0:09

Hey folks. Welcome to the dark horse podcast.

0:11

Live stream.

0:12

Number 1, 1, 1 a palindrome, whichever way you look at it And

0:18

date it is indeed. Here we Are.

0:20

Here we are. So we're ready. You're you're back from, from COVID exile From

0:27

exile. Yes. That little bit of theater last week is, is over.

0:31

I still have a little they'll stuff in my throat.

0:35

You guys will be noticing that, but No,

0:37

we're good. We might want to just slightly clear up.

0:41

Okay. Well we'll, we'll we'll get to it. Yeah. Well, I think, I think we should probably start there, but yeah.

0:46

So we're gonna, we're gonna, we're gonna talk COVID this week because we're still living this life.

0:51

Like all of you are as well, but we hope to talk just a little bit about somethings entirely not COVID as well.

0:56

So we got a little south American pre Incan culture stuff to, to mention and, and sperm whales too.

1:04

And maybe if we get to an ice fish ice fish, I

1:07

get that right. Ice fish. I think it's ice fish.

1:10

I didn't know you were headed to ice fish.

1:12

No you didn't. I S yeah, ice fish, ice fish.

1:15

Maybe That will give me an excuse to talk about my ice fishing gloves.

1:18

Yes,

1:18

I

1:18

should

1:21

have. I should have had them here as a problem. In fact, we could have done a pro bono ad for the ice fishing gloves.

1:25

I Don't think we could have because you don't ice fish.

1:28

No, but I do have ice fishing gloves, But

1:31

I don't think that not using them for their intended purpose satisfies both satisfied them.

1:37

Actually, it's a tremendous lesson in how to think about, you know, stuff, because whether or not I am violating the ethos surrounding ice, fishing gloves, by using them for things other than ice fishing, I

1:50

don't think you are. I just don't think it would really satisfy what they, if, if they continued to market these things as ice fishing gloves.

1:57

Yeah, they do. Yeah, they do. But let me tell you, I mean, the thing is our audience, which is currently thinking, Hey, we don't ice fish.

2:04

Why are we wasting time on this? They may, by the time we get through the ice fishing glove discussion, realize that they too need a set of ice fishing gloves for the same reason I do, or more or less not to ice fish.

2:13

No, definitely not. Yeah.

2:15

Isn't it like ice fishing presumably refers very rarely to actual, oh, Hey look what you just got delivered to me by a lush his 15 year old son, some nectar of the gods, which is what I call it in my subject this week.

2:27

This is honey lemon tea, squeeze an entire lemon, put it aside, put a large, large dollop of excellent honey in stir it into nearly boiling water, add the lemon on top and drink her.

2:40

You should call it honey lemon chai, just to be more inclusive.

2:44

As I say, I shouldn't have done that into the microphone, but as I say in the, in the sub stack, it's not T it's not it's it's T by no, by no stretch of the imagination.

2:53

Even through the degree that herbal team might be T this isn't T but I don't know what else to call it other than making it sound super clinical or weird.

3:01

So, but it's not teacher of the gods is what I now call it.

3:04

It's not T and the gap between what it is and calling it.

3:07

T's no bigger than the gap between what it is and calling it chai.

3:10

It's just the chais hipper.

3:13

It's definitely not shy, Right.

3:15

Or T true.

3:19

All right, then logistics to, to start the, our, our, our conversation with Jordan Peterson came out this week in which we talk about our book, this one, a hundred gatherers guide, the 21st century, and really lovely conversation.

3:37

It really lovely man. The three of us have had very few opportunities to talk altogether, and only a couple of times in person and that's pre COVID, but I believe I'm speaking for all three of us, but I know I'm speaking for the two of us that we all really enjoy each other a lot.

3:53

And the conversation was, was terrific.

3:55

So we encourage you to find that I should hopefully remember to put that into the show notes.

3:59

If

3:59

you

3:59

are

3:59

watching

3:59

on

3:59

YouTube,

3:59

you

3:59

can

3:59

find

3:59

the

3:59

chat

3:59

over

3:59

on

4:05

Odyssey.

4:05

You,

4:05

we

4:05

encourage

4:05

you

4:05

to

4:05

ask

4:05

questions

4:05

for

4:05

the

4:05

second

4:05

hour

4:05

on

4:05

four

4:05

of

4:05

our

4:05

Q

4:05

and

4:05

a

4:05

on

4:05

dark

4:05

horse

4:05

submissions.com

4:05

and

4:05

both

4:05

that,

4:05

and

4:05

this

4:05

hour

4:05

are

4:05

on

4:05

Spotify

4:05

as

4:05

well,

4:20

right? The videos, whereas the audio of the, of the main podcasts, what we're doing right now is only on all the other podcast places consider joining us on our Patriots, where Brett this morning had one of his, one of his monthly conversations, Great

4:38

conversation. And I haven't even had a chance to tell you that we came up with a plan.

4:44

Yes. And I liked, I like plans generated by smart people who have no interest in continuing the insanity into which we are spiraling.

4:53

This is a good one. The world will be rescued in 18 months is our best estimate, 24 at the outside.

5:03

Now I believe that you are to use our younger son's new phrase, pulling my goat.

5:10

No,

5:10

not

5:10

quite

5:10

sure

5:10

what

5:10

pulling

5:10

your

5:10

goat

5:10

would

5:10

mean,

5:10

but

5:10

no,

5:10

I,

5:10

we

5:10

did

5:10

actually

5:10

come

5:10

up

5:10

with

5:10

a

5:10

plan,

5:10

but

5:10

it

5:10

is

5:10

a

5:10

very

5:21

secret. It's a very hunter gatherers guide style plan, where the idea is not that we have a plan for, for saving the world.

5:28

It's not a blueprint. It's a, it's a trajectory.

5:30

Let's get us to that Foothill.

5:32

Yeah. So anyway, I'm kind of excited about it.

5:35

It's very good conversation. Share it with me at Some

5:37

point. Oh, of course, absolutely.

5:38

You're central to it.

5:39

Oh boy. I mean, you're taking all the risk.

5:41

I think you ought to know what it is.

5:44

Okay. Yeah, no, it's good. We did have a great discussion and it did arrive at something like a plan that I'm pretty excited about, which dark horse listeners and viewers will be brought into if they are of, of such a mind.

5:58

I'm sure that some of them are such a mind.

6:00

No doubt.

6:00

All right.

6:02

So yeah, patriotic and we do a monthly, private Q and a on my Patrion as well.

6:09

You can find various products at our stores.

6:12

Like you can show that one picture. We've got settle up the dire wolves we ride tonight.

6:16

We've got epic Tabby. We've got digital book burning.

6:19

As you can see on the screen.

6:21

Now we've got all sorts of good stuff there.

6:24

Okay. And excuse me.

6:26

And of course my, my newsletter, natural [email protected] continues to have been about, about COVID stuff this last week about, you know, I called it the Omicron diaries.

6:42

And in it, I did post are actually linked to the recipe for the brisket that I mentioned last week.

6:49

So you can find that there, and a lot of people were interested in the very oniony course attended full brisket To

6:57

also looking for the recipe. Yeah. Yeah.

6:59

I D I think we, we discovered that this really was not what your grandma Sophie made.

7:04

This was a different recipe, but Mostly

7:07

related, Well,

7:09

I'll let you and your mother, I

7:11

say something else. Yeah. Well, all right.

7:14

Probably she knows better since I was five.

7:18

She, she did not, I did not tell her anything about you having anything about the recipe.

7:22

I just said, Hey, what is it?

7:24

Brett thinks it's the same.

7:26

And she then gave us some specifics about Sophie's recipe.

7:29

And I was like, Hmm, Nope. Not in any way similar.

7:31

So Really well, I'm not sure how I got the misinformation.

7:34

I will say Sophie's recipe and natural Waxman's recipe.

7:39

Both. Excellent. Yeah.

7:40

And there's so much leeway.

7:42

I mean, basically that the thing is if the meat ends up fork tender at the end, then you did it, right.

7:49

No matter what, You got to start with a good piece of meat.

7:51

It's not, as we said last week, it's not an expensive cut of meat, but you want it to be as high quality as possible.

7:57

And then you need to take a lot of time. You can't, you can't rush brisket.

8:00

Yeah. There are, there are 16 kinds of awesome in the universe.

8:03

And this Bruce get is nine.

8:06

None of the cut-ins. Yeah. So this is a, this is a long standing trope in our household at Brett.

8:10

When the boys were very young, started to invoke the 16 kinds of awesome and would announce that various experiences we were having were three kinds of awesome.

8:17

Occasionally as high as nine Watts. That's a lot interesting though, that he has never to this day named any of the 16 kinds of awesome, that's protecting himself from future litigation, Not

8:27

to you. Oh right. And I kept it from the lawyers on all sides, because I don't want our lawyers abandoning us.

8:33

I don't want other people's lawyers coming after us. So yeah.

8:36

But, but there are 16 and this, this recipe, if you do it right.

8:41

Is nine. If you do it wrong, it could be two or three, but Yeah.

8:44

It's, it'll still sustain You.

8:47

Yeah. It's, life-sustaining either way. Yeah.

8:50

And it'll excite your credit Everence they will be, they will be attentive to you as you long cook the brisket.

8:55

What

8:59

else? Oh, this upcoming week on my, on sub stack on natural selections.

9:02

I'm hopefully if I get to it, going to be writing a bit about the different kinds of competition that men and women engage in, because I just had a piece that I wrote back in like April of last year, published in the archives of sexual behavior, a uninvited commentary to another published piece.

9:19

And that is of course written in academia is, and a bit arcane as a result, because that is how we are expected to write over in science space.

9:28

So as to keep all the riff Raff out, and it's not the state of reason, but I do think that is part of the reason.

9:33

So I'm going to turn some of that piece into something a bit more accessible for my substance This

9:39

week. So I ran into actually a new category of, of some competition.

9:44

I don't know if you have run into this, but it's hypoallergenic masculinity.

9:49

I

9:49

think

9:49

it's

9:49

going

9:49

to

9:49

be

9:54

good. And it's at least fairly safe.

9:57

Well, I was going to say it almost sounds like the opposite Of

9:59

toxic masculinity where it's not quite the opposite, but yeah, it's definitely at the other end of the Amazing

10:03

that that would, that Venn diagram. You're the, the intersection of the two groups of hypoallergenic masculinity and toxic masculinity is existence.

10:13

Right? I mean, yeah. Yeah. I think you can't go wrong with it.

10:15

I guess That's good.

10:17

Okay. We have three sponsors this week, for which again, we are grateful for our sponsors very, very much.

10:22

And

10:22

here

10:22

we

10:25

go.

10:28

Our first sponsor this week is brand new to us and brand new to our doggy as well.

10:32

Our first sponsor is Sundays.

10:33

Sundays is dry dog food.

10:36

When they approached us about being a sponsor, I was dubious.

10:39

We have a Labrador labs.

10:41

We'll basically eat anything. What possible difference was she going to show an interest between her usual kibble, a widely available high-end brand and Sundays I was wrong.

10:49

Maddie loves the food that Sunday's mix seriously loves it, and is far better for her than the standard burnt kibble that comprises most dry dog food.

10:57

Sundays is the first and only human grade air dried dog food.

11:01

No, we haven't tried it combining the two.

11:04

We haven't tried it. Maddie is eating it, but human grid and yet no, the humans have not tried it.

11:09

I tried it.

11:10

Yes. Oh. I thought light of our commitments as advertisers that we could not endorse this dog food.

11:18

If I had not tried it, What did you think?

11:21

Kimball Boy, you know, it's a really crunchy, it's the best dog food.

11:28

I tried. Let's put it that way.

11:31

Great. I got to change that script.

11:34

Yes. Combined, combining the nutrition and taste of all natural human grade foods with the ease of a zero prep, ready to eat formula Sundays is an amazing way to feed your dog.

11:45

And apparently your husband comes to it.

11:48

It's

11:48

Easy

11:48

for

11:48

humans

11:48

to

11:48

no

11:48

fridge,

11:48

no

11:48

prep,

11:48

no,

11:48

no

11:48

gross

11:48

wet

11:48

dog

11:48

food

11:54

smells. Sundays is gently air dried, ready to eat and artificial binders and that they got it.

11:58

It was a general garbage seriously. Look at the label.

12:00

All of a sudden these ingredients are easy to pronounce well, except for keenwah and healthy for dogs to eat here, she comes so fun.

12:08

Cue in a blind taste test, Sundays outperformed leading competitors, 40 to zero that was done with dogs though.

12:13

Not husbands. That sounds like a made up number.

12:15

I know, but here's the thing. When I have a bowl of Maddie's previous food ready for her, she certainly is enthusiastic again.

12:21

She's lab. And this is true for all of us. We all, we all feed the animals.

12:24

We all take turns. But when I have a bowl of Sundays ready for her, it's a whole different level of enthusiasm.

12:29

She spins, she twirls. She offers to do a little tap dance routine.

12:32

It's amazing. She bounces and spins and leaps.

12:35

Do you may want to make your dog happy with her diet and keep her healthy.

12:38

Try Sundays.

12:39

We've got a special deal for our listeners.

12:42

Receive 35% off your first order.

12:44

Go to Sundays for dogs.com/dark horse or use code dark horse at checkout.

12:48

That is S U N D a Y S F O R D O G s.com forward slash dark horse, switched to Sundays and feel good about what you're feeding your dog, your

13:01

next man. All right.

13:03

I should say before I move on to mine, I did, this does raise a little story.

13:08

I stepped on something absolutely terrible.

13:10

In the middle of this week, I was so frightened to look down and see what I had stepped in.

13:15

It was, was it Sunday?

13:18

This well, here's the thing you said that Maddie will eat anything.

13:21

I had this orange.

13:22

That was terrible and I didn't want it, but I thought maybe Maddie wouldn't I put it in her bowl.

13:28

Apparently she didn't want it either.

13:29

And she moved it out of her bowl where I later stepped on.

13:34

It was an orange, not one of the decomposing mice that we had.

13:38

Right. It wasn't anything super great. It was the best possible thing that I could've stepped on that would have felt like that.

13:44

All

13:47

right. It's a little silly Around

13:50

here. It is.

13:52

Okay. Glasses.

13:58

This is where we're not high. That's true.

14:00

You haven't even taken Sudafed, which you could totally justify how you're feeling having A

14:04

drink. And I don't know, a week and a half, I had nothing out.

14:07

I also have not had Sudafed.

14:09

Okay. Second sponsor is relief band.

14:12

A relief ban is a product that can help you with nausea first, though, a little about nausea under ancient circumstances and some modern ones.

14:20

Nausea was generally a useful signal that something was off.

14:24

You had eaten something you shouldn't have, for example, itself, a signal or itself, a signal that you should not get near something in modernity.

14:32

We still need to track our body sensitivities.

14:34

We should not always choose to simply erase discomfort like nausea.

14:38

Whenever we feel it, that said some of my dirty creates nausea that does no good at all.

14:43

Travel sickness, for instance, can be agonizing and relief would be lovely.

14:47

Travel sickness is basically your mind registering the jostling of your head as an indication that you may have eaten something poisonous, which you didn't.

14:55

So it's a useless signal.

14:57

Enter relief band relief band is an anti-nausea wristband that has been clinically proven to relief, to relieve and prevent nausea associated with motion sickness, anxiety, migraines, chemotherapy, and more release band is a hundred percent drug-free and can be used for as long as you need it developed over 20 years ago.

15:16

It is the only over-the-counter wearable device that has been used in hospitals and oncology clinics to treat nausea and vomiting.

15:22

There are zero side effects.

15:24

Now there's relief band sport, which is waterproof features, interchangeable bands, and has extended battery life.

15:30

We asked a friend to try it out.

15:33

Here's her testimonial.

15:34

I used to have nausea on a nearly daily basis from both anxiety and the need to take regular medication relief band relieves my nausea in less than three minutes without the side effects I was experiencing from anti-nausea medication, it has entirely changed my life for the better.

15:48

So if you've got nausea from anxiety or car or sea sickness or something else, you cannot otherwise disabled consider relief ban relief ban makes a great gift anytime of year.

15:58

Right now they've got an exclusive offer just for dark horse listeners, go to relief, band.com and use the promo code dark horse to receive 20% off plus free shipping and a no questions asked 30 day money back guarantee.

16:11

That's relief, band.com, R E L I E F B a N d.com and use the promo code dark horse for 20% off plus free shipping.

16:23

Okay. And our final sponsor today is public goods.

16:26

Public goods was one of our very first sponsors.

16:28

Eight months ago. Last time we talked about public goods.

16:31

I had a typo in the script that Brett read and suggested that have been doing ads for a year and seven months at that point.

16:37

But now it's only eight months ago and we are as pleased with them.

16:41

Now, as when we first tried their products, public goods can simplify your life as a one-stop shop for everyday essential.

16:47

As their ingredients are carefully sourced, high quality and affordable public goods has coffee and tea, grains and oils like olive and avocado.

16:54

They've got Castiel soap and trash bags and essential oils.

16:57

They have spices and extracts like vanilla and almond vinegars and pastas, dishware, and glassware.

17:02

There is so much a public goods to make a meal, including the materials to serve it on public goods.

17:07

Products of great design to the aesthetic is simple and clean.

17:09

And there are no garish colors.

17:10

Publicans cares about health and sustainability.

17:13

Their products are largely free of harmful ingredients and additives and the ingredients are ethically sourced.

17:18

Finally, there's subscription services, efficient and simple and easy to use.

17:22

Public goods members can buy all of their premium essentials in one place.

17:25

It really is an everything store for dark horse listeners.

17:28

We have the following offer receive $15 off your first public goods order with no minimum purchase.

17:33

They are so confident that you will absolutely love their products.

17:36

And come back again and again, they're giving you $15 to spend on your first purchase.

17:40

Go to public goods.com/dark horse or use code dark horse at checkout that is pub LIC, G O D s.com forward slash dark horse to receive $15 off your first order.

17:55

You'll regret it.

17:56

All

17:58

right.

17:58

So

17:58

did

17:58

you

17:58

want

17:58

to

17:58

say,

17:58

you

17:58

want

17:58

to

17:58

start

17:58

by

17:58

talking

17:58

a

17:58

little

17:58

bit

17:58

about

17:58

what

17:58

we

17:58

were

18:05

doing? Yeah,

18:06

I think so.

18:08

Sorry it find, get one of those Kleenexes.

18:12

Oh, Well

18:14

I certainly, Well, thank you So

18:18

very formal around here.

18:21

I never thought I never thought I was gonna end up in front of a camera as an adult, much less having to, you know, ask for a Kleenex or a drippy nose.

18:29

But anyway, here we are. It's 2022.

18:30

It's a lot. You didn't Expect there's a lot.

18:32

So, so much that I did not expect.

18:35

So

18:35

yes,

18:35

I

18:35

got

18:35

a

18:35

lot

18:35

of

18:35

feedback

18:35

on

18:35

last

18:35

week's

18:41

episode. And some of it reveal, they misunderstanding that people seem to have about what we were doing that I thought was important to address because people were had every right to be confused by a message that seemed to be self contradictory.

18:56

On the one hand, we said that we do not believe in the guidelines about what one should do with respect to COVID.

19:05

Especially in light of Omicron. The advice seems preposterous and it doesn't seem like anybody has considered what our actual wellbeing would dictate in the circumstances.

19:15

And so you and I made that very clear.

19:17

We made that very explicit. On the other hand, you recording, meeting in a different room and people were like, well, what's the deal?

19:25

Why are you abiding by mandates that you don't believe in?

19:29

And I do not want to fully solve the riddle, but I do want to, I, I

19:34

address this also in my subject this last week.

19:36

Yes You did. And it is well worth reading. And there's lots of other stuff that you can glean from, from your last sub stack about, you know, how you dealt with it and what your experience was.

19:44

And it's, it's well worth reading, but I did want to point out without fully solving the riddle.

19:49

We are stuck in a bind, right?

19:52

We have two children in two different schools.

19:55

Both of those schools have rampant infections as does everywhere else.

20:00

This is a highly infectious variant and it is ripping through these schools.

20:03

And I so far, I don't think there's any indication that anybody in these schools is desperately ill, but people are definitely, it's not enough disease.

20:13

People are suffering from it And

20:16

they're required to, to be out after they've when they get sick, their card to be out for some amount of time.

20:22

Right. And they're required to be out if they've been exposed to someone who, who has it and who has not been isolating.

20:31

Right? And so the point is we were living by dictates that we don't believe in not because we're too timid to resist, but because we're stuck with respect to, you know, our children already pay a very high price for our public profile.

20:47

And the fact that we are not in lock step with the people who are claiming to be protecting the public health, we believe they are quite wrong.

20:55

And in any case it would be nice if we could limit the harm to our children from just the simple fact of all of this nonsense.

21:04

And so living by dictum, you know, I also don't believe that the mask mandates that we abide by while rolling our eyes.

21:12

Every time we go into a public building here in Portland, where they're required and where people do abide by it, I don't believe in that stuff either, but there's a level of towing the line that is about not inflicting costs on others.

21:26

And frankly, there's also this added aspect of, I don't think the masks work I've looked at the evidence.

21:33

And I think that Kloss math, cloth masks are essentially a non-entity with respect to functionality.

21:39

And that even things like N 95 masks, if you're not pretty well schooled in how to use them are probably a trivial contributor.

21:46

You know, not that this variant is controllable anyway, but I've

21:51

heard this before. We have a box of N 95 masks, which I've used on airplanes, I guess.

21:58

And I've also heard this thing about if you use them correctly, it's a really simple object.

22:07

What, how, how would one, I mean, we've all seen people wearing masks below their noses, whatever, like, but is what, what is complicated about w what does it mean if you use them correct?

22:20

Well, in part, it means paying attention to the question of how pressure drives airflow around the mask versus through the mask.

22:28

And basically, you know, they, they come with this little metal strip that goes over your nose, and, you know, if you have a model and it would be even better if we gave people, you know, if you're really going to use this to control something like this, you would want people to stand in front of a thermal camera or something like that.

22:48

Or, you know, you could do it with a cold day, you know, where you're breathing out a hot vapor.

22:53

And so you can see your breath and get used to, you know, figuring out how to get the mask to fit.

22:58

So the majority of what is happening is going through the mask.

23:01

That's the basic idea.

23:02

And most of us who use them, and I must say, I have long ago, abandoned cloth masks.

23:07

And long ago, when I use a mask, I started using N 95 mass.

23:11

It's all I use now, but you know, you throw them on, you throw them off and it's not, you know, it is a barrier of some kind, it is much more effective at controlling something like spittle than it is at controlling, you know, aerosolized particles.

23:28

But nonetheless, it's not, you know, I can look at the evidence and I can say, you know what?

23:33

I don't think the evidence a, this variant isn't controllable in the first place, B the people who are dictating this proof, they, you know, they probably couldn't peel a carrot a much less control a variant of this virus, much less, this various, That's

23:48

actually a great analogy because not only could they perhaps not peel the carrot, but peeling carrots is unnecessary.

23:55

Yes. Right.

23:56

Not only can't you do this thing that everyone should be able to do, but like, you shouldn't even do that thing.

24:02

Right. Right. But like, get The dirt off and then eat it.

24:05

Right. But the, on the one hand, I do think I'm qualified to look at the evidence and say, it's not strong enough to be turning the world upside down, over mask mandates or anything else here.

24:18

But I also recognize that, you know, we are all fallible and it isn't my choice to make for other people.

24:26

Right. We can make it for ourselves, but we can't make it for other people.

24:30

Yeah. But that is, I mean, that, that's, that's actually a very different set of conversations than trying to minimize the already rather profound harm to our children, that they are experiencing as a result of extraordinarily bad public policy.

24:44

Right. Totally agree with this. Right. It is unforgivable that we are masking children against this disease without, you know, with the sort of logon, you know, my kid loves these things, you know, rather than thinking about the developmental impacts and all of that.

24:58

No question about it, Referring

24:59

to what we were doing last week and why we were doing it so that our children did not have to stay home from school for a week because they've been exposed to me.

25:07

Oh yeah. I mean, I just don't think we had a choice.

25:10

We we've got, we've got regulations and it made sense to abide by them for our children's wellbeing.

25:18

And you'd make of that, which you will, I

25:22

guess I will say before we move off this topic that used to be at work contacts all the time.

25:28

And now that my close range vision has begun to fail rather later than I was told it was going to, but it certainly has.

25:36

And so I wear, I wear glasses sometimes because I can, I have progressive lenses in these, like everything about, and when I wear my contacts, I have to put reading glasses on and off and to, to see up close the, I can't go out into the world wearing glasses anymore.

25:56

I would, I would actually be potentially happy to just be out in the world wearing glasses, because I really liked not having to navigate multiple pairs of glasses or, you know, pull things on and off.

26:05

But I want to read something.

26:06

But as everyone who wears glasses knows masks, fog glasses, and I've heard that some people have solutions that I heard some, and they didn't really work for me.

