Dave Smith and Rob dismantle Neil deGrasse Tyson's defense of the COVID-19 vaccine, exposing what they call logical fallacies in his appeal to authority regarding a rushed nine-month approval timeline. They challenge Tyson's reliance on flawed statistics, such as the misleading claim that 87% of hospital deaths involved unvaccinated people, arguing these figures conflate "with" and "from" causes while ignoring natural immunity's superior protection. By rejecting the authoritarian "social contract" used to justify mandates and highlighting pharmaceutical errors like the opioid crisis, the hosts conclude that blindly trusting scientific institutions without questioning data leads to tyranny rather than public safety. [Automatically generated summary]
Transcriber: nvidia/parakeet-tdt-0.6b-v2, sat-12l-sm, and large-v3-turbo
|
Time
Text
Implicit Vaccine Contract00:14:49
Fill her up.
You are listening to the Gash Digital Network.
We need to roll back the state.
We spy on all of our own citizens.
Our prisons are flooded with nonviolent drug offenders.
If you want to know who America's next enemy is, look at who we're funding right now.
Every single one of these problems are a result of government being way too big.
You're listening to part of the problem on the Gas Digital Network.
Here's your host, James Smith.
What's up, everybody?
Welcome to a brand new episode of Part of the Problem.
I'm Dave Smith.
He's Rob with the Fire Bernstein.
We are coming to a city near you this month.
What's the name of the town in Maryland?
Perryville.
Perryville, Maryland, and St. Louis at the funny bone there.
Get your tickets.
The links are up at comicdave Smith.com.
Plus, we'll pop them in the description for today's episode.
Come see me and Rob in a city near you.
We're coming all over the place.
Yeah.
How are you doing today, Rob?
I'm doing well, buddy.
We got some shenanigans to get up into.
Yeah, well, so I was inundated with requests on social media to respond to a video that's going around getting a lot of people worked up.
It was Neil deGrasse Tyson, famous science person.
And he was on with Patrick Bette David.
Full disclosure, before we start this, I very much like Patrick Bette David, and I really enjoy his show.
I've been on the show before.
I hope to do it again.
He's a very interesting guy.
I don't know if it, do you watch his show ever, Rob?
Every once in a while, he's one of the guys.
I'll check out clips.
I like what he does.
He's a very interesting guy.
He's a like he's came to America from Iran.
He was a survivor of the 1980 Iran-Iraq war.
He was in the military, a business guy who's been incredibly successful and now runs this whole like podcast network.
And I find him to be a very, very talented interviewer and kind of very good at, you know, grilling people and asking difficult questions.
I enjoy his style.
And he's just a very nice guy.
I hung out with him a bit down there after the last time I did his show.
So anyway, he had Neil deGrasse Tyson on.
I think this is worth responding to because Neil deGrasse Tyson is one of, if not the most famous scientists in America and has been for years.
I think for the last 20 years, probably if you, I mean, I don't know this offhand, but if you ask people who's the most famous scientist, I think he would be right up there with who people would say is number one.
And so for him to be spewing the utter garbage that he spewed on this show, I think is worth responding to.
And I just want to make the point before we start that the reason why I think this is worthwhile is like, well, number one, first and foremost, I guess I just want like the whole idea of this show is like trying to figure out what's right and what's real, you know?
And for people who listen to this show, I want them to, you know, if there's anyone who's listening to it who's kind of like, oh, like, well, I don't know, this famous scientist guy seems to have this whole scientific argument about why the vaccines are great and everything or whatever, which I doubt there's too much of that, but I'd like to help them understand this.
And then more importantly, or more, not even more importantly, but more probably more likely what the benefit of this would be is that, you know, if there's anyone that you know that you're arguing with out there, you're trying to persuade someone else who's on the fence who maybe would be pushed by Neil deGrasse Tyson.
Let's do a good job smacking this down so you can see the just enormous holes in all of his in all of his arguments here.
Did you watch this video, Rob?
Last night driving home from the city, it popped up on my YouTube thing because I'm on my phone while I drive.
That's that's the way I like to do it.
It's the safest way to drive.
Yeah, otherwise you fall asleep on the road.
You don't have anything good to listen to.
No one fun to how many, how many lives have been saved by people listening to YouTube, watching YouTube videos while you drive?
Am I just going to sit there bored while I weave in and out of traffic on the Degan Expressway?
That's crazy talk.
So anyways, it came up and I was watching it and I was just so enraged.
And I was like, put me in, coach.
This is nonsense here.
Well, it's unbelievable.
I mean, here, let's, you know what?
Let's just get right into it because it's a long video.
We'll go through as much of this as we can, but I think you'll start to get the point after a while.
But so, okay, let's let's play it.
Here it is.
This is the clip that they put out of the show.
I didn't watch the full show.
I just watched this clip.
But here's the title is They Were Wrong, Neil deGrasse Tyson in Heated Vaccine Debate with Patrick Bett David.
Let's play.
Beginning of COVID to what we know today.
What do we know about the vaccine today that we didn't know while we were all testing it on America taking it?
What have we learned now?
What do you mean testing it on America?
There were tests before it was released.
Nine months is not a long time to test.
No, but it was tested.
Yeah, but nine months, the average is 30.
The average is five to 10 years.
I mean, nine months is not enough.
So you have to tell.
No, you have to ask.
Hold on.
It was tested in trials.
Okay.
By the way, I'm not claiming to be the expert on all this.
I read all the same things you have, but I'm a scientist.
So I read it as a scientist.
Okay.
There were trials.
That's what the point of phase one, two, three trials are all about.
They are tested enough to get data on how to then advise the larger population.
Yes, it was tested.
For you to say it wasn't tested is it is a gap between your awareness and understanding how things work and what actually happened.
All right, so let's pause it already.
This I read it like a scientist is really just a very thinly veiled appeal to authority, which is a logical fallacy, just being like, well, I'm a scientist.
So what I say is right.
As I always say with all these things, if you're a scientist, so then make, so then you shouldn't need to sit there and say, hey, I'm a scientist and you're not a scientist.
You should just wreck me in this debate, right?
Like that's the way you demonstrate that you're a scientist.
Neil deGrasse Tyson starts this off already by being defensive about an obvious claim, which is that, yeah, these trials were expedited and they were granted approval on an emergency basis.
This is according to the FDA and the CDC.
This isn't like, I don't know, this isn't some conspiracy theory.
Yeah, look, he said they usually take five to 10 years.
And in this case, they took nine months.
So is it if nine months provides you with enough data to know everything you need to know about a vaccine, then are we wasting our time with all these other vaccines that we put through five to 10 year trials?
Or is this now Neil deGrasse Tyson can certainly make the argument that like, well, yeah, we had to rush it because this pandemic was so horrible that we couldn't just sit by waiting.
But you can't give pushback on the idea that like, yeah, no, we didn't do full trials the way we typically do with other vaccines.
And yes, to some degree, the experiment has been injecting them in millions of Americans' arms.
For example, we know a lot more now than we did then about the vaccines.
So anything you want to add to this beginning part?
Well, it's an annoying start because the phrase we tested is accurate.
You could have a test where literally everyone died and you could speak to the fact, well, we tested.
So yes, technically speaking, we tested.
As you pointed out, well, then why are all the other tests so much more robust?
Why do they go for as many years?
Are we just wasting time and keeping the general public from life-saving medications?
Is that what you're saying?
And then also when you stand by this process of we tested, I would have two follow-up questions.
First is, did he actually read those tests?
Because from what I remember, there was actually more deaths in the group of people that were vaccinated than unvaccinated.
So when you say we tested it and you're a scientist and we read it, I would love to be there, pull up what I read in these pre-trial studies and go, well, where's the evidence, the utility, right?
