Timcast IRL - Timcast IRL #761 Michael Knowles Event ATTACKED By Left, Explosives Causes Lockdown w/Michael Knowles

Episode Date: April 20, 2023

Michael Knowles is an American conservative political commentator and media host at the Daily Wire. Tim, Ian, Mary (Pop Culture Crisis), & Serge join Michael Knowles to discuss far left extremists attacking an event Knowles was speaking at, a reporter for Wired being banned from twitter for trying to solicit Matt Walsh's hacked information, leftists freaking out over Twitter removing it's "misgendering" policy, & a deep discussion on spirituality, religion, & science. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Discover the magic of BetMGM Casino, where the excitement is always on deck. Pull up a seat and check out a wide variety of table games with a live dealer. From roulette to blackjack, watch as a dealer hosts your table game and live chat with them throughout your experience to feel like you're actually at the casino. The excitement doesn't stop there. With over 3,000 games to choose from, including fan favorites like Cash Eruption, UFC Gold Blitz, and more. Make deposits instantly to jump in on the fun, and make same-day withdrawals if you win.

Download the BetMGM Ontario app today. You don't want to miss out. Visit BetMGM.com for terms and conditions. 19 plus to wager, Ontario only. Please gamble responsibly. If you have questions or concerns about your gambling or someone close to you, So Michael Knowles was speaking, where was it, University of Pittsburgh, I believe? Yeah, Pitt last night. Pitt last night when far leftists burned him in effigy, set fires outside, obviously, in addition to the effigy, and threw an explosive, which caused the building to get locked down. And it's fairly par for the course we've seen with far left extremism.

But with all that happening, I'd have to wonder, how would you define burning something with the intent to intimidate? Because we have another story where the guys who marched in Charlottesville with tiki torches are being criminally indicted for marching with tiki torches. Now, look, I don't think anybody in this room likes those guys. In fact, I'm assuming most of you watching probably don't like those guys either, but they're allowed their free speech. If they want to march around chanting or whatever, okay, fine. The left can do it. I don't like them, but they're allowed to do it. We can clearly see how the government is being weaponized against certain people and not against others. But I think to put it, to condense the thought, the left has weaponized the government against anyone it doesn't like.

So while there may be some people we don't like either, they're just going after their political enemies. So we'll talk about that, but we also got more news. Washington and Colorado are now becoming, I guess you'd call them child sex change tourism states. Washington has advanced a bill where they will not tell parents about the whereabouts of children who run away to seek sex changes. And in Colorado, they're going to give children puberty blockers if even if their parents said no, and they fled to that state. So, man, these are wild times. Plus, we have this very funny viral video, a funny sad, by the way, of John Fetterman's

return to the Senate. And, oh, man, I just at what point does anybody intervene to stop this? Just everything, just all of it. So we got lots to talk about. Before we do, my friends, head over to castbrew.com and pick up your pre-order of our Cast Brew Coffee. Rise with Roberto Jr. Breakfast Blend, Appalachian Nights Robust Dark Blend, and also Colombian and French Roast are available. These are the first roasts we have available for pre-order. It will ship by May 5th because we're opening up a coffee shop. So these are our first line of products that are going to be ready and available before the shop itself actually opens. And then hopefully in a year or two,

we have like 10 different shops. Get the snowball rolling down the hill. It's a bit ambitious. Maybe in five years, we got 50 to 100. Maybe in 10 years, there's 10,000 of these things. And then, you know, anti-woke corporations can start growing with your support. Also, don't forget to head over to timcast.com. Click that join us button button. Become a member and you can watch the members only uncensored show, which will be live on the front page of TimCast.com at about 10, 10 p.m. Eastern time. And if you've been a member for at least six months or you sign up at the twenty five dollar per month level, you can submit questions and even call into the show to talk with us and our guests. It's the most fun part of the night, in my opinion. So smash that like button, subscribe to this channel, and share the show right now. Take that URL, post it wherever you can. If you really do like us, that's the best way to help. Joining us tonight to talk about this and so much more is the man himself, Michael Knowles.

It's good to be with you. And I was burned in effigy last night. But I'll tell you what, I think I got the last laugh because, Tim, I'm still alive. They did not succeed. They did, however, after we were escorted out of the debate hall following the debate, they locked the room down for over an hour. So no one in the hall was able to leave because the libs were rioting so much outside. And then I kid you not, I was looking up.

I said, I've got to find some information about what's going on out there. And there was a Pitt student who said, we had a peaceful protest. Mostly peaceful. Well, we'll talk about that. For those that don't know you, who are you? What do you do? I am a genocidal fascist, according to CNN. Literally?

Did CNN actually say that? No, it was Daily Beast and Rolling Stone called me genocidal. Wow. Huffington Post may have called me genocidal, too, all because of my terrible position that boys and girls are different. You know, I brought you chocolate bars. I was going to say, too, we finally got some of this. Oh, man.

The Jeremy's chocolate. She, her, he, him. I ate the nuts. You did? They were delicious. Yeah. He, him's nuts. That's the one I chose. You're big on nuts? What do you mean? Do you think it was gay to eat the nuts. You did? They were delicious. He-Him's nuts. That's the one I chose.

You're big on nuts? What do you mean? Do you think it was gay to eat the nuts? What do you mean? I don't. I mean, only if you like it. You want to eat the nuts? Every day, dude.

And you wanted the one without nuts, right, Mary? I mean, I'll suck the chocolate off him first. Thank you. I'm all for standards and norms and everything, but I will tell you, the one with nuts is better. Yeah. So, you know, we had four. I tried one.

I decided to try the He-Him Nuts Bar just because I figured it's probably going to have more flavor to it. I mean, well, protein too. I just figured the she-her is probably a little, you know, plain, right? It's just chocolate. But, you know, chocolate's good. So we'll crack this open in a little bit. So, of course, Mary Morgan's hanging out hello everyone it's me mary i guess it's been a minute since i've been on irl except for austin i don't know if that counts yeah because it was just alex

screaming the whole time but i'm on pop culture crisis right here at timcast nice to be here hello michael great to see you ian crossland if you don't know but uh did you feel like dark voodoo magic when they were burning your effigy? I didn't. I actually thought it was all very funny, especially, I mean, we had basically the 101st Airborne there, so I don't know. These guys, they could have had whatever explosives they wanted. We take security very

seriously. I was also staying at a haunted hotel, and so I didn't... Let's save it. We'll open it up. You got a spiritual shield, man. I like it. I'm meeting some of the she-hers. It's very good. Jeremy, you've got a great font, man. Nice work.

Good font. We got Serge pressing the buttons. Yo, what's up, y'all? I'm ready to start when you guys are. All right, let's just jump into the story. Explosion at University of Pittsburgh transgender debate causes safety emergency as protesters yell and chant. One protester set fire to a cardboard cutout

with a conservative commentator's face on it according to the pittsburgh post gazette do they have the burning and effigy in this article they must they have the protest they don't they don't but uh yes michael so you were going to be debating uh at the university on transgender transgender issues i guess the the guess the professor backed out, and then far-left extremists set fires and burned you in effigy. This entire debate got more absurd by the day, because I was invited by ISI, the Intercollegiate Studies Institute, to debate this professor, Donald McCloskey, who now goes by Deirdre. He has transitioned. This is a very respected professor.

This guy has three degrees from Harvard. He's got half a dozen honorary doctorates. He's got two dozen academic publications. I am but a lowly podcaster. I have no particularly advanced degree. I've written two books. Only one of them has words in it, okay? The professor should have been down to debate. The professor didn't like me from the beginning, especially because of my CPAC speech, called me a fascist, called me an anti-Jesus Catholic. What? I guess he's Episcopalian or something. I really don't need to be lectured on theology by Episcopalians, but that's what he did. Is he really Episcopalian? Yeah. Yeah. He identifies that way at least. But he said, even though Knowles is terrible, it's important that we debate these issues. And he kept sort of insulting my intelligence. We had a pre-debate call just a few weeks ago in which he reiterated

his desire to debate. And then a week or so before the debate, he pulls out. And he pulled out because he's intelligent. And I think he realized that not even a guy with three Harvard degrees and a whole bunch of honorary doctorates could defend this indefensible idea. I think he also may have pulled out because he realized that I'm not just a provocateur bomb thrower, like the literal bomb throwers that were outside of the building. I think he just realized I'm kind of relatively polite and we were just going to debate these issues. He couldn't do it. And so Brad Palumbobo the libertarian leaning uh i guess he would call himself a conservative but he's he's a very left on lgbt issues he he filled in and i give him a lot of credit for pinch hitting and allowing this debate to go on but but even with brad who's relatively

moderate on these issues relatively to today where we're chopping off little kids genitals uh the the protesters were just absolutely nuts and uh and they did everything they could to shut it down they tried to burn me an effigy they did burn you well i guess they did burn me an effigy but here i am baby i'm not burned at all what was it you said before that angered these people that with transgenderism needed to be eradicated the concept of trans that's right i don't i probably haven't been on the show since the cpac speech yeah i said i've now memorized this quote because it's come up in the news so much for the good of society and especially for the good of the poor people who've fallen prey to this confusion transgenderism

must be eradicated from public life the whole preposterous ideology at every level so how do you but let's clarify that you you you were literally talking about gender ideology you weren't talking about people of course so i said it ism, first of all, refers to a set of beliefs. And then, lest there be any confusion, I clarified in the parenthetical immediately. I said, it's a preposterous ideology. I said, for the good of the people who have this confusion, so presumably I don't want to murder these people. There was no way to misinterpret what I said, which is why the left-wing media just changed

my words. So the Daily Beast, Rolling Stone, they defamed me. They admitted they defamed me because they ultimately changed the headlines. You know a lie gets halfway around the world before the truth catches up. We have the video of Michael Knowles being an effigy. Oh, wow. Actually from Tim Kass News. Right out of his neck and chest.

Its neck and chest will say it is an effigy. And so I just look just dash yeah right right uh i just look at this kind of stuff and i wonder is the intention here to intimidate because the end i mean the answer is simply put yes or black magic yeah who knows black magic also to intimidate my soul but you're you're using a very specific word there tim why would you why would you use that word because we got a story earlier that uh in charlottesville they they're indicting the tiki torch marchers and uh they say it's because they burned something with the intent to intimidate and it's like dude come on we know what that bill is supposed to be the law supposed to be about supposed to be about like someone putting a cross in your yard and setting on a fire

not walking down the sidewalk saying a cigarette yeah exactly saying dumb things holding a tiki torch which keeps mosquitoes away and and and here's the thing, right? I hold that group in a similar disdain to as I hold these groups. Both are entitled to their free speech. But as you see, law enforcement goes in only one direction. I mean, it's kind of a weird thing because they're identitarians, the same as the white nationalists, but for like a different race. So I actually don't view their ideologies as different. Discover the magic of Bad MGM Casino, where the excitement is always on deck. Pull up a seat and check out a wide variety of table games

with a live dealer. From roulette to blackjack, watch as a dealer hosts your table game and live chat with them throughout your experience to feel like you're actually at the casino. The excitement doesn't stop there. With over 3,000 games to choose from, including fan favorites like Cash Eruption, UFC Gold Blitz, and more. Make deposits instantly to jump in on the fun and make same-day withdrawals if you win. Download the BetMGM Ontario app today. You don't want to miss out. Visit BetMGM.com for terms and conditions.

19 plus to wager Ontario only. Please gamble responsibly. If you have questions or concerns about your gambling or someone close to you, please contact Connex Ontario at 1-866-531-2600 to speak to an advisor free of charge. BetMGM operates pursuant to an operating agreement with iGaming Ontario. For the most part, you know, it's kind of weird. Well, nobody is intimidated by either these people burning you in effigy because they look ridiculous,

and nobody was intimidated realistically by the tiki torch marchers in Charlottesville wearing white polo shirts. I mean, I will say, when they were throwing explosives at the wall, I didn't feel worried because, again, we take security very seriously. But that is a somewhat intimidating action when they're throwing explosives at you. I would not call it persuasion. I would definitely call it intimidation. This is what I'm tired of.

I'm tired of the attempt by the so-called moderate individuals. I consider myself fairly moderate, right? But I've heard this over and over again when i was in berkeley someone someone took uh i think it was an m80 and threw it in the air and it landed next to an old woman and exploded and she fell down and i said someone just threw an explosive at this old lady and they're oh come on it's a firecracker and i blow them into that okay not playing that game yeah it's an explosive did it explode it exploded so m80s are not like little poppers that can take your fingers off yeah you can take your whole hand off and so this woman like falls over they also take these mortar shells which are like the size of

maybe tennis balls maybe a little bit smaller and when they explode they spray like everyone seems seen fireworks when they go up they spray. Everyone's seen fireworks when they go up in the air and then it blossoms. Imagine that on the ground. Those are explosives. And you get these people. First of all, the left will, of course, call them firecrackers

because they want to minimize the language. But then you'll get people online being like, look, I don't like Antifa, but those are just fireworks, not explosives. And it's like, oh, okay, see what happens. One of those goes off next to your head. Right. They're both fireworks and explosives yeah it's fireworks are explosives

of course and but but but just to clarify i'll call it a firework if you put it in a tube and it launches into the air and it looks pretty i'll call an explosive when you're trying to kill people with it yeah like a knife isn't a murder tool unless you kill somebody with it yeah like exactly it's if if i went to a steakhouse this past weekend and I love it when they walk up and they say, you're nice, sir. And you get to pick one. You ever see, have you ever had that happen? It's like the second time in my life.

And I'm like, well, I'll take this one. He's not handing me a murder weapon. He's handing me a utensil. However, if someone took that and killed somebody, it would then be in a bag labeled murder weapon. Difference. So, Michael, I got to ask, how do you, based on this quote that kind of set this all in motion about eradicating transgenders, and probably those two words are pretty extreme to have near each other, but how do you balance

that with transgender people and your love or care for people that happen to be going through what they're going through? Well, there is no such ontological category as transgender people, that there are people who are confused about their sex. But the whole point is that there is no such thing as a man who is secretly a woman. That's a false anthropology. And this is why the libs had to lie about what I said and change my words and throw explosives at me and burn me in effigy, because they have no answer to that, because we all know that that's true. We all know that these men are not actually women.

