Episode 960 Scott Adams - Fake News, Bad Math, Bad Mind-Reading, Bad Behavior in the News
My new book LOSERTHINK, available now on Amazon https://tinyurl.com/rqmjc2a Content: Is the record unambiguous...it was a coup attempt? Mind-readers confirm, Schiff is panicked Tim Graham's visual writing style Ahmaud Arbery shooting The Plandemic video ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ If you would like to enjoy this same content plus bonus content from Scott Adams, including micro-lessons on lots of useful topics to build your talent stack, please see scottadams.locals.com for full access to that secret treasure.
Hey everybody, come on in. It's time for Coffee with Scott Adams, the best time of the day. Hey Jack, good to see you this morning. Good to see all of you. Is that Marla? Thanks for the super chat. I app
View segment →reciate it. And I know many of you are already prepared. Some of you, such as Joel, is jogging on the beach right now and cannot join us for the simultaneous sip. But many of you are prepared and all you need is a copper, margarita glass, a tanker, a chalice, or a canteen, jug, or flask, vessel of…
View segment →emic. It's called the simultaneous sip. Happens right now. Go. I feel the fake news fading away. The veil is lifted from my eyes. Yeah. So let's talk about a few things. So as you know, the drug remdesivir has reportedly shown some promise in reducing the virus, but there's no report or no evidenc…
View segment →t's say you vaccinate four billion. How much profit? Well, not profit, but how much gross revenue is that if you vaccinate four billion people at a thousand dollars a piece? Well, let me do the math for you. Or actually allow me to have someone do the math for me. Alexa, what is four billion times a…
View segment →now. I can't read Bill Gates's mind, but he's not in it for the money. I'm going to block anybody who suggests that. You just aren't smart enough to follow any of this if you think that's the case. All right, sorry. In the news on Fox News, it says that Schiff is panicked. He's panicked about the t…
View segment →when people are trying to use non-legal means to remove a sitting president? I don't know what else you call it, but that's what happened anyway. So as Jake Novak pointed out on Twitter, that I always call out when the left mind reads and they act like they know what's in Trump's mind or they know…
View segment →l play a pretty high-risk kind of a game. I don't think there's evidence they panicked, so let's not say that. Here's some for you. Usually you're going to see more and more articles about how the economy is the worst since the 1930s. You know, the worst since the Great Depression. Oh, this is all…
View segment →e it's good for their careers. And then they give the management these fake numbers to say it works. And then what does the CEO do with that? Suppose the CEO doesn't believe it. Suppose the CEO says, you know, they would have bought this much anyway. I don't think you did anything. Would the CEO say…
View segment →ead. It's brilliant writing. It's really good. And then the second part, he uses the word "jabbered." He jabbered for seven minutes. Now of course this is highly biased political writing, but you know it's on Fox News. You expect that in the opinion pieces on both CNN and Fox. You know, if it's an…
View segment →his is going to head, right? So I had a little bit of, I won't call it disagreement. I was confused at what Carl Bergstrom was saying on Twitter. Seems like a real well-informed, smart guy. And he was doing a real good job of explaining stuff. He was explaining specifically that the purpose behind f…
View segment →take me out of context later. I doubt there was a good reason to shoot this man, meaning a situation was created that probably didn't need to get created. So I'm not forgiving anybody. I would say however it is not evidence that these two people who did the alleged crime were white supremacists. I d…
View segment →t of law. Is that a life sentence? Thirty years? Execution? Capital offense? I don't know. Because I can't think of a bigger problem. You know what would be more of a crime than that? Would a terrorist act be more of a crime than that? I don't know. It's a pretty big crime. Feels like the biggest cr…
View segment →sn't look like it to me. You know if I had to put my own money on it I'd say there are two facts in there but the way you've woven it together, no that's just misleading. That's what I'd bet on. But I also would have bet the FBI was not trying to remove a legally elected president. I would have been…
View segment →and you would think that they would be smart enough not to write stuff down, right? Wouldn't they be smart enough not to write down the things that are going to get them in jail or whatever? But I have to think that Obama was never that dumb. You know, my impression of Obama, you can love him or hat…
View segment →. More likely degraded because I think we'd know if he was dead. But we wouldn't necessarily know if he were in a coma. Here is my evidence in case you didn't hear before. Just prior to the video being shown, the president was acting like he definitely knew what the situation was and he was wishing…
View segment →h he pops up and he's looking fine, then I'm going to revise and I'll say oh wow I guess I was fooled. Those were probably real videos. I mean they could have still been faked but more likely they'd be real. If a month from now he's up and walking around and it's obvious it's a current video, maybe…
View segment →en him on video, I'm right. So we wait. Now we wait. All right, that's all I got for now and I will talk to you tonight.
View segment →Hey everybody, come on in. It's time for Coffee with Scott Adams, the best time of the day. Hey Jack, good to see you this morning. Good to see all of you. Is that Marla? Thanks for the super chat. I appreciate it.
And I know many of you are already prepared. Some of you, such as Joel, is jogging on the beach right now and cannot join us for the simultaneous sip. But many of you are prepared and all you need is a copper, margarita glass, a tanker, a chalice, or a canteen, jug, or flask, vessel of any kind, filled with your favorite liquid. I like coffee. And join me now for the unparalleled pleasure, the dopamine hit of the day, the thing that makes everything better, including the damn pandemic. It's called the simultaneous sip. Happens right now. Go.
I feel the fake news fading away. The veil is lifted from my eyes. Yeah.
So let's talk about a few things. So as you know, the drug remdesivir has reportedly shown some promise in reducing the virus, but there's no report or no evidence that it reduces death rate. But we're still pretty darn excited about this drug that doesn't change the death rate. But I wonder, how much would this drug cost? Well, that estimate I saw, I don't know if this is still the case, would be a thousand dollars per patient. So a thousand dollars for remdesivir.
You know, I wonder if that's enough money that it would just potentially corrupt the system. Is that much? A thousand dollars per customer times all the people who would need it. Seven point six billion people in the world, but you don't need to vaccinate them all. Let's say, I don't know, let's say you do four billion. Let's say you vaccinate four billion. How much profit? Well, not profit, but how much gross revenue is that if you vaccinate four billion people at a thousand dollars a piece? Well, let me do the math for you. Or actually allow me to have someone do the math for me. Alexa, what is four billion times a thousand? Four billion is four trillion. Four trillion dollars.
Has there ever been any product or any company that ever sold one thing and made four trillion dollars in the first year? Now if you were on the brink of making four trillion dollars... Oh yes, thank you. It's not a vaccine, but one assumes that many people would take it if it works. So it's not a vaccine. That's correct.
So could we worry that maybe our, I don't know, science could be influenced by four trillion dollars? And somebody says, well, Bill Gates is just an angel, right? I'm blocking you for being an idiot. All right, I'm just going to block all the people who think that Bill Gates is the devil, because I've reached the end of that stupidity. If you're so stupid that you think Bill Gates is in it for the money, please don't follow me. Please. I don't know what you know. I can't read Bill Gates's mind, but he's not in it for the money. I'm going to block anybody who suggests that. You just aren't smart enough to follow any of this if you think that's the case. All right, sorry.
In the news on Fox News, it says that Schiff is panicked. He's panicked about the transcripts, the interviews about the so-called Russia collusion situation that turned out to be nothing. Now the interview transcripts are available. I guess they've been around for a while, but now they're talking about releasing them. And Adam Schiff has decided maybe not. Maybe not release them, because apparently what they show very clearly is that the FBI knew there was no basis for going after Carter Page because the Steele dossier was the basis and they already knew it was debunked. So apparently the record is unambiguous that it was a coup attempt. Now it doesn't say that, but what would you call it when people are trying to use non-legal means to remove a sitting president? I don't know what else you call it, but that's what happened anyway.
So as Jake Novak pointed out on Twitter, that I always call out when the left mind reads and they act like they know what's in Trump's mind or they know it's in anybody's mind. And so it would be fair to call it out when it happens on the other side. And let me do that. As Jake pointed out, we don't know if Schiff is panicked. What kind of reporting is that? Unless Schiff says he's panicked or we hooked him up to an EKG or something so we could find out that he's panicked. What basis do we report that Schiff is panicked? Ridiculous.
Now, a reasonable person could say, well, he would be concerned about this. Yeah, yeah. But I mean, they all play a pretty high-risk kind of a game. I don't think there's evidence they panicked, so let's not say that.
Here's some for you. Usually you're going to see more and more articles about how the economy is the worst since the 1930s. You know, the worst since the Great Depression. Oh, this is all ridiculous. It's all ridiculous. Here's what didn't happen in the Great Depression: sixty percent of the public making money. Because I think that's what just happened. I think forty percent of us, and I'm in the category of people who got hit bad by the coronavirus. My income will probably drop ninety percent this year. But you know, I'm not asking for sympathy. I'm just telling you a fact. Probably forty percent of us took a hit, but there's a good solid sixty percent who made money. That didn't happen in the Depression. All the people who made money still want to spend it, and they've got more than they had before when we go back to work. So all these comparisons to the Depression, where basically the entire world went down, it's so inappropriate. If sixty percent of the people made money, forty lost, that really speaks to a quick recovery.
Now the real wild card is whether people will go back into stores and restaurants and stuff. That's going to be pretty iffy for a while. But certainly buying products, they got the money and they want to buy them.
All right. Can you believe that in this most basic question the experts still don't agree? Which is, is it safe for kids to go back to school? You can add this question to the long list of very basic, seemingly basic questions that our best experts don't know, got it wrong, or they disagree. What the hell good are our experts? I mean, this is a pretty basic question. Is it safe for kids to go back? So some people say, well, kids don't get it. They probably don't spread it much. It's a low risk. Go ahead, send them back. There's some other study that says that that causes spread. Of course it would. Who's right? I don't know. I guess we can't ask the experts because they disagree.
I tweeted out an article on advertising on the internet, and I wondered how many people already knew this. So in the comments tell me if you knew this. Did you know that advertising is not real, that it doesn't work? How many of you knew that? Because we live in a world that's driven by advertisement. All of our media, the internet, it's all advertising based. But did you know it's all... I'm going to modify "all," so I'm going to say mostly, and then I'll go back to some special cases where it's not. Yeah, some of you did.
Here's how I found out. The way I found out that advertising isn't even a real thing is I advertised. You should try it sometime. Whatever your product is, or you can even just try this as an experiment. Try advertising anything. It won't make any difference. I've advertised restaurants. I've done radio, print. I've done every kind of advertising that you could do. Didn't make one dime of difference. Likewise for startups, etc. Done advertising, didn't make any difference.
Now the exception is if there's something that somebody doesn't know exists but they know they have a need for it. Then you're telling them about it for the first time. If you tell somebody about something for the first time and they want it, then it can work, of course. But they're not necessarily going to find it with a search engine. That's harder. So the kind of advertisement that doesn't work is brand advertisement especially. And the article that I tweeted around this morning gives a perfect example of that. It talked about somebody who understood statistics and stuff coming into this world and thinking to himself, am I crazy? Because it looks like none of this was real, and yet everybody's pretending it's real. And that our giant platforms all depend on selling it to people who think it's real.
And this guy said, well, why do you think it's real? And they would say, well, look, we ran this ad. Let's say it was eBay, because he used them for an example. We ran an ad for eBay, and then you look at all the people who clicked on the ad, and then you can tell that they bought a bunch of stuff. It's obvious. We run an ad, people click on it, then they buy. And the economist says, how many of those people were going to buy anyway? And they say, well, you know, we don't know, but they clicked the ad and then they bought, so the ads work.
And so the economist said, why don't we try this experiment? Because the ad that people are clicking on shows up in the search directly above the organic search, the one nobody paid for. If you were searching for eBay by name, you typed in eBay. The thing that comes up at the top is the advertisement that takes you to eBay. The one right below it that didn't cost you a dime is the organic search and also takes you to eBay. And now what do people click? They click the one on the top. So the economist said, why don't we try this? Why don't we try picking some regions of the country and not advertising on those and just see if it compares? So they did that. What do you think the answer was? The advertising made no difference.
So eBay was paying twenty whatever million dollars a year for these ads, and in one day, in a very easy test, he showed that they had no value. But his other examples of people who seem to know that advertising doesn't work but they still do it. And you say to yourself, okay, I'm confused. Are you telling me that everybody knows it doesn't work but they still do it? What exactly is behind that?
And he explained it in a way that I already understood as the creator of Dilbert and having spent a lot of time in big companies and done a lot of advertising myself. I knew the answer to this, but it was funny watching him sort of discover it. And it goes like this: The marketing department in your big company isn't just marketing externally. They're also marketing themselves. And what the marketing department in your big company wants is the biggest possible budget, because that makes them more important. It's good for their careers. They want to manage the biggest possible thing.
