Ask Dr. Drew - UFO “Whistleblower” David Grusch, COVID & Psyops w/ Lionel & Mark Changizi – Ask Dr. Drew – Episode 230

Episode Date: June 23, 2023

Lionel & cognitive scientist Mark Changizi join Dr. Drew to discuss claims by UFO “whistleblower” David Grusch, psyops, and technocratic censorship. Lionel is a talk radio veteran, trial lawyer, former prosecutor, author, pioneer podcaster, and multi-platform legal and media analyst. Lionel has hosted shows for Court TV, WABC, Air America, and RT. He has his own subscription video channel, free from draconian limitations as to expression. Find more at https://LionelMedia.com and @LionelNation on YouTube. Mark Changizi is a Theoretical Cognitive Scientist & Founder of FreeX. He received degrees in physics and mathematics from the University of Virginia, and his PhD in math from the University of Maryland. In 2002 he won a prestigious Sloan-Swartz Fellowship in Theoretical Neurobiology at Caltech. He is the author of multiple books including Expressly Human: Decoding The Language Of Emotions, and appears regularly on TV shows including Discovery Channel’s Head Games and National Geographic’s Brain Games. Find more at http://www.changizi.com and https://www.youtube.com/c/markchangizi 「 SPONSORED BY 」 Find out more about the companies that make this show possible and get special discounts on amazing products at https://drdrew.com/sponsors • PRIMAL LIFE - Dr. Drew recommends Primal Life's 100% natural dental products to improve your mouth. Get a sparkling smile by using natural teeth whitener without harsh chemicals. For a limited time, get 60% off at https://drdrew.com/primal • PALEOVALLEY - "Paleovalley has a wide variety of extraordinary products that are both healthful and delicious,” says Dr. Drew. "I am a huge fan of this brand and know you'll love it too!” Get 15% off your first order at https://drdrew.com/paleovalley • THE WELLNESS COMPANY - Counteract harmful spike proteins with TWC's Signature Series Spike Support Formula containing nattokinase and selenium. Learn more about TWC's supplements at https://twc.health/drew • BIRCH GOLD - Don’t let your savings lose value. You can own physical gold and silver in a tax-sheltered retirement account, and Birch Gold will help you do it. Claim your free, no obligation info kit from Birch Gold at https://birchgold.com/drew • GENUCEL - Using a proprietary base formulated by a pharmacist, Genucel has created skincare that can dramatically improve the appearance of facial redness and under-eye puffiness. Genucel uses clinical levels of botanical extracts in their cruelty-free, natural, made-in-the-USA line of products. Get an extra discount with promo code DREW at https://genucel.com/drew 「 MEDICAL NOTE 」 The CDC states that COVID-19 vaccines are safe, effective, and reduce your risk of severe illness. You should always consult your personal physician before making any decisions about your health.  「 ABOUT the SHOW 」 Ask Dr. Drew is produced by Kaleb Nation (https://kalebnation.com) and Susan Pinsky (https://twitter.com/firstladyoflove). This show is for entertainment and/or informational purposes only, and is not a substitute for medical advice, diagnosis, or treatment. 「 ABOUT DR. DREW 」 For over 30 years, Dr. Drew has answered questions and offered guidance to millions through popular shows like Celebrity Rehab (VH1), Dr. Drew On Call (HLN), Teen Mom OG (MTV), and the iconic radio show Loveline. Now, Dr. Drew is opening his phone lines to the world by streaming LIVE from his home studio. Watch all of Dr. Drew's latest shows at https://drdrew.tv Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

And we are very pleased today to bring you two guests. Amongst the topics we'll be getting into are things such as the UFO sightings, not to mention I'm wondering what a neurobiologist, cognitive scientist, has to say about our excesses during the COVID phase of the lockdown era. Lionel is with us. He's a talk radio veteran trial lawyer former prosecutor you can find him Lionel media comm also as YouTube at Lionel nation and then mark jang easy he is a theoretical cognitive scientist founder of free X he has a degree in physics and math from UVA PhD in math from Maryland he has a theoretical neurobiology degree from Caltech, multiple books, lots to talk about.

You can find him at Changizi.com, C-H-A-N-G-I-Z-I.com, and his YouTube of the same name. Let's get right to it. Our laws as it pertains to substances are draconian and bizarre. A psychopath started this. He was an alcoholic because of social media and pornography, PTSD, love addiction, fentanyl and heroin.

Ridiculous. I'm a doctor for f***'s sake. Where the hell do you think I learned that? I'm just saying, you go to treatment before you kill people. I am a clinician.

I observe things about these chemicals. Let's just deal with what's real. We used to get these calls on Loveline all the time. Educate adolescents and to prevent and to treat.

If you have trouble, you can't stop and you want help stopping, I can help. I got a lot to say. I got a lot more to say. You can spend thousands of dollars trying to look a few years younger, or you can skip all of that hassle and go with what works. GenuCell skincare. GenuCell is the secret to better skin. In fact, you might have witnessed the astonishing effects of GenuCell during a recent unplanned moment on our show, when just a little GenuCell XV restored my skin within minutes,

right before your eyes. That's how fast these products work. I know I'm a snob about the products I use on my face. Everybody knows it. Every time I go to the dermatologist's office, they're just rows and rows of different creams. And then when I get to the counter, they're overpriced. All kinds of products that you can all find at GenuCell.com. Susan and I love GenuCell so much, we've created our own bundles so you can try our favorite anti-wrinkle treatments, correcting serums, and ultra-retinol creams. Just go to Genucel.com slash Drew. Use the code Drew for an extra discount and free priority shipping. Again, that is Genucel.com slash Drew, G-E-N-U-C-E-L.com slash

D-R-E-W. So as I said, I'm anxious to get to our guest today. I'm going to reintroduce you to my gentlemen that are going to join me. Lionel's a talk radio host veteran. He's a lawyer, a trial lawyer, a former prosecutor, a pioneer podcasting as well. And you can find his website, lionelmedia.com, and also find his YouTube channel at Lionel Nation. Mark is a theoretical cognitive scientist, as I said, founder of FreeX. He degrees in physics, math, PhD in math. He fellowship in theoretical neurobiology at Caltech. Multiple books.

You can see him on TV, shangeezy.com, C-H-A-N-G-I-Z-I. And the YouTube is Mark Shangeezy. Let's bring both gentlemen gentlemen in if you could, Caleb, right now. Gentlemen, thank you. Oh, Mark's first. And I just, there we have everybody. Lionel, I'm going to talk to Mark for a minute. And I'm thinking, am I being too harsh to say that you're a skeptic, Lionel, and that maybe you too many years sitting in trial listening to experts being willing to say just about anything has made you a skeptic? Is that a fair way of framing your- Absolutely the opposite.

Opposite? The opposite. Oh, no, no. I believe everything. I have no differential ability to not believe it. I believe in every... No, no, no. Skeptic? Skeptic is another word for jerk. Are you kidding? No, no, no. I'm not a skeptic. Okay, excellent. So we'll just say just not a jerk. We'll just leave it at that since they're the same word. They're the same thing.

I'll let you go for a second, Lano, while I talk to Mark. Mark, your pedigree is ridiculous, obviously, and it'd be interesting to talk to you about so many different things. I do want to get into, if you don't mind, some of the excesses of the last three or four years and your sort of assessment of that. I know we're going to talk about these patterns of UFO sightings

and where you think that might be coming from. But let me just um just ask do you do first of all do is there something you're ready to talk willing to talk about sort of what just sort of in broad strokes what kind of cognitive distortions we've been living through in the last three years oh yeah i mean uh it was a nightmare and you, early March, for those of us that saw this as a collective hysteria, as I did, we were all alone. We were saying this is crazy. And I pinned ever since March, March 17th, this tweet on Twitter that just says the moral of coronavirus 19 will end up being that social contagion sort of memes, that is ideas traveling through people's brains will be much more dangerous than biological contagion, sort of memes, that is ideas traveling through people's brains, will be much more dangerous than biological contagion, i.e. viruses. It's exactly the kinds of

these kinds of collective hysteria, as these group thinks, when they sweep through all the democides, the genocides, the crimes against humanity, are really ultimately due to these kinds of sweeps. Yes, they sometimes sweep in on their backs, dictators, and we remember it by virtue of this dictator. And most of us, the naive story is the dictator did all this, top down. It's never like that. Dictators without the masses beating as one are impotent. They're like the new dictator of the week in some tin pot third world country. Everybody just sort of shrugs when there's the new dictator of the week in some tin pot third world country, everybody just sort of

shrugs when there's the new dictator of the week. Those don't typically cause the kinds of problems that we saw in early March. And I was just all alone because I hadn't found other people in what we now call team reality. So it's been three years where I've spent all of my time, started a research institute, done almost 400 videos of my Science Moment series, which was beginning just on science. And actually, when COVID hit, I was on like episode 50, you know, in this sort of Science Moment series. And I just, I didn't know how to continue it. I was like, I can't just continue doing the same old science.

It would be like artists during World War II in Nazi Germany, just still doing landscapes or whatever the heck they were doing beforehand and not changing. And after about six months, I realized, you know, not only is this the scariest thing that if you really understand what's going on, this is the scariest thing you've ever seen. And we didn't really think this could happen in the West. We thought if it happens in the West, it's going to happen to Germans because they're really harsh, you know, or it happens in China because they're a faraway communist people and we don't understand them. Or it happens in Iran where my family comes from. My wife is Iranian. My dad was Iranian because it's somehow Islamic. But it couldn't happen to us because we're totally different, right?

No, it's all the same human psychosocial forces. And so I sort of devoted a lot of my research since then in trying to understand these kinds of emergent psycho-societal forces that explain these kinds of sweeps and the origins of all of the democides and crimes against humanity, which really follow from all of these sorts of things. And free expression and censorship are all part of this, because if you want to understand why free expression works, you have to understand it as an emergent system rather than kind of the very simple linear viewpoint that a lot of people have. And they have got their well intention. They say, well, yeah, why should we let people say false things? Let's just make sure that people on social media only say true things. Right. That's a very kind of like there's a lot of intuition behind that, right?