And we're just lying to them to varying degrees. And this was, I think, the weakest part of Brad Palumbo's argument last night at Pitt, was he tried to have a moderate position, which is, okay, these men are not actually women, but we should treat them as women in the bathrooms, but not on the sports teams. And we should do it to the 19-year-olds, but 17 year olds. And it, it, it just is so arbitrary. I either men can really be women or they can. And, and that was, that was why the left reacted so much to my speech because the libs thought that they had won on the issue of transgenderism. No one took this thing seriously 10 years ago. Now it is enshrined in our law and they thought that they won. And they thought that the debate over transgenderism was now going to be, should we trans the seven-year-olds or should

we wait till they turn eight? And in my speech, I said, no, guys, there's no, on certain issues, there's a middle ground, like taxes. We can come to a middle agreement. On immigration, what's the right number of immigrants? Either women have bathrooms or they don't have bathrooms. The minute you let a man into the woman's bathroom, the women lose their bathroom. So we got to, we got to pick one. But I think there is a moderate solution to that. It just single, single room bathrooms. Right. You could abolish women's bathrooms altogether, but some women might, might say, you know, the issue isn't that we don't have enough bathrooms out there because this is the other, the other people,

they'll say, well, we just need another sports team for the transgenders but it's going to be we obviously will need two more sports teams one for the female to male transgenders and one for the male to feel so how many how many leagues i disagree a little bit i mean i don't care you make whatever league you want you can make uh if they made a league where it's like a basketball team with five players and one of them has to be a woman and we'll call it the uh the the four the one in four teams league i don't care make up whatever league you want the idea for me uh i'll go back to the bathroom thing too i'm at the airport this past weekend and they have men's room women's room and then all gender in the middle guess which bathroom i used all gender you know what it's a big private room i'm like this is fantastic i can take my coat off i can

hang it up i got like a big mirror to myself, washmans. I think it's fantastic. Those used to be called family bathrooms. That's right. They just changed the label. Fair point though. There's always a huge line coming out of the women's bathroom. So taking that bathroom away and giving them a single room is probably just going to make

things a little better. Probably going to have to just turn the whole airport into a bunch of individual single stall bathrooms. My issue is when it comes to female sports is that we did not create women's leagues because sometimes people wear dresses. We created women's leagues because biological females

have different physical characteristics and want to compete amongst themselves without men. So all of a sudden now the debate becomes, well, is a trans woman a woman? Then they can compete on the wins team but it's like no no hold on if you're making the argument that woman just refers to social constructs let me just remind you we did not create the wnba because sometimes people wear dresses this is real quick because the women playing basketball in the wnba are wearing the

same jerseys that guys wear like the social constructs don't play a role. It's so important, I think, to say like a boy is a boy. And if he becomes a trans girl or trans woman, he's still a boy that is a trans woman. Like you never stop being a boy. You never stop being a human. You're still a human that identifies as a carrot or whatever, or a man that identifies as one, but it's still a man and a trans woman together. You can be both. But right. But you're right, Ian. And the issue is they, they reject that. I don't know. I've never really had a deep conversation with someone that is identified.

There isn't one. This is the problem with it is every time that I've tried to engage in a conversation with a serious person, I'm not just talking about some clout chasing YouTubers or whatever. I'm talking, I wanted the most serious pro-trans person there was.

I got the best professor for it. And he pulled out of the debate. ISI then invited like a dozen people who are big in the transgender movement. None of them would, because they can't debate it. But here's the, you know what it is? I think I've thought about these issues, gun control, assault weapons, what is a woman, things like that. And I feel like I've done a better job articulating what their position should be. Of course. The issue is, and you could probably do the same, you could better articulate an argument on their behalf. But if you're being consistent, you're being logical and honest, you arrive more in a position where we are, you'd say, oh, okay, I can't make those arguments. Well, there's just no way to make it work because they make a lot of mutually

contradictory arguments. On the one hand, they'll say, well, transgenderism is when your true self doesn't align with your body. But, but so I guess your soul is female, but your body's male. I don't believe in souls. But, but they also don't believe in souls. So then they'll make a materialist argument. They'll say, okay, well, no, it's actually your body is male, but your brain is female, which first of all, is based on just complete bunk science. And there are interesting, there are interesting ways to debunk the methodological issues in those studies, but it's not. I think that was formally debunked, though, to be honest.

Oh, no, of course it is. Yeah, I remember there was a big issue with transracialism like seven years ago. And people were trying to use this idea that a brain could be male or female and the body could be different as the explanation. And then something happened where an academic created a transracial argument saying that individuals who have, let's say a person is like 2.7% Asian and they present white, they may have within their minds that they're actually Asians

and the left went and lost it. Because now, whoa, no, white people aren't, you can't do that. And so that kind of broke the whole argument. The other reason the brain studies are crazy is one,

men and women's brains are a little bit different. But the problem is the studies, when they're looking at the brains, they're looking at people generally who have been on these cross-sex hormones forever. So you can't know if the hormones themselves are changing the brain makeup. Also, the way in which the brains are a little bit different, say the brain of a trans woman from a man, the difference does not make the brain look like a female brain. It makes it look like a little bit different entirely. And so there are all sorts of problems with that.

But even then, the problem with their argument is your brain is part of your body. They're just, so you're saying part of my body is male, but the other part is female, but it doesn't actually show up on the scan. It just doesn't make sense. Here's what confused me with all of it. The question, what is a woman? up on the scan it just doesn't make sense here's what confused me with all of it the question what is a woman i can easily answer the question for the left but they can't answer their own question i don't quite understand what so what is the what would you think the leftist definition of woman is a human who identifies as an adult human female because and and it wasn't hard for me to think

that like they said female is sex and woman is social construct. And I said, okay, so if someone's a woman, they're identifying as a biological female, but not, but not. How come not one leftist has ever said that sentence? That's, it's a great point because it, it remains kind of circular, but in a charming way. This is why I don't even really love the-

Right, it's the social construct argument attached to biology. Right, but I don't even just love the biological argument because I sort of think it partakes of the same soul-denying scientism that got us in this mess in the first place. You know, if the answer to what is a woman is two X chromosomes in a womb, I think, well, you know, I think there's more to it than that, man. Maybe sugar, spice, and everything nice. A woman is much more than her body, but a woman is at the very least her body. And it's not like this is a brand new question that cropped up. We do have thousands and thousands of years of very sophisticated thinking on what constitutes a man and what

constitutes a woman. But the moment you try to engage in that conversation, the transgenderists run away because there is no way to defend it. The big divide I see here is not between the men and women and the trans and the whatever the opposite of trans is. It's between people who view humanity as being made up of intellect and will. I've got an intellect so I can perceive the truth

and I've got a will so I can act on it. And the people on the left who say forget that intellect stuff it's all about the will well i think what i'm thinking this is where i keep coming to i think what's happening is there's the the catholic the the christian conservative that says that a spirit impregnated jesus's mother that somehow and it's like i'm into reality so if a guy's gonna say a boy is a girl i'm into reality a boy is a guy's going to say a boy is a girl, I'm into reality. A boy is a boy. And spirits do not impregnate women. You need male sperm. Yeah.

Well, no. I mean, the virgin birth did happen and the incarnations, the pivot of history. But you're right. One of those things is fantastical. One of them is the miracle that directs the entire course of history. What's happening is people that are identifying as a woman, that as a man is like, well, they say that ghosts can impregnate people. So why do I even take it seriously?

They're denying the categories of male and female altogether. They're denying that there are natural laws. Miracles are just things that happen that deviate from the natural laws seemingly for supernatural reasons. But you've got to admit that saying that God could impregnate a woman's body is mythical. That's fantastical. I think that you're in two separate categories and you're conflating these things.

I'm trying to find a solution between the magical thinking. But they're not, I'll explain it to you. God is omnipotent. God is the creator. God is outside of time and space. And the mystery of the incarnation is that God, the divine logic of the universe, the

logos, takes on human flesh and dwells among us. And this is the pivot of history. Now, the reason this is not magical thinking is God being defined as the maximally great being, as omnipotent, can do what he wills, especially as he is logic itself. A little boy is not God. A little boy is not omnipotent and or a 25 year old man for that matter. And so when a 25 year old man says I'm actually a woman and comes up with some cockamamie explanation as to why that is, that can't make sense. Now I'm not I'm not insisting that you believe in God but I am pointing out that if you if you acknowledge that

some things are better than other things and that an intelligible world probably implies an intelligence that created the world that's outside of time and space, then the existence of miracles is not something that's crazy or unbelievable. That would naturally follow from that. I'll just address it for you, Ian. If a boy was witnessed by, let's say, let's just say a young man, 20 years old, six foot tall, walked into a town center, walked into Columbus Circle in New York City, and hundreds of people gathered around, and then he went,

something strange is happening, and then transformed into a woman. That's a miracle. Right? Yeah, but that's impossibility. And that exactly is the difference between your argument. When someone comes out and says that they can undergo surgery and they're now a woman, they're not. They're a man who underwent surgery.

I agree with that. But I also, I believe in God. I think there is a God. All right, so hold on. The difference is the left is not making the argument that a man magically transformed by power of God into a woman. They're arguing that they can surgically change their bodies or medically, and that makes them the same as someone who was born female.

They're arguing that it's not supernatural, that it's actually just a natural fact of the world. I feel like the argument is they're saying green is red when I want it to be red. And I'm saying, well, let's just be real. Green is green, red is red. And you're right. The difference between that and say like faith-based miracle believing, they're just different categories.

I don't know. I don't think so. I mean, they're definitely different categories, but different ways of kind of taking leaps of assumption about things that I think are patently impossible. I've never seen an inkling of evidence that God could impregnate a human body. Well, you're talking about faith versus denying reality. I think it's also faith. Transgenderism is faith.

But look, I can only say it like one more time. It's not the same thing. It's not the same, but I'm trying to find a through line in a solution. But it's also faith. Transgenderism is faith. But look, I can only say it like one more time. It's not the same thing. It's not the same, but I'm trying to find a through line in a solution. But it's not. I think you're attaching two things that don't come together. You're mesmerized by a central miracle in the history of the world, the pivot of history. But are you saying, let's put that aside for a moment. Are you saying that no miracles can happen?

You think the idea of miracles itself is impossible? Well, miracle, how would you define miracle? A suspension of the natural laws in a way that is improbable and fantastical. Well, that is possible because we are still learning what the natural laws are as we gain more physics knowledge. But I've never seen any evidence of someone. Let me try it this way. Is it possible we live in a simulation? Yeah. Could the person in control of the simulation alter the code on a whim to, say, impregnate a woman?

Yeah, but you've got to say the possibility of being in a simulation is near zero. It's actually closer to one, if you believe the... I would say it's 0.100 million trillionth of a percent. But let's not deviate. Let's assume that we're in a simulation. It's that's a bet not a good assumption because that is a very

unlikely you're just trying to avoid any evidence but okay go for it yeah didn't you you already granted the possibility it is a lot of things are possible and probable simulation theory is is possible uh there are many smart thinkers uh the easiest one is Elon Musk. That's because he's so famous. Who believe that if it is possible to create a universe, to simulate a universe based on our current. Here's the idea. Based on our current level of technology, we have created such vast virtual worlds. In 30 years with the advent of this technology, it is likely that in another 30 years, we'll be able to create things indistinguishable from reality. Considering where deep fakes are at already, yeah, we're only probably 10 years away from being able to render on-the-fly universes.

So, assuming... At most, 10 years. At most, I mean, yeah, that might be a little long. With deepfakes already to the point where they can make Joe Rogan say whatever they want him to say, and even show him... There was a commercial of Joe Rogan selling a product because they just typed into computer, pressed enter, and it rendered a video. Now, imagine they have to do the exact same thing, but using 3D modeling like Unity or

something, Unreal Engine or something like that. It would not. We're only a few years away from that. So this is the argument about simulism. That's if it is possible for us to do it only a few years, there is a strong likelihood we actually exist in such a universe. I take it. But I don't want to deviate too far. My point is just that.

I don't like that analogy, by the way. I don't like that belief that if we might do it in the future, if it's likely that we'll do in the future that it already happened, doesn't make sense. But you already granted the point, Ian, right? That miracles are possible. But possible is a strange word because 0.0 trillionth of a percent possible but you're just making up that okay but also the word miracle is vague you're you're i gotta agree you're making up that it's not that vague you might see a crack of lightning that looks like

a guy's face a miracle is a supernatural event and not a natural event but a supernatural but but but and you are making up that probability that's not it oh no no absolutely none of us can quantify simply put there is a difference, I'll put it this way. You make a video game. You as the programmer can decide. You're playing The Sims. You can literally lift the person up, put them in a bathroom, and get rid of the door. You can do that as the person in control of this universe. I'll grant you this.

There might be a technology in the future where you can vibrate a woman's womb. That's not. You're completely misunderstanding. We always get to the vibrations. When I'm programming a video game, I can just right-click, insert object, and manifest a goblin. There's no point at which

I have to find a person and then draw on him and make him, no, like, when you're programming something, you can just put it there. When you're playing Fallout and you want to build a treehouse, you click a button, boom, the treehouse appears. There's a difference between you being a programmer who can make something happen and in the game a character deciding they are not what you made them there there is there's a it's a very good analogy yeah but if the power goes out good luck convincing anyone we're in a

simulation like we're we're like fantasizing about some ridiculous possibility because we have electricity is is that i'm not trying to fantasize i'm trying to point out that arguing someone who is biologically male who is who you you can observe their dna under an electron microscope and see they have x and y chromosomes coming out and saying actually after the surgery they're now female because this is this is one component of this you're not i was at a uh often mentioned I'm not sitting at poker tables because that, that tends to be what I'm doing on the weekends. There was a dealer and someone brought up on the TV. They were having a discussion about men and female sports and the dealer said something like it was kind of obvious. The dealer was not taking kindly to all of these 30 to 40 year old men who were not happy with this. They were grumbling about it.

