Episode 1289 Scott Adams: I Try to Answer all the Coronavirus Mysteries Plus Biden's Lies

Hey everybody, come on in here. It's about time for coffee with Scott Adams. Best part of the day every single time. And you forgot your coffee. Wait a minute, hold on. Matthew forgot his coffee. Everybody. Hold on. Matthew, we're waiting for you. Okay, all right. I think Matthew has his coffee. The rest of you, do you have your cupboard, mug or glass, a tank of chalice or style, a canteen, chugger, flask, a vessel of any kind. If you do, fill it with your favorite liquid. I like coffee. Join me now for the unparalleled pleasure of the dopamine hit of the day. The thing that got everybody going. It's the best part of the day. It's called the simultaneous sip and it's going to happen. Wait, wait, somebody's not ready. John, John, are you ready? Okay, now go. All right, I think we got everybody there. So my favorite story of the day says way too much about me. I was thinking about not mentioning this one, but I figure I'll just be transparent about this. I don't know what this says about me, that this is my favorite story. There was an elderly couple, man in his 80s and his wife at home and there was a home invader. Home invader comes in with a knife threatening to kill the wife. The 82 year old Vietnam veteran takes his shotgun that was I guess displayed on the wall, takes it off the wall and beats the guy to death with it. I'm not proud of the fact that that's my favorite story, but I have a soft spot because there are a lot of these stories. It's usually a veteran. Have you noticed that? It's often a veteran. So I guess whatever that military training is, that's good stuff. It doesn't wear off. No matter how long you've not been in the military, apparently you're still willing to take the gun off the wall and be somebody to death. Now extra ashamed of the following thing that after he had subdued the guy, he finished him off. Now Once you're over 80, I think you can do that. I don't know if somebody say 35, had subdued an invader in their home and then once the person's on the ground, they beat them until they were actually dead with a blunt object, wouldn't there be some kind of charges? Because once you've stopped them, I don't know if you're allowed to finish them off. But if you're over 80 and you're a military veteran, thank you for your service. And by the way, he was protecting his wife. Let me put forth A new rule, just in case. The legal system doesn't cover every situation. Once you've subdued somebody and they're unconscious in your own home, it's probably illegal to kill them once they're no longer an obvious threat. But I would like to propose an exception to that rule. If that guy was trying to kill your wife, if that guy was trying to kill your wife or any family member, you can finish him off. You can finish the job. Because let me tell you something. If anybody ever tries to kill my wife and I get them down, they're not going to get a second chance. I'm not going to let them ever get up again. Because you only get one chance to try to kill my wife. That's not like, why don't you circle back situation. You know, we're good for now, but maybe later, you know, you could take another try at it. No, no. If somebody tries to kill your wife, it should just be legal to finish him off. Now, I don't think that's the way the law works, but it should. All right, let's talk about something else. The AP reports that the US Life expectancy has dropped by a year because of the pandemic. Number one. Do you believe that we can calculate life expectancy that. Well, maybe we can, but I don't know if a year is something we can necessarily pick out of the noise. But if it's true, let's say we can measure that. Maybe we can. It's possible. Maybe we can. Do you believe that the life expectancy dropped by a year? What if it did? Suppose it did drop by a year. Would that, Would that convince you that this wasn't just a bad cold? Yeah. A lot of people doubting it. Yeah. I feel like. I feel as if the only rational opinion to have about any data is that maybe not. Maybe the data is wrong. Because how often have we seen accurate data in the last year? Never. How about never have we seen any accurate data on anything? Because everything that we've seen has been revised. Do you think they're done revising? I don't think so. We haven't seen any accurate data in a year. But then we get this new one and we're like, well, here's some data. I guess this is accurate. Looks like it's got a source. So if we've learned nothing from the pandemic, the one thing we should take away is that you can't trust any of your data, any of it. Now, you still have to make decisions. So what the hell are you going to do. You don't trust any of your data, but you have to make decisions anyway. You don't get a pass. And even doing nothing is a decision. So what the hell are you going to do? So you're going to have to take some guesses about what to believe. If I had to rank the things that are likely to be true, I would say that measuring the life expectancy, probably one of the things we can do a little bit better than other things, probably. I would imagine that the system for reporting actual deaths, no matter the cause, is probably pretty advanced, I would think. Now, we don't know the cause exactly. I mean, there could have been some mixture of causes for this, but keep an eye on that. All right, here's the biggest question of the day. Why the hell are coronavirus deaths and infections and hospitalizations