So a lot of what I do as a kind of an emergent theorist or the kind of person who's good at understanding complex evolved emergent phenomena in various kinds of domains is trying to understand these kinds of sociopolitical forces in those sorts of ways and explaining to the public. Yes, I get it. So a ton of questions follow on from that.

I'm going to sort of pile a couple together. I started thinking, I was telling some sort of millennials, I kept saying, you know, you guys ought to think of this as like you live through a war. And then I started thinking, well, war is kind of like this, isn't it? It is kind of a meme contagion of bad, good, must-go, save, whatever that sort of collective is that causes a group of people to go commit atrocities and violence going both directions.

It is also very, very, would you say it's very similar to what set up this situation? Yeah, I mean, it wared over time. I really think the inception of this was somewhere around March 11th of 2020. There seemed to be a phase change. It was building for a few weeks. It almost happened back with H1N1 and with swine flu. You could kind of see it building, but then it petered out. And when that kind of virality, meme virality, just like your tweets, you know, you can tweet 10,000 tweets and you can't predict which one's going to go viral. It depends on the reactions of hundreds of thousands or millions of other people who,

you know, which you don't have control of. Same for this kind of meme virality. But it's certainly much more likely in the cases of pandemics and infection and cooties and these kinds of natural reactions that people have so yeah yeah you know if it was a bunch of locusts that were attacking us let's say it would have not led to social cohesion destruction of the social cohesion we would have all come together, worked. It happens to all of us all the time, actually.

When you're in a snowstorm and you've got three feet and everything's closed for a week and you all have to dig out and you all work together and cook for each other or whatever, there's a kind of nice communal feeling and everybody enjoys that. But it doesn't cut at all of the network strings that hold a community together. But infection does, and fear of infection does. And it is something that we have innate, we have a very strong innate disgust and social disgust and food disgust or gross things disgust really intermingle quite a bit.

And so a lot of, you know, this is one of the things that I've talked about. A lot of the beliefs of the COVID cult, as I call it, once you fell into this religion by virtue of the group thing that started beating as one, this kind of collective hysteria, whole suites of a dozen or so totally irrational beliefs became 100% obvious to them because everybody in their community, all of these high reputation people in their networks, which are usually independent sources of information, and so it's reasonable to believe them, suddenly began saying the same thing. And so they came to believe them, just like we all come to believe stuff, because high reputation people say them, except that the network broke during this period of time. The network broke, the usual independent

sets of opinions that are meaningful suddenly were no longer meaningful. They were all basically one voice, not many, but it just leads to this positive feedback loop, and they all began believing these same kinds of crazy beliefs concerning a relatively mild, for almost everybody, virus. So let me say three things. Two questions. One is, I'm going to put at the beginning here, which is were you surprised that the entire world got caught up in this or everybody except Africa, number one. Number two, my friends in finance, when I was sort of trying to figure out, the constant thought bubble over my head is what is going on? What is going on?

I would ask my friends in finance and they go, that's my business. It's what I do all the time. Finance is all about the behavior of crowds. This will remit, it will reverse. It's the behavior of crowd. It's Le Bon. And is the extraordinary madness of crowds still pertinent today? That was all being rejected, interestingly, I thought. That was sort of being reconsidered at least around the time of the outbreak. Now, Le Bon, who wrote about the French Revolution, seems like exactly spot on. So, A, there are three questions embedded in this. One is, surprise the whole world got it. Two, is financial market behavior the same crazy behavior we just saw, just on a different scale? And three, is Le Bon's madness of crowd actually pretty much

close to what happens? Yeah, I think that it is exactly what happened. And these things aren't new. They happen at many hierarchical scales. They happen in economics with certain kinds of economic fads, certain kinds of things that people are suddenly buying. They happen in just your neighborhood, part of your town. The ladies only want to wear Lululemon, whereas another part of town, they're all wearing fancy things everywhere they go. And these are all sort of micro little microcultures where

these memes have spread. And once they've come to spread, they typically have virtue signals, which signal this is a virtuous kind of behavior. And they come up with post-hoc justice protocols. And many of them are potentially healthy or not unhealthy.

But what we saw is. Always happened in some other faraway country, not in a world that's now networked together. And of course, Africa won't be seen as once they're fully connected on the network next time if it happens. So that is the issue it is the the speed of information or memes or whatever it is that's flowing through the world electronically and these extraordinary new communication i guess we should call them uh channels or i guess what the french call tributaries reso they call them rivers i thought yeah when i came upon their description, that was a pretty interesting description of how things flow in social media.

I want to bring, we still haven't gotten to the UFO stuff yet, but I want to bring in Lionel to see if he has anything to comment on the heels of what you've just said there. Lionel, I know you've been listening quietly. What are your thoughts? I'm fascinated by how if I were watching my planet from someplace else, speaking of

UFOs, and I was trying to explain to them these critters, I would say, now watch this. First and foremost, fear motivates us. But wait a little bit wait until the intellectuals rise to the top and try to explain our aberrant behavior and then wait until you hear these internecine fighting and then we have the maskers and the mask holes and people who after the fact will still drive around wearing a mask in their car by themselves and how this moment this moment that we hated we rebelled what's interesting is not the not the the the intellectuals who fought this and by the way

look at event 201 and johns hopkins and how people pretty much predicted this is happening as predicted what i'm fascinated by are the number of people who loved it who felt alive okay who are ready to jump back into it again oh and they love it and yes so that's a great point i that was astonishing to me but yeah astonishing to me the people that oh the people that loved it and the people that loved telling those people how to live moment to moment. Mark, what is that? Is that a personality problem or is that a cognitive problem? It's a much bigger than an individual brain problem.

I could have fallen into it if I had. You could have. Any of us are susceptible to these exact same forces. Luckily, it's either through luck, I've always wanted to be aloof as a scientist, I move from field to field. So I've always even written to my students little ways of remaining socially aloof, so that you're not stuck in that same conference community where you make fun of all the other communities, you really want to be aloof. And I think that protected me politically. And I was never really left or right. I was always

classical liberal. So but if I had been in the wrong place, if I had been sitting in academia and sitting in the stew of all that, I would have been just as much potentially swept through. And then once I really believe that it's super dangerous, disproportionately dangerous, utterly novel, in which case all of these kinds of beliefs wipe their priors clean, right? So we have all this prior information about respiratory viruses, but suddenly none of that prior information could be used. And so it takes years to build up in some sense, the kind of common sense that we would have started with. All of that was ruined by virtue of this. And I was susceptible in principle, but luckily I escaped it as did many. Go ahead, Lionel. You know, when I was here on

9-11 that Tuesday morning, and that was my red pill moment, because I could go outside and say, what I'm seeing on TV is not what I'm seeing here. That's when I realized, oh my God, and nobody's asking any questions. There may be two quick examples. During 9-11, we were told that at a hospital not far from us that they had refrigerated trucks, reefers. They had actual tractor trailers ready to stack the bodies like cords of wood. This was COVID. This was a COVID story. COVID. No, this was a Saturday in New York.

No, of course. Yes, it was a COVID. Anyway, so to make a long story short, we went there. We went. There was no truck. Anyway, so to make a long story short, we went there. We went. There was no truck. And I'm thinking, I've got people from the news. I'm saying, Dan down the street, he said, at the Javits Center. What?

Yeah, they did. There was one hospital that called some trucks in, and we actually have done some investigation into that. And there was a reason they had done that. That is because they had done that that is because they had shut down the mortuaries in the lockdown so you couldn't take the bodies out as you normally would with all due respect i'm talking about this one hospital where they said the trucks are now i went over there's no trucks so they imagined that then we had the comfort we could look out

the window literally in the hudson river remember the comfort this you know it sailed up and people were nobody went on it there were three people there are mostly marines doing pt yes then down the street at the javits center we were told then that you could not get in i walked down literally within minutes from this and nothing was happening so not only not only are we demented but you've got apparently the news media the sheeple sock puppet media who are apparently either repeating and not reporting so this is wonderful confluence of the story they even told us that they were gonna dig ditches in Central Park to bury the dead I mean people were panicked. And at seven o'clock, like a barking

seal, we opened the window with pans. And I'm thinking, what are this? I feel like a little toy thing. It was, to me, absolutely beautiful. I will never forget this. And whenever anybody says, how did genocide occur? Why do people in Europe look the other way? I saw it front and center because we are lemmings. We have no backbones. We're spineless. We are looking at what we believe in terms of religion and superstition and stupid vitamins. We're going to get to that. We're going to get to all that. Maybe not. We're going to get to all that. I don't know. I'm not sure.

But Mark, Lionel's dramatic way of describing this, I think is actually a reflection of, an accurate reflection of sort of what went down. And it was an extraordinary experience to watch, but the media does have a big, a big role to play in this. For me,

the bottom, so to speak, you know, a hitting bottom for me was the New York Times editorial board demanding lockdown. Why were they even in the conversation? A bunch of editorialists in New York Times telling medical policy to public health officials. And Lionel mentioned Event 201, which I think was just a coincidence because event 201 was was really joe well let's see what mark says but it was but i'll tell you this what it what i did learn about event 201 was there was this entire world of pandemic inc preparing itself for uh the next pandemic i mean they did nothing with h1n1 i got h H1N1. That was a terrible illness. It killed 300,000 people.

And suddenly we went from an illness that killed hundreds of thousands to one that killed a million. And we have to have a massively disproportionate response. Like orders and orders and orders of magnitude worse response. Right. And the 300,000 was the age distribution was much younger, by the way. Correct. That is correct. And I'm the skeptic. That is true., by the way. So correct. That is correct. And I'm the skeptic.

