All Episodes
Previous Next
May 5, 2020 - Real Coffe - Scott Adams
49:38
Episode 955 Scott Adams: Extra Cussing Tonight. Put the Kids to Bed. Close Your Windows, Get Under the Covers
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
It's looking a little bright in here.
Hold on a second.
Turn down the light.
Ah.
Ah.
Nope, that didn't work.
There we go.
Just the right amount of darkness.
Add makeup to my face without putting any on.
Can you tell me why Periscope and Zoom and Skype don't have Snapchat filters so that I can look like I have TV makeup on all the time?
Is there any reason you can't build a Snapchat filter into these Zoom and conference calls?
Why not? Why not, they say.
You've all been warned.
You saw my tweet, some of you, warning that there might be extra cussing.
You saw the title of my periscope, which says extra cussing.
I am now warning you directly that there will be extra cussing.
Cussing. Cussing.
Not cuffing. Cussing.
I recommend that you put the kids to sleep.
Close your windows and get under a heavy blanket.
Because the cursing could come out at any time.
At any time.
There will be no warning.
I asked this question today and it bugs me that I didn't know the answer.
Does anyone know, since we know that a lot of frontline healthcare workers are taking hydroxychloroquine, do we know if any of them have been hospitalized?
And the answer is, Nope.
Nope. Wouldn't you like to know, of all the many medical professionals who are around the coronavirus all the time, have any of them been hospitalized if they were also taking hydroxychloroquine?
Don't you think that's pretty, pretty important?
We don't know. I did talk to a doctor just moments ago on Twitter who said that Who said that he has heard of people who were on hydroxychloroquine and did contract the virus.
So anecdotally, it looks like you can get the virus, so it's not a preventive.
I don't think we necessarily thought it was likely to prevent it.
Some people were hopeful, but that didn't seem likely to me.
The more likely is that it would help you deal with it once you got it, and that we don't know.
Amazingly. However, I was conversing with Dr.
Jeremy Samuel Faust, and he was filling me in on some stuff, and after listening to his description, because he's following things pretty closely, he does not have much confidence that hydroxychloroquine is going to be a game-changer.
Now, he asked me to define game-changer because I said, are you saying it won't be a game-changer?
So he said, well, define game-changer.
And I said, well, something that would allow us to go fully back to work and still not have our hospitals crashed.
So I said, let's just make it that.
The hospitals stay intact and we still go back to work.
That would be a game-changer if the meds allowed us to do that.
And his opinion, we're not anywhere near that.
In fact, if hydroxychloroquine works at all, it's sort of going to be in the statistics.
And he made a good point, which I will make to you.
Because you know there are lots of hydroxychloroquine tests going on, right?
So there are all kinds of tests all over the place.
And as the doctor pointed out to me, If any of those tests had shown it obviously works, meaning that you don't need to do the statistics, it's just obvious.
Everybody who takes it gets better.
Or something like that, we would already know.
Now, that's why I had lowered my estimate of the likelihood that hydroxychloroquine is going to be a big deal.
I lowered it to 40% chance.
That's my current estimate. Current estimate.
40% chance it makes a significant difference.
And the doctor was saying, you know, if you could notice the difference, like the doctors could just tell without any statistics, we would already know.
Because first of all, they'd tell us.
And secondly, for humanitarian, humane reasons, they would have stopped the test.
Because if you get such good results with a drug that has been used for so long, you have a pretty good idea what the safety profile is.
If it worked that well, they would have stopped the trials already.
And they would have said, oh, it's just obvious.
We're not going to finish this.
We better just start giving it to everybody.
That's not happening. So I'll stick with my 40% chance that hydroxychloroquine is a big deal.
So the New York Times 1619 Project got a Pulitzer Prize.
So the 1619 Project was basically rewriting the history of the United States sort of to make us look like bad slavers, I guess, was the main thing.
And I guess historians ripped them apart for having bad history in there.
So they weren't very accurate about history.
And it was a total political nonsense.
And they got a Pulitzer Prize.
They got a Pulitzer Prize.
Now, are you impressed?