First, and then also when you say he tested it, did we test it for infection?
Because that's the basis for all of the mandates that we saw.
And then lastly, when you stand by this process of we tested it, well, what about Johnson and Johnson?
I don't even think they give that to anyone anymore.
And if you're standing by the we tested a process, well, one third of the vaccines he made available turned out to be a bad decision.
And it was from people like me saying, hey, that's the same company that just faced the largest ever fine because of their involvement in the opioid epidemic.
Why am I just being told to trust this?
And just one last point here, this idea of, well, because he's going to get into it.
The point overarching, he's just got this.
I mean, he's within the system.
So I guess he just likes, hey, these are credentialed scientists.
So let's respect credentialed scientists and everyone else.
Shut the fuck up.
I mean, I don't know who signs his paychecks that he's this much on establishment science over honest reason or looking at information.
But actually, I lost my train of thought.
Well, I think I put enough thoughts out there.
Well, I think he did.
He did get me too'd at some point, but like a light me tooing.
Like it wasn't like a raped me tooing.
It was like sexually inappropriate sexual misconduct shit.
So maybe he just doesn't want to piss off the whole machine because it would be a big deal for Neil deGrasse Tyson to come out and say anything other than the official script.
So it could be that.
Who the hell knows?
All I know is these arguments are weak as shit.
But all right, let's keep playing.
You can say, I don't want this unless it's millions.
That's okay.
Totally fine with me.
I'm okay with that.
So based on that, do you say, let's keep testing it while the virus keeps spreading?
Okay.
Right.
So this is, this is the contest between the information you have available to you at that moment and what's going on outside the lab.
People are dying.
Hospitals are becoming overloaded.
So do you say we have good data on the thousand?
It's not yet at a million in case you wanted a million.
Are you going to say, let's still do it on another, let's wait another six months so we get another million in here?
Will you do that as a public health professional?
No, I wouldn't.
Yeah.
All right.
So hospitals being overrun.
Are you still standing by that as being accurate?
Because from what I remember, that was only in New York City.
It didn't really turn out to be in a situation where hospitals were being overrun.
They brought in these ships.
They did the Jabbit Center.
Never got there.
And it was make yard.
For people who don't remember, they built makeshift hospitals and then just took them apart.
And it was because they were shipping people with COVID into old age homes, which boosted the death numbers.
So if you're saying that we needed to make an emergency decision to basically use the experimental vaccine because the death numbers are so high.
So what exactly were these death numbers at that you think that we were in an emergency?
Because I think with hindsight, what emergency?
He's also, he's begging the question here, the logical fallacy, the term of this kind of circular logic, right?
So it's just like a basic flaw in reasoning.
He's going, okay, so we have these vaccines.
Sure, we haven't finished the trials yet, but what do you want to do?
Finish the trials and just let this virus keep spreading?
And the point is like, well, no, you figure out in the trials if this stops the vaccine from spreading, you know?
And if it doesn't stop the vaccine from spreading, then like it doesn't mean anything to start injecting people.
And of course, we had not only did we make the vaccine available, but we had the largest campaign to coerce and force people to take the vaccine.
And people are still getting COVID today.
So obviously this did not stop the vaccine from it's not stopped the virus from spreading.
By the way, the other point he made there, which is there's this other weird conflation.
And it's pretty funny because Patrick Bett David takes pretty much the libertarian position on this issue.
He's about to say specifically, but he's.
they're going, oh, so what do you do as a public health official there?
Do you not let people take the vaccine or do you let people take the vaccine?
As if almost as if there's a binary between not letting people take the vaccine and forcing everybody to take the vaccine.
But the obvious answer in the middle is just like, I don't know, let people do it if they're comfortable with it and don't force them to do it if they're not comfortable with it.
Now, this is something interesting here.
And this is the true language of tyrants, is that Neil deGrasse Tyson says there, he goes, hey, maybe a thousand is not good enough for you.
Maybe you want to wait till there's a million people.
Okay, fine.
He says, okay, fine.
At one point, you have that choice.
Let's just keep that in mind as we keep lying.
Allow the individual to still have a choice that's okay with a thousand instead of a few million.
Leave the person have the choice, not force him to take it or else you're going to get out of the Marines.
And you've been doing this for 14 years.
Not force him to take it or else you have to quit your job as a nurse.
There's a public force versus there's a choice.
No, no.
There's a public health contract that you have signed implicitly as a citizen of a country where in part we depend on each other for health or welfare.
I know that this is right in the middle, but when he says you have signed, Dave, you remember signing this contract?
It's funny he says you have signed and then waits a beat and then goes implicitly because obviously as it's just funny, like what this is how this is the scientific take of it.
There's this contract that you've signed.
I mean, implicitly.
This is, this is not a scientific argument.
This isn't an intellectual argument.
This is a complete sophomoric, get out of jail free.
I have nothing to say.
So I'll just claim there's this implicit contract.
And like, this is just bullshit.
This is just complete bullshit.
And there's nothing objective about how you would even measure this.
There's no, it's not true.
Like there are an implicit contract.
Like here's an example of an implicit contract.
Okay.
An implicit contract would be me and Rob, we go out to dinner and we both order and eat our food.
And then they come with the bill.
When we ordered and ate our food, there was an implicit contract that we will pay for the food, right?
Like we never signed anything.
We never like even verbally said, hey, I'll take the T-bone steak and I will pay you for it afterward.
I just said, I'll take the T-bone steak, but it's implied through your action, obviously, that you're, but the idea that there's some implicit contract that you have to take a vaccine is just, it's just utterly ridiculous.
Ridiculous Tyranny Argument00:04:57
And look, for him to start yapping away about how, well, we all need each other and we all depend on each other for our safety.
It's like, so what like, like, how could, look, objectively speaking, the vaccines got were forced or coerced onto people.
And of course, some of the measures were struck down by courts because we still do pretend to be a free country.
And even the Supreme Court, who lets a lot of shit go through, was like, wait, no, you can't do this, Biden.
You can't have these OSHA mandates for private companies, for small businesses.
But they still did, you know, announce it and get a lot of these businesses to go along with that.
Of course, a lot of government workers were straight up fired.
Of course, private passports did come in in many major cities in this country where basically they turned the unvaccinated into second-class citizens.
So you had a tremendous amount of like tyranny, okay, over these vaccines.
Now, for you to just say, well, it's all part of the social contract or it's all part of the medical social contract that you signed implicitly.
It's like, what is there any level that you wouldn't push that to?
Let's just say, like, I don't know.
Let's say you locked people up for not getting the vaccine.
Maybe you torture them.
I don't know.
You know what I mean?
You violated the social contract.
Right.
Maybe you chop their heads off in public.
Is there any point where I could go, this is horrific tyranny?
And your response would be, well, you know, you signed a contract implicitly by existing.
I've decided that you signed a contract.
You see where this argument would be stupid, right?
Like there has to be a level of tyranny where you'd be like, this is the most ridiculous argument.
And we have a pretty high level of tyranny here.
And guess what?
It's still a ridiculous argument.
This means nothing.
This is, but this is just, this isn't an argument.
It's just like a get out of arguing card.
Well, I said the word social contract.
So now we don't have anything to talk about anymore.
But it's stupid.
It's really stupid.
And of course, it's a social contract that reflects his values.
Right.
So if there's a, what's if we got a thousand people in a room together and most of them didn't want the vaccine and most of them are happy to go to the gym with other people that aren't vaccinated and the guy that owns the gym not into the vaccine.
So what social contract are you describing?
You know, I say we all need each other and we all benefit from living in a society and all of this.
And so I say that we that Neil deGrasse Tyson, you've signed a social contract implicitly to allow everyone to have their freedom of choice.
There you go.
