The Philip DeFranco Show - PDS 4.09 The Trump Patriotic Education Problem & Reverse Discrimination Lawsuits That Will Change Everything

Episode Date: April 9, 2025

To subscribe & save 25% for life head to https://forwellness.yt.link/3WBdTBc and use code philipdefranco for free shipping on your first order. Use code “PHIL” for $20 OFF your first SeatGeek order & returning buyers use code “PDS” for $10 off AND your chance at weekly $500 prizes! https://seatgeek.onelink.me/RrnK/PHIL   https://BeautifulBastard.com Get 15% off the best tees and hoodies out there with CODE: "PDS15" on top of select 50% OFF sale items. Subscribe for New shows every Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday, & Thursday @ 6pm ET/3pm PST & watch more here:  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vNZrI3CaKdc&list=PLHcsGizlfLMWpSg7i0b9wnUyEZWI-25N3&index=1  – ✩ TODAY’S STORIES ✩ – 00:00 - Trump's “Patriotic Education” Goal Could Change America Forever 11:53 - Sponsored by For Wellness 13:00 - SCOTUS Shows Support for Straight Woman in Reverse Discrimination Case 20:56 - Sponsored by Seatgeek 21:31 - How the “Lunar Time” Problem Is Crucial for Colonizing the Moon ——————————   Produced by: Cory Ray Edited by: James Girardier, Maxwell Enright, Julie Goldberg, Christian Meeks, Matthew Henry Art Department: William Crespo Writing/Research: Philip DeFranco, Brian Espinoza, Lili Stenn, Maddie Crichton, Chris Tolve, Star Pralle, Jared Paolino Associate Producer on Patriotic Education: Jared Paolino Associate Producer on Reverse Discrimination: Lili Stenn Associate Producer on Moon Time: Star Pralle ———————————— For more Philip DeFranco: Apple Podcasts: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/the-philip-defranco-show/id1278424954 Spotify: https://open.spotify.com/show/6ESemquRbz6f8XLVywdZ2V Twitter:   https://x.com/PhillyD Instagram:   https://instagram.com/PhillyDeFranco Newsletter: https://www.dailydip.co TikTok:   https://www.tiktok.com/@philipdefranco?lang=en ———————————— #DeFranco #DonaldTrump #China ———————————— Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Truck Month is on at Chevrolet. Get 0% financing for up to 72 months on a 2025 Silverado 1500 Custom Blackout or Custom Trail Boss. With Custom Trail Bosses available, Class Exclusive Duramax 3.0L Diesel Engine and Z71 Off-Road Package with a 2-inch factory suspension lift, you get both on-road confidence and off-road capability. Dirt road ahead? Let's go! Truck Month is awesome! Ask your Chevrolet dealer for details. What's better than a well-marbled ribeye sizzling on the barbecue? A well-marbled ribeye sizzling on the barbecue that was carefully selected by an Instacart shopper and delivered to your door. A well-marbled ribeye you ordered without even leaving the

kiddie pool. Whatever groceries your summer calls for, Instacart has you covered. Download the Instacart app and enjoy $0 delivery fees on your first three orders. Service fees, exclusions, and terms apply. Instacart. Groceries that over-deliver. Trump's plans to inject so-called patriotic education into U.S. schools has experts freaking out that it's a dog whistle for making sure the next generation is loyal to him, with it mirroring steps taken in Russia and China. The Supreme Court now looks like it's about to agree

with a woman who said she was discriminated against by her gay coworkers because she's straight. And then some lighter, interesting news about the race against the clock to establish moon time. We're deep diving into all of that on today's brand new Philip DeFranco show. You daily dive into the news, how it's being covered, and how people are reacting to it, starting with this. So Donald Trump announced something in the second

week of his presidency, but we really haven't heard much about it since. And that is this whole idea of patriotic education. Specifically, I want to talk about not just the United States, but the way that we've seen this very idea implemented in other countries around the world over the past few years and what we can maybe learn from that. But first, let's go back to Trump's first term in office, Because that's actually when he first declared a new national campaign to promote patriotic education. With him claiming that, quote, "'Left-wing rioting and mayhem were the direct results

