Episode 758 Scott Adams: Schiff’s Rehabilitation, Weird Predictions, Funny Trump Tweets

Date: 2019-12-16 | Duration: 1:04:18

Topics

My new book LOSERTHINK, available now on Amazon https://tinyurl.com/rqmjc2a Devin Nunes letter to Adam Schiff…his need for rehabilitation Nancy Pelosi’s dentures Artist versus Economist Guessing Game… …Domains exist that do NOT provide thinking tools Self-gratification frequency and impotence, are they linked? Democrat attempts to explain their version of reality Their worldview is currently confusing and non-predictive

If you would like my channel to have a wider audience and higher production quality, please donate via my startup (Whenhub.com) at this link: https://interface.my/ScottAdamsSays

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

## Transcript

[0:08]

bum-bum-bum-bum-bum hey everybody hey Joe
Joe Andrew come on in grab a seat inside for a coffee with Scott Adams as luck would have it that's me and you're here for the simultaneous ascent which happens when my user count hits 1,000 which happens pretty quickly these days and if you'd like to participate in these simultaneous it all you need is a cup or a mug or glasses snifters Diane jealous tanker thermos flask canteen growl goblet vessels of any kind fill it with your favorite liquid I'll bet you know that I like coffee and join me now for the unparalleled pleasure the dopamine hit of the day the thing that makes that really better simultaneous it go mm-hmm whoo doggies all right well there's a whole bunch of fun and interesting stuff in the news interestingly here's what's

[1:10]

in the news interestingly here's what's not in the news lots of bad stuff think about that do you remember when the news used to be about disasters and people dying and tragedies and all those things not anymore we have entered the golden age my friends and the Golden Age everything's trending good and when something bad happens we take care of it pretty quickly compared to the past hello Ezra Bridger Azerbaijan Glenn all right all right let's talk about a few things Devon newness wrote a letter to Adam Schiff which was sort of mocking and sort of serious and the headline there is that

[2:10]

serious and the headline there is that newness that said in direct language that shift needs long-term rehabilitation after his many public lies that he knew her lies now have all been exposed as lies now I could not love this more if Devon Dunas had said oh you lied we right you were wrong because in normal wouldn't get any headlines and it wouldn't be very clever but by suggesting that the shift needs rehabilitation he's kind of taking it to another level he's making you think past the sale which is did shift do something bad and all the way past that - should we consider rehabilitation now he doesn't specify what rehabilitation means now but the implication is that it's sort of a mental health character issue and I'm starting to think that

[3:10]

issue and I'm starting to think that that's actually accurate for perhaps Sadler and chef you know when you're watching Schumer or Pelosi say stuff that is the same stuff often the same stuff that Shifa members are saying you can kind of tell that they're just being political can't you wouldn't you say that when you're watching Nancy she doesn't seem crazy she doesn't seem mentally ill she's just taking a side and you know why you know what's in there for her and you know there's strategy but it doesn't look crazy same with Schumer Schumer never looks crazy does he you know he's very political etc I'm not crazy but when you look at Schiff and Adler I wouldn't say they're crazy in some typical medical sense but clearly these are people who have a different level of issue with the

[4:12]

different level of issue with the president than the purely political people do I don't think Hillary Clinton is crazy you know there are lots of Democrats who are not crazy but when I look at chef and endler there's something else going would you not agree there's some emotional character something there's a little extra going on there I don't know what it is but when newness is just that shift needs rehabilitation it kind of hits that part of your brain this as yeah there's something about a chef he's not like the other politicians that you disagree with there's something extra going on there that maybe needs to be looked at now we're not medical professionals we cannot diagnose things but as a political strategy to reframe chef's as somebody who's got a problem as opposed to someone who has a different opinion not bad Devin newness

[5:14]

different opinion not bad Devin newness not bad thumbs up
speaking of reframing Lindsey Graham finally came in with the well I'm not gonna call it a kill shot but it's a very strong reframing hasn't it been driving you crazy listening to the Democrats talking about the president and impeachment in Ukraine and saying and I quote he's not above the law he's not above the law he's not above the law now what makes me crazy about that is that it's pretty effective it bothers me because it works and what it works to do is make you think past think that's the the question of whether the president committed a crime you think past that to the question of should he be free of punishment for that crime so it's a tricky persuasive persuasion trick to say he's not above the law when there's

[6:16]

say he's not above the law when there's no suggestion at the moment that any law was actually broken in fact the impeachment articles don't even mention a law there's no law even mentioned after all that after all that investigation they couldn't even find a law that was broken I mean I think you and I if you and I got investigated they'd probably find some law that we broke that we don't even know we broke but they've investigated the president up and down they can't find a law then he broke so they keep saying presidents not above the law which is good persuasion bad ethics but Lindsey Graham has countered in the interview he said I love Joe Biden but none of us are above scrutiny so that's talking about whether President Trump had a right to look into Brisbane and the Biden's so this is good framing from Lindsey Graham none of us are above scrutiny now since Biden is not accused of