Because they got a Pulitzer Prize.
Let me tell you what the Pulitzer Prize is.
Do you want to get red-pilled on the Pulitzer Prize?
In approximately three minutes...
You're going to think the Pulitzer Prize is so stupid, you wouldn't even want to win one, even if you didn't have to do anything to get it.
The Pulitzer Prize is a little group of people who volunteered and had to be selected, of course.
They volunteered but were also selected to be on a little committee where they would read 0.0001% of the work that was created that year, just the stuff that was submitted.
Most people don't even submit.
So they'd see this tiny, tiny little sliver of work that was produced, and then the, I don't know, six or eight of them, it's a small group.
They would vote, and they'd say, we like this one best.
And then they'd talk about it, and they'd decide that that one gets the Pulitzer Prize.
Now, there are different little groups for each flavor of Pulitzer Prize, for each category.
So each category has little judges.
How... How prestigious is it to win an award that's six to eight people sitting around in the living room saying, you know, I like this one the best of these few choices.
It's meaningless. It is absolutely, completely without value.
It's just some people sitting in the living room saying, well, there were a million things created.
I read seven of them.
Of the seven things I read, of the million things that were created, I like this one best, of the seven.
Four out of seven of us agree.
Pulitzer Prize is the most ridiculous prize.
So he says, is there a Pulitzer for cartooning?
There have been Pulitzers awarded to cartoonists.
I think Burke Brethard got one.
I think Gary...
Trudeau got one, if I'm not mistaken.
So at least two strip cartoonists and of course there have been other cartoonists who do political cartoons who have gotten them.
So there are Pulitzers for cartoonists and for a long time I wanted one.
I stopped wanting one when I met the husband of one of the judges.
So the husband of one of the judges was in my living room one day and He was also a reporter.
And he was writing a story about me.
And we were chatting.
And he talked about his wife who was on the Pulitzer Committee.
And he just described it like I described it to you.
And that was the last time I cared about winning a Pulitzer Prize.
Because I said, seriously?
It's just six people sitting around who haven't seen even 1% of the stuff that's been produced that year?
And they decide? That's it?
Useless. All right.
So, speaking of Dr.
Jeremy Samuel Faust, he suggests, along with his co-writer in the Washington Post, they wrote a piece with Carlos Del Rio in which they say that maybe the best metric to track for going back to work is net deaths.
So, instead of looking at just coronavirus deaths, Just look at the net compared to the historical baseline and say, are you keeping it close to the historical number?
Because there are lots of variables in net deaths.
To which I thought to myself, that's not bad.
That is not bad.
I don't see anything wrong with that approach, do you?
I mean, I would have said hospitalizations.
But you could attract deaths, but then you have a trouble of knowing if you're counting them right.
So counting the total net deaths and comparing it to prior year baselines, not too bad.
Not too bad. Are you wondering where the swearing is going to come in?
Oh, it's coming.
It's coming. And here it comes.
So, here's a new thing I learned from a doctor.
So, there's a doctor who worked in an emergency room for seven years.
This is a different doctor, so I'm not talking about Dr.
Faust. A different article in, I guess it was in Scientific American.
And this doctor had been an emergency room doctor for four years and an attending physician for three.
So he had seven years of doctoring, and he treated coronavirus patients, and he saw them die.
And he asked this question.
Why have I been a doctor for seven years, especially in an emergency room, and I've never seen anybody die of the regular flu?
Have you ever heard anybody say that before?
Have you ever heard anybody say, huh, I know people who have died of coronavirus.
Why don't I know anybody who's ever died of the regular flu?
There were 80,000 of them last year.
There's something wrong, right?
Doesn't quite make sense.
Now, when I said it, I said, well, the obvious reason is because I'm not a doctor, right?
Probably doctors see it all the time.
Didn't you assume that?
So the doctor says he'd never seen one, not one.
So he called around to his other doctor friends.
And he said, have you ever seen anybody die from the regular flu?
What do you think they said?
Well, there was this one case of a pediatric situation that we heard about.
And then a few of them had seen one or two over their lifetime.
