The David Pakman Show - 12/8/22: GOP Finger-Pointing, More Classified Docs Found, Everyone's Furious

Episode Date: December 8, 2022

-- On the Show: -- Dave Farina, a science communicator and author best known for his YouTube channel "Professor Dave Explains" joins David to discuss vaccines, homeopathy, GMOs, and much more -- A restaurant has denied a Christian group service over their anti-abortion anti-LGBT views, and it immediately becomes a huge fiasco -- The Republican blame game of fingerpointing hilarious escalates after Herschel Walke's loss in the Georgia Senate runoff -- Failed Arizona Republican Gubernatorial candidate Kari Lake agrees with Donald Trump's call to "terminate" parts of the Constitution -- Failed Arizona Republican Gubernatorial candidate Kari Lake has yet another lawsuit, now that the Arizona election has been certified -- Failed Arizona Republican Gubernatorial candidate Kari Lake joins a prayer circle to try to pray for election victory -- Classified documents have been found at a Donald Trump storage unit in Florida -- A confused and disoriented Donald Trump is caught on video telling obvious lies about the 2022 election at a Mar-a-Lago event -- Voicemail caller almost fell for another David Pakman impersonator text scam -- On the Bonus Show: Brittney Griner is released from Russian prison in a 1-for-1 prisoner swap, Indonesian "sex ban" threatens other freedoms, the real reason Iran says it's canceling the morality police, much more... 🌿 Sunset Lake CBD: Get 20% OFF using code PAKMAN at https://sunsetlakecbd.com 🔊 Try Blinkist for FREE and get 25% off at http://www.blinkist.com/pakman 🧻 Reel Paper: Use code PAKMAN for 30% OFF + free shipping at https://reelpaper.com/lemur ❄️ ChiliSleep by SleepMe: Get 25% OFF your bed-cooling system at https://chilisleep.com/pakman -- Become a Supporter: http://www.davidpakman.com/membership -- Subscribe on YouTube: http://www.youtube.com/thedavidpakmanshow -- Subscribe to Pakman Live: https://www.youtube.com/pakmanlive -- Subscribe to Pakman Finance: https://www.youtube.com/pakmanfinance -- Follow us on Twitter: http://twitter.com/davidpakmanshow -- Like us on Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/davidpakmanshow -- Leave us a message at The David Pakman Show Voicemail Line (219)-2DAVIDP

. An anti abortion, anti LGBT Christian group pulled a stunt to get themselves refused service at a restaurant. And now you've got a lot of right wingers saying they were denied service for their religion. Is that actually what happened? I want to start with this today because it is so important to understand when we talk about nondiscrimination differences between beliefs and identity. And this is the perfect example to talk about that. So let's start with an article that tells us what happened. It's a CBS News article. Restaurant denies Christian group service over its anti-abortion and LGBTQ stances.

Here's what happened. A restaurant in Richmond, Virginia, refused to host a private event for a conservative Christian organization over the group's position on same sex marriage and abortion rights. The restaurant is called Metzger Bar and Butchery, and it is known as an inclusive establishment that has rarely refused service to willing patrons, but said it denied service to the group in an effort to protect its staff, many of whom are members or member women or members of the LGBTQ community. Quote, We recently recently we refused service to a group that had booked an event with us after the owners of Metzger found out it was a group of donors to a political organization that seeks to deprive women and LGBTQ persons of their basic human

rights in Virginia. The move was consistent with Metzger's past practices, was made out of respect for its staff. Quote, We have always refused service to anyone for making our staff uncomfortable or unsafe. And this was the driving force behind our decision. All of our staff are people with rights who deserve dignity and a safe work environment. This is a super interesting legal story because discrimination along religious lines, meaning we don't serve Christians, would be against the law. But political beliefs are not protected outside of Washington, D.C. and that is what is at the crux of this.

Now I'm biased. My view here is that nowhere is there any evidence that these folks were denied service for being Christian. They were denied service for their views on particular issues, their view on abortion, their view on LGBT rights. Now, where it starts to get dicey is that as we have seen the religious right start to behave over the last few years is to argue, well, those views are informed by our religion. And by telling us that those views are what is getting us banned or refused service, you are effectively discriminating against our religion because there is no daylight between our view on abortion and LGBT rights and our

Christian faith. Now, the other part that's important to consider is that this was a stunt. The Family Foundation is the name of the group that did this. They obviously knew about Metzger's history of supporting inclusivity, including LGBT inclusivity. They knew that they tried to book an event there. And after they said no, they started soliciting donations because, oh, we've been canceled. They've canceled us where this was a very clear and known stunt. And this was the outcome. So there's a couple of different things that I think are important to talk about. From a legal standpoint, I can't adjudicate here whether based on all of the facts, a court would find saying no was because of Christianity or saying no

was because of political views that are not protected by nondiscrimination law. The truth is, we all know there are progressive Christian groups, progressive Catholic groups, etc. Endless Jewish groups that have very different views about abortion. There's no rule that says if you are, quote, Christian, you have to have this particular view about abortion or about LGBT people. So we know that you have other perspectives there. And so. It's obvious that if this were a progressive Christian group or a Christian group that had a let others decide view, we don't like it, but let others decide about abortion or whatever the case may be, they would not have been refused service.

And so by definition, that is not religiously based discrimination. The problem is that thanks to what happened to the judiciary in the United States under Donald Trump, one of the biggest victories that genuinely took place during the Trump administration was the ability of Donald Trump and the success for Donald Trump of moving the judiciary dramatically to the right in the United States. Now, most prominently, we think about the Supreme Court. And of course, that is prominent. That's what most of us know about long public confirmation hearings.

We know the names of these folks, et cetera. But at many other levels, the appointment of right wing judges by Donald Trump has led to a judiciary that is much more likely to find that even though really they say it's the views, not the religion, you can't separate those religious views. And this is effectively religiously based discrimination. You must host the family foundation. There are judges in the United States that would find that. And that's very, very scary.

