The War on Science: Exposing Fraud and Misinformation | Professor Dave DSH #1213

Summary

Digital Social Hour - Episode: "The War on Science: Exposing Fraud and Misinformation" | Professor Dave DSH #1213

Host: Sean Kelly
Guest: Professor Dave
Release Date: March 2, 2025

---

1. Introduction to the Episode

In this compelling episode of Digital Social Hour, host Sean Kelly engages in a profound discussion with Professor Dave, a dedicated science communicator renowned for his relentless efforts in debunking scientific misinformation. The conversation delves deep into the pervasive "War on Science," exploring the roots, manifestations, and implications of misinformation in today's society.

---

2. Criticisms of Pseudoscientists

Professor Dave opens the dialogue by expressing his strong condemnation of various influential figures he deems as frauds within the scientific community.

• Billy Carson:
  “He's a con man. He's just a complete fraud and con man.” (01:01)
  Professor Dave criticizes Carson for perpetuating deceptive narratives under the guise of scholarship in areas like mythology and quantum physics, alleging that Carson lacks genuine expertise.

• Terrence Howard and Eric Weinstein:
  Discussing Terrence Howard's dubious claims about quantum physics and his inability to perform even basic arithmetic, Professor Dave describes him as someone who “pretends to know things and he doesn't” (02:43).
  He contrasts this with Eric Weinstein, acknowledging Weinstein's intelligence but criticizing his tactics in positioning himself above established academia.

• Graham Hancock:
  Professor Dave labels Hancock as a purveyor of false archaeological claims, “completely full of it” (52:30), asserting that Hancock distorts legitimate archaeology to promote unfounded theories about ancient civilizations.

---

3. The War on Science: Misinformation and Its Origins

The conversation shifts to the broader issue of the "War on Science." Professor Dave attributes this conflict to long-standing historical movements, particularly the rise of Christian nationalism in the mid-20th century, which sought to erode the separation of church and state.

• Historical Context:
  “It's been about a hundred years... ramped up in the 50s and 60s... promoting evangelical ideology above empirical science.” (20:54)

• Modern Implications:
  This movement has infiltrated various scientific fields, leading to widespread distrust in scientific authorities and institutions.

---

4. Attacks on Scientific Institutions (FDA, CDC)

Professor Dave highlights the ongoing assault on key scientific institutions like the FDA and CDC, exacerbated by political agendas aiming for deregulation.

• Regulatory Undermining:
  “There's a war on science, it's a war on facts... want to distrust anybody who could rationally be seen as an authority.” (19:07)

• Consequences of Deregulation:
  The potential dismantling of these bodies could lead to an unregulated marketplace where harmful products proliferate unchecked.

---

5. Vaccine Misinformation and the Anti-vaccine Movement (RFK's Role)

A significant portion of the discussion centers on the anti-vaccine movement, with a particular focus on RFK's influence.

• RFK's Impact:
  “He's the premier anti-vaxxer alive today... regurgitating these long, long debunked, ridiculous anti vaccine talking points.” (37:07)
  Professor Dave criticizes RFK for promoting misinformation about vaccines, specifically targeting the falsified claims linking vaccines to autism originating from the fraudulent Wakefield study.

• Wakefield Study Rejection:
  Professor Dave emphasizes that multiple studies have conclusively debunked the Wakefield claims, affirming vaccines' safety and efficacy.

---

6. COVID-19 Vaccines Debate

The conversation transitions to the COVID-19 pandemic, where Professor Dave defends the safety and necessity of COVID-19 vaccines.

• Vaccine Efficacy:
  “The studies undeniably show that it saved lives... it didn't rush it.” (43:27)
  He explains the rapid development of COVID-19 vaccines, clarifying that despite overlapping clinical trial phases, rigorous testing ensured their safety and effectiveness.

• Side Effects and Misconceptions:
  Addressing concerns about adverse reactions, Professor Dave clarifies that, proportionally, COVID-19 vaccines did not present more side effects than other widely administered vaccines.

• Future Pandemics:
  He warns of potential future pandemics exacerbated by continued public distrust in science, leading to ineffective responses.

---

7. Religion vs. Science: Creationism and Intelligent Design

Professor Dave vehemently opposes movements like Young Earth Creationism and Intelligent Design, which attempt to undermine established scientific theories.

• Young Earth Creationism:
  “Young Earth Creationism is a much dumber version... intelligent design propaganda tries to work within it.” (50:52)
  He critiques the literal interpretation of religious texts that contradict scientific evidence about Earth's age and evolution.

• Intelligent Design:
  Professor Dave describes Intelligent Design as a sophisticated rebranding of Creationism, which distorts scientific literature to support its claims without genuine empirical basis.

---

8. The Role of Science Communicators in Restoring Trust

Addressing solutions, Professor Dave underscores the critical role of science communicators in combating misinformation.

• Active Engagement:
  “We have to fight fire with fire... more people doing the same with the same intensity, the same fervor.” (56:19)
  He advocates for increased efforts by science communicators to clarify scientific truths and debunk falsehoods aggressively.

• Collaboration with Scientists:
  Encouraging scientists to engage more with the public, he believes that bridging the gap between experts and the general populace is essential for restoring trust in science.

---

9. Social Media Challenges and Censorship

The episode also touches upon the challenges faced by science communicators on social media platforms.

• Account Suspension:
  Professor Dave shares his experience of having his Twitter account suspended after actively countering what he perceives as Zionist propaganda, leading to significant harassment.

• Content Moderation Issues:
  He criticizes platforms like Twitter for silencing dissenting voices, hindering the spread of scientific truth.

---

10. Conclusions and Future Directions

In concluding the episode, Professor Dave reiterates the urgency of addressing the "War on Science" to prevent further erosion of public trust.

• Call to Action:
  “We just need more people doing the same with the same intensity, the same fervor. We got to fight this.” (56:19)
  He urges both science communicators and scientists to amplify their efforts in educating the public and exposing misinformation.

• Upcoming Projects:
  Professor Dave hints at future debunking videos, including a comprehensive critique of Graham Hancock's archaeological claims, promising continued vigilance against pseudoscience.

---

Notable Quotes

• On Anti-vaccine Misinformation:
  “He's the premier anti-vaxxer alive today... regurgitating these long, long debunked, ridiculous anti vaccine talking points.” (37:07)

• On the Importance of Vaccines:
  “Vaccines... are the most important and best invention in human history.” (41:07)

• On Science Communication:
  “We have to fight fire with fire... more people doing the same with the same intensity, the same fervor.” (56:19)

---

Timestamp References

• 00:00 to 61:19: Transcript segments covering the entire discussion.

---

Conclusion

This episode of Digital Social Hour offers a rigorous examination of the challenges posed by misinformation in the scientific realm. Professor Dave's insights shed light on the tactics of pseudoscientists, the systematic undermining of scientific institutions, and the critical role of effective science communication in preserving public trust. Listeners are left with a clarion call to action: to advocate for truth, support diligent science communicators, and remain vigilant against the tides of misinformation that threaten the very foundations of scientific progress.

Transcript

[Dave]

Keep going back to that Wakefield study and RFK does it. And he's now part of the cabinet and he's just regurgitating these long, long debunked, ridiculous anti vaccine talking points. It's really scary that he has any control over any health related organization, this guy. I mean, it's just insane.

[Chris Gethard]

All right, guys, out here in Los Angeles here with Professor Dave, not my usual type of guest, so thanks for coming on, man.

[Professor Dave]

Happy to be here. Thanks for having me.

[Chris Gethard]

I appreciate you for coming because you've probably seen some of the episodes and it's a lot of people you fight against.

[Professor Dave]

I just, I took a peek at a few and I was like, all right, this seems like kind of a mixed bag.

[Chris Gethard]

Yeah. See what happens here to explore the other side today.

[Professor Dave]

Yeah.

[Chris Gethard]

Billy Carson is actually one of my most viewed guests.

[Professor Dave]

Okay.

[Chris Gethard]

I wanted to start with him because you've made quite a few videos about him, right?

[Professor Dave]

Well, I made one about him and then I made two more about him and Terrence Howard together because they are kind of thick as thieves, those two.

[Chris Gethard]

Right. What is your biggest problem with Billy Carson?

[Professor Dave]

Well, I mean, he's a con man. He's just, he's a complete fraud and con man. It's.

[Chris Gethard]

When you say con man, do you feel like he's just portraying misinformation on purpose or how do you view him?

[Professor Dave]

Yeah, he spews descriptive lies to trick people and get them to buy things.