Over their entire career, anyway, they'd seen one or two, but the other doctors had never seen one.
Not one. Now, how could it be that there are about the same number, let's say in very rough terms, of overdoses every year, but we all know people who died from overdoses.
How many of you know somebody who died from an overdose?
It doesn't have to be last year, just in general.
All of you? Every one of you, right?
You all know somebody who died of an overdose.
And that's about the same number as die of the flu.
Allegedly. But why do we all hear about ODs?
We all know people who died in drunk driving accidents.
Most of us know people who have been shot.
Do you know anybody who has been shot, you know, in some kind of a crime or murder or anything?
I do. I do.
I've had guns pointed at me several times myself.
So there's something that's not adding up, right?
So you may have heard President Trump asked exactly the same question at his town hall.
He said, why is it that I know three people who got coronavirus and his friend died?
And he said, I've lived my entire life and I've never heard of one person who died of the regular flu.
But this coronavirus hits and all of a sudden my friend dies and two other people I know have it?
I don't know if the others died.
I think they maybe just had it.
So he noticed it too.
So this doctor who noticed it, who is finally somebody who knows what they're talking about as opposed to us, he decides to look into how do they calculate that number for the regular flu?
Do they count it?
Do they count Look at the records and see what the death certificate says.
If it says, die to the flu, that's one.
And then they add them up. Do you think that's what they do?
Fuck no. Fuck no they don't do that.
It turns out that they use a fucking algorithm.
They do an estimate.
They don't count them.
And their estimate could be wildly off, which they acknowledge.
Do you know how many you would get if you counted them?
The way they count coronavirus, where you actually got a name and a medical record, and it's this guy.
Do you know how many you'd get?
Maybe 4,000.
High-end, 15,000.
But even at 15,000 a year, I feel like I would have heard of one.
Somebody I know.
I mean, 15,000 is still a lot.
I'll bet it's closer to four.
So do you know...
That the entire premise of this whole fucking shutdown is that we didn't want to have a situation that was much worse than the regular flu Which we believe to be in their neighborhood of, I don't know, 50,000 to 80,000 a year or something.
Turns out that's just fucking bullshit.
The most basic thing our fucking experts wanted us to understand was a lie.
It was as much of a lie as masks don't work.
It was as much of a lie as this does not pass From human to human, thank you, fuck you, China.
Fucking fuckers.
So, almost everything that we've been told about this thing has been wrong.
All of the important shit has been wrong.
And let me tell you, as confidently as I can, don't wait for testing.
Don't wait for testing to save you.
There's not going to be any fucking testing.
Not sufficient because we know what the number is that would be sufficient.
We're nowhere fucking close.
We don't have a plan to get there.
There's no plan.
There's not even a path.
There's no fucking way testing is going to save us.
Nobody has a handle on it.
Nobody knows what we're doing.
Nobody thinks we're going to have enough.
It's not a fucking solution.
How about the vaccine?
Maybe we'll have one by the end of the year.
Do you know how many times we've successfully made a vaccine for a coronavirus type of situation?
What would you guess?
How many times in history have we successfully made a vaccine for something of this type?
How about fucking zero?
Zero. In the whole fucking universe, the history of mankind, we've never fucking made a vaccine that works on this sort of thing.
Do you think we're going to make one now because we're trying harder?
Maybe. Maybe.
But if we do, we're going to accidentally cure the common fucking cold, because that's a coronavirus too.
Now, I'm not saying we won't do it, because there's a lot of genius and energy being concentrated on it.
Maybe we do. But would you count on it?
I mean, the fucking liars who are telling us, yeah, the vaccine's coming, be they medical, be they politicians, fuck every one of them.
They're not making us a vaccine.
It's not even a fucking thing.
Stop lying to us.
Stop fucking lying to us.
You have lost all moral authority.
You've lost it.
Moral authority comes not only from the organization of things where you have a leader, and people say, well, the leader, we elected him, he's got moral authority, but you must also perform.
You must show that you are capable.
To maintain your moral authority.
Just because you were elected, that doesn't give you moral authority if you can't perform.