Sorry, you signed a contract that you can't have vaccine mandates.
Is that a sound argument?
Could you imagine, by the way, through all the times we've spent arguing against these fucking idiotic vaccine mandates, that if I ever just went, well, you already agreed with me, you signed a contract because I say so.
Why is that?
Why is his version of that any more valid than what I just said?
Sorry, dude.
We live in an anarcho-capitalist society.
You signed a contract for that implicitly.
So I get my way now.
We've got a social contract here that no adults are going to smoke marijuana because if it's available, then kids might.
So it's a social contract.
No one can do that.
It's a social contract.
No one's going to have porn in their homes.
We're not going to have porn because we understand that it's spiritually corruptive.
And so if you have it, that's going to leak to all of us in society where there's spiritual corruption now.
It's a social contract.
Yeah, there's one more point that like Tom Woods has made this point very well.
I probably won't make it as well as he has over the years.
But there is a point to like, you know, if me and you go into a restaurant tomorrow, like I said, the example of an implicit contract and we order a couple steaks, you know, they'll just, it's like, okay, yeah, well, that's fine.
It's an implicit contract.
But if we were to say like, hey, I need to rent out your entire restaurant and I'm going to need a thousand steaks, you know, for a big, huge party that we're having there.
They'd, there'd probably be like, we're going to need a deposit or we're going to need you to sign something.
You know what I mean?
Like at that point, because this is like pretty important.
So like the implicit contract probably won't work anymore at this point.
We're going to actually need something tangible.
If you were to like buy a car, you know, you're going to have to sign something.
Like you're going to, and when I bought my house, I mean, the amount of things you have to sign.
It's like your hand is sore by the time you leave a closing because you're just signing and signing and signing documents, you know, like the more important things get, the less likely you are to use this like kind of, well, you just implicitly, and yet with the most important thing ever, they're just like, oh, no, you signed.
You never, by the way, this is the only one where you never did anything to implicitly agree to this contract.
You never in any way like voiced that you agree with it.
You didn't take an action that indicates that you agree with it.
You didn't sign anything.
It's just someone saying, no, I say you did.
That's literally the strength of this argument.
Flawed System Logic00:15:36
I say, I say you did.
Okay.
Let's, by the way, I mean, again, I mean, I guess we made this point already.
Maybe I don't have to hammer it home, but you could apply this to anything that could theory that could, not even does, but could increase the safety of others.
You know, we have a 10 mile per hour speed limit because social contract, you know, whatever you want to.
You have to nerf yourself at all times, you know, and walk around with foam padding all around yourself so you don't bump into anybody else because social contract.
He might as well be saying, well, listen, I'm above you and the people in my social class that are also above you get to make decisions for how everyone's supposed to operate.
And so we made this decision.
And so everyone's supposed to get in line with the decision.
And you're not even supposed to be questioning me on this podcast about the decision that I've already made for all of you because science.
I have the credential.
And I'll tell you what you agreed to on top of it.
All right, guys, let's take a moment and thank our sponsor for today's show, which is Bambi.
Bambi is here to help you avoid risk and seamlessly take care of all your HR needs.
Bambi is an HR platform built for businesses like yours so you can automate the most important HR practices and get your own dedicated HR manager.
First, Bambi's HR autopilot automates your core policies, workplace training, and employee feedback.
Then your dedicated HR manager will help you navigate the more complex parts of HR and guide you to compliance.
They're available by phone, email, or real-time chat.
An in-house HR manager can cost you up to $80,000 a year.
But with Bambi, your dedicated HR manager starts at just $99.
There's no hidden fees and you can cancel anytime.
Look, HR is a pain in the ass.
We all know that.
If you run a small business, I'm sure you didn't get into it to run HR.
So let Bambi take care of it for you.
Bambi has received thousands of five-star reviews on TrustPilot and their customers are four times less likely to have a claim filed against them.
Go to bambi.com slash P-O-T-P right now for your free HR audit.
That's B-A-M-B-E-E dot com slash P-O-T-P.
Bambi.com slash P-O-T-P.
At least let's keep playing.
Our security and the like.
And that contract is in the best scientific evidence available at the time.
If you do not get vaccinated, you will put other people in this organization at risk.
And that organization does not want to take that risk.
So you do not have this job anymore if you decline it.
So with any public health decision, there has to be a consequence to you not participating in that social contract.
Is it your job?
In some cases, it was.
But no, we're not going to have the army bust into your home and force a needle into your shoulder.
That's not going to happen.
I would just say to that, why not?
I mean, why not?
Why not have the army bust in and force the jab into their shoulder?
Why?
They violated a contract, right?
I mean, if you signed a contract that says, you know, I owe you $100 for something you just traded to me, you know, you would have a right to like, they could seize your money.
They could take it by force.
So why not?
Why is it okay to fire someone?
Like, I hate this kind of, it's like, hey, it's not like we have the army busting down your door.
You'll just, you know, starve to death, as Noam Chomsky suggested, right?
You'll just, you'll just be impoverished.
That's right.
So why not?
Why not just do it?
Why not really just do it?
Have the army bust down their door and force the jab in their arm.
Like at least own it.
If this is the argument you're going to make, at least own it.
Yeah, that would be okay, right?
By your twisted, ridiculous logic, that would be justified.
Stand by your contract.
Yeah, right.
Come on.
What's the contract here?
I mean, look, if I don't make my fucking mortgage payments, the bank will take my house.
They will actually take it by force.
If I don't leave, they will evict me.
There will be armed men who will force me and my family out of here if I don't do it.
So if you're claiming this is a contract, put up or shut up.
At least say it.
At least say the fucking quiet part out loud and defend it.
And on top of that, his argument, it's not a very fair argument because we're taking issue with the government force.
If a business doesn't feel comfortable having you because of a recommendation from a government policy, that's that guy's business.
You know what I mean?
If I own a business and I actually look at the policy of, hey, there's this vaccine, I go, hey, I want all my employees to be vaccinated.
I don't really take issue with that.
That guy wants to make that decision.
He can make that decision.
It's when government steps in and goes, hey, business, you're not allowed to have these employees here unless they're vaccinated.
Those are two different things.
Yes, drastically different things.
What he's describing is the social contract between you and your employer that if your employer doesn't feel comfortable, that's not what we're discussing.
And that's also, and by the way, that's often not a social contract.
It's usually an actual contract that you sign when you work for somebody.
But sure, but leave that aside because they're just separate things.
It's like, no, here you're talking about a vaccine that was funded by the government, authorized by the government, protected against liability by the government, propagandized that you should take it by the government.
And then in many cases, businesses forced to fire employees who didn't take it.
And in many cases, not even have customers or clients who didn't take it.
So yeah, that's a little bit different than somebody there just deciding that you're putting everybody else at risk or something like that.
I will say the one point that Patrick Bed David did not hit on in this entire clip.
I don't know, maybe he hit on it in some other part of the interview that I really wish he had.
And it's the one, I know we've said this a million times, but it's just like, it really bears, it's worth repeating that this argument has from day one been ridiculous on its face, where they say he goes, well, they want to protect everybody else there from you, the unvaccinated, who pose a risk to the vaccinated.
But again, I'm sorry, if these vaccines are worth mandating because they're so good, then why would you pose a risk to the vaccinated?
They're vaccinated, right?
I thought the argument here is that that means you're not at risk or such a drastically low risk that you're basically fine.
So like, what are we, this makes absolutely no sense.
Why would the vaccine so good that we need to mandate it, but also the people who are vaccinated still need to be protected?
This all the case for mandates always made no sense.
Once the vaccine is available, if you're saying it's so great and it works, then anyone who doesn't take it has made the choice not to take it.
They're the one at risk, I thought, right?
Not the vaccinated.