plummeting all over the world at the same time? Is the reason that they're plummeting at the same time all over the world? Seasonality? Because it's different seasons all over the world. It's not the same season. And if, as happened to me this morning, when I said, hey, it's plummeting, people said to me, and I would like to give a good impression of the average person who responded to me, duh. Scott, everybody knows a virus is seasonal. It's seasonal. And so when you see it acting seasonally, why are you surprised that a virus which is always seasonal is acting seasonally? Scott, why don't you understand that? To which I say I was not under the impression that a virus even uses a calendar. How does the virus know. How does it know what season it is? Right. If the virus doesn't know what season it is, how can it go away? Oh, I know what you're saying. Seasonality is really just a shorthand for the obvious stuff, right? There's more sunshine, there's more vitamin D when it's warmer. The virus maybe doesn't do the same stuff, you know, plus, you're indoors more, so it's all of that stuff. Right? You're indoors more. Don't get the sun. The heat doesn't kill the virus when it's on surfaces. Right? All debunked. It's all been debunked. Each component of seasonality has been debunked. In other words, they've studied humidity. It doesn't seem to be the answer. It's not the heat, exactly. Because let me ask you this. How much time do you spend outdoors in, let's say, Palm Springs or. Well, actually, they probably golf A lot in the winter. But you would notice if any of those sub things within seasonality, if any one of them actually made a difference, we would know that by now. Right, because you could just look at different places. Take a place that's really hot and it's so hot that they don't go outside in the winter, in the summer I mean, so they don't go outside in the summer because it's too hot. Do they have a plunge in viruses because it's summer or do they have an increase in infections because they're indoors because it's so hot they have to stay indoors. We don't see that. So we're not seeing a correlation with staying indoors because people do it in hot places. We don't see scientifically that it's the heat or the humidity. They test that in labs, etc. And they don't, doesn't seem to make a difference. So every component of seasonality, including, and I hate to say this, but I think vitamin D has been debunked. Now I'm not going to say that for sure, but I think it has and here's why. Because I believe that every time you see a study about vitamin D, it's at least as likely to be backwards correlation, meaning that people who have low vitamin D have the worst outcomes. But people who are unhealthy in general probably have low vitamin D. So it might be telling you nothing except that people are generally unhealthy, are more likely to die. Number two, we know that when people get the vitamin D concentrate or the activated vitamin D, whatever it is in the hospitals, there's some studies are saying that it makes a difference. So therefore you say, well wait a minute, if it makes people better in the hospital, duh, it must be good to take your vitamin D pills and get some sun. But apparently the, the type of vitamin D that you get in hospital is an activated type. You can't buy a pill over the counter that gives you that and you probably can't get sunshine. That would be equal to what you're getting in the hospital with a, with that activated vitamin D. So I don't think vitamin D is the answer, although I, I, I'm fairly confident that it's, you know, some part of, some part of the equation. But I don't think it's the big thing that doesn't, it doesn't seem to be that correlated or correlated enough with the big peaks and valleys. Then I saw somebody said it's really about holiday get togethers because if you look at the United States, our peaks are perfectly correlated with Halloween, Thanksgiving and then Christmas. And you look at the graph and you go, oh, that's pretty convincing. And then the skeptic comes in five seconds later and says, you're forgetting the regional effects. If you look at the country's average, it does look correlated with those three events. But if you look at regions, there are regions that didn't have that effect. How could that be? It was only the average that looked like it. But how in the world could there be a region in the United States that didn't have a Christmas effect? Is there some region in the United States where they don't celebrate Christmas the same way? I don't think so. It's pretty uniform across the country, I think so. Almost everything that you can come down to doesn't matter. What about leadership? How about leadership? We've got countries doing all kinds of different things in, you know, from Sweden to India to China to the United States, all kinds of different leadership things, and they're all having similar peaks and valleys no matter what the leaders are doing. How do you explain that? Does that tell you that masks don't work? It doesn't tell you that. It definitely doesn't tell you that masks don't work. It just tells you we can't suss out how much it works and explain the whole curves that way, because the beginning of those big peaks and valleys that we see, I don't think the mask wearing was much different in the beginning, the top or the end. I haven't seen that much difference in mask wearing where I am anyway. But the peaks and the valleys are still happening. So while I do believe that masks