[Chris Gethard]

But you think he's aware of that.

[Professor Dave]

Or you think he's just 100 aware of that? He's a con man.

[Dave]

Yeah. Wow.

[Professor Dave]

Of course he is.

[Chris Gethard]

I watched the West Huff debate.

[Dave]

Oh, yeah?

[Chris Gethard]

Did you see that?

[Professor Dave]

I didn't watch it, but I mean, like, I know what happened. I mean, Billy lies about two different things. He lies, he pretends to be a scholar of, like, mythology and religious scripture and things like that. He's not, he has no idea what he's talking about. And he pretends to be an expert in like, quantum physics and like all kinds of science. He's not, he has no clue what he's talking about. I'm a science communicator, so when I debunk him, I, I, I mention the, the, the, but you know, where he, where he contradicts, like, what we know historically and scripturally and things like that. But it's not my area. So it's like Wes Huff, I mean, he's an apologist, so. But he is genuinely an expert on that scripture. So you got a guy who is an expert on this. A guy who's pretending to be an expert but has no idea what he's talking about. So he got humiliated. And then there was the whole backlash from that, where he went to somebody's house in the middle of the night and was like, you got to take it down or something. I mean, the guy is just imploding. But I'm a science communicator, so I focus on the idiotic thing. Things he says about quantum physics. And he pretends, you know, he says, I have.

[Dave]

I.

[Professor Dave]

You know, I have these certificates from Harvard and mit. They're free online courses that anybody can take. He says, oh, I. I studied quantum physics at Khan University, Khan Academy, the YouTube channel. Like, it's just like, he pretends to know things and he doesn't. I mean, he's just.

[Dave]

He.

[Professor Dave]

And even the things that he is lying about, they're just recycled. Like all this Emerald Tablets crap.

[Chris Gethard]

Yeah.

[Professor Dave]

Maurice Doreal is the guy who invented that stuff. They don't exist. There's.

[Chris Gethard]

Wait, Emerald Tablets don't exist?

[Professor Dave]

That's not a thing. No, they don't exist.

[Chris Gethard]

I thought they did.

[Professor Dave]

He made it up in the early 20th century. He's just recycling that. Then all this Anunnaki crap. That's Zechariah Sitchin. Like, he just repeats just other grifters. You know, he's not even original with his grift.

[Chris Gethard]

Are there any ancient texts that actually exist on.

[Professor Dave]

Well, yeah, no, there's definitely ancient texts that. That archaeologists and historians study and read and translate and understand. And he's not part of that. He's not in that community. He's just a con man. He pretends to. He pretends to be able to read cuneiform. He can't. He pretends to know what all these books say. He doesn't. He's just spewing this ancient aliens sensationalist crap to trick people into thinking he's knowledgeable. And then either by his ludicrously overpriced Egypt trips where he just goes like, hey, here's some stuff, you know, wow, cool. He just lies to them. Or he has all these products. All these bogus products on his website, you know, was books. And then, you know, there's like water filter thing, you know, just ridiculous crap.

[Chris Gethard]

Monatomic gold.

[Professor Dave]

Yeah. And potions.

[Chris Gethard]

He says a lot of stuff that I want to believe in, if that makes sense. Like teleportation. Like, that'd be sick. Like Star Trek. He said that exists. And like, I don't know, alien stuff. Is fascinating to me. But you probably don't believe in aliens, right?

[Professor Dave]

Well, no, I certainly believe that. That life exists outside of Earth. I don't think it's been here. I don't think we've interacted with it. But I would be shocked if there was no other life in the universe. That would be.

[Chris Gethard]

Yeah, that's a logical thing, right?

[Professor Dave]

Ridiculous to me. I mean, I could. I don't know for certain that it's there, but I would bet so much money that there is, that the universe is teeming with life.

[Chris Gethard]

Yeah, Yeah. I mean, it's just so big, the odds of it.

[Professor Dave]

How could it be? I mean, the way that we look around, even just our solar system, and see that there are conditions where, you know, microbial life may exist and, and likely exists, and hopefully we'll find it maybe even within our lifetime. We'll find microbial life on Europa or. Or maybe even more. We don't know what's under in that subsurface.

[Unknown]

Hi, I'm Chris Gethard, and I'm very excited to tell you about Beautiful Anonymous, a podcast where I talk to random people on the phone. I tweet out a phone number. Thousands of people try to call. I talk to one of them. They stay anonymous. I. I can't hang up. That's all the rules. I never know what's going to happen. We get serious ones. I've talked with meth dealers on their way to prison. I've talked to people who survived mass shootings, crazy funny ones. I talked to a guy with a goose laugh, somebody who dresses up as a pirate on the weekends. I never know what's going to happen. It's a great show. Subscribe today.

[Professor Dave]

Beautiful Anonymous ocean in Europa. There could be multicellular life there. We don't know that's in our solar system. And there are, you know, 100 billion stars in the Milky Way and at least 100 billion galaxies in the known universe. I mean, it's like just the astronomical opportunities for life to exist can't be ignored. But I don't believe that we've encountered it.

[Chris Gethard]

Absolutely. I think one of your most viewed videos is debunking the flat Earth stuff.

[Professor Dave]

Yeah.

[Chris Gethard]

What was, I guess your message that really put the nail in the coffin for that debate?

[Professor Dave]

I mean, it's a lot of things I got dragged into that just because I made a video for my astronomy series where I was just saying, hey, I heard that there are some flat Earthers. Well, it's not. Here's how we figured out that It's a sphere 2500 years ago, right in, you know, classical Greece at the latest. You know, just simple observations looking at the celestial sphere. So I think I do a couple of things. One thing I do is explain with crystal clarity how based on naked eye observations and basic spatial reasoning that we know it's a sphere.

[Dave]

Right?

[Professor Dave]

The way, you know, when you look at what the stars do, what the sun does, all this kind of stuff, it's obviously sphere. That's why we figured it out so long ago before we figured out almost anything else. Then I go and I take flat Earth talking points, which eventually I did familiarize myself with. I eventually learned about all the dumb things they say and I just debunked them one by one. They deny the existence of gravity and they just. All this ridiculous stuff that amounts to them not understanding middle school level physics or other science concepts. And then I debated a couple of them and just humiliated them. And so that has an impact, I guess.

[Chris Gethard]

Yeah, well, they, they don't have facts and data, right? No, it's all hypothetical.

[Professor Dave]

Well, they pretend to. I mean, they'll say, oh, we shouldn't be able to see this thing. It's that it's this far and then 8 inches per mile squared and it should be covered. But like the most of it is just we see too far. We shouldn't be able to see this thing. But they're either not doing the math correctly or they're lying about how far away it is. Or they're not accounting for refraction because it's something that's done. Like they love to say, I shouldn't be able to see the Chicago skyline from across that lake.

[Dave]

Right.

[Professor Dave]

Well, it's only 50 something miles or whatever it is, so. And it's over water. So refraction is vector. And guess what? You can only see the top halves of the buildings. Why are the bottom halves covered?

[Dave]

Right?

[Professor Dave]

Because they're hidden behind the curvature. So it's just, it's. It's really a circus sideshow with these.

[Chris Gethard]

Guys that's probably easy for you to debate.

[Professor Dave]

It's the easiest thing in the world. I do, I do drunk reaction videos where I drink whiskey and put on a flat earth video and just pause it and mock it and stuff. You know, other stuff that I debunk requires research and I have to read primary literature and I have to like, you know, contact scientists and like really dig into stuff. But flat earth is the absolute bottom of the barrel. It's just, there's nothing dumber than anybody could possibly Fall for what was your.

[Chris Gethard]

Most challenging debunk that took you the most time?

[Professor Dave]

Yeah, the one. So there's this guy, James Tour, he's a chemist at Rice University and he is part of a very coordinated movement. He's paid by the Discovery Institute, which is a, which is a Christian propaganda mill out of Seattle. And so traditionally, you know how Christian propaganda in the, in the biological sciences has all been anti evolution. Right. Evolution is, is ridiculous, blah, blah, blah. But there's also this kernel in, in those sciences that is abiogenesis or the origin of life. Right. How did life begin on Earth? And they had no personnel that was able to really tackle that in a, in a, in a convincing way. This guy, James Tour is a chemist, so he can speak chemistry speak. And so he developed this whole, you know, this, this whole plethora of talk of ridiculous talking points that is very convincing to people who don't understand chemistry. And also took, took a lot of effort to, to tackle. I had to talk to origin of life researchers, I had to read a lot of papers and then try to take all that science and make it intelligible to the common viewer. And that actually culminated in a live debate as well, which is a complete debacle over at Rice University.