And they're all fucking lying to us.
Every goddamn fucking asshole that tells you they're an expert, a politician, they're all fucking lying to you about all the important stuff.
It's all a fucking lie.
Every fucking bit of it.
So... Do you have a right to defy your government when they have lost their moral authority?
Yeah, you do. You fucking do.
You can do anything you fucking want to do morally.
Now, legally you can't.
There would be consequences, and I'm not going to suggest that you go get yourself in trouble.
But from a moral standpoint, they're lying to us, and they're not performing.
Did you know that we don't even know why?
Viruses ever peter out?
Did you know that?
We don't even know why.
What about this remdesivir?
It's great stuff, right?
Just heard a study that says remdesivir, that'll cut down on that virus, baby.
You got some virus in you?
They've tested it.
Remdesivir will reduce that virus in you.
And therefore, obviously, it helps you survive, right?
No! No!
Remdesivir... If it doesn't change the survival rate, it's not a fucking drug.
It's just some company that's trying to make money.
Do you really need to pay $1,000 to get better three days earlier when you were going to get better anyway?
If it doesn't stop you from fucking dying, it's not a drug.
It's not a therapeutic.
It's a nothing. It's a scam.
It's, I don't know, what is it, a vaccine?
Some pharmaceutical company has figured out how to gouge the public again.
They're fucking lying about remdesivir.
Alright? Probably there's lies all over the place on hydroxychloroquine.
Probably in both directions.
Totally unreliable bullshit information we have on that.
We don't know what causes the virus to stop.
We'll never have a fucking vaccine.
Stop lying to us!
We don't have any therapeutics that are working.
We have one fucking option.
To suck it up, do the best we can, and try to save the economy.
Now that's obvious. Everybody knows that.
And I don't know that you necessarily have to push your government to do something quicker.
Because we're only talking now, you know, what, three and a half weeks to the end of May for most of the states.
By then we'll have a lot of information about the other states.
So we might be able to feel our way through this, you know, with some starts and stops.
I'm not sure that you necessarily have to protest your government.
I'm not saying that. But I am saying that the government has sacrificed its moral authority.
It just doesn't have it. You still might need to pay attention to them.
Maybe they'll correct.
Maybe they'll get it right, eventually.
But they have no moral authority.
So, as I said on Twitter today, if a store opened in my town, And the guidelines say I can't use that store.
But if they do, I'm going to go to that store.
I'm going to buy something at that fucking store if I don't even need anything from that store.
If somebody wants to take a chance, and I don't recommend this, by the way, I think it would be foolhardy to open a small business because you could get your ass kicked by the legal system.
But if you do, I'm on your side.
I'll wear my mask.
You know, I'll do curb pickup.
I'll do whatever you need. Wash my hands.
I'll do all that. But if you open up illegally, I'm your fucking customer.
Okay? And I don't see any other path to the other side of this.
So, who's lying?
As far as I can tell, I don't know if it's lying or just people don't know.
It's hard to say. All right.
On another topic, the fakest of fake news, and there's a lot of fake news, but I'm going to say the fakest of all the fake news, and I tweeted this earlier, is that every idiot pretending to not understand why Trump acts respectful to dictators when he knows he needs to negotiate with them for something important for this country.
Can you fucking assholes stop pretending you don't know why the president acts super friendly to dictators That he has to fucking negotiate with.
Do I have to explain why that makes sense?
Can you stop fucking acting like you don't understand it?
What's the president doing?
Why is he sucking up to a dictator before he does important trade talks?
I don't understand! Why does he be nice to the biggest country in the world with a nuclear arsenal?
I don't understand!
I'm too fucking dumb!
Stop it! Just stop being so fucking dumb that you act like you don't know why Trump is being nice to the dictators he has to negotiate with.
God, are you fucking kidding me?
In other news, I think I need to calm down a little bit.
I think I need to calm down a little bit.
Yeah, we don't know exactly what's a lie and what's just not knowing, but Scott, are you really surprised?
No, I'm way beyond, I think I'm way beyond being surprised.
All right, I'm just looking at your comments right now because that was sort of all I needed to say.
