Knowledge Fight Interactive Search Tool

All Episodes

Previous Next

Nov. 1, 2021 - The Podcast of the Lotus Eaters

01:30:09

The Podcast of the Lotus Eaters #253

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	Good afternoon and welcome to episode 253 of the podcast of the Lotus Eaters.
	I'm your host Harry, joined here today by Carl.
	Hello!
	And today we're going to be going over some subjects including why university students in America seem to be pretending not to be white, why the trans...
	what's this one?
	The trans lobby should be careful what it wishes for.
	Yeah, because it just might get it.
	Yep, and we're also going to be looking at COP26 and how all the climate alarmists are...
	...gathering together in one place, really, yeah.
	Tell us how the world's ending and the sky's falling.
	Yep, getting together.
	But before we go there, we have some articles and videos to shill.
	So, first of all, here's a new premium article with audio from Josh, why the government and the mafia use the same business model, where he's examining...
	Pretty typical libertarian-style ideas, I'd imagine, about taxation.
	I haven't had time to read it, but I saw the title and I assumed it had been written by Hugo.
	And I spoke to Josh about it, and he was like, yeah, Hugo messaged me and was like, oh, I really like your new article.
	I think Hugo's slowly dragging Josh over to his side.
	But, I mean, in Josh's defence, it's basically saying, well, look, we're being extorted for all this tax, and, you know, where's it going?
	Looking at the Conservatives last week and Biden's Build Back Better, I... Don't see the argument against it.
	No, I agree with him.
	We've got another one from Hugo, which is a similar topic, Tax Me Harder Daddy.
	This is another premium article with audio, so I imagine it's along a similar line, so our Libertarian viewers should get a kick out of those two articles.
	We've also got a new Contemplations, which came out just in time for Halloween with Josh and Thomas talking about the psychology, parapsychology behind why it is that people see ghosts or assume that they see ghosts.
	So check that out.
	It should be a fun one, I'd imagine.
	Then we've also got another Epochs on the end of the Hundred Years' War, which was you and Beau, wasn't it?
	Yeah.
	Yeah, this is me with the crying Wojak meme with a smiling mask over it.
	We had to give them one win.
	Oh, yeah, I mean, you know, they had to have at least one.
	But, yeah, no, obviously it's good.
	It goes through the life of Joan of Arc and how the Hundred Years War come to a close.
	So, yeah, it was really good.
	I really enjoyed that entire series, actually.
	Yeah, and at three o'clock this afternoon as well, we're getting another premium video out, which is me and Carl talking about the recent open letter that was given by a man called Ole Skambrax from the German broadcaster's ARD. It's just explaining why he can't really do it anymore.
	Yeah, well, the it being the COVID narrative that the German public broadcaster has.
	Seemingly most public broadcasters seem to be pushing as well.
	Yeah, and he's got a bunch of really good questions that he asks that just aren't being asked, and it's because they would completely destroy the COVID narrative.
	And, of course, we can't really put that on YouTube, so that'll be up later.
	Yeah, check out the premium video.
	So, without any further ado, let's get into it.
	So, why is it that university students are lying about not being, well, about being white?
	Yeah, that's a really great question, because, you know, you think with all that white privilege that they have...
	I mean, life's just a...
	jaunt in the park for white people, surely, according to the narratives.
	So, yeah, we've got this recent article from The Hill here where it states that more than a third of white students lie about their race on college applications, which is the results of a recent survey which was done of 1,250 students.
	So, I would assume a relatively representative sample of applications.
	Applicants in the American University.
	So it states here that a survey found that 34% of white students who applied to colleges falsely claimed that they were a racial minority in their application.
	I wonder how that was established.
	I don't know exactly.
	Did they test the blood or what, you know?
	Did they get the colour swatches out?
	Yeah, who knows?
	Yeah, so it says most students, 48%, claimed to be Native American on their application.
	Ah, the Elizabeth Warren defence.
	Exactly.
	And 77% of white applicants who lied about their race on their application were accepted to those colleges.
	The publication found that 81% of students who fit minority status did so to improve their chances of getting accepted.
	And 50% of students who lied said that they did it also to get minority-focused financial aid.
	So they did it to get some form of privilege.
	I mean, that is just uncontestably true, isn't it?
	If they're doing it because they think they're going to be discriminated against because they're white, and also there are financial benefits to being a racial minority, that is a racially-based privilege.
	And these have been in place since, what, the 1960s with affirmative action in America, I think?
	Yeah, I think there have been more that have been added over time.
	Yeah, it's ever-expanding in the Thomas Sowell sense of, well, it hasn't worked yet, let's just keep doing more and more and more of it.
	Exactly.
	But again, codified racial privileges for non-white people.
	And so white people are just like, okay, I'll just pretend to be a Native American like Elizabeth Warren then.
	Yeah.
	So yeah.
	It's very, very easy.
	And yeah, it goes a bit further into here.
	And just before we move on, just to make it clear on my position or our position on this, we don't think there should be any racial privileges at all.
	Oh, absolutely not.
	I mean, why even ask them about their race on the application?
	And there's so much going on in the world where people are claiming that this or that is socially constructed nowadays.
	And I think we can all agree that, well...
	How are they lying if it's just a social construct?
	Gender and biology is not something that we want to throw to the side.
	But of all of the categories that you could put into the social construction, why not just put race in there?
	Just go like, well, the differences are almost negligible.
	Yeah, but why bother with it?
	That's the thing.
	Unless you've got some sort of...
	Grand plan that you're trying to enact, which of course they do, I just wouldn't bother with it at all.
	But anyway.
	Certain people's financial future is built on this sort of thing.
	But yeah, so yeah, it basically just says 48% claim to be Native American, 13% falsely mark that they were Latino, while 10% falsely claim to be black.
	That would be...
	That's a ballsy move, isn't it?
	That would be a difficult thing to...
	Well, I mean, if...
	What's her name?
	Oh, I've forgotten her name.
	Are you talking about the mayor of Liverpool?
	One of those ones who's demonstrably obviously white, Rachel Dolezal, that's her name.
	If Rachel Dolezal can assume it, and yeah, Sean King as well, well, why not give it a try if they've gotten away with it?
	And yeah, so for the most part, Intelligent Fan, I assume Intelligent is the company that did the survey that white students tended to get away with their liars in 77%.
	Yeah, got accepted into the colleges.
	And yeah, the majority of them seem to be going for Native American, as we've maybe hinted at, the Elizabeth Warren defense.
	And why Native American?
	Because Elizabeth Warren showed that it's actually very, very easy to get away with it for a very long time before anyone will call you out for it.
	So this is from 2019, Elizabeth Warren at the Native American Forum.
	I'm sorry for the harm that I have caused.
	So this was back during the running, I think, for the nominations.
	Yeah.
	For the Democratic primaries, yeah.
	Yeah, the Democratic presidential candidate Elizabeth Warren offered a public apology to Native Americans over her past claim to tribal heritage, directly tackling an area that has proved to be a big political liability.
	So just in Elizabeth Warren's case, right, it was something, a narrative she could maintain, because she's like, well, you know, my great-grandfather or something was a Native American.
	What are you going to do, prove her wrong?
	You know, until she gets a DNA test...
	Well...
	Why?
	Speaking of DNA tests, it goes on further.
	So, like anyone who has been honest with themselves, I know I've made mistakes.
	I'm sorry for the harm that I have caused.
	So, she got caught and had to apologise because she did a DNA test, and the analysis showed evidence of a tribal ancestor as far as ten generations back.
	So, ten generations ago, she might have had some kind of tribal ancestor, and...
	It was part of a broader pushback against Trump's disparaging nickname, so I think she did this test so that she could go, because Trump had called her Pocahontas, so she was like, actually, kind of backfired.
	The funniest thing about this for me, though, is, like, I looked at it when it came out, and she's something like 97.5% white European.
	But the thing is, that's more European than most Europeans.
	Yes, it's impressively European, to be honest.
	Most Europeans aren't that European, you know?
	And then the Cherokee Nation joined some other Native Americans in rebuking the senator for attributing tribal membership to genetics.
	So they were like, actually, you're nowhere near native enough.
	And yeah, no, no, but that's a great point.
	Because tribal membership is not the same as genetic heritage.
	And this is actually one of the critical race theory...
	Oh, okay.
	And so the tribes themselves were often quite mixed race because people would leave the sort of colonist society, join a tribe, and they would be considered part of the tribe now.
	And their children would be part of the tribe because it's through relations and not heritage that the tribe is established and maintains itself.
	And that makes sense.
	Yeah, and so her doing a DNA test is actually not talking...
	Completely useless.
	Yeah, exactly.
	It's completely useless.
	Even if she did have this ancestry, the fact that she's not a member of a tribe, even if she had 100% Native American ancestry, if she wasn't part of this tribe, then it doesn't matter because she's not part of the tribe, and that's how it works.
	So yeah, the whole thing is just like a complete, you know, foot on rake moment.
	The Cherokees were not happy about this either.
	It seems that, from what I looked into, she'd been claiming that she was Cherokee since 1984.
	Oh, really?
	So this is how long she was getting away with it.
	And she also contributed recipes to a Native American cookbook.
	Wow.
	Wow.
	Eggs and bacon, perhaps?
	The irony, yeah, possibly.
	Full English.
	But the irony is that she probably could have actually joined the tribe.
	If she wanted, you know, she probably could have actually gone down, gone through whatever initiation ceremonies and actually, you know, been a part of the community if she had wanted to.
	It's just easier to say so than go through all of the initiation ceremonies, presumably.
	She breaks that DNA analysis and blows her own case up.
	Whoops.
	Idiot.
	Yeah, and moving on, so we're all aware, presumably, of race grifters such as Ibram X. Kennedy, who has been not very happy about these findings from this survey.