[7:18]

now since Biden is not accused of breaking the law and Lindsey Graham has said directly and I think he said it before there he does have a real affection for Joe Biden he actually he likes the guy so he's now saying Joe Biden isn't above the law because that would be pretty weaselly that would be weaselly because it was make again it would make you make you imagine that there had been a law that somebody is suggesting Joe Biden broke but nobody is suggesting that there is no law that anybody suggests he broke there is only the question of swamp eNOS that maybe needs to be looked into because you don't know why you find what you look into it scrutiny so when Graham says no one of his above scrutiny that's pretty strong persuasion good wording good choice of words a plus Lindsey Graham let's talk about Trump Trump tweeted he does his

[8:23]

about Trump Trump tweeted he does his father's tweets on the weekend I think he has more time to think about it while he's golfing and whatnot but he tweeted and I quote talking about Nancy Pelosi Trump says in the tweet because Nancy's teeth were falling out of her mouth and she didn't have time to think that was in reference to somebody else was saying she was confused about something or got something wrong and Trump actually tweets about her dentures falling out now here's the funny part about this the funny part about that is that's all that's all I'm gonna be seeing the next time I see or talk I'm just gonna be looking at her mouth and listening to hear the clink of her dentures I think there are dentures I'm not positive she even has dentures can anybody confirm that because it could be that she's just slurring her words for whatever reason but it does sound like she has dentures

[9:25]

but it does sound like she has dentures so what's funny about this is that Trump is the master of trash-talking like you went in a sport so when he my favorite I think was when Trump said that Marco Rubio was sweaty that is the ultimate excellent excellent trash talk because it gets in his head and makes Marco Rubio think am i sweating I hope I don't sweat I have to worry about everything but I also have to worry about sweating oh my god thinking about sweating is making me sweating am i sweating now oh no I'm sweating sweating makes me nervous one sweat anymore if you ever want to really get in somebody's head the the Trump he sweats too much play on Marco Rubio you can't beat that that gets in the head and is so self-reinforcing especially during moments of stress it's just so

[10:26]

during moments of stress it's just so good you you know you did a bad way right I'm not saying you should do this you know you can make your own moral and ethical judgments about things but you can't argue it doesn't work it's really strong Pelosi grip I see that Andrew all right likewise when Trump calls out Nancy's false teeth if they even are false teeth I have no idea if that's true but it's gonna make her self-conscious as all get-out now when you become super self-conscious when you're speaking what happens you don't do your best and I don't know how Nancy Pelosi could possibly not be self-conscious when the President of the United States calls that her dentures was flapping around when she talks if she has dentures I just don't know if that's even true so

[11:29]

just don't know if that's even true so again it's a classic Trump get in your head kind of thing and it's good stuff now he had another one today I think I wrote that one down
uh-oh forgot the right thing went down oh yeah so Trump also tweeted he was talking about the debates for the general election and he said I look very much this is a tweet today from Trump I look very much forward to debating whoever the lucky person is who stumbles across the finish line and the little washed do-nothing Democrat its stumble I have to read it again cause it's so damn funny I look very much forward to debating whoever the lucky person is who
stumbles across the finish line and the little watched do-nothing Democrat to me

[12:34]

there are so many insults in that one sense it's it's like now as you know when the Democrats read this the anybody who's anti Trump they're gonna say well that's not funny that's not clever that's just mean you know he's just being a bully why are you laughing at that that's not clever the joke is not what he writes that's not the joke and he knows that the joke is the reaction to it that's the joke so when you read this you know what the reaction is going to be and that's the thing that makes me laugh is what is why he's done to people how much he's got in their head so I tweeted this morning that for the last few years people have been arguing with me whether I would say the President Trump is the most persuasive person I've ever seen in my lifetime you know as far as the public figure and

[13:35]

know as far as the public figure and people would argue that point they say are you kidding me he's not persuasive and that I was jokingly tweeting this morning that well if you say he's not persuasive you have to explain I didn't say this part but I'll say it now you have to explain is 95 percent approval among Republicans or whatever it is it's something pretty high at the same time he's managed to convince the Democratic Party to work full time for his reelection now it's called the impeachment process but the effect of it is because Trump has managed to sort of take control of the the narrative if you will he's winning the narratives he's winning the persuasion if you will and the effect of it is that he has the entire Democratic Party working as hard as they can literally working overtime they're actually working long hours into the night literally working overtime to