work somewhat, it definitely doesn't explain the big differences. So then I saw a tweet this morning from a very well informed gentleman, Vincent Rajkumar. He's a professor at the Mayo Clinic and he's oncologist and blah, blah. So he's got a lot of qualifications. And he was saying that in India there's, you know, just like everywhere in the world, it seems there's a big drop in infections and deaths. So it's not just that the infections have gone down. This is an important point. If you think that the reason the infections have gone down is something about testing, you know, Biden's in office so we're testing less or whatever. Keep in mind, it's the same things happening all around the world and Biden didn't get elected anywhere else. It's not a Biden effect, nor is it how much they're testing because the correlation happens no matter what the countries are doing. The testing wouldn't have anything to do with how many deaths and ICU residents there were. We're seeing still a big mystery. What Vincent Rajkumar adds to this is that in India at least, they had a gigantic spike and now a gigantic decline. Apparently, the seroprevalence in a few cities. Chennai is one. Chennai, if I'm pronouncing that right, was 40% in November, which means it could easily be over 50% by now. I think there was at least one other city in India in which they did the study and found close to half of the people had signs of the infection without necessarily having had any symptoms. Half. Now, if you say to me, well, that explains India, India got some kind of herd immunity, but it doesn't explain other countries because other countries did more of a lockdown. And I don't think their seroprevalence would be anywhere near 50%. Could be close to 20, but I don't think it's anywhere near 50. And yet the similar outcomes. So, again, what the hell is going on? Now, some of it might be that we're getting smarter about treating people when they have symptoms. So that might be part of the ICU and death rate falling. Could be. But I know you're going to say it's hydroxychloroquine, but the total amount of hydroxychloroquine pills that were available in India, I saw 100 million. Now, I don't know how many pills one person takes, but I don't think 100 million pills would explain what's happening there. Because again, same experience in other countries doing completely different things. So even if hytroxycholine works according to the studies, and by the way, I did read a long paper saying that all of the studies on hydroxychloroquine say they work. Now, I can't say that's true. I forget if I tweeted that, but it was very credible. This is a problem when people like me look at scientific explanations or statistical explanations. I'm out of my field. So I'm judging based on how it's written and whether the person has qualifications. And, you know, I'm judging in all these indirect ways, but the argument was this, that 100% of all the studies have shown hydroxychloroquine works. Now, you probably say, that's not right, Scott. It was only the observational ones, where you sort of look backwards, that seem to say it Works the Zelenko, the Renault, ddo, whatever. They were not randomized control tests. In the randomized and controlled tests, it consistently did not show an effect. Is that what you've heard? Would you say that this is true as a general statement? All the ones where you look backwards and it's not the perfect way to judge science, but we use it if we can, if it's the only thing we have. And those seem to universally indicate that hydroxychloroquine probably works. But all the ones where they did a really good randomized controlled study, the really good gold standard, it didn't work. That's what you've been told, right? Is that your current understanding? This paper I read, and I wish I could refer to it, made the following point, which I'm not going to tell you is true. I'll just pass it along. The randomized controlled trials either focused in the wrong place, meaning looking at people who already were sick, which is not the whole point of hydroxychloroquine. You don't give it to people after they're really sick. So some of the randomized control tests were just irrelevant. They're not even studying the right thing, so throw those away. That still leaves some randomized controlled studies that showed no effect. But there might be another reason that doesn't show effect. It could be the number of people in the study. And if you take the number of people in the study, whether the hydroxychloroquine worked or did not work, it wouldn't show up. So the number of people in the study was not sufficient that you could have actually proven anything that it worked or that it didn't work. And sure enough, they did not show that it worked. But they also didn't show it didn't work because they didn't have enough. Enough study people. All they did is show that they couldn't show that it worked. And how does the news present that? The news says it doesn't work. But that's not what those tests showed, according to this person who seemed smart that I was reading. And what they did was they took the randomized control test that did study at least something close to what you were supposed to be studying, and they added them together, speaking loosely, not in statistically technical ways. If you take the various randomized control tests, you add them together until they do have statistical meaning. The benefit of the hydroxychloroquine is really clear, like it's a big benefit. So according to this