So when they go into their senior management, do they say advertisement doesn't work? No. They say you need the biggest advertisement budget you could possibly get. And then they get that. And then the boss is going to ask them, did it work? And what are they going to do? They're going to show them how many people clicked on the advertisement and how much they bought. And they're going to say, look at all that extra stuff people bought. And it's all not real.
Now somebody says I'm seeing a lot of people mention MyPillow. MyPillow is a special case, and I'll tell you why. Number one, did you know there was such a thing as an improved pillow? So it's the perfect example of something that can be advertised because you didn't know it existed, right? I thought a pillow was a pillow, but there's a better one. Oh, okay. Now once you know it exists, then your next question should be, but Scott, I know it exists now. That I know it exists, what good is the extra advertising?
Well, here's what good it is. Mike Lindell is not like an average advertiser. What he does is so darn persuasive that you can't compare it to a written ad on the internet. All right? Listening to him do his real thing over and over again and showing you examples and hearing the people using it and here's my graph and his funny stories and stuff. In a way he's selling himself, wouldn't you say? Mike Lindell is sort of selling himself. And you didn't know you needed him, did you? So that's the part you weren't looking for. Were you looking to find Mike Lindell? No, you weren't. But you did. So now you've found him and he gives his made-in-America stuff and people like him. So you like Mike Lindell and you say, well, I can always use a better pillow. And then suddenly that works.
So in the special cases, that can tell you why the normal cases don't work. All right? So if you just put a little print ad on Google, you know, buy my stuff, you're not Mike Lindell. They don't know you. They don't care about you. They didn't fall in love with you. They weren't interested in your story about how you came from nothing. They don't care if it's built in America. None of that's there. But if you can go full Mike Lindell, yeah, I would think in his case advertising works.
All right. But yeah, so the reason is the internal marketing departments are lying to their management because it's good for their careers. And then they give the management these fake numbers to say it works. And then what does the CEO do with that? Suppose the CEO doesn't believe it. Suppose the CEO says, you know, they would have bought this much anyway. I don't think you did anything. Would the CEO say that? Or would the CEO say, as all CEOs do, well, it looks like under my management we went up this much. It's because of all the good things we did. Our marketing's firing on all cylinders. Our products are good. No, the CEO is going to take it because it makes the CEO look like they did their job as well.
So it's this weird little fiction that companies run that the advertising works. And again, it does work in the special cases, but I'm talking about the general cases. All right, keep that in mind when you're looking at stories such as the number of test kits that will be available. You know, I told you everybody's lying about that. All the companies are lying because why wouldn't they? Of course they would lie.
All right, see what else we got. There was a great line written by Tim Graham who wrote on the Fox News site. And I'm only going to repeat this because I loved the way he put the sentences together. All right? So just enjoy this for the writing. It's not even any bigger point than that. He says a press conference for Trump has the feel of diving into a tank of hungry sharks. A press conference for Hillary Clinton or Joe Biden carries the vibe of getting free pizza and game tokens at Chuck E. Cheese. Biden's virtual press conference April 2nd only lasted twenty minutes, and he jabbered for seven minutes before he took his first question. Blah blah blah.
So here's what I loved about it. The "it has the vibe of getting free pizza and game tokens at Chuck E. Cheese." You know, I've told you before that we're visual people, so this is such visual writing. You know, a Trump event feels like jumping into a tank of hungry sharks. Like you can see it, right? You can almost see the press conference. You can sort of see him jumping into the shark tank. It's so visual. And then just the same thing about it's like getting pizza and game tokens at Chuck E. Cheese. Because you get the pizza, you see it. You've got the game tokens, you see it. And then there's the Chuck E. Cheese. You see it. And then you build the story in your head. It's brilliant writing. It's really good.
And then the second part, he uses the word "jabbered." He jabbered for seven minutes. Now of course this is highly biased political writing, but you know it's on Fox News. You expect that in the opinion pieces on both CNN and Fox. You know, if it's an opinion, it's an opinion. So you can say jabbered. But jabbered is a great word. Jabbered. Because you don't have to defend jabbered. You can just say it happened and people go, well, he sounds like he was jabbering. You don't have to give any examples of what a jabbering is.
All right. So I had an experience yesterday of talking to someone who shall remain nameless, but let's say it's someone who knows a lot about the world. So somebody who's really well educated about how things work, right? So I'm not talking to a dumb person. So keep in your mind: smart, super accomplished person supports Biden. And we got into a little conversation about that, about supporting Biden. He's a big anti-Trumper. And I was curious about why anybody could do that. Like what's the thinking? And I had predicted on Twitter maybe a week or so ago that we would hear more and more tortured explanations of why anybody would support Joe when it's obvious his mental health is declining. I mean, it's really obvious, right?
And here was the first cognitive dissonance example. Or it's true, so you get to decide. So my judgment of it is, or it looks a little cognitive, doesn't it? See, no it's not. You're not going to guess who it is. It's not somebody I've mentioned before. So if you're guessing somebody that I've talked about, just forget it. You're not going to guess. It doesn't matter anyway.
And here was the following thing. Objectively true, so you decide. Does this sound like crazy talk, which would be a tell for cognitive dissonance, or is it a perfectly reasonable statement? Here it is: Joe Biden is actually smart and capable when you talk to him in person. It's just that when he does things in public, he's sort of lost a step. So he can't keep up. You know, in a public venue he can't really keep up anymore. But there's no problem because if you talk to him in person, he's perfectly fine. Brain's all there. Everything's working.
Trump, on the other hand, goes the story that he might look like he can function in public, you know, at least to his supporters. I mean, it looks like he understands the topics and has full control of things. You know, I mean he's always Trump, but it looks like he does have full control of his faculties and he's operating at a high level in public. But the story goes that in private it's completely different.
So one version of what's going on here is that Joe Biden is this unique character who's smart privately but only recently he's become incompetent in public. But you shouldn't worry about that too much because he's fine personally. He's fine. Whereas Trump, and here's a weird coincidence. What are the odds that Trump would be the opposite? And that Trump would be perfectly functional in public, if you don't count what the fake media says he's saying. You know, if you believe he suggested drinking bleach, well then you think he's not competent. But of course that didn't happen. That's just what the media said he said. So if you ignore what the media said he said and just look at what he says, perfectly reasonable. But behind closed doors, not so much.
Now, as you know, I spent a little bit of time talking to the president in a personal conversation. I did not detect anything wrong with his brain. All right? So I have only this much experience, and we weren't talking about any kind of businessy or policy things, so there wasn't anything complicated about it. But I feel like I would have detected a problem. You know, we talked about enough things, a broad enough palette of things, that I would have picked up. I'm sure I would have picked up a little problem if there was one. I didn't see anything. I didn't see anything I even questioned, like why do you say that? Or nothing like that. Perfectly ordinary, functional person like most of us.
So look for further stories about the explanation of why people are okay with Biden. And at least people are saying directly, yeah, we think maybe he did do that thing with Tara Reade. We don't like it, but boy we really don't like Trump. So in other words, they're throwing their principles to the side to get a better result.
I got into this discussion with a professor of biology on epidemiology. Now if you've been following along with my Periscopes for a while, you probably already know where this is going to head, right? So I had a little bit of, I won't call it disagreement. I was confused at what Carl Bergstrom was saying on Twitter. Seems like a real well-informed, smart guy. And he was doing a real good job of explaining stuff. He was explaining specifically that the purpose behind flattening the curve, and his point was that the purpose is not just to keep people out of the hospitals, which is important, but then also by flattening the curve you would in the end infect fewer people.
And you know, of course I raised my hand on Twitter and said, okay, but doesn't what you said support that? Because I was just looking at his thread and his graphs, and I said it doesn't support that. What you've so far presented simply says it would be spread out, but I don't see the argument for why it would ever be less in the long run. We would still reach herd immunity one way or another. And we had a few iterations, and I still said, but I'm not seeing any kind of description of what would cause the flattened graph ever to drop off. Because if it doesn't drop off, then it just keeps going flat until you get to the same amount as if it had been a peak.
Now I'm just asking from the point of ignorance. I'm not yet disagreeing with anything. I'm trying to understand. So yeah, I guess he was doing something else today besides talking to me. So he said that he had to run. So we didn't quite finish this, but he did leave me with this provocative thought, which could be true. So let's say there's a good chance that what he's saying might be true. And here's the argument. Still missing some reasons in it, but at least here it is: that if you do the unmitigated peak and you just let it peak, that you will get to herd immunity same as if you had a flattened curve that would just take longer. But if you let the peak happen, you will go past herd immunity. In other words, if you creep up to herd immunity, maybe you can sort of hit it wherever that number is, sixty percent of people having it. But if you don't creep up on it, you're going to overshoot the mark because it'll just be so vicious that just too many people get it before herd immunity even gets to be a thing.
To which I said, okay, I will accept that people say that, but I still don't see why. And then I ask this question which is still hanging out there. I haven't got an answer. I said I can see why that might be a thing with a quick-killing, fast-moving virus. If it's moving fast and it's killing people fast, I could see how that would make sense, that having a spike could get you past herd immunity and then too many people died. But I said with the coronavirus, since you can be asymptomatic for you know a week or two, wouldn't even if you got all the infections in the United States to zero, all it would take is one traveler to come in and my town would be infected before anybody even got a test? So I said in the very specific case of the coronavirus where you can be asymptomatic for a long time, how do you ever not get to the same herd immunity?
But there could be something to this thought that if you get to it quickly and just all at once, you can shoot past it. But I've not yet seen the argument for it.
But there's a punch line to all this. And here's the punch line. So after a few of my ignorant non-scientist questions, Professor Bergstrom left me with this thought. He said, Scott, it's entirely possible that thousands of infectious disease epidemiologists are mistaken or lying, or maybe your intuitions are wrong. So he sets it up as is my ignorant cartoonist intuition, which he says hey could be right, and maybe thousands of infectious disease epidemiologists who agree with him, maybe they're all wrong. Which I thought was a pretty good line under normal circumstances, right? Good line, right?
Here's what I said. I said, well, it wouldn't be the first time this year I was more right about this virus than nearly every health professional in the world. It would be the third time. Because it would be the third time my intuition was better than what did he say, thousands of infectious disease epidemiologists? Yes, yes. My intuition was better in public than thousands of epidemiologists. I told you the masks would help when they said it wouldn't. Fact-check me if I'm wrong. And now they all agree with me. I told you that we should shut the airports on January 24th when the experts said not yet. Who was right? My instinct or thousands of infectious disease epidemiologists? And the answer is my instinct.
So Professor Bergstrom, he seems well informed and smart, and I hope he gets back to me because I think he has something there. I just think that he had some maybe some assumptions that he may have assumed other people assumed, and so I was a little bit in the dark about that. But I appreciate him working with me. I just think it's funny that even at this point people would still doubt my intuition over their thousands of experts. What's wrong with them, I say.
All right. Let's see. So remember I taught you how to spot fake news. And one of the ways that you do it is you look for a story that's a little too perfect because it fits a political narrative. And then secondly, fake news is when you think you can read minds. Okay, so it turns out we have this story about Ahmaud Arbery, a young African-American guy, twenty-five, ex-military I think he was. The story is, I'll just say the story is because I wasn't there, that he was just jogging in a Brunswick, Georgia neighborhood. And that there were two, and this is Twitter's explanation, two white supremacists chased him down and shot him.
Now I have many comments about this. Number one, the story from the people who did the shooting is that he looked like somebody who had been burglarizing some homes that they'd seen on a video from before. And they were just trying to talk to him and he was running away. And they wanted to talk to him, but they had guns. And if you look at the video, there's a video of the actual event. I don't know if people see the video differently, but what I saw was I saw Arbery attacking the guy with a gun. I did not see the guy with the gun shoot first or attack the other guy, the person who died. I only saw the person who died attack the person with the gun and run right at him and not let go while the guy with the gun had the gun in his chest. Like the gun was actually pointed at the guy's torso while the guy was still fighting with the guy.
Now I'm no hand-to-hand expert. I have not battled experts. I have never been in the military. But I don't know, if somebody's pointing a gun at me and they just want to ask me a question, I'm not going to try to take that gun out of their hands because I would be afraid I would get shot.
Now I think I have to insert at this point of the story, to keep me employed and out of jail and stuff, I'll have to insert this. This will be the part that people take out when they take me out of context later. I doubt there was a good reason to shoot this man, meaning a situation was created that probably didn't need to get created. So I'm not forgiving anybody. I would say however it is not evidence that these two people who did the alleged crime were white supremacists. I don't think that's evidence. And if they were white supremacists, which I haven't seen any evidence of that, that doesn't seem to be the motive for this. Because there was no part of it where they would have said, you know, there's a black guy jogging and we saw this black guy in the video and we think this black guy has robbed our neighborhood several times. Do you think they would not have tried to stop the white guy? I mean that's the assumption, right? That if everything was different, now everything was the same except the young man had been a white guy, do we assume that these two people with the guns would not have tried to stop him if they had recognized him on the video? Or I thought they saw him. I don't know that he was actually on the video.
