Coffee With Scott Adams — Knowledge Archive July 2, 2026
Scott Adams Philosophy Archive
Search ideas
Episodes Episode #1202 Segments
MainContent Confirmation Bias

Back to episode — Episode 1202 Scott Adams - Dale and I Tell You the News From Both Realities

Context —

ss and appropriateness and it's sort of subjective, right? So the thought is that you've waited too long to make your claim and therefore we can ignore the claim. So the claim was ignored because they said you missed a deadline. This is the important part. There was no deadline to make the claim per se in terms of a law or a statute or anything like that. It was just felt by the court that it see…

← Previous segment →

ribe what I just described other than saying they put feelings ahead of the law? And I believe that this is a common thing, not an uncommon thing, rather, that the court does sometimes say what's best for the world in our opinion. We're the judges so we get to be a little subjective. What's best for the world? And sometimes judges think what's best for the world is to ignore the law or ignore the Constitution.

I would argue that abortion rights are an example of that. I would argue that the Supreme Court kind of made up a right. I know people on the right believe this. You know the privacy or whatever it is, sort of crafted a law out of nothing and said ah it's sort of there if you look hard enough. I think that was just an example of the Supreme Court saying that in their opinion at the time that the world was better ignoring the law, you know, or just making up a law of their own if you will.

So it's not that uncommon but there you go. I would say that the odds of something like that getting overturned by the Supreme Court, I'm no Supreme Court expert, but I would think this whole doctrine of laches just looks like to me, looks like to me, but we'll see.

All right, I said yesterday that I'm going to start giving out compliments to various entities, especially entities and people that I have criticized in the past. So it's just a holiday thing. I'm going to compliment people and things and entities that I had been tough on in the past.

Here's an example. Have you seen any photos of the new Ford Bronco? I was pretty brutal about Ford when I was trying to buy a Ford truck and it's just a hard process. But oh my God, the new Ford Bronco. It's redesigned. That thing is beautiful. Now I don't know you know what real use it's going to get. I don't know how it is automotive and all that. But I am so glad to live in the country with a company like Ford, American company, that can build such a beautiful product.

I think the same thing about Apple all the time. You know I criticize Apple about various things but man you can't, you got to give it up for their design. Their design is beautiful. This Ford Bronco, I want that thing with an irrational lust. The moment I saw the picture I just I just freaking had to have this thing. So you know I bought a new vehicle not that long ago so I won't but I'm going to look at it hard for my next vehicle for sure.

All right, that's my compliment of the day to Ford.

So I did a little unscientific Twitter poll and I said this: According to the news and social media you consume — and this is important. According to the news and social media that you personally consume, which of these claims has more evidence? And the claims were that there was election fraud. Is there more evidence for that or climate emergency? I used emergency just to be more clear that I'm not talking about climate change but rather that it's an emergency.

Which has more evidence? In my scientific unscientific poll, 87% of you said that election fraud has more evidence than climate emergency.

Now if I made this same Twitter poll and ran it on Alyssa Milano's Twitter feed, pretty sure the numbers would be either completely reversed or 100% would say the opposite.

So here's my point. What does it mean when people say follow the facts and follow the evidence and follow the proof and believe the experts and listen to the science? What does any of that mean when we can't do those things?

So here's some advice for you. If this is good advice, by the way, and I think you would agree this is good advice. If you find yourself in the middle of the road and there's a bus coming right at you and you realize that you don't have enough time to get out of the way, just use your transporter like Star Trek. Could go disappear and then just reappear and transport to a different place. That is my advice. Is there anything wrong with my advice? Do you find any flaw in my advice that if you don't have enough time to get away from the bus in the normal way of like walking or jumping you would just use your Star Trek transporter? Why not?

Oh I forgot. Transporters don't exist. Is that the only reason you can't use my advice? Because it's not a thing. It does

Context —

n't exist. But it would be great advice otherwise wouldn't it? I mean if it did, if it existed, pretty good advice. So here's some more advice that's exactly like that transporter example. Follow the science. Do we have — how much proof do you need? The people can't do that. You can't do that because you don't know which science is real. How about follow the facts? You can't do that because you d…

Next segment → →