1 00:00:00,080 --> 00:00:02,720 Speaker 1: Welcome back to the deep dive. We are jumping straight 2 00:00:02,720 --> 00:00:05,799 into a phenomenon that really sits at the core of 3 00:00:05,960 --> 00:00:07,759 so much contemporary paranoia. 4 00:00:07,960 --> 00:00:08,679 Speaker 2: It really does. 5 00:00:08,960 --> 00:00:12,560 Speaker 1: It's this blend of pop culture, psychology, and well the 6 00:00:12,599 --> 00:00:16,960 deeply strange world of high level conspiracy theories. Our central 7 00:00:17,000 --> 00:00:21,640 question today is can fiction actually predict the future? And 8 00:00:21,679 --> 00:00:24,120 if it can, are we talking about magic or is 9 00:00:24,160 --> 00:00:25,519 it just math? 10 00:00:25,800 --> 00:00:29,039 Speaker 2: It's the ultimate plot twist, but playing out in real life. 11 00:00:29,199 --> 00:00:31,920 We're going deep into the belief system known as predictive programming. 12 00:00:32,079 --> 00:00:34,679 Speaker 1: And to really get why this idea is so powerful, 13 00:00:34,719 --> 00:00:37,799 so persistent, we have to start with the most chilling example, 14 00:00:37,799 --> 00:00:38,960 I mean, the one that always. 15 00:00:38,719 --> 00:00:41,560 Speaker 2: Comes up, the one that is almost impossible to explain away. 16 00:00:42,359 --> 00:00:44,200 We have to talk about the pilot episode of a 17 00:00:44,320 --> 00:00:47,479 very short lived X File spinoff, The Lone Gunman, a. 18 00:00:47,520 --> 00:00:51,000 Speaker 1: Show that was, let's be honest, an instant flop. But 19 00:00:51,079 --> 00:00:53,600 that one pilot episode, which aired back on March four, 20 00:00:53,679 --> 00:00:57,640 two thousand and one, it achieved this this unnerming infamy 21 00:00:57,880 --> 00:01:00,399 just six months later. Right, And if you've you've never 22 00:01:00,439 --> 00:01:02,200 seen it, or maybe you've tried to forget it, you 23 00:01:02,240 --> 00:01:04,640 really need to understand the level of detail we're talking 24 00:01:04,680 --> 00:01:05,239 about here. 25 00:01:05,560 --> 00:01:09,159 Speaker 2: The episode's plot centered on this really complex conspiracy inside 26 00:01:09,159 --> 00:01:12,640 the US government. The whole thing involved agents working for 27 00:01:12,680 --> 00:01:16,359 an American arms manufacturer and their goal. Their goal was 28 00:01:16,400 --> 00:01:19,560 to remotely hijack a commercial airliner. 29 00:01:19,439 --> 00:01:22,159 Speaker 1: And the target wasn't vague at all. The target for 30 00:01:22,200 --> 00:01:26,519 that remotely controlled hijacked plane was the World Trade Center 31 00:01:26,599 --> 00:01:28,640 Towers in New York City. 32 00:01:28,840 --> 00:01:34,159 Speaker 2: That specificity, yeah, it's just staggering. A hijacked plane, remotely controlled, 33 00:01:34,599 --> 00:01:38,200 aimed directly at the WTC. That's what creates that immediate, 34 00:01:38,280 --> 00:01:39,040 powerful shock. 35 00:01:39,280 --> 00:01:41,920 Speaker 1: But the fictional motivation is just as important, isn't. 36 00:01:41,799 --> 00:01:45,239 Speaker 2: It absolutely, Because in the show, it wasn't foreign terrorists 37 00:01:45,239 --> 00:01:47,680 being blamed. At first. The plot was that it was 38 00:01:47,719 --> 00:01:48,719 a government. 39 00:01:48,319 --> 00:01:51,159 Speaker 1: Backed scheme orchestrated by a domestic arms company, all for 40 00:01:51,239 --> 00:01:52,200 profit exactly. 41 00:01:52,239 --> 00:01:54,680 Speaker 2: The idea was to pull off a successful false flag attack, 42 00:01:54,959 --> 00:01:58,040 blame it on foreign enemies, kickstart a very profitable war, 43 00:01:58,480 --> 00:02:00,879 and then just watch Defense Spend Skyrocket. 44 00:02:00,920 --> 00:02:02,799 Speaker 1: When that aired in the spring of two thousand and one, 45 00:02:02,920 --> 00:02:05,599 it was it was just an obscure piece of television. 46 00:02:05,640 --> 00:02:06,760 Nobody really talked about it. 47 00:02:06,799 --> 00:02:11,159 Speaker 2: But after September eleventh, that timing that terrifying specificity. It 48 00:02:11,280 --> 00:02:12,319 just demanded an answer. 49 00:02:12,759 --> 00:02:15,240 Speaker 1: Was this just a one in a billion coincidence, a 50 00:02:15,360 --> 00:02:18,960 random fluke, or was this some kind of deliberate signal 51 00:02:19,240 --> 00:02:21,560 based on actual foreknowledge. 