All Episodes
July 30, 2023 - Real Coffe - Scott Adams
01:05:01
Episode 2185 Scott Adams: Lots Of News About The Fake News (Spoiler: It's All Fake) Bring Coffee

My new book LOSERTHINK, available now on Amazon https://tinyurl.com/rqmjc2a Find my "extra" content on Locals: https://ScottAdams.Locals.com Content: Politics, Jim Gaffigan, Joe Rogan, Hunter Biden Child Support, Hunter Biden Artwork, President Trump Delivery, President Biden, Extreme MAGA, Obama's Chef Conspiracy Theories, Tafari Campbell, Elon Musk, X Logo San Francisco, UFO Whistleblower, Ukraine War, Room Temperature Super Conductivity, China Hacking US Utilities, Reedley CA Illegal Lab, VP Harris, US Rights Under Attack, Scott Adams~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 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

| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
You're only the second technical problem I've had in the last 10 seconds.
So we've got bad sound on one platform, bad video on the other, but between the two of them, perfect.
How would you like to take this experience up to, well, levels that I don't think anybody could possibly understand?
You'd like that.
All you need to do that is a cup or mug or a glass of tankard chalicestine, a canteen jug or flask of vessel of any kind.
Fill it with your favorite liquid.
I like coffee.
And join me now for the unparalleled pleasure of the dopamine at the end of the day that makes everything better.
It's called the simultaneous sip.
And it happens now.
Go!
That's pretty good.
Pretty good.
I think everything's back on track now.
There was a little bit of disruption at the beginning.
But wouldn't you say things are going perfectly now?
Probably at your house as well as mine.
Well, I was just watching a video of Joe Rogan talking to comedian Jim Gaffigan, and it was a fascinating little clip in which Jim Gaffigan said, you know, that January 6th thing was pretty bad.
And then he got to listen to Joe Rogan, who obviously is going pretty deep into the January 6th rabbit hole, explain to him the relationship between the intelligence groups and the president and the public, and kind of laid out a whole bunch of things that it looked to me as if Jim had not ever heard before.
Now, I saw somebody tweeting around in a sort of a mocking way to Jim Gaffigan, that he'd been destroyed, you know, Joe Rogan destroys Jim Gaffigan.
That's not what happened.
So let me give you some behind-the-scenes, little behind-the-scenes story, in case you see that clip.
You should watch the clip, by the way.
So it's Joe Rogan talking to Jim Gaffigan.
Just search for it, you'll see it.
But, so here's some behind the curtains little personal knowledge about this situation.
Several years ago, I was in Vegas and it was with my ex and we were going to a Jim Gaffigan stand-up show.
And I had done a TV commercial for Barnes & Noble years before that, in which Jim Gaffigan was the host of the TV commercial.
And I appeared as an author who was in Barnes & Noble.
So we spent a day.
And I thought, oh, I know him.
I know Jim Gaffigan.
I'll ask if I can say hi after the show.
So we were both not very famous when we did the commercial.
So it turns out he didn't remember me at all.
I spent a whole day with him.
He didn't remember me at all.
Which is not surprising, because I was a new author, and I might not have remembered him, except that he became famous pretty quickly after that.
So I remembered him.
So I sent a note to one of the guys working at the theater there, and said, hey, can you tell Jim Gaffigan I want to say hi after the show?
Thinking he would remember that he spent a day with me.
Well, he didn't.
I remember that.
But he's a really nice guy.
And he knew what Dilbert was, so he said, yeah, come on back after the show.
So my ex and I went back, and it was just hanging out with him.
We just hung out for an hour or so, chatting about stuff.
And here's what I want to tell you.
If you imagine that you just assume he's on one side in politics and that maybe Joe Rogan was on the other side and that they had a, you know, a conversation and it looked like Joe Rogan knew more than he did.
That's not exactly what was happening.
I can tell you from my own interaction that Gaffigan is simply open-minded.
That's it.
That's it.
He listened completely, you know, when I told him things that maybe he hadn't heard before.
And he's just a seeker.
I would say he's somebody who's curious about politics and is completely aware that he doesn't have the whole story.
That's exactly who you want in your country, right?
So, you know, maybe Gaffigan has some politics that leans in some other way than you do.
Maybe yes, maybe no.
But you want more of him.
He's not closed on any question.
Completely open to listen to fully.
Fully listen to any explanation on the other side.
He's one of the good guys.
So I'd hate to see this characterized as somebody beat him down in this conversation or something.
That wasn't what happened.
If you watch it, you'll see him absorbing what Rogan is saying without rejecting it.
That's some good, that's like, that's America, right?
That's sort of the America I want to live in.
Where somebody disagrees but they fully, fully listen to the other side.
Incorporate it, modify their opinions a little bit as warranted.
That's some good stuff.
That's the best of us.
So, I love that.
I've got a new troll response.
Well, maybe you don't get them as much as I do, but if you're a public figure, you get the trolls that come in and just insult you.
Just nothing else.
It's just like, ah, this guy, blah, blah, blah, blah.
So I came up with a new troll response that I'm liking a lot.
I'd like to share it with you.
So I tweeted back at one of my trolls today.
It doesn't matter who or what they said, just troll stuff.
And I said, did you wake up this morning intending to be a useless turd on the sidewalk of humanity, or did it just happen?
I feel like you should borrow that.
A useless turd on the sidewalk of humanity.
It's kind of 2023, isn't it?
