Episode 1735 Scott Adams: Everyone Lying About Everything, Science Is Bungled, I'm In Trouble Again

And if uh you want to take it up a notch and I know you do, how about a copper mug or a glass, a tanker, chelcelstein, a canteen jug, or flask, a vessel of any kind filled with your favorite liquid, what would that be? Well my. Coffee. Now join me, please, for the unparalleled pleasure. This will be the dopamine hit of the day, the thing that makes everything better. This is really gonna get you going. Get that dopamine pump working. Pump, bump, bump, pump. Go.

But imagine it's a pump and it's pumping dopamine out. And when the pump is not working, you don't have any. And when the pump is working really hard, you got lots of things. So imagine that dopamine pump whenever you're doing something that gives you a little a little uh lift. For example, when I have my uh first sip of coffee, I know it gives me like just a tiny little lift. I mean it's not like the best thing that ever happened to you in your life, but it's a lift and you feel it.

And so when you take that sip or you do whatever the other activity is and you know it's gonna pump some dopamine into you, imagine that little pump in your head and just see the pump pumping out the dopamine. And if you do that every time you know that you're actually getting real dopamine in the normal way. Then you'll have this connection. You'll have this visual connection that you'll start to harden with practice of an actual pump popping out dopamine.

And you should get to the point over time when imagining the pump just by itself will actually trigger the dopamine. Now, what I just gave you is Is the key to unlock your own brain and reprogram it. Because you can generalize from this example. All you have to do is focus and reinforce any two connections that you would like to have a shared experience with. So if there's something you like.

For example, after I work out, I always have a uh protein shake, which I really, really enjoy,'cause it's the it's the closest thing to a a treat that I give myself because I eat fairly healthy. So it's it's the it's the most tasty, sort of desserty thing. That's the wrong word for it. But I really enjoy it. Better than most things that I imbibe. So I do it every time I'm done exercising. when I can. And that little hit isn't that associated with the exercise.

And I do it over and over and over every day. When I exercise, it uh there's protein in it, so there's a purpose to it, I get a little uh pleasure. Now do you think that makes me more likely to exercise because I've trained myself with like a little dog treat every time I do it? What do you think? Do you think that that literally makes it more likely I'll exercise? That little habit, just giving myself

The answer is yes, yes. It's a tiny little impact that if you did it every day for a week, you wouldn't notice a difference. If you did it every day for I don't know, a month or two, you probably wouldn't notice the difference. But if you do it every day for three years You're just gonna be addicted to that. you could actually make yourself addicted to good behaviors. There's a whole book on that, uh the The Power of Habit.

That's a good one to read if you wanna if you want to learn how to program your own brain the same way a hypnotist or an advertising executive would, just know it's attention, repetition.

And then connecting two things that you want to connect. Now it could be it could be two things that you like. You're trying to bleed the qualities of one into the other, but it could be the other way too. You can create aversions to things. You can create an aversion to thing by uh pairing it with a negative. For example, um I don't want to be a drinker of alcohol. I used to be. I I liked it a lot. It was great. But I don't think it's good for me.

So now whenever the subject of alcohol comes up, I repeat in my mind alcohol is poison. Sometimes I say it out loud, sometimes I just repeat it in my mind. Over time, those two things are just paired. Now there's an irrational pairing of them. It's just that they happen at the same time, and I make them happen at the same time. So you can program yourself by these little connections. Remember. Focus, repetition, and that repetition should be over years.

Think think of repetition as a as a multiple year process. It's not this week, next month. But if you do this this sort of repetition with your brain you can program it over time for almost anything. It's it's amazing why you can get done. And you don't have to be a hypnotist, you just use those simple principles.

Well, what is new? Um uh I'm announcing the uh the untimely death of Boo the Cat. Some many of you knew my cat, Boo, who would join us here on these live streams. She was about seven years old. She had a terrible cancer that uh couldn't be fixed. And so I tried to keep her comfortable till her final days, which was yesterday. And let me let me tell you something that's like positive about this. Right? So you you can imagine, you can imagine that I went through a very bad

Uh I'll keep it together for you uh for you today. Yeah, just out of respect for the job, I guess. Um but there were some things that I learned that were kind of amazing. Kind of amazing. One of them is that there's somebody whose job it is, now they come to your house to do it. You used prior animals I always took them to the vet and you know, you did it there.

So the newer model, I don't know where uh how um how widespread this is, but where I live, you can ask somebody to come to your house within several hours and There's somebody who's job there was a woman who's a a doctor, so she's apparently a trained veterinarian, and her job is just this. To come to your house and

And help you not just the animal, but help you through it. And you know, it's very peaceful. There's a a sedative that the animal barely notices the animal falls asleep and then they follow it up with the you know, the the kill dog. Literally. And the entire process is so respectful. that it's it's really s it's really special. But I'm mostly impressed.

by the person. Um so there there's actually somebody whose job is to do that all day long. You know, I don't know how many she would do in a day, maybe five, maybe more. Can you even imagine There's somebody somebody has um stepped into that that job. There the the amazing thing about human beings is that we will do any job. Not every person will do every job, of course.

