Episode 503 Scott Adams: Iranian Sanctions, Free College, 2020, Climate Credibility
Date: 2019-04-22 | Duration: 1:03:44
Topics
Poll of Democrat activists says they support Kamala Harris Poll of the public shows Biden at 30%, Harris 8.5% Who will win the Dem nomination, activists or the public? Iran deal cancelled a long time ago…no known repercussions John Stossel’s support for SAFE Gen IV nuclear power Whether or not climate change is real, SAFE Gen IV needed “Peak Oil” concept from the 1970s created the green community Peak oil worries went away because of new oil technology Green community pivoted to continue justifying their existence Now…green energy needed because of climate change Audience call, topic: Tell me something you think we disagree on Transgender athletes dominating on women’s teams “Easter Worshippers” reference by Obama, Hillary and others Who should make a life/death decision, mother, doctor, government? Freedom means the right to choose…possibly in ways others wouldn’t Freedom guarantees SOME people will abuse that freedom Doctor’s orders to someone I know personally Stop watching the news Her life improved, she was happier President Trump’s Tweet about impeachment when the OTHER SIDE committed the crimes and attempted to overthrow the government
Rough Transcript
This is an auto-generated transcript and may contain errors.
Transcript
[0:07]
bum bum bum bum bum ba ba ba ba ba hey everybody come on in here Andrew good to see you I hope you have your containers full of beverages tray Gary Pauly Justin hey Jen Caleb and Carrie Ann Arlene it’s wonderful to see you on this great Monday morning and you know why it’s a great day it’s because it’s gonna start with the simultaneous it but it’s gonna happen now if you’ve got your bug your copier class if you have your container you’re jealous you’re tankard your service your Stein your flask fill it with your favorite liquid I like coffee and join me now for the simultaneous scent so fascinating little poll out today so Nate silver just tweeted this round and I retweeted
[1:08]
just tweeted this round and I retweeted it so you can see it on my Twitter feed apparently the early states who were going to vote in the primaries for the Democrats so these are the this is the states they go first in the primaries the activists in those states when they were polled who they support turns out number one is Harris so Kamala Harris is the number one pick of Democrat activists who have already picked a candidate in the earliest states now remember I’ve been telling you for eight months that she would likely be the ultimate candidate and that it seemed unlikely to me that they would pick an old white and roe guy and so here’s the ranking from top to bottom of just early state primary states yeah the ones who go first and the and just the Democrat
[2:08]
go first and the and just the Democrat activists they pick Harris first booker second Warren third booted Budaj edge then Klobuchar then Gillibrand and then two three four five six seventh is Bernie Sanders so the people who were closest to the the power the activists they pick is Sanders seventh they pick Biden eighth they pick O’Rourke never O’Rourke is so far down on the rankings he doesn’t even register he does register but he’s way down so in the top six you have women people of color a gay guy and combinations thereof and no white males in the top six and I think that’s gonna hold so I think that that will be predictive of the final outcome and if
[3:11]
predictive of the final outcome and if it if that turned out to be it then I would have successfully picked the correct Democrat candidate and if a field of 18 that wouldn’t be too bad now I don’t know if I’ll be right but if it happened it would be it would be it would be a good prediction the other big news today is that the administration the administration has increased the pressure on Iran by saying that they’ll now put sanctions on any country who buys oil from Iran previously there had been some exceptions so people could buy the oil from Iran if they just had to but now he’s going to start sanctioning companies for buying any oil from Iran and Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates I thinks somebody else is going to pick up the pick up the slack by pumping more oil now remind me what
[4:13]
pumping more oil now remind me what people were saying about the Iran nuclear deal two years ago two years ago didn’t we assume that if the Iran nuclear deal got canceled by Trump that Iran would start doing all kinds of terrible things including reviving their nuclear arms but it’s been a while and the president canceled that deal a while ago and I’m not aware of any repercussions are you am I missing something it seems to me that canceling the Iran deal has been proven by time to be exactly the right thing to do because we don’t see any kind of response from Iran that we would be worrying it seems like they’re just getting closer and closer to capitulation now I’m sure they’re not thinking you got it in those terms but capitulation could look like anything it could look like a revolution it could look like a peace deal it couldn’t look
[5:17]
look like a peace deal it couldn’t look like anything but one of the things I tell you about all the time you say in terms of in terms of persuasion people are far more influenced by the direction of things and what Trump does really really well is he make sure that the direction of things is going well so when he cancelled the Iran deal that created a single point and not really a direction so it was different but it didn’t suggest yet a permanent direction it was just a decision now that he’s cancelled the deal but that he also he put sanctions on and now he’s going to the next level of tightening them so if you’re Iran what is the direction of things well Netanyahu got reelected so that’s not real good for Iran Israel just keeps getting stronger Israel’s stock market in which I invest
[6:19]
Israel’s stock market in which I invest you know the the basket of stocks that represents Israel is doing great it’s doing great right now so Israel just keeps getting stronger Iran just keeps getting weaker their economy is actually shrinking and here’s the important part there’s no end in sight there’s nothing that Iran could look at and say okay if we just wait it out you know if we wait this long things will be okay again because it really doesn’t look that way Trump has created in them a very clear impression that every day in Iran is going to be worse than the day before and it’s been how long has it been since he canceled the Iran deal as a bad I’ve lost all sense of time in the age of Trump everything is compressed has it been 18 months I don’t know how long has it been I really can’t remember not even it’s been a year so for a year Iran has
