Oliver Stone and Joe Rogan challenge nuclear fearmongering in Nuclear Now, debunking exaggerated media claims about Three Mile Island, Chernobyl, and Fukushima—where radiation deaths were minimal compared to fossil fuel’s 1M–4M annual toll. Stone highlights scalable SMRs (Korea, Russia, U.S.) and military vessels’ decades-long operation, dismissing waste as manageable in spaces like Walmart, while Rogan mocks Netflix’s rejection for controversy. They link nuclear’s potential to climate solutions, contrasting it with renewables needing backup power, and critique anti-nuclear activists like Ralph Nader for prolonging coal dependence. Ultimately, the documentary reframes energy debates by exposing how Hollywood and politics distort science, offering a pragmatic path forward. [Automatically generated summary]
Yeah, I have been fascinated by this subject for a long time, and I'm very, very happy that you made this documentary, and it's a very good documentary, by the way.
Thank you for making it and thank you for highlighting this very very important issue that seems to have been Really confused and I'm really glad how you covered it in this documentary about Three Mile Island and Chernobyl and Fukushima.
We have these ideas in our mind about the dangers of nuclear power and I love the analogy that you made in the film about how driving a car is not scary.
But it's dangerous.
Flying in a plane feels scary, but it's far safer.
And this is a great analogy to nuclear power.
When you went over the data, when you talked about the amount of deaths from coal every year, when you talk about The amount of deaths overall ever from nuclear.
That happens when a fad, I mean, becomes fashionable.
It's a very successful movement.
You're talking about the negatives here and the accidents.
We cover all that in the film, which is called Nuclear Now.
And the idea that was behind it was because I really was like you.
I went along with those things in the 70s and the 80s because I didn't know better.
I wasn't educated.
I really wanted to know what is nuclear power.
I wanted to go back to the source.
And you've got to go back to the beginning.
And you've got to go back to Marie Curie and Albert Einstein and World War II and how it got developed.
This nuclear energy is a beautiful, incredible, almost...
A miracle that was given to us.
We have an Earth.
It's in the Earth.
Uranium.
It's everywhere.
The planet, the Earth, the Sun.
And we, in a sense, we took it like Prometheus and we kind of misinterpreted it, misused it, which is kind of normal given what we do with natural things.
World War II was happening just as the nuclear fission was being understood.
Made the bomb.
They made the bomb with it because there was a war on it.
They rushed it and they did an amazing job, Oppenheimer, down in Los Alamos.
And they got it and they were successful.
But as you know, it was misunderstood at that point that nuclear energy was not a nuclear bomb.
In the contrary, a bomb is very difficult to build.
And it takes years sometimes.
It takes scientists and they have to enrich the plutonium and they have to work at it.
There's all configurations in the bomb that don't exist in nuclear energy.
So when people see a nuclear energy plant, they subconsciously, they cross it with both war and they cross it with horror films that they've seen in the 1950s with radioactivity and Monsters that come out of that.
You know, a spider bites the man and he becomes Spider-Man.
The Hulk, yeah.
It's incredible, the stuff that happens.
And Hollywood has done no favors to it.
It's continued for years and years and years.
Of course, you had Three Mile Island.
The film was coming out at the same time, China Syndrome, with Jane Fonda.
It was a good film.
I enjoyed it.
We all enjoyed it, but it really was hysterical and alarmist.
Nothing happened at Three Mile Island except the reactor did melt down, but nobody got hurt because the containment structure worked to keep it in.
So there was no release of radiation.
And they continued on.
Silkwood was another one.
And then, if you remember, not too long ago, there was the HBO thing, Chernobyl, which was a complete fictionalization of what happened at Chernobyl.
So we went to Russia, and we talked to the scientists there, and we wanted to know what happened at Chernobyl.
And the same thing is true for Fukushima, which is unbelievable because when you go to the bottom of it, I was astounded to find out that nobody died there from radiation.
Not one Japanese.
They checked the whole thing out and it's been done to death.