one author, the current situation is 100% of every hydroxychloroquine test or observational trial that asks the right question about taking it early, not about taking it too late, but about taking it early, that all of them show a big improvement. But only if you take the randomized controlled ones and add them together so they have enough statistical weight now can you add different things together. It's not a perfect way to do it. Sort of looking at the macro picture and doing statistics on the statistics, I guess you could say. Now, I do not promote that point of view which I'm describing, which is somebody else's point of view and somebody who looked into it. I'm just telling you that there is an argument out there that every look at hydroxychloroquine showed it worked. So that there's a point of view out there that says that it is not my point of view so I don't get kicked off of social media. Got that? Not my point of view. Just telling you somebody else's point of view. All right, so here's the thing. I don't think there's enough hydroxychloroquine that was prescribed in India. I don't think 100 million tablets would explain what's going on there. And the other problem is, apparently if you don't get the hydroxychloroquine pretty close to the first day you get the infection, its ability to help you decreases rapidly the longer you wait. How many people take hydroxychloroquine the day that they get the infection? Zero. Maybe zero. I wouldn't take any hydroxychloroquine or anything else until I had something that looked like a symptom. And that's going to be days later. Right. So I don't know that even if hydroxychloroquine works, I don't know. That could practically work because you don't know the day you got it. So the only way you could do it is everybody take it all the time, I suppose. But nobody's going to take it on the day they got the virus because they don't know they have the virus. They're going to wait a few days. So I'm just not even sure it would make that much difference even if it works the way it's being prescribed anyway. So what do you think of. Oh, I'm sorry. The seroprevalence was somewhat. I think I may be mixing my topics a little bit. So part of the theory about India is that they would have cross immunity from prior coronavirus infection. Now, I thought that had been debunked, but I don't have a source for that. Last June or so, people were talking about this cross immunity thing, but are they still talking about that? Because I feel like I saw something that debunked it recently, but I don't have a source, so I'm not going to say that's true. We'll talk about Simone Sanders in a minute. Somebody's asking about that. All right, so here is my best guess on what it is that's driving infections all over the world. And I'll just put this out here because I don't have a better infection. I think the biggest factor is the degree of strange you let into your house. Now I'm using strange the way the old timers use strange to refer to having sexual relations with somebody who's not your regular. That would be your. Your strange. So an old timey. Old timey kind of saying. It seems to me that the thing about holidays is not so much the weather, because the weather is different all over the world during holidays, but rather it's the one time people aren't going to wear masks and they'll be in close contact with people from other places. I think. When your family comes in town, you don't wear a mask, do you? Does anybody wear a mask if their cousin comes into town for Christmas and your cousin is staying at your house? Are you wearing a mask in your house because your cousin came and your cousin's from another state? Right? Oh, somebody said yes. Somebody actually said yes. But the comments coming through are no, no, no, hell no. So I think that you have this problem. The number of people who cross the transom into your house who are not your regulars is probably 80% of the story. That's my guess. My guess is that 80% of the infections are because you let somebody in your house who is not among your regular people you let in the house. And that, of course, goes wild around, you know, holidays. And that's probably the whole thing. Do I. Nope. Nope, I do not. So if my adult stepdaughter visits me in my house, as she did recently, so she's socially distancing in another place, typically. So I don't run into her, you know, too many times, even though we live locally, but when my own stepdaughter comes in my house, no, I don't. I don't wear a mask. But if anybody else comes in, when the plumber comes in, you know, etc. I mask up the whole time. So anybody else who comes in my house, I'm going to mask, but my stepdaughter can't do it. I just can't do it. I mean, I know I should, but I can't now. I also, you know, keep a little distance and stuff, but I don't really try too hard. Right. And I think that that's just a universal truth. You just don't mask your own family members inside your private home. And part of it is because we're dumb, right? We're dumb. And we think, well, my cousin looks healthy, so I guess there's no coronavirus. Cousin looks healthy to me. And then your cousin starts coughing, and then you go to the next level of denial. You go, well, cousin's a smoker, probably a smoker. It's fine. No coronavirus there. So we can very easily talk ourselves out of taking precautions. All right. Brian Stelter humorously was arguing, I guess yesterday that the news is not boring without Trump. No, the news is not boring. In fact, look at all