And then I said something like, uh, the dealer said transgender females. And I said, no, no, you mean transgender males, a transgender female is a trans man. And a transgender male is a trans woman. And he was like, no, wait, what? No. He got upset about it. The point is if someone is female and they are transgender, they are, they transgender, they have a womb, they have breasts, but they want to exhibit the characteristics of a male that is a trans man. What's happening now is the left is conflating. They are saying female and woman mean the same thing now. So you'll often hear people say transgender female to refer to a biological male who wants

to be a woman. Right, they're confusing the language. Well, it has to be confused because there's no argument for it. And to your point, Ian, you're saying, well, I don't like magical thinking on the left, so I don't want magical thinking on the right either. But the difference here is there are many good arguments for the existence of God, and then we can get into miracles from the existence of God. But there are many good arguments. I could give you five right now. I could probably give you 10 right now. And there are no good arguments for transgenderism. And so this is why we have theology. This is why we've had very wise men for thousands of years discussing this in a reasoned

way. And this is why not even an esteemed scholar on transgenderism will show up to debate this issue. So I think if we just follow logic, you might choose not to believe in the miracles. You might choose not to believe in God even. But there's a logical argument for that. There is no logical argument. I actually think God is logical at this state with quantum physics and the ability to see cosmic microwave background radiation. It looks like a neural path. And that's what Michael was saying about logos and the embodiment of logic.

Yeah, it is. It seems like a sentient waveform but i was talking about like god i want a sentient waveform doesn't necessarily mean that these miracles were real just because someone told me that i i but i i just want to i'll make one more point we're going to move to another story oh my gosh let's talk about this all night no it's just because you're saying the same thing over and over it's important because i think the people the transgender community is not taking your stuff seriously because of that kind of just accept it. But, but you're, no, look, I read a book when I was 19 years old that I would say made me believe in God.

I've told the stories about the conversations I've had with people who are religious when I view myself as an atheist. And the book that I actually read was about quantum physics and putting electrons through conductors and then trapping them to simulate elements and things of that nature. And the prospect that we could create one dimensional sheets of an element that by and then by altering the amount of electrons we push through the conductors, we could change the elemental properties and things like that. I started reading that stuff and then it made me start to think about the universe, think

about simulation theory and logic and then i was like oh wow like i'm starting to see a bigger picture here understanding that there is like we are we are in some kind of logical system the universe i it's hard to quantify to be completely honest the very fact that you're speaking in a way that is intelligible to me presupposes that there is such a thing as logic outside of ourselves, and it implies an intelligent creator. I want to make sure I get this one before they try and take a clip. My point is, humans write math. We then create equations and solve problems, and humans have a degree of understanding of math. That is not a human creation. It is humans mapping the logic

of the universe, meaning the logic of the universe exists to a massive degree well beyond our comprehension. And we have a tiny little flashlight that we're pointing in the dark and writing down what we see. It's possible that after billions of years, humans create this big, huge quantum blackboard showing all of the code that we would describe with the universe. And that is the logic or whatever you describe it as. But we can only see a tiny piece of it. It's real. It exists.

And we're mapping it out. Within the confines of that, to say something like, yes, this thing is discernibly wood. It's a word we use to describe this carbon structure. I've decided it's map. That doesn't do anything. You can't. And here's another example. Two plus two equals five, they say. Well, no, it doesn't. And it's funny because when I was a teenager, I actually got into an argument with a friend of mine who was in high school and they were teaching this back then. She told me one plus one does not equal two. That's a social construct. And I said, what are you talking about? No, it isn't. And I was like, I have a pen in this hand. I grabbed pens off her table. I was equal two that's a social construct and i said what are you talking about no

it isn't and i was like i have a pen in this hand i grabbed pens off her table i was like here's a pen here's a pen i have one pen here one pen here there's two pens in my hand there will never be a circumstance where that is three pens and then she's like you don't understand and i was like no i don't think you understand but i don't want to i don't want to go in circles on that i do want to move on to the next story because uh we have this well let's we'll we'll maybe come back in the members only stuff and get more and more deep. Yeah, I want to solve this big time. And Seamus is back on Sunday.

Music's the other way. Music's the proactive way that I think brings us together. This talking about the literal logics of what we're doing wrong is another harder. Though music's very logical. Oh, yeah. We can get into that in the member block. And there's correlation to like the human heartbeat and blood flow and the vibrations and stuff. But let's read the story from the Post Maligno.

This one's interesting. Wired writer suspended from Twitter after using platform to solicit and receive Matt Walsh's hacked materials. Del Cameron said, prove me wrong, kids. Send Matt Walsh DMs to and then posted his email address. They say on Wednesday, Wired senior reporter Del Cameron was permanently suspended from Twitter permanently after he asked for and obtained hacked materials from Matt Walsh's Twitter account. Quote, spoke with the hacker who says he compromised Matt Walsh's account and was able to supply some convincing proof they'd gain access to his personal email account.

Story to come. Our story, TK. I mean, that means I think that means coming soon. A tweet just after midnight read. In a post to Mastodon, Cameron stated that he just got permanently suspended for publishing this story, linking to an article he wrote titled, The Hacker Who Hijacked Matt Walsh's Twitter Was Just Bored. Another post revealed that Cameron was suspended from Twitter for violations of the social

media's policies against the distribution of hacked materials. The story alleges that the hacker provided screenshots of an apparent copy of Matt Walsh's W-2 tax form, which lists his employer as Bent Key Services LLC, the publisher of the Daily Wire. A direct message on Twitter from Shapiro from 2017, emails between Walsh and the conservative commentator Crowder, host of Loud Earth Crowder's podcast dated March 14th, etc. I don't want to go through all that because I don't want to actually reveal any of that private information but this just goes to show in my opinion many of these corporate journalists they're working in collusion with in tandem with the people who are sending threats who are intimidating there was a story of i think it

was a condé nast executive who was um he was uh he was gay. And I think he was trying to have some kind of gay hookup. I can't remember the exact story, but a blackmailer got access to the information and said, if you don't give me money, I will give this to journalists. And I think it was Gawker. I could be wrong, but the journalists were like, we would love to publish this and basically collude with a blackmailer. What Del Cameron is doing here, this Wired reporter, is basically saying, we will be the information laundering service for those that want to destroy your life and harass and intimidate and cause you harm. So Matt Walsh, who clearly has ideological enemies, will seek out, the enemies will seek

out any means by which they can cause damage to him. And this is, quote unquote, journalists doing it. The great irony of this is the journos, who I think very few people on the right have any respect for anymore, but they're understanding what you've pointed out, Tim, which is that they just work with these political operatives. But the journalists always present themselves as the brave fourth estate speaking truth to power on the front lines. And the irony here is Matt Walsh is actually one of the most important journalists in America. Matt Walsh is doing much more important journalistic work than any of these people at any of these liberal publications. And so they, left-wing political operatives, are doing everything they can to attack an actual

journalist by the name of Matt Walsh. I think Matt's going to sue this guy. I didn't name him by name, but he tweeted an hour ago. I've also made note of the members of the media openly solicited stolen information from my phone. I'm kind of talking like Matt would talk to. There'll be consequences there, too. Fortunately, we can afford very good lawyers. Oh, wow. Let me try and pull that up. That is on his Twitter account. matt pulls no punches man metaphorically spiritually you don't go after that guy well this is also the the reason that we sell a lot of chocolate and razors and why daily wire is a for-profit company is the only way to fight back against any of these people is to have a lot of money that we can translate into power so that

these guys don't do what they're doing against matt or me or brett cooper just got booted from tiktok today so really yeah wow they're just i don't know this is the last 48 hours has been like open season on the daily wire but the reason that we need to have a lot of money is so that we can fight back and punish these guys when they do it so they don't do it against everybody else could it have anything to do with the launch of the delicious she her he him chocolate bars by jeremy's chocolate i'm more of a he him man myself uh you know media matters is going to clip that one now but i it's good the nut one is very good but the she her it's actually it's really good yeah and i was uh this is actually

really funny i looked on the back of the ingredients fair trade cocoa butter fair trade cane sugar dried milk powder fair trade cocoa powder soy free it actually it actually does say soy free oils no see i am oh really yeah you're right i'll tell you something so jeremy insists that if he is going to tell a joke it has to be a very very expensive joke and so we decided early on we could have just sold schlock kind of products and people probably would have bought them and it would have been fine. No, we insist upon the highest quality products that we can possibly find. There's a lot of crunchy people at DW.

My wife has really pushed for that as well. So it's extraordinarily high quality stuff. It is really good. Yeah. Like, no, no joke. Crunchy people like they like. I was just kidding because I was. Crunchy.

I only read that because I saw the soy free in it but i was like hippie adjacent right wing person this has been one of the big realignments is that the when i was growing up when we're all growing up the libs were the crunchy people and the conservatives were just slopping down all sorts of corporate hormone injected food and now it's completely the opposite it's the libs lining up for just soy seed oil city and it's the conservatives who are buying the 12 eggs yeah there was there was like a like a sea change in 2012 something about barack obama and people just following the media narrative and just buying the pfizer and buying the coca-cola and doing what the commercial trump you know he loves mcdonald's he loves mcdonald's

and i love that he loves mcdonald. I agree. I won't go near it. He is more aspartame now than man, I would say. And it has preserved him fairly well. So maybe that's a good argument. And a well-done steak. Organic king sugar. That's what sustains him. No high fructose corn syrup?

No corn syrup? Oh, no. There's, let's see, one, two, three, four ingredients in this thing. That's college-educated chocolate right there. These days, I guess, probably not. Let me read Matt Walsh's statement. I was actually going to do that. Matt Walsh said, over the last year, my family has been harassed, threatened, doxxed,

and now we can add hack to the list. Apparently the hacker had an insider who gave him access to my phone. A lot we still don't know, but we're finding out. And there will be consequences. He says, I have also made note of the members of the media who openly solicited stolen information from my phone. There will be consequences there, consequences there, too.

Fortunately, we can afford very good lawyers. Yeah, we're going to be suing ourselves, Bandcamp. So they took down me, Bryson Gray gray five times august probably a couple others um i don't know how much i should say though but uh apparently they're lying publicly and internally about what happened so we actually have you know i probably shouldn't say too much now i gotta know you can't just but but for legal reasons like because we're gonna enter litigation most likely probably can't say too much but i table. But for legal reasons, like, because we're going to enter litigation, most likely. Probably can't say too much.

But I guess in this regard, perhaps it would be good that they know this, that we actually have received. I'll keep it as light as possible. Let's just say I have evidence that they're spreading defamation to defend, to preempt. Right. We were, our band and several others were removed without notice. We don't know if they're holding our money. We don't know what's going on. And so to justify that, apparently they're lying about what really happened.

Yeah. But, you know, we'll see. It should come out in discovery. But I digress. I bring that up simply to point out very good lawyers from the Daily Wire. Action needed to be taken. This is really important. Conservatives, for a long time, we've just been so nice. And I still think we should be just and do the right thing and virtuous.

But we got to be a little less nice, okay? I think we need to start wielding power a little bit more. I think we've got to engage in lawfare. People always think that the threshold for defamation suits is too high because of the ridiculous standards set by New York Times versus Sullivan. One, that decision should have been overturned. It's ridiculous. It should be much easier to sue people for intentionally lying about you. But two, you can see now when conservatives push back at all and when we've got a little power and money behind us, people cave. Rolling Stone

caved. Daily Beast caved when they defamed me after the CPAC speech. And we're going to sick the same kind of lawyers on the people that went after Matt. What happened withaved when they defamed me after the CPAC speech. And we're going to sick the same kind of lawyers on the people that went after Matt. What happened with that when they defamed you? So they came out. They said that I called at CPAC to eradicate transgender people. They rewrote what I said. They put words into my mouth. And then Daily Beast called me genocidal.

So I tweeted out. I said, you know, this is defamation. This meets the actual malice standard. And I had some pretty important constitutional lawyers who agreed with me. Senator Mike Lee came out right away as a Supreme Court litigator, U.S. senator. He said, this meets that standard. You should sue these guys. A number of other people did.

Those guys went running. I'm sure the editors got a call from their lawyers that said, you've got to change this because though the standard is high, you have crossed it. So they caved in two seconds. And it just takes a little bit of courage. I sometimes think that the libs, they're like the sand people in Star Wars. You know, they artificially-

Yeah, yeah. No, the sand people. The sand people in the beginning. Yeah, they try to inflate their numbers. They seem, but they're cowards and they don't have really a lot on their side. So if you just have a little bit of backbone, they're not impossible to defeat.

And that's so right, man. And that's why the Anheuser thing, I think, is so important, because it's the easiest. Yeah. And you can already see that Anheuser-Busch is kind of freaking out about it. But I guess in that regard, Jeremy's beer, when? Listen, I texted him this morning. I texted him this morning. I said, man, I know you're busy.

You're doing a million things. You have dropped the ball here, okay? And you clearly, there's too much money floating around the daily wire. We're too cash positive. You've got to burn that money on a beer company so that we can all laugh. Too cash positive.

So here's what we're going to do. We here at Timcast are going to make a generic website and we're going to get a URL that can be universal and we'll call it, I don't know, like, you know uh something product uh great great product whatever and then whichever brand makes the first step over the line some kooky wokeness we'll immediately mock up some graphics drop it onto the site and start selling whatever it is and then worry about sourcing it later yes Yes, of course. Of course. And the Budweiser thing here has been instructive

because, yeah, Budweiser loses six and a half billion in market cap. They could have gotten that back if they would just shut up. It's unbelievable. They keep changing their story every single day. They should apologize. They can apologize. But initially they defended it. Then they tried to pretend they didn't know about it.

Then they tried to split the baby with this crisis communication stuff. Then they made that stupid horse commercial that appealed to nobody. And so they keep blowing it here. But the bigger story, I think, is not even the hit to Anheuser-Busch. I think the bigger story is the hit to Dylan Mulvaney's brand.

Because I'm not convinced after this huge, unprecedented blowback against Bud Light, do you think other companies are going to be so quick to sponsor this guy? It's still happening. He has a lot still. And there will be some brands that will do it, for sure.