	Before we go on, just in case you're not aware of who Ibram X. Kennedy is, it might be worth doing a Google search, because he's one of the premier critical race theory grifters who's out there saying that there's nothing but unvarnished oppression to be non-white, and nothing but...
	Glorious, glowing privilege from being white.
	Well, the fun thing with Kendi as well is that he claims not to be a critical race theorist.
	Oh, does he?
	He's instead an anti-racist because he is one of the people who tries to disconnect himself from the movement and therefore any bad press that it's getting by saying, oh, critical race theory is all about the legal application of it from people like Derek Bell.
	Yeah, but that's not true.
	It did come out of critical legal studies, but it is a philosophical movement.
	It is not confined to the legal academy.
	Thank you, Mr.
	Kendi.
	Honestly, you might have even seen his books about the place.
	He's done that one, How to Be an Anti-Racist, and other such things, which have been huge sales, made him a lot of money.
	Yeah, and these all have their roots in critical race theory.
	Yeah, but Kendi found this study and summarized it on Twitter.
	More than a third of white students lied about their race on college applications, and about half of these applicants lied about being Native American.
	More than three-fourths of these students who lied about their race were accepted.
	So it's just a blanket statement of what happened, but you know why he was posting this in the first place, was that from his own perspective, he would have been like...
	Well, they're stealing all of these places from the real minorities who deserve them, purely on the basis of their skin colour or heritage, presumably.
	The white people are trying to move themselves into our category.
	What we need to do is keep them out, you know, a bit of segregation there.
	We need to keep that segregation in place, absolutely.
	And he puts here, this Fox News article as well says, can these critics pounce on a tweet saying it undermined his life's work?
	I mean, yeah.
	The post-millennial who first reported the tweet asked, if white privilege is such a decisive factor, then why do white students feel that their applications would be better if they pretended to be something other than white?
	And why would those applications be so successful?
	Which is a fantastic question!
	I love the tweet here from Alex Griswold.
	That feel when you accidentally blow up your entire life's work in a tweet and have to delete it.
	Yep, that's the thing.
	He did delete the tweet later on that same day, I believe.
	It's a case of, oops, have I destroyed my entire career?
	Well, yes.
	And the fact that he didn't come out and try and explain why this is an aspect of oppression, right?
	He didn't come out and try and explain, look, this is a fact.
	This is a true statement about reality.
	We know that's accurate to what's going on in the world.
	And here's why this is the product of systemic racism, blah, blah, blah.
	Because there are avenues that he could have gone down.
	Oh yeah, but he seems to have just thought it was self-evident.
	Exactly, but instead of trying to incorporate this into the framework of a critical race, well, this is just another example of a minstrel show, or something like that.
	Oh, this is digital blackface.
	Exactly.
	He could have gone down this being a way of...
	He probably could have tied it back to slave owners trying to subvert the black community and things like this by breaking apart various things, but instead he just deletes it, which is him admitting, well, this actually refutes everything I'm saying.
	Maybe I'll just pretend that doesn't exist.
	Big whoops.
	Yeah.
	I mean, how is that academic?
	It's like, I'm just going to deny this fact.
	I'm not going to try and explain this fact.
	I'm just going to delete it and pretend it never existed.
	That goes to show you that he's working within a very rigid framework, and there is information outside of this framework he's not prepared to touch.
	And that's the worst part about this.
	He could have made up any excuse, really, from a critical race theory perspective as to why this is more oppression from white people.
	Oh, yeah.
	He could have done, but he didn't.
	He went on after he deleted it, he said, They imagine white people are disadvantaged while white people are on the higher end of nearly every racial disparity.
	They imagine black and native people have racial advantages at the same time black and native people are on the lowest end of nearly every racial disparity.
	Shake my head.
	I mean, he's made a lot of statements there, but I don't see a convincing argument against anything he just said.
	Well, I mean, they imagine black and native people have racial advantages.
	Well, this is one of them.
	Well, yeah, this is a clear, demonstrable example.
	Yeah, and there isn't any such racial advantage for white people, and nor should there be, but there also shouldn't be racial advantages for black and native people.
	Yeah, once again, you can imagine it all you like, but the results are speaking for themselves here, can they?
	And then when Jack Posobiec...
	Sorry, but just before we move on as well, and the thing is, right, one of the things that critical race theorists and, sorry, anti-racist activists will say is, well, let's talk about implicit bias within the system.
	okay well what's the what's the implicit bias of all the anti-white people professors and hiring staff and all this who will accept and like you know give all these racial advantages to minorities do they have an implicit bias against the white population of america because i don't see how he could argue that they don't they say we're all biased is that okay well what's your bias you know well my you know your bias is obviously against white people isn't it you know Mr.
	Kendi.
	Sorry, Dr.
	Kendi.
	Dr.
	Kendi, yes.
	Yeah, and then he went off on Jack Posobiec on Twitter, who called him out and said that Jack got into a little argument with him and said, I broke Kendi, to which Kendi responded with this glorious tirade.
	Jack couldn't deny his lies, so this is how he responded.
	And his broke reference has a long history within racist structures.
	White enslavers boasted of breaking black people when they did not break black people.
	The resistance never stopped then and it won't stop today.
	It goes on underneath, he says, references to buying or selling or trading or breeding or breaking black people are a legacy of slavery, whether the white user realizes it or not.
	So you mentioned, you know, they'll find a way to tie it into slavery.
	Well, it took him a few, took him a day or so.
	Yeah.
	But he found a way.
	He must have watched the buck-breaking documentary.
	Yeah.
	And you need some go-go gadget extendo arms for that level of reach, but good God.
	Oh, yeah.
	I mean, Jack Prasobiec is obviously not talking or referring to slavery.
	Yeah.
	I don't know why I have to say that.
	It's a pretty typical internet expression to say, oh, I broke somebody, when they just have no response to anything you say, and you're just proving him right, Dr.
	Kendi.
	But amazing.
	Amazing that you're like, yeah, but that's slavery.
	Yeah.
	And you may ask yourself, well...
	He did get owned, to be fair.
	Yeah, he did get massively owned.
	But yeah, you could ask yourself, we've already explained a little bit of...
	Sorry!
	No, no, it is very funny.
	I love hearing from Kendi, he's such a clown.
	Yep.
	Despite being a clown, he is, if nothing else, a very handsomely paid clown.
	Oh, wow.
	Because why would it be that Kendi doesn't want this information to reflect badly back on him?
	Because it seems that Kendi, who wrote several books on anti-racism and has popularized the term, appears to have made over $300,000 in the past several years based on records obtained through public records requests.
	Yeah, that's just for lectures.
	That's not talking about his book sales, which is probably in the millions at this point.
	Oh, absolutely.
	They're in the tops of loads of bestseller lists.
	It was probably one of those ones that artificially got put into, like, the New York Times bestsellers.
	I don't know.
	I don't know if I'd say artificially, because the thing is, there is a constituency for this kind of thought, obviously.
	And, you know, they are often insufferable, upper-middle-class white people.
	And so it's not that I would say he's artificially doing this.
	But, I mean, and as a capitalist, I'm very impressed at your financial success.
	So, good for you.
	Tell us your secrets.
	And yeah, he does earn, I believe...
	Oh yeah, yeah, John's making a point.
	They're making textbooks in schools as well.
	Oh yeah, they do.
	Yeah, good point.
	Yeah, that's a good point.
	But yeah, he does earn, I think, the figure that I've seen bandied about is $16,500 for a 45-minute lecture over Zoom.
	So he doesn't even have to...
	Over Zoom?
	He doesn't even have to go and fly to whichever university he's presenting at.
	He just logs onto his computer...
	Here's your money, Mr.
	Kendi.
	There you go.
	That is a good grift.
	I know.
	And then if you skip over again, James Lindsay shared a great meme.
	If you just click on that one, John, just for the laugh of it, why would racist people on Twitter do this to me?
	And then you've got to ask yourself as well, what would have given the students the impression that minority students get so much privilege?
	And if you click along there, John, you can see that universities like Harvard have reserved special performances of Macbeth exclusively for black identifying audience members.
	So, this article here says, What if William Shakespeare's tragic tale of Macbeth, who usurped the throne of Scotland at the urging of his wife, were performed with less gloom and doom?
	What if instead, what if instead, the play were infused with modern music, dance, and a fresh interpretation of Lady Macbeth as an ambitious black woman, with a performance designed to elevate black female power, femininity, and desire?
	Which, this seems, what was it, that black, who was it earlier this year?
	Anne Boleyn.
	Yeah, Black and Boleyn, very similar to this, and this version of the play...
	Hang on, hang on.
	I have to make a comment.
	So, what if Macbeth wasn't a tragedy, wasn't set in Scotland, and didn't have the storyline that it had?
	Well, then you'd be talking about something else.
	What if it was the step-up films?
	Yeah, exactly!
	Like, why would you even bother calling it Macbeth?
	Well, they've changed the title a little bit.
	It's Macbeth in Stride now.
	Oh, oh, oh, okay, there we go.
	It's currently being performed by the American Repertory Theatre at Harvard University's Loeb Drama Centre.
	Unfortunately, some Harvard students and members of the general public interested in seeing this classic play with a unique twist and social commentary may be out of luck.
	One upcoming show on October 29th is billed as a blackout performance, designated to be an exclusive space for black-identifying audience members, according to the event page.
	So just outright segregation...
	What else could you characterise that as?
	That's mad.
	I know.
	But yeah, so they're designating specific events for black and minority students.
	And then it's not just the fact that these students might be wanting the privilege to go and see Macbeth in stride.
	I mean, why you'd want to, fair play, it's down to you.
	But it's not just these privileges that people might be after.
	There might be some other elements to it.
	And I've got a clip here.
	There was a recent Rutgers professor from Rutgers University who has said some rather spicy takes.
	And I've got a few clips from this interview that's been taken.
	So, John, if you want to play those for everyone.
