Hello, Hello, everyone we are already here welcome to this program, This
are for these special programs that we like to do on this, on the
two canals, in all peace and in history, in welcome history. Of
course, everyone' s going to say what schedule this is, what schedule
this is, but how it' s possible, well, that' s
right now. Let' s explain. Welcome to Lesli Hi, how are
you, Vita? Thank you so much for inviting me, because we are
on exact Narnia schedule, we are on a special schedule. But it turns
out they' re in Sweden. I' m in Vancouver. So,
in Canada, it has different times, so being able to put these two
times together wasn' t easy. So what time this to see had Leslie
proposed to me at six o' clock in the morning from Vancouver. In
what universe, if I am awake, it is now, because in this
vera, in the summer, here in Vancouver, it dawns as a quarter
to five, that is, very early in the morning, very early,
but they were going to see with their eyes swollen. All so good.
Grandpa lupita is that then I tell you that then a roll, because I
have asked you your schedule or my schedule and exact will be, oh,
no, but well, here we are thank you very much, i e
Angel you say it for Canada has five time uses. Yes, I imagine
exactly exactly. I' m in the here, in the Pacific, but
now they' re there, in Sweden. Let me go It' s
ten o' clock tonight with seven million. Ah well. Are you okay?
Are you okay? Yeah, yeah, it' s all right,
all right, listen, I' m sharing this program right now. If
you see me distracted, I don' t want to share it on our
channel anymore, well, on our Twitter account. But good because, because
we' re part of it, I share it with the Afitera band.
I already put it all the way right now. I just shared it.
There it is, then, is that this topic gives for much to talk
about. It gives a lot to talk about, because it' s unmasking
charlatans. Yes, it should be noted, It should be noted that if
we dare to do this, it is not with n n n a care
of moral judgment, with no desire to make anyone crucify or personally against someone.
It is simply a program for the best, because, of reflection,
of opinion, especially of opinion, but at the best of orientation, of
knowing where and how to verify an information reads them yes, look our fan
It is not is definitely already said in different tones, different forms on a
particular case. But I think it is also very important that we, who
are exposed to so much information, also have this radar and have this method
of detecting who is a charlatan. See, we' re not saying that
a particular person is a charlatan, but you see him every day on social
media. Every day we realize you have a million, hundreds million followers.
It doesn' t mean that that' s a specialist test person in a
given area. So let' s see influencers who are life coaches, we
see influencers who are health experts that that' s very dangerous. Why?
Because unfortunately, it comes to him that those people who, perhaps, do
not have this critical mass and take that information as true exact, exact,
go, by the way, something that, to the best and also,
can still undermine their physical health. But against them you also know what is
most serious, and that it can completely destroy them in moral, mental,
and physical terms, you can put yourself at a real serious risk. And
you' ve talked about toxicity, for example positive, that that' s
also telling you that you' re gonna make it, and you' re
gonna do it. But, well, each of us are people, we
' re individuals who have different needs and well, it' s just that
we don' t want to put it on the table and why? Now
why me and why? Lupiis did me a favor to invite me. Well,
because I work at the Swedish academy. I work as a coach of
innovation and entrepreneurship, because also being coach is not a profession itself or you
don' t go and study for coach. Rather you have an expertise you
are expert at something and you can use coaching methods to share this knowledge.
Then I work at six colleges. I have worked in the last few years
at six Swedish universities, the most prestigious Loone University, the University of Stockholm,
Carolinska University, the Carolinska Institute, the POTH University and the University of
Malmo. So I do what I do classes on innovation and entrepreneurship for now
yes, why my theme is this, because everything that is done with innovation
has to have a scientific sustenance. It can' t be that lupita and
I thought to say here is that they know that if they mix a little
bit of lemon with vinegar, then we' re going to cure the cancer.
Yeah, according to who, of course, and that' s what
I mean, you can put your life in danger of yours and very seriously.
That' s right and hear, Lupis seems yes to you, because
I had promised them that, as we also like gossip, I wanted to
tell them a little scientific cultural gossip. They think it counts. Count well,
so you can see that where there are people there is gossip. So
it turns out that out there, out of a thousand nine hundred and ninety
- six, in one September, a Baiteran writer decided to sue an American
professor who is given is called Boalipstad, because she wrote a book called Denying
the Holocaust, the growing assault on truth and memory. So David Irving was
outraged, that is, Mr David, so let' s say. He
was indignant because Deborah called him a liar, not why. Because Mr Irving,
if I ask You Lupis and all those who are listening to us,
there was the Holocaust, yes or no, yes, well, it'
s part of the story. Well, this gentleman said no ok and then
he said no. It' s just that you have to check it out
for me. Of course not. So what I did was to demand to
have her devoured, because she is an expert on Nazi issues, on extreme
right- wing issues on Holocaust issues. She' s a scholar of the
subject and then he said no, because I' m going to sue you
because you, because it' s interesting in the UK, you' re
the one who demands, you have to check, as everyone should be.
It' s the proof. It' s the proof, but it'
s the other way around. This one counts in the United States the one
who demands has to verify that his saying is correct. It' s the
other way around in the UK that you have to check. He' s
a kid all the way back. You don' t have to prove your
innocence. You have to check if they do. In this whole thing that
they start doing all this, they have to do an investigation, because in
order to be able to determine if it did happen or the Holocaust. And
it lasted six years this trial, well, so much, so they had
to go to Ouffitz to do as an analysis both sides. Imagine because there
and as one of the lawyers said it was the scene from which and they
had to go there to analyze whether it was true or not, because this
man said no, that it is not true, that there were no gas
chambers, that they did not gas anyone, that the Nazis were very good
people, that everything is an exaggeration. Blah, blah, blah. So
it turns out that a very important part of the trial was just to deny
this what I mentioned to you, that the gas chambers did not exist.