I mean, I know that's not actually the case, but that's what you're all claiming, right?
And if it's not the case, then it's still stupid to mandate the vaccine.
Go ahead.
And now that we know that the vaccine was never studied for infection, so the whole slow the spread thing was ridiculous.
Natural immunity is better.
So honestly, anyone who chose not to get the vaccine and to take the risk is a hero.
I mean, that person's a hero because they put themselves at greater risk of death and their contribution is natural immunity, which is more robust.
So if anything, you know, we should have been cherishing the unvaccinated.
Yep.
Yep.
Absolutely.
All right.
Let's keep playing.
We pretty much did that.
Well, only put your job at risk.
Yes.
67% of Americans took to COVID.
That's force.
That's not a choice.
That's a, that's a lot of force and coercing and pushing going on.
But that's, that's the, yeah, you, you can't go to the school unless you're vaccinated against bullshit.
I think that's bullshit.
That's a different country.
Yeah.
But okay.
Would you want a country?
No, America is supposed to be the one that offers the most freedom.
That's what America is supposed to be.
Okay, so watch.
So for example, so for example, if you use that argument, so somebody may say, well, freedom of choice.
I want to choose what I want to do with the body.
You're right.
What, buddy?
If you want to get an abortion, it's your own body.
Your own body.
If you want to get an abortion, get an abortion.
If I want to get the vaccine, I get to choose.
So you can't force.
If I can't force you to get an abortion, you shouldn't be able to force it.
Because it's not about you.
It's about people you interact with.
And that's the social contract of public.
But we don't even know if the vaccine worked or not at the time.
Yes.
That's what the trials are.
Dude, that's why these trials.
Are you missing data?
But let me ask you a question.
Are we saying only one type of scientists are right?
No, we're saying that the system in place.
The 16,000 that signed up.
No, no, no.
The system in place to test vaccines.
There's an entire system that's in place with review boards and all of it.
That's in place.
Now you can say, what you can say is, I have a better idea than all these review boards and all these agencies and the CDC.
I have a better idea.
Here's what you should do.
And that would have made everything better.
Okay.
You can put forth that idea.
But what I'm saying is.
All right.
Pause it here for a second.
I don't know.
It's just so infuriating.
I mean, okay, there's a system in place.
That's your argument.
There's a system.
There's a system.
There's a system in place.
Now, if you have an idea, a better idea, then you can put that forth.
Patrick B. David already did.
He already put it forth.
He said, let people choose.
That's it.
Don't mandate it.
That's, I mean, that's one idea.
That's a much better system.
I don't know.
You want me to go through?
Yeah, I could come up with a lot of things.
I don't know.
Maybe the people making these decisions shouldn't be allowed to be paid off by the pharmaceutical companies.
That seems like that would make this system a lot better.
Well, I don't know.
You're saying there's a system in place.
It's like, right.
Well, even within your precious system that's in place, as Patrick B. David already said, it usually takes five to 10 years to get approval to this, right?
So we're not even following your own system.
But yeah, I don't know.
A system would be in place.
Maybe giant pharmaceutical companies shouldn't be allowed to pay off the people who are making the choices to mandate their products.
That would be much better.
I mean, I would, yes, I think it would be much better if like short of even, you know, just abolishing all of these government institutions, which I think would be much better.
How about they're just allowed to make recommendations?
You can't force anybody because we live in a free country.
That would be a much better system.
And when you say they did the test, did you read them?
Because I read them.
Didn't seem to have a ton of evidence for the utility of these vaccines.
And when you say, hey, trust the system, is that the current system that's still saying to boost your kids?
I mean, what evidence do you see that these kids are dying, that they're better off getting the vaccine?
Hey, the system that you're talking about, is that the same one that had kids outside of school when no one was getting sick?
They found out that that was not a big transmission and the kids were not at risk.
I mean, how many mistakes does this?
Didn't the same system give me the food pyramid where they said limit your vegetables and have lots of wonder bread?
Wasn't that your system?
Your system, your health system has led to a horrifically unhealthy country.
That's something like 70% of our medical costs are associated with preventable illness.
That's this system that you're bragging about.
The same system that, okay, the Johnson and Johnson shot is responsible for the opiate epidemic.
I mean, what other mistakes did the system make over this past year that you're just going to give a full endorsement to, hey, well, that's the result of the systems?
I mean, how many.
The fucking Nazis had a system.
Right.
Like, I don't know.
What does this mean?
Oh, there's a system.
Yeah.
Their system determined that the Jews were like, you know, cancer on society.
So, okay.
Well, there's a system.
There are a lot of experts.
By the way, real deal scientists, many of whom were absorbed into the American scientific system.
So, like, okay.
Well, there's a system.
There you go.
Hey, take whatever drugs you find on the street because there's a system at the border.
So there's no reason to worry about fentanyl.
There's a system there.
They got a system at the border.
Not a working system, but there's a system there.
So just take whatever drugs you find on the street.
What does this mean?
This is why you have to say I'm a scientist because you can't actually present a scientific argument.
I have a system when I clean my hands, I pee on them, and then I blow my nose and then I rub that together.
And then I go, I have clean hands, and that's my system.
So I have a system in place.
He does it the same.
He does it the same way every time.
It's so systematic.
You have no idea.
It's so systemy.
All right.
Let's keep playing.
Idea.
But what I'm saying is, in a case where you can contaminate someone else, it's not about you.
It's about the collective health.
You're assuming.
We just pause the assumption.
The vaccine didn't prevent infection.
So you're talking about la la land here.
What are you talking about?
Well, the basis of your entire argument is that, well, you're going to contaminate someone else.
You mean the same as someone who got vaccinated?
So what the fuck are you talking about, Mr. Scientist?
This is your great grand argument.
And it's so, look, it's so absurd if you actually just think about it.
Like basically making the argument that like, well, look, it's about other people and you can contaminate other people.
Now, of course, I could just harken back to the point that I just made.
Well, if they're vaccinated, then they should be fine, right?
But okay, regardless of that, look, you could make an argument that if you have a vibe, like the old argument, like if you're, if you have AIDS and you have sex with someone and don't tell them you have AIDS, is that like an act of aggression?
Like, did you just commit a crime?
I think there's a very strong argument.
Yes, that like you, you have the obligation if you have AIDS to tell someone who you're having sex with that like you have AIDS.
And you could say, if you knowingly have COVID, and then you go up and you just start coughing in someone's face, like intentionally, is that a crime?
I could argue yes.
They're like, you're intentionally trying to get them sick.
Now, to extrapolate that to like, if you have COVID and you go out, are you committing a crime?
That seems like a real stretch.
But in this case, you're not even talking about people who have the virus.
You're just talking about people who may potentially have the virus.
If you were going to take things to that level, you could make existing a crime.
Because anytime you exist, anytime you go out into the world, you always have, there is some chance that you have something you're not aware of that you could be contaminating someone else with.
There's always some type of possibility that there was some prevention that you didn't take against something that could have protected somebody else.
It's just a completely unreasonable standard to say, therefore, we can ruin anybody who we deem it like it.
It basically, just like before, I said he was justifying the military kicking down your door and forcing the shot in your arm.
You're justifying any amount of tyranny with this argument.
This logically could never stop before you would justify like worse than North Korea.
All right, guys, let's take a moment and thank our sponsor for today's show, which is Yo Delta.
If you are over the age of 21 and living in states where Delta 8 is legal and you want to get high, go on over to yo delta.com and stock up on their gummies and vapes.
I'll tell you, everybody around the gas digital studios loves this stuff.
They all swear by it.
Go give it a shot.
Delta 8, this is the future.
It's naturally found in hemp.
It can legally be shipped to various states and it gets you high.
One more time, yoDelta.com, the official Delta 8 sponsor of the Gas Digital Network.
