Welcome to the best thing that ever happened to you: it's called coffee was got atoms and this morning, where you do something really special, it's called the simultaneous you might have heard of it. It's is is everywhere now and it's the way to take a good situation and turned it into a great situation. In fact, we have lots of stimulating topics. Today got good news stimulation and, according to Paul, we have good audio we're a good shape today. As I know, all you need is a cover among our glass, a tanker jealousies, Diana Canteen Drug Alaska, vessel of any kind fill it with your favorite liquid coffee. And join me now for the peril pleasure the dopamine end of the day. The thing that makes everything better

call. The simultaneous happens now go seems a good means go by locals platform by the way, if you're on Youtube could he had to subscribe button. For me, you think about it. The semi you'd like to subscribe to this channel, and if you want to see more of my content, then you can see in the more censored environment. The locals platform is where you wanna go for. That locals. Here was a tweet that caught my attention. From Austin all Red, and if we, this, you said someone I know reported having an incredibly year in every way, and I asked him what changed he said I just decided I'd, try believing in the simulation and be

if as if that were true, see our plays out so soon ass, he changed his frame from less colors standard reality to a simulation mindset, it doesn't mean that's true. It was just afraid, a change of frame of how to look a reality. That apparently his intentions transfer. translating directly into reality. Now, if, you're a simulation. I feel there is at least an eternal evidence that your intentions have some kind of effect, and I make the difference between the things you want, which are not intentions through decision want things you hope for less. Not it things your optimistic about nope. That's not! It But intention, like you, really intend for something to happen. It does seem that at least from a subjective reality perspective,

It does seem, like your intentions, are guiding the universe, There is one more report on that: I'm not gonna take as a scientific backing, for this I will just say that it was absolutely free for this individual to try it. So if you are to try this re yourself, just imagine your game, player and game. Doesn't poverty over inside. Nobody will even though you're doing it you can actually do it while you're bored. Standing in line or you're bored in a meeting just say to yourself what if this were just a video game and then the challenge is to get something that I would be happy whatever, and what, if my intentions could steer It's just something you to play with your head, because you will find that if you imagine the world is a video game, it's easier to imagine that your problems are real.

As you know, how many are problems are really just problems because of the way you react to them, The outside reality is gonna. Give you challenges, of course, but the way you react to us this year of media, and that's all you James, the frame to a video game, you'd say on competing, if you are in, if you less lesser heard, learn in the Olympics were years passenger up over these obstacles, you wouldn't say that the hurdles are obstacles. You wouldn't call the hurdles problems Take us because, as a game, you say: oh that's how the game works. I have to work through had a jump over these. These hurdles really quickly.

You can actually refrain your own experience. This is what I used to do a school. So if you have a student who has trouble seeing the significance of school does is really hard on you young to see how this all connects dear future, not everybody can do that, but if you say will think about more, like a sport They give us a competition, so every time there was a test coming. When I was a student I would say I was our task is like a competition. So you see how I do against the other competitors and that made it easy to study, because it's not hard for me to practice a sport. You know it's not really fun fun to practice list. A tennis is more fun to play a game, but I still can do it because I know it's connected to something.

South Korea. There's is a an entity there that has a fusion reactor that has done his thing for thirty seconds, apparently in November, successfully sustain fusion for thirty seconds, Now you may say to yourself Scott: I'm not impressed. That's only thirty seconds, how's it going to help us. Well, I'm not a hundred percent sure this system, but it feels to me like a confirmation of something I told you maybe five years ago,. That diffusion had already been reduced from scientific problem to an engineering problem.