"'of decades of left-wing indoctrination in our schools.'" With him denouncing what he described as a twisted web of lies being taught in US classrooms about racism in America, even calling it a form of child abuse. And then Trump warning that the crusade against American history is toxic propaganda and ideological poison that, if not removed,

would destroy the country. And so with that, he set up the so-called 1776 Commission to fight back, promoting a version of events that critics have said warped the history of racism and slavery in America. With him saying that not only did it excuse the country's dark past, but even doing it in ways that condemned the civil rights movement.

With some outraged historians calling it a hack job and outright lies. And of course, Biden, he rescinded the order. Now it's 2025, Trump is back, and so is the 1776 commission. And with that, an early executive order entitled Ending Radical Indoctrination and K-12 Schooling relaunched the initiative

while claiming that, quote, in recent years, parents have witnessed schools indoctrinate their children in radical anti-American ideologies while deliberately blocking parental oversight. With that, not so subtly making it clear that such concepts as white privilege, unconscious bias, systemic racism, as well as any acceptance of transgender identity all fall under that umbrella of radical anti-American thinking. With all of this paving

the way for the Department of Education to enforce penalties against schools that stray from the themes of patriotic education. We're sending a warning to schools that defying the order could be in facing investigation or losing federal funding. You know, with that, the call for patriotic education, it's not without precedent in American history. The 1776 commission, it came after decades of conservative outrage

about what some on the right have seen as the left-wing corruption of the country's youth. In 1940, for example, you had a parent writing an essay in American Legion magazine, criticizing radical, progressive, and communist teachers for not painting a perfectly complimentary picture of the founding fathers. And in fact, by the mid 20th century, many teachers accused of communist sympathies,

they lost their jobs or were taken to court. And by the 1960s, sex education became another big target of conservative backlash. And in 62, for example, the Supreme Court ruled that school sponsored prayer violated the first amendment with one parent reportedly saying in response, they've taken God out of the schools and put sex in. In any case, you know, now looking beyond the United States,

there of course is plenty of precedent outside of American history. Of course, some having highlighted how education became an instrument of control in Nazi Germany, but ironically, the specific language of patriotic education, perhaps actually is most reminiscent of decades long policies of the Chinese Communist Party,

which of course Trump and Republicans have fiercely criticized. With that, patriotism and propaganda, they've been a key part of education and other aspects of life since the CCP came into power in 1949. But then a very key thing is that back in 1994, the country explicitly adopted the language of patriotic education, them unveiling new guidelines in an effort to reassert control over the country in the wake of the Tiananmen Square Massacre. But then also, just in the past decade, we've again seen a resurgence of this idea. With this being in 2016, for example, the government issuing a directive calling for patriotic education to permeate each

stage and aspect of schooling. With this being not only through textbooks, assessments, and museum visits, but also through the internet. Which there, of course, is highly controlled, but still a very important source of information for many young Chinese people. And with that, the directive specifically demanded that university and college students be, quote, clearly taught about the dangers of negativity about the history of the party, nation, revolution, and reform, and opening up, as well as vilifying heroic figures. And then, in 2019, China stepped it up again, coming out with a sweeping new update to the guidelines. With this notably happening at the same time as a new wave of mass protests sprung up in Hong Kong against mainland interference. And what we've seen is that in the

past few years, as China has worked to solidify its grip on the territory, education has been a huge focus. Right, I mean, they just came out in 2024 with a new patriotic education law aimed at, quote, "'Enhancing national unity'", with a new curriculum being implemented in Hong Kong, including lessons on Xi Jinping thought, the personal philosophy of the Chinese president,

which was actually enshrined into the country's constitution in 2018. But also with this, what's very notable is, it's far from just China, where we've seen similar developments over just the past few years. In Turkey, for example, a 2016 coup attempt led to an authoritarian crackdown in which thousands

of teachers, academics, university administrators and education officials were removed from their jobs. With that also being part of a wider purge, the scale of which has been described as nearly unprecedented. With it also reportedly involving the firing of thousands of police officers, the detention of thousands of soldiers

and the shuttering of more than 100 media outlets. And not much later, you had President Erdogan announcing his plan to raise a pious generation by expanding religious education in public schools. In fact, even straight up replacing secular public schools with religious ones. And notably, he tried to justify the measures by claiming discrimination against Muslims.