That is true. But that's true. But but my question is really sort of what is the role that is there a responsibility that we need to lay at the feet of the press who are clearly in the hysteria, maybe more than anybody, and who were were capitalizing on it. They were capturing eyes and getting attention, which is their job. And finally, I had another sort of cognitive psychology question off of that in terms of how people got so distorted in there. Well, I lost it. But what do you say about media's responsibility in this, Mark? I mean, there's so many people that are responsible that it's difficult. The problem with crimes against humanity, democides, genocides, and these kinds of collective hysterias is that, you know, even after World War II and you and the the they only hung like a dozen folks amongst the Nazis. I mean, it is so distributed now.

And the other thing about the media is they're always like this. We know that they're click baiting. So it's like compared to their earlier behavior, they're acting just as irresponsibly as they always do. So it's, you know, yeah, you can get angry at them. So they're, of course, a huge part of the problem. Public policy folks, the supposed experts, politicians, of course, hold the largest amount of responsibility because that's their job to not panic and

not just follow the mobs when they're screaming to go violate civil liberties en masse. Mark, that was my question, though. Let me let me let me I remember now my two questions. One was Event 201, which is now an army of professionals whose whole world is about being prepared for a pandemic. That's that phenomenon of being a hammer waiting for a nail. Talk to me about that. I call them spring-loaded mechanisms just waiting to spring-load. And it's not just pandemics. As a scientist, I've been invited to this world,

this military industrial complex of conferences that they have all over the world where they bring in these folks and they're always looking for, they're there because the people want to apply for grants and they're somehow connected to the grant process so so they're just any possible weird thing that can go wrong there's these conferences about and pandemics are one of them and invariably those entire communities are uh are authoritarian and you can listen to the entire event tool one and it's in my way of describing it it's a bunch of academic blowhards who have no conception for civil liberties and believe censorship, controlling misinformation and disinformation. All of these are perfectly obvious things to do. And in fact, they're the most dangerous things to do. So these things were all there. They're not because they were planning.

You know, some people use this as evidence. Oh, they plan the pandemic. No, but they were planning authoritarian measures to be spring-loaded to help us, right? And they really thought it was going to help us, but all of these measures are stuff that only hurt, and none of it slowed the pandemic and only caused excess deaths, economic harm, and lots. And let me just mention, there's two different kinds of categories of anger I have concerning this. The first is all of these utilitarian justified interventions, lockdowns, shutdowns, school closures, masks, vaccine mandates, and so forth. And you can be angry about that. And I'm a libertarian, so I'm very angry about all of it.

But even as a utilitarian, I could maybe say, okay, fine, maybe you thought that. But when the state started to coordinate with big tech media to censor the opposing voices, that's another level. Now, the analogy that I'd like to give you is that suppose me as a scientist, and there's an opposing science lab, and I've had this one view in this field, and he or she's had this other view. And for years, we're going back and publishing these things. And it could turn out one of us is wrong and we lose reputation because we kind of were saying the wrong thing for a long time.

But imagine instead that this other lab goes around burning the other labs to the ground, right? Burning the other labs to the ground. This is completely breaking and violating the rules in some sense. They ensured that there was no critique, ethical critiques or empirical critiques of their utilitarian measures. The science really was going and burning and worse than just burning the voices. They didn't just

censor the voices. They did something much worse. They memory hold us. Because when you're suspended, as thousands of us, I was censored for two years, treated as sensitive content. Nobody could see what I was posting on Twitter. It just says, this is sensitive content, this is sensitive content. And I was permanently suspended for a while, and I managed to get back in. But I'm still under this sort of a stamp of disapproval. Many of many smarter people than me that were leaders in the community, permanently suspended for a couple years. Many have been brought back by Elon Musk. When you are permanently suspended, it's not just violating your speech. Anybody that mentioned your speech, anybody that quoted your speech, they're not

saying it. They're not making the claims that you're making, right? This is a use mention distinction in linguistics. They're not using the claims that you're making, right? This is a use mention distinction in linguistics. They're not using the speech. They're mentioning somebody else's speech. All of that, everybody that had mentioned your speech with quote tweets or retweets or commenting upon it, all of those things were wiped clean when the person was permanently suspended. They all disappear. I can go through my threads where I've linked to all of these other people because they're making similar points, let's say, about excess deaths and they've got nice data. I go through these old threads and it just links to nothing.

This person doesn't exist before. I have no idea what they said. I can't even have the information about what they said. I can't mention what they said, right? Memory holing is a deeply dangerous and damaging, very dystopian. And this is one danger of the internet, by the way, altogether. One advantage of physical books, physical books, physical magazines, physical newspapers are inherently decentralized in physical space, distributed across the world

with no centralized person that knows where they are, and they can't be memory hold. So that's one of the more scary things that happened and gets my anger a very high up. That's why you should write books, Drew. Well, it is the book burning. It's the modern version of book burnings and then imprisoning the authors. I mean, that's really what that is. Right, but this would be worse. Somebody else who was quoting somebody from that book, look, if you had quoted some, those things would suddenly go poof and disappear. All of their arrows pointing to somebody else. They might not even like that speech, but they were quoting it. Those disappear too. Right. And you mentioned the back and forth in the, in the way science is done. I noticed in, in the medical journals,

it all started going about two years ago, one way. So I knew there was something going wrong with the editorial process because medical information never, I mean, we are still arguing about statins and SSRIs and things that have been sort of standard of care for 25 years. We still argue in the literature. They all went one direction. And it wasn't until about two weeks ago, the Annals of Internal Medicine broke it. I keep promoting them because they broke it. They started talking about early treatment. They started talking about actual vaccine studies we should be doing.

And God bless them. That's told me something was changing. But the other thing, we got to take a break. When we get back, all right. When we get back, I want to talk about two things. We're going to talk about the whistleblower that claims to have all sorts of special insights into UFOs and what might be going on there. And I want to sort of wrap up

this conversation with the World Health Organization and its new digital passport and its new usurpation of all sovereignty of all nations. They will be the sole sovereign force in the world in situations that they deem it necessary for them to be that sovereign force.

I can't believe we live in a world where that's the case. And one last thing, just a quick story. You know, back to you mentioned a few minutes ago the prison guard behavior and a whole society developing and taking up horrible ideas. For me, I watched it happen individually to certain people in ways that literally shined the light for me on how these things happen to individuals. I was trying to get in my own hospital, and a security guard, young man, clearly recently recruited,

was there, wouldn't let me in the hospital. And then when I came in, I was trying to get the vaccine at the time. I was trying to get vaccinated. And he started screaming at me, where are your papers? Any regrets? Where are your papers? And I thought, oh, I looked at the guy, I thought, I just thought, A, how you speak to a senior physician? I've been working in this hospital for almost 40 years, number one. Number two, do you like this? Do you like to behave? Do you enjoy just railing on people for their papers just because it's your whim that you are under? You give people power like that, and it gets crazy.

Lionel, you seem to really be desirous of making a comment here. Go ahead. Any regrets about the vaccine? I didn't get it. I got COVID instead. I got COVID running around the hospital because they wouldn't give me the vaccine because at that time, the vaccine was being distributed with equity, and I didn't meet the equity criteria.

I was not, even though I was treating COVID patients. Hold on, I was treating COVID patients. I was, hold on, I'll tell you. I was treating COVID patients. I was a hospital staff physician for 40 years there, but I wasn't the equity distribution that was considered necessary at that moment. We can go into whether that was right or wrong.

But when I got COVID, I actually had my immunity measured with a very sophisticated test. So I was actually documenting that my immunity was insanely high, but we were traveling to Europe and in order to do so, I needed a passport. I needed a vaccine passport. So I took the Johnson and Johnson vaccine because I didn't want to take two vaccines. I knew I would have a reaction. I had a horrible reaction. Woke up with that in the morning, a spontaneous black eye, which is the symptom of transverse sinus thrombosis, which is the dreaded complication of the J&J vaccine. Now, fortunately, I had no other neurological symptoms, so it doesn't seem

that I have the stroke and all the other things that go with that. But I did not take the mRNA vaccine, but I still had a terrible reaction because that spike protein is bad. It's bad news. I'm telling you, whether you get it from COVID or the vaccine, it's bad. And the problem with the vaccine is- How many people do you know who have this? Are we going to get to the reality of this? I'm just curious. This is because we're- What do you mean by that? What do you mean? What do you mean? Go ahead. What do you mean? Let's get on the brass tacks. Let me ask you a question. This thing's going to come back again, all right? It's going to be COVID-3, COVID-9, COVID whatever, monkeypox, whatever it is. And they're going to ask you, Dr. Drew, do I take a vaccine? Because I'm hearing stuff and I'm

not a physician and you are. I'm hearing about everything from you name it from myocarditis to clots everybody's dying so what happens when they tell me again and the next Dr. Fauci comes along and the next come along what are we supposed to do whom do we believe because let me tell you something I will finish because I haven't said a damn word the whole time here your profession let me down like you can't believe your medical profession just spineless a testicular lemmings who didn't who worried so much about losing their insurance so the next time you people tell me anything whatever it is i'm not listening because i don't believe you you sold out one of the it's one of the major major liabilities of this whole pandemic we. The behavior was

reprehensible, particularly in the telling people to go home and come back when they were desaturating. That was unbelievable to me. And yes, there was behavior. People were afraid of losing their job, not just their insurance, their job. And I didn't realize how many were employees. That's a really serious problem. But back to what I would do, I would do the same thing I'm doing now. I would be very cautious. I would proceed very slowly. I would only advise people where I could. Well, for instance, I can see very clearly that there are significant benefits to the vaccine in the very elderly, people over the age of 75. So when I could see that benefit, I think I understood the risk and I could see the benefit.