[14:35]

the night literally working overtime to get him elected because that's the obvious I will come of all of this so that's funny so what else we got I had to delete a tweet a tweeted yesterday because the world is so darned AMA I tweeted a suggestion for filtering on Twitter to filter out trolls now what happens on Twitter if you make a suggestion of any type doesn't matter what the suggestion is if you tweet a suggestion you will get the following results something like 2/3 of the people who will be in your comments will misinterpret what you said into something stupid and then and then go after you like crazy for being so stupid but they're rarely criticizing what you said or rather they've turned it into some weird stupid thing just so they could criticize it so I was spending too much

[15:36]

criticize it so I was spending too much time yesterday going into the comments and saying no I didn't say that no that's not the idea no that's not how it works until I realized that could never end you know there would be just thousands of people who just would be misinterpreting it and blaming me so I deleted it but I'm gonna tell you what the idea was the idea was to have an option / to eat they'll listen to this it's the per tweet part that's important that the author of the tweet can say that for this tweet and just this suite alone I won't accept where I won't see let's say you can just mute them automatically anybody who's anonymous so you can still comment all you want if you're an anonymous account you can keep your anonymous account you can comment you can tweet you can do anything you want but I personally would have the option of not seeing it now the stronger

[16:39]

of not seeing it now the stronger version of that is that they can't actually comment I'm not opposed to that but if he wanted to give everybody their full freedom of speech you could just say well actually I think I would prefer it if I could just block them now the here are the complaints that people made when I made that suggestion somebody says that Jack Dorsey doesn't like suggestions he literally liked my suggestion so on Twitter Jack Dorsey actually hit the like button now that doesn't mean he thinks it's a good suggestion the way I the way I interpret it is you may know that Jack Dorsey and Twitter recently announced that they formed some external working group to try to figure out you know better ways to filter and and run algorithms on Twitter so he's actively looking for suggestions there they're actively brainstorming how do we make

[17:40]

actively brainstorming how do we make Twitter healthier etc so I think the like that you put on the suggestion had more to do with encouraging the brainstorming that and liking this specific idea that's my interpretation of it anyway so then so some people asked how can you tell if somebody's anonymous you know how could you detect it yeah that's a real good question and I don't know the answer to it but I imagine it could be done because when you sign up for Twitter you at least have to give them a phone number or an email and there are probably a number of ways that you could sort of determine if somebody is real now there's the the blue check verified system but that's only for some people so is there a way that you could build into Twitter a a way to test whether they're being anonymous or using their

[18:41]

they're being anonymous or using their real name that would not be maybe a hundred percent accurate but would work alright here's a suggestion if you want to be able to comment and be known as a real person you could maybe upload your ID so you can upload your driver's license and if you driver's license matches matches the name you're using in your profile then that that would be a real person now I don't know if that's practical I don't know if you could do that and it's you know it's an international thing so they'd have to handle IDs from different countries etc but it would be a nice option yeah so ID theft would still be a problem but most people would not bother I think most trolls would not bother to get a fake ID just to pretend to be a real person what it would be just as easy to continue being anonymous what would be the point of pretending to be a real person on

[19:43]

of pretending to be a real person on Twitter when you could just have an actual you know fake profile yeah so I don't think there's incentive to get a fake ID just so you look like a real person on Twitter except for you know a few pranksters what should be a trivial problem the other thing I wonder is if you were to put your name and address into Twitter when you signed up there are probably enough public resources that that know where people live in other words you probably find out if somebody lives in that zip code under the name that they're claiming and they are the age that they claim because right now you can sign up for a service to do a background check of anybody if you do a background check on anybody you can find their address you can find their age their baton their date of birth and their real name stuff like that so you can imagine in a process where somebody has to put their name and address in and and Twitter could at least check to see if there's somebody by that name who lives in that

[20:45]

somebody by that name who lives in that area now that still allows you to take the name of somebody who's not on Twitter alright so none of these are foolproof systems they're all just some brainstorming suggestions anyway so here's the main point some of the people who didn't like the idea thought hey you're taking away my freedom to speak anonymously and since I have to speak anonymously because I might get fired from my day job if I give my real opinion wouldn't you Scott to be missing out on good opinions to which I say probably not probably not if I were to block all the people who are anonymous but still allow all the people who are under their real identity would I miss anything important because it seems to me that the opinions that move the world

[21:46]

that move the world in other words opinions that actually matter are the ones that people will say out loud if you have an opinion that you're not willing to say out loud because you would get fired I understand that you know it's tough to be a trump supporter these days but you can guarantee that there's somebody who will say that same thing under a real identity there's probably nothing that you you would be afraid of saying because you might get fired there's probably nothing that there isn't somebody else who is perfectly willing to say it in public under their real name so would I miss any of the excellent opinions of the anonymous people theoretically yes but I think in the real world essentially no because most people have pretty similar opinions on each side of the political realm and if the anonymous people I'd never see on a particular tweet I'll see people who

