Welcome back everyone. I am Caspian Sea.
I'm joined as usual by my partner in crime.
Mr. Bennett Tomlin, how are you? I'm doing well.
Cass. How are you?
I'm doing good today. We're talking about the topic
near and dear to our hearts, but we're going to be trying to
figure out the nuances of it and trying to help people think
about it. In a healthier way.
I think there's been some weird stuff going on.
We're talking about skepticism, we're talking about our our
wheelhouse, this is kind of this is kind of something.
We've been doing since we've been involved in the
cryptocurrency industry because we mainly started out talking
about tether and everyone needing to be skeptical about it
lately. There's been a lot of issues
with both in amplification of certain kinds of skepticism and
a degradation of others. And I think we need to outline
what's going on. Not to suggest that we're the
professional Skeptics, but to say that we have some experience
in being skeptical that we have some experience in being
critical and that leapfrogging into total conspiracy land or
into unreality can damage not just the discussion or the The
way people are companies or other entities are perceived but
can actually do damage to your own reputation.
So I think it's important for people to reflect on this stuff
before they think to themselves. Like, I have to be skeptical of
every single thing that's ever been said period Bennett, how do
you want to start this? How do you want to kind of delve
into this enormous swimming pool?
Or piranha piranha so piranhas. Live in rivers.
Yes, leaks. Okay.
Just say your fresh lobbies. Get a water things about a fish
could live in lakes. All right.
Wow. See be skeptical, man.
Skepticism is very important, obviously, that's why we do it
because we think it's important to be skeptical.
And like generally, you know, I bring you live in lakes.
Fuck you they live in lakes and rivers I just checked.
This is why you got to be skeptical, folks.
Don't just believe him, don't just believe, don't look, I get
easy. Look smarter than me, he sounds
smarter than me, he behaves harder than I do, but you gotta
be a little support here somewhere.
All right. Sorry, I'm sorry, I'm sorry.
No, but like I tried to look for inconsistencies I try to look
for things that don't make sense and don't fit together and I try
to do it starting with the default.
Assumption that most people are reasonably good people who are
making a reasonable effort to do the right thing.
But it's easy. Once you start to do it to
start, the human brain is well-suited to finding patterns
in noise and alike, look at a bunch of different points and
start to see, very thin threads that go between them.
And it's easy to start to grasp onto those threads really hard
and become convinced that these circumstantial connections are
evidence of conspiracy. And like, I think, part of the
reason it we've been able to Moderate.
Some of those natural tendencies is because we've been able to
work together on this for the last four years or whatever.
And so when one of us starts to careen down a certain rabbit
hole, it's possible for the other one to go will couldn't
this just be blank and you have to then pause and step back and
go. Yeah I guess it could be.
Then you have to like with that thought look for the confirming
and disconfirming evidence and try to work through it from
there. Yeah.
It's ours are pretty classic Occam's razor.
I think I think it's one. Occam's razor is one of the most
useful kind of philosophical tools to reflect on when you're
trying to be skeptical. Because the idea with, in case
anyone is unfamiliar, I assume everybody is.
But in case anyone isn't Occam's razor is, basically the idea
that the simplest solution is the solution, like if you're if
you're if you're believing that oh the reason that my podcast
isn't popular, is because the bigger podcast are.
Are doing this campaign to keep my podcast at Lake.
Joe Rogan knows about crypto critics corner and he's doing
everything in his power to silence us.
Here's how I know this to be true and I can make up all kinds
of nonsense if I want to, or I can realize that our audience is
obviously going to be a lot smaller than the enormous
audience. That Joe Rogan has been able to
build over years and years and no way, you're onto something,
you see, we don't share it on Spotify.
Like we chart on Apple and Joe Rogan signed an exclusive deal
with Spotify and If I had to drive through a screen baby.
So this is what I'm saying, I'm saying, it's super easy to go
there if you want to and try to make excuses but it's usually
the most obvious answer which is like okay we're involved in a
very Niche industry. That's what we talked about
almost all of the time our audience is going to reflect
that and his audience is going to reflect his his
Communications marketing deal is marketability.
