some of those things include weight if a mother is obese when delivering a child the child has lower cognitive function did you know that or at least it's correlated let's say it's correlated causation I think you have to be careful about causation but it's correlated if you're obese your kid will have lower cognitive functions now some some people have rightly said are you sure you have the causation right maybe it's backwards it might be it might be and that would be exactly the kind of thing you want to look into but it's not the only thing other things associated with cognitive function or vitamin D something called inflammation il-6 something called oxidative stress or CRP something called omega-3 well we know what that is but the ratio of Omega-3 to omega-6 and then blood pressure so all of those things are based on science not guessing but based on studies now do we do we trust all studies no that Nicholas Fleming is yelling name the Jew Scott name them Nicholas believes that uh as some of the people in this channel are that I'm cowardly not mentioning the cause of all problems which he believes are the Jews we're going to be hiding you on this channel for more serious people all right sorry you're gone um but here's the point that uh Tyrone makes every one of these is treatable don't have enough vitamin D add some vitamin D don't have enough ratio of this to that improve your ratio blood pressure yes weight yes inflammation yes so there are a bunch of factors that can all be treated and here's the kicker all of the things I mentioned are at far higher rates in Black Americans far higher rates obesity for example listen to this one this just blew my mind do you know that uh 80 of black women are obese but it's two-thirds of white women are obese too two-thirds of white women and 80 percent of black women or obese huh I wonder why the I wonder why the birth rate is going down like sometimes sometimes the answers are so obvious all right let's not get into that though all right so Tyrone's point which I think is brilliant and brave is that there are there are identifiable completely treatable medical conditions that might completely change the the IQ differential between black Americans and everybody else now my my biggest issue is that correlation and causation are not demonstrated right but you could test it Justin Dunn needs to go away because he also wonders why I'm not blaming the Jews for everything maybe because I'm not a crazy conspiracy theorist Maybe all right so what do you think of Tyrone's approach you can see how toxic it is right because as soon as you talk about IQ difference even though IQ difference is the primary indicator of success um if it's true that black Americans for a variety of reasons are are giving birth in a sub-optimal way health health care Wise It's a sub-optimal way why don't we take that seriously at least test it you know you you could take a county or a state and say you know I don't know if this is a racist Theory or if it's just good thinking so let's just take a population of people correct everything see how their kids do by third grade by third grade you'd know if it worked wouldn't you so here's what I say um what I say is uh if you can test it small and the the potential benefit would be extreme and the cost to do it looks like it'd be doable because most of these things are education plus you know some supplements basically so I think that's worth doing I think that's worth trying third grade is the inflection point I think you'd know by third grade if it worked what about the slippery slope this slippery slope just so I clarify uh Claire I'm gonna I'm gonna make you go away for too many too many repeated comments in caps here's what I say about the slippery slope when people say slippery slope is lazy thinking meaning that there's nothing about a slippery slope that tells you anything about a topic there are some things that will go until something changes them so that so I I prefer to say everything will go forever until something stops it that's a more productive way to look at it and usually something pops up to stop it but usually after it's gone too far right yeah you have to go too far before you get the reaction so in my view the the acronyms and the you know let's say the wokeness I think it's guaranteed to end it's guaranteed to end because it went too far now if you if I believed in a slippery slope I would say it will just keep going forever but you can already see the resistance starting to pop up people willing to say things they could even say out loud a year ago they're willing to say it out loud I mean even the fact that you know uh people are saying seriously that the trans situation is at least partly Mental Health not all of it but some part of it is mental health that's that's a brave thing to say in public under the current situation and I would argue that the trans Community needs to do a better job of separating themselves from the crazy parts right just as uh you know if you're a trump supporter you want to separate yourself from the white supremacist who might also like it it makes sense for your brand to separate yourself from The Crazies so I think the uh I think the trans Community would help themselves and help the rest of us if they helped us identify the crazy people it's not it's not as easy for us I think get the hell away that's funny all right ladies and gentlemen this concludes the most shocking and entertaining live stream in all of reality I don't think you'll see a better thing today that's my belief and I'm going to say goodbye to the You.

Tube people for now thanks for joining and I hope you learned something bye for now

good morning everybody and welcome to

coffee with Scott Adams it's the

highlight of civilization

um you might notice my voice is a little

raspy got a little laryngitis so turn up

your sound put on your headphones this

is as loud as I can get

now if you'd like to take your

experience up to levels that I don't

know are just impossible to imagine at

this point all you have to do is grab

yourself a cup or a mug or a glass a

tanker jealous of style and a canteen

Joker flask a vessel of any kind fill it

with your favorite liquid I like coffee

and join me now for the unparalleled

pleasure of the dopamine the other day

the thing that makes everything better

and today it comes with a little

oxytocin too it's called the

simultaneous sip it happens now go

well jacinta

I hope you enjoyed your very first

simultaneous sip

everybody

congratulations to jacinta

good

I hope I'm pronouncing that right I may

I turned the the J into a y is that

correct

j-a-c-i-n-t-a yasanta

sounds about right

all right well

how many of you have seen the famous

probably every one of you the famous uh

audio

illusion in which you could hear uh what

is it green needle or something else

so you could hear two different things

even though it's always the same

well have you seen the one where there's

a whole list of things you can see

this is the one that will completely

change your opinion about the world

now I don't know if you can hear it hold

on

all right so before I put on the audio

just see that there's a whole list of

different things which the same audio

will sound like

but only if you're looking at it at the

time

so in other words if you're looking at

the line that says baptism piracy you

hear exactly that on the audio as soon

as you move to any other thing on the

list and there are two four six eight

there are eight things here

eight completely different sets of words

completely different you can hear each

of them clearly by reading it at the

same time as the music now I don't think

it'll come through very well on my audio

but you'll at least get the sense that

this is the most mind-bending thing

you'll ever see in your life right so

here's the sound

[Applause]