And with that, later saying, "'Our aim is to raise young people equipped "'with national values.'" And this, while in fact, his policy is pushing religion and traditional or family values, they've actually reportedly led to increased discrimination against religious minorities in the LGBTQ community. And this also, as there's some stuff in common there

with what's been going on in Hungary, where you've had Prime Minister Viktor Orban also embarking on a campaign of so-called patriotic education, revising school curriculums to restore national self-esteem and celebrate the country's Christian identity, and later banning LGBT content in schools and on kids' TV. Of course, that was just one small part

of a wider culture war, largely being fought by attacking civil society, including, and perhaps especially, focusing on education. Right back in 2018, for example, forcing out Central European University, which was once considered one of the country's leading institutions of higher learning. This also, as it was hated by some for the fact that it was founded

by the conservative boogeyman, George Soros, with the mission of promoting democracy and human rights after the fall of the Soviet Union. Within all of that, bringing us to Brazil, where Bolsonaro, you know, the guy who's been described as the Brazilian Trump, he actually came to power campaigning in part against alleged Marxist indoctrination in the classroom.

And with that, he then attempted to implement an overhaul of the education system in that fashion, announcing plans to revise textbooks, to remove references to feminism and homosexuality. You know, with that, I'll say, you know, Bolsonaro isn't president anymore. He lost an election without conceding defeat and been so distrust in the country's electoral system

as part of an alleged coup attempt, and he has since been barred from holding public office in Brazil until 2030. Meanwhile, if we look to India, though, you have Prime Minister Modi still hanging on to power, with experts notably saying there that he has increasingly embraced the ideology

of Hindu nationalism. And with that, also going back to 2016, you had high ranking officials pushing to make the country's education system more patriotic, with them calling for a greater emphasis on national heroes and the teaching of history, and even suggesting making mandatory the singing of the national anthem by school children.

And what we've actually seen is what's been described as a crackdown on dissent at universities and on college campuses, as well as the rollout of new textbooks casting Modi's policies in a positive light. Right in 2023, for example, students in thousands of classrooms received new textbooks removing Muslim history and Hindu extremism.

With them, for example, removing references to the links between Hindu extremism and the assassination of Gandhi, the secular foundation of post-colonial India, and riots in 2002 in which hundreds of Muslims were killed. And this as they slashed or straight up removed chapters about a time when much of India was ruled by a Muslim empire, which then speaking of empire

that brings us to Vladimir Putin and his efforts to return Russia to its glory days. Ever since coming to power in Russia in the early 2000s, Putin has insisted that students learn patriotic values in schools, but again, over the past few years, this effort has just ramped up big time. A recent study, for example, suggests that educational reforms picked up speed following the annexation of Crimea in 2014,

with the Russian government that year, for example, approving a new set of history textbooks praising Putin's achievements. But then in 2020, Putin putting forward legislation adding patriotism and war history to the country's existing law regarding school curriculum. With his amendments specifically seeking to add, quote, a sense of patriotism and citizenship,

respect for the memory of the defenders of the fatherland "'and the achievements of the fatherland's heroes.'" And then of course, since 2022, he has only placed greater emphasis on education in an effort to drum up support for the invasion of Ukraine. Revising school textbooks and introducing teaching guides that help teachers deliver so-called patriotic lessons

as well as launching a new nationwide children's and youth movement dubbed the New Pioneers. You know, with all that, you have researchers unsurprisingly saying the increased emphasis on patriotism, it has coincided with a decline in freedom of speech in the classroom. With, for example, us seeing surveys suggesting