[7:22]
it’s been a year so for a year Iran has seen their fortunes do nothing but get worse so for them finding some way out of this would seem to be pretty important and getting more important I tweeted around a video by John Stossel talking about green energy and how it’s impossible to to make everything work with just wind power and solar because we can’t make the and we won’t be able to improve the efficiency of those things fast enough and they have their own issues and storage and reliability etcetera and then he went on to within the piece that I tweeted to show that nuclear was the only solution so we continue to watch what looks like some kind of a weird proxy battle in which the media is trying to make nuclear look dangerous by you know running specials about Chernobyl for example now
[8:22]
about Chernobyl for example now apparently there’s an anniversary involved there so it’s not completely random but it looks like the the the press I’m just consider this for a moment just just hold this thought your head the press has just taken a really hard body blow from the whole Trump collusion fiasco now that has shown that for the last two years their biggest issue was a hoax what would be the very worst thing that could happen to the credibility of the the the popular press the mainstream media the very worst thing would for be be for their audience to realize that nuclear was always the only option whether climate change was a problem or even if it isn’t you would still want to do nuclear as hard as you
[9:23]
still want to do nuclear as hard as you could because it might be the only solution now I’ve also said you should also do Sun and wind as hard as you can you should try to improve all of those things as hard as you can because we’re not really running out of money for any of that you know there there is enough money to develop those technologies quite rapidly and so we are but imagine imagine the mainstream media having to tell their public okay we’ve been telling you forever that it’s got to be solar and wind and that’s the only solution to climate change but it turns out turns out that that’s now supported by science so it turns out we were anti science the whole time and and the pro science group I would say would be the people who say well I don’t know whether climate change is the predicted problem that it looks like but I do know if
[10:26]
that it looks like but I do know if there’s any risk at all and even if there’s no risk the scientific way forward the one that makes sense the one the math works the one the technology works is no clear so the most Pro science approach unfortunately is go hard on nuclear at the same time you’re going hard in you know wind and solar and everything else all right there was an article I tweeted around this as there might be a reason that older citizens let’s say the Boomers are more skeptical about climate change and it has something to do with the peak oil that most of us had a certain age we lived through now if you’re young you don’t know what that means peak oil was the idea in the 70s I guess that we were going to literally run out of new sources of oil and then we would sort of have a maximum that we could pump and
[11:28]
have a maximum that we could pump and from that day on there would always be less oil in the world because we were just using it up now as it turns out that prediction was driving the green the green community so because they thought that we were gonna run an oil they said you need solar you need to click you need not not nuclear so much you need solar and wind and green energy and then as the article I tweeted which is really worth a read notes that the situation the base situation that was driving green energy completely changed so when from we don’t have enough oil to hey we figured out how to do fracking and now we have plenty of oil we have tons of oil so the people who were pushing the green energy sources when it looked like we were going to run out of oil they said the only solution is solar
[12:29]
oil they said the only solution is solar and wind and then when the situation changed too it looks like we have tons and tons of oil what did the Green Energy people do they said the same thing they said when they we thought were running out they said oh they’re the only solution is you got to go to green and green technologies because of co2 so suspiciously the thing they wanted to do their solution was independent of the problem or so it looks I’m of course using a little hyperbole here now if it’s true that co2 is exactly the problem that the scientists by a large majority say it is then that’s just the truth that you have to deal with the truth and all that really happened is we used to be wrong but now we’re right that’s possible it’s possible that in the past we were just totally wrong about Peak
[13:29]
we were just totally wrong about Peak Oil being the problem that we thought it would be and it’s also possible that now we’re totally right the climate change is exactly the problem that so many scientists are saying it’s possible but if you lived through the peak oil phase and you noticed that these the facts all completely changed to their reverse almost and yet the solutions stayed the same you have to ask yourself that smells wrong it sounds like the solution was gonna stay the solution no matter what the facts were and to that point if someday somebody invented let’s say let’s say a fusion powered way to suck co2 out of the air let’s say tomorrow we invented a way to remove all co2 from the air so quickly and so efficiently that it didn’t matter how much we put
[14:29]
that it didn’t matter how much we put back into the air because we could just suck it out as fast as we put it in suppose we invented that tomorrow would the green energy people say glad we got that taken care of now it doesn’t make sense to use it doesn’t make sense to use some power and now it doesn’t make sense to use wind power and kill all those birds will just use coal and oil because there’s so much of it and because we figured out how to suck the co2 out of the air so problem solved right well I doubt it if you could pull all of the co2 that’s too much out of the air leaving leaving enough leaving enough co2 so that we have plenty for plants you know we haven’t taken too much out if we could do that today would it change people’s recommendations about future energy well better wouldn’t all better would have zero impact on what people think we should do they would still say don’t do nuclear they would still say they might want to talk