You don't want to use some old 1950s saying when you could update that to a turd on the sidewalk of humanity and then just walk away.
All right.
One of my favorite stories.
Remind me if I talked about this already.
Hunter Biden reached a deal on child support with his baby mama.
In which he would pay some amount of cash, but then I guess to complete the deal, he also agreed that he would give the mother of his child some of his artwork.
So he'd give her some artwork as part of the compensation.
Now, remember when Joe Biden said that Hunter Biden was the smartest person he knew, and you all laughed?
He's not the smartest person.
That was before he made tens of millions of dollars overseas and started selling his paintings for millions.
Who's the dumb one now?
He might be the smartest person you know.
He's not in jail.
He's lived his life on coke and hookers, which apparently he enjoyed quite a bit.
And he's still making a million dollars and he's still free.
If he's not the smartest person you know, who's doing better?
I know.
Maybe you don't want that lifestyle, but maybe he does.
Maybe he had exactly the life that he wanted, and so far it's working out great.
I don't know.
Just putting that out there.
But here's the funny thing.
Imagine negotiating with your ex, and you say, all right, I don't want to give you this cash every month, or at least not so much, but here's one of my paintings.
And the ex says, that's just like a thing to hang on the wall.
He goes, no.
Do you know how much they pay for these?
$1.4 million I sold the last one for.
And this one, I'm giving it to you.
You can sell it.
Now, here's the question.
What's the price of a Hunter Biden painting if you buy it from Hunter?
And what's the price of it if you buy it from his baby mama?
Same?
Does she get the 1.4 million?
Because the art is so good?
It's so smart of him because he can establish in the course that the paintings have value because he's selling them.
Right?
There's a market for it.
But the market is completely limited to it coming from him when he sells it, don't you think?
Do you think the baby mama's giving out political favors in return for selling paintings?
Probably not.
Probably not.
So I think it's just hilarious that he got away with that.
Although, I would like to add the following.
Have you seen any coverage of his paintings?
Have you seen the paintings themselves?
There's something really curious going on about the paintings themselves.
Now, I'm only looking at them on video, so I'm not, you know, not in the room with them, but aren't they suspiciously good?
Does anybody have that feeling?
That they're suspiciously too good?
And so I ask you this question.
Have any of you ever seen a video of him painting?
Making his own paintings?
No.
And if you have, was he just like adding a little brush stroke to something that already existed?
Does he have a ghost painter?
Maybe he has a ghost painter.
All right, so let's try to do some predictions.
Do you remember the prediction filter that said that reality, Elon Musk says this a lot, I say it too, that reality will go in the direction of the most entertaining outcome, as judged by somebody who's not personally involved.
So from an outsider's perspective, the most entertaining outcome.
But Hunter's paintings gives you two entertaining outcomes.
And I want you to tell me which is more entertaining, because I can't decide.
So you've got two possibilities.
One possibility is that Hunter Biden is a legit, world-class artist.
Wouldn't that be fun?
To me, that would be fun.
That nobody saw it coming.
He was this drug-addicted guy with problems, but he had some genuine talent.
And then suddenly it comes out and it's like the real deal.
Wouldn't that be entertaining?
I mean, you might want, you know, you still might want him to go to jail for whatever you think he did, but that would be entertaining.
I would be very amused to find out he was in fact a world-class artist.
Now, let's compare that.
Right?
Let's compare it to finding out that somebody else painted all the paintings.
Like just some art school graduate or something.
How entertaining would it be to find out that the paintings were always fake compared to finding out he's actually a legit world-class artist?
Which would be more entertaining?
Because to me, they're both entertaining.
I would like both of those.
Yeah, that's a tough one, isn't it?
I feel like this is the Schrodinger's, you know, cat experiment.
Either one about equally entertaining.
So, I kind of, I don't know.
I kind of hope that the reality is he's a great artist.
I hope that's the reality.
Because, you know, it would be a little more, I don't know, a little more fun.
You know, faking something is a little more ordinary.
All right, what else is going on?
So Trump was in a Pennsylvania rally.
And have you noticed that Trump is hard to ignore?
So he's at this rally, and he says, Biden is a dumb son of a bitch.
And the crowd goes wild.
And, you know, of course, that's the viral, you know, that's the one that everybody sees.
How can one person be so quotable all the time?
I mean, he doesn't go 10 minutes without saying something that you want to roll around in your head, you know, and repeat it in your head, because the way he said it.
But if you listen to him call Biden the dumb son of a bitch, I would like to point out the artistry with which he presented that.
Because there are lots of ways to call somebody a dumb son of a bitch, and it doesn't come out right.
But wow, did he deliver the line.
All right, he delivered the line.
The secret, I think, was that he delivered it as a matter of fact statement.
Here's what would have been wrong.
Biden, he's a dumb son of a bitch.
No, no.
That would look out of control, a little screechy, a little pleading.
Eh, weak, really.
Kind of weak.
But when Trump says it, he says it like he's whispering it in your ear.
Seriously, he's almost seducing you.
He says it so matter-of-factly, it takes you a moment to figure out what... Did he just say that?
He just says, I can't do the impression of it, but it's more a matter of fact, he just says, and Biden, he's a dumb son of a bitch.
And you just hear it and you go, was that just in the middle of a sentence?
Did he just deliver the President of the United States is a dumb son of a bitch?
Did he say that with the same emphasis as the rest of the sentence in the paragraph?