there are fewer opportunities for students to critically discuss what they've been taught in history classes. And also, you know, the teachers, they're more likely to be fired for publicly expressing political views. And ultimately, of course, this is by design, right? The studies show that education,

it serves as something like a long-term insurance policy for autocracies. But if you teach young citizens to be loyal to the authorities, this helps promote long-term social and political stability with, for example, the Washington Post explaining, autocrats realize that schools help create generations who share their ruling values and principles

and are loyal to the regime. You know, in looking at these other countries, where they were, how they've become more authoritarian over the past few years, I mean, you see the parallels. The very notion of patriotic education, the justifications given for it, mass firings and purges, the role religion can play, the way the LGBTQ community has been victimized,

it all rings a bell. There's nothing wrong with being proud of your country or loving where you live. But it's also important to know, like as we look at the US, the call for patriotic education, it is part of a bigger overhaul of the Department of Education.

In fact, I mean, we've talked about it over the past few weeks and months. You have the Trump administration recently signing an order to virtually abolish the department. And despite the fact that he lacks the constitutional authority to do so, he's moving forward. Where dozens of staff have been put on leave and Doge has been directed to review education spending

and already announced millions in cuts. And then beyond all that, Trump has signed orders that could reportedly drain millions from universities with many worrying that this threat will be weaponized to announced millions in cuts. And then beyond all that, Trump has signed orders that could reportedly drain millions from universities with many worrying that this threat will be weaponized to bring universities in line. And this also as he signs an order entitled, "'Seeking to Expand Access to Private School Vouchers." With us then seeing critics like the president

of the American Federation of Teachers arguing, "'This order hijacks federal money used to level "'the playing field for poor and disadvantaged kids "'and hands it directly to unaccountable private operators.'" With notably private school students in the US going to religiously affiliated institutions and just about half going to Catholic or conservative Christian ones.

Which is why you had the executive order most of all being celebrated by a movement that has already helped funnel billions in taxpayer dollars to religious schools. Right in this, playing out is you also had Trump signing an executive order, not aimed specifically at education, but aimed at eradicating what he called

anti-Christian bias in the US. You know, with that, announcing that Attorney General Pam Bondi would be heading up a task force to investigate the targeting of Christians. And with all this, right, all of this is not to say that the situation in the United States is currently remotely on par with places like China or Russia, where the country's leaders are single-handedly

dictating what students see in their textbooks. You know, there are a lot of reasons that it's very hard to imagine things getting that bad, at least everywhere in the United States, right? The president doesn't have the power to set curriculum. Additionally, Congress ostensibly has the power of the purse, though schools are largely funded

at the state and local level anyways. Plus, even when states and localities have tried, surveys of teachers show that most don't change their classroom materials or methods in response to conservative laws. But it would also be a massive mistake to think that there's nothing happening or that there's not a lot of room in the middle

from where we are in total control. And as you have places like the New York Times explaining, public school educators are often fearful of running into trouble with higher level authorities. And it's possible and even likely that Trump's executive orders will lead to some measure of self-censorship. Plus, while federal funding to public schools is limited,

most of what does exist, it helps prop up high poverty in rural schools and areas with weaker tax bases. So they're the ones most likely to be affected. And similarly, the Education Department provides discretionary grants aimed at helping low-income students and minority groups, as well as students with disabilities. But many of those programs, they're currently under review by the agency to determine whether they defy any of Trump's executive orders. And then also, in what's been described as an extraordinary step, the department announced that the Office of Civil Rights had dismissed pending complaints that people had filed to the office over efforts to

ban books about race and gender, with the office announcing that Rights had dismissed pending complaints that people had filed to the office over efforts to ban books about race and gender. Or with the office announcing that it had ended what it called the Biden book ban hoax. With it basically referring to previous guidance saying that book bans might create a hostile school environment or infringe on civil rights. And of course, all of this at the federal level, while at the local level,

some states and school boards have really taken a heavy hand in trying to dictate what can or must be taught. But you know, with all that said, I now, I gotta pass the question off to you, right? Whoever you are, I wanna know your opinions and reactions to this, but also, especially if you're involved in teaching or education in any way, at any level, I'd love to know your thoughts.