Okay.
Faker's gonna fake? Okay, so I didn't have much else to say.
So unless you have some questions, I will probably want to wind this down.
But I'm just watching your comments right now to see if anybody has anything that they'd like to ask.
It's funny that part of you like angry Scott Adams.
You may have noticed me talking about myself in third person.
Which I've explained before.
If you haven't heard that, if you've ever wondered why famous people sometimes refer to themselves in third person, there's a reason for that.
And it's not obvious at all until you become a famous person.
And the reason is that you are an observer of your famous side just like everybody else.
So when I talk about myself in the third person, I'm taking an observer view because that's actually how I see it, too.
The real me, my inner thoughts and stuff, I'm the only one who knows that.
That's sort of the real me.
The public me is the part that's designed for external exposure, and it doesn't feel like me.
Because it lacks, you know, critical parts that I keep from the public.
So I talk about that version of me as a third party like it's an artificial construct, too.
That's why people do that.
Please redo that as a shareable snippet.
Which part? The swearing? I don't know which part you mean.
Somebody asked me, and...
Hey, Ali. Thanks for the super art.
Somebody asked me to give tips on calming down when you're angry.
And they said they've seen me do it on Periscope, and it seems to be like a breathing thing.
So let me explain what I do do.
In the old days, the old me, and I've reformed, but for most of my life, If I got really mad, I had one way to calm down, which was that I would break something that had some monetary value.
Just destroy it.
It could be a printer that I needed to replace anyway.
I tried not to break things that I really cared about.
I don't think I ever have.
But there's always that item in your environment, the stapler that misfires every third staple, that sort of thing.
You don't replace it, but every third staple it misfires.
I hate this stapler. But then I'll get mad and I'll see that stapler and I'll say, goodbye stapler.
Your days, you had a good run.
You annoyed me for years, but you happened to be in the general vicinity when I got mad.
So I might take that stapler, take it out to my garage where I've got a nice concrete floor and Destroy it on the floor.
Probably finish it off with a sledgehammer.
And when I'm done, I feel great.
Almost instantly.
I feel great. But it turns out that other people didn't understand my medical process.
People would see me destroying items, people in relationships, let's say, and they would be horrified.
And they would think, my God, am I going to get hurt?
Is something I care about going to be broken?
Has he lost it?
Is he insane?
And the funny thing is that on the inside, it was completely controlled.
Because I would be aware that I was seething with anger.
I would look at the stapler.
I would judge that it was inexpensive, relatively speaking, that I would like to replace it anyway because it messes up every third staple.
And I know from experience that if I just go hog wild and destroy this thing, I'm going to instantly feel better.
So that's what's happening in my head.
It's all positive.
In a weird way, there's nothing negative in my head when it's happening.
But if you're observing it, it's pretty scary.
I've been told reliably, it's pretty scary.
So I tried to stop that habit as effective as it was.
And so I needed to replace it with some other mechanism to take me off the ledge.
And I do find the breathing works well.
It's the Mel Gibson trick.
So Mel Gibson, the actor, I've said this before in Periscope.
He teaches that if you want to get into an acting frame of mind, that you breathe the way a person would in that situation.
And that brings the rest of your body along.
Because the way you breathe is such a basic, central, connected to everything process in your body, that if you can just adjust that one thing, the rest of your body and brain will follow.
So that works in acting, but it also works when you're angry.
So you've seen me do it in real time, and it works in real time.
There's no pretending there.
When you see me, like my head is about ready to explode, and then I just relax and take a few deep breaths, it does make you go away, almost instantly.
So, I would say that simply relaxing your body, just let all your muscles go loose, and then take a deep breath from the bottom of your diaphragm, and just sort of feel your and just sort of feel your body relaxing and let the breath out.
It's almost instant. I would say almost an instant breath.
Going from, you know, a 10 to a 2, you know, with just a breath or two.
Now, I find that it works for me every time.
There's not one time that it hasn't worked perfectly.
So try it.
Give it a try.
Financial incentives for hospitals to code deaths as coronavirus.