So I started doing it and my clinical experience fit that. It helped a lot of people and no one had terrible reactions. When I'm asked by a 30-year-old what to do, I don't see the benefit and I'm not clear how profound the risks are. So I cannot do a good risk-rewarded analysis. What about the booster? Wait a minute. There's going to be another one. That's right. There's going to be another Fauci. They're going to tell you, but this is different. You don't know what's going on. And then you're going to have a bunch of people who are going to be like a bunch of lemmings sitting in their Facebooks like, look, look, look at this. And you are going to be, they're going to throttle you and all of your success and all of your millions and your mans is everything are going to go out the door.

And they're going to tell you, listen, Drew, you got one of two choices and all of your millions and your mans is everything are going to go out the door and they're going to tell you listen drew you got one of two choices you can do the right thing and speak your conscience or you can come on board and say what everybody wants you to say do the right thing and listen maybe when you're up yeah maybe you've been watching what happened to me the last couple of years maybe you haven't seen what happened to me by speaking my mind. I mean, you're describing what happened to me. And so I understand the weight of living, you know, standing by your judgment. I had a very similar experience to Mark. You have no idea. And let me also say something.

We have the Supreme Court case from 1905, Jacobson against Massachusetts, which is archaic. Dred Scott is more up to date than this. And the Supreme Court, I hope and I pray, deal with the actual evidence about and dealing with this thing called biomedical tyranny and biomedical martial law. And do I have the right of a variety of reasons? Because let me tell you something, they were giving us, remember people were expecting like bring out your dead they were talking about the Spanish flu now I saw when we look back at this there were a bunch of people who didn't know what they were doing many of them said look I'm a

doctor this is what they tell me to do I got it I understand it but there were other people who knew exactly what was going on let me tell you something also this was a beta test a beta test for a draconian society you cannot even believe. You don't know what's going to happen next. And China is going to look like Disney World compared to what we're going to see. You're going to see social credit scores upon social credit scores. You're going to be tagged and you're going to be zapped and you're going to be RFID chipped and people are going to be lined up because they love it. Tag me, tag me, mark me, mark of the beast. They love this where they actually had people wearing two masks, kids walking around. Yeah, I know. I saw it. I know. Kids who haven't blinked in four years who are walking around

and parents. And by the way, we still live in a world where now you're telling men that they can have periods, and what is your profession doing? Nothing. Nothing. Obstetricians, pediatric. You are the biggest bunch of quizlings I've ever met. I mean, I don't understand this.

You've got some of the most reputable hospitals mutilating children, orchiectomies, mastectomies, because little Johnny, who doesn't even know what his favorite color is, says, you know, I feel like a girl, and off he goes. And what are you people saying? Nothing. You're walking around with your pride flags. This is insane.

I pray artificial intelligence takes over. Please, somebody, somebody take over. We lost control. Okay. My God. So I just stopped quizzling. I totally agree with him. I know.

Believe me, Lionel, Susan, and you mentioned China. She's all in. So quizzling, trader or collaborator, one or the other. It's interesting. But listen, I have to take a break. I want to get into the – I knew he had something to say. I think I'm going to go right into the whistleblower thing.

You've been sitting here for 20 minutes listening to this theoretical cognitive – I know. Like you said, I'm the host. I'm the host. You can come back, Lionel, sometime. As you mentioned, I'm the host. But I do want to get into this UFO thing, and then maybe we'll swing back around to the World Health Organization. So we have to take a break.

If you guys are patient enough to bear with me, I'm willing to go well beyond the time limit and keep talking about these things. These are great conversations, I think. And we'll be right back after this. I suspect you've seen Susan and I gushing over Paleo Valley products. We love the taste and how well they fit into a paleo-based nutrition regimen. They're delicious and we use them for travel all the time. But there's more. We are huge fans as well of Paleo Valley's grass-fed bone broth protein.

It comes in three flavors, unflavored, vanilla, and chocolate. It's a powder you can add to really anything. We add it to coffee literally every day. Smoothies, baked dishesavored vanilla and chocolate. It's a powder you can add to really anything. We add it to coffee literally every day. Smoothies, baked dishes, just hot water dissolves really easily. The bone broth protein is made with 100% grass-fed and finished bones that are free from pesticides or antibiotics and are slow simmered to extract as much collagen as possible. As we age, collagen breaks down. That's what wrinkles are. And research shows that there are significant benefits to adding a collagen source in your diet. I don't think it's too much to say. It's changed our lives. And Susan is now reporting that after drinking the bone broth for a few weeks,

her hair is stronger and longer and nails are stronger too. Try it for yourself. You can order at drdrew.com slash paleovalley and use drdrew at checkout to save an additional 15%. A lot of you have been asking for more information about how to counter the adverse effects of the spike protein from COVID infections and the COVID vaccine. The spike protein is not your friend, let's just say that. So I'm glad we have the wellness company Spike Support Formula as a sponsor, especially since renowned internist and cardiologist Dr. Peter McCullough, who's also chief scientific officer of the Wellness Company, is one of its champions. There's some very intriguing research around natokinase, which might be a way to take on

the spike protein. Listen to this. So start, if you would, with talking about natokinase, how you got to that and where you see its application. So with the viral infection or the vaccines, the spike protein stays within the body and it's found in the heart, the brain, the within the body and it's found in the heart, the brain, the vital organs, and it's causing problems. The Japanese have been using this for heart and vascular disease now for 20 years. It's safe. It is a form of a mild blood thinner that it dissolves

the spike protein nearly completely. Spike support formula is the only product on the market containing nanokinase, dandelion root, and a host of other antioxidants, all showing promise in helping you protect yourself and your family. To order this unique, specially formulated supplement, go to drdrew.com slash TWC. That is drdrew.com slash TWC. Use code DREW at checkout for 10% off today. President Trump recently issued a warning from his Mar-a-Lago home, quote, our currency is crashing and will soon no longer be the world standard, which will be our greatest defeat, frankly, in 200 years. There are three reasons the central banks are dumping the U.S. dollar, inflation, deficit spending, and our insurmountable national debt. The fact is there is one asset that has withstood famine, wars, political and economic upheaval dating back to biblical times, gold. And you can own it in a tax shelter retirement account with the help of

Birchgold. That's right, Birchgold will help you convert an existing IRA or 401k, maybe from a previous employer, into an IRA in gold. And the best part, you don't pay a penny out of pocket. Just visit birchgold.com slash drew for your free info kit. They'll hold your hand through the entire process. Think about this. When currencies fail, gold is a safe haven. How much more time does the dollar have? Birch Gold has an A-plus rating with Better Business Bureau and thousands of happy customers. I do not give financial advice and previous performance is no guarantee of future performance. Visit birchgold.com slash drew to get your free info kit on gold. That is B-I-R-C-H-T-O-L-D dot com slash D-R-E-W.

We are back with our friends Lionel and Mark Changizi. You can follow Mark at YouTube, Mark Changizi, C-H-A-N-G-I-Z-I, and his website, Changizi.com. And then Lionel, of course, at Lionel Nation on YouTube and LionelMedia.com. All right, Lionel, I'm going to ask you to be patient again. If you become truly impatient with the way I'm managing today's show, I can always bring you back. So you can throw in the towel at one point if you wish. I'm going to make him the host.

I'm going to put you back in the waiting room again with me for a second while I talk to Mark again really quickly. So Mark, one of the extraordinary things about any of these so-called UFO experiences is how characteristically similar they are. It's always extraordinary to me why people that study these things, and anthropology generally, frankly, why they don't say, what is it about the human brain that has it that we do certain things, that certain experiences, certain, you know, phenomenology tend to prevail and recur? In the case of UFO experience, if you ask that question, you'll quickly come upon something called hypnagogic hallucinations, where people often have these similar experiences where they feel like an alien is in the room with them or having sex with them or lying on top of them.

And sometimes these hypnagogic hallucinations become quite elaborate, but they're almost always the same. And so we're not allowed to say that. I don't know why, number one. And then number two, I want to get your thoughts about the whistleblower per se in this particular case and what you think is going on. Go ahead. Yeah. On the first part, I don't know much about, you know, I've just seen the standard things everybody sees in terms of the kinds of experiences people have. But one of the things that I study is indeed that's what we find. Culture or certain kinds of memes will tend to be selected for that tap into certain kinds of natural proclivities. So for example, writing systems work on us even

though we didn't evolve to read. Reading is much too recent. But they all work on our brains because they've been selected over time, culturally selected over time to look like the contour conglomerations that happen in natural scenes. So you end up with T's and L's. And if you work out all the kinds of shapes that happen, some happen commonly in nature, some don't. Over time, culture selects for the stuff that jazzes or makes it easy on the human brain. And over certain kinds of cultural memes will come into being stuff that spreads easily in terms of the kinds of ideas for a an alien kind of creature and some of them some stupid idea of like some putrid mass of you know goopy stuff probably won't you know be exciting and spread across the community but certain other ideas will and so people will tend

to have similar kinds of stuff the same kind of stuff that creates, you know, that it's likely to spread and you're going to tell stories about and it's going to spread further. So I suspect most of those kinds of stories are just stories and they're due to the kinds of such stories that are likely to spread, right? Those are kind of a mean cultural evolution. As for the, you know, I don't have any, I have two different kinds of opinions about the likelihood of there being actual alien life here on earth. And the first is the, what's the probability that we're being observed or that somebody's here already, right? And my error bars are on this are basically from 0.0000001, like really almost zero to a hundred percent, you know know because when you're starting to talk when you

start doing the kind of math on the what are the chances over the last 15 billion years that some other uh you know some intelligent life form started spreading and exponentially went through the it's it's certainly highly plausible that they could be here right but i don't know how to put you know numbers on these and so it's highly variable but what i'm more confident about is that if they are here they're they're potentially hundreds of millions of years ahead of us in technology they're not going to get caught right they're not going to get folks ending their crap on the ground that they left behind you know and if we you know just even a hundred years here on Earth with the technology that we have blows the minds and it's perceived as magic by the lower technological culture.