26:14

But, and so this is, this is anecdote, but bizarrely, what I find when I actually pinch the pinch, the nose thing closed, where I have forgotten and gone out to the grocery store or something, where are my glasses like, oh God, I'm going to have to navigate the grocery store effectively blind because my glasses are going to be fogged the whole time.

26:31

The, the way that I wear my mask, that fogs my glasses, the least is when it's sitting the loosest on my face, the loosest.

26:39

Yep. Which means that it's doing even less good to the extent it does any good.

26:42

And when I've got the nose thing pinched, I feel like it forces it like up around my cheekbones or something.

26:47

And then my glasses fog and they stay fogged.

26:49

So it's not even clear to me that this, like how you're supposed to wear the mask thing is even doing the limited sort of good that it is Claimed

27:00

to be doing well. And If,

27:02

if the falling of glasses is a decent proxy for where air is going, which it should be.

27:07

Yeah, yeah.

27:10

Even worse. You know, one of the things that I think is so absurd about these mandates, you know, we're having kids wear masks all day at school.

27:19

I mean, I, you know, every time I bike with Toby to school and I watched the kids going to, and from wherever they're coming from wearing their masks, like, it's nothing, you know, they're kids that you'd like with them to school Without

27:31

wearing masks.

27:34

No, we're not mast biking to school.

27:36

And You claim to love him.

27:39

Yes, I do.

27:40

But,

27:40

but

27:44

So you, so you see both at the beginning and the end of school, all these kids coming and going from school.

27:48

Yeah. And the thing is they've obviously because they're kids and they're more adaptable than adults they've gotten used to it and it's not abnormal to them.

27:56

And I did, there was, you know, there was some point at the beginning of the school year, kids were wearing them religiously.

28:04

And then there was like a week or two where I started to see a certain amount of rebellion against them.

28:09

You know, these are kids out of school right.

28:12

In the outside world where I don't even think these mandates apply to them.

28:15

And, you know, they were kids like not really wearing them or wearing it around one ear or whatever they were doing, but then they sort of seem to go back to it.

28:24

I don't know if it was one of these waves of fear that was inflicted on them about new variants or, or what am I B?

28:31

Well, I've got just the Washington post article for you.

28:33

I was going to save this for later, but this seems apropos Zack, if you would show my screen here, we've got Washington post .

28:40

I'm gonna try to fix up.

28:42

I can't treat. That's not good.

28:44

I have a lot of things to show on my screen today, Zach.

28:46

I

28:46

was

28:46

just

28:46

making

28:46

sure

28:46

they

28:46

were

28:49

connected. Okay.

28:51

Well, an article that came out yesterday and Walpole Washington post is headlined.

28:59

It's under the education section.

29:01

Students seeing Lux, coronavirus protocols, walk out and call in sick to protest in-person classes.

29:07

Wow, well, right.

29:10

Most school systems are determined to keep school in person, but some students aren't convinced.

29:15

And then we have a picture of high schools of high school, sophomore who helped launch a petition and students sick out demanding more coronavirus safety measures or returned online school in California's Oakland unified school district.

29:27

And it goes on and on.

29:31

And on here, we have a quote, we were talking about how we can make school more safe.

29:35

And this, this whole article just strikes me as so reminiscent of the safety as that we've been seeing since 2013 muscle mannose and that Greg Luciana from China, that height discuss at length and the coddling of the American mind.

29:53

And until now, whether the kids have been scared of is, you know, racism and sexism and hearing things that made them scared and frankly, their own shadows.

30:05

And so their own shadows now includes literally a variant of a disease that if they get it now will perhaps make them immune.

30:13

We'll certainly make them immune to it in the future.

30:16

But hopefully to future variants, that may be worse.

30:19

Again, like if there's, if they're scared enough of this thing to, to organize, to become activists and petition their school, to take them out of school, to keep them safe, these kids are never gonna leave their bedrooms again.

30:34

Like, and you know, this, this, this was what we were seeing.

30:38

And this was like a, a large part of what a lot of people were objecting to and worried about about this generation, about both millennials and gen Z being scared of their own shadow and being unable to take risks and unwilling and not being able to, to see the world as it is, and, and embrace serendipity.

30:55

But this particle frankly, is a perfect indicator that the, that the sort of safety ism and the N the like preformed activism, I know what to do.

31:07

I'll be an activist have just slotted right in to COVID measures.

31:13

It's, it's more than an analogy, right?

31:16

It is another version.

31:19

It is a variant of the same mental disorder that underlied the, the woke safety as, and I would also point out there are lots of other parallels too, right.

31:30

So it'd be interesting to know what actually, the kids are rebelling against.

31:35

On the one hand I can, you know, we hear a lot of course about the nonsense that our kids face in school, right?

31:43

The level of it is high.

31:44

And I can imagine that in some sense, you know, not wanting to be exposed to it manifests as, yes, I'm not going back to school.

31:57

In other words, there may be a kind of allergic reaction to nonsense.

32:01

On the other hand, it could be a kind of mirror of what's going on in the adult world, where COVID disrupted everything.

32:07

People left their jobs, their employers closed down, whatever, and then they didn't really want to go back to work because they'd figured out how else to live or whatever.

32:17

And it just didn't look like an appealing deal anymore.

32:20

And I think the thing is, school is an abomination, right?

32:26

It has become one. We have allowed it to become one, and there's no excuse for this, but nonetheless, it has been one for quite some time long before COVID COVID and woke is some, have both made it worse from the point of view of going in and getting your mind upgraded.

32:39

It's like you're constantly fighting the malware installation that is being infused into every class.

32:45

And, you know, as I've said elsewhere, I sort of feel that the weird connection between so-called learning disabilities and intelligence, isn't really about the learning disabilities at all.

32:58

It's about the fact that they disrupt a normal learning process, which when it's bad being disrupted is actually positive.

33:05

And so I, you know, I wouldn't, I wouldn't rush to judge a rebellion against going back to school, although the idea of going back to school, because COVID is making it unsafe is obviously preposterous, right?

33:19

I mean, you know, we just have, you know, you can do this in isolation.

33:23

Well, there's a dangerous disease circulating don't, you know, well, yes I do, but there's always a dangerous disease circulating and this one's less dangerous to kids than others that we constantly expose them to.

33:35

Yeah. I mean, I just, how do we, hopefully I hear what you're saying about hoping that the, you know, activism against in-person school is actually activism against school.

33:50

That's become so toxic that it's, it's actually harming and miseducating, and shall we invoke desegregating?

33:56

Shall

33:56

we

33:56

coin

33:56

that

34:00

term? Just educating rather than educating clearly from this article, that's not what at least these, these little activists are doing.

34:06

This is, you know, this is safety as a Rhona addition and it's, it's appalling.

34:10

And the fact that the fact that we're encouraging it, the fact that, you know, activism itself is seen as an honorable educational goal by many.

34:22

And, you know, we certainly, we saw this at evergreen.

34:24

There were, you know, long before evergreen blew up, we saw certain faculty basically encouraging activism as the thing that they were teaching students.

34:32

In fact, in fact, credit was given for it sometimes.

34:34

And during the meltdown, there was all sorts of overt.

34:38

Talk about how they should be getting credit for turning the college upside down and not be penalized for not doing the work that they were supposed to be doing.

34:49

And, you know, it's, it's not, it's not a sane moment.

34:56

It's just not a Saint moment at all.

35:01

Well, that's where you're wrong. You're right. Yeah.

35:04

Do we want to, do we want to move into showing that that brief video from, You

35:11

know, it, So this is set up, I'm not actually positive that I know the backstory.

35:19

You, you sent this to me and we're going to have Zack show it in a minute.

35:22

Hold on just a second sec.

35:23

It's it's Wilansky it's, it's Rochelle.

35:28

Wolinsky the head of the CDC, the director of the CDC and Tony Fowchee, the head of the NIH ID ever notified.

35:34

She has at this point, testifying before Congress.

35:37

I'm just trying to remember when it was this week, but I don't know exactly what day and, you know, top health officials testify on Omicron response.

35:45

They were called to Congress to testify, and here is some of what they said Simply

35:54

can. Yeah. Dr. Willinsky it it's been reported by some of our biologists and scientists that this year around 170 people have died from taking the regular flu vaccine.

36:03

The vaccine adviser, adverse reporting system reported that the number of people dying after or following the COVID vaccine is actually in the thousands.

36:15

Now, this is what I'm hearing.

36:17

I'll give you a chance to refute that or confirm it here.

36:21

You know, is this true?

36:23

Are we having that many people die after taking one of these vaccine?

36:29

Senator Tuberville, thank you for that question. The vaccine adverse event reporting system is a mandatory system of any adverse event that happens after being vaccinated.

36:37

So if you get hit by a car tragically, after getting vaccinated, that gets reported in the vaccine, adverse affording system, their system.

36:45

So the vaccines are incredibly safe.

36:47

They protect us against Omicron.

36:50

They protect us against Delta.

36:52

They protect us against COVID.

36:54

They don't protect us against every other form of mortality out there.

36:58

Numbers of people that died following taking a COVID test from taking this vaccine.

37:03

Do we have any idea I'm just asking, I'm Sorry

37:07

to those who have died after taking the Following,

37:09

taking the vaccine. Is there any number of count?

37:12

We keep records on that that died of just Absolutely.

37:16

Yes. I couldn't give you the absolute number off the top of my head, but our staff could absolutely get back in touch with you.

37:21

We collect those, You know, Dr.

37:23

Fowchee, you have any clue on that.

37:25

About how many hundred?

37:29

I don't know the number, but I think it's really important for people microphone.

37:32

Sorry, I don't have a number, but I think part of the confusion is that when you do a reporting, if you get vaccinated and you walk out and get hit by a car that is considered a debt, I mean, that's the thing that gets confusing, that everything that happens after the vaccination, even if you die of something completely, obviously unrelated, it's considered a death.

37:57

So if I had metastatic cancer, God vaccinated and died, two weeks later, that's a death that gets Counted.

38:04

And every one of those is adjudicated So

38:09

well Lenski so just a reminder, foolishly, we can't hear that while it's playing, but we both listened to it a few times.

38:18

Well, Linsky says quote.

38:20

So if you get hit by a car tragically after getting vaccinated, that gets reported.

38:27

Okay. Even if that's true, that's true for all of theirs, that's not different for these vaccines.

38:36

What is being revealed in various at the moment is that after COVID vaccines, adverse event reports, spike the objection that both will Lensky and Fowchee make, as if they know they're speaking to completely innumerate and people who cannot possibly follow logic is that because you might get hit by a car after you're vaccinated, of course, you're going to see deaths that is just as much true after every single vaccine that has ever been given.

39:13

And that does not explain the spike.

39:15

Yes, it's also not true.

39:16

And, and we have to separate these two.

39:19

These are two different objections to this, these claims that are Right.

39:23

And the fact that both will Lensky and Fowchee say the same thing.

39:28

They are knowingly lying to Congress.

39:33

Now, presumably they're not under oath.

39:35

Maybe that would give them pause if they were, but they are perpetrating a fiction on their interlocutors in Congress and the American public here by saying something that they both know is exactly wrong.

39:52

That the verus system is actually very hard to report into and not mandatory.

39:57

And what happens is that a small fraction of actual events get in there.

40:03

And it isn't things like car accidents where people know very well, there would be no point in reporting it to that system because it doesn't carry any information.

40:11

And also same week that she acknowledges isn't it?

40:15

That, that a lot like a majority, I believe, and I don't have these numbers, I'm about to ding her for not having numbers, but I don't have the numbers off the top of my head.

40:24

I believe this is the same week that Willinsky said, well, yeah, actually a whole bunch of the COVID hospitalizations are actually hospitalizations for something else.

40:34

And then we, then they were tested and then it turns out they also had COVID Right?

40:37

So just so that people can track this, the CDC does make this error in the other direction when they are trying to convince us that mandates are necessary to control COVID there are all kinds of shenanigans, including involving counting people who are hospitalized with, after something like a car accident, if they happen to test positive for COVID, whether or not they have any symptoms.

41:01

So that's a game that we have seen played over, you know, at least a year, right?

41:05

In order to amp up the COVID numbers, they do count all kinds of nonsense that obviously doesn't belong there.

41:11

Then they're taking that thing, which they must know that they themselves are using to make COVID look more dangerous than it is.

41:18

And they pretend that that is accidentally making the vaccines look more dangerous than they are, which they know it isn't.

41:25

They know that the virus system, you know, there is not agreement on how much of an under-report I've seen estimates, careful estimates of how much of an underreported is range from something like a 99% underestimate.

41:39

That is to say 99% of actual events are never reported to a 90%.

41:44

Right? And so they are just simply pretending.

41:48

And the fact is for most people, they will hear something vague about the fact that sometimes things are counted as the result of something that are actually car accidents that have nothing to do with COVID or vaccines.

42:01

They're not going to track which place the accounting error goes in one direction and which place it goes in the exact opposite.

42:07

Yeah. And then the questionnaire here who I forgot to figure out who exactly it is, is asked.

42:15

Okay. So you say you can't trust fairs.

42:18

Do you have the numbers then?

42:20

And she says, so he asks, is there any number count?

42:26

Do we keep records on that?

42:27

And she says, absolutely, yes.

42:30

I couldn't give you the absolute number off the top of my head, but our staff could absolutely get back in touch with you.

42:36

Bull fucking shit Lies

42:40

What you were called before the Senate to talk about what is going on with Omicron and you have the numbers and that's the one number that you didn't bring.

42:51

Well, it's, it's, it's not like we haven't been asking for that number because of course Those

42:55

numbers and they either don't have them or they have them and they're keeping them from us.

42:59

And we probably will never know the distinction, but it's one of those two things.

43:02

It's one of them. I don't think, I don't think it can be that they have the number because where does it come from?

43:06

The point is you have a system it's called .

43:09

We can argue about whether it's a good system or a bad system, but the point is that's the system.

43:13

And what they tell us is, oh, that huge number of adverse events that you see in various doesn't mean anything because, and then they have a lot of excuses, like anybody can report anything.

43:22

Yeah. Okay. What that means is that at worst, the very system contains no information.

43:27

That's not the same thing as having information.

43:29

That's saying adverse events are rare.

43:31

It's like saying we don't have any information and therefore we're going to assume they're safe.

43:36

Even though we've got no system, we haven't gone looking.

43:38

We haven't asked. Yeah. So it's, you know, I, I guess the thing is it is stunning how much theater there is in this kind of testimony.

43:50

I was actually, yeah. What I was thinking was that Fowchee was his cause playing the hero again, it's like fake it till you make it, man.

43:56

And you know, we, we, all the whole country was told that he was our hero back in, I don't know, April of 20, 20, I guess.

44:05

And it's amazing how many people not only bought it then, but still are buying it.

44:12

Well, he was very charming.

44:16

I don't really snort it into the microphone.

44:19

That snort was non editorial though.

44:21

I think you would be entitled to, to snort editorially if you felt like it.

44:25

But you know, I think the problem is he is so incredibly charming seeming that people just have a hard time imagining that he could be doing anything other than his best.

44:37

He does a very good impression of a person who is being flustered under unfair questioning.

44:41

And it is preposterous.

44:44

And the problem is, oh, did I Forget

44:47

to turn on my mic? Oh, simultaneously rip off my mask.

44:50

Yeah, no, I must say even that thing it's you can't, you can't establish anything, but there is something weird about the fact that he was talking into a mic that was off while leaving his mask on when his policy is clearly to take the mask off when he wants to be heard.

45:06

But There's no way for us to know what it was.

45:08

He was saying can't lip Read

45:09

in any case, he's, let's put it this way.

45:14

The human part of me sees him and does feel like he seems like a nice, slightly, do we be scientist under Rodan conditions, right?

45:23

There's some part of me that can't help but feel sympathy.

45:26

And then I hear what he says, and I know that he has to know that what he's saying is false, that it can't be a noble lie because of what it results in the kind of harm.

45:37

And it's breathtaking.

45:43

That's interesting. I think that may, that may reveal that you're a better person than I am, but I, I cannot, you know, when you say things about him, like charming and handsome, I think, what are you talking about?

45:55

Like, I can't, I can't see any of that in him.

46:00

Well, I think it's Think

46:02

it's just objectively true.

46:05

No, I mean, I, I think, I think it, it, it speaks to a different kind of accounting.

46:08

I also basically believe that attractiveness in people is a kind of, what is it does a summing kind of value.

46:26

In other words, there is a purely physical attractiveness thing.

46:31

But the point is we all know people who aren't conventionally attractive, who we find totally compelling.

46:38

Right. Right. We want to spend time. We are literally in some sense, attracted to them.

46:42

Right. And the point is, well, what is that? And it's has to do it that's of character.

46:45

It has to do with integrity. It has to do with lots of things, which unfortunately, if you don't have a lot of experience with somebody are partially favorable.

46:53

And I think that's what I'm getting from Fowchee is that I think he's actually very good at it.

46:59

Well, I mean, we said this last week, right. We actually think he's really good at history.

47:03

Yeah. I think he is really good at his job and we just don't know what it is.

47:07

Great. Yeah.

47:08

The

47:08

Oregon

47:08

health

47:08

authority

47:08

this

47:08

week

47:08

or

47:08

last

47:08

week

47:18

recently. So can you show my screen?

47:20

You can, Hey look, the Oregon health authority is pleased to announce new guidelines.

47:30

Smell is pleased to announce that the CDC has approved new guidelines for the Moderna booster.

47:34

You ready?

47:34

Bigger,

47:34

effective

47:34

immediately

47:34

adults

47:34

who

47:34

received

47:34

the

47:34

Moderna

47:34

vaccine

47:34

as

47:34

part

47:34

of

47:34

their

47:34

primary

47:34

series

47:34

only

47:34

have

47:34

to

47:34

wait

47:34

five

47:34

months

47:34

before

47:34

getting

47:34

a

47:34

booster

47:34

only

47:34

have

47:34

to

47:48

wait. Only have to wait that's we have to wait.

47:50

Yay. That is the update that I was looking for because I was just chomping at the bed, waiting for the waiting, waiting to be able to rush out because that is definitely what everyone wants when they get a vaccine.

48:02

How soon can I get my next installment?

48:05

Well, so if we were, you know, as long as we're just ideally wishing for wonderful things, then wouldn't it be great if we had a vaccine that you only had to wait a week until your next booster?

48:14

I think So. I don't want to have to wait five months.

48:17

That seems like a lot of time. A lot of time waiting is not fun.

48:20

I don't know that reading is hard.

48:21

Yes, no, it's, it's an amazing construction.

48:25

And you can imagine that whoever came up with that, you know, they really, they earned six months worth of pay for that in version of reality that they have now perpetrated On

48:36

the public. In which time they'll have to get two boosters, If

48:41

they're even getting boosters. I mean, I hate to be cynical, but At

48:44

the Oregon health authority, I suspect They are yeah. The Oregon health and you know, we're remote enough from the centers of power that they probably aren't yet.

48:51

This is a Low

48:53

financial incentive outpost out here.

48:55

Yes.

48:59

Okay. Let's see. Oh, I forgot when we were talking about that incredible testimony from Willinsky and Fowchee, I wanted to point out this piece written by a friend of ours, Jimmy Kim, in her subs tack let's be clear, which is called.

49:19

I was deceived about COVID vaccine safety.

49:21

She starts by talking about having been vaccinated with the Madonna vaccine in may of 2021.

49:28

And

49:28

then

49:28

this

49:28

is

49:28

an

49:28

incredibly

49:28

long

49:28

article

49:28

and

49:28

it

49:28

is

49:28

incredibly

49:33

thorough. And first she defines consilience.

49:36

She basically goes after the, she doesn't do this explicitly.

49:43

I think I did read the whole article this morning, but it's very, very long.

49:46

I don't think she goes after directly.

49:48

The argument that, that trial trials randomized controlled randomized controlled trials, I was thinking critical theory.

49:57

How Could you have forgotten randomized?

49:59

They're the gold standard?

50:01

Well, critical theory is also the gold standards.

50:03

Yeah. So randomized controlled trials being basically the standard of evidence is, is absurd.

50:10

And really what you're hoping for is a lot of different kinds of evidence pointing to the same thing.

50:15

And, you know, RCT is when done well do of course provide an overwhelming amount of evidence, but it's still one When

50:23

designed well and executed well and Done,

50:27

there's a lot hiding and done there. Right.

50:29

And what they do and what randomized controlled trials do.

50:31

The reason that there is even a basis for a claim that they are the gold standard, is that they are very good at isolating weak effects and making them visible right.

50:40

By controlling for other, all the other things that might lead you that miss might mislead you in this direction.

50:46

Yeah. Right. But I would also point out that this is a classic variant on the idea that science is the strongest method we have have for figuring out what is true, but it is also a fragile method.

51:01

It is vulnerable to things like market forces.

51:03

It is not robust to them.

51:05

And so randomized controlled trials are very good at finding a weak effect and making it visible.

51:09

But they are also fantastically gainable that is to say, you can design trials to succeed and you can design them to fail.

51:18

Irrespective of the thing that is being tested.

51:20

And I know it's going to sound like I'm becoming cynical, but the more one digs and the more one understands about the way the pharma game is played, the more you realize that this idea that we all carry that this is the gold standard, may indeed be about the fact that they are gainable.

51:36

And therefore, if you're a company that wishes to sell compounds and get them inflicted on patients, then a game of BL mechanism, a game of ball metric is exactly what you're looking for, right?

51:48

Because Especially if you're allowed to stop those short Well,

51:51

right, the point is, look, we don't like it this way.

51:54

We think that medicine is science and medicine should be scientific.

51:57

But the point is the idea that this compound is effective at limiting the harm of this disease.

52:06

That is a narrative.

52:07

And the point is that narrative is founded on what we think of as evidence.

52:12

But if you have a gainable kind of evidence and the point is, oh, I can link to this compound, which I just so happened to have, you know, intellectual property rights to, to this disease, which I might broaden the definition of so that more people appear to have it.

52:25

And then, wow boy, a lot of this substance is going to end up in a lot of those people and a lot of cash is going to flow in this other direction.

52:31

And the point is, well, who amongst us really doesn't think that those kinds of incentives and opportunities are on the mind of these corporations who do this.

52:43

We are all, we are all privy to falling prey, to incentives all of us.

52:47

And we all do fall prey to incentives and pointing out incentives is not the same thing as pointing out a possibility of conspiracy.

52:55

And also those who point out incentives are thus not inherently engaging in conspiracy theory.

53:04

So Jimmy lays out her case, again, very long case.

53:09

And one which I think is eminently shareable with those who are skeptical of the position, the, the vaccines may not be all that they're cracked up to be.

53:17

If you could show my screen here, Zach, by saying basically the consilience that, that looking at multiple kinds of data.

53:26

And at the point that they aligned, concluding something from them aligning is a rather excellent way of assessing vaccine safety here.

53:35

And she says, I compiled multiple pieces of evidence to argue that injuries from the COVID vaccines are grossly under-reported.

53:40

These include one testimonies from doctors and nurses, two testimonies from the vaccine injured three evidence from medical records or official databases of adverse events for evidence from the vaccine trials, themselves five plausible mechanisms of action, six evidence from animal studies, seven evidence of past wrong drone wrongdoing by pharma, eight evidence of corruption or undue influence in our health institution and bonus explanations for why we're not hearing about this in the media.

54:11

Each section she continues in this article could be its own book.

54:14

And indeed, she's got a ton of links in here, but, but it's not, it's not even complete as, as will always be the case.

54:23

So highly recommended this as, as a, basically a clearing house of arguments and evidence and encourage you to, to share it with people who say, what are you talking about?

54:35

Of course they're safe.

54:37

So I would just add to this.

54:39

We

54:39

are

54:39

all

54:39

built

54:39

to

54:39

be

54:39

logical,

54:39

not

54:39

to

54:39

a

54:39

fault,

54:47

right? There are places where logic will mislead you because you don't have enough information.

54:50

And so the logical conclusion you reach is actually less good than your intuitive conclusion, but we are all built to do logic because it served our ancestors to deploy that tool frequently, especially when there's something complex and difficult to navigate or arrived, because then you could, you could at least try to parse out what was taking place, but this gives you lots of kinds of checks that you can do on whether something makes sense.

55:18

Right? So one check I often do is what would have to be true for this thing that I think is true to actually not be right.

55:27

How, like how robust is this piece of information?

55:31

Yeah. It's like the mirror image of a prediction, right?

55:33

It is a prediction, but it's, but it's not, it's like a negative prediction.

55:38

I think the, the, the right, the right analogy is it's check some check.

55:44

Some is, if you've gotten that program, let's say you've gotten a security minded program.

55:49

You've downloaded it from the internet. Well, how do you know that somebody didn't give you a version of the program in which they've got a back door installed and they just made the website look like the real website and you downloaded a program that isn't what you think it is.

56:02

Right? Well, you can do a check sum, right?