Now, at the back or the bottom or the top of this, however you want to describe it, there's always the hypocrisy with these people. They want to have it both ways. On the one hand, they want to be able to discriminate against the LGBT people, whether it's the anti gay baker or whatever story you want to look at. They want that freedom, but they also want everyone else to have to accept and suck up and allow their bigotry and their discrimination and their whatever it may be in the particular circumstance, xenophobia or homophobia or whatever the case may be. And then they frame it as religious when they want to do the discrimination. It's their right because of their religion. And then when they want to demand that they be serviced, they say it's discrimination

not to serve us. They want it both ways. There is not a lot of exciting stuff happening in hospitality from the from the from this particular perspective right now. But the right to refuse service is a real thing. And as long as you're not violating nondiscrimination law, which includes religion, et cetera, then you should be allowed to do it. I believe that the restaurant was well within its rights to say because of your views, they didn't even mention their religion because of your views. We are not going to offer you service.

We will see what it leads to in terms of lawsuits. And if there is an outcome, then we will get to that. There is something fascinating and delightful happening since Herschel Walker lost his election in Georgia on Tuesday, which is the Republican blame game. It's your fault. It's your fault. Hey, who said not to vote early anyway? That wasn't a good idea. Why didn't more senators go to Georgia to campaign for Herschel Walker? They're all pointing fingers. And the most important takeaway here to me is this was something they brought on themselves. We're going to listen to all sorts of different finger

pointing here. We're starting with Ari Fleischer, former Bush administration official on the Sean Hannity program last night saying you need good candidates starting to point to the candidate choice. And then Hannity says, well, but the kid, Herschel Walker was a good candidate. This is the best stuff. Isn't that things are so close down the middle. Yeah. But the final point I'll make, Sean, is mechanics are always important in campaigns, but candidate quality is essential. Good candidates will win. And the big issue for Republicans still is who is our leader? Who's the candidate at the top? Oh, I will say this is the best opportunity to bring people in.

So Fleischer seems to both be saying Trump at the top isn't great for the party. And Walker also wasn't a particularly good candidate, but both of which are arguably true. Herschel, I thought, was a good candidate. I know people disagree with that, but he got outspent in the runoff about three to four to one. He got outspent in the general election by an equal amount. Uh, that makes a difference. Money in politics makes a pretty big difference. Yeah. So now all of a sudden the concern is money in politics for Sean Hannity because

Walker was a good candidate. Walker was not a good candidate, but he almost won anyway because the electorate in Georgia is so depraved that they thought this guy is a better option than Raphael Warnock, which is really wacky stuff. Then sticking with Hannity for the time being, Hannity says, you know, in some cases, maybe Republicans do actually need to pick better candidates. And he says not Walker, but he talks about maybe Doug Mastriano, Michigan. In some cases, Republicans do need better candidates. I'll give you one example,

not to pick on Pennsylvania gubernatorial candidate Doug Mastriano, but you look at his position on abortion. He had no exceptions for rape, incest, the mother's life. You in Pennsylvania, I'm talking politically, not morally here. You cannot win morally. It's all bad. Pennsylvania with that position, it is simply mathematically impossible, a bad candidate for that race. And it had impact on the entire Republican ticket. So this is just interesting because you've got Ari Fleischer saying Trump at the top of the ticket isn't good for Republicans.

Walker wasn't a good candidate. Then in comes Hannity and says, no, Walker was a good candidate, but Doug Mastriano was not a good candidate. The finger pointing is starting. Then we go to Kellyanne Conway and Kellyanne Conway's message is the problem is other Republican senators. It wasn't Herschel Walker. It was that the forty nine Republican senators didn't go to Georgia to help H. She'll walk her a new, a new target of her blame. I think people say we need a new message. Let me just say something respectfully to the 49 Republican senators. Right.

Where were most of you? Right. Why weren't you in Georgia? Few of them were, but they all should have been gentlemen because they should have been there at some, in some form, a tele town hall in person saying the following. I serve in the United States Senate with Raphael Warnock. He's a terrible senator. He doesn't represent Georgia. He's not fit to serve.

He votes with Joe Biden. He voted for Inflation Reduction Act and doesn't do that. He said nothing when they pulled out of Afghanistan. He said nothing that Joe Biden's been to Delaware 174 days and down to the border zero days. That's what needs to happen. Where were the other senators to say, I want Herschel Walker, not Raphael Warnock in the Senate with me. This is absolutely the best. Okay.

So Ari Fleischer says the problem is Trump at the top of the ticket and Walker is not a good candidate. Hannity says, no, Walker was a good candidate. Trump at the top of the tickets. Fine. But Doug Mastriano was a bad candidate and it was money in politics that hurt Herschel Walker. Kellyanne Conway says the problem is the incumbent Republican senators. They should have been there helping Herschel Walker. Then we go to Mark Levin, Fox News host. He points out, hey, Republicans aren't explaining their positions on any issues.

That's the problem. The reason people don't vote is they don't have a reason to vote. What was the Republican position on inflation? What were they going to do? I still don't know. Well, there was no position and he's not wrong. I mean, listen, Mark. Mark Levin is correctly pointing out. What were they going to do about inflation?

Now, Herschel Walker couldn't even understand what inflation was. He has no idea what's going on. You know, up was down. They was night. It was for Herschel Walker. It was like a twilight zone. There was no way. That's why Walker didn't express his position.