	So, you know, like you talk to white people and whenever you really want to have a reckoning about it, they say stuff like, you know, it's just human nature.
	If y'all had all of this power, you would have done the same thing, right?
	And it's like, no, that's what white humans did.
	White human beings thought there's a world here and we own it.
	Prior to them, black and brown people have been sailing across oceans, interacting with each other for centuries without total subjugation, domination and colonialism.
	Wow.
	That is the least historically informed thing I've ever heard.
	Yeah, I'm not going to go out on a limb to say that that was particularly historically accurate.
	I mean, where to start?
	Black people didn't do nothing.
	If you wanted to take the average...
	Face of what a conqueror was like, all throughout human history, he would have been an Asian man with a very, very sour look.
	Like, this is madness.
	Yeah, well, he knows I'm right.
	You absolutely know I'm right, you know?
	Like, this is ridiculous.
	So the first empire we're aware of was in the Middle East, and...
	The Europeans didn't get to empire proper, as we understand empire, until the Middle Ages.
	The Europeans are actually really slow when it comes to this.
	We were just quick learners.
	Well, I guess, but we were really slow to come to it.
	Almost every empire in history was an empire run by people of colour, if you want to put it in their parlance.
	Like you, Songhai, what was the Empire of Mansa Musa?
	The Mali Empire.
	Oh, the Zulu Empire.
	You've got a bunch of African empires, which are all about that.
	And then you've got like the Arab empires, which are all the slave trading empires.
	And of course, you've got everything in Asia, which is just a long history of people conquering each other.
	And then you have the Europeans finally in the 15th century going, oh, there's a world outside of Europe.
	Let's go and explore.
	And so the idea that people of colour are all just picking daisies and sharing songs with each other is just effing ludicrous.
	Yeah, I mean, something tells me she's not, hopefully, not a...
	Not a professor of history.
	Please Rutgers.
	And that historical revisionism is not the only thing...
	That historical revisionism is deeply understated in the case there.
	But, well, destructivism, perhaps.
	Just total illiteracy.
	I just can't get over it.
	That is mad.
	That's not the only interesting comment that she made, John, if you want to play the next clip that we've got from there.
	The thing I want to say to you is we've got to take these motherfuckers out.
	But I know, but like, we can't say that, right?
	We can't say, like, I don't believe in a project of violence.
	I truly don't.
	Because I think in the end that our souls suffer from that.
	And I do think that some of this is a spiritual condition.
	What do you say to that?
	Well, I would kill you, but it would look bad on me.
	Yeah, it would be doing me more...
	This hurts me much more than it hurts you.
	Yeah, we could genocide you, but then I'd feel bad about having committed a genocide, so I'm not going to do that.
	Very gracious of her to say not to say, well, we've got to take these mother effers out.
	God!
	But once again, yeah, this person is actually teaching university students, so I think there are more than just those privileges that people can get.
	There is an active air and atmosphere of hostility in some departments at universities in America, and probably England as well, to what they would consider to be white colonizers.
	Yes.
	Almost certainly.
	So that's a little look into the madness unfolding in universities.
	We'll just add it to the pile, I suppose.
	Yep.
	Anyway, the trans lobby should be careful what it wishes for because it just might get it.
	So there's been an interesting and quite now long struggle between intersectionality and what are called just gender essentialist feminism.
	That's been going on in the UK. And the gender essentialist position is the position that most people hold, because it seems to just be a common sense position.
	As in, a woman is an adult human female, a man is an adult human male, and so there is a biological component, based on what you are, that connects you to a gender role.
	And that seems to be the case almost everywhere in the world.
	Until the intersectionals came along and said, no, no, no, this is all just a social construct.
	And what about these, the very, you know, the less than 0.1% of people who fall outside of that gender construct?
	I mean, we need to change the whole system to accommodate them.
	And it's like, well, maybe they could just figure a way of fitting in, right?
	And so this goes back a fair way.
	I mean, like, this is an example here from 2018, where the High Court refused gender-neutral passports because Nosferatu was asking for them.
	She says, I assume it's she, I don't know what the pronoun is, but Christy Ellen Kane, who's fought on the issue since 1995, as if that's the most important thing.
	Really, you've got nothing more important to do than, I need a gender-neutral passport.
	Okay.
	Wow.
	The answer's no.
	You must not have much going on in your day to day.
	Well, I mean, it just speaks to a remarkable level of privilege, doesn't it?
	If that's the thing that you're most concerned about, then okay, I'm most concerned about way more pressing needs.
	But, and as John again points out, reminder there has never been gender on passports, it's just sex that's on your passport.
	So that's again, biologically determined.
	But anyway, she said that she was bitterly disappointed that non-gendered people are socially invisible and being denied civil rights.
	What civil rights?
	I was not seeking special treatment.
	I was seeking to be treated as a human being.
	Okay, then pick male or female.
	And she's previously said that basic human right to have your identity.
	It's like, maybe, but do I have to do so much work in your identity?
	Yep, the Leo argument.
	Yeah, it is.
	Exactly.
	It's exactly right.
	Anyway, so this kind of fits into a wider pattern of the conservatives actually defaulting to conservatism in the face of gender identity attacks.
	And that's like, wow, the conservatives are actually doing things that are conservative.
	I suppose they've drawn one line in the sand.
	It's not even that they're drawing a line in the sand.
	I think they just don't understand the argument.
	They just don't get it.
	I think it's honestly they just don't get it.
	Under Theresa May, the government had apparently planned to allow transgender people to just change their birth certificates without medical diagnosis.
	And so this was just based on self-identity and Boris Johnson's government scrapped that.
	Thank goodness.
	And instead, again, this is back in June 2020, they planned to announce a ban on gay cure therapies and conversion therapies.
	And as the Times describes it, to placate LGBT people.
	And this was done on a consultation that they got more than 100,000 responses to, but insiders say about 70% of those that backed the idea said that anyone should be able to declare whether they're a woman or a man.
	So this makes officials believe the results were skewed by an avalanche of responses generated by trans rights groups.
	It's definitely giving me that impression.
	Yeah, me too.
	But anyway, moving on.
	Leftists have been screaming, oh, we need to ban conversion therapy.
	And I was just like, what?
	What?
	Like, what percentage of the population does that affect?
	In the past, I have actively tried to look into this and found it very, very difficult to find a single person who could give me a story of having gone through this.
	I can tell you why, actually, in a minute, if you want.
	Oh, yeah, go for it.
	Yeah, so we'll just go through this quickly.
	So, human rights lawyers, of course, are demanding the government bring forward legislation to end conversion therapy in the UK. So, this proves that Robert Conquest is still the most relevant historian in the West regarding lefty human rights lawyers, but legal professionals, campaigners, and experts have called upon the government to take decisive action.
	Oh, really?
	You want the government to do decisive action, do you?
	Are you sure that's wise?
	You sure you've got a TERF government?
	You want decisive action?
	Is that smart?
	I'm not sure it is.
	Baroness Helena Kennedy, QC, Chair of the International Bar Association's Human Rights Institute, proposes it to be made clear in law that would-be perpetrators that vile practices will not be What are you talking about?
	There's no, like, mandate that anyone has to go through any of this, but they say, you know, these degrading and inhumane practices are affront to the rights of gay, lesbian, bisexual, transgender and intersex people and must be criminalised in all their forms.
	So even if you want to go through whatever conversion therapy entails, and we'll look at that in a second, they want to make it so you're not allowed.
	So, okay.
	Why?
	Yeah, I don't know why people would want to go through the therapy, but as far as I can tell, it's entirely...
	Elective.
	You opt into it.
	Yes.
	And so the government did an assessment on it, and this was interesting.
	So, if we can go to the next one.
	The evidence suggests that the modern forms of conversion therapy are commonly based on a belief that same-sex orientations and transgender identities...
	Again, interesting here how conversion therapy mixes sexual orientation and transgender identity, as in LGBT... I mean, this is why we've broken off with the LGB alliance.
	Exactly.
	So they're, again, mashing together two things that are not the same.
	But they do this because of developmental disorders, addictions, or spiritual problems.
	The most common methods they identified was a combination of spiritual methods, for example, prayer, healing, or exorcisms, or pastoral counseling psychological methods, for example, taking therapies.
	The boundaries between the two approaches are often unclear, which may allow them to be described as pseudoscientific.
	Conversion therapy appears to be most commonly carried out in religious settings by individuals or organisations, but may also be done by mental health professionals or family members.
	In some cases, secular mental health professionals may treat minority gender identities or minority sexual orientations as symptoms of existing mental health conditions.
	It is unclear how often this is a deliberate attempt at conversion therapy.
	Is this actually something that happens?
	So is this what they claim to be conversion therapy?
	I think so.
	So I just go to the doctor, like a psychologist, and say, well, I think I might be asexual, and they go, well, it might be something other than that.
	Yeah.
	And that might be considered to be conversion therapy.
	No wonder I couldn't get in touch with anybody.
	There doesn't seem to be a hard and fast definition.
	Yeah.
	And so, I mean, maybe.
	But the problem, though, is that it's a kind of local community issue that may be found among the more religious local communities of Britain.
	So this might be an Islamophobic attack on the Muslim community of Britain.
	Yeah.
	Wow.
	I mean, to be fair, actually, thinking back on it when I was looking into this subject, it did seem to be most of the allegations were aimed at more religious institutions, which were still undergoing it in terms of exorcism and stuff like that.
	But even among them, it was an incredibly small fraction of a percentage.
	But that's not saying there can't be any coercion involved.
	Which it is possible.
	It's a local religious community.
	There could be quite a lot of coercive pressure put on them.
	Potentially.
	For threats of ostracism and things like that.
	But anyway, they carry on.
	Common reasons given for seeking out conversion therapy are a perceived incompatibility between someone's religious values and their sexual orientation or gender identity.