But you hear about 15,000, 20,000 people died from the tsunami and the earthquake, which was the biggest earthquake Japan ever had.
I mean, really, we show the earthquake.
We show the tsunami.
The wave was 100 feet tall.
There was a badly built wall.
The wall was not a sea wall that could hold, and the generators were flooded beneath the water.
Fukushima was, if you look at closely, Japan had built 20-some reactors at that point, and this one is the only one.
The others were exposed to the same earthquake and the same kind of...
Tsunami, several of them were on that same coastline.
But this particular one, this plant, was the only one that was shaken up.
And even then, all the radiation that was released, there was a hydrogen explosion.
That radiation released in the air, you heard about it.
It was supposed to be another terrible.
Well, we have shots in the film showing...
They're taking tests on all the Japanese citizens and nobody can, you know, it's low-level, what they call low-level radiation, which is we can sustain it.
We have DNA in our body that fixes, repairs our body as each day goes by.
But it's also, you point out very well in the film, that there's a lot of radiation that you don't even take into consideration that you encounter constantly.
We have this idea of radiation as being a net negative.
Yeah, but the point is we can live with it, and we have to because we're facing a very difficult situation, a cliff that we're going to go over.
And it seems that no one's really getting it.
So that's why I felt like the film, I wanted to know.
I need to educate myself.
So in doing the film, I think I was able to bring out these things.
You talk about what is wrong with nuclear energy.
It can work.
It is a miracle.
We should use it.
And we should use it abundantly.
The Chinese and the Russians are way ahead of us.
They've built this...
They built it, and they built it with government backing, not like the U.S., where we kind of back it, but we don't really back it.
So as a result, well, China's really cutting out now because they have about 70 reactors, approximately 70 reactors, you know, about 74, I think.
Anyway, they're building.
And I've heard, I can't, I don't remember the source, but I did hear that they're putting another $140 billion into this thing, which means that they're going to build 150-some reactors over the next, by 2038. That is a serious investment.
I mean, there's the waste and all the oil and this fossil fuel itself is destroying the universe because we're putting carbon into the atmosphere, CO2. But gas is considered, they're using gas everywhere.
It seems like a modern thing.
They say, well, renewables, which is solar and wind, we're all for that.
It's a sad thing because the truth is it worked for 70 years and it still work.
And the old ones work.
But okay, we want new stuff.
That's the American way.
We always have to have a new thing.
Because we get bored with the old thing.
Oh, nuclear, I heard about that.
That's dangerous, right?
That's the reaction.
So now they're building in the U.S., they have 50 companies working privately with some Department of Energy help towards making SMRs, small modular reactors, that are sleek, great looking, and they all have different methods of working, including natrium, including Bill Gates is there with a new company.
Because when you were talking about ammonium, when you're talking about just the different fertilizers and pesticides and herbicides that get put in the ground, you know, I don't know if it's scalable for the entire country.
That's the real problem with it.
But there's people like Joel Salatin and White Oak Pastures that's down in Georgia, and they figured out a way to have farms where it's regenerative, where the animals are eating the grass, they're fertilizing the grass, the fertilizer, they use the fertilizer for, they're fertilizing the grass, the fertilizer, they use the fertilizer for, you know, to grow
And they bring in these animals to these ecosystems, and they have them exist in a way that it just basically contained nature.
It's just the way the natural cycle is, and they have a zero-carbon footprint.
It's essentially, everything sort of works in balance, and that's how it's supposed to happen.
And if you look, especially from White Oak Pastures, he had video of the runoff from a rainstorm from his property into the river, which is nothing.
To the next door neighbor's property who runs an industrialized farm.
And it's a fucking disaster.
It's horrific to look at.
Because you just see the topsoil's gone.
Look at the difference.
There's a clear line between his property on the left and the neighbor's property on the right.
I mean, how insane is it that this is normal for us?
This is the problem.
The problem is they've gone into these monocrop agriculture situations where they use the same land over and over again and they have to apply fertilizer and they have to apply herbicides and pesticides and make it toxic for everything.