[22:47]

a particular tweet I'll see people who are not anonymous probably with the same opinions so I probably won't miss anything the other point is that your freedom of speech is not impinged by my freedom to ignore you so I certainly have the freedom to not see your speech while at the same time you have a you have the freedom to speak all you want tweet all you want etc hey so I just put that idea out there for thought so what it is not is something just for the blue checks you would need some other way to verify people's identity don't know what that is
is alright speaking of that sort of thing I've started posting these periscopes which as you know get posted over to YouTube but YouTube D monetizes all of my stuff and then makes me go through the manual process to romana ties it when it's too late because all the

[23:47]

when it's too late because all the traffic's already going by so that's still happening and by the way I have verified that YouTube does still run ads on my stuff that's demonetized now I don't know the details of that but wouldn't you assume that if we can observe it I mean we could just look at it and we could say okay it's demonetized you can check that for sure because it says so and then you can also check that you're looking at an advertisement at the same time it says do you monetize so it's not like you can't see that the advertisements are running when it's demonetised now do you think that they're running advertisements and not collecting money from the advertisers because I'm deep monetized well anything's possible I'm thinking that's not what's happening I'm thinking that YouTube is keeping the money from

[24:47]

that YouTube is keeping the money from the ads and simply not giving them to me now I would need confirmation that that's true but if it is true it's obviously a class-action lawsuit and I would imagine that there would be a lot of people in my situation who would join them so let me put this out to you if there are others having exactly the same problem but only if you have some visibility on the question of whether YouTube is really making money while at the same time to be monetizing me if that's true that I would have to say that's certainly lawsuit material but it's an open question I believe that the trend of Trump supporters lying to pollsters is growing and it should grow I recommend and I'm going to say this is unbelie-- if you're a trump supporter and you get polled you should lie and

[25:49]

and you get polled you should lie and say you're not now you don't have to of course it's free country you can say whatever you want but wouldn't it be funny if the polls were amazingly wrong you have to admit it would be funny but also why would you take the chance of giving your information to an anonymous pollster in an age when absolutely nothing is anonymous could the pollsters identify who you are they have your phone number right if they have your phone number and they know that you said you're a trump supporter does that information exist in a database that could someday be bad for you yes because the Democrats are saying explicitly that they're going to come after Trump supporters it's not even a theory it's happening right now if they had a list of who voted for Trump they would use that list do you think the polling companies are so secure that there's no

[26:50]

companies are so secure that there's no employee of a polling company who can get ahold of that data and put it on the Internet of course they can't now I don't know what the odds are but of course that could happen in fact I would say the odds of it happening what at least 20% minimum right 20% chance that you'll be on the list that says you're a trump supporter based on answering a poll if you're a trump supporter and you honestly answer a pollster that's just bad thinking because it doesn't help Trump to say that he's more popular because he's running anyway he got the nomination you don't have to help chunk he already got the nomination he's the candidate so you can't help him by answering honestly you can't help me by answering honestly because I don't want you to lose your job I don't want you to be on a list that

[27:51]

I don't want you to be on a list that says you're you know you should be shunned in the future so what will help me if you tell the truth can you think of anybody in the world it would help if you told the truth to a pollster I can't I can't think of any benefit to that I can think of a lot of risk I can't think of any benefit all right as you know I've been field testing the response to people who say okay boomer and depending on the context I continue to find that my clever response Marsh Snyder's one of the proponents of this as I say okay Doomer with addy okay doober so far seems to stop all conversation so when there's somebody who's afraid that Trump is destroying the world or Isis is taking over or climate change is going to kill us all

[28:52]

climate change is going to kill us all okay do Burger just totally stops the conversation but test it yourself that's anecdotal I have a new criteria for blocking people I blocked somebody this morning every now and then as many of you are aware I will retweet a Democrat or somebody who's anti-trump err because there's something they said that I think you should see or I thought or I agree with it yesterday or today forget I tweeted a OCE and it was part of a larger rant she had about health care but one of them was that she had 60 options that she had to figure out which one she wanted and that nobody should go through that kind of paperwork so AOC had a tweet complaining about the complexity of making a decision on click on health care in the current system I completely agree with that criticism and

[29:55]

completely agree with that criticism and so i retweeted it and then somebody came came after me in the comments and said that I need to explain why I've retweeted that as if I'm not allowed to retweet somebody who's on the other team according to you that's an instant block now okay so I want to make sure I've warned you all if you tell me that I should not have or could not have or it's bad form or it's a bad idea to retweet somebody on the other team instant block I don't want to have any association with people who are always seeing this as a team sport you can see it as a team sport and you're welcome to do that I just don't want to hear from you because that's that's just nothing useful so if you got blocked today that's why I continue to test my provocative theory that I call artists versus economists and on Twitter I was tweeting that you can you can tell

