0:00

This episode is brought to you by

0:02

Experian. How many subscriptions do you have?

0:04

It might take you longer than you

0:06

think to figure it out. These days

0:08

it's far too easy to get a

0:10

load of subscriptions that you might completely

0:13

forget about. That's why I love services

0:15

like Experian. It's like a

0:17

personal assistant for your subscriptions. Experian can

0:19

cancel over 200 plus

0:21

subscriptions in categories like streaming

0:23

services, meal kits, entertainment apps,

0:25

and more. You can save

0:27

an average of $270 per

0:30

year. Plus, they'll even let

0:32

you know if your provider offers

0:34

you a better deal to stick

0:36

around. It's time to take control

0:38

of your subscriptions. Download

0:40

the Experian app. Results may

0:42

vary. Not all subscriptions eligible.

0:44

Savings not guaranteed. $270 a

0:46

year average. Estimated

0:50

savings with one plus

0:52

cancellation. Paid memberships with

0:55

connected payment accounts required.

0:57

See experian.com for details.

1:00

This episode is brought to you by Crash

1:02

Champions. Getting an erect sucks.

1:05

There's not much else worse for your

1:08

plans. And that's exactly when you

1:10

need a pro to help you

1:12

out. Crash Champions can answer your

1:14

call and get you back on

1:16

the road quickly and safely with

1:18

trusted collision repair backed by a

1:20

lifetime warranty. They are the fastest

1:22

growing founder-led collision repair company in

1:24

the nation with 650 locations across

1:26

the U.S. It's

1:30

not easy to build a company from the

1:32

ground up. It takes dedication, the right people,

1:34

and care to give your customers the

1:36

highest quality service. And that

1:38

should tell you all you

1:40

need to know about Crash

1:42

Champions. So the next time

1:44

your plans get crashed, ask

1:46

your auto insurance company about

1:48

Crash Champions. Visit crashchampions.com to

1:51

find a location near you. podcast

2:00

by night all day Good

2:05

see my friend. Oh good to see you man strange

2:08

times were living in The

2:11

strangest and getting stranger didn't some shit go

2:13

down today. Didn't we steal the president of

2:15

Venezuela's plane? Yeah,

2:17

I think we just stole his plane. I didn't no

2:20

not us. Okay good the United States So

2:23

someone stole his plane all right, which

2:26

is Kind of an

2:28

act of war. What is that? Was

2:30

he in it? I don't think so. No, I

2:33

think we just stole his plane. Just

2:35

like for a joyride. What's the story? US

2:38

sees his Venezuela president Nicolas Maduro's airplane

2:40

in the Dominican Republic So

2:43

we said nope, we're stealing that How

2:46

does that work? Even if

2:48

you don't get along with like a president of

2:51

a country how disrespectful is it to steal their

2:53

plane this you're right It's an act of war

2:55

like if imagine Xi Jinping landed somewhere. We're like

2:57

we're gonna steal your fucking plane Yeah,

3:00

no chance That's a bully

3:02

move. That's a move you can only do to

3:04

a country like Venezuela Yes,

3:06

right. I'm trying to remember

3:08

exactly what the story was but there

3:11

was a point where Ecuador was acting

3:13

very courageously with respect to Julian Assange

3:15

and there was

3:17

a question about whether the president of Ecuador

3:19

could fly Assange out so that he could

3:21

be outside of the embassy and inside of

3:24

Ecuador proper and I believe

3:26

the reasoning was they couldn't do it because

3:28

they expected the plane to be forced down

3:30

same same issue So

3:32

this says Merrick Garland said

3:34

that the Justice Department sees an

3:36

aircraft We allege was illegally purchased

3:38

for 13 million dollars through

3:40

a shell company and smuggled out of the

3:43

United States For use

3:45

by Nicolas Maduro and his cronies. What

3:48

business is that of ours though? This

3:50

is what I don't understand like if

3:52

it was purchased through a shell company

3:56

Then it was purchased right and was there was

3:58

there a trial that established that This was all

4:01

gotten gains. It's a smuggled out of the

4:03

United States The plane was purchased from company

4:05

in Florida The Justice Department said and was

4:08

illegally exported in April 2023 from

4:10

the United States to Venezuela through the Caribbean So

4:14

we not allowed to sell them planes Is

4:18

that what it is like because we have a problem

4:20

with them would they say how much it cost 13

4:22

million bucks? Yeah, okay, so he's got this 13

4:25

million dollar plane a Dissault

4:28

Falcon 900 ex since been used

4:30

to fly almost exclusively to and

4:32

from military base in Venezuela Justice

4:36

Department said CNN reached out to Venezuelan

4:38

government you asked huh? It

4:41

seems like though. That's like That's

4:43

there's more to it than yeah that

4:45

plane was illegal You shouldn't have

4:48

that plane for years officials have sought

4:50

to disrupt the flow of billions of dollars to

4:52

the regime Homeland Security investigations

4:54

the second largest investigative agency in

4:56

the federal government has seized dozens

4:59

of luxury Vehicles among other assets

5:01

headed to Venezuela So

5:05

there's a US sanction so there's a sanction

5:07

this is it the plane was seized in

5:09

violation of US sanctions with Venezuela and Other

5:11

criminal matters that we're looking at

5:14

regarding this aircraft They

5:16

gonna find a reason to keep it like they stole

5:19

all those boats from all those Russian cats Yeah,

5:22

sorry you're too rich, and you know Putin's right. Give

5:24

me a boat Well, that's the thing

5:26

is there's a hidden story for everything and this

5:28

is about you know Incentivizing the world and we

5:30

in the public don't get to know the real

5:32

story. Don't you think now though? Most

5:35

people I feel like genuinely

5:38

most people are aware There's more to

5:40

the story every story everything in the

5:42

news every time something

5:45

comes up people like what's the

5:47

whole story here? Well, you know

5:49

I coined this term the Cartesian

5:51

crisis and the Cartesian crisis basically

5:53

means the point at which you

5:55

Can't really be certain of anything

5:58

and the problem is yes I do

6:00

think people are catching on to

6:02

the fact that they never know the real story, but

6:05

the response to that is either

6:07

that you start believing the bullshit that

6:09

they tell you or that you

6:11

just become cynical and stop believing anything, and

6:13

neither of those are functional ways to exist.

6:16

And both those ways are good for the

6:18

people that are running scams. Exactly. They're

6:20

good for the people who want to maintain power because it just

6:22

keeps us back on our heels. Yeah, because

6:24

if you don't know what's true and what's not true, you're like, oh, jeez. And

6:28

then you get cynical, oh, it's all bullshit. This whole

6:30

system is rigged. Then you just go fishing. Right. And

6:33

that's the thing people don't understand is that at the

6:35

point that you think you're striking a blow by

6:37

checking out of their system, you're actually doing them a

6:39

favor. Right. It's

6:41

actually beneficial to them because then you have a

6:43

smaller number of people that are voting. So

6:46

essentially in the 2020 elections,

6:49

it was the largest ever

6:52

win, right? The Democrats

6:55

got 80-something million votes,

6:58

which is ... So let's say, even

7:00

if it was 50-50, so somewhere in the

7:02

neighborhood of 160 million

7:04

people, how many people are women in ... I mean, how

7:06

many people are children? Women can vote. What

7:09

am I saying? How many people are children, rather? Oh, jeez.

7:11

I have no idea on the percentage. Under 18. It's

7:13

probably in the 30%. So that's a pretty high

7:16

turnout. Yes, if that was even the turnout.

7:18

If it was real. Yeah. That's

7:20

the problem. We have no idea. I'm

7:23

not convinced. You know why I'm

7:25

not convinced? Because everybody wants me to be convinced. When

7:29

they yell at you, if you ask a

7:31

question, like, hey, one of the things that

7:33

I've always said, and everyone sort of agrees

7:35

with this. I mean, literally everyone, even people

7:37

that think that the election was 100% legitimate,

7:41

the percentage of voter fraud is

7:43

never zero, correct? Right. And

7:46

they're always like, yes. No one can say it's zero. Right.

7:49

It's not zero. There's a bunch of

7:51

slippery people that get arrested on both

7:53

sides of the aisle. Republicans and Democrats

7:55

get arrested for election fraud. It's a

7:57

real crime. The idea that they commit

7:59

all all these other acts of

8:01

fraud and deception, but when it comes

8:04

to elections, Brett, that's a sacred institution

8:06

that we don't violate at any cost.

8:08

Yeah. Well, and the way

8:10

they maintain that story is by ruthlessly punishing

8:12

anybody who questions it, even though questioning it

8:15

is the obvious thing to do. Because

8:17

for one thing, elections used to be different,

8:19

as you remember, right? First of

8:21

all, you used to vote in person, and

8:23

voting by mail was something you were

8:25

very reluctant to do because you knew that if your vote

8:28

got counted, it was going to be very late in the

8:30

process. It wasn't really going to matter. It

8:32

was mostly for soldiers serving overseas. Right, exactly.

8:34

It was for people who just simply couldn't

8:36

vote in person and it never really mattered

8:38

except in very rare cases. The

8:41

disappearance of that and the normalization

8:43

of voting by mail, the

8:46

normalization of voting across a period of

8:48

time so that you're not all voting

8:50

on the same day, and the absence

8:53

of exit polls, right?

8:55

When everybody's voting from home or

8:57

wherever, you can't detect

8:59

fraud by virtue of the fact that

9:01

the count that came in from that

9:04

precinct didn't match what the exit pollers

9:06

registered. Right. And

9:08

so I don't think we are

9:10

wrong to imagine that we have

9:12

lost the ability to check whether an election

9:15

is fair and that that's not an accident,

9:17

that that leaves the possibility open to cheat.

9:20

And as you point out, they cheat in

9:22

every other way. Are we supposed to believe

9:24

that they won't do that because their patriotism

9:26

is so deep? I don't see any patriotism

9:28

to them at all. Well,

9:31

not only that, they've established this

9:33

narrative that it's imperative that the

9:35

Democrats win to save democracy. So

9:38

the Verde made all of these statements

9:41

that it's

9:44

more important for them to win than anything

9:47

more important than anything more important than having primaries

9:50

more important than letting the people

9:52

decide who the representative is more

9:54

important than having like

9:57

live actual conversations interviews

10:00

that aren't edited on CNN and said

10:02

they have a 40-plus minute one that's

10:04

edited down to 18 minutes. Like,

10:07

what? Well, and

10:10

we just went through this with them

10:12

over COVID. We know that

10:15

when they think they're in the right,

10:17

they feel entitled to lie about everything.

10:19

They feel entitled to coerce. So the

10:21

idea that we're supposed to imagine that

10:23

our elections are somehow different to them,

10:25

I can't imagine how that would even

10:27

work. It doesn't make any sense. It's

10:31

one of those things, again, that you're forced

10:34

into agreeing with just out of fear because

10:36

people get very aggressive with it, just like

10:39

people were super aggressive about the vaccine. I

10:43

hate seeing people

10:47

die because they made a poor choice.

10:49

But there's something insane

10:52

about how many people were

10:54

like pro-vaccine advocates that were

10:56

shaming people and angry people.

10:59

And now they're dead. And they're not

11:01

dead because they ran their time and they

11:03

got old and they died. And it's unfortunate,

11:05

but it happens to all of us. No,

11:08

they're dead young, like a lot,

11:10

a lot of people, not one, not 20. We

11:13

don't even know what the real numbers are because it's not

11:16

something the mainstream media covers because they've

11:18

all been vaccinated too. And they're probably freaking

11:20

the fuck out too. Yeah, it's a huge

11:22

number of people. We can detect that statistically.

11:25

The trouble is that it's hard in any

11:27

individual case to know whether or not you're

11:29

looking at something that would have happened anyway.

11:33

So you remember John Ritter

11:36

from Three's Company? Sure. I

11:38

work with him. Oh, you did? Yeah, did an

11:40

episode of News Radio with him. Super nice

11:42

guy. Good guy. Yeah, I

11:44

got that impression. Anyway, he died

11:46

of a ruptured aorta, if I

11:48

remember correctly, long before there

11:50

was COVID vaccines. So the point is, if

11:53

that had happened last year, we'd all be

11:55

saying, come on. Of course. He's in Hollywood,

11:57

he got vexed, and now look at it.

12:00

So it happens. Right?

12:03

But the rate at which it's happening has

12:05

changed radically. And the very people who say,

12:07

oh, that's not the vaccine are very uninterested

12:09

in figuring out what it is. So, you

12:11

know, let's put two and two together. Well,

12:13

they don't even want to consider the vaccine,

12:15

which is so crazy. If you called it

12:17

anything else, if it wasn't

12:19

called the vaccine, if it wasn't

12:22

for COVID, okay, let's, because COVID

12:24

became so politicized and it

12:26

was like culturally so polarizing,

12:29

let's pretend it was for something

12:31

else. And there was some medication and the

12:33

people that were taking that medication were dropping

12:35

like flies. They would 100%

12:38

make a correlation and they would make it publicly and

12:40

it'd be in the news. Of

12:42

course, it might not actually be in the news

12:44

today because this is part of the problem with

12:47

what we're dealing with, with advertising and the media

12:49

is that there's so much revenue

12:51

that comes from pharmaceutical drug companies

12:54

that there's just a reality about

12:56

them reluctant to print or put

13:00

any stores on television that are negative.

