Episode 443 Scott Adams: Checking Your Gullibility Scorecard

Date: 2019-03-09 | Duration: 54:44

Topics

Basing border security decisions on what we care about Trans participation in sports Elizabeth Warren vs. Google, Facebook, Amazon Who are the “brains behind AOC”? Hoax review - Keeping a mental scorecard, which did you fall for? Hoax scorecard - Whiteboard Occam’s Razor is an illusion Simulation Theory is supported by top, key scientists Patreon alternative: WhenHub’s Interface app now has Donate button Donate/support anyone who has an Interface account

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

[0:09]

hey Daryl April come on in here I hope that you got up early and made a big pot of coffee that's how some people say it coffee I say it coffee but it's just as delicious either way and if you're ready I hope you are grab your cup your mug your glass your Stein your thermos your t anchored your chalice fill it with your favorite liquid I like coffee and join me for the simultaneous
sip ah yes we'll do the simultaneous to one of these days um that's on my to-do list but today let's talk about a a few things I was thinking about border security and about how uh both sides tend to talk past each other for example one side says the percentage of crime from illegal immigrants is lower and other people say but the

[1:10]

lower and other people say but the number of crimes is higher so they're not even really talking the same language so that allows them to talk past each other without addressing the point of the other and I thought to myself wouldn't it be more um more accurate if if the concern is a humanitarian concern and we have some sense of how much crime is happening uh not just crime in the United States but crime in terms of how many people are being victimized on the in the process of illegally immigrating if we have those numbers couldn't we put our border security objectives in terms of how much crime you're willing to accept so for example you go to the Democrats and say I don't know what the number is but let's say the number is 100,000 um rapes in X years whatever that is so you go to the Democrats and

[2:12]

that is so you go to the Democrats and say our current rate with our current border security is that 100,000 women get raped every X years or every year or whatever it is what is your goal and if you say well I think I'd be okay with 95,000 rapes because that's sort of what they're settling for which is a an incremental Improvement on the border so if it was 100,000 the and they're only willing to you know reduce the rate of illegal Flow by a little bit then they're okay with 95,000 so could we instead of talking about price which is all we've been talking about so far well it's not all we've been talking about but we we tend to focus on right is it 1 billion or is it 5 billion is it 3 billion or is it 3.5 billion we and we end up starting to think that price is the primary variable

[3:14]

think that price is the primary variable just because we talk about it the most but the one thing that both sides agree is that1 to5 billion doar isn't much money in terms of the whole budget so since we are both sides concerned about the humanitarian crisis could we not say well the Republican goal is to get the the amount of crime as close to zero as possible so we're going to spend to pursue our goal of getting zero now you can't get to zero but you can certainly you have that as a a stretch goal and then you can say what would be the competing goal how many how many how many crimes are you trying to get down to we're shooting for zero um would you be okay with 100,000 so let's compare the compare the two um aspirations the Republican aspiration is for zero crime we don't

[4:14]

aspiration is for zero crime we don't think we can get there but that's what we're shooting for the Democratic aspiration is for 100,000 rapes per year because that's what they would be willing to fund as long as as long as both sides agree that you're not running out of money why don't you put the put the topic in terms of the thing you care about the humanitarian interest just a thought um here's another thought I have not talked about this yet so here's the first time I've talked on this topic transgenders competing um and I want to be careful since I rarely talk about this topic um I want to make sure I'm using the right language CU unlike many of you I actually think it matters to refer to people in the way they they're comfortable being referred to and I don't mind at all when any group says hey stop using those words we prefer it when you use these words because those

[5:14]

when you use these words because those other words are offensive in some way and so I'm I'm always okay with that if if some if the elbonian want me to call them some word I'm okay with that um I I would do the same in person so I would certainly do it you know on a on a national scale if somebody wanted me to call them by a certain name in person I would certainly do that so I just extend that same thinking so the issue in the news is that someone uh born male uh but now I guess could be described as trans you know help me with the language because if I use the wrong language it's on potential so it's a transgender person who born born male but is competing in a female Sport and winning so so some people are saying that's no fair because you have whatever genetic advantages of being born as a