[Chris Gethard]

But you did it in front of their students?

[Professor Dave]

Well, yeah, I mean it was, it was. Half of the room was students and like Rice students and faculty. And then the other half was actually like his church group that he bust in to try to stack the audience and he like reserved three rows of seats and was like. So they definitely. It was a very concerted effort to try and make his grift seem credible in a live format. And it really, it failed miserably, mainly because of how hot headed he is. He just lost his mind and was shrieking at me and just like acted like a toddler. So he made himself look bad. And then there was a part of me holding his feet to the fire about all the lies that he told for this was after several years of videos back and forth. And so that was the most energy intensive. Like I really had to read a lot of papers. Like my response videos took weeks and stuff. That's the polar opposite of just like never seen this video before, press play, make fun of it. Because I've heard all these talking points, they're so ridiculous. But yeah.

[Chris Gethard]

Have you ever went into a debate, started research and you were like, wait, maybe these guys are onto something?

[Dave]

No.

[Chris Gethard]

So it's always just no.

[Professor Dave]

My targets are, are frauds, con men, you know, APOLOGISTS the degree to which certain flat Earthers or creationists or something believe what they're saying is debatable. I'm not a psychologist, but everything, like I'm attacking people who, who are poisoning the public with false, with, with science denial, false rhetoric, this kind of stuff. I'm not going after, you know, like frontier science where we're not sure, like, this could be right. That's a conversation that the scientists have in the primary literature. Me, as a science communicator, I don't do research or anything like that. I'm here to understand what the scientific community is doing and convey that to the public.

[Chris Gethard]

Yeah.

[Professor Dave]

And part of that involves identifying the bad faith actors who are lying about science for financial gain, political reasons, whatever it is, and, and expose them. Right. And I do it very aggressively, possibly the most aggressively of any science communicators out there. So I have kind of a reputation for that, but I have a very strong sense of duty to do that, so.

[Chris Gethard]

I agree. I saw you talking on another show. You're able to do this because you're not tied to an organization basically.

[Professor Dave]

Right?

[Chris Gethard]

Scientists, or. They don't want to lose their job.

[Professor Dave]

Right. And it's not so much that they would lose their jobs, it's just that there's a lot of bureaucratic hassle that goes along with it. They have bosses. I don't, I don't have any bosses.

[Unknown]

Right.

[Professor Dave]

And then also they don't want to. Like, when you do what I do, you get targeted and attacked. I get, I get harassed all the time, but I am just a guy on YouTube, so I can, I can deal with it. Right.

[Dave]

It's.

[Professor Dave]

There's not a concerted effort to attack a particular institution in a way that would affect funding or anything like that.

[Chris Gethard]

Right.

[Professor Dave]

I make YouTube videos. I make a living on adsense revenue. I do whatever I want. I say whatever I want about whomever I want. You know, you can't stop me.

[Chris Gethard]

So those attacks get to you, though, because it must be tiring.

[Dave]

Right?

[Professor Dave]

I mean it, you. You get numb to it after a while. It's a, It's a minor hassle at this point.

[Chris Gethard]

Yeah, I agree. It used to get to me early on, and I'm like, all right, this is inevitable. No matter what I say, I can't please everyone.

[Professor Dave]

Right? Yeah. Like, well, and you certainly can't please the people who you are exposing or the people who are, who fell for them and are mad because they feel like their identity is being attacked when you expose their preacher, their hero, Right.

[Chris Gethard]

You saw that with Billy Carson.

[Professor Dave]

Yeah, a little bit of that. I got a. That was the. That was very curious to get the. The, you know, all these, you know, you're racist. You're, you know, the black man who is, you know, getting the real knowledge that the white man doesn't want the black man to get. You know, dude, he's just making up bullshit. It's not.

[Chris Gethard]

Yeah, I'm not a fan of the race card. I think that's a low level IQ argument for sure. You know, when people pull that out, I just stop talking about.

[Dave]

Yeah.

[Professor Dave]

Plus, these people clearly have not looked at my back catalog. I've debunked, like, 70 white people. And then I hit Terrence Howard and Billy Carson, and all of a sudden I'm racist. Give me a break, man.

[Chris Gethard]

What caused you to go after Terrence? Was it the Rogan episode?

[Professor Dave]

Terrence. So that was. That was. I was trying to figure out if I could do something a little more timely. And I was rewarded for it because everyone was talking about that first Terrence Howard, Joe Rogan episode. And I was like, screw it. I'm gonna do it. And I turned it around real fast, a couple of days, and it was really. It was the top search result on YouTube for Terrence Howard.

[Chris Gethard]

Wow.

[Professor Dave]

For maybe a week, maybe a little less than a week, you took over his name. Yeah, that was a little bit viral. I got, yeah, about 2 million views in. In a few. In a few days or a little under a week. And so I was like, all right, I'm going to do this a little more often and more in a more timely manner. Address. I mean, honestly, a lot of Joe Rogan guests because he has a lot of those people on. But that Terrence Howard episode was just so ridiculous and as patently absurd as it was everything that he said, I was shocked to get any blowback at all. I could not believe that there were actual adults that listened to him talk and don't understand within 10 seconds that he's completely talking out of his ass. He has no idea what he's talking about. He can't even do second grade math. Like, the guy is totally clueless, but it's this delusional narcissism. You know, he's convinced himself that he's a genius, that he's revolutionized physics and math and chemistry and all of these things, and it's just. It's really sad.

[Chris Gethard]

Did you see his debate with Weinstein a few weeks after?

[Professor Dave]

Yeah, I did a piece on that too. I mean, it wasn't a. It wasn't a debate so much as Eric Weinstein. So Eric Weinstein is also a fraud, but he thrives on this like, anti academia narrative, right? The ivory tower. So he had to play it in a way to position himself above Terry intellectually, which is very easy because Terry's an idiot and Eric Weinstein is intelligent.

[Chris Gethard]

But you'll admit that at least.

[Professor Dave]

No, yeah, he's smart. He's a smart guy and he understands math.

[Dave]

Right?

[Professor Dave]

He has a doctorate and he understands math. He's not like this mega genius. He understand. He understands math as well as anyone else with a doctorate in mathematical physics.

[Dave]

Right?

[Professor Dave]

He understands math. But he had to, he had to position himself above Terence while at the same time, like, validating this anti academia thing, like, oh, you sent it. You know, I was astonished that people reacted the way they did. And Terry, you know, he's an autodidact and he is multi town has all. He's an idiot. He has no idea what he's talking about. Right? He, he sent the thing to terrence, to Neil DeGrasse Tyson. And Neil DeGrasse Tyson gave this like, very classy charitable response. And Eric was like, that was so risky. What do you want him to do? Terry is completely clueless and thinks. Thinks that because Neil is black, he'll be like, yay, go black geniuses. No, he's a scientist, right? He's going to tell you as politely as possible. You have no idea what you're talking about. Please leave me alone.

[Dave]

Right?

[Professor Dave]

You know, yeah, he's a classy guy. He did it in a much more diplomatic way than. Than I do.

[Dave]

Right.

[Professor Dave]

I just. You're more on no idea what you're talking about.

[Chris Gethard]

But yeah, I wonder what Terrence Howard's angle was. That's where I try to think, like, why would he do that? You know what I mean?

[Professor Dave]

I think he is genuinely mentally ill and genuinely believes himself to be a genius. I think he genuinely believes that he has revolutionized. He doesn't even know, like he, he says that he has, you know, quantum field equations. He does not know what those are. He does not know what that is like. And because he doesn't understand even intermediate math, his way of rewriting math like Eric Weinstein has, has. Has his theory of everything, and that hinges on the Shihab operator and all this stuff. And that's been thoroughly debunked as not even a valid theory. He's not even saying anything. But he can dress it up like it looks like there's Real math in it. Right. And it's high level math. So if you don't understand high level math, you can't look at it and go, oh, well, this is obviously ridiculous. You have to understand high level math to see that it's not doing anything. Terrence, he has to lie about arithmetic. He has to say one, one equals two, because that's. That's the only level of math he has access to. He can comprehend arithmetic. So he's trying to rewrite that because that's the highest paradigm of math that his brain has access to. He can't even do algebra, let alone calculus or something.

[Chris Gethard]

Yeah. So, yeah, the one times one equals two messed up a lot of people.

