Um, I am interested in uh, hearing about
uh, your musicianship, apparently. Sure.
Can you play?
>> Yeah, what do you what do you what?
>> Uh, so I grew up playing classical
piano. Um, and then right before college
I switched over to drums. And so in
college I was uh, playing drums in a
bunch of bands as well as learning
various uh, ethnic and orchestral
percussions. And uh, that just like
in college I I decided I'm like, I want
to play drums in bands or you know, just
be a musician in general. So all
throughout my 20s I was playing
uh, in a bunch of bands and um, that was
what I wanted to do and got got pretty
far with one band. We were signed to a
label and touring and all that stuff and
um, that's around when I started the
channel.
Um, and then yeah, band didn't work out.
So pivoted to SciCom.
>> Sounds like it did work out. I mean,
that's farther than most people make it.
>> Yeah, sure. And yeah, way farther than
most people made it. Uh, had a had a
wonderful time, but still yeah, I mean
like I've
I I can't put it down. So yeah, I'm I'm
trying to get back to music this year,
which I was just something I've said
every year for the past like seven
years, but
>> Sure. >> Yeah.
>> Yeah, okay. That's cool. What is it like
uh, mostly uh, rock stuff? Like what
were you playing?
>> Yeah, I mean in the in the very broad
umbrella of rock. I mean, that band that
was doing pretty well was, you know,
rock and roll kind of in indie
Americana, very guitar-driven rock. Um,
my stuff when I work on my own
is a lot more I'm heavily influenced by
vintage progressive and psychedelic rock
as well as modern synth pop and very
specific niches within electronica um,
and so I'm kind of trying to blend
modern synth pop and electronica with
more of like a vintage uh, aesthetic and
approach to live performance. Um,
I guess is how I would describe my what
I'm trying to do. Yeah.
>> Yeah, okay. So that's too specific to
not have strong opinions on that, I
would assume. Like what what what drives
you in that direction? What what's so
attractive about that?
>> Sure. Yeah, so I I'm in love with the
aesthetic of a lot of modern music
that's the kind of on the cutting edge,
the frontier sonically. Um but I really
dislike how a lot of in particular synth
pop and then obviously electronica, but
um
uh the the lot the way that music is
performed live a lot of the times. Um I
don't like the approach of, "Hey, we
wrote this track and the track went big
and it has this specific snare sample or
this whatever it is." And that has to be
live, so we're going to sample
everything or a lot played up to backing
tracks and stuff like that. And that to
me just like sucks the soul out of
everything. I like the way music was
performed in the '70s. I love Zeppelin
and Floyd and all of that stuff and
progressive rock and King Crimson and
that kind of stuff. So, it's like I kind
of wanted to see if I can take
uh really interesting avant-garde
electronica and synth pop. Um I love
like LCD Soundsystem LCD Soundsystem
nails everything live. So, they're
they're they're they're not an example
of what I'm talking about. They I I love
their live show. Um but then there's
stuff like Boards of Canada and Trent
Reznor and like EDM and then certain you
know, there's just all this really cool
sonic stuff and I'm like, "What if this
is played live with like my best attempt
at Pink Floyd style vocals and lyrics?"
Like really heady um futurism themed um
lyrical content over this stuff. Um
that's not something I really seen and I
really want it to exist. So, I'm going
to try my best to create
>> That's cool.
>> Yeah, so do you have a group that you
like are imagining this with?
>> Yeah, my project is called Simulated
Sun. Uh I did an EP in 2019. That's the
last time I produced any music, but I
kind of threw together five tracks that
I'm really proud of and I did a few
music videos. And so, that was with kind
of I I worked on that for just a few
months. Like I wrote the tunes in like
two months and then I kind of you know,
recorded them um really quickly and and
I was like, "That's cool, you know, this
is this EP will get me started Uh and
then right after that
I had a kid and then COVID hit and then
I had another kid and it just like I
just for the past 6 years it's just been
like
head down working on science
communication and you know, getting my
career going and every year just like
no, okay, next year I'll do it now.
Yeah. So.
>> Yeah. Yeah, well, yeah, I would
encourage you to get into it as soon as
possible. I get a lot of like
retirement age people come in and
they're like man, I wish I would have
started this 10 years ago, 20 years ago,
but life life is busy.
>> Totally, yeah.
>> So, yeah, so then in the timeline of
things like so you you get out of
college, you're playing drums.
>> Mhm.
>> You go to where you get off tour, you
start a YouTube channel.
A kid comes.
COVID's in there somewhere.
Another kid comes.
>> Yeah.
>> Yeah, you know, you summarize
>> That that was that was like 18 years
>> [laughter]
>> went through there.
I'm older than I look, but yeah, I I
yeah, for I mean
I graduated college when I was 21 and I
had my first kid when I was 36. So,
yeah, but all through my 20s
it was just bands bands bands through
until my early 30s. I started the
channel when I was 31 while I was still
in the band as as an attempt to get some
passive income going cuz we'd be on the
road so much. So, it's like we you know,
we we we the band wouldn't earn enough
money to pay for all the band stuff. So,
we weren't really putting personal money
into it, which is great cuz bands are
require so much money,
but we're like how the hell do we pay
rent? None of us can have jobs like
we're you know,
what are we going to do? So, yeah, I I
tried to start this channel and um
>> Yeah.
>> became the A plan eventually.
>> That's the thing. So, you saw YouTube as
the potential income source and not
smell it. Okay.
>> Yeah, that's how it started. Just maybe
I can make a couple grand a month, you
know. This is 2014 is when I had the
idea for the channel
>> Okay.
>> and filmed the initial content and then
I released my first organic chemistry
tutorials on January 2015.
>> I have a hard time imagining what
YouTube looked like in 2014. Like who
else was in that space?
>> Sure. Yeah, in the in the educational
space it was pretty sparse, which was
very good for me. But there was stuff. I
mean Khan Academy started in like '07,
'08. They they were there for very, you
know, and then Crash Course and and then
in chemistry in particular there was
there was like a Tyler DeWitt. You know,
there's there's people there were people
making educational content and I looked
at it and was like, well, I can do that
cuz all through the interim
you know, I studied chemistry and I had
been
teaching chemistry to to pay the bills
for all of my adulthood. So
and I had been teaching organic
chemistry at this trade university.
And so I just delivered my lectures
to camera as though I was teaching class
and
put them online. I was like, let's see
what what's see what this does. I don't
know.
>> Yeah, that's cool.
>> Yeah.
>> So then at some point it feels like
this other thing came into your channel,
which is debunking.
>> Yeah.
>> Maybe period. Debunking.
>> Yes.
>> So
when did you when did you think when do
you think it first started to leak in
and when do you think you first noticed
that?
>> Yeah, so it was was kind of by chance. I
just I was making astronomy content just
like Astro 101 what you learn in
freshman year in college. And I thought
it would be fun to cap the series by
doing two little fun videos debunking
astrology and flat Earth. And honestly,
I thought the astrology one would get
more more heat.