But why haven't Republicans explained what they're going to do about inflation? Well, it's because they can't really do anything about it. These things are cyclical and they're global. And you need to figure out what can we do until inflation comes down beyond? We've talked about what the Fed can do, et cetera. That's an economic discussion. But Mark Levin is now saying they're not expressing their views on issues correctly. And then the last clip here is Charlie Kirk, and he says Republicans aren't voting because they don't trust the process. Well, why don't they trust the process? Because Charlie Kirk's MAGA movement that he is a part of has been saying you can't trust the process. Speaker 1 You see. It's interesting, I actually

assumed incorrectly that if you take time to watch this program, thank you. Right. That you would also just automatically vote. Turns out there's a fair portion of you that are completely done and that are willing to voice that opinion. Why would he think that his program, which endlessly talks about how everything's rigged, is going to encourage people to vote? Do we have that Laura Ingraham clip that we guys pulled? And I just want to say I do sympathize with being upset with the Republican Party and not totally trusting the system, but not participating at all guarantees the other side to be able to play games.

And if everything was broken and lost, how did we win the House of Representatives? If everything is broken and lost, how did Ron Johnson, who stood up against the pharmaceutical company win? Well, he barely won. And Charlie Kirk is right. Charlie Kirk, of course, is right. And I asked this question in 2020. They say the presidential election was rigged.

But all the senators and members of Congress on the same damn ballots who won there, they don't say a peep about those. But if it was rigged, how would there be some incongruence? And Charlie Kirk is now realizing, well, all of this talk about it being rigged. It makes people think it's not worth voting. And that is exactly what we have been talking about for a long time. So the finger pointing is happening. Will they figure it out before 2024?

They very well might. They very well might. We're going to be here with you until then. Make sure you are subscribed to our YouTube channel. Three million people in October. We're trying to figure it. We'll have the number for November soon. Three point two million of you in October watched our videos on YouTube, didn't subscribe. Please subscribe. It is free and it does wonders for us in the YouTube algorithm. We'll take a quick break and be right back. Lake CBD dot com and use the code Pacman. Unlike other companies using these cheap synthetic

cannabinoids, Sunset Lake CBD extracts natural CBD oil from hemp grown on their family farm outside Burlington, Vermont. Sunset Lake CBD believes this transparent farm to table approach is the best way to spread the benefits of CBD. But don't just take their word for it. A certified third party lab tests every product to ensure accurate dosing. You can easily view the results yourself at Sunset Lake CBD dot com. Just click on the quality tests tab. A lot of people report CBD being useful for things like insomnia, stress, pain. Producer Pat uses Sunset Lake CBD gummies for sleep. He loves them. I've had their CBD coffee. It's excellent. They also have oils, flour, topicals. Maybe you've been thinking of giving CBD a try. Sunset Lake is where you want

to go. They support the David Pakman show. They're socially responsible as a company. Go to Sunset Lake CBD dot com and use code Pakman for 20 percent off your entire order. The info is in the podcast notes. You love nonfiction books. You love learning as much as you can about politics and economics and history and science. But you just don't have the time to read every book that you want to read. That's why I'm such a big fan of Blinkist. It's the app that takes thousands of nonfiction books, boils them down into an explainer that you can read or listen to in 15 minutes and get the most important insights from the book.

You take a topic you've been wanting to explore and you can consume 10 books about it in an afternoon. It gives you a meaningful overview and insight into what other books you might want to read in full. I just read Welcome to the Universe. It's Neil deGrasse Tyson's latest book. That's exactly the type of book that I would love to have the time to read. But my stack of books is already so big. My girlfriend and I also use the Blinkist connect feature to share and discuss books with one another with one account. And it makes a great last minute holiday gift. You can try Blinkist free for seven days and get 25 percent off a subscription at Blinkist dot com slash Pacman. The David Pakman Show is funded by none other than you. We have something called the membership program.

You sign up at join Pakman dot com. You get every day. You get the full show with no commercials hours before everybody else gets it. You get the bonus show every single day. Alex Jones hates that damn bonus show. Oh, the bonus show where you want to make money. Everybody else that makes money to fund themselves is bad. Thank your lucky stars every day. You're not Dave Pacman. Well, you don't have to be Dave Pacman to get the bonus show. You can sign up at join Pakman dot com. You can use the coupon code. Twenty four starts now. And the next exclusive members only town hall will be announced very, very soon. Let's get to some Carrie Lake insanity. Donald Trump

recently said that we must terminate parts of the Constitution to either reinstate him. We're talking about 2020 here. Reinstate him to the Oval Office or have a completely new 2020 election, even though it's almost 2023. This was crazy and authoritarian and dystopian and horrifying. And Carrie Lake, who recently lost her Arizona gubernatorial race, but has a lawsuit and his has prayers that she's using to try to get in office. She says Trump was right to call for the termination of parts of the Constitution. Yeah, she's auditioning really hard to be Donald Trump's VP. Their values, right?

The Constitution, above all else, except except here. Speaker 4 A massive voter fraud of this type and magnitude allows for the termination of all rules, regulations and articles, even those found in the Constitution. Our great founders did not want and would not condone false and fraudulent elections. I agree with them on that. Whoa. Can you imagine our founding fathers, what they went through to help bring about this great nation, seeing what happened in 2020? Nothing happened. The person who got the most votes won. It's really seeing what's happening now in 2022. Just saying, okay, well, I guess it didn't go our way. And I guess they cheated. We know they rigged the elections and they put in a bumbling fool who doesn't even

have the mental capacity to run this country. Okay, just get over it. We'll just let the loser take the White House. I don't think that would happen. President Trump is saying we are in unprecedented times and unprecedented measures are necessary. That is President Trump is saying we are in unprecedented times and unprecedented measures are necessary. That is what he is saying. Right. Carrie Lake agrees with Trump terminate parts of the Constitution. Now, as a reminder, Donald Trump's full statement on Truth Social was, quote, and this was based on the Twitter story. OK, quote, So with the revelation of massive and widespread fraud and deception in working closely with big tech companies, the DNC and the Democrat Party, do you throw the presidential election results of 2020 out