[Professor Dave]

I mean, come on. Like, you listen to the guy talk about that and then all this, you know, why is root two cubed two root two? It's. Well. Or if you understood math, you would see that there's no problem with that, you know?

[Chris Gethard]

Yeah. But I saw you say on another show, the guy that funds Eric Weinstein is Peter Thiel. Is that true?

[Professor Dave]

Yeah, yeah. No, I mean, he. It's common knowledge that he worked for Peter. For Peter Thiel, and he wasn't like, managing a hedge fund or something or whatever. I don't know. Yeah. Like, his job was unclear. So my understanding is that he is just paid. He was, or maybe still is paid by Peter Thiel to spread anti establishment rhetoric.

[Chris Gethard]

Wow.

[Dave]

Right?

[Professor Dave]

To like, there's a war going on culturally right now. It's a war on science, it's a war on facts. It's one reality. And the idea is to get the public to distrust anyone who could rationally be seen as an authority. And we're not just talking about government figures. Right. Any scientist.

[Dave]

Right.

[Professor Dave]

The papers. There's corruption in the papers. There's. There's a crisis in peer review, there's a crisis in reproducibility. All the universities are indoctrinated, woke centers and all right. It's anyone who we all should agree knows what they're talking about. People who study something their whole lives. Don't listen to them, listen to us.

[Chris Gethard]

Yeah.

[Professor Dave]

We'll tell you what's true.

[Dave]

Right.

[Professor Dave]

And that goes for every area of science, especially the areas of science that cross over into, you know, public health and things that we should be concerned about, but just in a very general way, you know, when, you know, the James Webb Space Telescope proves the big bang didn't happen. No, it didn't. No, it didn't do that at all. That's absolutely ridiculous. And Made up. But if that story spreads, even though it doesn't seem like it affects public life, like climate or vaccines or any of these more hot button issues it sows, this seed of scientists are clues. I have no idea what they're talking about.

[Dave]

Right.

[Professor Dave]

This new discovery proves all of physics wrong. No, it didn't. No, it didn't. But if, if you can implant that in someone's mind, well, then all of physics is subject to revision at any moment. So I shouldn't learn any physics because it'll all be wrong tomorrow. And then I can trust this jerk about, about whatever he's saying because it's worth more than all of the knowledge that's. That suddenly evaporated. Because it wasn't worth anything.

[Chris Gethard]

Yeah. When do you think this war on science started happening? Was it recent or has it always been that case?

[Professor Dave]

I mean, no, it's. It's been about a hundred years.

[Unknown]

Oh, wow.

[Professor Dave]

I'm actually planning a piece on this, the history of the war on science and in particular the rise of Christian nationalism. And I wish that I had done more work on that. If I knew you're going to ask me on that, I would have been able to rattle off all of his stuff. But it, I mean, it definitely ramped up in the 50s and 60s. And then there's been a lot of effort by Christian nationalists to kind of. There's an interest in, in, in eroding the separation of church and state.

[Chris Gethard]

Yeah, Right.

[Professor Dave]

And a big way of doing that is promoting evangelical ideology above empirical science. And so one entry point is trying to get religion taught in public schools. Right. Intelligent design alongside evolution, which is just rebranded creationism and all these kinds of things. And then that also is behind the assault on women's rights and reproductive rights and all these things. So it's, it's, it's a multifaceted but singular endeavor. And the goal is to get people to distrust anybody who knows what they're talking about.

[Chris Gethard]

Yeah. So I'll say this, playing devil's advocate a little bit. So I'm kind of in the health and biohacking space. There's a lot of distrust there with the people in that space and science. Because when you look at some of these food studies and who's funding them, it'll be literally a brand related to the food study to make that company look like a good light. Does that make sense?

[Professor Dave]

Sure. And I'd have to see a specific example of that.

[Chris Gethard]

Yeah. A big one that comes to mind for me is the food pyramid.

[Professor Dave]

Yeah. I think that's been a little bit deconstructed.

[Chris Gethard]

Yeah, Food Cheerios and the Heart Health one, that's a classic one.

[Professor Dave]

Keep keeping the grains on the top.

[Dave]

Yeah, yeah.

[Chris Gethard]

But nah, just like when you look at who's funding it, whether it's a soda company or whatever and it makes them look like they're a healthy product.

[Professor Dave]

Sure, sure. So yeah. And then the, but then the flip side of that is that there are thousands and thousands of, of of you know, self proclaimed gurus on the Internet that are totally full of shit. I have no idea what they're talking about. Talking completely out of their ass about nutrition to make money.

[Chris Gethard]

Agreed. You get that. And I know you've called out a few of them. The structured water one, I saw you call that out. The hydrogen water bottles. Right. So that's all bs.

[Professor Dave]

So I did all of the special waters, you know, alkaline water, oxygen water, hydrogen water, all of those things. Those are the products, obviously, you know, alkaline water. This idea that it regulates any, the PH of any fluid in your body is insane. Your gastric acid is pH like 2. As soon as it hits your stomach, any base is neutralized. So that's ridiculous that people think it like regulates your, the PH of your blood or something like that. First of all, that's already self regulating, right? You're not going to drink water to regulate the PH of your blood. But also it can't do that. Oxygen water. The idea that you would drink water as opposed to just going like this is ridiculous. Hydrogen water was the only one where I was like, wait, there's one little thing, okay, I, I remained like not completely decided on that. But then there's all like I, I did three parts. I did water fluoridation and then the special water products and then the structured water. And structured water is this ridiculous crap that's pushed unfortunately by a couple of actual scientists. Some of them are crackpots. One of them was a virologist, the one who first isolated the HIV virus and just got Nobel disease and went completely insane and is commonly known to be a total crackpot. But then also pushed by, you know, there was the Masaru Emoto. We whisper the prayers and the different musics and it makes these.

[Chris Gethard]

If you talk positively, the plant grows.

[Professor Dave]

And then, yeah, total hoax. I mean he just, first of all, the guy is not a scientist or a doctor at all. He's just some guy. And then also he just said he did that and then showed random pictures and put them however he wanted. He just, he froze Water under differing conditions, pressure and stuff like that, and then just set him and James, Randy offered him a million dollars to go on TV and reproduce the experiment under controlled conditions. And he said no.

[Dave]

Hmm.

[Professor Dave]

Wonder why.

[Chris Gethard]

Do you think these health influencers or groups should be somewhat liable for their information?

[Professor Dave]

I mean, I think so. It's, it's, it's hard to know how to do this here because we have regulations for medicine. But when you go into the alternative medicine space, it's not medicine, so it's not subject to, you know, what the FDA does and things like that.

[Dave]

Right.

[Professor Dave]

But we need to figure out a way to. I, I just, I, I don't know. I, I don't know a lot about law and civics and things like that. I, I just, I, I just call out the bad science. Right. This is wrong, this is wrong, this is wrong, this is wrong. And hope that that makes an impact in the, in the collective consciousness. But I don't know how we can go about regulating these things, but we need to be able to because, you know, if you got somebody that's, that's trying to do Reiki or something and they say, oh, it'll make you feel better, okay. I mean, maybe you did, you know, maybe you got a placebo effect and you felt a little better. And, you know, I mean, you can't tell people that they did or didn't feel better. But if they start. But the danger is that people start undergoing these kinds of fake treatments when they have cancer or something where, I mean, there's just so many people that let cancer get to, like, stage four and they think they're gonna, like, eat this root and do the Reiki and the, whatever it is, it's not going to do shit. It will do nothing. And then now it's too late and you're going to die. Steve Jobs did that famously, so that's why so many of them are very careful about the claims that they make. But there's a difference between, like, the claims that you put out there on in writing versus what you say privately and what you. And what you imply and what people infer. And I don't think that everybody out there doing Reiki or any of these other alternative treatments is pretending that they can cure cancer or are telling their patients, you don't need to go to a hospital or see a doctor. You just do this. I think many or most, maybe I hope are responsible enough to not speak that way. Yeah, but there are definitely people, There are, there are frauds on the Internet that are very vocal and very influential that are not kind of just doing the mom and pop thing. They're going for the empire and they're enormously toxic influences on society.

[Chris Gethard]

I can see that. I tried Reiki once. I know how powerful placebo is, though.

[Professor Dave]

Yeah.

[Chris Gethard]

So I don't know. For me, I did feel better after. She knows, though.

[Professor Dave]

I mean, you had a headache and the headache went away. I mean. Yeah. I mean, that placebo can do that.

