The situation of their? They want to rule out further NATO expansion in general around their border Ukraine's any any path to it. So they don't want you claim to be parliament, NATO, reasonable or unreasonable, reasonable, or unreasonable. Now we would like to treat that as unreasonable, because that would be the proper negotiating stance. Nope nope, no way, because if you have to give them up at some point in any form, you wanna get something really

the return, here's. What I would ask for in return. No cyber attacks on each other now is something we can actually get word determined that we had gotten. Would we even know who is attacking us? I don't know Sir Zira Cyber security expert on here. Who could tell me, could we ever make a cyber deal that we can have verified was holding? Can you may tell is impossible? yeah. My my assumption is probably not, but we keep acting like we know one. Russia has helped us room with pillars. Emails such

so part of this, maybe if we tried to make aid, no cyber hacking deal, we probably couldn't get that deal. Could we doktor robber, justices of shocked, Scott fall for the seventy five years? Excuse sad, such a sheep will will block. Today, I feel if we could, if there was any way too make a cyber attack truce. I think you'd have to throw that in there, I would say that blocking NATO's expansion without that is non starter. What do you think. I think any discussion of limiting NATO anywhere can't go forward as long as Russia's cyber attacking us on the regular who would agree

So the first thing is: don't assume that their list as list you'd negotiate from we can at her own stuff, and it could be that we get more benefit from asking them. Then they go from here. So maybe we don't even want to offer as possible. We don't want to offer that I think it after you breathe deep into the world to know if that makes sense, How much do we learn from Russia Screw question wrong? Scott doesn't understand the Russia ought to be our ally. I'm just saying rush oughta be early when you talk about Yeah cyberattacks our status quo, but I feel like We should be at least trying to negotiate some way out of that. Then they're asking not to deploy additional troops outside them. To which they were in before Sunday, blah blah blah

Where are the eastern european countries joined the alliance bubble, but so they don't want you extra troops. There would threaten them. They want to abandon the NATO military activities in the Ukraine, so don't do in a military training. There don't put intermediate and short range missiles there not to conduct the exercises with. More than one military brigade that doesn't engine, this one is the one those signals they're serious. If, if she gave us a list of things that you just look at said and now this is all crap, then they would mean that they don't really even mean to have any kind of but this one? This wouldn't really signals some seriousness not to conduct exercises with more than one military brigade. The fact they would allow that there could be military exercises, but they should be small enough that they don't look like an attack that actually feels kind of reasonable.

Doesn't it I mean if it were part of the larger deal, not not if it's so here's the next one this is where Russia is asking to confirm that the parties do. I consider each other as adversaries greater resolve all disputes peacefully and refrain from the use of force. What would be The way to phrase that to confirm the parties do not consider themselves to confirm that you're, not the opposite of an ally, the sea. I confirm that I'm not the opposite of an ally. What am I this is it? What are you, what have I been tell you for actually years now been telling you this. Russia needs to be an ally with us, it's totally in their best interests and

probably ours too. If we can work out in all these little cyber things and in other stuff, I daresay you directly. I like there's something you don't put in a document. Unless you mean it. Good cause you're really see people talk this way there. When you see come, isn't resort at each other and they ve got a conflict. They don't directly. Why not be friends? That's where Putin! Just Basically, this is as directly as you can state we just say will get along as we don't really ever, is not to write, I've been tell you, though, that we don't have a reason to be at each other, but we have plenty of reasons to be allies. I mean they the risk that the list of reason to be allies is almost infinite. You wouldn't you die before you. You finish the list.

The list of reasons to be enemies: zero, Cyril, none now not another think Russia sees one and also the United States is one and to me this looks like just order, what do you call it inertia, this is some kind of left over a nurse in from the cold war or something anyway. I think the russian situation is gonna go the way we wanted and along the way they work apparently China's offering to pay so media influencers to say that the Olympics are awesome and they ve hired a public relations firm in New Jersey. Who gets social media influencers to say good things about the Olympics in China?