But cuz flat earthers I I I didn't take
seriously and honestly at that time when
I made that first one, I didn't look up
a single thing about flat earthers. I
had heard that they exist and was like,
that's probably a joke, but I don't know
what that is. And I just made a video
sort of
you know,
recapitulating lessons from the series
that to explain how we figured out the
earth is a sphere, right? Well, you
know, 2,500 years ago in classical
Greece at the at the at the very least,
right? You maybe even earlier. Just
basic observations of the celestial
sphere, things like that, how we figured
out that the earth is a sphere. Um
and then this channel called the
Globebusters
um like found that the the the very
first day it went up, it went to the it
was the number one search result for the
flat earth keyword and they were like,
oh, and fresh meat, we're going to we're
going to tear this apart on a live
stream and and I had you know, I wasn't
used to people like talking [\h__\h] about
me on the internet like not like today
where it's like 24/7 all the time
everyone's attacking me. But I was like,
oh my gosh, this will not do at all. So
I made a 45-minute video tearing apart
their ridiculous live stream and it's to
this day the number one viewed video on
my entire channel has like 15 million
views.
Um and so that was what kind of dragged
me into it and then I made a couple more
flat earth ones cuz it was so much fun
and and there I got such an incredible
positive response to that style of
content. I was like, I really like doing
this and people like watching it. So
then I thought, well, what else can I
debunk, you know, and so I moved on to
creationism and anti-vaxers and all, you
know, all manner of science denial, more
pressing areas of science denial, things
that are actually I mean, all I I've
come to realize that all science denial
is intertwined and harmful, but um some
stuff that's a little bit more pressing,
more immediately urgent like anything in
the medical sphere and things like that.
>> Yeah. Okay, so moving back to flat earth
though,
what do you think actually did bring
that back?
Like
>> Oh,
yeah. I mean, just some some clowns
putting content on on YouTube rehashing
stuff from
There was this guy, I forget what the
guy's name was cuz I haven't been doing
flat earth content a while. What was uh
it was like zetetic astronomy
uh
I forget the guy's name, but he wrote
some book called Zetetic Astronomy in
the 19th century, and that was the last
time there was like this kind of
movement of flat Earthers.
Uh which now you would think is
impossible because we have, you know,
satellites and we go to space and stuff
like that, but of course it's all fake.
Uh so there was just a few people who uh
in the mid 2010 10s started kind of re
One of them is Eric Dubay, this this
idiot, and uh they just started uh
>> [laughter]
>> like taking some of those things and
then adding other like, oh, you know,
just using that as a basis and then
filling it in with other stuff and just
making YouTube videos and and people
fall for it. I mean, some some people
say it was like a CIA psyop to just to
like see what is the dumbest thing that
that they could get people in large
numbers to fall for. I have no idea.
Maybe that Maybe that's true, maybe it's
not. But yeah, just a bunch of idiots on
YouTube uh spewing horse [\h__\h] and and
people fell for it. Not in huge numbers,
but, you know, a few thousand at any
given time.
>> Yeah, that it seems higher to me than
should be possible. Uh like I mean,
Terrence Howard's got his, you know, 1 *
1 = 1 thing and or two, I guess. Sorry,
I accidentally said the right thing. Uh
like but I don't see anyone like No
one's in that camp. Like how do you get
someone
>> some I would say as many as there are
flat Earthers, which is very very few.
But there I mean, Terrence Howard got
that platform because he's a famous
actor, right? He's an Oscar nominated
actor. So if he if he wasn't, nobody
would have paid attention to it. Um and
he went on Rogan and he spewed all that
stuff. But um
yeah, no, the the numbers are very very
small. I would estimate there's maybe 5
to 10,000 flat Earthers in the entire
world at any given time. Um
So I mean, it's just it's an exercise in
how much can you suspend logic in favor
of a conspiratorial mindset because flat
Earth is uniquely ridiculous in in that
it requires you to not only
disbelieve the vast majority of all
scientific knowledge, right? It's not
like you know, anti-vax or climate
change denial, which is trying to be
very specific. Um
This is like geology all wrong,
astronomy all wrong, physics all wrong.
It's all of science pretty much. Um and
then you couple that with the
the scope of the conspiracy being so
many millions or even billions of people
and so many trillions of dollar I mean
it's really all all of existence is
hiding this one thing and and honestly
truly for absolutely no reason because
were the revelation to come out it would
change nothing about societal dynamics
or or anything like that. So um it's
absolutely insane. It's the bottom of
the barrel ridiculous thing most
ridiculous thing anyone can believe.
>> [snorts]
>> The people who are in it that I've
talked to don't seem uh severely
mentally handy capped.
>> Mhm.
>> Uh they seem they seem to me to be
severely philosophically handicapped. Uh
but
I don't know. I
I guess I'm still I'm still a little bit
>> You understand that, right?
>> Uh well, I I don't know that so I I
assume
>> [laughter]
>> Fair enough.
>> Yeah, the main ones who make money off
of their channels and their apps and
their whatever the hell they're they're
con men. They they know that the Earth
isn't flat.
>> So you think okay.
>> Yeah.
All right. I don't know. That that
>> I do.
>> [laughter]
>> Okay. I how do you tell?
>> Um I mean it's the the evasiveness and
the approach to everything, um
you know, and then if you want to get
really technical just kind of like body
language analysis and stuff like that. I
mean it's just it's it's very
transparent to me. I don't know.
You know.
>> Okay.
Fine. Yeah.
Interesting.
So for the people
So [snorts] you think they are grifting
off of people who genuinely do believe
it. Sure. I mean, there are certainly I
mean, there's no there's no grift
without a mark, right? There there there
are a few thousand people who fall for
this and then they supply them with a
very meager income via YouTube revenue
and then their little super chats and
then their little conferences and all
the ridiculous things that they do.
Um yeah, I mean, it's not a super
lucrative grift. They're just not smart
enough to do a better one. You know,
there are there are there are smarter
grifters
that can that have scientific expertise
with which they can spin a more
convincing narrative that can ensnare
more people. You know, like the
Weinstein brothers or something like
that. You know what I mean? They're
they're they're also grifters, but
they're smart. Um so they can
you know, pedal a better a better tale
that can ensnare more people. Flat
earthers flat earth
priests are they're very dumb. They know
they're lying, but they're also very
dumb. They're not smart enough to to do
something
better.
>> Okay. I most grifters in my experience
switch grifts more rapidly when it stops
being lucrative.
And it seems like the flat earthers are
pretty dedicated to that one particular
thing.
>> Well, I mean, number one, there's a lot
of activation energy to getting a new
grift going. I mean, you have to learn a
whole new vernacular and get a whole
like they just have this set of talking
points that they regurgitate. Oh, we see
too far, CGI, blah blah blah. Like they
just they're they're stupid and they're
lazy, right? But also they they do I
mean, they do they pedal they pedal
anti-vax crap and they sell supplements
and they do MAGA, you know, they're MAGA
and they're you know, just they they do
flirt with other things because they
realize that flat earth is not it's not
a very wide net. You know what I mean?