Mutating Virus Criticism00:07:02
Use the promo code GAS and you're going to get 25% off your entire order.
Yo.
Delta.com promo code, gas for 25 off your entire order.
All right, let's keep playing.
Somebody can take the vaccine.
Uh, won't get Covid which, by the way, I don't need to play the clips for you to see it where everybody said hey, if you get it, you're not gonna get.
If you take the vaccine, you're not gonna get.
A Rachel Matter, Joe Biden, I can give you Fauci, I can give you fit, and you've seen these clips before.
It's not like you've never seen it before.
What happened?
They were wrong.
Hold on.
So so um, the strain evolved okay, so that the vaccine that prevented you from catching Covid was tuned to the variant of Covid.
At the time, the vaccine was denied what was okay over time.
Pause it here, go ahead.
I'm sorry, this is one of the most irritating parts.
It really is entire video because mr, it's one.
It's one of the most irritating arguments that gets made.
Period right but sir, go ahead.
Mr scientist, isn't that what happens with every virus?
Because how can it be that you and your grand scientists and these people that went through and there's a system, and even the system in place here, Rob didn't catch this went through all of academia, you've got the CDC, you've got all these doctors and somehow people that were listening to the run your mouth podcast were able to send me emails and go hey, this vaccine doesn't make sense because it only works against the current virus and so once this mutates, it's going to be irrelevant.
I mean, you're the scientist and you're the one standing here going hey, i'm the high and mighty scientist, so how can it be that you're not aware of viral mutation?
And how can it be that just simple listeners of my show were able to send me an email and we were able to go hey, this vaccine doesn't make any sense because it's going to mutate.
We're literally, you couldn't.
You couldn't predict variants.
Like, if you couldn't predict that, then shut the up about how you're the scientific one and you're the one with all your systems and understood.
Everybody knew that every anyone any, every non-scientist with the most rudimentary understanding of a coronavirus knew that obviously there were going to be variants of this.
But look, even aside from that, his claim is just not true.
It's just false.
His claim is that they weren't wrong, that it did prevent transmission of that of the original uh variant or I guess not the original virus um, but it just didn't uh prevent transmission of the, the subsequent um, you know uh, mutated variants.
That's not true.
That's not true.
It also didn't prevent transmission of the original.
This is something everybody knew.
This it was like as soon as people started getting vaccinated, all of a sudden everyone, within like weeks and a month, and right away.
I guess within weeks, they'd say it hadn't like taken hold yet or whatever, but right away people were getting covet.
Who had the, the vaccine?
This is one of the things that people were getting furious about.
They were like what?
I was told, I couldn't get covet and i'm covet positive and I just got the vaccine a month ago, a month and a half ago.
This was right away.
It was even before the delta uh, uh variant that people were getting covet.
So it's just not true.
But aside from that yes, your point really was the criticism of the vaccine, or one of the criticisms of the vaccine when it came out was saying oh, the virus is going to mutate, so this vaccine doesn't make sense, and now he's going.
Oh well, it made sense at the time because it worked.
Against the original strength yeah, but that was the fucking question.
Against the thing was that the second it mutates.
This is going to be irrelevant right, it's just infuriating.
It's like they're repeating back to you what you were saying at that time and then saying, no one could have known this at the time.
Right, they weren't actually wrong, they weren't actually you know right right yeah yeah um, all right, let's keep playing.
There were variants that arose.
The vaccine provided partial protection against the new variants, enough to keep you from dying statistically and to basically keep you out of.
I just want to make this point very quickly.
I just want to tear this up so everyone understands how awful this is.
Just let me let you know that he's setting up here the same thing that they all do, the double standard that they imply.
So the vaccine prevents you from dying statistically.
Just keep that in mind as we watch a little bit more of this.
So his argument is, like you, the we can.
We can say, the vaccine prevents you from dying and then add in, statistically, because you know it's such a, the odds are so small that you're going to die, so that it's not even something you have to worry about.
We can just say basically, you're not going to die if you're vaccinated because it's such a small chance, it's statistically irrelevant.
Fine, fair enough, just keep that in mind.
Let's keep playing allowing other people with more severe problems to get the hospital attention they required, and so then they would develop a, a subsequent the booster and a subsequent mixture of the vaccine.
This is what happens every year with a flu shot.
They look at how the flu has evolved from one season to the next, and we had.
What's fortunate is, Australia tends to get the variant of flu before we do, because they get their winter in our summer, and then so we study that have a forward projection for it, so that so these annual flu shots are precisely out of the same idea of how this occurs.
How long have those been tested, though?
For years, covet vaccine hasn't been tested for it.
It was a.
It was something we just came out, but let me I don't know what points you're making, other than it was tested.
You might.
Nine months is not, you might prefer.
No, it's not a matter of time, it's a matter of it's a matter of how many.
Yes, time matters, but oh, so it is.
The number of people is paramount.
That's the most important thing.
Okay, you don't test it on 10 people, you test it on as many people as you can.
I think it was thousands.
But is it fair to say that some of the side effects we may not know for five 10 15, 20 years?
Um we you, you can't, like they can't say we know 100 the side effects 10 years from now.
How are you gonna know that?
Yeah okay, so no, of course we can't.
So then all i'm saying you can't know that okay, but watch um.
So I have a whole chapter called risk and reward in the book, which is tries to get sensitize people to when they make a decision, what kind of risk are they absorbing relative to what they're rejecting?
Okay, and we're not very good at that, at probability and statistics or analyzing.
That's why tv commercials trying to sell you a product don't just show you data.
They show a person speaking of the effectiveness of the product.
A single person.
I lost 50 pounds.
The testimony of an individual should be irrelevant to you relative to the entire set of people who have done it.
And you want to look at those statistics, but we're not good at that and advertisers know that.
So they show the testimony of an individual, which is hugely potent in a civilization where we don't think statistically, we think about eyewitness testimony on something, and somehow that is, is raised to very high level of influence on our decisions.
Unvaccinated Death Claims00:09:43
What i'm saying is, you're not confronted, your decision point is not, i'm not going to take the virus because five years, 10 years, I don't know what effect it's going to happen, though some may not be comfortable, let me finish the sentence, you you, Okay.
So you can say, I don't want to take the virus because five or 10 years from now, there could be a side effect that we don't see, which is a possibility.
Hold on.
I'm trying to make a statistical pointer.
Okay.
If you say, I don't want to take the virus because it hasn't been tested for five years and there could be some long-term side effect that worries me.
Okay.
In that same moment, there's the risk factor of you getting COVID.
Sure.
Okay.
Unvaccinated.
80 at one point, 87% of everyone dying in the hospital of COVID was unvaccinated.
Okay.
So yeah, let's pause it there.
We'll forgive him for saying virus when he meant vaccine a few times.
But all of that, to get back to this, again, it's just there's okay.
So number one, again, he's just saying there's the risk factor in the meantime while you're waiting that you could get COVID.
The vaccine, as everybody knows, does not stop you from getting COVID.
So this point is just completely moot.
And then, of course, he'll repeat the old line.
I guess it's 87% now.
If you remember for a long time, they liked saying 99% of the people who were dying from COVID were unvaccinated.
But of course, Robbins, you've done a good job of covering when you really, you know, for somebody who's making this point that like, well, it's just these personal stories, but you got to look at data.
As soon as you start more than just looking at the presented data and actually, you know, scratching on it a little bit and seeing what they're measuring, a lot of that data starts falling apart.
Yeah.
I mean, that 87% number, well, one, anyone with an unknown vaccine status was considered to be unvaccinated.
We also know that there were a lot of cases of death where it was dying with the coronavirus as opposed to dying from the coronavirus.