This boy, you S or Australia and Canada have all there are going to boycott with deplore diplomatic stuff. The athletes will still persists me and Why are we leaving China pay influencers? How would you like to be an influence her there's somebody finds out was paid by China. While what will happen to your influence? Isn't this a death sentence? I can't think of any is loser. Who would have the cloud Or they will say the anti fragility, if you will to survive, knowing that China panel to say good things about the Olympics, who can survive.

I'm so curious if this company that took their money, the three hundred thousand dollars to get these influencers, I'm so curious if they can find any now, doesn't take much money to influence of influence. Her cuz there's a lot of moving, don't have much money, but I have big platforms. Maybe maybe you can find something you'll take money for anyway,. And they might not, even if his young enough people they might not even other doing anything wrong. You get a you get nineteen year old influencer? How do you say I'll? Give you a twenty thousand dollars to say some good things? I don't think they're thinking in terms of international relations. I think they're thinking in terms of twenty thousand dollars. That's real money! Alright, so discussing. Even CNN has an article in which, or was it soon but There is talk among experts that the underground my act like a vaccination, so

We still have reason to be worried just because it will be so spreading, but listen to this data that I dont believe will necessarily home but here's some data about COMECON remember is still fog of war. All these numbers could be wrong, but it's coming from. Experts and the experts say that infects people about seventy times faster than earlier strains what seventy times faster. Then the thing that just took out the world seventy times faster than the pandemic itself. What does s outright, I mean, I don't believe it you, you have. They said five times a day like well, maybe if I've done but seventy times, if you said seventy percent faster, assailants, less a lot, but seventy times do you believe that

If its seventy times is gonna be over in a month right, do the math, but off the off? The top of my head were thirty days to total infection of seventy times are spreading. Am I wrong about that? I would just just off the top eradicated and basis or a good good at math, this is one you don't have time to do the math I'll, be your head. If assembly, turns more spreading were done in thirty days. Only somebody says ten days. You might not be wrong well, and I feel like if it were really that fast. It would have been more spread already, but I guess it start slow, certainly the great of rice on the checkerboard. If you know that story by Europe and is also ten times or the infection is about ten times lower in lung tissue, so is

Seventy times more scrubby but times less infection in your lung tissue, which is where the problem would be ten times how many people are gonna die with virus lives ten times less infective than the ones that isn't killing or hardly anybody terrible sentence. But you don't owe me you're. The news is having a tough time dealing with us, because. All early indications are that this will solve the pandemic. It will create extra hospital impact, even the imminent mild form, just because the rapidity of it will hit so many people at once,

So I doubt that the risk is zero. I'm sure people will die of COMECON just like they die of every other medicine they take. Basically somebody does, but they then this I've. I think we're thirty days away from. The entire you traditional way to handle this pandemic just will make any sense as if it ever did. Well, remember. I told you that Michael Shell in burger keeps making things happen first the nuclear domain, and then you saw the San Francisco mayor completely changed her review point. Those no thing that he and his group were working on an today yet again as yet again, so it turns out that

That the Netherlands has now joined the UK and France in announcing a major expansion of nuclear and Michael, has a article on substantial, and thread talking about how did this happen lay? How did we so quickly go from nuclear is bad. Do let's build nuclear as fast as we, and the answer is that one of the people over in the Netherlands telling them what they should have done is Michael Kellenberger. Every place? Something is changing he's there is the best persuade her I've ever seen. I think you're ok and I ve been trying to figure out exactly what makes him so effective. One is a he argues from data. The other is that you actually can't tell why his political affiliations

I mean, I know I'm pretty well from this. The sort of stuff- and I don't know- Ilene left or right. I know one social stuff here traditionally left but when it comes to hard analytics of what works and what doesn't? Let's, not left or right, the hard and Linux ever larger numbers, and so he just done numbers where they come out and He doesn't give anybody a reason to be against him, which is different. Isn't it have you knows that everybody is a proponent of just about anything is also toxic. Have you noticed that including me So I am somewhat toxic because I'm sort of in the fight you know you, you get slimy with every related thing, But somehow shovel

