The government loves to tell us that it is our duty to “follow the science” when it comes to things like covid. But when the government is in charge of the meaning of “science” they form a monopoly over information.

Here’s a transcript of our conversation:

Connor: Hey, Brittany.

Brittany: Hi, Connor.

Connor: We’ve heard a phrase a lot over the last two years, and that’s that we need to quote unquote follow the science. And obviously this phrase has become popularized because of COVID, but it’s resulted, I think, in a lot of problems. So for starters, you know, science has become what we call a subjective term, meaning that it means different things to different people. We all have kind of opinions and perspective right about it, with something like math, right? Two plus two is four, of course. Now some people say it is math.

Brittany: I was gonna say it depends

Connor: That’s racist and that’s, you know, white supremacy, math, or whatever. But I think that’s still a very minority view. I think most people can reasonably agree that two plus two is four. That is what we call objective. In other words, it’s just plainly understandable and it’s apparent that it’s true. But subjectivity or something that is, subjective means that, you know, we have our different perspectives. And I think it’s that way with, you know, science itself for the government, you know, they now believe that only their version of science counts the official version, the Fauci Blessed versions. Excuse me. And so before we jump into some examples of this, let’s maybe talk about what science is. Science is, observing the world around us and testing out, and frankly, disproving hypotheses. Science is never settled. There is no final truth. It’s not, aha, I’ve discovered this. It’s, well, I’ve you know, disproven all these other theories and I’ve, I guess tentatively proven that this one is true. But, you know, other studies may show other things, or we may learn more as we go. It’s a very kind of tentative exploring type of perspective. And so science by its very nature, is never settled because we’re always getting new information and we’re changing our hypotheses. And so, you know, once we thought we had nine planets in our solar system, then we found out that there, that one apparently wasn’t a plan at all. This is a big controversy, I think, in some circles, you know?

Brittany: Because science should be debated. Exactly. So it should be a controversy.

Connor: Absolutely. And so, you know, things change and our understanding changes and you know, what we classify as a planet or not, right? And telescopes get better. So we can better see, you know, planetoids and all this stuff. But the government.

Brittany: Do you say Planetoids?

Connor: I don’t know. Now, I don’t even know, I know planetoid is a word, but I don’t know what the difference is between a planet and a planetoid.

Brittany: There’s a homework assignment for our listeners.

Connor: There you go. Someone, reach out on social media. Tell us what the difference is. So government and the science elite, I’ll call them, you know, I think they’ve decided that whatever they believe to be scientific fact is unquestionable. It’s like, it’s almost religious. I mean, it, yeah. Worse than religious, I would say it’s almost cultish. Like a cult of Fauci and a cult of COVID and a cult of like, you know, this is the, or we’ve seen it with climate change too, where we’ve long had this kind of sciences settled and 99% of doctors grieve, even though they all get proven wrong, cuz they make these predictions of the polarized cups are gonna melt. And, you know, all these bad things are gonna happen for decades. You know, researchers and scientists and futurists and all these people have claimed that you know, we’re gonna have overpopulation. Yeah. And we’re not gonna have enough oil and we’re gonna run out of food. And consistently these things have been proven wrong.

Brittany: Until the supply chain issue, I guess.

Connor: Yeah. I guess. Right, thanks, Biden. now and then anyone who questions this, anyone who questions the science is considered like a conspiracy theorist. So, Brittany, I want to ask you like, where do we see, we, we’ve talked a little bit about, right? I’ve talked more about COVID. How have we seen this kind of, in, in like you’ve had COVID for COVID for example? I know you’re a Jo Joe Rogan fan. So maybe say.

Brittany: I’m a Joe Rogan fan.

Connor: You’re an example of horse paste or what? A Dewormer.

Brittany: Ivermectin Dewormer. Yeah.

Connor: Ivermectin right? I mean, it feels like that’s another example, right?