52 00:02:21,000 --> 00:02:23,680 Speaker 2: And that tension right there, that's our emission for this 53 00:02:23,759 --> 00:02:29,280 deep dive. We're going to rigorously analyze this predictive programming phenomenon, this. 54 00:02:29,360 --> 00:02:33,719 Speaker 1: Belief that elites are using mass media everything from The 55 00:02:33,759 --> 00:02:38,120 Simpsons to the Lone Gunmen to what to warn us 56 00:02:38,199 --> 00:02:40,000 or condition us for things they've planned. 57 00:02:40,240 --> 00:02:43,039 Speaker 2: And we're going to examine the two competing theories. On 58 00:02:43,039 --> 00:02:47,159 one hand, the idea that this is intentional, almost ritualistic 59 00:02:47,240 --> 00:02:50,639 signaling by some clandestine elite, and on the other hand, 60 00:02:50,719 --> 00:02:54,080 the explanation that's rooted in well the cold hard facts 61 00:02:54,080 --> 00:02:57,000 of statistical probability and cognitive distortion. 62 00:02:57,240 --> 00:03:00,120 Speaker 1: Okay, before we jump into that whole conspiratorial worldview, we 63 00:03:00,120 --> 00:03:03,560 should probably pause for a quick but really important clarity note. Yes, 64 00:03:03,639 --> 00:03:06,120 if you're a computer scientist listening to this, you might 65 00:03:06,199 --> 00:03:09,280 hear the term predictive programming and think of something completely different. 66 00:03:09,439 --> 00:03:12,960 Speaker 2: Right, there's a formal technical definition a theoretical method for 67 00:03:13,039 --> 00:03:15,879 program specification invented by Eric Kanner. 68 00:03:16,000 --> 00:03:19,159 Speaker 1: We are absolutely not talking about that today, not at all. 69 00:03:19,520 --> 00:03:22,680 Speaker 2: We are talking about the cultural belief that mass media 70 00:03:22,719 --> 00:03:26,520 is being used as a tool for intentional forewarning. It's 71 00:03:26,680 --> 00:03:29,680 vital to keep those two concepts separate. They exist in 72 00:03:29,680 --> 00:03:30,800 completely different worlds. 73 00:03:30,879 --> 00:03:34,599 Speaker 1: Okay, So let's unpack the core idea of the conspiratorial thesis. 74 00:03:34,639 --> 00:03:37,639 The foundation, the premise of it all is that major 75 00:03:38,080 --> 00:03:39,520 global events. 76 00:03:39,240 --> 00:03:43,120 Speaker 2: Things like pandemics, huge cyber attacks, political violence. Right. 77 00:03:43,240 --> 00:03:45,400 Speaker 1: The idea is that these things are not the result 78 00:03:45,479 --> 00:03:49,719 of chaos or incompetence or just natural disorder. They are engineered, 79 00:03:49,840 --> 00:03:51,439 They're orchestrated, and. 80 00:03:51,360 --> 00:03:55,159 Speaker 2: They're orchestrated by what adherents just call the elite. 81 00:03:54,840 --> 00:03:56,400 Speaker 1: Which is a pretty nebulous term. 82 00:03:56,520 --> 00:04:00,159 Speaker 2: It is. It's very vaguely defined, but it's consistently associated 83 00:04:00,199 --> 00:04:04,000 with figures in international organizations like the World Economic Forum, 84 00:04:04,080 --> 00:04:07,360 powerful corporations, global banks, intelligence agencies. 85 00:04:07,759 --> 00:04:10,199 Speaker 1: That kind of group, and the mechanism they supposedly use 86 00:04:10,360 --> 00:04:14,680 isn't It's not like old school propaganda, right, It's more subtle. 87 00:04:14,439 --> 00:04:17,800 Speaker 2: Much more subtle. It operates through these advanced warnings planted 88 00:04:17,800 --> 00:04:21,560 in fictional content, and the goal is to desensitize and 89 00:04:21,680 --> 00:04:24,319 normalize the public to what's coming. 90 00:04:24,519 --> 00:04:27,959 Speaker 1: So the logic is, if you see a terrifying event 91 00:04:28,600 --> 00:04:31,800 like a catastrophic power grid failure or a civil war, 92 00:04:32,120 --> 00:04:33,959 if you see that play out over and over again 93 00:04:34,000 --> 00:04:35,560 in movies and TV shows. 94 00:04:35,360 --> 00:04:37,600 Speaker 2: Then when it happens in the real world, you're already 95 00:04:41,439 --> 00:04:42,279 prepared for it. 96 00:04:42,480 --> 00:04:45,680 Speaker 1: Conceptually, they're less shocked, less resistant. 97 00:04:45,319 --> 00:04:49,319 Speaker 2: Exactly, and therefore you're more likely to accept whatever official 98 00:04:49,399 --> 00:04:51,759 narrative you're given, even if it seems a little off. 99 00:04:52,079 --> 00:04:54,759 The trauma has been sort of pre softened by familiarity. 