All of his stuff, right? This is this is this is
something you have to think about consistently when You are
trying to be skeptical of stuff, but this kind of brings me to
the point, which is, but both of our points.
We've had a, we've had a slew of unfounded skepticism lately,
specifically, I think it's worth noting that Elon Musk tweeted
out a article by a fake. Hoax news site based in Santa
Monica, California that had said something along the lines of
Nancy Pelosi's husband was dating the man or like, trying
to sleep with the man who broke into their house and threatened
to kill him and Nancy Pelosi. You know, you have gone from
zero to 1,000 in in less than a second.
You are you are in. You are acting as though your
SpaceX rocket, hear it like dude.
We don't need to go that far. You can pull it back.
It's fair to have questions about the attack.
I think that's that's fine. If you want have questions about
the attack and how it happened. Feel free to ask questions but
jumping to conclusions is really, really silly now.
Did did he Lon? Umm, that he tweeted this out
and did and kind of push this insane.
Fake narrative. No, he didn't own it, he deleted
the Tweet, he deleted the Tweet. He did not own it apologize and
try to move on which Use me to the other person that I want to
talk about who did it right? Because someone we know and or
not. No but someone that we admire
and who I personally think is one of the best Finance
interviewers in the world right now.
Deirdre Boza who works for NBC NBC, she got caught up in some
nonsense because she went out to Twitter headquarters and Lima
Johnson to made-up names and Case you're not getting what I'm
saying? Like my Johnson, these two, Lads
were pretending to be Twitter. Employees holding, you know,
Michelle Obama magazines and just being complete rolls.
Pretending, they just got fired by Elon Musk lo and behold
Deirdre along with several other media, Outlets believed it and
reported on it. To say, she got piled on would
be a euphemism. People were not just making fun
of her, but just railing on her and CNBC and saying this is what
what's to be expected? Blah, blah, blah, blah, blah,
blah, blah. Thankfully Deirdre then about
two or three days later. Deleted the Tweet screencap.
The tweet and posted an apology where she said I made a mistake.
I am so sorry that I I did that. You should expect better of me.
I should expect better of me, and I'm going to do everything I
can to not make mistakes like that again.
I cannot tell you one. That is one of the hardest
things to do. It is so hard to sit upright,
talk to your audience and say, look guys, I really fucked up.
I am so sorry. I hope you can still support me
despite this. So first of all, that's very
difficult Bravo to her for doing it too.
I hope to see a lot more of that.
I hope that we can see a lot more journalist.
And media personalities who make mistakes.
Stand up and go. I am so sorry.
I did that. That was, that was really silly
because the end result of this. This is, and this is the final
part of this, this monologue. I've got going on here, is that
Everyone embraced her apology. Like I have never seen as much
as much, like the industry as a whole just going.
Well, thank you for doing this. Thank you.
Thank you so much for doing this and you know, you've done a lot
of important work and it's okay. It's okay, we appreciate you
owning it and I like, I don't know.
That's about as that's about all you can ask for from your
audience and that's all you can ask for from the people who were
giving you media who are the content creators and And the
ones bringing it to you, if they make a mistake and they own it.
I like there's very little else you can ask because we'll all
going to make mistakes at some point.
You and I have made mistakes, it's something that happens.
I think kind of what you're getting at here.
Is that In all these mediums and across all these things.
You have a responsibility to be responsible to try to find the
best information you can and report it as accurately as you
can and doing that. Well, risks, sometimes making a
mistake it is not always possible to check every possible
claim through to its entire possible, conclusion in the time
frame. You have to report certain
things. So it is incredibly responsible
that when you fall short of being able to check search
Things and you end up propagating myths and
disinformation that you then take an active effort to try to
make right? What you did wrong to try to win
to try to make sure that it's now as knowledgeable as
possible. That that information is not
true in this instead is the true information, which she did an
excellent job of and many other people try to instead, just
leave mistakes. They've made in the past and by
avoiding acknowledging them, just hope they fall out of me.