That's even something that Fauci admitted to when kids started getting sick, where all of a sudden that wasn't conspiracy anymore.
When all of a sudden it looked like the vaccine program wasn't working because kids started getting sagos, no, no, no, these are kids with COVID.
It's not from COVID.
So just to give you a little bit of perspective on that, the biggest study they had on it, which was the VA study when they were studying the hospitalizations and they said, you know, people hospitalized from hospitalized with COVID.
The number that they came up to was ballpark, 50%.
About half of those people were not hospitalized for COVID.
They just happened to pop positive when they were in the hospital for a broken arm or knee surgery or whatever other reason they were in the hospital for, right?
So just making the point, at least with the hospitalization numbers, it's not like this was some insignificant number.
We're not talking about like 5, 10%.
We're talking half, half the number.
The other point just to add, and I want you to finish is that, look, even if you go, like, I don't know exactly what point he's claiming this 87% number from.
The famous one I remember was 99%, but they started that from counting before the vaccines had even been distributed and also counted everyone who was indetermined as unvaccinated, which is really sloppy.
But just keep in mind, by the way, even if that number was true, that you have 70% of the adult population vaccinated.
So if the vaccine had no effect, you know what I'm saying?
Like you'd still expect it, like you have to take that into account also, right?
So like if the vaccine had no effect, you'd expect 30% of the deaths to be unvaccinated.
So now you're getting this up to 60% or whatever, or get it up to 80%.
It's still not exactly clear, like what, you know what I'm saying?
Like what effect the vaccine is having versus the other factors.
Anyway, keep going.
And then, I mean, if we're going to have a conversation about the statistics and, well, how many healthy individuals were dying of COVID?
I mean, exactly.
So if we're having a risk versus reward conversation here, the equation should be, well, what's my risk of death and how much is that improved by taking the vaccine?
And is that true for my age group of being a healthy 35-year-old?
He's having a very different conversation here where he's going, well, the majority of deaths, and he's not telling you the total death numbers, but he's just going, the majority of deaths were because we're unvaccinated individuals.
Firstly, he's not even validating that number because it's screwy, because even just on the basis of the fact that the death numbers are inflated and they assumed anyone with an unknown vaccinated status was considered to be unvaxed, which just means if you died or got sick in the state you don't live in even, there was no like centralized database for this.
So he's working with the screwy daddy data set.
I mean, either this guy's lying or he didn't actually dig into this at all.
And so he's just kind of talking out of his ass, or you and I are the biggest dumbasses in the entire world that we just can't follow him.
And I get like, these are the moments where I just get lost where I'm like, what the fuck is going on here, buddy?
Well, I mean, I think that there's a lot of these guys, especially when you're rich and famous for being the like, I represent science.
You are very highly incentivized to back up the whole structure.
There's systems in place, Rob.
You know, like you're, you're incentivized to back that up.
And I also do think, you know, look, we've created a thing here now.
And it's easy for a lot of people like us who kind of thrive in this alternative online world where we can say whatever the fuck we want.
And we got a lot of people who love us for saying it.
You know what I mean?
Like we got people who love listening to us and supporting us because we tell them the truth as we see it.
But when you're Neil deGrasse Tyson and you're still kind of in the, you know, quote unquote mainstream corporate world, I mean, if you were to come out and say the opposite and agree with Patrick Bed David here, he would have an avalanche come down on him.
Maybe not quite like it would have been in 2020, 2021, but still it would be an avalanche that would come down on him.
And that's a pretty strong incentive to not want to do that.
But anyway, you kind of got at something there.
I think we'll mention again in a second.
Let's play a little bit more.
Okay.
So your risk choice is, I'm not going to take it because maybe somewhere down the line, something will happen and we don't know what that is, or I will risk getting COVID.
And if I get COVID, depending on your age and other thing, there's a 3% chance of me dying in the hospital.
That's your choice.
Let's pause.
Yes.
Let's pause it there.
See, this is why I almost wanted to save what you were talking about until we got to this point.
So again, it's like he, he starts, he makes these points that logically do not really hold up.
He's invoked, he's using double standards when he talks about the vaccine versus when he talks about COVID.
And also he's just flat out wrong and quoting just false misinformation, if you will, or disinformation.
I always get those confused.
But no, there's not a 3% chance that you will die in the hospital if you get COVID.
That's not true.
Maybe if you were mostly already dead, 97 asthma with a kidney removed.
Yeah.
I mean, you know, now he's, he kind of, he says, depending on age and other factors, there's a 3% chance.
So I don't know.
Yeah.
If you're saying if you're 90 plus with four comorbidities, maybe you could get up to that number.
But okay.
So you're saying depending on age and all this.
Okay.
Well, let's do, let's, let's play a little game here.
Neil deGrasse Tyson.
Let's take someone.
I don't know, me or Rob.
Okay.
Let's say somebody who has zero other, you know, would have zero comorbidities if they died today, right?
Or other comorbidities, right?
has no underlying major health issues, is in their 30s and has already had COVID multiple times.
Can you name one person, one person who fits that description who's died from COVID?
One.
Give me one person who's in their 30s, has had COVID multiple times, doesn't have other underlying health issues and gets COVID and dies from it.
Because you see, once you start breaking things down like that a little bit, this is the point I was trying to make before.
Remember when he's very comfortable to say, oh, if you get the vaccine, you're not going to die from COVID statistically.
Okay, so guess what?
If we get COVID, we're not going to die statistically.
Okay.
You would be hard pressed to find one that fits that description that died from COVID.
So this is the double standard that they use.
They'll apply this to the vaccine.
Look, maybe if you take things the way he's applying them, maybe there is an argument for the absolute most at risk to take the COVID vaccine.
Maybe.
I don't know.
But there's no argument for the people who are at zero risk statistically applying your own standard that you use toward vaccinated people, their risk of dying from it.
Well, that's the risk that a six-month-old has, that a five-year-old has, that a healthy young person, particularly a healthy young person who's had COVID already, which by the way, nowadays is describing a huge portion of the population, a very huge portion of them, many of whom were vaccinated, still got COVID, right?
Zero Risk Standard00:02:06
So let's just say it's fuck this double standard shit.
One standard, that'll do just fine.
We could have one standard for both the vaccine and for COVID.
And if you're going to say that we can wave away things that are statistically irrelevant, which I'm fine with doing for the sake of the conversation, then okay.
But that also applies, that also applies to COVID itself.
All right, guys, let's take a moment and thank our sponsor for today's show, which is Moink.
Did you know that 60% of U.S. pork products comes from one company owned by the Chinese and their hogs are given something called ractopamine, which is banned in 160 countries, including China.
Yet you find it at the grocery aisle every day.
There is a better way.
And I'd like to tell you about Moink.
Moink delivers grass-fed and grass-finished beef, lamb, pasteurized pork, chicken, sustainable wild-caught Alaskan salmon, all straight to your door.
Moink farmers farm like our grandparents did.
And as a result, moink meat tastes like it should because the family farm does it better.
The moink difference is a difference you can taste and you can feel good knowing that you're helping family farmers stay financially independent.
You choose the meat delivered in every box.
Choose from things like ribeyes, chicken breasts, pork chops, salmon fillets, and much, much more.
Plus, you can cancel anytime.
The meat is delicious.
You will love it.
You will taste the difference.
Once you taste this, you're like, what the heck was in that stuff I was buying at the grocery store?
Ring doorbell founder Jamie Simonoff jumped at the chance to invest in moink.
You'll understand why.
Keep American farming going by signing up today at moinkbox.com slash P-O-T-P.
And right now, listeners of this show get free filet mignon in every order for a year.
That is one year of the best fillet mignon you'll ever taste, but for a limited time only at moinkbox.com slash P-O-T-P.
