Episode 340 Scott Adams: Our Useless Congress, Climate Hoax, Flynn Pardon, Wall Funding

Date: 2018-12-17 | Duration: 45:52

Topics

The wall isn’t a political decision…it’s an engineering decision Only engineers can determine an effective solution Congress can’t act, cause both sides need to win Will President Trump pardon General Flynn? The only serious crime committed…was by our government Morally, legally, politically, a pardon seems 100% certain Why can’t we have a “poor person’s insurance plan”? Climate alarmists vs. Climate Skeptics Both are equally persuasive How can non-scientists know who is correct? We need both sides in the same room to work it out A famous stock scam is eerily similar to climate science EVERYBODY believes in climate change Recent poll said 75% in favor of immigration Isn’t it 100% favor, and just a question of rate and process? The way that everyone is going after Trump is changing politics Proposed new law for non-disclosure agreements (NDA) Legal in all cases to pay someone to be quiet for a LEGAL act Cohen issue could be taken off the table by congress Fix this for President Trump and every future President China is an extremely successful country, why? Are more human rights always better? People who are NOT climate skeptics… …have NOT been exposed to the better skeptics side Looking at BOTH sides, the skeptics side is more persuasive The skeptics might be wrong, but they’re more persuasive What happens to models that don’t support climate change?

I fund my Periscopes and podcasts via audience micro-donations on Patreon. I prefer this method over accepting advertisements or working for a "boss" somewhere because it keeps my voice independent. No one owns me, and that is rare. I'm trying in my own way to make the world a better place, and your contributions help me stay inspired to do that.
See all of my Periscope videos here…
https://www.pscp.tv/ScottAdamsSays/1nAKERDOwylGL
Find my WhenHub Interface app here…
https://interface.whenhub.com

> [!note] Rough Transcript
> 
> This is an auto-generated transcript and may contain errors.

## Transcript

[0:07]

but um Oh Joanne you're quick as always hello everybody come on in here it's Monday it's 7 a.m. ish on the Pacific coast of beautiful California and that means it's almost time for coffee with Scott Adams technically it's already time but we haven't had the simultaneous sip and so if you will join me for the simultaneous if it happens now are any of you aware of the controversy happening about the patreon system patreon is where people like me Jordan Peterson Dave Rubin etc we we get most of our income from the least the video part of our lives through small donations people make a $1

[1:07]

through small donations people make a $1 donation usually and apparently patreon just kicked off somebody named sargon of akkad I don't know anything about him but apparently he said something that crossed the line and he got deep platformed and that is causing a number of people to quit the patreon platform so so my my patreon account just plunged and I looked at it was like what why did that go down it turns out there are a lot of people just quitting the platform over that yeah Sam Harris apparently quit and we're talking about people who are making you know serious amounts of money on that platform we're just leaving it without anything else lined up that's pretty big statement I have not left it so don't leave me yet but it looks like something might be happening there that would make the world a better place we'll see let's talk about the wall

[2:12]

we'll see let's talk about the wall funding once again I find myself shaking my head at the massive incompetence of the press and the massive and competence of our government and too they sort of have to work together to sort of double the incompetence because you and I are you know we're sitting here today if I said to you how much of the border should be a wall and how much should be other stuff fence or electronic whatever what would you say well you might say politically well it's all got to be a wall or you might say politically it mostly should be a fence but it's not a political decision it's a it's an engineering decision has your media source explained to you how much should

[3:13]

source explained to you how much should be a wall because because engineers say that's that's a good solution there mine is not I I sampled media from both sides I've never seen any kind of an engineer even being interviewed about the wall have you can you think of any interview with somebody who actually knows something about border security talking about how much should be a wall and how much should it be something else nothing you have been absolutely screwed you know you and I citizens of this country absolutely screwed by our news sources because our news sources need to tell us that because the citizens are the only ones who can break the the the log jam so right now our politicians are in you know complete gridlock because they can't decide to do anything useful

