Episode 2144 Scott Adams - Science Surrenders To RFK Jr. And Joe Rogan, Blink Fails In China, Trump

on my phone good morning everybody and welcome to the highlight of human civilization it's called coffee with Scott Adams today the special June teeth Edition happy Juneteenth and if you'd like to take your Juneteenth up to all new levels of Awesomeness all you need there's a couple of mug or a glass of tanker jealous of Diana canteen jug or flask a vessel of any kind fill it with your favorite liquid I like coffee join me now for the unparalleled pleasure the dopamine of the day the thing that makes everything better it's called the simultaneous sip go ah yeah well I have to admit it was only a few short years ago that I learned what Juneteenth was never heard of it was not anything I learned about but given now my understanding it's the last day of slavery in the last state I think it was Texas it had it I say that is very celebratible Freedom's always celebratible and that seems to me like a good celebration so let's celebrate freedom uh it is however not a work holiday for cartoonists do any of you get today off is anybody taking the day off or does it not work that way it's not it's not a it's not a national holiday right yet probably will be I feel like June is a little light on holidays are you with me do you feel like June just yeah they could use just a little bit more holiday not enough holidaying going on in June I mean there's my birthday and that that does cover a lot of the month all right let's talk about uh blinken's trip to China uh gigantic failure of course uh let's see he asked them if they would stop Fentanyl and they said nothing asked them if he would uh ask Johnny if they would agree not to give deadly weapons to Russia which they've been saying all alarms so that was nothing new and then he asked them if they'd like to have like an emergency deconfliction phone call sort of like a like the the red phone or the hotline to the Kremlin and China said nah no seriously we should have like a special phone call for deconflicting so we don't have an accidental nuclear war president XI yeah yeah you have my number call me if you need anything so I would say that was a big old nothing but uh blinken's concept and apparently Biden's concept is that you need to you need to be continually dealing with the Chinese because there's a better chance of getting a good outcome if you're talking if you're talking I completely disagree with this and I'll tell you what I would do I would close all of our embassies and send every Chinese student home unless they fix Fentanyl because the problem here let me explain how government works to the government is that they've treated fentanyl like it's just one other problem it's not it's not like any other problem well we're we're at we're acting like friends and all is on our list of negotiating topics you know when we go to talk to them about uh trade and our trade in the situation let's throw fentanyl in there because that's just another that's just another thing to negotiate right just throw it in there with the list you got uh we got this and that and that and then a little fentanyl let's talk about that too no no fentanyl is not like anything else on the list is not you don't go into a negotiation with somebody who's shooting your family members while you're negotiated do you no you say first you stop shooting my family members and then we'll have something to talk about but you don't you don't act like everything's business as usual while they're killing your family but we are now autobind business as usual if we're worrying about you know a trade War that's yeah that's just business but if they're killing people right now you don't negotiate nor do you keep your embassy open you close your Embassy and you say we'd love to talk to you but you're going to stop this first period period and and the fact that this is just put on the list with other stuff it's like oh we'd like you to do this and that and we'll just throw that on the list to you maybe if we'd someday talk about all of it together in some comprehensive way no no you close the embassy you just walk away and say you want nuclear war you're on the way you're on the way because it is a war it's a hot war and acting like it's not is ridiculous so Lincoln total failure I'd like to also say this about his name when you're going to send somebody to negotiate with your biggest adversary would you like the last name of the person who does your negotiating to be Trump or blinken he went into the negotiation and he was well he was blinking but the other guy went into the negotiation and Trump he trumped him he dropped him we should at least get the right the names right all right the big news everybody's talking about it on the internet today is that uh uh Joe Rogan challenged a noted vaccine pro-vaccine scientist guy named uh Dr.

Hotes I think from from Sega right h-o-t-e-z I think hotels maybe and uh Dr hotez Who I'd never heard of before how many of you had ever heard of Dr hote's prior to this situation with Joe Rogan okay a lot of you had all right this is a real good example of the news bubble because I saw some compilation clips of Dr.

Hotes on CNN and MSNBC where apparently he's been a number of times but I don't remember ever seeing him on Fox News so he's sort of a bubble situation yeah so he's probably been one of the darling Experts of the political left but the political right probably just froze him out because he wasn't really on message for them so the big story is that RFK Jr has a number of criticisms of vaccinations in general but also the covet ones specifically and and uh would like to debate Dr.

Hotes on Joe Rogan or at least Joe Rogan would like them to debate and a number of people were putting up money for charity if they would debate and uh Dr.

Hotes seemed to be hesitant but now he's speaking out about it and he tells us that a debate would be uh bad meaning it wouldn't be useful might even make things worse what do you think of that do you think a debate see is it his issue and let me give you more detail on his issue his issue is among other things that debate doesn't work because that's not how science works right science doesn't work on the best debater wins would you agree that's not how science works and as he points out science works with you know peer-reviewed papers and experimentation and you know all the processes of science so he he says you know you should do the scientific stuff nothing debating stuff because the debate stuff is about persuasion and as he points out well what what if the person who's wrong this is I'm not paraphrasing I'm I'm boosting his argument what if the person who is wrong is the most persuasive does that serve you would the public be served by the person who is the most wrong having the best argument that's an interesting point and he points out and Mark Cuban is well that RFK Jr is very persuasive and though he is an expert at persuading on this topic and uh he's so good that he's in the conversation to be maybe leader of the whole country like that's that's about his highest level of persuasion as you could achieve and so if you're a scientist who does does work on TV but you're not really the media expert like RFK juters is it fair to put in his words the strong argument with the less persuasive person on the same venue do you think that would serve the public I'm just going to go more with his argument then we'll talk about the other side um and I think he makes a good point that science is not about rhetoric and persuasion right that's not what science does it's not it's not a persuasion field but I would argue as I have in the past that if it doesn't also learn to persuade honestly not not persuade dishonestly but if science doesn't learn to persuade honestly it actually becomes useless oh what good is it if you can't persuade anybody to believe you it takes the entire value of science off the table oh yeah it's a good study I don't believe it um let's see then the other complaint is that RFK Jr has a habit of moving the goal posts meaning Dr.

Hotes believes that once he Nails him down and makes his good points that instead of just winning the debate then RFK Junior would just change it to another thing and he gave some examples of that he actually gave some specific examples of where in his mind RFK Jr used to make a claim of you know some element of the vaccinations being bad but then he changed it to well they're still bad but maybe it's something else then still bad but maybe it's a different thing and then still bad but maybe it's for a different reason which is a good point perfectly good point now did Dr.