	People of LUT feeling personally attacked.
	A desire to belong and feel normal within a community.
	External pressure or coercion by a family member or a faith community.
	And some people report that while they underwent conversion therapy voluntarily, they feel these choices were shaped by powerful influences in their social environment and under guidance from authority figures.
	So seeking out, though, meaning not directly imposed by the state.
	But again, it could be that the communities they live in are pressuring them into it.
	And that's maybe not fair.
	And so how many people are going through this?
	How big a problem is conversion therapy in the United Kingdom?
	Not very.
	A national LGBT survey of 2017 found that out of 108,000 respondents to the survey, 2% of them had attempted to be cured of being LGBT through conversion therapy.
	So 2% of, say, the gay community.
	So that's probably what...
	The gay community is like 1% of the country.
	Yeah, like 108,000 respondents, so that's what, a little over 2,000 people, maybe.
	And that's on something that seems to be very nebulously defined.
	Yeah, and a further 5% had been offered it, so 7% had even gone anywhere near this.
	So 93% of the gay community reports no.
	Don't have to worry about it.
	And again, it's not mandatory.
	But transgender respondents were more likely to have been reported having undergone or been offered conversion therapy at 13% rather than the cisgender respondents at 7%.
	Again, that's both.
	I wonder in which way that went.
	Which way were they trying to convert?
	And apparently one recent study found that compared with sexual minority adults with no experience of sexual orientation change efforts, people who had undergone conversion therapy were twice as likely to have had suicidal thoughts, 75% increase in odds in attempting suicide and things like that.
	So it makes them basically feel worse about themselves.
	So I'm not saying that it's good.
	There's no surprise really, especially if it's coming from a religious framework.
	Exactly.
	An inflexible religious framework, as they all are.
	And so the Conservatives are moving to ban conversion therapy, which, fine.
	Like, it's just a total non-issue.
	Like, I don't care.
	It hardly affects anyone.
	Go Conservatives!
	They're going to bring this legislation in to protect people from the coercive and abhorrent practice of conversion therapy.
	And Liz Truss, the Minister for Women and Equality, says, as a global leader on LGBT rights, this government is always committed to stamping out the practice of conversion therapy.
	It's always been committed to it, isn't it?
	So in the 70s, they were like, oh yeah, we've got to stop the conversion therapy, but the damn Labour Party won't let us.
	Okay, but whatever.
	It doesn't seem to be a very brief problem.
	But the way that they're bringing it about is going to be a big problem.
	So if we go to the next one, big problem for the LGBT community, because part of the legislation they're bringing in is to criminalize anyone who urges people to change their gender.
	They're not very happy about that, are they?
	No, they're not.
	This isn't what we meant.
	This is not what we meant.
	This is not what we meant at all, is it, mermaids?
	From next spring, it will be illegal to convince someone to change their sexuality or gender identity, with extra safeguards to protect adolescents.
	You can hear the Tavistock just sweating.
	Government sources suggested that organisations like Mermaids, a charity that offers advice and counselling to children with gender dysphoria, could be outlawed.
	Trans rights groups said the proposals will have a chilling effect on free speech.
	Oh, now they care about free speech, do they?
	Oh, do they?
	I don't believe a word of it.
	But, okay, so Mermaids potentially banned.
	Under the proposals, medical professionals will escape sanctions.
	However, informal advice sought from family and friends will also not be criminalized.
	However, all other counseling offered to children under 18 will be outlawed and adults will have to consent to take part in therapy.
	Laws will be introduced after a consultation.
	So, although the decision to ban this is controversial, the LGBT campaigners have long been calling for the ban on conversion therapy.
	It's like, yeah, but that goes both ways.
	That's the problem that you're going to have here, isn't it?
	Because you wanted it to go all one way in the direction of more people being converted to LGBT and no change at all, right?
	Yeah, I mean, what was it?
	And Stephen Crowder's done a number of looks into it in America, places like that, where they will just have big get-togethers of groups of people who will just say, oh, you can transition as young as eight.
	Why not five?
	Just keep it younger.
	In Scotland, what was it?
	They were allowing people as young as three to determine their own gender identity.
	Yeah, and also, if you're going to talk about the coercive nature of a, say, religious community, it's equally applicable to say, well, there's a kind of coercive nature to the transgender community to push it in the direction of being pro-trans.
	which is normal.
	You'd expect that from the trans community.
	But then from a religious community, you'd expect them to be anti-gay or anti-trans.
	Well, because it's that pro-their religious belief.
	Exactly, because these two groups have conflicting beliefs.
	And so the government's like, no, you're not going to do either of those things.
	And there was significant screeching from the left.
	We can go to the next one.
	Mike Freer, a Conservative Equalities Minister, has had to come out and say, no, no, no, look, we're not actually banning mermaids.
	Because the allegations that we're going to ban mermaids, this is from an insider, but...
	But you can see that they're feeling very personally attacked at this point.
	Oh, yeah.
	I wonder why, right?
	So he says, that's incorrect.
	Our proposals are set out that any person who tries to change the sexual orientation or gender identity of someone under 18 would be at risk of prosecution.
	But that does not mean organizations that seek to provide advice would be outlawed.
	So calm down, leftists.
	Nobody's coming for your transgender surgeries.
	We just want common sense transgender surgery control.
	Okay?
	Mermaids addressed the article, tweeting, The thing is, why do you feel personally attacked by this?
	You're not allowed to try and encourage children to change their gender.
	And Mermaid's like, well, hang on a second!
	This is our human rights!
	Exactly.
	Is that what you're doing?
	You know, they won't say that they're doing this.
	They, of course, say, no, of course we don't do that.
	But there are lots of anecdotal tales floating around the internet that suggest that people involved with this are activists who have been trying to encourage children to transition.
	And so this is...
	What they're concerned about.
	And as Pink News, hosted on Yahoo, but this is a Pink News article, says, From repeatedly referencing attempts to convert people to being transgender to allowing loopholes for religious conversion therapy in consenting adults, the proposed legislation is not what the LGBT community was hoping for.
	I'm sure it wasn't.
	Oh, good.
	This, again, is not something new.
	There's the case of Kira Bell, who's currently going through the courts, on her problem, her lawsuit, about how she was given puberty blockers at the age of 16.
	And if you can go to the next one, John, she was referred to the Tavistock Gender Identity Disorder Clinic, I should have been challenged on the proposals of the claims I was making myself.
	And I think that would have made a very big difference as well.
	If I was just challenged on the things that I was saying.
	So no point in the process.
	And it took three hours.
	Three one-hour consultations for her to get puberty block at 16.
	I mean, as far as I'm aware as well, the majority of diagnoses when it comes to these kinds of conditions like gender dysphoria and other such things primarily come down to self-reporting, which is an incredibly difficult thing to, say, measure the accuracy of, because especially at the age of 16, how well do you know yourself at 16 years old?
	Exactly.
	And that's the thing.
	Kira's point is, look, basically I'd gone on the internet, been persuaded through the media I'd consumed that in fact I was this.
	I wasn't challenged at any point.
	And she had both of her breasts removed.
	That's pretty irreversible at that point.
	Exactly.
	As a teenager, a teenage girl, getting both of her breasts removed because of things she's read on the internet.
	Like, you can see here, she described being a tomboy as a child, and tomboys are fine.
	They're not men, by the way, trans activists.
	When asked how strongly she felt the need to change her gender identity, she found out more about transitioning online.
	So she'd essentially kind of radicalised herself into this position.
	And so the question is, well, you know, why are they so bothered about this?
	Well, I found this on Mumsnet.
	And I found this very interesting, where Mermaids had tweeted out a thing about having to keep your Google searches private from your parents.
	That's weird, isn't it?
	Why would a charity be trying to come between the flow of information between a child and the parent?
	Well, that seems suspicious.
	It sounds like trying to hide your history results from your parents as a teenager.
	Yeah.
	You're never looking at good stuff in those scenarios.
	Yeah, and this person posted that the trans-children charity Mermaids has created a button on its desktop website so that children can immediately jump to another website if a parent comes into the room, presumably while either looking at Mermaids material or talking to someone else in the charity, so they can lie to their parents about that they were actually doing something else.
	It's like, hmm, not what I think a charity should be doing, No, that seems...
	I've never seen a charity be so outwardly deceptive.
	Yeah, it seems a bit sinister, doesn't it?
	Yeah.
	And then it's like, well, you can't encourage children to transition.
	They're like, oh, how dare you?
	This is oppression.
	It's like, okay, well, you know, I'm starting to wonder about mermaids, that's all I'm saying.
	But anyway, this isn't the end of the conservative...
	Commitment to gender identity, I guess we'll call it, you know, to biological gender identity.
	We can go to the next one.
	Priti Patel has stepped in and said, well, hang on a second.
	Why are you recording trans women as being biological women in the police reports?
	Because it's skewing the police reports.
	And so basically she's come out and said trans criminals are not women, which is...
	I mean, fair from my conservative perspective, but from an intersectional perspective, this is screech-worthy.
	I mean, from a classically liberal perspective, perfectly fine as well.
	If it's adhering to reality, at the end of the day.
	Absolutely.
	But the reason that she wants this is because it's distorting crime statistics, right?
	There's a really interesting point that's made.
	In UK law, only men can commit rape.
	So rape is defined as penetrative by a penis.
	And so only a man can commit a rape in UK law.
	However, between 2012 and 2018, 436 people prosecuted for rape were women.
	So that's spiked up, I imagine?
	Yeah, weird that, isn't it?
	So this is very interesting, and they give the example in the mail about a case of one Zoe Watts who was jailed for a string of offences, including building an improvised bomb, and she was born male but identified as a woman, and so they recorded the crimes as being committed by a woman.
	So it seems that women's crime rates start slowly ticking up.
	The number of rapes women commit goes from zero to 436!
	You know, it's just like, hmm.