[4:14]

can't decide to do anything useful because it would allow the other team to win so both sides say I'm not going to budge because I don't want the other team to win the only way that can really change at least in a product way the only way it can change is to inform the public and there are no new sources trying to do that at all so the biggest thing missing here is not you know who wins the President or Nancy Pelosi who is the winner none of that it should just be the citizens looking at some experts saying it should be this much wall or walls don't work or why don't we try some wall there there are a whole bunch of rational things you could do with the wall question and so far we're doing none of them there are lots of ways this could be a rational process but we're not doing any of them we're just talking about who's going to win and because the news the you know the

[5:15]

and because the news the you know the business model of the news is not to tell you boring but useful information is to get you to click and buy things and and to interact we don't have a way to get from here to there there's no path from where we are which is the public is completely uninformed about what we should or should not do with thee as I call it the whens yeah if you if you say it's a wall plus a fence it's a wince so I say build that whence some of its walls some of its fence let the engineers decide but but just think about how underserved you are by your by your news sources that you don't know that you don't know how much should be a wall you don't know how well it would work you don't know if it should be tested you don't know if there you know have an experience with something you don't know any of that and yet you know you're supposed to be an informed citizen so it's it's criminal how

[6:17]

citizen so it's it's criminal how under-informed we are let's talk about flip so I guess there's some stuff going on with land and sentencing and whatnot and the recommendation is for no jail time from Muller I guess now let's say the plan Flynn gets no jail time or
or even if he does we're trying to figure out the odds that the President of the United States will pardon him I want to see your your estimate your predictions first what are the odds from zero to 100% that the president will pardon Mike Flynn general Flynn give me your give me your percentages I see a hundred one hundred hundred hundred hundred ninety nine hundred well you guys are pretty confident 2500 hundred so it seems the vast majority of you think it's

[7:18]

vast majority of you think it's something close to a hundred percent some people saying zero it's a binary world here's my estimate 100 percent in fact if I'm wrong about this I would be so surprised you know sometimes you you make a prediction and you think you're right but rarely have I ever been this confident in a prediction this is a confident prediction unless there's some new information right so I could always throw in that hedge unless there's something new that comes out this is the most pardonable crime I've ever seen in fact if you if can you tell me any crime that is more deserving of a pardon than this I've never heard of one in fact everybody that I know who gets pardoned

[8:18]

everybody that I know who gets pardoned has committed a pretty serious crime has general Flynn committed a serious crime it's not even clear that he did he did anything but get trapped in fact I would argue that this is one of those cases where there is a serious crime committed by the government and when the government commits a serious crime against the citizen as is apparently the case maybe not in the legal sense but certainly no morals against general Flynn who has 30 years of service to this country I think a pardon is a no-brainer it would be the safest easiest the best pardon the president never gave secondly it allows the president's story to get more attention so what could be a better way for president Trump to discredit the witch hunt than to pardon Flynn because

[9:20]

witch hunt than to pardon Flynn because he is a victim of a witch hunt it's exactly the right story that you want to have as much air as possible because if the president pardons Flynn the news business has to talk about it non-stop and they can't avoid talking about the fact that it looked like it was a setup and he was squeezed to get the president and it was a massive just massive
what would you say miscarriage of justice so given that we want our justice system not just to follow the law although that's always the prime directive but we also want justice and this is one of those cases where it seems to any reasonable observer I would think that following the letter of the law in this case is a miscarriage of justice that's exactly when you do a pardon so if you look at it from the

[10:22]

pardon so if you look at it from the moral standpoint you get you should get a pardon if you look at it from a legal standpoint of how you know unusual it is that they would even the government would pursue this I would say from a legal perspective it looks like a pardon is due and then from a political perspective it's perfect it's it's literally just perfect the president couldn't be in a better position to give this pardon so in every dimension that matters pardon if I'm wrong about this I'll just be amazed now I don't know when it'll happen you know might maybe has to wait a little while or something but if I were Mike Flynn I would be worried just because she should always be worried in these situations but I would be personally I would be really disappointed in my president if this isn't if this is not a pardonable situation I would be very