and declare the rightful winner? Or do you have a new election? A massive fraud of this type and magnitude allows for the termination of all rules, regulations and articles, even those found in the Constitution. Our great founders did not want and would not condone false and fraudulent elections. I spoke earlier this week to you with peace and love about the unfortunate reality that even their most prized principles and values that they claim to ascribe to almost like sacred texts, the Constitution, free speech, not regulating businesses, you all, OK, you know, they abandoned them at the drop of a hat, at the drop of a pin if it's not convenient. And right now, that sacred text to them, the Constitution is nothing. It's toilet paper that you flush 10

or 15 times, depending on the type of plumbing that you have. How long is this going to be accepted or even just look the other way at by a large portion of these right wingers? I think for a long time because they're all part of it. They all don't really care about their values if the values are no longer convenient. And by the way, how long are people going to keep interviewing Carrie Lake? Fox News often bills her as former Arizona gubernatorial candidate. Yeah, but OK, she ran

a race and she lost. For how long does that keep getting you interviewed? I don't know the answer. Just asking questions. All right. Let's stick with the Carrie Lake stuff for a little bit longer. Carrie Lake lost in Arizona. She wanted to be the governor. More people voted for her opponent, Katie Hobbs, and Katie Hobbs will be the governor. A couple of days ago, Carrie Lake put out a statement saying we have a lawsuit and the lawsuit is going to stop certification. It did not stop certification. So now Carrie Lake has. Another lawsuit, another lawsuit, and this one is now

that the election is certified, it was a bogus certification, so she has a different new lawsuit. Let's listen. Arizona is at the tip of the spear. We just had an election here November 8th, which was run like they run elections in banana republics and this is why i'm going to be contesting the election as you saw earlier this week some of the um i call them clowns running our circus of elections actually certified the election my opponent katie hobbs who should have recused herself but oversaw the election in a very shady and shoddy way actually certified the election and a lot of amer America First patriots were saying, Kerry, what are you doing? Why aren't you contesting this? What's wrong?

And what they don't realize is that in order to contest an election in Arizona, it has to be certified. So this sham election had to be certified for us to begin contesting it, and we will be contesting it. We're going to be filing our lawsuit on Friday, and I'll be filling you in more later on in this program about the lawsuit and what's coming up. Yes, Friday, Friday, she's going to very, very powerfully inform us about that. So a couple different things. Number one, earlier in the week, she didn't mention, by the way, in order to

contest that it needs to be certified. The lawsuit earlier in the week was to prevent the certification. So let's take a look at that just as a reminder. How possibly can a Republican attorney general sit there and a governor sit there and allow this fiasco? People in Arizona have to understand some independents and Democrats. Yeah. You look like idiots on the world stage. This looks like something that would happen in the worst of banana republic's Cary Lake. Yeah, I mean, the optics in just a little over an hour, the optics of them sitting there and signing their signature. Can you imagine to the sham election? They did it back in 2020, two years ago, and many of us gasped and said, how could they do this?

Why couldn't they give more time to look into all of the issues? Now, fast forward 2022 today, and we've got more issues than we saw in 2020 in that sham election. We have just a blatant sabotaging of election day, a disrespect, a disregard, a disenfranchisement of election day voters. That's a lot of words. And if they sit there and sign their names to this sham certification, history will never forgive them. They will go down as as three of the very worst in history. Yeah. So then she went on to explain they have a lawsuit. So that lawsuit failed. The certification took place a few hours later. Now the next lawsuit is to decertify, which, of course, is not actually a thing. This will just go on and on. And then the next layer to this Carrie Lake thing is the God layer.

Let's talk about that next. Carrie Lake now participating in a prayer circle to try to pray away the stolen election. You know, there used to be a time where these religious conservatives would try to get people to pray away the gay. They would say, if you pray enough and if I pray enough, maybe you won't be gay no more. If you remember that viral clip, they have moved on, I guess, from trying to pray for people not to be gay or for themselves not to be gay. I don't even know. To praying for the winner of an election to lose. That's fundamentally what they're praying for here. And you will see Carrie Lake in this video. If you were why, if you were watching with her head bowed in prayer,

guys, this country is really messed up. We cannot be part of thievery and Lord, that which the people have done to try to steal this election shall come back upon their own heads. For now is the season and the hour for things to begin to shift and change as global freedom shall cover this earth. Yeah. So I would not bet on that one working necessarily. I don't know that it would put too many eggs in that basket, for lack of a better term. And Carrie Lake continues to invoke God. Here's another segment. And this is very much like, you know, when when an athlete says, well,

we I have to thank God for this victory. And it's sort of like. God is now choosing like who wins a tennis match, that's what's going on, or like a curling thing or a soccer game, it's God. And why is God making the choices in this way? Did the other team not pray enough? Did they not pray correctly? It's all very weird. But Carrie Lake applying that here to her election, I guess people can, for starters, pray we we really need God in this world. We need God in our hearts, in our homes and in our country. She quite literally doesn't have a prayer of being the next governor of Arizona. And I know God's making a big comeback in this country. I feel it. I talk to people who say I started to return to church. I brought God back into our families lives. It's so important right

now. We're due for a couple of miracles, I think. It's just such a fantasy world that these people live in. But I also believe we have on top of that, we have a really good court case and we're going to open people's eyes to what went wrong. You know, there's times I felt just like the voters out there in Arizona despondent over the last couple of weeks. Right. Because we had such a we have such an amazing movement. And then I think about what God, you know, our father is doing. He's imagine if you if your dad said to you, I have such great hope for you and I believe in you so much that I'm going to put you in charge of something difficult. Oh, this is just so crazy. Listen, if God wanted her to win, why didn't she just win? Right. Like is is God is all knowing and

all powerful and involved in every absolutely every decision, sports decisions and who wins the lottery and who wins elections. God is involved everywhere. And yet God allowed Katie Hobbs to seemingly get more votes and to have the election certified and imminently to be inaugurated as the governor of Arizona. And then now you have to pray for God to change his mind. Did you not pray enough before or did you pray the wrong way? Or did Katie Hobbs have better prayer or more prayer? It it's just insane. And it's the same type of grift that would get people to even donate to somebody like Carrie Lake in the first place.