100 00:04:54,800 --> 00:04:56,519 Speaker 1: We see this applied to new releases all the. 101 00:04:56,519 --> 00:04:59,680 Speaker 2: Time, constantly. Take the Film's Civil War from twenty twenty four. 102 00:05:00,399 --> 00:05:03,480 Adherents of this theory immediately branded it as a clear, 103 00:05:03,920 --> 00:05:07,240 purposeful attempt by the elite to foment and normalize the 104 00:05:07,279 --> 00:05:09,560 idea of internal conflict in the US. 105 00:05:09,759 --> 00:05:12,720 Speaker 1: They see it as conditioning programming the audience to see 106 00:05:12,759 --> 00:05:15,839 a domestic civil war, not as this unthinkable horror, but 107 00:05:15,920 --> 00:05:19,519 as I don't know, applausible, maybe even inevitable outcome. 108 00:05:19,560 --> 00:05:21,720 Speaker 2: And they'll often link it directly to past events too. Yeah, 109 00:05:21,759 --> 00:05:23,839 they'll look at the twenty twenty one Capital assaultants a 110 00:05:23,959 --> 00:05:25,519 see that wasn't a one off incident. 111 00:05:25,600 --> 00:05:26,839 Speaker 1: They see it as a prelude, a. 112 00:05:26,759 --> 00:05:29,240 Speaker 2: Stage prelude to what the film is now programming us 113 00:05:29,279 --> 00:05:30,560 to accept as the next step. 114 00:05:30,839 --> 00:05:34,199 Speaker 1: Another really potent recent example is that movie Leave the 115 00:05:34,240 --> 00:05:37,439 World Behind, the twenty twenty three thriller. 116 00:05:37,600 --> 00:05:41,160 Speaker 2: HM, the one about the blackout and societal collapse from 117 00:05:41,199 --> 00:05:42,199 a huge cyber attack. 118 00:05:42,319 --> 00:05:44,480 Speaker 1: And because that film was produced by Barack and Michelle 119 00:05:44,480 --> 00:05:48,040 Obamas company and had all these high level political figures involved. 120 00:05:47,720 --> 00:05:52,759 Speaker 2: It was immediately flagged as explicit programming for a coming 121 00:05:53,120 --> 00:05:54,040 cyber pandemic. 122 00:05:54,199 --> 00:05:57,000 Speaker 1: And what's fascinating is how they create this visual link. 123 00:05:57,160 --> 00:05:58,879 You see it all over social media. 124 00:05:59,040 --> 00:06:02,759 Speaker 2: Yes, adherents will constantly create these split screen videos. On 125 00:06:02,759 --> 00:06:05,800 one side you have a scene from Leave the World Behind, 126 00:06:05,959 --> 00:06:08,720 a city losing power, satellites. 127 00:06:08,240 --> 00:06:10,279 Speaker 1: Failing, and on the other side a clip. 128 00:06:10,040 --> 00:06:14,360 Speaker 2: From say World Economic Forum panel where they're discussing hypothetical 129 00:06:14,439 --> 00:06:16,839 future cyber attack scenarios. 130 00:06:16,399 --> 00:06:20,120 Speaker 1: And that visual pairing draws this explicit and i'd say 131 00:06:20,120 --> 00:06:24,600 manipulative line between the fictional warning and the alleged real 132 00:06:24,639 --> 00:06:25,480 world planner. 133 00:06:25,560 --> 00:06:28,279 Speaker 2: What's so interesting about this whole framework is is its 134 00:06:28,279 --> 00:06:31,040 psychological utility. I mean, for anyone who feels like the 135 00:06:31,040 --> 00:06:33,079 world is just increasingly. 136 00:06:32,480 --> 00:06:34,399 Speaker 1: Chaotic, which is probably a lot of us. 137 00:06:34,600 --> 00:06:41,040 Speaker 2: Right with climate threats, economic instability, political extremism. This theory 138 00:06:41,160 --> 00:06:45,560 offers a complete, coherent, alternative explanation for everything. 139 00:06:45,639 --> 00:06:48,079 Speaker 1: It's actually really comforting in a very dark way. 140 00:06:48,279 --> 00:06:51,439 Speaker 2: It is it replaces the anxiety of randomness with the 141 00:06:51,480 --> 00:06:52,519 certainty of control. 142 00:06:52,600 --> 00:06:54,800 Speaker 1: If the world is falling apart because things are just 143 00:06:54,920 --> 00:06:57,800 messy and people are incompetent, that's terrifying. 144 00:06:57,879 --> 00:07:00,240 Speaker 2: But if everything is controlled, if it's all part of 145 00:07:00,240 --> 00:07:03,839 a highly orchestrated plot, well at least there's a sense 146 00:07:03,839 --> 00:07:06,839 of order, and the person who believes they've cracked the code, 147 00:07:07,360 --> 00:07:09,720 they feel like they're one step ahead of everyone else. 148 00:07:09,920 --> 00:07:13,120 Speaker 1: This speaks directly to that fundamental skepticism so many people 149 00:07:13,199 --> 00:07:15,720 feel toward mainstream institutions and media. 150 00:07:15,879 --> 00:07:18,639 Speaker 2: It's the foundation of it. When that trust is gone 151 00:07:18,879 --> 00:07:21,120 and the established media is seen not as a news 152 00:07:21,199 --> 00:07:24,079 source but as a dangerous tool of the elite, this 153 00:07:24,199 --> 00:07:27,439 theory becomes a necessary narrative. It gives you a single, 154 00:07:27,600 --> 00:07:31,079 all encompassing answer to the question why is all this happening? 