But whatever the fuck it is they're growing, a lot of the stuff they're growing is genetically modified in order to be more tolerant of these pesticides and herbicides.
But the point is that we're going to need, some people say, three, four, five times the amount of electricity that we have now by 2050, which is the, we use 2050 as a goal mark because that's the IPCC standard.
They said that by 2050, all the countries of the world have to bring down the carbon emissions to zero, to zero.
Yeah, how is that impossible?
It doesn't work.
I mean, the green renewables are great.
There's a great idea.
It made great sense when you saw Al Gore's film.
But the truth is that CO2 keeps going up, not down.
It's gone up since then.
We've spent trillions of dollars since the 2000 period.
This is 20-some years now.
And it just hasn't worked, and nobody admits it.
That's what's crazy.
The only way to get the carbon dioxide out of the atmosphere is do it.
Do it clean.
Do it right now.
You've got to get rid of gas and you've got to get rid of oil, basically.
And you've got to be severe about it.
That means you have to have an alternative, a clean, cheap, scalable alternative.
And nuclear is the only one that's proven itself.
Proven itself for so many years.
And yet nobody...
It doesn't even get talked about.
I mean, journalists will say, and there's nuclear, which is dangerous.
But it's not dangerous if you do it right.
If you build it right and you keep it right, it's been done time and time again.
I wish there had been more accidents.
It would have really taught the lesson.
Every industry has needed accidents.
I mean, when they started the railroad, they thought that your brain would get pushed back in your head because of the speed of going forward.
Same thing was true with airplanes.
He had more crashes before the airplane has been, you know, modified into this incredibly powerful machine.
We're not going to get rid of the airplane.
We're going to have to use fuel.
We have to use aviation fuel.
And that will come from the marriage of hydrogen and carbon, actually.
And it will need a lot of heat.
And that heat is going to come from nuclear.
It's not going to come from anything else, that amount of heat.
We also have to take into consideration that if the population continues to grow and we're doing things the same way, whatever our output is now that's damaging, it's going to get worse and worse and worse.
The United States is in good shape compared to the rest of the world, but look at India.
Look at Africa.
I mean, people will burn wood if they have to, much less coal.
I mean, they're not going to stop people from getting things, and they're going to want energy.
That is going to be the prime.
India is crucial.
We bring it up in the film.
They are doing some great nuclear work.
They have 20-some reactors in India, but they are definitely on the path of coal, like China.
Their demand is enormous for coal.
So what happens?
There's no luck.
We can't get out of that mess.
We're going to have so much pollution, so much warming that the only way we can do it is by building nuclear now and taking everything else we can throw in there, including renewables, alongside it.
It's gonna take someone who's got some courage because politically it's an issue because people do have this false narrative in their head.
So it's gonna take someone who's willing to step outside of what the polling would show.
Because I would imagine that most people, if you just started talking about we have to switch the entire country over to nuclear power, if you're running for president, people go, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa!
So many people just have the knee-jerk reaction that is brought about because of these films, because of the anti-nuclear power movement.
There's still that propaganda exists in people's heads or the false narrative.
As things get worse, it will be clear that we need nuclear more and more and more and we'll come late to the game and we'll say, well, we've got to build more and more and more nuclear because it's not working with...
If it's handled correctly, built correctly, like Hyman Rickover did with the Navy, that's the Navy was one of the biggest developers of nuclear in America.
If you assembly line it, like in Korean shipyards or something, you can build it.
In a way that with SMRs, parts, you can put the parts in and ship them like a Lego set up and down the coastline of China or the coastline of America, any country.
Russians did that in Pevek, which is an Arctic outpost.
They sent a barge.
The Greenpeace, of course, predicted it would be a nuclear Titanic.
And it wasn't.
It arrived in Pevec, and it's set up, and it's working beautifully to this day.
So SMRs are shippable, and they can be built in shipyards.
They originally built 20-some reactors in the 70s and they were doing very fine with it and they had no problems.