But man, when something needs to get done, you can find somebody who'll do it. It's just the most amazing thing. So I found it inspirational. Um You know, as as far as the cat's death itself, it's very tough on me, you can imagine, because the the same thing that I explained earlier about the connecting a positive thing to your habit, well the cat was very attached to my habit. So that part's that's going to be really tough to break. But let's talk about other things that are more fun.

Is there anything that's true anymore? Uh pretty much all of it all of the news is a question of whether the news itself is true. Like that's the news. The news isn't really the news anymore. And then what do you think about the news and how do you interpret it? The news is, well, I don't know if that's true. That doesn't sound true to me. That's completely different, isn't it? Now was everything always fake? I feel like maybe it was.

Don't you? Maybe we just didn't know about it or we're more keyed into it. Thank you, Trump, for that. But let's talk about the Amber Turd uh uh trial. So Amberturd got to testify and now so she'll say some terrible things about Johnny Depp. But getting back to my main theme. Uh who would believe her? Why would you possibly believe anything that Amber Turn said?

Uh I mean now that she's been actually diagnosed by a professional on the stand who said, I've looked into this and she looks like one of these, you know, class B personality types. And one of the main characteristics is n nothing they say is true.

Like what what's the point of even having a testimony? You know, if I if I were uh uh Johnny Depp's attorney and I got to have the final say, I say, well you heard Amber uh Turd testify, but you also heard somebody testify that everything she says is probably a lie. Medically. Yeah, I'm not even it's not even a character um insult. I'm not disparaging her. It's not being disrespectful. It's a medical diagnosis that she lied.

She's one of those people who is in the lying category, and not just a little bit. Because you know everybody lies, right? Like you you you want to be the one who doesn't. But everybody lies in p some situation. You know, we all choose our shots differently, I suppose. But you know, it's a universal un unfortunate. But some worse than others and we're not all medically required to to lie. That's that's different.

Uh did you see the video I saw Mike Sernovich tweet of this the little video of uh Amber on the on the witness stand appearing to snort something that was in a uh tissue and then go you know as if she had snorted cocaine. Now let me be very clear I didn't see any cocaine. I I I didn't see proof of that. So I'm not saying that happened. I'm saying there's a video that that looks exactly like it happened.

But let's go back to our main theme. Main theme of the live stream today. Nothing's real. You just can't believe anything. Yes, it looked exactly like she was doing cocaine on the witness stand. It looked exactly like it. But do you think do you think that really was true? I I kind of doubt it.

I sort of doubt it. But it looked like it. So back to the original theme. Nothing's you can't believe anything. There's just nothing you can believe. You can look right at the video and say, Well So Dinesh D'Souza's film um with I guess it's got allegations of Voter irregularity in twenty twenty. Is has been I guess the accounts been banned by Twitter.

I don't know the specifics of why they banned it. Um and I think YouTube has banned it now, correct? Give me give me some fact checks on this in case I'm uh in case I'm out of date on my information. So now Twitter and YouTube banned it, but you can still see it on Rumble? Correct? Rumble still has it? Is that the only place somebody says 1 p.m. today? What's that mean? But it's out, right? It's it's released.

Alright, and somebody says locals has it, but I haven't confirmed that. Alright, so here's my story about that. This is just banned enough. There there there's a thing which is too banned, like you can't find it anywhere, like Hunter's laptop. And then there's not banned at all, and that could be great too. But this is perfectly banned. Meaning all it did was make me really kind of want to see it more than I naturally would have. I'm like, really? This is going to be a little hard to get.

Oh boy. How good is this thing? They're banning it? That's that's the best review I've ever seen for a movie. You know, can I get a list of all the banned stuff? I'd like to binge watch it all. Like, please give me some banned content. Like I'm just hungry for banned content now.

So I think uh Dinesh got almost the perfect level of banning that should make this a huge hit. We'll see. Now I don't have any opinion about the content. I haven't seen My understanding is that it makes a good case for uh further looking into I think that's as far as the claim goes, isn't it? You know, it obviously strongly suggests there's evidence of irregularity, but it stops short of claiming that it's proof.

And it and it and it suggests uh further research which would tell us for sure whether anything So to me that doesn't sound like a bannable content, but maybe I'd be surprised if I looked at it. Yeah. I suppose that's why we look at it.

I have a hypothesis about why Netflix uh traffic is down. I want to see if this sounds at all like any experience you've had. Prior to the pandemic, uh we might have had one streaming service and it might have been never. And the process for watching a Netflix movie, often on your television. would be um you just fire it up your password's probably already in there And uh you even pick up where you left off so you don't even have to search for anything'cause maybe you're binge watching already.

And there's lots of stuff there you like and a whole bunch of good content. And so you pick one and it's a it's a really simple, easy interface. It's a really clean experience. Right? That was before the pandemic. What no would you say that that that explains the user experience for Netflix? Was that fair? Clean, easy, lots of stuff to binge watch, real easy to pick up where you left off. Right.