155 00:07:31,160 --> 00:07:32,839 Speaker 1: But we have to be really careful here. We need 156 00:07:32,839 --> 00:07:36,519 to distinguish this theory of a cult forewarning from the 157 00:07:36,600 --> 00:07:39,480 acknowledged real world power of media influence. 158 00:07:39,680 --> 00:07:41,399 Speaker 2: That's a critical distinction. 159 00:07:41,079 --> 00:07:45,040 Speaker 1: Because media can and does intentionally influence public policy and 160 00:07:45,040 --> 00:07:49,199 social attitudes. It's not a conspiracy, it's just effective social persuasion. 161 00:07:49,360 --> 00:07:52,120 Speaker 2: And our sources point to a perfect historical case for this, 162 00:07:52,759 --> 00:07:55,560 the nineteen seventy three TV movie The Day After. 163 00:07:55,759 --> 00:07:57,839 Speaker 1: I remember the stories about that. It was a graphic, 164 00:07:58,040 --> 00:08:01,600 horrifying depiction of the act for math of a nuclear war. 165 00:08:01,639 --> 00:08:06,360 Speaker 2: And its social impact was absolutely seismic. It genuinely terrified 166 00:08:06,360 --> 00:08:09,439 the American public and the global political establishment, and. 167 00:08:09,360 --> 00:08:13,480 Speaker 1: That profound social impact is widely credited with pushing President 168 00:08:13,560 --> 00:08:16,879 Ronald Reagan to fundamentally change US nuclear policy. 169 00:08:16,959 --> 00:08:20,360 Speaker 2: It is the emotional urgency created by that film help 170 00:08:20,439 --> 00:08:23,560 set the stage for the nineteen eighty seven US USSR 171 00:08:23,680 --> 00:08:28,480 Treaty on Intermediate Range Nuclear Forces. That's a documented, massive 172 00:08:28,480 --> 00:08:30,439 political and social influence. 173 00:08:30,120 --> 00:08:33,759 Speaker 1: A fictional story acting as this powerful tool of lobbying 174 00:08:33,799 --> 00:08:34,519 and persuasion. 175 00:08:34,600 --> 00:08:37,879 Speaker 2: But here's the key difference. This was acknowledged social impact. 176 00:08:38,240 --> 00:08:41,519 It wasn't a secret, ritualistic foreplanning by some hidden. 177 00:08:41,200 --> 00:08:44,000 Speaker 1: Cabal, right, No one was claiming Reagan was getting coded 178 00:08:44,039 --> 00:08:46,080 messages from some interventional beings. 179 00:08:46,320 --> 00:08:49,639 Speaker 2: Exactly, it was just effective storytelling aimed at changing the 180 00:08:49,639 --> 00:08:53,399 world for the better. The predictive programming thesis demands that 181 00:08:53,440 --> 00:08:57,759 the influence be secret, manipulative, and ultimately malicious. 182 00:08:58,240 --> 00:09:00,840 Speaker 1: Okay, so let's move away from the geopolitical conspiracies for 183 00:09:00,879 --> 00:09:04,159 a moment and turn to the statistical beast of predictive 184 00:09:04,200 --> 00:09:05,039 programming lore. 185 00:09:05,320 --> 00:09:07,279 Speaker 2: Ah, Yes, the Simpsons. 186 00:09:07,279 --> 00:09:11,799 Speaker 1: The Simpsons. If the Lone Gunman is the high specificity anomaly, 187 00:09:12,240 --> 00:09:15,919 Springfield is the high volume certainty, the Internet is just 188 00:09:16,000 --> 00:09:19,360 a library of clips claiming the show has predicted hundreds 189 00:09:19,399 --> 00:09:20,279 of future events. 190 00:09:20,679 --> 00:09:22,519 Speaker 2: And this is where we have to introduce a crucial 191 00:09:22,559 --> 00:09:26,399 mathematical concept. The apparent predictive success of The Simpsons is 192 00:09:26,759 --> 00:09:30,879 overwhelmingly a consequence of what's called stochastic likelihood, or. 193 00:09:30,759 --> 00:09:32,440 Speaker 1: In simpler terms, probability. 194 00:09:32,639 --> 00:09:34,840 Speaker 2: Exactly, it's governed by the law of large numbers. 195 00:09:34,879 --> 00:09:36,919 Speaker 1: That sounds a bit dense, but it's actually pretty simple 196 00:09:36,960 --> 00:09:38,879 when you just look at the sheer scale of the show. 197 00:09:39,039 --> 00:09:41,919 Speaker 2: Right Since it debuted in nineteen eighty nine, the show 198 00:09:41,919 --> 00:09:44,879 has produced what is it now, over seven hundred and 199 00:09:44,960 --> 00:09:46,519 ninety episodes and it's still going. 200 00:09:46,840 --> 00:09:49,600 Speaker 1: And each one of those episodes is packed with dozens 201 00:09:49,600 --> 00:09:54,480 of jokes, background gags, satirical plot lines, throwaway cultural references. 