The Joe Rogan Experience - #2049- Coleman Hughes

Episode Date: October 20, 2023

Coleman Hughes is a writer and opinion columnist who specialises in issues related to race, public policy, and applied ethics. He's the host of the "Conversations with Coleman" podcast and author of the "Coleman's Corner" Substack. www.colemanhughes.org

The Joe Rogan Experience. Train by day, Joe Rogan Podcast by night, all day. What's up? Good to see you, man. What's cracking? I'm good. I can't complain. We were just talking about you live in New York City. Yes. And whether or not the migrant crisis is a real thing. It's a real thing.

You can notice it. It's a real thing. You notice it in Port Authority. And I think when Eric Adams gets in front of the country and says, I can't handle this, I think he's telling the truth. And some people have accused him of racism, bizarrely, but I don't think it comes from that. I looked into this, and the part people don't know about this story is really the full unfolding of it goes back to the 1930s. New York State

made a constitutional amendment to the state constitution, which required the state to provide housing for the homeless, essentially. And it was sort of vaguely worded. So in the 80s and 90s, the courts in New York began interpreting that more and more strictly. Almost no other state, I'm not sure if any other state actually has something in its state constitution requiring that kind of a thing. something in its state constitution requiring that kind of a thing. So basically what happened is the judges ended up interpreting this more strictly. Obviously, the original purpose of this is for New Yorkers that are homeless to be housed. But they ended up interpreting it so strictly that when the Republican governors in Texas and Florida began sending a few thousand migrants up to New York City as kind of an FU to the liberal cities that

have declared themselves sanctuary cities without actually having to deal with the kind of border crisis that Texas does, the first few thousand found that legally New York had to house them. And then word got down to Mexico that if you make it to New York City, you will not be turned away. Legally, you don't even have to be a citizen for the state amendment to apply to you. So what began as a few, let's say the first 10 or 15,000 were sent by the Republican governors as a kind of political tactic, has now become tens and tens and tens and tens of thousands coming of their own volition to New York City. And it's the only state in the country where Mayor Adams has no legal recourse to send people elsewhere. He actually cannot do it.

He's tried to do executive orders, but he legally can't because it's in the state constitution. It's above his power. And now it's taken on a life of its own, way over and above what the Republican governors started. So this is why he's going to the national media and literally saying, I can't do anything about this. I'm trying to do something about this, but I can't.

And we're putting people up in Airbnbs for $100 a night, and the city will be bankrupt in X number of years if we don't find a solution to this. Oh my God. Yeah. I was looking at a video of the Roosevelt Hotel, which is no longer a hotel. They've essentially said this is now a center for housing migrants. Right. And

they've said the restaurant is no longer a restaurant and sorry, that's just how it is now. Yeah. I mean, what do you do if you own the Roosevelt Hotel and you just wanted it to be a hotel and now the state just says, nope. Yeah. I mean, look, I don't blame any of these people. If I was born in Mexico, 100 percent, we'd all be doing the same thing. It's just it's a smart thing to do from their perspective. But that doesn't mean from our perspective that we should just put out the bat signal to the whole world and say, you can come to New York City and we have no legal recourse to move you anywhere else. It's not just New York City. It's other parts of the world. It's strange that recently it's become this crisis where migrants are coming en masse to these places and just flooding them.

Like, is this orchestrated? Is this just a fact that they found out that they can do it and it's better than where they are? And if they go there, these places that are, you know, essentially, you know, they're charitably minded and they, you know, they would like to house people that are down on their luck. But now people are sort of taking advantage of that loophole and just swarming. I think that's what it is. I think the whole Western world has become much more open to immigration recently. Obviously, America was open to immigration in the 19th century, but we were the outlier. All the other countries of the world, the default was closed borders, essentially.

All the other countries of the world, the default was closed borders, essentially. So I think the whole world has, out of empathy for the poor and struggling, has wanted to have more permissive immigration. But that sends an incentive to people of the world that they can now come. They can abuse asylum laws. And again, I don't even blame people for doing this because it's exactly what I would do if I were born in Guatemala or Syria. I would say, hey, I'm a refugee. This is my story. And I would probably lie about it in order to get a better life in the one life that I had. But this is just a true side effect of those compassionate laws is that people abuse them. You get immigration pools that are vastly proportion abuse them. You get, you know,

immigration pools that are vastly proportionally male, which is how you know that they're not refugees because where are the women? Right. And it's just, it's a side effect of the intended compassionate immigration policy. That's, this is how this works. Thomas Sowell's great quote, there are no solutions, there are only trade-offs. This policy has a trade. Thomas Sowell's great quote, there are no solutions, there are only trade-offs. This policy has a trade-off. It's more compassionate, but it also leads to, in the case of New York, what could be a serious fiscal crisis. Someone told me this. I was looking to check into this, but I figured I'd wait until the podcast. Someone was telling me that the Biden administration

is talking about sending people back to Venezuela, deporting Venezuelans. See if you can find anything about this. Why Venezuela specifically? Because Venezuela is dealing with a communist socialist government and they wouldn't vote for that in America. Now, one of the things that's weird about this crisis is it comes at the same time as people trying to say that you should have no voter ID. And they've openly spoken about it in New York that people who are illegal immigrants should be allowed to vote. Yeah.

Which is really, look, I cannot talk shit. They've been pushing for that for years. I cannot talk shit because I am the product of immigration. My parents. Yeah, as am I. My grandparents came over here in the 1920s and that is just, you know, okay. That's why I'm here. Where did they come from?

They came from Italy and Ireland, and that's just why I'm here. So they came over when they knew that they could have a better life in America, and these people are doing the same thing, and I understand it. But it's just wild that there's no requirements. It's like there's no background checks. There's no checks to see if you're on a terrorist watch list. There's that you're just like letting people through. Biden administration will begin deporting Venezuelan migrants directly to Venezuela. I mean that is just so transparent. So the idea is Venezuelans are going to vote

right-wing like Cubans because they hate socialism. Exactly, because it's ruined their country. I'm curious, what is his stated rationale though? This is, okay. Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas confirmed that the administration has successfully negotiated a deal with Venezuela to execute the policy, but did not say whether Venezuela was getting anything from the U.S. in return. We are a nation of immigrants and we are a nation of laws, Mallorca said at the same Thursday press conference. Officials said that some migrants have already been identified for deportation. Starting today, the United States will begin direct repatriations of Venezuelan

nationals back to their home country. And in fact, we have already identified individuals in our custody today who will be removed promptly in the coming days, a senior official said. Venezuelans make up a large share of border crossings, and for years the U.S. has generally been unable to deport them because of frosty diplomatic relations with Venezuela. Mexico has agreed to take some, but it remains a difficult issue for the administration and for cities receiving migrants. That is so transparent. The fact that they're saying

Venezuelans and that they're communicating with the Venezuelan government to deport these people, that's so gross. It's so gross. Yeah. It's very strange, very weirdly selective. gross. Yeah, it's very strange, very weirdly selective. It's just transparent. It's very obvious as to why they've been so loose about this border crisis thing in the first place. And I assume you saw that Biden suspended 25 federal laws to start rebuilding the border wall. Did you see that? So they're rebuilding the border wall now. Yes. Yeah. Essentially doing the same thing that Trump did. Yeah. They all do it. I mean, Obama talked about it in like 2013.

Yeah. Yeah. They've all talked about it. Speaking of the voter ID thing, though, this is one thing that really made me crazy during COVID. For years, people on the left have been saying that voter ID laws are racist. I don't know if you've paid attention to this at all, but the argument is that black people, and especially poor black people, struggle to get IDs. It's never made much sense because you need an ID to buy a

six-pack, you need an ID to open a bank account, you need an ID, just that all these, you know, normal things that people of all classes and races have to do. And then when in New York City, during COVID, they implemented the policy that to get into any restaurant, any gym, anywhere in the city, you needed VaxCard plus ID. So me paying attention to the discourse for the past few years, I thought to myself, where is everyone on the left that said black people don't have IDs? Shouldn't they be calling this policy racist and saying that we are excluding all of the restaurants and gyms and so forth to black people because you need Vax card plus ID and black people can't get IDs? I'm doing the math here. I didn't hear a single peep from anyone of the usual suspects.

And I said, this is how you know it's a fake belief. They never really believed that black people can't get IDs. No, it's not just a fake belief. If you want to say something's racist, you could make a much better argument that vaccine mandates are racist because the majority, at least in the beginning of the COVID vaccine rollout, the majority of the people that were refusing it were African-Americans and Latinos. They were like, we don't buy this, especially when you deal with the Tuskegee crisis, when you hear about the times in the past where medical interventions have specifically targeted or there's been like evil shit that they've done specifically to black Americans. And they're suspicious.

Yeah. Right? So. Yeah, yeah, yeah. I mean, definitely. Right. So. Yeah, yeah, yeah. I mean, definitely. So I was always curious. Was it I think in the black community in general, people are just more suspicious of the government in general. Yes. In every possible way from dealing with the police to dealing with just court systems in any domain. And they did make the argument that COVID itself was systemically racist because it was, at least in the beginning, it was disproportionately killing black people. I thought this was, again, this is a very simplistic way of thinking. I don't equate disparities with racism, but I noticed the Washington Post ran a

story a few years later that maybe by 2022, COVID was disproportionately killing white people, right? Because the situations change and it's just very complicated, right? Very few things fall equally along every population in life. And I asked the question, okay, did systemic racism change its direction? Is COVID now anti-white? Well, no, the truth is that every disease has a different racial profile in terms of who it affects. Hispanics, for whatever reason, no one understands it. Hispanics have the lowest maternal mortality rates, lower than white people. Nobody gets it. It could be any number of things. There are many cancers that preferentially, some kill black people more often, some kill white people more often.

If you look at the CDC charts, you'll just find every disease has its own profile. And rather than say, okay, this disease is racist because it has a disproportion, we should all back off the R word a little bit and realize that, you know, these things are very complicated, multifactorial, and to reduce it all to racism is just very, you know, we've gotten into this thing where we all, we have a hammer and everything looks like a nail and the media knows that racism stories get clicks. So everything becomes about that. Yeah. It becomes a failure of mainstream media and that, that there, and what you're talking about, about the need for clicks, that's a huge part of this failure is that they rely on people paying attention. So to pay attention to a story, like in order to be incentivized, it has to be something that outrages you or scares you.

And so those are the things that they lead with. And it's good and it's bad. The good part is it's given rise in a major way to independent journalism. So many people have lost faith in what they deem to be corrupt, very biased, and obviously corporate-influenced mainstream media. Because they'll hide certain narratives. They'll, you know, if it's Fox News, they will never criticize the right. Everything is about the left. If it's CNN, everything is about the right being fools and the left being like the ones that are on the right side of history. It's just it's just shitty journalism.

And you know that, you know, comedian Ryan Long, right? Yes. You've probably seen his skit where he takes footage of the BLM protests and the police brutality videos. And he says, you know, I give half of them to cnn and half of them to fox no what is it what do you mean he has this hilarious skit where he's he he's like to cameramen essentially to media organizations like what do you do with that other half of the footage right you shouldn't just waste it you should give it to the other side right so give the videos of police officers beating up protesters you give that to cnn and So give the videos of police officers beating up protesters, you give that to CNN and you give the videos of rioters burning down mom and pop shops to give that to Fox, right? And it's almost like an infomercial for how he doesn't waste any bit of the animal when he cooks the food, right? It's very funny. It's just, it's a failure. I mean, actual journalism should be unbiased, objective people discussing what is actually going on.

And that is definitely not the case. And that's part of what we're running into. And, you know, when it comes to the COVID deaths, I mean, so many factors were never discussed. And one of the big ones that seems to affect the African-American community more than other people is vitamin D deficiencies. The reason why there's so much melanin in African-American skin is because people in Africa deal with very hot climates and direct contact to sunlight. And so they have protection from that. The reason why people became white is because they moved to areas that are covered with clouds, like England. And it's not a fucking coincidence that people there are pale as paper.

It's because they're basically a solar panel for vitamin D. Their body's trying to produce more vitamin D, and the way to do that is to produce less melanin. Interesting. My friend who was a doctor in New York City said that when he was a doctor and he would find sick people that would come to the hospital and he would test them for levels of vitamin D, he would find oftentimes undetectable levels of vitamin D in some African-Americans who weren't supplementing and weren't getting sun exposure. And he's like, it is catastrophic for your health. It's catastrophic for your immune system. And none of this was ever discussed, of course, because there was a binary solution. Like it was this experimental mRNA vaccine or nothing. And any other solution was conspiracy theory, foolishness, anything else to improve your health.

Even on top of that vaccine. Even saying, yes, you should get health, even on top of that vaccine, even saying, yes, you should get vaccinated, but also you should lose weight. Also, you should take vitamins and you should exercise and you should eat better and don't drink, don't smoke. Do these things that are going to improve your overall metabolic health. There was zero of that because it wasn't journalism. It was all promoted by people who are advertising on these mainstream media platforms. And that was what it is. And that's what we're dealing with. And again, it's good and it is bad. The good thing is it's led people, I think, to have the lowest level of trust ever in mainstream media in our lifetimes. I mean there was a recent

CNN ratings poll would say they got like 43,000 people watching CNN which is insane. I mean that is like That's like an average comedian with a hundred thousand followers real. Yeah. You know, that's nuts. It's nuts that this massive, major, worldwide, international news organization is getting 43,000 people watching their show. But it's because people have completely lost faith in whether or not these people are telling the truth. So I watched your RFK Jr. episode. And, you know, I watched the whole thing very carefully. I read his books and checked the footnotes and,

you know, all of the people that are, you know, my friends that are very smart people really disagreed with the fact that I liked him. So I had to do a lot of soul searching about what it is that resonated with me, but not with all of my intellectual and journalist colleagues that I tend to agree with about 90% of stuff. I really had to do some soul searching. had to do some soul-searching and you know what I came out feeling was that it wasn't that I agreed with RFK about every claim that he made in fact there are certain claims that he made that I double-checked that were flat-out wrong it's that I felt the version of RFK portrayed in the mainstream media was a totally different person from the real rfk right and that there was a a framing put around him that was so obviously uh uncharitable and bad faith so for example if i told you if i'm one of those people that was obsessed with getting fluoride out of the water,

right, and that was my cause in life, as a journalist, what would you label me? Well, Coleman Hughes, the... Yeah, the conspiracy theorist. Or even more neutrally... Fluoride denier. Anti-fluoride activist or something, right? Now, would you call me an anti-water activist? Of course not. That wouldn't make or something, right? Now, would you call me an anti-water activist? Of course not.

That wouldn't make any sense. Right. If I was someone that wanted to take, like my mother's whole thing was she wanted to take high fructose corn syrup out of food. She was very, this was a big issue for her. Would you call her an anti-high fructose corn syrup addict as a journalist or an anti-food activist? Well, no. So RFK Jr., you know, and I don't think he's right about this, but just as a matter of journalistic accuracy,

his whole project with vaccines has been to take stuff out of the vaccines that he thinks is toxic, right? His most anti-vax quote-unquote book is Thimerosal, Let the Science Speak. He's trying to take the thimerosal out of vaccines. Now, if I were describing this guy, even if I disagreed with every word he said as a journalist, I would call him an anti-thimerosal activist, not an anti-vaccine activist. Right. Because why would you advocate taking a out of B if you

thought B was also poison what's the point of taking poison out of poison right so the framing of him in the mainstream media as an anti-vaccine activist to me seemed already like not at all the framing and objective journalists would put on the issue even if if he's wrong about the facts. And that, you know, that clear bias in the treatment of him, rather than treating him like a normal politician and, you know, putting your perspective on it, putting this framing on him as a crazy guy, as a crackpot. That seemed to me that I think that is really what rubbed me the wrong way about how so many people were treating him. he became this vaccine skeptic or this person who discussed the apparent connection between some adverse events and some adverse effects and some vaccines. He started off as an environmental lawyer and his work helped clean up the Hudson River. And you could research it. It's like

he did amazing work and he held corporations responsible that were polluting. And because of his work, the Hudson River made a remarkable comeback. And then these women came to him and they said, you are researching all these toxins and pollutants that get released in the water. I want you to do this with vaccines. And they started talking to him and this woman came to his door and she said, I'm not leaving until you look at this. And she gave him a stack of files and documents and he started looking at it. Started looking at the difference between ethylmercury and mercury or methylmercury and ethylmercury. What's the difference and which ones are toxic and why are they in the vaccines in the first place? And like,

and which ones are toxic and why are they in the vaccines in the first place and like why are the manufacturers that make vaccines not liable at all for adverse effects and so he starts doing a deep dive in this and he finds out that it's all foreboding right this is all forbidden subject if you talk about it you'll you'll be labeled a vaccine denier or an anti-vaccine person which is like the worst anti-science pejorative that someone can label on someone who wants to be taken seriously. And he realizes that he has to go down this road. And I can't believe he's like, I can't believe I have to go down this road, but I have to go down this road. And he starts researching and he starts talking about it openly and frankly, courageously. And there is some very bizarre, you know, correlation, not necessary causality, right?

Because it's not really being openly studied in terms of like, it's not like, it's not being discussed in mainstream media. It's not something that's being discussed openly in universities and taught in schools and medical school, but there seems to be a rise in adverse effects and all sorts of issues that people are having once they started adding more vaccines to the rollout, which also happened right after they made these vaccines and the companies that manufacture them no longer liable for any adverse effects. And it's sketchy stuff because you can't talk about it. And whenever there's something that you can't talk about, it gets real weird because you can't talk about it. And whenever there's something that you can't talk about, it gets real weird because you can't just look at it and say, okay, what is actually going on objectively? Let's not signal to everyone that I'm on the side of science

and I'm the side of reason and I'm on the side of what's best for the whole world. Let's just look at what is actually happening. And no one wants to do that because if you even just start dipping your toes in those waters, people are like, wait, what are you saying? Are you a vaccine skeptic? Are you a vaccine denier? Are you anti-vax? Right.

Which is not something that he's like, I've been vaccinated. My whole family's been vaccinated. This is not what I'm saying. What I'm saying is there are proven effects that mercury and aluminum have on human beings, particularly in their developmental stage that seem to be detrimental. So why aren't we looking at this? I think what happens when the experts, the real experts abandon a line of inquiry because it becomes taboo because everyone's blood pressure rises when the topic comes up and we have that caveman instinct that we may get socially ostracized for something, right? That's a big one.

Totally. When that happens, the experts abandon a line of inquiry. The non-experts are going to come in and do the job. And they're going to do it non-expertly by definition. Right. So that's what I feel has happened around the conversation with vaccines. It's that the experts have been so dismissive of any skepticism, right? Yes. Which generally skepticism is a good thing. You're taught to be a skeptic, right? But the word is pejorative in this case. And rather than really compassionately going into the evidence and saying, I'm going to go all the way down the

rabbit hole with you. And as an expert, I'm not going to talk down to you, but I'm going to explain to you what I may know that you don't. And I'm going to go into it with an open mind, knowing that some vaccines have turned out to be unnecessary in the past. Some vaccines have caused damage in the past. Rather than make the whole area taboo and just making everyone feel like a non-person who's there, the best experts should shine a light on it. Really, they should shine a light on it. And then someone, people wouldn't be necessarily running to a lawyer, an environmental lawyer, for their narratives about this issue. And I think that that's what happens when the expert class abandons a particular line of inquiry. Unquestionably. Yeah, that's a very good point. And then there's also the revolving

door between the FDA and pharmaceutical companies. Which no one denies that. No one denies. You cannot. There's clear incentives that are in place just based on the past, just based on the fact that people have been able to parlay these jobs, go from being a part of the FDA to being a part of Pfizer and being a part of all these other pharmaceutical drug companies. So I don't know if he mentioned this specifically on your podcast, but I looked into this because of his book and talked about it on some other podcasts. and talked about it on some other podcasts. He, you know, around 2000, the RotaShield, the RotaVirus vaccine,

seven of the 13 people responsible for approving that vaccine at the CDC and the FDA, seven of 13, so a majority, had direct financial ties to companies that were producing that exact kind of vaccine right at the time. Yeah. So you have to think to yourself, common sense. That's insane. That can't be how the system should work. Without doubt. Congress looked into it, and they reported on this.