13:03

There's too much money involved. Right. There's

13:05

too much money involved and it becomes

13:07

impossible to override this narrative. The narrative

13:09

takes on a reality of its own,

13:11

even though it is contradicted by the

13:14

facts and we, you know, our scientific

13:16

tools are, they're tremendously

13:18

powerful at discovering patterns like this. It's not

13:20

difficult to do and yet we deliberately avoid

13:22

using them in the ways that they were

13:26

intended. Do you think in the

13:28

future we'll look back on this and there'll

13:30

be some sort of a shift

13:34

in the way we discuss it? You

13:36

know, there's a lot of things in history that during

13:38

the time where they were happening, I'm sure people were

13:41

all like the McCarthy era. You

13:43

know, I'm sure people thought it was very important

13:45

to root out these communists, but they didn't exactly

13:47

understand like, Hey, you're calling a lot of people

13:49

communists aren't even communists. You're going after people that

13:51

just went to meetings to find out what's going

13:53

on. The world didn't exactly understand what that even

13:55

meant back then. There's, you

13:57

know, we looked back at it now. the

14:00

Red Scare is like a negative

14:03

thing. It's a dangerous sort

14:06

of negative aspect of our

14:08

history. Yeah, although you

14:10

know I'm sure you're having the same experience. There were

14:12

lots of stuff that you

14:15

learned as a clear narrative like you

14:17

know the Red Scare took over people

14:19

and it was like a witch hunt

14:21

and the answer is actually more nuanced

14:23

than that. There was more truth to it

14:25

than I was taught. Right? The Rosenbergs

14:28

really were guilty of

14:30

passing secrets to the Russians. Oh yeah,

14:32

there definitely was a lot of that.

14:34

So you know it's a mixed story.

14:36

Right. You asked the question though

14:38

if in the future we're gonna have a

14:40

different conversation about what's taking place and I

14:43

just want to put a little placeholder there. The

14:46

answer kind of depends if

14:48

there is a future and

14:51

I worry a lot

14:53

that not only are we

14:56

headed into chaos but

14:58

that we are going to

15:00

be denied the ability to have a

15:02

proper historical account of the present. That

15:04

we're never going to understand what these

15:07

stories were doing, why they played out

15:09

the way they did, you know why

15:11

people disappeared when they did and

15:14

that that's not healthy. You

15:16

need to be able to create a record.

15:18

It's never gonna be perfect but you need

15:20

to be able to create a record of

15:22

what took place that has been exposed

15:25

to some kind of analytical

15:27

standard so that you can correct your

15:29

course. If you don't know what happened

15:32

you can't improve on your thought process

15:34

going forward and that's extremely dangerous. It's

15:36

like you know flying with

15:38

a blindfold. Yeah

15:41

that's a great way to put it and I'm glad

15:43

you did point out the fact that there were really

15:45

things, the red scares a weird example because people

15:48

would like to kind of dismiss the impact

15:50

that the communists especially Russia was having on

15:53

our government and there was a pretty big

15:55

impact. I mean they did steal the plans

15:57

for the nuclear bomb. There's a lot of

16:00

that happened because of actual

16:02

communist interference. But the narrative

16:04

when I was in high school was that the Red Scare

16:06

was bad, right? It was like

16:08

everybody went crazy and they were all

16:10

looking for... Which was true too, but that's

16:13

part of the problem when you don't know.

16:15

Like back then, no internet, very

16:18

little paper trail. It's really hard to

16:20

find out who's talking to who unless

16:22

you get an actual listening device in

16:24

the room and capture them talking. Yeah,

16:27

we can't know. And

16:31

it's important to get your

16:33

comeuppance on these stories. You grow up comfortable

16:35

that you understand what happened during the Red

16:38

Scare. And then one day

16:40

you're doing a little reading and you discover

16:42

the story just isn't the one you were

16:44

taught. And the

16:47

more stories you dig into, the more frequently

16:49

that happens. Well, if you just get one

16:51

good one, you're hooked. For me, it was

16:53

the Kennedy assassination. One good

16:55

book on the Kennedy assassination, I was like, God

16:58

damn it, they killed the fucking president. It freaked

17:00

me out forever. That was

17:02

like, I literally had a giant

17:04

shift in how I viewed the world

17:07

after reading that book. Cuz before that,

17:09

I was never a questioner of whatever

17:12

was in the news or whatever the narrative was

17:14

that we were being told about anything. Well,

17:16

but I mean, I have exactly

17:18

the same reaction to that story and I've been

17:20

down that rabbit hole. And I

17:24

think you're just ultimately left to the question. Something

17:27

happened in 1963. That's

17:30

before either of us were born, right? Right.

17:35

That thing was either an

17:37

anomaly that robbed the nation of

17:39

a president and the

17:41

nation continued to be a democratic republic in

17:43

the aftermath of it. Or that

17:47

was interference with democracy and we

17:49

don't know how to look at

17:51

all of the seemingly democratic things

17:53

that have happened since. How

17:55

much of what has happened since are the

17:57

people who took control with

18:00

that assassination.

18:02

How much is them continuing to maintain

18:04

control with a certain amount of democracy?

18:07

And how much was that an aberration

18:09

that then returned us to our normal

18:11

course? It's a

18:14

good point, a certain amount of democracy. There's

18:17

clearly a certain amount. Yeah. Well,

18:20

which is one of the reasons why they're so terrified of

18:22

Trump? There's a

18:25

certain amount of stealing they can do. Let's

18:29

imagine if it is

18:31

dirty and you really can manipulate

18:33

elections. How much can you manipulate by? Can you

18:35

manipulate it by 30%? We

18:39

don't know. And as long as they can

18:41

have you believing in the polls, this is what's really

18:43

important, polls. Kamala

18:45

Harris is up by 3%. Oh,

18:47

she's up. She's winning. Who

18:50

the fuck are you talking to? Who are you talking to? Right.

18:53

You're not talking to me. What narrative is

18:55

it in which Kamala has done something that

18:57

might have caused a surge in her popularity?

18:59

Like, I didn't see it. Well, some magic.

19:01

It's like, you know,

19:04

there's that theory, that concept about

19:07

multiple dimensions, multiple

19:10

universes that we all live. Oh,

19:12

yeah, multiple universes. Sure. Yeah. There's

19:15

this possibility that there's infinite numbers of universes all

19:17

around us all the time and we enter into

19:19

a different timeline. We entered into a different timeline.

19:22

Well, clearly. I mean- Something happened.

19:26

I think the multiverse thing is nonsense. I

19:28

think it's an accounting scheme for figuring out

19:30

how to deal with the fact that actually

19:32

the universe is not deterministic, which people wrestle

19:34

with because we don't exactly know why it

19:36

isn't. But

19:39

to your point about how much can they

19:41

cheat, I call that factor,

19:43

which none of us can put a number on.

19:45

Maybe they can. Right. I

19:48

call it the cheat factor, right? The cheat

19:50

margin. One

19:52

of the things that I'm trying to convince

19:54

people of is that it's not

19:57

hopeless because they can cheat, but

19:59

it means that- you have to

20:01

succeed at a level that exceeds

20:03

their capacity to erase it. Right, so that's what

20:05

we're talking about. So we're talking about maybe they

20:07

can cheat by 10%. Right,

20:10

and what we know, and

20:12

I think actually we owe

20:15

Trump a huge debt of gratitude

20:17

for proving something that I

20:19

couldn't have told you if it was true

20:21

before he won the presidency, which is, is

20:25

there still enough democracy left in

20:27

the system for something to upend

20:30

the plan? Right, because

20:32

he was clearly off narrative, and

20:34

he did become president, so he did

20:37

something for us that I

20:39

don't know anybody else who could have done it. Yeah,

20:41

it would take a person with that kind

20:43

of personality that could withstand that kind of

20:45

abuse, because he didn't freak out at

20:47

all when they went after him. He was like, eh.

20:50

Right. He just brushed it off like

20:52

it was nothing, and no one's done that. He's also

20:54

the only guy that's ever gone through four years and

20:56

didn't age like he went through 30 years. That's

20:59

true. He aged normal. Yeah. He's

21:02

used to it. He's used to pressure, you know,

21:05

and Bush, he aged a

21:07

ton. Obama aged a ton. Everybody aged a ton.

21:09

Biden was already cooked before he got in, but

21:12

he's hard, but he aged a ton. I mean, Biden

21:14

from 2019 to today is a different person. Yeah,

21:17

and he was already visibly degraded.

21:19

But wow, was it a precipitous

21:21

decline. Big jump now. Yeah. Trump

21:24

was fine. Yeah, Trump physically,

21:26

and actually, I think he

21:28

sounds better. He

21:32

drives me crazy sometimes when he talks, but

21:34

I think he's getting better at it. He's

21:36

trying to be a little bit more reasonable,

21:38

and try to appeal to more people because

21:40

of that effort

21:42

to be more reasonable. He's

21:45

changed his mind about a lot of things. He's

21:47

talking about legalizing marijuana. He's talking about all these

21:50

different things that are like where,

21:52

you know, you're going to get a lot of different

21:54

responses from like the hardcore Republicans are not

21:57

going to be for that. You know, any.

22:00

Any idea of abortion,

22:02

the hardcore right wing, are

22:04

not interested at all. And

22:07

any restrictions on abortion at all, you get your

22:09

hardcore left wing. So it's mostly, it's

22:11

the people in the middle. Abortion's

22:14

a good one, right? Because most people are

22:16

like, no one should be

22:18

able to tell you what you could do

22:20

with your body, but also, aborting an eight

22:22

month old fetus is kind of fucking insane. Yeah,

22:25

I mean, the funny thing, and I've

22:27

been saying this forever, is that almost

22:29

everybody agrees on the basics on

22:31

abortion. We're supposed to not be able to

22:33

even talk about it. But most people believe

22:37

that abortion is negative, that

22:40

if you've got a blastula, right, a

22:43

clump of cells doesn't yet have a

22:45

nervous system, that you have the right

22:47

to terminate that pregnancy, and

22:49

that the farther you go through that

22:51

pregnancy, the less right you have. And

22:54

most people are incredibly queasy about it,

22:56

I think, as they should be in

22:58

the third trimester. And that's what we

23:01

agree on. And so it's really the

23:03

extremists on both sides that

23:06

we are up against. But

23:09

to the question of what Trump is doing with

23:12

an issue like this, I

23:14

wanna make a couple points. One, I think there

23:16

are two issues that are getting tangled. One,

23:20

I think he's politically going

23:23

to some places that are not traditionally

23:25

Republican, because I don't even think,

23:27

I think he's destroyed the Republican Party. I

23:30

just don't see the same Republican Party I remember at

23:32

all. I see a different thing and it's flat. It's

23:34

a MAGA party. Yeah, it's a MAGA

23:37

party, right, exactly. And that's a very different

23:39

thing, because I see MAGA as mostly the

23:42

labor faction that was cut loose by the

23:44

Democrats in the Clinton administration. And so they've

23:46

now found a home under

23:48

MAGA. Interesting, right? Like, because

23:50

blue collar people were generally

23:54

union people which were generally Democrats.

23:56

Totally, and then Clinton turned the

23:58

Democratic Party into a... Second corporate

24:00

party so that those people were homeless

24:02

and then Trump picked them up as

24:04

MAGA and they're now under the Republican

24:07

banner But it doesn't read like the

24:09

Republican Party at all to me and

24:11

now it's picked up a you know, I Don't

24:15

want to say technocratic that's dismissive but

24:17

it's got this this Silicon Valley component

24:19

to it. Yes, that's recent Yep, that's

24:22

reason over the last year. Yep. Yeah

24:25

It is interesting right because we

24:27

did growing up always associate unions

24:29

and blue-collar people with voting Democrat

24:31

because Democrats were Looking

24:34

out for the middle class looking

24:36

out for people's best interests supporting

24:38

unions and fair wages and funding

24:41

schools And all that kind of stuff Keeping

24:43

neighborhood safe and Republicans were more like

24:45

small government. Fuck you figure it out.

24:48

I don't want to pay taxes Yes,

24:50

it's stingy and they were

24:52

the ones that are encouraging war. Yep,

24:54

which is crazy today that

24:56

you have this massive 180 degree shift

24:58

and the Democrats are talking about how

25:01

important it is that we keep funding

25:03

Ukraine and that you know,

25:06

we have some sort of and whether

25:08

you're Pro Hamas or pro Palestine I

25:10

should say or whether you're pro Israel

25:12

there's involvement in that no one to

25:15

say neither No Democrats

25:17

are saying we need to get the fuck out of

25:19

there. Right? They're saying we need to free Palestine. Oh,

25:21

okay How are you gonna do that? How are

25:23

you gonna do that? What do you how much is involved in

25:25

that? Are you gonna bring in people you're gonna

25:28

send people there? Like what are you gonna do?

25:30

You're gonna kill people for this. What

25:32

are we doing? The Democrats are there you guys

25:34

are looking for war You're not looking for peaceful

25:36

solutions Like this

25:38

is kind of weird. This is interesting. You know

25:40

that we need to beat Russia. Are you out

25:42

of your fucking mind? Right serious. Do you know

25:45

how big that place is? Do you know how

25:47

much military force is behind Putin? Are

25:49

you what are you talking about? What are you talking

25:51

about? Like what if he just decides to go nuclear

25:53

at any point in time? if

25:56

he gets pressured you keep advancing further and

25:58

further into Russia and he's like I'll

26:00

just end this right now. I'll

26:02

just turn Kiev into a

26:04

fucking sandbox. Boom.