I just realized this doesn't work at all

because you can't read the you can't

read the sentences but you can you can

hear this as Bart Simpson bouncing

rotating pirate ship that isn't my

receipt lobsters in motion that is

embarrassing lactates and Pharmacy

baptism piracy or that isn't Mercy

no sound yeah there's plenty of sound

so the people saying there's no sound or

just trolls

um

now here's why this is so mind-blowing

when when the audio illusion was two

different things

you could tell yourself oh well that's a

weird coincidence there are two

different things the in the right

conditions you would confuse with each

other

in a way it's not really that

interesting is it

right it's not really interesting so

but what happens when there's eight

entirely different

words that you could hear clearly by

looking at them when the when the same

sound is playing

how do you explain that

the only way to explain that

is that reality is super subjective now

you knew reality was subjective because

we all have different opinions looking

at the same stuff but I'll bet you

didn't know it was that subjective

I mean that is really subjective and

that might be that might be the way you

walk around through life all the time

you know I think it was in the 60s the

first time I heard you hear what you

want to hear

you see what you want to see and the

first time I heard that it was sort of

mind-blowing really

do you hear what you want to hear

hmm I'm not so sure because you know I

was a kid I was like I don't know that

sounds a little simplistic doesn't it

but you do you actually hear what you

want to hear you can see this with news

stories

how many times have you seen on social

media somebody would tweet a story and

say look this proves X and I look at it

I go no it doesn't it disproves X

literally literally the opposite

so that that's the reality that you walk

around in there is no fixed reality or

if there is we can't tell what it is

um I would like to give one

clarification an important one

when Elon Musk and other prominent

people said we should pause rates I said

that's a good idea

other people said wait wait China and

other countries will Blaze ahead of us

if we slow down and that would be

dangerous

to which I say I'm not in favor of of

stopping development

so I'm only in favor of not making it

available to the General Public

too soon

so that's the only pause I would favor I

don't favor

stopping research I don't favor stopping

training it yet the I do believe that we

have a competitive

National Security and financial interest

and being first and being best and we're

lucky that we have a company that seems

to be first and best at least at the

moment

so I wouldn't want to lose that asset

it's one of the things that makes

America as strong as it is that we have

entrepreneurs who can create

technologies that change the world it

looks like that's what's happening

but I do think it would be wise to keep

it out of the hands of citizens for a

little while or even other commercial

interests and let the AI people do what

they're doing and then we can decide

what to do with it

um

but here's a take on this that is sort

of a clarification of something I've

said before the real risk of AI is that

if it starts telling us uh stuff that

isn't true

it will be banned or ignored would you

agree

if you couldn't trust AI to tell you

what's true which is the current

situation it's it's not reliable

it I found that my need to use it was

much lower once I realized that it was

full of does anybody have that

experience

when it first came out I thought oh my

God

I'm so interested in what it says

but as soon as I knew that it lies or

just randomly makes up facts I thought

oh it's just a random it's just a random

word generator I have no interest in a

random word generator

a random word generator that looks

intelligent to people who don't look

into it too carefully is not interesting

in the in the least

but will it always be like that

so there are two conditions one if AI is

undependable

it won't be that useful and people won't

be caring about it

but what if it becomes accurate

and how would we know

it's almost as dangerous if it's

accurate

because if it's accurate then there will

be no common narrative for the country

here's the problem

in the in my youth in let's say 40s and

50s or 60s we know now that the CIA

was actively

manipulating movies and TV

and trying to create a culture

that would be successful and defensible

and they succeeded the the so-called you

know American dream of you know owning a

house and being a consumer and having a

nice car and being a Christian back in

those days that was key thing those

things were never natural

those things were programs

so the United States wisely and

effectively programmed its citizens

how many of you stood and did the Pledge

of Allegiance

you know that's just brainwashing right

it's good brainwashing it's the kind I

approve of because you can't really let

Society take its own you know wild

Direction any way it goes it's just

chaos

so there probably is some need to

brainwash at least to children at the

very least you have to brainwash the

children because they can't make

decisions

now you could argue that adults can

either

but certainly with children we don't

agree

so you have to brainwash children

later you can teach them critical

thinking and maybe they'll change their

opinions on things but they would do it

somewhat on their own

um

however

it appears that the CIA got out of that

business for a while until Obama put him

back in that business

through legislation

so

once you know that the that the

intelligence Services of the United

States can legally

legally brainwash the citizens and

there's actually a utility to it it's

not all bad

um then you have to say to yourself what

are they brainwashing us with well at

the moment

they're brainwashing us with wokeness

because they could make it go away

they could make it go away

if the CIA or whoever you know here's a

phrase that I saw in a article by Jacob

Siegel in writing for a tablet

and it's called a guide to understanding

The hoax of the century 13 ways of

looking at disinformation

the problem is in our current situation

the intelligence entities of the United

States have formed working relationships

with social media and the news

now the way they approach it is that

they're going to help the news and hope

help social media remove disinformation

so who says no to that you go to the

news you say hey we know what's true and

what isn't wouldn't you like to report

True News

what's the news going to say

of course of course you know tell us

what's true

you know they might check it but at

least they'd want to know what's true

so if you have an entity that is selling

itself as the correctors of

disinformation

they really are in control of your

information

you've given them control of your minds