That's M-O-I-N-K-B-O-X.com slash P-O-T-P.
All right, let's keep playing a little bit more.
Yes, but what I see people doing is they focus on one thing, and that's the foundation of their decision.
Long COVID Bullshit00:15:26
Rather than the other chance, what happens if you get COVID?
Now you get long COVID.
Now you don't have a taste buds for two years or whatever it is for long COVID?
You're on a ventilator in the hospital.
So possibly dying?
So now, now we've gone, right, from when we talk about the vaccine, we say, if you have the vaccine, you're not going to die statistically.
Even though, by the way, even with his own numbers, there were lots of people who died from COVID after taking the vaccine.
I mean, even if his number was 87%, you know, like, let's just say all these COVID deaths are real deaths.
He's not, he's not taking the position you're taking, right?
That a lot of these people died with COVID.
What do we have?
How many people died in America from COVID, according to the official numbers?
So hundreds and hundreds of thousands.
Did it crack a million?
You know what I mean?
Like it's a huge number of people.
Even if you were saying only 13% of them who died were vaccinated, that's still quite a lot.
But you're willing to wave that away because it's like, well, statistically, it's not going to happen.
Statistically, 13% is irrelevant or something like that.
Whereas the numbers I'm trying to wave away are way lower than 13%.
But yeah, okay, the things that are unlikely to happen when it's 13%, even though that number is bullshit, just taking the number he had.
When it's 13%, we can wave that away.
But then you can also, if you're saying, you're talking this whole thing about how you have to make decisions about the data and what's most likely and what one risk versus another risk and these kind of competing decisions that you have to make, but you're supposed to make it based off of what if you lose your taste for years because of long COVID?
This is like, I'm sorry, these really are people who just have not looked into this at all.
Look, long COVID is basically bullshit.
Now, there are the exceptions to this are like, there are people who have, who, who got very sick and got pneumonia in the wake of getting COVID and did lung damage.
They may have permanent lung damage.
There are some people who fall into that category.
But this idea of like people who just had a mild case of COVID, but then got long COVID, there's no evidence to support at all that this is not psychosomatic.
Like there's no evidence at all to support that this is a real thing.
But to invoke, you can't argue on one hand when you're when you're, you know, you're analyzing two different things.
You're analyzing like taking the vaccine versus not taking the vaccine.
You can't argue on one hand when you're talking about not taking the vaccine, like, you know, or when you're talking about taking the vaccine, be like, yeah, some bad things can happen, but it's very, very unlikely.
And then when you're arguing about not taking the vaccine, argue the most highly unlikely thing is the reason why you should be taking the vaccine.
This is such an anti-scientific way to argue his point.
It's complete bullshit.
I don't care what you say about systems or how you're a science.
This is the most unscientific approach to making your point.
It's kind of funny that he started off with, hey, the way they market to you is with one random specific event that's unlikely.
And then his closing argument is you might end up on a ventilator.
Who are they even putting on ventilators for COVID anymore?
What are the odds?
How does that happen?
What are the odds that you end up on a ventilator today in 2023?
What are the odds that you end up on a ventilator from COVID?
And now do that with, you know, like a young, healthy person.
Now, now do that, even not even a young, healthy person, just outside of the highest risk category.
Give me the odds on that.
I bet it'll be a lot lower than your bullshit 13% number that you had of that.
Those are the people dying from COVID.
And, you know, anyway.
You might as well have started this with, hey, here's a disingenuous marketing tip technique that I'm about to use and then ramble for five minutes about statistics and go, you might end up on a ventilator.
Yeah.
Really just unbelievable.
All right.
Let's play a little bit more of it.
Dying?
Like, what?
Where is the, so I looked every day.
Once a week, I looked at the statistics.
How many people getting COVID?
What's the rate?
What's the rate of hospitalization?
What's the rate of deaths?
Where is it by state?
I had to look at it.
My board forced me to look at it.
And you know what?
It's data.
You know what data he didn't look at is by vaccine status.
You know why?
Because it wasn't available.
That's for sure.
So what I'll look at.
Please let us know where it is.
Right.
Daily as a scientist, you looked at bullshit, bad data from the CDC to basically, and you're a scientist.
Why weren't you looking at this and going, hey, some of the crucial variables aren't right in front of me?
Why aren't the most important variables right here?
If I wanted to make a comparison, that would be the information I needed.
Why isn't it here?
Seems like a lot of people.
That's a fucking dope.
Yep.
All right, let's keep playing.
Yeah, I agree.
On risk factors, the risk of people's lives.
Okay, for sure.
So nothing is ever zero risk.
Yeah, there's a risk that you'll grow a third arm in 10 years because the virus mutates within you.
Should the individual not have the right to say, I don't want to take it because you don't have the right to contaminate someone else.
So if you don't get that, though, but who says that?
It's a social contract in a modern civilization.
I don't have the right to contaminate someone else.
What do you mean?
I mean, we already kind of covered this before, but to just say it's a social contract and you don't have the right to contaminate somebody else.
It's like, okay, fine.
But then again, just by this logic, you should, it's perfectly legitimate to put everybody under house arrest if they have a cold.
Or in this case, you're not even doing it if they have COVID, right?
You're just doing it if they haven't taken a measure that you claim is going to be preventative against that.
So really just put everyone under house arrest permanently.
Because you could have a cold.
You could have the flu and not know.
In fact, I believe with the flu, double check me on this, but I think I'm right about this.
I believe with the flu, you are the most contagious right before you start showing symptoms.
So you don't even know you have the flu and you can go out and give someone else the flu.
And by the way, you know, okay, maybe not in the same numbers as COVID, certainly not by the official numbers.
The flu doesn't kill as many people, but I mean, you still, you know, bad flu season could kill 50, 60,000 people and you don't have the right to contaminate them.
Social contracts.
I uttered the magic word, social contract.
So we can put everyone on house arrest permanently, always, because they could be at their most contagious and have no way of knowing it, right?
Or maybe just people who haven't gotten the flu shot, you know, people who haven't gotten the flu shot.
You want to go there?
You want to start doing this?
You lose your job and you stay at home.
Why not?
Yeah.
I mean, just take this to its logical conclusion.
Like, I wish if you would defend this goofy worldview, then fucking defend it.
Actually, really look people in the eye and say, yep, that's what we're doing.
We're shutting this whole thing down always.
Constant lockdowns for the rest of eternity because you don't have the right to contaminate other people.
When you hone down his argument, did I just freeze?
Oh, no.
Okay.
It's double bullshit.
It's bullshit one of, well, you don't have a right to contaminate others.
Yeah, but the vaccine doesn't stop that.
So if that's the basis for which you have freedom, so I guess no one should have freedom.
And then second, you got this social contract, which no one signed.
So it's just double bullshit.
Yep.
Like, please, somebody send this to me.
Look, the logic of it is bullshit because it would lead to locking down all of society.
The claim is bullshit because the vaccine doesn't actually prevent transmission of the virus.
And the claim of the social contract is bullshit.
It's like every inch of this argument is just horrible.
It is spectacularly wrong on every level.
What he's really trying to say, but he can't say it is that there's a social contract of compliance that people above you get to make decisions for the people below you.
And that's the way that society is supposed to function because I say so.
And so if we have the masters making declarations for the people below them, we need the people below them to fall in line.
And we can't have society without that.
That's his worldview.
Don't think for yourself.
I'm the scientist here.
I understand the data.
All right.
Let's play a little bit more and then we'll wrap up.
Or it's go to the beach.
Yeah.
You stay, you stay away from other old people who stay away from people who are immune compromised.
So, so, so, Neil, so for me, I'm asking you because I'm, I want to know how you process this as a guy that's well-read, smart.
I process the data and the data, but we didn't have enough data, doll.