Emery or double down, or double dot, which is the other all,
that's the other option that's even worse.
But let's but we had, there's actually a great example of
this, which we've been seeing lately and this is so sad to me,
which it comes from a source that I used to enjoy very much,
which is the intercept and Glenn, Glenn Greenwald which,
you know, they're separated. Now they are not the same thing,
but both of these have now, been having these horrendous mistakes
that they don't clarify that they double down on that they
ignore and wait. So the intercepted this big
piece on all of this Department of Homeland Security, like
secret spending and stuff. And Mike masnick who I don't, it
does he work for Tech? I think it was protector but
just wait. Regardless, Mike masnick?
Who's I? Like, if you don't follow him, I
highly recommend. His Twitter feed, is very
informative. I know he's debating leaving
Twitter now I think most people are, but they're everyone's at
least stating that they're thinking about it.
Don't know how real it is. Anyway, he called out this
intercept article and basically said none of this is secret.
None of this is like under the surface.
Like it's all right there for everybody to see if they want to
see it. You guys are misreporting this
when in reality, there's so many other problems with the US
government, that you could be focusing on.
Why are you doing this and making it more difficult to
bring attention to the important stuff?
And instead of apologizing, instead of saying like, oh my
bad, I should have done better work the gentleman who I'm not
even going to name him gentleman who posted this thing put on
Tucker Carlson and other shit. The guy who posted this was like
basically just arguing with Mike masnick, not not suggesting that
he was going to fix the article, which they did edit the article
and not post when they fixed it. Why.
Which is again, if you're if you're in the media outlet, that
is absolutely something you need to be doing.
If you make a correction, mention it to your readers, you
have to mention it so that that's the first thing.
But then to Glenn Greenwald went off on this Ilan tweet
pretending, it was actually something to be skeptical of,
like, ya know, people you got to like, maybe he, maybe she maybe
he was seeing a prostitute, maybe blah, blah blah, and it's
like, hey Glenn. I appreciate skepticism to but
now you're just fabricating stories.
Like you're not, you're not being skeptical of the new
story. You're being skeptical of the
first story that you heard and then you get this new, totally
fabricated nonsense and you go, that sounds more believable.
That sounds more believable. Does it sound more Maybe maybe
Craig Craig Wright got hacked. You know, the hacker wanted was
not to take any of the Bitcoin or any of his money or anything
like that. All they wanted to do was plant
forgeries. That Craig would later enter as
real evidence into court trials, it's the only explanation he's
hurt. It's a lot of these, a lot of
this nonsense and I and I think my concern with doing this
episode is I you and I talked about this before we jumped on a
few days ago, was that, I think a lot of people perceive Our
early skepticism as being borderline conspiracy theory.
And while I think we have asked a lot of a lot of questions that
may be. Maybe some of them didn't need
to be asked, honestly, I think there's some questions that we
didn't even need to bother asking where as we could have
focused on the important ones and I think one of them for
instance being like, get an audit period, I don't want to
hear excuses, I don't want a five year timeline.
I want you to get an audit now, like this is absurd that end and
it should be questioned why they cannot do it.
It should be consistently questioned when they promised
this thing why they can't do it, great.
That is something very Hannibal to be skeptical about other
things that are worth being skeptical about.
They promised one to one backing, they have never, they
have never shown that they ever had that or the, that is ever a
goal that they will succeed at to.
They've talked about all the their transparency there.
How they're they've shown these assets.
They didn't do that. They didn't do that.
Until the New York attorney general force them to do a
summary. We still don't know of any of
this is true because there's been no audit of them.
So I think a lot of our skepticism, Comes from a very
real place, and that's, you have to ground your skepticism in
reality. You can't just let it unhinge
itself and go off and fly. It can't be.
The bird. Can't be the little Twitter bird
that has free speech. Now, it can't, you can't just
think whatever you want. That's not what skepticism is
about. It's not about just believing
everything, it's about wondering and questioning everything but
that has to be grounded. In reality, it has to so well.