Hotes make good points which are true good points which are true and logical yes he did those are true in logical points yeah those are true and logical it's true that that people like to move goal posts it's probably true that RFK Jr has modified his opinion over time probably true it's probably true that the most persuasive person if they had the worst argument that would be a problem the most persuasive person with the worst argument definitely would not move the ball forward but here's where I have my problem with Dr hotes's problem with the debate you don't think you could find a way to manage that stuff you don't think you could find any way to structure a conversation where you take it take that into account because I can it took me five seconds to figure it out here's how you do it you say RFK Jr you're making some claims that are you know contrary to the established science make three claims no more than three make three claims of fact and we'll present them to Dr hotels with you know a week or two in advance we're going to have him collect all of his sources that debunk it and we're going to show him all of your sources that make the claim after he's collected all of his sources that you know debunk yours before the debate he's going to show you his sources that debunk your sources so that when you both go into the debate you've seen the sources and you've also seen the other side's debunk of your sources and maybe even the response to the debunk before the debate you limit it to three claims and then you have a Joe Rogan or somebody who could actually handle an MMA calling an MMA fight which by the way could that be more perfect that Joe Rogan is literally part of his talent stack includes uh calling of fights and yeah who would be I mean it was just is it just such an interesting talent to have to go into moderating a debate that you're actually at MMA you know fight announcer type guy uh so the the task would be this that every time either one of them tried to move the goal post or either one of them sort of got off topic or did sort of a B2 or brought up something else about something else it would be Joe Rogan's job to just stop and stop him just okay stop stop you're you're outside the rules now you're changing the topic go back get back to the topic three points through whatever whatever RFK is best three points are whatever they are because remember how I told you to deal with laundry list persuasion which is what RFK Jr does really well by the way it you know it's a little bit I want to say it's dishonest but not exactly dishonest because there's not necessarily A Lie involved it's persuasion that's beyond what it should be I guess that's what I said a laundry list of oh all these reasons is why I'm right like a long list of reasons looks persuasive before you've looked at any of the reasons oh my god there are 10 reasons 10 reasons is way more than one so that must be a good argument there are 10 reasons so that's why people use the laundry list it just automatically looks true before you even look at it so I do believe that RFK Jr has a laundry list approach which is let me tell you 15 things I know about 15 different vaccinations therefore the 16th one is bad no he never said that but you know you understand that how the laundry list could be then sort of generalized beyond what it's supposed to do so as long as you can say RFK Junior make your three best claims because if you can't defend your three best does anybody need to look at the others right if he can't defend his three best claims his three strongest claims if he fails on those you don't really need to listen to the others do you now there may be somebody else who has a good argument for the others but if somebody fails on their top three their best points you don't need to listen to anything else so I would say that the easy way to go forward is to say three topics make sure you've both shared all of your sources both the source and the debunks make sure you both have seen all of your URLs and all of your sources and then come on and talk to us with no end to the conversation so you won't have a timed end you don't want somebody to run out and then you might schedule a follow-up make sure it's a it's a two event situation one is the event and then maybe a faster follow-up it's like okay you know people thought you won or people thought you want or the the audience really was obsessed over this one point you made can you go back to that then I think we'd have something now I agree that debate is not how you solve science I get that I mean the Dr hote's arguments are logical and true but they don't really handle the fact that you could manage those problems so that's what's left out it's true that he's identified the problems quite accurately it's not true that there's no way to handle those problems to minimize them until you've got something useful to do now suppose somebody took all of my excellent ideas that I just gave you put them together they do the event and it just doesn't work what would be your conclusion from that it just that didn't work no my conclusion would be you keep trying so maybe maybe one of the participants is weak for whatever reason and then you say all right well one of you is strong one of you kind of couldn't handle this this debate concept so we'll bring in another one we'll bring in your your best Champion that isn't the one who failed and that could be on either one not not just the scientist could be the anti-vaccination person is a different person by the way let me correct that it is unfair to call RFK Jr anti-vaccination you all get that right everybody agree that is not of that is not an accurate characterization of him but we we use that as a shorthand to say that he's a Critic of much of what we do with vaccinations but very important it's very important to make that distinction because if you're just anti-vaccination you're probably just an idiot right that's probably the whole story but but if you're saying well it looks like some of this worked and but other stuff I have questions then you're talking to a reasonable person that you could probably work with right but if somebody's just like every everything you put in your arm is bad because firm is bad I don't you can't really work with that um RFK Jr is never going to be satisfied with vaccine safety good that sounds like good news to have him never satisfied with don't you watch the people out there who are never satisfied with the safety that feels like the best situation of all uh yeah so RFK Jr is a apparently a high-end good qualified lawyer on these various topics so I think he's won some cases he knows how to dig into the science pretty well but he's not a scientist I'd like to see him talk now um let me test you so you heard my suggestion three claims and then let them share their sources before they even get into the debate and then make sure there's a follow-up already scheduled so that the follow-up you know cleans up any problems how many of you think that that would be worth trying let's see your comments right you see a lot of yeses on the locals platform a lot of yeses right and and would you agree with me that if it failed you should try again just tweak it and try again because this is the model we need the model we need is some version of this if the first version doesn't work do not throw out the approach because the the public is so deeply underserved in in the both sides situation if you could do anything just anything that would move you a little bit toward showing two sides of a story for the first time ever it would be a civilization changing I mean it would be one of the biggest you know it would be interesting is that if musk became the agent of why this happens right just because he's influential he's in the conversation if musk is the one who made this happen you know some kind of a understanding of a process to show both sides in a public way it would be his greatest contribution to civilization and you'd never think of it that way you'd always think of going to Mars or building electric cars but if he did that one thing just taught us a model for getting a little closer to understanding both sides if that's all he did in his whole life it would be the greatest contribution to the civilization it'd be hard to top um but Mark Cuban another billionaire has gotten into this conversation and I'm just going to read you uh Mark Cuban's statements his actual words because it's a little hard to paraphrase so I want you to see his actual words he said trying to bully Dr.

Hotes is ridiculous uh Cuban continued quote you have producers that will prepare you and you get to control the conversation meaning Rogan he would be prepared by producers as would RFK Junior Kennedy also has a staff ready to prepare him and those topics are what he talks about in every speech you both do this meaning Joe Rogan and RFK you both do this on a daily basis well Dr.

Hotes works every day to try to make things find ways to help people um they slammed uh Rogan and Musk for worsening the the climate you know on social media and he says uh Joe uh meaning Rogan Joe you and Elon musk's Twitter are the mainstream online media and your platforms have become everything supposedly wrong with MSM you are driven by self-interest just like the MSM always has been accused of Cuban wrote you both have earned that right you busted your asses to be great at what you do and earned all you've accomplished but don't lie to yourself and all of us and tell us you are different you aren't whoa well somebody woke up on the wrong side of the bed don't tell us you're different you're the same now do I agree with Mark Cuban or disagree what do you think do you think I'm going to agree with Mark Cuban or disagree which way am I gonna go well I'll tell you in general I hate to disagree with Mark Cuban it's just a bad play right disagreeing with people that's smart isn't a bad it's not a good strategy in life right so I like to find ways to agree with smart people just generally speaking um I would say the following I agree with Mark what Mark Cuban says because I agree with follow the money vaccine or genetic disposition to vaccines you know it's an interesting story but I don't want to get off off track right now um except I did I got off track what was I saying see that's the problem with the the super prompt you know where you pay money to make a comment is so destructive to the like the flow I I I think I think You.