[15:32]
would still say they might want to talk about pollution they might talk about something else they might talk about the the bad working conditions of coal miners I mean it seems like something else would pop up that we would start to think was just important as peak oil when it wasn’t true and has co2 when it was more of a problem before we figured out how to suck it out of there in this hypothetical world we don’t have to do that economically yet alright so here’s the point the problem with being a certain age is on one hand you have more experiences so you know what it you know exactly what it feels like to be bamboozled so if you live through peak oil you know what it’s like to read the news every day and it’s just completely wrong it’s exactly opposite of what was happening because in in fact we found out lots of ways to get more energy through carbon type of energy and but
[16:41]
through carbon type of energy and but the problem is it is also fairly normal for science to be wrong in the past but get it right in the present you know how many examples of how many examples are there in which we used to be wrong but now we’re right lots of them right so you can’t say that because we were wrong last time that we’ll be wrong again there’s there’s just no connecting logic to that and that’s that’s the Toni Heller problem so Toni Heller famous climate skeptic I’ve talked about him a number of times he has the most persuasive argument which is different from being true you know persuasive is not the same as being accurate that’s a separate question I can’t judge the accurate part but I can say it’s persuasive and one of the persuasive things he does is he points out just nonstop he points this out how many times in the past we’ve made climate doom predictions that were in the
[17:41]
doom predictions that were in the headlines and they were all wrong now that’s very persuasive because if you say look the same people who are supposed to be our authorities have been wrong for a hundred years and they’re always predicting doom with the climate they’ve never been right yet that’s very persuasive but but it’s not logical because the other thing that’s true is that science is wrong until it’s not so there is a point in the normal you know march of science where we were wrong right up into the point where we start getting right and you never know when that is you don’t know is today the day that we started getting your right from this day on or as today you know 20 in a row that we got it wrong it’s hard to know so the persuasion problem is pretty big all right I wanted to do a want you to
[18:43]
all right I wanted to do a want you to do an experiment I don’t know how this is gonna work I’m gonna change my microphone and then I’m going to take some callers all right so I’m gonna put on my new microphone and then I’m gonna ask a caller to debate me on or to anybody who disagrees with me on anything I’ve said on this periscope or any other so I’m looking for somebody who has a different opinion on something and here’s the test I want to see if someone who believes they disagree with my opinion can state my opinion accurately so it’s not going to be it’s not going to be necessarily a debate on the subject I want to see if there exists a person who believes they disagree with me and can also state what I believe accurately I contend that that’s rare that people who believe they disagree with me don’t actually disagree
[19:44]
disagree with me don’t actually disagree they can’t hear it hear what I’m saying that there they’re translating what I’m saying into something else in their mind and they’re disagreeing with these something else so I’ll do a little test let me change my microphone all right so I’m gonna take some calls and I’ll sure I’ll keep the call very short if you’ve called for some other reason so I’m only looking for people who have a specific disagreement with me and I want to see if they can state their disagreements all right facts are safe I believe it is your day all right so we have a caller fax they’re safe are you there hi good morning what what do you disagree with me on
[20:44]
what what do you disagree with me on what is the topic so I disagree with you on the transgender athlete debate I know you do I say we have interacted on Twitter many times all right now so don’t tell me what you disagree with tell me tell me the specific thing that you believe is true that I believe is not true so so tell me the specific thing youth that you say is true just state what you say is true that you be you believe I don’t believe go so I I know that you believe that competitions are in generally unfair to begin with correct so you and you agree with that too don’t you not to the not to the extreme that you that you believe that to be true not to the extreme so you don’t believe that Shaquille O’Neal plays basketball and that I also play
[21:46]
plays basketball and that I also play basketball that’s pretty extreme right because I can’t really how could I play against Shaquille O’Neal or let’s say some other player who’s still playing is that fair but but you’re not in that percentile of competitors that’s my point that’s my point alright so well hold on but let’s get back to the point where so I don’t want to argue I don’t want to debate the point I want to see if we agree just agree on what we’re both if you can characterize my belief so I’m saying that there’s an extreme difference in sports which is normal that if I go into a sport that I’ve never played and there’s somebody who’s in the lead athlete it’s like I might be it’s like I’m a chihuahua compared to a lion there’s extraordinary difference do you actually that’s true right that’s an extraordinary difference all right and so you would you would agree that it is common to have extraordinary
[22:47]