Yeah, so I was talking earlier.
About Dr.
Jeremy Samuel Faust and his idea that the metric that should matter is the total deaths compared to prior years.
So that solves the problem of things being miscoded, which is a well-understood problem, or at least the possibility that it's miscoded.
I don't know if anything's actually been miscoded.
But you take that Take that problem away by looking at the net.
So I think that's a pretty productive idea.
If it's not a perfect idea, it's the sort of idea that feels like it moved in the right direction.
Any comment on what the FBI reportedly did to General Flynn?
Yes. Yes, I do have a comment on that.
The FBI is a bunch of fuckers.
And I don't know how rotten it is, but it's seriously rotten.
And you can tell me that the rank and file are good people and it's only the leadership that's bad.
Maybe. That could be.
But do you know any organizations where the leadership is all bad and it doesn't seep into the workers?
I mean, maybe.
Maybe. I would have to say that the FBI, almost everybody at the top needs to be fired or jailed.
So what should have been our most trusted institution, maybe not counting the Supreme Court, the FBI should be number two of our most trusted institutions.
And we'll never trust Congress or the President.
It doesn't work that way. But we should be able to trust the FBI. I don't.
If the FBI came to your house right now, what would you think?
Let's say you're innocent of everything, and the FBI says, we'd like to talk to you.
What would be your first thought?
Would your first thought be, oh, no problem.
I didn't break any crimes.
I didn't commit any crimes.
So why wouldn't I talk to the FBI? They're on my side, right?
Why wouldn't I? They're good guys.
They have questions. I'll answer them.
I'll help the country. What would you do today, though, if the FBI said we'd like to talk to you?
Well, the first thing I'd do is say no, right?
And then the FBI would say, but, you know, you can help us solve this crime.
It's not even about you.
And do you know what I'd say?
Not a fucking chance.
You are not going to talk to me if I can help it.
Like, if I'm legally forced to talk to them, I suppose so.
But if they ask me for a favor, not a fucking chance.
Because I don't trust them.
They've given up all their moral authority.
Wouldn't trust them. Even if I thought I understood the favor, and I understood the favor to be in the good of the country, I wouldn't trust it.
I wouldn't trust that they told me straight.
I wouldn't trust that it wasn't a set-up.
I wouldn't trust that they're baiting me somehow.
I wouldn't trust it at all.
So the FBI has lost all trust from the citizens.
They better try pretty hard to get it back.
It wasn't my fault.
I'm not the one that performed incredibly unethical, immoral, and probably illegal activities on a regular basis for years, which is apparently what the FBI was doing on a number of different fronts.
That wasn't me. I don't take any responsibility for that.
So if the FBI doesn't have my trust, well, fuck them.
Fuck them. Maybe they shouldn't have been scumbags and dickheads and assholes.
Maybe try that for a change.
Maybe people would want to cooperate with you some more.
So the FBI, I think, is a completely discredited organization at this point, which I feel is just a huge national tragedy.
It is a national tragedy that they were so poorly managed.
And as for James Comey, there was a time I actually defended him when he first announced the email stuff about Hillary.
I said to myself, no, he's definitely going beyond his job description, so there's no question about he was acting out of turn.
But my first take was, no, I think he's trying to be a solid citizen, and he just needs the public to know what he knows before they vote.
And then they can do what they want to do with it, but he just wanted to make sure we knew what he knew, which I think was fair.
But as time goes by, and we see the fullness of things that Comey has done, he's such a horrible human being that I can no longer hold on to my optimistic take that whatever he did with those emails and Hillary was somehow for the benefit of the country.
I'm sorry.
Because he's certainly proven that he does not act in the benefit of the country.
I mean, that we don't have to wonder anymore.
So why would I assume that he did it in this other situation?
Well, so I retract...
If you're keeping track, I know some of you mock me sometimes, for never admitting I'm wrong.
Well, I don't know if I was wrong about the Hillary Clinton situation, because I do think I prefer that he told us what he knew.
So as a citizen, I definitely prefer the way he handled it.
But I no longer believe that his intentions We're what I assumed, which was positive.