We'll have all these Carrie Lake clips if you can stomach them on our Instagram, which you can find at David Pakman show. And of course, they will all be on the YouTube channel at YouTube dot com slash the David Pakman show. Make sure you're subscribed. It is free and we will be back right after this. Our sponsor, Real Paper makes toilet paper 100 percent from bamboo, never from trees, meaning no deforestation, sustainability and climate change can be a tricky topic for people of all ages.

It can be particularly challenging to talk about with kids. And Real Paper recently launched the Little Lemurs box, a 24 pack of their bamboo toilet paper with a beautifully illustrated kids book that tells an exciting story of sustainability. The box is designed to spark creativity and kids create an opportunity to talk about deforestation, The David Pakman Show David Pakman dot com. Today we're going to be speaking with Dave Farina, who is a science communicator and also author best known for his YouTube channel, Professor Dave Explains. I know we have some at least overlap with our with our audiences. Dave, really appreciate your time.

Good to have you on. Yeah, thanks for having me. So you know, I want to talk to you maybe more specifically in a few about homeopathy and GMOs and maybe maybe vaccines. But it seems to me that one of your goals in the content that you create is to blend, certainly as we all do, being entertaining and being educational, but specifically creating sort of a framework to think through an issue where there are conflicting claims and at least in principle, some kind of factual or scientific underpinning that would get us closer

to what we might call the truth. How do you approach it? What's your thought process? How do you think about it? Well, I mean, for the longest time, I was just making purely academic content on my channel. So explaining science. But then lately I've been doing this debunking content where I sort of go after prevalent purveyors of disinformation. And when I mean, I want to debunk their claims at face value, but I also do try to elucidate, you know, what is obviously their motive? What are the narratives they're using to ensnare people? So if I can kind of like unpack that for people, I think some can maybe approach it with a new perspective and go, OK, I see that's sort of the bias that's led me to to fall for this kind of thing. There's a whole bunch of typical things that happen in these conversations.

One of those can be that the person you're talking to maybe doesn't understand the difference between an opinion and a fact, and they might think you're kind of disagreeing about one when it's actually a factual question. Another thing that can happen is that it's Sam Harris called it the setting of many small fires, which is you you have you're you're prepared for a conversation and you're knowledgeable. But at any time, someone can say, well, but what about that study from Singapore, which you haven't seen necessarily? And it can sort of feel like an uncontested claim where I don't know, maybe they're right about that study from Singapore. Can you talk about a couple of those or others and maybe how to best handle those types of moments? Sure. Yeah. I mean, it's obviously we're seeing that it's rampant in science,

politics everywhere. I mean, I as a science communicator and an educator, I like to just find where there's a disconnect in the understanding and try to explain that. So I do like to try to explain the science. And you'd be surprised how how often it is that it's just a misunderstanding of basic scientific terminology or high school level concepts that if you just get in there and explain that, OK, now that makes a bit more sense. But as you're saying, yes, there are those people who are very they like to adhere to a particular narrative because they derive an identity from it. And they do go, oh, look at that study over here. Look at that study over there. Well, you know, in my debunks, I get into all that. So let's look at that study. Let's look at this figure. Let's look at this character. Who are they? What are they saying? Is that is that accurate? How does that compare to actual

science? You know, I like to try to get into the weeds with it. What about that when some some is something is brought up, maybe accurately or maybe not not that you simply just haven't heard of. It's unlikely that it changes the overarching narrative or the bigger truth, but you just aren't familiar with a particular data point that someone asserts. What's a good way to deal with that? Yeah, it almost never does change anything. Unfortunately, on the spot, it's hard to counter because you do have to go and look at that source.

But that's why I make debunking content, because I'm able to be very well researched with it. I'm able to I like to just hear what is going on in the ether. What are people saying? What are people pointing towards? Then I can go investigate those sources. And ninety nine point nine percent of the time, it's very easy to go, all right, this person is not qualified. They have no clue what they're talking about. They're just spewing an anti-establishment narrative to cash in. It's all there is to it. But then I like to try to illustrate that as clearly as possible. When you're in person, yeah, it's very hard. I don't know who you're talking about, but I mean, one tactic is to say what is more likely that the entire scientific community is either dumb and wrong or lying and corrupt, or this one guy is a liar.

I mean, it's it's it's it's very unlikely that this person is is accurate in what they're saying. Do you find that analogy and or examples can be useful sometimes in these cases? I'm thinking back to, you know, earlier in the pandemic, there was all this confusion about raw numbers versus per capita and understanding the rate of something versus the raw numbers. And like one thing that in my personal life seemed effective to talk to people about it was so the United States and Lesotho have different populations.

If I told you 100 people got covid in the US and 100 people got covid in Lesotho, does that seem like a like an important comparison or is something missing? And people go, oh, no. Yeah, because the US has way more people and it kind of like opens the door a little bit. Are those types of things useful mechanisms? Absolutely. I mean, anything you can do to get somebody to understand first, just understand science and numbers and data, but also show how others use numbers to obfuscate what's really going on or to, you know, push a narrative. There's a million ways to do it. And anything you can find that that establishes a line or connection that can help you get

a point across. Absolutely. It's a great thing to do. Let's just to pick something. Let's talk a little bit about homeopathy. So whenever I talk about homeopathy and I say, well, there's no active ingredients. And in many countries, the packaging has to actually say cannot does not treat or cure any condition or disease, period.