Tube should remove that I mean I love it when people give me money that's cool but I'd rather I didn't get the money and I'd rather that it just wasn't available as a as an option that would be better so I'd encourage you not to give me money for that um all right so I agree with Cuban that both Joe Rogan and Elon Musk um are at the very least part of a process in which following the money is going to be the predictive DNA all right I said that terribly let me try it again it is true that Joe Rogan is in a job where he's trying to make money although On Any Given topic he may not be thinking of it that way in other words on this topic he probably is actually just thinking what would be good for the country but have I told you a million times that people do have lofty goals that's a real thing people often have lofty help the world goals but what they actually do is coincidentally exactly what makes them money which doesn't make the lofty goals not real I think that they're real in the sense that the person really believes it it's the only thing they're thinking about they're not thinking about the money but coincidentally people always seem to do what's good for their money don't they and Joe Rogan you know this supporting the Mark Cuban argument Joe Rogan is doing a job where the moral audience he gets the better he does the better Spotify does and so having a debate would be good for views so I like the criticism so far that Rogan is a is a money-making entity and that may not be fully compatible with trying to tell people the truth you agree right that there's a little bit of conflict doesn't have to be not necessarily like it's not guaranteed but you could have a little conflict between what makes you money and what's exactly true and musk of course owns Twitter so musk would musk also likes big topics with you know big uh let's say event related stuff because it's it's a marketing strategy now do you think that musk is thinking of it primarily as a marketing strategy for Twitter I would say probably not probably not all indications are he'd actually like to see the debate he's probably looking at it just like you and I are which is wouldn't you like to see that now I saw I saw a criticism from somebody else online that it's all about creating a spectacle and you know the spectacle doesn't help us everybody just wants the spectacle to which I say we love the spectator but if the spectacle is what draws you to the information very good I mean it's just what Trump does right creates a spectacle and he draws you to the information he'd like you to act on so I don't mind the spectacle part if you do it right if the only thing you're doing is a spectacle it's a waste of time but if you're a spectacle to get people and you do it right well two good things in a row so so I would agree that there's a money motive and that imagining that Joe Rogan or Elon Musk or somehow outside the influence of you know the money motive that drives everything we do it's a good I would say sort of a dickish thing to say but philosophically I'd agree but what about um what about the bullying part is it bullying to offer somebody a huge amount of money to the charity of their choice to come on television to talk about their own area of expertise on the most important question in America probably you know trusting our experts does that seem like bullying because it's not it's not as if he's never been on TV this is somebody who goes on TV looks like every time he's asked by the major networks so so I'm not buying I'm not buying the he's incapable there's there's nothing to suggest that he wouldn't do a good job representing his side and I think it's sort of insulting it's a little bit insulting to imagine that he couldn't I mean he has a PHD in an MD and he's an expert at this field so and he's been on TV lots of times doing a good job I mean really is it believed to say that that guy that that guy should talk to somebody who's got some questions that doesn't feel like bullying at all like I don't get it does anybody else feel as bullied to me that's exactly the right question I don't see it at all right now of course the uh the internet is bullying again so just to be clear I don't think musk and uh musk is just having a good time with it saying he said on Twitter I guess he doesn't like charity is that bully I mean you're certainly persuading and cajoling but I don't I don't say this bullying at all right so I disagree on that characterization but you know again Cuban is talking with some hyperbole so calling it bullying is not really something you fat check he's using some hyperbole so we'll let him get away with the hyperbole I guess I guess I'll I will withdraw my objection to that because you don't want to fact check hyperbole you know that right don't don't fact check the hyperbole there's no point in that um but then Mark Cuban said that Joe Rogan and Kennedy both have uh staffs to prepare them does that feel like a good point that Kennedy and Joe Rogan both have like producers and staff to prepare them that doesn't feel like a good point because first of all do you think Joe Rogan would have his producers prepare him for that I think they would just make sure he knew when it was so he'd show up on time and the cameras are rolling I do not get the sense that Joe Rogan's producers are doing a lot of producing in terms of managing Joe Rogan do you think that's happening I mean he does have some one or more producers I don't know I don't know what the number is but I think they're just there to make sure that the show happens I don't think they're there telling what they think or say and what about RFK Jr do you think RFK Jr has anyone on this staff who knows more than he does about the topic I kind of doubt it I doubt it the whole point is that he he is the topic he's like a walking Encyclopedia of this topic it's been his life's work so I don't think that the staff argument holds and and it's so weak that it makes me wonder what's behind it I'll tell you what it makes it look like it makes it look like Mark Cuban doesn't want um the truth to come out now obviously he's not thinking that in a conscious way right because I would trust Mark Cuban enough that consciously is about thinking that I guarantee you he's not consciously afraid that it will go not his way but the way he's acting suggests there might be a subconscious concern that he might be wrong and it would be very very bad for anybody to be on the wrong end of this conversation believe me when the the when the rumors started that I was on the wrong end of everything when 4chan did their little prank on me it really makes life difficult when everybody thinks you're part of wrecking the world so I can see why uh there's some prominent people who were pro-vaccination again that's not exactly a good characterization but uh you know what I mean uh I think it's a dangerous conversation I think there are a lot of people who are worried that these Skeptics have a better argument than uh has been presented to the public so far the wider public those on the right have seen so much skeptical content that you wouldn't be surprised if RFK Jr won won the debate if you could say when you wouldn't be surprised but there are people on the left who would be hearing things for the very first time and they would be saying wait what so RFK JR could move the needle he's persuasive enough and he would come well armed enough that there would be people hearing stuff that they'd never heard before and it would be kind of a shock to their systems all right um so our Rogan and musk contributing to the worsening climate I don't see that I do not see Rogan and musk contributing to a worsening climate I say exactly the opposite I mean musk is saying if you're running for president doesn't matter what side you're on I want you on Spaces how is that wrong you're inviting everybody and giving them a big platform trying to get rid of the Shadow Banning I mean to me it looks like everything he does is in a positive direction in a bad way positive direction all right one of the claims about I mean there's a little side street I'm going to take what are the claims about vaccinations by some critics is that they might be behind the increase in autism have you've heard that argument right there's some who believe that some childhood shots are behind autism now you've heard the other explanation for the rise in autism right I wouldn't rule that now by the way but there's another explanation have you not heard it is not environment it's no it's not an environment or pollution every is enough food uh old dads is one right the age the age of the parents is one there's another one that's related to that not medications not chemicals not telomeres not old sperm well the old sperm we just talked about wow I feel like no there's another reason how do you not all know this so I guess so I'm going to give you something to fact check okay uh Elon Musk says he has two kids on the Spectrum and of seven seven children two out of seven Elon Musk says it's inheritable so that he's the reason to have his gets at it do you think he's right that it's inheritable do you believe it is inheritable two of his kids I would say yes yeah I I feel we don't you know I'm not a scientist but I feel that's probably true all right now what would happen if two Elon musks got married so there's a female Elon Musk let's say unrelated but basically safe um and he marries another Elon Musk do the odds of having a autistic kid go up if there are two contributors instead of one logically yes right again I don't have a study that proves it but logically you'd expect it now number two in our modern world can the Elon Musk male and female find each other more easily do it do we have a civilization in which if you're a smart Elon Musk type you could easily find your your matching female Elon Musk yes it's called going to work because if you go to work at Microsoft you walk down the hallway and there's all these other Elon musks you find a female one you marry him and now you've got two Elon musks do they have more autistic kids and kids on the Spectrum I believe the answer is yes now this is what I need to fact check on I thought that was well established is it not so am I wrong that that's not so well established it's just true but I was surprised that most of you were not aware of that at least claim again I'm not going to say it's true but I'll say that the claim has been out there for 20 years 20 years I think and I don't see anything wrong with it to me that seems so obvious so obviously true that it would take quite a bit of science to talk me out of it I could be talked out of it if they found some way to test it and it was reliable but it seems to me that you don't need any vaccinations to explain it the rise of technology companies brought male and female Elon musk's together they married and had kids and that's the end of the story and then there's also the other part that people are having children older so if they're a little bit older they're more likely I guess um I saw a paid comment go by that uh Mark Cuban is also a investor in or owner of I don't know which it is of this male what would you call it drugs by mail company I forget what it's called so he's got cheap drugs generics I guess that you can get through him that's competing with the rest of the industry so so you should understand that he's in the business of selling pharmacy from us pharmaceutical products and that might have it that might have an impact on his public opinion on this stuff it's not directly related but you should assume that he you know he's in that world that's part of the story I always like it when uh I see my uh my billionaire is arguing it's always productive to me to see that all right Jordan Peterson is warning uh Lex Friedman that he could get kicked off of You.

Tube for doing certain kinds of things such as talking to Skeptics and this these are the things that Jordan Peterson and I guess the daily wire Plus have gotten in trouble for recently they've removed Jordan Peterson's interview with RFK Jr they they took it off of You.

Tube as a citizen of the United States it has been judged that you cannot see Jordan Peterson talking to a major presidential candidate I I think I think my mind is going to explode how is that possible like what could RFK Jr have said that isn't the Public's not just right to know but we should have a pretty big interest in knowing what did he say that's so horrible that he had to remove it was a vaccination skepticism that's it and and who decided he was wrong who at You.

Tube was the person who could look at rfk's argument and Junior's argument and know it's wrong which which major scientist did that I mean everything about this seems just so so wrong now I'm not saying that everything RFK Jr said is accurate I'm not qualified to judge but I'm pretty sure You.

Tube doesn't know and I'm pretty sure he's a major candidate for president who has an actual path to the office unlike you know some who don't have a path yeah so anyway uh also got kicked off when Jordan Peterson interviewed Matt Walsh and Helen Joyce I don't know who Helen Joyce was was she in the trans which field is she in Helen Joyce I didn't see that interview well whatever it was it was too controversial for for a You.

Tube and the weird thing about this is it it's like they don't have any idea who Jordan Peterson is somehow because correct me if I'm wrong but if Jordan Peterson saw some unscientific he'd be the one to call it out am I wrong like who would be more qualified to stop somebody from saying some just total that him I I can't imagine who who I would be happier with you know monitoring what information is considered credible for me I mean I would trust him completely which doesn't mean he's right and it doesn't mean he's right but he's qualified to understand what looks like in the scientific realm and if he calls it out I'd say oh okay there's somebody who knows some when he sees it he just called it out but if he doesn't call it out I would like to know that too if somebody as smart as Jordan Peterson listens to an argument that's counter to the mainstream argument and he says you know that's good enough to be on my podcast I don't know if it's right but it's a good enough point to be on my podcast I'd like to know that so You.

Tube I get that you're trying to you know keep the world safe I get that and if he had if they had demonetized these things I understand that as well because the advertisers do have a preference of not being associated with certain kinds of content that's his business so if they demonetize that that's a whole different argument but removing it removing it and that seems so far over the line of what of what society would expect of you You.