[11:22]

pardonable situation I would be very very disappointed in my president so I think it'll happen no we're talking about Obamacare again because the judge who struck it down but probably that'll be overturned in Supreme Court or whatever so we don't know how that's going to go but I say again what is it that prevents the United States from simply having more than one system why can't the people who want something like universal health care have it and the other half just not have it because we have records we have databases and if as long as you make sure there's a wall between the people who have to pay for the free health care and the people who don't have to pay isn't there a way to work that out isn't there some way to just say okay your your in the aid group you're in the B group the B group never has to pay for anybody else's healthcare but nobody's going to pay for yours either the a group they get to live their socialist life and they get to tax

[12:23]

socialist life and they get to tax themselves for that what possible problem is there with that is there a problem does anybody see a problem with that idea by the way I suggested this a while ago and so out of the box because we're just we're just a program to think that there should be one set of laws for the United States but there is no reason for that somebody says cost I don't think that's such a big deal because whatever economies of scale you can get with 325 million you can kind of get with a hundred million if you have a hundred million customers you've got some economies of scale and you would also be competing against another system probably good - I would still love to see somebody put together what I would call a poor person's insurance plan which would have the following items and I just like to see them put in one place

[13:24]

I just like to see them put in one place an article or a blog or just in one place something that's like a catastrophic insurance only so just for the hospital stays and the big stuff some kind of insurance for that what would that cost and then a direct care doctor situation where you only you maybe pay a hundred fifty dollars a month and you can use the doctor all you want but just this one doctor or some combination of telemedicine where people who talk to their doctor on their app what would that look like you know how much would that cost compared to the other alternatives I'd love to see that anyway so switching topics people like to send me links to climate sceptics and one of the things that you will learn if you listen to climate alarm skeptics and you also listen to climate alarm alarmists the one thing that you should

[14:24]

alarmists the one thing that you should find is that no matter which group you're listening to there very persuasive so if you're only listening to the Pro Climate alarm people that they're completely persuasive if that's all you heard now if you listen to only the skeptics the skeptics are wait for it completely persuasive because you and I can't tell the difference you and I can't I can't tell who's lying in terms of science you know how can I know if somebody's graph is correct how would I know and then I've said for I guess I've been saying this for three years now in public that unless you put the skeptics and and the climate scientists who say there's a big problem in the same room and give them as much time as it takes for them to talk about it in a way that you can follow along unless you do that you're not even

[15:26]

unless you do that you're not even really doing anything useful so let me put it that way there there's no conversation about climate that only shows one side that is even a little bit useful if you don't see both sides you're just not seeing it now why do you think it is that we have not seen that kind of programming well it might be because it's complicated and boring and and nobody could judge you what anyway so I would propose that we break down this climate thing into the smallest chunks just take one claim at a time and see if he can get a climate scientist and a and a skeptic to talk about just the one point and I'll let me suggest a one point that fits that category and that is the question of how much ice there is in the you know and/or glaciers

[16:27]

there is in the you know and/or glaciers and such so apparently the I'm listening to a skeptic here recently and the skeptics claim which I can't confirm or deny and that's my whole point you can't confirm it or deny it if you're just looking at graphs you're like well okay that's a graph I don't know who made that graph I don't know if the numbers are real it's just a graph and one of the things the skeptic claims is that if you look at NASA's graph of ice it looks like it started high and it's declining and if it kept declining at that rate it looks like the ice would melt and the oceans would rise and a few problems but the skeptic says that they they picked a time to start start looking at it that gives you a completely misleading idea of the trend in other words if you went back to the 70s you'd see that the ice was was it lower but anyway that the trend is