And he did.
It was kind of perfect.
You know, he does not get credit for his delivery.
His delivery of his own lines, just amazing.
His timing, his wording.
He's really got that skill.
All right, so that's really basically the only thing I took away from the rally.
And it's the only thing I needed to.
Because the little bit of the larger context is that Biden's not quite all there.
And I think that's the best argument.
The best argument is that you can see it, I can see it, we can all see it.
He's sort of done.
I don't know how that loses, because the Democrats are not going to disagree with the argument that he's at a degraded mental state.
They can see it.
They'll argue it, but they can see it.
So at least he'd be leading with something that nobody would debate.
At least, seriously.
All right, so here's an opening that I think that Biden and his crew are leaving for Trump.
As you know, they've been trying to sell this extreme MAGA thing to make you think, oh no, those extreme MAGAs.
Because what they don't want to say is white supremacist every day.
Because that's a little hard to explain when there are a lot of Republicans who are Hispanic and Asian American and everything else, and black.
So it's hard to call people of color white supremacists.
So it looked like they were going for the extreme MAGA to try to weasel that.
But here's the problem.
Biden and his people have left undefined what Extreme MAGA is.
Which means that somebody who's good at defining things, such as Trump, could simply define Extreme MAGA any way he wanted and make it work.
And just take it away.
Take it away as an attack.
So, I've suggested that Extreme MAGA would be a great Marvel character.
Who would have one superpower.
And this super character called Extreme Maga, the only superpower he would have is not believing anything in the news or anything the government says is true.
Wouldn't it be funny to see a movie in which there was a character called Extreme Maga who only had one power, which is not believing bullshit.
And he ended up being like an actual superhero.
It's all it took.
He just had to know how to not believe bullshit, and he could live like a god because everybody else did.
So he'd be sort of like the one-eyed person in the land of the blind.
Extreme Mega refuses to believe what the fake news and the government tells him.
That's his only power, but it's also the only power he needs to rule.
All right.
As you know, this is America, so whenever there's a tragedy, we try to turn it into conspiracy theories and humor.
Conspiracy theories and humor.
Starts as a tragedy, turns into a conspiracy theory, morphs into humor.
So let's talk about the tragic death of Obama's chef on a paddleboard.
Oh, would you be surprised to learn that there are some conspiracy theories about that?
Let me tell you about them.
Now, first of all, I don't believe any of them.
So my starting point is no.
No on all of them.
However, while I don't believe any of the conspiracy theories, I would like to assert the following.
The story is not true.
That doesn't mean he was murdered.
I don't see evidence of murder, so I'm not going to go there.
You know this story isn't completely true, right?
Do you all know that?
Do you know why you know it's not true?
Can anybody tell me why you know it's not true?
Tell me why you know it's not true.
Go.
How do you know it's not true?
Exactly.
Because it's a story about a public figure.
It's a story about a public figure.
And it's in the summer.
The summer makes it extra, but it doesn't have to be in the summer.
All stories about public figures are false.
All of them.
How do I know that?
Well, I've been a public figure for over 30 years.
I've seen all the stories about me.
At the very least, they leave out key information that would change how you think about the story.
Sometimes it's an intentional lie.
Sometimes it's bad reporting.
Sometimes it's out of context.
Or any combination of those things.
But never will you see a story that has any details or complexity to it that's also true, in the sense that you've got the real picture.
Now what is true would be, let's say if somebody died in a horrible accident, they are dead.
I think that they're probably almost 100% right when they say somebody died.
But once you get past just the most basic fact of a story, almost everything around it is some kind of narrative or bullshit or just wrong, right?
So here are the things just for fun.
Again, I don't believe any of this is indicative of anything real.
It's just what's happening.
There's a photograph that emerged of Obama with a black eye and bandages on one hand.
So people are saying, my goodness.
Now what is the most likely explanation for the photograph of Obama with a black eye and cuts on his hand?
What's the most likely explanation for that?
Not that he had a fight with a paddle boarder.
No, the most likely explanation is it's an old photo.
It's an old photo.
Right.
Isn't that the most likely explanation?
So, you know, there could be a hundred reasons that you would have a black eye.
But remember, the picture, or a fake picture, yeah, could be a fake picture or a black eye or something like that.
So the first thing I would say is that if you believe, if you believe the picture is real, I think that's kind of You're being a little bit gullible if you automatically assume it's real.
It might be.
It could be a real picture.
I'm just saying that I assume it's not.
Starting assumption, not real.
Then there's also the story, again that has no backing as far as I know, that maybe one of Obama's daughters was maybe hanging out with a married guy on a paddleboard.
There's no evidence of that.
There's none.
Somebody said the paddleboard looked like Obama's, and that was the evidence that his daughter might have been there.
That's not good enough.
I don't know that there are that many paddleboard types.
I don't think you can tell whose paddleboard it is by looking at it.
All right.
And what if he did have his paddleboard?
I mean, that wouldn't mean anything either.
All right.
So don't believe anything about that or anything else about public figures.
Oh, my God.
I've seen some bad memes go by.
How many of you think the paddleboard story has something, like, illegal that Obama did?
Like, in reality?
How many of you really think there was something illegal going on?
I got some yeses.
Mostly no.
Now, I wouldn't rule out that there's something illegal that went on, but I don't think it was murder.
If, for example, somebody was drinking and they didn't want that news to come out, you can imagine that.
