Coffee With Scott Adams — Knowledge Archive August 24, 2026
Scott Adams Philosophy Archive
Search ideas

Context —

the details and evaluate the science. We don't have access to that. Wouldn't understand it anyway. So when I look at the two arguments they're both persuasive. If you look at the climate alarmist by themselves they'll say look at my graph and they'll show you a graph that shows the CO2 and they'll show you that CO2 and warming are perfectly correlated and that there's this hockey stick growth late…

← Previous segment →

aking thing that anybody could do on what turns out to be the biggest risk in the world right? According to the, if you were a climate alarmist you think that the climate is the biggest problem in the world and that in order to have a chance of survival the main thing you need to do is, what is the main thing you need to do if you're a climate alarmist to save the world? What's the main thing you got to do? The main thing you got to do is convince the skeptics. That's your job one right? You've got to convince them. And in order to do that you would need to put them in the same room with you so that your data and their data could be hashed out in front of the camera in front of the public.

I do understand why the skeptics can't get in the room with the climate scientists. That I understand because they don't get camera time. The climate alarmists don't want to give them. They say we don't want to justify your wrongness by putting you in the same room and acting like you have any credibility. So it makes perfect sense that the skeptics want to be in that room and want to sit next to the climate alarmist and want to have that conversation. So I think it's fair to say that one side wants to be in that room with the other side. The only reason I can think of why that you've never seen that, and by the way you've never seen that have you? You have never seen the skeptic and the believer in the same room in an unscripted way where somebody is just saying okay you say this graph, you say this graph, make your case. You've never seen that. And the only reason I can think of given that it's the biggest problem in the world according to the alarmists, the biggest problem in the world, and they're not willing to solve it by just putting their believer in the room with a skeptic. That's all it would take. It would be the most popular television show in the United States. So you can't say it won't be done because the ratings would be bad because the ratings would be very good. Even if it was just a YouTube clip the ratings and the viewership of that YouTube clip would be very very good. So you can't say that this hasn't happened because of money. You can't say it hasn't happened because the skeptics are afraid to get in the room because they want to get in the room. They want it badly. The only thing that's stopping it is the scientists themselves being apparently unwilling to do the one thing that could save the world. And the one thing that could save the world is to get in the same room with the other side and turn the camera on. If you don't do that you don't believe in climate science. Let me say that again for the people who are pro climate science. If they're afraid to put their person in the same room with the denier and turn on the camera and let the public see them talk about it, if you're afraid to do that for some reason about you don't want to give them credibility, you're not a believer. You actually don't believe your own story. Because if you thought the world was at risk you'd put those people in the same room because it's the only way to convince the other half of the country.

All right let us revisit the story of Patreon and people who are leaving Patreon because Patreon has kicked somebody off the platform. Sargon has been kicked off the platform for something he said on a completely different platform a few years ago and was taken out of context so that his inner thoughts were made to be evil when in fact they were the opposite of evil according to all evidence in the public eye. So I had been saying that I have disavow exhaustion. I'm just tired of fighting and boycotting and I'm generally anti-boycott. So generally speaking I oppose boycotts within the United States. I think boycotting another country might be fun and good but boycotting a company in the United States, they'd really have to do something bad right? My threshold for banning a US company is very high. That said tomorrow I think I will be giving you an alternative for Patreon at least for me. And I'll give you an option. If you would like me to leave Patreon I will leave Patreon if the other option is appealing to you. Okay so I will be leaving Patreon if when I describe the other option probably tomorrow if that seems appealing to you I will abandon Patreon.

I do think that and by the way a lot of people have been saying to me Scott you don't understand the argument. That's never been the problem here. It's not my understanding of the argument it's my priorities. But the argument is solid. That there's a solid argument that Patreon is acting against their own terms of service and not acting in good faith. So if Patreon is not acting in good faith and by the way my own Patreon account went down by I don't know 20 or 25 percent this week so staying on Patreon is no longer viable for me because the people who would use Patreon and would be the same people who were likely to support me have left in protest. So my income on Patreon went down 20 or 25 percent this week and it looks like it's not going to ever go in the other direction. So for that reason it doesn't make sense for me economically to stay on Patreon. It doesn't make sense in terms of being on the right side of history and that gives me everything I need. But I'm only going to leave if after I've explained to you an option if enough people are interested in taking that option.

All right that's like 25 million. Yeah now actually my Patreon account is very small. It's a few thousand. It's just a few thousand a month and I use all of that to pay somebody to prep my videos to move them to YouTube and put them on podcast and stuff. So basically I don't make any money from Patreon. I just pass that along to my assistant. Someone would have to explain what could be good, what could be accomplished by leaving. Well I think what people want to accomplish is showing that the audience will leave if you violate free speech. So fr

Context —

ee speech is violated and the person who is being targeted is not a bad actor but rather they're just on the wrong side of politics. That the market will punish that platform. So I think what you're seeing is people punishing Patreon for taking what looks to be a political position to them as opposed to a principled position. I think if Patreon was taking a principled position people would not hav…

Next segment → →