So.
>> Yeah, Okay, that's interesting to me.
So, then moving over to the [snorts]
Weinstein brothers, perhaps,
uh
do you do you feel like they also know
that they are lying to their Of course.
audience?
>> Yes.
>> Okay.
>> Mhm.
>> All right. Your that answer comes more
quickly uh to you than I would expect.
>> Sure. I mean, it's all extremely
calculated. I mean, there's a narcissism
that could play in that makes them kind
of like
sporadically convince themselves that
they're in the right or something. But,
I mean, it's it's the the the narratives
are so calculated. I mean, Eric
Weinstein is paid by Peter Thiel to spew
horse [\h__\h] on podcasts. That's his
entire job. He doesn't do anything. He
doesn't do anything else.
Um and just the evasiveness, how
calculated it is, like with this like
geometric unity crap. For years and
years, he had this approach of like, I
released it on April Fools. Academics
don't look at it. Nobody pay attention
to it cuz he doesn't want them to look
at it. He only wants science-literate
people to look at it and go, "Wow, that
looks really cool. He's so smart." He
goes on podcasts and he says physics
words and he sounds really smart. But,
he could only That could only last a
couple years. Eventually, academics did
look at it and they eviscerated it
because it's literally nothing.
Um and then it all came to a head and
then he got humiliated by Sean Carroll
on Piers Morgan and and just like it
eventually comes out when academics look
at it and go, "This is nothing. You've
been hiding right on the podcast, why
won't academics look at my work? They're
phasing me out because they can't handle
my super awesome anti-establishment
truth of my awesome theory." No, he was
hiding for as long as possible and then
he couldn't hide any longer and he got
humiliated, so.
Uh that's his whole thing. That's all he
is. Peter Thiel thinks that it's a
thing?
>> No. I mean, I Peter Thiel doesn't care
what is or what is is a thing. He's
cares about the very specific brand of
propaganda that he wants to disseminate
and which he pays Eric to do and other
figures.
>> And do you think that Brett I didn't
invite you on just to talk about the
Weinsteins, I promise.
>> can talk about whoever you want.
>> Um
>> I have long list of people that have to
be [\h__\h] down.
>> Do you think that Brett
genuinely in his soul thinks that he is
a victim of the uh
>> No.
>> diversity system?
>> No, the the Evergreen [\h__\h] was very very
very calculated. It was mirroring the
Jordan Peterson rise, right? Uh stir up
animosity among the the anti-woke, stir
up a fever, right? With the with a very
calculated and deliberately fabricated
tale, right? Everything about the
Evergreen incident was total horse [\h__\h]
Uh there was no there was no demand for
white people to leave campus, that's not
a thing that happened. He went on Fox
News and he he lied by omission because
uh the I think it was Tucker was like,
"Oh, they're like forcing white people
to leave." and he's just like Mhm. No,
that definitely never happened.
Um and so it became this darling of uh
the the anti-woke crusaders, much like
Jordan with similarly fabricated aspects
of the C16. There there was no nobody
was at risk of going to jail for
compelled speech or anything like that.
That's it's not a thing that happened.
So
and uh it's very deliberately riding
this wave uh into into prominence with
to get a platform. Then he has a podcast
and then he can spew all of this crap
anti-vax crap. Uh he's one of the main
architects of the Ivermectin thing by
platforming Pierre Kory and you know Joe
Joe Rogan obviously would be the number
one
uh platformer in that regard, but um he
he helped a lot. Yeah.
>> So, do you think there's a common threat
like I have a hard time
seeing there be a common threat from
like an intellectual Eric Weinstein who
to It to me to be legitimately smart Uh
and then let's say some of the other
people that we were talking about
before. I don't even know who that the
Eric uh flat Earth guy is, but
>> Eric Dubay.
>> Sure. So I don't I don't know him, so
I'm I'm willing to to consider that he's
he's genuinely stupid. Um and I
yeah.
So then
um what is the common thread between
those? Is it just a grift or is there
>> Yeah. Well, no. With that it would just
be a grift. I mean, you you don't have
to be like you can be an isolated
grifter. You can be just some schmuck
lying on the internet for money. Um and
that's what flat-Earthers are, right?
They're they're they're they're not
institutionalized. They're not backed by
anything, right?
You have you have uh very deliberate uh
propaganda campaigns coming from
powerful entities. Be they institutions
or specific oligarchs in the case of
Peter Thiel. That's very insidi-
insidious and very well well-crafted.
And we're and very intelligently
disseminated, right? The Weinsteins are
pretty smart guys. Um so the only thread
there is the the only connectivity there
is lying.
That would be the connectivity. Right?
Nobody's propping up Eric Dubay. He's
just some jerk with a YouTube channel.
Uh Eric is and you know, I don't want to
fixate on the Weinsteins, but many many
of these figures who are there come from
very well-funded sources, whether it's
Christian nationalists in the case of
Discovery Institute or but there there's
also through-line there, too, right? The
the oligarchy is propping up Christian
nationalism as well, right? Anything
that can uh anything that can aim
towards authoritarianism is in the best
interest of those in power. So that's
the uniting thing there.
>> [snorts]
>> It seems like the people who follow
these uh frequently follow each other.
Like the if you're into flat Earth,
you're probably into creationism. You're
probably into anti-vax. And you probably
have as your intellectual heroes the
Weinsteins and and others.
Uh Jordan Peterson, uh Joe Rogan.
>> Mhm.
>> So then like what do you what do you
think the the through-line is for for
that like
is there something different about their
brains
that make them latch onto all of those
things?
>> Yeah, I mean to be clear flat Earth is
the is unique in that it's the bottom of
the barrel. So yeah, every flat earther
is an anti-vaxxer and a climate change I
mean
there if you if you're a flat earther
you didn't you fall for literally every
single anti-science hoax.
It's just you there's no such thing as a
flat earther that is pro-vaccine. That
doesn't exist. But you can certainly be
an anti-vaxxer and not you can be an
anti-vaxxer and not obviously not a flat
earther but not a creationist not a
climate change denier, right? Um it
depends how because the the a lot of
anti-vax propaganda these days is very
very very well well crafted
and can be convincing to those that
don't have this niche um
understanding.
But I'm so sorry I forgot the question
now at this point.
>> What do you think the through line is
for the followers?
>> Oh yeah yeah. part. So there's
definitely I mean people who fall for
these narratives have a very very strong
anti-establishment bias
such that all you need to go is here's
the hot truth that big pharma doesn't
want you to know or that the government
doesn't want you to know or that the
blah blah blah blah whatever doesn't
want you to know which is
which is so easy to pedal because you
have all of these different sectors
where you have the government and you
have the private sector which are
directly opposing in in certain ways and
so you have your pick, right?