They said this is a disaster. They had to recall the vaccine, by the way, because it was causing intussusception in infants. And we've sort of been assured that they've cleaned up their act since then. And that seems to be the narrative that they've cleaned up their act. And I'm sure there was some panic and there was changing of policies, right? But as a journalist, our job is not to trust the government. Our job is to verify. And the status quo, I looked into it recently, is that the CDC and the FDA, they're still allowed to appoint

members of those panels who have conflicts of interest, so long as they're below a certain bar of conflict of interest. Now, who determines where the bar is? They determine where the bar is. And they're not required by law at all to report their deliberations publicly. So as an objective outsider, I would like to believe, I would like to believe that CDC and the FDA, I don't think they're evil people i don't think they're lizard people i think they're whatever i would like to believe that they're making good decisions but as a journalist you have to be able to verify it or else why should i trust yeah so if they're self-policing and not required to report i think people should be this is this is

my problem when ran paul is a is is aggressively pressing Fauci about conflicts of interest in Congress, journalists should be like, this guy's doing our job. We're supposed to be doing this. Instead, they label him as some kind of bad person. Journalists are supposed to aggressively police the government. And when you don't do that, you end up getting people doing the job for you. And they may not do it perfectly. And they may overstep.

But shouldn't the response be, how come mainstream journalism isn't pressing Fauci like that? We should have done it. And we should have done it 10 times harder and more precisely than Rand Paul did it. Right? That should be the response. Not Rand Paul as a conspiracy theorist. But the problem is money. The problem is when you look at the incredible amount of money that the pharmaceutical drug companies spend on advertising, they essentially have control of the narrative.

Whether people are directly told not to discuss these things, it is most certainly on the table that they know that there'll be repercussions. And so they don't report on them. Look, if you look at the Purdue Pharma crisis, have you seen the Netflix documentary, Painkiller? It's not a documentary. It's like a docudrama series. I saw the Hulu version. I didn't see that one. That's dope sick, right? Yeah. That one's excellent too. It was great.

But when they show how it's captured by money and when they show that they clearly knew that this was – it's an opiate and they are addictive. And yet they somehow or another use the language many believe or some believe. What was the exact wording? Some believe it is not addictive. Like who the fuck uses that for something that's going to be prescribed to millions of people? That's insanity. And it turns out, oh, my God, it's very addictive. Oh, my God, it caused a massive opiate crisis that didn't exist anywhere else in the world. The United States had this opioid crisis that it was unparalleled.

There was nothing like it anywhere else in the world. And it was directly because of the influence that these massive companies had, the amount of money they were spreading around, the revolving door between the FDA and these pharmaceutical drug companies, and the repercussions on millions of Americans. Who knows how many people died of overdoses? Who knows how many families were wrecked? How many lives were lost, just destroyed by addiction from something that was prescribed to them as being safe and effective by doctors? Yeah, no, it's insane. I know a few months ago, the city of San Francisco, I believe, won a lawsuit against Walgreens for, it might've been hundreds of millions,

I can check exactly. And in the report, in the discovery for the lawsuit, they were just talking about the sheer number of doctors who were found to be corruptly prescribing. It wasn't like one or two doctors. It was, it was a number that was so high that I, that I remember thinking, I mean, how can, how can a person that reads this really trust their doctor after reading this, right? Yeah. You have to have a good doctor. Unfortunately, most doctors are captured as well, including researchers. And that's one of the things.

Did you read RFK Jr.'s book, The Real Anthony Fauci? Yeah, I did. What did you think of that book? So my view of that book is that I don't jump to... RFK basically puts the worst possible interpretation of everything Fauci did. Kind of in the same way that Christopher Hitchens did with Bill Clinton, for example. When Bill Clinton bombed the Al-Shifa factory in Sudan that was said to have weapons, turned out to have medicine, turned out to have no link to Al-Qaeda, Hitchens wrote that he did this to distract the public from the Monica Lewinsky scandal. Now, that's possible.

I can't rule it out. Not saying it's something he wouldn't do. But without direct evidence for it, my bar is that i don't jump to the worst motives that's not how i tend to think well i appreciate that about you yeah you are incredibly reasonable and objective in that regard and that is that is important and hitchens you know he was brilliant but he was also angry and he he did like to throw rocks mother theresa yeah henry kissinger gandhi yes he wasn't factually wrong about any of his journalism about them but he when there's there's often just uncertainty about why people do things and a certain type of person jumps to the evil end of the uncertainty.

I feel I'm kind of more in the middle. So Fauci made tons of horrible public statements, later found to be false. And of course, I think we all, everyone would admit now that he suppressed lab leak for self-interested reasons, him and Francis Collins. But I think RFK, he strings together every mistake and assumes the worst end of that spectrum, which could be right. But it's not something, I don't like making those accusations without like a flaming gun evidence. Yes. And there's recent ones that people are talking about now that this was from the defense department and that this was that COVID was a bioweapon. Well,

you know, a bioweapon that accidentally got released. Like, do you have, would that hold up in court? Like, do you have enough evidence to say that publicly? And is it irresponsible to say that publicly? Because what, like my take on on it from clearly obviously a non-scientist is if I was a researcher and my education was in viruses and specifically coronaviruses, I would be looking to do research on coronaviruses. And gain-of-function research is one way, whether it's dangerous or not. And the Obama administration administration Obama outlawed He stopped it in 2014, right? Yeah It's sketchy work because what you're doing is you're making viruses worse, but are you doing it specifically to? Release them on people or you doing it to understand the viruses. I think scientists do stuff because it's super cool

Put yourself in the mindset of a scientist I think scientists do stuff because it's super cool to them. Yeah, there's a lot of that. Put yourself in the mindset of a scientist. They love this, right? Like this is their whole life. Right. If you tell them there's some new cool thing, we can now make viruses. We can insert specific strings of code into viruses that make them easily acquired by humanized mice. I mean, this is like giving a kid Legos, right?

Yes. So they don't have a bad bone in their body, but if it can be done, they will do it because it's cool, and they will justify it to get funding. They have to justify it in terms of a public health rationale. The truth is they're nerds, and they want to do it because it's cool, and I don't blame them. But the government's responsibility is to

say that is over the line. That is likely to leak given how common lab leaks are. We cannot be intentionally making viruses more deadly. Have you ever been to one of those labs? I've been in a BSL-3 lab. I've been in a lab of the same security as the one in Wuhan. I went to- And I had no clearance to be in there, by the way. I had no clearance to be in there. How'd you get in there? Girl I was dating at the time was working in there.

She wanted to show me the most. Oh, my God. That's so crazy. At Columbia University. But this goes to show you, this is why when I read that they were tweaking with coronaviruses in a BSL-3 lab. Oh, BSL-3 must be very high security. I was like, no, no. I just walked into one a few weeks ago.

With your girlfriend? Yeah, because every lab is as secure as the people that work there. It's just people. It's human beings. And they get tired. If you're on two hours of sleep, you forget to put your gloves on today. That's the story of every horror movie, right? Of course.

That's the story of, what is that, 28 Days's a story of like what is that 28 days later? They're working on some virus. Oh, you don't know I can't handle them 28 days later is an amazing one. It's the best zombie movie of all time and it's it's a lab leak Hmm, it turns people into these ferocious things which by the way Happens in nature. What do you think rabies is? Like what is rabies rabies is a Like, what is rabies? Rabies is a disease that affects animals that makes them fearless and aggressive and makes them want to transmit that disease to you by biting you. And if you give it to human beings, it's like 100%

fatal or 99% fatal, unless you take care of it, like within a certain time period. And with animals, it's fatal. And, fatal. And they have to get rabies shots. It's one excellent example of how vaccines have really helped people. Vaccines have helped human beings avoid getting fucking rabies. Rabies is scary. Rabies is essentially a real zombie virus. Because it turns... You ever seen an animal that has rabies?

They just have no fear of you they just want to come after you and bite you like a fucking zombie though so that it's like if i was a guy who is researching rabies i would go how do we make this even crazier how do we turn this into someone who like no longer needs oxygen and can just fucking exist in a zombie state you don't need blood pumping through your muscles anymore now this parasite has taken over your body which exists with cordyceps mushrooms have you ever seen that no cordyceps mushrooms infect ants and they get into the ant's body and ants recognize this and know that this thing is

going to grow mushrooms so the ants carry this other ant out of town they get them the fuck out of town so before the cordyceps mushrooms blow and the spores spray through the air and infect all the other ants these ants recognize oh this motherfucker's got it we got to get him out of here and they'll carry him way the fuck out of town like there's some sort of memory or some knowledge or understanding of the danger of this specific fungus that's growing on this dead ant that's amazing we got to get him the fuck out of here evolution is amazing it's amazing there's another one where there's an aquatic worm that grows inside grasshoppers and convinces the

grasshopper to commit suicide it rewires the grasshopper's mind and commits it to jumping into water so that it can be born. So it comes out of the body of this grasshopper that's drowning and begins its life. Dude, there's a ton of those. There's another one called toxoplasmosis. The reason why they tell women to stop, you can't touch cat litter because some insane amount of feral cats have toxoplasmosis, like probably all of them. Speaking of grasshoppers, I know for most of my life, I didn't know that grasshoppers and locusts were the same thing. I didn't either until a few years ago when we're looking at swarms. Yeah. Like what'd they call it? When the great plains, when that was happening,

like when people lost all their crops. It's like a numbers thing, right? Or some hormonal switch. They get into some mode. Yeah. Well, that exists in mammals, too, man. It exists in pigs. With pigs, when they let a pig loose.

Like, you see a cute little pig that you see. Oh, he's so sweet. You let that motherfucker loose, he will become a wild boar. And it happens quickly I believe it happens the the metamorphosis starts to take place within like six weeks or something see if you find that But what happens is the a body sends a signal to the or the mind says the signals of the body or some some of the System knows that you're on your own now motherfucker So your whole body changes. Your snout extends.

The males grow tusks. They get furry, thicker hair. They literally become a wild boar. I used to think a wild boar was a different thing. No, it's the same thing. Wow. It's one genus. It's Sue Scroffa.

It's one specific animal. If you domesticate it, it's cute and it's babe. It's the pig. If you don't, it's this fucking plague of mammals that can have three litters a year. It starts having a litter when it's six months old. Within a couple of years, they're 200 pounds and they eat constantly. And all they do is eat and fuck and make more pigs. And they're smart.

Wow. Yeah. Wow. Yeah. Wow. So we know that these things are fucking dangerous. And if we're monkeying around with nature. But also we know that there have been medical interventions. There's been medical technology. There's been research that's done that's enhanced people's lives, saved people's lives, rescued people from fatal diseases.

And to cast light on the entire pharmaceutical industry that it's like this horrible monster of a thing that's destroying lives. No, no, no, no, no, no, no. What it is is a bunch of people that are, like you're saying, scientists who figure things out because it's cool. And they get married to people who just want to make money. And so they're stock market psychos. And there's a lot of psychos out there. And the psychos say, okay, we got this thing and we're making X, but I think we can get to Z. We just got to get this guy to say this and this regulation to pass and then we're in Z. And this guy is thinking himself doing coke off a stripper's ass on a yacht. That's what he's thinking of. He's not thinking of saving the world, but the scientists

that are making all this stuff, they're just fucking scientists. And part of the problem with getting the money attached to the regulatory body and attached to the scientists is because then there's someone who doles out the funding, and maybe that guy is connected to the regulatory body, and attached to the scientists, that's because then there's someone who doles out the funding. And maybe that guy is connected to the money side. And maybe that guy was actually a doctor. And now you've got this crazy situation when these doctors can't even tell the truth. The scientists can't tell the truth. They can't talk openly about the reservations that they have

about some of these specific types of research that they're doing. Like, hey, should we be doing this? They can't say anything. They can't because they're doing like hey should we be doing this they can't say anything they can't because they're connected to the and if they get ostracized from that system they're fucked their career is fucked there's no recourse they don't have anything to fall back on so we've got a system much like our governmental system with much like our media that's captured by money and it's not that the journalists are bad people It's just that's the fucking game they're playing. That's the game they're playing.

Well, I think that the journalists, most of the journalists I know aren't necessarily captured themselves by money, but they may be captured by ideology and groupthink. Yes, there's a lot of that, I'm sure. Yeah. But so for example, on the money end, I was astounded that it was not widely reported

and that you have to get to someone like RFK Jr. to tell you this, that the NIAID had a financial stake in the Moderna vaccine. Yeah. How much money did they make off of it? One of the payments was like several hundred million dollars. That was one lump sum. Well, that's not enough to affect the way people think. You don't think so?

No, that's not enough to affect the way. I'm kidding. I couldn't tell. I couldn't tell. I'm sorry. I was like, what the fuck? I can't help myself. It's just so crazy.

Hundreds of millions of dollars. I think one lump sum was like 400 million. That's not that much. That's not that much. That's just a little taste. Right. So when I see the director of the NIAID, Anthony Fauci, former director, talk about the Moderna vaccine, as a journalist, great journalism does and pressure test everything he says. Demand the documents on everything he says. And what he says may turn out to be right. I don't assume it's wrong, but that should be the job of mainstream journalists is to pressure test everything.

When you don't do it, my point is it's left to the RFK juniors of the world who end up getting certain things very wrong because they're that's one person right it's not what they do and and so for example there was there were like i told you i was really going through all the claims in rfk juniors book because some of them are just insane turn out to be true some of them are insane turn out not to be true what did you find that wasn't true so for example example, he said that he cited a study. He said that the, uh, the diphtheria, uh, the DTP vaccine in the 1970s hurt or killed one out of 300 kids. So I clicked on the study. I read every single sentence of the study twice down. There was nothing in there that said one, one in 300. What was the data that they gave?

It didn't even give a clear number, and the numbers you could piece together were orders of magnitude smaller than that. And I was surprised to find that. Is that due to a lack of data? There's an assumption that the VAERS system is grossly underreported, correct? Yeah. Yeah. There's a, but you know, yes. Is that an assumption? Is that proven? I think so. I think that, I think that checks out. But with this claim, he was citing a specific study and he put it right there and it just wasn't in the study, right? Right. So you have to use the

actual data that's in the study, right? So if you're saying a study showed that, or if you're just saying Hotez? Yeah, Peter Hotez. If you're an expert on this and you have this guy that you're saying total misinformation, he's got every single one of the claims he made on your show in one of his books with a footnote. Peter Hotez, if this is his job and this is important to him, should absolutely spend the time. What could be more important, right? If you're saying that I'm an expert in this and this guy's dangerous for the world, you can't then say, well, I don't have time to go in his book and click on every footnote and show showing receipts for why he's wrong about everything. That was a total cop out of him to say, oh, this is not worth

my time. You can't debate a conspiracy theorist. I don't think any of that is true. Well, I think he's very anxious. And, you know, let me tell you my history with Peter Hotez, because I met Peter Hotez in, like, 2012. I had him on an episode of Joe Rogan Questions Everything, and we were talking about viruses. And I found him to be a really fascinating, very intelligent man who's dedicated his life to trying to help people specifically of tropical diseases, because there's a real issue

in tropical disease. He was telling me that people that live in tropical climates, like the vast majority of them have some kind of parasites, you know, which is just, you know, and, and what he wanted to talk about was that I think when COVID came along, there was this psychological angst that was overwhelming, even to people that are fairly good at keeping their shit together. Like, I think of myself as someone who's pretty good at keeping my shit together. I don't freak out too much about things. And so with COVID, I was like, all right, well, I guess this is a real thing. And we're going to have to, you know, hole up in the house

for a while and two weeks to flatten the curve and make sure we have food and power. He started thinking about things like, okay, if I needed to get food for my family, if I needed to get out of here, how much gas do I need? Like there's a real air. There's a feeling in the air where like, okay, we're in an unprecedented state of the unknown and chaos. And this could get worse. Like this virus could mutate into something that's just killing everybody. That level of anxiety prompts people to look for solutions that are very binary. And it prompts people to dig their heels into what their decision is to do this.

Like, should we go into the basement in the horror movie? Or should we get the fuck out of here? I think we should get the fuck out of here. We've got to go in the basement. We've got to go in the basement. There's these decisions that people make in these traumatic situations. Like, do we hide? Do we run?

What do we do? And when they have a decision that they've made, like the decision, there's only one decision. This decision is this, we have to take this one vaccine. That's the only thing that we can do. And everybody starts thinking, okay, well, we have a solution. And everybody that's opposed to that, you're fucking it up. You're fucking it up for everybody. And I think that was the feeling in the air.

And I certainly felt that when CNN was saying I was taking horse dewormer. Like when I was being attacked for taking that. When I said that I was taking monoclonal antibodies and IV vitamins and all these other things too. I was just saying this is what I took and now I'm better. Thank you. I got to cancel my shows. That's all it was. It wasn't some political declaration or some anti-vaccine. It was just, there was a reality of what I took. I told everybody what I took, but there's this feeling from everybody, you're fucking this up. You're

going to make sure people don't do it because people wanted to believe that there was a way out of this that was very binary very simple this this is the this is our solution everybody get on board everybody who's not on board is ruining it for the world and you saw the fucking cruel way people would talk people who think of themselves as compassionate progressive people, right? Progressives, left-wing people. The worst thing about unvaccinated people dying because they didn't trust pharmaceutical drug companies that are captured by money and the media that is captured by them, their money and the regulatory, the fact that people were just unwilling to look at the big picture because they wanted that fucking solution.

And I think when you're a person who's on the side of that solution and you're genuinely doing work to try to solve real problems that people have with parasites and diseases and all these different things, and then you're getting attacked. And then it turns out that, man, maybe a lot of the shit you said wasn't right. Now you're kind of stuck because you don't want to debate this because even though you probably did it for all the right reasons you look at the actual effectiveness and whether or not it actually did what it was what was promised to do it didn't do any of those things and it did certainly cause some adverse

problems in people that may or may not have had any problem with covet they might have gotten over it quickly like I did. So now you're fucked. Now you're fucked. And now you're in this situation where you kind of have to defend it all the time. And to go on a debate and talk about that, you would be so filled with anxiety. Because it brings us back to what the decisions that people make during times of extreme crisis. We always want to think that the evil things that people have done in the past, false flag events and all these different things that people have done in the past in order to start wars so that they can make more money.

We want to think that that stops. Like, oh, we don't do that anymore. We don't do that. It's a childlike impulse that i personally experienced when i was a young boy when i was a young boy we were living in san francisco and my mom and my stepdad were hippies and we lived in this like very progressive very like hippie area and when the vietnam war ended everybody was so happy. And there was this feeling. And I said to myself, I remember saying, Oh, this is so good. There's not going to be any wars. They figured out the wars are bad. I remember thinking this when I guess I was like 10 or 11 or something like that. Okay. There's no more war. Thank God. Like, cause I don't want to go to war

and end of history fallacy. Yeah. My stepdad, he, he didn't get drafted. He got lucky, but I knew people that went and I knew people that went and came back, and they were fucked up. And I was terrified as a young boy, terrified of being forced to go to war because that was the reality of the time. And you think that, well, that doesn't happen anymore. You know, all that, you know, golf a tonkin shit and all the, they don't do that anymore. They don't do that anymore. They don't do that anymore.

That's like people figured that out. They don't. So have you been paying attention to Israel? I've been paying attention. Yeah. Yeah. I have to. How could you not be?

Yeah. Yeah. It's terrifying. It's very terrifying. It's very, very scary stuff. What is your view on it? I wish I knew. Well, view on it? I Wish I knew

Well, first of all, I wish I knew how they didn't know that those people are gonna do that Because I don't want to talk about intelligence because I don't know what I'm talking about So if I start saying that the you know the the government like that they would have had the capability of to make sure that none of those things took place and that they had infiltrated these organizations and they did get accurate information from that and they were – I don't – I have – that would just be complete armchair speculation from someone who's not qualified. So I can give you what the leading theory is of how the hell this happened. Okay. please do. Right now, the belief is that, and I think we'll know more about this in a few years, that a few things happen all at the same time. It's a perfect storm. First,

Hamas has been planning this attack for two years. And one of the leaders of Hamas actually said that they've been strategically lulling Israel to sleep by making it seem like they're no longer interested in a conflict the past two years. And Israel, even just a week before the attack, allowed more Gazans to come over the border and work in Israel as basically a reward for good behavior, right? They thought Hamas has gone into this mode where they're more concerned about the economics of the Gaza Strip than about attacking Israel. So Israel was asleep at the wheel. Israel also had transferred a lot of IDF that would normally be at the Gaza border to the West Bank. It was also the Sabbath. It was also a major holiday.