the significance of that is the engineering problems almost always get solves a scientific problem. Well, maybe not because it s pretty basic like maybe we can make an anti gravity. Machine maybe not right, but when you get to the point where you can maintain something for thirty seconds your past, the theoretical part that was the hard part, a hard part meeting unpredictable, whether you can or not, but in terms of whether you can now engineer it to be more than thirty seconds and become economically viable? That becomes a good bet. So you just one from fusion being the flying car coming next year, a kind of perpetual joke to would you bet against that? Would you bet against fusion if you knew they done it for thirty seconds, the thing that

considered impossible. This seems like a really good news and it's not the only fusion entity, that's getting results, so this is probably the biggest thing, maybe the biggest thing in civilization. Right now is that two big? Can I say that that the was coming in fusion? Well, maybe robots? Are I robots either? Probably as

bigger. I tat did out renew member talker Carlson's, weird theory there I have marked in the past because I couldn't understand it, which was that the Democrats will always accuse you of the exact thing they're doing now. I always mock that cause. I thought. Well that's just a coincidence, and it's just really. It looks that way, because both sides accuse everybody of everything right. So a few selectively decide what you can look at. It would look like Democrats are accusing you what they're doing, but from their perspective it would look the opposite and really there's nothing. There, though those my original opinion, I have modified my appeal.

because there is a mechanism that would explain it as a strategy, because you ask yourself what's up with the fact that it appears in appears like they do. In fact, the Democrats do in fact blame the Republicans for their own crimes. Now. Could it be coincidence could be selective perception? Could it be just politics? Could projection where they don't know, they're doing it literally, they don't know they're doing it. That would be projection. But care rule out a strategy right. What, if it's a strategy, how the hell does it work like how how's our work and thus support? I think I figured it. Let me explain to you, suppose, you knew you were going to do and evil thing doesn't matter what it is. We will fill in some exempt

Later but I say you just decided, I'm gonna do evil thing, whatever is and what are you? How do you make sure you covered it up? You start by accusing opponent of doing that. Evil thing. Let me give you an example. Suppose you heard the following story: There's somebody accuse me of stealing some diamonds from somebody's house and let's say you don't know me, I'm just rent person, so I've been accused of stealing diamonds from somebody's house. And I say in response: does our happened? You stole my diamonds. you're the stealer of diamonds, not me, which one do you believe you, we have the first one who is accused of stealing diamonds or do We have the one who said thus now happened used all of the diamonds from me.

Your ear biases for the first accusation, because first and genes are sticky? In any context, whatever is the first, idea again, you had is hard to get it out Somebody says Scott, you stole my diamonds. My protest that no, in fact, that in reality, you stole my diamonds, it doesn't matter if it's true people can't see it they'll be invisible, is like a cloak of invisibility, and so, if you didn't get the media to support your narrative, that in fact the is the opponents or during the crime it becomes cognitive blindness for their base. What would be an example of this Russia collusion right? Russia collusion the best things. we know for sure that the Clinton campaign colluded with foreign elements too to overthrow the essential.

the will of the people. We know that for sure I don't even think there's any part of that that's in dispute by Left or the right, and yet we are completely inactive about it, what could possibly be and its base, because this works is because they accuse the trump with loud them died the fact that they were doing themselves. The first impression was sticky, so there's even the name for russian collusion, but that's the thing that they were doing doesn't have a name. Right, one of them got a brand name and a year of coverage, does he never away to refer to it and yet is completely true. Objectively research ably factually drew the media created the narrative, and now we, even though some portion of the

She understands what happened. We don't act on it. Because if the media is acting like it's not real, and that includes even Fox news being silent on sub stuff If, if nobody else is treating it as a big deal, is hard for you to do it, but it's the, media tells you is the biggest problem in the world and suddenly all activated like you're gonna. U can a protest and you get a tweet and stuff like that, but if they don't tell you is important, you actually act like it isn't You might know intellectual is important, is really important, but your body won't do anything you're, just gonna work. Just do the same thing you can do before. so right now we're watching Joe Biden talking about voting voting rights. What do you think is really happening.