because you've decided that some entity

can tell you what's true and not true

and believe me they don't know

they don't know

they're just going to tell you a version

that they think is to their best

interest

so we have a situation where our media

is completely and here's the

phrase I want to read from Jacob Siegel

because he said it so well he said the

American Press once the guardian of

democracy was hollowed out to the point

that it could be worn like a hand puppet

by the U.S security agencies and party

operatives

the media is so hollowed out it could be

worn as a hand puppet

by the CIA U.S security agencies and

party operatives

perfect

first of all is great writing because

it's visual secondly

it it just captures the entire situation

yeah so we're so addicted to watching

the news that we think is real even when

we know it's not real we act like it is

I do that every day I know the news

isn't real

and I still act like it is

and I can't break myself of the habit

I tell myself well

you know I'm working on this assumption

or you know it's a it's a it's real

until it changes you know I tell myself

ridiculous things but what I should tell

myself is none of it's real

because it's not the facts might be real

but the narrative in which it is

presented is always artificial

so

um I do believe in pausing AI but how in

the world do we get AI to be free

from the same things that corrupted our

media which is intelligence agencies

how do you keep intelligence agencies

from owning AI

can you

I don't think it's possible because they

have more power and they're better at it

see here I think this is my speculation

the way intelligence agencies can co-opt

social media managers and and news

people

is that when the CIA or somebody you

know like FBI somebody official

comes in and meets with you

and they say hey let us be partners and

let us help you the first thing you

might think is oh

I've got a partner

free partner maybe it's free maybe it's

not but I've got this partner like

they'll help me

but the trouble is intelligence agencies

are never your partner

they're always your boss

they're always your boss they're never

your partner they might come in as your

partner but try to do something they

don't want

see how that goes

right and some of it is ego

imagine you're the CEO of whatever news

entity

and the CIA asked for a meeting

what does that do to your brain

you're in charge and the CIA has to meet

with you because it's important to

National Security and you're important

yes you you're important to National

Security and you know we really think

you're great

and we'd like to work with you to help

you because you're so important we'd

like to help you be even more effective

and by the way we can tell you some

stuff that you wouldn't have known

otherwise do you like some Insider stuff

would you like to tell your family that

you meet with the CIA yeah you would

sounds kind of sexy doesn't it makes you

look kind of powerful you'll like it

let's be partners

so I don't think they need to force

anybody to do anything

I think they just have to associate with

them and then people start doing what

they want is somewhat automatic

somewhat automatic

all right given that the news is not

reliable

I would like to propose a way of

dealing with the news

this is how to deal with the news when

you don't believe it's necessarily

reliable

I'll call it the working assumption

model

the working assumption now a working

assumption doesn't mean you believe it

it means that the evidence suggests

something's true and unless something

disproves it that's your working

assumption let me give you some examples

there's no evidence that the Mexican

cartels have corrupted the government of

the United States in a in a big way

right would you agree there's no

evidence that I'm aware of that the

government of the United States is

already corrupted by the cartels

I've never seen any evidence of that

however

given what we see which is a complete

lack of interest in dealing with the

cartels effectively my working

assumption is that the government is

already compromised

I don't know this is true but everything

I see supports that working assumption

so if I said it's true well then I would

be lying because I don't know that it's

true but if I say the most practical

working assumption is that the

government has already been corrupted

what would you do

how would you act differently

I'll tell you how I would act

differently I would arm

because we might reach a point where

these citizens have to get rid of the

cartel and the only way that's going to

happen is with Superior Firepower

if the government is out of the game

that doesn't mean the game's over

the game isn't over because the

government decided to set it out now the

game is on

and you better arm yourself because the

cartels have already wiped out the black

gangs did you know that

this is Peter zahan's uh

provocative idea he says that the the

reason that the murder rate dropped

is because the cartels murdered the

murderers The Gangs they just murdered

the murderers and took over their

business have you ever wondered why you

don't hear much about the Crips and the

Bloods lately

they're dead

not all of them obviously but apparently

their power has been diminished and

completely gutted by the cartels

now the cartels are more dangerous in

one way even though they murder less

believe it or not that when the cartel

completely owns a place the murder rate

goes down

it's only when they don't have control

that the murder rate is high when the

murder rate goes down that's trouble

worry the most when the murder rate goes

down because that means the cartel

already has control

so working assumption is that our

government is already compromised by the

cartels

I love it to not be true but I have to

act like it is true because the

government is acting as if it's true as

well

um here's another one

there's no evidence that I'm aware of

that our elections were rigged in the

sense of vote counting no evidence at

all

however

the fact that our elections are not

fully auditable and there seems to be no

interest by our government to make them

fully auditable

my working assumption is that they're

rigged or will be

they're either rigged or they will be

now I don't have evidence of that it's a

working assumption under the context of

a a press that isn't dependable

and a government that is obviously not

working on a gigantic problem completely

ignoring it

the working assumption is that the

elections are rigged

or that they will be soon

is that fair again let me be as clear as

possible I don't have that I don't have

proof of it

if I said I had any kind of proof or

even strong evidence that would be a lie

what I have is a working assumption

based on living a life of you know who

you trust and who you don't sorting

things into those buckets and say well

that's what it looks like it's my