It was also the Sabbath. It was also a major holiday. It's also, they've had the biggest protests in a generation, almost the same way America was during 2020. Israel has been for the past several months over their judicial reform. So you put it all together. Can you go into that a little bit, please? Yeah. So basically the judicial reform in Israel, Israel is not like the United States. They don't have a constitution. They don't have this kind of really beautiful genius system of checks and balances that we have where, you know, the president can veto the Congress and the Supreme Court has a check on everyone, right? And everyone keeps each other in check. Israel just has a single parliament, they call the Knesset, a prime minister that has a lot of control over that parliament because he leads the majority coalition. So basically in Israel, the president and their Congress have a lot more power than in America. Historically, the Supreme Court doesn't have

the power to say no to them. But over the past 30 years, the Supreme Court has been basically grabbing more power for itself under these things called basic laws, where they can now say to the Knesset, no, you cannot implement that policy in the West Bank. it violates human rights, they have more powers to check the majority party. And that's come to a head now because the Supreme Court is perceived as left-wing and sympathetic to the Palestinians. Just like in America right now, the Supreme Court is perceived as right-wing. And Benjamin Netanyahu is obviously Likud. He's the right wing party. And he's gone into coalition with these ultra kind of right wing religious. And so it's come to a head where basically the right in Israel feels the Supreme Court is just expanding its own power and is anti-democratic. And now they want to, judicial reform is basically stripping the Supreme Court of the power it's grabbed for

itself over the past 30 years. Now, the left in Israel views the Supreme Court as the only protection against human rights violations and violations of minority rights. So the left feels the Supreme Court is a great defender of Israeli human rights. So the left feels the Supreme Court is a great defender of Israeli human rights. And the right feels that the Supreme Court is an undemocratic institution that's been expanding its own power for 30 years and now needs to be reined in so that the majority can govern. That's torn apart the country. It's absolutely the number one issue every day, protests all over Israel. So you put all this together with Hamas backed by Iran, and you also throw in the fact that Israel and Saudi Arabia are on the verge of a peace deal, which is huge. It would be the biggest

news in the Middle East in a very long time if Israel and Saudi Arabia made peace. It would basically put kind of the death nail in the coffin for Hamas because Saudi Arabia is the biggest holdout now in terms of who has not made peace with Israel. So Hamas, from the point of view of Hamas and Iran, they think this is a last chance, kind of. We have to attack now, kill this deal, or we're dead forever. And they planned this thing meticulously for two years, intentionally lulling the Israelis to sleep. And they have brilliant success, much more success than they expected to. Now, some people have said it's an inside job. I don't believe it is. I think if it is, we'll know that from reporting that comes out

in the next two years. But at this point, I believe the theory that it was an incredibly successful attack by Hamas and a perfect storm. Well, that all connects and makes sense, if that's the case. What's terrifying is that doesn't seem...what's always terrified me about the Middle East is that there doesn't seem to be a clear way to resolve this. I mean, if Saudi Arabia and Iran or rather Israel came to some sort of an agreement and made peace and were able to establish that long term, that'd be a great step in the right direction. But other than that, like when you look at what's happened now,

oh my God, the rhetoric from both sides, it's just didn't we learn anything from World War II? Didn't we learn anything from the Holocaust? Didn't we learn anything from human beings' ability to other human beings to just turn them into a thing that's not them, dehumanize them? And that there's this impulse to do so that existed forever because when we were tribal people that probably barely had a language, you had to be absolutely terrified of marauding male tribes that came over your border and wanted to kill you and take your resources and steal your women because that's what they did. And so we have this ability to look at other human beings as an other and get ruthless and horrifyingly violent because that was the only way for us to survive for thousands of years.

So it's ingrained in our system. But now it exists in the context of global war. And it exists in a time where you can manipulate media and spread false narratives. And governments are allowed to use propaganda. They're allowed to lie to people if it's for the overall better good of the nation. It's wild. And that's the root of the issue. The root of the issue is how every human being sort of reluctantly admits that there's almost

no way to stop all wars. Right now, if you had a magic solution to stop all wars in the world, what would it be? It doesn't exist. That's terrifying because the thing that we are scared of the most is global thermonuclear war the thing that everybody should be the most terrified of that we get so stupid that we wipe Every human being off the face of the planet and we're more than capable of doing it some insane number of times over and that They're playing with the very first steps of that game They've moved the first pawn out onto the chessboard of the global thermonuclear war chess game that is fuck the world yeah everybody every single nation that's involved in any every conflict and

all these people controlling resources over a group of gigantic people with their their representative and they're saying these people are the bad people and they're saying you're the bad people that's it's just like human beings have always done. It's literally a part of our system. So I agree with you that we are built and hardwired for deep levels of violence. Those of us that have been lucky enough to live in safety and security,

we may not realize the violence we're capable of because we've never had to survive. Right. But I do believe that there is a difference. You mentioned the lessons of World War II, right? We were capable of violence. Hitler was capable of violence, but we were not the same as Hitler. Right. There was an imperative for us to defeat him at almost any cost. And we did horrible things in that war. But people understand that there was a good side and there was an evil side. Yes. Now, I don't know if you or most of your listeners feel this way about Israel, but I do. I think that in this situation, Israel is the good guy and Hamas is the evil guy. I think some people feel Hamas is just acting like anyone would if you had taken their land and their

freedom fighters that go a little bit overboard. I don't think that's what they are. I think they are a death cult that really believes what they write in their charter in the late 80s, that they want to annihilate every single Jew in Israel and replace it with an Islamic state and eventually have a state like ISIS. And that what they did on October 7th with the barbaric slaughter, that's the point for them. That is what they want to do to all of Israel. And the difference is that Israel, though like the American army, there's been many excesses, much to criticize. If Israel wanted to annihilate Hamas and the Palestinians the same way Hamas wants to annihilate Israel, Hamas would be gone and there would be no Palestinians in Gaza. We know that Israel could obliterate them overnight. Why don't they? Well, for mixed reasons, but because they don't want to. They want to live in peace fundamentally. And so I don't think the two sides are equivalent here, though they're both

capable of that universal among humans, which is cruelty. I don't think these two sides are the same. I really think this is a situation where there is a good guy and a bad guy. What solution could possibly be created that would somehow or another calm this down at this point? After that attack, it's so horrifying. But then the response is horrifying too. Who knows how many civilians have died in Gaza? Yeah.

So we're terrified of both. And then there's this narrative that, what was the thing with the hospital? Oh yeah. So this has been going on the past 48 hours. Basically what happened, what happened is the entire media, the Gaza health ministry,

which is run by Hamas, said that Israel just bombed a hospital and killed 500 people. The entire media ran with this story. New York Times, BBC, everyone said 500 killed in Israeli airstrike on hospital. And obviously this is monstrous if so, right? This is why would Israel bomb a hospital? If so, right, this is why would Israel bomb a hospital? Israel is known to have at least a policy of not bombing hospitals because Israel feels that it wants to out 100% the hospital wasn't bombed. It was the parking lot next to the hospital.

So that was the first inaccuracy in the story. Then it turned out it's very, very unlikely to be an Israeli airstrike and was almost certainly not a Hamas rocket, but a Palestinian Islamic Jihad. This is the other Palestinian terror group in Gaza. They launched a bunch of rockets. One of them was a dud and landed in the hospital parking lot. And this is on video. Al Jazeera showed the video by accident. And that's part of how it's been confirmed.

What do you mean by accident? So they were showing this in real time. I think it happened at like 6.59 exactly. 649 or 659 they were showing live footage of or footage they had they had just taken of of a bunch of rockets leaving the gaza strip to go to israel and one of the rockets you could see it was it was screwy it kind of up, and then you see a big explosion in Gaza right at that time. Turns out that's the exact time the hospital allegedly blew up. So that's how they knew it was a rocket from inside, an accidental rocket from inside Gaza rather than the Israelis airstriking it. air striking it. So then all the New York Times, BBC, they all started slowly changing their headlines from 500 killed in Israeli airstrike to 500 killed in blast to, at this point,

they may be saying parking lot next to hospital killed only 50 to 100 people. This is still an evolving story and we're talking on Thursday thursday so by the time this actually hit the hospital itself it hit the parking lot next to the hospital and did damage to the hospital the latest is that it the hospital's still standing and it was only the parking lot next to the hospital and all a bunch of cars may have exploded as well so that's the latest because they have pictures now the next day they took pictures in the hospitals there. I thought they had photos of the hospital that was bombed out. The New York Times, when they reported it first, they showed a picture of a different place in Gaza that was destroyed by an Israeli airstrike, not the hospital.

Oh, my God. Yeah. Yeah. So this is now, you know, I think there's an emerging consensus that it was a parking lot, probably not 500 people, probably more like 50 or 100, which is, again, tragic. Every life is tragic. But that basically the legacy media took Hamas's word as fact and then has had to backpedal. Did you see the Babylon bees joke about that? What did they say? See if you can find it. Babylon bees. I can't still can't say X,

X page. Yeah, I know. I'm still Twitter. I'm right at that point where I'm transitioning to saying X without saying former Twitter. I just keep saying Twitter. It's Twitter,

you know, sorry, Elon. He really has an obsession with X. Also, it's like, are you sending an X? Or are you sending a tweet? Everyone says he tweeted. You don't say he X'd.

It just doesn't sound right. Yeah, it doesn't make sense. But he can do whatever the fuck he wants. Yeah, that's true. So what was the Babylon Bees? The Babylon Bees had a funny thing about the New York Times and Hamas. There's something from two hours ago? I don't know.

I saw it on my Instagram earlier today when I was embarrassed to be looking at my Instagram. Why embarrassed? I'm tired of it. I just stopped being connected. My new phone has no apps on it. Oh, yeah, yeah, yeah. New York Times patiently awaiting Zoom call from Hamas to see what they should print today. Yeah, so this is

about the hospital. That is, the Babylon Bee, thank God they exist. They disprove the idea that it's only left-wing people that are funny. That is not true. The Babylon Bee is, they out

onion the onion often. They're amazing. They're much better than the onion. The onion used to be great. It is not true. The Babylon Bee is, they out onion the onion often. They're amazing. They're much better than the onion. The onion used to be great. It still is good. They still knock it out of the park every now and again. But they're young, progressive liberals constrained by a certain ideology that doesn't allow them to poke fun at certain things. You know how much fun they could have with the trans issue?

They can't touch it. They can't touch it with the trans issue? They can't touch it. Rachel Levy, they can't touch it. Leave it alone. Get out of there. It's too hot. But you asked earlier, what is the solution to this? Yes. Look, I mean, we're not going to solve the Middle East here, but if I'm Israel

right now, I'm thinking we have to destroy Hamas. The same way when we were bombed during Pearl Harbor, nobody thought, well, what's the diplomatic solution to Japan? We thought, these people want to destroy us. We have to destroy them. There are some situations that can be resolved at the negotiating table, but there are others that have to be resolved through war because one side is committed to the destruction of the other. And you can only get to the negotiating table when you've retaliated militarily. Yeah, that's terrifying.

That's a terrifying thought. Wow. That's terrifying. That's a terrifying thought. What do you think of all, like, what was the latest pro-Hamas, pro-Palestine protest? There's been so many of them. Yeah, they had to shut down Columbia University, my alma mater. There's been a lot of them, yeah. What are they saying? Like, what is their main perspective on this? Their main perspective is that Israelis are colonizers in the Middle East. Uh, that, that Israelis are not the indigenous people. It's settler colonialism, colonialism, and that

resistance is justified and that we ought to side with the resistance. We ought to side with the resistance even when they go overboard. That's their basic perspective in a nutshell. Going overboard, that is a crazy way to justify paratrooping into a rave and just murdering people. Yeah, execution style. And rape and murder and torture and killing kids and explosions.

And I was reading about these parents who were trying to find their son. They were hoping their son was still alive, but that he had gotten his arm shot off by a machine gun. He was in a bunker and then he was captured. He was in some sort of a bomb shelter and captured him. And they have no idea where he is they hope he's okay yeah like this just the horrific idea that some peaceful civilian could just be targeted like you know like you would shoot a monster you know not even not even an animal you know you shoot an animal eat it yeah it's like a monster like just just gun that monster down, leave it where it is. It's so scary that people are still willing to do things like that. But it is real. That's what we have to all understand. Like you can have these utopian perspectives of how you think the world should be. And I side with a lot of what they think about the inequality of the world.

I just have different solutions than them. My solution is not redistribution of wealth. My solution is figure out what's wrong with communities and rebuild them. and money to try to solve these crises that have led to so many people coming out of these places and just being fucked from the jump and having no examples of people living good lives, no examples of people that are involved in crime, and just being swarmed by negativity and bad influences constantly. And the fact that we expect these people to rise past that is complete and total insanity. I agree. And almost always perpetrated by people that just like you were talking about, people that have experienced peace most of their life, they have no idea that violence is inside of them

or what violence really is. It's the same sort of thing. It's people that grew up where they really never had to worry about money. Maybe they weren't rich, but they weren't starving to death. They didn't have to worry about someone shooting them every day

or killing their parents when they were on the way home from working or whatever the fuck the problem was but for a large percentage of what we Supposedly think of as a community which is the United States. We should think of ourselves as a big community We've ignored people that are fucked It's like there's there's places that are just fucked and we have to do something to fix that if you don't do something to fix that You're gonna keep this disparity you're gonna keep this problem and the problem is far more

it's it's more solid solvable than so many other things that we try to tackle like we're trying to figure out how to cool the earth down like like that's great too but let's fucking figure out how to make the country a better place Instead of just like just saying the rich people with a problem There's a lot of problems with rich people. There's a lot of problems with influence There's a lot of problems that people that have the ability to change Laws and people have the ability to sell you things that they know will kill you They know you're gonna kill a certain number of you, and they can still sell them to you. They can just say, hey, some may believe it's not addictive.

Right. Yay. And then they cut it loose. Well, here's the thing. People like to throw money at every problem. Yes. But they don't love to see how the money is being spent. So, for example, we could use Hamas as the example. So much money has been thrown at the Gaza Strip, and they use it instead of to build buildings and build water pipes,

they dig up the water pipes and build rockets to go to Israel, right? But you could also... Use the water pipes as rockets? Yeah, they make pipes into rockets. No way. Yeah, yeah. They have a video of

one of their own propaganda videos where they show themselves doing this um and billions of dollars has been billions has been thrown by by europe by america at helping the gazans uh because they are living in conditions that are indescribably horrible. Just a third world doesn't even justify how Gazans are living. But they're living under a terrorist party that actually doesn't care whether they live or die, because any Palestinian that dies from an Israeli airstrike, they go straight to heaven, according to Hamas. So Hamas, and they genuinely believe this. This is why I think people in the West,

they don't remember what it's like to truly believe in religion because the West has been pretty much secularized at this point, outside of some pockets. People that still believe in religion really believe it. Like during the Iran-Iraq war, the Iranians, they would send 13-year-old, 12-year-old boys over to be cannon fodder. They would throw them at Saddam Hussein

and they would give them a key around their necks to get them into heaven. And the boys believed it. You have to realize that people really believe these kinds of things and you can't, so many people analyze the situation without putting themselves really in the shoes of a true believer. Yeah. That's a very, very important point. And in this country, when we connect, when we start talking about true believers, point. And in this country, when we connect, when we start talking about true believers, we really talk about the negative ones. We talk about like Westboro Baptist Church type stuff.

We talk about, you know, the worst aspects of cult-like behavior that comes from some organized religions and fanatical organized religions. So intelligent people in this country, you know, I i mean there was the big atheist movement that existed for quite a while it seems to have kind of like they've kind of dissipated into something else right you know i noticed that yeah but that movement of this this rejection of organized religion and this sort of because the atmosphere that most of these academics exist in, most media people exist in, and most people that live in big cities exist in, is that there's a sort of kind of wholesale dismissiveness

that's attached to organized religion. There is. And so because of that, they don't have the context, much like people that have never experienced violence, don't have the context of violence. When I see people talking about openly advocating for military interventions, things like who you are, you going to go do it? You want to go risk your face getting shot off because of information that may or may not be bullshit? You who's going to go? Oh, you want people other than you to

go and represent what you think of is the good thing because you don't know these people and if they die it doesn't feel like anything to you but those people have families and those people have children and there's got to be a way that we minimize the amount of violence in the world specifically the amount of violence it doesn't make any sense and this kind of violence in the world, specifically the amount of violence that doesn't make any sense. And this kind of violence doesn't make any sense. It's fucking terrifying. And if you have true believers

that don't think it's terrifying and think it makes total sense, and you don't realize that people like that exist in the world, that that is a real thing. That's always been a real thing. That was the Nazis. That is a real thing. It's always been a real thing. That was the Nazis. That is a real thing.

It's also most of human history, to your point. Yes, most of human history. You know, was Genghis Khan afraid of violence? Did he ever consider that violence was... So if you're dealing with someone who comes... or a group of people that... basically a cult that... perpetuates that kind of mindset,

that raises people... you know, the older brother raises his younger brother to believe that from day one, right? Yeah. You can't address that like we would want to address, I don't know, if we had some dispute with Britain nowadays. There's also this solidarity in this, there's a community aspect that can't be ignored where people want to be a part of something big and when you connect a Person who might have very dire circumstances otherwise like the world around them is very bleak, but you connect them to this group of people that are also committed to this This group of people that are also committed to this quest that they believe is righteous and in God's will, that God wants this to take place and that this is their directive on earth.

You can talk people into things, man. You know, we've all seen wild, wild country. We've all seen documentaries on cults. Human beings are extremely malleable. I mean, it's not like all the people that move to the cities just decided to move there because they're Democrats. Like, I'm a Democrat. I'm going to move to where the other Democrats are and find my people. That's not what's going on. There's a hive mind aspect to human beings that just can't be ignored because we don't want to be ostracized socially. We don't want to be kicked out of the tribe.

So we're terrified of stepping out of line. And so when you are in a terrible situation, you're much more likely to believe that someone put you there. You're much more likely to believe that someone put you there you're much more likely to believe that there's an oppressor you're much more likely to believe that that that person's taking from you if that's what you're told from the time you were young and you're you're told that the solution is to become a martyr and you're gonna get to go to heaven you can talk people into that with no options oh yeah it's not it is not, it is real. It's a real thing.

And I don't know how to re-engineer that. I don't know how to solve that. The truth is, I think... Once people have already been down that path. I think most of the solutions have been missed. I think that's the hard truth. Mm-hmm. That, you know, the land was partitioned

between an Israel and Palestinian state in 1947 the Palestinians rejected the partition and that was an attacked and that was the war of independence that was an opportunity for a solution there's an opportunity when it was occupied by Jordan and Egypt for them to create a Palestinian state, but it wasn't in their interest, so they didn't do it. There was an opportunity in 2000 was the closest opportunity when Yasser Arafat and Ehud Barak met at Camp David with Clinton, and Arafat walked away. And the difference between now and then is that Israeli society is now moving more

and more to the right. And what that means in Israel is less and less are they seeking a two-state solution compared to 2000 or 2008 when two-state solutions were offered. So, and part of the reason Israeli society is moving to the right is because the ultra-Orthodox, or what we call Hasidic often in America, in New York, they have communities in Brooklyn. They have six kids per family, something like that. And so they started out as a tiny minority in Israel 75 years ago. And now a third, a third of kids under a certain age might be 18 are ultra orthodox and they have more right wing views. They're generally more pro settling the West Bank anti two state solution. So I fear that the, that the Palestinian side rejected the only options, the only times that they were offered a state and that those offers are not going to be forthcoming again in the future because of how Israeli society is changing.