Tube now maybe there's a you know I'm only hearing one side of the argument maybe there's something I don't know about in this but I doubt it all right uh CNN got fact checked on Twitter which I love the community notes thing um CNN tweeted uh black fathers are often portrayed as absent or distance or distant but that isn't what most people experience according to both data and black dads themselves uh blah blah bias portrayals and then Community notes fact check them with the following facts there's 64 percent of black kids have single parents single parent homes 42 percent of Hispanic 24 of white and 16 percent of Asian have a single pair of home does the order of those things remind you of the order of any other thing what what else is that that has this exact order blackheads Hispanic kids white kids uh Asians well it has exactly that order crime and academics crime and academics and success right they're all perfectly correlated now uh since this is a conservative audience can we conclude that the having the single parent some of this might be a single male parent but can we conclude that the single parent is causing all these problems that a single-parent environment is is causing crime low academics maybe affecting IQ all that stuff somebody's clarifying that these single mothers have been identified as more of the more correlated I think that's true by the way I did see a study that said the single fathers were doing a better job I I don't know but I saw a study so so most of you would say this is pretty strong evidence given that the rate of single Parenthood in these groups seems to almost identically match their performance and output in a variety of ways so it's the Cause right do you is that your does your logic says that this is the cause no they're definitely correlated they correlated but is it a causation I don't see it I don't see it I think there's a cause that causes the single Parenthood that causes everything else isn't it more likely that whatever is causing this is causing everything that that they all have the same cause it's not that the one thing caused the others right so I've never quite agreed with the single parent Simplicity uh right-leading opinion so the right just says look the correlation is really clear single parent house you're going to do poorly period so stop having those single parent houses if you just stop having the the fatherlessness you'll do five because the the facts just show that high correlation I don't buy it I don't buy it I think that whatever causes uh the single parent's situation is probably causing all the other problems it's just one thing whatever it is it's just causing everything now it may not be one thing it might be like a basket of things you know not just one item but whatever it is is probably causing everything all right let me ask you something is this the first time anybody ever said in front of you that the single pair of thing might be just another thing that's caused by some other thing is it the first time you've heard that because that would be very sad now and and let me let me be clear I'm not ruling out that the single pair of thing is actually the cause of the other things I'm not ruling it out I'm saying it's just not demonstrated it's just correlation it's just not causation it might be it might be let me give you a um a different way to look at it now this is this is not I'm not saying this is true this is not a claim of Truth this is just so you could think of like a mental experiment suppose the way mothers Act is completely different among the the three entities if you married an Asian woman do you think she would treat her man better than if you married a Black Or Hispanic woman now again in each of these cases I'm not making a claim there's something different about the people so I'm not making that claim I'm just walking you through a mental experiment where you could imagine that there's something causing all of it to happen so anecdotally most men would say the Asian woman treats the man better so is a man more likely to stay married if he's treated well what do you think yes so the problem is not the single stuff maybe the problem is whatever caused you to be single in the first place Maybe maybe the mom is defective Maybe so and when I say defective I don't mean DNA I'm not saying that I'm saying that maybe there's a difference in how people act for whatever reason you know you you could have your own reason for why they act that way but they do act different right do you think Asian-American kids stop by the police acts exactly the same as the black 19 year old stop by the police does anybody believe that does anybody believe that no no you're not allowed to say it I mean I can say it because I got a disgraced and canceled so I could just say it out loud there's nobody in the world who believes that a 19 year old black kid on average right individuals yes anything you say about a group doesn't apply to the individuals but as a group there's nobody in the world nobody black nobody Asian who thinks the average Asian kid acts just the same in a police stop as the average black kid nobody believes that now I don't know why I actually don't know why if I did I'd give you some speculation I don't know why but it's just obvious so why would they get the same outcome if you act differently how can you possibly get the same outcome as somebody said the other day why do we talk about culture you know this is my culture and I want to protect my culture if you don't act different isn't the whole point of a culture is that you act different so if you're acting different and getting different outcomes it's supposed to work that way that's exactly how it's supposed to work you act different you get different outcomes so I don't to me none of this is too surprising culture would explain it I don't know if that is the explanation but it would explain it I mean it fits the facts but then you have to go back to another level what causes the culture what causes the culture I would say density as much as anything if you looked at the culture of low-income black people living in high density areas does it look just like the low-income black people who are living in less dense areas in the countryside for example probably not I mean they might like to say music yeah that's about it so I think density might be uh the underlooked the under appreciated variable nobody ever talks about that density population density mushrooms are all the Zeitgeist now everybody seems to be talking about it at the same time so Australia is the first nation to approve psychedelics as treatment for conditions such as PTSD so various mental conditions but apparently according to the story a patient will still have to jump through hoops to get it which is not a you know you would expect that right you'd have to do a lot of process to be eligible to get it but that's beginning now at the same time that Australia is legalizing it in limited way uh there's a story on CNN where the CNN correspondent went to I think it was Jamaica where it's legal and uh did a story in which he was observed doing mushrooms can you imagine any world in which CNN would have their their own host go to another country so that it's legal and take a Dr take an illegal drug illegal in this country uh and then just do a story about like how a felt and what he learned and stuff doesn't that seem amazing to you and it was a it was a positive story so the the bottom line was you know nothing bad about mushrooms but the fact that CNN is you know really the representative of the mainstream in many ways they're basically saying mushrooms yes did you see that coming that's the most unusual outcome that the mainstream is seeing mushrooms as it's it's time to go time time to legalize them it's quite it's quite quite a surprise because I think a lot of people on the right have been there for a long time yeah just in terms of Freedom yeah why don't why don't I have the freedom to put my body what I want not all the people on the right but you know the the freedom loving ones I saw an argument on uh also CNN uh that Trump's declassification argument is bunk and the idea is that Trump is claiming that he can declassify anything just by removing it I agree with that so I agree with Trump's stake that if there's no if there's no written uh law and it's up to the president then he can do what he wants but apparently during the Obama Administration uh there was an executive order that was created that did give some guidelines about how to handle classified stuff and apparently Trump did not follow those guidelines but here's my question not being a lawyer does a president have to follow an executive order how does that work it's an executive order it's like the president's order now if it comes from a prior president like I get it that that stays in place until it gets changed but if you're talking about the president does the president have to do what another president ordered which the new president could could reverse just by writing a piece of paper because if Trump didn't follow those executive orders it's just a paperwork problem because he could have simply written on a piece of paper I rescind this executive order right he had the full power to rescind it I think it's an executive order yeah they're not laws and so if so if Trump ignored it would that be breaking a law or is that ignoring an executive order that he could have made go away with a stroke of a pep it looks like you just cut a corner it doesn't look like the worst problem in the world yeah all right well I just wanted you to hear that argument unless it comes up because you're never going to hear it in the right-leaning press but it doesn't look convincing to me so here's my bottom line you can't put my president whether it's Biden or Trump or anybody else you can't put my president in jail when lawyers can't agree what the law is you can't will not happen will not happen and furthermore if the public isn't allowed to see these documents I get I get why we're not allowed to see them but you can't put them in jail if we can't see them now I would be willing to allow that if Republicans have access to it people who had security clearance and it was a set of Republicans you could trust you know if you let your you know uh let your Thomas Masseys in there or your Tom Cottons or people basically you would trust if they said yeah this is bad you know I hate to say it but you know we've looked at these documents and it's way worse than we thought they would be God admit they're bad I believe that the Republicans would do that I would trust them not everyone not everyone but there is a handful of Republicans that could have the right clearance that I would say all right I don't need to know but you know and I'm going to take your word for it I would go with that but I'm definitely not going to listen to Democrats who say it's bad and they can't show it to me right so you can't put my president in jail over documents that at least people I believe haven't seen and lawyers can't even decide if a law is broken uh Andrew you're very dumb but I'd like to mock you for a minute Andrew says Scott Adams says never voted sucks all right first of all that's not true I have voted yet last week he said we all need to vote LOL did I say you all need to vote I don't remember saying that I think you got two or three hallucinations going there at once but yeah I voted the reason I don't vote is that I have voted did I tell you I voted for when I voted for president Jimmy Carter Jimmy Carter and do you know what I learned after I voted for Jimmy Carter what did I learn tell me tell me what did I learn when I voted for Jimmy Carter that I don't know enough to vote yeah I learned that I'm bad at voting didn't help did I make anything better by my vote no I made the world worse if anything and Dapper Dale believes the 4chan hoax about my pandemic opinions Dapper Dale you're you're very gullible he just wants to say the same thing over and over again we'll hide you you are now hidden Dapper goodbye good he's gone board dapper um all right that ladies and gentlemen is all I wanted to tell you today and uh thanks for joining and just remember debates are good and if science won't go to your debate science gets to lose science loses I think the last credibility of science was removed today now if the if the debate or something like it happens then I'll change my mind but Dr.

Hotes destroyed science completely today I feel like one person destroyed science because when I see that he's unwilling to debate I I get his you know like I said I understand the subjections to it but they're not good enough they're not good enough if science can't defend itself then we can ignore it if it's so weak that it can't defend itself you can ignore it which would be terrible of course so all right uh is there a video or transcript of my meltdown at the Starbucks probably they probably have internal security but it was it wasn't as spectacular I didn't raise my voice when I say it was a meltdown uh I wasn't shouting I was just getting in his face with with some some truth all right that's all we got now and I will talk to you tomorrow You.

Tube

on my phone

good morning everybody and welcome to

the highlight of human civilization it's

called coffee with Scott Adams today the

special June teeth Edition happy

Juneteenth and if you'd like to take

your Juneteenth up to all new levels of

Awesomeness all you need there's a

couple of mug or a glass of tanker

jealous of Diana canteen jug or flask a

vessel of any kind fill it with your

favorite liquid I like coffee

join me now for the unparalleled

pleasure the dopamine of the day the

thing that makes everything better it's

called the simultaneous sip go

ah

yeah

well I have to admit it was only a few

short years ago that I learned what

Juneteenth was

never heard of it

was not anything I learned about but

given now my understanding it's the last

day of slavery in the last state I think

it was Texas it had it I say that is

very celebratible

Freedom's always celebratible and

that seems to me like a good celebration

so let's celebrate freedom

uh it is however not a work holiday for

cartoonists

do any of you get today off

is anybody taking the day off

or does it not work that way it's not

it's not a

it's not a national holiday right

yet

probably will be

I feel like June is a little light on

holidays

are you with me do you feel like June

just yeah they could use just a little

bit more holiday not enough holidaying

going on in June

I mean there's my birthday and that that

does cover a lot of the month

all right let's talk about uh blinken's

trip to China uh gigantic failure of

course

uh let's see he asked them if they would

stop Fentanyl and they said nothing

asked them if he would uh ask Johnny if

they would agree not to give deadly

weapons to Russia

which they've been saying all alarms so

that was nothing new

and then he asked them if they'd like to

have like an emergency

deconfliction phone call sort of like a

like the the red phone or the hotline to

the Kremlin and China said nah

[Laughter]