26:08

And then what do we do? No, it's

26:10

insane. And the hardest part, I'm sure you

26:12

have these people in your life too, but

26:15

let's just take my parents for a second. My

26:17

parents are good people, lifelong Democrats.

26:21

They live in LA, surrounded by

26:23

Hollywood types. They cannot

26:26

seem to grasp the fact that

26:28

the party that they believed in

26:31

is now doing the inverse of everything they

26:33

signed up for. Exactly. Because The New York

26:35

Times rephrases everything,

26:38

so it seems like the values

26:40

are still there. Right, which is

26:42

wild. It's crazy. And

26:44

if you're not a New York Times reader, you

26:47

can barely figure out what these people are talking

26:49

about. Did you see the article that I posted

26:51

on my Instagram that's a title of a New

26:54

York Times article for today? Which one?

26:58

Sandy, pull this up. I want Brett to see this so

27:00

you know this is real. This isn't

27:02

the Babylon B. This is

27:04

an actual New York Times article.

27:09

You see it? Yeah, I had it in the weird spot in the

27:11

yard. This

27:14

is so crazy. It's really hard to

27:16

believe that someone would print this and The New York

27:18

Times would say, yeah, we like it. Put

27:20

it out there. I'm

27:22

not quite sure what to expect. Oh,

27:25

yeah, of course. The Constitution is sacred.

27:27

Is it also dangerous? Right.

27:30

One of the biggest threats to America

27:33

politics might be the

27:35

country's founding document. What the

27:37

fuck are you talking about?

27:39

Yeah. One of the biggest

27:41

threats to America's politics might

27:43

be one of the greatest documents that

27:46

any country has ever found on, if

27:48

not the greatest ever. That

27:51

could be a threat to America's politics. What

27:53

politics are we talking about? How

27:56

could you possibly gaslight me enough to

27:58

go with long term? with you on

28:00

this. Yeah, it's

28:03

incredible. I mean, it's on

28:05

the one hand completely predictable,

28:07

right? Because there's obviously an

28:09

authoritarian force there that just

28:12

grinds its teeth at night over the Constitution and

28:14

the fact that it prevents it from doing things

28:16

that it just wants to do last week, you

28:19

know? And so of course

28:21

they're like scratching their heads like, can

28:23

we come up with an argument for

28:25

why it might be time to get

28:27

rid of that thing? And of course

28:29

if you're a normal thinking person, this

28:31

is complete insanity. But if

28:34

you're a New York Times reader, I'm sure that

28:36

fits with the kind of ethos that's been cultivated.

28:38

Well, this is why a person like Trump is

28:41

so important to them. Because

28:43

if you don't have someone that is

28:45

an imminent threat on the horizon in

28:47

three months, it's very difficult to justify

28:50

all this shit. So

28:52

if you have Kamala Harris and

28:55

she's competing against Ron

28:58

DeSantis, if it's just Kamala Harris and Ron

29:00

DeSantis and Trump doesn't exist, maybe he died.

29:03

Maybe he died in the last few years. How

29:08

could you, you wouldn't be able to make

29:10

that argument? There's no

29:12

imminent threat, right? Let's say

29:14

Mitt Romney. Let's say someone even more

29:16

moderate as a Republican, even more palatable.

29:20

You can't make that argument that we can't

29:22

have a First Amendment because the

29:24

First Amendment is getting in the way. The

29:26

First Amendment is allowing people to say things

29:28

that aren't true, misinformation and disinformation. And

29:31

right here we're September 2nd. I

29:35

think yesterday was the first day

29:37

where Brazil banned Twitter. So

29:40

X is illegal to have in

29:42

Brazil as of today, as of

29:44

yesterday. Not only is it illegal,

29:47

but you go through it through a VPN and

29:49

they will charge you $8,000 a day. I

29:53

know. It's incredible that we

29:56

are watching this. Insane. But I would

29:58

remind you. They

30:00

did pull this stuff when it

30:02

was Mitt Romney, when it was

30:04

George W. Bush. The rhetoric

30:07

was still existential threat,

30:09

and they always have particular

30:11

versions of this. Not

30:13

as ramped up as this is, though. This is like Hitler,

30:16

Hitler talk. They never talked

30:18

about Mitt Romney like he was Hitler. I agree. And

30:21

as I've been saying since the beginning

30:23

of this electoral cycle, they fear Bobby

30:25

Kennedy far more than they fear Trump,

30:27

because actually Trump gives them the only

30:30

argument for their existence that is functional.

30:32

They don't have an affirmative argument for why they

30:35

should be in power, but being the alternative to

30:37

Trump is that's a pitch. So

30:43

we are now somewhere pretty

30:45

interesting in the sense that I

30:48

think to

30:50

the faithful. This

30:52

episode is brought to you by

30:54

Mo's Southwest Grill. Mo's has a

30:57

huge variety of fresh ingredients and

30:59

bold flavors that allow you to

31:01

endlessly customize your burrito, bowl, or

31:03

even try something adventurous like their

31:06

stack full of steak

31:08

or chicken. Don't

31:10

forget to add a cup of their

31:12

famous queso made with three cheeses and

31:14

diced jalapenos or try all

31:17

their free sauces from mild to

31:19

spicy hot. Mo's come

31:21

free with every meal, so go

31:23

ahead and treat yourself. Stop by

31:25

any of your Mo's Southwest Grill

31:27

locations today and welcome to

31:30

Mo's. This episode

31:32

is brought to you by The Killer's

31:34

Game only in theaters September 13th. This

31:38

movie has a hell of a

31:40

concept. Dave Bautista plays a hitman

31:42

who's been diagnosed with a terminal

31:44

illness, so he decides to take

31:46

a hit out on himself. When

31:49

he finds out there's been a mistake and

31:51

he's going to live, all hell breaks loose

31:53

because once you've called in a hit, there's

31:55

no calling it off. This movie's got a

31:57

killer cast of assassins who are out there.

32:00

after him including Terry Crews and

32:02

Ben Kingsley, the guys from John

32:04

Wick 4, Marco Zoror

32:06

and Scott Atkins, plus WWE

32:09

wrestler Drew McIntyre. Don't

32:11

miss the killer's game in theaters

32:13

September 13th. That

32:16

argument still works. But

32:18

to a larger and larger group of people,

32:21

they're seeing right through it. Yeah. They're

32:24

understanding. First of all, we lived through four years of Trump, right? Right.

32:26

They were good aspects. They were bad aspects.

32:29

And it was not distinguished

32:31

as some moment of

32:35

total failure of our system or something.

32:37

Right. There were a lot of elements of it that were very positive.

32:40

Right. That's

32:42

where a

32:44

fun meme is. There's a fun meme that someone made

32:47

about how you're telling

32:49

me that he's going to do these things that

32:52

he didn't when he was in office. And

32:54

you're telling me that you're going to do

32:56

these things that you didn't do and you're

32:58

in office now. Right. Like

33:00

what? And add to that, you're doing

33:02

the things that you're accusing him of

33:05

intending to do. Right. All

33:07

this lawfare stuff. That's frightening. They're

33:09

weaponizing the courts. Yeah. And

33:12

they're weaponizing the courts over what was a misdemeanor

33:14

with... If

33:16

you look at the... Like Bill Ackman had

33:19

a post that he made on

33:21

Twitter laying out the legality of this

33:25

34 count thing

33:27

that they convicted him of. That this

33:30

is essentially an accounting error or

33:32

deception that's a misdemeanor

33:35

that is past the statute of

33:38

limitations. Not only that,

33:40

but I don't think

33:42

you have to really even squint at

33:44

it to see that it's just

33:47

simply unconstitutional to

33:49

point the courts at particular people and

33:51

not other people. Right. We

33:54

have a constitutional right to equal protection

33:56

under the law and obviously they are

33:58

setting a different... standard for Trump because they

34:01

want to keep him tied up in court, maybe they

34:03

want to lock him up and put him in prison,

34:05

but whatever they're doing is un-American.

34:08

It is anti-American. And

34:10

very dangerous because you've set a precedent now. Now

34:13

let's imagine, like we've gone through shifts in

34:15

this country where we leaned heavily left like

34:18

during the Carter administration, it was run by

34:21

serious lefty, you know, and then what

34:23

if now it is

34:25

run by a hardcore right-winger? What if there's

34:27

some sort of an attack on American soil

34:29

and it ramps up patriotism and people get

34:31

real angry and right? You

34:34

know, just like the left has moved

34:36

so far left that if you're not

34:38

in favor of hormone blockers

34:40

for kids, somehow you're

34:42

transphobic and you're a bigot, like somehow

34:44

or another, if you're not in favor

34:46

of that, you're a bigot. What if

34:48

it gets so right that

34:50

if you're not in favor of,

34:53

you know, stops

34:55

and frisks all over the

34:57

country for everyone, then somehow

35:00

or another you're anti-safety

35:02

of the nation. And if you're

35:04

not in favor of no-knock raids

35:06

on people's homes with no warrants,

35:08

then somehow or another you're a

35:10

danger to our democracy. Like, it

35:12

can go really creepy far right,

35:15

just like it's really creepy far left, and then

35:17

they're utilizing the courts, if they

35:19

fill the courts up with a bunch

35:21

of hardcore Republicans, now you're utilizing the

35:24

courts against people in a way

35:26

that you would find very offensive because you've

35:28

made it, you set a precedent. Right. And

35:31

I think actually we are already living this

35:33

nightmare in one way because what

35:36

they did was loaded powers into

35:38

the executive branch that were never

35:40

supposed to be there. They created

35:42

emperor-like discretion and they gave those

35:44

powers to the president. I think

35:46

believing that they would never be

35:48

in the hands of anybody that

35:50

wasn't on their team, right?

35:52

And I'm not talking red or blue. Right. I'm

35:55

talking about inside versus outside. And one of

35:57

the reasons that I think the reaction to

35:59

Trump is... what it was, is

36:01

that he was taking over an office that had

36:03

been given all of these

36:06

exotic tools that he could in

36:08

principle use against anybody. These are

36:10

tools that are absolutely a violation

36:12

of our Constitution, and yet they

36:14

exist there. And so the need

36:16

to prevent him from having access

36:18

to those things was existential

36:20

in their mind. And

36:23

so anyway, the point is they created tools

36:25

they never expected to be in the hands

36:27

of someone else, and that is the situation,

36:30

that's the scenario you're describing here as well.

36:32

Why do you think the multiverse is bullshit? I

36:35

just don't think it makes any sense, because if

36:39

you take the multiverse literally,

36:44

so let me back up a second.

36:46

We have a principle that tells us more

36:49

or less what is true called

36:52

parsimony, right? We take

36:54

the simplest explanation that accounts for what

36:57

we observe, and we imagine it's true.

36:59

And there's a little imperfection in there,

37:01

but if you had all the information,

37:03

it would work I think perfectly. And

37:06

then there's a flaw in how

37:09

we apply it. The

37:11

multiverse is analytically

37:14

very simple, right? It's

37:17

just one move. Oh, there are an infinite number

37:19

of universes. Every moment there are an

37:21

infinite number of things that could happen, and a universe

37:23

is created for each one. That's very simple. I just

37:25

said it in one sentence. On

37:29

the other hand, at the practical level, it

37:32

couldn't possibly be more

37:34

wasteful and absurd, right?

37:38

And the idea that there's going to

37:40

be two universes. You're

37:42

going to double the universe, because I just moved my

37:45

glasses, and we need one universe in which I didn't,

37:47

and one universe in which I did, and then each

37:49

of those universes is going to proliferate out from each

37:52

moment. This does not make any sense. So

37:54

I think what it is, is this is

37:58

just part of the process of discovery. If

38:01

you imagine an infinite number

38:03

of proliferating universes from each

38:05

branching point, right? That

38:09

accounts, that allows us to understand. We

38:11

could describe it that way and it

38:13

allows us to understand the universe as

38:15

we observe it. Now the question is,

38:18

what's really going on that allows that

38:20

to take place without the proliferation of

38:22

universes? That's why I think it's wrong.

38:25

It's the intermediate, it's the

38:27

immature analytical point at

38:29

which we have noticed that something is going on.

38:31

We know we need to explain it and we

38:33

haven't yet stood in the right place to explain

38:36

it in a way that's actually efficient. So what

38:38

we're doing is we're explaining it in a way

38:40

that if you typed it out, it's one tweet.

38:45

But isn't existence itself

38:48

insane? The

38:50

universe itself is insane. Subatomic particles

38:52

are insane, going all the

38:54

way out to solar nurseries. It's all

38:56

insane. The whole thing's insane. It's insane

38:58

in scope, it's insane in size, it's

39:00

insane in its complexity. It's

39:03

almost incomprehensible. Almost incomprehensible. So

39:06

why would it be more

39:08

incomprehensible if there was

39:10

infinite variety and infinite numbers

39:12

of them? It would just be

39:15

a different level of crazy

39:17

that we weren't aware of. Well, no.

39:19

I mean, I

39:21

don't think so because it's not a different level. Let's

39:24

just agree that the universe, the size

39:27

of it is impossible

39:30

to actually comprehend. Impossible. It's literally impossible. We

39:32

just look at it as a number. It's

39:35

a small number actually. You look at it,

39:37

oh, like what's the most recent, the Jameswood

39:39

Telescope, the most recent advanced

39:41

versions of it, they're talking about 22 billion

39:43

plus years for the Big Bang. They're

39:46

looking at that now because

39:48

of the structure of some

39:50

galaxies that shouldn't exist, shouldn't

39:53

exist in the time period of which they

39:55

would have to be formed in a

39:57

certain amount of years. And so there's stories. It's

40:01

very contentious, but there's some of

40:03

these people studying the results that

40:06

seem to believe it's quite possible that you might

40:08

want to push that date back to whatever

40:11

the Big Bang is. Right. Okay.

