Episode 465 Scott Adams: All the Hoaxes are Being Revealed at the Same Time

Date: 2019-03-24 | Duration: 33:59

Topics

Top hoaxes by Dems are falling apart this week, one after the other Where is the Tweeter in Chief? Why post-Mueller major-win silence? Fox News Poll: Will Mueller report change your current opinion? 41% say Mueller report will NOT change their opinion Climate change project update Unexplained plateau and cooling period in middle of rising temps It’s off-model for a plateau and cooling to have occurred How does the pro-climate change side explain the anomaly? Mueller is finished, no new indictments FOX is taking victory laps CNN is pretending nothing happened MSNBC is sputtering and making up stuff

 Please donate to support my YouTube channel:
https://interface.my/ScottAdamsSays
I also 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

[0:10]

hey everybody join me in the theme song for coffee with Scott Adams I think you all know how it goes because it's different every time but sometimes it sounds like
this all right hello everybody is it a great morning or is it a great morning as mornings go this was one of the finest mornings of all mornings now let's hope the Muller report does not surprise us and disappoint us when we know the details but so far this whole no more indictments thing is looking good looking good so congratulations to Don Jr and Jared and anybody else who has been in the special council's crossfires and in The public's crossfires for for two
two years congratulations for your Vindication so it seems to me that there

[1:13]

Vindication so it seems to me that there are a a whole lot of hoaxes that got revealed this week hoax number one of course is the the mull report we'll talk about that a little bit
bit more but hoax number two if you following the Saga even Wikipedia has now corrected unless the corrections been changed again but it's corrected the record that the president of the United States never said that the racists in Charlottesville were quote fine people it's been reported as a fact for two years or whatever it's been but it never happened his quote actually excluded that the races specifically he called them out for total condemnation the opposite of how it was reported so the the Muller thing has fallen apart and the fact that Trump praised racist and Charlottesville fell apart both this week what were the two most important components of TDS oh you're right I've somehow skipped

[2:16]

TDS oh you're right I've somehow skipped the simultaneous sip but we shall not skip the simultaneous sip because it's time to raise your glass your mug your chalice your Stein your thermos if you will if you've got a tankered use that filling with your favorite liquid I like coffee and join me for the simultaneous
sip is in my imagination or is the beverage extra good today I'm not wrong right little extra good huh tastes good here's a little tip for you have you ever noticed that if you have some uh let's say keeping it rated G some intimate marital relations with your spouse have you ever noticed that the food you eat immediately after that is twice as delicious it's one of those things I noticed when I was I was I don't know probably in my 20s

[3:18]

probably in my 20s but if if you go to dinner let's say you go out to a nice dinner say within an hour or so of having some fun at home the food tastes completely different and you should try it it doesn't taste the same it's like well this is the best meal I've ever had uh somebody said extra salty all right you're you're terrible all right here's another uh hoax that got taken down today do you remember the Southern Poverty Law Center the Southern Poverty Law Center allegedly was an organization dedicated to finding the hate groups in this country and Reporting on them well it turns out that according to the New Yorker it was just a whole big scam and the and the top executives are resigning or got fired or something so the Southern Poverty Law Center which has been the bane of the conservative world because they've been you know identifying conservatives as as hate groups just got taken

[4:21]

groups just got taken apart this the SPC was an actual hoax it was just a scam now that's not to say that some of the groups they identified were not actual hate groups because they were and it's not to uh I'm not minimizing whatever they did against the KKK earlier apparently that really happened but the the modern version of the splc according to reporting Al I'll say that allegedly so that I don't get sued allegedly and according to reporting uh it was a giant scam and the people there were racists
oh that's the most delicious one of all it's not going to get as much attention this week because we're all looking at the Muller thing right but the splc turns out it wasn't real at all a total hoax maybe not total but a hoax nonetheless now if you really want to I