[6:17]

genetic advantages of being born as a male with maybe greater greater muscle strength Etc so that's not fair some people say it's not fair competing with the women because you're just winning everything you you're just basically winning everything here's my opinion on that totally okay with it totally okay with the Trans uh Community competing in the competing in the area that is their current identity here's why you want to hear my argument here's why do you ever watch LeBron James compete against somebody who is not LeBron James have you ever seen LeBron James uh you know running down the court in basketball and there's a there's a a 6 foot2 guard who's the only person left to defend the

[7:17]

who's the only person left to defend the basket do you know what happens to that 6 foot2 guard who's trying to stop LeBron James one-on-one at a basket it doesn't go well for the six went to guard LeBron James treats him like a rag doll and here's the thing why is it fair that LeBron James can play play basketball why is that fair because you look at the court and there's nobody else on there's nobody else on the court who can compete with him physically he is physically Superior to pretty much everybody else on the court now the other team might have a big guy and maybe you know maybe that's a little bit closer in competition but Sports is sports is something that's completely um predetermined that we enjoy by imagining it's not all right so since I don't believe in Free Will and I think the

[8:18]

believe in Free Will and I think the world is largely predetermined um the game is sort of decided before you play because things are only going to go the way they're going to go if the Golden State War Warriors are playing the worst team in the league do you have to wonder who's going to win you don't if if the Golden State Warriors are perfectly healthy there's not really much competition but we still play the game you know if they're playing let's say the the worst team in the league there's not really much competition so my point is that every competition is an unfair competition when Tiger Woods goes out on the golf course does he have the same genetic composition as I do if I practiced really hard could I play as play as well as Tiger Woods I don't think so I don't think so I think he probably has better eyesight maybe hand

[9:19]

probably has better eyesight maybe hand eye coordination he might you know his his brain is probably wired in a way that mine isn't isn't argued there really is no such thing as a a fair athletic event there are only athletic events where you don't know how they're going to turn out and and most of the time you do know how it's going to turn out most of the time you can look at two teams and say oh there's this is the number one team this is the you know toward the bottom team we kind of know how this is going to end but you'll watch anyway so um given the sports are a random collection of very unequal people and and it shouldn't it should not entertain us but it does I would say that the the trans variable is just one more variable um it's kind of it's somewhat of a random choice to say that you know that men and women should be in different

[10:20]

different leagues I I get why we do that to make the competition seem like it's a little more fair but the fact is uh Sports in general are this super unfair situation where people who are bigger taller faster you know smarter have amazing advantages so if you just throw in somebody else who has an amazing Advantage it's just more of the same to me all right I know you don't like that but I thought I'd throw that in there for controversy um I was amused that Elizabeth Warren somebody says that's moronic you left out the reason you left out the reason here's the thing you either accept that Sports is something where some individuals have extraordinary advantages over other people on this on the field or you don't if you're okay with some players can have extraordinary advantages some people can be LeBron and

[11:20]

advantages some people can be LeBron and some people aren't if that's okay I don't see why it makes any difference uh if you allow trans to compete where the most comfortable all right Elizabeth Warren said she wants to bust up the big tech companies Google Amazon and Facebook what's the funniest thing about Elizabeth Warren Warren running for president saying she wants to break up Amazon Google and Facebook the funniest thing about that is the only companies that can make her the president of the United States are Amazon
Facebook Elizabeth Warren might have the worst political instincts of anybody I've ever seen in my life somehow she hasn't noticed that you can't become president unless Google Facebook and Amazon are you know kind of pushing for you now Trump did but he didn't you know

[12:23]

you now Trump did but he didn't you know he didn't uh rail against those companies they were against him uh but it's a little different when you're you're trying to break them up and destroy their business model I would not expect fair treatment from Google or Facebook if I were Elizabeth Warren so on a strategic level is literally the worst thing you could say to try to get elected I can't imagine I can't imagine a worse strategy for becoming president than to go against the very companies that can decide whether you get to become president or not now Trump Trump obviously uh is a different animal um if Elizabeth Warren had Trump's game they would be more of a fair fight but that's not the case all right I'm seeing a lot of uh speculation on the question of who is the brain or brains who are the brains behind AOC have you seen that a lot on