And then we'll get to more news in just a moment. But first, you know, coffee is a part of most of our mornings, right? But regular creamers and sugars, they're just empty calories that lead to crashes. So if you're looking for the ultimate productivity hack, today's sponsor for wellness, it has you covered with the good stuff focus.

I mean, trust me, it is good. No pun intended. One scoop into your coffee and it's like my brain just got a software update. Subtle mocha flavor that doesn't overcomplicate things, simple, yet it's just right. To me, it's not that sugar alertness. I'd call it a cleaner, more calming sense of focus

that keeps you sharp with no crash vibe. And it's packed with ingredients that actually work like the abromine to boost focus and mood, L-theanine for sustained energy without the jitters, collagen for that skin and joint glow up, C8 MCT oil for that lasting energy, and even Himalayan pink salt to keep the coffee's vibe in check.

And the good stuff's made in GMP certified facilities backed by actual research. So whether you're grinding at work, crushing a workout, or just trying to survive the day, this is your moment. Seriously, with over 10,000 five-star reviews, you got people obsessing.

And once you try it, I think you'll see why. And awesomely, save 25% with your subscription by clicking the link in the description or scan the QR code and use code Philip DeFranco for free shipping on your first order. But then next up today, we need to talk about how the Supreme Court seems like it's about to totally upend discrimination law, potentially opening up the floodgates for a

ton of reverse discrimination cases. For instance, the story, it centers around the case of Marlene Ames. She's a 60-year-old white woman who started working for the Ohio Department of Youth Services as an executive secretary in 2004, before then making her way up to become an administrator of a program to combat sexual assault in juvenile facilities by 2014. And throughout her employment, she regularly received solid job reviews and salary increases. So in 2019, in an effort to continue her rise, she applied for a management job for the first time. But instead of being offered that job, her direct supervisor presented her with a pin for 30 years of serving the public and told Ames, who was 55 then, that she should retire. With Ames then claiming that

the manager job was given to a woman who was less qualified than her and hadn't initially expressed interest in the role. Then, not long after that, Ames said that she was called into a meeting with an assistant director of DYS and a human resources official, who then gave her a choice. She could either take a demotion or lose her job entirely. With Ames then deeply upset, but she agreed to go back to her old secretary job out of financial necessity. And then, three days later, the administrator position that she had just been forced out of, it was filled by a 25-year-old protege of hers who she argued was also unqualified for the role. With Ames believing that there is one specific reason for all of this happening to her. She is straight, but her direct supervisor, her former protege, and the woman who

got the management role are all gay. Now that said, very significantly here, the assistant DYS director and human resources official who actually gave her the demotion, they are both straight. But Ames still claims that she was skipped over for the manager promotion and then later demoted so her direct supervisor could offer both positions to less qualified gay applicants. With her alleging that this was all part of a long running scheme involving her direct supervisor,

protege and others to kick her out because she is straight and arguing in a deposition that gay people stick together. Right, and all of those allegations, they're laid out in a lawsuit that she brought against the Ohio DYS that accuses the agency of discriminating against her based on sexual orientation and violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act. But here's the thing about proving workplace bias under Title VII. Past court rulings have set a precedent requiring folks from majority groups like men, white people, and straight people to meet a higher legal bar than those from minority groups. Now, of course, Ames is a woman, but she isn't claiming discrimination

based on her gender. Rather, she's claiming that a minority group, in this case, homosexuals, discriminated against her because she is heterosexual, which is a majority group. And so because this case involved a person from a majority group claiming discrimination from a minority group, she had to meet that higher bar. Now, notably, that threshold isn't uniform across the entire country, but it is required by nearly half of all federal appeals court circuits, including the one that covers Ohio

where Ames brought the case. But the idea here being that this extra step is necessary to account for the fact that it is rare to see reverse discrimination by a minority group against a majority. Right, so here's how it works. In order to prove a job discrimination claim in federal court, any plaintiff, majority or minority