And you look at studies where you can compare homeopathy to placebo and there's it doesn't work and people just get angry with me and they often will write to me and they'll say my uncle is a homeopath or I was successfully treated with homeopathy or whatever the case may be. I don't know if you agree with my position on homeopathy. I'll let you address that first. Of course I do. How how how do you tackle those types of rebuttals from from folks about, well, with chiropractic stuff, I get a lot of the same types of emails. These can be tough because there's a lot of emotional connection. Right. Yeah. And that's not my forte. I'll say that right off the bat. I'm not,

you know, if somebody has a really strong emotional bias there towards something, it's hard to penetrate. And that's not really my specialty. I like to make these larger, you know, this debunking content where I can go in and explain to you beyond a shadow of a doubt why homeopathy is pseudoscience. Now, some people are going to engage with that, and some people are going to reject that, and that's just how the cookie crumbles. But I think that, you know, my strategy is to go in and say, okay, why would you think that homeopathy would work? What is the mechanism by which this could work? And now let's compare that to what we actually know about the biological sciences, about medical sciences. What is it for something to work? What is happening on the molecular level mechanistically that would cause something to work?

And recognize that this has no chance of doing that. There's nothing in it. It's water or a sugar capsule or whatever it is. It cannot do anything. And homeopathy to me is the most incredible example of something that's so blatantly pseudoscientific on face value. It's so indefensible and yet is penetrating even certain areas of academia, you know, sort of these like low level trade universities that are offering programs in this stuff simply due to financial demand. Right. If people are going to pay for the program, some institutions are going to offer it, you know,

not Harvard Medical School, obviously, but some places going to do it. And then that that really feel it's a vicious cycle now because people then can point at these things and see there's validity to it. And no, they're 100 percent is not. So homeopathy seems a little easier to deal with than than chiropractic in my mind. And I think that one of the tough things about chiropractic is there is this kind of blend where some of the I've never had it done, but some of the adjustments probably feel good, at least in the short term. Maybe there's an endorphin release. There's there's maybe a stretching component.

There might be something that's more akin to like massage that that that is good. But then you have all of the supposed uses and treatments and the mechanism of subluxation of the spine through which it supposedly works in this type of thing. Chiropractic is a very tough one because there's so much so much there. Yeah, it is tough because I don't think that chiropractics is a sham field at face value. I think that there is there can be something to spinal adjustment. And it's fine that there are chiropractors and there's something to it. But the problem is it blends so easily into pseudoscience, largely because you have these, I mean, narcissists, essentially, who they're not

trained doctors, right? To become a chiropractor, you're not going through the same educational path as someone who's becoming like a medical doctor or surgeon or something like that. So they, they definitely know no less about things that are outside of their expertise. And then, but then you have people that go on the internet and say, I'm a doctor and here's some stuff that's totally unrelated to chiropractics about nutrition or something like that. And you should listen to me because I'm an authority and people really fall for it, especially if it has that anti establishment bite to it. This is what pharma doesn't want you to know or, you know, these kinds of ways of thinking. Last big issue I want to talk about,

and we can spend some more time on this one. You got into a back and forth with Matt Walsh from The Daily Wire on the topic of trans people. And over the last year, you know, if you've watched Trump rallies, CPAC and other places, the home of overtly homophobic and anti-trans rhetoric is some of what's getting people the most excited when there's a crowd there of the folks that go to these types of events. Something about it is really getting people excited. The right loves to say plain and simple, we're just scientifically correct on this trans issue. There's men and there's women and that's it. And just sort of anything else is kind of like cultural stuff, social stuff, woke stuff, which you can do, but it's outside of the realm of science. Where where do you think the most fundamental scientific mistake is being made by

the right on this issue? I mean, the scientific mistake is that they ignore science, right? Boys, penis, girls, vagina is not science. That's what you learn when you're five. Right. But that's not right. That's not science. Human sexuality, human physiology is is exceedingly complex. And all this is on the right is just a dog whistle right nothing unites people like a common hatred and people fear what they don't understand so i like everyone else 10 years ago or whatever it was had to have that moment where i went oh trans people okay that's a thing but i don't understand why the right didn't learn anything from the homophobia the the huge wave of homophobia you, 40 years ago or whatever it was a little bit before my time. But when when society had to

adjust to the fact that homosexuality is a thing and it's not boy and girl make baby and that's how humans are, right? Homosexuality exists and also sexuality is on a spectrum and all these things. Gender is the same way and they hide behind all these false narratives so every time i try to talk about this you know somebody says you think there's 76 genders or something like this never said anything like that it's just about the differences between sex and gender right sex being largely chromosomal and related to the primary sexual characteristics the external genitalia and gender identity being something that's a neuro anatomical construct right there's a thing such a thing as having the experience of being male or female, and that's intimately linked to

brain structure, right? Masculinization and feminization occurs in the brain just as it does in the rest of the body to produce secondary sexual characteristics, etc. And when sex and gender don't align, that's a trans person. And that's all it is. So I tried to make some content explaining what trans people are scientifically. And I did so for the lay person at first and actually expected to get a little bit of flack from the left because I sort of defended like Dave Chappelle and said, oh, yes, he said some problematic things, but ultimately he's not a bigot and he's just confused. He doesn't know the difference between sex and gender. So let me help try to explain this. And just the onslaught from the right was astounding. I'm not an expert in it, but when the title of the paper says

gender identity as correlating with the uncinnate nucleus or whatever part of the brain it is, people are studying this. I don't know the status of the field. I could dig into it more and do content on that if people are interested, but this is science. When you don't cite any primary literature and you deny the primary literature that the other side is citing, you're not pro-science. You're denying science. When you don't cite any primary literature and you deny the primary literature that the other side is citing, you're not pro science, you're denying science. And there's science behind gender identity, sexuality, all these things that the right