[13:26]

behind AOC have you seen that a lot on mostly social media so people are asking me all the time do you who who's the brains behind her who is it who's you know advising her because she keeps being successful in the sense of getting all the attention and you know managing she's going kind of managing our thoughts about the Democrats right now so who who's behind her a number of people have pointed me to
to Clips video clips of her Chief of Staff I don't remember his name doesn't really matter and people said he he's the genius look at this guy and uh I've watched some clips of him and uh I would say that he's I don't think he's the genius behind your persuasion it that doesn't come across he might be very good at what he does and some of that is the the data you know the data or the strategy part so he he could be very good at that I don't

[14:26]

he could be very good at that I don't know but um I don't say signs that he's the persuasion expert my guess is my guess is she's the she's the persuasion expert so uh those of you who ask the question you know who who are the brains behind AOC I hate to tell you might be her yeah that's my best guess my best guess is that she is the brains behind herself I see no reason to rule that out because all evidence suggest she has she has a lot of game all right now if I haven't made you mad enough yet here's the fun part um one of the things I recommend for understanding reality and understanding your place in it is to keep a a uh mental scorecard of how many hoaxes you fall for because if you find that you keep falling for hoaxes you should modify

[15:26]

falling for hoaxes you should modify your confidence about the next story if you're always right and you always see through hoaxes well maybe you could raise your confidence about the next story and so I'm going to talk about some hoaxes and I want you to score your own success now I will warn you in advance some of these hoaxes you still believe are true so so so you're going to get you're going to get a little worked up here in a minute so I'm going to call some things that many of you think are true I'm going to call them hoaxes but uh try to keep with the concept the concept is that one should keep a running scorecard of how many hoaxes they fell for so I'll show you in my case so here's here's some of my lists did you fall for the fine people hoax in other words did you fall for the idea that the Trump called racist in

[16:26]

idea that the Trump called racist in Charlottesville fine people he didn't but it was reported as if he did I did not so I give myself an a because I did not fall for that one did you believe that Q was a real Insider who had secrets about uh president Trump's Administration I did not if you did fall for Q that's that's you know that's a a mark on your record how about piz gate I never fell for piz gate from the first second I said no no so I never fell for pizzagate did you if you did now by the way I'm not going to say that the podesta's artwork is totally legit so I'm not going to go so far as to say that there's no such thing as people who have uh you know bad instincts and and bad you know practices but the the pizza gate part of it specifically that there was a pizza

[17:27]

specifically that there was a pizza parlor that part I never believed rush cusion I never believed it Kavanaugh accusers I did think that um Chris Christine whatever the first one I thought her presentation was credible at first but it fell apart quickly and I certainly never believ the the subsequent accusers that were kind of ridiculous so um I don't believe the accusers were telling the truth at this point um the Vegas shooter when people said it was Isis I said it is not when Isis took they actually took credit for it and I still said in public that it's not Isis even though they it's very rare for them to take credit for something they didn't do I said yeah this time they did it and I went against the grain and I was right Jesse Smet I never believed that um I I stayed out of the conversation

[18:29]

um I I stayed out of the conversation just because I didn't want to yeah I don't like to muck things up early on in a story like that so sometimes I wait on the the personal violence personal crime ones I kind of waigh a little bit but I never believ that one that was fishy from the start the Covington situation I got taken on that um I don't think I don't think that's the worst problem in the world because I was looking at it with my own eyes usually if you're falling for a hoax you're not looking at it you know in real what you think is real time and seeing it on video so it's kind of rare to be taken like that um but I was taken I quickly corrected when when more information came out some people believe there was a secret Sonic weapon maybe the maybe the Soviets or not Soviets maybe the Russians were behind it uh I said no there is no secret Sonic weapon at the embassies and sure enough none has been discovered um how many of you thought Michael