no seriously we should have like a

special phone call for deconflicting so

we don't have an accidental nuclear war

president XI yeah

yeah you have my number

call me if you need anything

so I would say that was a big old

nothing but uh blinken's concept and

apparently Biden's concept is that you

need to you need to be continually

dealing with the Chinese because there's

a better chance of getting a good

outcome if you're talking

if you're talking

I completely disagree with this

and I'll tell you what I would do I

would close all of our embassies and

send every Chinese student home

unless they fix Fentanyl

because the problem here

let me explain how government works to

the government

is that they've treated fentanyl like

it's just one other problem

it's not

it's not like any other problem

well we're we're at we're acting like

friends and all is on our list of

negotiating topics

you know when we go to talk to them

about uh trade

and our trade in the situation let's

throw fentanyl in there

because that's just another that's just

another thing to negotiate right

just throw it in there with the list you

got uh we got this and that and that and

then a little fentanyl let's talk about

that too

no

no

fentanyl is not like anything else on

the list

is not

you don't go into a negotiation with

somebody who's shooting your family

members while you're negotiated

do you

no you say first you stop shooting my

family members

and then we'll have something to talk

about

but you don't you don't act like

everything's business as usual while

they're killing your family

but we are

now autobind business as usual if we're

worrying about you know a trade War

that's yeah that's just business

but if they're killing people

right now

you don't negotiate nor do you keep your

embassy open you close your

Embassy and you say we'd love to talk to

you but you're going to stop this first

period

period and and the fact that this is

just put on the list with other stuff

it's like oh we'd like you to do this

and that and we'll just throw that on

the list to you maybe if we'd someday

talk about all of it together in some

comprehensive way no

no

you close the embassy

you just walk away and say you want

nuclear war you're on the way

you're on the way

because it is a war it's a hot war and

acting like it's not is ridiculous

so Lincoln total failure I'd like to

also say this about his name

when you're going to send somebody to

negotiate with your biggest adversary

would you like the last name of the

person who does your negotiating

to be Trump

or blinken

he went into the negotiation and he was

well he was blinking

but the other guy went into the

negotiation and Trump he trumped him he

dropped him

we should at least get the right the

names right

all right the big news everybody's

talking about it on the internet today

is that uh uh Joe Rogan challenged a

noted

vaccine pro-vaccine scientist guy named

uh Dr Hotes I think from from Sega right

h-o-t-e-z I think hotels maybe

and uh

Dr hotez Who I'd never heard of before

how many of you had ever heard of Dr

hote's prior to

this situation with Joe Rogan

okay a lot of you had all right this is

a real good example of the news bubble

because I saw some compilation clips of

Dr Hotes on CNN and MSNBC

where apparently he's been a number of

times

but I don't remember ever seeing him on

Fox News

so he's sort of a bubble situation yeah

so he's probably been one of the darling

Experts of the political left but the

political right probably just froze him

out because he wasn't really on message

for them so the big story is that RFK Jr

has a number of criticisms of

vaccinations in general but also the

covet ones specifically and

and uh would like to debate Dr Hotes on

Joe Rogan or at least Joe Rogan would

like them to debate and a number of

people were putting up money for charity

if they would debate and uh Dr Hotes

seemed to be hesitant but now he's

speaking out about it and he tells us

that a debate would be uh

bad

meaning it wouldn't be useful might even

make things worse

what do you think of that do you think a

debate see is it his issue and let me

give you more detail on his issue his

issue is among other things

that debate doesn't work because that's

not how science works right science

doesn't work

on the best debater wins

would you agree

that's not how science works and as he

points out science works with you know

peer-reviewed papers and experimentation

and you know all the processes of

science so he he says you know you

should do the scientific stuff

nothing debating stuff because the

debate stuff is about persuasion and as

he points out

well what what if the person who's wrong

this is I'm not paraphrasing I'm I'm

boosting his argument what if the person

who is wrong is the most persuasive

does that serve you would the public be

served by the person who is the most

wrong having the best argument

that's an interesting point

and he points out and Mark Cuban is well

that RFK Jr is very persuasive

and though he is an expert at persuading

on this topic and uh he's so good

that he's in the conversation to be

maybe leader of the whole country

like that's that's about his highest

level of persuasion as you could achieve

and so if you're a scientist who does

does work on TV but you're not really

the media expert like RFK juters is it

fair

to put in his words the strong argument

with the less persuasive person on the

same venue do you think that would serve

the public

I'm just going to go more with his

argument then we'll talk about the other

side

um and I think he makes a good point

that science is not about rhetoric and

persuasion

right

that's not what science does it's not

it's not a persuasion field

but I would argue as I have in the past

that if it doesn't

also learn to persuade honestly not not

persuade dishonestly but if science

doesn't learn to persuade honestly

it actually becomes useless

oh what good is it if you can't persuade

anybody to believe you it takes the

entire value of science off the table oh

yeah it's a good study I don't believe

it

um

let's see

then the other complaint is that RFK Jr

has a

habit of moving the goal posts

meaning Dr Hotes believes that once he

Nails him down and makes his good points

that instead of just winning the debate

then RFK Junior would just change it to

another thing and he gave some examples

of that he actually gave some specific

examples of where in his mind RFK Jr

used to make a claim of you know some

element of the vaccinations being bad

but then he changed it to well they're

still bad but maybe it's something else

then still bad but maybe it's a

different thing and then still bad but

maybe it's for a different reason

which is a good point

perfectly good point now did Dr Hotes

make good points which are true

good points which are true and logical

yes he did those are true in logical

points

yeah those are true and logical it's

true that that people like to move goal

posts it's probably true that RFK Jr has

modified his opinion over time

probably true it's probably true that

the most persuasive person

if they had the worst argument that

would be a problem

the most persuasive person with the

worst argument definitely would not move

the ball forward

but here's where I have my problem with

Dr hotes's problem with the debate

you don't think you could find a way to

manage that stuff

you don't think you could find any way

to structure a conversation where you

take it take that into account because I

can it took me five seconds to figure it

out here's how you do it

you say RFK Jr you're making some claims

that are you know contrary to the

established science

make three claims no more than three

make three claims of fact

and we'll present them to Dr hotels with

you know a week or two in advance

we're going to have him collect all of

his sources that debunk it

and we're going to show him all of your

sources that make the claim

after he's collected all of his sources

that you know debunk yours

before the debate he's going to show you

his sources that debunk your sources

so that when you both go into the debate

you've seen the sources and you've also

seen the other side's debunk of your

sources and maybe even the response to

the debunk

before the debate

you limit it to three claims and then

you have a Joe Rogan or somebody who

could actually handle an MMA

calling an MMA fight which by the way

could that be more perfect

that Joe Rogan is literally part of his

talent stack includes uh calling of

fights

and yeah who would be I mean it was just

is it just such an interesting talent to

have to go into moderating a debate that

you're actually at MMA you know fight

announcer type guy

uh

so the the task would be this

that every time either one of them tried

to move the goal post or either one of

them sort of got off topic or did sort

of a B2 or brought up something else

about something else it would be Joe

Rogan's job to just stop and stop him

just okay stop

stop

you're you're outside the rules now

you're changing the topic go back get

back to the topic

three points

through whatever whatever RFK is best

three points are whatever they are

because remember how I told you to deal

with laundry list persuasion

which is what RFK Jr does really well by

the way it you know it's a little bit

I want to say it's

dishonest but not exactly dishonest

because there's not necessarily A Lie

involved

it's persuasion that's beyond what it

should be I guess that's what I said a

laundry list of oh all these reasons is

why I'm right like a long list of

reasons looks persuasive before you've

looked at any of the reasons

oh my god there are 10 reasons 10

reasons is way more than one so that

must be a good argument there are 10

reasons

so that's why people use the laundry

list it just automatically looks true

before you even look at it

so I do believe that RFK Jr has a

laundry list approach which is let me

tell you 15 things I know about 15

different vaccinations therefore the

16th one is bad

no he never said that but you know you

understand that how the laundry list

could be then sort of generalized beyond

what it's supposed to do

so

as long as you can say RFK Junior make

your three best claims because if you

can't defend your three best

does anybody need to look at the others

right

if he can't defend his three best claims

his three strongest claims if he fails

on those you don't really need to listen

to the others

do you now there may be somebody else

who has a good argument for the others

but if somebody fails on their top three

their best points

you don't need to listen to anything

else

so I would say that the easy way to go

forward is to say three topics make sure

you've both shared all of your sources

both the source and the debunks make

sure you both have seen all of your URLs

and all of your sources

and then come on and talk to us with no

end to the conversation so you won't

have a timed end you don't want somebody

to run out and then you might schedule a

follow-up

make sure it's a it's a two event

situation one is the event

and then maybe a faster follow-up it's

like okay you know people thought you

won or people thought you want or the

the audience really was obsessed over

this one point you made can you go back

to that

then I think we'd have something

now I agree that debate is not how you

solve science

I get that I mean the Dr hote's

arguments are logical and true