working assumption

all right

um

here's uh here's another one The Tick

Tock band

so the country wanted to ban Tick Tock

it appeared that there were some

bipartisan support

but instead of a simple bill that bans

Tick Tock we got something called the

restrict Act

from

say senator Warner I believe Democrat

but the restrict Act is not targeted at

Tick Tock in fact I believe Tick Tock is

not mentioned

rather it gives broad powers to the

government

to determine if there is foreign

influence you know in any of our

communication social media structure

and it can go after any of that foreign

influence

you know with the powers of the

government

here's the problem

why are they doing that who asked for

that

do you remember a big American Uprising

saying give the government more power

over all our social media

when did that happen no there was a

problem

huh there was a problem with Tick Tock a

specific Tick Tock problem if if the

government is not working on the problem

as clearly defined and instead is

looking to increase its powers more

generally

what would you assume what's your

working assumption

my working assumption is it's a corrupt

process and it's just a power grab and

it's just political and has nothing to

do nothing to do with solving the

country's risk nothing to do with it

now is that true

I don't know I have no idea

but it's my working assumption

it's a it's a reasonable working

assumption here's what I say I say that

if you say something's true your enemies

can say it's false so don't do that

don't say it's true when the when the

other side just says well let's prove it

you can't prove it nope just say if

anybody wants to change my mind it's

pretty easy

do you know how you can change my mind

on tick tock

produce a bill just about Tick Tock and

then if you want you can also have a

bill with this other restrict stuff in

it and then let Congress vote on them

separately

one to be on Tick Tock which is what we

all want and one let's talk about it

maybe they have an argument that I'm not

aware of

on the surface it looks like a big

mistake just a power grab that the

citizens aren't going to like in the

long run

but I'd listen to it I just don't want

it combined with the thing that I want

to solved which is tick tock

see how easy it would be to change my

working assumption

with that little change a little change

just tiny little change just make a

separate Tick Tock bill

I would say okay it looks like the

government's trying to protect me and

they've got some ideas I didn't think of

so we better talk about those as well

how could they prove me how could they

change my working assumption about

Fentanyl and the cartels already owning

them simple

just attack the cartels or announce that

you're going to or or get tough or close

the border

lots of stuff

there's probably five different things

they could do to change my working

assumption and none of them are hard or

well none of them are undoable

all right about my uh

what else

no well you get the idea it's easy to

change my working assumption don't claim

things are true

claim that your working assumption

based on the facts

can be changed

so you could basically you would put the

burden of proof back on your accusers

here's the normal way it goes I believe

X is true then your Democrat critic

usually says you don't have proof of

that

there's no court that said that's true

show me a link show me some evidence

show me some data there's no no evidence

you're just often Crazy Town

but instead you say well the situation

suggests that this is true if you'd like

to disprove it it's easy to do I welcome

you to disprove it I'd love to know it's

not true

so you want to put the burden of proof

on the other side that instead of having

them put it on you so stop the certainty

and say well this is what it looks like

so that's my working assumption if

they'd like it not to look like that

they know how it's easy to make it look

not like that

it's real easy

but they're not doing it as long as

people aren't doing the easy thing to

solve the obvious problem

you can have a working assumption that

they're corrupt

you can that's completely reasonable

all right let's talk about the uh

Nashville shooting that I hate to talk

about because it just makes more of them

but I guess this one has some details

that made it interesting

um as Tucker Carlson and other people

have noted

apparently the shooter left a Manifesto

which one presumes is a complete

explanation of motive

that's what a Manifesto is right

a yetis but not been released to the

public

and the officials who have seen it say

they don't know the motive

what's your working assumption

the working assumption and this this is

way uh Tucker handled it and I think

that was correct the working assumption

has to be that they're hiding it from

you for a reason

what would be a good working Assumption

of why they would hide it from you

well I'll tell you the most obvious

interpretation for which I have no proof

for which I have no proof

the obvious working assumption is that

it was a trans person who was declaring

war on

possibly Christians

now do we have any direct evidence of

that nope nope there's no direct

evidence of that in fact my first

interpretation was it was just a school

and I think that's it's very likely that

will still be the final interpretation

that it was just a school it wasn't

about religion at all

um

but at the moment given the lack of

information about the manifesto I think

a good working assumption is that it was

about Christianity

and and the news or the government

doesn't want you to know that

because it might just make things worse

now I'm not totally

criticizing that

you know as much as I think that Freedom

of Information is good for us in general

and it is

this might be one of those special cases

where we're better off not seeing it

because I doubt that it represents

anything like a widespread opinion

if it did then maybe I'd want to see it

if it's just a crazy person babbling I

don't want the right-leaning news to say

well this represents trans people

yeah look at this one case of this

Manifesto that's that's how we'll

understand trans people from now on

so I don't feel like

were necessarily better off with with

seeing it

but I don't like the way the

government's treating us

you know what you know what I would have

respected I would have respected saying

you know what we don't want you to see

it

I actually would have been perfectly

good with that

because that would be honest

that would be honest

you know we've seen it we're going to

deal with it it does tell us something

we didn't know we're not going to show

it to you

believe it or not I would be okay with

that

believe it or not

because I'm completely okay with there

is some information I know you want to

know we're going to keep it from you

we think it's in your best interest

now depending on who says it and what