I now assume that he's just a diseased and broken individual and that there's nothing in there but, you know, twigs and snails and snot and Satan and whatever else is in his head.
I don't know. So, yeah, I could not have a lower opinion of the FBI right now.
And I hate that.
Because I've always had a high opinion of the FBI, law enforcement in general.
I've always had a high opinion. Mistakes and bad actors notwithstanding, I never felt it was the whole organization.
I've never felt that. But now I do.
At this point, you can no longer say, oh, there's the good ones and there's the bad ones.
The bad ones have so ruined the organization that it doesn't matter if they're good ones anymore.
You can't trust them.
What's the difference? There are good ones working there, but you can't trust them either because the other ones were so bad that you lost all your trust?
I'm sorry. I didn't break the good ones.
It wasn't my fault that the good people working at the FBI get this bad reputation.
That's not my fault.
That happened from Comey and his band of liars and crooks and treasonous bastards.
Somebody says their Wi-Fi router is named FBI van down the street.
Uhm...
Flynn needs more than a pardon.
I think Flynn is going to get more than a pardon.
Don't you? Don't you think that Flynn could sue?
Isn't there a wrongful something lawsuit?
Doesn't he have the cleanest, best lawsuit you could ever have?
Because remember, if he tried to prove something in a criminal trial, you've got this beyond a reasonable doubt standard.
So could he prove that something was beyond a reasonable doubt?
I don't know. Maybe not.
But in a civil case, proving that the FBI was out to get him turns out to be, correct me if I'm wrong, but in a civil case, it's just you vote for the one you think is most likely, as opposed to beyond a reasonable doubt.
So maybe there's no criminal penalties in the future for these FBI guys, but how could Flynn not be able to sue all of them individually?
I would think he could win that.
Wouldn't you? Do I think Durham will indict?
I don't have any visibility on that or insight or knowledge about the law or any of that.
But would that stop me from predicting?
No. Have you met me?
Of course I'm going to make a prediction based on no knowledge whatsoever.
I wouldn't be me, and this would not be the internet, if I would not be willing to make a prediction.
Based on no knowledge whatsoever.
And it goes like this. Durham will indict.
Maybe not everybody.
Probably not everybody.
At least everybody meaning the names that you can name right now.
You know, the main players. Probably not all.
But I would guess that he's dug in deeply enough that almost certainly There's going to be something.
So somebody's getting indicted.
I would say that that's close to 100%, that at least one person will get one indictment.
I don't know how deep it will go, but yeah, there'll be some indictments, I think.
Let's call that my prediction.
I think I should call it a guess, because when I predict things, I like to have my predictions based on a You know, a common variable that everybody can see.
So when I predicted that Trump would win, I said, it's because he's got this skill set that should win in the long run.
But when I'm looking at Durham, I'm not basing it on anything.
I'm just like, well, you know, he's a professional prosecutor.
There's so much material to work with.
What are the odds that a professional prosecutor type Can't find something to prosecute in all of this business?
I would think that they could find something, and that he would want to, because that's his reputation.
It keeps him credible.
It gets him the next job.
I think he's got to, he's probably got to indict somebody.
All right. Somebody says, why have other countries been able to, like Japan and the Czech Republic, been able to suppress new infections?
I was going to talk about that, and I'm glad you reminded me.
And it goes like this.
We don't know why any country is doing better than any other country.
Like, except for the most basic thing, like, we know that Italy had some air travel, you know, from Wuhan, and that almost certainly was right.
We know some have older populations, but none of these correlations work for all the countries.
So every time you think you've got one, it's like, ah, Italy has old people.
Done. Old people are the problem.
And then you go, you know, find another country and they don't have old people and they get a big problem.
So we have all these experts that can't tell us the most basic thing.
Which is, look at all these countries, look at the wildly varying results, and tell us why.
Why? They can't do it.
If they can't tell you why one country is doing better than another, they have theories, but they're untested, they don't seem to work.
You know, if you apply it to another country, it doesn't work.
So, nobody knows.
I'm going to take my, here's my guess.