Am I right, the real story is a marked Elias lawyer and the Democrats side did did a really good job and I'm gonna give him just a solid compliment. This won't be a criticism because The legal system, opportunistic lay with other people to create it created election situation, which I understand to be completely legal. I mean the Republicans could have taken advantage of a similar thing in a different way if they had a word about legal, so Through completely legal means, the Democrats have gained the system to advantage. They wouldn't want you to know that right. They wouldn't want you to concentrate on so, instead, all of the attention is on this voting rights thing, because a tie to your racial that racial politics And is a perfect distraction from whatever they may or may not be planning to do in this upcoming election.

So if they can make the only narrative the you care about voting rights effectively, accusing the opponent of being the one who's gaming, the system and in the interim, away once it becomes the narrative. It doesn't matter what they do to the elections of coming. You're gonna be blind to it, because the first, the thing in your mind is that Republicans or trying to suppress a vote now forget about the fact that the argument that Republicans or tried to suppress votes is close to ridiculous. If you're talking about things like requiring an identification-

I think we could all just laugh about what right lay almost every other element of society. That has any importance whatsoever from driving a car to attend college. To anything, pretty much anything you need identification. So to imagine that this would be. The exception is just truly absurd. Truly absurd, but it doesn't matter as long as a sir first impression as long as the media narrative keeps pushing it you'll be cognitive. We blind to anything they do wish and arrogance and election. Now, Let me let me stop short of conspiracy theory and say that I don't know That this is any intentional strategy by anybody. I don't know that I'm just saying: if you look into the possibilities, can't rule this one out, because it works every time

it's a little bit obvious. I mean a while to get there, but if you worked in this domain, it probably would have been little more obvious. I guess if Europe level operator. I would imagine a skilled political operative would just automatically no to do this. It took me a while the figure now, but that doesn't mean is intentional. That could actually be projection could be coincidence, could be selective memory. Who knows One of the stories that Democrats think is important is weird and is the fact that general sex, the of laughter Lord Ingram was texting the White House with advice, basically de escalating the protests and aside tweed by Nick Walden Pooh Blonde and you use it saying that Laura Ingram Texan Mark meadows

telling the White House how to respond to the hours about the aftermath. responded. The aftermath of the insurrection likes, you the White House counselor. he goes on to say: can you imagine how enraged the right would be if they found, Rachel Matter was texting the White House on how to deal with a major world events- lobby Adsum contact here. The select seriously missing context. First of all, if I heard that a democratic administration had gotten advice from Rachel Meadow about how to deal with public relations, I would have said that's good advice. When you I've, been wouldn't racial man I'll be a perfect source of advice, for how public opinion would be formed around any situation in politics. Knighton How old are you that you can say you don't like her advice, but I'm say

to be the most normal thing? There's somebody work. At the highest level in that exact field forming public opinion about political stuff. If that's the person that was asked, or even just offered advice, I would think that was appropriate. I wouldn't I wouldn't think the advice was good, but I would think it was perfectly appropriate. Listen to somebody with that level of intelligence and experience. exact job. So when I hear that the something weird about Laura Ingram texting mark meadows about how to handle the aftermath- which I assume you see here- the politics on the public relations of it, who would be better than that? I mean seriously Are if you, if you're gonna, put together like that the master group of best best people, you can ever get advice wrong in this exact situation have

The politics of a tough political situation. Don't you want? Somebody was exactly Laura Ingram, it should show inanity, What do you want to hear from shore inanity that question later you didn't want to hear from the very people who are at the top of the field. Who the hell are you talking to now? Here's the more context that I don't know that the left knows, but I think a lot of you know it the Trump administration was a fantastically good and will never get credit for this at collecting input outside their bubble. Did everybody now that the Trump in particular and then I think that that may. that culture spread out now. Some of it was because he was an experienced, are being politician. I think. But some of it was just smart because,