202 00:09:54,559 --> 00:09:58,600 Speaker 2: It's an immense, sprawling data set of fictional scenarios that 203 00:09:58,679 --> 00:10:00,000 spans more than three decades. 204 00:10:00,000 --> 00:10:02,720 Speaker 1: Aid, So the law of large numbers dictates that when 205 00:10:02,720 --> 00:10:04,799 you have a massive enough volume of. 206 00:10:04,759 --> 00:10:09,200 Speaker 2: Attempts, some percentage of those fictional scenarios are statistically bound 207 00:10:09,200 --> 00:10:12,759 to correspond to later historical events. It's almost a certainty. 208 00:10:12,879 --> 00:10:15,960 Speaker 1: If you make ten thousand predictions, getting fifty of them 209 00:10:16,000 --> 00:10:16,799 right isn't. 210 00:10:16,519 --> 00:10:18,279 Speaker 2: Prophecy, it's just probability. 211 00:10:18,639 --> 00:10:21,000 Speaker 1: This whole idea is also supported by how the show 212 00:10:21,080 --> 00:10:23,039 is made right. The writers aren't trying to be. 213 00:10:23,039 --> 00:10:26,919 Speaker 2: Profits, no, not at all. They are keen, incredibly informed 214 00:10:26,960 --> 00:10:32,279 observers of society, culture, and politics. Their whole goal is 215 00:10:32,360 --> 00:10:33,600 deep satire. 216 00:10:33,320 --> 00:10:36,799 Speaker 1: Which often involves taking plausible scenarios based on real world 217 00:10:36,799 --> 00:10:40,320 trends and just pushing them to their most absurd fictional extremes. 218 00:10:40,399 --> 00:10:42,879 Speaker 2: And these writers are smart, many of your graduates of 219 00:10:42,879 --> 00:10:47,519 top universities with backgrounds in economics, literature, politics. They're essentially 220 00:10:47,559 --> 00:10:48,320 running thought. 221 00:10:48,080 --> 00:10:52,919 Speaker 1: Experiments, thought experiments about societal collapse, political insanity, corporate greed. 222 00:10:53,399 --> 00:10:56,399 Speaker 2: Right, So it would actually be more shocking if over 223 00:10:56,480 --> 00:10:59,759 seven hundred and ninety episodes they didn't manage to get 224 00:10:59,799 --> 00:11:01,200 some of the big trends correct. 225 00:11:01,320 --> 00:11:04,000 Speaker 1: Let's talk about the most famous example, the granddaddy of 226 00:11:04,039 --> 00:11:06,480 them all, Donald Trump's presidency. 227 00:11:06,120 --> 00:11:08,600 Speaker 2: From the two thousand episode Barked to the Future. 228 00:11:08,759 --> 00:11:11,679 Speaker 1: In it, Lisa Simpson as president and she inherits a 229 00:11:11,679 --> 00:11:15,759 crippling budget crunch from the previous president, President. 230 00:11:15,440 --> 00:11:18,399 Speaker 2: Trump, and this aired a full sixteen years before he 231 00:11:18,480 --> 00:11:19,440 was actually elected. 232 00:11:19,679 --> 00:11:23,759 Speaker 1: This case perfectly illustrates the difference between prophecy and just 233 00:11:24,519 --> 00:11:26,440 really sharp, calculated satire. 234 00:11:26,679 --> 00:11:30,200 Speaker 2: It really does. The episode's writer Dan Greeney, he talked 235 00:11:30,200 --> 00:11:32,559 about the intent behind it. He said they put the 236 00:11:32,679 --> 00:11:36,000 idea because it represented the logical last stop before hitting 237 00:11:36,039 --> 00:11:38,200 bottom for American political sanity. 238 00:11:38,840 --> 00:11:42,000 Speaker 1: So, back in the year two thousand, presenting Donald Trump 239 00:11:42,039 --> 00:11:45,039 as a future US president was the most over the 240 00:11:45,159 --> 00:11:48,080 top farcical political joke that could possibly make. 241 00:11:48,159 --> 00:11:51,639 Speaker 2: It was a punchline, a joke about America potentially going insane, 242 00:11:51,720 --> 00:11:52,360 and the fact. 243 00:11:52,200 --> 00:11:55,000 Speaker 1: That the jokes stopped being a joke sixteen years later 244 00:11:55,120 --> 00:11:58,000 is well it's a powerful commentary on our own cultural descent. 245 00:11:57,960 --> 00:11:59,919 Speaker 2: Not evidence of a coded warning from the ilumni. 246 00:12:00,320 --> 00:12:03,799 Speaker 1: But the claims go so far beyond politics. They get 247 00:12:03,799 --> 00:12:06,519 into details that are truly baffling, which is why the 248 00:12:06,519 --> 00:12:07,480 theory is sore appealing. 