So I want you to see how interesting it is, how, from a
scientific point of view, there was, because we' re talking about social
sciences, we' re talking about a historical fact, we' re talking
about a documented fact. How you can play with perception and use the data
in your exact favor. Then he started presenting plans of these gas chambers and
he argued it' s not true, it' s that these were bunkers,
they were to protect themselves from the bombs. And it' s not
true. And besides, there were no holes in the ceiling, so how
do you say they got in. They put these gases in if there weren
' t even holes in the ceiling, so he started to argue all that
to the luck of our beloved brap had a fantastic lawyer that what he did
was look at facts. He said," Oh, yeah, well,
then you say this was a punker" No, I mean, it wasn
' t gas chambers. Of course not, of course not. Then he
says ah, well, that' s it. Let me tell you that
Auschmitz was built in nine hundred and forty. The gas chambers began operating in
a thousand nine hundred and forty- one. The aerial bombings you say this
dunker was made to protect itself from the bombs. The first bombing took place
up to a thousand nine hundred and forty- four. I don' t
know years later, then, at what time they built this bunker to,
according to this, protect themselves from bombs and besides, it was four kilometers
away from the Nazi military base. So, how do you think the bombs
were going to be protected and this is dropping the bombings that to me to
shelter you, it didn' t make sense. Then this gentleman spent six
years trying to use the information he had, because, apart from that,
he is a man who is a historian who had information, etc, to
try to use this information in his favor. What happened at the end.
Notice that this was victorious. In fact, you can find lots of documents
and lots of videos on YouTube by Devora Lifstad is one of my favorites.
Really. Above all she talks a lot about topics that we will use several,
many of her what she commented during the talk that she talks about,
because just the truth and the fact news and because she hears, she was
a victim of him. Then notice that the interesting thing was that he'
s going to read you Judge Charles Bray' s ruling when this whole trial
ended. Six years. I' m talking, six then says the judge
ruled the following. Irving has distorted and distorted the historical evidence is anti-
Semitic and racist. It has partnered with right- wing extremists who promote yonazism
for ideological reasons. Irdin has persistently manipulated history to exonerate Hitler. In my
opinion, the ECUs made against him in the Book of the List Doctor are
substantially true. Mr Irving, you have presented a completely distorted and false picture
of the Holocaust, something that cannot be allowed or tolerated under any circumstances.
Then a judge had to determine that the Holocaust if it worked, why it
' s a story for them, I tell them this whole story for what
they' re going into something that' s so boyfriendy, so brutal,
that there' s so many testimonies. There' s never one who tries
to molybdenum this in his favor, and it' s obviously these people who
do it. It' s because they get an exact benefit, exact everything,
that is, no one manipulates no more for free, but more because,
well, some yes, there are some more for the pure pleasure of
please, wanted to do the ego, of course. But it is true
what we have mentioned to ourselves and several times in this program is that it
creates to take truths and accommodate them in such a way that they seem another
truth to put together a truth but that it is not true, but that
in appearance it is. That' s who went to high school first must
have had the subject of logic. That I hope and that is the important
thing about that matter that many said and I what it will serve me for,
for the matter of those who serve more and nothing less than to think,
just as philosophy serves to think and then, well, that is reasonings
that, in appearance, are logical, but that go to truths that are
not true, that are lies, but in appearance truth, that is what
these kinds of people do And what happens that is to be guided. Indeed,
by all these theories, I understand and have spoken to me of many
theories of conspiracy and of many things that one then says ay no, for
it might even be true, but no. But not right there, critical
thinking, ability to search other sides for information, this ability to at least
keep the doubt present and not marry an idea forever, because, moreover,
all the idea that, after many tests, what we succeed in saying,
I think this is true, can still be manipulated, that is, it
can still change and change. That' s the problem. So I think
it would be interesting to talk about or all this that has come out lately
I remember, I remember a great because it is important and it is a
person and I brought it up and I' m going to have it to
mention to this character because it has a lot to do with the theme that
is right now in fashion that is this Marifer Centeno, of his graphology,
of how she defends it as if it was true a science existed and still
has a museum, which is the Museum of Portrait spoken in Mexico, there,
on University Avenue, in what was his part, Mr Haubert. I
don' t know if you ever heard him talk. Don' t tell
me, I' ll tell you. Let me have and in fact,
we worked with him sometime when I worked with Flor Rubio and Bueno in my
brother' s magazine, when it was the case with Diego Santoy and others,
Mr Haubert, Sergio Haubert, Sergio Carvajal Haubert, He was a man
who rural teacher, was studied in the normal. Then he was a great
painter. Esmeralda got into school at a painting school in Mexico City, which
is very important among the most important in Mexico, and began painting faces and
was offering to the police. He went to delegations to offer to make portraits
spoken about criminals and others, and they didn' t pay much attention to
him until he got involved in a crime of a Polish woman and a man
and interviewed the woman they had killed him. The man was dying and he
interviewed. The dying man told him to see more or less describe to me
what the attackers were like. And then he, this person describes, he
makes the portrait spoken and the police, with that portrait he manages to catch
beside or the criminal the talent of this man, who had anthropological studies,
because there were atropomóficos, rather than anthropological, anthropomorphic, precisely for having studied
in Esmeralda, in this school of painting that you have to study, of
course, human face hands truth. So, well, he has all this
baggage, this whole thing, and he manages to make portraits spoken to the
police and he is taken into account for the police and he did have criminological
studies and he is taken seriously, seriously. He' s a serious character,
but as you just told me, you didn' t know him and
I think everyone on the chat didn' t know Sergio Hover either, but
he did a prof sno job on this issue and he also managed to say
emotional and other questions according to the face he had studied for years. It
' s not hard to talk about emotions when a face was seen. That
' s not hard if you study it and if, besides, you have
knowledge of it and you' re shot down by studies. And it'
s one that made Sergio Hubert. But I think he' s a little
confused with what' s going on with Marifer Centeno and I think that her
problem and I' ve said it several times, is that he tried to
cover too much I don' t know how you see it. You see,
I' m going to be very careful how you talk now, because
we just have to do it. I' m going to give my personal
opinion. I think you have to be, you have to be just very
sensitive. When you are giving there are three ways to communicate, not a
knowledge, one is or personal union, that is to say I think then
another from the exact anecdote professional opinions and the or fourth are consultations. Then
I think that when you jump in between all these four, it makes a
mess, because it doesn' t exist to see. If you tell me
to see them explain to me about the graphology, I' ll explain the
graphology. I can give you entrepreneurship and I can give you innovation. I
can talk to you about how it' s created, what you need to
get close to the scientific truth, what' s the method of doing that
graphology. I don' t know if you tell me right now and from
the point of view of navigation and entrepreneurship, explain the radio to me.