[19:31]

um how many of you thought Michael Jackson was innocent of accusations of of Serial child molestation uh I did not think he was innocent and I watched the I just watched the second part of the uh uh leaving Neverland situation and um I know some of you may still disagree and I'll tell you I had this weird situation where so I watched the leaving Neverland um special and in which there are two people who give great details of you know yearslong uh abuse at the hands of Michael Jackson allegedly um in my opinion it's completely credible uh and I would say you know if you if you put a gun to my head and said you have to Bet Your Life did he do it or did he not do it I'd say I'm not even worried he totally did it click so uh but somebody else who watched it

[20:31]

so uh but somebody else who watched it about the same time and went into it believing that he was not guilty so somebody who started out thinking he was not guilty watched the same special I did at the same time and decided well he's probably still not guilty now uh you can still argue about it but the concept here is that you should keep track of what you believed so should you you know find a confirmation one way or another um then you can adjust your scorecard in my opinion this is already confirmed so you can you you can disagree with it at this point but in the concept of keeping your scorecard it's good enough for me that um I've decided he he is guilty of the crimes he's committed birtherism did you ever believe that President Obama was not a US citizen I never believed that uh life abortions I don't know if you can see

[21:31]

can see that uh many of you still believe that uh there was ever any intention for a live healthy baby to be born and then the doctor and the mother could say ah no we just we don't want this baby let's just let it die many of you still believe that that was
was proposed I believe that was never proposed and was and is still a hoax all right so I get I get it you don't think that's confirmed in my opinion it's confirmed in the sense that it would be easy it would be easy to show this is true and it's never happened it would be easy just show the language and then have somebody who supports the bill say yeah that's that is actually what it means it does mean a healthy baby is born and and that we can let it die that's exactly what the laws intended and that's what somebody wants if you don't hear that it's just not true uh

[22:33]

don't hear that it's just not true uh the context for this law as I understand it I know I understand that lots of you are saying I'm wrong I I see it don't worry the context as I understand it is that they're only talking about babies who were in a hospice situation in other words they were aborted in the you know up to the last day of pregnancy they were aborted and they did they did they survived but they do not look like they would survive in other words they're not going to last long it's a hospice situation so I think that was the context those of you who think it was not a hospice context I believe you have fallen for a hoax and people are saying be yes the Virginia governor explained it yeah there are two misleading videos one of a Virginia governor who's who if you asked him to follow up would clarify and then there was the woman who was pushing it who also said something completely um out of

[23:36]

context those of you who believe this hoax um I'm let me let me say as clearly as possible to change my mind you would just need to show me an interview with somebody who explains it the way you believe is true not an interview not a clip right not a clip of those two people so find somebody that is not the governor in that one clip and not the one clip of that that woman who was uh doing a bad job of answering the question so without those find any evidence that somebody intended to let a live baby that otherwise would survive that they would let that die just just make your case all right did you believe that tax cuts would uh would bring in more tax revenue than it would subtract did you ever believe that the president's tax cuts would lower the national debt I didn't believe that and

[24:36]

national debt I didn't believe that and sure enough it hasn't it hasn't worked before so I didn't believe it this time did you believe that uranium 1 was a big uh you don't have to tell me about gnell gnell is not part of this law that was being uh that was being suggested so that's not relevant to the question um did you believe that uranium 1 was a big
problem here you go sorry did you believe that uranium 1 was a big problem I did not you know what was always missing from the uranium one story what was always missing is that we can just buy uranium and on the open market anytime we want we can go we can go to uh uh Australia or Canada and say hey do you want to sell us some uranium and they'd say yeah we got plenty it was never there was never anything to except

[25:36]

never there was never anything to except a I think a Fox news story uh climate change let's call that an open question whether or not that's a a a hoax in either direction so it's either a hoax that is not true or it's a hoax that it's true but somebody's getting hoaxed here my preliminary opinion on climate change is this this is preliminary because I'm still doing a extended Research into it as sort of a citizen
preliminary uh preliminarily I would say that I could uh say the following for sure if you imagine that science in general you know publish papers Etc are wrong about half of the time which apparently is true so half of all published scientific papers turn out not to be reproducible not to turn out not to be solid then on top of that climate