Berger? I think, mostly by staying out of that, the true political parts of the questions you know he's not backing and candidate or anything. So I think that maybe the brilliant part of what he did. Everybody thinks everybody think, sir, these on their side, I guess what they're. All right, everybody thinks, Michael Shell, hamburger is on their side there, all right because he's on all of their size. He's just tell you what works and what does it less than theirs? they also areas are so. This works this thousand based on the data debunk thirsty month that, but if you take him, impeccable. Persuasion, skills you add it will probably a better ability to analyze things and anybody else's. In this conversation, my god he is cutting swath, threw back

Opinions like nothing. I've ever seen no interest in, like he picks the he picks the domains and which, if you believed the correct information you get a better result. It is interesting that they even exist. Why does exist. The anybody thought that say, removing defined in the police was help. Why why? Why was that everyone, the conversation, so he can get into the conversations where people are completely irrationally block and somehow break break the logjam. It's really remarkable, so keep watch him I asked this question: here's a primer for you if, if you saw that a medical experts disagreed with a personal, an expert in data analysis and the disagreement,

about the validity of a study. So that's the only question that lily of some study, and there was an expert who had every medical, qualification and yeah just really deep medical qualifications that are exact. To this domain. The data Alice doesn't have any of that, but is just good looking at and studies, and they disagree on whether the study is good or bad, which one do you believe who do you trust the expert or the other Yet the crack- the answer- is a daily analysed because There's only one expert in the story: she is a trick. Question I gave you a setup where there was only one expert, because if you look a data, the other stuff isn't gonna help you it's does the data look right? Did they do a ride to the proper controls? Does anything so

as far as under its Becker's points out. One of the things the Doktor Mccullough, who will talk about who is under your organs, podcast what things are you tweet is the doktor tat? Is a study about to people with the young people with my car notice, and they found there like ninety eight percent of them had Mile Cardenas and these people have been vaccinated. So too is that now that's pretty yeah legless Scott, his waking up right So the doktor was and very highly qualified expert, both in the ology and I believe, viral virology from correct right. Most relevant expert tease. And he he says that these these that these vaccinated people. Ninety percent of them in their young had had, in fact, Meyer Cardenas.

So that's what the expert said and he sent that around am my walk enough woken up, yet they bathing them woken up, New Youtube. There's somebody here say: oh now, you're getting aren't you Ok, but, as we mentioned the good doctor, is an expert in cardiology and viral GI, but not data analysis, Data analysis I'll tell you somebody who's, gonna data analysis, Andreas back else who looked at that way too. And informs us that the union? the eight percent people who had Mile Cardenas are selected from a group of people who had bio car Dardis. Does it sound like I said that wrong now they found out that ninety eight percent of the people, with my o Cardenas, have my or corrupted Cardenas. So they found because they always study people were clear symptoms of my car days. If you study people that the

Doctor say: well, that's definitely Mile Cardenas and then they look into it and they do the imaging they go up. Sure enough. There's a mile card ready, sir. What what do you expect all us doctors are pretty good responding by my car Douglas, But- So that's were hundreds points out that it was a completely misleading headline, but so something that you're your doctor, who is very qualified. As far as I can tell in all the relevant feels except data. Now so I did as you requested and listened to doktor Mccullough on Joe Rogan. And here are some of my thoughts, said a bunch of things. I agree with personal, so for a long time. I was listening and those seeking where's the provocative park. I agree with that. I agree with that. I agree with that, but, as things went they go

A more interesting. So he did ass. He dug the doktor did not see some obvious conspiracy theory to prevent Hydroxyl clerk. We or I format, so it didn't sound like ease. He was saying, though, some organised conspiracy would you agree those who watched it. He was not claiming that he was claiming incompetence now do I disagree with the notion that there was incompetence, especially about early treatment options. I do not disagree. Does anybody It was a fog of war, everybody trying as far as they could bureaucracies, blah blah blah.