the things that happened in January. And he said, look at all the stuff. I mean, January was full of news, mostly about Trump. What news was, what news was Brian Stelter watching for the month of January? The only news I saw was about Trump is what Trump did on the pandemic compared to Biden, what Trump did, you know, the Capitol assault, Trump's impeachment, what Trump is saying. Yeah, January was full of news. Brian Stelter, about Trump. So good luck when he's, I don't know if he'll ever be out of the news. So now that Trump has, at least he's off Twitter and he's maybe stepped back a little bit, we don't know for a while. And Rush Limbaugh has passed. Who exactly is the voice of conservatives now? Who would. There's, there's a giant void there, isn't there? Who would you say is the voice of conservatives? I'm seeing Tucker Carlson, Rand Paul, Ben Shapiro, Ted Cruz, Crowder, Glenn Beck. So those are the names. Mark Stein. I'm just reading some names going by. But which one of those would carry the weight of a Trump or a Rush Limbaugh? Which one of those has that kind of effect? Because some of them have big audiences. Yeah. Don Bongino, Dan Bongino, Hannity. I don't know. Don't know. I feel as if there's a void and that the ones, the ones you name are obviously the, the ones who. Candace Owens. Okay. Mark Levin. Yeah. You know, but all of the people you, that I've mentioned Have you noticed that they all seem to be in the same sort of zone. Right. There's nobody that we've listed who's just like, obviously a level above the others in the list. They're all good names. They're just, it's not obvious who's going to be the, you know, who emerges from that. So watching CNN turn on the Democrats is. And Biden's administration is fun. I was watching John Berman pressing Simone Sanders on the whether teachers should get vaccinated. You have to watch that interview. It's going around the Internet. But to watch Simone Sanders avoid the question. It was a simple question. And Berman, to his credit, was pressing hard and he was saying, I like this. He goes, it's not a trick question. I feel like you guys have treated it like a trick question. Is it safe for teachers to go back to school? And then she answers something about we think teachers should be prioritized for vaccinations. And then John Berman says, okay, okay. That's not quite the answer to the question. The question is with or without vaccinations? Or are you saying that they must be vaccinated before they go back? What is your view? Is it safe for teachers to go back? Well, let me tell you what the Joe Biden administration says about vaccinations. And like, Berman is like, no, that's not the question. It's a yes or no. And she wouldn't answer the biggest question in the country, the biggest question about kids going back to school. And Biden's spokesperson wouldn't directly answer it. Are you kidding me? That's a question you have to directly answer. Let me ask you this. Do you think Trump would not be able to answer that frickin question? Yeah, he could. Do you think Kayleigh McEnany couldn't answer that question? Of course she could. It's not a hard question. It's a yes or no question. Now you can say yes or no and then add some detail, but it's still a yes or no question. And that was shockingly incompetent, both as communication but also as policy is the biggest question. And they can't even tell us if they have an opinion. That's like not even being there. It's like taking the time off or something, I guess. There's reports that Biden's approval rate is plummeting because of the school openings. Lack of clarity. Now, remember all the words that were used about the Trump administration. It was chaos and incompetence. Chaos and incompetence. But when this happens with the Biden administration, which sure looks like incompetence to me. I don't know how else could you frame it? It just looks like incompetence because it. And I'm not even, I'm not even arguing against the policy. I'm saying if you can't even tell us your opinion of the policy, that's incompetence, you know, independent of whether the policy is good or bad. All right, Adam Kinzinger, so he's Republican and he's, he was one of the ones who voted to impeach Trump, and he started a group called Country First. So he doesn't like what Trump was up to. So instead of America first, they've come up with this great, this great slogan, Country First. I'll tell you, if you wanted to get away from the whole America first vibe, you would run to Country First. Wait a minute. Those sound very similar, don't they? Right? The guy who's the anti Trump can't even come up with a fucking slogan that doesn't sound exactly like Trump. Now remember what I've been telling you forever, that the longer Trump is out of office, the better he will look because the opposition to him was reflexive. Once he's gone and you get to actually look at the topic and actually independently think what makes sense, a lot of things he got criticized for are going to sound kind of sensible. And while Adam Kinzinger's country first idea is not the same as America first, if you can't even get the slogan part right, I don't even need to listen to the rest of it right. Because it feels like getting the slogan right or at least not making it the same sounding as America first, the thing you're against or the person you're against, I guess the policies, I don't know, not a good start. But country first in their context means not being political about political decisions, but rather making