What is the relationship between Nodal and Kazu? I whatsapp exactly, exactly.
One has a look, too. I think you also have to understand that
the protagonist must always be the exact lopital knowledge And also when you decide that
you are going to share a knowledge that you have, you have to become
the protagonist, not you exactly, of course, to fall into that and
we see it, for example, with other influencers, for example, and
I can say it with men that now I started to do my homework and
I started talking with non- talk, I started to listen, for example,
what Ashinder Bes says, etc. The vast majority of these people who
are now as a life coach, speak from the anecdote. So, when
I speak from the anecdote, I am speaking from my own experience. I
' m not speaking from the scientific point of view, because, eye,
you don' t have to be a neuroscientist in order to be a divulgator
of a subject. If you can communicate that, you don' t have
to have eighty metrics and four hundred doctorates to be able to cite a serious
study. You can say that according to neuroscience and Dr Daniel Aimam in his
book such a decu We know that there are seven different types of brain.
You can use it, but if we analyze the speech, it always goes
to the anecdote. And that' s the dangerous thing, because then there
' s no method that' s worth it. Of course, that'
s the problem, and you' re watching it and assuming it as you
do, because if it served me too, what you know about your album
comes from the anecdote, it doesn' t come from professional opinion and neither
influencers, neither Yon nor Lupita. Through that kind of videos we can do
queries, of course not, because in no way. This part that you
sent me has to do with what we say, that is, in this
program with all peace and in this program from history to history. If one
thing we emphasize is that it' s an opinion. It' s an
opinion. It' s never claimed that, according to my studies, no,
no, I' m going to prescribe you. Not that, not
that, there' s no quote. You have to always say from what
point of view you' re talking, from where you' re leaving to
talk. And if you' re going to talk about an already more solid,
more scientific question, because you bring in a specialist and clear, but
to see also it' s worth because you also have us, who are
building this kind of information that can also be entertainment, we also have to
have this filter to understand and say ah look. This is personal opinion and
I will see it, because in a sense of entertainment, because I like
the person, because I am am amused, because he hangs me out,
etcetera. No, and there I have him listening, but I don'
t take everything this person says as true. Now it' s good because
it' s on the show, because it' s one opinion, no,
no, no, well, it' s my opinion. And then
you also have to be very precise. You too, for example, you
do a lot in shows, not everyone, but you, if you are
very rigorous. With that, you also cease the fountains, because they must
be quoted. I think it' s fair. When sometimes you don'
t have it, sometimes you lose it, sometimes it' s a tweet,
but most of the time you try to quote the source. Right,
right, right, right, where things come from. For example, look,
I' m going to give you a very clear example. Question Alejandro
Rodríguez Hello Lupita. I hope you can get me out of a doubt.
The IPN comes out as homeopathic doctors and Mr Doctor says that homeopathy is also
a charlatan and the University teaches this. IPN means national polytechnic institute. It
' s a racing school that has to do with technology and I' m
going to tell you the source where I' m going to get the information.
Note that it is nothing less than the Government of Mexico, of the
Ministry of Health, and defines homeopathy as a medical, therapeutic clinical model that
uses substances obtained from vegetables, animals and minerals in very small concentrations dissolved in
water and alcohol. It gives the advantages, it speaks of the risks,
advantages of incorporating it into the health service and then well, because homeopathy is
a therapeutic medical medical model, that is, if it is recognized by the
Government and it is perhaps not an allopathic medicine and that many allopathic doctors deny
it, but it is recognized by the Government, it is recognized by many
other people. I don' t think so. Personally, I don'
t use homeopathy. No. I don' t think he' s ever
helped me in anything, but I respect whoever uses it. And here the
point is, unlike what we' ve talked about as charlatanism, it'
s not that doctors get out of the national polytechnic. I mean, I
' m gonna do a miracle cure with no, as the definition says.
Here, they use vegetables, they use natural compounds to make medicine. It
would be as much as denying Yurbedic medicine at the National Autonomous University of Mexico.