[30:58]

I was tweeting that you can you can tell if somebody is more likely to be an artist or more likely to be one of the fields where you learn Korean thinking economists being was standing for that as is the way on Twitter this was radically misinterpreted and then once again I had to spend my whole day explaining to people that they didn't understand the point and they were sure that I had contradicted myself and so I ended up just deleting the suite because it was it was just exhausting to explain to people that they can't read over and over again no you can't read trying to try reading it again hmm maybe if you read it perhaps you should read the tweet and then comment you know I so I just got exhausted doing that but here is what I've learned I continue to do this test and it continues to work in ways that are scary because I used to think maybe there were smart people and

[32:01]

think maybe there were smart people and dumb people in the world and I'm starting to think that's not the case at least in an IQ sense I'm starting to think that our that a lot of our differences in terms of how we see the world are based on what education and experience we have in one domains and that some of them don't teach you how to think but here's the worst part you don't know that you don't know that you don't know how to think so that you think you have common sense you think you're equal to the other people who have learned that I think because you can't tell the difference so look for that once you see it you can't unsee it the number of crazy comments that come from people in the arts is it's astonishing it's very consistent I
somebody was mentioning Krugman now I shouldn't have to say this I shouldn't

[33:01]

shouldn't have to say this I shouldn't have to say this you're adults right most of you you understand this something like this where I'm saying artists or economists you understand that doesn't mean every time every person right and you should understand that when I say artists characteristic most of the people who came after me said bus cough you draw Dilbert you draw Dell world's God so is it that inconsistent with you saying that artists are not going to critical thinking Scott now that of course is a complete misunderstanding and the point the point is that if the only thing you studied was art on average you're probably not going to have the same with thinking tools as somebody who studied let's say art and also economics and also science and also psychology so there are very few people who have only

[34:02]

there are very few people who have only studied art or only studied economics it's a it's a generality it's meant to be a generality and right there are no absolutes there so if you're arguing it from a perspective of there's an exception you know hey it's Craig Manning an exception I'm just not interested of course there are exceptions you don't have to ask me about every one of them all right did you see Rudy Giuliani's tweet thread which suggests he's found out all kinds of damning things over in Ukraine so I guess he's been traveling over there digging up dirt on something I don't know but he seems he seems to indicate he's got all kinds of you know good stuff I don't know if any of that's real but it's interesting it's interesting here's a random thought you know john mcafee he was the person who created

[35:04]

mcafee he was the person who created McAfee the antivirus stuff but he's an interesting character a I think he's he would get arrested if he came to this country but I realized that he follows me on Twitter and I follow him would you be interested in having me ask John McAfee to come on periscope because he's announced his presidential run and I think I can't imagine who would be more interesting with him so I'll just put that out there if you'd want it if you want me to invite John McAfee on the periscope I don't know if he'd come but I can't imagine anybody who wouldn't be more interesting all right here's a study have you been seeing all the talk about the damage of porn and let's say self-gratification so there's a lot of conservatives especially talking about

[36:05]

conservatives especially talking about porn and people who are using it doing a certain thing and how it's damaging people so I was reading this study and it said that the erectile dysfunction rates for been under 40 has gone up quite a bit so so the number of people with low libido is skyrocketing and the article I was reading says no variable related to youthful erectile dysfunction has meaningfully changed since then so they're saying that the only thing that's changed is that there's more porn or better porn so this suggestion is that the men who are looking at porn and then when they try to have sex with real women they can't function because the poorness or to rewire their brain I think that's true so I'm gonna say that's you know my assumption is so that's completely demonstrable but

[37:08]

that's completely demonstrable but here's my only quibble there's definitely something else that's changed so when the article says nothing else has changed except there's more porn that's not true is it let me suggest some other things that have changed diet so I as people are saying I don't know if that has a scientific bearing but it's changed and certainly it's implicated in you know the whole sex hormones situation here's another thing that's changed the the me too movement now the meetin movement I think most of us generally think it's a positive thing in the sense that women have been harassed for you know eons and now there's you know at least they're starting to get at least a little bit closer to you know some kind of relief from that and me to moved and being a big part of that but here's my

[38:09]

big part of that but here's my controversial statement if you were a young man working in a corporate environment in the let's say the eighties just to pick a decade you were surrounded by sex sexual suggestions and it was just a completely that was my experience anyway is that being a young person working in the corporate world was so sexualized it was crazy and the number of people who were in the office who were having you know extramarital affairs and you know and coupling up with each other was through the roof and the conversations were often sexual you know by today's standards they would all be grounds for grounds for firing but back then it was it was common good or bad I'm not putting a there's no judgement on this right I'm just describing so when might roles take at this time in context later I'm not saying the old days were better I'm just