56:04

Which takes some set of things from within the program that the originator of the program built that if anybody modified it wouldn't add to the same number.

56:15

Right? And so the point is you can say, well, I don't know why, the thing I downloaded doesn't match the thing that the manufacturer is distributing, but I know I don't want to use it because the checksum didn't match.

56:26

So anyway, there are lots of things you can check that way.

56:29

And this is just kind of a check sum on A

56:31

little bit of a modern day. Shibboleth It's

56:34

like a technical, It's

56:37

a numerous, numerous logical, which is wrong because neurology is a weird thing, but it's like, Yeah.

56:44

And actually this, this, this, this is no, I think this is really good because actually what it is is, you know, so for those of you who don't know Shibboleth is a biblical term and Shibboleth is a Shibboleth Shibboleth is a term that you could pronounce various different ways, but you could recognize people who really were part of your group because they would pronounce it the same way.

57:02

And if they pronounced it Shibboleth or whatever the alternatives would be you'd know something was up.

57:07

You're not, you're not All of us, you're not with Us.

57:09

But the thing about a check sum, or, and I assume there are other mechanisms that work like this, the thing about it is there are an indefinitely, large number of ways to be wrong and only one to be.

57:20

Right. So it's like a charged kind of Shibboleth right?

57:24

Yeah. I'm going to think that's true for Sheila to Chappelle list.

57:28

Scheibel if you know, there's indefinite, number of ways to say it wrong and maybe it's not indefinite.

57:32

Oh, I see. I see. I see it as more than One.

57:35

I see it. There's a plurality, but it's not indefinitely.

57:38

I see The distinction. Yeah, Exactly.

57:40

You

57:40

were

57:40

going

57:44

somewhere.

57:46

I'm already here. I've been here since the beginning of the podcast going somewhere.

57:49

Oh, what am I going somewhere? Well, I guess what I was going to say is there are lots of ways that you can kind of look at a body of evidence and say, does this look like something, somebody might've constructed for my benefit.

58:00

So I have reached the wrong conclusion or does this look like the way evidence actually works in the world?

58:04

Where even if I come at it, different ways I come to the same place because it's actually true.

58:11

Right. And that's so powerful, right.

58:12

If I think I know something and then I'm working on some other problem and it leads me right back to the same deep truth.

58:20

It's like, oh, well now I have two reasons to believe it.

58:23

Not one.

58:25

Yeah. Some things just canceled. Yeah. Right, exactly.

58:27

So it's just a kind of, it's a kind of, Oh,

58:30

it isn't that that's just so rewarding.

58:32

It's just like, that's, that's, that's one of the, that's one of the reasons to do it right.

58:36

To do this kind of work is to end up with things canceling and to be returned back.

58:40

And This

58:42

does fit. Absolutely. Absolutely.

58:44

And Never wore it and be like, oh, it doesn't fit.

58:47

These are different things. There's an error somewhere.

58:49

I don't know where it is yet, but you know, both of those have reward, but So

58:55

we were headed to the Heredic on conference in Miami and we didn't get to go because of, because of our encounter with COVID.

59:03

But nonetheless, one of the things I wanted to do at Heredic con, which is going to, was going to involve a whole audience full of very smart people.

59:09

Most of whom would not have been deeply steeped in how to think about COVID or vaccine safety or early treatment or anything.

59:18

The thing I was going to say to them, which I should probably write up or something was you in the public, I believe are subject to an anamorphic illusion, anamorphic, illusions are, you've all seen them.

59:35

You just don't know the word. Probably like those chalk drawings on sidewalks that look like a giant chasm has opened up in the sidewalk.

59:42

It's extremely compelling. It's very hard to convince your mind.

59:44

You're not looking into a giant chasm, but what you may or may not realize is that it looks like that from exactly one location.

59:52

Right? And so the exchange that the artist has made is that from this vantage point, I can make a very compelling rendering of something with a lot of 3d content.

1:00:02

You can look at it from any other direction and then you get some weirdly distorted thing that doesn't make no sense.

1:00:07

It doesn't add up. Right? It's incoherent, it's at least stretched.

1:00:10

And it doesn't look like a 3d thing.

1:00:13

It looks like a crazy thing. And my point to the audience was going to be, you are the subject of an anamorphic allusion surrounding public health.

1:00:21

And the only reason that that's working is because you're standing where they expect you.

1:00:26

And the point Is

1:00:30

Right. If you step three feet to your right, three feet to your left, you'll begin to see what we're talking about.

1:00:34

If you continue to stand there, we're going to sound crazy.

1:00:37

Right? Right.

1:00:37

So

1:00:37

in

1:00:37

any

1:00:37

case,

1:00:37

I

1:00:37

think

1:00:37

what

1:00:37

drew

1:00:37

me

1:00:37

is

1:00:37

up

1:00:37

to

1:00:37

here

1:00:37

is

1:00:37

a

1:00:37

very

1:00:37

good

1:00:37

indication

1:00:37

of

1:00:37

look,

1:00:37

I

1:00:37

believe

1:00:37

something

1:00:37

that,

1:00:37

yes,

1:00:37

you

1:00:37

will

1:00:37

be

1:00:37

told

1:00:37

the

1:00:37

public

1:00:37

health

1:00:37

officials

1:00:37

have

1:00:37

ruled

1:00:37

out

1:00:37

long

1:00:50

ago. Right.

1:00:51

But doesn't it look like a real object because it doesn't, you know, look at all of these kinds of evidence.

1:00:58

Right. I might be able to show you something, a picture of a rock and tell you all about it.

1:01:02

And somebody might challenge that.

1:01:04

It's not what I say it is, but it's different than being able to hand you a rock and you can look at it from any angle you like.

1:01:09

And, But my, you know, but my doctor said that he saw it's one doctor.

1:01:16

Okay. But 10 doctors so that they saw capita, it's just doctors.

1:01:19

Okay. But these people said that they were injured.

1:01:22

Okay. But it's still just people talking.

1:01:23

Oh, well we got medical records and verus, oh well, but verus is flood.

1:01:27

We got the vaccine trials themselves.

1:01:29

Oh no, no.

1:01:31

What I say about that? We got plausible mechanism, action.

1:01:33

Animal studies pastor are doing my pharma evidence of corruption.

1:01:36

She's got so many, she's just laid it out.

1:01:39

So cleanly, all the different kinds of evidence that we've got and, and it's, and it's still Right.

1:01:45

And so the point is what would have to be true for the analysis that she presents to just simply be backwards.

1:01:51

Right? All of these things would need a special explanation for what had gone wrong.

1:01:55

And the point is you can look at, at what she says, and you can say, look, I don't have any ability to evaluate this kind of evidence.

1:02:01

I know nothing about it, but then there's other kinds of evidence I can evaluate.

1:02:04

So maybe the one that I can't evaluate she's wrong, but if she's not wrong about the one I can evaluate, why are they pointing the same direction?

1:02:12

Right. So it's that style of how do you, how do you exactly, how do you think in a messy environment, this is kind of the thing is why you and I always say welcome to complex systems, right?

1:02:22

Yep. It requires a different style of, And

1:02:25

you know, no surprise. She's I actually don't know exactly her background, but she's trained as a biologist.

1:02:30

Yep. Yep.

1:02:31

It's actually, maybe this is a good moment to take a brief detour over to Peruvian sub fossil skulls.

1:02:41

Okay. I mean, right. I know you were thinking that I was not, you Were

1:02:45

not okay. I don't, I don't have any idea. What's Coming.

1:02:47

All right. Forgive me if I'm disrupting.

1:02:51

Okay. Hey Zach, do you want to put up that?

1:02:53

Actually I wanted to show some street art in DC, which is sort of a nice segue on from anamorphic art.

1:02:57

Although the street art is definitely not anamorphic, Not

1:03:00

anamorphic, Actually it's metaphorically, anamorphic.

1:03:02

We'll return to that.

1:03:04

Okay. We're going to return to it because I got some more stuff to say about anamorphic art too, is that, can you put up the, the tweet with the Peruvian?

1:03:12

I did send you a tweet.

1:03:15

It

1:03:15

just

1:03:15

came

1:03:20

through. All right, we've got it.

1:03:24

It's happening at the moment. You, while we're waiting, you can look at Fairfax who is considering some skullduggery that he might alright.

1:03:32

So what we have here, our audience may want to know that there is a marvelous distinction between fossil and sub fossil, where sub fossil is the actual bones that have not been remade molecularly by geological processes.

1:03:51

It's actual bone. Whereas a fossil from let's say a Tyrannosaurus will be an actual fossil.

1:03:57

Where, what was once a bone will now be rock that in the shape of the bone.

1:04:01

None of the original Bone remains.

1:04:03

Right? So what we have here.

1:04:06

Yeah. Right. It's yeah.

1:04:08

It's molecularly distinct from the surrounding rock, but, but not bunk.

1:04:15

Okay. What we have here is a sub fossil prehistorical and the distinction between history and pre-history history is anything that exists after writing so that there could be a first person And

1:04:31

a culture. So you actually have, you know, prehistory in north America through, you know, up and up into the second millennium by, by this very strange.

1:04:45

I actually, I don't, I don't love this.

1:04:48

I really like this definition, but even in north America, right.

1:04:51

With the Maya, you're on a different standard In

1:04:54

north America from Mesoamerica. But yeah, so you've got, you've got one new world people who are using writing in, in Mesoamerica, the Maya, but no one else, as far as we know, was using writing.

1:05:07

And so, you know, they, they lived rich, diverse, amazing lives and had zero and astronomy and agriculture and you, all of these things, but without writing, they didn't record for later generations and later peoples to see it, what it was they were doing.

1:05:22

And so we referred to what they were doing as Prehistory

1:05:27

prehistory. And I should point out in the case of the Maya, we have precious little of what they actually did.

1:05:32

Right. Because the Spaniards destroyed it with the exception of, I think, a single manuscript and whatever was written on temples and things like this.

1:05:38

So effectively, we'd been bumped back to a level of evidence that we have with prehistory, even with the Maya, for the most part.

1:05:45

Right. But in any case, so here you have a sub fossil skull from prehistory, Peru.

1:05:54

And the fascinating thing here is that this skull has had a surgical implant of a metal plate that has been put in apparently to deal with a fracture, right.

1:06:11

This person has received a serious injury, but here's the really amazing part.

1:06:14

The injury healed, right.

1:06:17

The plate got healed into place.

1:06:19

And so what we can infer from that is that first of all, it's incredible.

1:06:24

2000 years ago, we had a proven surgeons doing surgery on a fractured skull with a Certain

1:06:32

amount of metal there.

1:06:34

Right. You know, or it was exactly a common, this was either while they experimental, okay, this guy's going to die, let's see what we can do.

1:06:40

Or someone who was very important.

1:06:42

And they're like, do everything you possibly can.

1:06:45

Right. I mean, I just, I'm just guessing that this was not common practice.

1:06:49

Yeah. I don't think it was, but here's the thing. Somebody knew enough to be able to do it.

1:06:53

They use metal to make a plate to fit the location.

1:06:56

And we know that it healed, which means the person survived it.

1:07:01

Right. So in any case, the reason I raise it is it is a marvelous example.

1:07:08

You know, when I hear the randomized controlled trials are the gold standard of evidence.

1:07:14

And I think, well, that's all well and good for you, who can have them in some sense, but Sorry,

1:07:22

they're fantastically expensive.

1:07:25

Well, fantastically expensive and us evolutionists, we don't have the luxury of this, right?

1:07:30

The fact is there is a whole world of evidence outside of randomized controlled trials that we actually use and have made tremendous progress on very difficult puzzles.

1:07:40

Because even if it were the gold standard, the absence of it does not render you helpless.

1:07:46

Well, but I mean, that's also, sorry. I interrupted you by, by raising this at all.

1:07:52

But you know, evolutionary biology is an historical science and historical science inherently plays by different rules, just like history.

1:07:59

The actual study of history plays by different rules than other things in the humanities because history happens once.

1:08:05

And you know, there, there are not iterations.

1:08:08

You do not have, you know, your sample size is always one, right?

1:08:12

And so, you know, you find, you find convergence in which, you know, wings evolved once in insects and once in birds and once in bats and the wickedness of all of these things is interesting.

1:08:24

And you can make, you can, you can make adaptive arguments on the basis of those things, having a volt becomes, but they're not the same, like flight evolved multiple times, but the way that it evolved to particular instantiations are different.

1:08:38

Absolutely. But this let's put it this way.

1:08:42

People have all do RCTs,

1:08:44

Right? That's my point. You can't do them and you're not, you know?

1:08:48

Yeah. There are things you can't do well without them, very weak effects that are historical may be lost to history.

1:08:54

And you can't, you can't find evidence of them, but we can do a tremendous amount with evidence outside of randomized controlled trials, for example, you know, well, that's just an anecdote.

1:09:07

Yeah. That's a 2000 year old skull with a metal plate in it.

1:09:11

And evidence that it healed after the plate was installed.

1:09:14

Let's take that argument back. Just one, one step.

1:09:17

I, you know, I know that 2000 years ago, some people in Peru used a metallurgy in surgery.

1:09:25

Now you don't, how do you know that I've seen nothing to that effect?

1:09:28

Here's here's this that's just an anecdote.

1:09:31

And then, and then this place forward, right?

1:09:34

So the, the argument in this case, that comprises evidence that is not negotiable.

1:09:42

It may or may not, but this is a great test case for what would have to be in error in order for this to be an incorrect Conclusion,

1:09:49

what would have to be an error?

1:09:52

So I haven't inspected the skull.

1:09:54

I don't know anything about the people who wrote this paper.

1:09:56

The skull could be a fraud, right?

1:10:00

If the skull is what it appears To

1:10:02

be, if the skull was found in the way that it is purported to have been found, if it is true that people who can tell the difference between a heeled skull and a non skull have looked at it and said, yes, this skull healed in the aftermath of whatever this plate, the installation of this plate was.

1:10:20

If all of those things are true, this single anecdotal skull answers the question, was there surgery being done in new world prior to contact with Europeans?

1:10:33

Was there an alert, right?

1:10:36

So the point is you can do a lot with that evidence.

1:10:38

Is it in controvertible?

1:10:40

No, no.

1:10:41

There are fraudulent skulls in the history of science, right?

1:10:46

A lot of them And

1:10:48

people have incentives to make fraudulent skulls.

1:10:51

Right. All right. So I'm not telling you that that thing happened, but what I'm telling you is that you could rule out the things that actually make this in any way.

1:10:59

Questionable. I have a feeling that anybody who did would find that this is a perfectly genuine skull that says exactly what it appears to say.

1:11:07

And that knowing that a plate was installed and healing occurred after is sufficient to tell you, yeah, they did surgery, right?

1:11:16

They did surgery on skulls and people survived.

1:11:19

It. This was not done on cadavers before magnification or something like this.

1:11:23

This is actual surgery. So anyway, the point is, look, don't buy this garbage about the gold standard of evidence, which then by the way, does not imply the next thing they want you to believe, which is that no other evidence is any good.

1:11:35

Even if it was the gold standard, even if randomized controlled trials were the gold standard, it hardly means that the silver standard and the bronze standard are in sufficient to do scientific work because they're not right.

1:11:44

And then remind yourself, are they telling you that it's the gold standard, because they're really obsessed with precision, which is what they get out of those studies, or are they telling you it's the gold standard, because it's the standard they can gain and you won't be able to detect it.

1:12:02

Yes.

1:12:02

So

1:12:02

here

1:12:02

we

1:12:02

have

1:12:02

some,

1:12:02

hopefully

1:12:02

this

1:12:02

will

1:12:02

come

1:12:12

up. That's not looking good.

1:12:13

Oh

1:12:16

no.

1:12:16

So

1:12:16

this

1:12:16

is

1:12:16

some

1:12:16

street

1:12:16

art

1:12:16

that

1:12:16

someone

1:12:16

took

1:12:16

pictures

1:12:16

of

1:12:16

in

1:12:16

there

1:12:16

we

1:12:16

go

1:12:16

in

1:12:16

DC

1:12:29

today. And then when I saw it on Twitter and within an hour or two, I don't remember what reported that he saw.

1:12:36

Some woman tearing them down, which is really unfortunate.

1:12:40

But here we go. We got four pieces of, of street art that showed up in DC for those listening and not watching.

1:12:48

We've got Biden, holding an, a malate in.

1:12:54

These are all sort of Soviet style, Soviet art style, a mallet that says OSHA on it, comply and he's, and he's barking, comply, comply.

1:13:05

We have Biden Biden kind of just Biden.

1:13:11

Isn't it with needles coming out of his head and red masked kids looking up at the sky.

1:13:16

It says, good kids are compliant kids.

1:13:19

Again, all of these folder posters are Soviet art style Biden sitting in a chair holding, what is that an artichoke?

1:13:30

Is that a Corona virus?

1:13:32

I don't know what That is. It must be.

1:13:34

I can't see it from here very well. Yeah.

1:13:37

The Corona virus, that's red and his glasses are red and there's mass people behind him and it says mandate segregate, subjugate.

1:13:43

And then finally, this is maybe my favorite.

1:13:46

We have father Fowchee with a halo of an atomic symbol holding a very large needle and it says, trust the scientism.

1:13:56

So

1:13:56

those

1:13:56

are

1:14:02

fabulous. That is what is supposed to do that.

1:14:05

It's not the only thing are to supposed to do, but that is one of the things that art is supposed to be able to do.

1:14:10

And we have a whole lot, I mean this, and, and it's, you know, it's, it's super meta of course, because it's playing on actual propaganda and revealing how propaganda yest so much of our modern messaging is.

1:14:25

But you know, the fact that within hours, there was someone tearing it down, reveals that this is kind of metaphorically anamorphic, that you can't see this as meta propaganda as commenting on the propaganda that we are living through right now, unless you're standing in a particular place, you can't see it as anything, but, and I'm, I'm not gonna play the video that he took of her, of his conversation with her about why she was tearing them down.

1:14:51

But she says, it's bad for public health.

1:14:53

And you know, this is misinformation and you know, all the usual stuff that if you've got, you know, if you've got, if you've got father Fowchee in your head and you really think that that's who he is and he deserves the atomic halo, then, then this is offensive to you.

1:15:09

And it feels dangerous.

1:15:10

And if you move really not that far, just like not that far to the left or the right, the front of the back read like a levitate, something just like move a little bit and you will see something very, very different.

1:15:24

Yeah. I must say I'm disturbed by how little art is being used.

1:15:31

And, you know, as we are fishing into multiple non-overlapping societies, the absence of art at that interface is very disturbing.

1:15:40

Now I have a confession, which is that I am very much in favor of this mode from the other side as well.

1:15:52

And I remember as a much younger person back when evangelism was battling Darwinism, I remember admiring a kind of both sides of an arms race, right?

1:16:07

So you had the Jesus fish, which had nothing to do with Darwin, particularly, but it was a proudly displayed symbol.

1:16:12

And then the Darwinists put out a Jesus fish that said, instead of saying, well, instead of saying Jesus in Greek, it said Darwin and the fish had legs, right.

1:16:29

You know, poking fun at the creationist.

1:16:32

And then the creationists came back with a symbol where it was the Jesus fish eating the Darwin fish.

1:16:39

And I thought, you know, I like both sides of this.

1:16:43

I understand we're having an argument.

1:16:44

I definitely, you know, the fish with the legs that me, I mean, you know, this was actually, even before we were at Michigan, when Phil Gingrich, the paleontologist came back with his early spectacular finds of whales with legs, right.

1:17:02

From Pakistan, I think, yeah.

1:17:03

He Was there. He was at UMC as we were.

1:17:06

Yeah, he was. So it was, you know, he came back and it was this news.

1:17:09

So anyway, you know, the idea of fish with legs or whatever.

1:17:12

Yeah. That's surprisingly on target, right?

1:17:15

It's not, it's not just glib.

1:17:17

It's actually sometimes how this works.

1:17:20

And, but anyway, I like the idea of people who can be good natured about their differences.

1:17:27

And they, you know, I sort of believe that in the end, the better art will win.

1:17:31

Right. You know, I don't believe that for any deep reason, but I think the point is one side is more vulnerable because its explanation is worse.

1:17:40

And so Well, this reminds me of something that you've pointed out often, which is I, maybe you're not the first to point out.

1:17:48

I've also heard it in other corners, but you know, a movement that doesn't tolerate laughter or a movement in which there is no laughter is not what it seems.

1:17:56

And probably can't last.

1:17:58

Although although the, the, the woke rate, the safety ism and the woke, the woke seemed to be a mostly laughter free movement.

1:18:04

And they they're pretty damn.

1:18:07

Yeah. Laughter free and surprisingly tone deaf, Including

1:18:10

the medically woke very, you know, very much more about fear than laughter you know, laughter is probably dangerous because it spews droplets or something.

1:18:17

Yeah. Yeah. No. And you know, the, no kidding that they want to shut down comedians.

1:18:23

Right. Because the point is they just don't have, they don't have an argument that can go up against being rightly mocked.

1:18:29

You know? I mean, that's the thing, that's what it's for.

1:18:32

That's what mockery is.

1:18:34

And that's what those posters Are. Yeah. Yeah.

1:18:36

And you know, at the same time I did not before, before our stream have time to put together a list of these things, for those, a bunch of just jaw dropping, authoritarian moves being made in, I think in Germany, I saw that a telegram is they're contemplating banning telegram because people who are skeptical of vaccines are using it to talk to each other.

1:19:00

Right now I am old enough And

1:19:05

Germany have being the example of, you know, how could it be them giving what they just, what they, right.

1:19:12

They went through the two generations ago, but seriously Germany, How

1:19:16

could it be you? Right.

1:19:17

I will say I am old enough to remember when a move like that could never have happened in the west two years ago.

1:19:26

Yeah.

1:19:29

Yeah. I mean, it just it's insane.

1:19:33

All right. Okay. I wanted to say a couple of things about, about things that have nothing to do with COVID you ready to move on?

1:19:40

Or did you want to, you don't want to introduce anything else?

1:19:44

I did have one thing that doesn't fit with anything else You

1:19:47

want to save up for the end? Sure.

1:19:49

Okay. Okay. I don't know what it is.

1:19:52

Okay. By design.

1:19:54

Okay.

1:19:54

Oh

1:19:54

actually

1:19:54

there's

1:19:54

one

1:19:54

other

1:19:58

thing. I don't know. I don't know. Zack tells me I'm overreacting to this.

1:20:01

So before we talk about the science, this does piss me off Zach assures of overreacting.

1:20:07

This is in the New York times, which yes, yes.

1:20:10

I know. We still get the hard copy on Sundays.

1:20:13

Chicken is broken.

1:20:16

This was actually covering the times. This was a four full page ad that was actually covered wrapping with the New York times.

1:20:23

Yeah. It doesn't have a date on it.

1:20:25

Last week, chicken is broken.

1:20:27

It says, Derek goes on daring.

1:20:35

However, there's no chicken in this chicken.

1:20:36

They actually say a chicken that's made entirely out of plants.

1:20:41

Now I actually have no problem with this company.

1:20:44

I don't even know who it is. I'm not going to say it.

1:20:46

If I figure it out, like they're trying to make plant-based protein.

1:20:50

That tastes good. Even to people who like meat.

1:20:52

Cool. That's fine. That's fine.

1:20:53

But chicken entirely out of plants.

1:20:57

No,

1:20:57

just,

1:20:57

just

1:21:02

no. And frankly it feels to me like this is what postmodernism has wrapped.

1:21:05

And it is the ability for advertising companies and for frankly, terminally degreed, humanities, professors, and others to make claims in which you say a is only in shall ever be a, except when it's been.

1:21:20

And they just sort of stand back and watch the world in Gulf itself in flames.

1:21:25

It is part of why we're in this mess that we're in.

1:21:27

It's part of how landscape and fabric can get away with the shit that they get away with.

1:21:31

Well, you know, if you get hit by a car after you get vaccinated against COVID, that counts as a varus COVID COVID death, or in fact, a vaccine deaths like, well, what about if you get hit by a car, if you get vaccinated against measles, Right?

1:21:44

Nothing So

1:21:46

sorry, that may seem totally unrelated, but chicken is broken.

1:21:51

Okay. Maybe I'm a chicken that's made entirely out of plants now.

1:21:54

Now it's Not, well, this is awkward.

1:21:56

Something that tastes like chicken.

1:21:59

Maybe. I don't know. I haven't tasted it. I'm entirely made of plants.

1:22:02

Okay, cool. But stop it.

1:22:05

But the pretending that reality a is actually reality.

1:22:08

B no history, as we just talked about is, is one-off and chickens and plants.

1:22:14

Aren't the same thing I,

1:22:17

I hate to correct you. And the fact that you've been suffering a dangerous synthetic illness, which has probably robbed you of at least energy Capacity

1:22:29

shortly. I think it's just distracting you, but I mean, all chickens are made out of plants And

1:22:35

we're all, all energy is solar energy.