is common to have extraordinary differences in capabilities in sports for example somebody who has a physical handicap can’t play sports in high school wouldn’t you say I mean if they if they have a bad enough handicap depends on alright so don’t you agree with me that there is naturally an extreme difference in capability for every sport because people are extremely different there there is less of a difference between Shaquille O’Neal and LeBron James than you and Shaquille O’Neal and yes but it doesn’t matter but it doesn’t matter my point you you might actually be competitive in the WNBA alright so so let’s get back to what you think that I believe that’s different than what you think see when you say it’s a matter of degree that doesn’t write us anything to work with so give
[23:48]
write us anything to work with so give me give me a specific fact that you think we disagree on well I I think that that I believe that athletes who want to compete should simply compete in the genderless classification where all men compete right now oh so you would like to create a new classification well I don’t have an opinion on that there’s no new classification the NBA is a genderless league Oh meaning meaning that they could play if they’re good enough and he gender can play in the NBA okay so so so far so far we’re fine so tell me something that you disagree with what I think you something that you think is true that I don’t think is true you think you believe that it is okay for an XY chromosomal person to compete in an X X chromosomal competition hold
[24:50]
in an X X chromosomal competition hold on you’re using sloppy language when you said you believe it’s okay don’t don’t say why I believe it’s okay say that I either think it’s fair or economical or tell me what I think it is it is acceptable to have people of wildly different capabilities in the same sport yes no that’s the normal way sports are organized but they’re not wildly different I would not say that they are as wildly different as their biology would make them what like professional athletes are not are not multiple standards of deviations away from each other’s capabilities sure they are if you looked at if you looked at my high school collar or my high school basketball team I’m five foot eight and my coach actually tried to recruit me to play on the team because the team had so little capability that the guy that was jumping Center was five or six so that
[25:52]
jumping Center was five or six so that was my high school basketball team now if Michael Jordan’s family had moved into my town the and the actual Michael Jordan had been on my team there is no way that anybody in my entire school district could have ever scored a point he the the difference in his capability was would be so extraordinary compared to the person who jumped to Center Center on my high school team was five was six all right now you’re telling me that that five was six Center the best guy on our team was a was roughly in the same category as Michael Jordan that’s statement so Michaels was such an outlier you can only go to one high school all right but I think you just agreed with me that it’s it’s rare to have that much of a difference right you’d agree with that it’s rare to have the situation I just described Michael
[26:53]
the situation I just described Michael Jordan on my high school team would be unusual by he was on somebody’s team but not okay but it will not become unusual when X Y chromosome will people begin setting all the high school records across all of the states in all of the country alright so you’re worried about the slippery slope right okay are you aware that the slippery slope has been sliding since the 70s when the first transgender athlete played women’s tennis renee richards are you familiar with that story so so we’ve debated this all right but you know but you know that I’m aware but and you would agree that there was no slippery slope there or not even though she did well and proved your point that she would play better than the average woman it didn’t cause more transgender people to become professional tennis players would you agree that’s true yes so would you agree that the only case that we’ve seen it
[27:55]
that the only case that we’ve seen it the problem you you are suggesting as a problem simply didn’t happen well I think we’re seeing it now in high school athletics right I don’t know if we’re gonna see it in professional yet have we yet seen have we yet seen even one high school team with more than one transgender player on the team yes that has that ever happened yes there was a case in Connecticut with to transgender racers who took first and second okay and and did the world was the world a worse place for that because that I I would I would ask the female athletes on those teams how they felt about about such competition well why does that what hold on you and I you and I agree that those two transgender athletes who I will call when you you know you may have a different hold on let me just finish the point we both agree that if those two transgenders make the team and do well
[28:56]
transgenders make the team and do well that all of the women who did not win would be less happy is that true we agree on that knowing I would yes now would you also agree that no matter who won all of the people who didn’t win would be less happy than if they won would you agree with that not not not to the same degree no no I don’t not to the same degree and does it and doesn’t matter if they’re a little less happy because somebody else is happier because the two transgender athletes who won were quite happy I’m sure and their families were happy and they they had a good day does it matter that somebody else on the team was a little less happy because somebody else was happy is that could we manage a society - well I’m less happy that somebody else did well there’s somebody else here so let me let me just close out my point by saying ultimately comes down to some sense of it’s not fair wouldn’t you say I think
[29:59]
it’s not fair wouldn’t you say I think those women I think they feel they were cheated so that it was not right so I but I agree with that I agree that with that those women would feel they were cheated I just don’t think that that matters to anything why should I care the two women think they were cheated when the alternative is that transgenders would be discriminated against those that’s the trade-off right so I’m I’m intentionally saying that I would rather I’d rather give the transgenders a little extra freedom in this world little you know little comfort in safety and if there are a few people who don’t get to be on the team or don’t get to win doesn’t really matter it doesn’t really matter well it will in effect their life will they will it affect their incomes won’t have any any real effect so but thank you for playing yeah this one’s a tough one all right yeah bye for now all right why do we have rules and
