Sam Harris

One larger problem, and this goes back to the problem of how we rely on authority in science, is that you can always find a PhD or an MD to champion any crackpot idea.

I mean, it is amazing, but you could find PhDs and MDs who would sit up there in front of Congress

and say that they thought smoking was not addictive, you know, or that it was not harmful to, you know, there was no direct link between smoking and lung cancer.

You can always find those people.

And you can, and so, but, you know, some of the people Brett found were people who had obvious tells, to my point of view, to my eye.

I mean, and I saw them on, some of the same people were on Rogan's podcast, right?

And,

And it's hard because if a person does have the right credentials and they're not saying something floridly mistaken, and we're talking about something where they're genuine unknowns, right?

Like how much do we know about the safety of these vaccines, right?

At that point, not a whole hell of a lot.

I mean, we have no long-term data on mRNA vaccines.

But to confidently say that millions of people are gonna die because of these vaccines, and to confidently say that ivermectin is a panacea, right?

Ivermectin is the thing that prevents COVID, right?

There was no good reason to say either of those things at that moment.

And so given that that's where Brett was,

I felt like there was nothing to debate.

We're both the wrong people to be getting into the weeds on this.

We're both going to defer to our chosen experts.

His experts look like crackpots to me, or at least the ones who are most vociferous on those edgiest points that seem most

Well, no, but it's like with climate science.