[26:37]

to be solid then on top of that climate change adds a what i' call a marketing piece so where they say stuff such as 97% you know agree you don't have to be a scientist to know that that's a BS number and it's it's the way they count it that matters it's not it's not a good representative of the truth representation of the truth because in fact even the Skeptics agree with the question the way it's asked the CO2 does increase warming even Skeptics say that they just don't think it's the problem that the other side says so if you take uh the best case scenario for climate change is that probably half of the studies are fake just like every other scientific situation because about half of all studies done out to be BS so if half of the science is BS in a normal way just every not everything is right on the first try and then there's a big chunk that's also marketing BS I would say that the climate change

[27:40]

BS I would say that the climate change issue it's very possible that 75% of everything you hear about climate change is wrong and still could be exactly what the climate scientists say is true so these two things would not be in conflict you could have half of the science wrong about climate change and then on top of that you could have a whole bunch of you know BS about that's essentially marketing let's say the the projection models the you know the statements about the Hurricanes getting worse and the Super Storms and the bad predictions and all that so you could have 75% of climate science be complete and still be completely true that wouldn't even be unusual in fact that's my care my current opinion is that it's at least 75%
75% which in no way changes the possibility it's entirely true true

[28:40]

possibility it's entirely true true meaning that there's a big risk and that humans are warming the planet I haven't ruled that out but on the skeptical side uh it's at least half for sure because you know I'm no expert but even I can look at a lot of the skeptical arguments so a lot of the skeptical arguments are things such as I think the climate scientists forgot to include the sun well I'm no expert but I'm pretty sure the top scientists in the world whether their climate or not didn't forget the Sun so there are a lot of things that um the Skeptics say that are just so obviously that you know that doesn't tell you that the other things that other Skeptics say are also wrong so it's entirely possible that oh let's just pick a number for a conversation it would be possible for

[29:43]

conversation it would be possible for 95% of everything that the Skeptics say to be complete and still be right they could be wrong about 95% of their criticisms but if there's just one thing they're right about that the temperature isn't going up if that's the only thing they're right about well they win you know even if 95% of the stuff they say is complete anyway Seth rich I know some of you think that's an open question I would just say that uh I don't have an opinion on that but um in terms of let's say when I say I don't have an opinion I would say I don't believe Seth Rich was married was murdered by Clinton people so I don't believe it's true but I also don't believe it's ruled out in the sense that I suppose anything's possible um Chemtrails are are I'm not even going to talk about those those are too ridiculous and then did

[30:44]

those are too ridiculous and then did you believe that Trump was crazy that you know that the 25th amendment should kick in and and take him out I did not I did not believe that and the evidence suggests that he is not crazy all right do you have other uh other conspiracies that you want to put on the
angry that's the oh the uh the Omar Scandal is a hoax in was sense
all right uh yeah I didn't I did not believe that OJ was innocent so I got that one going yeah I thought I thought OJ was guilty um now ask yourself how many of you

[31:46]

you got well 911 um I'm pretty sure 911 was really an i Al-Qaeda operation uh but the the question of building seven I would say there's there's some question about that but that doesn't need but in terms of you know why why something happened there that's hard to explain I don't know we don't know the why we just know there's something about building seven that doesn't doesn't fit the official story um I just don't know
why so Syria gas attack I said was fake um and we now know that at least some part of the Syria gas stories were faked I think we know that right what we don't know is if there were real attacks but to make those real attacks look

[32:48]

but to make those real attacks look worse because they didn't film them did they do a little faking to draw attention to it so we we don't know if the faking was really just marketing something that really happened but they didn't get any pictures that part I think is still open to
debate somebody thinks Michael Jackson is not guilty if you've seen the leaving Neverland uh special uh you're allowed to have that opinion um
you're the Glenn Greenwald article on Omar I don't know what he wrote about Omar would we flood if I ice caps keep melting uh I don't know I'm not sure that that falls into the hoax uh Area 51 I don't believe anything about captured aliens I do not believe captured aliens in Area 51 uh Charlesville plus Trump saying white supremacy were good people well