And you need to remember to maintain a skepticism about the
evidence that confirms your skeptical belief.
So, like in terms of tether, one of the most common accusations
against Heather is that they were manipulating the market and
one of the most common pieces of evidence used to support.
That is the is Bitcoin untether paper by Griffin and Shams.
I've talked about in the past some of my problems with this
paper where If you eliminate like the two most extreme days,
the relationship, Was totally disappears.
They Don't Really address other potential explanations for the
weird end of month Behavior, like Futures closing, and things
like that. And so my conclusion, when
looking at the paper was always, this is insufficient evidence
that tether is manipulating the market, but like that paper has
been the foundation of class action lawsuits and of a whole
bunch of different coverage and discussion of tether as if it
proved they were manipulating the market, right?
And so this is why I I'm confident I have fallen short of
this repeatedly in my foreign a half, or whatever years covering
tether, my gold generally is to try to be as skeptical of that
type of evidence that tends to confirm the things were
predisposed to believe as the evidence as the things that
tether is saying and is presenting out into the world
because otherwise it is very easy to become unmoored.
And it's, so it's so easy to think about like an exam, like,
if I, if I had to be skeptical of every single thing that I do
in the world, I would be paralyzed.
Like I wouldn't be able to do anything anymore and that goes
for anybody, you can't be skeptical of everything all the
time. That isn't how it works, right?
You have to focus the skepticism on stuff that you can actually
follow up on and confirm and. And that, that, like I can't go
confirm what's happening in. Let's say Ukraine.
Just can't I guess I could I guess I could get, I don't know
if I need a visa. If I doubt, I need a visa to go
to Ukraine but I probably would, I need to buy a plane ticket.
I would need to find a place to live.
I'd be putting pressure on the resources in a country that
doesn't probably want to expend resources on a foreign visitor
so that you have to make decisions on what you can and
cannot confirm and and and to do it responsibly, you would need
to spend weeks months or years, studying the context and the
history. Turi and, like the different
reports and things like that, to understand what you're even
going to look at and like being able to parse it and slyke.
And so, yeah, there is, there is always in our society, like, a
little bit of that Outsourcing of trust.
Yeah. Right.
And it's not that you shouldn't be skeptical.
It's that you should be skeptical when there are clear
inconsistencies, when promises are being made and not kept when
you're seeing like things like that.
Like that are like in direct opposition because that's often
like the entry point where you can start to find meaningful.
Things. Otherwise you get caught in the
Whiplash you get pulled away. Yeah, yeah yeah.
I just think it's worth acknowledging.
The good skepticism in the bad skepticism that is happening out
there. I mean I wish more people had
been skeptical of something as crazy as Tara and Luna.
I wish that that I wish there had been more broad skepticism
from the industry as a whole and I don't just mean like everyday,
retail investors who God really guys.
It's far more important. Isn't that you are skeptical
than Mike novogratz or or Anderson Anderson Horowitz, you
know? Like, they don't need to be
skeptical. They can blow all their fucking
money, I don't care. I don't care.
I care about be good for society if they blew all their money.
Yeah, is what I'm really sorry. But for the read for the average
retail investor, I think it's actually really important for
you to be skeptical, especially about things that you might not
understand. And I, and that it's so easy to
get. Caught up in this like, well
that's a word. I don't know but I don't want to
look stupid. So, yeah, no, no go on.
No. An algorithmic stable, kind of
bring I mean, I know what an algorithm is.
And I would have stable coin is just represents a dollar.
Yeah, of course. Go on.
I mean, that sounds great. It's so easy to transform into
that person and be like, I don't need to be, I don't need to
question this stuff. I don't want to look stupid.
I really don't wanna look stupid or I don't, I want to know this
purse. I this person seems important I
don't want to be on their team. Mmmmm like it.
All these things, intermingle in morphing your ability to
perceive when you're being fooled and in finance.
I think this is particularly troubling because this is
something that we've seen throughout history.