the things that nobody criticized Trump for correct me if I'm wrong, but even his critics do not criticise them for this, which is taking advice from a lot of different sources. Mri. I don't believe you ever been criticized for land. I think it is generally considered someone who listens, genuinely listens like everybody who has given advice as recycling pretty much universally. and I will tell you the same thing as well, because I got to speak to him personally and I can I can confirm he absolutely listened attentively to what and gave it its full do had different opinion in their case or two but gave my opinion is folder Now I'm sure that he treats other people the same way, so and I am also aware that even pundits such as myself were routinely contacted by the minute

vision for opinions, as they were just reach out to collect lots of different opinions. Now did you know that. Then I'm not gonna name names, but you can. You can make some are educated gases that the blue chip, on twitter that you were baby tromp friendly. You don't think that they were contact on a regular basis, together input about how to handle a thing of course abbot over time it was the most normal thing now. I dont know if Appenzell with other administrations, I'd I'd never been involved in any part of that before. Well, with one exception, I guess so. Can we say at this point with certainty that anti fur, the alarm and even occupy Wall Street in terms of their protest activities, not in terms of their existence, but in terms of their

protest, energy that was all fake wasn't get. Can we say that now, just as a fact because nothing changed, they didn't go I mean: is there a few cities that defunded the police but you're, not to the extent that any of them would be happy about it? Do you think that the police stopped shooting black citizens during arrests, that happened or or or is it possible we're just not hearing about it? Now it is possible that they, just you know that they actually change the behavior. possible. I kind of doubt it because most of the cases that we ve heard about seem like genuine mistakes. In my opinion, mostly high profile cases, they just seem like mistakes So do mistake stop happening. because they all seem like different kinds of mistakes fluently. They were all one offs

I don't know how you get rid of one off mistakes. Does that's what makes them one offs. So I feel as if we can say this as just a fact as do a conspiracy theory that nothing really fundamentally stopped, but the protesting stopped as soon as the elections. You know started to go a certain way. I don't looks like to me. It looks like there was outside funding that or or even inside funding. So I guess Rachel Matter to speak of her again as some kind of story about art meadows being quota tied to forged election documents tied to them? what are some of the other tweets on the same topic and what kind of language do they use for? story: that's tough,

the true here are some of the language. I pull down tweets that mark meadows in that there's some information they quote suggests some involvement in forged documents. Also the Rachel marrow put the pieces together and Also, connect two and involved in so marked. My rose might be tied to involved in suggests there. As a suggestion of some involvement. I connected to those are all like glaring signals for fake news, MRI all that indirect that India Connection stuff: now I'm not saying there's nothing there, because who knows sometimes accusations

So I don't know what is true. I'm just saying if you are going to look for a story that on its surface at first glance, like bullshit. This would be it. Does it this kind of language there? really really signals, bullshit is ties to it. Do you know what else mark meadows has ties to were made? Some involvement in or is maybe connected to everything that happened in the republican world. If you're, the chief of staff or you have some new high in position that the administration you're tides, everything, either directly or indirectly than this one doesn't seem like us? our right should be following a twitter account of ethical sceptic. So just look for that ethical sceptic.

And I would like to call out an amazing visualization that he did does a lot of great data visualization stuff, I'm I'm such a data. Visualization nerd, though see somebody do like a spectacular job of it, where you can really you can really see what the least the message is. He who knows about the data, but we see what the messengers and His take on it is this I'll. Just read it, he said oh if immigrants, with eighty seven point, seven death rate, verses Delta, that means for every hundred people who delta you'd only get in less than eight percent would die of emigrants. believe you said that came from the south african numbers? How accurate is the south african experience and their data don't know, but it's what he had. So,

you take that as a as a an assumption that could be questioned. But if you take that assumption you work, this is what he worked out so he says: I'm a crime has been the predominant variant for three weeks now in the average and day of death is day eighteen after detection. So after you detected with the virus eighteen days later on average. Thus, when you're gonna die, if you're gonna die, he says that we should see a fallen death next week or so It is not right now, the sun, this now right could be the assumption about COMECON right, but it also could be something else and who knows what but the if this prediction is right, it will mean February. First is starting to look good for a bat,

lots of mandates and restrictions, because if things are happening down, for a week or two, and we know why so having down, and we know why and it looks like they should continue the argument for any kind of restrictions. Just full support, I mean arguably, is already fall apart You would say you would be the handier sing, I would love everybody solution, nation at a url, because somebody people too, me about their hallucinations, usually on venom. I can't really see them, it would help me a lot if we just had a url for that, and I could just connect directly to your hallucination. I believe this is possible you learn must accompanying in link. The Sunday, Somebody will say: let me Let me tell you what I think about your protection, Scott and also hold on hold on. I can see your hallucination