So there's no evidence of a racial motive, and there's plenty of evidence that it wasn't. So of course on Twitter that makes them white supremacists. And it was LeBron James says that African Americans are quote literally hunted every day every time they go outside. Would somebody get with LeBron James and teach him what the word literally means? Because I mean I could be wrong. Fact-check me on this. If we have some African-American viewers on Periscope, would you say it's literally true that you're hunted every day every time you go outside? Are you hunted? Feels extreme. I mean I get the point, and I certainly think that if I were African-American I might be arguing it's the same way they are, you know, because a lot of these arguments are about power and safety and you know it's not really about the specific situation. You know people are trying to generalize a specific situation to get some political gain. If I were African-American and I thought, you know, I think I'd like to improve my situation, I might use it this way. You know if I thought well it's not exactly in evidence but I can spin it this way and maybe something good comes out of this.
The weirdest part of the story that the simulation has served up is that the people who did the shooting suspected this young man of robbery and his last name is Arbery. What are the odds that somebody whose last name is Arbery would be accused of robbery? I don't know. I suppose anything's possible. Okay, but I like to think it's the simulation working on code reuse even though that's probably not what's going on.
So Lindsey Graham was saying that the Steele dossier just completely lays bare... I'm sorry, he said that the Steele dossier was discredited before Rosenstein even said to investigate Carter Page. And with that now documented, so we don't have to wonder about who said what or you know when it was said. And Lindsey Graham says basically it's just plain that now that there was a plot to get rid of the president. I don't even know how to process this. Are you having the same mental problem that I am? Which is apparently, you know, law enforcement and the FBI did actually try to remove a legally elected president with inappropriate means. How is that not just blowing our mind?
And the only thing we're talking about now, part of it is the coronavirus of course, and part of it is it took so long to get here that we got sort of exhausted by the story. So I think we got exhausted by the story before we found out how bad it was. And now we can't generate the outrage that you know you would get if it was the second week of the story. Imagine finding out one month into the story about the Russia collusion. Just fantasize with me. Imagine in one month you had found out everything it took us two years or whatever to find out. We'd be calling for the execution of Comey and some of the others, wouldn't we? I mean actually the execution. Would we not? Because what is the crime for trying to overthrow the country? Or I don't even know. Is that treason? It's treason if you're helping your enemies. But suppose you're just doing it for your own purposes. What exactly is the penalty for that? You know there might be penalties for not doing your job right and the details of you know maybe you violated somebody's rights and stuff. So there could be some legal recourse of the details. But what about the big picture? Is there no big picture where an actual coup was attempted? But it's not treason exactly, is it?
Alexa, define treason. As the offense of acting to overthrow one's government or to harm or kill its sovereign. Oh, okay. Yeah, treason. I was thinking that treason was more helping an enemy. But according to that definition it just has to do with trying to overthrow your own government. So did they try to overthrow their own government? I think so.
If you found out, let me ask this just hypothetically. If you found out that this was treason and that it could be demonstrated, I don't know what the actual penalty in this country is for that. Would you favor the death penalty for the people involved? So that would be Comey, Rosenstein, I don't know, McCabe. So make the assumption that the legal system does its thing and let's say they found that they did in fact try to overthrow the government. Let's say that that was demonstrated in a court of law. Is that a life sentence? Thirty years? Execution? Capital offense? I don't know. Because I can't think of a bigger problem. You know what would be more of a crime than that? Would a terrorist act be more of a crime than that? I don't know. It's a pretty big crime. Feels like the biggest crime I've ever seen. Maybe that's not actually violent. So I just put that out there.
Hey, if there's any companies that are looking for KN95 masks and some other protective equipment and you're lost in the wilderness of all these pirate and scam organizations who are trying to sell you things and not delivering, check my Twitter feed for tweet by Tom Sauer, S-A-U-E-R, who has located a number of supplies that he can deliver. So if you're a corporation and you want to let's say get some KN95 masks for your staff, you could buy them in big bunches from him. I'm only mentioning him because there are so many frauds out there. And since Tom is well known, at least conservative Twitter knows Tom well. A lot of you who are watching this follow him on Twitter. So he's a real person doing a real thing, military, ex-military. So I feel you could trust him to be straight on the transaction, which is the hardest thing to trust right now.
All right. I watched the "Plandemic" video because so many of you asked me to. Now if you don't know what that is, there's a video going around that it looks like an interview that might be a setup or publicity for something that's a full-length movie that I haven't seen. So I watched the interview part, not the movie. And "Plandemic," I guess is the movie. And here's my bottom line on the video. It looks, it's mostly as far as I can tell, this is just my initial opinion, it looks like conspiracy theory to me. All right? But it does look like a number of the facts in it are probably true, almost certainly true. So I'm not saying the facts are all untrue. But there's a way that they're tied together and some assumptions and some mind reading that turns it into a bigger conspiracy.
The net of it is it looks like this: that Fauci is actually some kind of a bad guy and that he is associated with an organization that they've funded the Wuhan lab. And a year or more ago he warned that there would definitely be a coronavirus. And how did he know? And by the way he's got some patents for some vaccines or something and there's patents on things he might profit from them if he can get you know his vaccine or his company with a therapeutic to do it. So there's this whole thing that Fauci, I don't know, somehow he might have been behind the virus. And so that's the conspiracy crazy parts.
The less crazy part about that is that the pharmaceutical industry could be corrupting things and lying and trying to make four trillion dollars. So there's, I did not find any credibility in the person who was interviewed, the principal character there. I would say that she had every, let's see, based on experience I'm going to say that people who look and act like her in my experience have some issues that go beyond the facts of this situation. So I didn't find her credible.
But in the same breath here's something else I didn't find credible at one point: that the FBI tried to overthrow the government of the United States. When I first heard that I just thought, come on people, is there anything you won't believe? Yeah, the FBI tried to overthrow the government, you bunch of ignorant... What? We have documents. We have memos. We've got handwritten notes. It's all true apparently. It's all true. It's all true.
Now the part I doubted early on primarily was the level of coordination. You know, was it like a ringleader and everybody was sort of working for the ringleader? Because that's the way it was sort of portrayed in the beginning. I don't see evidence of that yet. I do see evidence that lots of people have the same motive and thoughts and maybe they acted in a way that any one of them would have acted if they'd been in that situation. But it's a little different than an organized plot. But not by much, because it's not like they didn't all know each other, have the same goals, probably talk to each other. You know, people signed off on the same stuff. So you can't rule out the fact that it was kind of organized. I'm just saying that that's not in evidence based on the documents.
So I didn't believe that because that seemed just way too wild. I mean just way beyond the pale of likelihood. But turns out it's true. Turns out it's true. So are the claims made in the "Plandemic" video and interview, are they true? Doesn't look like it to me. You know if I had to put my own money on it I'd say there are two facts in there but the way you've woven it together, no that's just misleading. That's what I'd bet on. But I also would have bet the FBI was not trying to remove a legally elected president. I would have been wrong about that. So I like to remind you when I'm right, but it's also just as useful to remind you when I'm wrong. And I would say that even though I could make an argument that I cheated a little bit about how organized it was, I would have to say overall that I was just wrong on that one. So count that one on my incorrect predictions.
All right, I think that was everything I wanted to talk about. Just checking my notes. Yes it is. That's it. That's all I had.
Did President Obama know? Well that would certainly make things interesting, wouldn't it? Wouldn't that be interesting? Here's my best guess on that. Now even though all these people were professionals and you would think that they would be smart enough not to write stuff down, right? Wouldn't they be smart enough not to write down the things that are going to get them in jail or whatever? But I have to think that Obama was never that dumb. You know, my impression of Obama, you can love him or hate him for his policies or whatever, I don't care. But I don't know that anybody has questioned his intelligence. To me he always seemed like a really smart guy. So would a really smart guy leave any kind of a trail of this kind of activity? I don't think so. I think that if he was involved it would have been verbal and probably only with one person who he knew he could trust. That's how I'd play it. If I were trying to overthrow the government I would not leave any kind of a record of it.
So I know a lot of you are saying you know probably he did. I would have to go, if I'm going to put a percentage on it, the odds that... Well here's the problem though. We know that the FBI knew that they were doing something sketchy. What we don't know is if that was ever transmitted to Obama. We do know that he was the boss, but we don't know that if when they gave a status report to Obama, did they say you know I know you want this guy out of here so what we're doing is we're going to pretend that Carter Page has something. Maybe we can find something. We'll dig around. I don't know that they ever told him that. It feels like something you don't tell the president because you don't want him to know, right?
So I would guess that Obama will never be in it as a co-conspirator. So let me put odds on it. I would say the odds that he actually knew that something just blatantly illegal was happening... One of the odds he knew something illegal was happening. Then you'd have to define knowing. Did he know because he just sort of knew or did he know because they told him? I think knowing because they told him probably didn't happen. Knowing because he's experienced and he just knew, maybe seventy percent. Seventy percent chance, something like that. Yeah, I'll give you a seventy percent chance that Obama knew. Will you be satisfied with that? I know some of you one hundred percent.
Elon Musk is on Rogan really and it's dropping at 9 a.m. Somebody says well that would be interesting. Somebody says he knew but he looked the other way. Yeah, we would never be able to prove something like that. Lisa Page was quoted as saying... Somebody's saying in the comments here quote "POTUS wants to know everything we are doing." Well him wanting to know everything you're doing and you deciding to tell him that you're doing something illegal are very different things. So I don't doubt that the president wanted to know. I do doubt that they told him everything. Somebody points out that Watergate started without direct knowledge by Nixon. Good example.
So I think in general you would find that your presidents are smart enough to not commit things to writing. Here's something that I have a hypothesis that nobody like Trump could ever have made it to the presidency if he had ever used email. That's my statement. That Trump would never be our president if he had a habit of using email all of his life. There's just no way. Because sooner or later those emails would come out and God knows what would be in them. My understanding is that Trump made a career-long practice to not write stuff down. Now how well did that pay off? Really well. I mean not writing stuff down is a pretty solid strategy if you don't want somebody coming after you.
Somebody's asking about Kim Jong-un's body double. All right. So you know that I've called on the video of Kim Jong-un and on the photo as well. Now that doesn't mean I'm right. All right? So I like to always deal in probability. But I'm going to go with the prediction that Kim is either let's say degraded or dead. Probably not dead. More likely degraded because I think we'd know if he was dead. But we wouldn't necessarily know if he were in a coma.
Here is my evidence in case you didn't hear before. Just prior to the video being shown, the president was acting like he definitely knew what the situation was and he was wishing Kim well. But then right after that Kim is chipper walking around visiting the fertilizer plant. Did that happen? Did that happen? And then the president just immediately said oh it's great to see, you know, happy he's doing well. I don't know. So either the president had bad information or he had correct information and he knows this video is fake but he's trying to help them get away with it because maybe it's just better for everybody for the short term.
Of course videos can be faked. To me it looked like a video that was spliced together from maybe a prior trip or something. And then the still photograph just looked photoshopped to me. Now experts have looked at the photo that I say clearly looks photoshopped and people who know way more than I do about that stuff don't see it. And a lot of people are convinced the video is true because they see it with their own eyes. But we're not in a world where videos can be faked? Wait, we are in a world where videos can be faked.
So here's my further prediction. It's going to be a long time before you see Kim in public again. Now I don't know what his normal pattern is in terms of how long he would normally go before he's seen in public again. But here's my prediction. The length of time that he has not been seen in public will reach a new high coming up. In other words, if you don't see him just pop up again in a month, those are fake videos. Six months from now if you've seen no new videos of Kim, those were fake videos. If in one month he pops up and he's looking fine, then I'm going to revise and I'll say oh wow I guess I was fooled. Those were probably real videos. I mean they could have still been faked but more likely they'd be real. If a month from now he's up and walking around and it's obvious it's a current video, maybe he's shaking hands with somebody we know is over there. You know if it's current and it's in a month then I'm definitely wrong. Six months from now if we still haven't seen him on video, I'm right. So we wait. Now we wait.