40:14

And then there's Sir Roger Penrose, who thinks it's like a constant

40:16

cycle. Right. I'm open

40:18

to all these ideas, except ones like

40:20

the multiverse, because let's

40:23

put it this way. Okay. You

40:25

haven't solved a problem by invoking

40:28

the multiverse. What you've done is

40:30

you've caused a problem that is

40:32

like the original problem that

40:34

you had raised to the

40:37

infinity. Right. And so

40:40

my feeling is anytime you've made the

40:42

problem, the philosophical problem you had that

40:44

we all admit is really, really difficult,

40:46

infinitely worse, you

40:48

probably made it wrong, though. I

40:50

don't know about that. I don't

40:53

think that's necessarily true,

40:56

because just because we haven't solved the

40:58

problem of this immense thing that's impossible

41:01

to grasp, it doesn't mean

41:03

it can't be way bigger than

41:05

we even imagine in a concept

41:08

that's impossible to grasp. And

41:11

there's got to be some reason why

41:13

so many people are entertaining this multiverse

41:15

theory. It's not ... Well,

41:18

that's just because we're descendants

41:20

of chimp-like ancestors, and we have limited

41:22

tools to bring to bear to this

41:24

sort of thing. And it's exciting. Right.

41:27

It's exciting. And if you think of

41:29

it as a temporary stand-in for whatever the answer is

41:31

that's going to dawn on us at some point, it's

41:34

fine. It's a

41:36

good thought problem. But imagining

41:38

that it's real, you said

41:41

maybe the problem is infinitely

41:43

bigger than we thought. It's

41:47

not infinitely bigger. It's the rate of

41:49

growth of the problem. Every

41:53

instant needs multiple universes for

41:55

the most trivial of modifications.

42:00

I'm sorry, that just does not sound like nature

42:02

to me. I think it sounds like the universe

42:04

though. I don't think the universe necessarily sounds like

42:06

nature. Nature is what we see

42:08

here, but what we see everywhere is so

42:10

bizarre. Black holes are so bizarre. Supernovas, they're

42:13

so fucking bizarre. The fact

42:15

that there's a giant black hole in the center

42:17

of every galaxy, that's one half of one percent

42:19

of the mass of the galaxy, and it might

42:21

be another universe inside of that thing. But see,

42:24

I actually think that one. I

42:26

mean, I was waiting for that discovery for

42:28

my whole life, and when I finally heard

42:30

it, it was like, okay, now I understand

42:32

why you've got this huge swirling thing. You've

42:34

got this giant gravitational mass in the center

42:36

that you can't see. Now it makes sense.

42:38

So that was like a simplifying discovery.

42:41

Well, the existence of the black hole, but the

42:43

concept of a black hole being essentially a portal

42:45

into another universe where there's hundreds of billions of

42:48

galaxies, each one with a black hole in the

42:50

center of them. You go through each one of

42:52

those, you have hundreds of billions of galaxies, each

42:54

one with a black hole in the center of

42:57

it, and you just keep doing that forever and

42:59

ever and ever. Isn't that kind of the multiverse?

43:01

Well, let's put it this way. I

43:04

mean, A, we're a little bit safe

43:06

here because by definition, there's no way

43:08

of peering into those things. Right. For

43:10

now. I think forever. You

43:12

think AI can't get a grasp on this in a

43:14

better way? Well, it might be able to. Quantum computing

43:16

a thousand years from now might have a- The problem

43:19

is that there's a physical reason you can't. For the

43:21

same reason the light can't get out, there's no way

43:23

to peer in. Right. Am

43:26

I cool with

43:28

the idea that maybe there's an

43:30

equilibrium, that a black hole where

43:32

things, once they're pulled in over

43:34

that threshold, they never emerge again,

43:36

and that maybe they emerge somewhere

43:38

else? Yeah, I could imagine parallel

43:40

things that are entangled in

43:43

this way. That does not

43:45

sound inherently like an

43:47

insane cheat to me because what we

43:49

have is a mystery staring us in the

43:52

face in every one of those ultra

43:54

massive black holes. What the hell

43:56

is it? Right. What

43:59

about- a future in

44:01

which we develop

44:04

some sort of propulsion system and attach it

44:06

to a drone that's not it's

44:08

not based on fuel it's

44:10

based on some sort of gravity thing

44:13

and allows you to traverse immense distances

44:15

very quickly and then we

44:17

could actually get that fucker way

44:19

out there take some video and bring it

44:21

back well you're gonna avoid the warranty I'm

44:23

pretty sure well it's okay it's

44:25

all funded by the government all right infinite

44:27

money we just check oh we'll just text

44:29

people and we'll blame the UFOs yeah which

44:31

is what I think they're doing by the

44:34

way using the UFO

44:36

story yeah oh yeah yeah yeah I think

44:38

I think both things are true I

44:41

think we have been visited and I think it only makes

44:43

sense I think there is life out

44:45

there because it doesn't make sense there isn't and

44:48

I think I would visit if

44:50

I got a thousand years more advanced than

44:52

we are and we found out about some

44:54

planet that's 2,000 light years away that actually

44:56

is making nuclear bombs fuck it visit course

44:58

it visit I had a percent so

45:01

of course they would visit and of

45:03

course they would want to protect us

45:05

from the overwhelming shock to

45:08

our culture that would in

45:10

undoubtedly be thrust

45:13

upon us if we were if

45:15

we were confronted with a

45:18

city-size spaceship that's hovering over

45:20

Detroit just just hovering

45:22

over there it would send

45:24

the world into a massive panic no one

45:26

would know what to do I'm not sure

45:29

about this so I want to I want

45:31

to just adjust a couple things you said

45:33

okay please so my perspective you're absolutely right

45:35

it would be there's every reason to think there's lots

45:37

of life in the universe right and

45:40

that life that attains a

45:42

certain level of cognition will

45:45

inevitably create technologies that break

45:47

boundaries that it can't biologically

45:49

break so it'll you

45:51

know traverse some distance

45:54

across space but the real question

45:56

is how

45:59

many islands of life life, what's

46:01

the closest one, how traversable

46:03

is the cosmos? It

46:06

may not be traversable at all at those scales,

46:08

or it may be much more traversable than we

46:10

know, and then it doesn't take

46:12

very many islands of life to have

46:14

somebody visit us. But, as

46:17

to your last point, I

46:20

actually, well, first of all, everybody,

46:23

every thinking person I know is

46:28

pretty troubled by the present. And

46:32

a hostile alien force

46:35

would freak everybody out. But

46:38

I, A, I can't see a reason

46:40

why aliens would be hostile. Doesn't

46:43

make sense to me. They don't have to be hostile. Just

46:46

being there. Right. But then,

46:48

if they were just there, first of all, we've been training for this. We

46:51

all spend a lot of time on

46:53

sci-fi stories, and aliens, and

46:57

all that stuff. So I think,

46:59

actually, we wouldn't be impressed

47:01

enough, because we've seen really impressive stuff

47:03

on screens again and again and again.

47:05

If you actually heard that this stuff

47:08

was going on, if the ship showed

47:10

up in the sky, and you could

47:12

see it with your binoculars, I

47:15

think the question is, well, are

47:19

they friendly? And what do

47:21

they have to say? Right?

47:23

Right. I honestly don't think,

47:25

you know, if I heard about it, I

47:28

would think, that's got

47:31

to be good news, because we're- Right, but to anyone

47:33

in power, this would be a

47:35

gigantic threat. To anyone trying to pass off

47:37

some sort of narrative that this is the,

47:40

that we're in the lead in terms of

47:42

the moral high ground of the world, and

47:45

that we're the wisest, we're the

47:47

best, we're going to make decisions for everybody.

47:49

That would throw a monkey wrench completely into

47:51

the gears of that. Oh, totally.

47:53

So they would lose all control. Right. They

47:56

would lose all authority. They would lose all respect. But why

47:58

are the aliens abiding by their plan? Because I

48:00

don't think they are. That's not what I'm

48:02

saying. I think that would freak them

48:04

out, and they're not doing that. I

48:07

think if they are real and they do observe

48:10

us, they probably observe us in a way where

48:14

there's a limited amount of detection. And

48:16

I think there's probably, if

48:18

I was going to acclimate

48:20

a culture to the

48:22

idea that they're not alone, I would do

48:25

it slowly. That way you

48:27

could have the same

48:29

ultimate effect eventually and maybe

48:31

help them along their

48:34

evolution as well, along their cultural

48:36

evolution, to slowly introduce this concept

48:38

that they're not alone, and

48:41

then do it over decades, which is exactly what's

48:43

been happening. And the

48:45

acceptance of it has changed from, when I was

48:47

a kid, you talk about UFOs, you're a fucking

48:49

kook. One hundred percent. Straight up

48:51

kook. And then the Bob Lazar story came around

48:53

and everybody was like, hey, wait a minute. Was

48:56

that guy telling the truth? And that was like

48:58

89, but still seemed like bullshit. And then there

49:00

was a bunch of questions about his education background.

49:03

Ah, bullshit artist. But then

49:05

over time, more people

49:07

have seen enough things like Commander

49:09

David Fraver, and more people have

49:12

seen things that have no explanation

49:14

whatsoever. And you start hearing stories

49:17

from high-level people about retrieved vehicles.

49:19

And it's more and more and

49:21

more and more and more and more normal people

49:24

talking about it, and more and more professors at

49:26

Stanford and the New York Times in 2017, Prince of

49:30

Story and respected Air

49:32

Force pilots are coming out and talking about it.

49:34

It's a different world. And

49:36

it's a different world just over a few

49:38

decades. Yeah, it's a different world, but I

49:40

still haven't seen anything that isn't best explained

49:42

as psy-op bullshit. Right. I

49:45

haven't either. But also, I haven't seen anything, right?

49:49

These are unique experiences. And the problem

49:51

with unique experiences is everyone

49:53

has to just sort of trust you. Unless

49:55

you have some kind of evidence, everyone has to trust

49:58

you, even if it's a whole town. It's

50:00

a unique experience in the town, a mass

50:02

of gnosis, a bunch of bullshit artists, they're

50:05

taking advantage of it for tourism, like Virginia

50:07

and Brazil. The entire town saw this thing.

50:10

So, you know, I'm not sure

50:12

if it's all bullshit. I

50:15

think there's some bullshit mixed in with some

50:17

real stuff. That's what I think. This is

50:19

my conclusion over time, because if you go

50:21

back to like the Kenneth Arnold sightings in

50:23

the 1950s, we didn't have

50:25

anything that moved like that. Nobody did.

50:27

There's no way anybody had anything in

50:29

the 1950s that could shoot

50:32

across the sky, soundless, make

50:34

no noise, skip like flying

50:37

saucers is what the way described it. There

50:40

was a, I think there was nine of

50:42

them together. There was no, we didn't have anything like that.

50:45

So maybe occasionally we're visited.

50:47

Maybe occasionally they show themselves

50:50

and maybe they have been

50:52

here. Tucker thinks they've been here all along. He

50:55

thinks they're a part of this world that we

50:57

live in. They just, they hide from us and

50:59

maybe they live in the ocean. Yeah.

51:01

I mean, you know, you know what

51:04

my stock and trade is and my

51:06

feeling is I'm perfectly open to the

51:08

possibility that there are alien intelligences in

51:11

the universe. I'm perfectly open

51:13

to the possibility that they would stop by. Um,

51:17

but I'm going to need

51:19

something like evidence that isn't better

51:21

explained by terrestrial bullshit

51:24

because frankly, the terrestrial

51:26

bullshit is guaranteed. Right.

51:29

If they had some sort of a

51:31

drone that used gravity and could zip

51:33

across the sky, like, you know, 10

51:35

X light speed, they wouldn't tell you

51:37

about it. Yeah. But I

51:39

don't even think it's, I don't, look, I think the

51:41

fact, and I think we may have talked about this

51:43

before, but the fact that these things are doing stuff

51:46

that's beyond any terrestrial craft that

51:48

we know of and they're silent.

51:52

That's because they're not craft. They're

51:55

projections of some kind. And

51:57

so they're visually very compelling,

51:59

but. do not disturb the

52:01

atoms that they're passing through

52:03

because they don't displace anything.

52:06

So you think the radar,

52:09

when they use radar and they find these things, what

52:11

do you think that is? Oh man,

52:14

I think that's people putting blips on other

52:16

people's radar and it's not the only place

52:18

in history that that shows up, right? So

52:20

you could force a blip onto someone's radar?

52:22

Sure. You could hack their radar? And heck, if

52:24

you had a... How would you do that? Well

52:28

these radars are all computerized. But

52:30

let's talk about the David Fraver

52:32

one, right? Because this

52:34

is 2004, so it kind of

52:36

limits our ability in terms of... You

52:39

know, you have high technology, you have extremely

52:41

powerful computers, you have a lot of stuff

52:43

going on, but we certainly don't have what

52:45

we have 20 years later, right? Yep. We

52:48

all agree to that. Now they have

52:51

multiple different mediums, multiple

52:53

different types of evidence. They

52:55

have visual eyewitness

52:58

testimony and more

53:00

than one jet sees this thing, more than one pilot

53:02

sees this thing. They all have the same story. This

53:05

thing zips across the sky. They have the

53:07

radar that shows that this thing went from

53:09

50,000 feet above sea level to 50

53:12

in a second. They have this

53:14

thing moving at speeds on video, where you

53:16

see it move on video. That would turn

53:18

anybody inside it into jello. So

53:21

it's whatever the fuck this is, it's doing something

53:23

that we didn't think human beings could do. Right.

