My new book LOSERTHINK, available now on Amazon https://tinyurl.com/rqmjc2a
Find my "extra" content on Locals: https://ScottAdams.Locals.com
Content:
David Axelrod's clever spin on Jussie's crime
Booster shot vs. ZERO deaths from Omicron
Inflation is a TAX on the poor and middle class
Airplanes relatively safe from COVID?
HOAX IQ Test, list persuasion technique
Lying to the public...for their own good
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
If you would like to enjoy this same content plus bonus content from Scott Adams, including micro-lessons on lots of useful topics to build your talent stack, please see scottadams.locals.com for full access to that secret treasure.
---
Support this podcast: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/scott-adams00/support
Welcome to the best thing that's ever happened to you.
It's called Coffee with Scott Adams.
I might be a little bit underprepared today, but will that have any impact whatsoever on the quality of this?
Apparently it will, because I didn't have my microphone on for YouTube.
How about that? How about that?
All right, let me call up your comments here, and we'll be...
Good to go. As soon as I do that, I swear to God, I'm going to be prepared today, and this is going to be the best thing you've ever seen in your life.
Don't do the simultaneous sip without me, although I deserve it.
I deserve it for my tardiness.
All right, I'm just going to call up some comments here so that I can see them on a separate screen, because that's how I roll.
All right, anybody...
Anybody? Would you like to do the simultaneous sip?
Is there anybody here that would like to?
Yes, yes, I see.
Well, if you'd like to do that, what you're going to need is a little something called a copper mug or a glass of tankard, a chalice of stein, a canteen jug, a flask, a vessel of any kind, fill it with your favorite liquid.
I like coffee. And join me now for the unparalleled pleasure.
The dopamine of the day, the thing that makes everything better.
It's called the simultaneous sip, and aren't you glad you got here for this?
Yeah, you are. Go.
Ah, yes.
Ah, yes. Feeling stronger every day.
Well, in the news, a producer at CNN has been accused of being a pedophile.
They've got quite a bunch of evidence about it.
And apparently this particular CNN producer mostly worked with political analyst John Avalon.
Which means that when John Avalon was preparing to do his weekly anti-Trump pieces about how horrible a human President Trump is...
He was being prepared for that by a pedophile.
Now, I just want to give you an update.
I have it on good authority that there are still several people who work at CNN who have not been accused of any kind of sexual crime at all.
Several. So as soon as you say to yourself, wait a minute...
I feel like they're all involved in some kind of sex crime and or abetting somebody who was accused of a sex crime.
And that's not true.
That's not true. What is true is that there are several employees of CNN who have not been accused of any sex crimes at all.
And that's pretty good. You know, sometimes I think that MSNBC is nothing but CNN but without all the sex crimes.
It seems like that's the main difference.
So we got that going on.
Wait, I'm getting an update.
Okay, cancel everything I just said.
Two questions. For you, did I say this yesterday or did I just have it on?
I can't remember if I said this or I thought it.
You ever been in that situation?
Did I say this already or did I think about saying it?
You'll tell me in a minute.
So I tweeted yesterday, I think it was after the live stream, so I haven't said it yet.
If someone invented a technology that eliminated your ability to make good decisions, would you let them use it on you?
In the comments? If somebody made a technology that eliminated your ability to make good decisions, would you use it?
You wouldn't use it.
Because that technology already exists.
It's called the news.
The primary purpose of the news in the current era is to...
To make it harder for you to make decisions.
Am I wrong about that?
That feels to be the primary purpose of news now.
I feel like it used to be some kind of a public good, where we'd become educated, we'd become better citizens and everything.
But it's not that anymore, is it?
It doesn't seem to be that it has any kind of public good purpose.
In fact, it seems like some kind of a virus that the public is having to deal with.
So if you follow the news, as I do, you're in the same boat.
That you are willingly submitted to a technology that is designed to make you less able to make good decisions.
Because it's designed to confuse you.
It is propaganda by design.
It's not accidental.
So, speaking of propaganda, the Jussie Smollett case...
I think you've all realized that it's much bigger than the case about one person.
Because our brains are organized in such a way that we like to think any one example of something is really representative of the whole.
And the Democrats had this very successful, let's say, narrative going on.
That Republicans were a bunch of racists and you live in a racist country and a bunch of white nationalists were doing a bunch of racist stuff and you really needed to understand that before you voted.
But because this Jussie Smollett thing became such a big story, it's kind of the first thing you're going to think about the next time you hear that some black person is alleging that there was a racial crime against them.
Am I right? It'll be the first thing you think of, just because it's such a high-profile case.
Now, that's not fair, right?
We live in a world where awful things are happening all over all the time, and they're real.
They're not fake.
There's real awful stuff happening.
But... Your brain is going to automatically go to the most shiny object.
And that happens to be this case.
So if you were a Democrat and you were thinking at the highest level of strategy, you'd be a little bit worried about this, wouldn't you?
That this one case makes it look like maybe their whole narrative was bullshit?