There is also herbalism and it is a very complete study that also has
to do with curing through herbs. I don' t think it' s
like a charlatan. Yes, I believe it as an alternative matter, as
an alternative medicine. Not the opta. Now I would invite you to our
dear Alejandra Rodriguez, and thank you for asking us. But I' d
invite you and everyone who' s watching us do it now. Yes,
the challenge right now after the program on Google may be a part of Google
which is like a section called Google' s Coller, that' s Google
' s Coller is. I think Lupe can help me, it can help
me write it, but well it' s Google for just it' s
a Google where you get to find papers and scientific documents Google, then how
you write to Google as a school sticker, then you get in there and
you can google it is well written to see starsi like that, with just
one more thing, I think with an odam Ok, then you get in
there and you can have access to a lot of documents, a lot of
studies. I' d invite you to Alejandra that now I' m going
to rehearse after the show get in there and look for these key words and
see what they throw out, because we don' t need to be scientists
or have two hundred doctorates and master' s degrees, because I don'
t like to see myself say either the awards I have, because I have
awards, or the degrees I have, or anything, because I think that
' s also very noisy. I believe that also what you say and how
you say it and how you communicate it also, obviously, because I also
told them what I do to give credibility. But I think the way you
express yourself too can help you get this credibility. Then because party why I
tell you this, because there are also people who have many academic degrees and
who have many awards and recognitions and such and are very half cres in their
work. Many of these awards are also a matter of loving not falling for
jury viewing. Besides, the truth, that is the truth, and also
that if you are honest, there should be a program of gossip from the
Academy, because if you knew that the Academy is worse than any drama,
of any theme notes from any novel. I mean, academics are people who
have mostly, not everyone, there are fantastic people, but they are people
who have very high egos and they are also people who have a very perverse
game, which was more. One publishes a study or a paper or something
and everyone else is trying to say it is not true, but you already
give it to c avoid discrediting. Of course it' s wrong, because
well, that' s why they' re scientists and that' s why
we generate more knowledge and improve our knowledge. And that, that' s
important. I mean, it' s not bad, but I also think
that through this talk, I also want to give you a little bit,
as now, that a little window. How academia works and how it works
academic degrees, because an academic degree doesn' t make you a good person
performing is your job in a right way, w optional, of course.
Of course, besides, listen I' ll put you here is the information.
If you want to know about homeopathy, according to the government, because
there are laws. In addition, there are different schools, there are cards
to carry this and, indeed, as you say, homeopathic medicine is also
practiced in conjunction with the alopecia. Yeah, that' s good, but
that' s another topic. Yeah, yeah, but good things we'
re reading here. But let' s go on with this because we'
re going to put that in order then, because I really liked that.
What you sent me. We start with the first way, which is to
think according to my personal experience. And that' s what we do ordinary
and it' s day- to- day, we all talk according to
our experience, exact people opinions. The first personal retapination that personal opinion always
begins, for example, is that the characteristics are subjective and not necessarily based
on facts, are influenced by individual experiences and emotions. For example, I
think this movie is the best of the year, because it made me feel
very excited. Sure, sure hear it' s when you say about the
house, it' s perfect, because, according to you, according to
who, the concert was wonderful, because according to who was used playba,
but maybe, from your point of view, you' re the mega fan?
Or on the contrary? Or on the contrary, it was terrible and
he kicked the dim as alex is that I heard it. What, Luis
Miguel is gorgeous. Oh, yes, and you can say it, and
there will be some who say no. I was reading a review the other
day that said it' s not that Luis Miguel speaks to her terrible.
I' m telling you no. I don' t know about all the
people coming out of the concert so mad because he didn' t talk.
And surely it was one or three who came out angry because Luis Miguel spoke
to him. But then I read another one that said he spoke very nice
with regard to world peace. Well, that' s everyone' s personal
opinion, no, and you can' t rely on that. You can
' t base yourself on that. You can say yes, but it can
' t be anyone' s absolute truth, of course, because it can
be that I can have a different experience. Maybe. I was watching the
show and I didn' t see anything. I' m full of emotions.
Eh ta and or she' s well tired and exact it would hurt
your head that way listen, but your world danced, not that it'
s not no maybe you went with the boyfriend and then ended up and not
that actor or I hate him. Well, maybe it' s bad recides.
Well you see, for example, Paulina says Luis Miguel is the most
handsome man, Alice says you have all the sounds and then, sad,
Luis Diguel, you see opinion every one is not my type, but well,
the next, the point, that follows, level, that follows anecdotes,
that are short stories of personal events or individual experiences. Notice that this
is what this is the way most life coaches that are now everywhere and fitness
coaches are expressed. And all that because it' s always based on his
anecdotes. And an example is once I tried that diet and lost a lot
of weight in a week. So anecdotes do not represent general or universal data
and are based on real events, but limited to the perspective of a single
person. OK, what I' m interested in is what you tell me
about that, that' s the exact anecdotes all over the place, it
' s like you see it' s look, like I told them.
I get, I started to analyze this material where it was just i Rinders
talk a lot from the exact anecdot to see is that I went, is
that I did now. Eye is also important to say and this is also
told to my entrepreneurs, because it is what I do also something that coaching
and coaching is that conversation one by one to help a person achieve a goal.
Let' s say we get to a point at a point bsto,
but let' s see that we could define it as what we were saying.
I mean, they' ve always been called counsellers or counselors. That
' s the truth, because now, when you talk about coach, when
you talk about coaching in general, you mean someone who' s going to
get into everything even in your personal life. That' s the key to
the coaches. And now talking about anecdotes, because you grabbed me down that
I was doing that little letter of information levels, so that, well,
I think about you, like in my students, to see the rupito you
have become like. He' s open to your attention, but he didn
' t have an anecdote. But when you mention Islinder sometimes it' s
true she speaks from that, for example, it' s different. It
' s very different. When a scholar of a matter I am going to
speak, for example, from the career I studied, which is pedagogy,
it is different Jessel, it is different to talk about Maria Montesori, it
is different from talking about Piayet, because they observe by then, through a
system, to have a theory, and that is a scientific method, that
they appeal to that. But it is one thing to observe and say why
a child and in how many children, in terms of group of children,
with a lot of factors to be able to say something and to be able
to base a theory. When you talk about the anecdote, no, as
you say, ice Linderbs talks about whether or not I put his ether on
my little girl and if my dad scolded me or not, that doesn'
t hear if you' re lind said in the observation that we made fifty
children going out into the rain, putting their ether in half and in half
not and gets sick, hey, because we could be talking about the fundamentals
in another way. Indeed, nothing more is your anecdote, nothing more is
what happened to you and that is not valid for direct consideration either. It
is also important to understand the following and really that you will share with what
happens to me often with those who want to start businesses or who want to
start entrepreneurship in any of its forms. It' s not therapy. Uh,
and I also see that a lot of people who open this kind of
channel are okay, that is, it can help you as people, to
roll you as a human being. Okay, but many of them use them
because they have things to work on and they are doing it through a microphone
opening because they also tell very private things and from the anecdote to overflow.