Okay, now the pandemic happens. Okay. Pandemic happens. And then you think, you know, I've seen everything on Netflix. I'm going to need some more streaming. So if you're like me, you said to yourself, all right, you know, eight bucks a month, uh, I'm stuck inside. It's the same money I would have spent, was way less, than I would have spent if I'd gone somewhere. So I'll just give several streaming services. to get me through the pandemic. Because it's a real good, cost effective entertainment.

So then you have the experience like I had yesterday. Let me explain my experience. To watch a show. 'Cause now I have lots of options. I've got iPads and phones and different apps on different things, different accounts. And I also have uh um an Apple TV connected to my TV. So I've got all kinds of options now. Great options. So I saw there was a notice for uh a movie that I wanted to watch. I saw an advertisement for it, like, oh I'm gonna watch that. And then the next thing I thought was

Is that on Amazon Prime? Or do I see that on Netflix? Is that is that a Disney thing? HBO Max. No. No, it's Hulu. It's probably Hulu. So the first thing I do is I've got to figure out where the damn thing is. But I'm like, okay, that's not that much work. I could Google it. That's not that much work, right? And so I turn on the TV and it doesn't come off. Because the first problem is that I have several pieces of technology that have all rotted since the last time I used it.

I don't know why. The T V no longer turned on at the same time as the Apple TV, but it used to. Uh it's the wrong now the channel's wrong and uh there was some uh there was a cable unplugged. I don't know why. Um so it took me I think fifteen minutes to work out the cabling, the HDMI, and why the T V and the box weren't turning on, the remote wasn't working. And then I finally got it on. Then I went to look for him. Do you know what happens next?

So you you say, Oh, it's on this service but it doesn't work for some reason because my wifi was no longer connected to my Apple T V. So I had to go through and figure out how to re reset it to my new Wi Fi. Then of course my streaming services were turned off because I'd had a credit card problem. lost credit card. So then they were trying to renew and they were going to nothing because the credit card was dead.

So I have to fix my credit cards, which means getting my wallet to look at my credit card number, to put in a new credit card. and then test it and then it's gonna s it's gonna call my phone and it's gonna test my phone and then put in the password, it's gonna send it to a device. And and you know that thing where you recover the password that you're sure you knew but for some reason it's not working anymore? And and they're gonna email you the new password?

Uh I don't I don't wanna be a spoiler. Sometimes they do. It's happened. But usually they really don't send you anything. And you're waiting for the text or the or the email. And i it just doesn't come. And they know it doesn't come. Do you know how I know they know it doesn't come? Because they put a button there that says retry. Did you not get it? They're they're they're telling you it's not a compliment.

Otherwise it wouldn't be a try again button, if you know what I mean. So I try again and then I wait again. Now forty-five minutes has gone by. I barely remember the name of the movie. I'm almost there.

Finally, I get my password straightened out. I get my credit card straightened out. I've got my Wi-Fi working. My TV and my Apple TV are now paired. The remote control is working. Now I just have to find So I'm searching through the various things'cause I'm I'm too lazy to to Google it.'Cause you know, uh uh I've got uh'cause when I usually when I search for things I do it by voice.

And so I pick up my phone and I say, uh, I don't want to say it too loud, but A L E X A. And then I realize, no, that's not for the phone. That's the for the other device. But then I started saying, hey, S-I-R-I, but it can't hear me because the A-L-A-E-X-A is talking and like, shut up! I'm trying to talk to my other device. To search for where that movie is, whose name I can't remember now, but I can remember one of the actors. If I look up the actor, I could go to his IMDB page.

and I can figure out what movie is in recently. That'll give me the name of the movie. I can search for the movie on Google and find out which subscription service is on. I can go to that subscription service and that will be the one that doesn't accept the credit. Or it can't get me in. But I figured out, I can solve that one. I get in, I'm in. I find the movie.

I've succeeded. I'm in the right service. The technology is working. All of my passwords, my credit cards, there's the movie. I click on it. And it says, what's it say? What's it say when I click on it? Available next week? Yeah, available next week. That's the part I didn't see in the advertisement. Available next week.

Now, In the comments, in the comments, how many you how many of you feel me? Do you feel me? Maybe not that exact experience, but how hard is it just to watch a show? Now add on top of that, watching it with another person. Try to watch that show with another person. You can't find two people who want to watch the same thing at the same time. Can't be done.

So we went from a time when I was a kid where there was only one thing on, or three, and the uh you just sat down and you just watch everything, and you were reasonably happy about it. Now everybody's so fussy and there are so many choices you just can't watch anything. Here's my take. Before the pandemic, watching Netflix was a good user experience.

After the pandemic, and it's no fault of Netflix, Netflix is fine. Netflix might even be better than usual. But all the other stuff came in and made it impossible just to use Netflix. Because then Netflix became part of the problem when in fact it was a solution before the pandemic. It went from a solution to part of the problem. And talk to somebody these days about watching a movie together. They're going to say, ah, that's a lot of work. It's harder than I this is no joke.