	Women are acting an awful lot like men recently, aren't they?
	Well, and remember, just to top this off, the unofficial Prime Minister is completely opposed to all of these things.
	So I don't know how the sub-Prime Minister is getting through.
	If I'm going to the next one, remember that Carrie Johnson...
	Things that trans women are women.
	I was wondering who you meant by unofficial prime minister for a moment there.
	I should have guessed.
	Yeah.
	And the chair of the LGBT plus conservative group, Elena Bunbury, said that, oh, this is bringing into question trans rights.
	Trans people are not dangerous.
	They're not scary.
	And they're certainly not a threat to women and children.
	Although at the other event titles, this is at the conservative conference.
	They might think they are.
	Conservatives, get rid of this group, the leftist subverters.
	LGBT is a leftist intersectional acronym that comes from the heart of Kimberley Crenshaw, a critical race theorist.
	If you don't agree with critical race theory, you don't agree with LGBT as an acronym that needs to go.
	All right, moving on.
	Many of you watching may be aware that COP26, the climate summit in Glasgow, is happening today.
	I believe a lot of it's actually going live as we speak.
	I saw about an hour ago Boris Johnson was making his live speech there.
	Didn't manage to catch any of it, sadly, in preparation for this, but I can make a few guesses at what he was saying, but...
	We're going to cover some of what's going on, but before we do, Carl just wants to go through a little bit of what COP is and what their aims are.
	Yeah, so this is a world climate conference where there's going to be more on the 120 world leaders and thousands of delegates attending climate talks in Glasgow, Scotland.
	The place most...
	I'm not going to make a joke.
	We're not allowed to make jokes about this sort of stuff because YouTube has changed their guidelines.
	And yeah, maybe we should preface this as well, actually.
	We think that climate changes.
	Yes, we do not deny that climate changes.
	We believe that climate does change.
	However, I think that the accuracy of climate model predictions has been suspect, but that's only because of their record of predictions that we'll go through shortly.
	I mean, we believe the experts.
	I mean, which experts you want to believe will give you varying different answers as to the severity or why the climate is changing.
	Yeah.
	And I don't doubt that if we reduce emissions that maybe that will have an effect on the climate.
	It's a very conservative position to think that we can fix the climate in one position forever, but I'm in favour of that.
	So anyway, Joe Biden's going to be there, Boris Johnson's going to be there, Modi's going to be there.
	But interestingly, Xi Jinping and Vladimir Putin are not going to be there.
	Oh, what's a surprise.
	Yeah, I'm not surprised that Putin won't be there, and I'm not surprised that Xi Jinping won't be there, but that's the point, isn't it?
	Because China is the country producing the most amount of pollution out of any other country.
	I've looked into this.
	I mean, if you're going by, I think, greenhouse or CO2 emissions, it is 27% of the entire world's output, which is almost double the USA, which is 15% who are the next in line.
	And then when you get to the UK, it's negligible 1%.
	Yeah, we're 1%.
	Yeah.
	So, you know, important that we host this conference.
	But...
	Yeah, so let's go on to what they're trying to achieve.
	We can go to the next one, John.
	So on page six of this, they give us just some bullet points of what they're trying to do.
	So they want to secure global net zero by the middle of the century and keep 1.5 degrees within reach.
	So they want to reduce the amount of carbon emissions, which they think will reduce global warming to 1.5 degrees within reach.
	How do you expect to do that when China is just completely off the table?
	I don't see how it can be done.
	Unless every other country can get to minus emissions somehow?
	Start sucking the CO2 out of the atmosphere, then unless we can do that, then I don't see how we're going to be able to reach those kinds of goals.
	Yeah, and so they want to do that by 2030.
	And again, that's not to say that they don't think the climate won't increase.
	They just want to do it slower.
	And so to deliver on these stretching targets, countries will need to accelerate the phase-out of coal, encourage investments in renewables, and curtail deforestation and speed up the switch to electric vehicles.
	Or they could adopt nuclear power, which they're not talking about at all.
	Renewables, but not nuclear.
	And once again, China off the table, nuclear off the table.
	Yeah.
	So it seems to be a boondoggle that's not going to work.
	Doesn't France, that has the nuclear power stations, also provide excess energy to the surrounding countries because it's that efficient?
	To Germany, who decommissioned all of their nuclear power plants for some reason, and then had to go back to using coal.
	It's just bizarre.
	Very strange.
	Absolutely.
	It's totally ideological.
	That's the problem with all of this.
	It's not about being what...
	Okay, let's assume you do want these things.
	Okay, what are the practical steps we take?
	Well, we're not going to do that or that or that.
	Now we've got a bunch of really impractical things.
	And again, like the renewable energy.
	Well, they take a lot of carbon to produce, as I understand it.
	Yes, I believe that when you're producing something like solar panels and other such things like that, don't they need cobalt for them?
	I saw a thing on wind turbines that are just not produced in an economically sound way, environmentally sound.
	And then even with solar panels, I think you need to change them out every 10 to 15 years, and they're not biodegradable.
	No.
	Yeah, and they create waste.
	So none of these problems you get with nuclear power.
	But anyway, moving on.
	They want to adapt communities to protect communities and natural habitats.
	Okay.
	Alright.
	I'm fine protecting natural habitats.
	I like England looking pretty and green.
	Yeah, that would be lovely.
	That's great by me.
	If we could not build vast numbers of new houses over our green spaces, that would be great.
	Yeah, scrutiny is green philosophy.
	I agree with it.
	Not being framed in this way in here, but never mind.
	They, of course, want to mobilize finance.
	Of course they do.
	They want the countries who are going to this to raise $100 billion for climate finance in the next year.
	And I'm sure that is not going to just be pissed away on crap.
	And who are they going to get all that money from?
	Yeah, exactly.
	Us, the taxpayers.
	That's you.
	You listening.
	You're going to have to pay for this.
	They are working together to deliver.
	We can only rise to the challenges of climate change by working together.
	At COP26, we must finalise the Paris rulebook, which is the rules needed to implement the Paris Agreement.
	You'll remember that Trump pulled out of the Paris Climate Agreement.
	Or wasn't that precisely because China didn't want anything to do with it?
	He was like, well, if you're not going to, then we're not going to.
	Then it can't be done.
	Yeah, exactly.
	And we have to turn our ambitions into action by accelerating collaboration between governments, businesses, and civil society to deliver our climate goals faster.
	Sounds a lot like sort of an international climate fascism.
	Like we need to integrate governments, businesses and civil societies.
	Oh God, I don't like the way this is going.
	But they give us a bit of doom-mongering.
	I love a bit of doom-mongering from the climate change lobby because they're so good at it, right?
	If we can go down to a couple of pages.
	They go, why does limiting the temperature rise to 1.5 degrees matter?
	So, do you want to know why?
	Oh, I wouldn't mind knowing why.
	Because at two degrees we all die.
	Ah.
	We all spontaneously combust, presumably.
	Basically, yes.
	Go down a bit more, John.
	It's another page.
	But they say at two degrees of global warming, there's a picture of a lightning storm.
	Go down a bit.
	It just reminds me of that scene from Scanners.
	If it hits two degrees, everyone's just going to explode their heads.
	There we go.
	This is the one.
	See, look at that wonderful picture there.
	That is a fantastic photo, to be fair.
	It is great.
	And, I mean, I don't know that that's the cause of climate change.
	I think there were lightning storms before climate change.
	I think the Greeks were quite familiar with lightning.
	They did have it occasionally.
	But anyway, at two degrees of global warming, there would be widespread and severe impacts on people and nature.
	A third of the world's population would be regularly exposed to severe heat, leading to health problems and more heat-related deaths.
	Maybe.
	Almost all warm water coral reefs would be destroyed and the Arctic sea ice would melt entirely, at least one summer per decade.
	Possibly.
	With devastating impacts on wildlife and the communities they support, we cannot rule out the possibility that the irreversible loss of ice sheets in Greenland and the Antarctic could be triggered, leaving several metres of sea level rise for centuries to come.
	I mean, we can't rule it out.
	Doesn't mean it's happening, though.
	Just saying.
	1.5 degrees, the impacts would be serious but less severe.
	There'd be lower risks of food shortages and war shortages.
	Again, this is about risk.
	Like, we're not guaranteeing these things will happen.
	They just think, oh, it might happen.
	Lower risks to economic growth and fewer species at risk of extinction.
	Like who?
	What, polar bears?
	Yeah, they've been saying that the polar bears are going extinct for decades now.
	I'm going to go to the next one.
	Apparently, in 2007, they were predicting that, in fact, by now, 16,400 polar bears would be dead.
	And in 1984, there were 25,000 estimated polar bears.
	Yeah, I mean, this is all the stuff that I was learning during high school.
	I was fed all of this stuff about, oh, the polar bears are going to...
	By the time you're 25, you're going to be dead.
	Well, I'm 25 and...
	And the polar bear population is bigger than it's ever been.
	Oh.
	Yeah.
	Well, that's a pleasant surprise.
	There were estimated 25,000...
	Yeah, it is, actually.
	You know, it was nice, you know.
	Estimated 25,000 in 1984.
	Now there are more than 30,000, 31,000, something like that.
	And then you get this...
	Just pause on this a second.
	This National Geographic documentary that came out a couple of years ago, where it's a starving polar bear, and they're like, oh, God, look.
	This is the consequence of climate change.
	Is that in the Antarctic...
	No, polar bears are in the Arctic.
	Oh, the Arctic, okay.
	The Arctic is named after bears.
	Oh, fair.
	Art being Latin or something for bear.
	Oh, very interesting.
	Antarctic meaning no bears.
	Oh, really?
	Yeah, yeah, yeah.
	Oh, wow.
	Weird how that was named, right?
	That's some good info.
	Yeah, but that misleading National Geographic documentary was just a lie.