regularly ignores. That's all there is to it. It also does seem as though there's a concerted effort from the right to focus in on on a sliver of the entire issue, which if we think about it like concentric circles, you've got all gender, all possible gender topics. And then you've got trans people within that. And then within that, you have trans people in sports. But that's not even really the issue because they don't really seem that concerned about

trans men. Right. And they also don't seem that concerned about all sports. Like, for example, chess has women's and men's divisions, but it's not become controversial if a trans person wants to be in a different. Right. So they're basically talking about like weightlifting and swimming. And only when it comes to trans women, this is like the the tiniest sliver of the totality of the issue. And it's a shame because we should be able to have good faith conversations about those things. It is a problem what we do with trans people in

sports. Yeah. And and that's another thing I did in the first video where I was trying to admit that, yeah, there is something to talk about here. But they that's they're not interested in talking about the dignity of trans people or even acknowledging that that trans is a thing that you can be right. They just want to go towards, oh, they're having surgeries on children and this is no, they're not. No, they're not. They're not doing that. That's not a thing that's happening. Nobody is undergoing medical procedures as a prepubescent child. That has happened zero times. So it's it's just a way for them to garner political support by capitalizing on the fear

and anger of confused people that don't want to accept what humans are. That's basically it. It's also weird how obviously absurd things slip into the lexicon where, like, for example, for a little while it was puberty blockers on five year olds was like five year olds are about to go through puberty. Why would you why would you need to do that? Or prepubescent girls are having double mastectomies. They don't have breasts.

What are you what are you removing? How does that work? Yeah, it's just so blatantly false at face value. How can anybody listen to this and keep a straight face? Yeah, it's just a narrative. It's just a narrative that they're pushing. That's that's all there is to it. Folks, we've been speaking with Dave Farina, who is a science communicator

and author best known for the YouTube channel Professor Dave Explains, which I encourage you to check out. Dave, really appreciate your time today. Speaker 2 Thank you. Thank you for having me. Speaker 1 The science tells us that one of the best ways to get consistent deep sleep is lowering your core body temperature. When your body stays cooler at night, you're more comfortable and your sleep is better. Our sponsor, Sleep Me, is the home of Chili Sleep, the customizable climate controlled sleep solutions that can improve your sleep by keeping you cooler at night. There are three Thank you so much for joining us. I already did go to sleep dot me slash Pacman to learn more and get 25 percent off your new chilly sleep system.

Click on our chilly sleep link in the podcast notes to start staying cool at night. Well it is happening again. Classified items have been found at a Donald Trump storage unit in Florida. It is the guy who said no one respects classified information as much as he does. He may have been a little bit careless with the classified documents. Rolling Stone reports classified documents found at Trump's storage unit with swords and wrestling belts. Lawyers for the former president turned over more sensitive documents to the FBI after

conducting an independent search of his properties, identified additional documents with classification markings in a search that spanned three Trump properties, including Bedminster Golf Club Club in Jersey, Trump Tower in New York and presumably also Mar-a-Lago down in Florida. The documents allegedly made their way. Look at this to the storage unit as part of a 3000 pound transport of miscellaneous items shipped from Virginia to Florida. They're just in a storage unit. They're like in a pod. It was full of suits and swords and wrestling belts and all sorts of things, a source told

The Washington Post, who asserted Trump had likely never even been to the unit. Sources told The Post that the material was turned over to the FBI, which declined to supervise the searches. Those familiar with the investigation also indicated to The Post that classified materials were not recovered from searches at Bedminster and Trump Tower, only from the storage unit. Trump has been obsessed with people's handling of classified information for years and years and years. And it turns out that he is the worst.

Remember all of this stuff. Hey, we're going to move on. And yet she didn't know the word the letter C on a document. Right. She didn't even know what that word what that letter meant. You know, it's amazing. I'm watching Hillary go over facts and she's going after fact after fact. And she's lying again because she said she you know what she did with the emails was fine.

You think it was fine to delete 33,000 emails? I don't think so. She said the 33,000 emails had to do with her daughter's wedding, number one, and a yoga class. Well, maybe we'll give three or three or four or five or something. 33,000 emails deleted. And now she's saying there wasn't anything wrong. And more importantly, that was after getting a subpoena. That wasn't before.

That was after. She got it from the United States Congress. And I'll be honest, I am so disappointed in congressmen. Yeah. So Hillary, very, very untrustworthy. How about George H.W. Bush? Yep. Nope. That's that's also very, very bad. He can't be trusted either. George H.W. Bush took millions of documents to a former bowling alley and a former Chinese restaurant where they combined them. So they're in a bowling alley slash Chinese restaurant. OK, now that story, of course, wasn't true. As you might imagine, what actually happened was that the National Archives rented a facility

which previously was a laundry and Chinese restaurant. The documents were under the right possession and supervised at all points. It just is not even remotely analogous, but he was bad. OK, remember Trump's promise about documents in 2016 on political corruption? We are going to restore honor to our government. Right. In my administration, I'm going to enforce all laws concerning laws, the protection of classified information. No one will be above the law. No one other than, I guess, Trump himself. It sort of seems also Trump saying he is better than Obama, Bush and Clinton when it comes to documents. They've been given all the time.

These are other presidents all the time needed because you're supposed to have as much time as you need and complete deference when it came to their documents and their papers. Take as much as you need. Barack Hussein Obama moved more than 20 truckloads, over 33 million pages of documents, both classified and unclassified, to a poorly built and totally unsafe former furniture store located in a rather bad neighborhood in Chicago with no security, by the way. George W. Bush stored 68 million pages in a warehouse in Texas and lost 22 million White House emails. He lost 22 million emails. Can you imagine if I lost two emails that say this is terrible? It must have been nuclear in those two. So you get it.