[39:11]

saying the old days were better I'm just describing the difference so and then you were also in an environment where people were you know dressing in some cases more provocatively probably more so than today so I think there was also more continuous daytime exposure to real-world things that were getting men kind of worked up during the day so that changed because I'll bet I'll bet you that men are not even making eye contact in the hallways as much when they're walking down the hallways if a woman is walking the other direction and by the way I've completely stopped making eye contact when I remember to do it because my reflex let's say I'm walking by somebody in a hallway we're on a sidewalk or something my reflex is to look at their face in cases somebody I know or in case they're just friendly you know Baylor females and just say hi but if I if I catch that it's a woman walking the other direction

[40:13]

it's a woman walking the other direction I'm more likely to just you know look look down or look the other direction now so here's my point if you're male your body chemistry is greatly influenced by the inputs during the day and if the inputs during the day used to be more let's say overtly sexual and now they're less so because people are you know actively trying to avoid looking and thinking and acting a certain way that would make a difference wouldn't it is it not also true that the testosterone level of men has dropped every decade that's true too right I don't know why but that's changed so wouldn't the drop in in testosterone explain explain things as much as born unless the porn is causing the drop in testosterone maybe all right

[41:20]

and let me let me pivot to some of my predictions all right so that I'm gonna get back to the porn thing because I was one of my predictions so I've told you often that if you want to test your worldview the best way to do it is to see if you can predict things so I've made a number of predictions some you've seen something you don't know about I'll tell you about and I test them so I'm gonna test them right now and what I found is that I have a bad track record on let's say ordinary stuff like if just some ordinary person is running for office and I try to predict who's gonna win I'm not especially good at that because there's nothing there that works to my special knowledge but if there's somebody in the race or in the world who has special persuasion skills I probably have a little advantage there because I can recognize so for example as you know I identified Trump as being persuasive and likely to win the presidential election before

[42:21]

win the presidential election before other people and I also noticed a OC as having a special skill when most people were calling her a flash in the pan and the bartender and stuff like that and now she's practically running the Democratic Party so I seem to be good in certain categories but let me tell you some of the least let's say the wildest predictions I've ever made and see how I've done on the most unusual ones okay in my book the Dilbert future that I that was published in 1997 I made a prediction that still catches me flak 20-some years later and the prediction was this that evolution would be debunked in my lifetime in scientific terms not in religious terms so I never said that I never said that evolution

[43:23]

said that I never said that evolution would be debunked in favor of you know Genesis but I did say this science would debunk evolution in my lifetime has that happened yes now when I say debunked that's of course a strong term but it is true that there is an alternate explanation of evolution then is backed by small number but real scientists Nick Bostrom who's a I believe a scientist is the one who came up with it and it certainly would make evolution you know on a but not applicable so imagine how wild how wild that prediction was that's a the entire scientific community was saying no you know we scientists all agree for the most part evolution evolution and I publicly predicted against that not in

[44:25]

publicly predicted against that not in terms of a explanation but as a scientific one here was my thinking my thinking is specifically and here's the reason they gave for why I thought it would why it would be rethought I said that the next hundred years will be a search for a better perception instead of better vision in other words my prediction about evolution was based on our perception of our reality and that's what simulation theory is it's about a perception of our reality it's not about whether this fossil is real it's not about you know whether DNA can mutate it was about whether our entire perception of reality would be transformed so that was the 1997 I mean that prediction not bad all right I also predicted in the same book that virtual reality in the in the form of something like the holodeck

[45:25]

the form of something like the holodeck would make real sex extinct and as I just mentioned just regular or poor that's not yet even 3d for the most part it has lowered men's interest in having sex with real women substantially enough that some are considering it an emergency what happens when this level of porn moves into the 3d world well if you have not if you have not experienced virtual reality and I have I've got a virtual reality box over here if you've not experienced how real it feels even while your brain knows it's not real but the you see the world like it's real if you haven't experienced that in person you don't know how bad this is going to get let me let me tell you whatever level the porn addiction slash crisis is

[46:28]

level the porn addiction slash crisis is right now you haven't seen anything it's going to take a whole new level and it's going to make sex with humans seemed like a stupid idea that's happening alright there's nothing you can do to change that there's nothing that would change that so I think that prediction is certainly has the indication that it's happening I made a weird prediction also in 1997 that there would be a rise of something that I call the Harry reasoner's now Harry Reasoner was a real person he was a news guy back in the old 60 minutes you know original Deus he's passed away but it was a play on words instead of Harry like a person's name I refer to them as Harry as in the hair on your head and the thought was that on the internet there would rise a number of let's say voices or pundits who would have bad hair and would come to be sort