I'm not saying it is, but it's going to feel like it.
And that's really damaging to their whole story that they're the good guys and the Republicans are the bad guys.
So how do you fix something that absolutely can't be fixed?
Because this is unambiguously a hoax.
Unambiguously he was trying to frame MAGA people.
Unambiguously it was anti-Trump supporter.
Unambiguously it was designed to make people...
Hate Trump supporters in a way that could be violent in the long run.
I mean, if you believed that this sort of thing was happening, it would be easy to get violent in response to it if you thought it was real, if you thought it was part of a trend, and that's what the news was telling you.
So, given that this all blew up in the faces of all the people who thought it was real, how do you fix it?
And I saw a David Axelrod tweet that is so clever, and I mean that, like, legitimately.
I think there are only maybe five people on the Democrat side who could do what David Axelrod did in this tweet.
Now, it's not good enough, and I laughed for ten minutes when I read it, but it is such a good try in the face of an impossible task...
It's such a good try.
I'm going to read it to you. Because he's operating at sort of the highest level of communication and strategy within the Democrats.
He's one of maybe five people who can do this sort of thing.
And this is what he said.
He said that Jussie Smollett inexcusably slandered our city, meaning Chicago, to advance his career.
Today a jury held him accountable for that scheme.
So... It feels as though David Axelrod is very cleverly trying to make us look like, make us think that the problem here was not that Jesse Smollett was slandering Trump supporters, which is exactly what was happening.
Like, not a little bit, not a dog whistle.
It's like literally exactly what was happening.
And Axelrod has changed that to slandering our city.
Is that what happened?
Did any of you watch this story and say to yourself, my God, what has he done to slander Chicago?
Literally no one had that feeling.
Literally no one.
But what are you going to do?
I mean, there's nothing about this story that you can hold on to that's like the good side for your narrative.
But man, that's a good try.
I mean, it's a failure.
But it's a hell of a try.
He inexcusably slandered our city.
Slandered our city?
Nothing like that happened.
Well, I mean, you could argue it happened, but it would be, what, the fourth thing you'd worry about on the list of things you're worrying about?
So I had a good laugh about that.
And again, I would say he's one of maybe five people on the Democrat side who could even get that close to some kind of a reframe of the situation.
But it's sort of brilliant in its failure, because I don't think you could have done a better job.
And... Yeah, they're trying to change the motive to advancing his career.
Well, that was part of it, but I think he did have some social intentions.
We don't know. We can't read his mind, right?
So there's no way to know what he was thinking.
One of the funniest things I read about that case today was that one of the things that the police were very suspicious about is that when he got home, his Subway sandwich was fully intact.
He was a victim of this brutal hate crime.
And yet he got home and his Subway sandwich was just fine.
And I'm thinking, that's good police work.
They're looking at that sandwich and they're thinking, so you were the victim of a brutal hate crime, but you protected your sandwich.
And so that was sort of a tell.
It's funny how often Subway gets dragged into some terrible story.
Haven't they had, like, two spokespersons so far who got accused of heinous crimes?
I always feel sorry for Subway, because they're just trying to mind their own business, you know, sell you some sandwiches.
We just want to sell you some damn sandwiches.
Can you leave us out of the news?
Sandwich? You sandwich?
Stomach? That's it.
We'd like to keep our entire brand focused on the sandwich part of it.
But no, Subway just keeps dragging back into these heinous crime stories.
All right. As I was noting recently, and tell me if this is the same where you live.
So where I live, or anywhere that I could drive to in my area...
Mask compliance at restaurants is basically zero.
Meaning that you put it on to talk to the hostess, you sit down, you take it off, and then you're done.
You might put it on when you're leaving, but nobody's going to care because you're already leaving.
What are they going to do? Kick you out?
If you try to leave the restaurant without your mask, are they going to say, I'm sorry, you can't leave this restaurant?
Not until you put that mask on.
What are they going to do? I mean, they'd have to say, can you get out of here right away?
And you'd say, well, that's what I'm doing.
I'm walking from here to the door.
So, the reason I bring this up is, now, restaurants were probably the weakest link, right, in the mandatory stuff.
Restaurants were going to go first, I think.
Because the restaurant owners, a lot of them are independents, and a lot of them just said, no, I can't compete that way.
Because the restaurant right across the street, I don't think they're going to be too tough on masks.
So if I'm tough on masks, and the restaurant directly across the street is not, I'm done.
So the market pretty much forced the restaurants to ignore the mandatory mask thing.
I mean, the employees wear them.
You know, and not all of them.
You'll see some people who are not wearing them even to work there.
But here's what I want to remind you.
There are two problems about the mandatory restrictions.
One is all the problems of the mandatory restrictions.
You know, the physical things that prevent you from doing.
But the second part is how it feels.
Am I right? It's not just bad enough that they're restricting you from doing all this shit you want to do.
That's bad, because you can't do the stuff.
Or you have to wear a mask and it's uncomfortable.
But I'll tell you one of the biggest problems is that feeling like somebody made you do it.