When I consider driving to a movie theater to watch a movie versus live streaming it, I think driving to the movie theater is easier. Uh so there's your reason. I I think Netflix is suffering from the fact that the concept of live streaming got too hard. Just too many variables.

All right. Uh here is uh I'm gonna give credit to the Biden administration. Full throated credit. There's a there's no uh this next compliment. Uh, is to show you that I can be objective,'cause I'm no big fan of the Biden administration. But uh they're they're doing a push to uh uh promote three D printing manufacturing in the United States as part of the supply chain uh solution. To which I say Whoa, that's really good. That's really good.

Like that's really, really, really good. Because I'm not sure how far you can go with the three D printing of parts as opposed to shipping them from China. But that's exactly where I would be putting my focus because we could actually just make a gigantic difference in the supply chain.

and our vulnerability if the only thing we needed was raw materials that are part of the printer. Now, of course that's not going to help you with your rare earth minerals, but I suspect we'll get better at recycling. So Yeah, may maybe 3D printing but plus better recycling of rare minerals that are already in a lot of our products. Maybe that's Maybe that's how we get China off our back. Now

Let me say f um if Trump had done this, I would be equally complimentary. This i I I would call this the leapfrog uh um strategy. One of the advantages of uh having your country destroyed, and maybe Ukraine will learn this, is if you get rid of all the legacy stuff and you can just start from scratch.

uh you can build something awesome that's way better than if you had just incrementally improved whatever you were doing from that point on. So three D printing is so um out of a different field that you could just leapfrog

The entire system of making things in another country, putting them on a sh uh some shipping container and shipping them, putting them on a truck. I mean, y y if you look at the amount of stuff you would get rid of, that entire process That's just insane how how smart that is that we're looking at that. All right.

So uh kudos to Biden for Um So there's stories today and I think everybody's a little confused. I'm a little confused by this too. But the news is reporting that it's now clear that uh the US intelligence people helped the Ukrainians confirm the that big uh so the Russian ship that got uh blown up with a missile, the Moscow. So we don't really wanna be we the United States. We don't want to be seen as in the war against Russia.

even though it's clear we're supporting someone who's in the war with Russia. But we you know, we're trying not to blur that line too much. But why is it that uh even the news on the left, you know, the CNNs, are reporting this story and it's a major story. But it doesn't really it doesn't add that much because it uh the the claim here, at least by America, the claim is that uh the United States helped

Confirmed the location that confirmed that it was the ship they thought it was, but really the Ukrainians had all the intelligence they needed. So it's like barely made it. Yeah, so we're trying to paint it as, yeah, yeah, we we s we did a little confirming, but they have their own ability to do stuff. You know, we didn't help them that much. Now nobody believes that, right?

Uh whatever the United States is saying about how much we are or are not helping Ukraine is obviously more than It's obviously you know we're we're helping them with spotting and logistics, not logistics so much, but you know, all the visual locating of stuff, of course we're helping. Do you think that that Russia is reading CNN to find out if the US is helping you So I don't really know why.

This story is out. So it's a story about the story, I guess. Why is this story out? It it feels like we're being primed for something, doesn't it? It's like uh we're being vaccinated for something bigger. Possibly. You know, it it it's just the the oddity of this being a story at the same time in multiple places uh is and the fact that it's not really a story. I guess that's It the it's it became a story end of nothing when there's nothing to it actually.

Because we always assume that you didn't we? Didn't we always assume that the US was at least a little bit involved in the intelligence situation there? And so this would just be confirming that the U.S. is just a little bit involved in the intelligence service. Stuff. So it's not really a story, because it's everything that everybody would have imagined was exactly the case if they hadn't told us.

So why is it a story and why is it suddenly a story? And I'm not sure that there was enough of a trigger in the news to make it a story. It feels planted and it feels part of a Some kind of an operation. I mean it just feels like there's something behind this being a story. as if somebody's trying to push us into a bigger war with Russia. For example. I'm not saying that's the case, but it has that feel to it, like, uh, this doesn't feel right.

All right. How many of you have followed my series in Dilbert about uh Dave the new engineer? who is uh portrayed visually to look exactly like he's probably black, but he's decided to identify as white and it's revealed in the series that he may be pranking So it's sort of a prank he won't identify as a And

Uh the uh I told you it runs through Thursday, but I'd forgotten there's actually a Friday. So Friday is the today is the last of that series. Uh however, it looks like that one didn't give me any trouble at all. A number of newspapers didn't run it. Uh but that you know doesn't cost me any money.

And uh however it looks like I'm gonna have a slightly larger problem with the one that's upcoming. This one's not about Dave. This is a new topic, in which uh I'll give you a little uh advance on this. Uh if it gets published, and it's looking kind of iffy at this point. I'll be talking about that with my uh editor today. Um if it gets published it would feature Wally uh identifying as a birthing human.