53:27

So you have three different ways of verifying

53:29

that there is something there. You have the

53:31

radar, you have video, you have eyewitness testimony,

53:33

you have this thing flying to the cat

53:35

point where they were initially supposed to, when

53:37

they were doing their training mission they were

53:39

supposed to meet. Yep. There's a

53:41

lot of weird shit with that. Yep. But...

53:45

Do you think they could fake that? Yeah. I

53:48

mean, I do think you could fake it

53:50

because you just have multiple attack

53:53

vectors. So how

53:55

would you fake a

53:58

visual sighting? from

54:00

trained fighter jet pilots

54:03

over the ocean a Projection a

54:05

projection. Yeah, and where would the projector

54:07

be? I don't know could could be

54:09

could be coming from space could

54:12

be from an aircraft. That's flying too high to see

54:14

I Don't know, but

54:16

how would you do that? What technology would

54:18

enable you to make something? Look,

54:21

I mean they even had a disturbance of

54:23

the ocean floor Or

54:25

of the ocean surface rather so

54:28

I'm not an expert in these technologies I'm not

54:31

claiming that I could do it. But what I'm

54:33

saying is a you have a huge

54:37

amount of classified technology Just

54:40

imagine for a second how useful

54:42

it would be to be able

54:44

to convince your enemy that you

54:46

had Aircraft in its

54:48

airspace that they were able to

54:50

exceed limits whatever So do

54:52

you think we've worked on the ability to

54:55

fool an enemy into believing that we

54:57

have capacities that we don't have? Yeah, of course.

54:59

So given that those programs

55:02

are essentially certain to exist Do

55:04

you think anybody's ever gonna have the

55:06

idea that actually in this case

55:08

it would be useful if some, you know unassailable

55:11

authorities were to have undeniable

55:15

experiences that suggest x y or

55:17

z Hmm somebody's gonna

55:19

come up with that idea So

55:21

this would explain why these things are able

55:23

to stay stationary in 120 knot winds Because

55:27

they're not affected by physical

55:29

reality. Yeah, they're just images. Have

55:32

you I mean, I know you

55:34

have There are Incredibly

55:37

good magicians. Yeah,

55:39

who will do stuff in front of you that

55:42

You know You don't walk out of there thinking

55:44

the laws of physics have been broken because you

55:46

understand that magic magic is a genre where you

55:48

Walk in and you agree to

55:50

suspend your disbelief enough to look through

55:52

your eyes and register something as if

55:54

it's violated a law of physics But

55:56

we all know it's magic, right? David

55:59

Blaine, right? Exactly Exactly. An illusion.

56:02

Now imagine that you had teams

56:06

working on illusions who

56:08

were going to do so in a

56:10

context that you would have no concept

56:13

that that's what had happened because you're

56:15

so used to trusting what

56:17

your eyes perceive, what your ears hear, all

56:19

of those things. So all

56:22

I'm saying is the

56:26

evidence that these things exist

56:29

always hovers in the realm

56:31

where a ruthless whatever

56:35

could have faked it. Right?

56:38

Whether that has to do with an

56:41

MKUltra intervention where somebody's

56:43

been given drugs they don't know they've been given

56:45

and they've been shown things that they are more

56:47

open to because they were in a state in

56:49

which they were in induced openness.

56:52

That's a possibility or

56:54

a mixture of things. You see something you've

56:56

been brought into a state of openness

56:59

you accept it more than you think you

57:01

have because you don't know that anybody tinkered

57:03

with your wiring. I

57:06

just am waiting to see a piece of evidence

57:08

that really makes me go huh I don't think

57:10

we could have done that. Have

57:13

you seen any Gary Nolan stuff on

57:15

the metallurgy on the different samples they've

57:17

collected from these supposed down crafts that

57:20

defy our understanding of how to create

57:22

alloys and so how expensive it would

57:24

be to craft these things? Let me

57:27

ask you a question. You've

57:29

got alloys that

57:31

are beyond known human technology and

57:34

you've got discussion of alloys that

57:36

are beyond human technology.

57:38

Which is it? Well

57:41

it's certainly discussions. That's the

57:43

problem. Right. I mean I

57:45

don't know who see

57:48

if you could find anything on

57:50

Gary Nolan's samples. So Diana

57:53

Pasulko had been on the podcast before

57:55

she she had done some excavating

57:58

of these areas where they purport

58:00

that these things had crashed and they could

58:02

still find pieces which made

58:05

me a little skeptical soon as I see you

58:07

still find you didn't pick them all up like

58:09

yeah why wouldn't they send someone out there to

58:11

pick everything up why would you would sift yeah

58:13

you would take truckloads and you would get every

58:16

single scrap of that stuff yeah but if I

58:18

wanted someone to believe that a craft was there

58:20

I'd leave a bunch of bullshit out in the

58:22

field I'd blindfold them like they did I take

58:24

them out to this spot this is the spot

58:27

right around oh look you found a piece

58:29

like how do you not know where all

58:31

the fucking pieces are if this thing crashed

58:33

30 years ago why didn't you go over

58:35

this place with a fine-tooth comb people do

58:37

that for arrowheads yeah why would you not

58:39

do that for alien craft metal

58:41

of course you would yeah also there's

58:44

the other problem it's like why these things

58:46

crashing right exactly so fucking good they get

58:49

here from another dimension they're partying they got

58:51

here and then just they

58:53

don't know they're they get a hold of

58:56

some fucking Jack Daniels next they're

58:58

crashed in the sand they're having a good time

59:00

in America it's also

59:02

that's a big problem too a lot of these sightings are

59:04

in America they look at the chart

59:07

their sightings overseas for sure they happen all

59:09

over the world look we undoubtedly but they

59:11

haven't a lot more here we have an

59:13

alien problem across many different yeah

59:18

we do we go we

59:20

have multiple alien problems

59:22

we have well that's

59:26

another thing they're gaslighting people on the idea that they

59:28

would let people come over here so they would vote

59:31

of course they would that's a

59:33

great way to like get voters so

59:35

these are these pieces that Gary Nolan claims

59:37

to have had and what does it say

59:39

about these pieces I could only find in

59:41

the video I was trying to find pictures

59:44

yes explosion okay so this is from how

59:47

do you say that uber tuba uber tuba

59:49

Brazil so this is a

59:51

different it might be a different pronunciation

59:53

in Portuguese but this is a different

59:55

crash than the Virginia one so there's

59:57

been multiple sightings and things happen in

59:59

Brazil apparently Brazil also has a

1:00:01

little bit of an alien problem. Oh yeah, a little

1:00:03

one. But the Virginia one is wild.

1:00:06

That's the most wild one. Yeah, but those

1:00:10

fragments there appeared from where I'm sitting

1:00:12

to look like they were made of

1:00:14

pixels. Let me

1:00:16

say that again. That could just be a low

1:00:18

resolution photograph. No, no, I'm kidding with

1:00:20

you. I'm just saying, we're looking at that

1:00:23

thing as if we know that it's a

1:00:25

fragment of metal and we're being told that

1:00:27

it has properties that are

1:00:29

unfamiliar. But what we have, the evidence

1:00:31

you and I have is pixels. Right,

1:00:34

sure. We're not there. We don't get to see

1:00:36

these things. Also, even if you gave it to

1:00:38

me, how's that going to

1:00:40

help me? I have no idea what you're... Yeah, I

1:00:42

don't know what that is. Even if you

1:00:44

gave me the microscopes to look at it, I'm like,

1:00:46

what am I seeing? I'm seeing layers. Is that what

1:00:48

this is? Right. How do they do

1:00:51

this? So that's why, look, I want a

1:00:54

team of honest biologists to

1:00:57

look at some space biology.

1:00:59

That would settle this immediately.

1:01:01

Yeah, immediately. Immediately. Yeah. Like

1:01:04

if there really is a body. Just

1:01:06

one. What everyone says is there's frozen bodies

1:01:09

somewhere. Just one. That's

1:01:11

all that... We can settle this tomorrow. Let some people

1:01:14

in. Okay, here it is. Extraterrestrial

1:01:16

metal from the bottom of a wedge-shaped craft in

1:01:18

the late 1940s, made of 26 alternating

1:01:22

layers, 1 to 4

1:01:24

microns dark bismuth, and 100 to

1:01:26

200 microns silver magnesium zinc alloy.

1:01:29

Each of six pieces received from

1:01:31

US Army's source were formed with

1:01:33

a curvature that tapered. This

1:01:37

episode is brought to you by blinds.com. Do

1:01:40

you know the right window treatments aren't

1:01:42

just about privacy? They could

1:01:44

actually save you some serious cash on your energy

1:01:46

bills too. But is it really

1:01:48

worth the hassle? It's a lot

1:01:50

of waiting for some pushy salesperson to come to

1:01:52

your house with an overpriced quote. Sucks,

1:01:54

right? Well, say goodbye to all

1:01:56

that nonsense because blinds.com has revolutionized

1:01:59

the game. blinds.com lets you

1:02:01

do a virtual consultation with their

1:02:03

award-winning design experts whenever you have

1:02:06

time. No pushy sales rep in

1:02:08

your home. Just hop

1:02:10

online and blinds.com will send free samples

1:02:12

right to your door. How

1:02:14

cool is that? Whether you're

1:02:16

a do-it-yourself beast or you

1:02:18

prefer professional installation, blinds.com has

1:02:21

you covered. And guess what?

1:02:23

You can get your entire house

1:02:25

done for one low price. No

1:02:28

hidden fees, no showroom markups. What

1:02:31

you see is what you pay. Now I

1:02:33

get it, ordering online can be sketchy, but

1:02:35

not with blinds.com. They've covered more

1:02:37

than 25 million

1:02:39

windows and they've got a 100%

1:02:41

satisfaction guarantee. blinds.com

1:02:44

is hooking up my listeners with an exclusive

1:02:46

$50 off when you spend $500 or more.

1:02:51

Just use the code ROGAN at checkout at

1:02:54

blinds.com. Go to blinds.com

1:02:56

and use the promo code ROGAN.

1:02:58

Limited time offer, rules and

1:03:01

restrictions apply. See blinds.com for

1:03:03

details. This episode

1:03:05

is brought to you by Moen. Homes

1:03:07

are a big investment. You want to

1:03:10

protect them from fires, break-ins and especially

1:03:12

water. Water damage is a lot

1:03:14

more frequent. And something as small

1:03:16

as a leaky pipe can lead to

1:03:18

big problems down the road. And it

1:03:20

can also be hard to detect. Since

1:03:23

you know most pipes are hidden behind a

1:03:25

wall. That's why you

1:03:27

guys need the Moen Smart Water

1:03:30

Monitor and Shutoff. It's a device

1:03:32

that can automatically shut down your

1:03:34

home's water when a leak is

1:03:36

detected and it also works 24-7

1:03:39

monitoring and tracking your home even

1:03:41

when you're not there. It will

1:03:43

alert you through the app at

1:03:45

the first sign of a leak,

1:03:48

providing ultimate peace of mind and

1:03:50

security. Learn more and buy the

1:03:52

Moen Smart Water Monitor and Shutoff

1:03:54

at moen.com-slash-flow. And right now, use

1:03:57

the code ROGAN to get $100 off... plus

1:04:01

free shipping.

1:04:03

That's code ROGAN

1:04:06

at moen.com/F-L-O. Automatic

1:04:09

shutoff and real-time alert capabilities will

1:04:11

operate when the device is configured

1:04:14

with the proper settings. Wow. That

1:04:18

is incredibly compelling

1:04:21

metallurgical narrative. If

1:04:24

it's true. Transmitted by pixels. Right.

1:04:26

That's the problem. Yeah, that's the problem. It's

1:04:28

also the late 1940s.

1:04:30

How many of these fucking things crashed? It's

1:04:32

happening all the time. That's the weird thing,

1:04:34

right? Think

1:04:37

of how many corvettes there are. Yeah. You don't find

1:04:39

a whole lot of them on the side of the

1:04:41

road crashed. Yeah, it's not a common thing. No,

1:04:45

he's finding corvettes in the desert. Look,

1:04:49

we found a corvette. There's so many

1:04:51

corvettes. There's millions of them. Right, and

1:04:53

yet most of them make

1:04:55

it from A to B. But he's fucking UFOs.

1:04:57

Oh, man. They're so smart they can come here

1:04:59

from other planets and they just, yeah! Yeah. Boom.

1:05:02

Well, maybe we're not on their map. And so they're like...

1:05:05

Or maybe the only people that

1:05:07

are the only intelligent life outside of

1:05:09

this planet that's willing to do it,

1:05:11

they're like Australian outback people. They're

1:05:14

like those wild dudes who

1:05:16

go overlanding. You

1:05:18

know, Australia has a big overlanding culture

1:05:21

where they build up these vehicles. They

1:05:23

take them off into the bush and

1:05:25

they live off of them. My friend

1:05:27

Adam Greentree does that. These

1:05:29

people are wild. Australians are wild

1:05:31

folk. So maybe they're like the

1:05:33

Australians of space. Overlanding

1:05:36

and it doesn't always work out. Overlanding. They're these

1:05:38

nuts that, like, you know, there's people that go

1:05:40

out in the desert for 30 days and

1:05:43

they have enough food and water and they have a solar

1:05:45

thing on the top of their rig. And

1:05:48

that charges their cell phone and they have,

1:05:50

you know, jerry cans of petrol so they

1:05:52

can keep going. Well, I kind of dig

1:05:54

this. Look, if it were

1:05:56

possible to traverse

1:05:58

vast... Empty spaces and

1:06:01

go to places that were known to have life.