[5:23]

nonetheless now if you really want to I know a lot of you you're probably not proud to say this but if you feel like I do this week one of the things that you're asking yourself yesterday and today and and just tell me have you asked yourself this how can I most enjoy the Muller report news like what what can I do you know what news channel should I watch who should I talk to how can I how can I maximize my actual pleasure well one suggestion is I just I tweeted around uh um was last night or this morning an article by Matt taibe Now look for my tweet for a article written by Matt taibe who just tears apart the media and what's fun about it is that he's such a good writer H it's a it's a longish article but that's what makes it so enjoyable you start reading that article and you start

[6:24]

start reading that article and you start feeling oh yeah oh yeah Matt oh you're hitting it Matt you're hitting it and then you keep reading it and you're like Matt okay Matt whoa this is it just keeps getting better and better like I had to I had to give up I actually had too much happiness I couldn't read to the end of the article because I was actually so happy I couldn't read anymore it was so freaking good I me it's really good if you just want to enjoy the weekend and enjoy the let's say the enjoy the Gater level of awareness that the entire world has just has just gone to um the way i' put
put it is that we've all raised our awareness whatever you thought a week ago about the reliability of the news you don't think that anymore do you so whatever you thought about the reliability of the news just one week

[7:24]

reliability of the news just one week ago Gone Forever nobody will ever trust the news again and that's sort of what Matt TBE was getting at because he gives lots more examples that you've forgotten about or or you haven't put them in the same story but when you see them all collected together it's it will change you you read the Matt taii story if you've been let's say you've been casually following the Mueller stuff if you're a casual follower of the news and you read Matt T's article you will be changed you will never be able to see the world the same way again it's actually that powerful all
all right uh the [Laughter] president oh this this day couldn't be better so the president everybody's wondering where is the Tweeter and chief the the most prolific provocative

[8:25]

chief the the most prolific provocative provocative tweeter of all time just gets the second biggest win of all time all right winning the election was the biggest win he could possibly have but the Mueller no indictment part you know there still could be some bad stuff in there but the the no indictment part is about as big a victory as any president ever had in a in a domestic political context so what does the the most prolific provocative Tweeter and chief do when he has the biggest win of presidents ever had while already in office well not get let's say winning world wars and stuff but he goes the other direction he goes silent now some of the silence now he did tweet today we'll get to that but some of the silence until this morning may have been just his lawyer saying you know let's make sure we see what's in this thing before you get too

[9:25]

what's in this thing before you get too cocky so it could be that there might be a little bit of bad news in there and he doesn't want to Crow too much about it because then it will look like he's crowing about things but then there's a little bit of bad news in there and they go well you got ahead of yourself you you crowed too early or or you said Mission you said mission accomplished too early so there's a risk on the celebration side right so the president would have would be putting himself at risk if he celebrated a little too early but how can he ignore it he can't ignore such seemingly good news just because we're not 100% sure that it's going to end up in a unambiguously positive way for him so what is the smartest thing you could do if you were an experienced television personality you knew brand branding you knew promotion you knew the business model of

[10:25]

promotion you knew the business model of the press you knew the Public's feeling you knew the anticipation coming to this moment you knew it was the biggest the biggest moment in political history lately right I mean not forever but lately it's just one of the biggest deals the whole world was waiting for this thing so what do you do if you're the showman and chief nothing nothing I can't tell you how perfect doing nothing was because remember what is the what is the other thing people say about this president what is the other hoax well there's so many of them I I better narrow it down for you the other hoax is can't control
himself I have to stand up I just have to stand up to say this the other hoax

[11:26]

to stand up to say this the other hoax that we've been hearing for two years can't control his mouth impulsive can't control his
[Laughter] tweets you the uh the pure beauty of that decision to not tweet for 24 hours and then when he does tweet he says good morning have a great day I don't know how you rank these things right cuz you know it's easy to get impressed about something that happened today but maybe it's not the best tweet of all time so I won't say that the Tweet is the best of all time but the way he handled this
tweeting legendary all right now it could be it's just a legal strategy he doesn't want to