[33:49]

white supremacy were good people well that was the first one on the list the fine people hoax uh I never believed that he was talking about the racist as fine people and of course he wasn't uh yeah let's let's just talk about the current ones Benghazi Benghazi is more of a mystery so there's something about Benghazi that doesn't make sense in other words there's just information we don't have that's as far as I could go in Benghazi Catholic priest molesting young boys I always believed that that was happening massively and it is
is um Bill Mah was rough on Michael jacksson well yeah you ought to be Iraq weapons of mass destruction okay that's a good question weapons Iraq weapons of mass destruction uh I'm trying to go back in time and remember what I believed about

[34:52]

time and remember what I believed about that um I think I believe that they had them I think I believe that with pretty much everybody else at least citizens vaccines causing autism um it's unlikely to me that the antia are well I'm going to say let me qualify this when people talk about vaccinating versus not vaccinating there are a few different issues um one is whether there's safe and the some of the anti-vaxers have an argument that I find intellectually um intellectually valid which is that when they test uh when they test a vaccination it is not tested in a package with all of the other vaccinations so if if you test it individually and your body is fine with

[35:54]

individually and your body is fine with it you haven't really tested what happens if you give somebody a package of vaccinations all at the same time now I think it's true that that hasn't been tested now that's different from saying we therefore know it's dangerous I just think it hasn't been tested uh so that would be a valid concern without a conclusion uh in terms of the people who say I watched my child go from you know a you know a good kid into some problem right after vaccination uh I don't believe most of those are true I do believe given that any kind of drug could have a uh could have a bad effect for some people I do believe it's entirely possible that in some rare cases the vaccination is What Hurts the kid I'm sure that that could happen just because that wouldn't that be true of any Mass use of any chemical there's

[36:56]

any Mass use of any chemical there's going to be somebody who has a bad reaction to it but in terms of the number of U parents who have reported an otally uh I would say that probably most of those reports are confirmation bias cognitive dissonance people looking to blame somebody that's not themselves you know somebody looking for an explanation for something that's hard to explain so I would not [Music] believe I wouldn't believe uh in General parent reports uh CU there's they would they would not be credible by their nature and then there would also be coincidence because kids get uh kids get vaccinated and then there are also bad things that happen to kids people you know their their minds may snap at some point they may have some other medical issue that you can't identify so it seems very normal that

[37:57]

identify so it seems very normal that there should be if if you have a big population so let's say you have a big population some number of those kids are having health problems for different reasons all the time if you say now on Tuesday we're going to give everybody in this group a vaccination what are the odds that somebody in this big group has a terrible health problem within a day of getting a vaccination that's 100% because it would have happened anyway there there getting health problems all the time in this population and some of them are going to get a health problem right after they got the shot the parent is going to say well that's not a coincidence I got the vaccination the kid got a health problem it's obvious it's obvious it couldn't have been anything else but it isn't obvious you would not be able to sort out coincidence from that have you ever seen Tony podesta's art I would say that Tony podesta has a lot to

[38:58]

Tony podesta has a lot to explain with his art now uh having the art that Tony podesta has which shows children in various suspiciously non-artistic contexts non-artistic meaning it's hard to imagine how anybody would look at it as standard art it looks more like a celebration of young boys if you know what I mean but does your choice in art necessarily mean you're violating the law in some terrible way not really so I would not say that his artwork is confirmation I would say if I had to bet you know if if you said look at Tony podesta's artwork and now you have to bet you don't you can't you can't recuse yourself you have to bet is there something we should worry about there or is is no big deal if I