	I mean, don't get me wrong, animals do starve to death in the wild.
	Well, yeah, but that doesn't...
	That doesn't mean species extinction.
	That doesn't mean ideology.
	It doesn't mean if an animal sucks at hunting that the climate had anything to do with it.
	No, it doesn't.
	But again, the weird predictions that have not come to pass is not new for the climate change lobby.
	So if we go to the next one, in 2011, Gordon Brown was like, well, we've got fewer than 50 days to save our planet.
	Still counting.
	Yeah, two weeks to flatten the curve, you know.
	But he's not the only one.
	Back in 2000 and 2009, Al Gore was saying the North Pole would be ice-free by the summer of 2013.
	Not true.
	There is still ice in the North Pole.
	Even back in 1989, people were virtue-signaling about this.
	This is Barbara Streisand and her record collection.
	She needs everybody to know how much she cares.
	Yep.
	We only have 10 years to save our planet.
	It starts with you and it's easy.
	And then she just lists a few ways that you can help protect the environment.
	So the planet died in 1999?
	Love and respect all life.
	Great advice, Barbara.
	No, we must win the war on seagulls.
	But this, again, it's very interesting, especially as you go back to the 1970s, when it was a complete opposite.
	It's like, oh no, there's an ice age coming?
	We need to heat the planet up.
	Seriously, headlines of the era, right?
	Yeah.
	The Earth's Cooling Climate, Science News, 15th November 1969.
	Colder winters held dawn of new ice age in the Washington Post in January 1970.
	Science, another ice age, Time Magazine, 1974.
	The Ice Age Cometh, Science News, 1975.
	The Cooling World, Newsweek, 1975.
	Scientists ask why the world climate is changing, major cooling may be ahead in the New York Times.
	Again, all of these credentialed academic...
	Yeah, I was going to say Science Magazine, I assume, is some kind of actual professional journal.
	All of these are New York Times, Washington Post, Newsweek.
	These are not fringe internet blogs.
	To play the devil's advocate here, I mean, to make the argument, I'm pretty sure that they still say the Ice Age is coming if global warming goes any further, because this is the argument that I've heard.
	If the ice caps melt and flood the rest of the world, then it will cause the Ice Age in some way.
	I don't know the specific details, but I have heard a number of people say, well, if the ice caps melt and everything's flooded, then I presume due to a lack of CO2 or other such things being released into the atmosphere as a result, then everything will just freeze over again somehow.
	So it might just be wrapping around.
	I might have got that completely wrong.
	Yeah, no, no.
	I mean, I'm not persuaded by the argument.
	You know, saying it out loud, neither am I. I don't think that's the argument that's being made here.
	Yeah, that's the thing.
	They're probably making a very different argument.
	Well, if you scroll down a little bit, you can actually see their argument.
	Because what it was is that there'd been a 1.3% cooling between 1964 and 1972.
	And another one, you know, global temperature.
	Since the 1940s, global temperature had dropped about 2.7 degrees.
	So we've actually made some gains since then.
	Yeah, but the thing is, I mean, like...
	Speaking on geological timescale, a 10-year period is nothing.
	There's a very minor blip that goes down.
	You can't make any decisions.
	If it's saying that it dropped by about 2.7 degrees and they're worried about it raising 2 degrees now, I don't know how much has changed in the time period since then.
	It sounds like we're just making up for it.
	I have no idea.
	But anyway, the point is, for my half of this segment, it's just...
	I don't believe their predictions.
	I'm sorry, they've had too many predictions that are wrong.
	I do agree that climate change is, but I just don't think these people know as much as they claim to know.
	Yeah, and that's more into the more potentially scientific aspect of it.
	Now let's look at what some of the politicians who are attending COP have been saying in the lead-up to him.
	How they're going to spend our taxes.
	Yeah, how they're going to spend all of our money.
	So Boris put out this tweet this morning saying, I'll be asking world leaders to take action on coals, cars, cash, and trees to keep alive the prospect of limiting global temperature rise to 1.5 degrees.
	Now...
	I don't know exactly the environmental impact of cash, but it seems somewhat disconnected from the rest of it, and almost like we were talking about Insulate Britain last week in terms of it being a little bit, it felt like a PSYOP, didn't it?
	A little bit, yeah.
	A little bit of a psyop.
	And when they start to talk about things like cash being environmentally damaging, and then all of a sudden, presumably, I think Rishi Sunak came across recently saying that he wanted to implement some kind of digital currency.
	It seems like another aspect of the psyop trying to say, well, do you want to save the environment?
	Well, give us all your cash and you can take out our digital fun books, you know?
	Just embrace Bitcoin conservatives.
	Exactly.
	And then Boris also said recently, this is from Politics for All, that there is no excuses for not tackling climate change.
	I mean, I think the UK has done a pretty great job of it by their own terms as far as it's been since the 1990s.
	We've reduced since, what, 37%?
	In the PDF that we were referencing earlier, they do give a bunch of, oh, the UK has done this, this, this, this, and it's like, good, then stop talking about it.
	I'm pretty sure I've seen it listed that apparently, in terms of reducing carbon emissions and being green, the UK is like either number one or two in the entire world, so good job, Boris.
	We've done it.
	Don't talk to China.
	Yeah, now try and convince Xi.
	And if we move along, so in preparation to just getting there, it seems that they are doing some damage by their own definitions here.
	So there's an incredible amount of CO2 being blasted into the atmosphere by world leaders just getting to the COP. So more than 400 private jets carrying world leaders and business executives to COP26 will blast 13,000 tonnes of CO2 into the atmosphere.
	The flights, which will produce more global warming gas than 1600 Scots burn through in a year, so probably half the population of Scotland there, have been branded a rank climate hypocrisy and an idea of carbon inequality, which...
	I mean, by their own metrics, it absolutely sounds like it.
	Joe Biden's Air Force One is expected to touch down in Scotland last night.
	One of two aircraft he uses, French Cottom 001, it just lists a bunch of the different private jets that they all have.
	The carbon calculations are actually conservative, as they are based on the emissions of the smaller private jets, which are used by hundreds of the business leaders attending the talk.
	So that's not even accounting for the fact that Yeah.
	big American gas guzzlers of some form.
	So Biden and his wife Jill Biden used an 85-car motorcade on Friday to go for a meeting with Pope Francis in Rome.
	They both used extra cars as Italy's lockdown rules only permit three non-cohabitating people, including the driver, to be present in the vehicle.
	So thanks, lockdown rules.
	You're doing a great service for the climate right there.
	And it's just one of those things.
	If Kendi can do all of his things through Zoom and get paid handsomely for it, why can the global leaders not find some more carbon-efficient, more greenhouse-neutral way of having these large summits, these large meetings? more greenhouse-neutral way of having these large summits, these large It brings into focus the idea of the two-tier society, doesn't it?
	Oh, absolutely.
	Rules for the year, not for me.
	And this is something we're seeing a lot from the ruling elites of the West.
	Yes, and if you want to talk about someone quite high in the ruling elite hierarchy, you go next.
	We've got Prince Charles calling for military-like style action.
	So here we've got ITV saying Prince Charles will argue...
	I assume they've got all of this from prepared speeches and stuff that they may have had access to.
	So he will argue that a warlike footing is needing to tackle the climate crisis as he opens COP26 in Glasgow.
	Prince of Wales is expected to call for vast military-style campaigning to address the urgent environmental issues.
	The royal, who has spent decades trying to raise awareness of the growing crisis, will speak at the opening ceremony.
	He's also delivered a speech in Rome yesterday on Sunday to leaders of the G20 summit.
	During those remarks, he described COP26 as the last-chance saloon, as he called for fine words to be translated into finer actions.
	He said he's eager to work with people in the private sector, and they are apparently ready to play a hugely significant and game-changing role, saying solutions to major issues seem possible only if there is much closer partnership between government, the main multilateral banks...
	and the private sector and its investors.
	So no surprise there, just another way where we just say we just want to expand government.
	Continued centralisation of power.
	Yeah, to encompass every single aspect of your life.
	And once again, the banks being involved in there, Boris talking about how we need to get rid of cash, it's all adding up to something.
	But it's interestingly un-progressive, isn't it?
	It's a deeply conservative position that, no, no, no, this is how the climate should be, how we are right now.
	It's not allowed to change, and so we've got to do everything we can to not change it, and to make sure it never changes.
	It's like, well, where's the progressivism now?
	This is all very, very conservative.
	We've got more on that, such as Nicola Sturgeon committing a pretty symbolic seeming one million to fund climate change loss and damage.
	What in the grand scheme of things, globally, one million pounds is going to do?
	But she's going to send a million Scottish pounds, however much that translates into regular money, to what, foreigners?
	I don't know.
	It seems like very nebulous.
	And then we've also got The Guardian being The Guardian and saying that this will be the whitest and most privileged cop ever, because of course they do.
	It says here...
	I agree.
	And, yeah, I mean, to a certain extent, I can't disagree that, yeah, this is a rich kids' club for rich elites who are going to get together and say about how they're all going to save the world.
	By implementing some sort of international climate fashion.
	Yeah, I mean, they've got David Attenborough there, they've got Greta Thunberg there, so there's a certain level of prestige to it, and we've got...
	Apparently, we've got a breaking news from the conference.
	Boris Johnson has told the conference that climate change is, quote, entirely man-made.
	Not sure if that's scientifically true, and doesn't explain why the climate changed before man became a thing.
	I suppose this is what's going to happen if you're getting most of your advice from an 18-year-old Swedish schoolgirl, I suppose.
	Good point, yeah.
	How did climate change before the evolution of mankind, Boris?
	Just a quick question.
	But anyway, there we go.
	Shall we get on with the video comments?
	Nice.
	Carl, didn't you go to school for making video games in the past?
	Are we ever likely to see a Lotus Interactive venture at some point?