And uh doing that so he could get some you know, benefits. So it would be he would be clearly stating that he's not actually a birthing person, but he's identified. Now he would just and and it would be clear that he's just doing it to game the system. No. I told you that I'm already in trouble with the trans community because they thought that the series about Dave the engineer was about trans, but it wasn't. Like it didn't even occur to me that anybody would interpret it that.

So I'm already in trouble with the community for something I didn't do, like I literally didn't do, had nothing to do with anything in that topic. But I do have one that's a little closer to their topic and now they're all primed. So kind of asking for it, aren't I, at this point? Now again, the way I treat the topic is completely respectful in my opinion. Right? In my opinion, it's respectful. Meaning that it doesn't make fun of anybody of any type. It's literally about one guy.

It's about a a character named Wally who tries to use every you know, every mechanism to avoid work. That's it. So it's about how people deal with deal with the you know the texture of society. It's not about whether it's right or wrong. It's not about who's good or bad. It's not who's winning or losing. It's nothing. It's literally about one character who doesn't even exist.

How much trouble am I going to get into for doing a comic about one character who doesn't even exist? A lot. Let me give you the landscape of my life. Um so at this point I will have the trans community hating me because they thought a comic that had nothing to do with them was about them. That's number one. So the tran and by the way, You've watched me long enough to know. Is there anybody who's a bigger supporter of the LGBTQ community?

Probably not. Probably not. You'd have to look pretty hard to find somebody who's more supporting of of that community in particular. Like in particular. So much so that my audience often is like haste me for it. Here's another one. If you were to Google me, you would find out uh incorrectly, because it was fake news, that I had said something terrible about women. I'm not even going to get into the details, because it didn't really happen.

So there's a story taken out of context, which if you see it out of context, would appear that I'm an incredible woman hating sex. Which is exactly the opposite of anything that's ever been in my head or in my life. Yeah, I was raised by a strong woman, have a strong woman as a sister, have you know, most of my relationships are with strong women of one type or another. Um I don't really have

Whatever it is that people imagine I have in my head. Right. So now the trans people hate me for something that didn't happen. Uh women hate me if they've Googled me. They hate me for something again that literally didn't happen. Literally didn't happen. Um, minorities hate me because of the fake news about Trump. So to the degree that I'm associated with supporting Trump.

People think, well then you also support these other things like the fine people comment. No, because that didn't happen. So there are a whole bunch of Trump hoaxes that are that accrue to me. That are things that literally didn't happen. Okay. So now I've got trans hating me for something that didn't happen, women hating me for something that didn't happen, uh minorities hating me for something that didn't happen with Trump that accrues to me.

And here's the last one. A lot of conservatives are turned off to me because they believe I was pushing vaccines, which also never happened. Literally never happened. So I've actually so somebody somebody says I'm acting like a victim. Am I? I thought this was interesting. Is this not interesting? Don't you find it interesting that my entire um my entire public brand is 100%, 100% based on things that never happened. All of it.

All of it is based on stuff that didn't happen. Every fucking bit of it.

Is that not interesting? I think that's interesting. All right. Um it's hard to know what's interesting to other people. But I I suppose that's my job, so I should be I should know that. Press on, buddy, Craig says. We're gonna press on something that's interesting to you. All right, so uh people are up in arms because there's a left leaning group that published the home addresses of some of the um conservative justices, Supreme Court justices.

And this would be so that uh people would go protest at their homes. Um How alarming is that compared to, let's say, January 6th? Because everybody's going to compare it to January 6th, right? Hey, if January 6th was so bad, isn't this worth Well, I it's hard to be consistent with all of this stuff, so I'm gonna try to be consistent, which is uh to the extent that anybody in either group is doing something completely legal,

I guess free speech, if it's legal, right? I guess I suggest it, or I support the right to do it. That's different. But there is something terribly republic wrecking about uh going to the homes of the Supreme Court. Somewhat uniquely. Like way more than going to the home of a politician, which is bad enough. Right? I don't think anybody should be going to anybody's home. That's like that's like way over the But for the Supreme Court it's way worse in my opinion.

Because as I've often said, the Supreme Court is only it's the one thing we can sort of almost agree on, even though we're not, right? It at least they have s the credibility that they show their work. Yeah, scholars are gonna be pouring over it. If it's wrong, maybe there'll be a chance to change it in the future. So it is our most credible system, even though we're arguing about it at the moment.

So if you have people uh perverting that in any way, that's the most dangerous thing that could happen to our system. So yeah, it's really dangerous. I'm not I'm not going to go so far to call it call it trees. Like I I feel like that's too far. It's just really bad judgment and it's really bad patriotism. And it's also not the way to win. Um but you know, I I don't think it works so well on a group that knows they're going to be doing controversial things.

I doubt there are too many cowards in the Supreme Court. Probably not. And uh they're they're appointed for life. So, you know, I've got a feeling that the they won't be influenced is just all bad. It's just all bad. Well, meanwhile, Elizabeth Warren is going ballistic. She's trying to get most of the headlines here. So I think she's realized this could be her moment. Like uh Elizabeth Warren has been out of the headlines for a long time.