[39:59]

about there or is is no big deal if I had to bet I'd say there's something to worry about I would say the odds of somebody having that artwork and also having a totally let's say legal and innocent approach to life is low it's low but it's not guaranteed so I would not want to live in a world where people could be accused of crimes because of their choice of art so uh I would only talk about Tony podesta because he's already in the news but other words otherwise I think it's an inappropriate it's an inappropriate line of
of conversation uh you know if I didn't invent this topic so it's already out there um but I I wouldn't talk about it on my own just because I thought oh somebody with this kind of artwork must be a criminal that that's not a connection you want to make or or a world you want to live in

[41:07]

uh somebody says if it quacks like a duck you that's probably one of the worst uh rules of thumb you could ever have somebody said if it if it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck it's a
a duck maybe there was a time that used to be true maybe it was there was a time when you could just look at something and say all right this is just so obvious what the hell else could it be maybe there was a time but we don't live in that time now you know now if you see a video of the Covington kids you say to yourself well I'm looking right at it if it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck whoops it's fake news so uh these days you should not trust that rule I think it used to be a reasonably good rule rule of thumb but it's no longer a good rule uh Tim p and Joe Rogan talking about Twitter and YouTube I don't know which part would be the hoaxy part aam

[42:09]

which part would be the hoaxy part aam Razer of course is an illusion it's a good concept that that the simplest explanation for something is is probably the right one I like it as a concept in practice we all think our explanations are the simple one here's an example create aist how did the world get created simple God did it simple then you talk to the uh evolutionary biologist hey evolutionary biologist how did the world get created you know how did all these species get created and the evolutionist just says Evolution simple what's simpler than that things change over time we already know that's true simple right so everybody thinks their explanation of reality is the simple one which tells you that that rule is useless if we all think we see the simple explanation and well how about

[43:10]

simple explanation and well how about that it just coincidentally it uh it matches my opinion is God a hoax uh I'm going to answer that with uh famous atheist Richard Dawkins quote which which is that as an atheist uh he only believes in one less God than you do because if you think about it there are a lot of religions a lot of religions a lot of different versions of God the difference between somebody who has chosen one of those gods and of and of all the different religions and different versions of gods if you've only chosen one of them to believe you're only one different from an atheist they just believe one few are God now sort of a you know clever funny way to say it but uh the answer is that if you believe that out of all those religions you pick the right one

[44:10]

those religions you pick the right one well you could be right you might be you might be right maybe you picked the right one it's possible but if you're confident about that well that's more of a lifestyle choice
um somebody says the difference between believing in one and zero is immensely more than one and the percentage of people who can't get a joke just about 30% of the population yes I know it's not technically similar that believing in one God is very close to believing in no Gods it's a joke that's a joke how about intelligent design intelligent design uh in let let me uh give you some context back in the 90s I wrote a book called The Dilbert future and I made the following provocative uh

[45:13]

following provocative uh prediction that has haunted me and become quite a problem in my career but I'm also right so I took a chance that I could get beat up for 20 years in return for being right because if you're right about something that you've been beat up for 20 years it's it's a nice payoff right so I was right about President Trump winning the election I got beat up for a year and a half but I was right right so here it is in the 90s I made the following prediction I said that the theory of evolution and let me remind you that in scientific terms Theory means true in in conversation when you say something is a theory you mean it might be true might not be it's just a theory but when scientists talk about the word theory they mean we know it's true that's what it means in science terms the theory is true so the

[46:14]

science terms the theory is true so the theory of evolution means that the scientific Community has a consensus not everyone of course but as a solid consensus says that evolution is true I predicted in the '90s that in scientific terms not religious terms but in scientific terms that science would debunk Evolution specifically because we gained a new understanding of reality itself so I did not predict the evolution would be debunked uh in favor of the Bible I did not predict that it would be debunked in favor of a religious um interpretation nor did I say that it would be debunked in terms of um intelligent design now for 20 years when I do anything in public or write anything somebody will appear on in the comments and say this freaking idiot said that