[31:01]
all right why do we have rules and sports well for those who say we have rules in sports I’m saying that they should all follow the rules and if the rule is Society has decided that a transgender is a a woman in terms of what teams they would compete on then those are the rules so everybody is agreeing with following the rules there’s nobody there’s nobody on the side of breaking rules those of you who are saying it’s not fair I agree with you aggressively i aggressively agree with your your play I in fact I’ll go further it’s way unfair in the sense that the transgender athletes our argue that it’s not an advantage and I would never argue that it’s good for the other women who are playing for some of them is clearly bad it makes them less happy I just don’t care because sports are about making most people unhappy because most people lose if you go to a tournament
[32:03]
people lose if you go to a tournament and they’re you know 20 teams in the tournament only one team wins every time there’s only one winner everybody else loses sports are mostly about losing so if you add a little bit extra losing into a sport which is mostly losing it’s mostly about losing it’s mostly about people who didn’t make the team it’s rare that anybody makes a team is it fair that the good-looking tall person who was born with good genes gets to be a superstar and we and we treat them with extra respect and they get the extra dating capabilities no you know what is unfair unfair is simply being born with some you know just ordinary advantage that’s unfair is it unfair that I’m smarter than most people most of you are smarter than most people too or you wouldn’t be watching this this podcast is that fair is it fair that somebody’s tall and I’m not that’s not fair we don’t live in a fair world fair
[33:05]
fair we don’t live in a fair world fair is a ridiculous standard the only thing we can do is make sure the rules are the same and if the rules allow a transgender athlete to compete as a woman and I and I think they should then that’s the rule it’s not unfair if everybody follows the same rule all right that’s enough that I think that’s enough for now or Jordan Peterson would like to is on the other side of this debate was that true Jordan Peterson’s on the other side of transgender athletes that would be a fun debate he wouldn’t do well in that at all who decided on these trends under rules doesn’t matter doesn’t matter who decided on the rules it only matters that the rules are the same all right
[34:11]
what brand is your headphone mmm I don’t know Joe Rogan is against it you know it’s perfectly it’s perfectly acceptable to be to be against transgender in sports as a fan so as a fan if you say I think that would be less entertaining because I would already know how it’s going to work out or something like that that’s a fair opinion because that’s just an opinion of what kind of sporty like that would be no different than saying I like watching basketball I don’t like watching baseball so that’s nothing wrong with that but it’s a separate issue if you start treating people unfairly because of gender all right they can should compete or didn’t make this just reading your comments here for a minute it’s really slow news
[35:12]
here for a minute it’s really slow news day yeah I there’s a little news somebody’s prompting me here about so both apparently both Obama and Clinton used the phrase Easter worshipper talking about the sri lanka terror attack they called it easter easter worshippers instead of christians and people are saying what when did we come up with that term why don’t you just call them christians it’s a good question it’s a fair question i don’t know the answer somebody saying nobody agrees that men are women because they say they are I do i I say transgender is a woman so you can’t say nobody because I say that the transgender say that probably I don’t third or half of the country says that but here’s let me tell
[36:15]
country says that but here’s let me tell you my my view and what informs me and this whole transgender issue I don’t think there’s any such thing as normal when it comes to sexuality I think there’s this like huge range that includes some gay and some bisexual and some totally heterosexual and just all kinds of weird things all over the place so when it comes to sexuality I think everybody’s an outlier that’s just my personal opinion that everybody’s a little bit different something from everybody else and a lot different from a lot of different people so you just have to come up with some rules and it doesn’t matter what they are for the most part it doesn’t matter what those rules are as long as society agrees that those are the rules those are the rules sports are not important in fact I think sports are probably as negative as they are positive but that’s another for another day all right
[37:16]
day all right gender is not sexuality that is correct but let’s say let me speak clear yeah I don’t want to mix gender and sexuality I’m saying that sexuality is a big range but also gender is a big range and that the sexuality and the gender age overlap and etc so it is more complicated you right but I favor transgender rights because I don’t think there’s a good enough reason to single the amount when everybody is so different on those on those scales all right sports keeps daughters off of drugs maybe I’m not so sure that sports do half the things that people say somebody says transgenders have more suicide I
[38:18]
says transgenders have more suicide I don’t know if that’s true but it wouldn’t surprise me I mean if you were trying to fit into a world that that was resisting you that would be tough all right men in the women’s locker room know yeah the locker room thing is a challenge I’m not going to say that’s easy but you know everything was a challenge until it wasn’t you know giving the giving women the vote was seem like a challenge probably at the time but it worked out you know ending slavery seemed like a big challenge had lots of problems but you sort of had to do it yeah so the fact that it’s a big challenge and that it’s a problem and the fact that people lots of people don’t like it are all true statements there should not be decision-making variables why is it good
[39:22]