All right, that's all I got for now and I will talk to you tonight.
hey everybody come on in it's time for coffee with scott adams the best time of the day hey jack good to see you this morning good to see all of you is that marla thanks for the super art i appreciate it and i know many of you are already prepared some of you such as joel is jogging on the beach right now and cannot join us for the simultaneous sip but many of you are prepared and all you need is a copper margarita glass of tanker jealous or sign a canteen jugger flyscape vessel of any kind filling with your favorite liquid i like coffee and join me now for the unparalleled pleasure the dopamine hit of the day the thing that makes everything better including the damn pandemic it's called the simultaneous sip happens right now go i feel the fake news fading away the veil is lifted from my eyes yeah so let's talk about a few things so as you know the drug around desevere has uh reportedly shown some promise in reducing um virus but there's no report or no evidence that it reduces death rate but we're still pretty darn excited about this drug that doesn't change the death rate but i wonder how much would this drug cost well that estimate i saw i don't know if this is still the case would be a thousand dollars per patient so a thousand dollars for rem deserver you know i wonder if that's enough money that it would just potentially corrupt the system is that is that much a thousand dollars per customer times all the people who would need a vaccination 7.6 billion people in the world but you don't need to vaccinate them all let's say i don't know let's say you do 4 billion let's say you vaccinate 4 billion how much profit well not profit but how much gross revenue is that if you vaccinate four billion people at a thousand dollars a piece well let me do the math for you or actually allow me to have someone do the math for me alexa what is four billion times a thousand four billion is four trillion four trillion dollars 4 trillion dollars has there ever been any product or any company that ever sold one thing and made four trillion dollars in the first year now if you were on the brink of making four trillion dollars oh yes thank you it's not a vaccine but one assumes that many people would take it if it works so it's not a vaccine that's correct um so could we worry that maybe our i don't know science could be influenced by four trillion dollars and somebody says well bill gates is just an angel right i'm blocking you for being an idiot all right i'm just gonna block all the people who think that bill gates is the devil because i i've reached the end of that stupidity if you're so stupid that you think bill gates is in it for the money please don't follow me please i don't know what you know i can't read bill gates's mind but he's not in it for the money i'm gonna block anybody who suggests that you just aren't smart enough to follow any of this if you think that's the case all right sorry uh in the news on fox news it says that uh schiff is panicked he's panicked about the transcripts so the interviews the interviews about the uh so-called russia collusion situation that turned out to be nothing the now the interview transcripts are available i guess they've been around for a while but now they're talking about releasing them and adam schiff has decided uh maybe not maybe not release them because apparently what they show very clearly is that the fbi knew there was no basis for going after carter page because the steele dossier was the basis and they already knew it was debunked so apparently the uh the record is unambiguous then it was a coup attempt now it doesn't say that but what would you call it when people are trying to use non-legal means to remove a sitting president i don't know what else you call it but that's what happened anyway so um as jake novak pointed out on twitter that i always call out when the left mind reads and they they act like they know it's in trump's mind or they know it's in anybody's mind and so it would be fair to call it out when it happens on the other side and let me do that as jake pointed out we don't know if chef is panicked what kind of reporting is that unless schiff says he's panicked or we hooked him up to an ekg or something so we could find out that he's panicked what basis do we report the shift is panicked ridiculous now a reasonable person could say well he would be concerned about this yeah yeah but i mean they all play a pretty high risk kind of a game i don't think there's evidence they panicked so let's not say that here's some here's some for you usually you're going to see more and more articles about how the economy is the worst since the 1930s you know the worst since the great depression oh this is all ridiculous it's all ridiculous here's what didn't happen in the great depression 60 of the public making money because i think that's what just happened i think 40 percent of us and i'm in the category of people who got hit bad by the coronavirus my income will probably drop 90 percent this year but you know i'm not asking for sympathy i'm just telling you a fact probably 40 of us took a hit but there's a good solid 60 percent who made money that didn't happen in the depression all the people who made money still want to spend it and they've got more than they had before when we go back to work so all these comparisons to the depression where basically the entire world went down it's so inappropriate if 60 of the people made money 40 lost that really speaks to a quick recovery now the the real wild card is whether people will go back into stores and restaurants and stuff that's going to be pretty iffy for a while but certainly buying products they got the money and they want to buy them all right um can you believe that in this most basic question the experts still don't agree which is is it safe for kids to go back to school you can you can add this question to the long list of very basic seemingly basic questions that our best experts don't know got it wrong or they disagree what the hell good are our experts i mean this is a pretty basic question is it safe for kids to go back so some people say well kids don't get it they probably don't spread it much it's a low risk go ahead send them back there's some other study that says that that causes spread of course it would who's right i don't know i guess we can't ask the experts because they disagree i tweeted out an article on advertising on the internet and i wondered how many people already knew this so in the comments tell me if you knew this did you know that advertising is not real that it doesn't work how many of you knew that because we live in a world that's you know driven by advertisement all of our media the internet it's all advertising based but did you know it's all i i'm going to modify all so i'm going to say mostly and then i'll go back to some special cases where it's not yeah some of you did here's how i find i found out the way i found out that advertising isn't even a real thing is i advertised you should try it sometime whatever your product is or you can even just try this as an experiment try advertising anything it won't make any difference i've advertised restaurants i've done radio print i've done every kind of advertising that you could do didn't make one dime of difference likewise for startups etc done advertising didn't make any difference now the exception is if there's something that somebody doesn't know exists but they know they have a need for it then you're telling them about it for the first time if you tell somebody about something for the first time and they want it then it can work of course but they're not necessarily going to find it with a search engine that's harder so the kind of advertisement that doesn't work is brand advertisement especially and the the article that i tweeted around this morning gives a perfect example of that it talked about somebody who understood statistics and stuff coming into this world and thinking to himself am i crazy because it looks like none of this was real and yet everybody's pretending it's real and that our giant platforms all depend on selling it to people who think it's real and this guy said well why do you think it's real and they would say well look we ran this ad let's say it was ebay because he used them for an example we ran an ad for ebay and then you look at all the people who clicked on the ad and then you can tell that they bought a bunch of stuff it's obvious we run an ad people click on it then they buy and the economist says how many of those people we're going to buy anyway and they say well you know we don't know but they they click the ad and then they bought so the ads work and so the economist said why don't we try this experiment because the ad that people are clicking on shows up in the search uh directly above the organic search the one nobody paid for if you were searching for ebay by name you typed in ebay the thing that comes up at the top is the advertisement that takes you to ebay the one right below it that didn't cost you a dime is the organic search and also takes you to ebay and now what do people click they click the one on the top so the economist said why don't we try this why don't we try picking some regions of the country and not advertising on those and just see if it compares so they did that what do you think the answer was the advertising made no difference so so ebay was paying 20 whatever a million dollars a year for these ads and and in one day in a very easy test he showed that they had no value and but the his other examples of people who seem to know that advertising doesn't work but they they still do it and you say to yourself okay i'm confused are you telling me that everybody knows it doesn't work but they still do it what exactly is behind that and he explained it in a way that i already understood as the you know as the creator of dilbert and having spent a lot of time in big companies and done a lot of advertising myself i knew the answer to this but it was funny watching him sort of discover it and it goes like this the marketing department in your big company isn't just marketing externally they're also marketing themselves and what the marketing department in your big company wants is the biggest possible budget because that makes them more important it's good for their careers they want to manage the biggest possible thing so when they go into their senior management do they say advertisement doesn't work no they say you need the biggest advertisement budget you could possibly get and then they get that and then the boss is going to ask them did it work and what are they going to do they're going to show them how many people clicked on the advertisement and how much they bought and they're going to say look at all that extra stuff people bought and it's all it's all not real now somebody says i'm seeing a lot of people mention my pillow my pillow is a special case and i'll tell you why number one did you know there was such a thing as an improved pillow so it's the it's the perfect example of something that can be advertised because you didn't know it existed right i thought a pillow was a pillow but there's a better one oh okay now once you know it exists then your next question should be but scott i know it exists now that i know it exists what good is the extra advertising well here's what good it is mike lindell is not like an average advertiser what he does is so darn persuasive that you can't compare it to a written ad on the internet all right listening to him do his real thing and over and over again and showing you examples and hear the people using it and here's my graph and you know and his funny stories and stuff in a way he's selling himself wouldn't you say mike lindell is sort of selling himself and you didn't know you needed him did you so that's the part you weren't looking for were you looking to find mike lindell no you weren't but you did so now you've found him and he's you know he gives his uh made in america stuff uh and people like him so you like mike lindell and you say well i can always use a better pillow and then suddenly that works so in the special cases that's that can tell you why the normal cases don't work all right so if you just put a little print ad on google you know buy my stuff you're not mike lindell they don't know you they don't care about you they didn't fall in love with you they weren't interested in your story about how you came from nothing they don't care if it's built in america none of that's there but if you can go full michael and dell yeah i would think in his case advertising works all right but yeah so the reason is the internal marketing departments are lying to their management because it's good for their careers and then then they give the management these fake numbers to say it works and then what does the ceo ceo do with that suppose the ceo doesn't believe it suppose the ceo says you know they would have bought this much anyway i don't think you did anything would the ceo say that or would the ceo say as all ceos do well it looks under under my management we went up this much it's because of all the good things we did our marketing's firing on all cylinders our products are good no the ceo is going to take it because it makes the ceo look like you know mix the ceo looked like they did their job as well so it's this weird little fiction that companies run the advertising works and again it does work in the special cases but i'm talking about the general cases all right keep that in mind when you're looking at stories such as the number of test kits that will be available you know i told you no everybody's lying about that all the companies are lying because why wouldn't they of course they would lie all right see what else we got there was a great line written by tim graham who wrote on the fox news site and i'm only i'm only going to repeat this because i loved the way he put the sentences together all right so just enjoy this for the writing it's not even any bigger point than that he says a press conference for trump has the feel of diving into a tank of hungry sharks a press conference for hillary clinton or joe biden carries the vibe of getting free pizza and game tokens at chuck e cheese biden's virtual press conference april 2nd only lasted 20 minutes and he jabbered for seven minutes before he took his first question uh blah blah blah so here's what i loved about it the it has the vibe of getting free pizza and game tokens at chuck e cheese you know i've told you before that we're visual people so this is such visual writing you know uh a trump um trump event feels like uh jumping into a tank tank of hungry sharks like you can see it right you can almost see the press conference you can sort of see him jumping into the shark tank it's like so visual and then just the same thing about it's like getting pizza and game tokens at chuck e cheese because you get the pizza you see it you've got the game tokens you see it and then there's the chuck e cheese you see it and then you build the story in your head it's brilliant writing it's really good and then the second part they read uh he uses the word jabbard he jabbered for seven minutes now of course this is you know highly uh uh highly biased political writing but you know it's on fox news you expect that in the opinion pieces on both cnn and fox you know if it's an opinion it's an opinion so you can say jabbard but jabbard is a great word jabbard because you don't have to you don't have to defend jabbard you can just say it happened and people go well he sounds like he was jabron you don't have to give any examples of what a jabbering is all right um so i had an experience yesterday of talking to someone who shall remain nameless but let's say it's someone who knows a lot about the world so uh somebody who's really well educated about how things work right so i'm not talking to a dumb person so keep in your mind smart smart super accomplished person supports biden and we got into a little conversation about that about supporting biden he's he's a he's a big anti-trumper and i was curious about why anybody could do that like what's what's the thinking and and i had predicted on twitter maybe a week or so ago that we would hear more and more tortured explanations of why anybody would support joe when it's obvious his mental health is declining i mean it's really obvious right and here was the first cognitive dissonance example or it's true so you get to decide so my judgment of it is or it looks a little cognitive doesn't it see no it's not devel you're not going to guess who it is it's not somebody i've mentioned before so if it's if you're guessing somebody that you i've talked about just forget it you're not going to guess it doesn't matter anyway um and war or is the following thing objectively true so you decide does this sound like crazy talk which would be a tell for cognitive dissonance or is it a perfectly reasonable statement here it is joe biden is actually smart and capable when you talk to him in person it's just that when he does things in public uh he's sort of lost the step so he can't keep up you know in a public venue he can't really keep up anymore but there's no problem because if you talk to him in person he's perfectly fine brain's all there everything's working trump on the other hand goes the story that he might look like he can function in public you know at least to his supporters i mean it looks like he understands the topics and has a full control of things