Trump's the best at everything all the time. It will be interesting if we ever do find out exactly everything Trump stole on his way out. Are there still missing documents even after this particular find? And we have a situation apparently here in the United States where top secret documents, intelligence, it seems quite poorly managed to the point where this can even happen. Like there's there's two sides, of course, to all of this Trump insanity. On the one hand, no one has really tested our systems the way that Donald Trump has tested them. And so him doing this stuff is wacky. But also some of the systems haven't worked particularly well.

It's odd that agencies didn't necessarily know about every single one of these documents as soon as they were missing. Oh, some turned up in a storage unit. All right. I can't wait for the defense of this because it always boils down to incompetence. And it was someone else pointing fingers. And also, this isn't really a bad thing. And also, Obama did it worse and blah, blah, blah, blah, blah.

Yeah, that guy, you remember him. I don't know what the next step is on the classified documents, but like we said, after the Mar-a-Lago stuff happened, that was not going to be the last we heard about documents. And indeed, more have already turned up. Hey, I have a very I don't want to spend a lot of time of this on this. We've had so much stuff on the program already. There's a video that came out of a very disoriented, visibly confused Donald Trump at Mar-a-Lago with Charlie Kirk standing next to him. It's a bizarre video where Trump says

people were trying to vote for Carrie Lake in Arizona in miles in five miles long lines and for 10 hours on Election Day. Now that happens to be a lie. But let's listen to what he said. The audio is not great, but let's do our best to figure it out. She had lines in the three, four or five miles long, you know, because three, four or five mile long lines. And remember, there were a few them that were broken. And thousands and thousands of people left that line. They had to go home to their sons, literally.

They had to go see their doctor. They were older or maybe not so great that he couldn't stand in the Arizona sunshine for 10 hours. 85. And I was 85 years old. I mean, it's just folks. The line went to outer space. Some people are still in line today. A month later, there is no hyperbole too absurd for Donald Trump. And you know, if this stuff was true, which it's not, if there was only something that could

be done to help those voters where it's hot and they're elderly and they don't feel well, something like where maybe they could fill out a ballot and then take it to the post office or maybe leave it in their mailbox vertically to be picked up by the U.S. posters Postal Service. Or maybe if there were more locations to vote or maybe if there was early voting at several hundred locations where people could go and it would spread out the crowds. If this stuff were true. It would be nice if there were something that we could actually do about it. Now, of course, we all have to ask ourselves, where was the news coverage of file five mile long lines, five mile lines to vote,

even four mile lines or three mile lines? Trump said it was three, four or five. If there was a three, do you realize if there was a single line that went three miles to vote? It would have been national news all day on November 8th, and they the only story was some lines and a few malfunctioning tabulators. It really makes you think here's, by the way, just another video with the scene at Mar-a-Lago seems absolutely bizarre. Here is Trump, I guess, looking for Michael Flynn in a crowd around the same time that he gave that strange rant. I heard a lot of commotion down here.

I said, what the hell is that? Everything good. You have a good time. By the way, this is Trump at a meet at some event of filled with conspiracy theorists down there at Mar-a-Lago. I said, when I heard the group, the food's going to be good. I said, put on the 18th place. The 18th. But it's great to have you. You know, General Flynn is one of my favorites. He's a great gentleman, a great man. He's gone through hell. Yeah. And he's Michael Flynn and other conspiracy theorists apparently were there. Frankly, it looks better. So yesterday he looks better than he did 10 years ago. I don't know what's I don't know what's going on. Where is he, by the way? Where is he? Come on, Jim.

Get over here. General. I'm telling you, he's gone through all of that. You're a much more handsome man right now, General. All right. It's gotten very sad. Trump's the DJ. Trump's the maitre d'.

Trump's the guy who comes through saying, is there is there a Flynn here? Is there Michael Flynn here? It's all getting wacky. There were no 10 hour waits. There were no five mile lines. We have a voicemail number and that number is two one nine two. David P. This is another voicemail about me texting people. Just a reminder, these are scams. I'm not texting anybody. Yeah, I got one of your texts saying, call me direct message right away. But no, I don't have the Internet. I don't have a computer. I got off that damn hydraulic Internet platform stuff four years ago.

Well, good for you. I do listen to your show and dollar more and I'll read the stuff that comes up on. You too. Yeah. So listen, this this I feel bad for this guy. or more and I'll read the stuff that comes up on YouTube. Yeah. So listen, this this I feel bad for this guy. There are people on YouTube and because there's hundreds and hundreds, we report them as quickly as we can. OK, but they keep popping up.

They put my face in their profile picture and then they respond to YouTube comments ago. Hey, love the comment. Could you text me or WhatsApp me or DM me or whatever the case may be? I love everybody, but I am not trying to text any of you. These are scams. They will try to steal your money. OK, report them to YouTube for impersonation.

We report them as well. I feel bad. It's I. I'm not I'm too busy to text with people. OK, I'm not even texting my friends back because I'm so busy. I'm not trolling my own YouTube comments, looking for people to text. So it is not me. At some point, there will be a scam at the end of the rainbow. At some point, they'll try to take money from you or something. I don't even really know what the scam is. On the bonus show today, folks. Very good news.

Brittney Griner has been released by Russia. This was a one for one prisoner swap for arms dealer Victor Bout. There are people saying this was not a fair trade, that this was crazy to release Victor Bout. OK, we will talk about it. Secondly, we're going to talk about the Indonesian sex ban. What does that mean and what does it mean for producer Pat, who will join me on the bonus show?

And thirdly, we're going to talk about the real reason that Iran says it's canceling the morality police. What? Yes. All of those stories and more on today's bonus show. Sign up at join Pacman dot com. Oh, the bonus show where you want to make money. Everybody else that makes money to fund themselves is bad.

Beautifully set. I'll see you on the bonus show.