Brittany: It is a perfect example and it’s so crazy to me. So right now, the only thing that the government is suggesting we do is continue to wear masks. Even though we were told if we got vaccinated, we didn’t have to anymore and get vaccinated, right? Those are the only options. They’re pretty much saying, you know what, there’s nothing else you can do, so just do this, do your part. But they’re not, as we’re saying, people are still getting sick. I think the numbers right now are higher than they were before the vaccine. So again, your choice, if you wanna get that, and I am actually vaccinated, I don’t know that. I think it works cuz I got COVID. So one thing that I did is I was like, you know what? I don’t really trust the science cuz the government was coming out and they’re saying there’s no approved treatments approved, meaning we don’t believe anything else. We’ll cure it. So I talked to my friend who’s a co-host on Tim Pool’s show, and he’s an independent journalist and I knew that he had COVID and that he did all these kinds of experimental treatments that people like Joe Rogan were using. So I decided to do my own research and I found doctors who were willing to do this other treatment with me. And so there’s things you can do called monoclonal antibodies and this is like curing people within hours of getting COVID. So I didn’t do this cuz it was $2,500 and I have my limits. Ooh. So, yeah with insurance, if I got approved it would’ve been 600. But Virginia’s rationing it Florida, they’re giving it to out for free. So if you live in Florida and you get COVID, you can get it for free, which is pretty cool, even though the funding for that is a sticky situation. But, so I did that. I took something called Ivermectin, which is, horsey, wormer. But I went to a doctor, I need to say this specifically, I am not a doctor so that I don’t get sued or something. but I went to a doctor who gave that to me with an antibiotic. They’re doing tests right now. If you mix ivermectin an antibiotic and then you do all these supplements, these vitamins, and I tested negative within five days of getting COVID. So, I think it works. But if you tell anybody in, you know, government or even just regular people who only listen to the government, they’ll tell you that people are dying from Ivermectin, that hospitals are being flooded with Ivermectin, you know, people who overdose on it. And that’s not true. In fact, Rolling Stone had to redact a statement cuz they said that people who had been, they got like, gunshot wounds weren’t able to get the treatment they needed in emergency rooms because the emergency room was flooded with people who were taking this horse medicine Sounds silly every time I say it, but that didn’t end up being true. So that’s just another way you see it where they want everyone, the government wants everyone to get vaccines. And so they’re discrediting, they’re saying this science is bad science, it’s junk science. But as me and many other people can tell you, this stuff works. So I think that’s a really good example. I’m glad you brought that up, Connor.

Connor: It’s crazy that people feel like there’s like this final definitive science and nothing can ever be questioned about it. I, you know, Fauci has presented himself as like the embodiment of science on COVID to go back to this example, and at the time we’re recording this, which I think a lot of our listeners understand now, we do this a few weeks ahead of time. So recently when we recorded this, and for you guys listening now, you know, a couple of months ago, Fauci came out and he was being interviewed and he was talking about how Rand Paul and Tim Cruz, two senators had been attacking him and questioning his policies and his decisions and he basically not basically he actually said, I represent science. Yeah. Like they’re anti-science because I represent science. Well, science can’t be represented as we point out with Pluto, right? There’s kind of two sides of this, right? You can’t represent science because it’s an open question. It always is. We’re always learning, we’re always questioning and we’re always gathering more information. And so it’s not only is it arrogant to say that you represent science, it’s just stupid. Like, it’s just wrong and it shows.

Brittany: It’s anti-science.

Connor: Yeah, exactly. It is unscientific to say that anyone can represent science. And so, you know, he’s trying to show Fauci is that he is like above reproach. He can’t be questioned. His, his decree, his, you know, decisions are finalized, but it’s, what, Hayek called like the fatal conceit. Mm-hmm. And what he meant by that like, a way to simplify what that means is it’s people who make a claim they can’t back up. It’s people who don’t actually know what they’re talking about. It’s people who feel like they can control others, that they have the knowledge, right? Like to go back to our miraculous pencil book, okay, for all the kids who’ve read that, we know that even a simple pencil can’t be produced by any one person. No one knows how to do it. It’s actually this highly complex thing full of moving parts and people working together and stuff from all over the world. Even for just a simple, simple pencil. No one person has all the knowledge they need in order to control that process, guide that process, It’s spontaneous order. Well, okay, now let’s go into a public health world where you got Fauci and others like him who feel like they are the embodiment of science. That they understand the data that they can, you know, make the decisions and that they can control what people do and who needs to lock down and what vaccines are appropriate. And it’s the few deciding for the many, it’s this like fake understanding or belief that a few people or one person knows enough to know what’s best for many other people or to know what’s right.

Brittany: The knowledge problem.

Connor: Yeah, it’s the knowledge problem. No, one can possess all that knowledge, know what’s best for you because we don’t, there’s so many unique aspects to you, to me, to this vaccine, to how that person has COVID to transmission rates in one state versus another and all these other factors. And so it is unscientific again for Fauci or anyone like him to claim that they represent science or that their position is the scientific one. If anything, you can disprove some things. Like you can say that cloth masks don’t work because, you know, look, these studies show that particles COVID particles are smaller than the little, spaces in between cloth fibers. Like COVID particles can get out. You can prove that with science. So you can say definitively cloth masks do not work, but you can’t say, you know, you must wear n95 masks otherwise, you know, you won’t, otherwise, we won’t stop spreading COVID. I was like, well wait a minute. That’s a general statement. You, can’t actually prove that that’s true. You can prove that some things are not true. You can have your hypothesis and then you go try and test it out. But it’s just this weird, weird world where I feel like science has been turned into not just this religious culty weird thing. And I say this as a religious person. I’m not saying that religious matters, I’m saying that treating science like religion is probably bad. But, then also this, I don’t know this kind of weaponization, right? Where it’s like, oh, you’re on the wrong side of science, you know, and, it’s like, well wait a minute. That’s not what science has ever been about. Why are we suddenly changing that now?