decisions that are good for the country. But Democrats don't make decisions that are good for the country, do they? Don't they make decisions that are good for the world, not just the country? I think that's a philosophical difference. And anyway, So Daniel Dale, who was hired to do fact checking during the Trump administration, I guess he hasn't been fired yet. So in order to preserve his job and to not make it look as if he was just a hatchet man against Trump, he remains on the job, but now he's doing fact checking about Biden. Now, if Biden gave a town hall in which he made four False claims. What would be the word or words you would use to describe someone who made several statements which were not true? If it's Trump, would you say he's lying? You would, right? Liar. Liar. But no, if it's Biden, you say he made at least four, and I quote, false statistical claims. That's right. They were just, just statistical claims. I mean anybody can make a mistake on like a statistical claim. I mean that, that doesn't even count, right? How are we even, why are we even talking about it? It's not like it was a lie. It's not like he's incompetent. I mean those would be big problems. No, no, no. We're talking about like some statistical, you know, you know, just, we don't need to talk about it. It's just statistical stuff. Well, what were they? One, he said, Biden said if we kept the minimum wage of 725 and then just if we had indexed it for inflation, that it would already be 20 bucks an hour by now. So inflation would have just already pushed it to 20 bucks. So what's the big deal about 15 bucks as a minimum wage when it would have been 20 bucks if you just let inflation take it from 7, 25. Except that nothing like that is true. Do you know what the inflation would have been? Not 20 bucks. It would have gone from $7.25 an hour to a little over $8. So he wasn't, he wasn't even in the general vicinity of the right answer. Now that's just a statistical claim, right? It's kind of a big one because the difference between doubling the minimum wage versus not even raising it is pretty big. That's not a little statistical problem. It changes your entire impression of the topic. Because if you told me it was true that the old minimum wage would equate to $20, if we hadn't changed anything, I would actually find that kind of persuasive. I would say. Really? Well, if it wasn't a problem before and it's basically the same number now, why would it be a problem now? But in fact it's not true. So it changes your whole opinion of what this conversation is about. That's not a false statistical claim. That's a real big problem for a real big topic. What else do you have? Let's see. He claimed that the majority of undocumented immigrants are not Hispanic. A majority of non documented immigrants to this country are not Hispanic. He said, what's the real number? Approximately 77%. 77% are estimated, it's hard to count exactly. Are from Latin America and Mexico. He didn't even know that the majority are Hispanic. He's in charge of that. He's in charge of that. Didn't know even the basics of where they're coming from. Small statistical problem. You ignore it. It's a little statistical thing. I'd say that's a pretty big difference. He was talking about, let's see, he also talked about China's demographic challenge because he said they're going to end. Biden said when he came back from China one time talking to them, they're going to end their one child policy and they won't let in immigrants. And that's going to be a problem because more people are retiring than working. And China. So he says how can they sustain economic growth when there are more people retiring than there are working? And the fact check is that's not even close to true. That's not even in the same universe as anything that's slightly true. No, there are a lot more people being born in China than are retiring. It's not even close. So those are just three little statistical things he got wrong. All right. I am watching with amusement as CNN tries to handle the Governor Cuomo situation with the nursing home deaths and then the covering up of the data, etc. Allegedly. Now there's a new story that Governor Cuomo threatened another politician, a Democratic assemblyman. So this is somebody on his own in his own party. And in a phone call, he allegedly threatened to destroy him. Now, apparently these Democrats are big on destroying people. I'll destroy you. Now, remember when I told you when the, whoever the communications guy and Biden staff, he ended up quitting because he had threatened that he would destroy somebody. And I told you at the time, it's actually kind of common political talk. You know, in private conversations, I'll bet it's fairly common for a politician to or anybody in that business to threaten to destroy somebody. I just don't think it's that unusual. And sure enough, Cuomo threatened to destroy Assemblyman Ron Kim. Now, I would just like to point out that 100% of the people that Cuomo has threatened to destroy are Asian American, 100%. There's only one of them that we know of. But if this had been Republican, I feel like they would have pointed that out. But here's the fun part. So Jake Tapper, to his credit, is going hard at this story and pulling no punches. At least what I saw. How does Jake Tapper interact with his colleague Chris Cuomo, who works at the network, when Jake Tapper is going hard at his brother. Is that an awkward situation? How do those meetings go? It feels like that would just be