[47:17]

and say this freaking idiot said that evolution is is uh not true and that he must be a creationist Etc so they they make some assumptions which are not in evidence well time goes by and now we have simulation Theory simulation theory is supported by actual scientists there are people who work in the scientific Community uh Nick Bostrom being the primary one but other other people have joined the joined the band and the ideas that uh if a society such as ours could create a simulation in which the creatures in the simulation believe they were real then it probably is already happened and it may have happened thousands or millions or trillions of times already and therefore the odds of us being an original species when there would be so many copies and simulations for each species that reaches our level of

[48:18]

reaches our level of sophistication uh the odds that were an original it's possible but it's very very low so if my opinion that interpretation is very close to being proven out meaning that Evolution doesn't make sense if we're a simulation if we're a simulation wait for it here's the key if we're a simulation then we're writing the past as we go in other words the past didn't exist it's something we discover in the present and it gets Rewritten the way a video game would put in scenery but only when your character enters that new place all right so if a video game adds scenery to a situation that your character has not yet visited it's as if it added history it's as if it added the past because those those brains in the simulation in the video game are a story

[49:20]

simulation in the video game are a story of the past you know they started as a seed they grew so a video game creates history in the present and there's evidence that we do the same because if um if you look at there's something called the double slit experiment in physics and you can you can you can prove and this is very repeatable experiment that you can change the past uh I won't try to explain that because the double slit experiment is very confusing so just you know go Google it if you want want to read up and it'll break your brain but basically if somebody can see something or if there is a measuring device you can change what happened in the past and that's that's understood science now if it's true that you can change the past and it seems that we've proven that that would tell you that whatever you used to think about time was wrong we don't know if it's

[50:22]

time was wrong we don't know if it's wrong in a big way or a small way but you were certainly wrong if you thought that the past causes the present and that's the end of the story it could be that the past causes the present the present sometimes causes the past could be complicated but at the very least it's not a Straight Arrow of time the way you the way Evolution requires all right
angry uh I usually get angry at product that are poorly made there's nothing that makes more more Angry than using a product that was designed to be used in the dark quite often and it has a black interface on a black product so you can't see the buttons now here's an example of a good product right this is is made of color that's easy to find you don't even need to see any buttons it doesn't even have

[51:23]

to see any buttons it doesn't even have any buttons these are the earbuds from Apple this is like a fantastic product whoops I just kicked myself on offline by doing that I think um so it's it's a white color so it's easy to see and low light there are no buttons to find this is a product that got
got tested um compare that to the um to the jack on the bottom of your iPhone how many times have you tried to get that Jack and you know to get the cable in there and you're like or worse yet the micro USB that's it's got a right side up and a wrong side up how many times have you put it in a micro USB and it's upside down and you're like try the other way and then it doesn't work the other way either and you realize that really the first way was the way be and you just didn't have it lined up so you turn it back to the first way and then it doesn't go in again you realize really that it was the

[52:23]

again you realize really that it was the second way that was the right way and you already tried it but you didn't have it lined up so you go back to the second way who tested that these are so poorly designed do you know how easy it would be to fix this problem of finding the hole it would be really easy it would be really easy all you'd have to do is make the the plastic approach to the hole funneled so that if you're if you got anywhere near it in the funnel and you kept going down the funnel would take you into the into the Jack all you'd have to do is make that opening a little wider and funneled and it just goes right in simplest thing in the world all
right uh apple apple certainly fixed one thing which was by making the the cable work upside down and right side up that was that was of course great but they

[53:24]

was that was of course great but they need to fix the entry to the you know the tapered entry till you get the tapered entry you got
uh wireless charging yeah Wireless chargings okay all right I think I've said enough that's enough for now I got to go do some work and I'll talk to you uh later but not until I say that you should try interface by whenhub um we now have added a donation button so anybody who got deplatformed or just wants to have another place if you're a Creator and you want to raise funds you can get donations on the interface by whenhub app and if you're an expert of anything or you just want to be somebody who gets paid for your time online you could go on there and

[54:25]

time online you could go on there and you could you could help the world uh especially looking for people who are um addiction counselors and addiction folks they would be highly um highly useful on the app all right that's enough for now and I'll talk to you later