[12:26]

just a legal strategy he doesn't want to get ahead of himself so it it might not be as impressive as I'm hoping it is but what I hope is that think that he thinks he scored a complete Victory and he knew that the best way to play it was to stay silent for the first time ever now if that's what he did and we don't know right I mean it could be other factors but if he did it for the show oh my God oh my God it's just brilliant all right if if he did it for that reason now if he did it for other reasons who knows we'll find out
out later but just the potential to me the potential that he did this just to be a showman is so delicious it's you'll never be this entertained by another president it's just not going to happen all right uh apparently Rachel maddow's uh reaction to the Muller report is quote this is

[13:28]

to the Muller report is quote this is the start of something apparently not the end of
something well okay see how that goes um I told you that the Muller report probably wouldn't change more than uh I said 10 basis points in other words if if 50% of the world is you know believes that Trump was a Russian puppet that the 50% will not change by more than going from 50 to 40 so about 10 10 points there uh there's a Fox Fox News poll and they ask people uh what are the odds that they will change their opinion based on the Muller report all right 41% 41% said there's no way that the Muller report will change their opinion no matter what's in there now those people are weirdly self-aware

[14:29]

self-aware they're weirdly they're weirdly self-aware that that that data doesn't change their opinions you know in a weird way in a weird way I respect people who say yeah if all the data changes I'm not even going to change my opinion if you're willing to actually say that out loud I at least appreciate your honesty all right now there's something wrong with your brain that's a separate question but the honesty I like it uh but apparently so 41% said the Muller report no matter what it is isn't going to change their opinion of the president 29% say there's a small chance so you've got uh what 70 70% of people say there's almost no chance that the Muller report changes their opinion uh but 7% say there's a strong chance so remember I said sub 10% so 7% say yeah there's a strong chance that

[15:30]

say yeah there's a strong chance that this will change my opinion of things just about what I thought now what happens if 7% of the public goes from anti-trump to well maybe I maybe I've overreacted if 7% of the country really does move from I got a real problem with this president to gosh the news may be exaggerating what's wrong with this President where is the slaughter meter let let me reintroduce for anybody who doesn't know the concept I've introduced the idea of the slaughter meter the slaughter meter is what will happen in 2020 presidential election if none of the variables change from where they are right now in other words if just you straight line the trend now of course that can never happen because it'll be lots of surprises and dips and you know there'll be uh Hills and Valleys but it's fun to do so here's the

[16:31]

Valleys but it's fun to do so here's the thing if you had the election today you I think people are saying Bernie will win or Biden will win or something but that's not what we're saying we're saying if all the variables stayed the same and then you just project down to what that would look like in 2020 it would be a Slaughter the president would win one of the biggest you know electoral uh College victories of of recent history so the slaughter meter is pinned at 100% chance of Slaughter now that's not a prediction because the prediction is lot is going to change and so the slaughter meter will go up and down between now and 2020 it's just where it is today all right here's another uh here's another hoax that got killed today you just don't know it yet um you know that I've Been Looking Into Climate science trying to figure out what's true and what isn't now I'm

[17:32]

out what's true and what isn't now I'm still on the fence as to whether or not there's a major problem or not a major problem because my main conclusion is both sides are lying about a lot one of the sides presumably is not lying about everything but it's very obvious once you start digging into it that both the Skeptics are most if not all of them are lying well or or or wrong but the uh the climate scientists even if everything that they say is true even if everything they say is true in terms of the the big picture about what half of all published studies tend to be not reproducible and probably half of what you hear about climate change is more about the marketing of the idea and that stuff is mostly BS so B sides have so much BS that it's hard to figure out which

[18:33]

BS that it's hard to figure out which one has the kernel of Truth so that's where I am so my personal situation is I'm right between them both sides uh can't be trusted and so I don't know how to had to square it but there is one thing I'm going to give you my uh current preliminary ruling on one of the main claims of climate science is that it's settled right so if there were some conclusive way to find out that it's not settled in a way that's not you know crazy skeptic stuff um then you would debunk the main claim that it settled you would not have de you would not have debunked the notion that it might be a big problem right so separately it could still be a disaster and the scientists could be completely right about that but in independent of the actual reality there's how certain are we and the claim