And doesn't that really get under your skin?
It's not my choice, and I wouldn't have chosen this.
They're making me do it.
Well, it just pisses you off, right?
So let me tell you something just to make you feel better about that part.
The public already decided they weren't going to wear masks in restaurants.
And then what happened? No masks in restaurants.
As soon as the public, by some kind of hidden majority that we don't know exactly, as soon as the public, by some kind of majority, or it might have even been a plurality or something like that, we don't know what percentage tips things, but as soon as the public decided, it was completely over.
There was no fight.
There was no pushback.
The public just said, no, no.
We're going to go eat at restaurants, and we're going to take our mask off the whole time, and that's what we're going to do.
The public has all the power.
Everything that's still mandatory that you don't like is because your fellow public hasn't quite gotten there yet.
As soon as they do...
Then the government will have no power whatsoever.
So if you imagine you're being suppressed by your government, not exactly.
It feels like it.
That's not what's going on at all.
You are being suppressed by the fact that the percentage of your fellow citizens has not yet reached the tipping point.
When it does, boop.
It's going to be all over.
You think there was a slippery slope toward mandatory shit?
Where do you see the slippery slope away from it?
Right? And we're right...
I feel like we're not at the tipping point, but we're approaching it.
We're approaching the tipping point, and here's what's going to push me over the edge.
I'm not going to get a booster shot...
If the big pharma can't tell me if getting the Omicron virus is more or less dangerous than a booster shot.
They don't know that.
Why would I get a booster shot when Snopes, I know, I know, you're going to tell me Snopes is not reliable, but I'll bet you think it's reliable when it goes against the Democrats.
Right? And that's what it's doing.
Snopes is saying that there are zero reported deaths of Omicron anywhere in the world.
Doesn't mean there are none.
Zero reported confirmed cases.
Zero. Did you hear zero?
Zero. Whole fucking galaxy.
Zero. Zero.
Now, there might be some. I don't know.
Because over at the UK, some experts are saying that the Omicron could kill 25,000 to 75,000 people in the UK alone.
At the same time.
At the same time.
The Omicron virus is totally overtaking the others.
In some cases where it's prevalent, it's 75% of the infections already.
I think in, was it South Africa that's the case?
Or at least of what they were monitoring, right?
So these are still just little bubbles.
But we should probably see the Omicron take over everything reasonably soon, unless there's yet another better, more capable virus.
But it would have to act fast, because the Omicron's Raging.
And as long as that thing's raging and it's killing zero and probably confers some kind of immunity that matters against the worse or strains, I'm done with the booster.
Now, if science, in some credible way, I'd have to see more than one study or one opinion, but if I could be convinced, and I think I could, That in fact the booster is safer than the Omicron, or at least that it's a toss-up, I might modify my opinion.
I might. But at the moment, a booster shot would be stupid.
If you think you can wait it out until the Omicron is the main thing, then I'd wait it out.
Let's get rid of this asshole on YouTube.
Hide you on that channel.
I was just going to talk about these horrible people, and then you showed yourself, so you reminded me.
I'm blocking anyone who says the dumbest fucking thing in the world, which is, hey, Scott's finally waking up.
No, the data is changing.
The situation's changed.
What we knew in the fog of war stage is very, very different from what we know today.
Right? And all of you fucking assholes who think that it was always obvious the whole time, and I'm just waking up, and somebody said today, even the normies are getting it now.
No, I'm not fucking getting anything.
The data has completely changed.
Right? Completely changed.
If your opinion is exactly the same while all the data has changed, there's something wrong with you.
Now, it could be that the data changed in your favor and, you know, you got lucky.
But if your opinion with no data was complete certainty that blah blah blah, you shouldn't get vaccinations or whatever, you're not doing a good job of thinking.
Because you didn't know.
We were all guessing. We're still guessing, but we have way more information to inform our guess at this point.
All right. So that's where I'm going to take a stand, I think.
And again, it could change tomorrow.
By tomorrow, I could say, oh, new data changed my mind.
So I'm going to reserve that option.
I like to change my mind when the data changes.
So I'll probably do that.
All right. Is inflation transitory?
What do you think? I'll put this to you.
Some on the Democrat side would have us believe that the inflation is transitory.
What do you think? Well, I think it is because everything is transitory.
It's just how you define transitory, I suppose.
There's no such thing as permanent inflation.
You know, eventually the sun will burn out and the earth will be a cold, dead lump of coal.
So, I mean, I guess you'd have to define transitory.
If it's transitory over the next five years, would you call that transitory?
If inflation continued to be a problem, let's say, for five years, but then it calmed down, is that transitory?
Yeah. Transitory feels like less than a year, doesn't it?
I feel like that's what that feels.
So I doubt there's anything that's transitory, but let me give you some context here using my vast economic experience.
I do have a degree in economics.
I've got an MBA from a good school.
So I'm not completely incompetent talking about this topic.
Surprising. And here's what I know about inflation.
Nobody really knows how that works.