the context is I might not believe it

but in this case I would in this one

simple unique case if the FBI said you

know honestly we just don't want you to

see it

I'd be okay with that now I can totally

understand if people were not

I understand that as well but I feel

like his only use is political

talk me out of it does that would seeing

that would seeing the manifesto have any

use besides political points

I don't think so

I don't think so and we already know

what the point would be right

if the government kept it from you you

would already know what it says

or at least your working assumption

would be

if they kept it from me my working

assumption would be if some trans person

who declared war on Christians

I wouldn't have any I would have no data

to prove that

but that would be my working assumption

and you know I'd be okay with that

I'll be okay with that

because I wouldn't really be in the dark

I would just be okay they they kept a

political football off the field yeah

that's okay

yeah all right so

um and then there's a question of why

there seems to be a I don't know why why

are we treating a potential uh hate

crime against Christians as different

than we would treat other hate crimes

but I guess it's a little unconfirmed at

this point so that's part of it and

Tucker also asked the question uh why

don't we ask if antidepressants were

involved

now this question has a lot more

salience to me

than it might to you because I've

actually experienced as most of you know

when I took some blood pressure meds

that were not to my liking

um I was suicidal

and it was just the meds literally the

day I stopped boom everything was fine

and everything's been fine every day

since then

and you know what's interesting is that

you know by some other measure you might

say but Scott how could you be happier

now

when you've had a whole bunch of bad

things happen to you in the last year

and the answer is

I guess I just had the right mindset

you know these allegedly bad things

don't seem so bad to me you know the

upside seems so substantial to them like

this came out that came out okay

but over the summer when I was on the

wrong meds there was nothing that could

go right

I just wanted to get out of this world I

just wanted to get out of this world

and when I stopped the meds it went away

now

it's easy for me to understand how

people and it would be different for

individuals it's easy for me to

understand how a drug could make you a

mascular

because if it made you suicidal

at the same time you had you know

negative thoughts about something else

the suicidal part could make you a

murderer because if you don't care about

your own life you're not going to care

about anybody else's life after you're

gone

so

anyway

so we should definitely look at uh

antidepressants and I thought that that

was super Brave of Tucker to say it on a

TV program

which I believe is largely or used to be

anyway sponsored by a big Pharma

imagine how much balls it takes

to say that your advertisers might be

causing mass murder

that's like a lot of balls

now I realize Tucker is in a in a strong

situation career-wise but you've got to

have balls the size of a planet

to say on the very platform that's

supported by big Pharma money

somebody says no Pharma ads on Tucker

and I was wondering about that because

I've never seen any

there's probably a reason for that right

yeah

so I think that was a valuable service

by Tucker Carlson just sort of putting

these ideas out there

of course Madonna is gonna

have a concert in Nashville to raise

money for Trans rights

I'm not sure she's reading the room

right

but can we just agree that this any

story about Madonna is a story about

mental illness

would you agree with that I don't know

what's happening with Madonna but my

working assumption

I'm not a doctor I'm not a doctor I

can't diagnose her from a distance but

the way she presents is with mental

illness

pretty severe pretty severe

you know the the kind where if she were

not famous and Powerful somebody would

have forced her into treatment of some

kind

um

but I also think that the trans story

is at least partly about mental illness

now because I have more respect than

some of you do let me say as clearly as

possible

I think is super super likely

that for some portion of the trans

community

transitioning was exactly what they

needed and it made their life better

I just don't know what the percentage is

I don't know if that's 10 or 90 because

I don't have visibility but whether it's

10 or 90 it's the same point we live in

a free world or we try to be we're

trying to be free if they're adults

they've looked into it they think they

need it they talk to professionals

that's their business it's not my

business it's just their business and

I've never had a problem treating any

trans person

as a human individual with dignity ever

before

I don't know why I'd have that problem

in the future

but there does it does seem that it has

created a magnet for crazy people

right which is no fault of the

law-abiding you know good citizens who

just have a you know different situation

that they found a way to deal with

it's not about them it's about some

portion have been attracted to this for

all the wrong reasons

and if you can't say that the trans

issue is both things

you know legitimate people looking at

legitimate Solutions

that their freedom allows them to pursue

versus people who are just bad

crazy

as soon as you lump them together and

say it's all trans well there's nothing

you can do

there's nothing you can do with that

as soon as you lump them into one

category and I think that's what the

right does to their to their detriment I

think it weakens the argument to just

treat it like it's all one thing

um

so I think the Madonna thing really

underscores that

uh Rasmussen asked about preventing mass

shootings

an arrest was in poll 50 percent of

Voters say it's not possible to

completely prevent mass shootings well

shouldn't that be closer to 100 percent

that only 50 percent of people pulled

agree it's not possible

well it's not possible to stop them all

I think everybody would agree with that

how do you only get 50 to agree with

that all right well but 38 believe it is

possible to completely prevent such

shootings okay that's crazy

and other 12 are not sure

it's a weird little poll

so I suggested

well actually I stole an idea somebody

sent me a letter and I like the idea but

I extended it

so the idea that was not mine was to

recruit ex-police officers

to be teachers

would you like to know that there were

some legally armed ex-police officers

who just had become teachers

so that if your school wanted to be a

little safer just make sure that of your

I don't know 100 teachers how many

teachers at a school

what would be an average

number of teachers a hundred

fifty two hundred

something like that let's say 50 to 100.