but they don't really handle the fact

that you could manage those problems so

that's what's left out

it's true that he's identified the

problems

quite accurately

it's not true that there's no way to

handle those problems to minimize them

until you've got something useful to do

now suppose somebody took all of my

excellent ideas that I just gave you

put them together they do the event and

it just doesn't work

what would be your conclusion from that

it just that didn't work

no my conclusion would be you keep

trying

so maybe maybe one of the participants

is weak for whatever reason and then you

say all right well one of you is strong

one of you kind of couldn't handle this

this debate concept so we'll bring in

another one we'll bring in your your

best Champion that isn't the one who

failed

and that could be on either one not not

just the scientist could be the

anti-vaccination person is a different

person by the way let me correct that

it is unfair to call RFK Jr

anti-vaccination you all get that right

everybody agree

that is not of that is not an accurate

characterization of him but we we use

that as a shorthand to say that he's a

Critic of much of what we do with

vaccinations but very important it's

very important to make that distinction

because if you're just anti-vaccination

you're probably just an idiot

right that's probably the whole story

but but if you're saying well it looks

like some of this worked

and but other stuff I have questions

then you're talking to a reasonable

person that you could probably work with

right but if somebody's just like every

everything you put in your arm is bad

because firm is bad I don't you can't

really work with that

um

RFK Jr is never going to be satisfied

with vaccine safety good

that sounds like good news

to have him never satisfied with don't

you watch the people out there who are

never satisfied with the safety

that feels like the best situation of

all

uh yeah so RFK Jr is a apparently a

high-end good qualified

lawyer on these various topics so I

think he's won some cases he knows how

to dig into the science pretty well but

he's not a scientist I'd like to see him

talk

now

um

let me test you so you heard my

suggestion

three claims and then let them share

their sources before they even get into

the debate and then make sure there's a

follow-up already scheduled

so that the follow-up you know cleans up

any problems how many of you think that

that would be worth trying

let's see your comments

right you see a lot of yeses on the

locals platform a lot of yeses right and

and would you agree with me that if it

failed

you should try again

just tweak it and try again because this

is the model we need

the model we need is some version of

this if the first version doesn't work

do not throw out the approach

because the the public is so deeply

underserved in in the both sides

situation if you could do anything just

anything that would move you a little

bit toward showing two sides of a story

for the first time ever

it would be

a civilization changing I mean it would

be one of the biggest

you know it would be interesting is that

if musk became the agent of why this

happens right just because he's

influential he's in the conversation if

musk is the one who made this happen you

know some kind of a understanding of a

process to show both sides in a public

way

it would be his greatest contribution to

civilization

and you'd never think of it that way

you'd always think of going to Mars or

building electric cars but if he did

that one thing

just taught us a model

for getting a little closer to

understanding both sides if that's all

he did in his whole life

it would be the greatest contribution to

the civilization

it'd be hard to top

um

but Mark Cuban another billionaire has

gotten into this conversation and I'm

just going to read you uh Mark Cuban's

statements his actual words

because it's a little hard to paraphrase

so I want you to see his actual words

he said trying to bully Dr Hotes is

ridiculous uh Cuban continued quote you

have producers that will prepare you and

you get to control the conversation

meaning Rogan he would be prepared by

producers as would RFK Junior Kennedy

also has a staff ready to prepare him

and those topics are what he talks about

in every speech you both do this meaning

Joe Rogan and RFK you both do this on a

daily basis well Dr Hotes works every

day to try to make things find ways to

help people

um they slammed uh Rogan and Musk for

worsening the the climate you know on

social media and he says uh Joe

uh meaning Rogan Joe you and Elon musk's

Twitter are the mainstream online media

and your platforms have become

everything supposedly wrong with MSM you

are driven by self-interest just like

the MSM always has been accused of Cuban

wrote you both have earned that right

you busted your asses to be great at

what you do and earned all you've

accomplished but don't lie to yourself

and all of us and tell us you are

different you aren't whoa

well somebody woke up on the wrong side

of the bed

don't tell us you're different you're

the same

now do I agree with Mark Cuban or

disagree what do you think

do you think I'm going to agree with

Mark Cuban or disagree which way am I

gonna go

well I'll tell you in general I hate to

disagree with Mark Cuban it's just a bad

play

right disagreeing with people that's

smart isn't a bad it's not a good

strategy in life right so I like to find

ways to agree with smart people just

generally speaking

um I would say the following I agree

with Mark what Mark Cuban says

because I agree with follow the money

vaccine or genetic disposition to

vaccines you know it's an interesting

story but I don't want to get off off

track right now

um

except I did I got off track what was I

saying

see that's the problem with the the

super prompt you know where you pay

money to make a comment is so

destructive to the like the flow

I I I think I think YouTube should

remove that

I mean I love it when people give me

money

that's cool but I'd rather I didn't get

the money and I'd rather that it just

wasn't available as a as an option that

would be better so I'd encourage you not

to give me money for that

um

all right so I agree with Cuban that

both Joe Rogan and Elon Musk

um are at the very least part of a

process in which following the money is

going to be the predictive

DNA

all right I said that terribly let me

try it again

it is true that Joe Rogan is in a job

where he's trying to make money although

On Any Given topic he may not be

thinking of it that way in other words

on this topic he probably is actually

just thinking what would be good for the

country

but have I told you a million times

that people do have lofty goals that's a

real thing people often have lofty help

the world goals but what they actually

do

is coincidentally exactly what makes

them money

which doesn't make the lofty goals not

real

I think that they're real in the sense

that the person really believes it it's

the only thing they're thinking about

they're not thinking about the money but

coincidentally

people always seem to do what's good for

their money don't they

and Joe Rogan

you know this supporting the Mark Cuban

argument Joe Rogan is doing a job where

the moral audience he gets the better he

does the better Spotify does and so

having a debate would be good for views

so I like the criticism so far that

Rogan is a is a money-making entity and

that may not be fully compatible

with trying to tell people the truth

you agree right

that there's a little bit of conflict

doesn't have to be not necessarily like

it's not guaranteed but you could have a

little conflict between what makes you

money and what's exactly true

and musk of course owns Twitter

so musk would musk also likes big topics

with you know big uh let's say event

related stuff because it's it's a

marketing strategy now do you think that

musk is thinking of it primarily as a

marketing strategy for Twitter

I would say probably not

probably not all indications are he'd

actually like to see the debate he's

probably looking at it just like you and

I are which is wouldn't you like to see

that now I saw I saw a criticism from

somebody else online that it's all about

creating a spectacle and you know the

spectacle doesn't help us everybody just

wants the spectacle

to which I say we love the spectator

but if the spectacle is what draws you

to the information

very good I mean it's just what Trump

does right creates a spectacle and he

draws you to the information he'd like

you to act on

so I don't mind the spectacle part if

you do it right if the only thing you're

doing is a spectacle it's a waste of

time

but if you're a spectacle to get people

and you do it right well two good things

in a row so

so I would agree that there's a money

motive and that imagining that Joe Rogan

or Elon Musk or somehow outside the

influence of

you know the money motive that drives

everything we do

it's a good I would say sort of a

dickish thing to say but

philosophically

I'd agree

but what about

um what about the bullying part

is it bullying to offer somebody a huge

amount of money to the charity of their

choice

to come on television to talk about

their own area of expertise

on the most important question in

America probably you know trusting our

experts

does that seem like bullying

because it's not it's not as if he's

never been on TV

this is somebody who goes on TV looks

like every time he's asked by the major

networks

so

so I'm not buying I'm not buying the

he's incapable

there's there's nothing to suggest that

he wouldn't do a good job representing

his side

and I think it's sort of insulting it's

a little bit insulting to imagine that

he couldn't I mean he has a PHD in an MD

and he's an expert at this field

so and he's been on TV lots of times

doing a good job

I mean really is it believed to say that

that guy

that that guy should talk to somebody

who's got some questions that doesn't

feel like bullying at all like I don't

get it

does anybody else feel as bullied

to me that's exactly the right question

I don't see it at all

right now of course the uh the internet

is bullying again

so just to be clear I don't think musk

and uh musk is just having a good time

with it saying he said on Twitter I

guess he doesn't like charity

is that bully

I mean you're certainly persuading and

cajoling

but I don't I don't say this bullying at

all right so I disagree on that

characterization but you know again

Cuban is talking with some hyperbole

so calling it bullying is not really

something you fat check he's using some

hyperbole so we'll let him get away with

the hyperbole I guess I guess I'll I

will withdraw my objection to that

because you don't want to fact check

hyperbole

you know that right don't don't fact

check the hyperbole there's no point in

that

um

but then Mark Cuban said that Joe Rogan

and Kennedy both have uh staffs to

prepare them

does that feel like a good point

that Kennedy and Joe Rogan both have

like producers and staff to prepare them

that doesn't feel like a good point

because first of all do you think Joe

Rogan would have his producers prepare

him

for that I think they would just make

sure he knew when it was so he'd show up

on time and the cameras are rolling

I do not get the sense that Joe Rogan's

producers are doing a lot of producing

in terms of managing Joe Rogan

do you think that's happening

I mean he does have some one or more