Then it is also when a general, a professional who is sharing his knowledge,
will not always be speaking from the self. It' s just that
when I went, I was when I went. Of course, you can
also share some of your experience in coaching, but you' re not always
talking from the self. You have to listen to the other one, because
he' s the other one who has to talk. It' s the
other one that you' re into information, so you poop that information,
so you can help them structure their thoughts into the different methods that you work
on. It' s just listening and not getting out. I think many
use them too. My personal opinion is that many also use it a little
bit to bring up this topic from the anecdote and share that it is not
wrong. But you also have to be very careful about that, because my
personal experience doesn' t mean it' s the same as yours. Luis
ah of course not. Of course it' s not what followed me.
Or that I go with a person to Cancun even this one because they love
that not to Cancun to make a magical retreat that will cost you 30,
000 pesos. It' s going to change your life, because you don
' t have to be very careful about that either, so you have to
start being as an observer. Not like that, tell this person he'
s talking from the anecdote. To me, this person who is the anecdote,
but always say look at this. It worked for me and it also
happened in this study Notice that it does work because blah. Bla? BLA?
BLA? BLA? BLA? Bla? Of course, if you can
' t talk in general or pretend that what you lived is applicable to everyone
else. If that' s what we were saying, right now, the
anecdote may be that I can help you best if you go to a doctor
' s office and talk to him. That' s why he' s
so lame. But the doctor heard too. Each patient has a different anecdote
the patient and then the doctor has to appeal to their scientific knowledge, not
to each individual. But well, the next level. Next level are professional
opinions, which are judgments, evaluations issued by experts in a specific field.
The features are based on expertise and experience in the area. More reliable than
personal opinions. Due to the information and knowledge of the professional they are usually
supported by data, research and accepted theories. Now it is also important to
understand that how knowledge is generated, generated by people or not, generated by
Martians or by non- reptilians. No, so they' re not people
like you and me, they' re curious that they find a hypothesis and
they start to research a topic and then they say this is my result,
it' s published in and then they reach consensus. It is like a
group of people who say ah well, we accept this as the truth,
that there are no absolute truths, but we say our consensus leads us to
that this is the truth and this is a fact, so we can assume
it as truth and we can use it as data to support our sayings.
Not well, then an example of this is, according to recent studies,
this surgical technique is the most detective to treat that condition. Interesting eye.
I have also noticed when they interview psychiatrists and ask them, in particular,
for example, to see what you think of Donald Trump? It' s
Tonal Trumpo narcissistic. So serious psychiatrists always say I can' t answer you
if Donald Trump is narcissistic or not, because I haven' t treated him
and I' ll have to make a series of protocols to know and say
yes is a clear narcis to see, there' s what would happen to
see, but based on this, since I can indicate that he has narcissistic
traits. I mean, that' s the big difference. That' s
the difference, and I think John and Salazar really stressed it here. In
the programs that we have to create your life on mental health, it is
one thing to have narcissistic disorder and another thing is to have the narcissistic traits
that can be talked about now. There are issues that get fashionable. There
are also issues that get fashionable and then, as anyone talks about any topic,
ah also that as well as that everyone and apart comes as for like
onditas, not that it' s like the wave comes and we' re
all going to talk about I don' t know about a type of bipolarity
health. Everyone talks about bipolarity. Then, of which is like these subjects,
then you have to be as very careful also to know to go to
the sources and investigate who is giving these sayings so that we can take and
say ah good this information, whether it is valid or not. Then we
have another one, which is the one that is very important. I think
we need to discuss what a consultation is. The consultations are advice provided by
experts in response to specific questions, which is when you go to the doctor,
which is when you go to the psychiatrist that when you go for example,
with me, when you come to talk, innovation and entrepreneurship issues are
personalized according to the situation or need of the consultant, based on technical knowledge
that professional experience usually involves a detailed analysis and concrete recommendations. For example,
I consulted a nutritionist to develop a food plan suitable for my needs. I
mean, the nutritionist isn' t going to say oh well, because it
' s that you fit a 14- day tops and then we see that
you don' t what, because and this you' ve talked about so
much, not what made you weight up. We need to investigate, we
need to do an analysis. He bleeds to see me tell me ah and
there' s an individual thing. It' s a personal thing. It
' s one thing that that' s where the Mister Doctor here plays an
important Marifer fiber when he already gives advice regarding weight loss, writing with blue
pen and doing the long letter. Well, that' s just, I
mean, he' s right. It' s the doctor you want to
see and he can talk nice, ugly regular, but he' s right,
I mean, the part that' s happening is a fallacy, because
it' s not true. You may vent by writing as a tool,
as we have said your anxieties. But that' s where that' s
going to change your way of eating and it' s going to lower your
body fat level. Well, no, no. That is why there are
increasingly more specialized scales and more specialized nutriologists and that is why there is also
specialized exercise. You remember how they used to say. Hey, now you
can go down with this diet, you' re gonna lower the fat on
your fingers. Tiny doesn' t exist. No, I was saying no.