1:22:38

Yes. Fine. We're in we're all.

1:22:40

Yes, no, No.

1:22:43

I was going to introduce our, our R they were gonna, we were going to cut the Gordian knot and we were going to introduce our audience to the glory of second order vegetarianism.

1:22:52

Do it then.

1:22:54

Okay. Well, I mean, this is it. You just eat, you eat animals that eat plants and done, right?

1:23:01

You don't need this company for that. No,

1:23:03

no. I don't trust that company any farther, But

1:23:06

I mean, she comes art made, they aren't even made entirely out of plans because first off they're made of other chicken from the embryo, and then they're also eating insects.

1:23:17

Right. Who ate plants? I mean, that's the thing that sweet Fungus,

1:23:22

Fungus, which ate plants. That's the thing.

1:23:24

It's glorious Microbes.

1:23:28

They did it all.

1:23:30

Look, what about the

1:23:33

plants? Well, all right. That is a minor technicality best.

1:23:38

That's the two kingdoms.

1:23:40

There

1:23:40

are

1:23:40

two

1:23:40

kingdoms

1:23:40

that

1:23:40

I

1:23:40

think

1:23:40

would

1:23:40

argue

1:23:40

with

1:23:44

you. Th this is an exception, like, you know, that's not meat cause it's got salt on it.

1:23:50

Right. That you've got the autotrophs, you've got the, autotrophs actually doing the hard work and everybody else is stealing it.

1:24:00

And so ultimately it all does come from You're

1:24:02

late to the game as autotrophs man.

1:24:06

Yeah. But it's what I'm sure it's most of chicken feed, which I have not tried, but So

1:24:13

we're now looking for a new sponsor, right?

1:24:15

If I promise that if someone comes to us with a chicken feed that they claim as human grade, I will buy us a chicken so that we can have an excuse to have it around and see what this guy will taste.

1:24:27

And you know that I will, As

1:24:29

long as it's human grid.

1:24:31

Yes. Okay.

1:24:33

Okay. I'll stop talking about chicken now.

1:24:34

Let's

1:24:37

see. Oh, here we go.

1:24:38

I

1:24:38

need

1:24:38

the

1:24:38

link

1:24:38

to

1:24:43

work. Okay. I'm going to have you just briefly show my screen here for a moment.

1:24:46

And then Zack I'm on the back.

1:24:48

This isn't, this is not published in science, but this is like their science news thing.

1:24:53

The original article, I will show you shortly drug laced.

1:24:57

Beer may have forged ancient Peruvian empire.

1:24:59

Andy and rulers may have fostered allegiance, one feast at a time, the first paragraph being, and then again, this is the science.

1:25:07

This is the report on the science in the journal science between 500 and 1100 CE the Highlands of Perea were home to a far reaching empire known as the like the Inca after them, the watery managed to spread their culture over the vast distances and rugged terrain of the Andes mountains.

1:25:24

Now new finds from a small site in Peru, suggest that the war may have forged political alliances by serving drug laced, beer to local elites at periodic parties extending their empire one trippy feast at a time.

1:25:35

So if I may have my screen back for a moment sack, that was enticing enough that I went and read the actual article at those.

1:25:44

This was based on, hold on.

1:25:46

I don't have it up yet. It's different.

1:25:48

Is it?

1:25:51

Yeah.

1:25:51

Here

1:25:51

it

1:25:51

is

1:25:51

published

1:25:51

in

1:25:51

antiquity

1:25:51

this

1:25:51

month,

1:25:51

the

1:25:51

journal

1:25:51

antiquity

1:25:51

it's

1:25:51

called

1:25:51

hallucinogens

1:25:51

alcohol

1:25:51

and

1:25:51

shifting

1:25:51

leadership

1:25:51

strategies

1:25:51

and

1:25:51

the

1:25:51

ancient

1:25:51

Peruvian

1:26:04

Andes. Some little who knew, I didn't know that this was a realm of research and I find it fascinating.

1:26:11

Let's

1:26:14

see. There's one thing at the very end that I want to share, but let me just share the, this is sort of the summary.

1:26:21

It's not the abstract exactly, but maybe it is in the pre-Colombian.

1:26:26

Andi is the use of hallucinogens during the formative period, 900 to 300 BC, often supported exclusionary political strategies.

1:26:32

And they later go on to explain that basically hallucinations tend to be individual small group, if any group at all.

1:26:40

And therefore foster basically like they say, exclusionary strategies in which you have other shamans or just elites doing them.

1:26:48

Whereas during the late horizon period, 80 4,000 CE 14, 50 to 1532 Inca leaders emphasized corporate strategies via the mass consumption of alcohol corporate strategies via the mass consumption of alcohol.

1:27:01

Everything in this is just blowing my life using data from, from Coca Pompa.

1:27:06

The authors argue that a shift occurred during the middle horizon period, 8,600 to a thousand when beer made from sinus smaller, I don't know, was combined with a hallucinogen and a then thera Calu Brynna the resulting psychotropic experience reinforced the power of the winery state and represents an intermediate step between exclusionary and corporate political strategies.

1:27:30

This Andy and example, as the global catalog documenting the close relationship between hallucinogens and the social power.

1:27:37

And so their basic argument is alcohol loosens people up and makes people feel like they're having a shared experience and anyone can make it right.

1:27:47

So once you expose people to alcohol, if, if, if somehow you have a society where there is no alcohol, which I don't know if that even exists, but, and you, and you bring it to a party or a festival or something, people are going to figure out how to do it.

1:28:00

And I mean, precisely because it just happens like alcohol happens.

1:28:03

Whereas especially in south America, the strong hallucinogens tend to involve very carefully curated and crafted combinations in which you don't just happen into this stuff, right?

1:28:17

It's not that you found some, some suicide, you know, you didn't just find the mushrooms and eat them and, and had a trip.

1:28:23

They tend to be, you know, very complex recipes.

1:28:26

And that basically the argument is that the, what they're calling the corporate structure of the Inca and of many modern modern nation states encourages basically mass mass, lack of sobriety with alcohol, but not the sort of insight of hallucinogens because that many people on hallucinogens wouldn't be controllable.

1:28:52

And what the, what the worry of done, they're arguing.

1:28:56

Let me find this one quote that I wanted to share.

1:29:02

Okay. There's two quotes actually. So here's one are paleo ethnic botanical evidence from the warrior outpost of Coca Pumbaa.

1:29:08

Strongly suggests that was, I had to Molly beer at feasts, combining a hallucinogen with alcohol altered the experience of both psychoactive substances.

1:29:16

And we argue provided warrior leaders for the corporate strategy of governance via patron client feasting relationships.

1:29:23

So they go through the botanicals.

1:29:26

They actually have fascinating list of all the, all the species they found at the site, which includes keenwah and squashes and cactuses and Coca and beans and peanuts and potatoes.

1:29:37

And he, which is a pot pepper and some and corn.

1:29:43

And then these solution agenda in this thing, they're making alcohol into, sorry, looking for the, here it is.

1:29:56

Vielka

1:29:56

infused

1:29:56

Molay

1:30:02

Cheecha. So cheetah is just the broad name for the, the alcoholic brew that is still eaten, drank a lot in Catchoua territory.

1:30:12

In the, in south America, they'll get infused Molly Chicho enabled a more inclusive psychotropic experience in warrior society for perhaps the first time in the Andes, the consumption of Vielka therefore moved beyond those spiritual leaders who commune with a supernatural realm.

1:30:24

The Villa infused brew, brought people together in a shared psychotropic experience while ensuring the privileged position of warrior leaders within the social hierarchy, as the providers of the hallucinogen, people couldn't go source it for themselves because they didn't know the recipe.

1:30:39

So you came to the parties and you knew you were going to have some fun at the parties and you couldn't go try this at home.

1:30:47

You

1:30:47

actually

1:30:47

just

1:30:47

want

1:30:47

one

1:30:47

more,

1:30:47

but

1:30:47

by

1:30:47

tying

1:30:47

their

1:30:47

esoteric

1:30:47

knowledge

1:30:47

of

1:30:47

obtaining

1:30:47

and

1:30:47

using

1:30:47

Milka

1:30:47

as

1:30:47

an

1:30:47

additive

1:30:47

to

1:30:47

Molly

1:30:47

cheetah,

1:30:47

and

1:30:47

in

1:30:47

toxicant

1:30:47

that

1:30:47

stimulated

1:30:47

communities,

1:30:47

while

1:30:47

our

1:30:47

leaders

1:30:47

were

1:30:47

able

1:30:47

to

1:30:47

legitimize

1:30:47

and

1:30:47

maintain

1:30:47

their

1:30:47

heightened

1:30:47

status,

1:30:47

these

1:30:47

individuals

1:30:47

were

1:30:47

able

1:30:47

to

1:30:47

offer

1:30:47

memorable

1:30:47

collective

1:30:47

psychotropic,

1:30:47

feasts,

1:30:47

but

1:30:47

ensure

1:30:47

that

1:30:47

they

1:30:47

could

1:30:47

not

1:30:47

be

1:30:47

independently

1:31:08

replicated.

1:31:10

That's wild. Yeah, I have to.

1:31:12

Yeah,

1:31:12

this

1:31:12

is,

1:31:12

this

1:31:12

is

1:31:12

new

1:31:12

to

1:31:16

me. One there's, there's a delightful little game you can play where, you know, you listen to this description scientific as it is, and you know, how would they know?

1:31:28

Well, no, I, I haven't looked at it, but my guess is, you know, that's a, that's a decently plausible description of a mechanism and all of this.

1:31:37

And who's to say if it's really a hundred percent accurate, but nonetheless, there's nothing about that description that strikes me as, you know, preposterous, but it does strike me as, you know, academics go to a party and then try to describe what happened.

1:31:53

Well, if they'd written it while they were on this, bro, it probably wouldn't be as Coherent.

1:31:57

If they had been invited to the party, it's easy to understand why academics wouldn't be.

1:32:01

I mean, Aside

1:32:02

from this being a 1500 year old, That's

1:32:06

another obstacle.

1:32:06

But nonetheless, it is funny to me.

1:32:10

I think if we were to be able to teleport to such a party, you might actually be able to recover their description, but that would be like, oh no, no, that's not.

1:32:18

That's not what it was like. Right. You know what it was like was very Trying

1:32:22

to, they're not, they're not pretending to have done ethnography.

1:32:25

I hope that they wish that they could write that they could have been participant observers in these feasts and thus learned even more, but archeologists are not cultural anthropologists.

1:32:35

They do different work and they have different evidence that they are looking at.

1:32:40

It leads me to my other reaction to this, which is some part of me desperately wants alien anthropologists to describe what has happened in light of COVID and our public health priesthood, and the way that they have gained power and led the collected population into a mass psychosis event that only served to instantiate their own blah-blah-blah deep into the future.

1:33:09

It would be if you, if you had, if you could put that description up next to a proper and similar description of what is taking place in the present, but then you'd know something.

1:33:19

Indeed. Yeah, no, that's good.

1:33:21

That is good.

1:33:25

Okay.

1:33:28

Here. No, it's not coming up.

1:33:30

Hold on the other thing, and maybe we'll get to ice fish as well, but here we have a paper also just published in biology letters.

1:33:43

This is actually from the end of, of, it looks like it's slightly earlier.

1:33:49

Actually. It's not just, just published. I just ran into it.

1:33:51

Adaptation of sperm whales to open boat whalers, rapid social learning on a large scale question mark.

1:33:59

Awesome. Awesome. Right. And so, you know, obviously, so they're, they're looking at north Pacific, north Pacific wailing in the 19th century.

1:34:08

And so they're looking at log books, whalers log books.

1:34:12

So it's indirect that way. And then they're, then they're modeling.

1:34:15

And so it's, and the modeling is kind of a black box.

1:34:20

I didn't pursue there all of the, the data and the models that they have online.

1:34:25

I just read through this article where they say we've got all the explanations online, but they seem to be doing a really, a really compelling job here.

1:34:36

Let me just share a couple of a couple of quotes.

1:34:38

Some historians have suggested that the success I'm going to start over.

1:34:43

Some historians have suggested that the success rate of open boat, whalers and harpooning cited whales, the second stage, and these whaling operations dropped substantially during the initial years when industrial exploitation and that this was due to socially learn to changes and well behavior.

1:34:58

The development of pelagic whaling operations in the north Pacific by American whalers during the middle 19th century as well, chronicled and digitized Wheeler's log books.

1:35:06

So that's the source of their data.

1:35:08

We assessed whether this decline was caused.

1:35:12

So, so w they, they do see that there are declines in efficacy, Reduce

1:35:18

the effect of the hunt so that they're, it's, it's kind of founded by that Confounded

1:35:22

by that, but they actually, they actually have four hypotheses.

1:35:24

They, and again, they're using their model to assess.

1:35:27

And, you know, I don't, I don't love the, the way that they've been forced to assess what they're doing, but the fact that they lay out for alternative hypotheses upfront is such a refreshing change from how most so-called scientific papers are written.

1:35:39

They say, we S we assessed whether this decline was caused by socially learn changes in the defensive behavior of the whales.

1:35:45

That's their primary hypothesis, H hypothesis X, they call it evaluating support for several alternative hypotheses using causal models.

1:35:53

The first whalers on a ground were particularly proficient that's hypothesis.

1:35:59

One, the whalers initially captured, especially vulnerable whales hypothesis to, or the whales learned to escape whalers from their own individual experience of encountering them hypothesis three.

1:36:09

So that's different from the, their main hypothesis.

1:36:12

And that's an individually learned like individuals learn to evade as opposed to their social learning there's transmission of social stuff between groups.

1:36:19

And in fact, it's even a higher bar than it seems like they they're asking, could groups of whales have, have, have communicate information to other groups of whales, and they find them without going into the methods at all.

1:36:33

The,

1:36:33

between

1:36:33

unit

1:36:33

social

1:36:33

learning

1:36:33

model

1:36:33

fits

1:36:33

the

1:36:33

data

1:36:33

better

1:36:33

than

1:36:33

all

1:36:33

other

1:36:33

causal

1:36:33

models

1:36:33

producing

1:36:33

a

1:36:33

rapid

1:36:33

decline

1:36:33

in

1:36:33

strike

1:36:33

rate,

1:36:33

as

1:36:33

units

1:36:33

learned

1:36:33

defensive

1:36:33

models

1:36:33

measures

1:36:33

from

1:36:33

one

1:36:44

another. All right. So a number of reactions, one super cool to really skeptical.

1:36:52

We've got a bunch of mechanisms.

1:36:54

And as far as I can tell, none of them are mutually exclusive.

1:36:58

So to say, one fits the data better.

1:37:02

Again, I did not spend enough time, and I just am not a fan of the modeling approach.

1:37:06

And that was all they had.

1:37:07

So I can, But

1:37:10

nonetheless, they all day drew. And in fact, but, but They,

1:37:12

but you know, to, to hear them talk about, they find it was hardest for them to distinguish between the social learning model and the individual's learning model, that it was easier to get rid of the other two.

1:37:24

And I think they may have, it's possible. I'm overlooking it.

1:37:26

And I apologize to them if I'm about to suggest that they do something that they actually did, but there's actually more range in here because you could have In

1:37:37

terms of hypothesis. Yeah.

1:37:39

So if you, fans of our book will be familiar with the style of thought, but there are two ways that you could get a change in a group behavior or lineage behavior that would result in improvement in the odds of the whales against whalers.

1:37:55

One is that there's variation between the whales and how they behave, which they will be.

1:38:00

And that the ways of being a whale that made them vulnerable to the whalers began to decline because the Wailers had success against them.

1:38:10

And the ways of being a whale that were incidentally more effective at not being spotted or not being successfully pursued than would propagate just by virtue.

1:38:20

So that is Different

1:38:22

from vulnerable. So their use of the term vulnerable is like old, weak, young, whatever.

1:38:27

And you're saying basically that there will be a selective spread in a population behaviorally, and some behaviors that weren't putting them at risk before, put them at risk of whaling.

1:38:37

And those, that part of the, of that behavioral spread will simply be selected out by wailing, right?

1:38:43

Which won't read as vulnerable because they don't have the demographics.

1:38:47

And this will, you know, I don't mean to diminish it.

1:38:49

That really is selection producing adaptation.

1:38:51

And the nature of the adaptation is immunity to Wayland.

1:38:55

That's not social learning.

1:38:57

On the other hand, it could be social learning, and there are multiple ways that it could be social learning.

1:39:01

There's a question about, you know, again, individuals who succeed and those individuals who succeed then being, let's say even mimicked by other whales, right.

1:39:11

As successful As

1:39:13

you know, mimicry sounds like social learning.

1:39:16

Well, I'm not, I'm not discounting that at social learning, but I'm arguing if these were humans, right?

1:39:21

You would have two things competing.

1:39:24

You would have humans succeeding at various things that would propagate, and you would have humans discussing the problem and coming up with possible solutions right now in Wales, we have a highly intelligent, you know, these are from Wales.

1:39:42

Yep. We have a highly intelligent animal that does not have language.

1:39:46

They communicate, but they don't have a language.

1:39:49

Right. So their ability to propose things to each other is on the one hand, it would seem extremely limited from the human perspective on the other hand, maybe not right, because they can show.

1:39:59

Right. So while communication might be a lot more show than tell, but nonetheless, You

1:40:06

know, that long distance vocalization, like long distance vocalizations.

1:40:10

Right. But very short distance, what you can see in water.

1:40:12

And if you're so close that you can see it, you're presumably at risk for the same whalers.

1:40:16

Okay. Right. Exactly. But, you know, I mean, we see, we see much smaller tooth whales, like dolphins learning special techniques for, you know, corralling fish and hitting them with their tails and things like this From

1:40:31

watching, but there's a risk to them in the watching And

1:40:34

just started to watch it. You've got a mechanism for the transmission of information that, you know, I don't know if Wales can propose things to each other by showing, but that's a possibility.

1:40:44

And so you could get like, right, like that was close, but watch this right.

1:40:51

Watch what I would do.

1:40:54

Right. Here's what I did. Right. Exactly.

1:40:56

So, you know, that could be fanciful imagining of what whales might be doing might be projecting a human style thought process on them.

1:41:03

On the other hand, we're talking about a highly intelligent mammal Yeah.

1:41:07

At hand, or like, oh, I did something that worked.

1:41:09

I'm going to, I'm going to practice that a bunch because that worked and then others watch it and like, oh, look what he's doing.

1:41:14

I wonder if that's what, Right.

1:41:16

So in some sense, the point is we argue that consciousness is about getting ahead of this process of selection.

1:41:23

Doesn't have to solve the problem because you can actually mentally model a problem, pool your insight with others who are mentally modeling the same problem and come up with a solution that you didn't have before that actually works.

1:41:34

And then you can try it in the real world and see whether you had it.

1:41:37

Whales have some of our tools, not all of our tools and they have them in different proportions.

1:41:41

But the point is it interfaces very closely here with the question of, well, how did the whales get better at this?

1:41:47

Right. So anyway, fascinating stuff.

1:41:52

Okay.

1:41:57

Okay. The only thing about ice fish I've got is this again, it's in current biology, new paper, this one is actually brand new, a vast ice fish breeding colony discovered in the Antarctica in the Antarctic.

1:42:11

Totally

1:42:14

surprising. There was, oh boy, that's not working at all.

1:42:19

There. It is a breeding colony of know-nothings ice fish, Neo Paget, ptosis Iona, probably butchering that Latin of globally.

1:42:32

Unprecedented extent has been discovered in the Southern Weddell sea Antarctica.

1:42:35

The economy was estimated to cover at least 240 square kilometers of the Eastern flank of the filter trough trough trout comprised of fish nuts nests at a density of 0.2, six nests per square meter representing an estimated total of 60 million active nests and associated fish biomass of over 60,000 tons.

1:43:00

Jeremy That

1:43:04

didn't work at all.

1:43:05

I don't know why it started talking at me.

1:43:07

Well,

1:43:07

I

1:43:07

can't,

1:43:07

I

1:43:07

can't

1:43:07

make

1:43:07

the

1:43:07

computer

1:43:07

do

1:43:07

what

1:43:07

I

1:43:07

want

1:43:07

to

1:43:07

do

1:43:07

at

1:43:07

the

1:43:07

moment,

1:43:07

but

1:43:07

that

1:43:07

is

1:43:15

massive. Just that, I mean, that's really all I got, but we science, Western science just discovered an amazing amount of ice fish where apparently we'd only ever seen, you know, one or two nests in a place before.

1:43:29

And maybe it's because the entire global population of ice fish nest right there, but all in one place That's

1:43:37

cool. And it, you know, it speaks to one of the great things about being a biologist at the scale is that the world is actually full of things that we've never seen before.

1:43:49

And you and I have found stuff that nobody had ever seen before.

1:43:52

You know, there's still a lot of it out there.

1:43:54

I just ran across one today where somebody, I think in Thailand found a, I found this through Monica Lewinsky I saw on Twitter was she said that the person had lost her at the word tarantula.

1:44:14

Apparently she's not a fan.

1:44:16

But anyway, the point is the report that she was pointing to was of a discovery of a tarantula tarantula whose entire ecology is based around bamboo.

1:44:25

And apparently it's the only one.

1:44:31

What is it Doing? Oh, it lives inside the bamboo.

1:44:33

And it has a special, you know, it's not unlike your, your frogs in the sense that it has developed, you know, bamboos are really weird plant.

1:44:42

Okay. But anyway, it's cool.

1:44:46

I do well. So I mean the, the, the audience doesn't know that my, you know, my research system was indeed fun to tell them breeding frogs.

1:44:54

If I tell him just meaning, like the holes that forum in some plants that then fill with water and then make little mini ecosystems for organisms that use to live in them.

1:45:02

As soon as it's bromeliads, it's like we've got this familiar head back here in the new world, start poison frogs, which is the frogs.

1:45:07

I started working on.

1:45:08

They, they lay their eggs in the Wells and the bromeliads.

1:45:13

And then in, depending on the species, sometimes they leave their tadpoles there.

1:45:17

And mom or dad, depending on the species comes back and feeds them or somebody, they leave their eggs in the leaf litter.

1:45:23

And then someone transports them, usually a parent on their back to the anyway in Madagascar, the frogs that I worked on, I discovered a number of things about them, including they had an UN really, really similar system, largely using in produced bamboo, which is interesting because there are not that many native fight atomic plants in Madagascar.

1:45:49

There are sort of the troughs left in big buttress trees, which occasionally I found a mental eggs and Tad's in, but very few other things.

1:46:00

And, you know, occasionally in like the winter called the crutches of trees as well, but bamboo is the big one.

1:46:05

So I spent just a lot of time. I like carved windows and to bamboo with tax saw and made little windows with a proxy and Ziploc bags and just spent a lot of time around bamboo.

1:46:15

And if there had been tranches also living in them, I would have been much less pleased with the wholesale.

1:46:21

That's all there's nothing at to Rancho could do.

1:46:23

That would be nearly as terrifying as what does.

1:46:28

If you happen to be peering into bamboo looking for mantilla, frogs and eggs.

1:46:35

Yes it is. But they only bark Only

1:46:39

part have a bite. Yeah. But it's, so this is a frog.

1:46:43

So Heather Heather's system involved frogs that were laying eggs in these basically off bamboo where the water collects in the rain, but there are other species that there's the same, I've

1:46:54

found three other species that are using the same thing and an N and a crane fly.

1:46:58

Also. That is parasitizing the frogs.

1:47:01

At some point, you're going to have to explain this plain English, but anyway, this, this one frog

1:47:07

well,

1:47:07

the

1:47:07

dental

1:47:07

Hyla

1:47:07

Natasa

1:47:13

Well, I botched that. No, you just mumbled suddenly this was the one where the fathers were tending all of the babies in the well, Yeah,

1:47:24

so the men tele have long-term territories and in fact, identify three different kinds of territoriality that the males have, but the most successful males, the male that you want to be defends, a territory that has one or more of these Wells in them, but there are at least three other species of frogs that come in and use these Wells for their reproductive purposes as well.

1:47:44

But they don't defend them at all other moments.

1:47:46

They just come in and defend them short term, including the Donna Highlander Tosca, which is boy, I don't have the numbers in front of me, of course, but I don't know, seven to 10 times the mass of a mentor bids, a big honk and frog.

1:48:00

And they basically, the dudes fill up the, their, their whole cavity with their, with their bodies.

1:48:06

And they come in, they send out messages into the universe, looking for sexy female Pepperdine, highlighted hosta because after they get one and she leaves all of her eggs in the well, he stays there and just guards, the eggs as they turn into, as they develop, they hatch out into Tad's Oxygenates

1:48:21

the water, Water,

1:48:23

and guards them against creditors until they fully metamorphose and leave off and go off as froglets.

1:48:30

And then he leaves. But the way that they defend.

1:48:35

So as a hapless photographer, looking for interesting Malagazi phenomenon peering into the occasional well, which is of course, very, very dark.