you wouldn't need many of those to be

cops

two

three

two or three percent being retired

police officers because you know if

you're getting out of the police game

and a lot of people are because the

changes to you know bail and everything

else if a lot of people are leaving the

police force

you have exactly the pool of applicants

you're looking for some of them might

yeah now you can extend it to

ex-military as well that's correct but

here I

um but I wanted to extend the idea even

further

so I tweeted that what if the federal

government or maybe you could leave it

to the states that's a separate argument

but what if uh what if funding was made

available either in the state or federal

level

that anybody who wanted to be a legal

a carrier of a weapon

could take the classes or get certified

in whatever whatever certification and

maybe have to get re-certified every

year and then keep the weapon in some

kind of a

protected safe in a few places

so you want to make sure that people can

get to them quickly but you don't want

the kids to get them obviously so some

kind of a safe

a holster well somebody can grab your

holster

you know if three kids wanted to they

could hold you down and take your weapon

so I don't want it in a holster

unless they're actually a security guard

then yes but not in the classroom we've

seen too many videos of of students

taking on teachers

students will take on teachers they will

steal their gun I think that's like a

real thing

there's Biometrics for holsters

interesting

I'm not sure I would trust a biometric

for a holster because you still might

want to steal it and get rid of the

biometric somehow

um

so that's just one idea speaking of

which uh I saw a tweet from Emily Brooks

saying that there was a quoted shouting

match between representative Jamal

Bowman Democrat and representative

Thomas Massey

and then I watched the video when I

watched the video do you think I saw a

shouting match

this is the way all headlines work

there's a shouting match and then I

watched the headlines nope nope there

was one person shouting

uh Jamal Bowman and then there was a

Plucky representative Thomas Massey who

happened to be walking by the public

hallway who wrote Under wherever it was

he just happened to be walking by and so

as Jamal is just like screaming at the

crowd in like every direction he's just

you know screaming his gun control stuff

Thomas Massey just walks right up to him

and just starts talking to him calmly

about a suggestion for I think for

arming teachers

and Jamal just keeps yelling and yelling

and messy just keeps you know keeps to

his same tone and they're at one point

they're just talking each other over

each other and then Thomas Massey sees

it is being filmed

so he you know sort of excuses himself

from the shouting guy and goes to talk

to that it was probably as a phone or a

news reporter or something and and he

starts to give his idea directly to the

video

and then the the shouting guy comes over

and tries to shout him away from the

video so he can't even he can't even say

his idea

all right every day I'm finding a new

reason to to love Thomas Massey I just

love the fact that he just walked right

up to him and started talking to him

with a productive suggestion

and the guy wouldn't even listen to it

wouldn't even listen it was awesome

all right

um here's uh one of the best

and scariest ideas I've ever heard

um how many of you were in favor of

universal basic income where the

government gives you money and you don't

have to work you just have enough to

live

right

pretty much in this audience it's going

to be old now right oh a few yeses a few

yeses all right here's a hidden danger

of Ubi that I'd never thought of

and you're going to say to yourself oh

how did I not think about that are you

ready for this I'm going to bend your

mind courtesy of uh Tweeter called the

Commander in Chief one

uh it's all one word the

commander-in-chief and then digit one if

you're looking for this person on

Twitter

and here's the tweet that just blew my

top of my head off are you ready for

this seriously this is going to blow

your head off

hold on to your scalp here it comes

they can talk about a universal basic

income as much as they like any smart

any smart person will know where this is

going

but I didn't know where this was going

so I don't qualify as smart let's see if

you did

here's where he says it's going

they will not be interested in keeping

keeping people around who cannot be

useful

that's what I realized

before

yeah suppose we can't create a society

where let's say 30 percent of the people

are

are just

um

just using the money of the other people

and they're not working

now in our current woke Democratic world

that's pretty safe

if you were to introduce Ubi if you

could afford it somehow and you

introduced it into America

and let's say ten percent of Americans

took you up on it

because it's safe it would be it would

be not that big of a burden on the

country ten percent they're probably

getting some kind of services anyway

and you'd say to yourself well I'll

never even meet one I'll probably never

even run into anybody who's on the Ubi

it's no big deal but imagine it got to

like 30 percent

imagine if one third of adults

were not working and they were just

taking your money your money

the money you work for

so you get to work and have a good life

and they get to do no work at all and

spend your money

now presumably they would have fewer

things they'd have to live a more basic

life but probably they could be just

happy doing their Fentanyl and whatever

now in the short run that could work in

the short run

in the long run you can never be sure

that a death spot won't take over

am I right history has shown us that

every civilization ends everyone they

all end or they become a different thing

what if what if the United States

becomes a dictatorship

and what if we don't have enough money

to feed everybody

they're going to kill all the Ubi people

first they're going to round up the Ubi

people starve them to death and say all

right we have a chance now we got rid of

the we got rid of the anchor that was

holding us back I'm glad they

self-identified as useless because we

got rid of them nobody even argued oh

you're going to get rid of the useless

people

and it wouldn't even be racial because

it would be you know distributed across

races and everything so you say it's not

even racial it's just all the useless

people all the people who add nothing to

society will just round them up and put

them in camps or Kill Them All

had you ever thought about that

had you ever considered that you're

guaranteeing the death of the people who

stopped working

and I'm going to generalize this to a

bigger point

there's no such thing as Security in

this world

you're never safe

you could have the illusion of being

safe and you could be safer than other

situations so you can be safer

but you can never be safe we don't live

in a safe world

but one thing you can do to make

yourself as safe as you can in a

dangerous world is to be useful to other

people

nothing is going to help you more than

that

all of your happiness

all of your financial success

all of your physical safety

is going to depend on how useful you are

to other people

if you're taking a Ubi and you're

nothing but a drain on other people

don't expect to be safe

do not expect to be safe because other

people don't care about you at that

point they really don't if you're just

going to take my money and give me

nothing in return

good luck you're on your own

so I would argue that the more you

create your talent stack

the the safer you are

right why was it that I wasn't panicked

when I got canceled worldwide in my

primary profession for 34 years why did

it not send me into a death spiral

because my talent stack is so well

developed I knew I could just do other

things

and So within a day I was already

spinning up my other things and they're

working fine

and it's only because I've spent a

Lifetime on developing a set of skills

that I know work together and have

commercial value

if you don't have that going on

you're not safe

you can only make yourself safe by

developing a talent stack that helps

other people in some way they find Value

in it

that's your advice for today

well I don't know if I said this

yesterday but Governor Newsom got

himself in a trap by commissioning this

group to recommend reparations then they

came back with an absurd number that

some are saying would cost 800 billion

dollars two and a half times two and a

half times the annual budget of

California according to NBC

so now Newsome has two choices if he

backsues uh reparations

he has no future in politics would you

agree

he has no future in politics if he backs

the reparations but