It feels like it'd be the easiest thing in the world, right?
Add more money to the system.
Juice the activity.
Demand will outstrip supply, reasonably predictable.
Prices go up.
So the mechanism of inflation is pretty clear.
But there are always these big surprises.
For example, all of that makes sense, but what if tomorrow a fusion reactor comes online and two years from now everyone has one in their closet?
Now, that's not going to happen.
But there could be, you know, technical changes that change everything.
Somebody paid $10 to get blocked by me.
So Vector says, wow, it took Scott this long to wake up to the COVID sham.
Congrats, Scott. Now you're using your noggin.
Welcome to the club, big guy.
He paid $10 to say a comment that I just said will get you blocked.
I appreciate your money.
You're a fucking asshole.
But thank you for the money.
And you're hidden on this channel.
Alright, anybody else want to get blocked?
I'm in a blocking mood.
Thanks for the money. I told you I had a degree in economics.
I can take your money and I can block you, too.
That's something I learned in economics class.
Yes. Anyway, here's what I know about inflation.
The experts are not good at predicting it.
Do you remember when the experts said, oh, no, it's going to be stagflation?
We'll have inflation and low growth, which can't really happen at the same time, except it did once.
During the Carter administration.
So if we don't even know exactly what caused stagflation and why it doesn't get caused again and what's coming at us, will there be another pandemic?
God knows. So we're not good at predicting this stuff.
But one of the big...
So let me say this.
Inflation ends up being a tax on the poor and the middle class.
Am I right? Yes.
Now, if you're in one of those categories, you saw your prices go way up.
Your gas prices, probably your food prices, right?
You've noticed food. Food is through the roof.
And you didn't have much of any stocks, if you're in the lower or middle range.
Thanks, Eddie. So...
Let me tell you my experience so far as a rich guy.
I'm just going to be obnoxious in the interest of full disclosure and just being honest.
Sometimes honesty is fucking obnoxious, depending what you're talking about.
So this is going to be obnoxious to a lot of you, but I think it's fair to say.
I'm doing great.
I've never done better financially because my stocks are up.
And I don't know how much my gas price would have to go up to make a difference compared to how much my net wealth has gone up because of just owning stock.
I'm doing great.
So Joe Biden just put the biggest tax I've ever seen on the poor.
Didn't affect me.
Literally, I've never done better than Joe Biden's year.
I didn't expect that.
You know, if you told me, you know, who did you do better under, Trump or Biden?
Not even close.
I got killed under Trump.
I got slaughtered.
Financially? I just, I had my ass handed to me.
Mostly because, you know, getting cancelled for this or that.
You know, you can't do deals, can't do speaking.
Just talking about it.
But as soon as Biden came in, people stopped hating me as much because I wasn't as relevant talking about Trump.
And I, you know, I made one lucky move.
I bought a bunch of stocks when they hit their bottom.
So suddenly, like anybody who owns stocks, I'm thinking, ooh, it's looking pretty good.
And all the people who don't own stocks, the lower-income people, just absolutely got fucked.
And it's not going to let up anytime soon.
So I would think that the number one thing that the Democrats have for them is that they're the ones who are trying to help the normal people get by.
That's not happening. That's not happening.
But let me give you the plus side.
The economy is really screeching, right?
Despite inflation, the economy is just screaming.
And it's hard to hire people.
You saw Kramer, financial or investment expert Kramer, you saw him say that this is the strongest economy he's ever seen, maybe since the 60s or something.
And I would agree with that.
I don't think I've seen a stronger economy if you don't count the inflation, if you don't count that.
If you do count it, it's only a great economy for people at the top half, maybe.
Maybe top 25%.
So, I just don't know what to think about inflation, but I hate ignoring it, but it looks like we're just going to tax poor people until it's not a problem anymore.
So, there's that.
Why are airplanes relatively safe...
In terms of COVID. I keep going back to that.
Because I feel like everything we need to know about COVID, you can learn on an airplane.
Am I wrong? Because the thinking is that the reason that air travel is safe enough is not just that people are getting tested and vaccinated.
That's helping a lot. But...
That people are wearing masks on the airplane.
This is what the industry would tell you, the experts would say.
It's because people wear masks on the airplane, except when they eat, and that their ventilation systems are great.
Now, that's true. I think airplanes have great ventilation.
They have to. And one of the anecdotes of a spread involved a jet that was idle on an airport during a layover.
And they turned the ventilation off for half an hour.
And the speculation is that that half hour they turned off the ventilation is when all the spread happened.
Maybe. I don't know.
So I was feeling pretty smart.
I'm reading about this and thinking, OK, OK, I've got a pretty good grip on why these airplanes are working or not spreading.
So you've got the masks.
Good. Don't disagree with me yet.
Just wait till I get to the end of this.
So you've got the masks.
Okay, okay, that should make a difference.
You've got that great ventilation.
Good, good. You've got the vaccinations now.
All right, all right. And some people have natural immunity.
That's good, that's good.
And I thought I'd covered all of the bases, like I'd consider all of the variables.