And so it's a very grim situation because it seems like it it there's no solution, no solution that does not involve horrible bloodshed and there's horrors from both sides that's another thing that people need to look at they they need to stop this idea that there's good guys and bad guys because there's there's things that people do when the other side is the enemy that are absolutely horrific on both sides. It's always been the case. It's natural. It's not like everyone on side A is pure. No, they're all humans.

And when you're dealing with a group of people that want you dead and you want them dead. They do horrible things. Like Abby Martin, who was on my podcast, talked about her experience going back and forth from Israel to Palestine, how scary it was talking to people that had been shot by soldiers and people that people were shot in the dick on purpose and crazy shit. Like that's real too. That's real too. You mean from the Palestinian side? No, from the Israeli side. Doing it to Palestinians. Oh yeah. No, that's what too. That's real too. You mean from the Palestinian side? No, from the Israeli side, doing it to Palestinians. Oh yeah, no, that's what I mean.

Yes. Yes, absolutely. That's real too. Yeah. So it's, you know, Israelis are human beings, just like all human beings. And human beings have good ones and bad ones. And they have people that do horrible things in horrible times. I mean, there was a guy once,

oh God, I forget the story. I think he was running for some office and they labeled him as like a war hero. And he was kind of running with it. And then I believe he dropped out and then just started admitting the horrific things that he had to do during Vietnam I think it involved I don't even want to say see if you do you know that story Jamie I forget exactly what he said so I want to keep going no but I totally agree like

every army that's ever waged war has done horrible things and and they not that they all do the same extent of horrible things some are really worse than others but none are none are saints i don't think there's ever been an army that just truly behaved like a saint no down the last man. It's not real. It's not possible. I think that is, to your point, a fantasy standard that outsiders who've never had to get their hands dirty to survive,

you know, but obviously it's a standard we should ideally want to hold people to. We should encourage the world's armies to behave better. But if a country is going to wage a just war, if you're going to say you have the right to wage war in this situation, I don't think that can be revoked the second you find a soldier that does something horrible. Because by that logic, we could not wage World War II. Right. That's important to talk about.

And that's going to happen. Israeli soldiers are going to do the worst stories I think are yet to come. And we can have sympathy for the Palestinians without saying that Israel has no right to retaliate. That's my point of view on it, at least. Well, that's a balanced perspective. And, you know, I wish I knew more about the history of that conflict to see if there's any way that they could change the way they interact with each other, but I just don't. And so, it's just one of those things where you just see it playing out, you feel so helpless.

It's made me so anxious. Sometimes at nighttime, I think about Ukraine and Russia, and I think about what's going on right now with Israel and Palestine, and I get so terrified. I get so terrified of the possibility of it just going off the rails. and then nukes being on the table because i just i know we haven't used one since 1945 but i feel like that is one of those things when you look at history like the invention of the bow and arrow the invention of the atlatl

oh it's 2 000 years later there's a how long for someone shot someone with it did they wait a while you know was it a few years like was it a few months before someone shot someone with an arrow once they first invented it just because it's been let's go to 100 years in overall history of human beings 100 years ain't shit if you look at the 1700s do you really think there's a big differentiation between 1720 and 1790 or is there that much of a difference i bet there's not i bet i bet if someone did something today with the nuclear bomb history would look at it the same way we look at every other thing that takes place over long periods of time oh then there was an invention of the wheel and then x amount of years later they put a

fucking gun on top of that thing started mowing people down and this is just just blips in time we're just in the middle of it so we think well mutually assured destruction is what's kept us from dying but has it or is it or we just waiting are we waiting for this fucking stupid game this chess game? To reach a point where it's checkmate reach a point where someone flips the table over because that's if you're dealing with people that aren't afraid to die and you're dealing with people that are Willing to kill everyone that opposes them because they genuinely think they're doing the will of God, they get a hold of a nuke. Like, if they're willing to kill,

I've always said this, how many people is it acceptable to kill in one shot? Like, if you say they bombed and killed thousands, well, that number seems to be reasonable for us. We're like, well, thousands of people died in 9-11 too, and that sucks, and that's really awful that thousands of people are dying. But if someone dumps a nuke and it kills a million people instantly, is that more horrific?

To them. To us, it scares the shit out of us because of mutually assured destruction. But is that more horrific to someone who really believes they're doing the right thing? If it's okay to kill a thousand people look if you're like thanos right this is why thanos was such an amazing villain is because you could see deep in his mind he felt he was a monk like a monk for good and that he had to snap half the universe out of existence to save the world right he's a true believer he wasn't just some guy that's you you know. Right. Well, eugenics. When people talk about eugenics, like if you were not a human being, if you were raising like an animal and you wanted to do a very specific task, like dogs, for instance, you don't let the ones that are fucked up breed. Right.

Right? So you could see how someone who has no sense of humanity and no compassion for human beings that are unfortunate, you could see how they would say, well, you got to kill them. It's a creepy, scary conclusion to like what your problem, your solution is. But you could see how a sociopath or a psychopath would go in that direction. Well, we're going to have bottom up eugenics very soon, as opposed to top down eugenics being the government deciding who gets to procreate and not based on racist ideas or anything like that. We're going to have very soon, like I think within the easily within the next three years. And you know, you, you and your wife with a, getting a bunch of embryos, 15 or 20 embryos, doing polygenic analysis on those embryos and telling you which ones are going to turn out taller, which ones are going to turn out smarter, which ones are going to turn out

less likely to be depressed. If you have a history of schizophrenia in your family, we can tell you that correlates with this this set of genes and this one's less likely so you're scoring your own embryos which people already do but now they just score it based on what's the biggest embryo which is is that what they do yeah like they you you prefer the bigger embryo because it's there may be some scientific reason why it's like maybe healthier or something what if it's like that dude from Mice and Men? He was big. That might have been the way to go, kids. It might not be just bigger.

They have some reason, but they're going to get very precise with it very soon because of polygenic analysis. Well, and then there's CRISPR, which they've already used in China, and they supposedly jailed the scientists that did it. What they were saying they were doing is they were uh doing something with a gene to make people uh impervious to AIDS but what what really was going on is they were making them smarter yeah see where you find

that because I know I butchered that if you're a scientist out there sorry so in China they're doing this they did it they did it they did Yeah. Wow. And I believe the international response was, you know, people were pretty scared that this kind of stuff is going on. But here it is. China's CRISPR twins might have had their brains inadvertently enhanced. It was a mistake. Guys, we're just trying to kill this thing that doesn't really kill any people anymore. New research suggested a controversial gene editing experiment to make children resistant, not even immune, resistant to HIV

may have also enhanced their ability to learn and form memories. Yeah. You don't think that's an accident? I'm sure it's on purpose, but... I would hope it's on purpose. It sounds like a great accident. Yeah, it does sound good.

Look, if you're a parent, after your kid is born, you're going to spend who knows how many thousands of dollars. If you send them to private school, you're going to send them $20,000 a year for some fancy private school to make them smarter and happier. But you wouldn't invest a little time

at the beginning and effort at the beginning to make them smarter? Right, especially if it only costs like a couple hundred bucks or something like that. I get that one is icky and sci-fi, but if you remove that element of it and just look at it for what it is, if it's reliable, why would I not want to make my kids smarter? Smarter people live longer, they're happier, et cetera.

That's pretty clear in the data. Is that clear in the day that smarter people live longer i think up to a point smarter people have but you always hear about that guy every other i drank whiskey and smoked cigarettes and i'm 105 years old and i feel fucking great those guys exist too they do what's up with those guys i don't know they they just have i don't know amazing genes other than their brain but actually you know the there is? I don't know. They just have, I don't know. Amazing genes other than their brain. But actually, you know,

there is a, I don't know if you've seen this, but one of the smartest guys in the world, IQ wise, is like a crazy white supremacist.

Really? Yeah, he has like a 190 or something IQ. Wait a minute, are you talking about that guy? They did a documentary on him back in the day,

the smartest man in the world. He was a bouncer. I don't recall whether he was a bouncer or not. Let's make sure that we're not talking about the same guy because I don't want to disparage this guy. But this guy was, they did like a documentary on him. Like he was like a fuck-up all through school, but he was just genius and got moved around a bunch of times.

But, you know, he's a big, thick thick guy he looks like a bouncer this guy man with the world's highest iq christopher langan is gaining a following on the far right so are you saying that this guy is a white supremacist that's what i was uh that's what i read that's what you read where though this is 2019 so they've likened him to alex jones with a thesaurus Langan now in his 60s been a curiosity for nearly 25 years a man who has clocked his own IQ somewhere north of 190 Albert Einstein Einstein wasn't quite there apparently who has mostly worked as a bouncer in a bar never attained any significant professional roles or published any serious academic work he's been the

subject of several profiles from Esquire magazine to Malcolm Gladwell, makes an appearance in Outliers. The documentarian Errol Morris even interviewed Langan. He's an interesting guy. He's very intelligent. Like when you hear him talk, he's obviously able to like retain an incredible amount of information in his brain. But over the years, it says in this article, but over the years he has garnered a following that overlaps considerably with fans of the far right internet content. Okay.

Overlaps doesn't mean he's far right. Right. We can agree to that. He invades against the academic establishment for not accepting his papers about his proprietary theory of everything. He frequently touts his IQ. Okay. So he's got flaws. Inviting the interest of alt-right readers. Okay. What does that mean? Inviting the interest of alt-right readers, just because people read him. I don't like this at all. I'd like them to just quote him. Exactly. This is horseshit. Inviting the interest of all

but by the way, I've read that about me and writers who subscribe to the belief that IQ is racially determined and a sign of racial superiority. Okay, look what he's saying though. He's inviting the interest. He's not saying this. It's saying he's inviting

the interest of people who believe and writers who subscribed to the belief that IQ is racially determined and a sign of racial superiority it's not him saying that it's saying that people who like him think something fucked up one of Langan's posts an obituary for the intelligent gorilla Coco where in Langan suggested the US would do better to admit African gorillas as refugees than African people, was praised by the Daily Stormer, the neo-Nazi blog. So what did he actually say, though? So yeah, this is, you know, I think as I get older, the more and more

suspicious I am when they don't just quote. Right. Because usually if the quote is not knocked down evidence, you put the quote. Yeah, Jamie, I don't think you should click on that because I think that's just the people that believe that IQ is racially determined. No, I was going to find his story that way. Right, but, oh, okay. I would just like to see what his quote was. Yeah, I'll find it. Give me a second.

Because it seems like they would put that quote in there if that quote was so probably yeah it was such a problem why don't but you can't this is why at the end of the day there's no substitute for just listening to the person the words out of their mouth and making up your own mind i don't know if that guy has a 190 iq but he's obviously very intelligent yes when he talks about things he's very smart he's also like a bouncer like he's kind of a hard ass and he's got an ego. You know, he knows he's smart too. Yeah, I don't like that about people. It's uncomfortable, but sometimes...

People that go around telling you their IQ, it's like... I know. It's kind of gross. It's insufferable. It is. But there's also people who are insufferable when they tell you about how well their business does. They're insufferable when they tell you they have a big dick. Whatever it is, people are insufferable.

But it doesn't necessarily mean that they're stupid. It just means that they have flaws. The thing, though, is that smart people can get things very wrong. Yes. Because not all smart people have a good temperament to absorb evidence that doesn't confirm their belief. Not all of them are intellectually honest. So to me, I think IQ is one thing,

but intellectual honesty and general psychological, mental maturity, emotional maturity, two totally different things. Yeah. But isn't it interesting how you, even though you didn't have the information, were saying he was a white supremacist? There you go. Yeah. But isn't it interesting how you, even though you didn't have the information, were saying he was a white supremacist. There you go.

Yeah. So this is something that I fall victim to this too. We all do. I shouldn't just repeat things that I read in one article without having done the primary source stuff. I try not to, but I catch myself doing it too. But it's also a function of, it's part of this thing that you just can't have all the information.

It's not possible, especially when you're talking about all the events and all the things in the world. It's just, you're going to fuck things up. Do you find anything about that guy's quote? There's a lot about him, so I'm trying to dig through that then. I just like to see the quote that he said about African gorillas. I don't think it's actually a quote. He's got a blog where he talks about he's got long right? He writes he's got tons of writings right sub stacks guys been writing for a long time. Yeah, there's so many profiles on him Mm-hmm. There's a videos asking if he's completely made up if all this is bullshit Well, I just think he doesn't have the sort of academic

You know, he doesn't have the sort of academic, you know, he doesn't have PhDs and he's not accepted. So even if he's really intelligent, people are going to dismiss him just because he's not a part of that system. But I want to know what he said that made them say that. Right. Me too. Because I don't like the way they were framing all the things before that where they were saying that people who also believe this like them. You can't do that. Because how many people like them? Like if the guy's got a sub stack that has 100,000 followers and you find a thousand

white supremacists and you say some people like that believe that Jews should be exterminated. Like, come on. Right. That's not him. Like, you can't do that. Like's that's bullshit that's journalism it's your your that's like how a lawyer in a courtroom would grill the other side right it's it's it's that's not journalism no it's not and it's it's uncomfortable because this is something that we all fall prey to and you just

openly admitted that you did you know know, and I have to yeah I read a headline just like oh, that's must be real. Yeah Yeah, I don't know any time there's not enough time in the world to research all the different things that'll freak you out But you were talking about just intelligence in general and the ability to manipulate intelligence in embryos. And I think that this thing with China, where you're saying that it's overall good to increase a child's intelligence, who would say that's not good? Like would you rather your kid be dull-witted?

Like well this Billy could be dull. Or what we can do with CRISPR is by a significant margin, increase his ability to memorize things, and you'd go, oh, yeah, what do I have to do? It's really safe and effective. We're just going to do this little gene editing. And then all of a sudden, Billy's a fucking genius. Of course you would do that.

And that's just the beginning. That's the beginning. We're going to... But then what happens is they mess up once. You know, they make Billyy stupid they make billy billy's maybe billy's a psychopath maybe billy's american psycho he's really smart but he's a fucking evil person right and there's some massive class action lawsuit against one of the companies well the company is now maybe no they'd be immune because it's for the greater good of the human race come on on. Yeah, they'll lobby Congress to make an immune first.

100%. If they've done it with vaccines, they can do it with other things. The precedent's been set. We'll see about that. We'll see about that. Somehow, I don't know. These companies may not have very much power at first. They may have nowhere near as much power as the pharmaceutical lobby. Well, also, what kind of regulations are in place to prohibit this sort of experimentation? I think none so far. That's not good. Yeah. But it's not bad either. I think it's just a function of human beings' creativity,

innovation, and this desire to constantly make things better. And we do that with computers, and we do it with cars, and we do it with everything. We do it with solar panels. We do it with fucking everything. We're going to do it with cars and we do it with everything. We do it with solar panels. We do it with fucking everything. We're going to do it with us. But the thing is, it's like we're going to miss some things. Like there's beauty that comes out of people's tortured experiences

and how it gets expressed in art. And if you eliminate all the negativity of life, you're going to miss out on a lot of things that bring us joy and inspiration. And that's the real conflict. That's what's fucked. Every time you have an ecosystem that has a problem and they introduce an invasive species into the ecosystem to solve the problem. Every time it gets fucked. Unintended consequences. Unintended consequences are off the charts.

Australia is a great example. They brought in feral cats to deal with some of their pest problems. And now feral cats have like decimated ground nesting birds. They make everything extinct. So now they're trying to kill all the cats, right? Yes. People hunt cats in Australia. So when you have like bow hunting journals in America, bow hunting journals in America

where there's like magazines and stuff, people hold up pictures of like a white-tailed deer that they're going to eat. You know, it's like, oh, we got venison for dinner tonight and look at this beautiful buck that we harvested. In Australia, they hold up, some of the magazines hold up dead cats too. Like, look, we got rid of this motherfucker. And it's a house cat. And you're like, yo, that's great.

That's like, for some people, it's like a dog. You know, the way I feel about my dog, some people feel that way about a cat. And to see a cat with a fucking arrow hole through its chest and the guy's holding it up like i did a good thing mate like in that world they've fucked that system up so badly that the cat is now the bad guy the cat is not your little friend like hey buddy what's your body your little friend no now the cat's the bad guy and you can shoot him and take pictures of him. So, it's a question, if we, through gene editing, get rid of schizophrenia, Yeah.

does that also dial the clock down on creativity in general a bit? Who, yeah, who knows? Does a guy like Kanye get born in such a world?

Right. Right. Well, he's a great example of that. Whatever issues he has, I think he thinks now that he's autistic. I think that's what he's been openly saying. But whatever issues he has, that guy is a fucking tornado of creativity. Like his mind is when he wanted to do the podcast. Okay. One of the things he wanted to do is make a set that was a womb and we're going to do it in there. He goes, he was like, your studio is ugly and it's boring. I forget what he said. He said, would you allow me to design your studio?

I go, yeah, do whatever the fuck you want. This is going to be fun. But Jamie got COVID. So it all got thrown into a monkey wrench and we need someone else to engineer it. And so we just did it in my little shitty studio. But that guy is just always trying to think about sustainable housing he's trying to think about new forms of currency he's designing clothes he's writing fucking songs constantly his brain the same thing that makes him blurt out things that are questionable and he probably shouldn't have said it that same brain is responsible for an insane amount of art

i think that's right. Yeah. I think it's true of Elon, too. And when he was medicated, like, he didn't like it. Like, they cut that off. Like, this superpower. It's like telling Superman, like, you have to wear a kryptonite coat. Why? I'm fucking Superman.

I can handle this. The color just gets drained from the world or something. There's, I mean, yeah. Probably something will come of that. We'll find out. I can handle this. The color just gets drained from the world or something. Yeah. There's probably something will come of that. We'll find out. I mean, they find out. He's been quiet for a while, no? I don't know. I haven't heard anything about him.

I haven't been paying attention. Recently. It's kind of crazy. What did he actually eventually say? What was the big thing that he said? He said that he loves Hitler because he loves everyone. Yes. And Alex Jones really tried to get him,

gave him every opportunity to walk it back. And he's like, oh, so you're just saying you like the Nazi uniforms. You like the aesthetic of Hitler. He goes, no, I love Hitler. Right. He really just stepped right into it. He didn't take any of the exit doors that Jones was giving him. Well, you got to understand his personality, too.

He's a guy that does not like being told what not to do. That's right. Right. When Obama called him a jackass, he immediately started supporting Trump after that. Remember? He was wearing the Make America Great. When people were saying that Trump was bad, Kanye was like, no, no, no. I'm with Trump.

Yeah. And there was a concert that he did. He said he didn't vote, but if he did vote, he would have voted for Trump. And the whole crowd was like, boo! Right. One thing I've noticed about people as I've gotten a little older is that if a strategy has been working for someone their entire life, they're not going to get to 50 years old or 40 years old and suddenly change it when it stops working. Right.

So if you're Kanye, you're a random kid from Chicago and you became like a decent producer, but like everyone else, you came to New York with big dreams and you didn't get noticed for a while. And then the second you did get noticed, the second you tried to rap, everyone told you you were crazy. And not just everyone, the top experts of rap in hip hop, Jay-Z's record label, the people that would most know say, look, Kanye, you're a good producer, but take it from us. We're the top experts in the world. You don't want to get into the rap game. And he says, you know what? I'm

going to do the really dumb thing and say, no, you're all wrong. And then he becomes not just a good rapper, but the best rapper in history, right? So this strategy of a bunch of people that are the smartest people. And then by the way, he did the same thing with fashion. Everyone, the smartest people in the world said, Kanye, you're a great rapper, but trust us. We know more than anyone in the world about this industry. You can't make it. And then he does it better than them. So a guy for whom that strategy has been working, he's just been calling his shot like Babe Ruth over and over again and getting it every time against the odds. He's not going to wake up at 45 years old and when people say,

you can't vote for Trump,'s gonna say yeah actually i should listen to them this time right good point and i've noticed this about other people too it's like if they have some weird strategy that's really worked for them you can't you can't tell them to change it halfway through their life yeah elon's the same way this is i think it's precisely connected to his extreme success of all this all the ventures that were supposed to fail, that had you put anyone else at the helm, they would have failed. Tesla, SpaceX. Just constantly having the smartest people in the world tell him he can't do something and then doing it. he's immune to a chorus of very smart, well-meaning people telling him,

don't say that, don't do this. Right. Because it's worked for him his whole life. And so I think the point is the flaws people point out in these people, they may be genuine flaws, but they are the flip side of the coin of their success. Yes. They're inseparable. Such a good point. Such an important point.