This is something that happens, like, a lot of people are trying
to fool you in finding they want your money, they don't care
about you. And if you're not skeptical,
you'll lose your money, you will lose your money.
It's not even a question. Like, if you're not If you don't
but then then there's the other side.
There's the other side of that which is if you're too skeptical
of the entire system, if you're too skeptical of every single
thing that is in operation today, in society that keeps
Society going, you end up putting, let's say, all of your
money in a box in your backyard and you bury it and you are not
helping yourself. If you do that, you're not
helping yourself. You're not investing, you're not
trying to earn Earn any kind of like interest on the money,
you're bleeding out due to inflationary like that.
The dollar is inflationary so you're bleeding out due to
inflation and you're bleeding out to extra inflation right now
and if someone ever finds out that there's a box in your
backyard with a bunch of money if they're just going to fucking
take it. So I like there's a lot of
things. That can push you way too far in
One Direction here and I wish we could give somebody a guy wish
we could give people just step by step instructions.
I don't think you can. I don't think it's possible to
tell people exactly how to be skeptical, but it is a fine line
and you do have to be aware of it.
You really do. You need to know when you're
maybe like you said, we have each other to kind of Bounce
these ideas off of. Hopefully, you have some same
friends and same family. A, I know that's a big ask for a
lot of us, but hopefully you have some and you can bounce
these ideas off of them and hopefully they're honest with
you. So that when you say something a
little bit crazy, like I don't know.
Atlantis is real. They go.
And, can you prove that to me, please?
And when you can't, they can go okay, dude?
No. And you trust them when they say
do note know, you know, like I just yeah, I need People to be a
little bit more skeptical to own when they're not skeptical
enough and to own when they're way too skeptical.
It's the big ask, but I really need everybody to try to do
their best to do that because I'm seeing so much of it being
almost weaponized. I would say, I think what you're
talking about is kind of going back to like Elon Musk great if
you flood the field with so much misinformation, you start
questioning even the confession of the attacker themself.
Right. Then you can make it so you can
challenge any premise and you can make any conclusion true.
And once you've gotten to that point, you control the
information space, right? You just continue to flood it
with nonsense and you avoid coherent, narratives that can be
responded to, from being formed. Because how do you respond to
someone still supporting the claim that like this attack?
Or at the Pelosi house was these things that Elon Musk
propagated, you have to, like, claim that the confession was
false or somehow coerce that there's some other evidence
that's being held back. That would somehow prove this
This stance. And that even in that, that
evidence would not just provide some small circumstantial piece
but would prove the larger overarching claim of why this
individual was there and like the relation, the pre-existing
relationship. And so, like, the amount of
confirming evidence that would require that is required for
that hypothesis to be true. Should make you deeply skeptical
of it if you understand stand skepticism.
But if you've been just taught that your goal is to be
skeptical of claims made, especially by this type of
person, which is often how it's used, that's how Glenn Greenwald
will. And use it.
Now, though, the New York Times is making that claim a, we
should doubt every claim, they're making the New York
Times often falls short, but there's still one of they still
some of the best journalists in the world reporting.
These stories, most of the things they report are going to
be reported pretty well, right? And so you should have some
skepticism but don't jump to it's wrong because it's from
here because that's the same kind of flawed thinking that
you're trying to respond to with well done skepticism.
Yeah. That it's almost like you can
get into a place where you've reversed the flow of the water
like you you've done it. You've done the Opposite of what
you're trying to do. And the amount of conspiracy
theories that are just utter nonsense.
Utter nonsense, totally insane, off-the-wall batshit crazy, the
right. The Sandy Hook nonsense that
Alex Jones is going to have to pay a billion dollars for now.
When we've gotten to the point that people are presuming that a
mass shooting is staged. You need to step back and go.
Maybe I'm questioning too much because I like it's not the
world against you. It's I know it feels like that
to all of us but it is not the world against you.
It is not everybody is doing everything to push you down.
There are certainly systemic issues in society and I think we
can all grant that. It is absolutely true.
You want to talk about minorities in the prison system.
You want to talk about how Flawed.