You would expect massive amounts of incompetence as we struggle to get the right answers. So I think yes, affair, characterisation of weapons lot of incompetence, but that's to be expected not not appreciated expected. Now here are some claims, by the way, Joe Rogan, I thought did a really good job and in the interview for those who watched it, I thought Joe talked just the right tone of letting the doctor speak, but pushing really hard on some questions that the doctor wasn't quite answering to my satisfaction as I did a really good jobs and an end is really hard hit, that exact tone where you are clearly being sceptical,

about what he saying, but you still show you full respect. Does you don't wanna, shot him down or make it into some kind of a fight? So I dont know if anybody really realises how good Europeans at the stuff right, I mean that whose better really it's hard to think of anybody. Especially because he gives them enough time to say whatever they want? My report that model is that there should be an expert there or an x, on the other side, why? Let me give you an example:. When Dr Mccullough said one of the reasons that we know in fact check man? This is cuz. I don't want to. I don't want to say a claim that he didn't make. So just crack me in real time. If I say something wrong When Joe Rogan was asking him effectively, why haven't other countries what? Why is it if there's, going on with I've reflected in Hydroxyl Chloroprene, why isn't it?

happily everywhere at the same time, so exactly the right question, I I've asked a question a number of times, which if these things work when thirty somewhere on earth, where their working. Because, even though you can imagine and american conspiracy and even the global conspiracy easy to imagine but would get every country, because every country had the pandemic everywhere, Did you tell me there's not why little country they couldn't just say, are working to use I from acting as we know, have vaccinations, let's get rid of it. So, in order for the good, the doctors opinion that the signal is very strong, we don't have a randomized control trial. Everybody would like that, but its impractical. Within the timeframe you saying that the signal of the benefits of these drugs is so high from studies that are not perfect

and the risk is so low that Clearly, it makes sense and then cap pushing on that question about what Are these other countries not having the big result and then here's the pay off? And so then the doktor proved his thesis by giving you several examples where I have remained in the head completely squashed the pandemic in their country. So are you good? So examples were Peru. Mexico, then he set his first level thing in Japan, but the asian none of the asian countries had trouble with us. I think that's a special case,

So let us take two of Mexico and I think India and you might have been on his list. What would happen if you spend five minutes, googling Peru and I reckon will you would find out that it did not. Cage anything proved, so the claim that it worked in Peru. There's no data sport them. In fact the data says the opposite. You can see the introduction of it and you don't see in Effect Mexico. No data to support it. India, no data to support it, but there is that speculation that I respect and might take care of worms. So well, let's ones for so. If it did that it might help some people who would have had one extra challenge they get rid of that challenge, maybe they can survive the covert better, but would be a direct effect on the covered under that SIRI himself.

If you believe that the doctors I partner says, is correct that these drugs have signalled their working, that you must explain to yourself why his biggest examples are clearly debunked. Now, how do I know that the bank is wrong Right S, Peru? Do you think if Peru had use, I respected just squashed squashed the pandemic in all think more people would be taken. I reckon really If there really happened, this would be over. If that was true, clearly is not true. True anywhere. In fact, every exemplary gave where people are using, it was success, just doesn't exist and you can check for yourself. Google, it google his name or Google. Peru and I respect him. Just Google, it up you see for yourself,

Not any of his examples are real. Now. Given the Andreasen Back house example where we saw that at least that one example apparently we're knock. I can't read his mind right but from the outside looking and it looks like he misjudged data analysis, or at least this it Secondly, the examples are used as the main things that proof is point. Here's my problem with the Joe Rogan model. If Andres Back House was sitting in the chair next to it,. Andres would take out his laptop and say pop up up up up here. We go. That example is debunked what else you got now. That would be useful, So I want to see, in fact, if european is listening, could you

back on one any one of the doctors who have the non traditional views and bring on a fact. Checker doesn't have to be Andres areas in Germany that might be hard, but just bringing a factor doesn't have to be an in studio could be. I think you could do remotely, but that's my request to not do the row. Doctors unless you bring on a fact checker? Now I don't want somebody who, just as the opposite opinion, because that's justified you want somebody who doesn't have any dog and any what does any dog in the race bring on Daniel Dale. Ring on CNN Spectacular, Daniel they'll. Just have the sector there as a advertisements for CNN and say, look here's my fact. Checker years by Sport and just have em workin on his laptop. Since Rio Rochelle right votes.