[17:29]

lower but anyway that the trend is completely obliterated if you go back another couple of decades so everything that the graph tells you about the ice decreasing in recent years is completely debunked if you go back a few more years because you can see that it's cyclical now I'm not claiming that that's true all I'm telling you is that there is a skeptic I don't know who it is I don't know what their qualifications are who has made a claim that looks very persuasive when I see it out of context so as long as I'm only looking at the critic it's totally persuasive that does me no good at all if I can't put that guy in the same room with it with the NASA person says oh yeah there's a perfectly good reason why we didn't start looking until this date and the reason is let's say the old information was apples and oranges so we don't really have a you

[18:31]

oranges so we don't really have a you know a predictable history based on the same criteria so we just started where we could and you know that's why we did until I hear why I don't know anything don't know anything but I will tell you this there is a financial scam that works exactly like what the climate alarmists are doing that doesn't mean that what they're doing is a scam but it does mean that their communication plan is packaged exactly as a scam here's what how this game looks let's say you're a financial investment firm and somebody says oh boy with eyes rolled you haven't even heard what I'm gonna say so if you're let's say you're an investment fund and you're presenting yourself as a fund that can pick stocks

[19:31]

yourself as a fund that can pick stocks and can do it better than average and so you should put your money into this fund because they're really good at picking stocks on your behalf do you know how they advertise let me tell ya stock funds tend to have good periods and bad periods that are up a little bit they're down a little bit they're up a little bit they're down the period when do they show you the chart they don't show you the whole period of the last five years they wait until there's a period where their stocks have gone up and then they take a snapshot of just that period especially if it's the recent period and then they say look what we've done everything everything in this chart is true and we could back it up look at this chart in the past two years we've killed the market we're just absolutely obliterating the market in the last two years here's my chart you can't argue with it these are real numbers but it's a scam because what they did was is they ignored the last

[20:33]

they did was is they ignored the last five years where they were under water or just average right everybody's going to have a good period with stocks so where do you see the climate information presented the same way as a well known well understood no question about it scam if you have to package your truth in a scam package my eyebrow goes up and I say why must you package it in a way that is identical to known scams why would you do that is it because you don't know that it's identical to scales I need an answer to that and until I know the answer that it's hard to come up with a judgement if you look at financial scams they have a lot in common with the way climate science is presented which doesn't make climate

[21:35]

presented which doesn't make climate alarm a scam but you have to ask why is it presented exactly like one here's another thing you would expect of a scam you would never put the critics in the same room with the people making the claim right you would never do that because because it can't survive it the reason that the financial people give you the chart of just this you know the final most reason here because I happened to go up that year is that nobody's going to give the counterpoint there's nobody who gets the other chart and says ha ha I'm going to put an advertisement right next to yours that shows the 10 years before that that you lost money because they don't have a counterpoint the financial scam works now if you can't put your skeptic in the same room with the alarm person and still sell your point do you have a

[22:37]

still sell your point do you have a point if you can't survive the skeptics do you have a point I'll get rid of this so there's somebody saying that I'm buying the big oil story I think I just told you exactly the opposite idiot sorry I blocked him anyway I think what I just said is I can't tell if the I can't tell if the skeptics or the alarmists are correct does that sound like buying big oil story idiot no that's exactly the opposite sorry it doesn't seem to you that people have gotten stupider in the last well you know it feels like the last month the stupidity level has just gone through the roof there was some guy on Twitter I ended up getting in an accidental controversy with yesterday

[23:38]

accidental controversy with yesterday who is some some guy who said that a recent poll said that you know 75% of people were in favor of immigration so take that and I thought to myself 75% of people are in favor of immigration isn't it closer to a hundred percent I've never even heard of anybody who was in who isn't in favor of some form of immigration so he claims victory against all Trump's Porter's I guess by saying that a poll said that most people are in favor of immigration well big freaking surprise a hundred percent of the world is in favor of immigration we just want to you know do it in some different ways a little bit and I'm looking at stuff like this online and I'm thinking what is wrong with people what the hell is wrong with people it does feel like they're getting dumber and I wonder if there's actually something to that do you think that people are getting dumber at least in