It is because there's clearly an elite class in America and
throughout the world that has more wealth than the rest of us
and more property than the rest of us.
Sure like, I feel free to discuss it and talk about the
reasons that it exists to be suggesting that there's a big
cabal and a conspiracy and they're working to harm.
You is again, getting, so skeptical that you almost cannot
prove your skepticism anymore. You've now created a whole new
theory that would Would people need to be skeptical of?
Because it doesn't, it's not grounded in reality anymore.
And yeah, I don't. I again, I don't know.
I don't know how we help people walk this fine line because it
is a fine line and I know we're asking for a lot and look, we
we've made mistakes too. I think it's, we recently
tweeted out my in response to you.
I tweeted out my old article about a former friend of ours,
who started a onion site who helped me, start up my onions.
I and was trying to do this thing as like, a Is going to do
build a company around this. I got hosed for whatever was a
hundred hundred twenty five bucks, not much but that money
is gone. And a friend of ours, another
friend of ours, got hosed for a couple thousand dollars, I
should have been asking more questions that whole time.
I wasn't asking those questions because I trusted this person
that's going to happen in life, that's just what's going to
happen. You're going to have friends,
you're going to have family, they're going to disappoint you.
You're going to do things that you don't expect them to do.
Of course, that's going to happen as long as you're A
functional human, but to take the important part is to take a
lesson from it to expand on that and to try to utilize it to not
only help yourself but hopefully help other people.
Yeah. The two last things that kind of
went to touch on here is that most conspiracies are
challenging to pull off. Like when you actually start to
think about the number of people who would have to be involved
the types of resources, they would need access to the
logistics. You would need to support all
those. Horses.
And the number of people that involves and that many people
all keeping it a secret for however long it's been operating
is generally extraordinarily unlikely.
And so, when you actually look at most of these theories
through that lens, you realize they're not going to work
because people are bad at keeping secrets, people are bad
hiding this kind of thing and the other part is you want to
continue to trust most people even if you run some risk of
being scammed, who defrauded because many of the most
rewarding and and good things in life come from when you're open
and trusting and seeing the good in people and most people are
good. And so it's when you start to
see the inconsistency, the broken promise the LIE, the
thing that can't be true being spread is, if it is true that
then you need to become skeptical that then you need to
put the attention. There is when you've already
seen like the disconnect. When you've seen the flaw, the
initial flaw. You shouldn't start from, this
is wrong, right? And and they're look, there's
plenty of. I think there's plenty.
A of silly harmless conspiracy theories out there.
There's a Wyoming doesn't exist, there's birds aren't real.
There's plenty of these conspiracies that are
essentially Unhinged from reality on purpose and that's
that's totally fine. The problem is when you have
even conspiracy it, well there's even conspiracies that I feel
are more or less harmless which are like, we never landed on the
moon. It's like, okay, I mean I don't
really give a shit if you think we didn't land on the moon, it's
not gonna hurt me. It's not gonna hurt you, it
doesn't matter, fine. But then it starts getting weird
when you start getting into ones where it's almost like the goal.
Is to rip apart Society, the fabric of society as we know it
and you go, okay, I don't know why we're even discussing this.
Like, you cannot prove or disprove it.
You cannot you like that is the. That is how most of these things
are. That's why skepticism should be
utilized because if you cannot prove or disprove something and
it's getting passed along, like it's fact, like, I don't know.
I mean, they're here. Okay.
Instead, here's one that I think is a Here's one that I think is
a totally fair skepticism, is that that ultimately, I think
Occam's razor could be totally true in this case.
And yet, it's okay to be skeptical, right?
Is the classic Epstein didn't kill himself thing where it's
like, okay I get why people think that actually totally
understand why people believe that he didn't kill himself.
It makes sense to me. Why people believe that also
prisons are vastly underfunded. These dudes have been working
like 48-hour shifts or something.
They say they fell asleep, they probably bubbly fell asleep, the
cameras weren't working the cameras, probably weren't
working and and Epstein was going to be in jail for the rest
of his life and probably didn't want to live anymore.