The our show you can just check all the facts right there you'll have to wonder Scott. Am I going to take these? Iser pill. I'll, give you the same answer. I gave her the vaccinations. I'm gonna wait as long as possible. I might but I've gotta wait as long as possible before I do so this say what else did happen from that. I do think that the doktor was right about the no early treatment protocols, I feel like he has a data problem about monoclonal antibodies. My understanding at the beginning of the pandemic is that we knew from pretty much the beginning. At least I did. I did have some information that you didn't have a long time before he had it that regeneration works. I can't tell you how I knew that, but

We have months before a public, and but the problem I understood is to make enough of it. Can they give me a fact check on, My understanding is that the monoclonal antibodies were mostly a problem, love how fast you could make it, because I think that what Doktor Mccullough maybe interpreting as part of the problem of a bad early treatment protocols, is this, some of it just wasn't available like even if you knew a work, you couldn't get it, but I would, I think you spot on by saying we should have released the doctors to maybe be a little more creative with their solutions. Cuz, I don't know what does or nothing at work, but if, if doctors were experimenting with her cousin with her people and giving them hydroxychloroquine or something I feel like the doctor should have been able to do that. So I agree with them on.

The big picture, so here's my bottom line- and I hate to do this, but I just feel like is important. Cuz we're all trying to understand who's, credible and who's. Not, and I have an impression of the good doctor Mckayla that I'm going to share with you now that I'm going to tell you in advance feels unfair, even though, even though I'm going to say it right, this feels unfair, but I also think it's important. I just want you to have this filter, you further phrase. It takes one to no one. Well, when I watch watch Doktor Mccullough he's one of me, I think I so that's support this the provocative or, and by one of me I mean a grandiose narcissist. Now there are several versions of narcissists, and I put myself in the category of a grandiose narcissist.

The specific kind there, the sum of the nurses surges, toxic and bad for the world, is not that kind. The grandiose narcissist is trying to build up their own image self image and reputation, but by doing something useful for the world and make you surely do it right? I do that every day I don't think you can have a better example, of a grandiose narcissist than me. I literally tell you: that's my business model all the time, it's more like my psychological model than my business model, but that combined and I literally wanna help as many people as I can see the other books. That's why the topics of the books, I writer, that that's. Why do the micro lessons as why do most list?

but I am also self aware that I do it because that feeds something in me right that you may be proud of, but is sorely capitalism. Nobody would say: greed is a positive element of life, but if you don't have to It is part of your capitalism model and doesn't work. So I would say that narcissism is just one of those double edged things. It's obnoxious can have a downside, but in some cases The personally wants to change the world and get credit for it contributing is less a bill gates or Elon Musk. We are they grandiose, Narcissus. Allow I mean, I think I think musk is his brain. Just doesn't work like other people,

So you can't make any assumptions there, but if they are, I hope so. I hope they are because they talk like it. They talk like doing the best I can to help the world in the biggest way that I can so we don't know where they internally process it. So when, when are you a doctor, Mccullough Talk, though the way he talks about his own? qualifications etc, and how you see that the only one who knows the right answer and east a lone voice in the wilderness and going on all the big talk shows and stuff like that. He strikes me as someone who needs this to be to work for him. I feel like I don't feel his motivation is monetary does you, a gazelle who's paying Omer. It was there some way he thinks he's gonna make money off of lecturing nor simply giving speeches. I doubt it. I didn't pick that up at all now again right

Nobody's a mind reader right so anything I say about another person's internal thoughts. You should automatically say: well, you know how do you know that this the right stance, but it's just my impression, that his motivation looks like you really the help. I think that's real by the way. So if you could pick a personal doctor. Pick this. What it looks like he's really good doctor, because I He really really wants to help people, but it's because it feeds him as well and there's nothing wrong with that. Nothing wrong with that. That's not a Chris, but I think he has that person and having their personality myself I'll tell you there's a risk to it. If, if my hypothesis is right that we have in common which is you can easily blind yourself that you found the thing that will change the world.