And now they've shut them all down because the Green Party, which is a political party, Green Party, which is also pro-war, pro-NATO. You know, it's a strange Green Party.
It's a hybrid.
Anyway, they came into power and it's a democracy and they don't want any nuclear.
So they destroyed, they shut down all their plants that were working.
But would it, you know, I think people just like to cook with gas.
Which is really weird like if it's really bad for you and really bad for the city and for the environment that just the fact that you don't like cooking with electric and Well, I can't comment on that.
Which, you know, we found out, we just talked about this the other day, but we found out from leaded gas that there's a giant dip in IQ points, not a giant one, but like a measurable dip in IQ points amongst people that grew up in my generation with leaded gas everywhere.
So even if it's causing kids asthma, it's not good for anybody then, if that's really what's going on with gas.
But the amount of time that it would take to get the United States, what would that take?
To get rid of all of the things that are polluting the environment, all of the things that are putting out particulates, coal and all that stuff, replace it with nuclear?
I genuinely think that it takes someone like you making a documentary about this to get the word out there to the point where people really start demanding this.
I really do.
I'm trying.
You're countering all those movies that you discussed, all the fictional movies.
You're countering all those.
You're countering all of the stuff that we had growing up, Godzilla and Spider-Man and all that.
We show images in Brazil of going to, Brazilians going to black sand beaches to absorb the radiation that is good for their body.
We show, you know, in cancer therapies, it's used, radiation, heavy radiation is used to kill off tumors in the body.
We show in Iran, Ramsar, Iran, which has got huge radioactivity.
It's very high and it's got, it's tremendously high.
They're doing very well in Iran with Ramsar.
No one's dying.
So in other words, we can live with radiation much longer than we know because DNA, as Crick and Watson found, reduplicates.
It has a double.
So the body repairs itself as it's damaged.
And that was a big argument in the old science, because the Rockefeller Foundation, of course, put out the scare, and they're oil people, they put out the scare to the public in 1957, where they said, you know, any amount of radiation to the body is dangerous.
And that really worked.
The New York Times publisher put it in the front page column, and then it gets out, you know, that fear.
So that's where, meanwhile, the counter comes later, but you don't hear about it.
And the counter claim is we repair our body as we move through life.
It's a wonderful system we have of DNA. Well, we just have scary stories about radiation and, you know, rightly so in some cases, like the radium girls.
It's a very famous story, but these poor women, they developed these holes in their faces.
It's really scary stuff, but it's from very specific type of radiation, and it's also from direct contact through this paint with no protection at all.
Was this something, this subject that, when you decided to make a documentary about this, was it simply just because you had the information and you felt compelled that this is just not a story that's being told correctly?
No, I read a book review in the New York Times, of all things, about Joshua Goldstein's book with Stephen Kvist, the Swedish nuclear scientist, and it was called Bright Future.
I bought the book, read it, it's very practical, it's simple, and it goes into the truth, which is, this is all, there's been a lot of lies, and Then I bought the book and made the movie with him.
He gave me a lot of, I had to learn a lot, I had to travel, and it was difficult.
It was not an easy film to make.
I wanted to make it understandable to a ninth grade level, you know, trying to make it simple.
It's just very important to do, and I'm really glad you did it.
I've talked to so many intelligent people that share your perspective on this, but it's just not being discussed publicly enough that it might have been our solution the whole time.
Unveils battery made from nuclear waste that could last up to 28,000 years.
The nano-diamond batteries power comes from radioactive isotopes used in nuclear reactors.
Yeah, that's what I was talking about.
So as...
Technology advances and obviously technology would, you know, whatever they're able to do now or even, have they actually done this or is this just theoretical?
This article is 2020. It unveiled a battery that uses nuclear waste.
Well, I think we have to look in terms of a long period of time.
If you go back to just the invention of electricity to the time where everybody's carrying around a battery-powered cell phone in your pocket, you're not talking about that long.
You're only talking about a couple of hundred years.
We're looking at it like, oh, my God, we've got to get it done tomorrow.