really awkward. But credit to CNN for not. It didn't look like they were pulling any punches. At least what I saw. Let's see. That is about what I wanted to talk about today, except that China is. China is claiming that maybe the virus, COVID virus came out of an American lab. So that's what China is claiming, that the virus might have come from an American lab. Okay. And they took the American lab virus and we took it to Wuhan and released it near there. I mean, I don't know what's that theory? So while I am not. I'm not convinced that the Wuhan lab is where the virus came from, I don't think that we can know that. And I certainly wouldn't trust any of our intelligence sources on a question like that. But I don't think we'll ever know where it came from. Was stolen from the Canadians. Somebody says, yeah, we're just never going to know. All right, here's my last opinion on India. The average Asian India is less. Could be that they get exposed to more things that tax their immune system. So maybe they're just more ready for it. But there's something going on in India and other places, and we'd like to figure it out. And how did we get to this place in the pandemic without knowing the biggest cause of what makes infections go up and down? How could we possibly be in this situation? I mean, it feels impossible, doesn't it, that we could be in this situation and we still don't know the biggest cause of it. Somebody says India is Sweden. Yeah. Everything you see on the Internet that says Sweden did this and got this result. You should assume that that's all fake, or at least the credibility is zero. Some of it might be real, but you should treat it as if it's all fake. I don't think there's. There are any good charts about COVID on the Internet is my thinking. We talked about hydroxychloroquine. They didn't have enough pills even available for their own population that would have made this much difference. So even if it worked, it wouldn't have made that much difference. They didn't have that many pills. When is monsoon season? Yeah, I don't think it's weather. I don't think it's heat. It seems just how much strange you let into your house. I think that's just it. Florida did it. Right. I don't believe that any of the leadership hypotheses will hold up. I don't believe that in the long run you'll find that what Florida did was the smart leadership thing. I don't think you'll find that. I think you'll find that the biggest effects have nothing to do with what our leaders did and had a lot to do with what the people did in their own house. Probably just my guess, schools never closed in Sweden. Yeah, but. All right. Oh, yeah. About Kamala taking over. Yeah. So Kamala Harris is taking calls with world leaders and it is starting to look as if they're just prepping her for the job. And because masks are not mandatory, it doesn't mean people aren't watching them. That's correct. So whenever you try to compare Sweden, etc. It's hard to factor in the fact that apparently the Swedes socially distance naturally. There's a whole lot of socially distancing going on. Just naturally. They don't have many people per household, etc. That might be the whole story. Number of people per household. Yes. As somebody is asking here in the comments, what brought the Spanish flu to an end? And the answer is we don't know. We don't know what stopped the Spanish flu. Think about that. It wasn't immunity because not enough people got it. But if we don't know what stopped the Spanish flu, we're really flying blind on this one too, I think. And I would have to say there must be some kind of natural immunity that people have because I don't know what else it could be. It's got to be some kind of natural immunity, right? What else could it be? All right, that's all I got for now and I'll talk to you later. All right. Go back to first principles. Give me more. Give me more than that. I hear what you're saying, but I need some context. Am I worried about the shot? I'm going to wait until the last minute since it's not available to me. I'm not going to make a decision until it is. You please have Montana skeptic and or, and or Tesla charts on the show to expose the Elon Musk fraud. Well, I don't know what fraud that is, but I wouldn't bet against Elon Musk. Somebody says I had Covid but no antibodies do you know, apparently false positive Covid tests are a thing. I just heard of a number of them recently in my personal life. And have I ever chatted with Penn Jillette. I have, actually. I've hung out with Penn Jillette after one of his shows in Las Vegas. Great guy. I like him a lot. I don't know what I'm saying. Never bet against Elon Musk. I wouldn't. Florida did better because they did not destroy their economy. Well, here's the thing. We don't know why Florida is doing well. So Florida and California acted completely differently and got the same result. Ish. Or is it Texas? Might be Texas and California, but we know that California acted completely differently and got the same result as other people. Did you miss the Texans who were frozen out from tuning in? It probably has a pretty big effect on viewership here. Yeah. Somebody says Florida is not open and free, so they. I'm sure they have restrictions. Yeah. I do think that not destroying your economy is important, but in terms of the number of infections, it doesn't seem to matter what leaders do. Yeah. So I will. I'll give Florida credit for not destroying their economy. That's for sure. All right, that's all for now. I'll talk to you.