you know i mean he's always trump but it looks like he does have a full full control of his faculties and he's operating at a high level in public but the story goes that in private it's completely different so one version of what's going on here is that joe biden is this unique character who's smart privately but only recently he's become uh incompetent in public but you shouldn't worry about that too much because he's fine personally he's fine whereas trump and here's a weird coincidence what are the odds that trump would be the opposite and that trump would be perfectly functional in public if you don't count what the fake media says he's saying you know if you believe he suggested drinking bleach well then you think he's not competent but of course that didn't happen that's just what the media said he said so if you ignore what the media said he said and just look at what he says perfectly reasonable but behind closed doors not so much now you know as you know i spent a little bit of time talking to the president in a personal conversation i did not detect anything wrong with his brain all right so i have you know only this much experience and we weren't talking about any kind of you know businessy or policy things so there wasn't anything complicated about it but i feel like i would have detected a problem you know we talked about enough things a broad enough palette of things that i would have picked up i'm sure i would have picked up a little problem if there was one i didn't see anything i didn't see anything i even questioned as like why do you say that or nothing like that perfectly ordinary functional person like most of us so look for further stories about the explanation of why people are okay with biden and at least people are saying directly yeah we think maybe he did do that thing with tara reid we don't like it but boy we really don't like trump so in other words they're throwing their principles to the side to get a better result i got into this discussion with a professor of biology on epidemiology now if you've been following along with my periscopes for a while you you probably already know where this is going to head right so i had a little bit of i won't call it disagreement i was confused at what carl bergstrom was saying on twitter seems like a real uh well-informed smart guy uh and he was doing a real good job of explaining stuff he was explaining specifically that the purpose behind flattening the curve and his point was that the purpose is not just to keep people out of the hospitals which is important but then also by flattening the curve you would in the end infect fewer people and you know of course i of course raised my hand on twitter and say okay but doesn't what you said doesn't support that because i was just looking at his thread and his graphs and i said it doesn't support that what you're what you what you so far presented simply says it would be spread out but i don't see the argument for why it would ever be less in the long run we would still reach herd immunity one way or another and he we had a few iterations and i and i still said but i'm not seeing any kind of description of what would cause the the flattened graph ever to drop off because if it doesn't drop off then it just keeps going flat until you get to the same amount as if it had been a peak right now i'm just asking from the point of ignorance i'm not i'm not yet disagreeing with anything i'm trying to understand so yeah i guess he was doing something else today besides talking to me so he said that he had to had to run so we didn't quite finish this but he did leave me with this provocative thought which which could be true so let's say there's a good chance that what he's saying might be true and here's the argument still missing some some reasons in it but at least here it is that if you do the unmitigated peak and you just let it peak that you will get to herd immunity same as if you know say this these are my worst nights same as if you had a flattened curve that would just take longer but if you let the peak happen you will go past herd immunity in other words if you creep up to herd immunity maybe you can sort of hit it wherever that number is 60 percent of people having it but if you don't creep up on it you're going to overshoot the mark because it'll just be so vicious that just too many people get it before herd immunity even gets to be a thing to which i said okay uh i will accept that people say that but i still don't see why and then i and then i ask this question which is still hanging out there i haven't got an answer i said i can see why that might be a thing with a quick killing fast-moving virus if it's moving fast and it's killing people fast i could see how that would make sense that having a spike could get you past herd immunity and then you know too many people died but i said with the coronavirus since you can be asymptomatic for you know a week or two wouldn't even if you got all the infections in the united states to zero all it would take is one traveler to come in and my town would be infected before anybody even got a test so i said in the in the very specific case of the coronavirus where you can be asymptomatic for a long time how do you you know how do you ever not get to the same herd immunity but um there could be something to this thought that if you get to it quickly and uh you know just all at once you can shoot past it but i've not i've not yet seen the the argument for it but there's a punch line to all this uh and here's the punch line so after a few of my ignorant non-scientist questions professor bergstrom left me with this thought he said scott it's entirely possible that thousands of infectious disease epidemiologists are mistaken or lying or maybe your intuitions are wrong so he sets it up as is my ignorant cartoonist intuition which he says hey could be right and maybe thousands of infectious disease epidemiologists who agree with him maybe they're all wrong which i thought was a pretty good line under normal circumstances right good line right here's what i said i said well it wouldn't be the first time this year i was more right about this virus than nearly every health professional in the world it would be the third time because it would be it would be the third time my intuition was better than uh what'd he say thousands of infectious disease epidemiologists yes yes my intuition was better in public than thousands of epidemiologists i i told you the masks would help when they said it wouldn't fact-check me if i'm wrong and now they all agree with me i told you that we should shut the airports on january 24th when the experts said not yet who was right my instinct or um thousands of infectious disease epidemiologists and the answer is my instinct so professor bergstrom is uh he seems well informed and smart and i hope he gets back to me because i think he has something there i just think that he had some maybe some assumptions that he may have assumed other people assumed and so i was a little bit in the dark about that but i appreciate him working with me i just think it's funny that even at this point people would still doubt my intuition over their thousands of experts what's wrong with them i say all right um uh let's see so remember i taught you how to spot fake news and one of the ways that you do it is you look for a story that's a little too perfect because it fits a political narrative and then secondly fake news is when you uh you think you can read minds okay so it turns out we have this uh story about uh ahmood arbury a young african-american guy 25 uh ex-military i think he was he was uh the story is i'll just say the story is because i wasn't there that he was just jogging in a brunswick georgia neighborhood and that there were two uh and this is this is twitter's explanation two white supremacists uh chased him down and shot him now i have many comments about this number one uh he the story from the people did the shooting is that he looked like somebody who had been uh burglarizing some homes that they'd seen on a video from before and they were just trying to talk to him and he was running away and there was sort they wanted to talk to him but they had guns and if you look at the video there's a video of the actual event i don't know if people see the video differently but what i saw was the i saw uh arbory attacking the guy with a gun i did not see the guy with the gun shoot first or attack uh the other guy the the the the person who died i only saw the person who died attack the person with the gun and run right at him and not let go while the guy with the gun had the gun in his chest like the the gun was actually pointed at the guy's torso while the guy was still fighting with the guy now i'm no hand-to-hand expert i have not you know battled expert i have never been in the military but i don't know if somebody's pointing a gun at me and they just want to ask me a question i'm not going to try to take that gun out of their hands because i would be afraid i would be shocked now i think i have to insert at this point of the story to keep me employed and out of jail and stuff i'll have to insert this this will be the part that people take out when they take me out of context later i doubt there was a good reason to shoot this man meaning a situation was created that probably didn't need to get created so i'm not forgiving anybody i would say however it is not an evidence that these two people who did the the uh alleged crime were white supremacists i don't think that's an evidence and if they were white supremacists which i haven't seen any evidence of that um that doesn't seem to be the motive for this because there was no part of it where they would have said you know there's a white guy jogging and we saw this white guy in the video and we think this white guy has robbed our neighborhood several times do you think they would not have tried to stop the white guy i mean that's the assumption right that if everything was different now everything was the same except the young man had been a a white guy do we assume that these two people with the guns would not have tried to stop him if they had recognized him on the video or i thought they saw him i don't know that he was actually on the video so there's no evidence of a racial motive and there's plenty of evidence that it wasn't so of course on twitter that's that makes them white supremacist and uh it was it lebron james says that african americans are quote literally hunted every day every time they go outside would somebody get with lebron james and teach him what the word literally means because i mean i could be wrong fact-check me on this if we have some african-american viewers on periscope would you say it's literally true that you're hunted every day every time you go outside are you hunted feels extreme i mean i get the point and and i certainly think that if i were african-american i might be arguing it's the same way they are you know because a lot of these arguments are about power and safety and you know it's not really about the specific situation you know people are trying to generalize a specific situation to get some political gain if i were african-american and i thought you know you know i think i'd like to improve my situation i might use it this way you know if i thought well it's not exactly in evidence but i can spin it this way and maybe something good comes out of this the weirdest part of the story that the simulation has served up is that the people who did the shooting suspected this young man of robbery and his last name is arbory one of the odds that somebody whose last name is arbory would be accused of robbery i don't know i suppose anything's possible okay but i like to think it's the simulation working on code reuse even though that's probably not what's going on um so the st that lindsey graham was saying that the the steele dossier just completely completely lays bare i'm sorry he said that the steele dossier was decred discredited before rose rosenstein um even said to investigate carter page and with that now documented so we don't have to wonder about who said what or you know when when it was said and lindsey graham says basically it's just plain that now that there was a uh a plot to get rid of the president i don't even know how to process this are you having the same are you having the same uh mental problem that i am which is apparently you know law enforcement and you know the fbi did actually try to remove a legally elected president under with uh you know uh inappropriate means how is that not just blowing our mind and the only thing we're talking about now part of it is the coronavirus of course and part of it is it took so long to get here that we got sort of exhausted by the story so so i think we got exhausted by the story before we found out how bad it was and now we can't generate the outrage that you know you would you would get if it was the second week of the story imagine finding out one month into the story about the russia collusion just fantasize with me imagine in one month you had found out everything it took us two years or whatever to find out we'd be calling for the execution of comey and some of the others wouldn't we i mean actually the execution would we not because what is what is the uh what is the crime for trying to overthrow the country or i i don't even know is is that is that treason it's treason if you're helping your enemies but suppose you're just doing it for your own purposes what exactly is the penalty for that you know there might be penalties for not doing your job right and the details of you know maybe you violated somebody's rights and stuff so there could be some legal recourse of the details but what about the big picture is there no big picture where an actual coup was attempted what but but it's not treason exactly is it alexa define treason as the offensive acting to overthrow his government or to harm or kill itself for more oh okay yeah treason pets i i was thinking that treason was more helping an enemy but according to that definition it just has to do with trying to overthrow your own government so did they try to overthrow their own government i think so if you found out let me ask this um just hypothetically if you found out that this was treason and that it could be demonstrated i don't know what the actual penalty in this country is for that would you favor the death penalty for the people involved so that would be comey rosenstein i don't know mccabe you so so make the assumption that the legal system does its thing and let's say they found that they did in fact try to overthrow the government let's say that that was demonstrated in a court of law is that a life sentence 30 years execution capital offense i don't know because i can't think of a bigger problem you know what what would be more of a crime than that um would a terrorist act be more of a crime than that i don't know it's a pretty big crime feels like the biggest crime i've ever seen maybe that's not actually violent so i just put that out there hey if there's any companies that are looking for kn 95 basks and some other protective equipment and you're you're you're lost in the the wilderness of all these pirate and scam organizations who are trying to sell you things and not delivering um check my twitter feed for tweet by tom sauer s a u r um who has uh located a number of supplies that he can deliver so if you're a corporation and you want to let's say get some kn 95 best for your staff you could buy them in big big bunches from him i'm only mentioning him because there are so many frauds out there and since tom is well known on at least at least a conservative twitter knows tom well a lot of you who are watching this follow him on on twitter so he's a real person doing a real thing military ex-military so i feel you could trust him to be straight on the transaction which is the hardest thing to trust right now all right um i watched the pandemic video because so many of you asked me to now if you don't know what that is there's a video going around that it looks like a an interview that might be a setup or publicity for something that's a full-length movie that i haven't seen so i watched the interview part not the movie and plandemic i guess is the movie and here's my bottom line on the video it looks it's mostly as far as i can tell this is just my initial opinion it looks like conspiracy theory to me all right but it does look like a number of the facts in it are probably true almost almost certainly true so i'm not saying the facts are all untrue but there's a way that they're tied together and some assumptions and some mind reading that turns it into a bigger conspiracy the the net of it is it looks like this that fauci is actually some kind of a bad guy and that um he is associated with an organization that um they've funded the wuhan lab and and uh a year or more ago he warned that there would definitely be a coronavirus and how did he know and by the way he's got some patents for some vaccines or something and there's patents on things he might profit from them if he can get you know his vaccine or his company with a therapeutic to do it so there's this whole thing that fauci uh i don't know somehow he might have been behind the the virus and so that's the conspiracy crazy parts the less crazy part about that is that the pharmaceutical industry could be corrupting things and lying and trying to make four trillion dollars so there's uh i did not find any credibility in the person who was interviewed the principal