[47:30]

have bad hair and would come to be sort of the voices of reason and the prediction was that we wouldn't be able to discern our reality from the news because the news wouldn't be reliable 1997 folks and I said that instead of relying on the news for the truth you would need certain people who would emerge just as credible figures that would have bad hair but they'd be good at explaining stuff that's exactly what I'm doing I've got bad hair and I'm good at explaining stuff somebody just said Alan Dershowitz exactly exactly somebody said joe rogan exactly bad hair good at explaining stuff i was going to say jordan peterson be actually has excellent hair but he has a beard I don't remember if I said in the book

[48:31]

don't remember if I said in the book that they would be hairy in that way but it is true that 11 ya live in it is true it seems that well sort of it shows good here he's a bad example Malcolm Gladwell
so they're not all of the important figures who were explaining things about hair but I'm gonna claim partial victory on that one I also predicted in the early 90s now early 2000s that there would be a Caliphate in the Middle East there was and that they would be using drones for you know small drones for terrorist attacks I think that's guaranteed I also predicted in this book years ago that the news industry would start killing celebrities to generate news and I predicted that the actual news would be

[49:33]

predicted that the actual news would be so positive that we would figure out how to how to make stuff work pretty well in the future that the news industry would have to actually start creating news by killing people that was shortly before princess died died trying to avoid photographers so I'm not going to say that proved it but we are watching the news trying to assassinate people's careers wouldn't you say that it's true that the news industry especially the news on the left is literally assassinating people at least politically and career-wise to generate news would you say that's not true Ari are you watching it every day the news is not physically killing people in most cases but they're actually targeting people for Destruction to make news it gets clicks that's almost all we're

[50:35]

it gets clicks that's almost all we're watching though is the news targeting and destroying people to create more news think about that I predicted in 97 that video cameras would be so ubiquitous that it would be impossible to get get away with crime almost there when was the last time you saw a crime that involved any kind of a public event or a business in which there were not video cameras it almost never happens anymore so that one was correct I also made that weird prediction that Hillary's health was bad during the election now that was a pretty bold thing to say and she's the only candidate I know who during the election passed now at a public event had to be dragged into a car and there's more to the story this rumor but that's not confirmed but apparently she was pretty darn sick so a few people were on the

[51:41]

darn sick so a few people were on the same page on that one my predicted of course back in 2016 I said that the two movies on one screen was what we were about to have to see they said that reality reality itself would be changed by Trump true it's true when you say I think I think that in fact there was just a yet another article I think in the New York Times in which somebody was saying exactly the same thing that our world has separated into two versions of reality what a weird think about what a weird prediction that was in 2016 I literally predicted that reality would split into two movies that are playing on the same screen meaning we'd look at the same facts but we see different movies think how weird that was when I said it and now it's literally ordinary like everybody agrees it's true when I first said I don't think anybody thought

[52:41]

first said I don't think anybody thought it would be true that's about as contrarian a prediction as anybody's ever remained in the Institute of predictions here's another contrarian one when the Vegas shooting happened and Isis claimed claimed that it was an Isis event I said in public it wasn't Isis at the same time Isis was actually taking credit for it and the experts said you know Isis doesn't take credit for stuff unless it's really them and I said this will be the exception and it was think how weird that was Isis was taking credit and I still said in public it's not that and then we found that it wasn't remember the the Cuban sonic weapon I said it's not a sonic weapon when everybody said it's a sonic weapon at least everybody had no muff maybe somebody thought it wasn't and sure enough years have gone by and they can't find

[53:43]

years have gone by and they can't find any sonic weapon as I predicted and somebody gave me a hard time because I predicted that commonly Harris would be the nominee for the Democrats and she's already dropped out of the race were suspended or a campaign but am I wrong yet let me just suggest that if Carla Harris became Joe Biden's running mate that people are gonna look at that situation especially since Joe is talking about having one having only one term and the reason he's talking about that is because if we see more of him and you'd have to in the general election once it reaches the general election the news will no longer be able to ignore Joe Biden and he's gonna look less and less appealing until his vice-presidential running mate is being talked of as wait for it the real

[54:45]

talked of as wait for it the real nominee because people are going to say you know you know Joe is technically the head of the ticket but we're kind of voting for the vice president in this specific case that would make Coble Harris effectively the nominee without getting nominated I might not happen but I'm just saying that my prediction about her being the nominee is not yet dead except in a tactical sense in which it is somebody says your predictions are often wrong well I cover that in the first part you might have missed so when my predictions are wrong but they're usually in certain categories so the ones that tend to be wrong are ordinary things like which which ordinary candidate will win this race you know which way will evoke go stuff like that I don't think I have any special insight and that stuff but in terms of understanding reality and the the trends of how we see our world and