I don't think you do get this thing done tomorrow.
But I think a big step is what you're describing in your documentary.
That's a big step.
A big step is understanding that nuclear power is a fantastic way forward.
And if they really can make batteries out of nuclear waste, well now we have a – instead of a problem, now we've got a commodity.
So, are nuclear diamond batteries too good to be true?
You're probably wondering what the catch is.
There's a diamond battery out there that really uses nuclear waste, lasts thousands of years, and involves layers of only the most minuscule diamonds.
It's slightly more complicated than that.
Each battery cell will produce only a small amount of energy, for one thing, so scientists must combine the cells in huge numbers in order to regularly power large devices, raising the cost a great deal, along with increasing the complexity.
So I guess the battery would have to be big.
Okay, so that's smaller than the battery that's on your watch?
It's pretty small.
So if we need power a different application, the number of stacked cells can be increased to meet the demand.
I think the thing that's helped me more than anything is being on this show and having conversations with people.
It's like when you think of education as being something, obviously, when you sit in a classroom, you're observing a lot.
You're getting a lot of education.
And the kids today that are going through the workload that they have to go through to put in to get a bachelor's degree and then a master's or a PhD, it's an insane amount of work.
Right.
You're absorbing information.
That's the key.
The key is that you're learning about all these different subjects and absorbing all that information.
I think there's two schools of thought when it comes to climate change.
There's the school of thought that it's not an issue, it's a natural cycle, and there's a school of thought that human beings are pushing the world to the brink of demise.
Right.
I think human beings are doing a lot.
Whenever people try to come up with excuses for things, I was like, well, it's always been this way.
But how much impact are we having?
Instead of looking at it like the climate's always going to change, which it always does.
That's the thing about the climate.
If you look at the climate models of when they do ice core samples, when they try to figure out like how warm it used to be and what the atmosphere was like, it's always changed.
I mean, it's changed radically.
But how much are we fucking it up?
Forget about it.
It's never static.
It's never like the climate is like this, right?
If human beings never existed, internal combustion engines never existed, you still have volcanoes, you got chaos, you got asteroids, you got all kinds of shit.
There's no stable.
There's no flat, safe, we get to this, we're on a life vest.
But just the vastness of the universe itself, and if you believe in the concept of infinity, that means the possibilities of this happening exactly the way we are, are also infinite.
Infinity, it's really hard to put it in your head because it doesn't make sense.
But the true infinity would mean that everything that you've ever done and everything that I've ever done and everything we've ever said and every piece of paper you ever put down all that has happened an infinite number of times in the universe in some other place That's how crazy and every other variable in between that's how crazy infinity is so I think that if we If we imagine that we're the only ones, that seems silly.
It just doesn't even make sense.
It's kind of like nuclear power.
Because you talk about nuclear power to people and go, wait, nuclear bombs, nuclear bad.
Nuclear is dangerous.
Nuclear is dangerous.
I think we think that way about aliens because I think there's been so many kooks that have had so many fake stories and so many doctored photos and everything's blurry and just weird people that probably lied.
And then compelling stories that are really confusing, like really intelligent people, like Commander David Fravor.
Who was a fighter jet pilot in 2004 and encountered this thing that they tracked going from 50,000 feet above sea level to 50 in a second.
They think it was interacting with something that was submerged.
And then this thing...
When it jetted off at this insane rate of speed, first of all, it blocked their tracking.
It blocked their radar or whatever sensors that they were using.
And then it shot off at an insane rate of speed and stopped at their cat point, which is the point where they had the predetermined point where they were going to meet up in this exercise that they were doing.
This thing went to that spot.
And it was 20 feet long and looked like a tic-tac.
And it was just hovering like a tic-tac, like a candy, like a little white tic-tac candy.
So they call it the tic-tac UFO. When I talk to guys like that, when I talk to guys like that, I go, well, if it's not a UFO, if that's not from another planet, that is maybe more scary than if the Chinese have something that's that advanced.
That can move like that?