So you can't even wrap your head around what 1,000 or 10,000 or a million or hundreds of millions of years would be. So whether they're here, they could well be here monitoring us with lots of technology we can't even imagine. But I find it very hard to believe that any of us humans have our hands on it, much less know that we have our hands on it and know how to use it in any way. Well, it's interesting that they all land in the United States. Shocking. That's sort of interesting. They all seem to land in certain areas, characteristically. To me, it's like I did a life regression analysis, and I was a Civil War soldier. I was a queen. No, you would have been a baby that died in infancy in all probability doing the math. If you had a previous life, that's what your life would have been. You certainly wouldn't have made it out of childhood if not out of infancy. But I'm going to go the other way with your theory about aliens being here.

I'm going to say they are here and they are bacterium and viruses. And they probably came in on a freaking asteroid. Probably our mitochondria are those aliens. You know what i mean that we the reason we have animal cells is this bacteria learned how to get inside the cell live symbiotically and we get energy out of it and we can become complex systems uh i i think they're here but we want them to be something that is is a meme rather than something that they're more likely to be was i mean also took hundreds of millions of years to evolve, like a virus, like a bacterium.

Oh, please. That's highly, highly. Okay, Lionel, go ahead. Go ahead. Let Lionel in on this one. Go ahead. I would never want you two as being my lead detectives in a homicide. You would be, you see the hypnagogic, you see somnambulistically, the parietal, you

see there's a certain recurrence. Yes, and you know what, doctor? Women who were attacked, people who were robbed, people who were stabbed, all seem to share the same type of assault, penetration. So, yes, sometimes horrible things do share. There is this wonderful desire to find the most incredibly, you know, this labyrinthine idea of the fact that we, listen, I don't know. Stop with the ad hominem argument.

Tell us what your thoughts are. I don't know. I'm not telling you. No, no, no. But I'm saying, no, but what you're doing is, your ad hominem is you're mocking the, I don't know how many thousands of people, not in this country only, and especially, and I don't know about you, but the people that I've talked about or talked to know nothing about the history of UFO sightings. They don't know Rendlesham Forest. They think they know something about Roswell.

Right, so Lionel, let me interrupt. Let me interrupt. Let me just say, yes, and they have a human brain. You didn't interrupt that. But that's all right. And human brains have a way of reproducing these same experiences over and over again. Especially when it happens over and over again. You're right.

It's called eyes. It's called memory. Yes. And what you're trying to do is, it's like people who try to dispute religion. It's like people who try to find, who do not understand that, believe it or not, yes, there are people from outer space who land either because of parallel universes or who knows. Did you know, here's something interesting, the Catholic Church, I don't know if this means anything, but the Vatican a long time ago said they are completely okay and cool with the idea of there being extraterrestrials. Listen to this one, because people would always want to say, why don't they want to share? Why don't they get out of their

spaceship and talk to us? Why don't they get out of President Biden? When was the last time you pulled your car over, went over to an anthill and said, let me talk to you about nuclear fusion. So anyway, they believed over a period of time that one of the questions is, would these critters not share in original sin? Would they not need redemption? You know what would happen if all of a sudden there is a group of people who not only are God's chosen people, but are, I mean, light years smarter than us, and who feel that there's no need for us to talk. Now, let me explain something.

I do, and let me give you as a lawyer and as a just a rational person, I find it absolutely amazing that there is such a paucity of evidence. Would somebody please show me a good picture? And by the way, there are, believe it or not. But I want somebody to say, to show me a picture that's very, very clear. I've got pictures of every kind of upskirts, down, you name it,

go online, there's a picture of everything. But for some reason, there is not a good picture with all of the cameras that we have. I don't understand this. But here is the thing. As a scientist, both of you, you must suspend this immediate reflex to explain away something. Disbelief is wonderful, but sometimes incredible things can happen. And I am telling you right now, I've never seen an electron. I think we both agree, and we are both willing to, like Lionel said, he goes all the way to 100% on probability of something. But what I find extraordinary is that when people talk about, when humans talk about these things, they can't get out of their own way. That's why I take the position that it is something like a bacterium or a virus.

You several times said people from outer space no whatever they are they're not going to be people they are not going to be like anything human or i'm sorry but i'm saying that we can't even know if it's intelligent or not is kind of the interesting question and whatever that have you ever heard people have you ever heard people talk about have you ever heard people talk about God or Jesus or Allah? Have you ever heard about that before? Have you ever heard them speak? It's really something. And they will speak sometimes imprecisely. And there were millions and billions of people all over the world who believe in this. Now, I'll be damned if I'm going to sit here and say that all

these people are some kind of weird kind of a collective, some kind of weird conversion reaction, hysteric, this collective, this societal, the way they're taught. I don't know. There's a part of me that says, I don't know anything. And the last thing I'm going to do is listen to science. And by the way, you know who the biggest con in the world is? Are the professional physicists and astronomers like Neil deGrasse Tyson, Carl Sagan, gatekeepers from the get-go, whose job it is to laugh, to make fun, who sit back and say, now, why would somebody want to come here? I don't know. Or they have some idea about how long it would take to get here. It would take millions of years traveling at the speed of light. They start off with the premise that everybody's crazy. Have you ever heard about the Rendlesham Forest people? Have you ever heard, looked at the data? Just listen to people,

people who've been there. Have you, is there anything, do you think Roswell, for example, that we talk about Roswell and Bob Lazar and others, are these people psychotic, delusional? Is there anything to this? Do you think that when somebody talks about anti-gravitant propulsion do you think they're just making this up are they nuts do you think that this is are you going to ask me so here's what i think that was and i won't that was true that was truly the most important uh finding in the history of physics. Why the hell are you going to grab Bob Lazar and have him be the physicist that evaluates the most important physics finding in history? Oh, we'll just get Bob to do it.

See what you're doing? Hang on. I'll tell you why there is an explanation. You're interrupting me. My explanation is we did a lot of human experimentation by the military back in those days in particular. And my bet is we were trying to look at how our enemies would deconstruct technologies. So you take a couple of smart physicists, you give them impossible technologies, and you go deconstruct this. They study them and what they do and how they think, and then we obfuscate that in our technology so our enemies cannot figure it out. That makes perfect sense to me.

So you're saying, so that's the reason why. So Bob Lazar is a liar. Now, I'm not saying I believe in Bob Lazar. Not a liar. People who— Not a liar. He was an object of experimentation. People who believe in, for example, in fact,

Okay. People who believe in lords and that sort of thing. It's very interesting. We would say, using your theory, isn't it funny that God would pick this strange little peasant in the middle of some Syrian, in order to speak to. So what I'm doing is, number one, I'm speaking for God, I'm speaking for the aliens, and I'm creating a construct because I think if they were to announce themselves, or if something of this

note were to be discovered, it would be done with more fanfare um a panache than some respectable rube in the middle of something i i don't believe this or i'm going to pull out another an experiment which was true in order to deconstruct this because what you're saying to me dr drew is you don't want to believe this and you're going to go through every i want to every study that you know. I do. I want to believe in the— No, no, no, I do. I want to believe in that cesium molecule particularly that he said he observed. What I don't believe is that they would pick Bob to study that. That's what I don't believe.

That stresses the limits of credulity. Let me ask a physicist. Mark, do you have a similar reaction that Bob Lazar has picked off the street of Las Vegas and goes, we've picked you. This is the most important finding in the history of physics. Have at it. Mark, what do you say? I mean, the more general point is I, I think understanding, understanding human, what humans believe is complicated. Humans have lots of biases, psychological biases. There's lists of them that are 100 long. And when you're involved just floating around here and there and people have found their parts is so minuscule that it's, you know, has probably eight or nine zeros in it, in my opinion.

And most people, what they are good at thinking about is likelihoods. It's like, what's the thing that could most, does this evidence explain, point to this hypothesis? Yeah, it does. But this hypothesis is so super, super, super rare, and you don't know how to wrap your head upon how rare it is. Furthermore, there's all of these other kinds of well-known things in psychology and sociology that explain why humans are likely

to think that way. Once you have all of those things in your head, the infinitely simpler explanation in terms of Occam's razor and just saying, look, it's much, much simpler that none of these things are true. And you yourself said there's not a good picture. There's literally upskirt shots of every person on earth from every possible angle. But with all these cameras, there's not one shot. And that's- But we still haven't seen a picture of a gravitron.

What do you think about, what do you think about abductions? Betty and Barney Hill. What do you think about Betty and Barney Hill? People who claim to be abducted. John, what is his name? The Harvard psychiatrist who, oh, what is his name? Who, through hypnosis, said that he believed that people who came to him were actually abducted, that they weren't lying.

Do you think people are making this up? And please, don't, just ask. People need not be always lying. How about it's true? Is it true? Well, I can add that as potential evidence. It's highly, and highly doesn't do it justice, right? There's just the level of highly.

Can it be true? You say no. Practically no. Say it. By any reasonable measure, no. Say it. They're lying. They're lying. No, no, no. They're lying. Lying is a willful thing. Not lying. Not lying. They did come to believe it

and they could be parts of communities. You have lots of social, psychosocial diseases like eating disorders and a lot of these trans it's never happened these people truly so nobody's ever believed what they say they truly believe that they can become skeletons for example that way people can come to have incredibly irrational beliefs and truly believe it has anybody ever been abducted has anybody ever been abducted as far as

your country can you say no never has happened never never because they wouldn't come and abduct these people right dr drew they wouldn't pick these abduct these people, right, Dr. Drew? They wouldn't pick these people. No, no. Didn't say that. Didn't say that. Do you think abductions ever took place? I didn't say that.

Do you think abductions took place, yes or no? Outside of mathematics, every no is not 100% like it is in mathematics. But outside of mathematics, it's as strong a no as exists. And let me answer that. Hang on. Lionel, let me just say that what I find makes me very skeptical about it is how the experience is exactly the same person to person. It's always the same exact meme or story.