1:48:44

I have a great picture accident, actually, that I got of a , which we will show you at some point by pop hop on pop that's the photo.

1:48:53

But in order to get that photo, I had to peer into these Wells and the bark.

1:48:58

So imagine a frog, you know, frog that size with a right.

1:49:05

And he's got a megaphone, right.

1:49:08

But he's got 40 babies bamboo.

1:49:10

And his job is that if anything, piers into the thing, he needs to scare the crap out of it.

1:49:17

So it goes away. And if that something is you looking for a good photo opportunity.

1:49:23

Wow. Well that wake you up.

1:49:26

Yeah. No, the med tele vocalizations are sweet and are, they can get lot of there's a lot of them.

1:49:31

And the what is an antidote?

1:49:33

Hyla, antidote, Hyla, balloons, your eyes, the one of the other species.

1:49:36

I don't remember him vocalizing at all.

1:49:38

Females don't talk, but plus Madonna highlighted hostage.

1:49:42

Yeah, man, man, that is not a frog you want to tangle with.

1:49:44

They'll knock you off your son on a map.

1:49:46

Yeah, exactly. If your socks, which, because it's Madagascar are rotting.

1:49:55

Right. I don't know why we're Talking about this either.

1:49:57

I Okay.

1:49:58

Oh, we were talking about ice fish and other cool things.

1:50:03

Yeah. That's all I got.

1:50:06

Well, I'm going to leave the ice fishing gloves discussion for another time.

1:50:08

I

1:50:08

did

1:50:08

have

1:50:08

one

1:50:08

thing

1:50:08

that

1:50:08

I

1:50:08

wanted

1:50:08

to

1:50:13

do. I had a thought I saw puzzle. I've been thinking about, you know, just a topic that's been on my mind somewhere backburner for a long time.

1:50:19

And finally, this week I made a breakthrough and I wanted to drop it on you and you know nothing about this.

1:50:25

And I just want to see what you think. Oh boy.

1:50:27

All right. Here's the idea.

1:50:29

Given another three or 4,000 years of selection under domestication, cats could make great pets.

1:50:46

So it wasn't the cats that pulled their rotting orange out of their bowl and left it for you to step on.

1:50:51

But we did have two instances of not entirely fresh mice this week.

1:50:57

Was there something else that's Part

1:50:59

of it? I just, you know, here's the thing I do Nearly

1:51:02

not do not entirely fresh mice in the bedroom.

1:51:04

I should say Squirreled

1:51:07

away as it were. Yeah, no, it's not.

1:51:09

I just, the, you know, I do, I understand that there are people who think that cats make good pets already.

1:51:16

And I assume these people right here, they listening, these people must rent all of their stuff.

1:51:24

Right. Anybody who owned anything would know that this is, this is not an animal ready for prime time as a pet.

1:51:29

But it, I mean, it has a great promise.

1:51:30

I think We

1:51:34

invite a little bit of the wild and yes, A

1:51:37

little Too much. And it is, it is marvelous.

1:51:39

And he is just sleeping through your, your rant.

1:51:43

And he will see to it that you can hear him come up and Slater.

1:51:46

He's such an intelligent cat.

1:51:48

He's been doing this thing this week.

1:51:50

So

1:51:50

we,

1:51:50

in

1:51:50

order

1:51:50

to

1:51:50

watch

1:51:50

movies

1:51:50

at

1:51:50

night,

1:51:50

we'd

1:51:50

like

1:51:50

to

1:51:50

put

1:51:50

our

1:51:50

feet

1:51:50

up

1:51:50

and

1:51:50

we

1:51:50

got

1:51:50

some,

1:51:50

some

1:51:50

soft

1:51:50

cubes

1:51:50

that,

1:51:50

you

1:51:50

know,

1:51:50

aren't

1:51:50

like

1:51:50

Ottomans

1:51:50

and

1:51:50

which

1:51:50

I

1:52:05

Have dubbed the scratching cubes.

1:52:08

Right. So he will scratch the Ottomans and I will shout at him.

1:52:14

And then he will give me that, look with all of the intelligence in those eyes like, huh?

1:52:19

You don't seem to like it when I do that.

1:52:22

But then the next thing he does, he will go over to the Sasol scratching posts that we have bought for the purpose of scratching.

1:52:30

And he will look me directly in the eye and then he will scratch it.

1:52:36

And I can see the gears turning in his head.

1:52:38

Like, why are you troubled by my scratching?

1:52:42

That, but you seem to not be troubled by my scratching.

1:52:46

This seems equal to me.

1:52:48

Anyway, he's a smart critter Who

1:52:54

has very little interest in your rules because you're not going to throw them out of the seals.

1:52:59

Are you? Nope. He has the, the intelligence, the dexterity and the morals of a raccoon.

1:53:05

He

1:53:08

does.

1:53:08

He

1:53:10

does. Yep. And we love him. Okay.

1:53:12

I think that's it.

1:53:13

I think that's it for the week we've gone on for quite a while.

1:53:17

So, oh, I forgot to mention at the top of this hour, I should have mentioned the next two weeks.

1:53:21

We're going to be at a different time. We're actually going to come on Fridays, different times each of the two Fridays for various, for various reasons.

1:53:29

Next week, we're going to be Friday Pacific time afternoon, which means for those of you in Europe, you probably miss us, but you know, stuff stays up and we go on, we put the stuff on Spotify right away as well.

1:53:44

At this point, you just can't live stream on Spotify.

1:53:46

And

1:53:46

then

1:53:46

the

1:53:46

following

1:53:46

week,

1:53:46

we're

1:53:46

going

1:53:46

to

1:53:46

be

1:53:46

coming

1:53:46

at

1:53:46

you

1:53:46

Friday

1:53:51

morning. So anyway, two different, two different time schedules.

1:53:54

We'll, we'll be here just rather than just Early

1:53:58

Friday morning. We should point out the two weeks, two weeks from now because I am going to be no that's next week.

1:54:05

Oh, that's next week. Oh, right. Oh time.

1:54:08

Yes. Got it. The 23rd of January, we are going to March on Washington peacefully, but we are going to make clear through our speech that these mandates are unjustified.

1:54:24

They are not justified because the thing is being mandated are not acceptably safe and effective because the people doing the mandating are not free of corruption.

1:54:35

And because it is un-American.

1:54:36

So anyway, consider marching with us January 23rd, the same DC.

1:54:42

Yeah, exactly.

1:54:45

Okay. You can use The mandates.com I believe is the weapon Defeat

1:54:48

the mandates.com.

1:54:49

So you can ask [email protected], emailing you logistical questions.

1:54:55

You have two dark horse [email protected].

1:54:57

And I mentioned last week that our moderator can give you an address of PO box to send things to.

1:55:05

And we've been getting some just delightful things from people.

1:55:07

And we appreciate those things you can, of course always join our Patriots.

1:55:11

We really love for you to read the book.

1:55:13

If you don't want to buy it it's available at many, many libraries, many copies, and there's more translation, rights being sold all the time.

1:55:22

So it's going to be available in more and more languages and anything else to say, Oh,

1:55:28

thanks. All Right. So be good to the ones you love.

1:55:32

Eat good food and get outside.