1:06:03

I'd be all about that But it would only

1:06:05

be the real hardcore adventures that would take that

1:06:07

chance and maybe those people are nuts Maybe

1:06:10

those alien people are nuts just like the human people

1:06:12

are nuts that do that kind of stuff, right? They

1:06:14

like to get into trouble winch themselves out and wild

1:06:16

people. Yeah, they got winches on their spaceship Well,

1:06:21

you got to also think here's

1:06:23

here's another problem with the idea of them

1:06:25

being biological We it's

1:06:27

far more effective to send things that are

1:06:29

non-biological in the space like what we're doing

1:06:31

on Mars We we don't have a base

1:06:33

on Mars allegedly But there's a lot of

1:06:35

nutty people that believe we do but they

1:06:38

do certainly have some robots that are on

1:06:40

Mars It's gathering data and they're doing it

1:06:42

right now And so you don't have to

1:06:44

worry about radiation All the

1:06:46

things that kill people make people sad if we

1:06:48

lose one of those rovers who gives a fuck

1:06:50

make another rover Ship it out there fly it

1:06:53

nobody cares if you lose 50 people if you

1:06:55

take 50 people and they die on your Mars

1:06:57

trip You're gonna have Congress is gonna be meeting

1:06:59

about it. What are we doing? Why are we

1:07:01

killing people? let's not do

1:07:04

that and so as time goes

1:07:06

on and as technology improves and

1:07:08

as Sentient

1:07:10

artificial intelligence becomes a better

1:07:12

option for sending some intelligent

1:07:14

robot to gather data Why would

1:07:17

why would anybody go through space

1:07:19

as a living creature? It seems

1:07:21

stupid Yeah, I mean

1:07:23

I agree on the other hand. I probably

1:07:28

You know why why do I want to go to the Amazon right

1:07:31

I can I can see but you

1:07:33

can go to the Amazon That's the thing humans

1:07:35

live in the Amazon humans don't live on Mars.

1:07:37

It's way simpler to send a robot to Mars

1:07:39

Why would we go to Mars? Yeah? Yeah, there

1:07:41

is a good reason to go to Mars and

1:07:44

the good reason to go to Mars is we're

1:07:48

in jeopardy here and

1:07:50

I Don't think

1:07:53

Mars is in any way

1:07:55

a long-term plan for survival

1:07:57

of people But the There

1:08:00

are processes unfolding

1:08:03

here in our solar system that

1:08:05

put us in jeopardy, potentially here

1:08:08

on Earth, and having just at

1:08:10

least an outpost of people somewhere

1:08:13

else would not be a bad hedge against that.

1:08:15

So I think we're not close enough. Right.

1:08:21

But it's definitely a potential reality, and if

1:08:23

it was possible, it would be a good

1:08:25

move if you wanted to hedge your bets.

1:08:27

Yep. And we should hedge our

1:08:29

bets because ... Elon's position on this. Yeah. That

1:08:32

we're in danger of the human race

1:08:34

going extinct from a variety of

1:08:37

different things. Not even our own

1:08:39

fault. It could be a bunch of different

1:08:41

things. Asteroid impacts, super volcanoes. A lot of

1:08:43

stuff can happen right here that kills us

1:08:45

all. Space weather. Oh yeah. Fucking

1:08:48

some supernova. Too close. Sorry. Everything's

1:08:50

cooked. Micronova, which is actually a viable

1:08:53

hypothesis. Apparently, this is something that can

1:08:55

happen. It doesn't necessarily destroy the star.

1:08:57

You can have a burst of radiation

1:08:59

that radically alters things down here. Oh,

1:09:02

fun. Yeah. And

1:09:04

maybe that's what happened to Mars, which is also part of

1:09:06

the problem. Because Mars at one time had an atmosphere. Mars

1:09:08

at one time had liquid water. We don't

1:09:10

really know what happened. Yeah. No,

1:09:13

agreed. Mars is probably a little closer to the sun at

1:09:15

one point in time in the past. It

1:09:18

turns out that our solar system is

1:09:20

dynamic and dangerous in a way that

1:09:22

we don't really know

1:09:25

because our study

1:09:27

has happened in a

1:09:29

period of calm. We're

1:09:33

really looking at a very brief amount of time that

1:09:35

we can measure in terms of our human experience. It's

1:09:38

so brief in terms of what we know

1:09:40

about what human beings have experienced. And then we have

1:09:43

to go back to core samples. You have to go

1:09:45

back to, oh, it appears that

1:09:47

there was Earth-1, and Earth-1 was hit by another

1:09:49

planet. That's how we get the moon.

1:09:51

And then the moon. The moon's

1:09:53

crazy. What

1:09:55

a crazy thing that this thing stabilizes

1:09:58

us. It's in the exact same... same

1:10:01

right position, the exact right size,

1:10:04

to make sure that we can exist as we exist right

1:10:06

now. It seems like somebody put it there. It's

1:10:08

a beautiful thing. It's a beautiful thing, but it's

1:10:12

kind of kooky. It's almost like

1:10:14

someone put it there. It's very convenient. Yeah. Yeah.

1:10:17

I mean, and of course there's an anthropic principle in play

1:10:20

here as well, because the question is, are

1:10:22

we here because we do have a moon

1:10:24

to play the exact right role? This

1:10:27

planet has a lot going for it, and one

1:10:29

way to think about that is, wow, that can't

1:10:31

be ... that's no accident, or no, we're here

1:10:33

to talk about it because those accidents happen to

1:10:35

line up here. Right.

1:10:37

Or, yeah, it's odd, but that's also

1:10:40

why there's not life everywhere. Right. And

1:10:42

this does happen, and when it does happen, then you get some life. Yeah.

1:10:45

But until it happens, and the variety

1:10:47

of temperature changes over the course of

1:10:49

the seasons is just too vast for

1:10:51

what we understand as biological life to

1:10:53

survive, or at least intelligent. Right.

1:10:56

See, it's not just biological. It has to

1:10:59

be intelligent. It has to be able to

1:11:01

manipulate its environment. It has to be able

1:11:03

to record the previous thoughts in history, develop

1:11:05

language, and it's really tough

1:11:07

to do that if you're in an

1:11:09

environment and you've adapted to an environment

1:11:11

that can vary by 300 degrees. Right.

1:11:15

Now, you're exactly right that the number of things

1:11:17

that have to stack up before you get to

1:11:19

the point that you're pondering why you're here is

1:11:21

many. Yeah. You have to have food.

1:11:23

Right. And then you have to

1:11:25

be beat up and go, why are we here? Yeah,

1:11:28

and you have to not be going routinely extinct because

1:11:30

then suddenly go haywire. Right. Exactly.

1:11:33

This is why this kind of thought emerges once people sort of

1:11:35

settle down. Yep. Get some food, start

1:11:37

herding some cattle, and go, hey, stars

1:11:39

are kind of crazy. Yeah. You

1:11:42

ever looked up? Instead, everybody's just looking in the

1:11:44

bushes for what's going to kill them, what's going to

1:11:46

eat me. You know, it's funny. I've

1:11:48

spent a lot of time watching animals. They

1:11:50

don't look at the sky. Oh,

1:11:53

that's interesting. It is interesting. That is

1:11:55

very interesting. It's very interesting. I mean,

1:11:57

I get it. It's not productive.

1:12:00

until you get

1:12:02

pretty deep into thinking about abstract

1:12:06

things as a way of finding what you're

1:12:08

not doing right. Well, we look outward and

1:12:10

we look inward, which is really like next

1:12:12

level, right? Like we look at microscopes, we

1:12:14

go, what is going on here? Right. We're

1:12:16

all filled with bacteria. This whole thing is

1:12:18

nuts. Like we're not even an individual. Right.

1:12:21

We're an ecosystem. We're individual

1:12:23

ecosystems. And the healthier

1:12:25

your ecosystem is, the healthier you

1:12:27

are as an individual because you're

1:12:29

not really an individual. Wow. So

1:12:31

this is something Heather and I talk about frequently,

1:12:34

is that we have more or less an

1:12:36

epidemic of people who

1:12:38

are maybe smart, but

1:12:41

they don't know the difference between a

1:12:43

complex system and a complicated one. And

1:12:46

so they take their complicated system

1:12:48

thinking into complex systems. What is

1:12:50

the difference? Whether it's predictable. So,

1:12:53

for example, your computer or your

1:12:56

phone, you know, it's beyond

1:12:58

your comprehension or my comprehension, but it

1:13:00

is well understood how it works.

1:13:02

There's nothing mysterious about the outputs, right?

1:13:05

It's a system that

1:13:07

all of the functionality is well

1:13:09

understood. But a

1:13:12

biological creature isn't anything like this. And

1:13:14

so when you intervene, you know, when they give you

1:13:16

a drug and they think

1:13:18

they know what it's going to do, they're

1:13:21

intervening in a system in which things

1:13:24

are connected in ways that they've not

1:13:26

yet discovered. And they can't

1:13:28

anticipate the cascading effects. So, you know,

1:13:30

we keep getting upended by the sense

1:13:33

of like, you know, oh, this

1:13:36

thing is wrong with you. Here's

1:13:38

a biochemical intervention that will adjust

1:13:40

one parameter and put you back

1:13:43

into health. No, almost

1:13:45

never true, right? It

1:13:47

is occasionally true if somebody is quite sick

1:13:49

that you can push them back in the

1:13:51

direction of homeostasis. You can rescue them. But

1:13:55

the idea of improving health with an

1:13:57

intervention is almost always the wrong way.

1:14:00

approach, right? You should be restoring the

1:14:03

environment in which the body knows how to

1:14:05

take care of itself because it is a

1:14:07

complex system. Given the right inputs, given the

1:14:09

right parameters, it has all

1:14:12

of the processes necessary to keep it functioning. But

1:14:14

if you think you're going to improve it by

1:14:16

intervening, you're almost certain to do harm. Hmm,

1:14:20

but what about medication for people that have like type

1:14:22

1 diabetes? Right, but the question is why do you

1:14:24

have type 1 diabetes? But it's a genetic thing. Yeah,

1:14:26

but is it a... Do you

1:14:29

think our ancestors were walking around with type

1:14:31

1 diabetes? They might have and just died

1:14:33

off. Well, but then you would have a

1:14:36

very low rate of that gene, so our

1:14:38

ancestors... Right. So the question is... Do you

1:14:40

think there's an environmental reason for type 1

1:14:42

diabetes? I think there is a massive

1:14:47

disruption in all

1:14:49

of the environments that we pass through

1:14:51

in life that is causing

1:14:54

a mismatch between what we are...

1:14:56

We are basically perpetual fishes out

1:14:58

of water, and that

1:15:00

process is making us unhealthy in every single

1:15:03

regard. Heather and I call this hyper novelty,

1:15:05

and in fact it's not even that we're

1:15:07

just out of our environment in

1:15:10

which we can be healthy, but

1:15:12

the rate of change is so high that

1:15:14

even to the extent that we are highly

1:15:16

adaptable, we can't adapt fast enough to keep

1:15:19

up. Hmm. It's a

1:15:21

pathology, and the

1:15:24

flip side of this is if you

1:15:26

did recognize exactly where you started, that

1:15:28

you are actually a system that is

1:15:31

complex beyond even the sense

1:15:33

that you're an organism. I

1:15:36

mean, you're multiple organisms at multiple

1:15:38

different levels. Every single cell in

1:15:41

your body is being fueled by mitochondria

1:15:43

that started out at a different place

1:15:45

on the evolutionary tree and got taken

1:15:47

inside of cells to become powerhouses. That's

1:15:50

a symbiosis. So you are a symbiosis

1:15:53

in each of your cells. And

1:15:55

even crazier, your psychology,

1:15:58

your mentality affects

1:16:00

your physical health? Profoundly.

1:16:02

Profoundly. So the way you

1:16:05

think about things, the joy you have in

1:16:07

your life, the happiness that you encounter has

1:16:09

an enormous effect on your

1:16:12

biology. A hundred percent,

1:16:14

yes. Which is just madness. So

1:16:16

the reductionist view of just give them a shot of

1:16:19

this and a pill of that, like, well,

1:16:21

there's a lot more going on here. Right.

1:16:24

Our whole medical standpoint

1:16:28

is fundamentally

1:16:30

flawed. And I'm

1:16:33

really hoping that we

1:16:35

will take the lesson of COVID

1:16:37

seriously and we will recognize, in

1:16:40

my opinion, allopathic medicine, standard

1:16:42

Western medicine, is

1:16:46

living on the

1:16:49

gains of a tiny number of

1:16:51

subfields. Right.

1:16:53

The fact that a surgeon can put

1:16:55

you back together after a car accident,

1:16:58

that's something that we all know we

1:17:00

want there for us if we

1:17:02

need it. Right.

1:17:05

That surgeon's capacity to do that

1:17:07

is, A, predicated on the

1:17:09

ability of the body to repair

1:17:11

itself. Right. A surgeon

1:17:13

can cut you open and go, you know,

1:17:16

take out your spleen. But

1:17:20

that surgeon is depending on the fact that

1:17:22

your body knows how to heal the damage.