And then a Twitter user named iloveiheartpipelines, Tweeted this.
You're going to feel as dumb as I did when you hear this.
All right? This is just like a guy on Twitter, and he's going to say something, and I'm going to read it to you, that's going to make you slap your fucking head and say, oh, God, that was obvious.
People don't talk on airplanes.
That's it. People don't talk on airplanes.
And so the main cause of transmission is talking.
And I'm like, I'm all into the masks and the vaccinations and the ventilation.
And I'm reading about their HEPA filters.
And I'm thinking, huh, I wonder if it's the ventilation.
Is it the filtering or is it the airflow?
And I'm like, I'm like into the science and shit.
And then the iHeart pipeline says, I don't fly much, but I don't think people talk much on planes.
Fuck you for being so smart.
How in the world did we miss that?
Seriously, how did we miss that?
Yeah, you're still breathing, but the best thinking is that it's the talking that makes the difference.
But is anybody having the same experience?
How did we analyze this?
And this is the first time I've ever heard this.
I've never heard anybody say...
But you know the main way it gets transmitted is from talking, and people don't talk much on airplanes.
In fact, the only person you talk to is the person you probably came there with.
And if they infected you, you're already infected.
All right.
I'm thinking of putting together, if I ever got, I don't know, less lazy, a hoax IQ test.
And what it would be is simply a list of hoaxes, and you, the test taker, would simply check whether you know it's a hoax or you believe it's true and the fact that it's a hoax is a hoax.
So you just say true or false to each of the claims or the hoaxes.
Now, why would I do that when I already talk incessantly about all these hoaxes?
And a lot of people know what they are, but not so much on the right.
And the answer is because this is a persuasion trick to get people to think past the yes or no.
If you give somebody a hoax IQ test...
And they start arguing with you about whether or not they got the right answer or the test itself is graded correctly.
Just don't even have the argument.
Just say, thank you very much.
Here's your score. No, no, no.
I'm pretty sure that three of those that I marked really, really happened.
Thank you very much.
Here's your score. No, seriously.
I know this one's not a hoax.
I saw it with my own eyes, heard it with my own ears.
That one really happened.
Here's your score. Thanks for taking the test.
We're getting to the point where we should stop arguing about them.
Just put them on a list and use what I call list persuasion.
Have you heard me describe list persuasion?
It's a persuasion trick.
The best user of this is Sean Hannity.
If you want to see a really good example of it, also Alex Jones.
Alex Jones did it once.
I was on his program a few years ago.
And he did that.
And I watched him do it.
It was just sort of masterful, really.
I'm not saying I approve of it.
I'm just saying that the technique works and that when you see it done, it's really good.
And the way the technique works is you list four things that everybody listening believes to be true, and then you slip one thing in that they don't yet believe is true, but you'd like them to believe is true.
So... So let's see if I can come up with an example off the top of my head.
This will be hard because I'm just, like, winging it here.
But let's say you were...
You were going to say bad things about Joe Biden.
All right, I'll just do a pretend Hannity.
So this won't be a real example, just to make the case.
There are several things you could say about Joe Biden that are true, or at least the audience would accept as true.
You say, Joe Biden is mentally incompetent.
And the audience is like, that's what I see.
He's increased inflation.
He's beholden to the progressives.
He's got real trouble with them.
True. And he said some racist things in his earlier days.
Things that people thought were racist.
True. And he's a lizard person from the planet Krypton.
You just, like, throw it in there, but you never put it at the end.
So it's never the first one and it's never the last one.
You always sandwich it in the middle of the list toward, like, closer to the end.
Because you want people to hear three true things, then the lizard person accusation, and then two more real things.
If you sandwich the lizard person thing between three truths and two more truths, it just slips right past your defenses until you're pretty sure it must be true.
It was on that list.
So that would be the same technique with using the hoax IQ test, but an ethical use of it, because as far as I know, there would really be real hoaxes, right?
So it wouldn't be trying to trick anybody.
You'd be trying to persuade them.
Here's a weird story because the simulation loves us.
When right-leaning, and I guess CNN would call them far-right, companies get deplatformed and that sort of thing, where do they go?
Where does Gab go and where do a lot of people get deplatformed?
Well, they go to a server company called Epic, E-P-I-K, And the founder of that is a free speech advocate and is willing to take people onto his system so that they can still be in business.
And he's not as concerned about their, you know, horrible speech.
But he has banned some direct Nazi-type organizations.
But not everybody who likes Nazis, apparently.
So it's a pretty rough group over there, along with regular people.
So there's lots of normies.
But it's a little extra bad compared to the rest of the world.
But you can use your own judgment, whether that's free speech or something worse.
Now, the individual who does this is sort of fascinating.
I guess his parents were both, you know, anti-Nazi activists.
He's got a pretty good case that he doesn't lean that way himself.
Now, you'd have to suspect, right?
So the people on the left are like, we're not so sure, because you do seem to be helping those people on the right.
All right.
And here's the payoff.