[24:42]

people are getting dumber at least in terms of critical thinking or is it just that the dumb people used to be easier to ignore maybe that's it maybe it was easier to ignore the dumb people before
Big Oil versus the earth I don't know what that means and immigration is not migration correct yes so then yesterday somebody told me that the critics like to say this the trolls they like to say well your boy meaning President Trump your boy is in trouble now he's got six different states or after him and bla bla bla bla bla bla here's the thing I'm wondering about the Trump situation with all of the hoaxes and investigations isn't this guaranteeing

[25:42]

investigations isn't this guaranteeing that will never have an effective government again there's something about the the way everybody's going after Trump which tells me that if it works and they take him out one thing you won't the Republicans take out the next Democratic president and don't they have to you know I'm typically not the one who says oh oh let's get revenge on them because they got revenge on us well wha but if the if the Democrats are successful in taking out President Trump or even just making him harder to do his job dealt the Republicans have to return in the favor it's sort of a mutually assured destruction situation in fact I will go further I would say that if President Trump were to let's say go to jail I think that's deeply deeply unlikely but if it did happen don't you think they'd have to take Hillary Clinton's in

[26:43]

they'd have to take Hillary Clinton's in jail over something I mean you could always find something right it feels like they both have to go to jail if either one of them did so there's that but I have a funny idea for you all right so we've got this lame-duck Congress which is still at least on paper Republican in Congress so they could pass something so they would be able to pass something but only under the conditions that the you know the next Congress doesn't overturn it right there would be no point doing that let me suggest the law for the existing lame-duck Republicans to pass are you ready for this it would be hilarious and completely doable this would be completely doable there's nothing that would stop them from doing it and the law would look like this we would state that it is legal in all cases to pay somebody for a non-disclosure agreement in the context

[27:45]

non-disclosure agreement in the context of an election and that it would never be called an election expense so you narrow it you narrow it so it's a very specific to paying somebody to be quiet it doesn't matter if it's a girlfriend it doesn't matter if it's a co-worker or whatever now the requirement has to be that it can't be over an illegal act so maybe you can't pay somebody to to be quiet about something that was illegal but if somebody was involved with a woman or something that would just be embarrassing but wasn't illegal wasn't illegal why can't Congress just say we make that legal in all cases that never be prosecutable as a as an election crime because we just made it legal now I don't know how it works in terms of retroactive laws because if something's already happened if something's already happened can you

[28:46]

if something's already happened can you say it's not illegal in the past well as a practical matter it doesn't matter because if you if you imagine that something became legal during the time that somebody was in the you know the legal process by the time it got in front of a judge the judge would I think in every case say yeah used to be illegal Congress made it legal now so it would be a miscarriage of justice to prosecute you for something that is completely legal now all right so in effect couldn't Congress the Republicans take the entire Cohen situation off the table just by making it legal tell me that wouldn't work can any somebody says that's unconstitutional it's not unconstitutional how in the world could that be unconstitutional somebody says somebody saying that it's already legal

[29:53]

and I think you're probably right about that but wouldn't it be funny for the Congress to make it completely codified in law instead of sort of leaving it for lawyers to argue about whether it's legal or not
so understanding that some of you say it's already legal and I agree with you but you do understand that some big portion of the country who are trained lawyers think that a law has been broken so whatever it is that they think has been broken in this imagine if you will that the Congress just said RA is legal let's make the non-disclosure agreements paying for them with your own money even if you think it will help you in the election just make it legal