[19:35]

there's how certain are we and the claim of the scientists are that we're certain to the point where it's just the fact so I gave a challenge uh recently uh by Twitter I tweeted a a Skeptics graph that said that said that in the beginning of the century the rate of temperature increase was similar to the rate now and in between those two rates that look similar was an unexpected sort of plateau or Cooling and that the theory of CO2 being the main driver of temperature could would not explain why the early part of the century and now have a similar slope because we have so much more CO2 now it should have been earlier it was low and now it's high that's what it should have looked like but the graph if it's correct says that we had two periods uh separated by decades that were the same slope and one of them had a lot of CO2 and one of them had a lot

[20:36]

had a lot less so how does co2 explain that when it was completely different and yet you got the same thing now the and then the more problematic part is the part where the temperature wasn't Rising for uh from 1940 to 1980 so for 40 years there's some general agreement that the temperature wasn't Rising too much so the question was how does the current theory of clim of CO2 and anthr anthropomorphic global warming how how does it explain the fact that the that there was something that looks like it's off model you know that there was some 40 years where there wasn't the um the warming and I want to read to you from skeptical science so skep iCal science is a site that does what I consider a really good service whereas they they take every they try to take every skeptical argument and then they

[21:38]

every skeptical argument and then they debunk it using the best science now the writers of this website I don't necessarily think are climate scientists themselves maybe it doesn't matter because they they simply use the available science so they point to the study they point to the graph they point to the temperatures and they have a very long list of skeptical claims and they debunk them quite well so every time I've looked at their site to see about a skeptical claim I'll read the claim and I'll say that skeptical claim looks pretty pretty solid and then I'll go to their site and and I'll say oh okay I guess it was BS after all but this latest claim I I had called down as sort of like the the key lever you know if this one's if the claim is true it really means something and if the claim is false that means something else um and so I want to read to you the exact quote from skeptical science in which they explain the 40 years from 1940 to

[22:40]

they explain the 40 years from 1940 to 1980 roughly where the CO2 warming Theory doesn't seem to fit the graph so how do they explain it now remember the question we're asking is is climate science settled and here's this here's the scientific argument from skeptical science says so what caused the cooling period that interrupted the overall trend in the middle of the century so they're talking about that same period 1940 to 1980 and then they say the answer seems to lie in Soul or dimming the answer seems to lie does seems to lie sound like they know what they're talking about for sure I'll keep going a cooling phenomena caused by Airborne plutons so they say is seems to be caused by airborne fluence and they say the main culprit is likely to have been so in other words to explain a 40-year period in our recent 100

[23:41]

40-year period in our recent 100 years the language used here on the pro-science side of the debate the exact language here on this one website skeptical Sciences the main culprit is likely to have been likely to have been does likely sound like settled science to you let me go on um the main culprit is likely been an increase in sulfate Aerosoles which reflect incoming solar energy back into space and lead to cooling um and they say that there might have been two causes that would be unique to 1940 through 1980 that would not be the case today they said there's two causes would be industrial uh pollution basically because back then industry polluted more they didn't have the same environmental controls so point1 would be industrial pollution and number two would be volcanic eruptions

[24:43]

eruptions now all right so the first part it said two weasel things it said um that the answer seems to be and then they said the culprit is likely to Abend in other words a a clear a clear admission that the scientists don't understand a 40-year period in the last 80 years according to their own best settled science so it's settled science that can explain 40 of the last 100 years in fact that's just the 40 years where temperatures weren't going up do you know what else it can't it can't explain the 40 years before before that where it was going up at the same rate it is now so there's something like I'm just this is not an exact number but something like 80 of the last 40 years I'm I'm sorry something like 80 of the last I don't know 120 years are not