249 00:12:07,559 --> 00:12:10,679 Speaker 2: Oh absolutely, Let's dig into some of the other specific 250 00:12:10,720 --> 00:12:12,120 examples that people always bring up. 251 00:12:12,200 --> 00:12:15,600 Speaker 1: Okay, what about the corporate mergers. The show depicted Disney 252 00:12:15,639 --> 00:12:20,440 acquiring twentieth Century Fox years before that deal was ever finalized, and. 253 00:12:20,320 --> 00:12:22,879 Speaker 2: That deal happened in reality over twenty years after the 254 00:12:22,919 --> 00:12:26,399 episode aired, which you have to admit, shows a pretty 255 00:12:26,399 --> 00:12:29,360 impressive understanding of consolidation trends in Hollywood. 256 00:12:29,440 --> 00:12:32,080 Speaker 1: And you have the cultural and logistical stuff. I mean, 257 00:12:32,200 --> 00:12:35,279 think about the absurdity of that nineteen ninety six episode 258 00:12:35,600 --> 00:12:39,200 where the rap group Cypress Hill accidentally books the London 259 00:12:39,279 --> 00:12:40,559 Symphony Orchestra. 260 00:12:40,440 --> 00:12:43,639 Speaker 2: A very specific, very ridiculous scenario. 261 00:12:43,240 --> 00:12:46,679 Speaker 1: And it became an actual reality decades later in twenty 262 00:12:46,759 --> 00:12:50,440 twenty four. This isn't just informed speculation. That's a specific, 263 00:12:50,600 --> 00:12:53,320 bizarre operational error that actually came true. 264 00:12:53,399 --> 00:12:54,960 Speaker 2: That one is pretty strange, I'll grant you. 265 00:12:55,159 --> 00:12:56,559 Speaker 1: This is where I have to step in and apply 266 00:12:56,559 --> 00:12:58,799 a little friction. Wait a minute, if these are just 267 00:12:58,960 --> 00:13:02,120 keen observers, how do we explain the really granular stuff 268 00:13:02,879 --> 00:13:06,600 like the show foreshadowing the twenty fifteen FIFA corruption case 269 00:13:07,240 --> 00:13:11,600 that required a pretty deep knowledge of international organizational scandals. 270 00:13:12,240 --> 00:13:15,120 And then there's the Millhouse case, which people always cite. 271 00:13:14,919 --> 00:13:16,879 Speaker 2: Is the clincher, the Nobel Prize prediction. 272 00:13:17,279 --> 00:13:21,679 Speaker 1: Right in one episode, Milhouse correctly predicts that bend Or 273 00:13:21,720 --> 00:13:24,559 Holmstrom will win the Nobel Prize in economics. 274 00:13:24,600 --> 00:13:27,120 Speaker 2: He did this six years before Holmstrom actually won the 275 00:13:27,159 --> 00:13:28,320 prize in twenty sixteen. 276 00:13:28,440 --> 00:13:31,080 Speaker 1: That feels like it requires more than just general observation. 277 00:13:31,159 --> 00:13:33,799 How does the statistical argument account for something like that. 278 00:13:34,200 --> 00:13:38,000 Speaker 2: It suggests either a massive amount of luck or that 279 00:13:38,159 --> 00:13:42,000 the writers were doing very deep, very specialized research into 280 00:13:42,039 --> 00:13:44,679 some pretty obscure academic fields. 281 00:13:45,000 --> 00:13:45,720 Speaker 1: So which is it. 282 00:13:45,840 --> 00:13:47,840 Speaker 2: I think it's a mix of both. In the case 283 00:13:47,879 --> 00:13:51,519 of the Nobel prediction, Holmstrom was already a highly respected 284 00:13:51,679 --> 00:13:55,440 and frequently discussed name in macroeconomic. 285 00:13:54,639 --> 00:13:56,360 Speaker 1: Circles, so he was on the radar. 286 00:13:56,639 --> 00:13:59,360 Speaker 2: He was consistently on the shortlist of potential winners because 287 00:13:59,399 --> 00:14:02,320 of his ground breaking work on contract theory. He wasn't 288 00:14:02,360 --> 00:14:06,120 a random guess. He was an educated, high probability guess. 289 00:14:06,159 --> 00:14:08,000 Speaker 1: But the timing is still remarkable. 290 00:14:08,159 --> 00:14:11,519 Speaker 2: The timing is statistically remarkable, no question, But we are 291 00:14:11,600 --> 00:14:15,600 still talking about a pool of very educated writers making 292 00:14:15,799 --> 00:14:21,000 thousands of educated guesses over decades. The most informed guess 293 00:14:21,039 --> 00:14:23,320 still looks like prophecy if it happens to come true. 294 00:14:23,440 --> 00:14:27,039 Speaker 1: And we can't ignore the architectural foresight. The nineteen ninety 295 00:14:27,080 --> 00:14:30,840 six episode Lisa's Wedding where they imagine a futuristic London. 296 00:14:31,320 --> 00:14:32,960 Speaker 2: Yes, with the flying cars in the. 297 00:14:32,960 --> 00:14:36,000 Speaker 1: Background skyline, there's a building that looks almost exactly like 298 00:14:36,080 --> 00:14:36,960 the Shard. 299 00:14:36,720 --> 00:14:39,559 Speaker 2: A massive skyscraper that was built over a decade later, 300 00:14:39,799 --> 00:14:41,960 between two thousand and nine and twenty twelve. 