has to do one of two things. A, they can provide direct evidence of bias, like an email or recording of someone saying you were not hired because you are straight. B, because it's often hard to get that kind of direct evidence, they can instead build a circumstantial case, which is what Ames did. And in order to prove a circumstantial case, both majority and minority plaintiffs must have evidence that they were rejected for a job they were qualified for and that the employer continued to seek applicants with similar qualifications, as well as refute any non-discriminatory reasons the employer may offer for why they weren't hired. But then this is where the extra step comes in. Members of majority groups also need to show background circumstances to establish that their employer discriminates against majorities,

a standard that minorities do not need to prove. And in Ames' case, a district court ruled that she failed to show background circumstances proving her employer discriminated against majority groups. With the judge there noting that the bosses who actually demoted her were straight and that she didn't provide any data to establish that DYS had a pattern of anti-straight bias beyond her case. And with that, in an interview, Ames openly said she was unaware of any other examples of alleged discrimination against straight people in the department. With her adding that she was never told that she had been rejected for the promotion or given the demotion because she's straight and that no one ever made derogatory comments about her sexual orientation. Additionally, you had the director of the DYS refuting her

allegations by claiming that Ames was demoted because her supervisors didn't think she had the skills or vision to effectively manage sexual victimization in the state's juvenile facilities. This is he also alleged that her workplace demeanor was abrasive and that she did poorly in her interview for the management job. And then adding that the applicants who got Ames' former job in the manager position had skills and experience she lacked. Now, notably, Ames appealed that ruling,

but the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit, it affirmed the lower court's decision. But, and this is a huge key thing here, in their ruling, one of the court judges questioned the validity of the background circumstances requirement, arguing that having different standards for different groups of people is exactly the kind of unequal treatment that Title VII was created to prevent in the

first place. And that is something that's also been echoed by one of Ames' attorneys, Edward Gilbert, who said that it was both unfair and very difficult to find the kind of statistical evidence that would show that an employer was biased against a majority group, and adding, I mean, we would have to, when a person is hired, have asked the question, are you gay? And were you promoted because you are gay? That's an illegal question and it's an inappropriate question. And so Ames appealed to the Supreme Court, arguing that the extra requirement on majority groups, it goes against the text of Title VII. And notably, her suit has attracted support from across the political spectrum with both the Biden administration and a right-wing group founded by a former Trump aide filing briefs, urging the court to side with her. But this is, on the other hand, we've also seen

groups like the NAACP Legal Defense and Education Fund filing briefs urging the court to rule against Ames. With them arguing it is necessary for majority groups to meet an extra burden of proof because of structural inequalities in the U.S. and given how rare instances of reverse discrimination actually are. That's also an argument that DYS has made, with them claiming that the background circumstances requirement isn't really a higher standard that majority plaintiffs have to meet, but rather a necessary prerequisite to screen out meritless claims.

And with that, arguing that Ames still would have lost her case regardless of the background circumstances standard, because she had no evidence that her employer's actions were motivated by the fact that she was straight. Claiming that the higher-ups who made the promotion and demotion decision didn't know Ames' sexual orientation. But during oral arguments back in February,

the Supreme Court justices indicated they would rule in Ames' favor. And notably, I'm not just talking about the conservative supermajority. I mean, some liberal justices were also apparently receptive to her claims. The justices across the political spectrum repeatedly questioning the Ohio Solicitor General

over the defense's opposition to Ames' arguments. With this including liberal justice Elena Kagan, who noted a passage from a defense's opposition to Ames' arguments. Or with this including liberal justice, Elena Kagan, who noted a passage from a lower court ruling in Ames' case saying. And it says, you know, Ames' prima facie case would have been easy to make had she belonged to the relevant minority group, here gay people.