character there i would say that she had every let's see based on experience i'm going to say that people who look and act like her in my experience have some issues that go beyond the facts of this situation so i didn't find her credible but in the same breath here's something else i didn't find credible at one point that the fbi tried to overthrow the government of the united states when i first heard that i just thought come on people is there anything you won't believe yeah the fbi tried to overthrow the government you bunch of ignorant what we have documents we have memos we've got handwritten notes it's all true apparently it's all true it's all true now the part i doubted early on primarily was the the level of coordination you know was there was it like a ring leader and everybody was sort of working for the ringleader because that's the way it was sort of portrayed in the beginning i don't see evidence of that yet i do i do so evidence that lots of people have the same motive and thoughts and maybe they acted in a way that any one of them would have acted if they'd been in that situation but it's a little different than an organized plot but not they're not much because it's not like they didn't all know each other have the same goals probably talk to each other you know you know people signed off on the same stuff so you can't rule out the fact that it was kind of organized i'm just saying that that's not an evidence based on the documents so i didn't believe that because that seemed just way too wild i mean just way beyond the you know the pale of likelihood but turns out it's true turns out it's true so are the claims made in the planned uh pandemic video and interview are they true doesn't look like it to me you know if i had to put my own money on it i'd say ah there are two facts in there but the way you've woven it together no that's just misleading that's what i'd bet on but i also would have bet the fbi was not trying to remove a legally legally elected president i would have been wrong about that so i like to remind you when i'm right but it's also just as useful to remind you when i'm wrong and i would say that even though i you know i could make an argument that i cheated a little bit about how organized it was i would have to say overall that i was just wrong on that one so count that one on my incorrect predictions all right i think that was everything i wanted to talk about just checking my notes yes it is that's it that's all i had did president obama know well that would certainly make things interesting wouldn't it wouldn't that be interesting um here's my best guess on that now even though all these people were professionals and you you would think that they would be smart enough not to write stuff down right wouldn't they be smart enough not to write down the things that are going to get them you know in jail or whatever but i have to think that obama was never that dumb you know my my impression of obama you can you know love him or hate him for his policies or whatever i don't care but i don't know that anybody has questioned his intelligence to me always seemed like a really smart guy so would a really smart guy leave any kind of a trail of this kind of activity i don't think so i think that if he was involved it would have been verbal and probably only with you know one person who we knew he could trust that's how i'd play it if i were trying to overthrow the government i would not leave a any kind of a record of it so i know a lot of you are saying you know probably he did i would have to go if i'm going to put a let's say a percentage on it the odds that well here's here's the problem though we know that the fbi knew that they were doing something sketchy what we don't know is if that was ever transmitted to obama we do know you know that he was the boss but we don't know that if when they gave a status report to obama did they say you know i know you want this guy out of here so what we're doing is we're gonna we're gonna pretend that carter page has something maybe we can find something we'll dig around i don't know that they ever told them that it feels like something you don't tell the president because you don't want him to know right so i would guess that obama will never be it as a co-conspiracy so let me put a odds on it i would say the odds that he actually knew that something just blatantly illegal was happening one of the odds he knew something illegal was happening ah then you'd have to define knowing did he know because he just sort of knew or did he know because they told them i think knowing because they told him probably didn't happen knowing because he you know he's experienced and he just knew maybe 70 70 chance something like that yeah i'll give you a 70 chance that obama knew will you be satisfied with that i know some of you 100 uh elon musk is on rogan really and it's dropping at 9am somebody says well that would be interesting somebody says he knew but he looked the other way yeah we would never be able to prove something like that uh lisa page was quoted as saying somebody's saying in the comments here quote potus wants to know everything we are doing well him wanting to know everything you're doing and you deciding to tell him that you're doing something illegal are very different things so i don't doubt that the president wanted to know i do doubt that they told him everything somebody points out that watergate started without direct knowledge by nixon good example so i think in general you would find that your presidents are smart enough to not commit things to writing here's here's something that i have a hypothesis that nobody like trump could ever have uh have ever made it to the presidency if he had ever used email that's my statement that trump would never be our president if he had a habit of using email all of his life there's just no way because sooner or later those emails would come out and god knows what would be in them my understanding is that trump made a a career-long practice to not write stuff down now how well did that pay off really well i mean not writing stuff down is a pretty solid solid strategy if you don't want somebody coming after you uh somebody's asking about kim jong-un's body double all right so you know that i've called i've called on the the video of kim jong-un and on the photo as well now that doesn't mean i'm right all right so i like to always deal in probability um my but i'm going to go with the prediction that kim is either let's say degraded or dead probably not dead more likely degraded because i think we'd know if he was dead uh but we wouldn't necessarily know if you were in a coma here is my evidence in case you didn't hear before just prior to the video being shown the president was acting like he definitely knew what the situation was and he was wishing kim well but then right after that kim is chipper walking around visiting the fertilizer plant did that happen did that happen and then the president president just immediately said oh it's great to see you know happy is doing well i don't know so either the president had bad information or he had correct information and he knows this video is fake but he's trying to help them get away with it because maybe it's just better for everybody for the short term of course videos can be faked to me it looked like a video that was spliced together for maybe a prior trip or something and then the still photograph just looked photoshopped to me now experts have looked at the photo that i say clearly looks photoshopped and people who know way more than i do about that stuff don't see it and a lot of people are convinced the video is true because they see it with your own eyes but we're not in a world where videos can be true so here's my further prediction it's going to be a long time before you see kim in public again now i don't know what his normal pattern is in terms of how long he would normally go before he's seen in public again but here's my prediction the length of time that he has not seen in public will reach a new high coming up in other words if you don't see him just pop up again in a month those are fake videos six months from now if you've seen no new videos of kim those were fake videos if in one month he pops up and he's looking fine then i'm gonna i'll revise and i'll say oh wow i guess i was fooled those were probably real videos i mean they could have still been faked but more likely they'd be real if a month from now he's up and walking around and it's obvious it's a current video maybe he's shaking hands with somebody we know is over there you know if it's current and it's in a month then i'm definitely wrong six months from now if we still haven't seen him on video i'm right so we wait now we wait all right that's all i got for now and i will talk to you tonight
hey everybody
come on in it's time for coffee with
scott adams the best time of the day
hey jack good to see you this morning
good to see all of you is that
marla thanks for the super art i
appreciate it
and i know many of you are already
prepared some of you
such as joel is jogging on the beach
right now and cannot join us for the
simultaneous
sip but many of you are prepared and all
you need is
a copper margarita glass of tanker
jealous or sign a canteen jugger
flyscape vessel of any kind
filling with your favorite liquid i like
coffee
and join me now for the unparalleled
pleasure the dopamine hit of the day the
thing that makes
everything better including the damn
pandemic it's called the simultaneous
sip
happens right now go
i feel the fake news fading away
the veil is lifted from my eyes yeah
so let's talk about a few things so as
you know
the drug around desevere has uh
reportedly shown some promise in
reducing
um virus but there's no report
or no evidence that it reduces death
rate
but we're still pretty darn excited
about this drug that
doesn't change the death rate but i
wonder how much would this drug cost
well that estimate i saw i don't know if
this is still the case
would be a thousand dollars per patient
so a thousand dollars for rem deserver
you know i wonder if that's enough money
that it would just potentially corrupt
the system is that is that much a
thousand dollars per customer
times all the people who would need a
vaccination
7.6 billion people in the world but you
don't need to vaccinate them all
let's say i don't know let's say you do
4 billion let's say you vaccinate 4
billion
how much profit well not profit but how
much
gross revenue is that if you vaccinate
four billion people at a thousand
dollars a piece
well let me do the math for you or
actually
allow me to have someone do the math for
me
alexa what is four billion times a
thousand
four billion is four trillion
four trillion
dollars 4
trillion dollars
has there ever been any product or any
company
that ever sold one thing and made
four trillion dollars
in the first year now if you were
on the brink of making four
trillion dollars oh yes
thank you it's not a vaccine but one
assumes that many people would take it
if it works
so it's not a vaccine that's correct um
so could we worry that maybe our
i don't know science could be influenced
by
four trillion dollars
and somebody says well bill gates is
just an angel right i'm blocking you for
being an idiot
all right i'm just gonna block all the
people who think that bill gates is the
devil
because i i've reached the end of that
stupidity
if you're so stupid that you
think bill gates is in it for the money
please don't follow me please
i don't know what you know i can't read
bill gates's mind
but he's not in it for the money i'm
gonna block anybody who suggests that
you just
aren't smart enough to follow any of
this if you think that's the case
all right sorry
uh in the news on fox news it says that
uh
schiff is panicked he's panicked about
the transcripts so the interviews
the interviews about the uh so-called
russia
collusion situation that turned out to
be nothing the
now the interview transcripts are
available i guess they've been around
for a while but now they're talking
about releasing them
and adam schiff has decided uh maybe not
maybe not release them
because apparently what they show very
clearly is that the
fbi knew there was no basis for going
after carter page
because the steele dossier was the basis
and they already knew it was debunked so
apparently the uh the record
is unambiguous then it was a coup
attempt
now it doesn't say that but what would
you call it
when people are trying to use non-legal
means to remove a sitting president
i don't know what else you call it but
that's what happened
anyway so um
as jake novak pointed out on twitter
that i always call out when the left
mind reads
and they they act like they know it's in
trump's mind or they know it's in
anybody's mind
and so it would be fair to call it out
when it happens on the other side
and let me do that as jake pointed out
we don't know if chef is panicked what
kind of reporting is that
unless schiff says he's panicked
or we hooked him up to an ekg or
something so we could
find out that he's panicked what basis
do we report
the shift is panicked ridiculous
now a reasonable person could say well
he would be concerned about this yeah
yeah but i mean they all play a pretty
high risk
kind of a game i don't think there's
evidence they panicked
so let's not say that
here's some here's some for you
usually you're going to see more and
more articles about how the economy is
the worst
since the 1930s you know the worst since
the great depression
oh this is all ridiculous it's all
ridiculous
here's what didn't happen in the great
depression
60 of the public making money
because i think that's what just
happened i think 40 percent of us
and i'm in the category of people who
got hit bad by the
coronavirus my income will probably drop
90 percent this year
but you know i'm not asking for sympathy
i'm just telling you a fact
probably 40 of us took a hit but there's
a good
solid 60 percent who made money
that didn't happen in the depression all
the people who made money
still want to spend it and they've got
more than they had before when we go
back to work
so all these comparisons to the
depression where basically the entire
world went down
it's so inappropriate if 60 of the
people made money
40 lost that really speaks to a quick
recovery
now the the real wild card is whether
people will go back into stores
and restaurants and stuff that's going
to be pretty iffy for a while
but certainly buying products they got
the money and they want to buy them
all right um
can you believe that in this most basic
question the experts still don't agree
which is is it safe for kids to go back
to school
you can you can add this question to the
long list of very basic
seemingly basic questions that our best
experts
don't know got it wrong or they disagree
what the hell good are our experts i
mean this is a pretty basic question
is it safe for kids to go back so some
people say well kids don't get it they
probably don't spread it much
it's a low risk go ahead send them back
there's
some other study that says that that
causes spread of course
it would who's right i don't know
i guess we can't ask the experts because
they disagree
i tweeted out an article on
advertising on the internet and i
wondered how many people
already knew this so in the comments
tell me if you knew this
did you know that advertising is not
real
that it doesn't work how many of you
knew that
because we live in a world that's you
know driven by advertisement all of our
media
the internet it's all advertising based
but did you know it's all
i i'm going to modify all so i'm going
to say mostly
and then i'll go back to some special
cases where it's not
yeah some of you did here's how i find i
found out
the way i found out that advertising
isn't even a real thing
is i advertised you should try it
sometime
whatever your product is or you can even
just try this as an experiment
try advertising anything it won't make
any difference
i've advertised restaurants i've done
radio print i've done every kind of
advertising that you could do
didn't make one dime of difference
likewise for startups etc done
advertising
didn't make any difference
now the exception is if there's
something that somebody doesn't know
exists
but they know they have a need for it
then you're telling them about it for
the first time
if you tell somebody about something for
the first time and they want it then it
can work of course
but they're not necessarily going to
find it with a search engine
that's harder so the kind of
advertisement that doesn't work
is brand advertisement especially and
the
the article that i tweeted around this
morning gives a perfect example of that
it talked about somebody who understood
statistics and stuff coming into this
world
and thinking to himself am i crazy
because it looks like
none of this was real and yet
everybody's pretending it's real and
that our giant
platforms all depend on selling it to
people who think it's real
and this guy said well why do you think
it's real
and they would say well look we ran this
ad
let's say it was ebay because he used
them for an example we ran an ad for
ebay
and then you look at all the people who
clicked on the ad
and then you can tell that they bought a
bunch of stuff it's obvious
we run an ad people click on it then
they buy
and the economist says how many of those
people we're going to buy anyway
and they say well you know we don't know
but they they click the ad and then they
bought
so the ads work and so the economist
said
why don't we try this experiment because
the ad that people are clicking on