301 00:14:42,159 --> 00:14:42,960 Speaker 1: How does that happen? 302 00:14:43,080 --> 00:14:46,159 Speaker 2: Again, it's case of observing trends and extrapolating. In the 303 00:14:46,200 --> 00:14:50,000 mid nineties, London was already undergoing these huge, ambitious urban 304 00:14:50,039 --> 00:14:54,360 planning changes. Okay, the idea of a massive modern glass 305 00:14:54,399 --> 00:14:57,639 spire dominating the financial district was not an alien concept. 306 00:14:57,879 --> 00:15:01,759 It was a plausible extrapolation of existing architectural trends, just 307 00:15:02,000 --> 00:15:03,840 placed into a fictional future setting. 308 00:15:03,919 --> 00:15:05,720 Speaker 1: So the lesson here is that while the hits are 309 00:15:05,720 --> 00:15:08,840 really impressive. We have to apply a critical filter yes, 310 00:15:09,039 --> 00:15:12,559 and claims about technological foresight, like predicting smart watches or 311 00:15:12,600 --> 00:15:15,840 autocorrect they often fail this filter absolutely. 312 00:15:16,320 --> 00:15:19,600 Speaker 2: When people claim The Simpsons predicted the smart watch, they 313 00:15:19,639 --> 00:15:23,480 conveniently ignore that the concept of a wristwatch communicator was 314 00:15:23,519 --> 00:15:27,240 already everywhere in fiction. Dick Tracy, James Bond. 315 00:15:27,440 --> 00:15:29,639 Speaker 1: It was a standard sci fi trope. 316 00:15:29,399 --> 00:15:33,080 Speaker 2: Right, and the joke about an autocorrection device was almost 317 00:15:33,080 --> 00:15:37,799 certainly based on existing but very niche real world. 318 00:15:37,879 --> 00:15:40,159 Speaker 1: Devices like the Apple Newton exactly, the. 319 00:15:40,159 --> 00:15:42,559 Speaker 2: Apple Newton, which was on the market in nineteen ninety 320 00:15:42,600 --> 00:15:46,600 three and was famously, hilariously terrible at correcting text. 321 00:15:46,840 --> 00:15:50,000 Speaker 1: So The Simpsons teaches us that massive output, combined with 322 00:15:50,080 --> 00:15:53,200 highly intelligent, culturally informed satire. 323 00:15:52,799 --> 00:15:55,240 Speaker 2: It guarantees a regular stream of apparent foresight. 324 00:15:55,440 --> 00:15:58,840 Speaker 1: It's statistical certainty that's just dressed up to look like prophecy. 325 00:15:58,919 --> 00:16:02,200 Speaker 2: It's the statistical beast always churning out enough content that 326 00:16:02,240 --> 00:16:05,399 a few fragments will inevitably align with reality, and then 327 00:16:05,399 --> 00:16:07,720 those are the ones that get cherry picked and amplified online. 328 00:16:07,759 --> 00:16:10,240 Speaker 1: So now we have to pivot from the statistical certainty 329 00:16:10,240 --> 00:16:14,639 of Springfield back to that single massive statistical anomaly, the 330 00:16:14,720 --> 00:16:18,279 Loan Gunman. This is the one case that predictive programming 331 00:16:18,320 --> 00:16:22,080 advocates claim statistics just cannot explain away, that's right. 332 00:16:22,320 --> 00:16:25,440 Speaker 2: Unlike The Simpsons, which had hundreds and hundreds of chances, 333 00:16:25,799 --> 00:16:29,320 this was one single, highly specific plot element in a 334 00:16:29,399 --> 00:16:32,799 standalone pilot episode of a show that barely lasted. 335 00:16:33,039 --> 00:16:36,639 Speaker 1: For it to combine a hijacked plane, the WTC target, 336 00:16:36,919 --> 00:16:38,200 and a false flag. 337 00:16:37,919 --> 00:16:41,080 Speaker 2: Motive, the pure probability of that being a coincidence is 338 00:16:41,120 --> 00:16:42,879 extremely low. It's near zero. 339 00:16:43,039 --> 00:16:45,960 Speaker 1: And the detail that the fictional airliner reportedly took off 340 00:16:46,000 --> 00:16:48,720 from Logan International Airport in Boston. 341 00:16:48,399 --> 00:16:50,559 Speaker 2: The same airport where two of the real nine eleven 342 00:16:50,559 --> 00:16:51,960 planes originated. 343 00:16:51,559 --> 00:16:54,279 Speaker 1: It just compounds the sense of impossible coincidence. 344 00:16:54,600 --> 00:16:57,320 Speaker 2: So if the law of large numbers fails us here, 345 00:16:57,840 --> 00:17:02,320 what explanation is left that doesn't immediately jump to clandestine foreknowledge? 346 00:17:02,559 --> 00:17:03,440 Speaker 1: That's the question. 347 00:17:03,480 --> 00:17:05,920 Speaker 2: We'd argue that this is best understood not as prediction, 348 00:17:06,359 --> 00:17:07,599 but as cultural prescience. 