The name of this individual who owns this company called Epic, who the people on the left would like to demonize to de-platform for good anybody who's got views they don't like, this is his actual name.
His last name is Monster.
M-O-N-S-T-E-R. And his first name is Rob.
Now, I would call myself Bob if my last name was Monster.
Because Monster's bad enough, but Rob is actually a crime.
You don't want to rob people, and you don't want to be a monster.
So Rob Monster is the name of this.
That's his actual real name, like the name he was born with.
Now, I don't have anything bad to say about him.
I just think it's interesting that people who do think he's a monster, well, that's his actual name.
Apparently it's a common name in the country.
Where was he from? I don't know.
He's from some European country.
All right. Chris Christie is positive that Trump gave him COVID when they were doing their debate preparation and Christie was playing Biden.
He said it was a spirited debate practice, so there was a lot of spittle going back and forth.
Now that we know the timeline, it looks like Trump probably infected several people in the room.
So Christie, Steve Miller, I think there were some other people.
And what this story fails to mention...
Give me a fact check on this.
Isn't the story that Trump tested positive, but then when he did a higher quality test, he tested negative?
Is that true? And was the debate before or after those two tests?
Because the thinking is that Trump knew, which means it had to be after the first test...
But wasn't it also after the second test when he was tested negative?
Does anybody know that?
Does anybody know that?
How could you know that?
Yeah, I don't know. So I would love to know about the ventilation in that room.
Because I'll bet the ventilation wasn't working.
So I still have a theory that the difference is the airflow, not just the filtering and the ventilation.
So I'm going to keep on my theory that airflow is the only thing that matters.
And if you got the airflow right, you'd be fine.
We'd be done. That's what I believe.
I don't have data to back that up, but everything is pointing in that direction.
Do you realize that... I mean, Chris Christie actually went to the ICU. Trump could have actually killed him.
Trump might have actually killed Chris Christie.
It was close.
And Trump himself had a tough time with the virus.
So both Christie and Trump could have died.
Now, of course, they had the best health care, so the odds were against it in their cases.
But... All right.
There were multiple tornadoes that ripped through Kentucky and several other states, Arkansas, Illinois.
And there's not much to say about that, but 50 people dead.
Good Lord. I guess the only thing I'd like to say on this is you have to worry about the one you don't hear.
Have you heard this old thing about the military?
If you hear the bullet, like, poof, Then it didn't get you?
Because the one that gets you, you don't hear?
I'm not sure that's true.
Because, you know, if it was a sniper, I think you'd hear it before.
If it was a sniper at a distance, wouldn't you hear it before it hit you?
I don't know. Maybe.
No, I'm seeing people say no.
I think this crowd knows guns more than I do.
No, okay. Let's stick with it.
You don't hear the one that gets you.
This tornado situation reminds me of that.
So, you know, probably the 50 people who died were worried about other things, don't you think?
They were worried about other things.
And I'll bet none of those other things would have killed them.
I'll bet they wouldn't have died of COVID. I'll bet they wouldn't have died in a climate change disaster.
I'll bet whatever they were worried about wasn't the thing.
And I always like to remind myself of that.
Because you find yourself getting all worked up, worrying about something...
Like climate change or something that's going to kill you that's big in the world.
There's going to be a war.
Kim Jong-un's going to bomb you any minute.
Whatever. Almost never can you see it coming.
Almost never. Please study PCR tests.
I'm not going to do that. If where you're going on this is at the...
Is that the pandemic is fake and the tests are picking up?
That's really a dumb hypothesis at this point.
In the beginning, it was, you know, you throw it in with everything else because everything was confusing.
But at this point, if you're still bitching about the PCR test, I think you're, you know, I think events have left you behind, is what I think.
Now, I don't mean to be condescending.
If it sounded like that, that's not my intention.
Because I think everybody's confused about all of this stuff.
But if you're reading stuff about the tests being bad, yeah, I agree that we're probably doing a bad job of counting stuff.
But here's the problem.
The ICUs are clearly being impacted where there are waves of COVID. That's not imaginary.
It's not imaginary. So although the PCR tests may have some problems, it's a real pandemic, so I just wouldn't spend any time on that path.
My friend who got monoclonal, he's good as far as I know.
he was on the mend.
Scott's finally waking up to tornadoes.
Sniper would...
It's true, I work in a hospital.
So, Doc Bailey, you're saying it's true that it's obvious that COVID is real?
Because you don't hear front-line people saying it's not real, do you?
Do you hear anybody who actually deals with COVID patients saying, you know, I don't think these are real.
I think the PCR test was wrong or something like that.
Yeah, somebody has a registered nurse who's a wife, and she's quite sure it's real.
COVID is real, just overhyped.
Well, every danger is overhyped.
If it's in the news, it's overhyped, because that's where the money is.
The inventor of PCR said they shouldn't be used the way...
It's a real pandemic. Blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, tests.
I don't care. I mean, you might be completely right...
It doesn't seem relevant.