You know, all of those things can be true and yet, right?
And yet you can still be like, hmm.
I don't know about that. And I get it, I totally get it
also. At like it's not going to harm
any of us. It's again, this is not
something that is going to matter to any of us right now.
It's not going to destroy Society, it's not going to like
it's, it's people. Yelling about a dead guy.
I don't know an additional scrutiny on Jeffrey Epstein, his
activities and who all was involved in them is probably not
good for our society even if some of the claims like and my
guess is he did kill himself, right?
Yeah. My guess is he died by suicide
because it's an awful prison in prison sucks and life sentences
suck, and everyone finding out that you're a sex trafficker and
talking about it for the rest of your life.
Where you're stuck in prison is going to suck, right?
And so, but yeah, you're right, it's possible.
There was a lot of Powerful people who knew Epstein who were
really close to him. Maybe he knows you made a good
point with, like, people like to talk to where it's like it works
on both ends where one, if something is a conspiracy.
For instance, we never landed on the moon.
Well, I would expect that a lot of people would be talking about
that then because you took film that and fake it, you would need
dozens, if not hundreds of people, some of those people are
going to talk. Like that's just that's just how
people work, not somehow. None of those people exist to Us
how this big Sound Stage? Was there that fake?
The moon landing, they're not there the CIA killed them right?
The CIA took care of all of them, but none of those people
who killed them are also around to talk anymore.
Because if you kill them, look, whatever man, I'm not.
I'm trying to say that people like to talk, so most
conspiracies aren't real. There are some real conspiracies
though to well, and some of the real ones are done like out in
the open like the FBI killing Merchants Luther King jr.
Right? Like they do exist.
Yeah, but when they do this often subsides were criminal
Network, working with politicians in Malta to kill a
journalist and and the politicians never going to jail
for it. I think it's pretty clear that
politicians worked together with criminals to blow up a
journalist, but they're not in prison.
Okay. So I like okay, there are
conspiracy theories that are real.
There are people who know how to keep their mouths shut.
But for the most part that is not the case, and on the other
end of that, we all love to talk about nonsense.
So it's really easy to start up nonsense and I think it was Mark
Twain who said, but people go around the world.
Before the truth can even get its shoes on.
It's an some say, yeah, something like that, right?
So, so the idea being basically that you can tell 1000 lies and
they're going to go around the world a million times before
anyone is like, oh, the truth, is we more live in that world
than when Mark Twain was alive. It communication is instant now,
Oh, so there's no chance to even try to.
I we've seen it a million times on Corrections and on Twitter,
which I again is, this is why I think Deirdre Boza did such a
good job. She deleted the original tweet
screen, shot at it and said this is incorrect.
I am sorry. That is how to handle this.
It is absolutely how to handle it.
It's taken me years to understand that it's taken me
years. I didn't know, I didn't know
that's how you should deal with this stuff, but once you do know
that, make sure that's what you do when you make a mistake
inevitably, because we're all going to do it.
We're all going to make a mistake.
We're going to report something too early.
We're all going to accidentally spread misinformation.
One day, we're all going to not be as skeptical as we should be,
when we are or two skeptical when we shouldn't be.
That's okay. As long as you correct it.
And I think that's, that's my main, that's the main point.
I want to make Yeah, I think that's the takeaway is that it's
important to be the goal of skepticism is to get to the
truth and so it's important to use that as your orienting thing
is to try to understand what is actually going on.
And skepticism is a tool to get it.
That skepticism itself is not like It is not disbelieving, all
of the evidence until you've worked yourself into whatever
position. Fits your feelings, which is
what it can sometimes end up. Being it's all in the pursuit of
actual understanding. Right?
So now that we've acknowledged that we're all in a simulation
and none of this is real, please make sure to hit that like And
subscribe and review button because man Even though this is
a simulation and it's not real, I just need that dopamine.
Hit, please, please help me live, my best fake existence.
The dopamine gives the aliens who keep our bodies as
batteries, more power Xenu.