All right, so here's, and then here's my favorite part about how fake news gets started.
How long did it take somebody to suggest that he was a young, healthy man who died of maybe a sudden cardiac arrest, that maybe he'd been vaccinated lately?
How long did it take for that rumor to start?
Are you disappointed you didn't think of it yourself?
Because it happens in the context of LeBron, you know, LeBron's son having some cardiac problems and Jamie Foxx having some cardiac problems and so now it's the third youngish black guy who had an unexplained death, sort of suddenly.
So brains just automatically go there.
But I want to say, there's no evidence for that whatsoever.
No evidence for any vaccination thing.
It's just a natural thing.
You expect all the stories to start conflating.
We're about a day away from it being caused by an alien.
The aliens are really from under the pond.
They dragged them down.
Something like that.
Well, here's the weirdest thing that happened to me today.
So you know how sometimes if you use Twitter, sometimes you'll tweet something and you'll think, oh, this is a throwaway tweet.
And other times you'll tweet things that you think are kind of genius.
You're like, ah, I think I nailed it this time.
And then the thing you thought was a genius tweet gets no retweets, because everybody just looks at it and goes, yeah, we thought that too, so it's not new.
But then you'll do the one that's just a throwaway, and it gets 1.2 million views.
That happened to me yesterday.
I tweeted this, there's an enormous correcting force forming.
The most ambiguous tweet you could ever do.
There's an enormous correcting force forming.
And the reason I tweeted it was because I felt it.
Like I felt the, just the feeling.
I could just feel it forming.
And I didn't know what it was.
I didn't know exactly what it was.
But it feels a little like dad's coming home.
Like things went too far, and now the correcting force is coming in.
And the correcting force is primarily male.
Doesn't mean women are not involved, of course.
But there's definitely a thing that we would all describe as a male force and a female force.
We know what it is when we see it.
And when times are good, Female forces rise, because that's sort of a luxury feeling.
You know, let's all be nice to each other, and I'll share my stuff, and you share your stuff.
You know, that's good stuff.
But when things go wrong, and there's danger, the women typically take a different role, and the men come out of hibernation.
They do whatever dangerous, and mostly dangerous, things have to be done.
And then if they succeed, they go back dormant again, because you don't need that male force so much.
So what I feel is a rising male energy.
It feels palpable.
Some of it, I think I'm influenced by the fact that the major candidates are all male, and the Republican candidates who are very specifically bringing a male perspective, in a good way, not a bad way, back into the mix to maybe get us a better balance, because I think we're just off balance.
Nothing wrong with female energy.
Nothing wrong with male energy.
There's everything wrong with either one of them being out of balance.
You don't want too much male energy.
Can we agree?
Too much male energy is a problem, but too much female energy is a problem too.
And that's our current problem.
Not a permanent problem.
I think this is all cyclical and pendulum stuff.
It had to happen, but it's happening.
There's definitely an energy entering the field that you just feel.
You just feel it in a hundred ways.
Interestingly, after I got one point, I think it's up to 1.2 million views, just saying there's enormous correcting force forming, then later I tweeted that male energy is rising.
And that had, I think that's pushing a half a million views, which are very big numbers for my account.
And then something else happened.
The same day, Elon Musk tweeted, equally cryptically and without detail, quote, something special coming soon.
Now, I think he was talking about maybe a Twitter feature.
I don't know what he's talking about, but I feel like there's just this feeling that something good is happening.
Some kind of general feeling that there's some kind of positive thing happening.
And maybe we'll see it in Twitter, etc.
I saw somebody say that, you know, Musk was ruining Twitter and blah, blah, blah.
And I always think, how does Musk ruining Twitter square with the fact that it's at an all-time high in traffic and we can't stop talking about it?
That's like opposite of what you see, right?
Because Musk just tweeted their numbers.
It's at an all-time high.
It's doing nothing but going up.
So remind me if I talked about this before.
I think I talked about it in the man cave, but not here.
So Musk puts this giant X logo thing on top of the Twitter building in San Francisco, which San Francisco is not happy about because it seems to be some kind of zoning building violation.
But they're having trouble getting up there to inspect it.
Somehow the inspectors can't get on the roof for whatever reason.
I don't know.
And so it stays.
The entire country is talking about it, I don't know about internationally, but nationally we're all talking about his big offensive X on top of the building and we're all arguing whether we like X or hate X or does some other company have the trademark and what's he going to do when everybody sues him because they have X's in their names too and all this.
This is the most successful rebranding I've ever seen.
Number one, there's nobody who doesn't know that Twitter just became X. Am I right?
Name another company that's ever done this well in making the entire country, at least, I don't know about internationally, but making the entire country completely understand that Twitter became X. We all know it now.
Now, it reminded me of, there's a restaurant entrepreneur in my town.
Who started a new restaurant.
So he opened them and built them up and sold them in many cases.
So he opens a new restaurant.
He paints it the most offensive purple color you've ever seen.
It's right in the middle of the main street with the other restaurants.
And it's just an eyesore.
You drive past that thing and you're like, oh God, who did that?
And immediately you think, is this okay?
Did the zoning regulations allow this horrible thing?
And of course they did not.
So pretty soon it's in the local publications and everybody's gossiping about it and people are saying, did you see that horrible purple building?
And when everybody had complained about the purple building, it lasted, I don't know, six months or whatever it was, I can't remember.