With then conservative justice, Brett Kavanaugh, further asking. You agree that those passages are wrong. And eventually the Solicitor General even conceded that he agreed that members of both majority and minority groups should be treated equally saying. I think the idea that you hold people to different standards

because of their protected characteristics is wrong. Which then prompted Justice Neil Gorsuch to respond. We're in radical agreement today on that, it seems to me. So by all accounts, it really does seem like the High Court is gonna be taking Ames' side and overturn the decision by the Sixth Circuit Appeals Court. And with that, you have experts saying that a ruling in her favor would dramatically change

the law governing workplace discrimination and make it easier for members of majority groups to sue for reverse discrimination. With, for example, Johnny Taylor Jr., the chief executive of the Human Resources Association, SHRM, explaining, if she wins, the flood of reverse discrimination claims will be like nothing we've ever seen.

Straight white people everywhere could be filing. And then also, very notably, a ruling like this, it could have sweeping implications for DEI initiatives at a time when Trump and the right have launched a full-blown assault on the programs. I mean, according to Julie Levinson Werner, an employment lawyer,

while Ames' case doesn't directly implicate corporate DEI programs, she still sees it as the next major turning point in the nationwide battle, noting that employers are watching the case as a test for whether they should pursue diversity efforts in an already hostile landscape. With us also seeing the director of the National Institute for Workers' Rights echoing that and adding that a decision in Ames' favor, it would effectively create a springboard for the Trump administration as it works to hollow out anti-discrimination law. But for now, we're going to have to wait to see what the Supreme Court ultimately decides, and in that, the scope of their decision, which is not expected until this

summer. So, you know, in the meantime, I got to pass the question off to you. What are your thoughts? What are your reactions to this news? And then we'll get to more news in just a moment, but actually just a quick congratulations. Congrats to Bradley W., SeatGeek's latest weekly winner, who just scored $500 in tickets. So now he's torn between going to Post Malone or ACDC, not sure which to recommend for you. But all of that thanks to our sponsor, SeatGeek, who's still giving away $500 in tickets,

and you should definitely enter today if you haven't already. I mean, just imagine being the next winner and snagging $500 towards seeing your favorite artist, sporting event, or play, and there's like over 70,000 events to choose from. And all you gotta do is add code PDS to your SeatGeek app profile for a chance

at the weekly $500 prize, no purchase necessary. I'll link you to the app in the description, but yeah, get in on it, it's a win-win. But then, next up today, we should talk about the moon time problem, because it's one of the latest projects at NASA and a problem that they were ordered to solve by the White House.

So you see, back in spring of 2024, the White House gave NASA a policy directive to give the moon its own time zone. With them even saying that it is foundational to US efforts to explore the lunar surface. And that's no small task because if you didn't know, time moves differently on the moon compared to Earth. In fact, time moves differently

even in some places on Earth. The way that humans first started keeping track of time was pretty simple. Sun dials and stone formations using the shadows to mark a day's progression. With them then using the moon to track a month. But when mechanical clocks joined the party in the 14th century,

we started demanding more and more precision from our timekeeping devices, with then Albert Einstein making things infinitely more complicated with his theories of special and general relativity. And with that, I'll say those theories are pretty complicated and we don't need this video to turn into a lecture.

So the basic information you need to know with that, general relativity is a framework that explains how gravity affects space and time. And you've probably seen something like this before. It shows that the more gravity something has, the more impact it has on space and time, which explains why seconds tick by ever so slightly faster at the top of a mountain

than standing on the beach. But planet-side scientists have accounted for this, right? They've placed several hundred atomic clocks at various locations around the world. And these atomic clocks, they're super precise. They use the vibration of atoms to measure the passage of time. And those clocks show, like Einstein said, that seconds tick slightly slower the closer they sit to the Earth's surface. So we average out all of those readings from around the world to get a broad but accurate as possible

sense of time for the planet as a whole, which is called Coordinated Universal Timer, UTC. And so if this time thing is an issue that we have here, you can only imagine things get even weirder when we leave Earth. So for example, a single Earth day is 24 hours, right? Well, on the surface of the moon, a single day is just under 60 microseconds shorter than that, which to really put microseconds into perspective, let's look at hummingbirds.