[30:56]

yeah I'm not seeing legal but not explicitly legal right now am I wrong that this is would be hilarious because it would just take the entire issue right off the map now what would the Democrats argue about that so here's the here's the other clever thing about it Democrats would have to argue that it should be illegal to pay for a nondisclosure agreement it's a terrible argument nobody wants to make that argument because the entire world revolves around non-disclosure agreements it's the most common thing in business everybody who has ever worked in business a signed a nondisclosure agreement right they can't there's no argument against it and it doesn't matter because the lame duck Republicans have a majority so I say why don't we fix it for President Trump just to get on with the business of the country but also fix it for every future politician

[31:56]

also fix it for every future politician who might be in the same situation it's got to be a common thing yeah and Congress spent millions for that same purpose why not make it legal for them too
it's funny I don't see much pushback on that now there may be some procedural or other reason why it's just hard to do
alright yeah the Weger topic yeah the so the Chinese do seem to be pretty dead set about keeping a religion and of their country you know it's hard to judge China because China is an insanely

[33:00]

judge China because China is an insanely successful situation and part of it is because there's such badasses in other words they you know they rule their own country with a harshness that we find offensive in this country but you have to ask yourself if China would be succeeding if they had the same set of laws that we have here it's a and I think the answer is maybe not but we'll see so on one hand it's of course a terrible tragedy if they're singling out nough crews for for bad treatment on the other hand what would would the world be better off if China was in some state of perpetual civil war I don't know how do you know if the reports are true good point we do not know if any reports about the Uighur minority are true it's exactly like the situation where the the

[34:00]

exactly like the situation where the the people coming out of Iraq before the Iraq Wars would say well bad things are happening over there take my word for it
yeah all right your comments are being read by me in case you wondered isn't better human rights always better well that's the question let's say you had a and I'm not I'm not comparing anybody to Nazis here but let's just say that China had a Nazi movement that was you know that was starting up would China be better off suppressing it or letting it go in in

[35:02]

suppressing it or letting it go in in the name of you know freedom of speech or something I don't know how would do we know somebody says you really don't believe in climate change that is a stupid question somebody said do you believe in climate change is there anybody who doesn't believe in climate change that is a stupid question they say there are no stupid questions but that was a stupid question everybody believes in climate change do I believe that the climate models are accurate no no I don't do I believe that there might be a risk yes I do do I think we should treat it seriously absolutely with that many scientists who are worried about it I treated seriously do I think that a 10% reduction in GDP

[36:06]

do I think that a 10% reduction in GDP over 80 years is enough to panic about personally no according to the climate alarmists their own numbers the you know we may have a 10% hit on GDP during a time when the GDP will be up by five times so it'll go up by five times but it could've going up a little bit more that's according to the climate report the government put down if that's the case no big deal and we've got 80 years to figure out technology to to take care of the problems as well as reduce it if if co2 is the big issue do you believe in magic I don't know what that means so here's here's the worst argument against climate alarm and it goes like this it's

[37:07]

climate alarm and it goes like this it's all being caused by sun cycles now I've told you I told you earlier that I can't determine between a skeptical argument and a you know a non skeptical argument I don't have the ability to detect who's right but there are some special cases where it's pretty easy to tell what's right one of them is the claim that the Sun cycles have perfectly predicted warming and that therefore that's all that's going on you know you have to just look at the Sun cycles or that's mostly what's going on here's the thing that seems like the easiest thing that NASA could ever check all right could there be anything easier to check than the Sun cycles because I guess we'd all be looking at the same data right if NASA has looked at all that data and just as now there's nothing here I can't check their work

[38:08]

nothing here I can't check their work because I'm not a scientist but the odds of them getting that wrong very small not impossible not impossible but if you're gonna bet on it I'd say the odds of getting the Sun cycle thing wrong from NASA very small now what are the odds that their long-range multi variable variate models are right and that they've taken account into all the things and they can really predict the weather well I think the odds of that are low but the odds that they got that sunspot thing wrong maybe very small chance they got that wrong I'm talking about NASA here now when I talked about earlier that NASA had a graph that said that the the ice the ice is you know melting around the world and then the skeptic says yes but you go back a few years and you can see that it's just cyclical what are the odds that the skeptic is right I don't know