if he doesn't back them

he has no future in politics not

National politics yeah it might make he

might be able to get reelected

probably not but he would certainly be

out of the race for president there's no

way he could be president right that

would be completely dead so he can't he

can't accept it

because then he'd be dead and he can't

reject it

because then he'd be dead

politically so what are you going to do

you can't accept it you can't reject it

resign no he's going to form a new

committee to study the recommendations

of the first committee

that's what I would do

that's what I would do I'd form a new

committee

to look into the committee's

recommendation and then I would wait a

year and see if see if everybody forgot

about it

and maybe you know maybe release it on a

late Friday afternoon it looks like it

wasn't practical

well we tried but the committee that

examines the committee found that the

first committee didn't do his job as

well as it could so I guess it's dead in

the water

it's a good thing I asked the committee

to look at the other committee

now every path he takes on this is the

losing path but that's the least losing

path so I predict it

all right uh meanwhile over in Minnesota

Governor Tim Walls uh did a big event in

which he introduced and announced a new

Chief Equity officer Dr Stephanie

barrage Chief Equity officer

if you're looking for a state to move to

I would recommend one that does not have

a chief Equity officer that should be a

giant red flag to stay away from that

state

as far away as you can why because

they're racists do you think a white

male could have been hired as the first

chief chief Equity officer

seriously do you think a white male

could have been considered for the job

of course not a course

not

of course not is purely racist

what's the definition of racist you're

hiring people based on their race

there's no way they would have

hired a white man for the job

why would you move to that state

that state has a big sign on it that

says no white man allowed women I don't

know maybe women but white men no nope

can't get a job in Minnesota

it's pretty clear

all right

um

uh speaking of Governor Newsom he

tweeted a two charts one is a chart of

the state of the the states that have

lots of guns and or the states have the

most strict gun control

and I found that uh when you have the

strictest gun control it correlates

really high with

fewer murders

now what do you think of that

so the data probably came from good

sources

well well let's say the data is accurate

we don't know it's accurate of course

that would be ridiculous but let's say

it is

how many problems do you think there

were there are with that comparison

a lot of them

a lot of them all right let me give you

just the sampler set of problems

which for some reason I didn't include

in my notes

here's the sampler set

if you're looking at Estates and

comparing a state to a state do you

think that's a good comparison

because California shows up as a low

murder state with high gun restrictions

but you can't go near Oakland

you can't go anywhere near Oakland I

drive around Oakland I don't even want

to drive through it

is so dangerous

right

so yeah Compton Etc so the the use of

states is meant to conceal what's true

not to tell you what's true would you

agree

that the almost all the murderers are in

cities

well you know the vast majority are in

cities

and if you don't break out in City to

City so what I'd like to see is

strictest gun laws

by City

I think you'd find that Chicago has

strict gun laws and a high murder rate

Washington DC strict gun laws High

murder rate Oakland strict gun laws High

murder rate

Baltimore strict gun laws High murder

rate right so you can see how easily

Newsome can lie with accurate numbers

now you're saying the numbers might not

be accurate and I agree

but even if the numbers are accurate

he's found the only way to be misleading

by grouping it by state

instead of by City

it makes the whole thing ridiculous

then you'd also want to see a before and

after

show me the murder rate in let's say

Chicago before and after the gun control

strict regulations went into place did

it immediately fall

that'd be a strong argument or did it go

up

which I think he did

yeah so those just a few problems if if

you looked at the comments on that tweet

you'd see other people suggesting other

problems we've reached the point where

data is absolutely useless data

all right and so I tweeted this

um here's here's where we're at this is

my summary of everything you need to

know about data

um

dumb people

argue without data would you agree

if somebody's making their argument and

they're ignoring the data or they don't

know what it is or they're not using it

that's pretty dumb pretty dumb

smart people argue with data would you

agree

if you see a smart person they're

probably showing you their data

but the smarter people the people who

are smarter than the smart people know

that you can torture the data until it

tells you anything you want to hear

right so summarizing so far if you're

dumb you don't use data

if you're smart you do use data if

you're smarter than that you know the

data is useless because it's been put

together by corrupt people

but there's one level above that

smarter than the smarter people these

would be the smart-ass people know that

the data is not real and neither are you

I'll just leave that there

all right um

Senator Mark Warren was defending his

restrict act that's the one that's

supposed to be aimed at Tick Tock but is

in fact a general statement about giving

the government more power over social

media basically even domestic

and he said this defending it he said

the restrict act isn't an infringement

on Free Speech it's a systemic

rules-based approach to identify and

addressing to identifying and addressing

foreign Tech that could threaten

National Security

huh now when he explains it that way

that doesn't sound so bad does it

wouldn't you like to know that our

government is has a rules-based approach

you know something you can really

there's no gray area it's a rules-based

approach he says and though you want

them to identify and address foreign

technology that can threaten National

Security

that's all good right

isn't that terrific

here's what I tweeted back to them we

don't trust the government with new

rules in other words Powers over

communication it's that simple

that's that's my my reply is we don't

trust you

that would be that what he's proposing

is something that would be good for

somebody that you trusted

am I right if we trusted the government

that probably makes sense it sounds like

they need some a little more structure

to look for bad intention from foreign

powers

sounds good but what happens if you if

you don't trust your government and you

think everything they do is a trick

which is my current operating belief

in that case you don't want to give them

any power for any reason because they're

not going to use it for good reasons

so his problem is not that it's a good

or a bad Bill

the problem is him

let me say that again

the problem is not Senator Warner's bill

because he defended that quite

adequately the problem is Senator Warren

Warner

Warner the problem is the senator

and the other Senators because we don't

trust them

am I right

he's defending the wrong thing he should

defend why we should trust him

not why we should trust the bill why we

should trust him

and he has no argument for that

sorry

because you know nobody's going to trust

the other party and nobody even trusts

your own party and it all looks

suspicious to me

so no you're not allowed to change the

topic the topic is you Senator Warner we

don't trust you

and if you say oh I have this other

senator who agrees with me oh that's

just another person I don't trust oh

you've also got Romney on your side

I don't trust him

I don't trust him

because he's in Congress basically

um

all right

if he put together a one-pager Banning

Tick Tock I might trust that

um

have you heard of uh the tartarian

theory of why civilizations

might disappear

how many of you heard this

this is the the greatest some call it a

conspiracy theory

some call it true

all right let me tell you what it is

it's an idea that there used to be an

advanced civilization on Earth

that built great structures from the

pyramids to even skyscrapers in New York

so that you know a lot of stuff is

included and that there was a great mud

flood

literally a bunch of mud that destroyed

that advanced civilization

but

the the buildings and structures that

remained were the tall ones

so that if you looked at the tall older

buildings or more ornate the less modern

ones you would find that they have many

stories below the ground

that used to be above the ground

[Laughter]