So after about six months of everybody complaining, and the city being, you know, on their backs and everything, do you know what the owner of the restaurant did?
Guess.
What did he do when everybody complained?
Just guess.
He repainted it a normal color.
It's the funniest thing I've ever seen a business person do.
It was an op.
He wanted everybody to talk about it because it was a new restaurant.
He spent zero on advertising.
Every person in my town was talking about that restaurant.
And we all had to go because everybody was talking about it.
So then when you said, hey, where do you want to go?
You want to go out to eat?
And somebody would say, yeah, I hear there's this new purple restaurant.
Let's go to the purple place.
So he paints it back to a regular color, sells it for an enormous profit because the business is going crazy, and then as soon as people were done talking about the color of the restaurant, you know, the business collapsed back to a normal level, and I think the guy who bought it didn't even survive.
It was like the smartest, like, entrepreneurial thing.
So I remember that when I was seeing Musk do this.
Do you think that Musk Believes the X will stay there?
Or do you think he knows there's a pretty good chance that San Francisco is going to make him take it down and he'll end up taking it down?
Now, he might fight it some more because that's just more of the fun, right?
Remember, he has a big budget.
So maybe San Francisco fines him $20,000 a month.
What if he pays it?
What if he just pays the fine every month?
$20,000 a month is cheaper than advertising.
So watching this little dance is hilarious.
But remember, the dance is not about the logo.
It's not about the logo.
This is Elon Musk being the entire marketing and rebranding department for all of his businesses and doing it laughing at the same time.
I mean, he's basically, he's doing his rebranding and probably just thinks it's hilarious and it's working perfectly.
And, you know, what will the people who don't understand anything about business or psychology say?
Well, there he goes again with these bad decisions, they'll say.
All right, this was a funny report from NBC News.
Now remember, NBC News, at least according to people who are smarter than me, that's a lot of people, say that NBC News is sort of in the pocket of the CIA.
So it's important to know that when NBC News is saying something, you might be hearing some influence from the intelligence community.
That's what people say.
I can't prove it.
But NBC News said that the news that came out that the government might be in possession of non-human biological UFOs was met with surprising apathy online.
That's right.
There was a credible, I guess, looking whistleblower.
Major news that Congress was taking seriously.
The fact we might have downed UFOs and captured aliens.
And NBC News is sort of, I don't know, I wouldn't describe an attitude to it, but they're reporting that the public wasn't buying it.
Now, I realize that I have not met one person in my real life who believed the UFO story.
Not one.
Now, there might be people who do believe, but I've not spoken Not spoken to one person who thinks this is true.
Have you?
Have you spoken to even one person who thinks it's true?
Even one, like in person.
Not online, but in person.
Even one person?
Somebody said yes.
But most of you are saying no.
Do you remember when I told you there's, just a moment ago, there's a huge correcting force that's forming?
Do you see it yet?
The fake news, and maybe the fake government, I'm not sure.
To me it looks like an intelligence op of some kind.
To me.
There's no way to know, but that's what it looks like.
It looks like there was an op to change the opinion, or what we're thinking about, and that America didn't buy it.
They actually saw it for exactly what it was from the first minute.
What's that tell you?
It tells you they went too far.
Too far.
The entire public realizes that that's too far.
That the UFO thing is telling us clearly and forever that the news is fake and the government can't be trusted about anything.
That everything we've been told about everything from the government has been Either lies or self-serving.
Everything.
What happens if the public just woke up?
Because that's what it feels like.
The enormous correcting force feels like the entire public waking up and saying, wait a minute, it's almost as if the news has never been real.
That's because the news has never been real.
The news has never been real.
Not in the past, not in the present, and certainly not in the future.
There's nothing that's going to make it real.
So if you are building your worldview around what you saw in the news, you are brainwashed.
And we all are to some extent, right?
The best we can do is, you know, we're trying to tread water as fast as we can to keep our heads above it.
But the brainwashing is massive, it's pervasive, it's all the time, it's unending, unstopping, and it's the major force in civilization.
But I feel like people can see it now.
I feel as though the machinery is becoming obvious.
To that point, watching the video I mentioned before of Joe Rogan talking to Jim Gaffigan about January 6th, when you see Rogan lay it out, and Rogan is not, he's not talking as a conspiracy theory, he's talking only the things we know to be true.
So he says, we don't know that Ray Epps was anything.
We don't know that.
So Rogan says that directly.
It's not proven.
What we do know is that he was clearly instigating and was not treated like the rest of the people.
That part we know.
The other part we know is that our intel people routinely insert agents to sometimes escalate problems.
And that that's an understood, long-running process.
And that January 6th was exactly the sort of thing that an enemy of, if somebody was an enemy of the intelligence agencies, as Trump was, everybody understood that, that if they used the normal techniques they normally use, then January 6th was exactly the opposite of what Jim Gaffigan had been told it was, which was an insurrection.
It was actually an op.
If the evidence suggests it, we don't know it, but the evidence suggests it was some kind of an op at some level.
You know, whether the op part became the important part or it was a trivial add-on, don't know.
Don't know.
But what we do know is that the news is bullshit.
And we know that our government is lying.
And we know that when Congress asked the head of the FBI, or one of the FBI people, if Ray Epps was working for them, they wouldn't say.
They wouldn't say no.
Under oath, they wouldn't say no.
So that's what we know.
So the one thing you can conclude from that is not, you cannot conclude from that what Ray Epps is.