Woke brands and leftist companies will absolutely celebrate it. And bigger companies are going to say, look, we appreciate you bringing this offer to us. We're not interested at this time. Didn't the brand Olay take him on after Bud Light? I thought Olay already had it.

It's hard. He's got like a dozen sponsorships. It's insane. Yeah. But I tend to agree with you, Tim. I just think six and a half a bill in market cap, that's a lot to lose. And I always think it's important to stress this point

for those who watch all the episodes, you've heard me say it, but just whenever I repeat stuff like this in multiple episodes, understand it's because not everyone watches every show. But Dylan Mulvaney is not trans. And this was said to me by multiple trans people, citing one very powerful example, Dylan Mulvaney making a video pointing to his bulge and saying, look at my bulge, look at my bulge. The issue is that people who are gender dysphoric feel pain, depression, and anxiety from those attributes.

That's what they're suffering from. Gender dysphoria quite literally would be a person saying like, don't look at me. Don't look at this part of my body. It causes me anxiety. Dylan Mulvaney making a video saying women have bulges. Look at my bulge is the antithesis of what gender dysphoria is supposed to be. Yeah. You mentioned earlier the time for being nice is not now.

And I agree because like nice is like, oh, someone's going to say that they're a girl when it's a guy. And I'm like, okay, I'll just not say anything because I want to be nice. Now being kind is different. I'm being friendly. I'll tell you to your face what I think, but I still love you. That's being friendly. And I think what it is, is meekness. We need to be meek, which is humble and kind, but carry a big sword and do not mess around. This is something Jordan Peterson has talked about a lot. The meek, which is humble and kind, but carry a big sword and do not mess around. This is something Jordan Peterson has talked about a lot. The meek shall inherit the earth. It's the ones that are vastly wealthy and not afraid to speak the truth to someone, but also willing to listen. That's what I think. I don't know that Jordan was the first to say that, but I do like the idea of

the meek shall inherit the earth. Yeah. Well, it's got a lot more. That's got, yes. I think it's from the Bible. One of Jordan's favorite books. He was explaining how people think weak and meek are the same thing. And that's a big misconception. Yeah. No, it's a very important point. And, you know, when we try to parse the truth of this issue, because I agree, Tim, there's obviously something weird going on with Dylan Mulvaney here that isn't true of all people who have sexual confusion, But there are different types of transgenderism. Dr. Ray Blanchard made a point that he discovered two different types of transgender people, which is homosexuals who like the idea of being a woman and people with autogynephilia, people who have a sexual fetish who are aroused at the prospect of dressing up like a woman. That's the traditional understanding of cross-dressing. The first one would be gender

dysphoria. Is that what you're saying? Well, they're both a kind of a gender dysphoria, but it's a really complex issue. A good analogy for this would be body integrity disorder, which body integrity disorder shares a lot of the same attributes. Obviously, it's a defect of perception about your body. It often sets in early on between the ages of 8 and 12. There may be some mapping onto the brain to explain it, though a lot of those studies seem kind of a little shallow as well. And often, though not all the time, this disorder is associated with sexual arousal,

that it has an association with a kind of a paraphilia or a sexual fetish. So it's virtually identical to transgenderism. I will add to that. There's three different kinds that I believe that we've seen publicly. The two you mentioned, but then Dylan Mulvaney represents a third. And that is pseudo transgenderism. Professional actor. Professional actor.

Dylan Mulvaney is just trying to be famous. It's like relentless self-promoters that use transgenderism as a way to infiltrate institutions of power. That might be a little bit overthinking it. Dylan Mulvaney's like, I'm going to be famous. Ooh, look at this. It's giving me attention.

So I'll use both of those examples. Let's assume, I think it was Michael Malice who said that Dylan Mulvaney's acting out a fetish. And this probably comes from Michael's personal friendships with trans individuals. I thought you were going to say his personal perversions. No, that too. Michael's friends with some trans people, and this is probably the experiences he had with them and things that they've explained to him. So is Dylan Mulvaney acting out a fetish? I don't believe so. If it is, I think it was Leah Thomas who was accused of being what they call AGP autogynephilic, meaning that it's a fetish

that they are aroused by this. Well, Dylan Mulvaney would not be making a video singing, look at my bulge, look at my bulge, because the fetish is look at my, look at me, I'm a woman, right? If it was gender dysphoria, where the person experiences a state of dysphoria from looking in the mirror and seeing the wrong body, they also would not sing about their junk. Dylan Mulvaney, fundamentally misunderstanding what transgenderism is, made a video singing women have bulges because this is just, not all trans people have dysphoria and that's okay. Not all trans people take hormones and that's okay. And then essentially anybody can adopt the identity with zero consequences. Well, I mean, this is just modern wokeism and leftism. It's just like definitions mean nothing.

But I do want to stress this. Postmodernism. That book right there. You know, I've never actually looked into it. I've seen the screenshots. And it's the book Genderqueer. And you will probably not be surprised to learn that in the book, the woman who claims to be non-binary explains that she's an auto-androphile, meaning that her desire to be perceived as a male is rooted in her sexual arousal from being treated as a male. Of course. So when this, this woman is a teacher talking to

children, telling them to say that she's a man, she explains it's actually her fetish to be perceived that way. She's including children in her sexual arousal, which I'm surprised conservatives, more conservatives haven't actually looked at this and said, Hey, wait a minute. First of all, kind of hard to look at. Yeah. She, well, there's a lot in there. She couldn't read till she was 12. It's wild. We had her peeing in the yard yard she was not so she was not socialized properly by her parents she never shaved her legs she never showered she would wear crusted dried pads for for for days on end to the point where she smelled like feces and the school had to pull her aside say something is wrong here and then she later got on to explain how she is sexually aroused the thought of being

perceived as a man and that she pushes that onto other people right i think conservatives would do a great service in understanding that the libs are open about this though that's why they say don't kink shame right don't don't i think now on social media you're not allowed to make fun of people's fetishes no matter how weird i think that's one of the rules on some of the big tech platforms and this follows naturally from the idea that your sexual desires no matter how deviant, are some wholly protected matter. Well, let's jump to this story, actually, that you brought that up. This is from TimCast.com. Twitter removes portion of hateful conduct policy that prohibited deadnaming and misgendering transgender people.

Based. The platform has prohibited using pronouns matching a trans person's biological sex since 2018. The policy appears to have been changed on April 8th. An archived version of the page from April 7th still stated those rules. The last sentence has since been removed. Instead, the policy now states the platform prohibits targeting others with repeated slurs, tropes, or other content that intends to degrade or reinforce negative or harmful stereotypes about a protected category.

I'm just going to say it again. I know I'm the low guy on the totem pole in this regard, but Elon Musk, Joe Rogan, me having a follow up to the Jack Dorsey, Vijay Gada episode we did, I think would be absolutely tremendous. But like I said, I'm the low guy. Obviously, I'd love to be sitting in a room with Elon and Joe Rogan. But at least I can say that follow up, I think, would be very important because this was a core component of it. It's so important to you think about there's this guy, Charles Clymer, who is a trans activist, and he's very far left. I think he worked for the Human Rights Campaign.

He worked for this ridiculous group called Catholics for Choice, a pro-abortion Catholic group. Yeah, not the most coherent kind of group. And if the policy were in place that you couldn't refer to Charles Clymer, you have to call him whatever girl name he goes by, this would be very convenient for Charles because he has a bit of a dodgy past back when he was Charles and got into some political scandals. So if you're not allowed to refer to Charles, all of a sudden, wow, how nice. All of these problems and scandals go away. No longer a Google search away. Well, I think the other issue with it is where is the line in what someone is allowed to identify as? And this is a

huge component. So back in, I think, 2018, I was looking at New York City's laws, and they protect, they identify 31 genders, but the law explicitly states infinite genders exist, because it defines gender expression as self-expression. And so they say that you can't discriminate in public accommodations based on the clothing a person wears, the name they go by. And if that's the case, what is the legal limit? So I asked a human rights lawyer and they said, well, obviously, there's a reasonableness expectation in the law. The assumption is with this law, it's if a person is transgender, they're, they're, you know, discernibly male, but wearing a dress, you can't fire them. If they're discernibly male, but going by the name Susan, you can't fire them. And so I asked a, uh, a couple of human rights lawyers,

if somebody went to Starbucks and, um, applied for a job, then showed up on day one in a fursuit and they called themselves Volsiferon, Harold, Harold of the winter mists. Would Starbucks be able to fire them for this? And they said, yes, of course. That's ridiculous. And I said, well, why, why can't they sue under that very same law that that is their gender expression. And what I was told was a judge would laugh them out of the courtroom. And then I said, what if the judge doesn't like trans people and laughs at the man in a dress? What's the difference? And they didn't have an answer. Well, and you know, the case that established a lot of this is that Harris funeral home case from just a few years ago in which we're talking about a funeral home here. So the customers

at funeral homes are very, very vulnerable. They're grieving their loved ones. And there was this dude who decided that he wants to be a chick. And so he started wearing skirts to work. And the owner of the funeral home said, hey, man, I don't know what you're getting into, but, you know, you've got to have some respect for the mourners here. Skirts are not appropriate for funerals. Skirts are not appropriate. This isn't about you, man. You know, this is about the people who are mourning. And he sued him, went all the way up to the Supreme Court, and the Supreme Court decided

that that man, that man's sexual fetish was more important than people's right to mourn in a respectable environment. But think about how crazy this is. If you have a funeral home, the issue is not that we don't like that you're wearing a dress. I mean, kilts exist. They're similar in a certain respect. We're talking about you respecting someone whose loved one died and there's formal attire requirements with new york city's law they've basically abolished uniforms it says you can't discriminate based on what someone wears in public

accommodation so if i show up at starbucks wearing a clown costume let's just be reasonable i show up wearing jeans and a t-shirt and say you can't make me wear those clothes because those are man clothes yeah they can't do anything about it the the theounding thing, however, to me was, and this was honestly a big revelation for me in understanding law, a judge will laugh a person out of a courtroom. And then I said, then there will be many judges who are going to see a man wearing a dress and laugh and say, get out of my courtroom. This is ridiculous. Where's the line? And what I was told is, well, judge make judges make those determinations that they're, they're the human interpretation of the law. And then I went interesting. The law doesn't matter. The only thing that does is the culture. If the culture tolerates men and women cross-dressing

in public, then the judge will defend it. If the culture tolerates fursuits, the judge will defend it. And right now it seems the fursuit goes overursuits, the judge will defend it. And right now, it seems the fursuit goes over the line. But I'd say in three or four years, you will see people in full fursuits at Starbucks serving your coffee. Of course. And notice when you say we've now got the abolition of uniforms. This is always the result of these kind of leftist policies that specifically focused on trans right now. But all of these leftist policies is this constant leveling and lowering down and abolition of standards. So the answer that people give, the middle ground on the bathrooms is what you said earlier, which is, well, let's just all have unisex bathrooms and we'll just all have individual

bathrooms. What's the answer on the sports teams? Oh, we'll just have, we'll all just have our own sports teams or something. What's the answer? And so what happens is we all just become this undifferentiated androgynous consumer. That's all we do. All we are now is, I don't want to sound like a commie or something, but this is being pushed, not just by the leftist activists, it's being pushed by the entire liberal establishment and by corporate America and the whole power structure, which is just to take away all the ornamentation all the differentiation all the natural lovely diversity of life and make us all just a bunch of blobs to buy a bunch of hormones and purchase their products and uniform actually means the same one form that's what uniform is for is to

make all the same so they're stripping away the communist sameness of everything to create a weird world to then reconfigure it so that everyone... Well, yeah. Instead of having different kinds of uniforms in different areas of life for men and women, now it's literally

we will just be uniform, undifferentiated blobs plugged into our computers and living in the metaverse and eating bugs. I think that's absolutely where we're going. The deep fakery is getting so advanced so rapidly.

Last time I was on Rogan, I said I didn't think it was that big of a deal. And I was so wrong and so naive because I was looking at the modern iterations of deep fakes and I was just like, I'm not worried about that. I didn't stop to consider the rapid degree of advancement. How long ago was that when you were on Rogan? This was a year and a half ago. A year and a half. Think about how fast AI has advanced so far in six months. A year and a half ago,

there was like one program that had accomplished voice manipulation and there were some goofy videos that were low res. And I was just like, I'm not worried about this. And then within a year and a half, it advanced to the point where I was on Instagram and I saw a Roggan clip and it's joe advertising some uh i think it was like a i think it was penis growth or something like that

some weird like testosterone booster thing and uh i was like whoa it was if you if you if you watched it you're like that's a deep fake if you were just passing through you might not have noticed and that's when i was like oh man now we have that 11 labs website where you can take 30 seconds of anyone talking drop it in and you can make them say whatever you want now i'm like imagine what it's going to be like in a year there is going to be a deep fake of donald trump giving a speech that looks completely real he will say something kind of bad but not really that bad but bad enough to lose votes and no matter what anyone says, the left will believe it. I wonder if it'll get to the point where there'll be two presidents, according to everyone,

and no one will know which one's the real one and which one's the fake one. That's a good point because yes, because someone will make a deep fake clip of CNN and put it on Twitter by a verification. And then it'll be Don Lemon saying, Donald Trump has been reelected this 2024 and then people are going to see the clips and they're going to believe it. I mean, that's going to happen. This AI stuff is actually the end of society. I know people like to claim that all sorts of advancements and innovations are the end

of society. This one actually is because it impels people to just retreat into themselves for everything. So now we will retreat into our own fantasies for art. It makes great art. So the art that I put up on my walls, I can just type it into Midjourney or any of them and get a beautiful piece of art. It will, you'll be able to create these deep fakes of video and audio. It's obviously going to be applied to porn. I assume it actually probably already is being applied to porn, is it? Yeah. And I'm sure in the future, I'm sure it will be.

And so people will have no reason to engage in reality because one, you won't have any common referent to talk about. You'll just have, I'll have my video of Trump and you'll have your video of Trump and we'll both have made them up. I'll have my fantasy that I'm living in, be it personal, be it entertainment, be it sex, be it anything. And we'll all just be living in our pods plugged into our own fantasies. That is the end of community.