Can you send that link and then they do sir neural to nurture probably through Starling, and and then I would see directly, they just send you the url, and I said oh yeah, okay, now I'm in your hallucination go on and then I can listen to it. Bro, just just an idea. Rasmussen said that Biden. Public support is approval, is down, thirty nine percent, the lowest ever figures Quinn IMPACT at thirty three, so Joe not doing good. Butter Rasmussen also found that a democratic voters support harsh measures against the unfair needed, and thinking how many times have I told you that if you want to predict the future, just look at the insurance industry

because the human beings like we're not in that industry will be acting in the app about what you said. do. What will YAP Yap Yap and then the insurance industry just says: here's my a risk? Ok, here's your insurance policy costs just went up under present, Everybody says: oh, but everything happens because of that and the turn the only thing that ever mattered was what the insurance companies thought like that's all that ever mattered and son you can just say, ok forget about all the YAP Yap. What the hell insurance companies gonna do what once we sorting out of crisis pandemic mode which were doing what What are they sat alone is how they charge people about this if the insurance companies have data in a competitive market where you can get your insurance from who are

we want, and some of them say you know we're going to charge more for non people. I say if they can prove it so gay with me I know you're going to say to yourself: Scott wait hold on now, you're opening up the pandora's box. What about smokers right? What about drinkers? What about? dream sports people. What about overweight people right? What about people, though, exercise here's the thing you can't prove any of that stuff easily right, there's no practical way to prove any that stuff. If he could you If he could, so, the things you can prove would be somebody's age right you go is proof of his age.

do they use age to determine insurance on a yes, they do because you can definitely determine somebody's age. There's no ambiguity: how about their well! This was harder now how about there Other sex now that was a Willoughby, gives us the chance. But that's that's in the noise, insurance candy. Based on your gender, because for all practical purposes they can be sure whether it is right, if vaccination status becomes a matter of public record. Well, this record. Would be something that they would know for sure at least now they have Dana that they can rely on to say if you were vaccinated or no So what do you say to me, Scott, philosophically, if you're gonna look at whether Europe vaccinated

not, you should also philosophically be looking at lifestyle stuff, and I say you are completely right. If we could they would, but we can't, we can't it's just impractical the measure, people's weight and all that you just wouldn't be able to make a market, and so on are saying that they should or should not do anything, I'm saying that they will hear but hear me. I'm not saying that insurance companies should or should not do anything. I'm not recommending an erratic, I'm just predicting I'm predicting anything that they can measure with certainty. It's probably going to get more numbers and probably going to get in there across the situation. Now, if you're saying to me You ve forgotten that there is also a risk of taking the vaccination. Am I right

There is an unknown long term medical risk of getting vaccinate because there's no eight that we ve studied and long term because it's only been shorter. So what were the insurance companies do with that? I don't know, but it doesn't matter to my point by point: is the insurance companies will decide once what? Ultimately, the mandate will go away and will become an insurance. I think I think that's where we're having. Well, Sir journals reporting that China has got a big problem, so I like the way they afraid this As such, I there's two choices they can. They can do harsh locked down to try to deal with on the Koran which will will they succeed or fail harsh locked downs like they did with elfin delta, but with democratic will they succeed or fail. We all think they'll fail right.