That does not tell you who Ray Epps is.
Period.
Right?
Oh, I hate saying period.
I apologize for saying period.
I mock people who say that, but it was just sort of at the front of my head.
It came out.
Sorry.
But it feels like the whole country is getting roganized.
You know, the way Jim Gaffigan was?
Because Jim, you know, again, Jim Gaffigan's an open-minded guy.
He can see the whole field.
He's listening to everything.
And he's open-minded.
He's actually one of the ones you want to support.
Mind your disfluencies.
I'll mind my disfluencies if you mind yours.
You mind your own disfluencies.
Well said, though.
All right, so we don't believe the UFOs, and maybe that will be the thing that takes the lid off of everything.
Small news here, Ye has been reinstated on X, formerly known as Twitter.
Is that true?
I don't believe he's tweeted, or as we say now, posted.
By the way, I hate that, posted.
Does everybody agree?
So I get why you wouldn't want to call it tweeting anymore, but posting, now that's too generic.
It doesn't feel right in my mouth.
I don't think that's going to last.
Maybe, we'll see.
Moscow had some more drone attacks and some of them hit.
I guess they jammed one that may have fallen and still done some damage.
I didn't see any news of deaths, but there was a pretty big explosion caught on cams.
And I think this is probably how Ukraine gets negotiations going.
I think Ukraine is probably wisely making sure that the public in Moscow doesn't feel safe.
And I don't see any reason that they can't do that.
Because as long as Kiev has been under regular attack since the beginning of the war, to me it's completely, in terms of war, you know, all war is immoral.
But within the context of war that is completely immoral, You can attack their population center if they attack yours.
If you think it'll work.
Because once the other side says, we're going to kill you all if we can, then you can do anything you want.
Morality doesn't exist when the other side says, we're going to do anything we can to kill you.
All morality goes away.
That's just survival.
And if they think their survival helps by terrorizing civilians in Moscow, they have every moral and ethical opening to do that.
In the context that all war is immoral.
It's just not more immoral than anything else that's going on at the moment.
I guess that's the better way to say it.
It's all immoral, but it's not any worse than the baseline at the moment.
So that might actually make a difference.
I do think that if the residents of Moscow feel genuinely unsafe, That might have some influence on Putin.
Because a lot of the rich people live in Moscow, and presumably they have more influence on Putin than other people would.
Elon Musk, again, making news about the headquarters, the ex-Twitter, now ex-headquarters.
Well, that's weird.
I just called the company that was once known Twitter as ex-Twitter.
And the new company is called X. So it's the X Twitter company.
I feel like that covers everything.
I think I'm just going to call it, you know, the X Twitter company?
Yeah.
Yeah, that might work.
Anyway, Elon says that He is not moving out of San Francisco, even when others are.
You only know who your real friends are when the chips are down.
And San Francisco, beautiful San Francisco, though others forsake you, we will always be your friend.
Elon tweets.
They may...
Something tells me that that tweet is going to cause SpaceX to get drug tested again, but it's just a feeling.
Yeah.
It just feels a little bit like, you know.
You know.
He might have been having some fun that night.
All right.
You know the story about the Korean company, the South Korean company, said they solved for room temperature superconductivity.
And if that were true, it would have changed all of civilization and our technology, because superconductivity at room temperature could make electrical transmission loss-free, and quantum computers work better, and all kinds of things that are just gigantic.
But the critics waded in and said, that's not true.
You really can't do those things.
And then they said, you try it yourself at home and you'll see.
And then some people did.
So the original claim seems highly, let's say, highly criticized.
And I would not say that you should assume it's true.
And then the most amusing thing happened.
What would be the most amusing outcome of that?
Well, you didn't see it coming, but there's a company called Taj Quantum that announced they just got a patent for higher than room temperature superconductivity.
And they're saying, no, this is the real thing.
We have the real one.
We haven't been bragging about it, but we did just get a patent for it.
Now, the fact that they patented their I guess, above room temperature type 2 superconductor.
Do you think the fact that they achieved a patent means that it's real?
What do you say?
They got a patent.
Now the patent is a check to see if the technology is legitimate.
I guess that's the best way to say it.
Is it legitimate and innovative and unique?
Here's what they don't do in the patent office.
They don't reproduce the experiment.
They don't.
They can't tell if your data is made up.
Unless, you know, you do something really stupid.
They don't know if you made up the data.
They just know that you satisfied the requirements of the patent.
That's it.
So having a patent does not tell you that you have superconductive materials.
It does tell you that you satisfied the patent requirements.
So now we have two claims of superconductivity.
How much money would you place to bet that either company, or both, has actually achieved this breakthrough in a way that really does change civilization?
What do you think of the odds?
I think close to zero.
Yeah, I hate to say it.
Close to zero.
But I like to think it's true.
I like to think maybe.
But unfortunately, it just feels like zero.
I hate to say it.
Well, there's some news that Chinese hackers, New York Times reporting, may have inserted malicious computer code into our networks so they could turn off our power grids and communication systems and water supplies.
According to US officials.
Or at least the water supplies that feed American military bases.
And what do you think?
Do you think that's true?
Do you think it's true that China has inserted lines of hacker code?
I'm gonna say no.
I'm gonna say no.
It's possible.
It's possible.
But you really don't think we can find code that doesn't belong there?
Wouldn't we know the size of a program before it was loaded and what was in it?
Are you telling me that we can't say, all right, these are the applications running on this server.