No. With this diet no more you' re going to get off
your hips either. When you give a diet, your body will function as
a teda that will work and lose weight. But there is no such thing
as so specific. And he' s already seen it. The problem is
that we continue to believe that there are magic remedies and I think that also
if we talk about Mariferi' s case and I' m going to address
it, hints from the point of view of references and how they are cited,
not how sources are cited. You and I commented, Lupis, that
a few hours ago posted a twitter, not a I don' t know
if you want to share it, but well he shared it here. Got
it. I' ve got it here because he put it in since last
night too. Marifer Centeno shared it since last night in her instagram and she
says we had talked and well, I, at least, I, at
least I had mentioned several things. Marifer Centeno has not faced things and or
had pretended that nothing had happened and that everything was going on and I keep
reading faces and letters and giving advice and so on without giving importance and he
was summoned to different programs that did not help him much, because all it
seemed is that Marifer was ignoring, of course, what was going on around
his expertise, his person or his character or how they want to call him
yesterday I said in this program in all peace. I didn' t say
it in history, but I can say it right now. I said that
if I hadn' t extended an invitation to her, I hadn' t
spoken to her or anything like that, it' s because I' d
be exposing Marifer again to a public scorn. And it' s not the
idea because they don' t have or didn' t have damage control.
Or he doesn' t have a damage control, he doesn' t have
a structure that can contain all this so that Yapa went out to defend himself.
And well, finally yesterday there was a reaction from Marifer regarding the issue
that I think is late, but well it says in Mexico the subjects of
graphology and graphoscopy exist so much that they are contemplated in the judicial bulletin admitted
as auxiliary expert evidence to provide to the judges and magistrates and other authorities elements
to reach a legal truth. The Colegio Mexicano de Grafología y Criminalística is that
was founded in the early two thousand years and is a group of expert investigators
charged with divulging, studying to go rns the latter. Its primary characteristic,
among other disciplines, is graffiti to everyone who wants to learn. We'
re not a bachelor' s degree. There and apart from the first seeing
reading as well as from So, we already recognize that we are not a
bachelor' s degree. However, the students who successfully conclude the skills that
are taught here this part I will underline is. I repeat them. We
are not, however, the students who successfully complete the skills taught here.
You can' t satisfy the skills. Skills are held or not held,
developed or not developed. Then I can try to teach you a skill.
They tried to teach me how to paint countless and tired of no. I
can' t paint, I can' t draw. Then there' s
no way. But, she says that students who successfully complete the skills taught
here have the elements to obtain the registration of competencies before the SEP in their
program. I know to know in the same way if you wish, to
register with the secret TPS as an external enabler of it, of the same,
not of that of this I do not understand. You understand what this
was It was as if you noticed. He' s very upset because he
says you, we' re not a bachelor' s degree. However,
students who successfully complete the skills taught here have the elements to obtain registration in
the competence competence before the CEP. In your program you know in the same
way if you want to register with the STPs as an external enabler of it.
But I don' t see what the STP is, because I don
' t explain it to us, that' s it. The text is
also very conmo. You also leave many, many s but aside, you
also start to read because it is a slightly long text. It is also
interesting because it continues to defend ghofology as a science. And in the end
that this that I would like that is what I wanted to comment on.
In the end he cites an exact series of authors. But if you allow
me immediately to accredit the knowledge you give him in matter, being able to
participate in a trial as expert of part. I mean, she keeps holding
that if you graduate from her Mexican College of Grafology school, you' re
going to be an expert and you' re going to be able to participate
in a trial. On the other hand, as in all parts of the
world and even more in social networks, there are people who misinform, are
not constructive and are dedicated to pretending and discrediting on fundamentals. This part seems
to me like it' s already a personal defense that I wouldn' t
need to do if what you do was perfectly backed up. And she calls
this a bullying log they' re making her. It says on social networks,
you can distort the information. He says what he did on the show
today I hold and I' m convinced that emotions can make us sick.
We all know that. Stress can cause a lot of disorders, among others.
Eating from anxiety or eating from depression. And it' s not my
invention in the authors we' ve talked about. And he quotes Luis Hey
who is also an alternative, which is also an alternative. What she says
is neither absolute truth nor scientific truth. That on the one hand, on
the other hand, she, on the show today did say that emotions make
you fat because you have anxiety. That' s what he said, but
he also said that graphology and changing your handwriting could change that behavior. When
I consider how personal your behavior is to the contrary, modify your writing too,
which is the secret of graphology, graphoscopy is to validate the authenticity of
graphology. I could be the one who can tell you, like Jaubert did,
what emotional conditions that person might be in because of the way he wrote.
But the way he wrote it won' t change the other way around,
which is not because I write diff is not but good, good.
What you say here then is that he mentions a lot of authors and he
also says he takes advantage to say that he joined Daniela Parra that this seems
to me with absolutely all the peace of the universe, his papacy manipulative,
because you are joining a person who has become a victim in everyone' s
eyes and is fine. That' s how it works for Daniela, because
she' s a pain in the ass, but I don' t think
I know, but she has something to say in this discussion. Also no,
because if I don' t see what that means, I don'
t know what Daniela Parra has to do with this whole problem, more than
like a Daniela Parra if she defends a real, tangible thing that we know.
It was a real case we' ve seen, of course, but
Marifer, I think it' s gone. Well, I don' t
know what you think. Yeah, look, then, like I tell you
after all this I don' t really make it very clear how many,
many loose ends are left at the end cites a series of studies, not
a series of names, names is not sources. So I, as curious
as I am, tend me and I' m looking for them because I
don' t, but I didn' t think them here is already.