1:17:24

You can't go up to a car and,

1:17:26

you know, slice it open and pull out

1:17:28

the alternator and put it in another one

1:17:30

and have the car. Right. Staple

1:17:32

it back together again. Right. It

1:17:34

doesn't work like that. So anyway, there are a few things

1:17:36

in medicine that are transcendently

1:17:39

awesome, like the ability of a

1:17:42

surgeon to fix you

1:17:44

and the ability of an emergency

1:17:46

room physician to stabilize you where

1:17:48

your body is, you know, spiraling

1:17:51

out of control. But

1:17:54

those things result in a sense

1:17:56

of the godlike powers of medicine.

1:17:58

And most of the time, medicine

1:18:00

is in danger of hurting you. If it's

1:18:02

not of the mindset that we

1:18:04

should be minimizing intervention, we should be

1:18:07

figuring out what the root cause of

1:18:09

the pathology is. If we

1:18:11

have to intervene, which should be a temporary intervention

1:18:13

that pushes you back to the place where your

1:18:15

body knows what to do and then we should

1:18:17

take our hands off, which is of course not

1:18:20

profitable. Right. The problem is we want you to

1:18:22

be hooked on a medication because then we can

1:18:24

prescribe that to everybody and then you have the

1:18:26

Sackler family. Right. The fact is

1:18:28

this process,

1:18:31

health, is far

1:18:33

too important to be managed

1:18:35

by market forces left to

1:18:37

their own devices. That's

1:18:39

a good point. And the

1:18:41

problem is right now it is and

1:18:43

so we have to figure out

1:18:46

how to regain control of that. A hundred

1:18:48

percent. And so I'm hoping that

1:18:51

medicine having just gotten its comeuppance during

1:18:53

COVID where you know almost every doctor

1:18:56

ended up poisoning their patients with advice

1:18:58

that turned out to be you

1:19:01

know. And themselves. And themselves.

1:19:03

Yeah which is more important because those doctors believed

1:19:05

it. They thought that it was true. I was

1:19:08

just talking to a doctor recently that regretted taking it

1:19:11

and they they really believed. Yeah.

1:19:13

They believed they believed they were telling people what

1:19:15

to do and now they're injured and you

1:19:18

know. Yeah. And then they have this practice

1:19:21

where they've told people this is

1:19:23

what you should do and then a bunch of people did it and got

1:19:26

all fucked up and now they're in

1:19:28

a situation where it's not just that they got

1:19:30

fucked up but like how much time they have

1:19:32

left. Like how many of these

1:19:34

people are gonna drop dead over the next five

1:19:36

ten years. Yeah. Because it's not just one, it's

1:19:38

not just two. There's probably gonna be a bunch.

1:19:40

There's a bunch of people out there with like

1:19:42

real myocarditis. There's a bunch of people out there

1:19:44

that have blood clots. The D Dimer

1:19:46

test. There's this doctor on Twitter the other

1:19:48

day was talking about how it's very rare

1:19:51

that he uses an D Dimer

1:19:53

test on unvaccinated patients and finds blood

1:19:55

clots but he finds a ton of

1:19:57

them on vaccinated patients. Yeah. And some

1:19:59

of them micro blood clots,

1:20:02

some of them are significant, but that they

1:20:04

find quite a few. Yeah, there was a

1:20:06

paper recently, I haven't delved deeply into it,

1:20:08

but that just says, you know, that the

1:20:11

spike protein, which is obviously produced by the

1:20:13

shots, is interacting with fibrin, which is a

1:20:15

clot-producing protein. So

1:20:17

it's not surprising that it's having these

1:20:19

cascading effects. But, okay,

1:20:22

so you had all these doctors who gave terrible

1:20:24

advice to patients. They assured them not only that

1:20:26

this was the right thing to do, but that

1:20:28

it was safe, which they should have known better

1:20:31

because it couldn't possibly have been. And there's

1:20:37

no course taught in

1:20:39

medical school about, you know,

1:20:42

repentance. How do these

1:20:44

people repent for what they did

1:20:46

so that they learn the lesson and it can't

1:20:48

happen again? And the fact is the whole system

1:20:50

is rigged around pharma and they

1:20:53

can't. There's so many people out

1:20:55

there that are still all in. I found

1:20:58

some lady in my timeline. I

1:21:01

don't follow her, but she was talking about

1:21:03

how disturbing it is to her that

1:21:05

children are not being vaccinated

1:21:08

and that COVID is killing

1:21:10

kids and the reports that she

1:21:12

has of child death. And

1:21:15

she was talking about how she wears a mask

1:21:17

everywhere. And then there's all these people in the

1:21:19

comments that are commenting on that. I only go

1:21:22

to places where I know there's going to be

1:21:24

minimal amounts of people. I always wear a mask.

1:21:26

And they were all like, it

1:21:29

was some weird echo chamber where

1:21:31

they were all terrified still of

1:21:33

what is now like a cold.

1:21:36

Well, I will resist portraying it as

1:21:39

a cold because I do think that

1:21:42

ain't where we are. It's not a cold to

1:21:44

you, right? When you got it, it was rough. I

1:21:46

got something that was pretty rough. But

1:21:49

let's put that aside for a second. Let's say that

1:21:51

this is not a very severe disease. And by the

1:21:53

way, I will just tell you at

1:21:55

the risk of opening

1:21:59

old controversies. It

1:22:02

took me a long time to understand

1:22:05

that ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine,

1:22:08

they have broad applicability across RNA

1:22:11

viruses. And many of the things

1:22:13

that make us sick are RNA

1:22:15

viruses. So

1:22:18

there is a strong argument to be made

1:22:20

that in a world where we are now

1:22:22

being exposed to all of these RNA viruses,

1:22:25

that acting quickly and

1:22:27

taking those things is a reasonable thing to do. So

1:22:30

hydroxychloroquine may have more toxicity than ivermectin, in

1:22:32

fact it does. But ivermectin

1:22:34

has such a low toxicity that

1:22:37

from the point of view of not doing

1:22:39

the damage to the body that comes from

1:22:41

being sick with these pathological agents, simply

1:22:44

being reflexive about taking this stuff

1:22:46

quickly is sensible.

1:22:48

And of course, if

1:22:50

what I just said is correct, you would

1:22:53

expect pharma to look anywhere but there, because

1:22:55

they can't patent this stuff. Right. So

1:22:58

did you see Chris Cuomo on

1:23:01

Patrick Bette David's show admit that he's taking

1:23:03

ivermectin now? I heard

1:23:05

about it. I didn't see it. He admitted

1:23:07

it. He admitted his doctor has him on

1:23:09

ivermectin for long COVID. And he kept distinguishing

1:23:11

the difference between long COVID and vaccine injuries.

1:23:13

Like he said, had some sort of a

1:23:16

vaccine injury. Then he was talking about how

1:23:18

ivermectin is not good for COVID but it's

1:23:20

good for long COVID. And I'm like,

1:23:22

what is long COVID? Long COVID is not even a thing.

1:23:24

Like stop saying that. You're

1:23:26

fucked up because either of COVID or

1:23:28

you're fucked up because of the vaccine.

1:23:30

One of those two things happened where

1:23:32

you got damaged. Calling it long

1:23:35

COVID is weird because it's like saying

1:23:37

you're still sick from COVID. That's

1:23:39

not really what happened. Okay, if you get

1:23:41

pneumonia and you get lung damage, you don't

1:23:44

have long pneumonia. You

1:23:47

had damage to your lungs. It's not

1:23:49

long COVID. So you're either taking ivermectin

1:23:51

because your doctor said, like what benefit

1:23:54

would ivermectin have on long

1:23:57

COVID? Like what does

1:23:59

that mean? Well, I mean... Or

1:24:01

vaccine injuries. It has a benefit for

1:24:03

vaccine injuries. We can just say that

1:24:05

empirically. People who have become successful

1:24:07

at treating these things tell us this. Which

1:24:10

vaccine injuries? COVID. But

1:24:12

which ones? Which specific vaccine injuries? You

1:24:14

mean what are the symptoms? Yeah, what

1:24:17

things? Things like

1:24:19

brain fog, fatigue,

1:24:21

neuropathy, these things. And

1:24:24

I actually have several friends who report

1:24:26

that they were suffering badly. I

1:24:28

sent them to Pierre. He treated them. Ivermectin

1:24:31

was core to the treatment. And

1:24:34

they report, I don't

1:24:36

want to say miraculous, but spectacular recovery.

1:24:38

Pierre by Pierre. You're talking about

1:24:40

Dr. Pierre Corey. Yep.

1:24:42

Who... Did he lose his

1:24:44

license or something? Yeah, I believe so. Or it's in

1:24:46

process. But they are punishing him for... For

1:24:49

talking about a beneficial medicine that

1:24:51

happens to not be patentable. Punishing

1:24:54

him for doing his job. Wild.

1:24:56

Yeah. Wild. It's

1:24:59

crazy. That's crazy. Yeah. That's

1:25:02

diabolical really. It is diabolical. So what would

1:25:04

be the mechanism as to which Ivermectin would

1:25:06

help these people? I

1:25:08

don't know. It has a number of

1:25:10

different mechanisms. It's certainly an anti-inflammatory. You

1:25:14

know, there's only so far that explanation will

1:25:16

take you. But

1:25:19

it... I don't know. I can't answer

1:25:21

that question. I understand. But I can say it

1:25:23

really doesn't much matter if you're sick and it

1:25:25

makes you better. That's what you want. Our

1:25:28

understanding of how many medicines work

1:25:31

is pretty... But isn't it bizarre

1:25:33

when people that have been vaccinated

1:25:35

not once but multiple times and

1:25:37

had side effects from the vaccine

1:25:39

that they'll report openly, will

1:25:41

talk about it and say it's long COVID

1:25:43

while they're still suffering. It's almost like they

1:25:45

alleviate themselves from any of the responsibility of

1:25:48

making a terrible choice. I

1:25:50

think they're also being fed this story.

1:25:52

Right. And we've seen that

1:25:54

in multiple places. So for example, you

1:25:57

remember these long debates about, well, okay,

1:25:59

yes. mRNA shots do cause a

1:26:01

certain amount of myocarditis, but not nearly as

1:26:03

much as COVID. And it goes away quick.

1:26:05

That was the other thing they kept saying.

1:26:08

It's temporary. Yeah, which is nonsense. And it

1:26:10

turns out now that the myocarditis

1:26:13

appears to have been vaccine-induced myocarditis

1:26:15

that was being just like everything

1:26:17

else happened with COVID. I

1:26:22

don't want to say an accounting error.

1:26:24

It was cynical. They shoved things into

1:26:26

the wrong category. Right. And they also

1:26:28

pushed out a narrative that you get

1:26:30

more myocarditis from the virus, rather, than

1:26:33

you do from the vaccine. Right. And apparently,

1:26:35

you don't get it from the virus. Yeah,

1:26:37

well, what you do is get you get

1:26:39

hydroponin levels, right? And Asim Mahaltra explained

1:26:42

all this, is that when you test

1:26:44

for that, you can assume if a

1:26:46

person is suffering from a viral infection

1:26:49

that they will have high troponin levels.

1:26:51

But it doesn't mean they have myocarditis.

1:26:53

Right. So you're calling it myocarditis without

1:26:55

actually doing an MRI on the heart.

1:26:58

Right. And as I've pointed out

1:27:00

in many different places, myocarditis is

1:27:03

kind of a red herring anyway, because

1:27:05

what it means is inflammation. And inflammation

1:27:07

is there for a reason. There's an

1:27:09

underlying pathology. And so the fact that

1:27:11

we can detect that you have myocarditis

1:27:14

means, well, OK, something's up with your

1:27:16

heart. What is it? And the vaccines

1:27:18

create damage in the heart. They

1:27:20

create damage because they get taken up

1:27:23

by heart cells. Those heart cells produce.

1:27:25

Explain the whole thing with lipid nanoparticles

1:27:27

so people understand why they cause damage.

1:27:29

So the way these shots were supposed

1:27:31

to work is

1:27:34

you have an mRNA transcript that is

1:27:36

loaded into lipid nanoparticle. The lipid nanoparticles

1:27:38

are injected. We were told that they

1:27:40

stayed in the deltoid where they are

1:27:43

injected. They do not. They circulate in

1:27:45

the blood and lymph. Lipid

1:27:47

nanoparticle and lipid means. And this is proven. Yeah.

1:27:50

Lipid nanoparticle. Lipid

1:27:53

means fat. You may

1:27:55

remember from high school chemistry that like

1:27:57

dissolves likes of fats dissolve other fats.

1:28:00

So you've got this thing encased in

1:28:02

fat, any cell it encounters is

1:28:04

covered in fat. So it gets

1:28:06

taken up by cells haphazardly around the body.

1:28:09

Those cells take the message,

1:28:11

the mRNA transcript, into the

1:28:13

cytoplasm. They translate it

1:28:15

into protein. And that protein gets

1:28:18

exported to the surface of the cell. This

1:28:20

is how the manufacturer wants it to work.

1:28:22

Now if it happened in your arm, okay.