because I'm upon is just way to spreading, so they have a strategy there. They left arm upon rip through the China and keep in mind that they don't have much natural immunity there. The vaccinations, not that natural movie, so COMECON will rip through their vaccinations. They already know that they have weak vaccinations. That would be a terribly let's say, an embarrassing situation for China. so one strategy is still don't do locked gowns and then China's gonna get widely infected and it will look make China look like basically idiots, it will make them look like they failed completely on the virus, but suppose they go. The other way option to drastic shutdowns

they're gonna have drastic shutdowns and loss of on the ground. So though, failed twice right, so they only have they have two options: drastic locked them. Or not, but unlike America, both of those paths or a failure for them, If America said let alone get rid of our restrictions and I'm a grand one wild. What would we call that. Failure or success if we drop their mandates and just let the COMECON run. What do we call it? A success or failure in America? Probably a success, because we would say a lot of people did had problems, it did ruined. Yo R supply chain got degraded, yet all those things happened. sure enough, but we were still say we preferred it, because I was a choice we made whereas China, since they sort of pushed this, we are so

if a ball and you are so incompetent they all to do is shut down and we can control it, but you losers in the west cans. Ha there there, they're going to have to eat crow like or bad rather gonna have to eat bat like a lot about. Or fail. The other way they'll have to pass through failure. So you always used to say that tromp was all about two ways to win and their ways to lose. China accidently is the situation with only two two to waste: lose they don't even have a winning option. Am I wrong. I'm not wrong right. There is no winning option, they are in trouble at least reputational. Somebody said on twitter that they use their got instinct to make a vaccination distant decision and

that they trusted their got instinct because, It had done well for them in the past in other words, their life and worked out well using got instinct gonna try to do these the super chess at the end. If I remember- and I have time And I asked this question: if you think you did well with your gun instinct, What happens if somebody who did even better with Aragon Instinct, disagrees with you? What do you do so if you think your gun instinct, really like a valuable asset, and that's what got you where you you got there's somebody else who use their own instinct and did even way better. Why, as if they disagree with you and the next thing, do you go with your instinct, which you know to be less good, released, less successful or they go?

the other person's got instinct who has done better at this is a hard standard. so- I don't recommend as a standard. Don't trust you got instincts I mean sometimes it's all you got you have to, but I wouldn't imagine is magic, so I think this bugging me and I'm going to try to make a lesson and persuasion, and not so much just about me, even though on the star of the story and as we do with the fact that a lot of my critics have been saying that I really displaying by vaccination, regret how many of you have seen that in me, my actions or words recently suggested that I have a great deal of vaccination regret because my critics or sale Adler there quite certain. They said. now locals most say knows I'm ceasing asses some say now.

Well. Let me tell you where I'm at in my thinking and then you can judge, because if I am experiencing cognitive dissonance, it would be something you can see, but I can't I also see if you can see it or if you agree with me that I'm not trade. I saw recently that are suffering the seven signs of death or whatever it is where you your first year, bargaining than and denial and then accept sir something but here's my state of mind about my own vaccination. Nothing that I'm gonna talk about has to do with your vaccination can we agree that your decisions were your own and that your situation isn't my situation, so they're they're not directly comprable. So I'm just going to talk about my state of mind for those who think that I'm afraid or that I have regret

here's. My current state of mind, as of today, there was the most recent report. Is that basically everybody whose having a tough time in hospital is on vaccinated? One of the biggest criticisms I got is that when I was vaccinated myself, I said that the pandemic was over for the vaccinated. Not the UN vaccinated as of today. There are basically zero vaccinated people dying in hospitals. Not exactly what is so low that, in my mind, at rounds two zero. Remember I'm only talking about my mental state so my mental state rare has rounded the risk of me personally dying after getting vaccinated as euro. So how much fear do I have of a zero risk right Is now zero for you,