And, you know, I think when people get in a situation like, we've never seen a person get in a situation like Kanye, where he was one of the biggest entertainers on the planet Earth, if not the biggest, and then all of a sudden becomes persona non grata. the biggest entertainers on the planet Earth, if not the biggest. And then all of a sudden becomes persona non grata. But that's never really happened before like that. Over words.

And a guy who clearly has a penchant for saying things that are outrageous. And he's always done that. And he clearly goes on rants. You know, where I don't even know if he knows where he's going sometimes. Like, he went on a crazy rant when he met with Trump. Did you ever see that one? Yeah, I did. It's one of my favorites. Because Trump is so happy that Kanye is there.

He's like, this is great. This is great. I'm just going to listen. Like, if that, if Kanye was opposed to him and was saying the same kind of things, how do you think Trump would respond? Yeah, he would have. What are you talking? Where did you get your education? What kind of talk is this?

Instead, he's sitting there going, okay, Trump's smart. He's sitting there. He's letting Kanye rant. Kanye is trying to change Make America Great Again to Make America great or something or keep America I forget what he was going but he had this idea in his head that he had this this was bad for black people and we want to make it change into this thing it's just a wild dude he's a wild dude I think he's a bad person he's not a bad person I stretch the image I don't think he's gonna be persona non grata forever he's

talented man that motherfucker will put out a new album it'll be a real anger listen to it and for most people all will be forgiven especially i think people will give him a pass because of mental illness like i don't think he'll be canceled forever no he's too good yeah he's too good to this day to this day people listen to michael jackson music to this day to this day i want to rock with you comes on and everybody goes, oh man, you don't think, oh, that's that guy went crazy and had wild facial reconstructive surgery and may or may not have molested kids. You don't think that you think that guy was so fucking good when beat it comes on, you don't, you know, you don't think about those things. It doesn't matter.

It's pretty. I do remember there was like one week where people considered not listening to Michael Jackson. And then everyone at the same time was like, ah, it's too good. It's too good. It's too good. Got to be starting something. When you hear some of those songs, you're like, God damn, that dude was good. Yeah.

He was so good that they played him on rock and roll radio in Boston I remember I was in in Boston and it was WCO Z which was like the local rock station We would all listen to it's most like classic rock like Aerosmith and Led Zeppelin shit and the DJ comes on This is back when DJs can still play whatever they wanted to play and he came on and he said look I know this isn't rock and roll but I'm gonna play it anyway because it's so good and he played Billie Jean and it was so good that people didn't give a fuck that it was Michael Jackson they didn't think it was disco or any they didn't give it a label they're like wow yeah undeniable just undeniable and that's kanye kanye's got some bangers oh yeah i got kanye in about 10 songs on my green room playlist and when we're in the mothership and those songs come on everybody's

like oh shit here's another one he had so many of them so many of them so many of them and that's that same mind that same mind that says crazy shit that same mind is just fucking going it's just going in a bunch of different directions with like like a fucking thousand horsepower engine and we're all here in civics yeah exactly that's what's going on the rest of us are not like that no i mean we're different we're different and we need people like that we just need them to to not say things that hurt people's feelings. Don't say things that, you know, disparage entire groups of people. And I don't think he means to do that. I don't think anybody that's a good, I don't think he's a bad person by any stretch of the imagination, but I think we

have to recognize that there's some mental illness that is extremely beneficial. And that when these people are behaving and and expressing themselves in a certain way they're just unwell and it might be momentarily there's people that get into manic states and they say things then they have to call people back and say i'm so sorry i was freaking out i'm not supposed to be drinking and i drank and i'm on this medication and i fucked up and it's like yeah okay but as a society, just cast someone, like Adidas stopped their contracts with them and everybody stopped doing business with them. It's like, wow. I don't think you get rid of bad ideas by doing that.

No, I don't think so either. So everything I said about Israel on your podcast, no one can say that I'm a Hamas defender, right? I'm very pro-Israel. No one can say that I'm a Hamas defender, right? I'm very pro-Israel. But there are people right now that for expressing pro-Hamas beliefs are being, you know, there's companies saying we're never going to hire you to college kids. There's all kinds of stuff like this is going on where I'm totally against it. I think people should be absolutely free to make these stupid arguments and we should inform them we should argue right

we should have a conversation right even when it's like a really bad belief but do you think that you would want someone to work for you if you found out that they were pro-terrorist like if you probably like if you found so if some guy says he's into ISIS. No. And he wants to work for your company. Like you would say, hey, I'm not going to hire you because you've decided that you're pro-Taliban. I wonder about that.

I wonder about that because I want to say yes, but my friend Noam Dorman, who owns a comedy cellar, he says that he has people working in his kitchen. This guy, both his parents are from Israel, very pro-Israel. It's actually the most important issue to him in life, perhaps. him in life, perhaps. He has people working in his kitchen from the Middle East that believe all the propaganda, all the anti-Semitic propaganda that they've been fed, that many people in the Arab world are fed. They believe the Jews are controlling the media, the Jews are everything, right? And they're totally anti-Israel. And maybe some of them would even, are even happy about the Hamas attack. But he says as long as they keep their politics out of work,

they don't alienate customers, and we treat each other with respect, I'm not going to say I'd fire you or I wouldn't hire you. Well, good for him. That's a very beautiful and Jesus-like way of approaching the world. Yeah. very beautiful and Jesus-like way of approaching the world. Yeah. But I think ideally it should be more and more the way we approach the world because I don't think you persuade people by persecuting them. Right.

The difference between that and someone holding beliefs because they came from a particular part of the world is very different from someone particular part of the world is very different from someone going out on the street and yelling it holding up banners and flags using bullhorns and that that is what someone might do at a protest so if you were at a pro ISIS protest and you were screaming about ISIS is caliphate and that this is the just way of life and this is what God wants. Like, I probably don't want you working at Subway. You're probably not going to be the dude I want to be making sandwiches next to. You know, I don't probably if I'm hiring at an auto repair shop and this guy thinks he's going to be a martyr if he blows himself up.

Maybe I'm not going to hire that guy. Maybe I'm not going to hire the guy that thinks that it's okay to talk little kids into wearing a fucking vest and walking into a school. I agree. Yeah. But at the same time, I don't like the idea that there's a political litmus test for having a job. Right. And this is part of what's happening with diversity, equity, and inclusion statements

is that all over the country there are these jobs, professorships at universities where in order to be hired, you have to sign and say, I support diversity, equity, inclusion, and a long paragraph of values you may not hold. Why should I need to sign on to that to be hired to teach math? Right. I get very uncomfortable with that. It gets slippery because you get to political ideologies that you're forcing people to subscribe to. Yeah. Yeah. I mean, it is a slippery slope, right? I mean, if you were a Catholic and you would not hire Baptists, because Baptists were fools.

You only believe in hiring Catholics. That would get weird. Yeah. you only believe in hiring Catholics. That would get weird. But those, we're okay in that sense that most people of differing Christian persuasions are comfortable with each other. Lutherans are comfortable around Methodists and they look at Baptists the same way they look at Catholics. Maybe they look at Mormons weird.

Mormons are, that's a weird one. But, you know, it's very, they're the nicest people, but it's, it's very common for people of different branches of Christianity to work together and have no problems. But it's when things get weird is when you just like one thing is way worse than the other thing, or one thing opposes the existence of another thing. Now we're getting to extreme differences. Like if the difference between the Hamas and Israel. If you're getting to that, or if you're getting to Nazis and the Jews,

or if you're getting to, there's things that you can get to where you're like, okay, this is valid. These are valid reasons to not be worried. But if you do that, and it keeps pushing in a certain direction, it could get to Catholics hating the Protestants. And that's what the fuck happened in Ireland. They were blowing each other up.

I mean, when I went to Belfast, Northern Ireland, for UFC once, there's cars, police cars, that are covered with, like like steel plates to bomb-proof them. Wow. Have you ever seen it? No. It's wild. It's wild. And the people that live there, there's people that are there right now that still remember the IRA and they remember all the bombings and the terrorists and the horrible things that people from both sides of Ireland did to each other the two totally different countries Northern Ireland's a completely different country than

Ireland because of that and because and a lot of it was wrapped up in religion and I Mean we don't want to think that that could happen But whenever you have this thing where you're against someone who's not on your, on your team that could, that could take place. You could have like a peaceful coexistence like Baptists do with Methodists or you, or it could be fucking horrible and you could other that person. And it's just a part of human programming. So I agree with the new atheist about how many problems have been caused by religion. And I'm an atheist myself. I grew up with no religion. On the other hand, the empirical literature suggests that religious people tend to be happier.

And also suggests that conservatives tend to be happier than liberals. And that's a very interesting finding to me because I grew up in a very secular liberal context was never even tempted by religion really um like you know how they say there's no atheists in foxholes right I'd be an atheist in a foxhole like I wouldn't even believe in God I think if my like I just it's nowhere in me but it's an interesting and pretty verified result. I think at this point that conservatives tend to be happier than liberals,

less mental illness, and the religious tend to be happier than the secular. So then the question becomes, why is that? Is it because they believe in religion or is it, uh, explained by a third variable? Is it correlation without causation?

Is it that religious people have communities? They have somewhere to go to where they see familiar faces every Sunday. And atheists lack that. Or they don't have it automatically. And it's tough to build. Well, that's really a factor, right? It's unquestionably a factor. Got to be a factor, yeah.

Yeah, people need community. It is absolutely a part of us. And one of the things you see in primarily secular places, like if you think about New York City, there's so many people, but yet they're not friends with each other. And they're all stacked on top of each other. I was talking to my friend Jim Norton the other day. He's like, I've lived next door to my neighbor for 10 years. I have no fucking idea who he is. And they all just live in this giant stack of humans that they don't know.

And, you know, that's normal. I've had culture shock when I've come to the South because I grew up in North Jersey, right outside of New York. And I didn't realize that until I came to the South, until I hung out in Florida and even the Midwest, that people in the Northeast aren't as nice. I have a theory for that. What? What's your theory? Well, my primary theory for why people are so wild on the East Coast, because they are wild and aggressive, is because those are the ancestors of the people that fucking came

across on boats. They were people that took a crazy chance. Ambitious people. Yeah. Before YouTube. Competitive, ambitious people. Just, and mean. I mean, just the echoes of the past.

Have you watched Gangs of New York? You ever watch that movie? But, you know, we think of New York City as this metropolitan. It used to be a horrible, crime-ridden, murderous place to be. And at the turn of the century, when people were coming over here from Europe, the people that came here from all parts of the world, those people came from somewhere that sucked and they had a wild, crazy chance to try to make it in America. And it was probably very aggressive.

And it was during the time of the Depression. So you're dealing with like really fucking scared people and really desperate people. And you're dealing with like very aggressive culture. And then a lot of people are like this i'm going west and they just kept going they just kept going until the on the west coast of the country whether it's because of the entertainment industry or was because of the amazing climate i think there's a combination of those two that became like the most progressive the least aggressive the most open-minded like when I heard I used to hear about fighters coming from California I'd be like how good could he be that's what I used to think when I was a kid I was thinking you're gonna get a good fighter

they're all gonna come out of the cities they're all gonna come out of places where there's like a lot of hardship and and people are like push and shove and you're gonna eat your ass kicked at school all the time and then you get a few dudes that grew up in the south that lived you know in like hardscrabble neighborhoods coal mining communities they were bad asses too there's the hobos like Jack Dempsey the dudes who rode the fucking railroad trains and just hard men who did hard jobs and they were scary too but once you got to california yeah those dudes was a ridiculous thing to think yeah but that it comes out of this thing where the people that arrived there they dealt with those are the people

that stayed they're the people that like were fine with that or didn't know another way of life i watched the uh i watched like five or six hours of the New York history documentary, New York City history documentary by Rick Burns. Oh, I haven't seen it.

You know Rick Burns? I've heard of him. Yeah, Ken Burns' brother that no one talks about. It's funny to me that Ken Burns has a brother

that makes exactly Ken Burns style documentary. That is kind of funny. Great, by the way. He's not like worse than his brother. I don't think I've seen

any of his stuff. But no one ever talks about him. I don't think i've seen any but no one ever talks about him i don't think i've seen any of his um anyway he has like a mega marathon new york city history documentary that's fantastic and what's it called i think it's just i think it's just called new york rick burns new york you need to like get buy a subscription within amazon prime to get it it's really annoying but worth it and buy a subscription oh you have to get a subscription within Amazon Prime to get it. It's really annoying, but worth it. Get by a subscription? Oh, you have to get a subscription to Amazon Prime?

Within Amazon Prime, there's like a PBS package or something. Oh, it's another thing you pay for? Yeah, you have to pay for it. Those fucking people sitting on the beam over the city. It freaks me out. Leather soles, slippery ass shoes. Yep, and they have footage of building the empire state building and these guys are just like tossing hot rods to each other like 20 feet

away from each other just absolutely insane um way of living and and from there i learned that the empire state building was supposed to be a parking spot for a blimp or a dirigible, whatever it's called technically. Really? That was the pretext for why they had to build the spire higher. It was total BS because they wanted to get it over the Chrysler Building. So they said, we got to park blimps here. That's why we need this tall thing. And then they tried to park a blimp,

but they didn't even build it to really work or be practical. It was just a pretext for why they needed to get higher than the Chrysler building. But there is a picture of, I don't know if it's a real picture or if it was kind of the blueprint of the Empire State Building with a blimp parked there. Hold that thought because I really have to pee. Yeah.

But I want to talk about this more. We'll be right back. Okay. So the blimp, New York City, Empire State Building. Someone's going to yell at me for calling it a blimp because it's actually a dirigible and I don't know the difference. I think it's the structure. I think it's the exterior structure.

Yeah. Anyway. Dirigible. Dirigible, and I don't know the difference. I think it's the structure. I think it's the exterior structure. Yeah, anyway. So dirigible has an exterior structure, whereas I think a blimp is just a balloon. Is that the case? So it parked it there, and that was why they said they needed to do it, and people walked onto that fucking thing from there? They tried to do it for about five minutes or something, and it didn't work. And then they said, ah, screw that. At least we're taller than the Chrysler building now. When I was reading it, it didn't work. And then they said, ah, screw that. But at least we're taller,

taller than the Chrysler building now. When I was reading it, it didn't work because it was super fucking windy, which it obviously is in New York city. Right. So they didn't, they didn't plan for wind. For a fucking giant balloon. It was supposed to be the stop for a transatlantic Zeppelin flights.

Dude. How crazy is that? I had a dream once. It was a really weird dream. It was a dream of, I forget, it was a thousand or a million Teslas. There was a dream that in a parallel universe, a very strange dream. And by the way, I've had it more than once. I think I've had it at least twice. It was a dream where instead of having one insanely innovative person like Nikola Tesla, was a thousand of or a million of them and that the world and in this dream I was living in like 1960 and there were blimps everywhere there was flying crafts everywhere and uh it was very different the world was very different it was

a really strange dream but it was like the sky was filled with these flying crafts and there was Nikolai Tesla's all over the place yeah literally him but literally like him not just one guy that everybody like breaks into his apartment after he's dead to get his notes but thousands of them millions of them dream yeah something like that in his dream of New York wow Wow, that's crazy. So this is a kind of very... But in my dream, everything had like a kind of steampunk sort of feel to it because it was sort of early. It wasn't a dream of today. It was a dream where I was imagining what would the world have looked like

if instead of one of these guys in... When did Tesla live? It was like the 1920s, right? Instead of one of those guys, have a shit ton of them. And that, you know, we are often driven by a few mad geniuses that have just through their own creativity. And Tesla's very unusual with his creativity because he talked about how he was kind of like,

I don't think he was saying aliens, but he was saying that he was receiving this information from somewhere else. Like he had this, he was fine about that because I don't want to misquote him, but he had some very bizarre descriptions of where ideas came from. And I think he felt like he was in communication with something from somewhere else as well. Well, I know a lot of artists and musicians have described it that way because I don't think you know where the idea comes from. I mean, I have a theory. When you're joke writing, where does it come from? I think ideas are a form of life. I think it's not a life that uses blood and tissue. I think it's like a different kind of like non-tangible life form that enters into the creative mind. And it manifests itself in the form of physical objects. Every physical object that we see on Earth, from cars to planes to tables, was thought of first.

A thought came to someone's mind. What if I cut this wood and sand it down and put some fucking legs on this bitch and I got some shit to put my stuff on? Look at that. I got a table. Somebody had to think of that. And that thing became a real object. The whole earth is covered with these things that human beings have put here because they had an idea. And it's making us make a better version of ourself. And this is what I think AI is. I think what we're doing with this constant thirst for innovation and also this, it coincides with our materialistic tendencies. It's like it facilitates. It helps it.

Everyone's so material. You got an iPhone 6? What's wrong with you, bro? You know? You need to get the 15. It's USB-C now. Oh, my God. I got to get the 15.

And everybody's running out. And everybody wants to do that. Everybody wants to have the newest, latest, greatest thing. And what does that do? It fuels innovation. And ultimately that leads to us creating AI. And this is where we find ourselves. And we find ourselves in this weird situation like, okay, who's in control of AI? And if someone really does invent a better form of AI and uses it to hijack the economic system, to hijack, who knows? You have insane amounts of power if you have an insane mind and the ability to innovate far beyond the capabilities of the human mind. Some people have been arguing, I think they're probably right, that the safest way to build ai is to have lots of people build it separately because then no one ai will be decentralized right right rather than try from

the top down the government to say okay we got to build this safely we're going to take charge we're going to regulate everything we're going to put we're going to make you put the seatbelt on. To have multiple parties at the same time all over the world doing AI, it may guarantee or may help ensure that no one of them becomes so powerful that they exist unopposed by others. Well, it'd be very irresponsible if you were a superpower and you didn't do work with AI. Yeah. And China does or Russia does or Iran does. Right.

That would be irresponsible. So you would really kind of have to do that. So you remember when people were asking for a six-month pause? Yeah. You heard about that? Yeah. China's not going to pause. China's not going to pause.

I mean, this is sometimes the smartest people in the world don't have common sense. Well, they would like the international scientific community to get on board with that, but they don't have that option in certain parts of the world. They just don't. They just don't. And when it's something like AI, something that does have the power to radically transform everything that we see around us and is probably doing it right now with algorithms that manipulate people's perspectives on all sorts of things. How much of the Twitter beef with the bots and all that stuff, how many of those fake accounts are being run by AI? How many of them are being generated by programs? I would assume at this point, it's not zero. It's not zero. And we know

that that's a real factor in making sure that people are constantly pissed off at each other and fighting back and forth. There's certain foreign and domestic interests that have a vested responsibility to do that. Like this is what, this is what they're trying to do. Like, this is like, this is my job. I got to go out and make people mad about abortion. I got to go out and make people mad about the border. I got to go out and make people mad about abortion. I got to go out and make people mad about the border. I got to go out and make people mad about this. And they're running programs that are having people argue with people, like constantly, all the time. I'm sure you've seen when someone will highlight some sort of a tweet about a particular thing,

and then you put that tweet in a search engine, and you will see thousands of people tweeting the exact same thing. Wow. Yeah. It's wild. It's wild. And there's less sophisticated versions and more sophisticated versions. And then there's actual physical bad actors, human beings that are doing it, you know, and they're doing it very creatively. very creatively. And that was one of the things that Renee DiResta investigated when she was looking into what was going on with Facebook and these troll farms and the internet research

agency in Russia and how they were manipulating social media arguments. One of the things she noticed that they had organized a Texas secession rally right across the street from some Islamic rally. And did people show up? Yeah Sure people showed up. I think I learned from her too that they had Organized a BLM rally and people showed up. That's wild They also organized well one of the crazy things they did was out of the top 20 Christian Facebook sites 19 of them were run by troll farms wow so all the you know the hateful rhetoric and all the you know all that stuff run by people who are just trying to get people angry at each other now i will say that said i love gpt4 you know

chat gpt i love it i use it almost every day It's like a smart buddy that will do whatever I tell him to do. Yeah, that's a good way to put it. And even when I don't agree with him, I can have a fun or intelligent exchange with him that makes me smarter. Yeah. It's just so much fun. It's very interesting. I like throw on a documentary and everything i

don't understand explain this to me are you sure about that well i heard that you know it's like it's fantastic there's i strangely meet a lot of people that don't like it at all why either because they well they feel that it's not smart enough to interest them, that's the first thing. And I don't, I really don't get that. It's smart enough to be interesting. It's smarter than a lot of people. Why would they say it's not smart enough to interest them?

