hear you say you don't want to persuade them to take the shot but still you word things the way that feels to them you actually are. How could I avoid that? How could I avoid wording it in a way that you think I'm talking you into it? If the data leads that way should I not lean the same direction as the official data? Would it be antibody dependent enhancement? Antibody dependent enhancement. Meaning what? I mean I know what the words mean but why should I be talking about that? So yeah, so the thing that, Eileen thank you. Exactly. I tried to lean toward credibility meaning that the official responses, as wrong as they've been, the official science about COVID, as wrong as it's been, it tends to have higher credibility, you know, until they change their minds, than things that you hear about in some Twitter link to an article that never gets any traction. So I wait for the scientists to tell me which of the other things I should pay attention to. And you give too little weight to VAERS. I do give, I give, wait were you here? So somebody said I give too little weight to VAERS. If you watch this entire live stream do you say that's true or false? I give too little weight to VAERS. Now VAERS is where reports of bad outcomes are. I just had a whole discussion where I said I agree with you that the number of reports of bad outcomes is alarming and conflicts, it conflicts with and actually hurts the credibility of the scientific opinion. I said that as clearly and directly as you could possibly say it. And the VAERS database is just the obvious example of those reports. But it doesn't have to be VAERS because I asked on Twitter and tons of people say yeah I got a friend, I got a friend and they got a friend.

Scott would you call Joe Rogan for a chat? I don't think he and I are the right ones for that chat. Oh but let me say this. I don't know how often Joe Rogan has multiple guests for like a panel discussion. I don't think he does that model. But if he did there are better people than me to put on it. I don't think I'm the right person for that. It would be entertaining but it wouldn't be as useful as you want it to be. So he says I got vaccine because of Scott's discussion and by doctor's advice. Well I hope your doctor's advice was a little bit weighted more than mine. Well I've been on Joe Rogan's program so if you Google it you can find it. He does have multiples on but not multiples who are on different sides, right? Has Joe ever had people who are on different sides of a debate on this at the same time? I'm saying yes I don't think I've ever seen one. Oh he has a few times. That would be the perfect situation. Although he's on Spotify so he's behind the paywall. It'd be better not to be behind a paywall. Yeah a Tim Pool would be sort of a good choice for that I think. I'd be a good choice but I don't have the wherewithal to set it up. I mean I do have the wherewithal but I don't have the time and interest right now. Spotify is free? Why are you saying Spotify is free? Are you saying that his program on Spotify is free? That's not true is it? Wait am I missing something important? It's not a paywall. Oh it's just ads. Really? I don't know that. I don't use Spotify so Spotify is not a subscription service? It's just got ads? That's the reason I didn't have Spotify. Maybe I should get it.

All right. Well thank you. See this is that example again of a new kind of intelligence in real time. You watched my mind be changed and you saw it a few times. It's kind of cool isn't it? That we are collectively like a single rational entity. It just takes all of you to correct me on a regular basis to get there. Body autonomy, what about it? I don't know. So didn't watch the episode with Dr. Gupta. Complete, I did not, no. All right. So there's no ads if you have a subscription on Spotify. Okay that makes sense. Alex says God can you imagine being married to this guy. I assume you're talking about me, right? Well I'm not sure I understand. That was my phone. My phone just said I'm not sure I understand. Well I do understand. Somebody said imagine being married to that guy. You're not wrong. Imagine being married to me. It's no picnic, believe me. So you're right about that.

Would I host Bret Weinstein versus Andres Bek? No I would not host them if just the two of them. No, because that's not the right two. The ones you want are, because both of them are kind of critics, both of them are skeptics I would say, skeptic of different things. But I want somebody who's a believer and at least one skeptic and then somebody who can do some fact checking. So you want three people. One of them just a fact checker and the other two being on other sides of the issue. So that would be the ideal model. And then maybe a moderator. So you need four people: moderator plus those three. Three plus, I was good. Yeah actually let's make that a thing. You want to make that a thing? You want to do a little persuasion experiment? Whoever just said, let me call you out, Twix bar. So user Twix bar over on the Locals platform just has a comment that says three plus host. And I like that branding. So let's see if we can make three plus host a model that people understand as the best model. Now of course the news will often violate that model but let's see if we can get somebody to do it. Three plus one. The plus one is the host and the three are people on two sides of an issue and then a fact checker who doesn't seem to be associated with either of them. And then a host who can keep it all straight. And oh and then here's the last part. Last part is not a timed event or if it's timed it's a lot of time, right? It could be three hours but you don't want to have five minute hit, right? It can't be, it can't just be you know something that it's an episode on Hannity or something. You know it's got to be its own show. It can't be an episode on somebody else's show. Wouldn't have enough time. So let's see if we can make that happen. Three plus one is the model. Three plus host. And it will be one fact checker, two people on opposite sides and the host. The host does a good job of moderating and making sure the fact checker gets in there. What do you say? Let's make it a thing. Let's see if somebody can do one of them and then no matter how it works then we refine the model. Maybe the first one isn't so good but you just refine the model based on what you learn.

Oh Ben Shapiro would be, yeah there's lots of people you could think of who have the platform. So here's the first thing we need. We need the platform and the host, right? Getting the guests I think would be the easy part. Ooh Dave Rubin. Dave Rubin I think he has all the technical wherewithal which is what you need because you nee