Back to episode — Episode 1325 Scott Adams - Biden's Press Conference Scorecard, I Announce Identifying as Black
Context —
around the world. It happens now. Go. I can feel that cargo ship starting to be dislodged. One sip. That's all it took. Amazing. Well, let's talk about all the news. So first of all, let's talk about that giant cargo ship because it's the only fun thing that happened this week. Now that you don't have Trump in the news so much, you have to wait for a cargo ship to draw a giant penis in the ocean…
← Previous segment →per? And I thought, well, that's crazy. Yeah, we'll figure it out. We're not going to run out of toilet paper. Well, here we are.
So Greta Thunberg, you all know her. How dare you. She tweeted an article and said China continues to build coal-fired plants at a rate that outpaces the rest of the world combined. Combined. They're building more coal-powered plants than all the rest of the world combined, more than three times what was brought online everywhere else. So China looks to be wrecking the whole planet with their coal plants. But there doesn't seem to be anything we can do about it, so I guess we're just going to watch that happen.
Yeah, but I feel as though they've got a real problem there. It seems like the air pollution is going to make them do something differently pretty quickly, because what would be the point of building a city you couldn't live in because of the air? But that's what they got. More about China later.
So Ted Lieu, he tweeted this about the Biden press conference. He said, "President Biden did a terrific job. Totally objective. He did a terrific job at the press conference. He explained the actions his administration took to help the American people, and he set bold new goals to move our nation forward." Well, that's pretty good. Sounds pretty good.
But then he added to his tweet, "Also, he didn't tell people to inject bleach to get rid of the coronavirus." Okay, that's not so good. And I asked myself, does Ted Lieu actually believe the bleach-drinking hoax still? Still? I mean, I kind of understand how you could get Rupar'd by it temporarily. You all know what being Rupar'd means. It's named after Aaron Rupar at Vox. If you get Rupar'd, it means you take a video out of context to make it look different than what it really was there.
So the drinking-bleach hoax was caused by a Rupar. They just took the middle of what Trump said, and they lopped off where he said he was talking about light, and then they lopped off the end where he clarified he wasn't talking about injections. He was talking about light. So you just get rid of that, and then people like Ted Lieu still believe that there was something about drinking bleach in there. And even bleach wasn't even mentioned in that context.
So here's what we can do about this. Here's how you handle the bleach-drinking hoax. Are you ready? Number one, the existence of the verb "to Rupar" turns it from a concept that's hard to explain. Well, you know they can make it look different if you remove this editing. But if you put a word on it, just the way our brains are organized, as soon as it has its word "to Rupar," R-U-P-A-R, Rupar, once you have a word for it, people's brains interpret it as more of a thing because it's got a word. Now this is a persuasion trick that I like to use a lot. Anything that doesn't have a word, you can't persuade on it. It's just got to be boiled down to a word, because words have their own persuasive power. They carry it with them. So until it's a word, yeah, like "borked." Exactly. Somebody's using "to bork." So having the word helps.
Now when people say, "Hey, he said drink bleach," you say to them, "Oh, dude, you got Rupar'd. Dude, you got Rupar'd." And bad. Do you see how much more persuasive that is? Because if you say your facts are not technically correct, has that ever changed anybody's mind? No. Because the facts, they'll just say the facts are wrong. You'll say, look, I'm making a claim about what he said. Here's the video. Here's the transcript. I'm not making this up. It says right here he's talking about light in his own words. You can see it on video. Would that change anybody's mind about what they saw? You'd think so, right? You think that if somebody thought something was X and you showed it right to their face, you let them hear it and see it, that they would then think, oh, okay, not X. I guess I got Rupar'd. I didn't know it. That will never happen in as long as you're alive. And once somebody gets committed to the argument, cognitive dissonance will be their path.
And I was watching some well-informed Twitter user who may or may not be watching this at the moment dismantle somebody in the Twitter feed who believed the h
Context —
oax. And he was just quoting the actual transcript to just dismantle it. Now, did the person then say, oh, well, thank you for clarifying? Nope. Nope. Did not. He just went into a cognitive dissonance spiral and just became temporarily insane. And that's what you'd expect. That's exactly what cognitive dissonance is. It's like a weird insanity hallucination that pops up when your self-image doesn'…
Next segment → →