1:55:34

Be well, everyone. Hey folks. Welcome to the Dark Course Podcast Live Stream number 111A Palindrome, whichever way you look at it. Indeed, it is. Indeed. Here we are. Here we are. So we're ready. You're you're back from from COVID exile? Yes. From From exile. Yes. That little bit of theater last week is is over. I still have little stuff of my throat, you guys will be noticing that, but No, we're we're good. We might wanna just slightly clear up. Oh, think we should, but let's Okay. We'll we'll we'll get to it. it. Yeah. Well, I think, I think we should probably start there, but think I think we should probably start there. But yeah. So we're gonna we're gonna we're gonna talk COVID this week because we're still living this life like all of you are as well, but we hope to talk just a little bit about something that's entirely not COVID as well. So we got a little South American preIncan culture stuff to to mention and and sperm whales too. And maybe if we get to an ice fish, ice fish. Did I get that right? Icefish. I I think it's icefish. I didn't know you were headed to icefish. No. No. You didn't. Ice yeah. Icefish. Icefish. Maybe. That will give me an excuse to talk about my ice fishing gloves. Spell it. Yes. I should I should have had them here as a prop. In fact, we could have done a pro bono and for the ice fishing gloves. I don't think we could have because you don't ice fish. No. But I do have ice fishing gloves. Fair enough. But I don't think that not using them their intended purpose satisfies we'll satisfy them. Actually If if -- Mhmm. -- it's a tremendous lesson in how to think about, you know, stuff because whether or not I am violating the ethos surrounding ice fishing gloves by using them for things other than ice fishing. I don't think you don't know whether Sure. I just don't think it would really satisfy what they if if they consilience to market these things as ice fishing gloves. Yeah. They do. Yeah. They do. But let me tell you. I mean, the thing is our audience, which is currently thinking, hey, we don't ice fish. Why are we wasting time on this? They may. By the time we get through the ice fishing glove discussion, realize that they do need to set up ice fishing gloves for the same reason I do or more or less. Not to ice fish. No. Definitely not. Yeah. Isn't it like ice fishing presumably refers very rarely to actual, oh, Hey look what you just got delivered to me by a lush his 15 year old son, some nectar of the gods, which is what I call it in my subject this ice fishing presumably refers very rarely to actual oh, hey, look what you just got delivered to me. We're a luscious fifteen year old son some nectar of the gods, which is what I call it, in my sub stack this week. This is honey lemon tea. Squeeze an entire lemon, put it aside, put a large large dollop of excellent honey and stir it into nearly boiling water. Add the lemon on top and drink and it's delightful. You should call it honey lemon chai just to be more inclusive. As I say, I should have done that into the microphone, but as I say in the in the substag, it's not tea. It's not It's it's t by no stretch of the imagination, even to the degree that herbal tea might be tea. This isn't tea, but I don't know what else to call it. Other than making it sound super clinical or weird. So But it's not tea. Victor of the gods is why I now call it. It's not tea and the gap between what it is and calling it teas. No bigger than the gap between what it is and calling it shy. It's just the shy's hipper. It's definitely not shy, definitely not shy. Right or t crew. Alright. Then logistics to to start the hour. Our our conversation with Jordan Peterson came out this week in which we talk about our book this 111th gatherers Guide to the twenty first century. And really lovely conversation, conversation. It really lovely really lovely man. man. The three of us have had very few opportunities to talk altogether, and only a couple of times in person and that's pre COVID, but I believe I'm speaking for all three of us, but I know I'm speaking for the two of us that we all really enjoy each other a three of us have had very few opportunities to talk altogether and only a couple of times in person, and that's pre COVID. But I believe I'm speaking for all three of us, but I know I'm speaking for the two of us that we really enjoy each other a lot and the conversation was was terrific. So we encourage you to find that. I should hopefully remember to put that into the show notes. If you are watching on YouTube, you can find the chat over on Odyssey. You we encourage you to ask questions for second hour on for of our q and a on emissions dot com. And both of that And this, our R and Spotify as well, right, the videos. Mhmm. Whereas the audio of the of the main podcast. What we're doing right now is only on all the other podcast places. Consider joining us on our Patreon's Wari this morning had one of his one of his monthly conversations. Great conversation, and I haven't even had a chance to tell you that we came up with up plan. Thank you. Yes. So good. I like with a plan. I like plans generated by smart people who have no interest in continuing the insanity into which we are spiraling. is a good one. Mhmm. The world will be rescued in eighteen months is our best estimate. Twenty four at the outside. Now I believe that you are to use our younger son's new phrase pulling my goat. No. Not quite sure what Heying your go would mean, but no. I we did actually come up with a plan, but it is a very secret it's a very hunter gatherers guide style plan Wari the idea is not that we have a plan for -- From a blueprint. -- saving the world. It's not a blueprint. It's a it's a trajectory Let's get us to that foothill. Yeah. So anyway, I'm kind of excited about it. It's a very good conversation. If you're with me at some point? Oh, of course. Absolutely. You're central to it. Oh boy. I mean, you're taking all the risk. I think you ought to know what it is. Okay. Yep. No. It's good. We did have a great discussion it did arrive at something like plan that I'm pretty excited about, which DarkHorse listeners and viewers will be brought into if they are of of such a mind. I'm sure that some of them are such odd. No doubt. Alright. So, yeah, Patreon's and we do a monthly private q and a on my Patreon as well. You can find various products at our stores. Like, you can show that one picture we've got settle up the dire walls we ride tonight. We've got epic tabby. We've got digital book Heying. As you can see on the screen now, we've got all sorts of good stuff there. Okay. And excuse me. And, of course, my my newsletter, natural selection's at natural suction dot substrate dot com continues to have been about COVID-ninety stuff this last week. About, you know, I called it the Ombocrad diaries. And in it, I did post or actually to the recipe for the brisket that I mentioned last week. So you can find that there, and a lot of people were interested in the very oniony course attended full brisket so you can find that there. And a lot of people were interested in the very oniony Corsetan full brisket. They had a lot of contacts To also looking for the Also looking for the recipe. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. I don't I think we've we discovered that this really was not what your grandma Sophie made. This is a it's a different recipe, but Mostly related. Well That's I'll let you and your mother fight. Say something else. Yeah. Well, alright. Probably she knows better since, you know, I was five times. She she did not I didn't not tell her anything about you having anything about the recipe. I just said, hey, what is it? Brett thinks it's the same. And she then gave us some specifics about Sophie's recipe. I was like, nope, not in any way similar. So Really? Well, I'm not sure how I got the misinformation. I will say, Sophie's recipe and natural waxes recipe -- Mhmm. both excellent. Yeah. And there's so much leeway. I mean, basically, the the thing is if the meat ends up fork tender at the end -- Yeah. -- then you did it right no matter what else. You you gotta start with a good piece of meat. It's not a as we said last week, it's not an expensive cut of meat. But you want it to be as high quality as possible and then you need to take a lot time. You can't you can't rush brisket. Yep. There are there are sixteen kinds of awesome in the universe and this brisket is nine. Nine of the cousins. Yeah. So this is a this is a long standing trope in our household that Brett, when the boys were very young, started to invoke the six kinds of awesome and would announce that various experiences we were having were three kinds of awesome occasionally as high as nine. That's that's a lot. You know, interesting, though, that he has never, to this day, named any of the sixteen kinds of awesome. Thus protecting himself from future litigation expert. Not to you. Oh, right. And I kept it from the lawyers on all sides because I don't want our lawyers abandoning us. I don't want other people's lawyers coming after us. So yeah. But but there are sixteen and this this recipe, if you do it right, is nine. If you do it wrong, it could be two or three. But Yeah. It's it'll still sustain you. Yeah. It's life sustaining either way. Yeah. Yeah. And it'll excite your credit cards. They will be they will be attentive to you as you long cook the brisket. What else? Oh, it is upcoming week on my on the subject on natural selections. I'm hopefully, if I get to it. Gonna be writing a bit about the different kinds of competition that men and women engage in because I just had a piece that I wrote back in April of last year published in the archives of sexual behavior, an invited commentary to another published piece. And that is, of course, written in academics, and a bit arcane as a result because that is how we are expected to write over in science space, so as to keep all the riffraff out, and it's not the stated reason I do think it is part of the reason. So I'm going to turn some of that piece into something a bit more accessible for my sub stack. This week. So I ran into actually a new category of of -- Awesome. -- competition. I don't know if you have run into this but it's hypoallergenic masculinity. I I think it's gonna be good. And it's at least fairly safe. Well, I Well, I was going to say it almost sounds like the opposite gonna say it almost sounds like the opposite of toxic risk. Yeah. Well, it's not quite the opposite, but, yeah, it's definitely at the other end of the Amazing that that with that VAERS diagram, you the the intersection of the two groups of hypoallergenic masculinity and toxic masculinity is existent. Right. I mean Yeah. -- I I think you can't go wrong with it. Yeah. That's good. Okay. We have three sponsors this week for which, again, we are grateful for our sponsors very, very much. And here we go. Our first sponsor this week is brand new to us and brand new to our doggy as well. Our first sponsor is first sponsor is Sundays. Sundays is dry dog Sundays is dry dog food. When they approached us about being a sponsor, I was dubious. We have a Labrador We have a Labrador. labs. We'll basically eat will basically eat anything. What possible difference was she going to show an interest between her usual kibble, a widely available high-end brand and Sundays I was What possible difference was she gonna show an interest between her usual kibble, a widely available high end brand, and Sundays. I was wrong. Maddie loves the food that Sunday's mix, seriously loves it and is far better for her than the standard burnt kibble that comprises most dried dog food. Sunnys is the first and only human grade air dried dog food. No, we haven't tried it combining the we haven't tried it. Combining the two. We haven't tried we haven't tried it. Maddie is eating it, but human grid and yet no, the humans have not tried Maddie is eating but human grade and yet know the humans have not tried it. I tried I tried it. Did you? Yes. Oh. I thought light of our commitments as advertisers that we could not endorse this dog I thought in light of our commitment, as advertisers that we could not endorse this dog food if I had not. Try it. What did you think? Kimball Boy, you know, it's a really crunchy, it's the best dog Kibble boy? You know, it's really Big crunchy. It's the best dog food tried. Let's put it that Let's put it that way. Great. I got to change that Gotta change that script. Yes. Combine combining the nutrition and taste all natural human grade foods. With the ease of a zero prep, ready to eat formulas, Sundays is an amazing way to feed your dog. And apparently your husband comes to dog and apparently your husband if it comes to it. Don't know. It's sunny. This is easy for humans too. No fridge. No prep. No cleanup. No gross wet dog food smells. Sunnys is gently air dried, ready to eat. No artificial binders. Antithic additives it. It was a general garbage or general garbage, seriously look at the label. All of Sunday's ingredients are easy to pronounce, well, except for quinoa, and healthy for dogs to eat. Here she comes. This is a fun. Cue in a blind taste test, Sundays outperformed leading competitors, 40 to zero that was done with dogs queue. In a blind taste test, Sundays outperformed leading competitors forty to zero. That was done with dogs though. Not not husbands. That sounds like a made up That sounds like a made up number I know, but here's the thing. When I have a bowl of Maddie's previous food ready for her, she certainly is enthusiastic When I have bowl of Maddie's previous food ready for her, she certainly is enthusiastic. Again, she's lab. And this is true for all of lab this is true for all of us. We all, we all feed the We all we all feed the animals. We all take We all take turns. But when I have a bowl of Sundays ready for her, it's a whole different level of when I have a bowl of Sundays ready for her, it's a whole different level of enthusiasm. She spins, she She spends, she twirls. She offers to do a little tap dance she offers to do a little tap dance routine. It's It's amazing. She bounces and spins and leaps. Do you may want to make your dog happy with her diet and keep her Do you want to make your dog happy with her diet and keep her healthy? Try Sundays. We've got a special deal for our listeners. Receive 35% off your first Received thirty five percent off your first order. Go to Sundays for dogs.com/dark horse or use code dark horse at Go to Sundays for dogs dot com slash dark horse or use code dark horse at checkout. That is S U N D a Y S F O R D O G s.com forward slash dark horse, switched to Sundays and feel good about what you're feeding your dog, That is SUNDAYSF0RD0GS dot com forward slash DarkHorse, switch to Sundays and feel good about what you're feeding your dog. Your next man. Alright. I should say before I move on to mind, I did that this does raise a little story. I stepped on something absolutely terrible in the middle of this week. I was so frightened to look down and see what I had stepped in. But It was wasn't Sundays? Well, here's the thing. You said that Maddy will eat anything. I have this orange that was terrible. And I didn't want it. But I thought maybe, Maddie, wouldn't I put it in her bowl? Apparently, she didn't want it either, and she moved it out of her bowl Wari I later stepwise. It was an orange, not one of the decomposing mice that we occasionally Right. It wasn't anything super great. It was the best possible thing that I could have stepped on that would have felt like that. Alright. It's a little silly around here. It is. Okay. Classes. This Wari we're not high. It's true. Yeah. You haven't even taken Sudafed, which you could totally justify how you're feeling having You haven't even taken suicide, which could totally justify behind the scenes. Heying drink and, I don't know, a week and a half. I had nothing. Yeah. I also have not had suicide. Okay. Second sponsor is relief band. Relief band is a product that can help you with nausea. First though, a little about nausea. Under ancient circumstances and some modern ones. Nausea was generally a useful signal that something was nausea was generally a useful signal that something was off. You had eaten something you shouldn't have, for example, itself, a signal or itself, a signal that you should not get near something in had eaten something you shouldn't have, for example, itself a signal or itself signal that you should not get near something. In modernity. We still need to track our body we still need to rack our body sensitivities. We should not always choose to simply erase discomfort like We should not always use to simply erase discomfort like nausea whenever we feel it. That said, some of my turn if he creates nausea that does no good at all. Travel sickness, for instance, can be agonizing and relief would be Travel sickness for instance can be agonizing and relief would be lovely. Travel sickness is basically your mind, register during the jostling of your head as an indication that you may have eaten something poisonous, which you didn't. So it's a useless So it's a useless signal. Enter relief band relief band is an anti-nausea wristband that has been clinically proven to relief, to relieve and prevent nausea associated with motion sickness, anxiety, migraines, chemotherapy, and more release band is a hundred percent drug-free and can be used for as long as you need it developed over 20 years relief band. Relief band is an anti nausea risk band that has been clinically proven to relieve and prevent nausea associated with motion sickness, anxiety, migraines, chemotherapy, and more, relief band is a hundred percent drug free and can be used for as long as you need it. Developed over twenty years ago. It is the only over-the-counter wearable device that has been used in hospitals and oncology clinics to treat nausea and it is the only over the counter wearable device that has been used in hospitals and oncology clinics to treat nausea and vomiting. There are zero side VAERS are zero side effects. Now there's relief band sport, which is waterproof, features interchangeable bands and has extended battery life. We asked a friend to try it We asked a friend to try it out. Here's her Here is her testimonial. I used to have nausea on a nearly daily basis for both anxiety and the need to take regular medication. Relief band relieves my nausea in less than three minutes without the side effects was experiencing from anti nausea medication. It has entirely changed my life for better. If you've got nausea from anxiety or car or sea sickness or something else, you cannot otherwise disable, consider relief ban. Relief band makes a great gift anytime of year. Right now, they've got an exclusive offer just for DarkHorse listeners. Go to relief band dot com and use the promo code dark horse to receive twenty percent off plus free Heying. And no questions asked thirty day money back guarantee. That's relief, band.com, R E L I E F B a N d.com and use the promo code dark horse for 20% off plus free That's relief dam dot com, RELIEFBAND dot com and use the promo code DarkHorse for twenty percent off plus free shipping. Okay. And our final sponsor today is public goods. Public goods was one of our very first goods was one of our very first sponsors eight months ago. Last time we talked about public Last time, we talked about public goods. I had a typo in the script that Brett read and suggested that have been doing ads for a year and seven months at that I had a typo in the script that Brett read and suggested that we've been doing ads for a year and seven months at that point. But now it's only eight months ago and we are as pleased with But no, it's only eight months ago. And we are as pleased with them now as when we first tried their products. Public goods can simplify your life as a one stop shop for every day essential. As their ingredients are carefully sourced, high quality and affordable public goods has coffee and tea, grains and oils like olive and their ingredients are carefully sourced, high quality, and affordable. Public goods has coffee and tea, grains and oils like olive and avocado. They've got Castiel soap and trash bags and essential got cast steel soap and trash bags and essential oils. They have spices and extracts like vanilla and almond vinegars and pastas, dishware, and They have spices and extracts like vanilla and almond, vinegars and pastas dishware glassware. There is so much a public goods to make a meal, including the materials to serve it on public is so much of public goods to make a meal, including the materials to serve it on. Public goods goods. Products of great design to the aesthetic is simple and products are great designed too. The aesthetic is simple and clean and there are no garish colors. Public Goods cares about health and sustainability. Their products are largely free of harmful ingredients and additives and the ingredients are ethically Their products are largely free of harmful ingredients and additives, and the ingredients are ethically sourced. Finally, their subscription service is efficient and simple and easy to use. Public goods members can buy all of their premium essentials so in place. It really is an everything store. For listeners. We have the following offer receive $15 off your first public goods order with no minimum we have the following offer. Receive fifteen dollars off your first public goods order with no minimum purchase. They are so confident that you will absolutely love their products and come back again and again, but they are giving you fifteen dollars spend on your first purchase. Go to public goods.com/dark horse or use code dark horse at checkout that is pub LIC, G O D s.com forward slash dark horse to receive $15 off your first Go to public goods dot com slash dark horse or use code dark horse at checkout. That is PUBLICG00DS dot com forward slash dark horse to receive fifteen dollars off your first order. Your credit. Alright. So did you wanna say you wanna start by talking a little bit about what we were doing last week? Yeah. I think it is. So sorry. It I get one of those Kleenexes. Oh, Well I certainly, why certainly? Well, thank you. It's been very formal around here. I never thought. I never thought I was gonna end up in front of a camera as an adult much less having to, you know, ask for a Kleenex for a drippy nose. But anyway, here we are. It's twenty two. There's a lot you didn't VAERS a lot. There's a lot I didn't expect. So much. So I did not expect. Yeah. So, yes, I got a lot of feedback on last week's episode. And some of it revealed misunderstanding that people seem to have about what we were doing that I thought was important to address because people were had every right to be confused by a message that seemed to be self contradictory. On the one hand, we said that we do not believe in the guidelines about what one should do with respect to COVID, especially in light of Omicron, the advice seems preposterous and it doesn't seem like anybody has considered what our actual well-being would dictate in the circumstances. And so you and I made that very clear. We made that very made that very explicit. On the other hand, you were quarantining in a different room. And people were like, well, what's the deal? Why are you abiding by -- Yeah. Mandates that you don't believe in. And I do not want to fully solve the riddle, but I do want to And I actually I address this also in my subject this last I I addressed this also in my sub stack this last week. Yes. You You did. And it is well worth And it was well worth reading. And and there's lots of other stuff that you can glean from from your last substack about, you know, how you dealt with it and what your experience was, and it's it's well worth Heying, but I did wanna point out without fully solving the riddle. We are stuck in a bind. Right? We have two children in two different schools. Both of those schools have rampant infections as does everywhere else. This is a highly infection variants and it is ripping through these schools. And so far, I don't think there's any indication that anybody in these schools IS DESPERATELY ILL, BUT PEOPLE ARE DEFINITELY, IT'S NOT NOTHING DISEASE PEOPLE ARE SUFFERING FROM IT. And they're required to, to be out after they've when they get sick, their card to be out for some amount of REQUIRED TO BE OUT. After they've lensThis get sick, they're required to be out for some amount of time. Right. And they're required to be out if they've been exposed to someone who who has it and who has not been isolating. Right. And so the point is we were living by dictates that we don't believe in, not because we're too timid to resist but because we're stuck with respect to, you know, our children already pay a very high price for our public profile and the fact that we are not in lockstep with the people who are claiming to be protecting the public health. We believe they are quite wrong. And in any case, it would be nice if we could limit the harm to our children from just the simple fact of all of this nonsense So Heying by Dick to me, you know. I also don't believe that the mask mandates that we abide by while rolling our eyes every time we go into a public building here in Portland where they're required and where people do abide by it. don't believe in that stuff either, but there's a level of towing the line that is about not inflicting costs on others. And frankly, there's also this added aspect of, I don't think the masks work. I've looked at the evidence and I think that cloth masks are essentially a a non entity with respect to functionality and that even things like N95 five mask if you're not pretty well schooled and how to use them are probably a trivial contributor. You know, not that this variant is controllable. Anyway. But So I've I've heard this this before. We have a box of N95 masks -- Yep. -- which I've used on airplanes. Yes. And I've also heard this thing about if you use them correctly. It's a really simple object. What how how would one I mean, we've all seen people wearing mask below their noses when I'm like Yeah. But is what what is complicated about what what does it mean if you use them correctly? Well, in part, it means paying attention to the question of how pressure drives airflow around the mask versus through the mask. And basically, you know, they they come with this little metal strip that goes over your nose. And, you know, if you have a model and it would be even better, if we, you know, gave people, you know, if you're really gonna use this to control something like this, you would want people to stand in front of a thermal camera or something like that. Or, you know, you could do it with a cold day, you know, where you're breathing out hot vapor, and so you can see your breath. And get used to know, figuring out how to get the mask to fit. So the majority of what is happening is going through mask. That's the basic idea. And most of us who use them, and I must say, I have long ago abandoned cloth masks and long ago when I used a mask, I started using M95 masks. It's all I use now. But, you know, you throw them on, you throw them off, and it's not, you know, it is a barrier of some kind. It is much more effective at controlling something like spittle than it is at controlling, you know, aerosolized particles. But nonetheless, it's not I can look at the evidence and I can say, you know what? I don't think the evidence, a, this variant isn't controllable in the first place. Be the people who are dictating this proved they, you know, they probably couldn't peel a carrot, much less control a variant of this virus much less this variant. That's actually a great analogy because not only could they perhaps not peel a carrot, but peeling carrots is unnecessary. Yes. Right? Like, you not only can't you do this thing that everyone should be able to do, but, like, you shouldn't even do that thing. Right. Right. But Like My baby started off and then eat it. Right. Eat it. But the on the one hand, I do think I'm qualified to look at the evidence and say it's not strong enough to be turning the world upside down over mask mandates or anything else here. But I also recognize that, you know, we are all fallible and it isn't my choice to make for other people. Right? We can make it for ourselves, but we can't make it for other people. Yeah. But that is I mean, that that's that's actually a very different set of conversations. Than trying to minimize the already rather profound harms to our children that they are experiencing as a result of extraordinarily bad public policy. Right. Totally agree with this. Right? It is unforgivable that we are masking children against this disease without you know, with the sort of login. You know, Mike loves these you know, rather than thinking about the developmental impacts and all of that. No question. No. No. I'm referring to what we were doing last week. Why we were doing it so that our children did not have to stay home from school for a week because they've been exposed me. Oh yeah. I mean, I just don't think we had a I mean, I I just don't think we had a choice. We we've got we've got regulations and it made sense to abide by them for our children's well-being and you make of that what you will. I guess will say before we move off this topic that it used to be our contacts all the time. And now that my close range vision has has begun to fail rather or later than I was told it was going to, but it certainly has inside Wari wear glasses sometimes because I can I have progressive lenses in these? I get everything about. And when I wear my contacts, I have to put reading glasses on and off and to to see up close that I can't go out into the world wearing glasses. Anymore. I would I would actually be potentially happy to just be out in the world wearing glasses because I really like not having to to navigate multiple pairs of glasses or, you know, pull things high enough and I wanna read something. But as everyone who wears glasses, nose, masks fog glasses. And I've heard that some people have solutions that I heard and they didn't really work for me. But and so this is this is anecdote. But bizarrely, what I find when I actually pinch the pinch the nose thing close when I have forgotten and gone into the grocery store or something where my glasses, like, oh, God. Now I'm gonna have to navigate the grocery store effectively blind because my glass is gonna be fogged the whole time. The the way that I wear my mask that bugs my glass is the least is when it's sitting the loosest on my face. Mhmm. The loosest. Yep. Which means that it's doing even less good to the extent it doesn't need good. And when I've got the nose thing pinched, I feel like it forces it like up around my cheekbones. Something, and then my glasses fog and they stay fogged. So it's not even clear to me that this like how you're supposed to wear the mask Heying. Is even doing the limited sort of good that it is claimed to be doing. Well, and much if if if the body of glasses is a decent proxy for where air is going, which it should be. Yeah. Yeah. Even worse, you know, one of the things that think is so absurd about these mandates. You know, we're having kids wear masks all day at school. I mean, I you know, every time I I bike with Toby to school and I watched the kids going to and from wherever they're coming from wearing their masks like it's Heying. You know, their kids Did you like within the school without wearing masks? Here's mask. No, we're not mast biking to We're not masked Heying to school. And you and you claim to love him? Yes, I do. But but you So you, so you see both at the beginning and the end of school, all these kids coming and going from you so you see both at the beginning and the end of school, all these kids coming and going school. Yeah. And the thing is they've obviously Nice. Because they're kids and they're more adaptable than adults, they've gotten used to it. And it's not abnormal to them. And I did VAERS you know, there was some point at the beginning of the school year. Kids were wearing them religiously. And then there was like a week or two where I started to see a certain amount of rebellion against them. You know, these are kids out of school, Right. Right? In the outside world Wari I don't even think these mandates apply to them. And, you know, were kids like not really wearing them or wearing it around one ear or whatever they were Heying. But then they sort of seemed to go back to it. I don't know if it was one of these waves of fear that was inflicted on them about new variants or what it might be? Well, I've got just the Washington Post article for you. Oh, I was gonna save this for later, but seems I propose, Zach, if you would show my screen here. We've got Washington Post. . I'm gonna try to fix up. I can't treat. not good. I have a lot of things to show on my screen today, Zach. I was just making sure they were connected. Okay. Well, An article that came out yesterday in WAPO in Washington Post is headlined. It's under the Education Section, students seeing lacks Coronavirus protocols walk out and call in sick to protest in person classes. Whoa. Whoa. Right? Most school systems are determined to keep school in person, but some students aren't convinced. And then we have a picture of high school of high school sophomore who helped launch petition and students sick out demanding more coronavirus safety measures or a return to online school in California's Oakland Unified School District. And it goes on and on and on here we have a quote. We were talking about how we can make school more safe. And this this whole article just strikes me as so reminiscent of the Safetyism that we've been seeing since twenty thirteen Massimo Manos and that Greg Luciano and John and I discussed at length in the Continental American mind. And until now, what the kids have been scared of is you know, racism and sexism and hearing things that made them scared, and frankly, their own shadows. And so their own shadows now includes literally a variant of a disease that if they get it now, will perhaps make them immune will certainly make them immune to it in the future, but hopefully to future variants that may be worse again. Like, if there's if there's scared enough of this thing to to organize, to to become activists and petition their school, to take them out of school, to keep them safe. These kids are never gonna leave their bedrooms again. Like, and and this this this was what we were Heying, and this was like a a large part of what a lot of people were objecting to and worried about this generation, about both millennials and z of being scared of their own shadow and being unable to take risks and unwilling and not being able to to see the world as it is and and embrace their antipathy. But this article frankly is a perfect indicator that the that the sort of safety ism and lensThis like preformed activism. I know what to do. I'll be an activist, have just slotted right in to to COVID measures. Yeah, it's It's more than an analogy. Right? It is It's more It's much more than another version. It is a variant of the same mental disorder that underlied the the woke safetyism. Mhmm. And I would also point out there are lots of other parallels too. Right? So it'd be interesting to know what actually the kids are rebelling against. On the one hand, I can, you know, we hear a lot, of course, about the nonsense that our kids face in school. right? The level of it is The level of it is high. Mhmm. And I can imagine that in some sense, not wanting to be exposed to it manifests as, yes, I'm not going back to school. In other words, there may be a kind of allergic reaction to nonsense. On the other hand, it could be a kind of mirror of what's going on in the adult world COVID disrupted every thing. People left their jobs, their employers closed down, whatever. And then they didn't really wanna go back work because they figured out how else to live or whatever -- Yeah. -- and it just didn't look like an appealing deal anymore. And I think the thing is, school is an abomination. Right? It has become one. We have allowed it to become 111. And there's no excuse for this. But nonetheless, it has been one for quite some time long before COVID. Yeah. COVID and Wokism have both made it worse. From the point of view -- Yes. -- of going in and getting your mind upgraded. It's like you're constantly fighting the malware installation that is being infused into every class. Right. And, you know, as I've said elsewhere, I sort of feel that the weird connection between so called learning disabilities -- Oh. -- and intelligence isn't really about the learning disabilities at all. About the fact that they disrupt a normal learning process, which when it's bad, being disrupted is actually positive. That's right. And so, you know, I wouldn't I wouldn't rush to judge a rebellion against going back to school, although the idea of going back to school because COVID is making it unsafe is obviously preposterous. Yeah. Right? I mean, you know, we just have, you know, you can do this in isolation. Well, there's a dangerous disease circulating, don't you know? Well, yes, I do, but there's always a dangerous disease circulating, and this one's less dangerous to kids than others that we constantly expose them to. Yeah. Yeah. I mean, I just How do we hopefully, I hear what you're saying about hoping that the activism against in person school is actually activism against school that's become so toxic that it's It's actually harming and and miseducating and shall we invoke disaggregating? Shall we coin that term, just educating rather than educating. Clearly, from this article, that's not what at least these little activists are doing. This is, you know, this is safety is a RONA addition, and it's it's appalling. And the fact that the fact that we're encouraging it, the fact that, you know, activism itself is seen as an honorable educational goal by And the fact that the fact that we're encouraging it, the fact that activism itself is seen as an honorable educational goal by many. And, you know, we certainly saw this at evergreen. There were, you know, long before evergreen blew up, we saw certain faculty basically encouraging activism as the thing that they were teaching That were, you know, long before evergreen blew up, we saw certain faculty basically encouraging activism as the thing that they were teaching students. In fact, in fact, credit was given for it sometimes. And during the meltdown, there was all sorts of overt talk about how they should be getting credit for turning the college upside down and not be penalized for not doing the work that they were supposed to be doing. Right. And you know, it's it's not it's not a same moment. It's just not a same moment at all. Well, that's where you're at now. You're right. Yeah. Do we wanna do we wanna move into showing that the brief video from You know, it, You know it? So this is set up, I'm not actually positive that I know the So this is set up. I'm not actually positive that I I know the backstory. You you sent this to me and we're gonna have Zach show it in a minute. Hold on just a second, Zach. It's it's Walensky. It's it's Rochelle Walensky, the head of CDC, the Director of the CDC and Tony Fauci, the head of the NIA ID. I don't know if Fauci is at this point. Testifying before Congress, I'm just trying to remember what it was this week, but I don't know exactly what day. And you know, top health officials testify on Omerkorn response. They were called to congress to testify, and here is some of what they said. Simply