it's not from the public. I'm saying that in my mind, is zero for me. So am I afraid of his ear, Risk here's what else we know. I got the vaccination and then the first received four months ago, since I gather five in the first. five months. I have not had a negative health outcomes that I would say was associated with it. Remember I'm not making the decision before I got vaccinated, I'm looking at it after the fact, so the biggest risk of vaccinations would you agree. The biggest the biggest known risk of the vaccination is fairly soon after you got it. Everybody agree. So even if people are dropping dead from them all over the place, I didn't so do I have any regret after having

already passed through. What I consider the dangerous part is already behind Now, what's ahead of me, oh here's, here's something that in Maltese is just found out, so this is brand new information. This you'll be hearing this for the first time by the way, so look for I e in Martinez's. You can see it in my twitter. Feed is well retreated, so we did a study of anti bodies, and this is one of the most interesting studies. I've seen it would need to be re produced in peer reviewed and all that I think it's gonna go through that, but but what he did was he looked at the anti bodies of people who got one vaccination to boosters, but here's the interesting part. He looked at people who got vaccinated first and then infected and looked at their anti bodies and then the reverse. The people got infected first and then antibodies. It turns out that the very best company-

just by accident. I mean it's not like I planned it. The best combination is to give vexed first and then get on the ground. if you do it in this order, according to its numbers, which again all data has to be verified, you you'd you'd, want larger samples Bob, reproduced, etc, but if, as numbers hold out and by the way, this is my current information, because again worldly talk about my state of mind. This is my current information. credible to me: I've somehow locked into the very best situation in the world I got vaccinated and if I get infected, almost certainly going to be all mccrone at this point, Best case now, what about the long term anew,

on the side effects of the vaccination. Do they exist while the risk exists? We all agree on that right is unknown because it could not have been studied, but also the effects of getting covered when you know backs needed, is and studied. So. The way I make decisions is that, if there's stuff I'd know, I wait that heavily and if there are things that are complete unknown unless the catastrophic, but these two or serve equally catastrophic, but their complete amounts. It usually discount that do nothing so just to be really careful in my choice of words, I'm not telling you it would be smart for you to give vaccinated or to not be especially during COMECON. I don't know why. I'm not your

If anybody tells you it's smarter to give vaccinated now, your during COMECON, I would say they better support that opinion, but is not one that I necessarily would wanna promote. I mean I'm not sure that we now at this point it is closer to an unknown ed, while I think is likely that this will be the best situation getting vexed first weight but not boosted. This is what I think so far the boosters, I don't think, are in my personal risk management. I don't think the boosters has the same risk profile as the first two shots. Does the first two shots at least we had a proper trial, but no who tested the boosters and there's is reason to believe there the others. There is actually a reason to believe that the boosters might be a problem. We don't know yet. So

Best situation might be stay with the vaccinations. You have apparently, whatever vaccinations you have in one hospital that reported it didn't matter if he had one or two and it didn't matter. If your boosted less important part it didn't matter if your boosted, you still survive so one doktor was saying, forget about the boosters, just make sure that people get at least one shot. I'm not promoting that view. I'm just saying one doktor said them, so I would like to put to bed the idea that I have accepted a regret, because, while it still entirely true that I could be wrong and I can drop dead tomorrow from the vaccination itself, does it make sense, and I would have regret if this is my understanding of the current situation,

It doesn't fix up right, I'm gonna have to go in a few minutes. Flemish living close up here that the weird thing this gonna happen is it the bet the people were bad at analysis are also It would be bad. analyzing, whether there were right or wrong in their predictions and the weird thing that the people are bad and analysis are doing Is there say there were right all along, but their predictions were made during a completely different situation: the people obeyed predictions during the alpha and delta way. a claiming to be right all along now, the armor on his ear and somebody said to me on Twitter, but we knew that the attenuated virus would come. That was part of our protection.