Is this some new type of technology that might be available to probably just the high-end military applications that they're using for drones and all these different propulsion methods?
If they've figured something that crazy out, it's kind of game over.
If they can go 50,000 feet above sea level to 50 in a second, what is that?
It's this amazing documentary series that's on Netflix right now.
And it's about these embedded journalists who document chimpanzee life in this part of the very deep in the jungle, a place called Ngogo.
And it's incredible because the scientists that laid the groundwork for this documentary, they've been studying this particular group of chimpanzees for 30 years.
So the chimpanzees have become completely fine with them being around.
They have rules of interaction.
They have to stay within, I think, 20 yards of the chimpanzees at all time.
And as long as they do that, the chimpanzees behave as if they don't exist.
And they enact in war.
They kill monkeys.
They hunt.
They defend their territory.
They take over new territory.
They do all this stuff in front of people.
But they don't interact with the chimpanzees, and they don't interrupt their life.
I think that's what the aliens do with us, because that's what we do with intelligent primates.
Why would you do any different if you were an alien?
I think if I was an alien life form, I would make sure that the chimps don't blow themselves up.
Like, if chimpanzees and Ngogo, if all of a sudden they've developed TNT, and they start soldering, and they're building bombs, and they're planting...
Okay, hold on, fellas.
You can't blow yourselves up.
You can't just be blowing the jungle up and starting fires.
Let's stop.
If I was an alien life form, I would treat human beings the same way that I, as a human being, would treat chimpanzees if they started developing bombs.
We need to get the bombs away from the chimps.
If chimpanzees developed like missiles and they start shooting missiles at each other through the jungle, don't you think we'd be like, hey, hey, hey, cut the shit.
You're not even people.
Only people are allowed to kill people like that.
I think if alien life forms do exist, I think the most likely strategy is the one that we use on higher primates, on lower primates rather.
We don't interfere.
We observe, but the true scientists, they just sort of stand back and watch.
And the chimpanzees don't seem to have any problem with these people being around.
Occasionally they get curious, and when they start walking towards the person, the person just keeps backing up.
And as long as they stay a certain distance, the chimp loses interest.
It's really weird.
You just can't eat in front of them, ever.
And you, you know, just can't ever, like, raise your voice.
My point is, I think that if there are aliens, I think they would do the same.
I think they would just watch.
Just make sure we don't blow ourselves up, watch, and maybe, maybe, you know, let us know occasionally that we're not alone.
That's what I would do.
I would, I would like, just like the scientists had to slowly habituate themselves to the chimpanzees, they had to slowly do it.
They did it over, because at first the chimpanzees ran, and then they had to figure out some sort of a way that they can just be around them enough The chimpanzees relaxed, and as soon as they realized they were never a threat, and then generations of them realized they were never a threat, then they could do the work that they're doing.
My friend Remy Warren, he used to have a show called Apex Predator, and it was a, what he would do is like study all of the different methods that different apex predators used.
And see, like, is there anything you could emulate as a human being?
But this shows some footage of octopuses camouflaging themselves to their environment.
It's insane.
It's alien.
And this is what Remy said.
He goes, dude, they're aliens.
He goes, you've never seen anything like it.
And he had no idea until he filmed this show, I don't think, of how complex their ability to blend in is.
I mean, what a crazy little thing that's moving around at the bottom of the ocean, changing its texture, changing its colors to look exactly like its environment.
Like, look at this thing.
It's fucking bonkers.
That's an alien.
I mean, if we found that on another planet, we would be like, what the fuck is that thing?
And a lot of the problems with these studies that are associated with whether or not meat is bad for you, a lot of these things are – what they're doing is basically they're asking you to take a survey.
And if you say you ate meat four times a week or five times a week and then they make some sort of a correlation, they say, well, the people that ate meat more consistently had more cancer, more this, more diabetes, all these things.
Which may be true.
But also, what else did they eat?
Because if they ate meat five times a week, I guarantee you they were drinking Coca-Cola.
I guarantee you they were eating bread.