Government bad so believe my story easy.
Uh you know big whatever bad so believe
my story it's a very easy emotional hook
and then if you're then if you have very
sophisticated rhetoric which a lot of
these charlatans do such that you need
to be able to read primary scientific
literature to disprove them
then that's going to that's going to
ring true with a lot of people who who
maybe don't even maybe aren't even dumb
or it's not that it's not that everybody
who falls for this stuff is dumb
because a lot of it is very very
sophisticated. Um
And so, yeah, it's just
all of these narratives have the
emotional hook of I'm Luke Skywalker
battling the Death Star, right? I'm the
whistleblower truth-teller that's
telling you the truth on the podcast
that they're trying to censor. The
stupid jerks are trying to censor us,
but they can't cuz we're This is where
we tell the truth here. This That's Joe
Rogan in a nutshell. When he just
platforms fraud after fraud after fraud
after fraud. I mean, anti-vax, you know,
vaccine hesitancy has gone has ballooned
completely out of control because of how
mainstream so many of these narratives
have become in terms of certain vaccines
being harmful, vaccines causing autism,
stuff like COVID lab leak, like all of
these are very very well-executed
propaganda campaigns
that are disseminated on all what we
would have called alternative media in
the past
in the podcast space, which let's be
honest now is the primary method by
which this sort of information is going
to spread to the to the common to the
general public
cuz they're not watching the news as
much. They're listening to podcasts and
things like that. So
>> Real quick, just as a side note, when
you say lab leak, you mean that you you
believe that the that COVID did not come
from
a leak?
>> No. Zoonotic
>> Okay.
>> All of the evidence confirms zoonotic
transmission. And the and the the
majority of people at this point don't
know that is the result of several
stages of a very well-executed
propaganda campaign. Started with Steve
Bannon, and then there were multiple
phases after that.
I have did a very long 2-hour video
breaking down every all of the minutia
of this propaganda campaign.
>> Yeah, I'll check it out.
>> Okay.
Um
Crap, there was that was supposed to be
a side thing.
I don't remember what the other uh
>> We were talking about the mentality of
the people who
>> fall for this stuff. Or that was the
last thing we were talking about.
>> Yeah.
>> [snorts]
>> I don't know. Have you ever been part of
a group that you now think is
ridiculous?
>> Uh
I can't think of one. No.
>> [laughter]
>> Yeah. So, you were you were never a
Christian.
>> No, I've never been religious ever for a
single moment in my whole life.
>> Okay. Yeah.
So, I I I was for a long long time. Uh
and uh
it for me it's troubling
and I apologize, I'm getting over a cold
and my face is just exploding this
morning. Um
I find it troubling how
uh not different I feel now than before
and how little I can relate to before
me. And so, that whole thing is is
intriguing to me. Like, I didn't have a
jump in IQ or anything. Um but suddenly
it just became extremely not
uh compelling to me.
>> Yeah.
>> And it now seems ridiculous to me. And
so, that
the line between that is an enigma for
me because I I want to assume that just
because someone thinks something as
stupid as what I used to think, uh that
doesn't necessarily mean that they're
stupid. But also, I have a hard time
reconciling that.
>> No, that's the power of indoctrination
and especially for children, right? I
mean, if you're brought up a certain
way, it's very hard to shed the default
worldview that was handed to you. Um
intelligent people that were
indoctrinated often shed it as early as
10 years old, you know? Or they go like,
oh, oh, yeah. No, this is really dumb.
Um some people takes longer, maybe
they're 20s. Uh some people never get
out of it. Um
but sure, I mean, there are very very
intelligent people that were that have
been indoctrinated by religion and uh
we're seeing that indoctrination with a
lot of secular topics uh these days
through the podcast space. Um
It's a very similar it's a very similar
mentality, you know?
>> Yeah. I um honestly see some some people
going the opposite direction though,
too. And that's weird to me. Like it
like how does how does a
intelligent person who's not been
indoctrinated since childhood suddenly
fall into
something that seems ridiculous?
>> Religion specifically or or other I I'll
I'll take anything. Anything in that
category.
>> Yeah, I I don't think too many people go
from being secular to highly religious.
It It happens, but usually it's based
around a traumatic event or something or
maybe [clears throat]
some struggling with addiction and then
they
go you know, do the AA thing and stuff
like that. Um
so probably that. But then but but
honestly for yeah, people who are
rational and science-based like there
are people in the scientific community
that fall for some of these traps and it
it really is just because of how
convincing and how well-constructed this
anti-science propaganda is. We it's
really it's the best it's ever been,
which is why science denial is the
highest it's ever been among the general
public because you have these very very
well-funded propaganda campaigns that
are that are convincing and are making
the rounds on all right it it goes
tandem with the podcast space, right?
The podcast space has been polarized
towards disseminating false information.
Rogan is the leader, but so many other
podcasts. You can You can You can trace
the evolution of a podcast by how how
quickly and how thoroughly
it starts to favor these types of
figures. Um and part of that is audience
capture
and right just sort of the natural
you know, marketplace of clicks sort of
sort of a thing and then some of it is
very very deliberate. You have powerful
people that craft these narratives that
hire these people to disseminate them
and put a lot of money and and influence
towards getting them on the right
podcasts to to capture as many minds as
possible.
>> Yeah. So then uh specifically about
Rogan, he seems like a a doofus who
started out as a doofus and was
accidentally first to market and um
>> Yeah.
I mean, to be clear, I think Rogan is
of average intelligence. I don't think
he's specifically dumb. Um he can say
smart things, but it's just that he is
so heavily entrenched in his own
anti-establishment bias that all you
have to do, some jerk goes on there and
go, "Big Pharma blah blah blah, so
listen to this." And he's like, "Tell me
the fact" Like there's just zero
uh ability to to apply scrutiny
in all directions, right?
Um And so it's like, you know, and then
there are there like I recently went on
the Danny Jones podcast, which I was
kind of surprised to be invited on
there. Like he that's sort of a
situation where it's it's a Rogan
atmosphere, but he I I feel like he's
trying to not go that way. He's
struggling cuz most of his audience
wants that, but he's like I agreed to do
it because I did some content on on moon
landing denial where I debunked this guy
Bart Sibrel, and Bart Bart went on the
Danny Jones podcast, and I commented on
those episodes, and
Danny had him on once, kind of fell for
it,
had him on a second time, did some
research in the interim, and then kind
of really heavily challenged him with
some stuff about shadows and all these
things. And and I could see in that
episode that he's like, "This guy's a
fraud." And he you know, like pressed
him and stuff, and I'm like, "Good.