The only thing I can think that would change that or one of the things is if the power goes out. And I don't want the power to go out. But if it did then the artificial intelligence would die i'm not laughing at you i'm sorry but but there's ways to make perpetual electricity and i'm concerned about why solar wind geothermal and tapping the vacuum i mean it's possible and an ai this is why they're so hell-bent on pushing that because they want to create my my pitch i actually pitched this uh half pitched it to you guys at The Daily Wire,

an idea for a show where I'll try and give the super simple version. It takes place in a world that's like human civilizations collapse. There's only one city left and it's people. It's like the year 2130. Technology is comparable to what it is now. A conflict emerges between very thin, tall humanoid beings in white jumpsuits with chrome heads who can shoot lasers. Humans fight. No one knows how civilization collapsed, but they assume these creatures must have wiped out the planet because of some kind of aliens.

And then in the final episode of the season or whatever, you know, there's a fight and then someone hits like a crane release, which drops a boulder or a car onto one of these creatures and crushes it, disabling its force fields. They pull the chrome helmet off and it's a human. And the reveal is that society didn't collapse. It migrated underground into pods where humans all networked themselves with neural links into a virtual world. And the reason why the last city was unaware of what happened to humanity is the news didn't stop. News was still being written, but it migrated. My example is if someone came from the year 1900 to this time period, they'd immediately be like, get me a newspaper so I can learn about what's happening in the world.

And then they would find that newspapers slowly started to disappear. If someone from the 1900s jumped 200 years in the future and then just tried to take a look at history based on their understanding of how to look through history, they would be like, newspapers ceased to exist in the year 2075. History was gone. We have no idea what happened. Humans, no, it just went online. So my idea for this show is there will be some humans who never migrate, and they will not have access to the metaverse historical archive. So to them, they'll just, like their great-grandchildren will be like, we don't know exactly what happened,

but some kind of collapse happened, and we have no access. We just find these old records, these old websites and stuff and servers. We try to boot up and figure out where they all went. The problem for those metaverse records, though, is that when everything is digital, you can just constantly change the records.

This is one of the prophecies of 1984. And that's actually a component. This show would be fantastic, records though is that when everything is digital you can just constantly change the records this is the one of the prophecies of 1984 and that's actually a component like this show would be fantastic because the people who live in the metaverse would have a warped view of reality because there would be oligarchs who rewrite history but then the people who live in the real world with the physical unalterable will like meet one of these people in the metaverse and be like look at these archives that we've brought and they they're like, that's not history. And they'll pull up Wikipedia to show history. And it'll be last edited yesterday. And they'll be like, this book hasn't been re-edited in 300 years. This is all very scary. But I think what Mark Zuckerberg is trying to sell is like,

what if you had Zoom meetings, but you were an octopus? And I'm just like, I don't know what to do with this information well ian mentioned earlier like you could you could identify as a carrot you know like you're gonna you're gonna go you're gonna be in the metaverse on on tinder and you're gonna be like a carrot a dog a toaster a vw oh a person swipe say well it's like the person even they get that gets back to the trans thing like everything else today which is that in the metaverse, did you see Mark Zuckerberg cut everyone off at the naval? So initially, they kept sexually harassing each other. So he just cut their legs off.

Is that what happened? Yeah. In the beta testing, they kept pinching each other and things. They had to chop off their sex. Just don't take away their legs. It is. I like how you brought up the word trans because of the transhumanism movement well that's what it's all about ultimately and the word says is from the mathematical term trans and cis yeah oh like cis alpine gall trans alpine gall

say again the billionaires are all super into the transhumanist stuff and because they're evil they don't want to die and that's an incredibly dark impulse and that's why they're kind of getting behind all the transgenderist stuff because yeah that's totally true incremental step it's a lot of these guys are pretty intelligent but sometimes intelligent people are just the dumbest people on earth for all of human history really rich selfish people have tried to figure out how to live forever. And we're living in such a stupid time that we're, this has been going on for all of history. And people now go online and they say, wow, you know, we're really close to living forever. This time we've almost figured it out.

Spoiler alert, they're not going to figure it out. That's not a real thing. You're just going to kill a bunch of people in the process of trying to find out. You're going to kill a bunch of people. You're going to cause all sorts of havoc and it's that same lie from the garden of eden which is the lie that ye shall be as gods uval herari refers to this as homo deus that we're now going to take control over the future of humanity and you think okay good luck buddy i mean unfortunately it's going to cause lots of problems in the short term but it ain't going to work man i think we need to get uh the daily wire crew we we might have to force them to watch full metal alchemist brotherhood it's an anime and uh but i'll just

spoil it for you right now to explain i was just about to watch it or or attack attack attack on titan is also really good uh and i'll tell you why full metal uh alchemist brotherhood is about a basically this entity that wants to sacrifice humans to become immortal to to to ascend to a higher plane and so it's just government conspiracy to murder people and sacrifice them so uh that i think is interesting and there's something like matt walsh said about like not watching anime and then there was like a backlash from people like no there's some good stories here and attack on titan is about uh ancestral crimes and how certain races of people should be held criminally responsible for things their ancestors did thousands of years ago so that's

they're interesting stories that i think you know what the italians did those poor etruscans those poor etruscans oh yeah i mean don't get me started dude the etruscans let's rock and roll that's where that's the romans took credit for all that stuff the etruscans actually are where it's at i found i was reading the sub stack of Popehead the other day, great sub stack. And I saw this quote from Seneca, the philosopher Seneca. And it was about the difference between the Romans and the Etruscans. And Seneca said, the difference between us Romans and those Etruscans is that the Romans look at clouds creating rain and they say, okay, natural forces came together and they put the clouds and then the rain came.

And then here's some meaning that we could infer from that. But those Etruscans who attribute everything to the divine, they believe that the gods wanted to express meaning. And so they pushed the clouds together and had the rainfall. And the thing is, the Etruscans were totally right. Have you ever moved clouds with your magnetic field? I have not. I am not a god. You can.

Oh, well, it's flowing through you. You utilize the magnetic fields. I think you're wrong, Ian. I think my field is a little off. We talked with Alex Jones about this. And you weren't in the room, though, but I could hear the screaming from Ian downstairs. So Ian likes to talk about the magnetic fields all the time. But Alex Jones actually mentioned that they did experiments and found there is some kind of energy around all of

us moving through us that it's it's uncontrollable that uh i i don't know exactly how he described it he was basically saying it it does connect all of us in some way but you can't control it just because something hasn't been controlled doesn't mean it can't be. That's an important differential. You know what I think? Or I should say, you know what I hypothesize sometimes? That if there really is this connection to the greater or whatever, that people probably don't all have the exact same connection.

And probably to varying degrees, some people, I wonder if the reason why you have woke NPC type people and some people who seem to be smarter, more perceptive is simply because they're call whatever you want. Third eye or antenna is more receptive to, you know, this kind of energy or whatever that is to say, if you are closed off from the greater, from the spiritual, from whatever prayer is meaningless to you. You don't experience it. You haven't, there is nothing beyond this reality.

You're a moist robot and that's all that there is. But if you're someone who has a greater connection to whatever you want to call it, the spiritual realm or to God or whatever, you're going to understand and know things. And you also can't give that feeling to a person who doesn't have that. Well, of course, because it's not about you. I mean, we used to just call this sanctity. And so I loved when you brought up earlier the simulation theory, because simulation theory is just the way that modern people talk about basic religious concepts in a world that doesn't accept religion. And so we talk about the magnets and the fields and whatever. But yeah, we're talking

about holiness and we're talking about spiritual reality. And so, of course, it's the case that some people are holier than other people and more attuned to this. But the thing is, you can grow in holiness and you can also turn away from the grace of God. And when you say, well, you can't give it to someone else, that's because it's about your relationship with God. It's not about your relationship with some other dude. I had a guy tell me a story that he became Christian because he was doing drugs. He was

in the woods. And then he woke up in the morning, strung out, hungover, went to go take a leak. And then all of a sudden felt this booming voice from within his own chest say, what are you doing? And it freaked him out. And then it said, you are wasting your life. You have to stop this. You have to change. And he didn't know what it was. So he went and sought answers and then found, you know, holy men who explained to him what this was, what it meant. He got clean, started a business and lived a fulfilling life with his friends and became very responsible. And he went from a strung out drug addict, wasting away into a productive member of society after having this profound moment. And he said to me, I don't care if you don't believe me, it happened to me and I can never give you that feeling, but I assure you,

I experienced it. Oh, of course. I was like, no, I believe you. It was a voice that sounded like, why Saul of Tarsus are you persecuting me? These things happen. People have those road to Damascus moments. And I'm sure the secular atheist types might just say, well, he was on drugs and he was having a psychotic break or whatever. And I'll be like, call it whatever you want, explain it however you want. This person had a experience where they felt something that changed their life for the better. I'm totally okay with that. I think sometimes your frontal lobe clouds

your spiritual part of the brain maybe, because when it quiets, when you can go into flow state and dim the activity in your frontal lobe is when you really, time starts to lose meaning. I think it can kind of happen. And there's so much activity like stimulating the frontal lobe, my name, who am I? I exist in my frontal lobe. Without that, you're kind of part of it. Do you wonder, Ian, though, if you're confusing the physical for the metaphysical? Like you're talking about this as if your brain

is controlling everything, as if the physical world is controlling some aspect of your metaphysical understanding. But what if those two things are just occurring simultaneously, or what if it's going in the opposite direction? So now we say all the time, I had such an adrenaline rush. We don't say I got excited, right? We say, oh, I got a dopamine hit instead of I felt happy. But why is the physical the only meaningful thing, when in fact the physical world alone can't have any meaning. Let me bridge this with science. People who do DMT and break through the veil. And then see some other kind of entity beyond this realm.

Usually demons. Well but maybe. You can call them demons. But why make that assumption? Some of them may be demons. What if some of them are more holy or something like that? Well I got. I actually had a great interview.

There's a little bit of a plug up for my YouTube channel. I had this two-hour interview with a guy who was a total psychonaut all into psychotropics and hallucinogens. And he thinks they're demons. But it's worth it. If people want to go watch, it's a two-hour conversation. But yeah. I'd be more inclined to believe they were demons, to be honest.

But at the same time, a bit more agnostic on whatever people experience this, whatever they could be. But the only reason I bring it up is because if it is true that multiple people, I mean, hundreds or thousands of people have experienced some kind of consistent entity by taking this chemical, then when you, Ian, like as you were saying, you conflate the metaphysical with the physical, when you experience these things, it could be something beyond the veil reaching into you. Yeah, I think I focus on the physical a lot because I feel like that's what I can control in the process that like it's like a radio tuner. I can tune it to the right frequency, but I'm not making the music happen. So I'm just so evidence based.

So I'm looking at like, but I think the magnetic field, it's like moving around the magnetic field, I believe you can. But it's like if you have a magnet in your hand and you're moving it underneath a piece of paper with all these iron fragments on top of the paper, the iron's moving. But are you moving the iron or are you moving the magnet? You're moving the magnet. The iron filings are just moving along. I think you're still making the same epistemological error, though, which is you're saying that you're evidence-based, and so you want to ground everything physically. But the error here is the idea that reality is fundamentally physical, which it certainly is not. The fact that we have intelligible speech, the fact that symbols have meaning that we can interpret and that we rely on it all tells you that reality is fundamentally metaphysical, and there's evidence for it.

I got this, though, Michael. I think plasma is where it starts to change. Well, that's physical, too. I got this, because, Ian, you're a fan of incubus i love incubus and brandon boyd what's up dog and they have that song where um i don't know if it's which song it is a certain shade of green or something like that where in the middle of the song there's a recording of a guy who says at the turn of the century humans thought that what they could touch smell see and hear was reality but since the initial publication of the charged electromagnetic magnetic spectrum humans have learned that what they can touch smell see and hear are reality. But since the initial publication of the charged electromagnetic spectrum,

humans have learned that what they can touch, smell, see and hear is less than one millionth of reality. So there you go. That's a good line actually from Incubus, which is a kind of a demon. Yeah, when you talk about it, it literally is a demon. When you talk about physics, what's physical, they used to think it was solid, liquid and gas.

And then all of a sudden, at some point, they realized oh, plasma is a fourth state of physical matter there's more there's more physical stuff than we realized and when you look at clouds of plasma moving around i don't think they're intelligent but there seems to be a sentience involved with the way that plasma like it doesn't move like a cloud in the air it moves like you you're a physical thing and you are sentient also but the sentience isn't from your, your consciousness, your rationality is not from your physical body. That's, you're just a clump of cells in your physical body that your reason comes from

your rationality. I'll put it this way. We're playing a video game. It's not a simulation. It's a video game. And we are entities that exist beyond the physical bodies, but we are occupying them to facilitate this simulated experience. In plasma clouds, there's these things called plasmon

in the center of plasma clouds. And when they're hit with photons, with light, it causes the plasma cloud to react. So it's like information is being transferred from light into plasma, which is then cooling down into gas and then into liquid and then into solid that doesn't that doesn't have to be a conscious process physical things react to stimuli right we seem like a sentient process not necessarily conscious but like if i if i threw let's say i threw an explosive like those people last night

at pit if i threw an explosive at that wall the wall would react and there'd be a hole in the wall or a dent in the wall but the wall wall is not conscious. I think you're right. I think consciousness is like, is like living organisms seem to have consciousness, not necessarily organism, because then it'd be carbon-based, but like living things have consciousness, but not unliving things have sentience. It seems like, like when they say God is, I don't think God is conscious. I think it's sentient. Well, so God is consciousness, right? God is reason. But if we're, if we're talking about sentience in the sense that one can feel sensations, you know, like an animal or even simpler organisms can react to certain stimuli

in a, you know, they can feel pain, say, that's true. And when we talk about consciousness, we're usually talking about rational consciousness so we can discuss abstract things. You know, we can talk about justice, but an ape or a plant can't talk about justice. I think Ian desperately wants to believe in God. He does. He does. Every time I'm here,

I just think you're like, you're so close, but you keep falling into all this new age. We're talking about a different thing when we say God, because if there's a conscious God, he's looking for a personal relationship with us as individuals. And if there's a God who's not conscious, but he's sentient somehow. No, no, no.