shows up in the search uh directly above
the organic search the one nobody paid
for
if you were searching for ebay by name
you typed in ebay the thing that comes
up at the top
is the advertisement that takes you to
ebay
the one right below it that didn't cost
you a dime
is the organic search and also takes you
to ebay
and now what do people click they click
the one on the top
so the economist said why don't we try
this
why don't we try picking some regions of
the country
and not advertising on those and just
see if it compares
so they did that what do you think the
answer was the advertising made no
difference
so so ebay was paying 20 whatever a
million dollars a year for these ads
and and in one day
in a very easy test he showed that they
had no value and
but the his other examples of people who
seem to know
that advertising doesn't work but they
they still do it
and you say to yourself okay i'm
confused
are you telling me that everybody knows
it doesn't work
but they still do it what exactly
is behind that and he explained it in a
way that i already understood
as the you know as the creator of
dilbert
and having spent a lot of time in big
companies and done a lot of advertising
myself
i knew the answer to this but it was
funny watching him
sort of discover it and it goes like
this the marketing department in your
big company
isn't just marketing externally
they're also marketing themselves and
what the marketing department in your
big company wants
is the biggest possible budget because
that makes them more important it's good
for their careers
they want to manage the biggest possible
thing so
when they go into their senior
management do they say
advertisement doesn't work no
they say you need the biggest
advertisement budget you could possibly
get
and then they get that and then the boss
is going to ask them did it work
and what are they going to do they're
going to show them how many people
clicked on the advertisement
and how much they bought and they're
going to say look at all that extra
stuff
people bought and it's all it's all not
real
now somebody says i'm seeing a lot of
people mention
my pillow my pillow is a special case
and i'll tell you why
number one did you know there was such a
thing as an improved pillow
so it's the it's the perfect example of
something that can be advertised because
you didn't know it existed
right i thought a pillow was a pillow
but there's a better one oh okay
now once you know it exists
then your next question should be but
scott i know it exists
now that i know it exists what good is
the extra advertising well
here's what good it is mike lindell
is not like an average advertiser what
he does
is so darn persuasive that you can't
compare it to a written ad
on the internet all right listening to
him do his real thing
and over and over again and showing you
examples and hear the people using it
and here's my graph and
you know and his funny stories and stuff
in a way he's selling himself wouldn't
you say
mike lindell is sort of selling himself
and you didn't know you needed him did
you so that's the part you weren't
looking for
were you looking to find mike lindell no
you weren't but you did
so now you've found him and he's you
know
he gives his uh made in america stuff
uh and people like him
so you like mike lindell and you say
well i can always use a better pillow
and then suddenly that works so in the
special cases
that's that can tell you why the normal
cases don't work
all right so if you just put a little
print ad on google
you know buy my stuff you're not mike
lindell
they don't know you they don't care
about you they didn't fall in love with
you
they weren't interested in your story
about how you came from nothing they
don't care if it's built in america none
of that's there
but if you can go full michael and dell
yeah i would think in his case
advertising works
all right but
yeah so the reason is the internal
marketing departments are lying to their
management
because it's good for their careers and
then then they give the management these
fake numbers to say it works
and then what does the ceo ceo do with
that
suppose the ceo doesn't believe it
suppose the ceo says you know
they would have bought this much anyway
i don't think you did anything
would the ceo say that or would the ceo
say
as all ceos do well it looks under
under my management we went up this much
it's because of all the good things we
did
our marketing's firing on all cylinders
our products are good
no the ceo is going to take it because
it makes the ceo look like
you know mix the ceo looked like they
did their job as well
so it's this weird little fiction that
companies run
the advertising works and again it does
work in the special cases
but i'm talking about the general cases
all right
keep that in mind when you're looking at
stories
such as the number of test kits that
will be available
you know i told you no everybody's lying
about that
all the companies are lying because why
wouldn't they of course they would lie
all right see what else we got
there was a great line written by tim
graham who wrote on the fox news site
and i'm only i'm only going to repeat
this
because i loved the way he put the
sentences together
all right so just enjoy this for the
writing it's not even any bigger point
than that
he says a press conference for trump has
the feel of diving into a tank of hungry
sharks
a press conference for hillary clinton
or joe biden
carries the vibe of getting free pizza
and game tokens at chuck e cheese
biden's virtual press conference april
2nd only lasted 20 minutes
and he jabbered for seven minutes before
he took his first question
uh blah blah blah so here's what i loved
about it the
it has the vibe of getting free pizza
and game tokens at chuck e cheese
you know i've told you before that we're
visual people
so this is such visual writing you know
uh
a trump um trump event feels like uh
jumping into a tank tank of hungry
sharks
like you can see it right you can almost
see the press conference
you can sort of see him jumping into the
shark tank it's like so visual
and then just the same thing about it's
like getting
pizza and game tokens at chuck e cheese
because you get the pizza you see it
you've got the game tokens you see it
and then there's the chuck e cheese you
see it
and then you build the story in your
head it's brilliant writing
it's really good and then the second
part they read uh he uses the word
jabbard
he jabbered for seven minutes now of
course this is
you know highly uh uh highly biased
political writing but you know it's on
fox news you expect that in the opinion
pieces on both cnn and fox
you know if it's an opinion it's an
opinion so you can say jabbard
but jabbard is a great word jabbard
because you don't have to you don't have
to defend
jabbard you can just say it happened and
people go well he
sounds like he was jabron you don't have
to give any examples of what a jabbering
is
all right um
so i had an experience yesterday
of talking to someone who shall remain
nameless but let's say it's
someone who knows a lot about the world
so uh somebody who's
really well educated about
how things work right so i'm not talking
to a dumb person
so keep in your mind smart smart
super accomplished person
supports biden and we got into a little
conversation about that
about supporting biden he's he's a he's
a big anti-trumper
and i was curious about why
anybody could do that like what's what's
the thinking
and and i had predicted on twitter maybe
a week or so ago
that we would hear more and more
tortured explanations
of why anybody would support joe when
it's obvious
his mental health is declining i mean
it's really obvious right
and here was the first cognitive
dissonance
example or it's true so you get to
decide
so my judgment of it is or it looks a
little cognitive doesn't it see
no it's not devel you're not going to
guess who it is it's not somebody i've
mentioned before
so if it's if you're guessing somebody
that you i've talked about
just forget it you're not going to guess
it doesn't matter anyway
um and
war or is the following thing
objectively true
so you decide does this sound like crazy
talk
which would be a tell for cognitive
dissonance or is it a perfectly
reasonable statement here it is
joe biden is actually smart and capable
when you talk to him in person it's just
that when he does things in public
uh he's sort of lost the step so he
can't keep up
you know in a public venue he can't
really keep up anymore
but there's no problem because if you
talk to him in person he's perfectly
fine
brain's all there everything's working
trump on the other hand goes the story
that he might look like he can function
in public you know at least to his
supporters i mean it looks like he
understands the topics and
has a full control of things you know i
mean he's always trump
but it looks like he does have a full
full control of his faculties and he's
operating at a high level
in public but the story goes
that in private it's completely
different
so one version of what's going on here
is that joe biden
is this unique character who's smart
privately
but only recently he's become uh
incompetent in public but you shouldn't
worry about that too much
because he's fine personally he's fine
whereas trump and here's a weird
coincidence what are the odds that trump
would be the opposite
and that trump would be perfectly
functional in public
if you don't count what the fake media
says he's saying
you know if you believe he suggested
drinking bleach
well then you think he's not competent
but of course that didn't happen
that's just what the media said he said
so if you ignore what the media said he
said and just look at what he says
perfectly reasonable but behind closed
doors
not so much now you know as you know i
spent
a little bit of time talking to the
president in a personal conversation
i did not detect anything wrong with his
brain
all right so i have you know only this
much experience
and we weren't talking about any kind of
you know businessy or policy things so
there wasn't anything complicated about
it
but i feel like i would have detected a
problem
you know we talked about enough things a
broad enough palette of things
that i would have picked up i'm sure i
would have picked up a little problem
if there was one i didn't see anything i
didn't see anything i even
questioned as like why do you say that
or nothing like that
perfectly ordinary functional person
like most of us
so look for further stories
about the explanation of why people are
okay with biden
and at least people are saying directly
yeah
we think maybe he did do that thing with
tara reid
we don't like it but boy we really don't
like trump so in other words they're
throwing their principles to the side to
get a better result i got into this
discussion
with a professor of biology
on epidemiology
now if you've been following along
with my periscopes for a while you you
probably already know where this is
going to head right
so i had a little bit of i won't call it
disagreement i was
confused at what carl bergstrom was
saying on twitter
seems like a real uh well-informed smart
guy
uh and he was doing a real good job of
explaining stuff
he was explaining specifically that the
purpose behind
flattening the curve and his point was
that the purpose is not
just to keep people out of the hospitals
which is important but then also by
flattening the curve
you would in the end infect fewer people
and you know of course i of course
raised my hand on twitter and say
okay but doesn't what you said doesn't
support that
because i was just looking at his thread
and his graphs and i said it doesn't
support that
what you're what you what you so far
presented
simply says it would be spread out but i
don't see the argument
for why it would ever be less in the
long run we would still reach herd
immunity
one way or another and
he we had a few iterations and i
and i still said but i'm not seeing any
kind of description
of what would cause the the flattened
graph
ever to drop off because if it doesn't
drop off
then it just keeps going flat until you
get to the same amount
as if it had been a peak right
now i'm just asking from the point of
ignorance
i'm not i'm not yet disagreeing with
anything
i'm trying to understand
so yeah i guess he was doing something
else today besides
talking to me so he said that he had to
had to run so we didn't quite finish
this but he did leave me with this
provocative thought which which could be
true
so let's say there's a good chance that
what he's saying
might be true and here's the argument
still missing some
some reasons in it but at least here it
is that
if you do the unmitigated peak
and you just let it peak that you will
get to herd immunity
same as if you know say this these are
my worst nights
same as if you had a flattened curve
that would just take longer
but if you let the peak happen you will
go
past herd immunity in other words if you
creep up to herd immunity
maybe you can sort of hit it wherever
that number is 60 percent of people
having it
but if you don't creep up on it you're
going to overshoot the mark
because it'll just be so vicious that
just too many people get it before herd
immunity even gets to be a thing
to which i said okay
uh i will accept that people say that
but i still don't see why
and then i and then i ask this question
which is still hanging out there i
haven't got an answer
i said i can see why that might be a
thing with a quick
killing fast-moving virus
if it's moving fast and it's killing
people fast
i could see how that would make sense
that having a
spike could get you past herd immunity
and then you know
too many people died but i said with the
coronavirus
since you can be asymptomatic for you
know a week or two
wouldn't even if you got all the
infections in the united states to zero
all it would take is one traveler to
come in and my town would be infected
before anybody even got a test
so i said in the in the very specific
case
of the coronavirus where you can be
asymptomatic for a long time
how do you you know how do you ever not
get to the same
herd immunity but um
there could be something to this thought
that if you get to it quickly and
uh you know just all at once you can
shoot past it
but i've not i've not yet seen the the
argument for it but there's a punch line
to all this
uh and here's the punch line so
after a few of my ignorant non-scientist
questions
professor bergstrom left me with this
thought
he said scott it's entirely possible
that
thousands of infectious disease
epidemiologists are mistaken
or lying or maybe your intuitions are
wrong
so he sets it up as is my ignorant
cartoonist intuition
which he says hey could be right and
maybe
thousands of infectious disease
epidemiologists who
agree with him maybe they're all wrong
which i thought was a pretty good line
under normal circumstances
right good line right
here's what i said i said well it
wouldn't be the first time this year i
was more right about this
virus than nearly every health
professional in the world
it would be the third time because it
would be
it would be the third time my intuition
was better than
uh what'd he say thousands of infectious
disease
epidemiologists yes yes my intuition was
better
in public than thousands
of epidemiologists i i told you the
masks would help when they said it
wouldn't fact-check me if i'm wrong and
now they all agree with me
i told you that we should shut the
airports on january
24th when the experts said
not yet who was right my
instinct or um thousands of infectious
disease
epidemiologists and the answer is
my instinct so professor bergstrom
is uh he seems well informed and smart
and i hope he
gets back to me because i think he has
something there
i just think that he had some maybe some
assumptions
that he may have assumed other people
assumed and so i was a little bit in the
dark about that
but i appreciate him working with me i
just think it's
funny that even at this point
people would still doubt my intuition
over their thousands of experts
what's wrong with them i say all right
um uh let's see
so remember i taught you how to spot
fake news
and one of the ways that you do it is
you look for a story that's a little too
perfect
because it fits a political narrative
and then secondly fake news is when you
uh you think you can read minds okay
so it turns out we have this uh
story about uh ahmood arbury
a young african-american guy 25 uh
ex-military i think he was he was uh
the story is i'll just say the story is
because i wasn't there
that he was just jogging in a brunswick
georgia neighborhood and that there were
two
uh and this is this is twitter's
explanation
two white supremacists uh chased him
down and shot him
now i have many comments about this
number one
uh he the story from the people did the
shooting is that he looked like
somebody who had been uh burglarizing
some homes
that they'd seen on a video from before
and they were just trying to talk to him
and he was running away and there was
sort they wanted to talk to him
but they had guns and if you look at the
video there's a video of the actual
event i don't know if people see the
video differently
but what i saw was the i saw uh
arbory attacking the guy with a gun i
did not see the guy with the gun
shoot first or attack uh the other guy
the the the the person who died i only
saw the person who died attack the
person with the gun
and run right at him and not let go
while the guy with the gun had the gun
in his chest like the
the gun was actually pointed at the
guy's torso
while the guy was still fighting with
the guy now
i'm no hand-to-hand expert i have not
you know battled expert i have never