This is, I hear, I hear this all the time. I say, oh, it's not really that intelligent. It's just, it's just feeding you talking points. It can't really think for itself. Come on, man. If you don't see that as the seed of something that's going to be infinitely more intelligent than human beings, you're foolish. I think so, too. Yeah, that's a person that—

That ship has sailed. Yeah, but then that falls into this—people don't want to be duped by things. They don't want to be the person that. That fell for the hype. Yeah, exactly. Well, the hype is real this time. Well, it's real as fuck. A lot of people are still on 3.5 because they don't want to or can't pay 20 bucks a month.

Go to GPT-4 and really have a conversation with it about anything. Tell me it's not smart. It's very smart. And it's also just the beginning. I had Sam Altman on the podcast. had a pretty long discussion about this and I feel like it's it's inevitable and I think it's part of it was a part of our history before it was ever written we are going to make a better version of ourselves and one of the things we're to do first is create some sort of sentient intelligence

that may or may not be physical. It may exist only in terms of running programs, but it's going to be smarter than us. And one day, someone's going to put that in a physical object. Or one day, we're going to allow that thing into our own brains we're going to develop some sort of an ability to utilize that and a universal language would be one of the quickest things that it could do so it would change the way people communicate with each other because there would be no longer not neither a cultural boundary nor a language boundary you'll be able to understand the way a person thinks

based on their actual thoughts versus the rhetoric and what they're thinking and saying might be two different things, but you'll be able to recognize that instantaneously. There'll be no ability to lie. There'll be no bottleneck between information and your ability to acquire it. It'll be instantaneous. And I think we're going to change what we are fundamentally. And it may overall be the thing that saves us. Because if we truly can understand that we are all connected and we are all the same thing, and that the only thing that separates us is where we were from, how we

grew up, who we were influenced by, what our genes are, what our environment is, all these variables. But the core of what we are is just human beings. And maybe through a universal language and an ability to communicate universally, like across no boundaries, no boundaries for expression, no boundaries for understanding, no misconstrued things, no things taken out of context, the ability to recognize the actual thing and you to be able to recognize what you are too, because people will confront you. Like the people that read your thoughts and know your mind will be able to show you the error. It will be almost impossible after a certain point in time to have distorted perspectives because you won't just be a biological human being.

You'll be a biological human being that is interfaced with an insanely intelligent technology that allows you to elevate everything around you. But then again, it's not going to be great. It's not going to be all great. technology that allows you to elevate everything around you. But then again, it's not going to be great. It's not going to be all great. It's not going to be perfect. What are we going to lose? Are we going to lose blues? Are we going to lose the blues?

Are we going to lose hip hop? What are we going to lose? Are we going to lose comedy? Are we going to lose violent movies? Are we going to lose fun? Are we going to lose bungee jumping? What are we going to lose? We're going to lose some things. Yeah, I'm sure. We you're gonna lose a lot of thrills and a lot of the chaos of life you know maybe all bars will close maybe people completely stop drinking

what the fuck was I doing you know oh now I realized why I needed to release my inhibitions and this is like all just like a thing I'm dealing with a conflict an internal conflict. Right. So I had this lady, Nita Farahani on my podcast probably a year ago. And then I met her at TED recently. And she, she wrote this book called the battle for your brain. She's a professor. I, uh, I'm forgetting the college in, uh, somewhere in North Carolina, I think, uh, maybe Duke. Is that in North Carolina, I think. Maybe Duke. Is that in North Carolina or South Carolina?

Am I crazy? Not sure. Which one is it? North. So she just had this book and she's, you know, she pays close attention to the current state and the near future state of mind reading technology. reading technology. And I was absolutely blown away because I did not think that things were possible that are already happening in certain parts of the world. For example, she talked about a factory in China where they're able to, through an ESG, an over-scalp ESG scanner, through an ESG and like over scalp ESG scanner,

determine whether someone is slacking off by the brain signals being sent, uh, from them. Wow. Right. Uh, and apparently it's even possible to simply have a tattoo, uh, like kind of behind your ear or somewhere on your face that gets enough of a signal of

an electrical signal from your brain that can then get enhanced to get actual brain readings like to to read your state of mind essentially just a tattoo yeah is that the mark of the beast i don't know what it was mark of the beast from I don't know. I don't know. The mark of the beast from the Bible. Oh. Anyway, so the full thing is to have a big cap on, right? Okay. And it gets ESG signals.

And these signals get correlated through big data with states of mind. So you get enough data. You say, okay, this signal pattern means you're happy, this signal pattern means you're tired, this signal pattern means, et cetera. You get enough data of people talking with ESG and correlate it, perhaps using AI, then you can get a signal in principle of what does the brain look like when someone is saying the sentence, I'm hungry for food or whatever. In principle, you can mind read with this, right? You can read if, and this apparently has been done in India, according to Farahani.

done in India, according to Farahani. If you're in a courtroom and you ask a witness, have you seen this murder weapon before? They can lie, but there's a neural signature to recognition. This has been, this is very controversial. This is FMRI, correct? She's talking mostly about ESG. ESG. So I know that there was, when you brought up India, I know that there was a trial where someone was convicted of, I think the term was functional knowledge of the crime scene. Right. And, but I talked to a neuroscientist that said that would never fly over here. Right. That there was something about the court system where this person was convicted. That they,

if you had, that, it's simple. You remember when there was a seismologist in Italy that were sued because they didn't accurately

predict an earthquake? Do you remember that? No, no. See if you can find that. Yeah. There was a, they, they literally had to go to trial.

They were, they were, they had to be acquitted because they were being accused of either negligence or some sort of a, I forget exactly what the charge was. But they were essentially not understanding seismology and the unpredictable nature of the movement of the earth. Italian seismologists cleared of manslaughter. So they were going to charge them with manslaughter. So six seismologists accused of misleading the public about the risk of an earthquake in Italy were cleared of manslaughter on 10th of November.

An appeals court overturned their six year prison sentences and reduced to two years the sentence for a government official who had been convicted with them. So a magnitude 6.3 earthquake struck the historic town of La Aquila in the early hours of 6 April 2009, killing more than 300 people. The findings by a three-judge appeals court promptly prompted many, I don't know how I'm not saying that right, Laquila citizens who are waiting outside the courtroom to react with rage, shouting shame and saying that the Italian state had just acquitted itself, local media reported. But it comes as a relief to scientists around the world who had been following the unprecedented case with alarm. We don't have to be worried about the possibility of being prosecuted if we give

advice on earthquakes, says seismologist Ian Main of University of Edinburgh, UK. That would discourage giving honest opinion. The defendants themselves have mixed feelings. Guilo Salvaggi, former director of the National Earthquake Center in Rome, says that although he is happy to be acquitted, there's nothing to celebrate because the pain of the people of La Aquila remains. The scientists that end up in court is a consequence of a botched communication in a highly stressed environment. In the months before the major earthquake struck, the region around La Aquila had been subject to frequent, mostly low-magnitude tremors known as seismic swarms. Residents were confused and increasingly alarmed by statements made by a local amateur earthquake predictor

who said that he had evidence of an impending quake, although geologists dismissed his methods as unsound. A commission of experts met on 31 March 2009 to assess the scientific evidence and advise the government. According to the prosecution, a press conference after this meeting attended by acting president of the commission, volcanologist Franco Barberi of the University of Rome, Roma Tre, and the government official Bernardo de Bernardinis. Then directly... Parents with that name named their kid Bernardo.

Bernardo de Bernardinis. And then deputy director of the Italian Civil Protection Department conveyed a reassuring message that a major earthquake was not on the cards. OK, so the earthquake happened. And so they charged these people with manslaughter as a consequence. So, OK, the television interview recorded shortly after the meeting, but aired shortly before the meeting, rather, but aired after it. D. Bernardinus, who is now president of the Institute for Environmental Research and Protection in Rome, says that the scientific community tells me there is no 6 April 2029, people chose to stay indoors instead of stepping outside as they otherwise would have done and died as their homes collapsed. All seven members of the expert commission were found guilty of manslaughter. And this is 2012.

This is pretty recently after a 13 month trial that transfixed the international scientific community. But I think, I mean, charging them with manslaughter is fucking crazy. Yeah, it's insane. Like, I don't think they're basing it on what they know about earthquakes. And earthquakes are unpredictable. Yeah, how predictable are earthquakes to begin with? Not very predictable. Yeah, that's what I, I was never under the impression that they could be predicted super easily.

Predictable are earthquakes to begin with. Not very predictable. Yeah, that's what I, I was never under the impression that they could be predicted super easily. Oh, brain scanning in Chinese factories probably doesn't work if it's happening at all. And this is, do you remember that thing, that video that we watched, Jamie? What was that from? Where the girl was sitting in her desk and she was having fantasies about a local, a co-worker. And, you know, was like trying to like not have these then someone in her office because of their brain scanning got convicted of fraud oh no i didn't someone that

she was directly involved with in some sort of a meeting it was it's a cartoon but it's it's trying to paint i think it's a world economic forum thing. Is it? They're trying to predict this rosy version of a much more productive future if you just submit to letting the company that you work for read your fucking mind. Yeah. And the things that she's citing, it's really fascinating.

But she's talking about how much better her productivity is and she's getting more work done. She's much more focused because they know when she's not. This is somehow her. You know that video? Do you remember it? So I don't know if that China factory story ends up being true, but Farahani has a lot of other examples in her book of studies that have been done

and what's possible, and she has this worry about this notion of cognitive liberty that soon we're going to have to decide if the right to privacy extends to our brain data. Right. Well, we've already submitted to this idea that a company can mandate whether you get vaccinated, even when it was preposterous. We submitted to that. There was people that I know that had COVID recovered from COVID and were required to get vaccinated in order to participate in certain television programs and certain movie programs. I know a professor, a music professor, that was required to get the booster, already double-vaxxed and had gotten COVID, was required to get the booster on pain of lost work of not being able to teach. Yeah. And I had a friend that was doing a television show and the exact same thing. He had gotten COVID, he had gotten vaccinated, but he hadn't gotten boosted. And they, they required him to get, he's like, I've already

recovered from COVID. Like it's totally unscientific and they required him and he had to do it. And I think part of the, part of the reason why you know someone like rfk is has so much support and enthusiasm because there's all these people that didn't have zoom professions that didn't work from home right that for whom a paycheck was meaningful who were forced into this thing not forced forced, I shouldn't say forced, were pressured, were pressured into additional things that they didn't need. And that caused, that has caused an understandable backlash. And I think people have, there's obviously an age element to this too. Vaccines were far more important for older folks than for younger folks. And so I think people have really failed to take the compassionate angle towards why people are so interested in a guy like RFK,

and that is definitely part of it. 100%. Yeah. It's all, we're in a strange new territory. We're in a strange new territory with human discourse. We're in a strange new territory with AI. We're in a strange new territory with global conflicts. This is a wild time.

Because think about the social media coverage of the Israel-Palestine issue. This is one of the first times where you don't need the mainstream news at all to get your information. In fact, the mainstream news is slower than Twitter. I've been following the hospital story the past 48 hours. All of the mainstream news outlets are like 10 hours behind Twitter. That's very interesting. It's very interesting. Well, they don't have the confinements. So they're going to, like you said before, they're not professionals. So they're going to get things wrong too.

And there's always that. There's a lot of that kind of stuff that goes on. But generally, that gets sorted out with free speech. If people are paying attention, but the problem is some people only pay attention to the initial assertions, and then afterwards they miss the corrections. That's right. And there's a lot of people that are doing that now. I've watched people today talk about Israel bombing that hospital. I saw it today, someone who's talking about it that I follow. There are some people that are never going to get the correction.

No, they're not going to get it. Yeah. They're going to still be saying it in a year. Yeah. Well, you're going to always have that. You're going to have that. But at least we're getting that information quickly. Like, the correction was quick as opposed to the way it would have been in 1967.

It's very different. In 1967, it would have been in 1967. It's very different. In 1967, it would have taken years to correct. Years, if ever. It would still be up for debate who was right or who was wrong. I mean, how long did it take before they admit the Gulf of Tonkin was a false flag? It took forever. You know, the speed at which we get access to the actual truth is very quick now. It's very different.

Have you seen The Last Days in Vietnam? No. That is possibly the best documentary I've ever seen. Definitely top three. I was blown away. It's just a documentary about our pullout from Vietnam and our efforts to get South Vietnamese out. The fact that we waited so long to admit the war was

fully lost and that we had to leave. There were people just clinging to the myth that we could still be there a little bit longer, a little bit longer. And the total logistical failure of it, that people were just trying to find helicopters from anywhere in the world to get people off of the rooftop of the embassy, and all the South Vietnamese that we abandoned that ended up in concentration camps. It was maybe the best war-related documentary I've ever seen in my life. Wow. I teared up. It was just incredible.

It's just so horrible. And it was very reminiscent of our exit from Afghanistan as well. When you look at how many people we abandoned to the Taliban. Yeah. Who were our collaborators who worked with us. It's heartbreaking. Yeah, it's horrific. And again, it points to this thing that we were speaking of earlier that we would think that we would know better by now.

That we've learned from the horrors of the past. But apparently we haven't. There's also the realities of war that are available to you now. Like how much Russian Ukraine footage have you seen from people's GoPros and cell phone footage? It's insane you get to see like actual videos of war crimes torture i saw a guy get murdered with a sledgehammer you're seeing people get shot when they're on the ground you're seeing like real high resolution footage of some really horrific shit. That is what actual war is. Not this sort of sterilized, I support this because I got a flag on my Twitter bio

and you go over there and do the right thing. And it's moral imperative that we support these people. That's the actual reality of what you're supporting. War is hell. It's hell. It's hell. The apocalypse exists. It just doesn't exist right here. It exists in parts of the world. It's hell. The apocalypse exists. It just doesn't exist right here.

It exists. Parts of the world, it exists. And then there's the insane fact that these people are tweeting about these things on phones that you can literally trace. that you can literally trace if you go back down the supply chain, literally made by slaves who are using materials that are pulled out of the ground in some of the most inhumane, horrific conditions on Earth right now that pregnant women, women carrying their babies on their back are digging cobalt out of the ground.

And that's getting into your phone, and that's what you're using to tweet about inequality. It's wild. I read this book recently called In Defense of Capitalism by, I think he's like a northern European guy. northern european uh guy and he mentioned this this episode where unesco banned child labor in uh either in pakistan or bangladesh and did a follow-up study of the kids that were no longer in those child labor factories and some crazy proportion of them had gone into child prostitution because that was their that was their alternative.

Their alternatives in life were work in the factory or sell your body. Oh, my God. And so the question becomes the people working in those cobalt mines, what are their alternatives? Realistically, from their perspective, what is this cobalt mine better than that they're choosing to come here if they are choosing if they're not choosing then they're slaves you know right it's it's it's a it's a very grim reality it's a very grim reality that's

currently happening that's one of the the strangest things about these things that when they're not happening to you right now it's very difficult to wrap your mind around what would be like if your role the dice was you were born in karachi or you were born in just name the place name the troubled place on earth you were born in beirut you were born wherever it is name that spot you were born in libya name it just luck luck of the universe of of karma of whatever the fuck you want to believe but it's just luck and if you're born in north korea you're fucked you're fucked and no one's coming to save you and that's real and that's real right now in 2023. And the only thing that stops that from happening is people who have good intentions making sure that we engineer a future that's better for everybody. And I don't know how you do that. How do you do that with all these different special interests? How do you do that with the military industrial complex complex how do you do that with education being halfway sideways how do you do that how do you do that with the immigration crisis the fucking political discourse in this country like though despite it all life seems to get better generation after generation if you

anyone you or i know talks to their grandparents nine out of ten we have a better life than our grandparents nine out of ten 100 so despite all of it the world chugs along uh and improves bit by bit that's not inevitable it can backslide it could all end tomorrow yeah but we managed to make progress and that progress is important the progress is important it's not guaranteed um and during the time of the mongols it was definitely not not good and the the thought is during your lifetime it might go sideways but ultimately it'll level back out yeah like the stock the stock market or something. And it may. It may. But I think sometimes that takes a long time. A long time.

And that's one of the things that I've become very fascinated with from my discussions with Randall Carlson and Graham Hancock is the Younger Dryas Impact Theory. And it's a theory that's somewhere around 11,800 years ago. The end of the Ice age was caused by us getting hit by comets and it probably wiped out most civilization. And when we're looking at what we're looking at, the Mesopotamians and ancient Sumer, we're looking at a rebuilding of civilization, not the emergence of civilization, but a rebuilding of civilization. What that means to me is that from 11,800 years ago to 6,000 years ago, it was probably pretty fucking horrific. Pretty horrific for a long time.

People probably barely made it, and the people that did make it were probably monsters. And then it took a long time for everything to settle back down again. And people started inventing mathematics again, start rebuilding structures, start using agriculture, and all these different things that they probably had already harnessed

when they were building the pyramids. They probably already harnessed all that. They were probably as advanced, if not more advanced than us, that we are is... We're take two. Yes. Graham Hancock likes to say

that we're a civilization with amnesia. And that seems like archaeologists were pushing back against it for a long time, but they seem to be backing off of that now for a bunch of reasons. One, because of the physical evidence. There's a lot of real physical evidence of ancient cultures that were far more sophisticated than we give them credit for. Specifically, Golbekli Tepe and some of these places in Turkey, they found 11,000-year-old complex stone structures back when people were supposed to be much more primitive. And they really don't know the actual dates of the pyramids. They've just carbon dated some genetic material, some material that's inside the cracks of the stones and stuff on the surface,

but they don't know when they actually put it down. It's just kind of guesswork. Because easily it could have been work that was done thousands of years later by people who found it. Like, they don't really know. I hear this said all the time. Is it now known how the pyramids were built or is it still an unknown? No idea.

Not just no idea. Is there a leading theory? Nope. They're all bullshit. And the thought behind it is, the real problem is some of these fucking things weighed 50, 70 tons. And they were taken from quarries hundreds of miles away through the mountains. At the very most recent, what the mainstream archaeologists believe, was 2500 BC. Most recent, what the mainstream archaeologists believe, was 2500 BC.

Somehow or another, back then, they had the ability to move 70 ton blocks almost exactly to due north, south, east, and west. And that at one point in time was covered in smooth limestone. What we see now is like jagged. It's because people looted it. And they took the limestone off the surface of the pyramid. People are monsters. They found this thing that far more intelligent people built a long fucking time ago and they rummaged through it and stole shit. But whoever those people were and whatever they did

and how they did it and how long ago they did it, what they did we can't do today, no matter what anybody says. I think the number was if they cut in place 10 stones a day it would take you 600 plus years to make one pyramid 10 of these massive stones that they move into place 4 000 plus years ago at least like how how'd you do it no one knows no one knows it's all guesswork they don't even know what they did how they cut it they they only had supposedly had copper tools back then they don't know how they cut those things. They don't know how they moved them.