If you want I' ll tell you as if, say it to see
Mira, as I know I am without giving. Then tell me asada ajá
see expert documents before the courts of Justice, School of Legal Medicine of Madrid,
Homer, Emmanuel f Test of graphic projectives of Barcelona, creation expert calligraphic,
graphic and manuscript Dickinson, Madrid, as well as Augusto Betz, Francisco
Viñals, Ricardo Alberto Fernández, María Luz Puente, Evelyn Aguilera, Arce Palmiro
Viñas, Amadeo Palliser, María Joseph Claret, López Monserratedo Miquel, Isabel Sánchez,
bernoue Germán, Belda García Fresca, Julio Cabilli, Cavali, Juan Allende
del Campo, all with a normal judgment, without fallacies of authority of perverse
traits. We understand that in the networks, in short, those are the
authors that already cites good. Then it' s interesting because I, as
curious as I am, started looking for why. Because if someone writes you
in the chat how boring when we start with this anecdote that I told you
about Bora and this so- called irving this one, why? Because how
easy when an event can manipulate you to see everyone is clear to us that
the holocaust happened to everyone, but this person tried to change, so,
to change using data, to change the narrative in his favor. Then I
started to investigate who these people are. And, in fact, if you
google the vast majority of these people because I' m not going to talk
about each one of them, yes, they' re graphologists, but you
also get to see that reading articles and they' re also called that they
' re a pseudoscience. At no time are they said to be neurologists.
No time at all. At no time is this mentioned now something also very
interesting. He is one of the authors, researchers or experts in this subject
that he also cites, it is also used in a way says. It
' s not that this person is an expert on this subject. Well,
the reality is that also this person who is engaged in is not in graphology,
but is engaged in the study of interpretive drawings. I mean, well,
but let' s see, but that' s known to be that,
yeah, it' s that, yeah, it' s a tool,
that' s a tool that if you use it in psychiatry, that
is, there are studies about it, and so on, because it'
s projection. No, I mean, it' s something else. So
these people who also cite, because neither do they endorse their saying because,
well, I too can say things and I can also publish things, but
no, that is what they argue, does not change. It does not
change the sense of what is being discussed exactly. We can all miss lupita.
We' re all salty people. All academics are fallible people. There
have also been many who have to go out with their tails between their legs,
say sons. Yes, I want to work, but excuse me,
I married fifty million dollars, but I didn' t. He didn'
t come out in the end. That is, yes, it can happen
too It may also be that, for example, researchers who publish very serious
books that have to have a second edition to correct, not put exact rat.
Of course, correcting them is the only thing, the only thing I
think that for you to have this credibility is to be able to say yes
I was wrong and not try to put third people arguments like that is that
it' s bullying, it' s that they don' t like me,
it' s that they don' t want me, that' s
that kind of thing. Yeah, that' s what I' m saying.
No, you wouldn' t have to mention them if what you do
is hold. I believe Marifer is well, that doing what you do is
right, no, no, I don' t say it to good.
Just put it where it belongs. Marifer stops saying it' s a science.
Yes, you' ve been told and I think it' s wrong,
because you take powers that don' t correspond, like giving questions that
belong to the field of psychology, for example, to that of emotions,
when there' s no preparation it' s okay that you know it there
' s nothing wrong with studying it and knowing it and, like you said,
talking about it quote that source what you can' t. You want
to work as you can and look within these categories texts. I also add
something that is important, also that I want to share with you, which
is what I also do, that is, the subject of disclosure. I
mean, there are people like me who are also science divulgators. I'
m a neuroscience and neuroentrepreneur and I' m not a neuroscientist. I'
m going to explain what a science divulgator is. So, a science divulgator
is people who communicate scientific information to the public in an accessible and understandable way.
Generally, scientists. Not all of them. There are super talented people
who have the gift of the word and who are super entertaining, but in
general, scientists do not connect, because with the public. So, that
' s why we come to the science divulgators, who help that knowledge be
made, come to the masses. So, what are the characteristics of science
divulgators? They are not necessarily scientists, but they have a good knowledge of
the issues they deal with. Its aim is to educate and increase interest in
science. Don' t worry about it. It is to educate and increase
interest in science. Have you become curious to find out more about it.
They use platforms such as blogs, videos, podcasts and social networks to reach
a wider audience for example, a science communicator explains in a video how vaccines
work using simple language and everyday examples. So, that' s what science
divulgators do. I work with scientists every day, with researchers every day from
different branches, and many of them, also those who I give coachin our
associations, one are researchers and then I run all the information that I share
and that I ask them I interview. I have constant communication with them.
I' m looking for my sources, not just one, but two,
three, four or five to be sure that the information I' m sharing
is the right one. But I' m never going to tell you Luis,
is that, according to neuroscience you have to take vitamin or not at
all that you can' t. No, but you can say according to
a study conducted by Dr David Circleir, who is a specialist in longevity issues
from Harvard University, that if you improve on this type of vitamins, your
longevity is going to be greater, very different from what I say. Make
it clear, of course, like me, me, Leslie, I'
m telling you, and I recommend it. Of course not exact, of
course not exact, of course not. That' s the big difference.
Then you have to be very careful. I also think it' s like
a shared responsibility. Yes, the communicator, because social media has enormous power.
We have to get a responsibility. Eye is not bad, of course,
that it is not bad that also the people who have knowledge generate an
income of this knowledge, because also enough work, put one to make the
content two to have this knowledge, it is worth, it is worth that.