What I'm saying is the questions Ian asks sound more like a please make me understand. Totally. Yeah. I used to be agnostic. And then I saw the cosmic microwave background radiation. I was like, OK, I'm evidence guy. That is evidence of God. That is like, looks like a neural net.

But everything is. I mean, I remember I had this, when I was an atheist, I was sitting out having a cigar in my little front porch and I had this tiny little house in New York and I had this dead rosebush. The thing was all, it wasn't like a beautiful thing that I was looking at, but I just, I was sitting there and I was looking at the leaves and the complexity of the leaves on this dying rose bush. And I thought, you know, there's got to be some logic here.

There's got to be, why is that so complex? Why is that conveying meaning to me? Even this totally quotidian thing. And it wasn't, it wasn't the biggest push in my becoming a christian and believing that god exists but it was another piece of evidence which is the the evidence of meaning and intelligence is all around us it's here it's even in the stupid book gender queer that fibonacci sequence that golden ratio keeps showing up in reality well yeah because there's a structure to the universe there's a logic and there's a math and we're only some like you're like wow the golden

ratio is everywhere but in reality it's just you noticing a tiny little piece of the logic of the universe that exists sometimes i wonder if i'm looking through the lens of the spiraling galaxy there's three types of galaxies there's irregular galaxies which is like a star cluster then they become a spiral galaxy where it starts to spin then they form up into a spheroid galaxy and i feel like we're in a transition towards the spheroid but i wonder because we're in a spiral other things look like they're spiraling so we're only seeing the fibonacci sequence from our perception because we're wearing spiral glasses perhaps so i i will dive into this subject matter just because it came up and i and i think it's a good opportunity with

with having you here because uh seamus will be back uh next week i'm so we're excited for seamus coglin of freedom tunes will be hanging. Seamus is going to be the one to actually get you in. I can maybe push a little bit on the apologetics. But Seamus is a Shiite Wahhabi Catholic who has an answer for absolutely everything. He's a smart guy. He is. He's a very. But I want to I want to I want to make this point for those that haven't heard it, because

we briefly mentioned that simulation theory is the language used by, you know, how did you describe it? It's just the way modern people talk about religion because they don't know how to talk about religion. So it's, it's, it just seems more relatable for people. When I, when I was in Catholic school and we were learning about science and we were learning about energy and I was told that, you know, the real is energy cannot be created or destroyed. It can only be changed. Energy is, and always has been. And I was like, it sounds very similar to how you describe God or the universe or things like that. It just sounds like you're

talking about something similar. And they never really gave me a good philosophical understanding of any kind of similarities or what it could possibly mean. But as a kid who was nine years old, I certainly took that to heart and considered maybe what they mean is like maybe back when they wrote this stuff, when the Bible was being written, when people, when holy men were studying and coming with ideas, they were, they were conveying their understanding of the universe without our modern sensibilities. So that brings us to simulation theory, where you get people who are seemingly atheists saying, I kid you not, a more advanced entity than us created this universe for a purpose with rules and expects something from us. And then I'm like, I can't tell if you're a holy man

or a simulist. Are you a tech bro from Silicon Valley? Or are you someone trying to explain the rudimentary religion to me? The simulation language that people use now, if it persuades anyone, it's fine by me, but it's better even than the idea of energy. You recognized a similarity between something in the created world and the creator of that world, but the idea that God just is synonymous with the world or that God just is the world and there's a little God left over, which is called panentheism, that is different from the Christian idea and the monotheism and the way things that really are the simulation theory is a better mapping of that because you have god who is entirely self-sufficient who does not need us who creates the world in this act of love out of nothing

and makes us in his own image that is is, in the modern way we talk about it, just some geeky programmer who like makes us. Now get this. I often hear people say something like, well, if God created the universe, who created God? And it's just like, well, hold on. Now you're ascribing our physical limitations to something that is beyond our physical limitations. But here's a better way to explain it all. Y'all have played The Sims. I have all four of them. Are The Sims smart enough to comprehend this reality or existence? The Sims aren't smart. Exactly.

But they do their little thing. They live in their little universe. They don't have a degree of consciousness. They are not smart. We, that's us. Yeah. We are The Sims. We are the very stupid, bumbling around, and then we cannot comprehend what exists beyond our world.

Do you believe when you think about destiny and free will, do you think that we're just destined to play a part in this chemical reaction? I think the likely – I wouldn't say I'm as definitive as Michael, but I believe we're here for a reason. I believe the universe was created for a purpose. I believe that it's entirely possible the universe is actually only 5,000 years old. And that is, I'm not saying I believe that wholeheartedly, I'm saying it's possible if you are someone who believes in simulation theory. The idea being, you've played Grand Theft Auto? Oh yeah. That was the only video game as a teenager that I played because it was just so shocking. Oh real but not not let me put this

out uh when you played grand theft auto you know there is no point in that video game where people built buildings yeah where a construction crew came in and constructed a skyscraper it just always has been and the that universe was created specifically in the year 2013 or whatever and it just came into existence and And so I find it fascinating that people who believe in simulation theory can't understand the same argument from a religious perspective that the universe was created 5,000 years ago. I don't like that argument. I used to think that nothing existed unless I was perceiving it, that everything was a wave of infinite possibility outside of my perception and my perception collapsed reality.

And this is just a simulation I'm experiencing. It was very egocentric. It's calledism and other people were like ian you freak i'm part of this too like what's wrong where did you go you're not the ian i used to know and so i think it it's possible that it's both that and everyone's experiencing that and but it because of that we're all it is all real but we're also it's all a wave of infinite possible i mean it is possible aren't those mutually contradictory? Exactly. Yes. Yeah.

So they can't simultaneously. Well, they can't. Contradictions can exist in nature. No. What? Well, like quantum computing allows something to be a one and a zero at the same moment. Yes. That's true.

You're saying that there are, you're saying that there are possibilities that can collapse down into actualities. That's the quantum, the physical, quantum physical perception of like the, I don't know, double, I don't want to misquote the double slit experiment, but things were like electrons work as, as function as a cloud until you put a perception on them. Then they collapse into their, where they're at, but you don't know where they're going to be at until you look. Yeah. But now, but what you're suggesting is now, I'm always a little hesitant when people bring up quantum things because I just find, you know, physics is

very hard. And because all of the quantum language is so fantastical, people tend to turn them to their own ideological or theological purposes. So I'm a little cautious with it. But are you suggesting that scientists have discovered a way to violate Aristotle's law of non-contradiction? I'm not familiar with Aristotle's law. Which is the idea that mutually contradictory things can't simultaneously exist well kind of like uh women's bathrooms and transgenderism can't simultaneously i disagree because i think someone could be a man and a trans woman at the same time but not a female correct they could be a female or trans man but they're still both in this regard what we're

currently what we what we if assuming you believe all of the companies that have claimed this quantum computing is uh right so computers operate with yes and no gates ones and zeros quantum computing allows the the calculation to exist as a one and a zero in the same space at the same time so the calculations happen rapidly oh sure sure so i i understand i understand the not rapidly but instantaneous. Right, right. No, I understand that from the perspective of rapidity, but I don't really understand, and we're speaking in language that is figurative, even when we talk about ones and zeros, I don't really understand what it means for these contradictory things to be simultaneous. Another simultaneous contradiction is like this. I'll give you an analogy. I'll show you. Well, let me explain. Let's say you want to brute force a password, right? Yeah. Imagine it like you have an ant farm.

Yeah. When you're looking through the glass, you can see all these little paths and trails that go all the way down in little shapes, like a maze. Yeah. If you were to try and send in one drop of water at a time to navigate that maze, it gets blocked. You drive another up. It gets blocked. That's brute forcing to get to the bottom. Quantum computing would be pouring water straight in the top so it goes and it instantly gets you to the bottom and gives you that access. Here's an example of a contradiction, a simple contradiction. Like when you look at that number, what number do you see?

Well, I see nine. I see a six. But you see a six. And we're both right. Well, no, we just, we don't know which way is the top of the paper. I don't think there is a top of the paper. There is a top of the paper. But who's gonna decide?

Well, I can tell you, I've got good evidence for it. So let me... I'll grab this. I'm pleased to say that I'm right about what the number is, because I can see that the paper was pulled from your notebook out this way. Oh, you're wrong. I'm wrong? Yes. Look where the margin on the paper is. Oh, you're wrong. I'm wrong? Yes.

Look where the margin on the paper is. Okay. You're right. I got you. If I were more observant and more scientific, I would have noticed where the margin was on the paper. What did you say? You said nine? You flip it.

Yeah. So there it is. The margin's at the top. It's the six. Yep. It's the six. Listen, I'm a modern person. I don't use notebooks.

You were right. It is a nine from your perspective. No. Unfortunately, Tim was right and I was wrong and you were right. If we had a piece of paper. That's Mary. But the reason is the paper has a direction, objectively. I can know using my perception and using my reason where the paper came from, what the orientation of the paper is.

And once I know that, I can know if this is a six or a nine and i will admit i'll be the bigger man you were right so assume there was no paper it was just outside in the wilderness you came upon that symbol it doesn't there's no relativism it just your your perception is what it is no no no hold on let me let me let me answer this for you ian. Let me see the paper. So the way we deduced that this was in fact a 6 and not a 9 is first, Michael tried to point out the tear, and he assumed it came from this side of the paper,

but you were holding it upside down, so you assumed it came this way. In fact, Ian pulled it out from the other side. The margin is at the top. If the margin was not there, and we couldn't determine what it was, that doesn't mean it is a six. It is a nine. It means we don't have enough evidence to form the correct conclusion. But it is a six and it is a nine. No, Tim is right. It's both at once.

That's the correct contradiction of reality that can exist. Ian, I disagree and I'll explain. If someone were to write a password onto a piece of paper and they wrote 666 and it was a square post-it note that with no sticky, it was like a square piece of paper and they dropped it somewhere. It was intended, the intention and the code itself is 666, meaning if you want to unlock the door, it's 666. Someone comes upon that paper and they say, I don't know the orientation of the paper. It may be nine. It may be six. The answer is, I don't know the orientation of the paper. It may be nine, it may be six. The answer is, I don't know. Not that it's nine because I choose it to be. Because then, if you go to the keypad terminal and type 999, door won't open.

You're applying relativism. If there's nothing to relate it to, you just have to take it at face value. But in objective reality, there are things to relate it to and to ground it in. So to use Tim's example, there is the adhesive line on the sticky. So that could give you some evidence of which way it is now. Let's say the adhesive rubbed off. Well, you're going to have to look and see, is there a little hint of that adhesive left? Or maybe it got ripped off.

Unless the intention of the individual was to make an obscure symbol to confuse people, it is either a six or a nine. Our inability to understand the intent of the person who crafted that symbol does not negate what the symbol sometimes in nature there is no intent it just is and and the experience of being human is our is our attempt to rationalize but what we're saying is there's always intent there is well and always purpose and t loss and and and all and and let's let's take it one step further and if this symbol appeared on a tree because a lightning lightning struck it and then it was sideways,

and someone came up and said, is it a six, a nine, an E? Well, I think it's a six. Well, I think it's a nine. The reality is it's a mark from a lightning strike. It's all three of those. It's not. It surely is, yes. In order for it to be the symbol you describe it as, it must relate to the language, the

abstract ideological structure the person ascribed it to. If a fish flops on the ground and draws this symbol, I'm not going to say that fish just wrote a number for me. I'm going to say the fish flopped on the ground kind of looks like a six, kind of looks like a nine. But you're establishing a lot of relative aspects to the position. Like if someone walks into nature and that is just on the ground, it depends on what angle. If you come at it from one side, it looks like a nine. If you come in from the other, it looks like a six. What you're really getting at here is, is a distinction between the way actually that the left and the right view of the world, which is as one of a world of interpretation or a world of

activism and the imposition of will. So the idea of law, actually, the idea of whether that's a six or a nine, the conservatives would look at that and say, look, there is objective reality. There is an intelligibility to the universe. I have a faculty of reason. And so I can interpret and I can learn things from the world. Whereas the way that the modern left, the very relativistic, self-centered left, and very willful, wrathful left would look at that and say, I don't give a damn what it's supposed to mean. I'm going to deny my faculties of reason. I'm going to pretend that men are actually women. I'm going to say that babies aren't really babies. And it's going to be whatever the hell I want. Let me pull this into this analogy. The right takes the approach,

I think, that you and I described, Michael, where you'll see the symbol and they'll say, how did the symbol come to be? And what meaning does it intend to convey? The symbol exists. I would like to understand why it exists. The left's perspective is there's a symbol. I'm going to tell you what I want it to be. But it's a humpty dumpty, right? Words can mean whatever I want them to.

Whatever empowers me. Which is what political correctness is too. The right using rationality. I think that is a good method towards describing meaning, but- No, no, no. To interpreting meaning. To interpreting meaning. Not ascribing meaning, but to interpreting meaning. And so you, incredibly rational, brilliant, probably genius level IQ,

was certain that was a nine. After a moment of examining the situation, using your rationality. That was one of the few times that I've been wrong. That's the point. Even the most brilliant rationalists can be wrong. Yes.

And being wrong does not mean it is a nine. It means you were wrong. The thing is though, you weren't wrong. You were right. Stop trying to make me feel better. I was wrong, man.