She she sort of, you know, will get a get a quote or something, but she's not she's not really too relevant at the moment. But then this issue comes up and she she wants to get on video screaming louder than anybody else's screaming. So that it becomes about her and she can harness that energy. Nothing wrong with that, by the way. If I said that like it was a negative, I would have said it as a positive if Trump did it.

Yeah, it's a real good technique to attach yourself to something that already has that So she finds something that already has energy, the abortion question, attaches herself to it, and uh she did it well. So i if I'm going to uh evaluate her on technique. Pretty good. Now, uh uh I see a lot of you are saying, oh, it's like a John Dean moment where she looks like a crazy person by screaming too much.

To which I say, not if you agree with her. She only looks like a crazy person if you disagree with her. If you agree with her, she's the most passionate uh person and she's gonna be fighting on your side. whatever else. So I don't think it was a mistake. I think it was I think she she probably pulled it off. Yeah, the Howard Ding thing was a mistake, but also because he was male and because there was no top Think of the difference.

You're allowed to scream as as loudly and as crazy as you want if the reason you're shouting deserves And she's selling it as it deserves it. So sh I think she's making the sale. Howard Dean wasn't selling anything. He was just making noise to make noise and it just looked silly. She's selling something that people are buying. So that's completely different.

Um So let's see. Yeah, Jonathan Turley was coming out pretty strong strongly against uh these protesting at the uh Justices House. And Yeah uh he he does a good job of explaining it. Two studies here that I think you should be alerted to. So you know there uh we're seeing lots of data recently, so these are not brand new, but in in the recent couple of weeks We've seen a big Ivermectin study, we've seen a big study about the vaccinations

You know, Pfizer information and separately other studies of vaccinations and stuff like that. And there's one thing that we can conclude about all ivermectin studies and all vaccination studies. And what is that? What is it we can conclude the one thing we know for sure about vaccinations and ivermectin studies? Is it I'm not talking about the drug, I'm talking about the studies. What do we know about all the studies?

So here's the th the one thing we know. The one thing we know is not whether they're all crap. We don't really know that. The one thing we know is that they are Rorschach tests in which everybody will only see what they want to see. We do know that. That's something we know. So the ivermectin study, and the people who think ivermectin doesn't work say, well, there it is. The biggest randomized controlled study says it doesn't work.

And then all the people who think it does work say, Um, look at the way they designed it. It was literally designed to fail. And here are our reasons. Then then then they show their work. And then I say, Huh. That well, they have an argument. It's not that they don't have an argument. They show their work. Here's our argument. Here's the dose. Here's what would have made sense. Is there a counter argument to that? I don't know.

But that's where I go off the rails. So I end up der uh I end up defaulting to what I thought was true in the first place. So in other words, it's like a Rorschach test. I look at the ivermectin study and I just see what I already thought was true. Same thing with the the vaccination studies. I'm seeing people tweeting all day, well, now there's proof that the vaccinations harmed you. And then people look at the same study and say, well, here's proof that they worked compared to getting COVID.

Which is true. I don't know. I don't have the skill to know that. And I don't know how I could tell without having the skill myself. I don't know how I could ever know it. The only thing we know for sure is that everybody sees what they want to see in the in in the the science. And that feels different.

Because I feel like we've gone to uh the third layer. So like, you know, twenty years ago, if the science journals said it was true and the scientists said it was true, we mostly thought it was true. And then it got to the point of Oh wait a minute, some of these studies are bogus, actually way too many, maybe half of them.

that got published shouldn't have been published, or they're not repeatable or they can't be reproduced. Right? So then we went from, oh, science is good to, whoa, I guess we overtrusted science. So you we've got to be careful. Sciences might be right half the time, but if you do your own research, you can figure out which time they're right. Because humans, the non-scientists can do that. That's what we thought.

W we used to believe that we could do a deep dive and we could figure out which of the scientific studies were the good Now what do you think? I think we've gone to the next level of awareness. The next level of awareness is you can't tell which ones are real. You don't know who's lying. but you do know you're gonna see what you expected to see. That, ladies and gentlemen, is the golden age. Welcome.

It's about time. It took you a little while to get here. Yeah, you had to take the long way, didn't you? Some of you are having an experience right now. Not all of you. Some And and you're realizing that you actually took that path. You went from science probably right to science, ooh, you gotta really be careful, but if you do your own research, you know, you can work it out, to you can do your own research.

That's not a thing. You're just going to see exactly what you wanted to see, but now you know it. Now, when you see what you wanted to see, you'll know it's not s necessarily real. You'll just know you see it. You could look at these studies now and say, okay, I see clearly, clear as day. Yes or no. Doesn't matter what you see, but I see it clear as day, and now for the first time, for the first time.

You can step outside of your own perception and you can say, you know, that looks exactly like that study is saying something, but I don't know. I really don't know. I really, really don't know. That's the same thing. is where you need it to be. So if you weren't there until today, welcome.

And it's going to be a big deal. You just wait. Um I saw a little uh bit by Pete Buttig being uh being quite persuasive. And here's how he was framing the I guess the culture war situation, the Disney situation, the Dose gay stuff. And the way he says it is that the r uh the Republicans have no answers. For the big problem.