[55:47]

the trends of how we see our world and persuasion I seem to have a good record there boom and you would still lose the bet that is correct yeah even if Carla Harris were vice president that everybody thought should be president I would still technically lose the bet the evolution was wrong artist opinion well I'm not gonna argued that with you he missed the deep state did I so what I said was that the deep state was not an organized coup but rather it was probably people with Trump derangement syndrome acting individually they may have been complaining to each other collectively but I imagine their decisions were sort of individual decisions they may have been blinded by the thought that it was good for the

[56:48]

the thought that it was good for the world something like that we still don't know what the deal is with Brennan and clapper if there was anybody who specifically was planning on an overthrow it would be those two but we don't have that information yeah if the deep state is just a bureaucracy that has some preferences that of course that exists you totally missed the boat on any conspiracies such as I still have stocks I own a few stocks i I'm into index funds so I'm mostly in stocks what about the meeting in the Andes office we still don't know what that was about so I don't know if I had a but I did say and I did that the so called insurance policy was not a reference to a coup and I believe

[57:51]

not a reference to a coup and I believe that Horowitz has validated that right had do a fact check on this did Horowitz I did not conclude as far as I know that the insurance policy conversation or the meeting in Andy's office all that conversation I believe he did not conclude that that was coot awk I need a fact check on that yeah so somebody who's agreeing with me now that doesn't mean it wasn't but he looked into it pretty clearly he asked what was their other explanation for things and he must have heard them what about cartels as terrorists dead in the water I think that there will be continuous movement toward treating the cartels as terrorist organizations I'm guessing that we've got a secret deal with Mexico because

[58:53]

got a secret deal with Mexico because the Mexican government can't say that they're going to work with the United States to take out the cartels because the cartels probably have too much control over the governments of Mexico so the way that it could happen is the Mexican government says in public no no no we're not going to do this while in private they turn they turn a blind eye or or help a little bit so depending on how much in the pocket the President of Mexico is in the pocket of the cartels
that's the part we don't know but I wouldn't be surprised if the United States is already organizing and planning military action maybe you'll never hear about it because if if a cartel if a cartel facility in the jungle blew up would that ever be on the news because there's not like there's

[59:54]

news because there's not like there's any press you know I don't know if we'd ever know so it seems to me that we could have massive military action against the cartels you'd never even hear about it do you remember when there used to be a problem with pirates remember the Somali pirates do you remember that there was like pirates pirates pirates and it looked like there was nothing that could be done because there were so many pirates and it was good business and there were just more pirates every day and pirates pirates pirates when was the last time you heard about a pirate think about it when was the last time you heard about a Somali pirate do you think they are retired they're not they're not taking any more ships what do you think happened well speculate what happened is the Somali pilots got wiped out by no doesn't matter it doesn't matter because you're not gonna hear about it was it on

[1:00:55]

you're not gonna hear about it was it on the news will never be on the news but I can tell you one thing for sure there are probably a lot of dead Somali pirates we just don't hear about it so what's the difference between the Somali pirates we're just sort of quietly all disappeared dead and the cartels kind of a similar situation I suspect that the cartels are going to have some bad days ahead but you might never hear about it so there's that I think I have hit all my top points oh so I'm watching the the Democrats who are trapped in a losing movie trying to explain the reality and it's kind of funny to watch them flail now the problem with the Democrats movie or their version of reality is that it doesn't predict and they have they have

[1:01:56]

doesn't predict and they have they have to deal with that now my version of reality is predicted quite well so for example I said now the president did not collude with Russia and sure enough and I said Ukraine is not a crime I don't say anything there and sure enough doesn't seem to me much of anything there but if you are a Democrat you think that all of these things really exist and you're probably trying to explain why thirty percent of Hispanics are supporting the President and probably I'm guessing there will be a historically a high number of african-american voters for Trump for reelection now if you're a Democrat how do you explain that because because they believe that it's obvious to the entire world that this president is the biggest racist in the world and yet something between you know ten and thirty percent depending on which minority community are actually

[1:02:59]

which minority community are actually voting for him do you think that millions of people didn't notice what the news says is just true that the president's obviously just obviously a big old racist and you think that all of these people who would be the victims of this racism you think they didn't notice how do they explain their world so they're trying to explain it away as saying that everything the Republicans believe is conspiracy theory or it's gaslighting it's lying it's stupid or it's selfish behavior that's you know some kind of a cond so those are the go to the big five conspiracy gaslighting lying stupid or selfish so that's sort of the the material of the the walls of their bubble as long as they can explain everything away with one of these five things that's a conspiracy theory or gaslighting lying stupid selfish commune then they can stay in their bubble but

[1:04:00]

then they can stay in their bubble but band as their bubble continues to be terrible at predicting I don't know how long you can stay in a bubble they can't predict that would be very painful right that's all I got for now I will talk to you later bye for now