Let us compare the exact code in all of these programs to the exact code that we loaded and see if anything changed after it got loaded.
Or maybe it got changed in production so after loading it doesn't tell you anything.
But possible.
Possible.
Now, there's two ways to look at that.
One is that, of course it's true, and we did the same thing to them already.
What do you think of that?
How about, of course it's true, because it's just routine.
Not only is it routine, but we're doing exactly the same thing to them in Russia, and maybe our allies too.
Who knows?
Yeah, that's possible.
So this is one of the weird ones where it could be complete BS, or it could be just normal.
And it means nothing.
But if it's complete BS, it's not a problem.
And if it's completely normal, I don't even know if that's a problem.
Right?
Because if we knew China turned off our power, we would treat it just like they nuked us, wouldn't we?
As in, you've got five minutes to turn the power back on, or it's going to get bright over there.
Right?
So to me, them having access to turn off our grid and we all die seems not that different than having nuclear weapons, given that we would know about it.
All right. - Okay.
I just saw an interesting meme go by about the elections, but I think that's unconfirmed.
All right, so I don't know, maybe the Chinese hackers are in, maybe they're not.
Sounds a little fake-ish.
What about that mysterious Chinese COVID lab uncovered in the city of Readley, California?
I don't know where Readley is, but I hope I don't live near it.
Readly?
Anyway, there was some, you know, code enforcement thing that uncovered an illegal lab doing all kinds of things like pregnancy test kits, bacterial and viral agents, and all kinds of mice and stuff like that.
They don't know what's up, but it seems to be Chinese-related lab.
Do you know what's true about that story?
Maybe nothing.
All right, this is like the quintessential story of, you better wait and see on this one.
I don't know.
There's something very fake and wrong about the whole story.
That doesn't mean there's nothing there.
I mean, there's probably a lab.
But it kind of makes you wonder if it really has any importance to anything.
Could it be that there are some people born in China, Who are just running an illegal little business.
And that's it.
Why not that?
Why can't it just be some people born in China, living in the United States, who made a lab and said, hey, let's see what we can make that we can sell.
And they're trying a bunch of stuff.
Maybe.
I don't know.
It just seems to me that if this were some kind of illegal Chinese, if it were a Chinese plot, I don't know why they would have five different product lines.
Why would they have five different product lines where things are working on if it's a terrorist lab?
You know, pregnancy kits?
So, there's something about this story that doesn't add up, but it doesn't mean it's some kind of Chinese attack.
I don't know what it is, but it's just confusing at this point.
That's all we know.
All right, here's a little advice.
If you're a liar, and you're a gigantic liar, which of these two things should you do?
You know you're lying about everything all the time.
You should make generic statements that are hard to fact check, or you should make very detailed, specific claims that would be easy to fact check.
Remember, you're a giant liar all the time.
Which one do you do?
I'd say you want to go with the generic stuff, right?
You want to put in people's minds an idea that the people themselves add the details to.
So you want the recipient of your language to put in the details, because if you gave them the details, they could fact-check it.
You want them to imagine details.
So Kamala Harris.
Said somewhere in public that extremists are advancing a national agenda that is a full-on attack against hard-won freedoms and rights.
But she says she's going to keep fighting and win.
So who are the extremists?
That's kind of general.
And why do you say they have a national agenda?
Are they all working together?
And it's a full-on attack against hard-won freedoms and rights.
And which ones were they?
Which are the freedoms and rights that are under attack by these extremists?
Can you name some?
Name some that are under attack?
All right, I'll name some.
Some of the things that are under attack by the extremists are looting.
The right to loot without going to jail.
That's under attack, right?
The right to loot without having bail and without ever going to jail.
That's a right.
Because right now, in effect, that's a right that people in cities have.
How about the right to get into college even if you're less qualified than other people of other races?
How about that right?
Are the extremists fighting against the right to discriminate by race in college admissions?
They are.
They're fighting against discrimination.
How about job preferences?
By race.
Are the extremists fighting against using race as a hiring preference?
They are.
Very extremists.
How about child mutilations, as the right would call it?
Others would call it gender reaffirming surgery.
Are the extremists against minors making decisions that alter their bodies for the rest of their lives?
They are.
They're fighting that.
So they're fighting the right to loot, Be racist in colleges and job preferences and for parents to mutilate children if the children claim it's necessary for their good mental health.
Those are the extremist policies that Kamala Harris is against.
And do you see why she didn't mention any of the freedoms and rights?
The reason she didn't mention the freedoms and rights that are being taken away Is because she can't.
Because nobody wants a country that does this kind of stuff.
Or at least not many people.
Now she's probably also thinking about abortion.
But she doesn't have an argument there either.
Because so far the only thing that's been done that's changed is that the Republicans have said let the states decide.
Because the states are closer to the people.
That's it.
So You didn't have a right taken away, except you could define it that way, by Roe versus Wade decision.
Instead, you had a right that was modified so it was more appropriate to the population.
In other words, the population could have more control over their own rights by taking it down to the state level.
So the extremists gave individuals a little bit more control over their own rights by making it a state issue, state by state.
And that's the extremists.
How did they make extremists sound good?
Did you see that coming?
I actually am starting to embrace extremists as a label that's making me sound... Well, I would like to be one of those.
I would like to be an extremist who is against looting.
I wear that badge.
I'm totally an extremist about that.
I think there should be laws.