decision-making variables why is it good to mutilate the body somebody says well that’s just a bias statement what you call mutilating the bodies other people would call adjusting or improving or fixing the body that’s just a point of view to call it butylene and not a very nice one somebody says I disagree with your abortion views or we should leave the decision up to women well the question on abortion yeah I’m not sure I want to get into that but the real question is who makes the decision because somebody has to make the decision so it kind of comes down to do you make does the government make the decision or do you let the the individual and the doctor make the decision so it’s very interesting it’s
[40:23]
decision so it’s very interesting it’s interesting in a sense that conservatives oppose abortion because that would put conservatives on the side of more government so it’s maybe this is the one exception where the liberals want less government they don’t want the government to get in between their their doctors and the and the pregnant woman’s decisions both sides lie about abortion that is correct both sides lie about abortions man’s voice is important in what way somebody said the men’s voice on abortion is important to which I say is it you would get the same result wouldn’t you if if no man was ever allowed to vote on the topic of abortion and I guess that’s nobody gets to vote
[41:25]
and I guess that’s nobody gets to vote on it but if no man ever got to weigh in on the topic of abortion and let’s not count knock out the money stuff just just the decision of whether it’s legal or illegal or under what conditions if no man ever had an opinion on that or offered an opinion would we be in a different place I think we’d be in exactly the same place wouldn’t we because women disagree the same as men disgrace I think we’d be in the same place no government no conservative would say they want more government well that’s what it is you want more rules over people’s private decisions that’s what abortion is it’s putting a government control over a a woman and a doctor’s decisions so I think I think conservatives are let me break it down this way
[42:26]
this way conservatives have by far the better moral argument on abortion this is where I’m gonna get in trouble because I’m gonna I’m gonna be taken out of context so if you take just that part out of context then I get in trouble so this is the part you’re gonna leave out when people take this out of context so if you look at the positives of both sides the conservatives by far have the more moral moral position which is that if there’s any if there’s any doubt about where life begins and there’s certainly differences of opinion but the conservative position that if you can’t tell if this entity is alive or not alive if you’re even talking about it the most moral thing to do is to treat it like it’s alive so morality wise the conservatives by far have this strong argument which is not to say I agree all right so you’re not gonna get my opinion in what I’m going to be saying here I’m
[43:28]
in what I’m going to be saying here I’m just laying out you know observation but the the pro-abortion people by far have the argument that’s most compatible with freedom and getting the government and of your decisions so those are the problems you get the moral argument far better in the conservative side the freedom argument far better on the liberal side and morality and freedom are both absolutes so it’s hard to find a any kind of a way to to match up there when you’re talking absolutes freedom versus license hmm I don’t know if I put it that way yes so the question is who gets to decide so
[44:28]
the question is who gets to decide so the liberal point of view which I never hear the Liberals explain it as well as I’m going to explain it the question is who gets to decide if there’s a life-and-death decision because there are situations where there’s a severe risk to the mother in order to produce a healthy baby so who gets to decide does the government decide that the mother must take that risk does the doctor decide that the mother must accept that mortal risk to herself to save the baby or does the baby decide somebody has to decide right is that the law is it strangers they’re strangers who get to decide whether you take a risk with your life why do strangers get to decide that so the freedom argument is squarely on the side of the pro-abortion people that that’s what freedom looks like the freedom to for the mother to protect her
[45:30]
freedom to for the mother to protect her own health in her own opinion nobody else’s opinion about her own baby and to end - and to balance how much risk she’s willing to take for the benefit of her own babies somebody has to make the decision so the liberal point of view isn’t so much about pro-abortion or not abortion it’s really they should concentrate on who gets to make the decision and they should throw it right back in the conservatives face if they were smart if they were good at this which they’re not they would throw it back in the face of the Conservatives and say look be consistent with your own stand you know you have two things you’re trying to be consistent with and you’ve got to pick one one thing that conservatives want to be consistent with is that life innocent life there you know there’s a big difference if you’re guilty maybe some death death penalty might apply but if you’re innocent like a fetus the conservative view is there’s there’s no wiggle room if you’re innocent and
[46:32]
no wiggle room if you’re innocent and you’re maybe a life or you are a life or even we’re talking about it’s a life it will be protected so that’s like an absolute but the other absolute maybe a little less absolute is that the government should not interfere in your in people’s lives any more than is absolutely necessary and I would argue that this is unnecessary it’s an option so the government doesn’t have to have a law about abortion it could let the mother and the doctor decide it’s not it’s not mandatory it’s just not mandatory it’s just a strong preference all right somebody says that mother was not willing to save her baby’s life isn’t that a mother or deserves to be a mother well that’s I respect opinions on both sides of this debate but you’re actually not on the right topic the question is who gets to make the choice the question is not will
[47:34]