This is not the issue, but you have to have the responsibility that
what you share is scientific and that you also know how far your limitations go,
that you know what topics you can talk about and what you don'
t. And those of us, who consume this content, also that we
make the decision to decide or consume this. There' s no way you
can see it, that you can see it far away, considering that with
all the reserves in the universe and you' re going to see it,
okay, you' re going to take it into account, but you'
re not going to believe it. Everything you' re not gonna do and
everything and look. I will give them to close today with all peace,
with absolutely all peace, and well they will say no. That is not
with all peace, but if it is net, it is with all peace
to see look. Indeed, it is possible to collaborate with the prosecutor'
s office, because the prosecutor' s office all over the world appeals to
what they need to solve a case. They appeal to mediums, they appeal
to graphologists, to face readers to everything you want witnesses all to be able
to solve a case. Yeah, it' s necessary, which doesn'
t mean that you' re what you do is a professional. You remember
the case in which the bala uy participated was very small, but as a
naro, but I think everyone. It was all clear when it was the
case of Raúl Salinas de Gortari, the murder of Francisco Ruiz Massier and that
he had disappeared, that we never knew about him. Painted Muñoz Rocha where
it disappears. And where is he, where is he? And then the
prosecutor' s office, for why don' t you put this man the
bale, this woman the bale, the seer the bale, which was the
one who told you. This is not the obvious, this is one that
is digging, but this one that is burrowing, the one that told you
is that here goes the prosecutor' s office with the bale and that someone
tells you exactly this whole roll of the bale. Really, Google investigate it
because it was true. The whole society said they didn' t find Muñoz
Rocha anymore, because the bale already told them where he is? Her?
It' s the bale, the bale, which is a seer and already
told them it' s buried. The body of deputy Muñoz Roche has already
been, the case has already been resorbed. It was a lie, of
course, it was a lie. Well, they went to the pit,
because I tell you, I was celebrating very little. But it' s
those things that shock you, because they were everywhere twenty- four seven and
there' s the news. So they did go and go to the pit,
of course, and I think, and very much with cameras and microphones.
Yeah, we' re live here like the bale, the plate,
of course, the plate unwinds, if I remember correctly, it was plate
unwind the procurator, because they also made songs. I remember the stuffed animals
making songs. Well, but here' s the reality. The reality here
is that, of course, there will be people. I do, I
think there are people who can see, who have faculties, who have this
ability, I think it is blindly, now that I don' t think
there are 50 million in millions. No. I don' t think they
' re unique, they' re few, they' re determined, they
' re at times and so on. But the point here is that it
can be clear that you can participate with the prosecutor' s office if you
bring them something that can serve them, or with the prosecution that is now
called no, which doesn' t mean it is. And maybe Mrs Paca
does have those faculties. Maybe, yes, but not to move an entire
country and forgive me, tell me what you want, but Mr Muñoz Rocha
' s remains have not appeared. Pau Pau tells me yes, Lupita.
That story was true, no yes, but the remains never appeared maybe so,
yes, they had their powers for other things, but to appear to
the MP it was not possible. So this part of me is relative.
The prosecutor' s office gives me work and receives me. That' s
very relative. Yes, because we had also heard in some other people that
there has been much talk about this issue, which they also say. Well,
an expert also kind of now that the lawyers themselves can qualify you.
So, he' s an expert on this, no, and you go
and register, and either, it' s not like you require too many
documents, that is, and we also see how things are generated, unfortunately,
in the Mexican justice system. We know how they are, unfortunately,
that is also the exorte quality of judges and professionals in the Mexican position system,
because it is not the best. Then we see that also through corutelas,
friends, etcetera, because they are also given to them exactly by examining
these experts, for time to say goodbye to Sweden so that you will already
rest tonight there, this afternoon, here late in Mexico City, late here
in Canada, here in Vancouver, but also from supernight there lesley hears and
so international that we are and to part this schedule like Lupita. I don
' t know what we' re gonna do when you get back to Mexico,
but we do, we could do it, I still have a little
bit left here in Vancouver. So we can do something else in due course.
Look, lupita, it' s not a no, but it'
s not certified by the CEP. They' re not professionals, they fall
into another category. They are not exactly advertised as professional careers. Jacobo Greenberg,
in his time a psychologist, a physiologist, tried precisely to test the
theory of Sintergia in time, of course and fine. But the joke is
that Jacob Greenberg became a scientist, as clear as casjun was a scientist.
And there, yes, there are many bases to talk about rupper and many
of those theories that we have today, because they come as from these thoughts
of the moment of the aha not that in their time they seem crazy,
because also to be scientific and to be able to generate this knowledge you have
to also dare. Of course, how do you shape it, then say
hey no. But if we do it like this, then you change.
And that' s what' s made us have computers today, we can
have the Internet, we can have electricity. Hey, all these things are
from people who have had, who have broken the not that imagination completely,
who have discovered things. Not bad, but you just have to be.
There' s got to be. It' s a wonderful thing. This
is how knowledge is generated. You have to keep being curious all the time,
questioning and every time we question more, we learn more exo. Well,
now we do say goodbye. Dear, leslie and thanks to all those
who are members of this channel, those who are your good of the two
channels of grace are members of history in history and of this program with all
peace. Lupita, Pastor Martinez, thank you for being here, thank you
for following us Alice, thank you for moderate and also follow life. Liga,
follow me to the miss fierre books where you tell us where all the
dice are going to follow you, Ahorita, I' m trying to make
this tiktok era, but enter gramera of all the lupis to see how they
follow you in tiktok miss fere les Lee, in all social networks, in
ou, in Twit, inist, miss fire isquiers Lee on all social networks
sr Lesley. There' s miss Fear Lesley. So you can follow it
on IT, on Instagram, on tiktok on Twitter, Twitter that will never
be called x. There they can be denied by celebrities. This is good,
because thank you all very much and we will see each other at night,
at night, we will see each other in peace here. Thank you
so much for joining us and in the most night in history, in history,
we meet later guys and thank you very much. Thank you, so
come on, it' s