Because some things happen to do it. And those same exact experiences are had by my patients who are having hypnagogic hallucinations. Precisely the same. And those come to me and say I wasn't abducted. They're coming and saying I have a sleep disturbance and I make it go away. And it comes back every night. It goes away when I put them on medicine. So is the medicine preventing aliens from visiting them?

For reasons I will never understand, you two fine and very brilliant men cannot bring it upon yourself. Maybe you will be laughed at at the parties in Hollywood, Dr. Drew. I don't know. Maybe this is just something you don't do. But you are adamant in killing any possibility from the time it gets started. No, I'm not adamant. I'm not adamant. You are not going to budge. Listen, and I appreciate this, but I think it's interesting how two incredibly brilliant people, men of science, who are here because there were people

years ago who never believed in what they were told. The greatest scientist, when Einstein said, you know, I think this guy, I think Mr. Newton's full of it with the gravity thing. I've got another idea. God, thank God for Galileo and Copernicus and others. I'm saying simply this, my answer is very simple. Prove it. But do I rule that out? No, absolutely. Do I think all these people are crazy? Do I think all these people? No, no, but i'm saying yeah i agree but if somebody tells me that they believe it but if somebody believes in god are they crazy because they can't prove god do you think there's something to religion do you think that when somebody says i felt god i believe in the lord and the holy spirit and i believe this and i would die for this and it changed my life do you believe in miracles

when somebody says this this happened happened, I am about to, I am never going to rule something out. I'm not going to start off with the premise. You see, when mankind wanted to explain the inexplicable, he would sometimes create. No, that's nice. And that may be true. But the thing is, sometimes things are so beautiful. They're looking you right in the face and they're saying, yes, it's as simple as this. This guy was abducted. There's a good possibility. A lot of people weren't. A lot of people say things that aren't true. They're in Washington. I'm lied to all the time. A lot of them by your profession, Dr. Drew. But I'm not about to sit here and just immediately remove the possibility of this being there. And I think there's something to it. There is when

millions of people over a long period of time have said identically the same thing, not because they're reciting the same lie, but when something is experiential that they believe that actually happened, I give it great weight. I'm not all in. There are very few things I believe in. There are things I believe in I can't explain. I believe in love. I know it sounds like a song. I'm Kenny Loggins. But what I'm saying is I can't prove this through metrics and through brainwave tests,

but I believe sometimes these anecdotal observations and experiences that seem to follow a pattern, I believe there's something there to it. That's all. Mark, okay. We'll accept your point of view. And Mark and I do tend to be more open than you're giving us credit for, I would say. But Mark... Of course you're in the street, Mark. I mean, an open-minded... Look, I don't believe in the consensus. I mean, I'm a scientist with 15 different discoveries where I overturned all this stuff that the scientists were saying. I'm happy. I'm excited to make discoveries that stick

it to the consensus. I'm super happy about that. My life is all about that. But you have to treat every case by virtue of evidence and how evidence and Bayes' theorem and all of these kinds of things that you have to understand to do evidence and evidence justification uh change the probabilities over time in the right way using the right kinds of math and once you fully understand kind of Occam's razor and and the how induction works and the kind of math of it um it changes the way you think as well as understanding human violence and so see yeah and let me let me follow wait I'm gonna fall on the heels in that you know Lionel did did mention something that he's brought up a couple of times now, which is sort of the behavior of my profession and my peers. And one of the things

that came out of the pandemic for me was, was how culty we are. We are very culty in terms of how we, you know, very military, very culty in terms of how we think as a group, it's very, very much that way. I thought that about 10 years ago a little bit. I'm thinking, well, why do I do that with the kidney failure patients? I had certain treatments that I was taught many years ago that were axioms. And I thought, I'm not sure that's the right thing. And then COVID came around and, well, boy, and you saw it in full display. But my question to Mark is, and by the way the way both of you i want you to know that i appreciate you a playing along and having this lively conversation b that you're going beyond

that you've been very kind with your time and i plan to keep abusing it so please stay with me because i'm watching the threads here and people are loving this they're loving but they're not they're not loving that we step on each other and i know there's a little delay here that makes that kind of difficult um but let's kind of watch out for that but i'm going to go back to mark what what can you explain what you think is going people are liking this conversation and uh military explain to me no it's one of us mark what what do you think from a cognitive psychologist or even their biological standpoint what do you imagine that whistleblower was? What kind of, is he just a cognitive bias, a positive bias towards his peers, and therefore is a little bit too open to what's being said to him?

If you were to evaluate what you think might be going on with that whistleblower, other than that he saw things, which is what Lionel thinks, how would you, what might you surmise is going on? Well, he apparently, I don't know it in detail. I haven't read in detail, but apparently he hasn't himself seen things. He's heard testimony from many who have. And again, that's sort of stereotypical. These are, okay, well, you haven't seen anything. And whenever someone does see something, they're, you know, these wispy kinds of images that don't seem to be much, but they might be captured by

multiple modalities, you know, measurement systems. So there's so many, you know, one of the things that you always have to be open-minded to a hundred different ways you can't think of that might explain what's going on. And people often just think, well, I've handled all the possibilities. It could only be these three possibilities and that's it. And so it has to be this. It's extremely minuscule prior probability idea. But no, there's always tremendous ranges of possibilities that can explain it that you and nobody else have thought of. And this happens in normal life all the time. You're like, no, I mean, the keys were here. There's no way, honey. And then it turns out life all the time. You're like, no, I mean, the keys were here. There's no way, honey, that it,

and then it turns out it's this weird cat had moved it in. Like, and none of you would have thought of that. That happens all the time. And it can be, this is compounded in real situations like this with lots of complexity. The possibilities won't even enter your mind. And so I don't know. I don't have an answer to exactly what these people were telling him.

Let me ask this. Let me ask this then. But the priors are so low. Okay. In terms of the priors, the Bayesian reasoning, and the calculations you were sort of alluding to as it pertains to probability of life elsewhere or even here, what kind of assumptions do you load into that? I guess the one assumption is that it's possible. Well, I think it's quite possible that they're here observing us, you know, and may have, you know,

been floating around Earth, so to speak, for the entire time that there's been life on this planet. But, and again, my range of probability for that is minuscule to 100%. I don't know how to even bound it. But the idea that they're getting caught in anything seems completely unreasonable.

And their technology would be just imagine that they're just floating around and just getting caught. Like you're not going to wrap your mind around what they're able to do. And it's hubristic to imagine that you have an idea of what they're like. Well, that's that's the hubris that I keep finding, is that we keep thinking of them as, we think of them as what little green men? We think of them as people from outer space, this kind of thing.

And we really have no concept of what they're like. They could be humanoid, right? Easily, it could be conversion evolution, right? They likely could have forward-facing eyes if they had grown up in environments that needed to see through trees. They could end up with a lot of similar features if it was a macroscopic world. They could end up with convergent evolution, just like we find dolphins and sharks and plesiosaurs, which are the dinosaur equipment. They end up with very similar designs. So they could end up to be bipedal, but their technology is going to be

millions or hundreds of millions of years in advance. You're not catching them with anything if they don't want to be caught. So a lot of what people are saying, I'm open to the idea that it can easily look vaguely bipedal, you know, in some of the ways that we are. It could well be the case. Conversion evolution happens all the time. Mark, are you familiar mean not mark uh uh lionel are you uh familiar with you guys with the many worlds interpretation of uh of um quantum mechanics essentially are you familiar with that are you familiar i mean you mean

no that that there is the way... Can I go back? Okay. Well, I just want you to understand something, which is that, because this is how open Mark and I would probably be, which is that there is a way of understanding... Open.

...wave mechanics such that every single time there is a quantum measurement, the world separates into two. Every time. It separates into one where one thing happened, another where another thing happened. And there are millions of worlds out there. Are you familiar with the many worlds hypothesis?

Oh, yes, yes, yes. Okay. Now, can I ask you a question? So we're open. How about this? Go ahead. You haven't heard this guy talk. So far, he hasn't even, we think we know what the whistleblower was saying. We know,

we're not sure. He hasn't seen anything. And I think he says, maybe there might be something that that is a land or whatever it is. already without seeing anything without hearing his testimony looking at him i mean if if we talk to him we we might say we're supposed to guys are not i have no idea but already we are we're talking about a multi-words heisenberg we're talking about maybe fermi's the fermi of the of conundrum maybe we'll go into Schrodinger's cat next. Why are we not just being, just listening to what the man says and why he's a, and we're getting whistleblowers left and right, but none of this, if some, is there ever anything, any story that anybody can give you where you would say, you know what, I'm onto that. What you are doing is you are immediately trying your best to destroy the possibility and also creating the idea, to give an example, that they are so beyond our, that

they're millions of years, that they're so incredibly beyond our intelligence. Another thing, by the way, which cracks me up. But let's stop on that. Are you suggesting that they're maybe just tens of years ahead of us? They're not going to be tens of years ahead of us. For one thing, what are the odds that they're tens of years ahead of us? No. Right.

Or even a thousand years ahead of us. They couldn't possibly have gotten here if they weren't it to get over here time-wise and they're gonna have to be already a million years just to get here wherever they were and to have the technology to get there they have to be tens of thousands probably years ahead no even when they started this process there's just no way to go through a wormhole that's how we do no no no no if you look at Zeta Reticuli, this binary star system, it's about, what, 30 light years? And you know the faster you go, the less time it takes and all this kind of stuff. And the idea is that we're using our idea of rockets and fuel. I'm not getting there yet.

But what I'm saying is, let me just throw something in. What you're doing is what other people do. There's a fellow named Project Disclosure. What is his name? He always has this idea that these critters are nice. And that they want to tell us. And that they came in 1940. They're just like you, but in reverse. They have this idea that, you see, in 1947, at the time of the detonation of the atom bomb, they wanted to come here to tell us, please, you're going to destroy the world. And that's why right around 1947, we saw Roswell and Hollywood and, and I'm thinking to myself, wait a minute, why are these people necessarily nice? You're this, this Disney version of this.