	If so, I have a very serious pitch ready for you.
	The year is 20XX. A shady biotech corporation has engineered and released the TDS virus, a mutagen that transforms its victims into mindless slavering husks filled with hate and bent on violence.
	This plague would be quelled, but only by the advent of the C virus.
	When the cure is worse than the disease, can you prevent the baddies from building back better?
	Find out in President Evil, coming November 2024 from Lotus Interactive.
	I mean, I didn't go to school for it.
	I just did it because I was interested in it.
	And one day I would like to go back and return to programming and make some stuff.
	But it won't be any time soon, but that is an excellent pitch.
	And that's an excellent trailer.
	Thank you for making Callum the woman.
	So one of my friends has another key like this.
	His name is Jordan.
	And we have this bet going on.
	And the bet is the following.
	Will Karl convert to anime or to religion first?
	And the reason behind this is atheism is just not working for society.
	I mean, just look at the modern West and then you look at Western media and yeah.
	So we both put £100 into this box each week and we're going to stop putting money in once it reaches £10,000.
	Karl, do me a solid favour.
	I want that money.
	Start going to church.
	What's your answer, Carl?
	God or anime?
	Well, I'm going to convert to religion long before I convert to anime.
	Really?
	Yeah, I mean, I'm an atheist.
	I have no plan to be religious, personally.
	But I'll be cold in the ground before I convert to anime.
	There's some good stuff out there, though.
	I literally have made my list all clear.
	Well, that's that, I suppose.
	The triumvirate.
	God the Father, God the Son, God the Holy Spirit.
	I don't see how it's so complicated.
	This is what you're asking for.
	Three to one.
	It's like an egg.
	A white, a yolk, and a shell.
	Pretty simple.
	Anyway, I'm having lunch at the traditional American fare.
	Get in there.
	Ha ha ha!
	So, cheers guys.
	Oh, and by the way, it's called Maryland, not Maryland.
	What is it with people in foreign countries thinking that I should pronounce words in the way they do?
	Well, I don't understand why they think you care.
	Yeah, well, I know.
	I got the thing with the, oh, it's pronounced Gramsci, not Gramsci.
	It's like, well, maybe it's just a little different.
	Maybe Italians are just wrong.
	Yeah, exactly.
	Have you considered that, Italians and foreigners in general?
	Moving on.
	Good day, everyone.
	Earlier this week, I asked the question about how to deal with the situation in Sweden, and I just wanted to say that It was a rhetorical question, I never intended to leave this country, but I thank you for your answer regardless.
	Gave me some hope.
	Thanks That's good fair play That's very impressive fair Fair play.
	Chad.
	Yeah.
	This is Endeavor.
	He is a very Japanese superhero.
	His problem is that he is not able to outshine his rival, a very American superhero, forever condemned to be the second fiddle.
	When his rival loses his powers, he technically is number one now.
	He sacrificed much for his, but the victory is entirely hollow, and he knows it.
	How can this count if he does not beat his rival at his best?
	Maybe if your author wants to express something here.
	Oh my god.
	This is how the Trinity works.
	This is this anime you should be watching.
	We've got the battle for Carl's soul going on.
	Neither of them.
	Absolutely neither of them.
	God damn it.
	No Catholicism, no anime.
	What is wrong with you people?
	Next.
	This is my test round of my outfit for work on Friday where we're dressing up.
	I'm a vampire, you can't tell.
	Good evening.
	Oh, hi.
	Oh, what a lovely looking pair.
	You took the words right out of my mouth.
	Yeah, disavow, disavow, disavow.
	I was actually about to disavow.
	But I... So...
	You know, like Barbara Windsor in one of the Carry On films, apparently her breast was revealed in one of the scenes once.
	I think I've heard about this.
	And this was ruled as being not likely to cause the moral degradation of British society.
	Well, I disagree.
	I think we've arrived at a point of complete moral degradation.
	I think the British Board of Film Classifications was wrong, and that was the one point that began the steady decline.
	Maybe that's a podcast tracing the decline of British culture since...
	This is definitely one for academic agent.
	This is for Carl.
	I recently discovered Louis Laval's channel and came across a conversation with Jim three years ago.
	I just wanted to express my appreciation for the work you've done on YouTube and the latest you've done over the years.
	In spite of the potential cringe and your inherent unwillingness to become a public figure in the fight against the now dominant ideology consuming the West, keep it up.
	Thanks.
	Thanks.
	One thing that I always find remarkable, looking back on the early stuff I did, is just how naive I was about the depth of this.
	I mean, I had no idea where all this had come from or anything like that.
	You know, I've not actually watched your early stuff.
	Oh well, it's a cringe now.
	I'm sure there's still some value in it.
	I might have to watch some so I can see the trajectory that you've taken.
	The good thing about it is that, like, in 2013 when I started, you couldn't criticise feminism.
	It was...
	Treated like a religion and everyone, anyone who would speak against the sort of inconsistencies, oh, you just hate women.
	It's like, look, I don't hate women, but you are wrong about a bunch of stuff or you being inconsistent.
	And so what the anti-SJW YouTube did is managed to open up the space with which this stuff can be critiqued in the public discourse, not just from a, you know, extremely conservative position, And it seems to have been successful, at least in terms of discrediting feminism, because now it's pretty much a joke.
	Yeah, they never talk about feminism anymore.
	Yeah, it's been wrapped into intersectionality.
	Exactly, because they've moved back into the...
	The modern Bailey, yeah.
	Exactly, because that's a more strong position.
	But I do think that the sort of anti-feminist YouTube was quite a significant cultural force in...
	You know, opening up that space and making an opposition to feminism worthwhile and productive.
	And so, you know, it's nice to look back and go, okay, at least we did something of worth, you know.
	LARPing on the weekend with my little brother.
	I mean, that just was quite fun.
	That's sweet.
	I always wished I'd had a little brother when I was a kid growing up, yeah.
	Oh, same here.
	I had a sister.
	Me and my son do that sort of stuff.
	We get the plastic lightsabers and playfights.
	It's awesome.
	I can't wait for kids.
	That sort of stuff sounds awesome.
	I also have a sister, and not only do I have a sister, she's 17 years older than I am, and lived with her mum, who is different than my mum, so I never had much of a familial connection, or at least not on that sort of level, sadly.
	My sister's a communist and thinks I'm the villain.
	Well, to be fair, my sister introduced me to GTA at far too young an age, so I've got some things to thank her for.
	My wife posted how Gaston was the hero of Beauty and the Beast the other day, and my sister, who doesn't have me on Facebook, was like, well, I'm not surprised since you married Carl.
	Oh, really?
	Oh, thanks, thanks.
	Well, family dinners must be fun.
	No, no, no, fine.
	We're not allowed to talk about politics.
	Oh, fair.
	Moving on.
	Well, having just gotten back from a nice trip to Italy, I can safely say that coronavirus travel restrictions are absolute nonsense.
	I would like to and need to thank the staff of the various airports I had to go through for doing their best to help me in very trying circumstances, but the Scottish, Italian and British governments can all go hang.
	That's why I'm not even going to try and travel anywhere.
	Yeah, I think this morning they might have changed the restrictions on certain countries again just out of nowhere.
	Even if you go somewhere, how do you know what restriction level you're going to be in by the time you get back?
	No, you don't.
	We've been reading a lot about the communist regimes of the 20th century.
	It's hard for English-speaking people to really understand the depth of the suffering.
	We just don't have analogies for it in our culture.
	There are stories in Russia of people so desperate that one of the mothers has to choose one of the children that she's going to kill so the others can eat them.
	We just don't understand how bad it can be.
	How many people were killed in the Irish famine?
	And I didn't want to have to do those stories because they're too depressing, you know?
	And they're too serious.
	No wonder Irish people got emotional issues.
	The fucking shit they made you read when you were at school.
	Well, I mean, that wasn't in England, is what I was talking about.
	It's their problem.
	Yeah, like, you know, England, America.
	I'm not saying that the Irish didn't suffer or anything.
	Of course they did.
	But, like, I don't think that that's in the cultural memory of non-Irish people.
	Yeah.
	You know, when you're elected governor, you're elected Democratic governor, who's going to fight like hell to make sure they got a good, high-paying quality job and invested a billion dollars in me?
	I'm Terry McAuliffe, candidate for governor, and because I didn't care what the entire state...
	...feeling politicians who are focused more on their own enrichment than those they are elected to serve.
	That's why I want you to hear this from me.
	Glenn Youngkin's taking my words out of context.
	I've always valued a billion dollars in me.
	Remember everybody out in Virginia, the vote is tomorrow, so get out.
	Hello from Florida.
	I'm really enjoying your content.
	First, as a comment, I would respectfully disagree with your various characterizations of divine revelation.
	I don't think any serious theologian would describe such events and reactions in such a simple way.
	My question to you would be, I believe Joan of Arc was so galvanizing because she was fighting for something truly true, and she and her people found this truth in their religion.
	I can see you have a love for your country.
	As an atheist, where do you find your truth to fight for?
	Big question.
	Basically, I happen to like my country and my life and my family.
	So there we go.
	Tony D and Little Joe win an update on the New Jersey governor election that seemingly the media here wants the Democrats to rule us forever, but Jack Citarelli, the Republican challenger, has closed the gap to about 6%, which could be dead even for all we know.
	He also posted this a few days ago.
	In 2017, 61% of New Jersey's voters stayed at home and elected an out-of-touch, tone-deaf elitist.
	If you think your vote doesn't matter, think again.
	Vote, New Jersey!
	Yeah, I think I saw on that there that it's tomorrow that the New Jersey election's going on as well, I suppose.
	So, if you're in New Jersey, get out and vote.
	Get these...
	I don't know how to describe them.
	Get these losers.
	Democrat rats?
	No, demon KKK rats.
	Get these demon KKK rats out of office.
	They have no good intentions for any of you.