I think there are probably three or four main variables.
One of them is, you know, just age and whether the old people are in one place.
So, you know, a lot of it is just are they old and are they in the wrong place where they're around too many people, etc.
So that's the obvious one.
But elevators are a big part of it.
Or things that are very enclosed spaces.
So it makes me think that maybe air conditioning is part of it.
Could it be that air conditioning is what's circulating this thing because it lives in the air?
So I worry about any kind of air circulation that's not externally vented and brought in.
In other words, if you're circulating the same air, like in an elevator, you know, while it's closed, there's not much air getting in and out.
It's just sort of circulating in there.
On a cruise ship, circulating within the cruise ship, In a nursing home, circulating within a nursing home.
So, I don't know.
Maybe we'll find out.
The elevators and closed spaces with other people, that's it.
I mean, that might be the whole story.
Wouldn't be surprised. Yeah, and when you look at places that didn't shut down, some of them have higher death rates.
But not so much higher.
It's very unexplained.
And I think that genetics is going to be a big aha when we do that.
Not many cases in Africa, which could be because of the more outdoor living.
What is unique about Africa?
One of the things that's unique is that for a hot place, Africa probably has less air conditioning Per person than any place else, wouldn't you say?
For a place that's also hot.
So, I don't know, outdoor living, not as much air conditioning, lots of sun, very young.
Africa's a young country.
Could be that people are dying and they don't know it.
Not good reporting.
I don't know. Could be lots of things.
Yeah, and then people say that Africa has the least amount of foreign travel.
Could it be just that? Yeah, airplanes, subways, elevators.
It's probably just all that stuff.
Yeah, and somebody mentions in the comments super spreaders.
I have this feeling that 80% of the spreading is coming from 20% of the people.
Or worse.
Could be 99% is coming from 1%.
The fact that super spreaders exist...
It tells you that there's a range, right?
There's the barely spreading to super spreader.
You would think that the ones that are way on the edge of the super spread spectrum, they could take out a whole train car.
They could take out the whole coach section of an airplane.
They could take out a nursing home.
It would be interesting to find out that the super spreaders are the people who talk too much.
Because don't you sort of think that might be the case?
You do, don't you?
Don't you think, what would make somebody a super spreader and somebody not?
Is it just the amount of virus they have in their body?
Well, maybe. I mean, it might be just the viral load.
But if it's coming out of the mouth, doesn't it stand to reason that the person who projects the most out of their mouth...
It's the most super-spready.
So, might we find out that the only risk is from big mouths who can't stop talking?
And I'm completely serious.
We could find out in a week.
It's embarrassing, but it turns out the people who are doing 95% of the spreading is that, you know, loud Howard person who comes into your cubicle and can't shut up.
But everybody who just talks the normal amount, they're not spreading at all.
It turns out that normal talking doesn't have much danger.
But that guy is, how was your weekend?
How was your weekend?
My weekend was good. How was yours?
Do you like ice cream?
I mowed my lawn.
I like your shirt.
You know, everybody knows that person.
Would you be surprised if one of these days you found out that the super spreaders are just the loud talkers who can't shut up?
You know, the person at the restaurant That you can hear four tables over and it's all you can hear and you can't even eat.
You're like, oh! Will that guy shut up?
And guess what? It's always a guy.
It's always a guy. That guy who can't shut up in the restaurant, it's always a guy.
Somebody says Chris Cuomo talks a lot.
Well, I'm talking about somebody who gets it.
I don't know if you can get it from talking too much.
Somebody says alcohol makes anyone a super spreader.
Could be. Is there a correlation with how much you drink?
Italy? Big drinkers.
But Israel?
Doing a little bit better? Maybe fewer drinkers in Israel?
I don't know if that's true, but it feels like it could be true.
So what about alcohol?
Yeah, maybe it's all just down to alcohol.
Could be. Alright.
I think I've said enough.
I've said enough. I really have.
I will see you in the morning.
You know where.
You know when.
You know what to bring with you.
I expect you to be there.
Be punctual. We will have the best simultaneous sip the whole week.
▲
Export Selection