Most of the time in cases who are superior, and I would venture to say, I would put my money in them being superior to us. Most of the time, a superior creature does not treat too kindly the people who are not so intelligent. And that's what we do by domestication and all kinds of experimentation. So what I'm saying is, it's the same thing you're doing, but in reverse. Before anybody has heard the whistleblower, before anybody said Philip Corso was one who he wrote Day After Roswell, I don't know if his story was correct, but he said he swore he saw things. He said he saw them. Okay, prove it. But I am not going to necessarily come up with these theories before I know anything. And you know, by the way, you see this news nation or whoever's doing this, anybody who even remotely pretends to believe this guy is forever going to be blackballed from the news organization. You cannot believe this. Michio Kaku, by the way, is a buddy in the media who has even been allowed to think that there might be something to this. There is a bias against this. And by the way, why do you think that is? Let me ask you a question.

Why do you think there is such that the idea- There's a bias against it because extraordinary hypotheses, and this is more extraordinary than any hypothesis you've ever heard of, require extraordinary evidence. There is nowhere in the smell of this that there's anything like extraordinary evidence. There may be well be cover-ups in terms of bullcrap programs that they had running that had been covered up and lots of you know spinning wheels upon wheels that were trying to look like they were up to something or found something to make china or russia worry and who knows what kinds of layers and layers of stuff but that doesn't mean there's no

place there's any evidence of interest much less extraordinary that's why very simple question who would be more interested let's assume this to be true. Assume, arguendo, this is true. Who would be more interested in trying to quash this particular information? Would it be the military? Would it be private industry? Would it be religion? Would it be politics? Who is behind this poo-pooing? And I'm not going to mention any names, Drew but who who do you think is responsible for trying to to quash this from the beginning do what would happen if let me give you a question leave the point let's take this wonderful blue little dot here this this thing that's floats around and let's assume that one of these days somebody comes along and they say guess what there's this thing

from someplace else and all of sudden, we start losing this sense of nationalistic separation. We start not talking anymore like Americans and Palestinians and Israelis. We're talking more like earthlings. And that would put a real damper on a lot of stuff. That's one thing. Number two, what do you think would happen to the petroleum world, to the oil-based nations, if all of a sudden somebody said, you know what, we do have another way to propel around here, and it's a lot cheaper. Do you think that might have a problem? What are some of the indices of bias that might be responsible for this? Because I'm telling you, what I find more interesting is that if I were to say something about religion, nobody questions me at all. Even those stories,

I hate to say it, some of the stories in the Bible that I've heard, many of them, not all of them, are preposterous, but they are accepted as faith. Now, if I turn around and say, well, here's 10 people, don't ever, ever compare me with compare me with that be ocean don't ever put me in the same sentence don't ever put me in the same question religion he is a friend of mine I think stuff out of my ear oh you've got the he is the biggest phony who has ever walked I I disagree. I disagree so strongly. He is trying everything.

He doesn't know what he wants to believe. Remember when he was just mocking religion? Finish your point. Finish your point. What I'm saying is, why is there such a bias against this, but there's no such bias against religion? Why? What is the difference? Well, there's one difference is that a mature approach to religion is that religions have value not by virtue of the propositions that they make, but by virtue of them also

having culturally evolved over long periods of times, and they've evolved to tap into human brains and do things for us. They help you. They build communities and they create. They help us survive. They literally help us survive. They help humans survive. They have an evolutionary advantage. That's right. Engineered by cultural selection over relatively long periods of time.

And there are like little machines that tap in and help or sometimes maybe they're negative consequences. But mostly I think they help us. This is nothing like that. Right. This is all about whether it's true or not. Religion is not about whether it's true or not. And you're missing the point like Richard Dawkins does by just saying the claims are false and therefore religion is bunk. Totally missing the point. No, no, no. Religion, I didn't say this. Don't compare me to Richard Dawkins either because he's got this weird Darwin fetish,

which is another story. I'm not saying that. What I'm interested in knowing is that stories of Noah's Ark, Adam and Eve, Tower of Babel, I mean, it's preposterous. And you say religion brings us together? Oh my God. I've got this thing called history I'm going to talk to you about, because you're not going to believe what people have done to each other in the name of religion.

No, he did say that. Mark said that. But that's another story. Mark pointed at that. What's interesting, Mark can speak for himself. Look, the claim is that just like many things in culture, writing systems, language, music, many of the things in arts and religions themselves have culturally evolved over time to fit and harness human brains. Now within communities, they can sometimes potentially serve good, but of course other communities are evolving their own religions. They might disagree and like any movements might and have wars and so forth. So they are highly designed, not always necessarily for the good, but they're nevertheless highly designed for human minds. They are part of the

cultural artifacts that shape who we are, just like writing and speech does. We are not the human 1.0 biological animals that we sort of evolved to be, where we're a little bit smarter than chimpanzees. We're astronomically smarter than chimpanzees because culture has culturally evolved over time to take the kinds of evolved instincts that we have and turn them into new kinds of powers, like reading and language and the arts and all these different kinds of things, which we never evolved to do, but we can do only because of cultural evolution, having shaped them to fit like a glove our minds and transform us into something more. There's a topic in my earlier book, Harnessed, and a book before that, Vision Revolution. Religions are like that as well, but they're very complicated in terms of like-

I have a quick question. As a scientist, I try to focus on simpler things like the shapes of writing, but these things are highly complicated. And I think that people should have respect for religions because they have evolved culturally over time to tap into human minds, right? Yes. So here's what my question is. Yeah, I totally agree with you. And, you know, I'm just thinking about Kiki and Boba. And, you know, you think of those two sounds and you'll draw a picture or I show you pictures. You will point at the picture that humans point at when they hear Kiki and Boba. And that's the language stuff that Mark is alluding to.

But I just always had a question. I'm going to take that. I want to look up Kiki and Boba. Bobo or Boba? Oh, I will. Kiki and Boba, Mark? I want to look up Kiki and Boba. Bobo or Boba? Oh, I will. Kiki and Bobo, Mark? I will. Yeah.

Kiki and Bobo. It doesn't really matter. I'm going to do both works, but yeah. Can I say something really ridiculous? Okay. Just because. Say something ridiculous, Susan. This should be just great.

Okay. This should fit right in here. So I worked with a lot of spiritualists who tell us that when you die, you don't die. You go into a spiritual realm and our brains are somehow connected to our past ancestors. It's a different show. It's a new show. No, but what if you're seeing things, but what if it's spirit, but you can't prove it because it's more mental? No, because our brains, here's what Mark and I would agree on, I think, is that if our brains are

imperfect instruments, they were evolved for very specific things. I mean, you might see something. Even Mark thinks it's less evolved than I do. He thinks it's culture that really brought us along more than our own systems in our brain. But that we can't see all kinds of things. Who knows what we're not seeing? Yeah, there's a lot of stuff we're not

seeing or understanding. We were evolved to survive in the savannas of Africa, period. And that's it. And then we adapted to other environments using culture. Mark, am I overstating this? Yeah, I mean, that's right. We are highly designed for those environments. And we're only designed for the environments today because cultural evolution has changed what it means even to be human.

We consider ourselves, we consider language and writing to be fundamentally part of our nature. It's not at all. It seems like it's an instinct to do these things only because culture has shaped them to be good for our brains. So let me ask this. So this is a question I have.

This is really, it's really, I've taken the wind out of this little road we're going down very quickly. Nobody answered my question. The answer is who knows. I was trying to. We only know what we have. I know. Thank you.

Hold on. Let me get to the question I wanted to ask, which is I agree with you. The religions seem to have been evolved for adaptive purposes for the human being. Why does it deteriorate into child sacrifice and human sacrifice throughout history if it is an adaptive system it seems like exactly the most maladaptive kind of kind of manifestation of a meme that it could possibly could put you possibly imagine frankly well by the way may i say something no let mark answer well just just to answer that look um, they are highly designed machinery in some sense that have been designed for minds across cultures. That doesn't necessarily mean that your eyes and all

the body parts and design features on your body are designed to help you and to spread your genes, right? The cultural evolution stuff isn't necessarily selected for you or even necessarily for the good of your culture. I think sometimes it could be that it's really designed to pull people together and create kind of community. But it's not necessarily designed. I mean, they're going to be selected against to the extent that they kill everybody in their own society. That'll be selected against over time. But these things, my only point is I can't claim that they're always good or always bad.

But they are highly, like, you know, you should respect a lion. And it may not be good to you. Religions, if you were, you can't just treat them as all bad, like a lot of the Richard Dawkins, Bill Maher types do. These are highly designed machineries that have been selected with regard to human minds. And sometimes they probably do bad things, sometimes, but you have to treat them as evolved objects that need to be studied. Susan, Susan, may I ask you a question? Yeah, Susan, there's a wonderful piece on, by the way, you can look this up, Google this. This is a University of Arizona, Professor Stuart Hameroff and British physicist Sir Roger Penrose believe that there is life after death at the quantum level. Very quickly, the duo says that there's something called orchestrated objective reduction, which says that there is a protein-based

microtubules, a structure component of human cells that carry quantum information. And these, not exactly the most holy roller types, believe that there is evidence of life after death at a quantum level. Now, of course, I believe that's worth investigating. I want to believe in this idea of there never being a cessation of life, whatever it is. I do have a thing, though, that nobody will ever get away from, is that because we as human beings have always tried to figure out what the heck is going on. And somewhere along the savannah, as you mentioned, a long time ago, there was a guy who heard thunder and saw lightning and said, you know what? I think I know what this is. And on that day, on the eighth day, man created God.

And from that moment on, it just took off. There is something in us. Remember they talked about the God particle in the Higgs field stuff, which I don't know if that's true, but they have also looked at being able to use electro, uh, transcranial electromagnetic stimulation to create, uh, version feelings of, uh, of profound depth and love and whatever. I'm, I'm not ruling out that sometimes these might be a kind of a biochemical, uh, mix of a lot of things. But I'm not going to rule them out. And I'm not going to say anybody is stupid. And I'm not going to do that, especially when virtually everybody on the planet believes in something.