been in the military but i don't know if
somebody's pointing a gun at me and they
just want to ask me a question
i'm not going to try to take that gun
out of their hands because i would be
afraid i would be
shocked now i think i have to
insert at this point of the story to
keep me
employed and out of jail and stuff i'll
have to insert this
this will be the part that people take
out when they take me out of context
later
i doubt there was a good reason to shoot
this man
meaning a situation was created
that probably didn't need to get created
so i'm not forgiving anybody
i would say however it is not an
evidence that these two
people who did the the uh alleged crime
were white supremacists i don't think
that's an evidence
and if they were white supremacists
which i haven't seen
any evidence of that um
that doesn't seem to be the motive for
this
because there was no part of it where
they would have said you know
there's a white guy jogging and we saw
this white guy in the video and we think
this white guy has
robbed our neighborhood several times do
you think they would not have tried to
stop the white guy
i mean that's the assumption right that
if everything was different
now everything was the same except the
young man had been
a a white guy do we assume that these
two people with the guns would not have
tried to stop him if they had recognized
him on the video
or i thought they saw him i don't know
that he was actually on the video
so there's no evidence of a racial
motive
and there's plenty of evidence that it
wasn't so of course on twitter that's
that makes them white supremacist and uh
it was it lebron james says that
african americans are quote literally
hunted every day
every time they go outside
would somebody get with lebron james and
teach him what the word
literally means because i mean i could
be wrong
fact-check me on this if we have
some african-american viewers on
periscope
would you say it's literally true that
you're hunted every day every time you
go outside
are you hunted feels extreme
i mean i get the point and and i
certainly think that
if i were african-american i might be
arguing it's the same way they are
you know because a lot of these
arguments are about power
and safety and you know it's not really
about the specific situation
you know people are trying to generalize
a specific situation to get some
political gain
if i were african-american and i thought
you know
you know i think i'd like to improve my
situation
i might use it this way you know if i
thought well it's not exactly
in evidence but i can spin it this way
and maybe something good comes out of
this
the weirdest part of the story that the
simulation
has served up is that the people who did
the shooting suspected this young man
of robbery and his last name is arbory
one of the odds that somebody whose last
name is arbory
would be accused of robbery
i don't know i suppose anything's
possible okay
but i like to think it's the simulation
working on
code reuse even though that's probably
not what's going on
um so
the st that lindsey graham was saying
that the
the steele dossier just completely
completely lays bare i'm sorry he said
that the
steele dossier was decred discredited
before rose
rosenstein um even said to investigate
carter page
and with that now documented
so we don't have to wonder about who
said what or you know when
when it was said and lindsey graham says
basically it's just plain that now that
there was a uh
a plot to get rid of the president i
don't even know how to process this are
you having the same
are you having the same uh mental
problem that i am which is
apparently you know law enforcement
and you know the fbi did
actually try to remove a legally elected
president under
with uh you know uh inappropriate means
how is that not just blowing our mind
and the only thing we're talking about
now part of it is the coronavirus of
course
and part of it is it took so long to get
here that we got
sort of exhausted by the story so so i
think
we got exhausted by the story before we
found out how bad it was
and now we can't generate the outrage
that you know you would
you would get if it was the second week
of the story imagine finding out
one month into the story about the
russia collusion just
fantasize with me imagine in one month
you had found out everything it took us
two years or whatever to find out
we'd be calling for the execution of
comey and some of the others wouldn't we
i mean actually the execution would we
not
because what is what is the uh
what is the crime for trying to
overthrow the country
or i i don't even know is is that is
that treason
it's treason if you're helping your
enemies but suppose you're just doing it
for your own purposes
what exactly is the penalty for that
you know there might be penalties for
not doing your job right and
the details of you know maybe you
violated somebody's rights and stuff so
there could be some legal recourse of
the details
but what about the big picture is there
no big picture
where an actual coup was attempted
what but but it's not treason exactly is
it
alexa define treason
as the offensive acting to overthrow his
government or to harm or kill itself
for more oh okay
yeah treason pets i i was thinking that
treason was more helping an enemy
but according to that definition it just
has to do with
trying to overthrow your own government
so did they try to overthrow their own
government
i think so if you found out let me ask
this
um just hypothetically if you found out
that this was treason and that it could
be demonstrated
i don't know what the actual penalty in
this country is for that
would you favor the death penalty for
the people involved
so that would be comey rosenstein
i don't know mccabe you so
so make the assumption that the legal
system does its thing and let's say they
found
that they did in fact try to overthrow
the government
let's say that that was demonstrated in
a court of law
is that a life sentence 30 years
execution capital offense
i don't know because i can't think of a
bigger problem
you know what what would be more of a
crime than that
um would a terrorist act be more of a
crime than that
i don't know it's a pretty big crime
feels like the
biggest crime i've ever seen maybe
that's not actually violent
so i just put that out there hey if
there's any companies that are looking
for
kn 95 basks and some other protective
equipment
and you're you're you're lost in the
the wilderness of all these pirate and
scam organizations who are trying to
sell you things and not delivering
um check my twitter feed for tweet by
tom
sauer s a u r
um who has uh located a number of
supplies that he can deliver
so if you're a corporation and you want
to let's say
get some kn 95 best for your staff
you could buy them in big big bunches
from him
i'm only mentioning him because there
are so many frauds out there
and since tom is well known on at least
at least a conservative twitter knows
tom well
a lot of you who are watching this
follow him on on twitter
so he's a real person doing a real thing
military ex-military
so i feel you could trust him to be
straight on the transaction which is the
hardest thing to trust right now
all right um
i watched the pandemic video because so
many of you
asked me to now if you don't know what
that is there's a video going around
that it looks like a an interview that
might be a setup or publicity for
something that's
a full-length movie that i haven't seen
so i watched the interview part
not the movie and plandemic i guess is
the movie
and here's my bottom line on the video
it looks
it's mostly as far as i can tell this is
just my
initial opinion it looks like conspiracy
theory to me all right
but it does look like a number of the
facts in it
are probably true almost almost
certainly true so i'm not saying the
facts are all untrue
but there's a way that they're tied
together and some assumptions and some
mind reading
that turns it into a bigger conspiracy
the
the net of it is it looks like this that
fauci
is actually some kind of a bad guy and
that
um he is associated with an organization
that
um they've funded the wuhan lab and
and uh a year or more ago he warned that
there would definitely be a coronavirus
and how did he know and by the way he's
got some patents for some vaccines or
something
and there's patents on things he might
profit from them
if he can get you know his vaccine or
his company with a therapeutic to do it
so there's
this whole thing that fauci uh i don't
know somehow he might have been behind
the the virus and so that's the
conspiracy crazy parts
the less crazy part about that is that
the
pharmaceutical industry could be
corrupting things and lying and
trying to make four trillion dollars so
there's
uh i did not find any credibility in the
person who was interviewed the principal
character there
i would say that she had every
let's see based on experience
i'm going to say that people who look
and act like her in my experience
have some issues that go beyond the
facts of this
situation so i didn't find her credible
but in the same breath here's something
else i didn't find
credible at one point that the fbi tried
to overthrow the government of the
united states
when i first heard that i just thought
come on people is there anything you
won't believe
yeah the fbi tried to overthrow the
government
you bunch of ignorant what
we have documents we have memos
we've got handwritten notes it's all
true
apparently it's all true it's all true
now the part i
doubted early on primarily was the
the level of coordination you know was
there was it like
a ring leader and everybody was sort of
working for the ringleader
because that's the way it was sort of
portrayed in the beginning i don't see
evidence of that yet
i do i do so evidence that lots of
people have the same
motive and thoughts and maybe they acted
in a way that any one of them would have
acted if they'd been in that situation
but it's a little different than an
organized
plot but not they're not much because
it's not like they didn't all know each
other have the same goals
probably talk to each other you know
you know people signed off on the same
stuff
so you can't rule out the fact
that it was kind of organized i'm just
saying that that's not an evidence based
on the documents
so i didn't believe that because that
seemed just way too
wild i mean just way beyond the
you know the pale of likelihood but
turns out it's true turns out it's true
so are the claims made in the planned
uh pandemic video
and interview are they true doesn't look
like it to me
you know if i had to put my own money on
it i'd say ah
there are two facts in there but the way
you've woven it together
no that's just misleading that's what
i'd bet on
but i also would have bet the fbi was
not trying to remove a legally
legally elected president i would have
been wrong about that
so i like to remind you when i'm right
but it's also just as useful to remind
you when i'm wrong
and i would say that even though i you
know i could make an argument that i
cheated
a little bit about how organized it was
i would have to say
overall that i was just wrong on that
one so
count that one on my incorrect
predictions all right
i think that was everything i wanted to
talk about
just checking my notes yes it is that's
it
that's all i had did president obama
know
well that would certainly make things
interesting wouldn't it
wouldn't that be interesting um here's
my
best guess on that now even though all
these
people were professionals and you you
would think that they would be smart
enough not to write stuff down
right wouldn't they be smart enough not
to write down the things that are going
to get them
you know in jail or whatever but i have
to think that
obama was never that dumb you know my
my impression of obama you can you know
love him or hate him for his policies or
whatever
i don't care but
i don't know that anybody has questioned
his intelligence
to me always seemed like a really smart
guy so
would a really smart guy leave any kind
of a trail
of this kind of activity i don't think
so
i think that if he was involved it would
have been verbal
and probably only with you know one
person
who we knew he could trust that's how
i'd play it if i were trying to
overthrow the government i would
not leave a any kind of a record of it
so i know a lot of you are saying you
know probably he did
i would have to go if i'm going to put a
let's say a percentage on it
the odds that well here's here's the
problem though
we know that the fbi knew that they were
doing something sketchy
what we don't know is if that was ever
transmitted
to obama we do know
you know that he was the boss but we
don't know that if when they gave a
status report
to obama did they say you know i know
you want this guy out of here so what
we're doing is we're gonna
we're gonna pretend that carter page has
something maybe we can find something
we'll dig around
i don't know that they ever told them
that it feels like something you don't
tell the president
because you don't want him to know right
so i would guess that obama will never
be
it as a co-conspiracy so let me put a
odds on it i would say the odds that he
actually knew
that something just blatantly illegal
was happening one of the odds he knew
something illegal was happening
ah then you'd have to define
knowing did he know because he just sort
of knew
or did he know because they told them i
think knowing because they told him
probably didn't happen knowing because
he
you know he's experienced and he just
knew
maybe 70 70
chance something like that yeah i'll
give you a 70
chance that obama knew will you be
satisfied with that
i know some of you 100 uh elon musk is
on rogan
really and it's dropping at 9am somebody
says
well that would be interesting
somebody says he knew but he looked the
other way yeah we would never be able to
prove something like that
uh lisa page was quoted as saying
somebody's saying in the comments here
quote potus wants to know everything we
are doing
well him wanting to know everything
you're doing and you deciding
to tell him that you're doing something
illegal are very different things
so i don't doubt that the president
wanted to know i do doubt that they told
him everything
somebody points out that watergate
started without direct knowledge
by nixon good example
so i think in general you would find
that your presidents are smart enough to
not commit things to writing
here's here's something that i have a
hypothesis that nobody like trump
could ever have uh have ever made it to
the presidency
if he had ever used email
that's my statement that trump would
never
be our president if he had a habit of
using email
all of his life there's just no way
because sooner or later those emails
would come out and god knows what would
be in them
my understanding is that trump made a a
career-long
practice to not write stuff down now how
well did that pay off
really well i mean not writing stuff
down is a pretty solid
solid strategy if you don't want
somebody coming after you
uh somebody's asking about kim jong-un's
body double all right so you know that
i've called
i've called on the the video of
kim jong-un
and on the photo as well now
that doesn't mean i'm right
all right so i like to always deal in
probability
um my but i'm going to go with the
prediction
that kim is either let's say degraded or
dead
probably not dead more likely degraded
because i think we'd know if he was dead
uh but we wouldn't necessarily know if
you were in a coma
here is my evidence in case you didn't
hear before just prior to the video
being shown
the president was acting like he
definitely knew what the situation was
and he was wishing kim well but then
right after that kim is chipper walking
around
visiting the fertilizer plant
did that happen did that happen
and then the president president just
immediately said oh it's great to see
you know
happy is doing well i don't know
so either the president had bad
information
or he had correct information and he
knows this video is fake
but he's trying to help them get away
with it because maybe it's just better
for everybody
for the short term of course
videos can be faked to me it looked like
a video that was spliced together for
maybe a
prior trip or something and then the
still photograph just looked
photoshopped to me
now experts have looked at the photo
that i say
clearly looks photoshopped and people
who know way more than i do about that
stuff
don't see it and a lot of people are
convinced the video is true because they
see it with your own eyes but we're not
in a world where videos can be true so
here's my further prediction
it's going to be a long time
before you see kim in public again now i
don't know what his normal pattern is
in terms of how long he would normally
go before he's seen in public again
but here's my prediction the length of
time that he has not seen in public
will reach a new high coming up
in other words if you don't see him just
pop up again in a month
those are fake videos six months from
now
if you've seen no new videos of kim
those were fake videos if in one month
he pops up and he's looking fine then
i'm gonna i'll revise and i'll say oh
wow i guess i was fooled those were
probably real videos
i mean they could have still been faked
but more likely they'd be real
if a month from now he's up and walking
around and it's obvious it's a current
video
maybe he's shaking hands with somebody
we know is over there you know
if it's current and it's in a month then
i'm definitely wrong
six months from now if we still haven't
seen him
on video i'm right
so we wait
now we wait all right
that's all i got for now and i will talk
to you
tonight