can. Yeah. DarkHorse it's been reported by some virologists and scientists that this year around a hundred and seventy people have died from taking the regular flu vaccine. The vaccine advisory adverse reporting system reported that the number of people dying after or following the COVID vaccine is actually in the thousands. Now, this is what I'm hearing. I'll give you chance to refute that or confirm it here. You know, is this true? But we haven't that many people die after taking one of these vaccines. Senator Gorville, thank you for that question. The vaccine adverse event reporting system is a mandatory system of any adverse event that happens after being vaccinated. So if you get hit by a car tragically after getting vaccinated, that gets reported in the vaccine adverse affording system, the their system So the vaccines are incredibly safe. They protect us against Omicron. They protect us against They protect us against Delta. They protect us against They protect us against COVID. They don't protect us against every other form of mortality out there. Do we keep numbers of people that died following? Taking COVID test from Heying this vaccine? Do we have any idea I'm just asking. I'm sorry, those who have died after taking the vaccine, vaccine. Is there any number of is there any number count. We keep records on that that died of just from Absolutely. Yes. I I couldn't give you then the absolute number off the top of my head, but our staff could absolutely get back in touch with you. We collect those data. You know, know Fauci? You have any clue on that? How about how many died after? Hundred I don't know the number, but I think it's really important for people You can do Michael Phone. Michael Phone. I'm sorry. I don't have a number, but I think part of the confusion is that when you do a reporting, if you get vaccinated, and you walk out and get hit by a car. That is considered a dead. I mean, that's the thing that gets confusing, that everything that happens after the vaccination Even if you die of something completely, obviously unrelated, it's considered a death. So if I had metastatic cancer, got vaccinated and died two weeks later, that's a death that gets than that. And every one of those is a adjudicated. So, well, Penske, so just a reminder, foolishly, we can't hear that while it's Heying, but we both listen to it. A few times. Walenski says, quote, so if you get hit by a car tragically after getting vaccinated, that gets reported. Okay. Even if that's true, that's true for all of theirs. That's not different for these vaccines. What is being revealed in VAERS at the moment is that after COVID vaccines, adverse event reports a spike. The objection that both Walensky and Vauci make. As if they know they're speaking to completely enumerate and people who cannot possibly follow logic is that because you might get hit by a car after you're vaccinated, of course, you're going to see deaths. That is just as much true after every single vaccine that has ever been given, and that does not explain the spikes. Yes. It's also not true. And and we have to separate these two These these are two different objections to this these claims that are being made. Right. And the fact that both Walensky and Fauci say the same They are knowingly Heying to congress. Yeah. Now presumably they're not under oath. Maybe that would give them pause if they were. Okay. But they are perpetrating a fiction on their interlocutors in congress and the American public hereby saying something that they both know is exactly wrong. That the VAERS system is actually very hard to report into and not meant story. And what happens is that a small fraction of actual events get in and it isn't things like car accidents Wari people know very well. There would be no point in reporting it to that system because it doesn't carry any information. Incidentally And also same week that she acknowledges isn't also same week that she acknowledges, isn't it that a lot, like, a majority, I believe, and I don't have these numbers, but I'm about to ding her for not having numbers, but I don't have the numbers at the top of my head. I believe this is the same way that Malinski said, well, yeah, actually, a whole bunch of the COVID hospitalizations, they're actually hospitalizations for something else, and then we then they were tested, and then it turns out they also had COVID. Right. So just so that people can track this. The CDC does make this error in the other direction lensThis are trying to convince us that mandates are necessary to control COVID. There are all kinds of shenanigans including involving counting people who are hospitalized with after something like a car accident, if they happen to test positive for COVID, whether or not they have any symptoms. So that's a game that we have seen played over at least a year. Right? In order to amp up the COVID numbers, they do count all kinds of nonsense that obviously doesn't belong there. Then they're taking that thing, which they must know that they themselves are using to make COVID look more dangerous than it is. And they pretend that that is accidentally making the vaccines look more dangerous than they are, which they know it isn't. They know that the VAERS system you know, there is not agreement on how much of an under report. I've seen estimates, careful scientific estimates of how much of an under report it is range from something like a ninety nine percent underestimate. That is to say ninety nine percent of actual events are never reported to a ninety percent. Right? Mhmm. And so they are just simply pretending. And the fact is for most people, they will hear something vague about the fact that sometimes things are counted as the result of something that are actually car accidents that have nothing to do with COVID or Abaxis. They're not gonna track which place the accounting error goes in one direction and which place it goes in the exact opposite direction. Yeah. And then the questioner here who I forgot to figure out who exactly it is, is asked, okay. So you say you can't trust VAERS. Do you have the numbers then? And she says so he asked, is there any number count? Do we keep records on And she says, absolutely. Yes. I couldn't give you the absolute number off the top of my head, but our staff could absolutely get back in touch with you. Bullfucking shit. Yeah. Lives. What are they talking about? What you were called before the senate to talk about what is going on with Omar Khan and you have the numbers and that's the one number that you didn't bring? Well, it's it's it's not like we haven't been asking for that number because of course we want those numbers. And they either don't have them or they have them and they're keeping them from us and we probably will never know the distinction, but it's one of those two things. Well, it's it's one of them. I don't think I don't think it can be that they have the number because where does it come from? The point is you have a system. It's called VAERS. We can argue about whether it's a good system or a bad system. There is no other point. That's the system. And what they tell us is, oh, that huge number of adverse events that you see in Verus doesn't mean anything because and then they have a lot of excuses like anybody can report anything. Yeah. Okay? What that means is that at worst, the VAERS system contains no information. Yeah. That's not the same thing as having information that's Heying, adverse events are rare. It's like Heying, we don't have any information. And therefore, we're going to assume they're safe even though we've got no system. We haven't done looking. We haven't asked. Yeah. Yeah. So it's know, I guess the thing is it is stunning how much theater there is. In this kind of testimony. I I was actually, actually yeah. What I was thinking was that Fauci was he's cosplaying the hero again. It's like fake it till you make it, man. And, you know, we we all the whole country was told that he was our hero back in I don't know, April of twenty twenty, I guess. And it's amazing how many people not only bought it then, but still are buying it. Well, he is very charming. Excuse me. I don't really snort it into the I snorted into the microphone. That That snort was non editorial snort was non editorial, though. I think you would be entitled to to, you know, snort editorial if you felt like it. But, you know, I think the problem is he is so incredibly charming Heying that people just have a hard time imagining that he could be doing anything other than his best he does a very good impression of a person who is being flustered under unfair questioning. And it's it's preposterous. And the the problem is, oh, did I forget turn on my mic? Oh, when simultaneously rip off my mask? Yeah. No. I I must say even that thing, you can't you can't establish anything, but there is something weird about the fact that he was talking into a mic that was off while leaving his mask on when his policy is clearly to take the mask off when he wants to be heard. VAERS no way for us to know what it was he was saying. Can't lip rape. In any case, he's lensThis put it this way. The human part of me sees him and does feel like he seems like a nice slightly dewy scientist under rotten conditions. There's some part of me that can't help but feel sympathy. And then I hear what he says, and I know that he has to know that what he's saying is false, that it can't be a noble lie because of what it results in the kind of arm, and it's breathtaking. Yeah. Well, I don't That's interesting. I think that may that may reveal that you're better person than I am. But I I cannot you know, when you say things about him like Heying and handsome, I Heying, what are you talking about? Like, I can't I can't see any that him. Well, I think it's Do you think it's just objectively true? No. I mean, III I think it it it speaks to a different kind of accounting. I I also basically believe that attractiveness in people is a kind of what is it? It is a summing kind of value. In other words Yeah. -- there is a purely physical attractiveness Heying, but the point is we all know people who aren't conventionally attractive who we find. Totally compelling. Right. We just right. We want to spend time. We are literally in some sense attracted to them. Yeah. Right? And the point is, well, what is that? And it has to do with depth of character, it has to do with integrity, it has to do with lots of things, which unfortunately if you don't have a lot of experience with somebody are partially fakable. And I think that's what I'm getting from Fauci is that I think he's actually very good at it. Well, yeah. I mean, we said this last week. Right? We actually think he's really good at his job. Yeah. I I think really good at his job, and we just don't know what is. it is. Right. Yeah. The Oregon Health Authority, this week or last week recently. Zach, can you show me screen? I can. You can. Hey, Luca. The Oregon Health Authority Is pleased to announce new guidelines, Moe, is pleased to announce that the CDC has approved new guidelines for the Moderna or are you ready? Mhmm. It just makes a lot bigger. Effective immediately, adults who received the Moderna vaccine as part of their primary series only have to wait five months before getting a booster. Only have to wait. Only have to wait. That's right. Yay. That is the update that I was looking for it because I was just chomping at the bed, waiting for the Heying, waiting to be able to rush out because that is definitely what everyone wants when they get a vaccine. How soon can I get my next installment? Well, so if we were, you know, as long as we're just idly wishing for wonderful things, then wouldn't it be great if we had vaccine that you only had to wait a week till your next booster? I think so. I don't wanna have to wait five months. It seems like a long time ago. Waiting is not fun. I don't know that. Meeting is hard. Yes. Yeah. No. It's an it's an amazing construction. And you can imagine that whoever came up with that you know, they really they earned six months worth of pay for that inversion of reality that they have now perpetrated On the on the public. In which time, they'll have to get two booster if they're even getting blisters. I mean, I hate to be cynical. But At the Oregon Health Authority, I suspect VAERS. yeah. The Oregon health and you know, we're remote enough from the centers of power that they probably aren't Oregon Health there. Yeah. We're -- Yeah. -- remote enough from the lensThis of power that they probably own. Yeah. This is a this is a low financial and send about post out here? Yes. Okay. lensThis Oh, I forgot when we were talking about That incredible testimony from Walenski and Fauci, I wanted to point out this piece written by friend of ours, Julie Kim, in her substock, let's be clear, which is called. I was deceived about COVID vaccine I was deceived about COVID vaccine safety. She starts by talking about having been vaccinated with the Moderna vaccine in May of twenty twenty one. And lensThis is an incredibly long article and is incredibly thorough. And first, she defines conciliance She basically goes after the She doesn't do this explicitly. I think I did read the whole article this morning, but it's very, very I think. I did read whole article this morning, but it's very, very long. I don't think she goes after directly the argument that that try credit credit trials randomized controlled trials. Randomized controlled trials. I was thinking critical theory. How could you have forgotten randomized control? They are the gold standard of action. Well, critical theory is also the gold critical theory is also the gold as it is? Yes, it is. Yes. So randomized controlled trials Heying basically the standard of evidence is absurd. And really what you're hoping for is a lot of different kinds of evidence pointing to the same And, you know, RCT has been done well. Do, of course, provide an overwhelming amount of evidence, but it's still one fun signal. When designed well, and executed what -- Right. -- and what he had Done, there's a lot hiding and done VAERS a lot hiding and done VAERS. Right. But what they do, what randomized controlled trials do, the reason that there is even basis for a claim that they are the gold standard is that they are very good at isolating weak effects and making them visible. Right? By controlling for all the other things that might lead you that miss might mislead you in this direction. Yeah. Right? But I would also point out that this is a classic variant on the idea that science is the strongest method we have for figuring out what is true, but it is also a fragile method. It is vulnerable to things like market forces. It is not robust to them. And so randomized controlled trials are very good at finding a weak effect and making it visible. But they are also fantastically amable. Yes. That is to say you can design trials to succeed and you can design them to fail iris perspective of the thing that is being tested. And I know it's going to sound like I'm becoming cynical, but the more one digs and the more one under stands about the way the pharma game is played, the more you realize that this idea that we all carry that this is the gold standard may indeed be about the fact that they are game And therefore, if you're a company that wishes to sell compounds and get them inflicted on patients, then a game able mechanism. A game able metric is exactly what you're looking for. Right. Especially if you're allowed to stop them short. Well, right. The the point is, look, we don't like it this way. We think that medicine is science and medicine should be scientific, but the point is the idea that this compound is effective at limiting the harm of this disease. That is a narrative. And the point is that narrative is founded on what we think of as evidence. But if you have a gameable kind of evidence, then the point is, oh, I can link this compound, which I guess so happened to have, you know, intellectual property rights to, to this disease, which I might broaden the definition of, so that more people appear to have it. And then, wow, boy, a lot of this substance is gonna end up in a lot of those people, and a lot of cash is gonna flow in this other direction. And the point is, well, who amongst us really doesn't think that those kinds of incentives and opportunities are on the mind of these corporations who do this. Yeah. We are all, we are all privy to falling prey, to incentives all of are all we are all privy to falling prey to incentives, all of us, and we all do fall prey to incentives. And pointing out incentives is not the same thing as pointing out possibility of conspiracy and also those who point out incentives aren't thus not inherently engaging in conspiracy theory. So Jimmy lays out her case, again, a very long case, and one which I think is eminently shareable with those who are skeptical of the position. That the vaccines may not be all that they're cracked up to be. If you could show my screen here, Zach, by saying, recently the consilience that that looking at multiple kinds of data and at the point that they align, concluding something from them aligning is a rather excellent way of assessing vaccine safety here. And she says I compiled multiple pieces evidence to argue that injuries from the COVID vaccines are grossly underreported. These include one, testimonies from doctors and nurses, two, testimonies from the vaccine injured, Three, evidence from medical records or official databases of adverse events. Four, evidence from the vaccine trials themselves. Five, plausible mechanisms of action six, evidence from animal studies seven, evidence of past wrongdoing by pharma eight, evidence of corruption or undue influence in our health institutions and bonus explanations for why we're not hearing about this in the media. Each section she continues in this article could be its own book and indeed. She's got a ton of lace in here, but but it's not it's not even complete as as will always be the case. So I highly recommended this as as a a clearinghouse of arguments and evidence and encourage you to to share it with people who say, what are you talking about? Of course, they're safe. So I would just add to would just add to this. We are all built to be logical. Not to a fault. Right? There are places where logic will mislead you because you don't have enough information so the logical conclusion your reach is actually less good than your intuitive conclusion. Mhmm. But we are all built to do logic because it served our ancestors to deploy that tool frequently, especially when there's something complex and difficult to navigate arrived because then you could you could at least try to parse out what was taking place. But this gives you lots of kinds of checks that you can do on whether something makes sense. Right? So one check I often do is what would have to be true for this thing that I think is true to actually not be. Alright. Mhmm. How light how robust is this piece of information? Yeah. It's like the mirror image of a prediction, the mere image of a prediction. Right. It it's a It is a prediction, but it's not it's like a negative prediction. I think the the the right the right analogy is it's checksum. Right? You know, I check some of this. If you've got a program let's say you've got a security minded program, you've downloaded it from the Internet. Well, how do you know that somebody didn't give you a version of the program in which they've got a backdoor installed and they just made the website look like the real web side and you downloaded a program that isn't what you think it is. Right? Yeah. Well, you can do a checksum. Right? Which takes some set of things from within the program that the originator of the program built that if anybody modified it wouldn't add to the same number. Right? And so the point is you can say, well, don't know why the thing I downloaded doesn't match the thing that the manufacturer is distributing, but I know I don't wanna use it because a checksum didn't match. Mhmm. So anyway, there are lots of things you can check that way. And this is just kind of a check sum on And this is just kind of a checksum on Is that little bit of a modern day chivalrous? It's like a technical, like a technical. Yeah. It's a it's a numerator numerological, which is wrong, because numerology is a weird one. Something It's like a new Merrick. It's a new Merrick chivalrous. Yeah. And actually This is this is no. I think this is really good because actually what it is is you know, so for those of you don't know, Shabelith is a biblical term, and Shabelith is a Shabelith. Shabelith is a term that you could pronounce various different ways, but you could recognize people who really were part of your group because they would pronounce it the same way. And if they pronounce it Shabbalith or whatever the alternatives would be, you'd know something with that. Yep. You're not you're not All of us, you're not with us. You're not with us. But the thing about a checksum or and I assume there are other mechanisms that work like this. The thing about it is there are an indefinitely number of waves to be wrong and only one to be right. So it's like a turbocharged kind of shhibli. Right? Yeah. I I mean, I think that's true for Shailesh too. Shailesh, Shailesh, you know, there's an indefinite number of ways to to say it wrong. Maybe it's not indefinite. It's not indefinite. Oh, I see. I see. It it yeah. It's more than one. I see. VAERS a plurality, but it's not indefinite. Yeah. I see the distinction. Yeah. Exactly. You were going somewhere? I'm already here. I've been here since the beginning of the podcast. Wari you going somewhere? Oh, what am I going somewhere? Well, I guess what was gonna say is there are lots of ways that you can kind of look at a body of evidence and say does this look like something somebody might have obstructed from my benefit, so I've reached wrong consilience, or does this look like the way evidence actually works in the world Wari if I come at it different ways, I come to the same place because it's actually true. Yeah. Right? Yeah. And that's so powerful. Right? Mhmm. If I think I know something And then I'm working on some other problem, and it leads me right back to the same -- Yeah. -- deep truth. It's like, oh, well now I have two reasons to believe It's like, oh, well, now I have two reasons to believe it not one. Yeah. Something's just canceled. Yeah. Right. Exactly. So it's just a kind of it's a kind of Oh, it isn't that that's just so isn't that that's just so rewarding. It's just like, that's, that's, that's one of the, that's one of the reasons to do it just like that's that's that's one of the that's one of the reasons to do it. Right? To do this kind of work is to end up with things consilience to be returned back and go, Okay. This does fit. Absolutely. That girl. Absolutely. And And it's a different kind of reward. Be like, it doesn't fit. These are different things. There's an error somewhere. I don't know where it is yet, but you know, both of those have reward, but I don't know where it is yet. But, you know, both of those have reward. Howard Bauchner: So we were headed to the Heredicom Consilience in Miami. We we didn't get to go because of because of our encounter with COVID. But nonetheless, one of the things I wanted to do at Heredicom, which is gonna was gonna involve a whole audience full of very smart people, most of whom would not have been deeply steeped in how to think about COVID. Or vaccine safety or -- Yeah. -- early treatment or anything. The thing I was going to say to them, which should probably write up or something, was you in the public, I believe, are subject to an anamorphic illusion. Mhmm. Anamorphic illusion. Are you've all seen them. them. You just don't know the just don't know the word probably. Like those chalk drawings on sidewalks that look like a giant chasm has opened up in the sidewalk. It's extremely compelling. It's very hard to convince your mind you're not looking into a giant chasm. But what you may or may not realize is that it looks like that from exactly one location. Right? And so the exchange that the artist has made is that from this vantage point, I can make very compelling rendering of something with a lot of three d content. You can look at it from any other direction and then you get some weirdly distorted thing that doesn't make doesn't add up. Right. It's in copay and it's at least stretched and it doesn't look like A3D thing. It looks like a crazy It looks like a crazy thing. Yeah. And my point to the audience was gonna be you are the subject of an anamorphic dilution surrounding public health. And the only reason -- Mhmm. -- that that's working is because you're standing where they expect you. Yeah. And the point is your vantage point for just a little. Right. If you step three feet to your right, three feet to your left, you'll begin to see what we're talking about. If you continue to stand there, we're gonna sound crazy. Right? Right? So in any case, I think what Jimmy is up to here is a very good indication look, I believe something that, yes, you will be told the public health officials have ruled out long ago. Right. But doesn't it look like a real object -- Mhmm. -- because it doesn't, you know, look at all these kinds of evidence. Right. I might be able to show you something, a picture of a rock, and tell you all about it. Yeah. And somebody might challenge that it's not what I say it is, but it's different than being able to hand you a rock, and you could look at it from any angle you like. And But my you know, but my doctor said that he saw, yeah, it's one doctor. Okay. But ten doctors said that they saw, yeah, but it's just doctors. Okay. But these people said that they were injured. Okay, but it's still just people talking. Oh, well, we got medical records and and Verus, oh, well, but Verus is flawed. We got the vaccine trials themselves. Oh, what? No. No. No. What I say about that? We got plausible mechanism of action, animal studies, past drug doing my pharma evidence of corruption. She's got so manage. She's just laid it out so cleanly all the different kinds of evidence that we've got. And and it's and it's still not complete. Right. And so the point is, what would have to be true for the analysis that she presents to just simply be backwards. Right? Right. All of these things would need a special explanation for what had gone wrong, and the point is you can look at it what she says, and you can say, look, I don't have any ability to evaluate this kind of evidence. I know nothing about it. Yeah. But then this other kind of evidence I can evaluate. Right. So maybe the one that I can't evaluate, she's wrong, but if she's not wrong about the one I can't evaluate, why do they point in the same direction? Right? Right. So it's it's that style of how do you how do you exactly how do you think in a messy environment? This is kind of the which is why you and I always say, welcome to complex systems. Right? Yep. It requires a different style of, it requires a different style of thought. And, you know, no surprise. She's I actually don't know exactly her background, but she's trained as a biologist. Yep. Yeah. So actually, maybe this is a good moment. To take a brief detour over to Peruvian sub fossil skulls. Okay. I mean, right? I don't know anything. I know you were thinking that. I was not. You were not. Okay. I don't I don't have any idea what's coming. Alright. Forgive me if I'm just wrapping of No. We're good. Okay. Hey, Zach, do you wanna put up that Actually, I wanted to show some street art in DC, which is sort of nice segue on from Anamorphic art. Although the street art is definitely not anamorphic, although the street art definitely not anamorphic. Not anamorphic. Actually, it's metaphorically anamorphic. We'll return that. Mhmm. Alright. Okay. We're gonna return to because I got some more stuff to say about anamorphic part too. Is that can you put up the the tweet with the Peruvian I did send you a tweet. Oh, it just came through. It just came through. Alright. We've got it. It's happening. At the moment, you while we're waiting, you can look at Fairfax who is considering some skull duggery that he might Alright. So what we have here, our audience may want to know that there is a marvelous distinction between fossil and sub fossil, where sub fossil is the actual bones that have not been remade molecularly by geological processes its actual bone, whereas a fossil from lensThis say a tyrannosaurus will be an actual fossil where what was once a bone will now be rocked in the shape of the bone. None of the original bone remains. Right. So what we have here Right? Yeah. None. Right. It's Right. It's yeah. It's molecularly distinct from the surrounding rock, but, but not It's molecularly distinct from the surrounding rock, but but not font. Okay. What we have here is a sub fossil prehistorical And the distinction between history and prehistory history is anything that exists after writing so that there could be a first time There's And a a culture. So you actually have, you know, prehistory in North America through, you know, up into up into the second millennium. By by this very strange. Actually, I don't I don't love this. Oh, it definitely doesn't really like this definition. But even in North America, right, with the Maya, you're in different standard. I was separating North America from meso America, but, yeah, So you get you've got you've got one new world people who are using writing in in meso America. The Maya, but no one else as far as we know was using writing. And so, you know, they they live rich, diverse, amazing lives and had zero and astronomy and agriculture and all of these But without writing, they didn't record for later generations and later peoples to see it what it was they were Heying. And so we refer to what they were doing as pre pre history. And I should point out, in the case of the Maya, we have precious little of what they actually did write because the Spaniards destroyed it. With the exception of, I think, a single manuscript and whatever was written on temples and things like this. Yeah. So, effectively, we've we've been bumped back to a level of evidence that we have with prehistory even with the Maya for the most part. Right. But in any case, so here you have a sub fossil skull from prehistory Peru. And the fascinating thing here is that the skull has had a surgical implant of a metal plate that has been put in apparently to deal with a fracture. This person has received a serious injury, but here's the really amazing part. The injury healed. Right? The plate got healed into place. And so what we can infer from that incredible. Is that not first of all, it's incredible. Two thousand years ago, we had Peruvian surgeons doing surgery on a fractured cell. With a certain cell cell. Not kilometer. Right. But nonetheless Or it was exactly is either wildly experimental. Okay. This guy's gonna dial, let's see what we can do. Or someone who was very important and they're like, do everything you possibly can. Right. I mean, I just I'm just guessing that this was not common practice. Yeah. I don't think it was. But here's the thing. Somebody knew enough to be able to do Somebody knew enough to be able to it. They use metal to make a plate to fit the do it. They used metal to make a plate to fit the location and we know that it healed -- Yeah. -- which means the person survived it. Right? So in any case, the reason I raise it. Yeah. Why do you raise it? Is it as a marvelous example? You know, when I hear that randomized controlled trials are the gold standard of evidence -- Mhmm. -- and I think, well, that's all well and good for you who can have them in some sense. But Right. Sorry. They're fantastically expensive. Well, fantastically expensive. And as evolutionists we don't have the luxury of this. Right? The fact is there's a whole world of evidence outside of randomized controlled trials that we actually use and have made tremendous progress on very difficult puzzles because even if it were the gold standard, the absence of it does not render you helpless. Well, but I mean, that's also sorry. And I interrupted you by by raising this at all, but you know, evolutionary biology is an historical science. Yep. And historical science inherently plays by different rules just like history, the actual study of history, plays by different rules than other things like humanity is because history happens once. And, you know, there there are not iterations You do not have, you know, your sample size is always one. Right. And so, you know, you find you find convergence in which Heying evolved once in insects and once in birds and once in bats. And the wingedness of all of these things is interesting and you can make you can you can make adaptive arguments on the basis of those things having evolved multiple times. But they're not the same. Right. Like, flight of all multiple times, but the way that it evolved, the particular instantiations are different. Absolutely. But this let's put it this way. People have all Well, can't do RCTs. Right. It's not an option. That's my point. Yeah. You can't do them, and you're not you know? there are things you can't do well without them, very weak effects that are historical may be lost to history. And you can't, you can't find evidence of them, but we can do a tremendous amount with evidence outside of randomized controlled trials, for example, you know, well, that's just an and you can't find evidence of them. But we can do a tremendous amount with evidence outside of randomized controlled trials. For example, you know, well, that's just an anecdote. Yeah, that's a two thousand year old goal with a metal plate in it and evidence that it healed after the plate was installed. Let's take that argument back just one one step. You know, I know that two thousand years ago, some people in Peru used metallurgy in surgery. No, you don't. How do you know that? I've seen nothing to that effect. Here's here's this. That's just an anecdote. And and then and then this plays forward. Right. But so the the argument In this case, that comprises evidence that is not negotiable. Well, It may or may not, but this is a great test case for what would have to be in error in order for this to be an incorrect may or may not, but this is a great test case for what would have to be an error in order for this to be an incorrect consilience. What would have to be an error? So So I haven't inspected the I haven't inspected the skull. I don't know anything about the people who wrote this paper. The skull could be a fraud. Right? If the skull is what it appears the skull is what it appears to be. If the skull was found in the way that it that it is purporting to have been found, If it is true that people who can tell the difference between a healed skull and a non healed skull have looked at it and said, yes, this skull healed in the aftermath of whatever this plate the installation of this plate was. Yes. Yes. Yes. If all of those things are true, then this single anecdotal skull answers the question, was there surgery being done in the New World prior to contact with your APMs -- Yes. -- was VAERS you're ad alerting. Right? So the point is -- Yep. -- you can do a lot without evidence. Is it in Is it incontrovertible? No. No. There are fraudulent skulls in the history of science. Right? A lot of them. People have different And and people have incentives to make fraudulent skulls. Right. Right. So I'm not telling you that that thing happened, but what I'm telling you is that you could rule out the things that actually make this in any way question. I have a feeling that anybody who did would find that this is a perfectly genuine skull that says exactly what it appears to say and that knowing that a plate was installed and healing occurred after is sufficient to tell you, yeah, They did surgery. Right? They did surgery on skulls, and people survived it. This was not done on cadavers before mom vacation or something like this. This is actual surgery. So anyway, the point is, look, don't buy this garbage about the gold standard of evidence. Which then, by the way, does not imply the next thing they want you to believe, which is that no other evidence is any good. Even if it was the gold standard, even if randomized control trials were the gold standard, it hardly means that the silver standard and the bronze standard are insufficient to do scientific work because they're not. Right. And then remind yourself, Are they telling you that it's the gold standard because they're really obsessed with preIncan? Which is what they get out of those studies? Or are they telling you it's the gold standard because it's standard vacant game and you won't be able to detect it? Yes. So here we have some Hopefully, this will come up. That's not looking good. Oh, no. Relative. So this is some street art that someone took pictures of, and there we go. In DC today. And then I saw it on Twitter and within an hour or two. I don't remember what. Reported that he saw some woman tearing them down, which is, you know, really unfortunate. But here we go, we got four pieces of of Street art that showed up in DC. For those listening and not watching, we've got Biden holding and a a mallet and these are all sort of Soviet style. Very Soviet style. Soviet art style a mallet that says osha on it, comply, and he's Heying. Compli. We have Biden. Biden. Yeah. Kinda just Biden. Isn't it? With needles coming out of his head and red masked kids, Heying up at the sky, and it says good kids are compliant kids. Again, all of these folder up posters are Soviet art style. Biden sitting in a chair, Heying, what? Is that an arctic joke? Is that a coronavirus? Don't know what that is. No. I think it must be. I can't see it from here very well. Yeah. It's coronavirus. It's red, and its glasses are red, and there's mass people behind him and it says mandate, segregate, subjugate. And then finally, this is maybe my favorite. We have father Fauci. With a halo of an atomic symbol holding a very large needle, and it says, trust the scientists. So those are fabulous. That is what art is supposed to do. That is not the only thing art is supposed do, but that is one of the things that art is supposed to be able to do. And we have a whole lot I mean, this and and it's, you know, it's it's super meta, of course, because it's playing on actual propaganda and revealing how propaganda is so much of our modern messaging is. But, you know, the fact that within hours, there was someone tearing it down reveals that this is kind of metaphorically anamorphic, that you can't see this as metopropagand as commenting on the propaganda that we are living through right unless you're standing in a particular place. Mhmm. You can't see it as Heying, but and I'm I'm not gonna play the video that he took of of his conversation her about why she was tearing them down. But she says it's Heying for public health and, you know, this is misinformation 111th, you know, all the usual stuff that if you've got you know, if you've got if you've got father Fauci in your head and you really think that that's who he is and he deserves the atomic halo. Then then this is offensive to you and it feels dangerous. And if you move really not that far, just like not that far, to the left, to the right, to the front of the back, or you like to levitate something, just like move a little bit. And you will see something very very different. Yeah. I must say I'm disturbed by how little art is being used, you know, as we are fissioning