And it could be everything from the spiritual to whatever it is. But aside from this, there is something that I'm seeing here. And I want to be very, very kind. This is called mental masturbation, what we here we are complicating things and I love complex I love it but sometimes a cigar is just a cigar and sometimes there is a beauty of just looking at something and not trying to figure out what atavistic primordial primeval what what you know of structural cranial, neurological reason is for this. Sometimes there are things that are true and that we can't really explain them. And whenever mankind who douses themselves and

believes that they're in the world of science, whenever they can't explain something, they will look to something else to try to explain away this this phenomenon rather than saying I don't know maybe it's maybe there is as Susan said maybe there is something this spiritual elf like whatever fantasy I don't know but I know not comes razor which I think we've said about a million times there should be a drinking game for outcomes razor but sometimes I comes razor said why don't you just listen to what these people are saying and believe them rather than trying to figure some socio-political reason

as to why they particularly enunciate this thing. It could be because it's just true and they are experiencing it. Well, I would say two things to that. Maybe three. Maybe they're just invisible. I'm bracing myself. I'm sorry.

If Mark and I just simply believed in things, I would have no ability to take care of patients. No. Nobody's saying that. Nobody's saying that. No, no, no. It would immediately stop because I always happen to interpret things. And Mark's pursuits would have to stop immediately because his job is to try to, as he said, really assail standards, assail the standards of care or whatever.

But if you had a patient who was abstaining, but you would not be going to Munchausen by proxy or something right away before you would say, maybe this guy does have abdominal pain. Maybe he is in pain. You wouldn't start off with the premise that you see he's here because this is a hospital and he's in a white coat. And sometimes the stressors in the hospital. It did not have an extraordinary claim, of course,

I would take it at face value for starters. But if he or she course, I would take it at face value for starters. But if he or she said, I'm Napoleon, I would start to think that's an extraordinary claim and there's an explanation for that. But of course, that's absurd. Yes, I understand this. Yes, that's true. And what you're saying is, please, I'm not saying that both of you are demented. I'm insinuating it greatly. I'm kidding, of course. But I love this idea. I love the fact that we can talk about this because there's a balance, and I think Susan would agree. The essence of this is finding the balance between clinical certainty and also something which I find kind of more interesting to talk about, and that's

the idea that maybe things are just a little bit more mysterious and spooky than you ever thought they were maybe there are maybe everything you heard maybe it's just in your head but it it just lives but the point is you know that even just in your head is a very packed statement i used to do a show about psychic mediums and i had to stop doing it because it made me look crazy. I know what you're saying. But no,

not looking crazy. It's the point is, yes, we have, and, and Mark and I are saying the same thing. And Lionel, you're really kind of saying the same thing too,

is we have these very primitive instruments in our skull. They are, they, they miss most things. We, we, we can't even get, we don't even know what color is.

You know, we, isn't it great? I do think it's great. If it wasn't for what color is you know we isn't it great i do think it's great if it wasn't for that there's a lot of mysteries yes think about it we're there are people right now listening to us people who are shut-ins people who are deprived of any kind of social connection who actually find this interesting don't you want to know who they are don't you want to know who they are find where they live and lock them in and make sure they don't drive or have sharp lock them in in. There are people right now watching saying, I think of this.

I don't know what they're. This is where we started. We started with. Go ahead, Mark. I was going to say, I agree with Drew here. Lionel, I think there's this, you probably don't disagree in the manner in which you come to your conclusions, I think, as similar kinds of principles,

except you agreed that the case of his patient saying, hey, I'm Napoleon, that's definitely crazy, right? That's just because your normal intuitions can tell how low of a prior probability that is. My claim would be that there are other cases where Dr. Drew would have intuitions about the prior probability of some disease. It doesn't sound as crazy as that, but he can tell it's still a 0.001%. It's a good point. Anyone would have no idea. My claim, though, for people who don't understand these kinds of psychosocial things will give

a 10 to the 6, you know, million times higher probability on some of these hypotheses because they don't have the suite of knowledge in that field to realize how rare that probability is. And so they just inflated that. And so they think it's not an extraordinary hypothesis at all. And this is where we're at our evolution stage. If somebody came to you, Dr. Drew, and somebody said a man, if Dick Butkus came in and said, I'm pregnant, I'm into menarche. I'm into men. I've got dysmenorrhea. I think I'm having an ectopic pregnancy. At any other time, you would say, Mr. Butkus, you're out of your mind.

You're a man and you're beyond different. And there's a dog barking. But aside from that, but today we live in a world where you cannot necessarily eliminate that as a possibility. Think about that. If you do, if you were the same people, by the way, that brought us a lot of the immunological variations of lunacy. But anyway, there are people today who would say, no, wait a minute. There is no such thing that a man cannot get pregnant. This is where we are. Just think about this. Stop for a

second. There are people in hospitals, some of the most prestigious teaching hospitals, you name it, who are saying, okay, all right, let me wrap you. By the way, the man who says he's Napoleon, you're crazy. But you, Mr. Butkus, we're going to do a sonogram. We're going to see how far along you are. When did you have your last period? This is how demented we are in this world. This is— I would argue that we've gone well beyond that.

And I would argue that we're at the point where all objectivity is devalued and subjectivity is elevated to the highest extreme. Therefore, my patient who says, I'm living my best life, dying of heroin addiction on the street, is accepted at face face value much the way the guy who says he's napoleon if that's how he wants to live his life he's living his best life as napoleon because subjectively that's his reality therefore that is so and that is the world we live in and that harms human beings and it kills them and it actually my patients are hand over fist because of that foolishness so we're gonna leave it leave it at that. You guys have been great.

Our audience was very entertained by all this. I have one last question for Mark, maybe, just because I'm curious. I have these things I think about that cognitive sciences can help me with, which is why the hell is it that things that go viral, at least in my world, whenever something about me goes viral, it is never what I said. Because what I said is probably boring. It's always what somebody said I said or what some reporter said I said. That's always what goes viral.

Is that just true for me or is that kind of some feature of the memes on social media? Yeah, I don't have an offhand answer, but just off the cuff, it could be that it's just exciting to pass on rumors from somebody else about you rather than you, what you're saying. That's just sort of like I'm just trying to raise Dr. Drew. It's much more fun to pass on some bull crap that other people are saying about you. That's just inherently naughty. Yeah. Yeah. Rumors. That's a whole other topic we can get into. Go ahead. Yes, Lionel. May I, as a trial lawyer, tell you in the rules of evidence, one of the reasons why we have this rule against hearsay, hearsay is defined as an out-of-court statement that is offered to prove the truth of the matter asserted. And the reason why courts hate hearsay is because number one, it's an out-of-court

statement. It wasn't under oath. And number two, we lack demeanor evidence. So you can say something. So whenever somebody repeats something by virtue, it's almost like Heisenberg or something. Whenever you repeat something, not only am I not getting it right, but I don't get the context. It's impossible to say exactly how you meant it and what you meant to say. And there are some exceptions, for example, by the way, if you're screaming, oh my God, he's dead, that one will take it. That will listen to it. That sounds good. But there's something that's interesting. The greatest thing, this social media, this device, and one of the greatest social media, greatest oxymoronic terms ever, even though it's a medium,

is this will be the end, the end of civilization civilization perhaps artificial intelligence next but what this has done in order to create this hyper metastatic narcissism and people who live in back to do you will know this more people who live in their world where do you live la no I'm in Instagram I live in Instagram and nothing exists unless I document it unless unless I see it. We could go on and on, but to answer your question, we don't like people saying what somebody else said in court, even if you said it, even if you repeat what you said.

And like you said, social media is an oxymoron. That's why I like the French version, which is réseau socio, which is social rivers, social tributaries. It's a very interesting way of— It actually means the cattle are dying in French. So there we are. So listen, there's a lot of ways this conversation could have gone. I hope this was satisfying for everybody.

Thanks for the reference. I'm going to look that guy up. We could have—yeah, I just saw them. They have a bunch of videos out there. But there's a lot more we could all get into, and I still want to get into. This conversation went a certain way, and we could just drill in further just on the lockdowns and the masks and spend a couple hours doing that. Well, we didn't talk about the WHO, but next time. And the World Health Organization.

We all sort of looked at, I headlined it. We all agreed to exitthewho.com. You know, where the World Health Organization takes sovereignty over elected sovereign officials and decides when they take that sovereignty and how and what they do with it. That is an insanity people have to become aware of and make sure that does not happen. But be that as it may, gentlemen, you've been very, very, very kind with your time and with your thoughts. And I appreciate it.

And I hope you'll both come back. I'd love to have you back soon. That was great. Thank you. Thank you guys. And for everyone else, we will see you tomorrow at two o'clock. Joseph Latipo, the Surgeon General with Dr. Kelly from the state of Florida. Mark Morano, we've got coming in Dr. Tom Rents coming in,

returning to give us more information about counterespionage and viruses, which I think is what's coming up there. A lot of guests are brewing, and so we have TBD up there because there's a lot of people flying around. And these two guys I plan to bring back in pretty soon too. So we will see you tomorrow at 3 o'clock Pacific time. Thanks for being here. Ask Dr. Drew is produced by Caleb Nation and Susan Pinsky. As a reminder, the discussions here are not a substitute for medical care, diagnosis, or treatment. This show is intended for educational and informational

purposes only. I am a licensed physician, but I am not a replacement for your personal doctor, and I am not practicing medicine here. Always remember that our understanding of medicine and science is constantly evolving. Though my opinion is based on the information that is available to me today, some of the contents of this show could be outdated in the future. Be sure to check with trusted resources in case any of the information has been updated since this was published. If you or someone you know is in immediate danger, don't call me, call 911. If you're feeling hopeless or suicidal, call the National Suicide Prevention Lifeline at 800