1:28:26

But if it happens in your heart, well,

1:28:29

anywhere it happens, it will trigger your

1:28:32

immune system to spot this antigen that

1:28:34

it doesn't recognize. And

1:28:36

T cells will

1:28:38

come in and kill the cells that are

1:28:41

making this foreign protein. Because in

1:28:43

natural circumstances, any time a cell makes

1:28:45

a foreign protein, it

1:28:48

has the signature of a virally

1:28:50

infected cell. A cell is producing

1:28:52

self-antigens and foreign antigens. That's a

1:28:54

virally infected cell. No matter what

1:28:57

place in the body it exists, the right thing to do

1:28:59

is to destroy it. So the immune system comes in, T

1:29:02

cells destroy that cell, and that leaves you

1:29:04

with a wound, right? You've lost cells that

1:29:06

were doing something. Most

1:29:09

of the tissues of the body can tolerate

1:29:11

a certain amount of that. But in your

1:29:13

heart, you can't tolerate very much because the

1:29:15

heart has an extremely low capacity to repair

1:29:17

itself. It scars instead, and it takes time

1:29:20

to scar. You have a wound until it

1:29:22

scars over. So those wounds are

1:29:25

vulnerabilities. If you're

1:29:28

an athlete and you've got a wound in your heart

1:29:30

that you don't know about, you

1:29:32

could easily die because you have a weakened

1:29:34

wall in the chambers of your heart and

1:29:37

something breaches at the point that your blood

1:29:39

pressure is high in the middle of some

1:29:41

activity. So my

1:29:43

point is, when we say

1:29:45

myocarditis, we are effectively

1:29:49

accepting a place holder

1:29:52

for, that there's an underlying pathology that

1:29:54

we haven't found. And that pathology can

1:29:56

be damage to the heart, which is

1:29:58

very serious in hand. inherently it

1:30:01

compromises your lifetime capacity for your

1:30:03

heart to function and

1:30:05

in the short term it creates a substantial

1:30:08

vulnerability to Cardiac

1:30:12

incidents and

1:30:15

so these injections which

1:30:17

were supposed to stay local is

1:30:19

it because that they didn't aspirate

1:30:22

That they get into blood vessels like what is what

1:30:24

is the reason why it gets through the entire system?

1:30:26

Well the aspiration issue

1:30:28

I believe is a contributor,

1:30:31

but I don't think it is the

1:30:35

determinant so in the

1:30:37

case that Just

1:30:39

to explain what people what you're getting at when

1:30:41

you inject somebody Pulling back

1:30:43

on the plunger in the syringe

1:30:45

allows you to see whether or

1:30:47

not you have accidentally landed inside

1:30:49

a vein If you pull back

1:30:52

and you see blood the tip of the needle is

1:30:54

at least partially in a vein and if you inject

1:30:56

there It doesn't go into the

1:30:58

spaces between the cells in your muscle. It

1:31:00

goes into your circulation that's

1:31:03

a bad thing you plunge the needle

1:31:05

in you pull back on the syringe and On

1:31:08

the plunger and you see blood then you should

1:31:10

plunge in further so that you're no longer in

1:31:12

that blood vessel But we never saw that in

1:31:15

fact people were specifically told not to do

1:31:17

it and the rationale was They

1:31:20

did not want to create vaccine hesitancy by

1:31:22

leaving the needle in the arm any longer

1:31:26

than necessary, so they

1:31:28

did end up doing a certain percentage of

1:31:31

intravenous accidental intravenous injections and

1:31:33

that means that a globule

1:31:37

of this stuff went immediately into

1:31:39

the circulation which meant that

1:31:41

if it went to your heart and got picked up there

1:31:43

it might Not just be a small number of cells. It

1:31:45

might be a large number of cells. So

1:31:47

that was a completely unnecessary

1:31:50

level of harm Aspirating

1:31:53

the needle was the right thing to do and they

1:31:55

should have done it and they didn't and who knows

1:31:57

how many people have Died because they got a big

1:31:59

dose intravenously where it was supposed to

1:32:02

be intermuscular. And that seems so straightforward

1:32:04

that I can't imagine that they were

1:32:06

showing people doing it any other way

1:32:08

on television. Yeah. And when they did

1:32:10

the president, remember when they injected him

1:32:12

on television? They stuck it right in

1:32:14

there. Well there's a question about

1:32:16

what they injected him with, but yes,

1:32:19

whatever happened on television. Are you

1:32:21

suggesting that that was deception? They

1:32:24

didn't give him this life-saving

1:32:26

vaccine? Well here's the problem.

1:32:29

I don't know how dumb these people are. It

1:32:33

seems to me, let's just let's just

1:32:35

play this out with

1:32:38

sort of standard parameters. Inoculations

1:32:43

cause a

1:32:45

certain number of acute adverse

1:32:49

reactions. These

1:32:51

people wanted everyone injected.

1:32:54

They didn't want us talking about

1:32:56

injuries that were real, right?

1:32:58

They went out of their way to

1:33:00

make sure that nothing

1:33:02

caused anybody to have the sense

1:33:04

that there was some problem with

1:33:06

them. Do we really

1:33:08

think they rolled the dice injecting an old

1:33:11

man with an active

1:33:13

shot on TV? I don't

1:33:17

think so. I suggested it back then and

1:33:20

I got called to kook. But

1:33:22

I was talking about there was a

1:33:24

lot of people that were talking about

1:33:26

being injured and they were getting

1:33:28

attacked. Like remember when they were going after

1:33:32

Eric Clapton? Yeah. Remember that one? Oh

1:33:35

yeah. That was horrific. Ficious. I mean

1:33:37

full bore attacks on Eric Clapton. I

1:33:40

mean calling him the most hurtful

1:33:43

words and anti-vaxxer. He's always

1:33:45

been a terrible person and like,

1:33:48

the fuck are you talking about? Yeah,

1:33:50

the gaslighting of the injured is

1:33:52

insane. Insane. Especially

1:33:55

you've asked people to do something. There's

1:33:58

always adverse events. How

1:34:02

is it that somebody who suffers

1:34:04

an adverse event is not entitled

1:34:06

to our compassion? I don't understand

1:34:08

how you would turn vicious in

1:34:10

that case. And how can you

1:34:12

rationalize continuing to have these companies exempt? Oh,

1:34:19

you can't. It doesn't make any

1:34:21

sense. Especially if they're that profitable. Because

1:34:23

we know that if they're profitable they're gonna keep selling stuff.

1:34:27

Yeah, well, let me put it to you

1:34:29

this way. I

1:34:32

think it makes sense to

1:34:36

establish a policy that

1:34:38

I will not accept any medical

1:34:40

product for which the manufacturer is

1:34:42

not liable if it goes wrong.

1:34:46

This episode is brought to you by Simply Safe. I

1:34:49

talk a lot about taking care of

1:34:51

yourself, you know, working out and eating

1:34:53

right. But that also means you should

1:34:55

be doing what you can to stay

1:34:57

safe. And no one does safe, quite

1:34:59

like Simply Safe. They have

1:35:01

some of the best home security systems

1:35:03

on the market and they make it

1:35:05

so easy to protect what you care

1:35:07

about most, you and your family. With

1:35:10

fast protect monitoring and live guard protection,

1:35:12

their agents can respond within five seconds

1:35:14

of receiving your alarm. They can even

1:35:16

see, speak to, and deter intruders

1:35:18

in real time. I

1:35:21

really like that there's no bullshit with

1:35:23

their pricing. There's no hidden fees or

1:35:25

extra costs. You know exactly what you're

1:35:28

paying for. So if you're gonna trust

1:35:30

anyone with you and your family safety,

1:35:32

trust Simply Safe. They've been named best

1:35:34

home security systems by US News and

1:35:37

World Report for five years running. And

1:35:39

right now you can get an exclusive

1:35:41

50% discount on a new system plus

1:35:44

a free indoor security camera with fast

1:35:46

protect monitoring. Just visit

1:35:48

simply safe.com/Rogan. But this

1:35:50

offer is available for

1:35:53

a limited time only.

1:35:55

So be sure to

1:35:57

order today. That's simply

1:35:59

safe.com/Rogan. There's no safe like

1:36:01

simply safe and that's

1:36:03

not medical advice. That's legal advice. Yeah Yeah,

1:36:08

cuz there's just too much room for fuckery

1:36:10

and profit When when they know

1:36:12

that something is profitable and they know they can get

1:36:14

away with it because they don't have any liability at

1:36:16

all They're gonna fuck

1:36:18

with you. They're gonna gaslight you they always have

1:36:21

because you have two different types of people, right?

1:36:24

They're involved in any

1:36:26

kind of medication. You have the

1:36:28

scientists and the clinicians that Develop

1:36:31

these things and create these things and

1:36:33

then you've got the money people and

1:36:35

the money people they're not even scientists What those

1:36:37

people are interested in is making the most amount

1:36:40

of money for their company. In fact, they have

1:36:42

a They have a

1:36:45

responsibility to their shareholders, right to make a

1:36:47

ton of money. Absolutely make more money every

1:36:49

year So if they know that they can

1:36:51

get it's their job as CEO to push

1:36:53

that shit through use Oh, why do you

1:36:55

have all those connections and all those relationships

1:36:57

if you don't utilize them to help our

1:36:59

company? Isn't that why you get a fucking

1:37:02

gigantic salary every year as a CEO

1:37:04

of a pharmaceutical drug company? And

1:37:07

don't you understand the relationship that we have

1:37:09

with the FDA and the CDC has been

1:37:11

we have cultivated this this relationship forever So

1:37:13

we have a revolving door to make

1:37:15

it nice and easy so the people that are in charge

1:37:17

of regulation They get a nice sweet job a nice

1:37:20

sweet golden, but we got it locked in you

1:37:22

got locked up Let's sell the shit sell

1:37:25

it well, the fact is if You

1:37:28

understand how the market is supposed

1:37:30

to do its magic This

1:37:33

doesn't work even in principle just

1:37:35

simple evolutionary dynamics

1:37:37

Guarantee that corporations that

1:37:39

are not responsible for the harm that

1:37:42

they do will start making a

1:37:44

profit by doing harm Right.

1:37:46

Yeah, they will be out competed by

1:37:48

other corporations who do if they don't show

1:37:50

it is guaranteed that they will move in

1:37:53

that direction Which is why I say you

1:37:55

shouldn't take any product produced by

1:37:57

an entity that is not liable for the

1:37:59

harm harm that it does to

1:38:01

you. It just doesn't make

1:38:03

any sense. Yeah, anything. Anything. Across

1:38:06

the board. Yeah. Yeah, it's

1:38:08

just bizarre that we let that slip through

1:38:11

because they had decided at one point in

1:38:13

time that vaccines create so many problems, there's

1:38:15

no way they could sell these and be

1:38:17

profitable and have a legal responsibility. And

1:38:19

our government was like, all right. All

1:38:22

right. Yeah, no responsibility. I don't think most

1:38:24

people know that little fact

1:38:26

that you just mentioned. In fact, they

1:38:28

were granted immunity from liability because they

1:38:30

said it was impossible to make safe

1:38:32

vaccines. Yeah, explain when this happened

1:38:34

and how it happened to people so they understand that this

1:38:38

is an issue that came up because

1:38:40

of problems from vaccines. Yeah, I believe

1:38:42

it happened in the Reagan administration that

1:38:45

they were reluctant to make

1:38:49

vaccines. The Reagan administration wanted them

1:38:51

to ratchet up production and they

1:38:53

said, it can't be done safely and

1:38:55

they were granted this immunity and the system,

1:38:57

the various system was set up and a

1:38:59

special court was set up to adjudicate cases

1:39:03

and tremendous

1:39:05

amount of evil has flown

1:39:08

from that fateful decision, including

1:39:10

the proliferation of the childhood

1:39:12

vaccine schedule. Yes, which is

1:39:15

right now pretty fucking insane. There's

1:39:17

so many of them and they give them to them so quickly. From

1:39:20

the moment they're born, they want to bang them

1:39:22

up with vaccines. And it's incredibly

1:39:25

profitable and people

1:39:27

who are kind people, who

1:39:29

are intelligent people would never imagine there are

1:39:31

human beings that are willing to profit off

1:39:33

of injecting babies with things that may very

1:39:35

well fuck them up for the rest of

1:39:38

their life. They're like, there's no way, no

1:39:40

one's that evil. It's hard

1:39:42

to imagine. And then when you start

1:39:44

looking into the evidence, it's like, oh my goodness.

1:39:46

Oh, well, you look at just the history of

1:39:48

vaccines themselves. You read turtles all the way down

1:39:51

or dissolving illusions. You're just like,

1:39:53

wait, wait, wait, wait, wait. What?

1:39:57

What happened? Because all our lives.

1:40:00

Vaccines are the most important invention.

1:40:03

Vaccines saved countless millions of lives. Vaccines

1:40:06

the way we can be safe today. Vaccines

1:40:08

are the... So that was one of the

1:40:10

dirtiest tricks about this mRNA technology, that they

1:40:12

piggybacked on an old word that already had

1:40:15

pass. It already had a hall pass.

1:40:18

Yeah. Yeah. It's

1:40:20

crazy. I mean, you know, Heather and

1:40:22

I wrote into our book in 2020 that

1:40:26

vaccines were one of the three

1:40:28

greatest medical inventions in history.

1:40:31

You know, the other two being surgery

1:40:33

and antibiotics. And

1:40:36

I still believe that

1:40:38

in principle, there is something potentially

1:40:40

very medically valuable there. But

1:40:42

in practice, the way we

1:40:44

produce these things, the way we

1:40:47

manufacture them, the way the technology

1:40:49

on which they are based has

1:40:51

been modified, right? The idea