That's what you need to do. That's what
everyone in the podcast space needs to
do." Can you imagine if Joe Rogan had on
Bobby Kennedy and like grilled him on
facts? Are you kidding? The whole world
would be different, you know? Um and so
I went on I agreed to go on to be like,
"This is good what you're doing. I know
you all of your viewers are going to
despise me, but I'm here anyway, because
I I to do whatever I can to nudge the
podcast space in this direction of
having on an equal number of people that
can debunk all the have the frauds on.
You don't have to be the arbiter of
what's true. You don't have to know
every fraud is a fraud. You fell for a
fraud, that's fine. It happens. But then
next week have another person on whether
it's a science communicator like me or a
professional in that field um to explain
to you how everything that other guy
said is wrong and a lie. Um and if we
can do that equally man, that's going to
be a big shift in society.
>> You would seem more optimistic than I am
of people's willingness to change their
minds. Cuz like in I feel like in the
Joe Rogan world
uh that whole Graham Hancock Flint Dible
thing, they still feel like Graham
Hancock like Flint Dible came in and and
lied and just showed his hand.
>> Because Joe told him. Because Joe told
him that. He just started saying, he
lied. Really? About what? Oh, he's a
liar. It just became the new narrative.
>> Yes. Right. Well,
>> Imagine if he didn't do that. Imagine if
he had on more archaeologists and more
you know what I mean?
Instead of instead of you know, banning
Flint from the podcast and having Graham
on a bunch more times.
>> Yeah. Okay, fair enough.
>> That's on Joe. That's what I'm saying
right now. The attitude of the podcast
hosts needs to shift.
>> I don't think Joe made that up. I think
that was genuinely Joe's conclusion. I
don't obviously I'm not in his head. You
don't think so?
>> That was very coordinated and influenced
by Graham right?
>> Because of his friendship with Graham
Hancock. He didn't he didn't want to
>> He didn't want to sacrifice that. Graham
was honestly one of the main guests that
propelled Joe's show in the first place.
He's had Graham on like a dozen at least
a dozen times.
>> One of the first guest. He was the first
like kind of alt info conspiratorial
like oh, check out my super secret truth
right? As opposed to just comedians
shooting the [\h__\h] and whatever. Which is
what I wish it still was.
>> [laughter]
>> You know. Um
So they rode this thing together. Joe
knows where his money comes from. Um
and the narrative became, right, this is
why I say Joe's not really dumb because
in that episode, he was following along
with what was happening and he was
acknowledging where Flint was ruining
Grant's Graham's uh uh narratives.
And uh and then it just flip of a
switch, Flint is banned, Graham come
back on a bunch more times plus all of
his idiot underlings uh in perpetuity,
you know, uh one after the others. Um
so, Dan Richardson and Jimmy Corsetti
were next and then there's this other
guy banned Ben Van Kerkwyk. Uh I I've
been debunking every single one of these
guys cuz I have this pseudo-archaeology
cult pisses me off as much as anti-vax
and all the other ones.
Um so, I'm I'm dedicated to destroying
them.
Um
And uh that became the narrative.
Flint's a liar, Flint's a liar. Ask any
of those guys who says Flint's a liar
how what he lied about. None of them can
give you an answer. The best they can do
is cite one error he made in a he said 3
million shipwrecks and the correct
figure was 300,000. Oh my god, he made
one one quantitative error in a 4-hour
podcast pulling all this stuff off top
of his head, you know what I mean? Uh
yeah, they cannot handle uh legitimate
information debunking these ridiculous
narratives that um
yeah.
>> [snorts]
>> That that certainly uh fits
my impression of it is that there's like
this uh
emotional attachment to this idea that
that I've got um which seems like I I
I don't know one of the more human
things that we do is I I feel like we
get a mo- we
our i- our identity is
our belief systems.
>> Mhm.
>> Um and so, it's it's hard to hang on
[snorts] to hang on to a belief loosely
and go, I might be wrong about this uh
but it's what I I currently think. It's
what I currently makes sense to me.
>> It's a it's a combination of being
tethered, you know,
getting a a sense of identity from this
alternate set of facts that make you
feel smart and special. I know the super
secret truth about this thing combined
with this bizarre rage towards
established knowledge.
Which is that which becomes
anti-academia, anti-whatever,
anti-whatever you want to call it. Just
all of the people who actually know
things, those stupid jerks are wrong,
right? They they're they're either
idiots or they're compromised by special
interests or whatever it is, but the
stuff that we know is wrong because I
don't know why. I'm too dumb and lazy to
learn it and so this is my defense
mechanism to feel better about, you
know, the fact that I couldn't get an
education or whatever it is, right?
Whatever this attitude is towards
established knowledge.
Right? The this the this inability to
understand that, hey, human beings all
over the world learn things over time
and then we pass on that knowledge,
right? In school and scientists write
papers where they report the uh the
results of the research they've done,
etc. It's this wholesale rejection of
that entire system of gathering and
disseminating knowledge generation after
generation in favor of some dumb story
that makes me feel like I I get to
I'm smarter than theoretical physicists
now because Eric Weinstein told me that
I am, right? That's that's what it is.
>> Yeah. Well, it seems to me that there's
also a a distrust uh for people who have
been misled or lied to by institutional
knowledge. Um
>> Mhm.
>> And whether it was that was intentional
or just mistakes, like I I I trusted you
with this thing and then, I mean
maybe
>> But I mean, uh you know, there are very
the the
like, yeah, you can you can cite ins-
occasional instances of that, but uh but
there's a couple things. Number one,
scientists are not, you know, a
government agency. We're talking about a
global scientific community operating in
so many different sectors. But the more
importantly, if you're going to compare
the times that science lied versus
podcast bros and their guests lying
literally all the time, it's a pretty
easy uh contest where you're going to go
with, you know.
>> I don't I don't think most of those
people see a difference between the
science community and government. I
think they they see it as ridiculous.
>> Not all Most scientists don't work for
any government.
>> Yeah.
>> There are There are scientists that work
within government institutions. There
are scientists that work within
academia. There are scientists that work
in the private sector. There are
scientists that work for independent
institutions, non-profit institutions.
Scientists, millions of them, all over
the world work at You You cannot buy off
the entire scientific community.
Physically impossible. You can buy off
one scientist, absolutely, or doctor.
Um and that's what That's where a lot of
these grifts start is you get a jerk
like Andrew Wakefield that takes a bribe
of a half a half a million pounds to pen
the fraudulent Lancet study that says
vaccines cause autism. And here we are
30 years later, cannot shake this crap.
It keeps coming back wave after wave of
new [\h__\h] about vaccines cause
autism. So, you can buy off one doctor,
you can buy off one scientist, sure,
maybe even a small group. You cannot buy
off the entire global scientific
community. Impossible. That is why the
consensus of the global scientific
community is what we go by at all times.
If you encounter information that runs
contrary to what we have to what the
scientists of the world have come to
know, that's what you are skeptical
about. You approach that with extreme
skepticism, always.
>> Yeah, so
uh man, I've I I'm sorry, I got a lot of
different directions there. Um
Yeah, I'm going to I'm going to uh
Hang on.