producers I don't know I don't know what

the number is but I think they're just

there to make sure that the show happens

I don't think they're there telling what

they think or say

and

what about RFK Jr do you think RFK Jr

has anyone on this staff who knows more

than he does about the topic

I kind of doubt it

I doubt it

the whole point is that he he is the

topic he's like a walking Encyclopedia

of this topic it's been his life's work

so I don't think that the staff argument

holds and and it's so weak

that it makes me wonder what's behind it

I'll tell you what it makes it look like

it makes it look like Mark Cuban doesn't

want

um

the truth to come out

now obviously he's not thinking that in

a conscious way right because I would

trust Mark Cuban enough that consciously

is about thinking that I guarantee you

he's not consciously afraid that it will

go not his way

but the way he's acting

suggests there might be a subconscious

concern that he might be wrong

and it would be very very bad for

anybody to be on the wrong end of this

conversation believe me when the the

when the rumors started that I was on

the wrong end of everything when 4chan

did their little prank on me

it really makes life difficult

when everybody thinks you're part of

wrecking the world

so I can see why uh there's some

prominent people who were

pro-vaccination again that's not exactly

a good characterization but uh you know

what I mean uh

I think it's a dangerous conversation I

think there are a lot of people who are

worried that these Skeptics have a

better argument

than uh has been presented to the public

so far the wider public

those on the right have seen so much

skeptical content that you wouldn't be

surprised

if RFK Jr won won the debate if you

could say when you wouldn't be surprised

but there are people on the left who

would be hearing things for the very

first time and they would be saying

wait what

so RFK JR could move the needle he's

persuasive enough and he would come well

armed enough that there would be people

hearing stuff that they'd never heard

before and it would be kind of a shock

to their systems

all right

um so our Rogan and musk contributing to

the worsening climate

I don't see that

I do not see Rogan and musk contributing

to a worsening climate I say exactly the

opposite I mean musk is saying

if you're running for president

doesn't matter what side you're on I

want you on Spaces

how is that wrong

you're inviting everybody and giving

them a big platform

trying to get rid of the Shadow Banning

I mean to me it looks like everything he

does is in a positive direction in a bad

way

positive direction

all right

one of the claims about I mean there's a

little side street I'm going to take

what are the claims about vaccinations

by some critics is that they might be

behind the increase in autism

have you've heard that argument right

there's some who believe that some

childhood shots are behind autism

now

you've heard the other explanation for

the rise in autism right

I wouldn't rule that now by the way but

there's another explanation have you not

heard it

is not environment it's no it's not an

environment or pollution

every is enough food

uh old dads is one right the age the age

of the parents is one there's another

one that's related to that

not medications not chemicals not

telomeres not old sperm well the old

sperm we just talked about

wow I feel like

no there's another reason

how do you not all know this

so I guess so I'm going to give you

something to fact check okay

uh Elon Musk says he has two kids on the

Spectrum and of seven seven children two

out of seven

Elon Musk says it's inheritable

so that he's the reason to have his gets

at it

do you think he's right that it's

inheritable

do you believe it is inheritable two of

his kids

I would say yes

yeah I I feel we don't you know I'm not

a scientist but I feel that's probably

true all right now what would happen if

two Elon musks got married

so there's a female Elon Musk let's say

unrelated but basically safe

um

and he marries another Elon Musk do the

odds of having a autistic kid go up

if there are two contributors instead of

one

logically yes right again

I don't have a study that proves it but

logically you'd expect it now number two

in our modern world

can the Elon Musk male and female find

each other more easily

do it do we have a civilization in which

if you're a smart Elon Musk type you

could easily find your your matching

female Elon Musk yes it's called going

to work

because if you go to work at Microsoft

you walk down the hallway and there's

all these other Elon musks

you find a female one you marry him and

now you've got two Elon musks do they

have more autistic kids and kids on the

Spectrum I believe the answer is yes

now this is what I need to fact check on

I thought that was well established

is it not

so am I wrong that that's not so well

established it's just

true

but I was surprised that most of you

were not aware of that at least claim

again I'm not going to say it's true but

I'll say that the claim has been out

there for

20 years

20 years I think

and I don't see anything wrong with it

to me that seems so obvious so obviously

true that it would take quite a bit of

science to talk me out of it I could be

talked out of it if they found some way

to test it and it was reliable

but it seems to me that you don't need

any vaccinations to explain it the rise

of technology companies brought male and

female Elon musk's together they married

and had kids and that's the end of the

story

and then there's also the other part

that people are having children older

so if they're a little bit older

they're more likely I guess

um I saw a paid comment go by

that uh

Mark Cuban is also a investor in or

owner of I don't know which it is of

this male what would you call it drugs

by mail company I forget what it's

called so he's got cheap drugs

generics I guess that you can get

through him that's competing with the

rest of the industry so so you should

understand that he's in the business of

selling

pharmacy from us

pharmaceutical products

and that might have it that might have

an impact on his public opinion on this

stuff

it's not directly related

but you should assume that he you know

he's in that world that's part of the

story

I always like it when uh

I see my uh my billionaire is arguing

it's always productive to me

to see that all right Jordan Peterson is

warning uh Lex Friedman that he could

get kicked off of YouTube

for doing certain kinds of things such

as

talking to Skeptics and this these are

the things that Jordan Peterson and I

guess the daily wire Plus have gotten in

trouble for recently

they've removed Jordan Peterson's

interview with RFK Jr

they they took it off of YouTube

as a citizen of the United States

it has been judged that you cannot see

Jordan Peterson talking to a major

presidential candidate

I I think I think my mind is going to

explode

how is that possible

like what could RFK Jr have said

that isn't the Public's not just right

to know

but we should have a pretty big interest

in knowing what did he say that's so

horrible that he had to remove it

was a vaccination skepticism

that's it and and who decided he was

wrong

who at YouTube

was the person who could look at rfk's

argument and Junior's argument and know

it's wrong which which major scientist

did that

I mean everything about this seems just

so

so wrong

now I'm not saying that everything RFK

Jr said is accurate I'm not qualified to

judge but I'm pretty sure YouTube

doesn't know

and I'm pretty sure he's a major

candidate for president who has an

actual path to the office unlike you

know some who don't have a path

yeah

so anyway uh also got kicked off

when Jordan Peterson interviewed Matt

Walsh

and Helen Joyce I don't know who Helen

Joyce was was she in the trans which

field is she in Helen Joyce I didn't see

that interview

well whatever it was it was too

controversial for

for a YouTube and the weird thing about

this is

it it's like they don't have any idea

who Jordan Peterson is

somehow

because correct me if I'm wrong

but if Jordan Peterson saw some

unscientific

he'd be the one to call it out

am I wrong

like who would be more qualified

to stop somebody from saying some just

total

that him

I I can't imagine who who I would be

happier with you know monitoring what

information is considered credible for

me

I mean I would trust him completely

which doesn't mean he's right and it

doesn't mean he's right but he's

qualified to understand what looks like

in the scientific realm and if

he calls it out I'd say oh okay there's

somebody who knows some when he

sees it he just called it out but if he

doesn't call it out

I would like to know that too

if somebody as smart as Jordan Peterson

listens to an argument that's counter to

the mainstream argument and he says you

know

that's good enough to be on my podcast I

don't know if it's right

but it's a good enough point to be on my

podcast

I'd like to know that

so YouTube

I get that you're trying to you know

keep the world safe

I get that

and if he had if they had demonetized

these things I understand that as well

because the advertisers do have a

preference of not being associated with

certain kinds of content

that's his business

so if they demonetize that that's a

whole different argument

but removing it

removing it

and that seems so far over the line

of what of what society would expect of

you

YouTube now maybe there's a you know I'm

only hearing one side of the argument

maybe there's something I don't know

about in this but I doubt it

all right uh

CNN got fact checked on Twitter which I

love the community notes thing

um CNN tweeted uh black fathers are

often portrayed as absent or distance or

distant but that isn't what most people

experience according to both data and

black dads themselves

uh blah blah bias portrayals and then

Community notes fact check them with the

following facts there's 64 percent of

black kids have single parents single

parent homes

42 percent of Hispanic

24 of white

and 16 percent of Asian have a single

pair of home

does the order of those things remind

you of the order of any other thing

what what else is that that has this

exact order

blackheads Hispanic kids white kids

uh Asians well it has exactly that order

crime and academics

crime and academics and success right

they're all perfectly correlated

now uh since this is a conservative

audience

can we conclude that the having the

single parent some of this might be a

single male parent but can we conclude

that the single parent is causing all

these problems

that a single-parent environment is

is causing crime low academics maybe

affecting IQ all that stuff

somebody's clarifying that these single

mothers have been identified as more of

the more correlated I think that's true

by the way I did see a study that said

the single fathers were doing a better

job I I don't know but I saw a study

so so most of you would say this is

pretty strong evidence

given that the rate of single Parenthood

in these groups seems to almost

identically match their performance and

output in a variety of ways

so it's the Cause right

do you is that your does your logic says

that this is the cause

no they're definitely correlated

they correlated but is it a causation

I don't see it

I don't see it I think there's a cause

that causes the single Parenthood

that causes everything else