	I mean, has it not become obvious that the Democrats are a deeply corrupt party, wildly ideological, and are acting against the best interest of the United States?
	But I don't live in the United States.
	I'm looking at what they're doing.
	It's just like, why would any country do this?
	It's awful.
	So, Jen Psaki is infected by the coof.
	So, I think one of two things are going to happen here.
	One, she's going to make full recovery, and the next time she's in a press conference, she's just going to be a bunch of oomps, oomps, and oomps.
	And, of course, the other one might happen, where the coof magically game ends her, either by a car or a Pillow, or a ice pick to the neck, and yeah, because the goof is also very dangerous and varied in how it just came into.
	Honestly?
	I wouldn't mind either.
	I think she'll take ivermectin.
	I mean, not to...
	I don't know if you've heard, but apparently get the COVID vaccine makes you less likely to die of any means.
	So even if it did try and game end her by car crash or anything like that, surely it should make her invulnerable.
	I'm sure she is vaccinated as well.
	Yes.
	Anyway, catastrophic regression threshold says, Morning, gents.
	Funny story about the whole lying on college apps piece.
	I actually got called into the office in high school because I put Puerto Rican on my applications.
	My sister put white on hers.
	I was pulled in and had to explain my family has a Puerto Rican background and that I have other ethnic backgrounds that are all white, hence the appearance.
	Need to say, my sister was told I had the right idea to use whatever cards I had.
	Yeah.
	I mean, speaking of that, everyone should know who Slash is, the Guns N' Roses guitarist.
	He's mixed race.
	I think he's got a black dad, a white mormor, maybe the other way around.
	And he said that when he was growing up, he did the same thing.
	Whereas depending on where he was applying to go to, he would put, oh, I'm white, I'm black.
	So it's not necessarily a new thing.
	It's just seems to be record numbers of people, especially those who may not even have that same sort of like background in their family.
	Lord Nerevar here.
	I lied on my university application.
	I said I was gay.
	Received an offer the next day.
	This stuff is effed up.
	Thomas says, asking why HR was so concerned with what's between my legs and my skin tone got me in a lot of trouble.
	But it was also much amusement while watching the cognitive dissonance occur.
	Also being a white male minority might have caused an aneurysm.
	A student of history says, they set up a system where minorities and women get beneficial treatment and are then surprised that people would want that privilege.
	Yes, exactly.
	71%er.
	Nice name.
	White identifying students.
	What does that even mean?
	It's like, well, I mean, students who think of themselves as white.
	And so if you just don't think of yourself as white, then you're not one of them, are you?
	Sorry, John, are you showing us Biden falling asleep during the COP speeches?
	Well, I mean, it is his nap time.
	So, you know, give him a break, John.
	It's always his nap time.
	Come on.
	I mean, who doesn't want to have a nap at about two o'clock in the afternoon?
	No, seriously, you know.
	Carl breaks his pillow out often.
	I wish I did.
	There are lots of things, Chris, before someone's waking up.
	Oh, what?
	Am I up yet?
	Oh, okay.
	That's gold.
	Jill, is that you?
	No, no, I'd want a nap too, to be fair.
	Anyway...
	Rubbing his eyes.
	Jesus.
	How long was I out?
	Edward Woodstock says, I have to say, I really wish people would stop trying to one-up Shakespeare.
	The greatest English playwright, perhaps the greatest to have lived, and people choose to make edits to fit their political agenda.
	The Bard knew what he was writing, and it speaks even to a modern audience.
	At the core of what it is to be human, there's a certain arrogance that comes with trying to muck with that.
	Yeah, but they will argue that there are particulars in Shakespeare that don't apply to other communities, and they might not be wrong on that.
	So, I mean, I'm not saying that you can't adapt these things.
	Just be honest about it.
	We don't really like English.
	Like, just say it.
	Yanala says, "I think someone needs to refer to the professor in your video on how the British tended slavery.
	I mean, just to say that, like, there were no conquering empires before white people turned up?
	Just...
	Just white people are the root of all evil.
	Yeah, if you say so.
	I mean, it's just ridiculous.
	It's just such an untrue statement.
	Like, I just can't go over it.
	Anyway.
	That Alan Guy says, We call for a ban on conversion therapy.
	Okay, you're no longer allowed to tell little boys they can be little girls.
	No, not that conversion therapy.
	Oh, really?
	Why not?
	Student of history, again, ban conversion therapy.
	Does that mean that gays, lesbians, tomboys and children are transgenderism as well?
	Yes, it does, actually.
	Marcus says, I can hear the coping, seething and dilating already.
	No more grooming for you.
	Yeah, I know.
	So this is going to make mermaids illegal.
	It's like, really?
	So what we're saying is that all they do is groom children.
	Andrew says, the conversion therapy issue is just another example of UK activists taking US talking point whole cloth and not changing anything.
	Exactly.
	That's exactly it.
	They heard about this on Twitter.
	That's where they heard about this.
	They heard that Christian camps do this sort of thing.
	Yes, they did.
	Oh, there are Americans in Alabama who are doing conversion therapies.
	Oh, wow.
	How terrible.
	Ban it!
	What are you talking about?
	Yeah, so, don't tell them that in most of Europe this will affect their precious POCs far more than any whites.
	Yeah, that's the point.
	This is going to be the Islamic community doing this.
	Evan says, the unfortunate part of society's inability to ask questions about the transgender lobby is how it typically leads to making many poor decisions when they're young, leading to the transformation of said individuals into what is often a skewed representation of the opposite sex, which in turn makes many such people mediocre versions of said opposite sex, While no one can question...
	Oh my gosh.
	That's a very conservative motorcade I see there.
	It just keeps going as well, doesn't it?
	This is what was holding up on the M6 yesterday, maybe.
	Yeah, anyway, we don't do live rolling coverage, John.
	We don't have the resources for it, but if you want to sign up, maybe we can.
	Yeah, so, well, no one can question why the decision was made and what sense it makes.
	Agree.
	Moving on to the COP26, since we're all right, a student of history says, we need to go, we need to do hundreds of things to slow the temperature increase.
	Off in the distance.
	Nuclear power.
	Please notice me, I can help.
	Are you...
	It just is the answer.
	I don't know why we have to have this discussion every bloody day.
	Henry says, I saw an article talking about the carbon footprint of anaesthetic.
	I didn't get a chance to read it, but unless it's comparable to India, China or the US, I wonder what's the point of even considering it.
	COP26 seems to be a lot of pearl clutching about sources of carbon that make negligible impact in the grand scheme of things, but all of these things can be used to point to the great unwashed masses of member nations of the elites.
	Ring the bell at them and chant shame.
	I used to think that claims that it's all about control, not the climate, was a mad conspiracy theory, but the more the COP26 lot keep talking, the more believable it becomes.
	When they start to talk about cash as being detrimental to the climate, it's like, hmm, where's the logical end point of this line of reasoning?
	Yeah, when they're like, yeah, we need to integrate the government and business to solve this problem.
	I've seen this one before.
	Yeah, Ignacio says, when the elites that scream that you'll be concerned and scared keep using their private planes and buying beachfront properties, you can rest assured that everything will be okay with the climate.
	Yes, and it's the beachfront properties that really get the old noggin-joggin, isn't it?
	And at the end of the day, if we lose Bristol and California...
	Rob says, those CO2 and SOX output numbers are total garbage.
	The only real numbers are from IR satellite feeds.
	I worked for Big Five Oil Company up until yesterday.
	They just moved numbers around and do hokey crap to hide the CO2 numbers.
	I wouldn't be surprised at all, to be honest.
	Grant says, if these people had the courage of their convictions, they would be advocating a complete internal invasion of China unless China commits to reducing emissions.
	Now, that's a great point.
	If they really believe that annihilation is a product of global warming, then the possibility of annihilation would result in a hot war with China is worth the risk.
	Yeah, well, that's the thing, doesn't it?
	It creates an imperial mandate.
	If the entire world is going to die, or, you know, whatever catastrophic...
	Might as well take our chances.
	And China's going to be responsible for it because they're not going to commit to reducing their emissions.
	You have to do something about China.
	Yeah.
	There's no question of it.
	That would be very interesting to see, wouldn't it?
	Well, yeah, exactly, but they're not going to.
	And so they're like, yeah, well, we'll just let China kill us all.
	Not even necessarily just invasion, just hold them to like, hey, you need to come to this or else we'll put, I don't know, some kind of sanction on you.
	Just hold them to account any way.
	You could easily destroy China by just saying, well, look, we're not going to allow the import of Chinese-made goods anywhere.
	Done.
	Yeah.
	You've got an internal economy now, China.
	Deal with it.
	XYNZ says, anyone ever notice how these gender items say we have to become vegans?
	One of the largest sources of methane is rice.
	Oh, that's interesting.
	I didn't know that.
	Jimbo says, I wonder how much needless hot air is going to be emitted at the COP26? Greta might as well be China in this analogy.
	That old guy says, Biden's approval rating is now so low, his own body is using dirty protest techniques to disavow his presidency.
	Also, Goodest Boy's polar bear white pill.
	Yeah, it's good news about the white pill.
	And we have no way of confirming or denying that Biden shat himself in front of the Pope.
	Yeah, did you see this?
	Yeah, no, I shared it in the office.
	Unbelievable.
	It's ridiculous.
	These incredibly handsomely paid men.
	I don't think the slaves were getting 40 million a pop.
	But I love the fact...
	I mean, like, it's not just the pay, it's the social prestige that comes with all of this.
	And the fact that you can, you know, choose to live where you want, choose to do what you want.
	You can quit any time you want, and you've got women throwing themselves at you, you're driving around in, you know, luxury cars.
	But McGrift.
	Exactly.
	It's a total grift.
	But anyway, I guess we're probably out of time at that point.
	Yeah, well, thank you very much for tuning in.

▲