and that you don't know it but you know

it's been hidden from us that there was

a great society that got wiped out by

mud

now it's not real as far as I know

there's there's no reality to it but

it's the most interesting

the most interesting new Theory and

apparently there are there are some

examples of some buildings that do have

substantial below ground structure so

they use those as examples

all right so no I don't think that's

true

here's a story about uh female students

at the University of Wyoming

they were concerned and now they're

suing their sorority because a

trans-identified

um

they call it a trans identified male I

don't know if that's the wrong way to

say it or not but

um

yes a trans

no I think I think they're using the

wrong language here I think they I think

the polite language is there's a trans

person

who identifies as female

right so there's a trans person who

identified as female uh not the way they

were born

um at least physically not the way they

were born and it alleges that this trans

woman Artemis Langford has been quote

watching the women undressing the

sorority house sometimes wall erect

now my first question is why are all

these women who are undressing erect

I mean is it a clitoral thing I don't

understand it's possible that the

sentence is just confusing and what they

mean is that the trans person Artemis

Langford is erect not the women who are

undressing

okay I think that's probably what it

means all right

now here's my question

what's wrong with that

what's wrong with this trans woman who

still has male equipment having an

erection while uh in the company of all

these women who are just like Artemis

they're just other women

and would they have a problem if Artemis

had been a uh born a lesbian

wouldn't a lesbian I mean I don't know

too much about lesbian culture but am I

wrong would a lesbian be turned on by

saying a naked attractive women

is that a thing

I don't even know if that's a thing

is it a thing

so if a lesbian would be allowed in the

sorority and I assume they would be

right the sorority isn't going to

discriminate based on the LBGTQ stuff so

if you could be a lesbian

in the sorority

it seems to me that a trans who also

how does physical reaction to women

same thing

so I feel like they're discriminating

against this poor trans person for

having a penis

that doesn't seem right

because they you know they wouldn't

discriminate against lesbians

it's not the same

you can never tell when I'm serious can

you

am I serious

all right so what I'm doing is a little

bit of

you know basically accepting and

amplifying all right so I'm doing some

amplification to make a point

Embrace and amplify correct

so all right here is the most

provocative thing you'll ever hear in

your entire life something that I could

never even mention until I'd been

canceled

somebody says I look high I wish no I'm

not high right now believe it or not I

tell you if I were

you know I I live a

a transparent life when it comes to

marijuana I tell you if I were I'd just

tell you but I'm not

um all right here's the topic

and first you need to know where this

comes from all right here's my source

so my source is Tyrone Williams who's on

Twitter and goes by uh immune hack

you know at immune hack now

I don't know what's true

but I'll tell you what looks true

that's all I can do what looks true is

that Tyrone is a real person

a black American and the Black American

part is important to the story

all right

because if you didn't know that I was

quoting a black American man

uh you would think I'm the worst person

in the world for bringing up this topic

but it's not my topic I think it's

useful

I think is valuable I don't know if it's

true

but it has enough meat on the bones for

me to say I think Tyrone's on to

something

and I'm going to share it with you and

the biggest reason that you probably

won't have seen this is It's just so

dangerous it's like dangerous thoughts

you ready

here it comes remember this is from

Tyrone not for me and all of this is

meant to be constructive

right if it seems to you that this is

anything but trying to be helpful

for America then you're misinterpreting

I'm trying to be helpful

goes like this according to Tyrone

there are at least four or five health

related factors that can affect your

cognitive ability

um

of a baby and therefore the cognitive

ability of that baby when it grows up

some of those things include weight

if a mother is obese when delivering a

child the child has lower cognitive

function did you know that

or at least it's correlated let's say

it's correlated causation I think you

have to be careful about causation but

it's correlated

if you're obese your kid will have lower

cognitive functions now some some people

have rightly said are you sure you have

the causation right

maybe it's backwards it might be it

might be and that would be exactly the

kind of thing you want to look into but

it's not the only thing

other things associated with cognitive

function or vitamin D something called

inflammation il-6 something called

oxidative stress or CRP something called

omega-3 well we know what that is but

the ratio of Omega-3 to omega-6 and then

blood pressure

so all of those things are based on

science not guessing

but based on studies now do we do we

trust all studies

no

that Nicholas Fleming is yelling name

the Jew Scott name them

Nicholas believes that uh as some of the

people in this channel are that I'm

cowardly not mentioning the cause of all

problems which he believes are the Jews

we're going to be hiding you on this

channel

for more serious people

all right

sorry you're gone

um but here's the point that uh Tyrone

makes every one of these is treatable

don't have enough vitamin D add some

vitamin D don't have enough ratio of

this to that

improve your ratio blood pressure yes

weight yes inflammation yes so there are

a bunch of factors that can all be

treated

and here's the kicker

all of the things I mentioned are at far

higher rates in Black Americans

far higher rates

obesity for example listen to this one

this just blew my mind do you know that

uh 80 of black women are obese

but it's two-thirds of white women are

obese too two-thirds of white women and

80 percent of black women or obese

huh I wonder why the

I wonder why the birth rate is going

down

like sometimes sometimes the answers are

so obvious

all right let's not get into that though

all right so Tyrone's point which I

think is brilliant and brave is that

there are there are identifiable

completely treatable medical conditions

that might completely change the the IQ

differential between black Americans and

everybody else

now

my my biggest issue is that correlation

and causation are not demonstrated

right but you could test it

Justin Dunn needs to go away because he

also wonders why I'm not blaming the

Jews for everything

maybe because I'm not a crazy conspiracy

theorist

Maybe

all right

so what do you think of Tyrone's

approach you can see how toxic it is

right because as soon as you talk about

IQ difference even though IQ difference

is the primary indicator of success

um if it's true that black Americans for

a variety of reasons

are are giving birth

in a sub-optimal way health health care

Wise It's a sub-optimal way

why don't we take that seriously

at least test it you know you you could

take a county or a state and say you

know I don't know if this is a racist

Theory or if it's just good thinking so

let's just take a population of people

correct everything see how their kids do

by third grade

by third grade you'd know if it worked

wouldn't you

so here's what I say

um

what I say is uh if you can test it

small

and the the potential benefit would be

extreme and the cost to do it looks like

it'd be doable

because most of these things are

education plus you know some supplements

basically

so

I think that's worth doing I think

that's worth trying

third grade is the inflection point I

think you'd know by third grade

if it worked

what about the slippery slope

this slippery slope just so I clarify

uh Claire I'm gonna I'm gonna make you

go away for too many too many repeated

comments in caps

here's what I say about the slippery

slope

when people say slippery slope is lazy

thinking

meaning that there's nothing about a

slippery slope that tells you anything

about a topic

there are some things that will go until

something changes them

so that so I I prefer to say everything

will go forever

until something stops it

that's a more productive way to look at

it and usually something pops up to stop

it but usually after it's gone too far

right yeah you have to go too far before

you get the reaction so in my view

the the acronyms and the you know let's

say the wokeness

I think it's guaranteed to end

it's guaranteed to end

because it went too far

now if you if I believed in a slippery

slope I would say it will just keep

going forever

but you can already see the resistance

starting to pop up people willing to say

things they could even say out loud a

year ago they're willing to say it out

loud I mean even the fact that you know

uh people are saying seriously that the

trans situation is at least partly

Mental Health

not all of it

but some part of it is mental health

that's that's a brave thing to say in

public

under the current situation and I would

argue that the trans Community needs to

do a better job of

separating themselves from the crazy

parts right

just as uh

you know if you're a trump supporter you

want to separate yourself from the white

supremacist who might also like it it

makes sense for your brand to separate

yourself from The Crazies

so I think the uh

I think the trans Community would help

themselves and help the rest of us if

they helped us identify the crazy people

it's not it's not as easy for us I think

get the hell away

that's funny all right ladies and

gentlemen

this concludes the most shocking and

entertaining live stream

in all of reality

I don't think you'll see a better thing

today

that's my belief and I'm going to say

goodbye to the YouTube people for now

thanks for joining

and I hope you learned something bye for

now