It's not like we're wondering if there's a pandemic.
You do hear the front line talking about heart issues in the young.
That's true. Yes, I would say that the...
Oh, here's a good question that somebody asked me.
I'll let you deal with this, too.
Rifle bullets are faster than sound, Sparky says.
Thank you. There is some disagreement on this, but I'm not the expert, so...
The trouble with these super chats is they're really disruptive to the flow of thought.
And I believe I just lost my flow of thought.
Oh, it'll come back.
Yesterday I tweeted that it seemed like we stopped hearing about long COVID. Is that...
Do you find that?
It seems like the news was a lot about long COVID. And then the news...
I'm not talking about the reality.
I'm just talking about the news coverage.
I feel like the news just stopped talking about it.
When it was actually maybe one of the biggest variables for my decision to get vaccinated.
And we're talking about all the other stuff.
But it seems like the biggest...
One of the biggest variables, other than death.
And... Oh, most rifle bullets are faster than sound.
Okay, thank you. So I tweeted that to see if other people were having that experience.
And again, I was just talking about the reporting of it, not the actuality.
But it did make me wonder if the actuality had disappeared.
Did we just stop thinking it existed?
But there were plenty of people who gave me links and anecdotes.
And a lot of people have experienced it themselves, etc.
So I think we can say that long COVID is real.
How many of you would agree with that statement?
That long COVID is real.
Yes, yes, yes, before you say it.
Yes, yes, yes, before you say it.
Vaccinations could give you long-term problems, too.
Please don't tell me that.
Please know that I knew that.
Okay? I'm begging you.
I'm begging you.
Don't say the obvious NPC thing.
Well, vaccinations are bad, too.
I know. I know. I know.
All right. Yeah, so I think everybody believes law and COVID is real.
Not that it necessarily would change your decision at this point.
All right, the question I forgot about was, how many anecdotal reports would it take to sway you if you didn't have good scientific studies?
And let me walk you through it.
Let's say you walk out your back door and a bird shits on your head.
And you say to yourself, what bad luck?
But obviously it's not any kind of a trend or anything.
So the next day you walk out your front door going to work and a bird shits under your head.
Two days in a row.
And you say to yourself, damn it!
That is a big coincidence.
Third day, bird shits under your head.
Fourth day, bird shits under your head.
Let me do a survey for you.
How many times does the bird have to shit on your head before you say, okay, there's something going on here?
Not once. I think every one of you would discount one.
How about two?
If it happened twice in a row, would you automatically conclude this is not a coincidence?
Um... How many of you would?
Some of you would go at two.
Some of you would go at five or six.
I don't know what to say about that.
I'm pretty sure if I got shit on five times in a row walking out the same door, I don't know if I would get to six.
I think I would...
I'm pretty sure I would tap out after three.
But it's funny seeing all the differences in the answers.
Now, my example is meant to be artificially constrained.
In that case, I think it would only take me two.
I think I'd be...
I probably would never use that door again after the second time.
That's just me. But if you're looking at like a global thing, you know, it's not about you and your house.
You're looking at, you know, lots of population of people and stuff.
It should take you more anecdotes.
So in the context of, I don't know, five billion people who might get vaccinated, how many anecdotes of bad outcomes would it take To convince yourself that five billion people shouldn't get vaccinated?
How many anecdotes would it take?
Give me a number. Give me a number.
A hundred? A thousand?
Ten thousand? A hundred thousand?
A million? What would it take?
Somebody says zero.
Millions. Some people say zero.
A thousand. So if a thousand people had a bad outcome, would you cancel the vaccination?
Because that would cancel every vaccination, you know, for everything.
I think, right?
Doesn't every vaccination kill a thousand people?
Like, eventually? Uh...
Someone's trying to tell me that Russia and China are invading Ukraine.
Nice try. Nice try.
All right. Well, so when I put it that way, it's hard to come up with a number, right?
So my point is you could easily think that two dozen reports tells you something.
You could easily think that a hundred adverse reports...
Is telling you something? It probably isn't.
How about a thousand adverse reports?
And let's say they're pretty well documented.
Let's say they're in the VAERS database, which means a doctor had to fill out paperwork.
So there's a professional who has something at risk.
Let's say 10,000.
What if you knew for sure there were 10,000 reports of adverse, let's say, death from the shots?
Does that mean you shouldn't take them?
How about 100,000?
Here's the really bad, bad thing.
Suppose you're the leader of a country, and your experts tell you, don't tell the public, but the only way we're going to get through this pandemic without losing 10 million people...
Is to lose a million through the vaccination.
Now, I'm not aware of any numbers that would support what I'm saying.
I'm just giving you numbers to do the math.
There's no reality behind these that I know of.
But what if, behind closed doors, they said, we're positive this is going to kill 10 to 20 million Americans.
The only way to stop it is with vaccinations that will kill a million different people.
Probably. It won't be the same people who the virus would have killed.
It's a million people who probably would have been fined.
But you might save 11 to 19 million Americans.