If you just wait, all all viruses burn out the attenuated virus with them. Just like we predicted. I would like to question whether you predicted that the engineered virus would escape from the lab and it would be off across really now, of course, I'm making an assumption or night that on his engineers, and I am making that assumption. But if you're telling me that you predicted that the. Engineered Armagh. Iran would escape from a lab. Also, I'm gonna call bullshit on that. That's bullshit, because the the thing that you predicted you genetically Firstly, the EU predicted wasn't attenuated virus. You didn't predicted genetically enhanced attenuated virus, nobody predicted that

so I don't know if it was escaped or released or what, but I think the smart money says it's engineered. It's not confirmed. I don't know if you get kicked off of social media for saying what I just said, but it's not confirmed, but I think the smart money says it's engineered. So here are some examples of what people are saying that doesn't make sense to me. Louis peace says Dewey Mandy, other vaccines that have not been, I mention the other vaccines are mandated, but people take that wrong and hears. Here's reaction: do we Mandy other vaccines have not been fully tested and for which there is no? I ability on the part of the manufacture, which I say, that's bad analysis. People were bad. They Eliza things will get one thing consistently wrong will compare the wrong two things, and this is an example of that.

You should not compare anything you did in a crisis with any you do in an non crisis that that would be the most basic mistake of analysis, so well while by only point is that vaccines have been mandated in the past, I'm not saying that them that's the reason they should be demanded in the future. That that's not the point. The point is that, if you're talking philosophically about whether a vaccine can be mandated in the United States, that's been asked and answered. It's already happened for years, but, as other people have pointed out, will you talk about limited ways and is about kids going to school and maybe for some kind of travel and Bob? I get that so my point is: don't compare the two. That's my whole point. You can compare what we do.

With other vaccinations to what you do in a crisis in a crisis, you take a bigger chance because this crisis in a non crisis, you take a small risk because you have the option in a crisis. You're probably gonna, take a bigger risk and thus the smart to do so. When somebody says we took a small risk when it made sense and we took a bigger risk when. Also make sense in that case that doesn't sound like a problem to me. We'll see what else we I go on did you know the athletes have been dying suddenly for years. The new one gene Ramirez Aged twenty eight for the Tipp of a raise he was a star. and he just passed away suddenly and of course, I gets tweeted round in the context of. Is this one of the vaccination desk? Now there's no there's no reported linked

station, but were you aware that this happens regularly and always has How many of you are aware that the baseline of top and athletes is suddenly dying, usually with our complications is fairly normal. They do you know that it's been happening since I can remember, and if you google it if you want to check on this just Google, something like athletes dying? Suddenly, I think that's what I did. Athletes dying suddenly And make sure that you do a search this before the pandemic just limit make sure your search was back for you'll find it's just a widespread thing. Now, I'm not tell you again. Careful, I'm not tell you. We won't find out that some of those tests or vaccine related. How would I know

I'm just saying that if you ignore the fact that as a baseline thing, that happens all the time you're missing some of the context, the deaths in the field of five times, I dont believe there's any data that woods there. Support them now. Yes, that's true. That would be a big deal, but if you. I know that you think uses and data on that, but as producers debunked now, I could be wrong about that. I literally just said I could be wrong assemblies Marcie me for saying I'm always right. I tell you this. My whole fucking experience in life as people saying that, like I, all apple in my hand, and my critics was in front of me and say. Why don't you ever have an apple in your hand, be like? I have an apple

my hand right now, my critics would say snapped up. as an orange you're trying to sell us well, by trying to get rid of the filibuster- and I guess Mcdonald, and That, in turn down a man is said, said this. He said that everything is a did. He say this is me saying this is by no means reading those because for for a moment. I thought, while Mccall's, because really got away with words, really my own note for myself, play about. I am so, I think, maybe the year.

Yeah all of the filibuster stuff that this related to the voting rights. I think that's all a diversion feels like a strategic version, as I had to say about that. So I think we can agree. This is the very best live stream has ever ever happened, and I need to run and thanks for reminding me and policy, is this. Is there one super chat up there, while it didn't store them, damn it there's supposed to be a little list of superchats that I can tap. I don't know answer so, but I can't handle that right now and I'll have to talk to you later bye.