[39:10]

that the skeptic is right I don't know 50 50 I don't know how to handicap that one but it does look like it's a solid argument I would love to hear the counter if I don't hear the counter to it I don't know what to think of it let me give you let me give you a challenge if you will maybe maybe challenge is the wrong word I I I assert that people who were not climate sceptics have never seen or be exposed to the skeptical arguments let me say this as clearly as possible the people who by completely into climate alarm this is my speculation have not been exposed to the better skeptics arguments literally have never seen them the people who are skeptical have been exposed to both sides and therefore I believe that

[40:14]

sides and therefore I believe that anybody who is the climate alarmists let's say a citizen not a scientist not talking about people who can look into the data but if you experienced both sides you would leave as a skeptic or more skeptical than you started you know you could there may be various degrees of skepticism so I've looked at both arguments and from a persuasion perspective the skeptics have the strong argument completely different from and I know you know there'll be 25 idiots on here who say well Scott while you're agreeing with the big oil companies just because you say the skeptics have the more persuasive argument no no I'm not saying that saying that I have no way to tell who's right the skeptics or the others can't tell but I can tell you who has a better argument meaning what is more persuasive and the skeptics by far have a more persuasive argument even if they're

[41:15]

persuasive argument even if they're wrong and I can't tell the difference so you have to ask yourself why the skeptics have the stronger persuasive argument even if they're wrong did I know that exon discovered global warming I don't know that that's true so I'm going to say no to knowing that since I still don't know if it's true well it doesn't matter that 0 of the models have been correct because the the models are showing an increase in the rate of warming so if there's an increase in the rate of warming kind of doesn't matter exactly how precise that is so on that in that sense I agree with the climate scientists that if all the if all the models go in the right direction that

[42:16]

models go in the right direction that would tell you something well we don't know and can't know is what did they do the models that don't point in that direction if somebody makes a model that doesn't fit within this fairly wide range of all the other models what are they going to do with that model I'm not gonna keep it they're going to tweak it until it fits people asked me about Mike sort of itch what do I think well wha why should I have been why should I have any opinion on that he has he has opinions about jump and maggot and all that and I would say he's got specific opinions on specific topics which is different from saying he's buying the whole model so I think it's it's perfectly reasonable for Mike to like some things and not like other things I

[43:17]

some things and not like other things I don't know that there's any story there
how to support this broadcast without patreon well if you don't want to use patreon the super hearts that are built into this periscope worked so somewhere in the bottom of your screen let's see if I can figure out how to point to it somewhere down there you should see an icon with a heart that's got little lines coming off it if you press it it would tell you how to have it give me a super heart as they call it which means that you you buy them for a few bucks and then you can give them oi so that would be a great way to do it where some Bitcoin I'm not accepting Bitcoin but thanks for asking however if you want if you had if you wanted to support me here you could buy the when when tokens that are part of my

[44:20]

the when when tokens that are part of my startup so that would be certainly the cheapest way that you could support me while also potentially becoming rich it's not an investment but it could happen
[Music] yes and you could buy a Dilber a calendar or you could buy when Bigley as a gift in fact the best the best thing you could do for B would be to buy a win big Li as a gift for Christmas if you did that one thing that would be amazing for me yeah if you go to La token that's an exchange la token dot-com I think la token la token you can buy the web and the when are the tokens that are associated with my interface app and you're going to hear a lot more about that in the next few weeks because we've got some big upgrades there talk about

[45:27]

got some big upgrades there talk about France you know France just isn't interesting what kind of coffee do I drink just Starbucks or whatever whatever is laying around I'm not a big coffee connoisseur all right that's enough for now I will talk to you all later