And then he lists a bunch of things. He said, you know, they have no answer for child care costs and they have no answer for uh the deficit and taxes. And he gives a bunch of things that the the Republicans have no answer. To which I say, actually those were pretty good examples. They really don't have an answer for health care. That's true. I say the same thing. Well he conveniently left out all the things that they do have answers for. Because you know this uh the surge in crime?

Talk to a Republican. Uh talk to a Republican. They actually have answers to that. Th there there are actually things you can do to reduce crime. It's well understood. Talk to a Republican. How about the border? Do you think the Republicans have any solutions for the border? Yes they do. Yes they do. You might not like them. It it would be reasonable to say you don't like them. But to say that they don't have a solution that has worked in the past would not be true.

So um I'm gonna give Buddh judge a A plus for persuasion. But of course I see what I want to see in Pete Buddha judge. And and the people who like him are going to see what they want. So does it matter that he's uh that what he says makes sense or doesn't make sense or he leaves something out? No, not really. It doesn't matter. It only matters if it was persuasive to the people he wanted to persuade, and he's pretty good at it.

And so h his uh his take is that the Republicans are creating these fake targets and and demonizing people like the trans community because they don't have any real argument. I thought to myself Okay, it's not true, because he's, you know, selectively picking the things that they don't have arguments for. I'll give them that. But he's really good at it. He's pretty good at it. Yeah, I I do think he could be president.

I'm not I'm not endorsing him. Don't worry, don't worry, I'm not endorsing him. I'm just saying that he needs to be seasoned. He's not ready. I would say he shouldn't be president now. He's just not there. But he has the ability, he has the natural ability to figure out what it is he's not doing right yet, and then get there. Now, don't be angry at me. I'm not I'm not suggesting he should or should not be present. I'm just saying that his his uh skill level

is higher than most of the people on the left, and he only has to be the best one on the left. Am I right? Wait. That sounded confusing. He only needs to be the best one on the left. Because that's all it takes to be president. Yeah, unless he's running again. uh a uh uh a power like Trump or something like that. But that's all it would take. You only have to be better than the left. And that you could argue that that bar is low because their bench isn't very good.

And I don't think that that's partisan to say that the Republicans have a better bet. Do you feel that that is subjectively is that too subjective? I g if just few I think the er both sides say that, right? Because you can go I think you can go three or four deep on the Republican side and still have a good candidate, but on the left it's a little bit harder because Kamala and Biden so strong. Uh China wants to uh increase its military presence abroad. Nothing to worry about there. Oh my god.

What would happen if China ended up with military bases everywhere that they have economic interests and more influence than the United States, because it would take take that to happen. I don't know. It's pretty scary stuff. It does seem that demographic wise and just number wise, eventually we live in the Chinese world, right? 'Cause they're just so many. So many of them and if they spread out and spread their influence, spl spread their money.

and continue succeeding as they have. Uh I don't know how we don't live in a China dominated world eventually. I mean three hundred years from now, but not right away.

Alright. The uh the most interesting story of the day, I don't know why I waited so long for that, is that um there's a new book out by Espers. was it Esperce? He would he had been in the Trump administration and said that he was Secretary of Defense, right? And uh he reports in his new book that Trump had asked him about sending some Patriot missiles in to destroy uh destroy the drug making operations in Mexico. And the news treated it like a that was such a crazy thing.

Now, can I ask you a question? Those of you who have watched me for a while and also watched the news in general for a while. Before you read about this. Was there anybody else in the public besides me who was saying, let's drone the fentanyl um labs in Mexico? Was I the only one saying that in public? I think I said it a lot, but I don't remember seeing anybody else say it. Do you have any memory of anybody saying it before I said it? anybody in the public public eye.

Huh. But name a name if you can think of anybody, because I want to give credit where credit would be due. Well, okay. So it's blowing my mind a little bit because as of today, now that uh Trump said that um or reportedly said it, you know, you have to take it with a grain of salt. And I think it was it was uh phrased as a question.

My understanding was not that he ordered him to do it or said, You must do this. My understanding he said, Would it be feasible? Essentially. And then Esper said no, and then it didn't happen. Okay. I'm not sure that that's a uh uh there's something missing in the story, isn't there? The part that's missing in the story is why isn't it a good idea? Because I don't think that's even been mentioned. And obviously there are risks.

You know, obviously we know the whole situation, what what is likely to happen, but I've never heard anybody explain the risks. Because to me it doesn't seem like if the if Mexico is owned by the cartels And you bomb the cartels, uh I I just can't see a moral, legal, or even a homeland security risk in doing that. It just seems like we would uh we would show them that having an industry that kills fifty thousand Americ Americans per year is gonna get you fucking killed.

It would just send the message. Yeah, uh you can keep sending fentanyl to the United States and kill fifty thousand Americans. Yeah, and I know it's the addicts' fault. You don't have to make that argument. I get it, I get it. The addicts are the ones that take the drugs. I get it.