A hummingbird flaps its wings roughly 50 times in a second, meaning that each flap lasts about 0.02 seconds or 20,000 microseconds. And so with 60 microseconds, it can seem minuscule or even negligible. As that adds up, it can have a serious impact when you're talking about distance in space.

So they're seeing Sheryl Grambling lead on lunar position, navigation, timing, and standards at NASA headquarters saying, for something traveling at the speed of light, 56 microseconds is enough time to travel a distance of approximately 168 football fields. If someone is orbiting the moon, an observer on Earth who isn't compensating for the effects of relativity

over a day, they would think that the orbiting astronaut is approximately 168 football fields away from where the astronaut really is. And so for some space missions, the solution has been simple. Spacecraft keep their own time with onboard clocks. But those have to sync up with Earth time, with Grambling saying.

Most of our operations are spacecraft. Even spacecraft that are all the way out at Pluto "'or the Kuiper belt like New Horizons "'rely on ground stations that are back on Earth. "'So everything they're doing has to correlate with UTC.'" Now, humans are looking to get more involved with the moon like NASA's Artemis campaign, which according to NASA, is looking to establish a quote,

"'sustained presence on and around the moon.'" With Grambling saying that when astronauts are on the moon, they're gonna need to leave a habitat and explore the surface and carry out investigations. Not to mention, they'll need to communicate while they drive around in buggies on the lunar surface. And in order to do any of that, they'll need a lunar timescale,

an entirely new system of measurement to account for the roughly 60 microsecond difference. With Gramling adding here, when they're navigating relative to the moon, time needs to be relative to the moon. But also, the need for moon time, it's not limited to superficial US government lunar trips.

But there are also other governments that have plans to become active on the moon as well, not to mention the growing industry of commercialized space travel. And according to Dr. Ben Ashman, navigation lead for Lunar Relay Development, quote, "'A shared definition of time is an important part "'of safe, resilient, and sustainable operations.'"

And that shared definition of time, it's exactly what scientists are working toward with the coordinated lunar time. And actually, researchers at the National Institute of Standards and Technology have created a system to establish and implement lunar time that accounts for that 60-ish microsecond difference. Their research, which was published

in the Astronomical Journal, is focused more on the theoretical, the blueprints and mathematical models necessary to make this happen. But essentially, it would do something similar on the moon that we do here on earth for UTC, placing atomic clocks around the lunar surface and then determining the weighted average.

With one NIST physicist saying, it's like having the entire moon synchronized to one time zone adjusted for the moon's gravity rather than having clocks gradually drift out of sync with earth's time. But there are still a lot of important unanswered questions there. Like who's gonna pay for the clocks?

Exactly what type of clocks are going to go? And where on the moon they'll be positioned? And that's just a few examples. What they're seeing rambling here is saying, we have to work all of this out. I don't think we know yet. I think it will be an amalgamation of several different things. You know, once all those questions are answered and the system gets implemented, it could seriously change the space game.

With this system that the NIST proposed, it would be the first step in the development of a lunar positioning system, kind of like GPS. And how it would work, simply put, is a network of highly precise clocks on the lunar surface and in lunar orbit would work in tandem to provide accurate timing signals for navigation. But there's one of the benefits that we could see from this being more precise lunar landing.

With an NIST physicist saying, "'The goal is to ensure that spacecraft can land "'within a few meters of their intended destination.'" Well, for some of you watching, it might all sound a little bit too sci-fi. It's probably not that far off. With actually the White House's deadline to NASA for the implementation of the lunar time zone

reportedly being by the end of 2026. You know, it's definitely something we're gonna keep our eyes on, not only for the upcoming Artemis missions, but also, I mean, how this could affect other space travel and other lunar missions. But that, my friends, you beautiful bastards, is where today's show and deep dives are gonna end.

And do not worry, you won't have to miss my stupid face for too long, because of course, I got a brand new show for you every Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday, and Thursday at 6 p.m. Eastern, 3 p.m. Pacific. Thank you for watching. I love your faces, and I'll see you right back here tomorrow.