isn't it more likely that whatever is

causing this is causing everything that

that they all have the same cause it's

not that the one thing caused the others

right

so I've never quite agreed with the

single parent

Simplicity uh right-leading opinion so

the right just says look the correlation

is really clear

single parent house you're going to do

poorly period so stop having those

single parent houses if you just stop

having the the fatherlessness you'll do

five because the the facts just show

that high correlation

I don't buy it

I don't buy it I think that whatever

causes uh

the single parent's situation

is probably causing all the other

problems

it's just one thing whatever it is it's

just causing everything now it may not

be one thing it might be like a basket

of things you know not just one item but

whatever it is is probably causing

everything

all right

let me ask you something is this the

first time anybody ever said in front of

you

that the single pair of thing might be

just another thing that's caused by some

other thing

is it the first time you've heard that

because that would be very sad

now and and let me let me be clear I'm

not ruling out

that the single pair of thing is

actually the cause of the other things

I'm not ruling it out I'm saying it's

just not demonstrated

it's just correlation it's just not

causation it might be

it might be

let me give you a

um a different way to look at it

now this is this is not I'm not saying

this is true this is not a claim of

Truth this is just so you could think of

like a mental experiment

suppose the way mothers Act is

completely different among the the three

entities

if you married an Asian woman

do you think she would treat her man

better

than if you married a Black Or Hispanic

woman

now again

in each of these cases I'm not making a

claim there's something different about

the people so I'm not making that claim

I'm just walking you through a mental

experiment where you could imagine

that there's something

causing all of it to happen

so

anecdotally

most men would say the Asian woman

treats the man better

so is a man more likely to stay married

if he's treated well

what do you think

[Laughter]

yes

so the problem is not the single stuff

maybe the problem is whatever caused you

to be single in the first place

Maybe

maybe the mom is defective

Maybe

so and when I say defective I don't mean

DNA

I'm not saying that

I'm saying that maybe there's a

difference in how people act

for whatever reason you know you you

could have your own reason for why they

act that way but they do act different

right do you think Asian-American kids

stop by the police acts exactly the same

as the black 19 year old stop by the

police

does anybody believe that

does anybody believe that no

no you're not allowed to say it I mean I

can say it because I got a disgraced and

canceled so I could just say it out loud

there's nobody in the world who believes

that a 19 year old black kid on average

right individuals yes

anything you say about a group doesn't

apply to the individuals but as a group

there's nobody in the world nobody black

nobody Asian who thinks the average

Asian kid acts just the same in a police

stop

as the average black kid nobody believes

that now I don't know why

I actually don't know why if I did I'd

give you some speculation I don't know

why

but it's just obvious

so why would they get the same outcome

if you act differently how can you

possibly get the same outcome as

somebody said the other day

why do we talk about culture

you know this is my culture and I want

to protect my culture if you don't act

different

isn't the whole point of a culture is

that you act different

so if you're acting different and

getting different outcomes

it's supposed to work that way that's

exactly how it's supposed to work you

act different you get different outcomes

so I don't to me none of this is too

surprising

culture would explain it I don't know if

that is the explanation but it would

explain it I mean it fits the facts

but then you have to go back to another

level

what causes the culture

what causes the culture

I would say density

as much as anything

if you looked at the culture of

low-income black people living in high

density areas

does it look just like

the low-income black people who are

living in less dense areas in the

countryside for example

probably not I mean they might like to

say music

yeah that's about it

so I think density might be uh the

underlooked the under appreciated

variable nobody ever talks about that

density population density

mushrooms are all the Zeitgeist now

everybody seems to be talking about it

at the same time

so Australia is the first nation to

approve psychedelics as treatment

for conditions such as PTSD so various

mental conditions

but apparently according to the story

a patient will still have to jump

through hoops to get it

which is not a

you know you would expect that right

you'd have to do a lot of process to be

eligible to get it but that's beginning

now

at the same time that Australia is

legalizing it in limited way uh there's

a story on CNN where the CNN

correspondent went to I think it was

Jamaica where it's legal and uh did a

story in which he was observed doing

mushrooms

can you imagine

any world in which CNN would have their

their own host go to another country so

that it's legal and take a Dr take an

illegal drug illegal in this country uh

and then just do a story about like how

a felt and what he learned and stuff

doesn't that seem amazing to you

and it was a it was a positive story so

the the bottom line was you know nothing

bad about mushrooms

but the fact that CNN is you know really

the representative of the mainstream in

many ways they're basically saying

mushrooms yes

did you see that coming

that's the most unusual outcome

that the mainstream

is seeing mushrooms as it's it's time to

go time time to legalize them

it's quite it's quite quite a surprise

because I think a lot of people on the

right have been there for a long time

yeah just in terms of Freedom yeah why

don't why don't I have the freedom to

put my body what I want

not all the people on the right but you

know the the freedom loving ones

I saw an argument on uh also CNN

uh that Trump's declassification

argument is bunk

and the idea is that Trump is claiming

that he can declassify anything just by

removing it

I agree with that

so I agree with Trump's stake that if

there's no if there's no written uh law

and it's up to the president then he can

do what he wants

but apparently during the Obama

Administration

uh there was an executive order

that was created that did give some

guidelines about how to handle

classified stuff and apparently Trump

did not follow those guidelines but

here's my question not being a lawyer

does a president have to follow an

executive order

how does that work

it's an executive order it's like the

president's order now if it comes from a

prior president like I get it that that

stays in place until it gets changed

but if you're talking about the

president

does the president have to do what

another president ordered which the new

president could could reverse just by

writing a piece of paper

because if Trump didn't follow those

executive orders

it's just a paperwork problem because he

could have simply written on a piece of

paper I rescind this executive order

right he had the full power to rescind

it I think it's an executive order

yeah they're not laws and so if so if

Trump ignored it

would that be breaking a law or is that

ignoring an executive order that he

could have made go away with a stroke of

a pep

it looks like you just cut a corner it

doesn't look like the worst problem in

the world

yeah all right well I just wanted you to

hear that argument unless it comes up

because you're never going to hear it in

the right-leaning press but it doesn't

look convincing to me

so here's my bottom line

you can't put my president

whether it's Biden or Trump or anybody

else you can't put my president in jail

when lawyers can't agree what the law is

you can't

will not happen

will not happen

and

furthermore

if the public isn't allowed to see these

documents

I get

I get why we're not allowed to see them

but you can't put them in jail

if we can't see them now I would be

willing to allow that if Republicans

have access to it people who had

security clearance and it was a set of

Republicans you could trust

you know if you let your you know uh let

your Thomas Masseys in there or your Tom

Cottons or people basically you would

trust if they said yeah this is bad you

know I hate to say it but

you know we've looked at these documents

and it's way worse than we thought they

would be God admit they're bad I believe

that the Republicans would do that I

would trust them not everyone

not everyone

but there is a handful of Republicans

that could have the right clearance that

I would say all right I don't need to

know but you know and I'm going to take

your word for it I would go with that

but I'm definitely not going to listen

to Democrats who say it's bad and they

can't show it to me

right so you can't put my president in

jail over documents that at least people

I believe haven't seen

and lawyers can't even decide if a law

is broken

uh Andrew you're very dumb but I'd like

to mock you for a minute

Andrew says Scott Adams says never voted

sucks

all right first of all that's not true I

have voted yet last week he said we all

need to vote LOL

did I say you all need to vote

I don't remember saying that I think you

got two or three hallucinations going

there at once

but yeah I voted the reason I don't vote

is that I have voted

did I tell you I voted for

when I voted for president

Jimmy Carter Jimmy Carter

and do you know what I learned after I

voted for Jimmy Carter

what did I learn

tell me tell me what did I learn when I

voted for Jimmy Carter

that I don't know enough to vote

yeah I learned that I'm bad at voting

didn't help did I make anything better

by my vote

no I made the world worse if anything

and Dapper Dale believes the 4chan hoax

about my pandemic opinions

Dapper Dale

you're you're very gullible

he just wants to say the same thing over

and over again

we'll hide you

you are now hidden Dapper goodbye

good he's gone

board dapper

um

all right that ladies and gentlemen is

all I wanted to tell you today

and uh

thanks for joining

and just remember

debates are good

and if science won't go to your debate

science gets to lose

science loses I think the last

credibility of science was removed today

now if the if the debate or something

like it happens then I'll change my mind

but Dr Hotes destroyed science

completely today

I feel like one person destroyed science

because when I see that he's unwilling

to debate

I I get his you know like I said I

understand the subjections to it

but they're not good enough

they're not good enough if science can't

defend itself then we can ignore it

if it's so weak that it can't defend

itself

you can ignore it

which would be terrible of course

so all right

uh is there a video or transcript of my

meltdown at the Starbucks

probably they probably have internal

security

but it was it wasn't as spectacular I

didn't raise my voice

when I say it was a meltdown

uh I wasn't shouting

I was just getting in his face with with

some

some truth

all right

that's all we got now and I will talk to

you tomorrow YouTube