Do you know how many times I thought to myself. I think I found it. I might be the only one who failed us just found something that changes world do now, I've had therefore, and then I have to use every every power of rationality too, like squeeze it down and say, Okay, maybe you're being a little too gullible, maybe you're being a little too optimistic about Mccrone being a vaccination. Baby, you're a little too optimistic about this fusion technology. That sort of thing, so the blind spot that a grandiose narcissist would have on putting mice from this category is little too much optimism about week. What we can do you feel that. Have you ever seen me do that to have too much of it?

about what I can do just personally to make the world a better place. Right am Rigi, have kids JFK, Juniors Polly, I'm sorry are you can write Orkut. His credibility is really low. You know where I was not to say you didn't get this one right, but here's what doesn't help reading one person's book I want our of k to be under Rogan show

so they re Baxter, Daniel Dale or some fact checker could be fundraiser anybody else and then we'll have a conversation about or of K. Ok, but if you're saying red or if case book you're telling me to do something that I know to be psychologically crippling because you would get one person's open no counterpoise. That is like that's, like you telling me I'd like you to run a marathon, but could you start the start, the marathon by cutting off one? Are you legs? That's what it feels like. Thank you Torah appreciate. That is our if case all ideas

So, just now this every time you tell me to read a book or listen to one expert. I automatically think you're not at an analysis, nothing personal because, as I often say, nobody's gonna do anything unless a right or if they ve been trained with their skills, so people have been trained in data.

Now, since I got up and people who have not been train- think they're good at it, but the difference read all the books. I write. What about the other airline must tweet, where we talked values. Tweet about me the other day right, Scots, Peru debunking meet your own comparisons. Well, I'm not sure. If the point you are making is that they d bunks themselves get debunked. But I'll tell you this. If you looked at the say who is it the? Is it Factcheck dot Org, who sometimes debunks things that are true? But when you see somebody debunks something, that's true, there's a way that they do it. Which is sort of avoiding the question or or modifying the question as they go.

Until you're, not really even on the same topic by the end of the fact check. We notice that, but in fact check that are usually depend on is one that says the claim is ex here's, the data shows is wrong, I'm going to go with the fact check on our one, usually because if the person who made the claim wasn't even aware that there was dated that it that's the problem. Now if this person said unaware of the data that looks like it debunks it, but there is a problem with that. Debunk then I'll be ok. Now it's a tie, but if the person making claim is not aware of the hour

against that or doesn't include it in their presentation? Jesse. You know that they know it. I go with a devolved in those cases, so look for the DE bunks on the on the question of Peru and over Meccans make your own decisions dismissing Japan is a mistake. Just watch Doktor John Campbell ha is Doktor John Campbell, somebody who might have appeared on the show without a fact checkers sitting next to him, I've just guessing I'm just guessing How many times can I tell you the same fucking thing and you'll just say what about this expert? Let's do it again? Let us do it was practices I'm gonna tell you clearly as possible that the last fucking thing I'm gonna take as credible is one rogue expert talking to an interview who doesn't know what the fuck is talking about. Now, that's not Joe Rogan.

Interview so now, you're supposed to say, oh, but what about this expert? Who doesn't have a factor that see how that goes can we just do this over and over again until you give up, will you fuckin give up to tell me to read this one book or this expert it never ever is a good idea. Not ever wherever there will no longer be an exception. There will not be, but there is an objective source that shows that the plus the minuses unleash the whole picture. I would definitely like to see that all right, all right, dislocate your comments, and I think I'm just about done yet the new, the

This missing from live stream technology is, I would like to live stream and have a split screen with YO to remote or one remote person and were not there now. You think we are because you're thinking of these streaming things it combined things, but they don't work well enough to be a personally so we're almost there. If somebody like Google or something could create these zoom alternative, where I can do media split screens and an amazingly zoomed us do that either multi stream.

That's. What we're only where only just at the point where our wife I can handle is one thing, but we can do it now. Doesn't Israel do that? No I haven't used, it is to them lived, they did it isn't locals, not as it should be in locals, but is not built in it. Are you still taking down eighteen eighty? I think they gonna take them themselves, yeah fact. Yet.

Stream none of those solutions work if it runs through a third party software. It's a it's a non starter. You needed one software that does the whole thing as soon as you had the other software, you don't have a stable solution, blue the cats, doing great Streamyard same problem. We had no third party software. It's got to be one piece of software, the decimal. Alright, that's all I got for now, and I will talk to you tomorrow.