[Chris Gethard]

Yeah. So you mentioned FDA earlier. There seems to be an attack on them right now.

[Unknown]

Right.

[Chris Gethard]

Especially with the biohacking health community.

[Professor Dave]

Sure, yeah. I mean, I'm not, I don't have my finger on the pulse of it, but I mean, there's, I mean, the current administration is definitely trying to undermine all attempt at regulation, that's for sure. I mean, and it's not just Trump. I mean, this has been going on, I mean, it's been going on for decades and then heavily since Reagan. Reagan was the first to make really big steps towards massive deregulation which led to, which led directly to the corporatocracy today. But Trump is totally in line with that, wants to completely undermine fda, cdc, you know, all of these institutions that we need. You know, I mean, you can say what you want about the FDA and you can, you know, cite maybe an individual instance where something didn't go right. But this is like the, the alternative is completely un, completely unregulated marketplace. Prior to the fda, people could say whatever they want, drink this, it'll cure your whatever. No ramifications. Right now there are regulations if you make these claims, right. You have to go through, through clinical trials, you have to demonstrate the efficacy of your product. There are a lot of hoops to jump through for a good reason. Right. We don't want people just taking harmful substances thinking that they'll do something that they don't do. But it's just that it's hard to even talk about this with a, with a science illiterate general public because they're so trained to have this knee jerk reaction that any government institution is evil. Anything that has anything to do with the government is evil. And you know, I'm, I'm here to criticize the government in, in, in, in many ways as well. But to just say none of these institutions that are there for safeguarding, right. They're, they're regurgitating rhetoric from those who want deregulation to get the public to agree to it, to coalesce with it.

[Dave]

Right.

[Professor Dave]

It's a very underhanded psychological Manipulation.

[Chris Gethard]

I wonder what's going to happen if they actually fire 80% of the FDA and CDC?

[Professor Dave]

I mean, it'll be mayhem. So I think so.

[Chris Gethard]

Wow. I mean, they are exposing a lot of corruption though, I'll say that. Did you see the Social Security one that came out yesterday?

[Professor Dave]

I did not know.

[Chris Gethard]

So we'll put an image up on the screen. But basically there's millions of people claiming Social Security that aren't even alive.

[Professor Dave]

Okay.

[Chris Gethard]

Which is just fraud.

[Dave]

Okay.

[Chris Gethard]

So they are exposing stuff like that, which I think is. It's useful for sure.

[Professor Dave]

If that's true.

[Chris Gethard]

Yeah, no, it is.

[Professor Dave]

Okay.

[Chris Gethard]

Yeah, we'll link it below. I know you're scientific and you know.

[Professor Dave]

The problem is that today we are in the post truth era and there are so many outlets on the Internet and even the president himself who just say things and pretend that they're real. And it's just these days you can't just. I mean, I'm not saying what you're saying is not true. It very well could be, but I.

[Chris Gethard]

Know you mean it's hard to take things out.

[Professor Dave]

You can take literally nothing at face value these days.

[Chris Gethard]

And even that, if you read certain studies, that could be bullshit too, you know, so what? Like if you read certain articles or you read certain information like that could. That could be false as well?

[Professor Dave]

No, there's almost no source of information that can be trusted in a vacuum.

[Dave]

Right.

[Professor Dave]

You need to compare. You mean you need to read that. You need to read other similar things. You need to expose yourself to anything that's claiming that's false and consider that as well, you know.

[Chris Gethard]

Do you use Twitter at all?

[Professor Dave]

I was on Twitter and was tweeting a lot and then I got my account suspended.

[Dave]

Yeah.

[Chris Gethard]

Under Elon, or was it before that?

[Professor Dave]

No, it was under Elon.

[Chris Gethard]

Really? I thought he was.

[Unknown]

About what?

[Chris Gethard]

Did they tell you what you did or.

[Dave]

Well, it was. I was after October 7th for about six months, I was relentlessly countering Zionist propaganda every single day because it's just this massive campaign of Zionists who manipulate the public into, you know, granting them the green light for war crimes and genocide. And so they have these paid actors that just sit there every, every hour just spewing the narrative. And I was very aggressively countering all that.

[Professor Dave]

Yeah.

[Dave]

And. And then I was, you know, anti Semite of the week and all this stuff. And then eventually I just got dogpiled with reports and it got.

[Unknown]

That was literally my question for you. Have you seen all the misinformation on X? But you're already suspended, so.

[Dave]

Yeah, so I don't go on there anymore.

[Professor Dave]

I mean, a little bit of me.

[Dave]

Was relieved because it was affecting my mental health.

[Unknown]

Yeah.

[Dave]

Because I'm very invested in Palestine, in the situation there and. And the genocide and just having to look at the way Israeli media and those figures are distorting the truth at every turn. Just like it. I was angry all day, every day. It wasn't good for me, my health. So when I got suspended, I was like, all right, I don't have to do that anymore.

[Unknown]

What were their methods for distorting it? Because I've heard they own the news networks.

[Dave]

Right.

[Unknown]

That's. That's pretty known at this point of interest.

[Professor Dave]

Well, I mean, there's, like, Heretz, which.

[Dave]

Like, is, like, on the fence and, like, kind of exposes some of their stuff.

[Professor Dave]

But, I mean, it's not really about media.

[Dave]

It's just about these personalities, media personalities that, I mean, they just lie. Everything is a lie. You know, I mean, early on, like, some of the stuff, I was like, you know, first of all, everything is a must. Everything that they want to bomb is a must.

[Unknown]

Right?

[Dave]

That hospital, Hamas, that school, Hamas. They bomb every. You know, isn't that convenient that just everything that you want to do to wreak havoc on civilians happens to be Hamas? Right? And then there was Al Shifa Hospital, where they were like, this is like the super mega Hamas base. And they had these cgi, like, all these terrorists on this underground tunnels right under Al Shifa. They finally go in there, and they, like, planted, like, a couple guns in a corner. Like, see, there's guns there. And then they went downstairs. They're like, look, it's a list of terrorists. It's literally a calendar. And, like, they're just, like, the level, like, it was so bad that even CNN was like, all right, well, we're not running your propaganda on this, guys. We're going to actually expose you because you're looking so bad that we have to flip now to retain any ounce of journalistic integrity. So it's just all this, you know, they openly call for genocide, and then anyone, you know, from the river to the sea, which is resistance to genocide, that's a call for genocide, you know, while you are committing genocide. It's just. Yeah, I just. I don't know. It's rough.

[Unknown]

It's rough. And I. I lean conservative, but I know a lot of conservatives support Israel, obviously, and that's. That's probably my biggest thing. I don't really speak on that too Much.

[Professor Dave]

Yeah.

[Unknown]

You know, it's rough.

[Professor Dave]

Well, we got it now.

[Chris Gethard]

Yeah.

[Unknown]

I didn't vote this election, but I go to all these conferences and I see it so, and I see it all over at. It's nuts.

[Dave]

Yeah. I mean, that's the main platform with which that is spread. It's very effective. It is. You know, you get people all the time denying that it's a genocide. So I don't know how much more clear we can get. Right. You know, Human Rights Watch, Amnesty International, un, the, you know, icj, International Court of Justice, like just everybody agrees that it's genocide except Israel and America.

[Unknown]

Yeah.

[Dave]

Isn't that convenient?

[Unknown]

Do you have any faith in Tron that he might put an end to that?

[Dave]

Absolutely not. Are you kidding? Of course not. He's bending over for Israel already.

[Unknown]

Wow.

[Dave]

He always has a lot of people.

[Unknown]

Think he's, he's going to help put that to an end.

[Dave]

Absolutely.

[Unknown]

You don't think he won't?

[Dave]

There's nothing he's going to do that is going to be beneficial to Palestinians. He says he wants to take, keep Gaza. Right?

[Unknown]

No.

[Dave]

Okay, that, that's helpful. Sure. The only thing that a president could do that would be helpful would be to cut off all funding, all, all financial support and weapons.

[Unknown]

Yeah.

[Dave]

Right.

[Unknown]

Doesn't look like it's going to happen.

[Dave]

Right. I don't think it's going to happen anytime soon. Not just him, but I think any president that, that openly planned to do that would be assassinated. Any candidate who, who was outspoken about that would be murdered well before election day with you.

[Unknown]

So anyone in Trump's cabinet you like? Because I know you're talking about rfk, which we'll dive into, but do you like anyone on his cabinet?

[Dave]

I mean, I, I have to admit I'm not like, I don't know his whole cabinet.