There's evidence of drill marks. There's like all these different pieces of stone that looks like a tubular diamond drill has gone into it. They don't know what the fuck that is. So Graham Hancock's theory is then that this was an advanced civilization that got destroyed? Yeah, not just his, but many people now are coming on board with this. But there's also core samples. They've taken core samples of Earth. And when they get to that point in time at 11,800 years ago,

they find high levels of iridium in certain parts of the Earth, which is very common in space and very rare on Earth. They also find nanodiamonds that come from impacts. And I think they call it tritonite or trinitite, like after the Trinity bomb, because when they detonated the Trinity bomb, they found this same sort of micro glass because of the explosion. It's just extreme amount of energy slamming into dirt and it makes these micro diamonds. And they find those also at that level of 11,800 years. And they think it was not just that one time. They think it probably happened again somewhere around 10,000 years ago as well. Maybe multiple times throughout years. And they think it was not just that one time. They think it

probably happened again somewhere around 10,000 years ago as well. Maybe multiple times throughout history. And they think it's also the same comet storm that we passed through that led to the Tunguska event. Do you know about that? I think that was in the 1920s. There was an area of Siberia where I think it was like more than a million acres of trees were devastated. And what they think happened was we passed through that comet shower and something blew up in the environment upon reentry, upon entry into our environment, into our atmosphere, and blew up over. It didn't actually impact, but it detonated above it. And I think to this day it's still flattened. To this day I don't think there's trees there. Why would it detonate above it?

Just on reentry, sometimes they blow up. You know, shooting stars. When you see a shooting star and it gets really bright and then it stops, that's because it's burned up upon entry. Right. But something might be so big that when it burns up upon entry, it just explodes. And this Tunguska event, there's wild speculation. I was listening to a Radiolab podcast where there was a scientist who was speculating that perhaps it was a very tiny black hole that impacted the Earth.

But there's a lot of debate as to whether or not that's valid. I don't know. I'm not smart enough to understand that. But they do believe that that time that the Tunguska event happened coincides with the time where Earth goes through this regular period of comet activity. Because we pass through this comet cloud. I think it's every November and every June. See if you can find that Tunguska thing. Because I think to this day it's still flattened. I mean, it just devastated this area

and it's pretty wild when you see the original pictures of it yeah it just all these trees are just flattened it's like this is that's what it looks like now still to this day which is crazy but if you look at the other images of what it looked like when they discovered it after it happened I mean, just imagine. So you have this dense forest. If you see that black and white, excuse me, Jamie, the color image again, the color image of what it looks like now. Now imagine what it looked like back then.

Well, that whole area was covered with trees too. And something detonated, they think, right above it. And it just boom, just flattened out everything Wow yeah so it's 1908 that's what it was and they think that this has happened many many many times in Cuban history there's they found these big impact sites in Greenland they found them off the coast of Australia they They found these things, obviously, where the dinosaurs died off of Mexico. That happens. That's a thing that happens. And when it does happen, we get knocked back into the fucking Stone Age. And the same thing could happen with nuclear war. It could be the same

thing, same kind of thing, where we reach this incredible level of sophistication but everything that our sophistication is based on in terms of your ability to acquire that information is all either electronic or paper i mean all that stuff is like so easy to destroy it's like if we didn't have computers if we if we died if there was some walking dead type situation and all the people that run computers and all the people that run the power grid, they all die. And then we have these hard drives four, 500 years from now.

They're not going to be worth anything anymore. They're going to be gone. They're going to be laying around. They won't feed us. You can't light them on fire to cook food over. So we're just going to leave them on the ground. And those things are going to rot and they're just going to disappear.

And the earth's going to swallow them up and there's going to be no evidence of them just to completely be absorbed by the earth and that's probably why we don't find anything you know from whatever the technology was that these people had that they were able to invent the pyramids because whatever the fuck they had that there's there's these bizarre stones where it looks like they've somehow or another scooped out sections of stone that it looks like it was done with like some unknown technology they speculated all sorts of different things like different kinds of energy systems that they would have used to cut this stone in this manner but it's's, I mean, some of the stones in the Great Pyramid

are cut so precisely, you can't even get fucking a razor blade in between them. And they just stacked these things on top of each other and made this perfect structure. It's amazing that there's no leading theory. They have theories, but they're kind of horseshit. But there's no theories that everyone agrees on because they're so likely, right?

It's almost like this civilization may be, like imagine if you're a civilization that's so advanced that you want to leave evidence of yourself. No matter what happens. No matter what happens, this is going to be around. Because this is so crazy. Like even if we do get hit by meteors, even if- This will survive.

Yeah, this will still be here. And then people go, oh, we're not the first. Mm-hmm. We were rebuilding We're rebuilding what they did in Africa is above and beyond What we do today in the wildest ways in the wildest ways if you've seen people there's there's all these demonstrations there's a guy named bright insight who has a YouTube channel and He's got a just a bunch of stuff on the mysteries of these ancient civilizations and what they were able to accomplish. But he's got this whole series of things like people trying to move 30-ton rocks and how insanely impossible it is. Like them putting them on dump trucks and the trucks fall over, trying to place them in the back of pickup trucks as suspensions explode.

Trying to place them in the back of pickup trucks as suspensions explode. Like the most sophisticated machinery we have today. If you had to move a 70-ton block of stone 500 miles through the mountains, good luck. Good luck. Tell me how you did it. Tell me how you did it. You didn't even make a road? You didn't even make a massive road and have these impossibly large metal machines to move this thing? What did you do?

You put logs on the ground and you guys rolled it? Through the mountains. And how many times did you do it? You did it 2,300,000 times? How long did that take? How did you cut them? What were you using? How did you figure out how to make it perfect north, south, east, and west?

What were you using? How'd you figure out how to make it perfect north south east and west? Why does it have like portals in it that? Sarah the Sun there in the summer summer solstice where it like a lines up with like Yeah, that's nuts. It's nuts. They were so advanced They were so advanced and there's a fantastic series called magical Egypt by this guy that he's been on my podcast twice. He's gone now, unfortunately. But his name was John Anthony West. And he was sort of an alternative Egyptologist. It wasn't like formally trained in it, but became obsessed with it and learned so much about the mysteries of these ancient cultures and how insanely sophisticated they were and how they have hieroglyphs that date back 40,000 plus years of history. So they depict these kings that modern Egyptologists say, oh, that's just fantasy.

They're just making that up. They don't even, that's, don't pay attention to that. Pay attention to the stuff from the time period where we tell you it happened. Because they talk about kings and people that lived 40,000 years ago. I think they were probably right. I think that's probably real. I think they probably had some sort of memory of how this all got done. And they probably lost all of it over time.

And all of it due to catastrophe and who knows war they were conquered by the Nubians all sorts of things happen to Egypt and now it's just like just guessing just quit but this thing these structures they're so insane that you just look at him and go how I gotta learn more about this it's wild stuff magical Egypt is called yeah it's a fantastic documentary but but just if i could recommend anybody discussing it's randall carlson and graham hancock and and graham has i always fuck this up it's ancient apocalypse right on netflix yes and it's a whole series about the evidence that points to ancient civilizations that we can't explain and we don't

know what who who built this why is it here? Like how, how is it so sophisticated and where this culture go? Like we don't like, we know about the Mayans, right? We don't know how they built that stuff, but we do know that they were probably wiped out by plague. It was probably European settlers came down here and gave them diseases. They had no immunity to, and it wiped them out. Just like it wiped out 90% of Native American population Native Hawaiians too yes, so we know that that's probably was the end of the Mayan civilization But we have no fucking idea like what prompted them to do that I went to Chichen Itza and you just look around you go whoa

What did you do? How did you guys do this? Yeah, like what you're doing something that people in other parts of the world have no, like people in Europe, they weren't doing anything like that. They're making shit out of fucking bricks and stuff and wood, stupid ends, you know? And these people are making these immense structures out of stone and dedicating them to the cosmos. It's wild stuff. Yeah, I love these things where there just is no theory yet.

Yeah. So, I mean, the one I pay most attention to is consciousness. I have lots of philosophers on my podcast. It was my major in college. There's no leading theory of why it is that human beings are conscious as opposed to mere robots or mere lifelike robots. There's nothing agreed upon there's no you know we're in the pre-darwin days with respect just to this problem like there's

no one solved it and what is it and is it local is it a part of you or are you an antenna we don't know there's no theory i mean are theories, but similar to the pyramid, there's nothing agreed upon because there's no evidence that strongly, no evidence or even logic that strongly favors one theory or the other. It's fascinating that people always say it's the mind. But my thought was always been like, imagine if there was a machine and this machine did all these incredible things, but you realize this machine was plugged into the wall. And if you pulled that plug out, the machine stopped working. Like, oh, well, that's the brain right there because you pull that out, it doesn't work anymore. Well, you blow someone's brains out, they can't think anymore.

But is that because the brains are where they're thinking? Or is it possible that the brain is receiving consciousness, that consciousness is something that's just a part of the universe and that we are the embodiment of it in a physical, biological form? But we're just kind of tuning into it and we're using the mind. We're using the human brain to tune that in like a radio. mind but using the human brain to tune that in like a radio it's kind of close to the idea of panpsychism right which is it's it's as respected now a theory as all of the the other theories which is just that consciousness is in every atom in microcosm and when you put enough atoms together in some kind of way you get advanced consciousness but you know by that logic the table would have some rudimentary form of consciousness it would just be nothing like an animal nothing like a dog which is nothing like a human

but and as as nuts as that sounds it is on a par with all of the other theories. None of the other theories have more evidence for them than that one. It's a deep mystery that science, despite its enormous successes over the past 400, 500 years, is no closer to an answer about now than it was, you know, a hundred years ago. But isn't that always the case? Like if you stopped and think about what life would be like if you lived before they understood that viruses existed or what caused them or what bacteria was, what caused infections when they, you know, when surgeons didn't even wash their hands, they didn't even know. They didn't have any idea.

Their understanding of what these things are was based entirely on what people had already figured out, and they couldn't imagine a world. Imagine if you lived before bacteria was discovered. Imagine a world where someone tried to explain to you. Now, there's like these little tiny invisible things. That's what's fucking you up. Like, what are you talking about, dude?

Hey, you need a microscope to see them. Like, a microscope. But Philip Goff, who's a philosopher, he made a very good point to me because I made that exact same argument to him. I said, isn't this just another one of all the big paradigm shifts that we've had? And he made the good point,

which is that the whole idea of science is premised on what is observable, what you can empirically observe. All of the great idea of science is premised on what is observable, what you can empirically observe. All of the great discoveries of science in one or another form have been based on observable evidence. Even things that are too small to see, they have effects that can be measured, and we can test different theories by looking at observable things. Consciousness is about the unobservable. And so in some deep way, science was not designed to answer the question, right? The, the, like I, you wouldn't know that I was conscious if you couldn't tell that you were conscious and you, you extend the courtesy,

the analogy to me. I figure Coleman's conscious. He's a thing like me. There's something it feels like to be this flesh. So I'm going to assume that there's something it's like to be Joe Rogan. There's the lights are on in there and it's not just, you're not just a humanoid robot that is, that has advanced AI, but there's no feeling. Right. Um, how does science deal with a problem like that? Because the evidence of consciousness is unobservable from the outside by definition i cannot observe that you're conscious you just know it because you know it right that's not like other scientific problems we've solved yeah that's uh you know it makes it in principle much more difficult of a question to solve because what would an answer even look like yeah yeah and yet it's kind of the most interesting question from my perspective.

Indeed. Yeah. What is it? What is it? Because according to the laws of physics, the laws of chemistry, everything that is known in biology, chemistry and physics, there is no reason why we should be feeling something in addition to doing stuff. You know? But doesn't it motivate you to do more stuff?

You can create a robot that does, that has the incentive structure of motivation without the feeling. Right. But you would have to create it, but you'd have to be a thing that understood those things in order to create it, but you'd have to be a thing that understood those things in order to create it. The assumption is that through evolution, there's been determining factors that favored that sort of thinking and behavior. Because those determining factors allowed you to create tools, shelter, devise strategies to avoid problems you've experienced in the past, and that all this would be beneficial to passing on your genes.

Yes. Yeah. But why does evolution have to come with this additional thing of having feelings? Right. But why does it have to? Bacteria evolve. Viruses evolve. But it just, why does it have to? Bacteria evolve, viruses evolve. But don't feelings motivate behavior? And doesn't behavior motivate innovation? Like all those things sort of, they work in conjunction to make sure we keep progressing. Yeah, they do. But,

but this extra variable of consciousness is, is not necessary for any of that. You could build a robot that hunted. In principle, the laws of physics allow for that you could build a robot that hunted and tried to procreate and did all this kind of stuff, but there's nobody home. Well, that's animals. That's what we like to think about it with predators. That's what we like to think about it. Probably, I assume animals have some rudimentary feeling. Right, but if we get down to certain really ancient creatures like crocodiles, we don't assume that.

Have you ever seen a video? There's a lady that's feeding crocodiles. She's throwing chickens into this crocodile pit. And this one crocodile reaches over and grabs the other crocodile's foot and just bites it and does a gator roll and just snaps his foot off and chokes it back and swallows it. And he doesn't even budge. He doesn't even budge. Like that thing is the thing you're talking about. That's like the biological robot that just consumes.

Watch this. This lady's throwing the food out there. So watch. This crocodile dives on it. And this one just grabs that guy's foot and, look, spins, off. Oh my god, and then just chokes it down look at that Because he thinks it's food and the other one doesn't even budge And I think they regenerate do crocodiles regenerate limbs They may regenerate a foot but maybe it

They may regenerate About a foot But maybe a Let's see Let me see Certain really primitive animals regenerate Which is pretty fucking wild Like you chop their hand off A new one grows back

Do crocodiles do that? No No What animals do regenerate? Some lizards can regrow their tails Not all of them None can regrow their limbs Ah interesting all of them. None can regrow their limbs. Ah, interesting.

So it's only tails. I wonder why tails. It says alligators are now the largest species known to regrow. Oh. This is from the Smithsonian. Okay, so is it saying regrow limbs? Young gators can sprout new tails that reach up to nine inches. New tails, Young ones. Regrow severed.

It says regrow severed limbs right on top. Yeah. Alligators are now the largest species known to regrow severed limbs. It's not a crocodile, though. But it's gators. I think they're pretty similar. Despite being reptiles, little is known about whether or not alligators could regenerate their thick, massive tails. Gators can reach 15 feet in length, way up to 1,000 pounds,

so regrowing a tail is no small feat. But in a surprising new discovery, scientists found that young American alligators can regrow their tails up to 9 inches, or around 18% of their body length. What does it say about their limbs, though? Are they considering a tail a limb? Is that why they're saying it that way? I guess, yeah. And this is even saying that one might have started regrowing

away from the body or it was in a pickle jar. Look at this. Further analysis revealed that the tail had grown back after it was severed. Using a high-tech imaging technologies and traditional dissection, the researchers found that the gator's tail regrew cartilage, connective tissue, and skin

instead of bone and skeletal muscle. The findings revealed that American alligators have more regenerative abilities than mammals. It says that mammals. Oh, I see. That mammals, which usually grow nerves, skin, and blood vessels, but less than lizards, which can sprout entirely new perfect tails with skeletal muscle. So lizards can grow a real new tail. So they're smaller. That's what it is. But So lizards can grow a real new tail. So they're smaller.

That's what it is. But can lizards regrow limbs? I don't think it's the same thing other than tails. Yeah, so they're saying limbs, but they really just mean tails. It's a limb, I suppose, but yeah. I'll see it. I believe there's an animal that regrows limbs. Which is fucking wild. I think octopi do.

Do they? Yeah, I think so. Animals such as lobsters, catfish. Lobsters? Yeah, lobsters do. That's right. That's one of the reasons why they chop lobsters' claws off

and throw them back in the water. Because they can regrow them? Yeah, they'll do that with crabs too. They just chop their claws off. See ya, bitch. Throw them back in, they'll do that with crabs too. They just chop their claws off. See ya bitch. Throw them back in the water and then they grow more claws. Just like to my point. Why isn't your spleen conscious? Maybe it is. Maybe your entire body is one conscious entity and when you cut things out of it, it fucks up the system.

You know? Maybe your spleen has its own point of view, where it's like, oh, I'm Coleman's spleen. He doesn't really know about me. I'm doing my best to do my stuff, and I feel things. Well, what about gut bacteria? I'm working hard today, but I'm going to work less hard if I finish this, you know? Well, there's a lot of observable data about gut bacteria and human behavior. Yeah.

Yeah, and there's gut bacteria of observable data about gut bacteria and human behavior. Yeah. Yeah. And there's, there's gut bacteria linked to depression, linked to all sorts of ailments and mental disorders. And which is fascinating because like, if you have a disruption of the organisms that live inside of you, like there's, who knows how many, someone said once that there's more E.

Coli living in your gut than there have ever been humans ever. Yeah. And so there's bacteria that exists in your body. You're like this host of life. And whether or not that is healthy bacteria or unhealthy can determine the way you think. It can determine cravings for sure. Like the type of gut bacteria. What is that stuff that there's like a certain type of gut bacteria

that people get when they eat too much sugar? It makes you want more sugar. Candida. Yeah. It's wild. So what do you take for a gut bio? Well, I think there's probiotics that you can take that can mitigate some of those issues,

but it's also a healthy diet and feeding yourself the correct foods because you want your body to have the real building blocks to be healthy and to regrow tissue instead of just stuffing your face with stuff that tastes good, which gets you addicted to that it's weird empty calories filled with sugar but so addictive and so bizarre that that's a normal part of the human diet and that some study recently said something like 40 of the american diet is processed food which is just nuts just i was drinking this allulose stuff recently. What's that? Allulose, they have it in Soylent. It's what makes Soylent sweet. It's an alternative sugar.

But it basically causes diarrhea to everyone at some dose. So for me, it caused diarrhea if I had drank two. Two gives you diarrhea. One, you're good. My girlfriend gets diarrhea one sip. Wow. And everyone just has a threshold. And also it's my understanding is it's not approved at all in Europe. So when I learned that, I just said I should probably cool off on this, not drink it every day until we have a little more information that this is OK in the long run, but it tastes great and it's not technically sugar. So they can, they can say a Soylent has zero sugar, but tastes amazing. So, and this feels too good to be true. My mother told me whenever something sounds too good to be true, it probably is. So I stopped drinking it. Uh, although it's really good. Do you know the

difference between like net carbs and actual carbs? You know, they're allowed to say things like net carbs. Net of what? Yeah, exactly. So like if you look at something and it's like, oh, this only has like two grams. Are there negative carbs that are being? No, no, it's not that. It's just there's other factors. Like net carbs, like outside of sugar, outside of this, but how does your body process it?

Like net carbs, I think, find out if this is true. I think it was a phrase that was invented by Atkins when they were doing the Atkins diet, when they were trying to label things in terms of like, they were trying to make things more low-carb seeming. But I think it's kind of a deceptive term. Someone was explaining online, and I just glanced at it really quickly, and I didn't get the deep dive on it. But I...

Is that what it is? According to the Wall Street Journal, Atkins coined the phrase in 2001 to sidestep guidelines. Yeah. So Atkins coined the phrase net carbs back in 2001 to sidestep the FDA's existing guidelines. Atkins labels will drop the term net carbs. So what is net carbs? Okay, the concept net carbs was first introduced in 2002 when researchers, when research demonstrated fiber had a minimal impact on blood sugar. Is it carbs minus fiber then? I think so. So what does it say? When a carb is not a carb, the net carb debate. Click on that. Okay. When is a carb not a carb? That's the question many carb conscious dieters are now facing as they struggle to keep their carb counts within the strict limits recommended by Atkins and other low carb diets. In an effort to cash in on the low-carb craze, food manufacturers had invented a new category of carbohydrates known as net carbs, which promises to let dieters eat the sweet and creamy foods they crave

without suffering the carb consequences. But the problem is that there's no legal definition of the net active or impact carbs popping up on food labels and advertisements. The only carbohydrate information regulated by the FDA is provided in the Nutrition Facts labels, which lists total carbohydrates and breaks them down into dietary fiber and sugars. Any information or claims about carbohydrate content that appear outside that box have not been evaluated by the FDA. The terms have been made up by food companies, says Wahinda Karmali, Dr. PHRD, Director of Nutrition at the Irving Center for Clinical Research at Columbia University.