Um but that doesn't make them innocent, does it? They're not more innocent because somebody else should have done something different. So I I think a lot of people, at least on Twitter, are saying, uh, why don't we take out the the fentanyl line? Why don't we? Now Now the first thing you're going to say to yourself is that what difference would it make? Because it would only take them a week to spin up a new lab. Right? And you'd be right.

Do you know what also doesn't stop murder? Putting people in jail. It doesn't stop crime. So why do we have jails? What's the point of a jail if it doesn't stop crime? Maybe slows it down a little bit, but it doesn't really stop it, right? So the our entire system depends on punishing people that don't completely stop what they're doing. So you don't not do it because it's not a hundred percent fix. Nothing works.

You do it to create uh friction, to make it harder to do it. And then you just keep squeezing. And bombing, you know, literally bombing the labs would only be one thing. It's not the one thing you do. You know, it's just one other thing. So if you just keep squeezing in every possible way you can squeeze, well maybe you can reach the point where there's less fentanyl coming out. But I wouldn't look at it as you know one act.

Does that completely solve the problem or not? No. No, it doesn't work like that. You would just put pressure everywhere you could put pressure. And if it were me, I would make those labs explode if we knew where they were. And then somebody says, well what about the civilian deaths? To which I say, civilians at a fentanyl lab? Are those the deaths you're worried about? If somebody takes their children to work at the fentanyl uh lab I I'm not going to call that my problem.

I'm definitely not going to call that my problem. I mean that would be tragic. But it's also it's adult business. Everything about this are adult decisions. If you can't handle an adult decision, then don't be part of the conversation. And adult decision does mean killing. Accidentally, intentionally. No way around it.

So yeah, I would take out the fentanyl labs. If there's a way to find them and know for sure that they were they're fentanyl labs, I would make them all explode. Uh uh definitely. But it's just not the only thing I would. Uh all right. Let me ask you this. Um In the comments. In the comments. Would you agree with taking out the fentanyl labs in Mexico? Not necessarily with a specific patriot missile. Could be drones, could be special operations, whatever whatever works. I don't know. I'm no

So on the locals platform, uh ninety percent yeses. On YouTube, so far all yeses. Yeah. Now isn't that interesting? That um now of course you're you're probably you know right leaning audience. For the most part. So that's not too surprising. But the way the news treats it is as is as if you don't even have to debate how crazy.

To which I would only add this one thing. No, you do need to fucking debate how crazy that is. You do need to. You don't get to say it's crazy and walk away. No, fuck you if you're doing that. You don't get to say it's crazy and walk away. You better stay.

You're going to need to tell me why this isn't a good idea. It might not be. And by the way, I could easily be convinced. It wouldn't take much to convince me. Just somebody who knows what they're talking about, laying out the reasons and the risks. And then I'd see it say, oh, this risk looks bigger than the benefit. Don't do it. But if you're not even gonna engage in the conversation, well, I'm not gonna take you seriously. I'm gonna take seriously the person who asked the question.

Would it work if we d if we missile attacked the lab? That's a that was the right question. Even if the answer was hell no, because of X, Y, and Z, it was still the right fucking question. And boy do I respect Trump for asking. Now he couldn't get enough uh support to do it, and I think he would need the support of his you know his top people. But it was the right question. And I have to I have to say uh I'm going to slightly revise

my opinion of Trump's performance on fentanyl because I had given him something like a a D minus because nothing changed. It got worse. But, you know, at least he made it a little bit more of a national conversation. He tried to push China a little bit, but it didn't work. And so I was I was basically he was this close to a completely failing grave. But now that I know how serious he was about it, that he was willing to risk war with Mexico to kill these motherfuckers.

I have a lot more respect for him. I'm I wish he had been successful at something with fentanyl, and he wasn't. So yeah, I'm not gonna lose sight of that. But at least he was serious. He he was serious about it, and that he obviously was willing to take a risk that would have been a big risk to himself personally. Let me say that again. He would have known that was a big risk to him politically.

Like, you know, he would have hoped it went his way, but he obviously would have known the size of the risk. So if Trump was privately taking a risk that big to himself, privately. to himself. That was a personal risk. Even asking the question was a personal risk. So now my respect for Trump on this topic, I'm being very specific here, is now vastly increased. Because we know he was willing to take a personal risk to get it done.

It's hard to ask for more than that from a politician, right? He didn't get it done and that matters. But he he if this book is correct, he was willing to take a personal risk to get it done. on top of the you know the country risk, et cetera, which is a separate conversation. All right. Did I discuss this topic with Trump? I did not. No. I did not. Um th only only in the limited sense that I do it publicly. So I I've talked about uh going after the labs publicly.

That that would be a horrible crime, in my opinion. But I'm never gonna get on somebody for asking the question. So you know I I I just don't think that's a standard that we should appreciate. You know, the the standard should be we'll look at their decision, not the questions they asked to get there. That's not how you want to judge anybody. You don't want to see the first draft. All right. Um Assange did not kill millions.