Coffee With Scott Adams — Knowledge Archive July 2, 2026
Scott Adams Philosophy Archive
Search ideas
Episodes Episode #2157 Segments
MainContent Health & Biohacking

Back to episode — Episode 2157 Scott Adams - Talking About The News. Grab Some Coffee And A Pet

Context —

is so much better. So I think those two things make Bitcoin not normal investment. I'm probably not eloquent enough to delve in and give the correct answer but those two questions there are definitely very good answers as to why there are reasons that these they're not as much of a fundamental risk. Well okay without hearing the argument it's hard to debate it but I'll just say this. I'm not goin…

← Previous segment →

w? Here's the response. That when the original the original virus was out there the original vaccination did in fact stop its transmission but that lasted like no time at all because it mutated. So when Tyson says they told you it would stop the transmission they were right for a while but that while didn't last long. Is he wrong? He's probably I don't think he's wrong. I think it did stop. If you had the exact shot with the exact variant it would stop it cold but that didn't last.

So both of them had trouble accepting the other's point which is sort of what I say. I see people having trouble saying it totally worked for 10 minutes. People want to say it didn't work or they wouldn't say it worked. Tyson's the only one who says it accurately. It totally worked for 10 minutes and it worked a little bit for the next variant but not much and then after that it was useless. So I believe that's the accurate answer. It worked perfectly for 10 minutes but it's also true that everybody knew it would only last 10 minutes. Yeah I'm exaggerating with the 10 minutes.

Then the other part that Tyson got right is that you're not just taking an experimental vaccination. You're taking a chance on the vaccination that was designed to help you versus a virus that was actually designed to hurt you. Who knows which of those is more dangerous? I don't know it all.

So anyway so I thought he did a real good job of explaining that stuff. Then the part that he didn't do well on is Tyson was saying oh so the podcaster says what about this documentary of all these young athletes dropping dead. Tyson was not aware that that's not true that that's been widely debunked. Just the data is bad but the podcaster got to present that to the public like it was true.

Now here's what Tyson said even if it is true which was a mistake because it was very untrue. He said even if it is true let's say 10,000 people dropped dead from the shot but they think it saved 10 million. And here's what the podcaster should have said but didn't. You already know where this is going right? Here's where that should have gone. The podcaster should have said but the people the people under a certain age had basically zero risk but the vaccination was a risk. So he should have bifurcated it and said whoa whoa the old people maybe young people it's a whole different situation.

So the trouble is everybody's this is a Greg Gutfeld thing you know the prison of two ideas. If you're sold that the vaccinations work or y

Context —

ou're sold that they didn't work at all it's just so hard for you to say that the other side is a little bit right. It's just so hard but you should. Yeah it's definitely a little bit right that we don't know the five-year implications of the shots right. It's definitely a little bit right or 100 right and it's a hundred percent right that you don't know what the risk of the COVID itself and you h…

Next segment → →