into multiple non overlapping societies. The absence of art at that interface is very disturbing. Now I have a little confession, which is that I am very much in favor of this mode from the other side as well. Mhmm. And I remember as a much younger person back when evangelism was battling DarkHorse. Mhmm. I remember admiring a kind of both sides of an arms race. Right? So you had the Jesus Fish which had nothing to do with Darwin particularly, but it was a proudly displayed symbol. Yep. And then the Darwinists put out a Jesus Fish that said instead of saying Well, it was Instead of saying Jesus in in Greek, it said Darwin and the fish had legs. Right? Yep. You know, poking fun at the creation as And then the creationists came back with a symbol where it was the Jesus fish eating the Darwin fish. And I thought, you know, I I like both sides of this. I understand we're having an argument. I definitely, you know, the fish with the legs and mean, you know, this is actually even four. We were at Michigan when Phil Gingrich, the paleontologist, came back with his early spectacular finds of whales with legs -- Yeah. Right. -- from Pakistan, I think. Yeah. He he was there. He was at UMC as we were. Yeah. He was. So it was, you know, he came back and it was spectacular news. So anyway, you know, the idea of fish with legs or whatever. Yeah. That's surprisingly on target. Right? It's not it's not just Glib. It's actually sometimes how this works. And But anyway, I'd like the idea of people who can be good in nature about their differences. And they, you know, I sort of believe that in the end, the better art will win. Right? You know, I don't believe that for any deep reason, but I think the point is one side is more vulnerable because its explanation is worse. And so Well, this reminds me of something that you've pointed out often, which is maybe you're not the first to point it out. I've also heard it in other corners, but you know, a movement that doesn't tolerate laughter or a movement in which there is no laughter is not what it I've also heard it in other corners, but, you know, movement that doesn't tolerate laughter or movement in which there is no laughter is not what it seems and it probably can't last. Also terrorized. Although the the the vokery, the safetyism and the vokery seemed to be a mostly laughter free movement, and they they pretty damn persistent. Yeah, laughter free and surprisingly toned death. Including the medically woke, very, you know, very much more about fear laughed. You know, laughter is probably dangerous because it spews droplets or something. Yeah. Yeah. No. And, you know, the no kidding that they wanna shut down comedians. Right. Right? Because the point is they just don't have they don't have an argument that can go up against being rightly mocked. Mhmm. You know? I mean, that's the thing, that's what it's I mean, that that's the thing. That's what it's four. That's what mockery is. Yeah. And that's what those posters are. Yeah. Yeah. And, you know, at the same time, I I did not before before our stream have time to put together list of these things where there's a bunch of just jaw dropping authoritarian moves being made in think in Germany, I saw that telegram is they're contemplating banning telegram because people who are skeptical of vaccines are using it to talk to each other. Right? Now, I am older. Should they get tired? In Germany -- Mhmm. -- of being the example of, you know, how could it be them given what they just what they -- Right. -- they went through the two generations ago. But seriously dirty. Like, how could it be you? Right. I will say I am old enough to remember when a move like that could never have happened in the west two years ago. Yeah. Yeah. I mean, it just it's insane. Alright. Okay. I wanted to say couple about about things that have nothing to do with COVID. Mhmm. You ready to move on? Or did you wanna, you know, wanna introduce anything else? Well, I I did have one thing that doesn't fit with anything else did have one thing that doesn't fit with anything else. You wanna save up for the end? Sure. Okay. Okay. I don't know what it is. No, you don't. Okay. By design. Okay. Oh, actually, there's one other thing. I don't I don't know if it Zach tells me I'm overreacting this. So before we talk about the science, this does piss me off Zach assures of to So before we talk about the the science, this this pissed me out, Zach, assures me what we're reacting. This is in the New York Times, which, yes, yes, right now, know. We still get the hard copy on still get the hard be on Sundays. Chicken is broken. This was actually covering the airtime. So this is a four full page ad that was actually covered wrapping the New York Times. Yeah. It times. Yeah. It doesn't have a date on a date on it. Last week, chicken is broken. It says, daring. It goes on Heying. However, There's no chicken in this chicken. They actually say a chicken that's made entirely out of plants. Now, I actually have no problem with this company. I don't even know who it is. I'd like to say it. If I figure it out. Like, they're trying to make plant based protein that tastes good even to people who like meat cool. That's fine. That's fine. But chicken is entirely out of plants. No. Just just know. And frankly, it feels to me lensThis is what postmodernism has dropped. And it is the ability for advertising consilience and for, frankly, terminally degrade humanity's professors and others to make claims in which you say a is only and shall ever be a, except when it's b. And they just sort of stand back and watch the world in golf itself in flames. It is part of why we're in this mess that we're in. It's part of how Blanco and Fauci can get away with the shit that they get away with. Well, you know, if you get hit by a car after you get vaccinated against COVID, that counts as a VAERS, COVID death or vaccine deaths, like But what about if you get hit by a coronary and vaccinated against measles? Right. Heying. Nothing. Yeah. So so sorry. That may seem totally unrelated, but chicken is broken. Okay, maybe. A chicken that's been entirely out of plants. No. No. It's not. Well, this is awkward. Something that tastes like chicken. Maybe. I don't know. I haven't tasted it. Entirely made of plants. Okay. Cool. But Stop it. But the pretending that reality a is actually the pretending that reality a is actually reality b. No. History, as we just talked about, is is one off, and chickens and plants aren't the same thing. I I hate to correct you in all the fact that you've been suffering a dangerous synthetic illness, which has probably robbed you of at least energy. Mhmm. But then to capacity, surely. I think it's just distracting you, but, I mean, all chickens are made out of plants. Mhmm. How And we're all, all energy is solar where all all energy is solar energy? Yes. Yes. Fine. We're in. We're all yes. No. No. I was going to introduce our, our R they were gonna, we were going to cut the Gordian knot and we were going to introduce our audience to the glory of second order I was gonna introduce our our they were gonna we were gonna cut a Gordian knot and we were gonna introduce our audience to the glory of second order vegetarianism. Do it then. Okay. Well, I mean, this is it. You just eat, you eat animals that eat plants and done, You just eat you eat animals that eat plants and done. Right? You don't need this company for that. No. No. I don't trust that company any farther than I could draw them. But But, I mean, chickens are made they aren't even made entirely out of plants because first off they made a mother chicken from the embryo, and then they're also eating insects. Right. Who ate plants? I mean, that's the thing. Passwheat fungus. Fungus, which ate plants. That's the thing. It's glorious. With microbes. They they're it all looks What about the autotrophs? You need yes. Other autotrophs beyond plants. Well, alright. That is a minor technicality at this. Save the the the two kingdoms of there are two kingdoms that I think would argue with you. That Th this is an exception, like, you know, that's not meat cause it's got salt on is an exception like, you know, that's not meat because it's got salt on it. Right? The you've got the autotrophs. You've got the autotrophs actually doing the hard work and everybody else's stealing it. And so ultimately, it all does come from It's late to the game as Autotros man. Yeah. But it's what I'm sure it's most of chicken feed, which I have not tried, but It's what we I'm sure it's most of chicken feed, which I have not tried. But so we're now looking for a new sponsor. Right. If I promise, if someone comes to us with a chicken fee that they claim is human grade, I will buy us a chicken so that we can have an excuse to have it around and see if this guy will taste. And you know that I will. As long as it's you went great? Yes. Okay. Okay. I'll stop talking much. A chicken now. Let's see. Oh, here we go. I I need the link to work. Okay. And have you just briefly show my screen here for a moment, and then, Zach, I'm gonna need it back. This isn't is not published in science, but this is like their science news thing. The original article I will show you shortly, drug laced beer may have forged ancient proved an empire. Andian rulers may have fostered allegiance one feast at a time. The first paragraph Heying, and then, again, this is the science. This is the report on the science, in the Journal of Science. Between five hundred and eleven hundred CE the Highlands of Korea were home to a far reaching empire known as the Wari. Like the Inca after them, the Wari managed to spread their culture over the vast distances and rugged terrain of the Andes mountains. Now, new fines from small site in Peru suggest that the Wari may have forged political alliances by serving drug laced beer to local elites at periodic parties. Extending their empire one creepy feast at a time. If I may have my screen back for a moment, Zach. That was enticing enough that I went and read the actual article. those. This was based on, hold This was based on hold on. I don't have it up yet. It's different. Is it? Yeah. Here it is. Published in antiquity. This month, The journal antiquity, it's called hallucinogens, alcohol, and shifting leadership strategies in ancient Peruvian Andes. Some of who knew. Yeah. Like, I I didn't know that this was a realm of research, and I find it fascinating. See, there's one thing at the variant that I wanna share, but let me just share the this is sort of the summary. I don't it's not the abstract exactly, but or maybe it is. In the pre Columbian Andes, the use of hallucinogens during the formative period, nine hundred to three hundred BC. Often supported exclusionary political strategies. And they later go on to explain that basically hallucinations tend to be individual small group, if any group at all, and therefore foster, basically, like I say, exclusionary. Strategies in which you have either shamans or just elites doing them. Wari, during the late horizon period, AD four of CE fourteen fifty to fifteen thirty two, Inca leaders emphasized corporate strategies via the mass consumption of alcohol. Corporate strategies via the mask of alcohol. Everything in this is just blowing us up. Using data from from Klicka Pompa, the authors argue that a shift occurred during the middle horizon period, eighty six hundred to a thousand. When beer made from skynosmole, I don't know, was combined with a hallucinogen and a denomira cholubrino. The resulting psychotropic experience the power of the Wari state and represents an intermediate step between exclusionary and corporate political strategies. This Andean example adds the global catalog documenting the close relationship between hallucinogens and social power. And so their basic argument is alcohol loosens people up, makes people feel like they're having shared experience, and anyone can make it. Right? So once you expose people to alcohol, if if if somehow you have a society where there is no alcohol, which I don't know if that even exists, but And you and you bring it to a party or a festival or something. People are gonna figure out how to do it. And I mean, precisely because it just happens, like alcohol happens. Wari, especially in South America, the strong hallucinogens tend to involve very carefully curated and crafted combinations in which you don't just happen into this stuff. Right? It's not that you found some some siliside. You know, you didn't just find the mushrooms and eat them and and had a trip. They tend to be, you know, very complex recipes. And that basically the argument is that the what they're calling the corporate structure of the Inca and of many modern modern nation states encourages basically mass mass lack of sobriety with alcohol. But not the sort of insight of hallucinogens because that many people on hallucinogens wouldn't be controllable. And what the what the worry I've done, they're arguing. Let me find this one quote that I wanted to share. Okay. There's two quotes actually. So here's one. Our paleoethanol botanical evidence from the Wari outpost of Kolkapamba strongly suggests that Vilka was added to moli beer at feasts. Combining a hallucinogen with alcohol altered the experience of both psychoactive consilience, and we argue, provided Wari with corporate strategy of governance. Via patron client feasting relationships. So they go through the tentacles. They actually have fascinating list of all the all the species they found. At the site, which includes quinoa and squashes and cactus and cocolatas and beans and peanuts and potatoes and a he. Which is a a hot pepper and some and corn. And then these solution agenda lensThis thing they're making alcohol into. Sorry, looking for the Here it is. Vilca infused moli Chicha. So Chicha is just the broad name for the the the alcoholic brew that is still eaten. Drunk a lot in quechua territory in South America. Voca infused moli Chicha enabled a more inclusive psychotropic experience in the Wari society. For perhaps the first time in the Andes the consumption of VELCO therefore moved beyond those spiritual leaders who commune with the supernatural realm. The VELCO infused brew brought people together in a shared psychotropic experience, while ensuring the privileged position of Wari leaders within the social hierarchy as the providers of the hallucination. People couldn't go source it for themselves because they didn't know the recipe. Yeah. So you came to the parties and you knew you were gonna have some fun at the parties, and you couldn't go try this at home. Yeah. Actually, just one more. But by tying their esoteric knowledge of obtaining and using VELCA as an additive to moli Chicha, an intoxicant that stimulated communitas. Wari were able to legitimize and maintain their heightened status. These individuals were able to offer memorable, collective, psychotropic feasts, but ensure that they could not be independently replicated. That's wild. Yeah. I I have two Yeah. So this is new to you. Yeah. This is this is new to me. Mhmm. One, there's there's a delightful little game you can play where, you know, you you listen to this description scientific as it is. Yep. And, you know How would they know? Well, no. I I haven't looked at it, but my guess is, you know, that's a that's a decently plausible description of a mechanism and all of this. And who's to say if it's really a hundred percent accurate, but nonetheless, there's nothing about that description that strikes me as, you know, preposterous, but it does strike me as, you know, academics go to a party and then try to describe what who's to say if it's really a hundred percent accurate. But nonetheless, there's nothing about that description that strikes me as, you know, preposterous. Yep. But it does strike me as you know, academics go to a party and then try to describe what happened. Well, if they'd written it while they were on this brew, it probably wouldn't as co here. Right. If they had been invited to the party and it's easy to understand why academics wouldn't be. I mean, aside from this being a fifteen hundred year old That's that's another obstacle. Yeah. But nonetheless, it is funny to me. I think if we were to be able to teleport to such a party you might actually be able to recover their description, but that would be like, oh, no. No. That's not that's not what it was like. Right? You know, what it was like was very I mean, they're not trying it. They're not they're not pretending to have done ethnography. No. They're I I hope that they wish that they could -- Right. -- right? That they could have been participant observers in these feasts. And thus learn even more, but archaeologists are not cultural anthropologists. They do different work, and they have different evidence that they're looking at. Which leads me to my other reaction to this, which is some part of me desperately wants alien anthropologists to describe what has happened in light of COVID in our public health priesthood and the way that they have gained power and led the collected population into a mass psychosis event and that only served to instantiate their own blah blah blah deep into the future would be. If you if you had, if you could put that description up next to a proper and similar description of what is taking place in the present, then you'd know something. Indeed. Yeah. No. That's good. That's good. Okay. Here, no, it's not coming Hold on. The other and maybe we'll get to ice fish as well, but Here we have a paper. Also just published in biology letters. This is actually from the end of Looks like it's slightly earlier, actually, it's not just just published. I just ran into it. Adaptation of sperm whales to open boat whales. Rapid social learning on a large scale question mark? Awesome. Awesome. Right? And so, you know, obviously, So they're they're looking at North Pacific North Pacific Heying in the nineteenth century. And so they're looking at logbooks, whalers logbooks, So it's indirect that way. And then they're then they're modeling. And so it's the and the modeling is kind of a black box. didn't pursue their all all of the data and the models that they have online. I just read through this article, where they say we've got all the explanations online, but they seem to be doing a really really compelling job here. Let me just share a couple of a couple quotes. Some historians have suggested that this is sex. I'm gonna start over. Mhmm. Some historians have suggested that the success rate of open boat whalers and harpooning sighted whales, the second stage in these whaling operations, dropped substantially during the initial years of industrial exploitation, and that this was due to socially learned changes in well behavior. The development of pathologic whaling operations in the North Pacific by American whalers during the middle nineteenth century is well chronicled and digitized whalers logbooks. So that's the source of their data. We assessed whether this decline was caused, so they do see that there are declines in efficacy. Potential reduce the effect of the sunset VAERS. It's it's confounded by that. It's confounded by that, but they actually they actually have four hypotheses they And again, they're using their model to assess and, you know, I don't I don't love the the way that they've been forced to assess what they're Heying, but the fact that they lay out four alternative hypotheses up front is such a refreshing change from how most so called scientific papers are written. They say we assessed whether this decline was caused by socially learn changes in the defensive behavior of the whales. That's their primary hypothesis, h hypothesis x, they call it. Evaluating support for several alternative hypotheses using causal models. The first whalers on the ground were particularly proficient. Oh, that's hypothesis one. The whale is initially captured especially vulnerable whales, hypothesis two, or the whales learned to escape whales from their own individual experience when countering them hypothesis three. So that's different from the their main hypothesis and that's individually learned, like individuals learned to evade as opposed to their social learning, their transmission of social stuff between groups. In fact, it's even a higher bar than it seems like they they're Heying, could groups of whales have have have communicated information to other groups of whales. And they find and without going into the methods at all The between unit social learning model fits the data better than all other cause of models, producing a rapid decline in strike rate as units learn defensive models. Measures from one another. Alright. So a number of reactions. One, super cool. Yeah. Two, really skeptical you've got a bunch of mechanisms. And as far as I can tell, none of them are mutually exclusive. So to say one fits the data better, Again, I did not spend enough time, and I yeah. I just I'm not a fan of the modeling approach. Right. It was all they had. Yep. So I I But nonetheless, they could all be true and in fact But but they but, you know, to to hear them talk about, they find it was hardest for them to distinguish between the social learning model and the individual's learning model that it was easier to get rid of the other two And I think they may have it's possible. I'm overlooking overlooking it, and I apologize to them if I'm about to suggest that they do something that they actually did. But there's actually more range in here because you could have I mean, in terms of hypotheses? Yeah. Yeah. So if you fans of our book will be familiar with the style of thought. But there are two ways that you could get a change in group behavior or lineage behavior that would result in improvement in the odds of the whales against the whales. One is that there's variation between the whales and how they behave, which VAERS will be, and that the ways of being a whale that made them vulnerable to the whales began to decline because the whalers had success against them. And the ways of being a whale that were incidentally more effective at not being spotted or not being successfully pursued than would propagate just by virtue. So that is So that's different from vulnerable So their use of the term vulnerable is, like, old, weak, young, whatever. And you're saying basically that there will be AAA selective spread in a population behaviorally, and some behaviors that weren't putting them at risk before, put them at risk of Heying, and those that part of the of that behavioral spread will simply be selected out by Whaling -- Right. -- which won't read as vulnerable because they don't have the demographic measures. And what and this will you know, I don't mean to diminish it. That really is selection producing That really is select producing adaptation 111th the nature of the adaptation is immunity to wailing. But That's not social not social learning. Right. Yep. On the other hand, it could be social learning and there are multiple ways that it could be social learning. There's a question about, you know, again, individuals who succeed and those individuals who succeed then Heying, let's say even mimicked by other whales. Right? successful Well, As you know, mimicry sounds like social you know, mimicry sounds like social learning. Well, I'm not I'm not discounting it at social learning, but I'm Heying, if these were humans, right, you would have two things competing. You would have humans succeeding at various things that would propagate. And you would have humans discussing the problem and coming up with possible solutions. Right? Now in whales, we have highly intelligent, you know, these are sperm whales. Yep. We have a highly intelligent animal -- Mhmm. -- that does not have language. They communicate, but they don't have language. Right? So their ability to propose things to each other is, on the one hand, it would seem extremely limited from the human perspective. On the other hand, maybe not. Right? Because they can show Right? So whale communication might be a lot more show than tell. But nonetheless Maybe although, you know, that long distance vocal like, long distance vocalizations. Right? But very short distance what you can see in water. And if you're so close that you can see it, you're presumably at risk from the same whalers. Okay. Right. Exactly. But, you know, I mean, we see we see much smaller tooth twales like dolphins learning special techniques for you know, corralling fish and hitting them with their tails and things like this. From watching, but there's a risk to them in the watch where there would be risk to I'm just starting to watch it here. You've got a mechanism for the transmission of information that, you know, I don't know if whales can propose things to each other by Heying. Mhmm. But that's a possibility. Mhmm. And so you could get Oh, you mean later? Like, Right? Like, that was close, but watch this. Right? Mhmm. Watch watch what I would do. Right? Here's what I did. Right? Exactly. So, you know, that could be fanciful imagining of what whales might be doing might be projecting a human style thought process on So, you know, that could be fanciful imagining of what whales might be Heying, might be projecting a human style thought process on them. On the other hand, we're talking about highly intelligent mammal. Yeah. And or, like, oh, I did something that worked. I'm gonna I'm gonna practice that a bunch because that worked and then others watch it and, like, oh, look what he's doing. Wonder if that's what worked. Right. So in some sense, the point is we argue that consciousness is about getting ahead of this process, so selection doesn't have to solve the problem because you can mentally model a problem -- Yeah. -- pool your insight with others who are mentally modeling the same problem and come up with a solution that you didn't have before that actually works, and then you can try it in real world and see whether you had it. Yeah. Wales have some of our tools, not all of our tools, and they have them in different proportions. But the point is the interface is very closely here with the question of well, how did the whales get better at this? Right? Mhmm. So anyway, fascinating stuff. Okay. Okay. The only thing about ice fish I've got is this again, it's in current biology, new paper, this one is actually brand new, a vast ice fish breeding colony discovered in the Antarctica in the The only thing about ice fish I've got is this, again, it's in current biology. New paper. This one is actually brand new. A vast ice fish breeding colony discovered in the Antarctic in the Antarctic. Totally surprising. There was Oh, boy, that's not working at all. There it is. A Heying colony of nona thineoid icefish. Neoagitopsis, I wanna I'm probably butchering that latin. Of globally unprecedented set has been discovered in the southern White Sea in Antarctica. The economy was estimated to cover at least two hundred and forty square kilometers. Of the eastern flank of the filtered trough, twoth crowd, comprised of fishnets, nests at a density of point two six nest square representing an estimated total of sixty million active nests and associated fish biomass of over sixty thousand tons. During the next No. Stop the twenty twenty one. Stop the Wow. That didn't work at all. Man. I don't know why it started talking at me. Well, I can't I can't maybe computer what do what I wanna do at the moment, but that is massive. Just I mean, that's really all I got, but we, science, Western science, just discovered an amazing amount of icefish where apparently we'd only ever seen, you know, one or two nests in a place before. And maybe it's because the entire global population of ice fish nest right VAERS. all in one place. That's cool. And it, you know, it speaks to one of the great things about being a biologist at the scale is that the world is actually full of things that we've never seen before. And you might have found stuff that nobody had ever seen before. Yeah. You know, there's still a lot of it out there. I just ran across one today where somebody I think in Thailand found a I found this through Monica Lewinsky who I saw on Twitter was she said that the person had lost her at the word tarantula. Apparently, she's not a fan, but anyway, the point is the report that she was pointing to was of a discovery of a tarantula, whose entire ecology is based around bamboo. And apparently, the only one. But what what is it doing? Oh, it lives inside the bamboo and it has a special you know, it's not unlike your your frogs in the sense that it has developed. You know, bamboo is a really weird plant. Okay. But anyway, it's cool. I find a little disturbing. I I do do. well. So I mean the, the, the audience doesn't know that my, you know, my research system was indeed fun to tell them breeding so. I mean, the the audience doesn't know that my, you know, my research system was indeed if I had to tell breeding frogs, if I had to tell him just like, the holes that form on in some plants that then fill with water and then make little mini ecosystems for organisms that you used to live in them. As far as it's bromeliads, like we've got this bromeliad here in the New World, Star Poisonfrogs, which is the frogs I started working on. They they lay their eggs in the wells and the Bromeliads and then in depending on the species, sometimes they leave their tadpoles there and mom or dad depending on the species comes and feeds them or sorry, they're eggs in the leaf litter and then someone transports them, usually apparent on their back to the anyway, In Madagascar, the frogs that I worked on -- Mhmm. -- I discovered a number of things about them including -- Mhmm. -- that they had an an really, really similar system, largely using improved bamboo, which is interesting because there are not that many native cytotonic plants in Madagascar. There are sort of the troughs left in big buttress trees. Which occasionally I found a medella eggs and tads in, but very few other And, you know, occasionally in like the, what are called, the croches of trees as well. But bamboo is the big one. So I spent just a lot of So I spent just a lot of time. I, like, carved windows into bamboo with taxa and made little windows of epoxy and ziplock bags, and you know, just spent a lot of time around Babu. And if they had been, TransUnion, is also living in them, I would have been much less pleased with the whole scene. That's all. VAERS nothing a tarantula could do that would be nearly as terrifying as what Travagan Haile and Natostica does if you happen to be peering into Campu Heying for Mandela, frogs, and eggs. Yes. That's it is but they they only DarkHorse VAERS. Have a bite. Yeah. But it's So this is a fraud. So I have their Heather's system involved fraud that we're laying eggs in these basically broken off bamboo Wari the water collects in the preIncan but there are other species that the same I found three other species that are using the same thing lensThis and a and a crane fly also that is parasitizing the frog Well, at some point, you're gonna have to explain the syllabus. English. But anyway, this this one frog This one species of This one species of This one species of dog to Haylon, Natasta, a placenta hiala. Placenta hiala, Natanzica. Alright. Well, I botched that. No. No. You just mumbled slightly. This was the one where the father's were attending all of the babies in the the well. Yeah. So the mantela have long term territories. And in fact, I identify three different kinds of territoriality that the males have, but the most successful males, the male that you wanna be. And defends a territory that has one or more of these wells in them. But there are at least three other species frogs that come in and use these wells for their reproductive as well, but they don't defend them at all other moments. They just come in defend them short term, including Platte Donahai Land ethostica, which is, boy, I don't have the numbers in front of me, of course. But don't know, seven to ten times the mass of a mental health. Yeah. It's a big It's a big honking frog, and they basically the the dudes fill up the their whole cavity with their bodies. And they come in, they send out messages into the universe Heying for sexy female clathodonthalangiatostasis. After they get one and she leaves olive eggs in the well. He stays there and just guards the eggs as they turn into as they develop, they hatch out into dads, oxygenates the water. Oxygenates the water and guards them against -- Okay. -- competitors until they fully minimum or close and leave off, then go off as froglets and then he leaves, but the way that they defend their wells. So as a hapless photographer looking for interesting Malagazi phenomena, peering into the occasional well, which is, of course, VAERS, very dark. I have a great picture actually that actually that I got of Pappadonna, Haile, Natostica, which we will show you at some point. Top on top. Top on top. That's a photo. Mhmm. But in order to get that photo, I had to peer into these wells and the bark. So imagine a frog, you know, frog that size with It's his head width. Yeah. Right? And he's got a megaphone. Right? But he's got forty babies. Bamboo. And his job is that if anything peers into the thing, he needs to scare the crap out of it so it goes away. And if that something is you looking for a good photo opportunity, wow, will that wake you up? You said yeah. No. The med telecommunications are sweet. And, you know, they can get louder, there's a lot of them. And the what is it? Anadadadah highlight? Anadadah highlight blanger eyes. One of the other species. I don't remember him vocalizing all. Females don't talk. But placenta high latatostica. Yeah, man, man, that is not a frog you want to tangle Man. Man, that is not a frog you wanna tangle Yeah. They'll knock you off your socks. No, ma'am. Yeah. Exactly. If yeah. Your socks, which because it's Madagascar, are are rotting. Yes. Right. I don't know why we're talking about. I don't really either. I Okay. Oh, we're talking about ice fish and -- Yes. -- other cool things. Yep. Yeah. That's all I got. Alright. Well, I'm gonna leave the ice fishing gloves discussion for another time. Okay. I did have one thing that I wanted to to get you. I had a thought. I saw a puzzle I've been thinking about, you know, just a topic that's been on my mind somewhere back burner for a long time. And finally this week, I made a breakthrough and I wanted to drop it on you, you know, nothing about this. And I just wanna see what think. Oh, boy. Alright. Yeah. Here's the idea. another three or four thousand years of selection under domestication, cats could make great pets. So So it wasn't the cats that pulled their rotting orange out of their bowl and left it for you to step It wasn't the cats that pulled their rotting orange out of their bowl and left it for you to step on, but we did have two instances of not entirely fresh mice. This week. Oh, there was that. There was there something else? That's part of it. I just you know, here's the thing. I Do not entirely not do not entirely fresh minds in the bedroom. Should say. Yeah. It's world away as it were. Yeah. No. It's not. I just the you know, I do I I understand that VAERS are people who think that cats make good pets already, and I assume these people -- I know he's right here. -- they're listening. These people must rent all of their stuff. Right? Anybody who owned anything would know that this is this is not an animal ready for prime time as a pet. But I mean, it has a great promise I think. We invite a little bit of the wild and yes, invite a little bit of the wild in. Yes. A little little too much. And it is it is marvelous. And he is just sleeping through. You're -- Right. -- you're rent, and he will see to it. Just keep your rent come up and slitter. Yeah. He's he's such an intelligent cat. He's been doing this thing this week. So we in order to watch movies at night. We'd like to put our feet up and we got some some soft cubes that, you know, are like, Ottomans and which I have dubbed the scratching cubes. Right. So he will scratch the Ottomans and I will shout at him. And then he will give me that look with all of the intelligence in those eyes like, you don't seem to like it when I do that. But then the next thing he does, he will go over to the Sasol scratching posts that we have bought for the purpose of But then the next thing he does, he will go over to the Sasol Scratchin Post that we have bought for the purpose scratching. Mhmm. And he will look me directly in the eye. Mhmm. And then he will scratch it. And I can see the gears turning in his head, like, Why are you troubled by my scratching? That, but you seem to not be troubled by my that? But you seem to not be troubled by my scratching. This seems equal to me. Anyway, he's a smart critter. Yep. Who has very little interest in your roles because you're not gonna throw him out of his heels. Are you? No. He has the the intelligence, the dexterity, and the morals of a raccoon. He does. He does. Yep. And we love him. Okay. I think that's it. Think that's it for the week. We've gone on for quite a while. So, oh, I forgot to mention at the top of this hour, I should have mentioned. The next two weeks we're gonna be at different time. We're actually gonna come on Friday. Different times each of the two Fridays for various for various reasons. Next week, we're gonna be Friday Pacific time afternoon, which means for those of you in Europe, you'd probably miss us. But, you know, stuff stays up and we go on we put the stuff on Spotify right away as well at this point. You just can't live stream with Spotify. And on the phone, we're gonna be coming at you Friday morning. So anyway, two different two different time schedules we'll we'll be here. Just rather just a day early. Friday Heying, we should point out. That'd be two weeks from now. Two weeks from now because I'm gonna be No. That's next week. Oh, that's next week. Oh. Right. Oh, time. Yes. Got it. The 23rd of January, we are going to March on Washington peacefully, but we are going to make clear through our speech that these mandates are The twenty third of January, we are going to March on Washington peacefully, but we are going to make clear through our speech. That these mandates are unjustified. They are not justified because the things being mandated are not acceptably safe and effective because the people doing the mandating are not free of corruption and because it is unAmerican. So, anyway, consider marching with us Wari third. Indeed. Same. DC. Yep. Exactly. Okay. Defeat The mandates.com I believe is the weapon mandates dot com, I believe, is the website. Defeat the mandates dot com. So you can ask questions at dark horse emissions dot com. Email any logistical questions you have to dark horse moderator at gmail dot com. And I mentioned last week that our moderator can give you an address of PO Box to send things to, and we've been getting some just delightful things. Yeah. And some people, and we appreciate those things. You can, of course, always join our patrons. We would really love for you to read book. If you don't want to buy it it's available at many, many libraries, many copies, and there's more translation, rights being sold all the the book. If you don't wanna buy it, it's available at many, many libraries, many copies. And there's more translation rights being sold all the time. So it's gonna be available in more and more languages. And anything else to say? I Oh, think so. Alright. So be good to the ones you love, eat good food, and get outside. Be well, Be well, everyone.