You were right and you were right and I was right. It was a six, a nine and a scratch mark on paper. It actually isn't, Ian. You took a piece of paper with the margin on the top

and you wrote a six. Well, I drew that shape. I wanted to see what number he thought it was. I thought it was a six. So the point is, I think in the culture where this is actually a great conversation for people who are listening. I think it's important to understand the left's predominant view versus what we would describe as the right. The right includes post-liberals because the political factions are no longer about policy. It's about understanding reality and i grew up traditionally liberal i think you did too right michael oh yeah i'm from new york i mean everybody was now you're now you're a theistic christian conservative yeah i don't know what i am some kind of ism you know but i mean i i grew up i was always kind of a young republican type you know i had I had a little liberal phase. But to your point, Tim, even being a young Republican conservative type,

pretty much meant we were all liberals for much of the last 30 years. So I like this analogy, this way to break down the way people see the world. And when I see this symbol, I look for the evidence. The way you drew this Ian on this paper with the paper's margin on top is how you would typically make a six. Therefore, you drew a six. You can call it whatever you want. I understand for this purpose, you are not intending to make it either symbol. The left does two things. The first, they jump to conclusions and then insist they know because of ego. When they see the piece of paper, they will say it's whatever they want it to be, a nine or a six, whatever suits their needs at the time. They are unwilling, typically, to listen to any evidence.

The typical leftist perspective on this would be, hey, look at that margin on top. That means it's a six. Well, if that's offending their ego because they determined to be a nine, they'll say you were wrong and they'll make a similar argument to you, which is called sophistry. An attempt to make a fallacious argument to prove them right for the sake of their dominance over you because they believe there is no truth but power. I don't think it is sophistry. I'm pointing out that it's both a six and a nine. That's not sophistry. That's just an observation. Right, right. And what I'm explaining to you is on a piece of paper with this orientation, you have drawn a six. I mean, that's not what I'm explaining to you is, on a piece of paper, with this orientation, you have drawn a six.

I mean, that's not what Michael told me 10 minutes ago. Because I was wrong. But you see... I don't think you were. Okay, but... But well, now you're wrong. I drew an upside down nine. I'm just going to be clear.

This is my point. Yeah, you actually didn't. You actually drew a six. I mean, that's an upside down nine, man. Flip it upside down. It's actually not. It's an ugly looking nine, but it sure is. You drew this from... That's how I draw, yeah. That's not how you make nines. I mean...

So my point is simply this. Honestly, I was drawing a six. Yes, thank you for the honesty. And you're saying there is truth here. I thought you might think it was a nine. And in fact, I wished it was a square white piece of paper with no margin for the argument. You succeeded at deceiving me, Ian. But this actually... But it's disappointing. This gets to exactly what was going on last night at Pittsburgh, by the way. We were supposed to have a debate and conservatives are more inclined to have debates and debates are about pursuing logic to come to the truth. And the libs were outside throwing explosives.

And that's, and actually this gets back down to the Bible. You know, there's an important moment in the Bible when Christ goes in and he's hanging out with these two ladies, Mary and Martha. And one of the sisters is sitting contemplating what Christ is saying. When Christ goes in and he's hanging out with these two ladies, Mary and Martha, and one of the sisters is sitting contemplating what Christ is saying. And the other sister is serving the lunch and is busy and doing all these things. And what Christ says is the contemplative life is the better portion. Not to say that we shouldn't feed ourselves and, you know, we're living in time and space. We have to do certain things to maintain our bodies. But that contemplation, interpretation is actually better than the act

of life. And we obviously need both of these things, but we need, if we're going to use our will, it has to be in accord with intellect. Otherwise, we're just going to start throwing explosives at the wall. You can look at the way I wrote those letters to determine what numbers they are. 96B. So what I did was I flipped it upside down and then I wrote a nine and a six. Nines and six are not drawn the same way. When a person is taught to write, they don't draw a nine by starting from the bottom and then looping up around the top. They start from the top and then go down. I mean, you're making a lot of points based on like modern culture and all that.

I know what you're saying. Let me just say this. I think the point, the danger in all of this is what I'm saying is if you become steadfast on what you think it is and there is no other, like, I'm not saying be postmodernist. Right, right. Okay. But when you claim something is what you think it is, it doesn't mean that it necessarily is to other people that way.

And that's okay. But you know, aren't you being that steadfast when you say it is both a six and a nine? You're insisting upon that. I'm trying to be open-minded about it can be more than what I think it is. You're being tyrannically open-minded. Okay, so here's the point. You're not open-minded to my open-mindedness. And that's why I hate the phrase open-minded.

It's meaningless. Yeah, you have to stop somewhere. The point is, Ian, the right tends to have a view of there is meaning. Let me figure out what it is. And if it turns out the symbol never had the ascribed meaning, then it's not a six or a nine. It was a shape. I just want to make sure people don't live their life based on what they thought that symbol was and just go all the way without considering that they might be wrong. Right. And that's what the left does. And when you offend their ego, they insist they were right.

Oh, it's a big problem. It's a big problem among all sides and groups of people that i can see but the problem is if you have too open of a mind then you become a post-modernist where it could be anything what if it was just a sideways shape it wasn't even a number to be right like so you have to find reality all right we got to go to super chats everybody so smash that like button subscribe to this channel share the show with your friends head over to timcast.com, click join us, become a member so you can watch the uncensored members only show, which will be live at about 10, 10 PM Eastern time on the front page of timcast.com and sign up at the $25 level. You can submit questions and maybe even be a caller to the show. We typically are taking callers like now ish. So if you're in the discord server, now's when you want to be submitting

questions to, to get on the show. Or you can be a member for at least six months at the $10 level. Let's read your superchats. All right. I'm not your buddy guy says, how can we not worry about the people who think humans are a blight on the earth

are also the ones designing AI? It already thinks the right is evil. Yeah, it's shocking to me that they're not open sourcing that thing right now well we mentioned this uh before the show hank green did a poll and he said which universe is a better one with humans without and 42 said without humans i wonder how many of you first guys 30 of them were bots i hope they were the ai but the robots being like we don't like did. Did you see Chaos GBT?

No, what is that? So Chaos GBT is the AI designed to destroy humanity. And what it first tried to do was look up ways to get nuclear weapons. That didn't get them very far. That didn't get the bot very far. And so then the bot decided that the better way to destroy humanity was to manipulate human beings. And specifically to manipulate human emotions. And specifically to do it by being a reply guy

in social media platforms. No way. Yeah, but it couldn't go too far. It couldn't be too on the nose because then the humans would get wise to it and shut down the chaos GBT. And it occurred to me, I know we've been talking about demons

a lot on the show tonight. That's just what the demons do, right? They just kind of manipulate you and tempt you, but they try not to go too far. And it's just everything, what people thought 2,000 years ago, even more than 2,000 years ago, it was just all right.

It was all right. And we think we're such geniuses because we talk about it now with computers, but nothing has changed. It's all exactly the same. I think we're psychic, but it's been dampened. They used to probably be more psychic

and they could sense God's words. I think some people have stronger connections than others. I think that, call it whatever you want, third eye, spiritual connections, whatever. Some people have strong connections and their whole life, they just know there's God. They can feel the presence and they're confused as to why you don't. And then there's some people who are completely closed off and think they're a moist robot and you're insane for thinking otherwise. I used to be like that. That's what they call themselves. And then I learned God.

I think it was when I humiliated myself in public on the internet. I started making internet videos and just telling all my, I kept people that like thoughts will come into your brain. You guys ever have that where you're just sitting there

and you're like, oh, these crazy thoughts. I just told the world what my thoughts were and they stopped popping into my head. And I was like, oh, then I started hearing God. I was like, okay, this is real. Like that is a real thing. Let's read this one got a good one coldy locks production says nebraska became the 27th state to pass constitutional carry today it passed congress and now just has to be signed by the governor who will sign it immediately let's go brandon

27 states think about how fast it's been accelerating yes that's really big man i mean and if you look at gun rights in the 80s gun rights used to not be a thing yeah like most states would not give you permits for carry you know this is crazy there's two issues that the right has won on there's only two we've lost everything but the two things we want on guns and pro-life because it's the only issues where we speak with moral clarity we say no this is a right you have a right to life you have a right to protect yourself pro-life is winning. And pro, I don't know, we undid Roe v. Wade.

That was pretty big. Fair point. But then you got Colorado that went the other direction. So it's kind of like rubber banding. Yeah, no, I mean, it's not going to be a straight shot toward ending abortion, but just overturning Roe v. Wade

will save hundreds of thousands of babies a year. It's pretty good. Tyler Pittman says, Jared from Guns and Gadgets is currently streaming the judiciary hearing. He expressed that he's interested in being on timcast but doesn't know how to contact you guys i'm just a broke bro trying to spread the word um and i don't know how he can tweet at tweet at us i don't know yeah he can send in his own

super chat why has he got to rely on a broke pro to send in the super yeah uh i don't know all right where we at spark says gop will lose in 2024 i live in brooklyn new york democrat campaign staff came to my house come to my house every day at 6 p.m asking to vote democrat in 2024 the gop is asleep at the wheel again i hope the democrats are focusing all of their attention on convincing new yorkers to vote Democrat in presidential elections. Put it all there in California, New York, and we'll go to the swing states. Mark D says, I was retweeted by Jeremy Boring tonight. Mention it on Timcast and make this Marine Corps Veteran Day even better. Congratulations. And thanks for your service. That's great. And I'm really excited. We ordered, I think, 2,000 of the Daily Wire's chocolate bars, but it's an important business purchase. We have snacks.

We have granola bars. We have drinks. You have great snacks. We have the keto granola bars. And now we're going to have Jeremy's She Her Nutless bars. And I just ordered, I think, 600 cans of conservative dad's ultra right beer. We're going to get so fat. Don't look at me.

I mean, you can eat all the chocolate you want. That's one of the things that the challenges of working at timcast is control your gluttony yeah because we make sure you know we're communists here so everybody has whatever they want and there's food and pizza we i ordered starbucks the past three days days in a row for everybody i know i'm not a bit like once we get casper coffee up and running we are gonna have there's no more starbucks i will say this is how i knew that your show was really doing great is every time i would come in the bar would get in like not infinitely but exponentially more ridiculous that's the that's like the craziest bar i've

ever seen the drinks over there yeah i mean the pappy's gone the pappy's there's a louis the 13th of there you got the louis the 13th you got the lefroy 25 it's unbelievable 27 gold over there for a while you ever drink that uh we got manuka honey tooaig 25. It's unbelievable. 27. Colloidal gold over there for a while. You ever drink that? We got Manuka honey, too. I don't know that I have. There's Manuka honey. Wow. Yeah, that's expensive Australian import. We cracked open the Louis XIII when Elon took control of Twitter.

That's a good occasion. We were like, we need a reason to like, this is a very expensive bottle of cognac. But none of us really drink. It's mostly just because we have prominent worldly people who come on this show and uh you know we treat them like kings i don't drink any booze that's true but you do have prominent worldly luscious who come on this show i mean look you know i can't wait when we have when we have prominent individuals of merit we want to make sure we're treating them with the utmost respect yeah and so we we had corn whiskey up there for a while. It cost five bucks

because some people prefer the down to earth, you know, local Joe brand. But I'm really excited for the beer that we get. We normally like to buy local and a conservative dad's ultra right American beer. We'll have that for our guests and for our events and stuff like that. Did Seth Weathers start ultra,

what is it? Ultra right conservative dad. Is that what it's called? I believe it was him. Yeah, he sent on the super chat we'll read it in a minute in a minute let's uh let's read this what do we got douglas caplan says michael knowles best from the wire lol said i missed your show question for michael have you heard of frank turek i think you and him can have an interesting conversation he is from a channel called cross examine and may maybe bring hope and understanding to faith in Jesus.

Oh, I like the name sounds vaguely familiar, but I'm not really familiar with his work. So I got him. I got to check him out. Oh, snap. It's Dave says, hey, Tim, I know. I know long way from this, but look into Baldwinsville, New York, a left of center town, very pro small business. We have an old pizza hut for sale. Perfect for coffee shop outside my bjj gym

in um frederick there's a pizza hut for sale and i really want to go into business with jack posobic and launch papa jack's pizza shack and bring back that old school pizza hut oh stained glass kind of lamps i salad bar i was explaining this to my wife, sweet little Alisa, the other day. Because she grew up, she was a little fancy. You know, she didn't go to the Pizza Huts. And I said, you know, you don't know what you were missing. This was very high class dining. Think about what they've taken from us.

That crispy crust. Oh, yeah. Those red cups with the crystalline structure. Oh, that was good. That salad bar just coated in disease. Yeah. Gabby Hayes says, Tim, I know you can't show the memes right now from Oh, that was good. That salad bar just coated in disease. Yeah. Gabby Hayes says, Tim, I know you can't show the memes right now

from Chris Tyson's old posts, but you should on tonight's uncensored show for a few minutes. I want to see Michael's reaction. Ian too, love you all. Okay. Are you familiar with Chris Tyson? So he's the Mr. Beast guy

who decided he was a woman. He's got a bunch of old spicy memes that I can't say on YouTube. I know he posted about- and i'll tell you this i no one here even wanted to read what he posted on the uncensored show because nobody wants those words coming out of their mouths it's kind of like when obama read his autobiography he's like sometimes we ate dog and we did a lot of cocaine but i imagine chris dyson's is way worse i do know they're they're like they're funny memes they were just boilerplate 4chan edgy right right wasn't he in the weird porn stuff i mean he's obviously into weird porn stuff

but it wasn't there like weird like that might have just been shock edgy edgelord stuff right you just don't know my take on that was not that he's there for a pedo or something like that maybe he is maybe he isn't but i i didn't conclude that he was. My take on that, though, was this guy is fluent in the language of pornography. If he's using really obscure terms that you've got to Google or probably you shouldn't Google, then he probably knows. You think it's 4chan? Well, we'll show you the memes in the Uncensored show. All right.