Brittany: Well, the scary thing is, and we’re actually gonna talk about this in the next episode, is now your questioning science makes you a threat, right? People are, people think you are scary because if you don’t believe in the COVID science, you’re out there infecting everybody else. And that scares me. But I wanna move away from COVID for one-second cuz there’s other examples. I wanna make sure we hit on that. And one way, or one way this shows itself, Emma and I talked about, and that’s the food pyramid. And this one always gets me. So when Connor and I were in school, they taught us, what was it, how, I don’t even remember how many little tiers the pyramid, there were, I don’t know, but it was like six, yeah. Six or something. Cause it used to just be the five food groups when I was like in kindergarten. And then they switched to the pyramid. Well, basically the pyramid is like what foods you should eat to stay healthy. And everything on the bottom were things that the government subsidized. And that’s the word Emma and I have talked about a lot. So that was like industries they were paying to prop up. So of course you had lots of bread. In fact, I think it was all like bread and corn. And now we found out that eating a ton of bread is not that good for you. And they would say things like fat is really bad if you eat fat, you know, that’s gonna give you problems. Well, now new science is emerging that saying actually, you know what? Eating a lot of fat, like eating good fats, eating like avocados, which have a lot of fat in them and you know, grass-fed butter and things like that, that’s actually kind of, it’s showing to be pretty healthy for you. And a lot of people are doing living really healthy lifestyles eating that. But the government has pushed this agenda and because public schools, you know, answer to the government, all the kids were being taught, oh, the food pyramids, how you stay healthy. And now we have obesity problems. And you know, back to COVID a little bit, one thing that’s so funny to me is we’re only being told to get vaccines. Joe Rogan has mentioned is we’re never being told, why don’t you live healthier? Why don’t we, you know, why don’t we start exercising Now that we know that COVID is a threat, why don’t we start eating better? But that’s never an option. And according to the government, eating better is just eating bread all day. So the food pyramid’s always a good one to me where it’s supposed to be this settled science and now we’re realizing like, oh, that’s actually really unhealthy.

Connor: Well, what is science when someone at the CDC can go change the definition of a vaccine on their website? Yep. Where before it was about, you know providing immunity and so that you can avoid catching a disease, right? And spreading it to others. And now it’s like, oh, a vaccine is something that helps lower the effects of catching a disease. It’s like, well, no, it’s not like we don’t get smallpox vaccines so that when we get smallpox, we have it, you know, not as bad. We get the smallpox vaccine so that we won’t get smallpox. That’s what vaccines historically were understood to be. And now the goalposts have been moved, the definition has changed, and suddenly by decree from some government agency, right, vaccines mean something different. Natural immunity, right? This idea that if you catch COVID, you have the antibodies in your blood, which means, you know, you’re not gonna spread it, you’re not gonna catch it or whatever. And so you don’t need to get vaccinated or you don’t need to wear a mask. No, one in the official scientific elite even talks about natural immunity. It’s like it doesn’t even exist anymore. And yet that’s what science has always been. And again, science can change, right? I have to be careful here. It’s not that, oh my gosh, it’s, that’s the way it’s always been. So that’s the way it must be, right? Science implies change because you’re always gathering new information. But that’s not why these definitions have changed. That’s not why these things are happening. It’s not that there’s new information, it’s that there is a political agenda, right? That has to be advanced by the people who are trying to assert control. And we’ve moved beyond into this like post-truth environment where it’s no longer about these objective truths. It’s the subjectivity. It’s like, oh, well I believe the science is this and you know, I follow science and I trust science. And it’s like, well wait a minute. Like that’s not how it works. We’ve moved away from these long-held definitions and understandings based on data, and now we have these it’s almost, scientism, right? Like, you can have, I like that, like, I don’t know, Catholicism or Mormonism or Evangelicalism, evangelical, I don’t know now. Is it even? Yeah, I’m like, whatever that word is. But like, you know, these kinda religious based things. Well, Scientism is like this religiously culty approach to science where it’s oh, all hell worshipful, you know, Fauci and, you know, I follow his sci. Like, it’s just weird. it’s a messed up world. We have to be very careful about where we learn from and who we perceive as authoritative and worthy of believing. And, because science is skeptical, science is asking questions. And I think that’s a good approach for us to take with, with leaders, with government leaders, with the science elite, right? There’s so much, especially if you look, and maybe we could talk about this on another episode, but when you look at how the government is funding most of the scientific research, it’s become very corrupted. And so now it’s about producing certain outcomes instead of discovering the truth. It’s a big problem. And if we want the truth, we have to be very skeptical and ask those questions. To encourage you guys to do that. Let’s all share that skepticism a little bit. Have an objective approach to what is true and what the science is, and be sure to ask those questions. Brittany, it was great chatting with you about this. And until next time, we’ll talk to you later.

Brittany: Talk to you later.