[Unknown]

Talk about.

[Dave]

Yeah, I think at some point I will. Because the thing is, I'm a science communicator. So I, I, I try, I, I only delve into politics where it is science related, which happens sometimes because there's legislation on scientific topics. I try not to just do raw political commentary. It's not my area. I mean, like I said, I mean, I'm a person and I have opinions. So if you ask me questions about politics, I'll tell you my answer, but I'm not staking my reputation on that. I stake my reputation on my analysis of scientific topics. So we're having a conversation. So whatever you want to ask me, I'll tell you what I think But I, I also just am so busy all constantly doing content creation that I'm not really on the pulse with the news so much.

[Unknown]

Yeah. So that's probably good then. Yeah, I guess. I don't know. Let's dive into RFK though because obviously he's. I don't know if he started the anti vaccine movement, but he was a big part of it.

[Dave]

Yeah. Oh well, he didn't start it but I mean he's the premier anti vaxxer alive today. I mean one of the most vocal and most powerful obviously.

[Unknown]

Is that your biggest issue with him?

[Dave]

Yeah.

[Unknown]

Anti vaccine start.

[Dave]

Of course.

[Unknown]

And what, what would be your argument to him? I've seen you say on other shows you want to debate him.

[Dave]

I mean I would, I guess, yeah.

[Professor Dave]

That would be, that would be a pretty.

[Dave]

I mean I can't imagine why he would do that, why he would agree to that. Yeah, but that'd be a good opportunity for me. He's just completely full of shit. All you just views anti, you know, long debunked anti vaccine talking points. He's still doing like the Andrew Wakefield MMR autism thing like just long debunked. Right. One paper retracted many studies proving it's not legitimate. The the study was fraudulent or everything about the study was fraudulent. He was bribed by injury attorneys to make a case for, for suing.

[Unknown]

But autism is increasing though, right?

[Dave]

No, no, it's all. I mean diagnosis might be but that's just because people who are autistic 40, 50 years ago weren't diagnosed. They're just weird diagnosis a diagnostics really. Yes. I don't know.

[Chris Gethard]

I mean you, you would know more than me.

[Dave]

There's certainly not like some thousandfold increase in autistic people. That's insane. That's not happening. Right. And also autistic autism is genetic. Right. It's not. There's no substance in a vaccine that is going to give you autism that has been so unbelievably conclusively debunked. Right. It all comes back to that one Wakefield study which was fraudulent. He was bribed into line in the study. It was somehow got it in the lancet. I don't know how the hell that happened. Was rapidly retracted many studies since then which we all knew had that vaccines had nothing to do with autism but they did the studies anyway just to appease the public. Conclusively showing no relationship. But people keep going back to that Wakefield study and RFK does it in these now part of the cabinet and he's just regurgitating these long, long debunked, ridiculous anti vaccine talking points. It's really scary that he has any control over any health related organization, this guy. I mean, it's just insane. And they're already rolling back, you know, language about, you know, vaccines and, and.

[Unknown]

Yeah, yeah, we'll see what changes come now with the vaccine schedule for children. Right Now I've heard zero, ages zero to 18, they got to get over 50 vaccines. Now, I'm not sure if that's true or not.

[Dave]

That's not true.

[Unknown]

If it's not, do you know the exact number then? I mean.

[Dave]

A dozen or 12 or something. I don't know. I mean, see, that's reasonable. Both of my boys get all their vaccines and I think it's like two doctor visits, maybe three.

[Unknown]

Okay, that's reasonable to me. I've had here and say it's 70.

[Dave]

No.

[Unknown]

Okay, so that's not true.

[Dave]

No, that's not true.

[Unknown]

Got it. That's where I was like, that's way too many.

[Dave]

70.

[Unknown]

But 812 is. I'm sure I got around.

[Dave]

Also, why would somebody react that way just to a number without even understanding what they're being vaccinated against? Could. I mean, there are things that are very important to be vaccinated against and then things that aren't. As much like we don't get mass vaccinated against smallpox anymore because we already did that and now smallpox doesn't exist. Right. We don't take polio vaccines because that was more or less eradicated. But guess what, it's coming back. And under rfk, I wouldn't be shocked to see some kind of polio outbreak even in America. There was one in Gaza. There was a polio outbreak in Gaza.

[Unknown]

That's scary.

[Dave]

Yep.

[Unknown]

That could spill fast, right?

[Dave]

Yeah. And it's absolutely devastating. Right. I mean, Pete, this is the problem is that young people today, people my age or younger are. They don't even know what smallpox is. They don't even know what polio is because it was eradicated before we were born.

[Unknown]

Yeah.

[Dave]

And so we don't know the horrors of some of these pathogens. Right. Some of these diseases and vaccines are very obviously a candidate for the most important and best invention in human history.

[Unknown]

Wow.

[Professor Dave]

Yes.

[Dave]

At the turn of the 20th century, our newfound ability to contain pathogenic bacteria and viruses basically doubled the lifespan, the human lifespan. It changed the quality of human life in unimaginable ways. Right. We used to die all the time from pneumonia and crap like that. Yeah. And now we have Antibiotics and we have ant. You know, and we have vaccines and antivirals and all these things. And our command over pathogens is the most incredible thing that humans have ever done.

[Unknown]

I will say I almost died from pneumonia. I probably would have without antibiotics. So I'll always be grateful. The western medicine.

[Dave]

Yeah.

[Professor Dave]

I had a real bad.

[Dave]

When I was seven, dude.

[Unknown]

I had terrible down coded.

[Dave]

Yeah.

[Unknown]

So bad.

[Chris Gethard]

Okay.

[Unknown]

COVID vaccine.

[Dave]

Yeah.

[Unknown]

You probably get asked about this all the time.

[Dave]

Sure.

[Unknown]

Are you defending that one?

[Dave]

Yeah. Really? It saved a ton of lives.

[Unknown]

Wow. That's a hot take, man.

[Dave]

I mean it shouldn't be. It's just that we're in this post truth era where people just repeat over and over and over and over again. Clock shot clot.

[Professor Dave]

It killed all these people.

[Dave]

Myocardial. All of it is fabricated.

[Unknown]

All of it.

[Dave]

Virtually all of it is fabricated. Not all of it. Because you can have. There. There are side effects to any vaccine. But there were not appreciably more adverse reactions to the COVID vaccines than any other vaccine that was that widely applied. Well, I mean, one thing is that no other vaccine has ever been that widely distributed. Right. Right. Something like 5 or 6 billion people took it. So that's the most people who've ever taken any vaccine. But no there. So if you take the raw number of adverse effects, it was the most. But you have to scale it. Right? Right.

[Unknown]

It's a percentage.

[Dave]

Percentage wise. There were not appreciably more adverse reactions to the COVID vaccines than any other really Vaccine.

[Unknown]

Because they rushed. Right.

[Dave]

They didn't rush it.

[Professor Dave]

I mean they were.

[Dave]

I mean they were trying to get it out as fast as possible.

[Unknown]

In comparison how long other vaccines.

[Dave]

But people don't understand that it went through clinical trials. Right. The clinical trials.

[Professor Dave]

All.

[Dave]

All. All that happened is that the. This. There are three phases of clinical trials. They were allowed to overlap. Usually you do one phase, you analyze the. There's red tape. Got it clear. Right. Then you go phase two. Finish phase two. Then you. More stuff, checking stuff. Then phase three. This time we went boom, boom, boom. They were all overlapping. We weren't in because we're trying to get it out as fast as possible. And it saved, I don't know, 10 million lives or sort of.

[Unknown]

Yeah, absolutely. Do you think it's possible something like that could happen again, Covid. In our lifetime?

[Dave]

Yeah. Why couldn't it?

[Unknown]

That's steroid, dude. Yeah. It doesn't seem like we placed any measures to prevent that from happening again.

[Dave]

No. And. And furthermore won't. And I. I shudder to think what would happen if a pandemic of the scale of COVID or greater broke out tomorrow. It would be pandemonium. Nobody would be listening to any scientist. It would be insanity. Because of.

[Unknown]

What do you think that is?

[Dave]

Just the. The. The distrust and the paranoia and the conspiracy theories and everything.

[Unknown]

Well, Fauci, people do not like Sachi.

[Dave]

I know.

[Unknown]

How do you feel about him?