No, no, we didn't have enough data.
At any given moment, there's data for you to make a decision at any given moment.
Sure.
The data is constantly getting better and better.
Yeah.
All right.
So, all right, at any given moment, you say to yourself, okay, what happens to me if I get COVID?
There's a chance I'll get long COVID.
I'm certainly out for at least a week.
And there's a chance I'll be hospitalized.
And there's a chance I'll die.
Quick pause again.
I'm sorry.
Every part of that's a lie.
There's a chance that you're going to be out for a week.
That's not true, or at least a week.
I'll tell you this, people that got vaccinated.
Most of them were sick for two or three days.
So, I mean, there was no guarantee.
I know people that got COVID and it was literally nothing for them.
Oh, yeah.
Whatever happened to the whole justification for the lockdowns, which was asymptomatic spread.
There's people who get COVID are asymptomatic.
People literally have zero symptoms.
They're not out for a day.
This happens.
It's kind of one of the weird things about COVID.
But that is true.
And there's also people who have gotten COVID who had incredibly mild symptoms.
We're not out for a week.
These are just facts.
It's factually wrong that he says, you know, you'll be out for at least a week.
What did he say right before that?
Because even what he first started saying was total nonsense.
I don't remember now.
There's a chance you'll get long COVID.
There's a chance you'll definitely be out for a week.
There's a chance you get hospitalized.
There's a chance you die or something like along those lines.
Yeah.
And there's also a chance that you get myocarditis from the vaccine.
You can argue it's a very small chance, but the problem is here's the double standard again.
All the shit you're talking about is a small chance too.
Okay, it's not a small, it's not a small chance that you'll be sick for a week if you get COVID.
That's not a small chance.
There's a decent chance that you'll be sick for a week.
There's a decent chance that you'll be sick for three days with the vaccine.
Oh, and by the way, you got to get two vaccines.
Oh, and then by the way, you got to keep getting boosted.
So it's like, even if you take that into account, it's like, yeah, it's really not much of a difference there, is it?
And by the way, I know, you know, lots of people who have had this happen.
And I think this is pretty backed up by this data that Neil deGrasse Tyson is so on top of.
A lot of people get the vaccine, get sick from it, get the booster, get sick from it, and still get COVID and they're out for a week.
You know, it is what it is.
Anything else you want to add?
I'm trying to remember what he said at first, but it's so irritating.
It's hard to keep your thoughts coherent.
Yeah.
Yeah, I hear you.
All right.
Let's play a little bit more and then we'll wrap this up.
Basically, entirely removing the chance that I'm going to die, essentially, at my age group.
And I will accept the risk that in five years I'll grow a third arm.
That's the kind of decision making that I make.
Now, that's just for me.
Oh, all right.
I remember and it's important.
That's fine for you to make that decision, but without perfect data, why are you making this decision for other people?
Like, I understand if you were to go, hey, we have perfect data.
And so it's kind of like the way the Fed works.
The Fed can't hit a 2% inflation target rate.
They don't know what's going on.
So then why are you stepping in here to make adjustments?
Like, I understand if you're a scientist and we go, well, we have perfect data.
And so other people are really stupid.
They're not good with like these understandings.
They listen to Alex Jones and they go, oh, there's microchips in here.
And so they're going to make a bad decision.
And I got perfect data.
So I'm going to make a decision for them.
That's one argument.
To stand up here and go, well, we're working with the best data that we have at the time.
Well, if you don't have great data to make a decision for everyone, then don't.
That's like that is flagrantly evil to go.
Well, it's important for we for us to make the decision, even if we don't have all the tools that we need to make a good decision.
We should still be making that decision.
Why?
Yeah.
Of course, the thing, it's also just condescending and a bullshit straw man to be like, oh, there's a chance you'll grow a third arm in 10 years or something like that.
It's like, I don't know.
Like, look at this study that Dr. McCullough just did, where they went over the people who did experience myocarditis from the vaccine, and they all had elevated spike proteins in their blood.
You go, this was from the vaccine.
Like, this is a real thing.
And again, he's just playing this stupid game of like, well, I know that, you know, again, the double standard of like, well, it's, I'm statistically like, it's almost impossible that I'm going to die in my age group if I get the vaccine.
It's like, okay, fine.
But if we're talking about this now on an individual level, as he just did for himself, let me talk about it on an individual level for myself.
Never been vaccinated in my 30s.
Hanging on to that one.
In my 30s, no underlying major health conditions.
And I've had COVID twice at least.
What?
Tell me, Neil deGrasse Tyson, what are the chances that I die from COVID?
Hey, listeners, there's a lot of you harass Tyson with this clip.
I mean, take this whole video and absolutely harass him until at least when we say harass, don't we're not telling you to like call him mean names or anything like that.
We can't stop you, but just flood him with the clip.
There's a couple hundred thousand of you or so.
Just everyone, go to Twitter, take the full video of this and go, hey, Mr. Tyson, check this out.
Hey, Mr. Tyson, do you care to acknowledge any of these questions on science?
You're a scientist.
Just keep appealing to his incredible science-y brain to, you know, just field the questions of us idiots.
I don't know if you guys have any questions.
And specifically the question that I asked: a guy in his 30s has had COVID at least twice that he knows of for sure, two times has had COVID, no underlying health issues.
What are the chances that I die from COVID?
And if you can say that with the vaccine, it rules out any chance that you die from COVID.
I think I already got you beat.
I think I already got you beat.
Neil deGrasse Tyson, somewhat overweight guy, substantially older than me.
Let's say he never had COVID and gets the vaccine.
I think I got much, much better odds than you do without the vaccine.
That's my guess.
Prove me wrong, Mr. Scientist.
Come up with a data-driven argument as for why I'm wrong about that.
And everyone out there, just be really nice.
Mr. Tyson, oh, great scientist, can you please explain these questions from these dumb comedians to your lessers?
Please just inform us your lessons.
Yes.
And just to preempt it, because it's the only thing we haven't said yet, is that any arguments about the utility of the vaccine and I guess death numbers coming down, if even that's the case, good luck comparing that to typical death charts from viruses and when natural immunity kicks in.
Yeah.
Good luck proving.
By the way, he does say later in the video something about how the vaccine came out and then death numbers go down.
And then he extrapolates from that that we know, we just don't have time to play the whole thing, but he extrapolates from that that we know that we've saved tens of millions of lives from the vaccine.
Saved Millions Lives00:01:48
The major problem with that is number one, the way you get to that number is they just go, look at what the death rates were in 2020 before we had the vaccines.
Look at what the death rates are now.
All of that difference is we credit to the vaccine.
That's how they get these numbers.
That's how you look at data.
See, there's a problem with just saying, oh, I followed the data is that data can kind of like statistics can paint any picture you want to.
So that's how they get to the number, the vaccine saved tens of millions of lives.
There's major problems with that argument.
Number one, the death numbers actually went up in 2021 as people were taking the vaccines more and more.
Lots of countries, America, Israel, all types of England, lots of other European countries actually experienced their worst seven-day death averages after close to 60, 70, 80% of the population had been vaccinated.
So that throws a wrench in there a little bit.
The other thing is that, of course, The two major factors are that the variants are less deadly than the original variant in 2020 was.
And of course, now you have rampant natural immunity.
There's tons of people now who have gotten COVID and have some natural immunity, which almost every study done demonstrates is substantially stronger than the immunity you would get from the jab.
The question really is how many times stronger is natural immunity than the vaccines, not whether it's stronger or not.
Okay, so we're going to have to wrap on that.
Thought this one was worth a nice takedown.
All right.
Catch you next time.
Come see us live.
ComicdaveSmith.com.
All the ticket links are up there.
Come catch me and Robbie, the fire, coming to a town near you.