So, I've I've got a lot of questions
about science, but also your your I'm
having a hard time because your channel
is dedicated to it, and so I don't want
to like ask you to regurgitate a
a lot of videos that I've watched.
>> Or I can briefly summarize something. I
don't know.
>> Um
are you optimistic about the future of
um
science literacy
in our species?
>> No. Well, I mean, okay, to be honest,
over the past 10 years I've grown more
and more and more pessimistic. And then
in the past 6 months to a year, I've
regained a slight tinge of optimism um
because it's gotten so bad, science
illiteracy and anti-science mentality
has gotten so prevalent and so bad and
now institutionalized
um science denial has infected our
government. You have uh the leader of
HHS HHS director peddling uh medical
disinformation through state-sanctioned
channels. That's never happened before.
It's gotten so bad that I'm finally
seeing a stirring among the
intelligentsia, among academia uh to try
and fight back a little bit. Um so, that
kind of
um
gives me a little bit of uh optimism.
Just We can get make a little bit more
noise and convince a few more people
like, "Hey, this is all bullshit." Uh
that and the fact that Gen Z seems
pretty on it and pretty pro-science and
pro-fact and pro-social justice and
things like that. Um
so, I I'm not I'm not uh irretrievably
pessimistic. I would still call myself a
pessimist, but uh
I'm holding out.
>> [laughter]
>> Okay. Yeah. It Like, I would say like as
if you if you zoom out on the chart, we
are more scientifically literate now
than we've ever been.
Is that fair?
>> Yes, but you have to kind of measure
that against the metric of how prevalent
uh science denial and anti-science
narratives are, and those are more
prevalent than ever before also.
>> Yeah.
>> Um so it's hard to quantify.
Um
But the the thing that um
you know, I I'm just I'm 42 years old.
So the internet became
widely used in my childhood, right in my
youth. And so you know, I was a preteen
when everyone was doing the AOL chat
rooms and stuff. And then we started
using the internet in school. And and um
we were
as a civilization a bit naive in
thinking, "Hey look, everybody has
access to all of the information that
all of humans possess. That'll make
everyone smarter, won't it?" Um and
there's some
truth to that, but I unfortunately
um
we were not anticipating the degree to
which special interests would manipulate
the masses through the internet uh and
get them to believe
lies wholesale.
Uh it's been a adjustment for all of us,
I think. So
>> Yeah. Well, I I mean I think that was a
failure of the generation before us
because you should have seen that coming
since that's exactly what we did with
every single tool that we've ever
created ever in history. Like it's
always it's never it's never the thing
that you think it's going to be. It's
always better in ways that you didn't
expect and also used by whoever can use
it to wield power. So like
probably should have seen that one
coming. Uh I feel that way probably
about AI. Like it's whatever the
predictions are about whatever it's
going to be, it's probably not that
thing. It's probably better and worse.
Um and we're going to find out as we
implement it and hope that it doesn't
blow us up.
>> Yeah, hope that we Yeah, I've done a
little bit of content on how AI might
destroy us. Um
and uh yeah, that's an interesting topic
because it's one where
uh it is very speculative. And I don't
know a whole lot about it. I just sort
of echo what experts in the field say.
Um
and yeah, don't know what's I I know I
know exactly what's going to happen if
we continue ignoring climate change. I
have no idea what's going to happen
with the AI. So,
you know, yeah.
>> Yeah. Well, and I'm I'm not even I can't
even tell what it is frankly like
because the people who are pushing so
much money into it like obviously I
don't trust their predictions about
they're they're going to try to overhype
it. Uh but also like it
it might take us by surprise. Those of
us who are thinking well, it's it's just
>> It's a quagmire.
>> Yeah. Yeah.
Um so then some of the people
well, with the with the science literacy
thing
it seems like we've made so much
progress in the last let's say 100 years
or 50 years or how whatever timeline you
want to do it 10 years. Um
my species is not all
half of them are below average and
average I don't know that the average
person can do
the whole like learn what we currently
know game.
>> No. No nobody ever can again. Nobody no
human
I mean that's part of the problem is the
20th century was absolutely astounding.
If you look at what we knew in 1900 and
then you look at what we knew in 2000
it's mind-boggling. In 1900 we barely
knew that atoms and molecules exist. And
now our command of the molecular world
is so sophisticated we can synthesize
any molecule our imaginations can
conjure. Um stuff like that. And so
um no the average person obviously has
zero access to the frontier of any
scientific field. Um and even people at
the frontier of their respective
scientific field have no access to the
frontier of some other scientific field
or even a subfield within their field.
What we know as a species is unthinkably
vast
um and overwhelmingly sophisticated. So,
that's and that that's not what I'm not
looking for anybody to grasp frontier
astrophysics. That's never going to
happen
ever. But, I promote basic science
literacy. I want everybody to understand
high school level physics, chemistry,
and biology, things like that.
And we're not we're not there.
>> Yeah. Well, and I feel like that's the
place where I am pessimistic about the
future because high school level science
it today is better than the
frontier not that long ago.
And so, like
what does high school science need to be
>> Mhm.
>> in
30 years, 50 years?
>> The basics hasn't haven't changed that
much. I mean, when you learn basic
chemistry, basic biology, that's not
going to change a lot. You know, just
learning the basics about molecules and
cells and forces and that will change
very it has changed very little in my
lifetime and will continue to change
very little because it's just basic
information, you know. It doesn't really
reflective of like the frontier of
theoretical physics or um
you know,
bioinformatics or stuff like that, you
know.
>> Okay.
So, you feel like we can cram in what we
needs to in
12 to 16 years?
Graduate with a BA and be scientifically
literate in can be can be considered
scientifically literate in 50 years?
>> Uh yeah, well, I mean, it depends what
you call science literate. I mean,
having a bachelor's degree in a
particular field exceeds science
literacy, right? You're beginning to
develop expertise. Um
when you get a bachelor's degree, you
know a lot about the broad topics within
a field. And then you begin to
specialize in graduate school and you
become a expert, leading expert in one
tiny narrow little thing, you know.
Um
So, I'm not even talking about that. I
mean,
to expect the public to have a
bachelor's degree level of knowledge in
almost any field, that's not going to
happen either. That's too sophisticated.
I really mean truly high school level
knowledge, which you're supposed to get
in high school, right? And a lot of
people did and they they either forgot
or they just didn't have a good school,
they didn't have good teachers or
or they just or they did learn it and
then they deliberately cast it aside for
whatever alternate narrative is more
captivating to them, you know.
>> Yeah, I I think they didn't get it. I
think
and I'm I'm in the school system. I I
think the school system sucks.
Um and the people are getting out of it
not knowing the stuff in it.
And to a large extent
well, either from a combination of not
having people who really are passionate
about what they're supposed to be
teaching and also like just not
a life that is conducive to receiving
information.
>> Mhm.
>> It's
yeah.