[Dave]

I mean, he's just a guy all like. It's just there's so much mythology that gets wrapped up in. Okay. Fauci. Like, okay, at the beginning he was like, no, don't get the masks. Because he didn't want everyone to panic. Buy the masks. Because he was afraid there wouldn't be enough for health professionals. Okay, fine. That was a little bit of a weird thing to say. Fine. But this just like, this complete, like, they turn him into Satan. It's just ridiculous. Well, again, the same thing with the tech too.

[Professor Dave]

Like.

[Dave]

Like, you know, it's. It's gene therapy. You know, these people, they don't know what gene therapy is. It's not gene therapy. Right. If you. I mean, we were all supposed to learn what MRNA is in ninth grade. We all did, but people forgot, and so they need a refresher. But that you have the MRNA transcript that. That gets translated into the viral protein is only one step different from injecting the viral protein. It's pretty much the same thing. So the tech itself too, people don't understand that. Yeah, they say it's not really a vaccine. Right. It's an experimental gene therapy. No, it's a vaccine. You just don't know what vaccines are.

[Unknown]

I'm sorry, do you think the masks actually helped stop the spread?

[Dave]

Yeah.

[Unknown]

You think so?

[Dave]

Of course.

[Unknown]

What about the six foot thing? I follow Kyle's weird six foot rule.

[Dave]

I mean, what's weird about that? That. That really, I have the hardest time wrapping myself my head around. It's like we have a communicable disease that is spread by people coughing on each other. And you think that. That not staying away from each other. You think that staying away from each other is not a good idea. Yeah. I mean, it's six feet. Fine. Six feet is made up. But it's just like, hey, we want to minimize contact.

[Professor Dave]

We want to minimize.

[Unknown]

I mean, I'm the worst person to be talking because I got Covid four times.

[Dave]

Yeah.

[Unknown]

So I shouldn't even be talking about.

[Professor Dave]

I mean, I got it once.

[Dave]

I mean, the. The problem is that for reasons that I don't Fully understand. That particular virion was subject to mu. A higher rate of mutation. So we had many strains.

[Unknown]

I call it that one.

[Dave]

The problem is that, I mean, we all got the omicron. Yeah, that's the one. That's the only time I got it. But I mean, the problem is that people looking at like enormous amounts, percentages of people not getting a vaccine. You have this enormous host pool where it's going around and has all these opportunities to mutate. You get new strains, and when you have new strains, the new strain is a new viral protein, then it's. Then the existing vaccine is not going to work on it.

[Unknown]

Oh yeah, why? It was four vaccines, stairs or whatever.

[Dave]

Sure. I don't know how many they did.

[Unknown]

They've done a fifth on it.

[Dave]

I mean, I got one, I think.

[Unknown]

Oh, so you didn't even get the other?

[Dave]

I mean, I've gotten some, but I mean, it's like the flu shot. Sometimes I get it, sometimes I forget. I mean, whatever. Now at this stage, Covid is like the flu, more or less. I mean, in terms of severity. No, it's a different family of viruses. People who say it's the flu. No, it's not. The corona viruses, your influenza viruses, they're morphologically different, but yeah, I mean, it. The studies undeniably show that it saved lives. I mean, there's no two ways about it.

[Unknown]

Yeah. I watched this documentary, you probably heard of it called Die Sudden.

[Dave]

Have you?

[Unknown]

No, I do have a. Yeah, it just showed like people like pulling people pulling stuff out of dead body to a year. I don't know. I would look into that.

[Dave]

Like COVID infected.

[Unknown]

Well, the claw shot stuff is for you. I mean, but you never know, like who funds these documentaries? Right. That's the thing.

[Dave]

No, and invariably they're just grifters that are trying to make, you know, put it up on Rumble or Bit shoot and gain a following. I mean, it's. It's a proven business model these days. What's this shoot I ever heard on Bitchute is like Rumble. It's like where people go if they can't put their content on YouTube because it violates community guidelines, because it's just a bunch of laws.

[Unknown]

Well, if it's not on YouTube these days, you got to be really talking about some nonsense because. Yeah, on YouTube. Exactly. I have some controversial guests and I haven't gotten a strike in a while. Yeah, I will say during COVID I could not talk about the vaccine in a negative spotlight. They were taking those down. I will say. Okay, but ever since then. Smooth sound.

[Dave]

Yeah.

[Unknown]

Have you ever had issues on YouTube or.

[Dave]

No, just like. No, sometimes I. A couple videos have the 18 and up just for language. Because, like, I did one where I debated the rapper flat Earther, Lord Jamar, and he was swearing a lot. And I swear a little bit, too, but just an amount of swearing that they do. 18.

[Unknown]

That's. I've heard of that graph.

[Dave]

Yeah.

[Unknown]

Do you get a lot of hate from the Christian community?

[Dave]

Yeah, of course.

[Unknown]

What's their biggest issue?

[Dave]

Well, because I. I do a lot of work debunking creationism. I mean, young earth creationism, but also intelligent design, which is a propaganda movement. It's creationism rebranded. It's creationism in a tuxedo. It's their best attempt at making a sophisticated case for creationism. And so that would be another example of content where when they lie about primary literature, I then have to read the primary literature and show how they're lying about it, which takes a lot of effort. Do you already.

[Unknown]

The whole bottle.

[Dave]

No, no, no. When I say primary literature, I mean scientific journals. Oh, scientific articles.

[Unknown]

Okay.

[Dave]

No. So intelligent design tries to distance itself from, like, an evangelical approach because they're trying to see very rigorously scientific. Right. We're. We're scientists, and we're talking about controversies within science. That has nothing to do with religion. Right. I mean, it does. And they're lying the whole time. They're doing nothing but lying. They're distorting whatever science they're talking about. So that's very popular concept I've done on Discovery Institute, where I just go down their roster, and I just take each of them, take videos of them spewing their script, and explain with crystal clarity how it contrasts. You know, they're lying about a paper, and not only do I explain how they're lying about the paper by showing the part of the paper they don't show you, but also I'll get a statement from the author that says, yeah, that guy's lying about my paper. Is. He's saying the opposite of what the paper says, you know, so they can't stand me. Their. Their followers can't stand me. Yeah.

[Unknown]

I feel like there's always been that divide with religion and science, though, Right. That's been since.

[Dave]

Only on the side of religion, not on the side of science. Right. Really, Science is not trying to disprove religion. Science is trying to figure out what's. What's true about the physical world. If that contradicts your religion, that's your problem. Science doesn't care. Science certainly is not trying to disprove God. Right. And there are plenty of religious scientists. Really? Yeah, of course. But you, to be a religious scientist, you have to have a worldview that does not contradict science. Belief in God does not contradict science. Belief that the earth is 6,000 years old does. So you can't be a young earth creationist geologist. That doesn't work.

[Unknown]

So there's people that believe the earth is 6,000 years.

[Dave]

Oh yeah.

[Unknown]

Real.

[Dave]

Yeah.

[Unknown]

I've never heard that tape.

[Dave]

It's called Young Earth Creationism.

[Unknown]

Wow. I know.

[Chris Gethard]

Looking at that one.

[Unknown]

That's crazy.

[Dave]

Yeah, it's crazy. I mean, dinosaurs or anything? No. Well, so there were dinosaurs, but they lived alongside man and.

[Unknown]

Oh wow.

[Dave]

Yeah, yeah. All this crap I feel like we.

[Unknown]

Would have heard stories about or something, you know.

[Dave]

So yeah, they pretend that, that there's mention of it. They, they distort, you know, or reinterpret something in the Bible. Oh, that's talking about, you know, dinosaur something. But so young earth creationism is a much dumber version. And then intelligent design is this more sophisticated version where they're right. Younger Young earth creationism is just denying all these scientific fields like geology and paleontology and anthropology, whereas intelligent design propaganda tries to work within it and like make some concessions. Like they don't, they, they sort of, like, they don't outright state it, but they don't argue about the age of the earth and stuff like that. They try to make it a more scientific version but they go into the primary literature and distort it to try to undermine it, basically. So you have to go in the literature and show outer line.

[Unknown]

Got it. Wow, that's interesting. Yeah. Have you done a video on Brent Hancock yet? He's been on the show.

[Dave]

So he's been here.

[Unknown]

He's been in this exact video.

[Dave]

Yeah. So I'm planning one. It's going to be epic.

[Unknown]

Oh no.

[Dave]

It's going to be big. So I mean, but in bluntly, Graham Hancock is completely full of. He's a, he's a. Wow.

[Professor Dave]

Yeah.

[Unknown]

He's one of Rogan's most viewed guests.

[Dave]

I know.