make the choice the question is not will everybody make the right choice so when you’re talking about freedom you are not limiting freedom to make the right choice it’s not freedom if the only freedom you have is to do the right thing according to other people that’s not freedom freedom would be you get to decide period this is your freedom you get to decide so if you want to take freedom in this limited sense away from mothers just know that that’s what you’re doing you’re you’re you’re taking an into individuals decision and you’re giving it to the central government or the the state if that’s what you want just call it what it is taking freedom away from a woman for a reason that you think is good but it is taking freedom away so the reason they can’t agree is that they’re on the wrong topic one is arguing freedom and the other is arguing life and they’re not even the same conversation
[48:35]
conversation alright I’m not free to murder someone that’s right yeah the government has taken away your freedom to be a murderer but society has also decided that we all agree with that so you can’t compare this is the problem with analogies you can’t compare the fact that the government makes murder in general illegal to abortion because everybody agrees that murder should be illegal but everybody doesn’t agree that if you have to balance the risk of the mother versus the health of the baby not everybody agrees that it should always go in the same direction that’s very debatable somebody would like to debate me on statue removal mmm there’s not much to debate there I would now put up an offensive decoration in my
[49:35]
now put up an offensive decoration in my house and I think that it is bad behavior to put up an offensive decoration in the public square when something like a third or a half or I don’t know what the percentages of the public would be deeply offended by it so we shouldn’t run a society in which for no strong reason we’re deeply offending people it just just is unnecessary what about when is just for convenience that’s how freedom works see if you cannot argue that people will use their freedoms inappropriately it is not a legitimate argument against freedom that some people will misuse their freedom because that argument would would prevent every every freedom you know it can be true that leaving it up to the
[50:38]
can be true that leaving it up to the mother of the doctor as the only decision-maker it could be completely true and I would argue it is true that you guarantee there will be people misusing the system to literally murder babies I think you can just guarantee that somewhere and in some number whether it’s a small number or a bigger number we don’t know but you can guarantee that there will be some mother doctor decisions that you wouldn’t have made and that you consider deeply wrong that’s freedom if you want freedom you put up with a little of that all right that’s the trade-off and I’m not saying you should put up with that you know if you think life is sacred that’s a strong moral argument all right do you have a happy subject today yeah why is there no happy subjects how about that all right how about this let me
[51:40]
that all right how about this let me give you a little optimism to round out all the the unhappy stuff we are absolutely in the best time of history it wasn’t long ago and maybe it was two years ago or a year and a half ago I started saying that we were entering a golden age very few people quite agreed with that because they would look at all the problems in the world and say my god this or that it’s going wrong this is that is going wrong to which I said no the the business model of the media makes you think things are going wrong when they’re not even if everything they say about climate change is true in terms of the economic dislocation even if it’s all true it’s still a tiny problem in the context of our economic well-being will be extraordinarily better in a hundred years no matter what no matter what climate change does we’re
[52:40]
no matter what climate change does we’re gonna be five to ten times better off just because of the normal pace of advancement we’ll figure out how to handle climate change if it’s a problem will compensate we’ll be able to move people we’ll build robots to build dikes we’ll do something it’s a hundred years we’ve got time to figure this out well we’ve got the best economy the best the best health care in the world we’ve got fewer Wars I don’t know just about everything is going well right now have you ever gone completely without media influence to test improvement of how you feel I have not that would be an interesting you know it’d be hard for me to do it now because I do this every day but I do know somebody who with doctor’s orders did him a news diet meaning it was somebody whose doctor told them to stop watching the news and it was the
[53:42]
stop watching the news and it was the most fascinating thing because this was a co-worker a million years ago and I would sometimes ask her about world events I mean headlining events and she would look at me and say what I haven’t heard about that and I’m talking about like big headline stuff like somebody got elected president you know that sort of level you say hey what do you think about the new president and she’d be like new president wasn’t paying attention what’s his name it was the most fascinating thing to see a modern person in the modern world who had cut news and of her life and when I asked her like how she felt about it and how was she said it was great because it turns out there was nothing she ever did differently because of the news no all of that bad news she was consuming didn’t cause her to vote differently didn’t cause her to become an activist didn’t cause her to do anything but worry the only thing the news did for her is it’s just it made her worry so
[54:48]
her is it’s just it made her worry so she got rid of it and it made her happier somebody just said that mic sorta released the interview portion of me that was a small part of that became or some part of that became part of his movie hoaxed so I haven’t seen that tweet but if it’s they are all tweeted around oh do I have a slaughter meter report today yes the slaughter beater is still at a hundred and forty percent yeah if if nothing changes and of course things will change so this is a ridiculous statement but the slaughter meter imagines in an artificial world if nothing changed between now and 2020 what would be the election result if nothing changes trump is good young i hyperbolically put it above 100% where it can’t logically be to make the point that that 100% is really safe well he could he could have things go wrong and still have a hundred percent chance of
[55:49]