I don't think that getting out of high
school
allows you to even understand words like
Some of the people that we go ahead go
ahead. You were going to say something.
>> Well, I mean it depends where you go,
you know. Yeah, I mean it's it's very
tethered to socioeconomic status. I
mean, I got a great high school I got a
great public high school education, but
I was living in an affluent area,
Fairfield County, Connecticut. You know,
I I am not so naive to think that
everybody had access to that. You go to
Compton and they're not going to get
that.
But so that's that's an economic
problem. It's it's not it's not so much
a design problem or or a curriculum
problem. You know, I I did a master's in
science education and so I know the
standards very well and they're good.
They're perfectly good standards. Um
then it's just a matter of incentivizing
people to become teachers. So we need to
pay them more, you know, so
but yeah, so so yeah, that's not to
what what you said is true. There's a
lot of people who don't get the
education that they need. Um
but
uh
yeah, I don't know. It's to me that's
not really the focal point. It's more
just how voluminous and how relentless
anti-science propaganda has become. It's
become this hydra that is inescapable.
It's everywhere and it's insidious. And
that's that's the battle. You know what
I mean? I mean, there's these people who
there's so many millions of people who
did learn basic biology and basic
chemistry and physics and they didn't
get you know, they didn't do great and
they don't remember a lot of it, but
they they wouldn't naturally come to
these positions that they now hold if it
were not for this mountain of propaganda
that has polarized them and put them
there very deliberately for very
specific political and financial
reasons.
So, that's that's the battle that I'm
in. I mean, I also create general
educational content because the more you
learn when you're young, the less likely
you are to fall for this stuff. But,
just the battleground to me is here on
the internet where these false
narratives are being peddled.
That's what I spend most of my time
thinking about attacking, you know,
making content to neutralize these very
specific toxic figures.
That's it's the front lines. I'm on the
front lines. That's where I spend my
time. Yeah. Can we talk a little bit
about
style?
And
so, it seems like you view yourself as
someone who is bullying the bullies or
something like that. Is that
is that right?
Yeah, absolutely.
It seems like these are Yeah, these are
horrible horrible people that are
knowingly pushing falsehoods that kill
people.
And
anybody who winds about my tone in in
addressing and neutralizing these
figures can [\h__\h] themselves. That's what
I think.
>> Okay.
It seems like some of the people that
you
are taking down are genuinely not smart.
Like
>> Yeah, Terrence Howard or I mean yeah,
that I mean that's the one that comes to
mind. Honestly, yeah.
>> Yeah, I make a lot of I make a lot of
content and you know, some of it is very
has a very extreme social necessity and
anything in the medical realm obviously
and I've been trying to focus on that
very heavily because I do recognize the
how how dire that is and this is a
societal need. Sometimes I comment on a
viral moment. So Terrence Howard I think
is genuinely mentally ill.
He's also a toxic person though. I mean
he's he's not a good person.
Um
but so with that stuff, I do enjoy
making fun of him as I think he deserves
it.
The narcissism there is just completely
off the charts, but it's also just kind
of a commentary on what's going on
culturally that a narrative like that
could gain any kind of traction
whatsoever whatsoever and commenting on
the mentality of the people who can
become ensnared by that, you know. Um So
it it's it's a valid it's valid
commentary, but as as you can see I'm
not talking about Terrence Howard every
week, you know, I I kind of cashed in on
that viral moment and then
I'm I'm focusing more on these very
specific cults that do more harm, but uh
Yeah, but sure. Fair fair play.
>> Yeah,
yeah, I
I don't obviously don't know Terrence
Howard
personally, but it does seem like
he's got that like self-aggrandizing
like something's something's perhaps not
right in his head. Like he he might
think that he's God.
And also genuinely mentally ill. Yeah,
and he also doesn't know the definitions
of common words. No idea. He has no
>> No idea what he's saying. It's word
salad. It's just he's just
spewing words at random.
>> And it seems like he's come up with some
ideas that I'm not like maybe I'm not
smart enough.
>> not.
He has not and that is not the case.
>> I'm I'm trying to stay open to may maybe
99% of it is gibberish and there's
something he's he's got something in
just unable to communicate it cuz he
doesn't have the vocabulary. Uh but
okay. Fair enough.
>> Um
For peop- for people like that though,
like um I don't know. It's like it feels
>> [snorts]
>> uh you're not supposed to like make fun
of the men- mentally handicapped and I
feel like some of these people are
mentally handicapped.
>> No, I skirt around it by him being
a horrible wife-beating lunatic uh
trying to start a cult, you know what I
mean? His
When when you have that level of
influence and you're that toxic a
person, you know, just get ready to be
neutralized, you know? I'm sorry. Like
if [snorts] you're going to poison
society, I'll be the antidote and I
don't care
um how you know, like it's just this
cry-bully mentality that so many of
these frauds have is they do so so much
damage and they are toxic people. Um and
this is in the government, too, you
know? But just they can be so horrible
and and so harmful and then the moment
that somebody brings that energy back to
them is just "Wow, why are you doing
this? You're so mean." It's like [\h__\h]
off. Absolutely not. I will not be
gaslit. You're horrible and I'm
neutralizing your influence on society
and you can cry about it till the cows
come home. Don't care.
>> When you're making your content, do you
have a
um
like an audience in mind or a persona or
in mind or like how how do you approach
uh
some new content?
>> Yeah. So I try to think very generally
and I try to cast as wide a net as
possible. The thing is that I've learned
over the years that the people who are
the most entrenched in these narratives
and these cults will not watch the
content. Does not matter what I say or
do, they will not press play, they will
not watch frame one. They just come to
whine about it in the comments and uh
just whine about how mean I am and how
unqualified I am and whatever other
manner of deflection that they can uh
offer. I will and I get in the trenches
and what it Where am I wrong? Can't
answer. Where am I wrong? Can't answer.
Where am I wrong? Can't answer.
Um, so people make the mistake of
thinking that I'm aiming specifically at
those who are most entrenched. I'm not.
I'm hoping that they'll that's that a
tiny percentage of them will will watch
it. But, um,
instead by going very broad, you hit a
number of other groups. Number one, you
hit the group of people who are, uh,
pretty neutral and kind of coming at
this fresh and may have seen some
content by somebody,
um, but are open to, uh, an alternate
perspective. And if they watch my
content the way that I set it up, it is
absolutely undeniable when I expose
somebody as being a lying fraud, there's
there's no room for for error here. I
cite so many sources and and deconstruct
their their narratives and deconstruct
their motives for their narratives, etc.
You can't If you come to my content with
an open mind, you there's no way to go
back to these frauds. And then the other
group that I'm addressing
is rational people who have gotten wind
of something and can tell that
something's wrong, but they don't have
the time to do all the research and and
and get and you know, find all of the
talking points that, uh, you know, all
the facts that counter the talking
points, etc. So, I'm arming the general
public with the ability to, um,
to push back on these narratives in
their own personal spheres. So, you have
a buddy who's an anti-vaxxer at work or
your in your family, you know, you have
a family member that spews this crap
that they heard from whoever whatever
jerk was on Joe Rogan.