What do you do? Do you tell the Americans what their actual risk is?
Look, here's the deal, people.
You get the vaccination, a million of you are going to die.
A million of you. But we're pretty sure we can save...
Tens of millions. Pretty sure.
Nothing's 100%. But we're very, very sure.
What would you do as a leader?
Would you tell people?
Or would you fudge the data and say, we'll give you all the data in 75 years when everybody involved in the decision-making is dead.
But... Just don't ask too many questions.
It's looking fine. Vaccinations are good.
Because I feel like that's what happened.
Not the million number and not the 10 million number.
I'm making up numbers. But I feel as if the truth is that our government knew that these vaccinations, and the experts knew, and told the government, would be far more dangerous than ordinary vaccines.
And it still made sense.
And it still made sense.
The stratified risk thing is a scandal of unlimited proportions in my mind, but it's a separate question.
Why is vaccines being pushed on kids?
Follow the money. There can't be any other reason.
Can you think of a reason other than following the money?
I can't. Now, the idea was that we would sacrifice the young to save the old.
Do you think that the government could tell you that that's actually what they're doing?
Here's the deal. We know that we're going to kill a bunch of children, but we have a pretty good feeling that if we kill a bunch of children, we can save even more older people.
I feel like that was a conscious decision.
But you see that these decisions can't be sold, right?
You can't go to the public and say, we're going to kill a million of you to save 20 million.
That's a no-sale. That is no sale.
Even if it was the best thing for the country, you could argue it.
But you can't sell it.
I think you have to lie to sell it.
And I think that a lot of what we saw in the so-called leadership about this was our leaders lying intentionally for what they thought was our own good.
In some cases, probably money was the influence.
But... When they lied about the masks, that was for our own good, wasn't it?
Allegedly. But we know it happened.
They lied to our faces for our own good.
Don't you think that they're lying about the vaccinations too?
For our own good?
I do. I do.
Now, here's where I get in trouble, right?
Because there seems to be a binary.
Like there always is, right?
Vaccinations are good and safe, or vaccinations are very unsafe and bad.
I have neither of those feelings.
I feel that they're probably less safe than just about anything we've ever done medically, and might have been the right leadership decision.
Because I don't think you could have sold that proposition.
It was an unsellable proposition.
So you either let 20 million people die and destroy the economy that ends up destroying another 10 million people by indirect effects, or you lie to the public for their own good.
For their own good.
Just like the masks. You don't think your government would do that?
I do. I think there were at least elements of the government, not necessarily the president, I'm not sure who tells the president what, but I have a feeling that there were enough people involved in decision-making that they knew it was way more dangerous than medicine in general.
Still worthwhile, in their opinion.
But they never could have sold that to the public.
Adam is saying, Scott's finally waking up to people lying.
Finally, I've learned that lesson.
I lived my whole life without understanding that people can lie.
Risk of losing credibility is too high?
Nope. Nope.
Apparently the risk of losing credibility is not driving anything.
Because the credibility is gone.
You can't lose what you didn't have.
Um... Scott wants to kill the young and strong to save the old and weak.
There's your mind reading of the day.
Incorrect, of course. I've said explicitly that one of the reasons that I volunteered to get the vaccination is that it would save other people, not necessarily just older people.
They don't care about credibility, yeah.
It is weird how often our public servants lie.
Yeah, for various reasons, either for their own or they think it's for our good.
You know the old line, you can't handle the truth?
That's true. All right.
How about... Do you have any questions?
Because I think I'm done with my prepared thoughts.
How angry are the kids about all this?
I think they're just used to it.
I think they're used to it.
I'm going to give you a story that drives a lot of my decision-making.
It's called the Indian Elephant Trainer.
So over in India...
There are some people who train elephants.
And one of the things that always confused me is why does a big old elephant do what a tiny human being tells it to do instead of just like killing the human?
And the answer is that they train them when they're babies.
So the elephant trainer is going to be beaten on the baby elephant to make it do what he wants it to do until the baby elephant is afraid of it.
And then the elephant grows up and still thinks that this little tiny human can hurt it.
Well, it can hurt it if the elephant doesn't fight back.
But if it did fight back, it wouldn't be a fair fight, right?
A human with a club versus elephant.
But this works because the elephant has been trained that it is helpless to this little human.
That's us right now.
We're the elephant, the public.
The government is the tiny little human who's been beating us since we were children.
And when they tell us to lock down, we're that elephant.
And we're like, okay, they beat me when I was a baby, and now they're saying they're going to beat me again.
Better lock down.
But don't forget, don't ever forget, you're the fucking elephant.
The government is that thing that you can squash with your foot.
But the elephant can't do shit unless all the parts of the elephant are thinking the same way.
So we're an elephant, but we're an elephant that hasn't made up its mind.
Or it's been trained not to think.
The elephant is getting ready to wake up.
So you could talk all day about me waking up, but I'm not your problem.
The fucking elephant is waking up.
And the elephant is going to get rid of the mandates, it's going to get rid of the masks, when it's ready.