Sometimes it's more of a meme than anything. All right, here we go. Because of the Moon says, hello, Mr. Knowles, would America and the world be objectively better if its government was a Christian Catholic theocracy? an understanding of justice. So there is no such thing as a total separation of religious thinking and state. That has never existed anywhere. So what you're asking me is, should we live under a state animated by Christianity, which has animated our whole civilization for as long as we've been a thriving one, or should we have a state animated by, I don't know, left nihilism sadism and i think if i got those options christianity sounds pretty good i'd like to answer this um the

statement objectively better is not objective what what does better mean different people like different things if you're talking about from our perspective on what good things are i'll put it this way clearly the left doesn't it would not be better for leftists who like destroy things and don't want you to have civil rights. Well, they wouldn't think it was better for them, but it certainly would be better, right? If they lived in a country

where they were encouraged to just be normal and have a good life instead of just chopping themselves up and burning things. Let's define better then. Better being you will have a higher standard of living, you will be safer, and you will be happier

and be happier then i i believe the answer is not definitively yes but slightly leaning in that direction yeah and because because a government is no guarantee on the actual values being instilled so what we should say is would the world be better if all people were Christian or Catholic? And the answer is objectively, yes. And I'm not saying that Christianity is 100% correct, although I think you probably would agree it is. I would say it is. My point is simply, if everyone shares a cohesive culture

and agrees upon what the rules are, you would not need government. You would not need police. People would have a shared faith and moral system where they would work with each other. But people would still be fallen. People would still sin, right? Like you wouldn't need nearly the police presence or government imposition. You'd still need people to kind of, you know, but it would be, you're right.

It would be much more cohesive and it would just be in accordance with truth. You know, I mean, I'm not saying that I've got perfect knowledge of every aspect of society and human life, but I can know it is better to, I actually brought this example up on this show before. I can at least know it's better to bake a pie for a widow than to kick a baby, right? And so if we had a society that enshrined that in the law, yeah, it'd be a better society. I think centering society around God would be a good move, but I have seen people use that for their power and benefit throughout history. And that's the government component, not the God component.

But also the law is a teacher. So, you know, it's true that culture affects the law, but the law will also inform the culture. And even, you know, once laws are passed, they can be in the news and we can all be arguing over, oh, Roe v. Wade got overturned or whatever. But then people don't think consciously about the law. The law is just the air. The law is just the air. The law is just the water that the fish

are swimming through. And that does influence our behavior because of incentives. When you incentivize something, you get more of it. When you disincentivize something, you get less of it. Amish man says, Ian said that he believes in God. Argument over. If you believe in God, then you accept miracles happen. The creation of man out of nothing is a miracle.

Yeah. Well, I don't think men are created out of nothing. It's like hydrogen. At first it's plasma, then you accept miracles happen. The creation of man out of nothing is a miracle. Yeah. Well, I don't think men are created out of nothing. It's like hydrogen. At first it's plasma, then it cools down and becomes hydrogen, and then it's fused into helium and the sun. Where did the energy come from? I don't think, I think it's always been here. So God didn't create. So you're saying you don't believe in God. I think it's just always been here.

So God did not create the created world. Well, things got fused together to create what we know as matter, but... Where'd the things come from? I don't think it's... Where'd the things come from? Yeah, where'd the things come from? It didn't have to have come from... I don't think it came from anything.

My response to all of this is like, there exists things outside of human comprehension. Like infinity. Yeah. It can be real. So my issue with it is, I guess that's what I was trying to explain. Yeah. That we can't necessarily comprehend creation of matter. We are within the confines of the system.

So we don't know what exists beyond it and if we are to relate it to anything in our world looking at say computer programs mario has no intelligence compared to a human we have no intelligence compared to god also if you're saying you believe in god but you also think that the this created world has just always been here which i understand is a contradiction are you are you saying that the universe is older than God? I think time is not real. Well, hold on. Sorry, I don't think it's a contradiction.

Well, to say the created world has always been here means it wasn't created. I would argue that time is a component of this universe created by God, and that there perhaps is something well beyond it that we can't conceive of. Sure, it's obviously if the universe is finite and space-time are part of the created world, then obviously there's something outside of that. I'm just saying, you can't say it's both created

and not created. Right, think of it this way. Imagine however you want God or an entity or whatever and there is it creating the universe however you imagine that what that is time is a component of this reality that we don't necessarily perceive we move through in one direction yeah as though we're falling so if you imagine time as a dimension it would be like we are just free falling we can't go back in the other direction but the direction does exist And if it's possible that time is actually cyclical, that time is not moving from point A to point B,

in fact, it goes in a big circle and loops back around, then it would be perceived to us as always having been because time is infinite. Well, that's, yeah, that's something more akin to what the Hindus or the Buddhists would believe. But God could still have created it because time is... Yeah, but not the Christian. The Christian God would... But that would imply that God is confined to time.

And I don't believe that. No, no, no. God is outside of time and space, though he, through the incarnation, takes part in time and space. But I'm just saying that the notion, the Christian notion is that history has a beginning and history has an end. And history has this pivotal point, which is the incarnation and the crucifixion and the resurrection. But the idea that there is such a thing as history at all. No, no, that can still be true. But then it wouldn't be cyclical. If we're talking

about the universe and all that it's matter is in a time loop, but there is a point that is a beginning and end of history, I think can exist as well. So it's kind of like a loop-de-loop. It's not a circle. It's just kind of going. That is to say like. It's a spiral because it's moving in multiple dimensions. It's circling. It looks like it's also going forward.

So it's spiraling. But I'm just saying, even if it's kind of goes on a loop-de-loop, if it one place and ends in another place then it's linear right even if it's a little well it's moving in every direction at once well then i don't know interesting thoughts i'd have to think about it yeah well let's read some more super chats i do like that though it makes me makes me think all right let's uh what do we got here we some. Oh, I like the simulation theory stuff. Let's see. Mandalore the Mighty says, simulation theory is God. Using Star Trek techno battle.

Both are technically correct. The best type of correct. Feature, I'm a joke. I was thinking a couple days ago. I think of God as like the movement of matter, the formation and creation and just animation of all things is God. That is not what God is. It's the way things are moving.

And then I was like, God is the way. And then I was like, oh, that actually says that in the Bible. God is the way. It's not a thing. It's the way. But that's like saying in GTA, the computer code is the creator of the video game. No, a human being programmed that video game. I don't think this isn't a video game.

This has just always been here, this thing. It's just, we're just part of this motion. The thing you're describing then is not God. That the being that you're describing is not God. You're just describing a kind of a nature worship. You're describing a kind of a paganism, which a lot of the new age movements partake of. But you're saying that God is just kind of synonymous with nature or with different parts of nature.

But that's a very different idea from the God. They said God is the way, the truth, and the light. And I thought truth is the way, the life. The truth is the way you communicate. The life is the way that you grow. I mean, it's all just part of the way things move. Let's read some more Super Chats because otherwise we're just talking in circles.

Noah Sanders says, my dad and I have been making seltzers with fresh fruit and other ingredients is there any advice y'all could give for starting up our own company to combat these ones that despise us we'd love to work with y'all one day oh that sounds fantastic uh what's what how do we find the website you should have put the name in the super chat let me know he should have put it in it's all i drink i drink black coffee i drink booze and i drink, bubbly, millennial seltzer drinks. I don't drink tap water, ever.

No? Very rarely in a pinch. Otherwise, I am going to go bankrupt on Spindrift. So if you give me a cheaper alternative, I'm there. Yeah, that'd be great. Seth Weathers sent a big ol' super chat. He says, conservative dad's ultra-right beer loves Tim Kast. Knowles is okay.

Knowles is okay. He could tell I'm not a beer drinker. That's why I was fine when Bud Light went gay or trans, I guess, because my preferred canned alcohol is White Claw, which is already so gay that they're never going to have to sponsor a transvestite. That's not even, it's already there. I just don't drink alcohol. I didn't.

I know, yeah. I had an apple cider this past weekend because I'm not like, oh, I will never drink. It's usually just like, I just, it doesn't taste good. Oh, a hard cider? Yeah, like I'll go out with people and they'll order beers and i'll be like ah what the heck i'll get one i'll take one sipping back i'm done yeah i just i'm not it is weird that a lot of very successful high-performing people don't drink you don't drink trump doesn't drink i don't i want

charlie kirk i've i don't know that i've ever seen him drink. I think, I mean, I take health, I would say moderately to highly seriously. I wouldn't say extremely because then I'd be lifting. But exercise, I cut the sugars down, way, way down. And I don't drink alcohol. I don't smoke. Also no tattoos. You know what? You want to know something really crazy to me that I've absolutely retained since I was a kid?

Like the Bible prohibition on tattoos and piercings. When I learned that when I was a kid, I don't consider myself to be deeply religious, but I really just have an aversion to body modification. Why is that? Yeah, I mean. Oh, sorry to interrupt, but why is that in the Bible? No tattoos, no piercings. I kind of just feel like it's like your body, man. It's what was, it's a beautiful snowflake.

Was it like an anti-pagan thing? It's not, I mean, it's not an aspect of the unchanging moral law in the sense that it's more ceremonial and related to the nation of Israel. But I, so I'll eat shellfish and I'll eat pork. But yeah, I'm not into tattoos or body modification. It doesn't do it for me. I kind of just look at it like when raindrop is crystallizing and becomes a unique structure, humans are the same way.

The energy comes together and forms something that is deeply unique. And then humans don't feel unique enough and then want to get tattoos and stuff. And I don't care if other people do it. I'm not going to, I'm not judging them. I'm just saying for me, I'm kind of like, I don't want to get tattoos and stuff and i don't care if other people do it i'm not gonna i'm not judging them i'm just saying for me i'm kind of like it also i don't want i don't want to you know if a marine gets a tattoo or a say some kind of sailor gets a tattoo or a convict or something that seems right i don't know there seems something fitting about that but what drives me crazy when pretty girls get the tattoos i i'm not saying they can never look good

i'm not saying i'm totally but i think, why? I have a controversial take and it's that no attractive woman looks more attractive after getting a tattoo. She'll still be attractive, but only in spite of her tattoo. Yes. Yeah. It never, it's at the very best neutral, which is rare. Right. But it never.

Yeah. Let's, let's, let's grab one more super chat. James hates everything says Ian's nonsense tonight left me speechless. Just like the bestselling book by Michael Knowles. My man. Here we go. Where do people get that book? Two years on.

I know. You can get it wherever you buy fine. Number one bestselling book. Turning your ad into a meme. That is unbelievable. Wow. Great talk. This is the thing where jokes can start off kind of funny, and then they get really lame,

and then they just get very, very funny again. Every time the joke is told, Michael Knoll's bank account goes up. But it literally does. That certainly makes me smile. All right, everybody, if you haven't already, would you kindly smash that like button, subscribe to this channel, share the show with your friends, and go to timcast.com, click join us, become a member at timcast.com. We're going to have the uncensored members only show up in about 10 minutes.

You're not going to want to miss it. And of course, members who are there for at least six months or the $25 level, we will be taking your calls tonight, answering your questions in real time. So smash that like button. You can follow the show at TimCastIRL on Instagram and Facebook. You can follow me personally at TimCast. Michael, do you want to shout anything out? Yeah, I do.

I want to shout out a lot of stuff. Obviously, we've got our chocolate bars here from Daily Wire. She, her, and he, him. And then- Did you guys try it? I didn't try it. I'm kind of down on sugar these days. I'm not really a food ASMR person.

You've got to eat a little bit. I just tried. I did ASMR for the first time. You did. Oh, it's unbearable. Yeah. I hate it. It makes me angry.

What did you do? Well, actually, this is the thing I'll shout out. On my YouTube channel, Michael Knowles Show, you can subscribe. We've been doing these extra releases in addition to my show, these really long interviews, Michael and, we did one with an exorcist, one with a kind of druggie who turned his life around. But then we do these breakouts of just kind of weird things that my producer, Ben Davies, wants to introduce me to. And he made me do like a woman just chomping on a honeycomb. And I figured, I think it was kind of gross,

but who cares? I thought you meant you were going to make the ASMR. I am, yeah, I'm going to start in OnlyFans. Yeah, that's the other thing I'm shouting out. No, I'm not doing any of those things. Stop buying nudes from people who hate you. Buy them from Michael instead. He's just kidding.

Do you have more to shout out? I do. Yeah, let's see. I already did ASMR. I'm going to start doing a mukbang company. Do you have more to shout out? I do. Yeah, let's see. I already did ASMR. I'm going to start doing a mukbang company. Do you ever hear about that? That's the other kind of that. No, but I actually would say if people want to head over to my YouTube channel, Michael Knowles Show, we're starting to branch out into the yes or no game, into face off, into these long interviews. So check that out now. The one with the exorcist went viral in a short period of time, got well over 2 million

views. So if you want more than just the Daily Politics, go check it out. Can we play this game for the Uncensored show? We should play the Yes or No. Oh, did you make that? Yes, we have this game, Yes or No game. It's sold out. I think we got more in, though, so you can order it now at dailywire.com slash shop.

It is the number one board game on the internet. At least I'm saying that. And you can get it. You can watch the episodes on my show. You can shop it is the it is the number one board game on the internet at least i'm saying that and uh you can get it you can watch the episodes on my show you can play it yourself and hey who knows maybe we'll play it over here that's the uncensored show we'll bring it up i want to show you those memes that everyone wants you to see and have you react to so we'll do that uh yeah you got you shut out everything should we move on or i let's see i've got like 10 other things so i've got no i'm joking all right. All right, Mary. Okay. Go subscribe to Pop Culture Crisis. It's a show here at TimCast where we talk about celebrities, movies, entertainment, and all of that good stuff.

If you send super chats on the show, then we get shot with money guns. It's a fun time. Not as political as TimCast IRL. And if you want to follow me on Twitter or Instagram, they're both Mary Archived. I'm going to be on Pop Culture Crisis next Monday. Yeah, you are. I'm excited for that.

3 to 5 p.m. Eastern Standard Time. We love having you. Pop Culture Crisis on YouTube. I'm also going to be in Austin April 29th. I will be with the Mises Caucus for the Take Human Action Tour. And that's

TakeHumanActionTour.com for tickets. Austin, Texas. I think all the locations and everything is there. So hopefully I'll see you out there. And then we'll maybe chat after the show. Looking forward to that.

Thanks. Great conversation tonight, guys. That was really fun. This game is going to be fun. All right. I'm already looking for questions. Take it away. Yeah, I am Serge.com.

I'm excited, Michael, for you to see 4chan memes. Oh, yeah. I can't wait. It's going to be good. Yeah, good show. I enjoyed the camera work for this. It was quite fun. Yeah.

All right. All right, everybody. We will see you at at timcast.com in a few minutes thanks for hanging out you you