Here you go. Here's a 45-minute video of
me deconstructing everything this jerk
says. Um, so here's here's here's what
you say. And watch that person in your
life be completely flabbergasted and
unable to counter these very basic
facts. Um, that sort of thing.
>> Yeah, so then, uh, they take your
information to Thanksgiving dinner and
uh, have some way to hold their ground.
Um,
Are are you
Is your YouTube personality the same
personality that you are at
Thanksgiving?
>> Uh, well, no. I mean, because what
I don't surround myself by grifting
science-denying frauds. So, there's uh
>> You don't choose your family, though.
Like, like, some some some of us are
>> My family
sure, totally. I mean, uh yeah. So, I
mean, I I treat people how they deserve
to be treated and I speak to people how
they deserve to be spoken to. Um, and
so, the the thing is that my content is
aimed uh at largely at at at
propaganda-peddling
frauds who deserve much worse than stern
words. A lot of them deserve to be in
jail. Um
and so, if you get a a picture of me as
sort of, you know, always that way,
well, look, I'm dealing with these very
specific figures that are not
representative of a of the general
public. Um, but uh in in my personal
life, obviously, I don't associate with
such people. So, I'm much more cheerful
and and garrulous and uh
uh easy to get along with. Um
>> Yeah, I mean, you're you've been
perfectly nice to me. Uh and obviously,
I've exposed some places where I've I've
got ideas that you I'm sure strongly
disagree with. Uh but that seems to be
my experience of you
as a guest on other uh shows is like you
you're cool until people aren't cool.
And then
you match their not coolness.
>> You start some [\h__\h] I'll smack you
down.
>> [laughter]
>> Um what just to end a couple ending
questions here. Um what do you think are
the most dangerous popular ideas
currently?
>> Everything in the medical realm. I mean,
just
>> what we've been seeing most specifically
aimed at vaccines. I mean, just anti-vax
propaganda is out of control. It's out
of control. I've never seen anything
like that like it. There's just so many
figures and it's and it's in the
government now, right? CDC's no longer a
trusted source of information under
Bobby Kennedy and every single one of
his underlings, everybody heading the
individual departments.
Um
yeah, kids are dying. Kids kids are
starting to die again from from you know
we're seeing a huge spike in measles
pertussis all these vaccine preventable
diseases
and then it's just generally leading
towards distrust of
medical science and and you know
legitimate uh
medicine which is yielding other deaths
um
Yeah and it's all just in favor like
just anything that's
like anti vax anti legitimate medicine
and then all of the the alt health
wellness
grifters that are trying to sell
whatever other snake oil those are two
sides of the same coin of course.
Um that's the most immediately directly
harmful. Then you have like you know
climate change denial.
>> Can you expand on Can you expand on the
medical thing real quick? So there's
anti-vax
What other can you list some other
things in that category for me?
>> Uh I mean any like whenever Bobby is
like oh Tylenol causes autism this kind
of crap you know what I mean just
anything that villainizes
you know I don't even want to say
medical establishment because there's
you know just there's these words that
have that have become negative buzzwords
like establishment and consensus. It's
very clever what this propaganda does
right establishment means established
established knowledge knowledge that we
have established over centuries that we
understand to be true over very rigorous
experimentation and testing and
confirmation of what we know. That
shouldn't be a bad word. Consensus same
thing right Consensus has become this
buzzword that the propaganda peddlers
have trained people to recoil at like a
Pavlovian response. We're like consensus
oh that's bad that's No it's just what
everyone who knows what the [\h__\h] they're
talking about agrees on because it's
true and empirically validated
consensus should be a good word
but that's what this propaganda needs to
train people to do is to take this
mountain of verified scientific
information and just brush it aside with
one fell swoop. Equate knowledge and
expertise with corruption. That's what
this propaganda has to do. Because if
you actually learn and understand
science, all of these other alternative
narratives, they just fall they crumble
so quickly. Um
So, anything named that, you know, like
the
the overly cartoonish villainization of
of of the pharmaceutical industry
um is is obviously part of it. Uh you
know, you can there's plenty of things
to criticize pharmaceutical industry
for, but this thing of like pharma bad
poison you with the poison things uh is
just it's it's infantile.
Um
>> Can Can you list a thing uh cuz you seem
to be uh careful there to use extreme
words describing pharma. Can you Can you
describe a couple things that you
personally feel like
are wrong with the pharmaceutical
industry?
>> Yeah, I mean, the same as there is with
any other gigantic industry um where
there where there are people that are
profit-oriented that are trying to
squeeze out a little more profit. So, uh
trying to convince doctors to prescribe
things that are slightly off-label.
Right? It's, you know, it's it it it is
unethical, right? I mean, like this
might not work that well, but will you
will you prescribe it anyway? But it's
still something, you know, it's still if
it's a drug that's FDA approved, you
know, it's it's it's had its safety
demonstrated, you know? Um will the
efficacy be as high for this uh
off-label indication? It might not be,
right? And so, that that's them
squeezing 5% more profit out of out of
something by uh by by in in maybe in
some cases even flat-out bribing
doctors. That could be the case. So, I
mean, there's there's stuff there to
talk about, you know, it's a large
industry. But just it's so not like this
gigantic equally gigantic and profitable
alt health wellness space where it's
just untested, unregulated supplements,
total snake oil, her harming people left
and right. You know what I mean? Like
it's it the the the the hyperfixation on
on on things that can be improved with
the pharmaceutical industry is never
accompanied with this with the necessary
scrutiny towards the snake oil peddlers
in the in the wellness space, you know.
>> Yeah. Yeah. So then if you could have
like one one billboard or one message
you could get into every home. You've
got your own PBS special or something
and you get you got a couple minutes to
get your message. What do you wish
everybody could understand?
>> I wish that everybody could understand
foundational science. As I said, high
school level physics, chemistry,
biology,
and medical, you know, information,
things like that. And then to just sort
of help people understand that if you
have like this anti-establishment bias
is such a is such a mind virus. Right?
It's something that makes you go
the actual people who know what they're
talking about, the global scientific
community, they're wrong, they're
corrupt, they're clueless, they're
captured, whatever. And this jerk on Joe
Rogan is the whistleblowing
truth-telling Luke Skywalker and I'm
going to put all my eggs in that basket.
That is the exact wrong way to approach
epistemology. Please stop doing it.
>> [laughter]
>> And that would be the elevator pitch, I
think.
>> All right. Well, thank you for joining
me and thank you for the content that
you're putting out. I I really enjoy the
information as a source of
alternative information to the
alternative information.
>> Absolutely, yeah.
That's a good way to good way to think
of it. Thanks for having me.
>> [snorts]
>> All right, Libby.