It's a way for the manufacturers of these products to draw attention to them and make them look appealing by saying, look, you can eat all these carbs, but you're really not impacting your health, so to speak. Although the number of products touting net carbs continues to grow, nutrition experts say the science behind these claims is fuzzy, and it's unclear whether counting net carbs will help or hurt weight loss efforts. So what's a net carb? The concept of net carbs is based on the principle that not all carbohydrates affect the body in the same manner. Some carbohydrates, like simple or refined starches and sugars, are absorbed rapidly and have a high glycemic index,

meaning they cause blood sugar levels to quickly rise after eating. Excess simple carbohydrates are stored in the body as fat. index, meaning they cause blood sugar levels to quickly rise after eating, excess simple carbohydrates are stored in the body as fat. Example, these include potatoes, white bread, white rice, and sweets. Other carbohydrates such as fiber found in whole grains, fruits, and vegetables move slowly through the digestive system, and much of it isn't digested at all, which is insoluble fiber. Also in these categories of largely indigestible carbohydrates are sugar alcohols, such as mannitol, sorbitol, xylitol, and other polyols, which are modified alcohol molecules that reassemble sugar.

These substances are commonly used as artificial sweeteners. In calculating net carbs, most manufacturers take the total number of carbohydrates, a product containing and subtract fiber and sugar alcohols because these type of carbohydrates are thought to have minimal impact on blood sugar levels. So, for example, the label on Power Bar's new double chocolate flavor protein carb select bar says it has only two grams of impact carbohydrates.

The Nutrition Facts label on the product says it has 30 grams of total carbohydrates. Yes. These people are shameless. Wild. Just below the Nutrition Facts box, the impact carb facts box provided by the manufacturer explains fiber and sugar alcohols have a minimal effect on blood sugar for those watching their carb intake count two grams that's 30 grams minus the bar's 27 grams of sugar alcohol and one gram of fiber but the researchers here's even further

researchers say that the impact of sugar alcohols on blood sugar levels and the body is not fully understood. And they may also cause problems in some people. There are some sugar alcohols that can raise your blood sugar, says Carmalli. Certain sugar alcohols do have a higher glycemic index. And they are still not counted as carbohydrates by these companies. Yeah, this is shameless. I mean. It's wild.

It's a wild term. Yeah. It does remind me, though, of what we were talking about earlier with the opioid scandal and OxyContin. They came up with this notion of breakthrough pain. Yeah. Which instead of saying that OxyContin doesn't prevent pain for 10 hours, right? That was their 10 or 12 hours, I guess, was their original claim. Instead of admitting that that was false, they had all these people coming in after three, four hours and the pain is back. And it's horrible, back and worse

than ever. Instead of admitting that it just doesn't protect you for as long as they said, they said, oh, well, some patients experience breakthrough pain as if the oxy is doing its job, but certain pain is like breaking through. Right. It's blaming the pain as opposed to the drug. Yeah. That's the way it's framed. Well, remember, breakthrough transmissions. Yeah. Again, this is the idea that COVID somehow broke through the defensive shield of the vaccine rather than claiming, saying it normally, which would be the vaccine doesn't prevent you from getting it again.

Right. That would be the normal way to say that rather than to create a new concept of a breakthrough infection that is breaking through like a powerful warrior through the shield of this substance. It's a weird, a very backwards way of framing what's going on. Well, it's deceptive. And it's, again, this product of money being connected to science, money being connected to medical science, money being connected to nutrition science. Money being connected to nutrition science. How do we make more money?

Net carbs. I got this idea. Listen to this. How do we call it net carbs? And so even though it has 30 carbs, people are like, that's too many carbs. Two grams of net carbs. Ooh, I like it. Can we get away with that?

Yeah. No problem. Yeah. Glycemic index. Bunch of shit. Yeah, we're good. Roll it out. Roll it out.

So it's not people that are objectively looking at these products and saying, well, we have to be honest about what's in here. And that total carbohydrates, no one's going to read that, bro. That's in that little thing at the bottom. That's little tiny letters. You can't even read it if you don't have eyeglasses on. The big total net carbs is like two grams in the front on the label. We're good.

Most people just look at that and go, oh, two grams of carbs. I'm good to go. That's how they get you. Yeah. And what they are doing is just doing what they do. That's their game. That's the game. That's the money game.

That's when you get money. By the way, if they don't do it, they'll be replaced by someone who will. If their company doesn't do it, their company will over time lose revenue to the companies that do. Probably, if that's legal, until people recognize it like they do now. And regulate. And regulate, yeah. It's a sneaky world that's going to be solved with mind reading. We're going to fix it all. Did you ever find that commercial? The World Economic Forum cartoon about mind reading at work? Because we should probably end with this because it's adorable. It's so kooky when you watch it.

You just go, what? Like this lady is fantasizing about the guy. And you see the guy with like a six pack in a cartoon. And you see her coworker getting hauled off in a cartoon and you see her co-worker getting hauled off you know because the co-worker was doing something corrupt and she was worried because she was starting a project with this guy so it's all labeling all the reasons why you should submit to mind reading this is going to be great yikes you find it jamie you remember we played it, right? Sort of, but I mean, also, like, if it's the same thing as the...

But it was a cartoon. Then it's not real. No, it's a cartoon, though, Jamie. I understand. But you mean it's a fake cartoon? Like, it's not real? What I was trying to say is that whatever they're trying to depict in the cartoon isn't accurate. No, no, no, no, no.

What they're saying is, in the future, this is what they're saying in the cartoon, what you can look forward to, not that they're doing it right now. They're saying you can look forward to when this technology is implemented, it's going to radically increase productivity, and this is how. It's going to make people happier, and this is how. I think I have it. You got it? It's from their whole presentation.

It's adorable. What do you watch it? You're like, what? I just want to know who looks at this and goes, I like it. Here. First off, a video. It's going to make you see the future and understand a wonderful future. It's wonderful, Coleman.

We're going to fight crime, Coleman. Future crime. You're in the zone. Even you can't believe how productive you've been. Your memo is finished. Your inbox is under control. And you're feeling sharper than you have in a decade. Sensing your joy, your playlist shifts to your favorite song.

Sending chills up your spine as the music begins to play. You glance at the program running in the background on your computer screen and notice a now familiar sight that appears whenever you're overloaded with pleasure, your theta brainwave activity decreasing in the temporal regions of your brain. You mentally move the cursor to the left and scroll through your brain data over the past few hours. You can see your stress levels rising as the deadline to finish your memo approached, causing a peak in your beta brainwave activity right before an alert popped up telling you to take a brain break. But what's that unusual change in your brain activity when you're asleep? It started earlier in the month you send a text

message to your doctor with a mental swipe of your cursor could you take a quick look at my brain data anything to worry about your mind starts to wander to the new colleague on your team whom you know you shouldn't be daydreaming about given the policy against intra-office romance No fucking way. Look at him. He's hot. Wait. Yeah. She notices.

She thought about him and then her supervisor notices. Oh my God. Ugh. When the email she sends you later that day congratulates you on your brain metrics from the past quarter, which have earned you another performance bonus. You head home jamming to the music with your work-issued brain-sensing earbuds still in. Work-issued. You arrive at work the next day. Yeah, look at this. A somber cloud has fallen over the office. Oh, my God.

Along with emails, text messages, and GPS locations. Look at the guys with sunglasses. Oh my god. Look at the guys with sunglasses. The government has sunglasses on. The men in black. for his co-conspirators. You discover they are looking for synchronized brain activity between your co-worker and the people he has been working with. While you know you're innocent of any crime, you've been secretly working with him on a new startup venture.

Shaking, you remove your earbuds. Whoa. Oh, this is who I'm talking about. Yeah, Nita Farah fair honey that's who i had on my podcast yeah just imagine that as being the future oof that's not your your supervisor notices you're thinking about something other than work hey coleman what are you concentrating on over there sorry sorry back to work I saw you checking out Jessica back to work sorry sorry look you got a performance bonus you were a good robot

fuck Nita even told me about situations where a couple would go into therapy and a woman would say to the man like i don't know if you really love me and they say well we can actually see how he feels when when he sees your face or when he let's put him in a esg or fmri and and now we can confirm it and now he's freaking out he's like well do i have to do I have to play act or should I just feel what I feel or what should I be thinking? Should I try to rig this or will my love naturally come through

in this sterile environment? And now they have proof that, you know, like this kind of stuff. Well, that is a sterile environment too. It's like the rat farm study. You know what they did with the rat farm study you know that what they did with the rat Park study the the the the heroin study yeah yeah you think these cocaine as well didn't use cocaine some of us but the point is that in

laboratory environments harsh sterile laboratory environments the rats go immediately to the drugs yeah they just take the drugs because they're fucking freaked out but when you put them in a rat park, they just drink water. Right. So the rat park is all stuff to play with. There's a lot of space. A lot of other rats are having a good time

doing stuff. They don't get high. They don't get fucked up because it's a much more natural environment. Right. If you scan my brain in couples therapy, I might seem like a dick. Yeah, you could.

You also might not have wanted to be there. Yeah. And you might be dealing with some fucking nonsense and you're like oh my god I can't believe I have to go here and deal with this stupid shit and then you're hostile and then we're reading that you're a house though I have things to do this is fucking crazy yeah well hopefully we'll figure it out before we get to that reality hopefully we won't blow ourselves up and have thousands of years of barbaric human behavior before we restart civilization too yeah before take three okay before you leave because yeah we've been doing

this a long time what's your take on all this uap shit oh yeah so i'm i'm very open minded to it. I when I originally read the article from David Grutch, not from him, but reporting about him and all of these other intelligence people that seem to confirm his story. I thought this seems like the best. This seems like the most solid case for UAPs to date. Then I saw him interviewed and he seemed like a crazy guy. So I kind of, just you get that sense sometimes when you see someone actually on video. On the other hand, you know, I have people I know that are saying because of the multiple confirmations from other respected people,

former intelligence people people that they take it very seriously and um uh and and i think i don't know i think we'll know soon i don't know i mean i i really i really uh i put i put the odds at like five percent when i first saw the David Grutch story drop. But then when I saw his crazy eyes, I put that down to like 1%. That's hilarious. I think there's multiple things going on simultaneously. I think if you go back to the sightings that happened in this country,

specifically the multitude of sightings that happened after we dropped the bombs. There seems to be, if they're telling the truth, there's a lot of credible sightings by high-level military people, by people that claimed they shut down nuclear missile bases and that they did things, that they hovered over bases and that fighter jets scrambled to go after him. All this stuff seems verifiable that there was some sort of a phenomenon back when there was no possible technology that existed that could do that in terms of like what we could make. I don't think that's the case anymore. my feeling is there's probably real life situations where we or someone encounter something from somewhere else i think it would be foolish to think that's not possible just given the vast scope of the universe and the possibility of things existing

in a much more stable environment where they don't have to worry about asteroid storms in a different kind of solar system or the different kind of life form that doesn't have all the primate issues that we have that evolves to the point where it's capable of traveling through the universe and visiting these semi-primitive cultures like ours or relatively primitive cultures. I think that's possible. I also think when the government starts telling you about out of world crafts and things not of this earth and all that, I think that's what I would say if I had some technology that we have developed that is insane, that is beyond the imagination of the Luddite, beyond the imagination of the person who doesn't understand the physics involved and whatever this propulsion system they've engineered is.

And people have been working on magnetic propulsion systems and gravity propulsion systems forever. That with the unlimited amount of funds that the government has, that the military has to develop things, that somewhere they've developed some sort of a drone that's capable of moving in ways that we can't even imagine. And that's what the Tic Tac UFO is and all the other military sightings. I think they all seem to happen near where military bases are. They seem to happen like off the coast of San Diego is the Tic Tac one. There's a big military presence in San Diego. They happen off the East Coast where they have military bases

and these restricted air zones. They happen in these places where they run tests, like when they do training missions with jets. And that's how these fighter pirates like Ryan Graves have encountered these things. Specifically after they updated their sensors. These people have spotted things visually.

They have visual confirmation. Their detection systems have seen these things. But who's to say that these things aren't some sort of fucking crazy drone that we have developed that we don't want the world to know that we've developed it so we say oh

it's out of this world it's crazy ufos bro that's i hear in brazil that they're publicly way more open to the possibility of uaps and even the the government has like kind of looked into it open-mindedly and um and and Brazil has just been like an open conversation, a non-taboo conversation for decades. Yeah, it's very different. Also, there's a very famous sighting or event that happened in Virginia. So the town of Virginia, Brazil, actually has this giant flying saucer as a monument dedicated to this event that happened in the 1990s.

It's documented in the James Fox documentary Moment of Contact. It's a great documentary because you go into it open-minded and you go, what did these fucking people see? Because they bring this police officer to the site of where they supposedly found this crashed thing that happened during some crazy electrical storm, something crashed. Then another vehicle seemed to have been looking for it. And supposedly, according to this story, and the people that were interviewed, they saw creatures. They saw this creature, and one of them was injured. And this soldier took this creature to more than one different

hospital. It's documented. And then that soldier died. That soldier died of some crazy bacteria infection, some crazy infection that they couldn't treat. He died. He was a young guy and he died pretty quickly after it happened. And there's people that to this day, they're like, you know, much older now. And they describe when they were children and they saw this thing. They saw this living creature that had apparently been trying to communicate with him and asked them for help and that that after that happened there was another craft that came that was seen by thousands of people in this town that described this exact same thing where they saw this thing that appeared to be like looking for this crash craft or the members that were inside the the creatures that were inside this thing.

I don't know. It sounds awesome. That's what I'm scared of. What I'm scared of is I want it to be real. Right, right, that it's cool sounding. Yeah. And look, this guy David Grutch, he says they have evidence of organic materials

that are not man-made. Right. That's a very easy claim to prove or disprove. Right. You could send bits of it to five different labs tomorrow if anyone had it and have them all independently confirm, right? But David Grush is not saying

he has any personal experience with this. This is where it makes it interesting. This is just stuff that was revealed to him, which is also how I would get out information if I wanted to put out misinformation. I mean, we know that the federal government infiltrates extremist groups. And they put, you know, they have members. Like when the famous Gretchen Whitmer case, when they were saying that they were going to kidnap her. And it turned out that 12 of the 14 people that were involved were federal informants.

So 12 of the 14 people were feds that were involved in this. So, like, if I was going to, if I wanted to release some fake information, I would find some dude and I'd say, hey, man, look at this. This is crazy. Look what we found. Like, I want you to investigate this. And then maybe you should probably be a whistleblower. I should tell the world.

You should tell the world. Dude, you should tell the world. But if you haven't seen it yourself, this is all just talk. It's all hearsay. You're reading documents. Maybe they're true. Maybe they're not. What fascinates me is people like Commander David Fravor

that encountered that Tic Tac thing, and the other fighter pilots in a different jet that encountered this. They saw this thing, and they saw it take off at insane rates of speed, and then they tracked it where it went to their cat point, which is their agreed-upon point where this mission had very specific areas that they were going to go to. This thing went directly to there at an insane rate of speed that supposedly if there was a human being inside of it did just turn into jello like you wouldn't you would in the structure would break apart like

nothing that we have can withstand that kind of g-force and that kind of speed so what is that what is that is that a propulsion system that is right now unknown to the general population? Is that something that they've been working on for a long time where they've developed this ability to get this thing to move to certain directions? Well, I know there's this guy, Mick Jenkins, you know, you know about him? No. Mick Jenkins, uh, made a series of videos and articles explaining in detail how that could all be camera error and very kind of- Mick West. Mick West. Mick Jenkins. Mick Jenkins is the rapper. I'm an idiot. Mick West.

Mick West is- You've seen those? Yes. Yeah. But the problem is he's assuming that all of their communications, that they don't know what they're seeing, that they don't know how to read these machines that are detecting things, that their eyes are deceiving them. They're, they're looking at this thing physically. Either they're lying or they don't know what they're looking at. He's a non-believer believer. You know, there's people that are just

skeptics no matter what. And they're not going, I don't know what that is. They're like, no, there's no way that is this. But when you talk to the actual fighter pilots that have listened to his criticism, like he doesn't know what he's talking about. That's what they say. I don't know who's telling the truth. I don't know who's correct, but I would probably believe that they understand that a thing that moves from 50,000 feet above sea level to 50 in a second is beyond comprehension. If the tracking systems are accurate, which they are with everything else, they are with all the jets and there's ways to detect them or there's ways to evade them, right? That's what the stealth bomber is all about.

There's ways to evade certain radar systems. But there's like multiple systems and physical or visual recognition of this thing where multiple people have seen this thing move in this very bizarre way. And then there's the recognition of this thing where multiple people have seen this thing move in this very bizarre way and then there's the video of this thing taking off at this is supposed insane rates of speed there's the go fast one that's uh off the coast the east coast there's these weird things where you're like what are they looking at yeah why how fast is that thing going and what's why doesn't it have a heat signature? Where's the propulsion system?

What is that thing? Is that just a mylar balloon and they're stupid? That doesn't seem to make sense to me. It doesn't seem to make sense to me that they're detecting this thing that, according to Ryan Graves, stays motionless in 120 knot winds and then can zip off in some insane way. They don't understand what it's doing, that they're seeing this. Is it a circle inside of a sphere or a sphere inside of a circle? That's the same thing.

I'm sorry. Is it a circle inside of a sphere or is it a circle inside of a square or a cube? Yeah, it's like a cube in a sphere. A cube inside of a sphere. So there's a translucent sphere and inside is a black cube. And they keep seeing this very specific thing that behaves in this way and moves in this crazy way. Well, if they have something that can manipulate gravity and something that moves in a totally different way. If it was our government doing that, wouldn't they make sure everyone in the Air Force was clear of the area before they tested it? Or is it that they're not coordinated?

Well, maybe they want them to be able to detect it. Maybe they want to see how much they can see of these things. see of these things. If it's a drone and you have these fighter pilots and if you wanted to test some super sophisticated just ultra secret technology. To see if it's undetectable by radar. Or how much of it is detectable.

Let's upgrade their systems and let's send these things loose and see how often they spot them. And let's see what they can do. Can they track these things? Are we capable of tracking them? When they do move off at like a million miles an hour, like how much can we see? What can we do? And what can we do with these things?

Like maybe right now they can't use them in terms of like maybe there's not some sort of a military way to use it. You know, it's just they just fly real fast. So maybe they're still in some sort of a stage of development, you know? And if something is moving at that insane speed, maybe you can only have it made out of a certain thing. Maybe you can't put weapons on it. Maybe you can't put electronics on it. Maybe you can only make it move around. I don't know.

But the whole thing that it's definitely from another world, if they're telling me it's from another world, I'm like, you know, you guys aren't square about anything. Why would you be square about that? It's definitely more likely to be from our world. More likely. More likely. time, I, you know, I think most, most people that believe life is biological and that God didn't start at all and earth isn't special would acknowledge there's probably life out there. Yeah. Most likely. Most likely. And if it's advanced, it would be curious. Just like we're curious. So I don't, that's why I don't rule it out. Like I said, I always assign

it very low probability because the odds are things that are crazy and on earth are created by us. And we just haven't found out about that yet. But I don't rule out the extraterrestrial source. For me, it's a frustrating distraction. It's like less frustrating than social media. It's less frustrating than scrolling through Instagram. But it's equally unsatisfying. We're like, ugh,

what is that? What am I wasting my time paying attention to? Show me some shit or leave me alone. I'm not going to be the one to figure it out. No. No. No. Well, listen, man, thank you very much for your time. Yeah, my pleasure. I really appreciate you very much and I appreciate the way you think about things. You're very intelligent, very objective

and just measured and I think you're an important voice out there. Oh, thanks. You're very intelligent, very objective, and just measured, and I think you're an important voice out there. Thanks, Joe. I really appreciate you. And tell everybody how they can listen to you more. Yeah, listen to my podcast, Conversations with Coleman. I release an episode a week. I write for the free press

and for my own sub stack called Coleman's Corner. And go to colemanhughes.org. All right. Thank you very much. Cool. Bye, everybody. and go to ColemanHughes.org alright thank you very much cool bye everybody