[25:46]

don't know 120 years are not explained by the settled science in fact it it's conflicts with it you know so they they have strong evidence so when they say it's likely that the Aerosoles likely that the pollution were the explanation they do have more um the article you know gives more scientific studies that seem to confirm that not confirm but rather suggest that it's true but so this is a very big proponent of anthrop anthropological uh global warming and this proponent only refers to the the theory as being likely and seems to
all right but it gets better in the same in the same argument a little bit down the page on skeptical science is this sentence wait for this it says as a final point and so now as a final point to the same topic it should be noted that in

[26:46]

be noted that in 1945 the way in which sea temperatures were measured changed leading to a substantial drop in apparent temperatures once the data are corrected it is expected that the cooling Trend in the middle of the century will be less pronounced let me put this in my own words if they use if they use the data that they had before which they know to be
be wrong is still explains their theory in other words their Theory works when the data is wrong by their own description because this was just a whole explanation of why well yes it's still works because you throw in the Aerosoles you throw in the pollution you throw in the volcanoes you throw in the CO2 it all works it all works by their own

[27:48]

works it all works by their own description with incorrect temperatures and then it goes on to say that it will work even better when they fix the temperatures so they're correct what kind of a theory works if the data is correct and also works when the data is incorrect because that's what they're saying in pretty clear language that the current incorrect ocean temperatures totally explained you just have to throw in some pollution from the 40s throw in a little volcano action bam CO2 you got it all all variables have been explained if if that's true then when you cor when you correct the ocean temperatures your theory should no longer work right because then the the uh the the curve which they say has now been completely explained Away by pollution and by volcanoes no longer needs to be

[28:51]

and by volcanoes no longer needs to be explained away so how does the theory still work when the data changes all right so here's my point nothing I've said um would disprove the basic notion that we have a climate catastrophe and that humans are the primary cause so I've not said that's debunk be very careful about that right I'm not debunking based on this information anything about the actual outcome and the danger I am debunking and I'm going to say this as a conclusion like science I can change my conclusions if the data changes so in science when they say there's a theory the scientific meaning of theory is that's basically proven sure if new information came up we would revise our Theory but in science theory means as good as a fact for for all practical purposes yes still it can change because that's how science

[29:51]

it can change because that's how science works I'm going to say the same I would say based on science's own best argument they have said in their own words that it's not settled or at least it's not settled that their models can predict so we still might have the danger that part I don't know but I can say for sure that the scientists uh have been lying to you and that like the fine people hoax and of Charlottesville like the Russian collusion like the uh Southern Poverty Law Center the claim that it's settled science is debunked by the scientists themselves I'm just reading their own Theory so but don't take that as saying that climate science is debunked just the certainty of the claims all right um wasn't that

[30:57]

fun all right that's all I got today um I'm going to be watching ing the uh the Sunday shows I haven't decided if it's more entertaining to watch Fox News take their Victory lapse or is it more entertaining to watch CNN pretend nothing
happened MSNBC is just bad crazy I mean they're um if you look at their fallen faces they're they're literally just sputtering and making stuff up at this point you know far more than before so uh I'll probably be flipping flipping uh across U channels I hope you do too
um now um I'm probably going to turn on the interface by whenhub app and I'm going to make myself available as an expert to the Press so the interface by one Hub

[31:58]

the Press so the interface by one Hub app for those of you who don't know is my startups company it's a free app and anybody can sign up as an expert on anything so I'm going to
to um I'm going to uh change my description I'm going to say ask me about the Mueller
report asking about Mel report now I'll make this just for the Press so if the Press wants to ask me about the Muller report damn
it press uh I will I will lower my price to zero my hourly price will be zero and you can ask me about

[33:05]

Mueller all right so I'm now online so I'm an expert online if anybody who is a member of the press the Press if they want a quote on this whole situation just to give their story some color I would be happy to give you that quote so the beauty of this app is that nobody has to um trade contact information you can contact me through here and it would be an immediate video call and I will give you a press worthy quote um and I somebody says can we listen in well I would like you listen in if I knew it was going to happen right away but I don't know when somebody's somebody's going to uh contact me yeah the the slaughter meter Slaughter meter is at 100% right now and I will talk to you later