still have a hundred percent chance of winning at this point all right now much will change and now we’ll revise the slaughter meter up till the day of the election it could be down to zero by Election Day so it’s not a prediction it’s a it’s sort of a meter to show where you are at a snapshot in time it’s not telling you how it’s going to end it’s telling you how it how it would end if nothing changed but of course things will change yeah problems will happen and most of them will be fake so the president tweeted today how can a president be impeached for crimes committed by the other party how can a Republican president be impeached for crimes committed by Democrats and correct me if I’m wrong about this but there’s something that’s just freaky about the fact that we still talk as though it was Trump who did or did not do something illegal or immoral when all of the
[56:51]
illegal or immoral when all of the evidence shows clearly and unambiguously that the Clinton campaign did all of those things they seriously broke the law it’s it seems obvious that they tried to overthrow the government overthrow the government in what world does it make sense that I can say in casual terms oh yeah Hillary Clinton and the Democrats they did try to stage a coup and overthrow the government of the United States which of course would be a big problem for the world in general how how weird is it that I can say those statements which as far as I can tell are completely true and yet the world goes on as though none of it exists now there are two explanations for this and the way and then neither of them are neither of them are anything but freaky there are two way I can think of there
[57:52]
there are two way I can think of there might be other explanations maybe there’s one I’m not thinking of but one explanation is that I’m experiencing cognitive dissonance and confirmation bias and that many of you are too because most of you are I think most of you on this are having the same experience right you’re looking at what seems obviously a coup attempt I don’t I don’t know how you could interpret it any other way and yet it’s treated like as sort of doesn’t exist in what it feels like is Godzilla appeared on the mainland and Godzilla is tearing through American cities and you’ll see like a weather report and the weatherman will say well it’s a cloudy day it looks like chance arraigned and doesn’t mention that behind him in the video an actual Godzilla is destroying the city and I’m watching I’m thinking well you’re gonna mention Godzilla right because Godzilla’s like right behind you that’s actually Godzilla I can see it
[58:53]
that’s actually Godzilla I can see it right there I’m not guessing I’m watching Godzilla right in front of you you get a mention you’re gonna turn around right you mentioned Godzilla and then the weatherman says and that’s a wrap that’s all the weather for today and then the weather reports over and I think what the hell did I just watch I think I watched Godzilla destroying the city but the weather band talked about clouds what’s happening what’s happening so that’s the feeling I’m getting when I’m watching people talk about the president’s alleged bad behavior in the context of the Democrats literally trying to overthrow the country now am I just suffering from cognitive dissonance is there actually no real crime by the Democrats am i imagining it am I am I taking a bunch of coincidences and putting them together in a way that the the facts do not quite dictate you know maybe I’m I’m imagining more
[59:56]
know maybe I’m I’m imagining more connection and the facts than they really are is that what’s happening or am I actually watching the mainstream media ignore a coup attempt that almost worked and took two years and all of our attention which of those two things is real I honestly can’t tell and the fact is you can’t tell either it would look exactly the same if there’s one thing I could teach you with this persuasion stuff is that what I just described should be the way you should always look at the world which is that I have two worlds that are operating perfectly within the facts and their opposites so all of the facts that I can I I know about the world would support the hypothesis completely that I’m having an imaginary view of the world it’s completely consistent with what I know about life and the world in
[1:00:57]
what I know about life and the world in reality that I’m just imagining this completely consistent the fact that I can give you ten reasons for why I think it in no way makes it real because we’ve watched tens of millions of people show you ten reasons why the president was obviously colluding with Russia but that wasn’t real that wasn’t real although the other side says it was so you have to be open to the fact that there are two interpretations of reality and I just hold them both as potentially true and see which one predicts so the so here’s what I would suggest which of these world predicts if it’s true that Hillary Clinton and Democrats etc were part of a plot to overthrow the government the prediction would be that bill Barr who is no democrat would be digging into it and that he would eventually come up
[1:01:59]
and that he would eventually come up with evidence that would prove that case so the prediction if there was a coup is that bill Barr would find out more about it and there would be more meat on the bones and that we would have something like a conviction or at least knowledge of what happened and under that theory the problem is me know under that theory I have correctly identified reality but the other reality is that that the bar never makes any progress against what we imagine was a coup attempt that there are no indictments there’s just there’s just no new information and we just are left wondering if that happens which I don’t predict then then it would just be me imagining the situation along with most of you most of you would literally be imagining what’s happening right now both are possible given the current set of facts I just look at your comments
[1:03:10]
of facts I just look at your comments first time a periscope is there a way to turn off the stupid hearts I believe if you have a mobile device and you turn it sideways to landscape mode it’ll give you sort of a theater mode that turns off the comments and the hearts and you have to be hit it with your finger again to turn them back on or turn it sideways again I believe that’s true your device might vary all right I will talk to you all tomorrow