I guarantee you they were eating candy.
I guarantee you Monster Energy drinks.
I want to know what the fuck they ate.
Don't tell me that because the people that ate meat more, because people that eat meat more, generally, if you go by the narrative, the same kind of narrative that you have about nuclear power, that it's bad for you.
If you go by that narrative, the people that shuck it off and don't give a shit, those are the same people that smoke cigarettes and drink whiskey, they don't care if it's bad for you.
You just want to do it in a way where you're not going to get hurt.
That's the most important thing.
Do it in a really smart way.
If you can, do it with a trainer.
But everyone should do something.
Whether it's yoga or push-ups or sit-ups and chin-ups and body weight stuff.
You can get an amazing workout done with a chin-up bar and just your body.
Just your physical body weight.
You don't really need to go to a gym, but you really should get someone to show you how to do stuff if you don't know how to do it.
And it helps if someone can help you write out a program that's like a good program for someone who's if they assess like your physical ability.
You don't want to get like a person who just started to go run like David Goggins.
That would be ridiculous.
But you want them to be able to build up and build up in a way where the body is recovering and they continue to push themselves, but they're not getting hurt.
That's what you gotta do.
I say that to everybody.
I think everybody should do that.
It's just my suggestion.
I know people that are very happy that they don't exercise at all.
It is possible.
It's just not possible for me.
And I don't know what it's like for everybody else, because I'm not you, but I can only tell you how it feels for me.
And for me, you know, I believe the people that say they don't need to exercise.
But for most people, if you just want to maintain your physical frame, if you want to maintain your functionality of your body, I really think it's imperative.
I don't, you know, I don't know...
What makes less sense if you just if you Don't use your body it breaks down and then you can't get around and that sucks And when you can't get around then you would we'd be willing to do anything to get it motion again Well, you can mitigate a lot of that by exercise a lot of it Just keep your body fit and strong and you don't have to worry as much about all the things that plague people.
I was saying to you that climate change, if it didn't exist, which I believe it does, but if it didn't exist, I'd still advocate nuclear energy because it's clean.
I don't think we should be afraid, but I think we should be aware.
And I don't think that this demise fear, it exists because it happens.
Civilizations collapse.
You can go visit ancient Rome.
You can look around.
You can see the Colosseum.
They're not there anymore.
Those people are gone.
The people that built that.
That's just going to happen.
It's going to happen to us, too.
And it's going to happen to us biologically, too.
So there's this constant fear of so many different things that we have that we carry around with us all the time as you hold the Day of the Dead skull.
You'd have to figure out some way where it's significant that it happens in a two-hour film, something that's going to take place over the next, like, five, ten years of construction of these things.
And Lomachenko, who is the older guy, he's about 35 years old, just served in Ukraine.
He's a Ukrainian and he served protecting his country for like a year.
Took a year off of boxing and then came back and had this insane fight with Devin Haney.
It was insane.
It was so good.
It was just this crazy back and forth fight that most people thought or a lot of people rather thought Lomachenko should have got the decision and he didn't get the decision.
It's very unfortunate when stuff like that happens too because then people don't appreciate how good Devin Haney's performance was because all they're thinking about is Lomachenko should have won.
But Devin Haney fought amazing too.
It was a very good fight.
It was a really, really top high-end fight.
The consequences of that, going into a fight like that, when you're watching something like that, anything can happen.
It's such a wild risk that you're going to do this for a living, and you're going to get to the pinnacle of the world champion, the greatest two 135-pound fighters alive, and they go to war in front of the world.
And watching something like that, to me, it's so overwhelming.
I'm so interested in it that I don't have really time for the sports.
And I can't get too involved in too many different things because I get obsessed with them.
I don't want to be watching all the basketball games.
If you think about how many hours a week it is, if you have basketball, football, baseball, all these different things you're watching as well, there's no time left.
Where's your time coming from?
There's no way.
So even though I think it's very enjoyable, I would enjoy it very much.
I just stay away because I just can't get involved in too many different things.