How about a border?
Oh, I'm total extremist on that.
I think we should maybe have a country with a border.
Total extremist.
So, that's my advice.
If you're a big old liar, keep it generic, because you don't want details.
All right.
Have I missed any fun stories today?
Was all of today's news about fake news?
Let me check.
Alright, I mean there's real things that people said.
But the... Yeah.
I don't know.
Seems like all the real news is about fake news.
Other than somebody said something once.
Keep it general, Scott does this with his predictions.
Do I?
Do I make general predictions?
Do you remember my general prediction that said Trump would win in 2016?
Sort of generally?
You just sort of generally win against all odds?
Do you remember my general prediction that the vaccinations wouldn't work?
Sort of general.
They won't work.
Yeah.
Oh well.
But I will give you that my prediction about some kind of counterforce rising.
That doesn't feel like a prediction.
That feels like a description of what I'm feeling.
And Purgosian is headed to the Polish border.
Do you think Purgosian is with Wagner?
Do you think he's with his army?
When I told you that Purgosian was absolutely, definitely not going to Belarus to live his life, was that sort of general, sort of generic statement?
No, that was very specific.
He's not on the plane.
That's pretty specific.
How about when the secret sonic weapon was in the news and I said, does not exist, you will never see evidence of a secret sonic weapon.
Kind of generic.
I don't know.
I make pretty specific predictions.
Do you believe Antarctica telescope, laser weapon, whistleblower?
No.
Somebody says there's some Antarctica laser weapon.
No, I don't believe that.
There does.
Let's see.
What?
Wait, wait, wait, wait.
Is that true?
Devon Archer is John Kerry's stepson?
Is that true?
Somebody just saying in the comments?
I don't know if I believe anything.
The specific ocean?
All right.
Is there anything else I've forgotten?
Somebody says it's true.
See, this is why you need the app of who's connected to who.
Wouldn't the whole story about... The story about Hunter makes a lot more sense if this is true.
Somebody saying that Hunter's business partner was John Kerry's stepson.
Doesn't the story feel different with that information?
Feels a little different, doesn't it?
So that's what we need.
We need the app that shows everybody's connection to everybody else, so the news makes sense.
You could even imagine the news being overlaid onto the map of connections, right?
So imagine the map, and then the news story is overlaid on the person.
So if you want to read that news, you can click on the person, but as soon as you click on it, it lights up all their connections to the other well-known characters.
That would be news.
Now that would be news you could use.
The rest of the news is you can't really use it because you don't know what's real.
Like Amazon's x-ray.
Maybe.
I don't know what Amazon's x-ray is.
Created the partnership on his advice?
I don't know about that.
Guilt by association?
No.
How did you even hear guilt by association?
No.
Association simply explains a situation.
It's not like you had lunch with somebody.
That's not what I'm talking about.
But if you're actually related to somebody or you're married to somebody, yeah, I want to know that.
I want to know that.
All right.
Yeah.
Good screen.
Thank you, Rick.
Appreciate it.
Is there a COVID 2.0?
I don't know.
I've never believed in the intentional release of COVID so the world economic order can be preserved.
I don't believe in that.
Speaking of Greg Gutfeld, did you see he got heat for the crazy people calling him anti-semitic for saying nothing like that?
So without even getting into the details of what he did or did not say, just trust me.
Can you trust me?
He didn't say anything that was even remotely, you couldn't even construe it as possibly being anti-semitic.
And he isn't, right?
And he isn't.
But there was some horrible person who wrote an article.
He decided to come down hard on her on Twitter.
He came down pretty hard on his troll.
And she was complaining about it.
So she was complaining that there was pushback to her bullshit story.
So she's trying to ruin somebody's career just to get clicks on a story that's clearly and obviously untrue.
And anybody could tell it's untrue.
She could tell it herself.
So that's like the worst person in the world.
Imagine trying to ruin somebody's reputation in life for a few clicks.
For a few clicks.
You're the worst person in the whole fucking world if you do that.
Whole world.
You're just a terrible scum.
And I think Greg was just calling her out.
Because I think the people who are seriously just the scum of the earth, the ones who are just making up stories to take people down, I think they need to be called out.
And maybe that's part of the force that's happening.
I think you're seeing more and more people who reflexively know that when you see a claim about a famous person being bad, unless they wouldn't fool Mel Gibson and it's on video, it's not true.
It's not true.
All right, I'll explore the book with x-ray.
Got it.
So, Teddy, we have a stupid person here I'd like to talk to.
So Teddy, you're too stupid to talk to, honestly.
Because I know you don't believe what you're saying.
There's somebody on YouTube who's trying to sell the idea that... I'm not even going to repeat what you said.
You're too fucking stupid to be talking in public.
If you actually believe there's somebody who thinks there was an upside to the Holocaust or to slavery, because you think you heard it on TV, you're a fucking idiot.
Nobody, nobody anywhere ever had those thoughts.
And you know it.
You know it, Teddy.
Teddy, you know it.
Come on, you know it.
Admit it.
You know you're lying.
And you know that nobody has ever had the thoughts that you're imagining that Greg Gutfeld had or you're imagining somebody else had.
Didn't happen.
Nobody ever had those thoughts.
Nobody ever said those thoughts.
And you know it.
You know it.
Never happened, Teddy.
All right, that's all I got for you YouTubers.
I'll talk to you tomorrow.
Thanks for being awesome.
Export Selection