[Unknown]

Over like 25 in the goose.

[Dave]

I know.

[Unknown]

Crazy.

[Dave]

Yeah.

[Unknown]

What's your biggest issue with him?

[Dave]

He just distorts and lies about legitimate archaeology. I mean, again, these are all proven business models. Right. You pick a field, pick a field of science and say the establishment is wrong and closed minded and ignoring these incredible other discoveries. Whereas what you're, what you're pointing at is Just some you made up.

[Unknown]

So when you hear about these ancient civilizations, sounds like what he's known for, like advantageous stuff. You think all that's just is like they never existed?

[Dave]

Yes.

[Unknown]

Wow.

[Dave]

It's a story.

[Unknown]

Yeah. I guess scientifically there's really no evidence.

[Dave]

No, there's none whatsoever.

[Unknown]

What if some evidence came to light? Did you change your stats?

[Dave]

If archaeologists acknowledged it as religiv evidence, which. Why wouldn't they, right? There's this idea that like, there's some suppression within the establishment of this evidence for Atlantis. Why. Why would they do that? They discovered a thing. They're archaeologists. You, you would be the most famous archaeologist. We're like, look at all these artifacts I uncovered. Like they're the. Like the narrative doesn't play. This, this like victimization being ignored by the ivory tower because they can't handle my truth or it's being suppressed. For what reason? What are you talking about? We find new civilizations all the time. You go, you find new Mayan ruins or new, you know, Mohenjo Daro over here or new African thing or, you know, new anthropological finds. Right. We figured out that Homo sapiens is a little older than we thought because of the Jebel Erhoud remains in Morocco. Pushed the origin of Homo sapiens back. Like it's all revisionary. Science is revisionary. We discover new things and we revise. You know, it doesn't totally undermine everything. What we know is what we know. But then we find new things and it's, you know, slightly changes to fit that. And our understanding is updated all the time. We make new discoveries all the time. So to pretend that like I have this secret knowledge and the establishment is, is ignoring me is totally idiotic. When you hear someone talk that way, your default response should be to assume that they're a charlatan. You can feel free to look into what they're saying more and then compare to what actual experts are saying. And maybe one time out of a thousand, they have something. But your default chance, default stance should be this person is a grifter. They're completely full of. And that's where Graham Hancock is.

[Unknown]

Did you see his debate with Knife?

[Dave]

Yeah, So I only skimmed it. But my piece, I'm. I'm. I'll be working with Flint. I mean, but yeah, I mean, Flint just wrecked him. But then they kind of like repackaged it. And then Joe, you know, there's a couple other guys. It'll. There's a wide cast of characters. So we'll wait for that video to come out, but, yeah, it's going to be good.

[Unknown]

Yeah. I will say it'd be hard for every archaeologist to team up together and decisively decide, I'm not exposing this at the same time.

[Dave]

Exactly. And that goes, by the way, for biologists and physicists and any field of science. Right. People tend to think that the scientific community is like this one room with a couple of dudes making decisions. They had a couple. It's not. There's scientists in a hundred developed nations working under the government, some in the private sector, some in academia. You can't buy off an entire field. You can't buy off archeology, you can't buy off physics. You can buy off one person. Somebody bought off Andrew Wakefield to pretend that he was a gastroenterologist, and then they bribed him half a million pounds to pretend that autism is linked to the MMR vaccine. You can buy off one guy, you can't buy off 200,000 in all these different countries.

[Unknown]

And how do you think scientists can get their respect back?

[Dave]

That's a very good question. So I do what I can. I'm not a scientist. I'm a science communicator. I work with the scientific community. I view myself as kind of an ambassador to the scientific community. And so I interface with them a lot. I am always, always encouraging scientists to do more scicom and to stand up for themselves when their field is being attacked, when their work is being attacked. I want to see more engagement from them. Historically, they haven't really done a lot because, number one, they see, they. They kind of see themselves as above the fray. There's all these conspiracy theorists here, but they're actual scientists doing actual science. They don't need to concern themselves with this. But I think some are coming around now because they're seeing that with this current administration slashing NIH funding, I go to universities and I give talks and I hear like the panic in their voice where they're like, we don't know what's happening. Like, all of this funding is frozen. It's completely unprecedented. We don't know what we're going to do. So they see the urgency with how public perception of science influences voting behavior, that votes in administrations that are detrimental to science, and that they don't really have the liberty anymore of ignoring public perception of science. So, yeah, I could do what I can do. And so, you know, I like me not being a scientist. The public sees that as both a pro and a conversation. Right. It's a pro in that I'm not of the establishment. I'm just some guy working in my house. Right. But then it's when they want to, they create. They call it a con because I don't have a, you know, a terminal degree in a particular field that I'm commenting on or whatever it is.

[Unknown]

So they won't take you serious.

[Dave]

So. Well, if they, if they don't want to. Right. They'll take some other jerk seriously who didn't even graduate college. But yeah, I don't have a PhD, so I don't, I can't be listened to. So they have the opposite situation. They're pros that they're, they're experts, they're credential experts. Feel the con is that they are part of the ivory tower or whatever. So no matter what who you are, the science denier can find an angle to deny what you're saying. But I don't see any way around this other than just a really concerted, high volume effort from a lot of career science communicators like myself. I go to schools, encourage students to go into scom as career to do what I do, as well as scientists speaking from their place of expertise and making content and, or just tweeting or whatever it is getting out there. We have to fight fire with fire. There are a lot of very, very, very vocal charlatans out there and we just need more people doing the same with, with the same intensity, the same fervor. We got to fight this.

[Unknown]

I'd love to see more of you guys on social media. I grew up loving science. Bill9 Neil DeGrasse Tyson. I know how you feel those guys.

[Dave]

But I mean, they're colleagues. They're the, my two most famous colleagues.

[Unknown]

Yeah.

[Dave]

And they're very good at what they do.

[Unknown]

Love their stuff. Neil's got a good podcast.

[Dave]

Yeah.

[Unknown]

So I'd love to see more like that. You need that to counterbalance all the Charlottes you do.

[Dave]

Yeah.

[Unknown]

And you're seeing that with the election. I think that's a big part of the reason Trump won. There wasn't as many, you know, Democrats pushing content on social media.

[Dave]

Yeah, I think that might be part of it.

[Unknown]

I mean, it wasn't even close if you went, if you looked at just podcasts alone, it was probably 80 joints where.

[Dave]

Sure, yeah, yeah. I think certain, certain narratives and certain voices and certain styles are rewarded on social media.

[Professor Dave]

And that is not always the truth.

[Dave]

Yeah, unfortunately. So.

[Unknown]

Well, Dave, what's next for you, man? What's your next debunk? Where can people find you.

[Dave]

Oh, yeah. Professor Dave explains on YouTube.

[Professor Dave]

I just.

[Dave]

I got a bunch of stuff in the works. The Graham Hancock one is coming.

[Unknown]

I'm gonna watch that one.

[Dave]

Yeah, it'll be good.

[Unknown]

All right. Check out his stuff. We'll link it below. See you next time.

[Dave]

Hey, I'm Ryan Reynolds. At Mintmobile, we like to do the.

[Chris Gethard]

Opposite of what big wireless does. They charge you a lot, we charge you a little.

[Dave]

So naturally, when they announced they'd be raising their prices due to inflation, we decided to deflate our prices due to not hating you. That's right. We're cutting the price of mint unlimited from $30 a month to to just $15 a month. Give it a [e-mail] Switch $45 upfront payment equivalent to $15 per month new customers on first three month plan only. Taxes and fees.

[Professor Dave]

Extra speed slower above 40 GB.

[Dave]

Details Geico's motorcycle expertise means I'm covered.

[Chris Gethard]

By people who know bikes like I do.

[Dave]

I'm happy as a clam.

[Professor Dave]

Disclaimer no conclusive scientific research has shown.

[Chris Gethard]

Clams can experience happiness.

[Dave]

It just meant that I feel really.

[Professor Dave]

Good about my coverage. I mean, even if you took the climb out for the best day ever, visiting the zoo, taking a scenic ride, knowing you're insured by specialists, and sharing a strawberry ice cream cone together, the.

[Chris Gethard]

Clam would not feel happy.

[Professor Dave]

And your strawberry cone would taste sort of clammy.

[Chris Gethard]

Geico's motorcycle specialists who know bikes like.

[Professor Dave]

You do, assume no liability for clammy ice cream cones.

[Chris Gethard]

Geico expertise for your motorcycle.