349 00:17:07,880 --> 00:17:09,920 Speaker 1: Cultural presence, what does that mean exactly? 350 00:17:10,039 --> 00:17:13,599 Speaker 2: It means the fictionalized maximal exploration of a known, high 351 00:17:13,720 --> 00:17:15,240 risk societal vulnerability. 352 00:17:15,319 --> 00:17:18,079 Speaker 1: Okay, let's dull into that idea. The entire x Files 353 00:17:18,160 --> 00:17:21,640 universe was built on tapping into these deep, widespread public 354 00:17:21,640 --> 00:17:23,720 anxieties of the nineteen nineties. 355 00:17:23,519 --> 00:17:29,799 Speaker 2: Totally anxieties about government misconduct, unchecked military secrets, the pervasive 356 00:17:29,920 --> 00:17:31,200 nature of the deep state. 357 00:17:31,400 --> 00:17:34,440 Speaker 1: The writers who operated in that genre, they specialized in 358 00:17:34,519 --> 00:17:38,599 taking those public anxieties, the most paranoid what ifs, and 359 00:17:38,720 --> 00:17:42,200 pushing them to their absolute logical narrative extreme. 360 00:17:42,319 --> 00:17:45,200 Speaker 2: We call that a maximal narrative extrapolation. And the writers 361 00:17:45,279 --> 00:17:48,440 were essentially asking themselves a question, which was, if the 362 00:17:48,480 --> 00:17:52,119 government or the shadow military industrial complex is willing to 363 00:17:52,240 --> 00:17:56,279 orchestrate events for profit, what is the single most destructive, 364 00:17:56,359 --> 00:17:59,880 most profitable, and most symbolic act that could possibly commit 365 00:18:00,279 --> 00:18:01,160 on US soil? 366 00:18:01,240 --> 00:18:03,400 Speaker 1: And the answer they came up with was a false. 367 00:18:03,160 --> 00:18:06,640 Speaker 2: Flag attack targeting the nation's most recognizable financial symbol, the 368 00:18:06,680 --> 00:18:10,440 World Trade Center, using the very method remote hijacking that 369 00:18:10,559 --> 00:18:14,880 seemed technologically cutting edge but also horrifyingly plausible at the time. 370 00:18:14,960 --> 00:18:17,519 Speaker 1: And it's also important to remember the WTC was already 371 00:18:17,519 --> 00:18:21,000 a known target. This wasn't an unimaginable scenario, not at all. 372 00:18:21,119 --> 00:18:23,880 Speaker 2: The nineteen ninety three bombing had already shown its vulnerability. 373 00:18:23,960 --> 00:18:26,720 There were multiple foiled plots in the nineties involving planes 374 00:18:26,759 --> 00:18:28,440 and explosives, all targeting. 375 00:18:28,079 --> 00:18:32,960 Speaker 1: The towers, So the concept of a successful devastating attack 376 00:18:33,000 --> 00:18:37,319 on the WTC was already It was floating around in 377 00:18:37,359 --> 00:18:38,079 the cultural ether. 378 00:18:38,319 --> 00:18:41,640 Speaker 2: As you said exactly, it was a plausible target for 379 00:18:41,680 --> 00:18:46,000 writers looking for maximum drama, and tragically a plausible target 380 00:18:46,000 --> 00:18:49,880 for terrorists looking for maximum impact. The writers weren't getting 381 00:18:49,920 --> 00:18:53,240 coded messages, they were just analyzing the thread environment for 382 00:18:53,279 --> 00:18:55,119 the most compelling story they could tell. 383 00:18:55,160 --> 00:18:57,160 Speaker 1: But the power of this anomaly really comes from the 384 00:18:57,200 --> 00:19:00,279 audience's memory, which is where the cognitive biases we're going 385 00:19:00,319 --> 00:19:01,799 to discuss later start to kick in. 386 00:19:01,960 --> 00:19:04,680 Speaker 2: That's so true when you look back at the actual viewership, 387 00:19:04,720 --> 00:19:08,200 A lot of people, even diehard X File superfans, had 388 00:19:08,279 --> 00:19:11,759 no actual memory of that plot until after September eleventh. 389 00:19:11,880 --> 00:19:14,240 Speaker 1: The episode got decent ratings for a pilot, but then 390 00:19:14,279 --> 00:19:17,480 it was just forgotten. It vanished into the cultural landscape. 391 00:19:17,559 --> 00:19:21,640 Speaker 2: Right. The plot element only became overwhelmingly salient, emotionally and 392 00:19:22,319 --> 00:19:25,200 historically significant after the real attacks happened. 393 00:19:25,240 --> 00:19:28,200 Speaker 1: The sheer trauma and historical weight of nine to eleven 394 00:19:28,319 --> 00:19:32,519 retroactively imbued that obscure piece of fiction with this overwhelming 395 00:19:32,559 --> 00:19:33,680 sense of intentionality. 396 00:19:34,079 --> 00:19:38,000 Speaker 2: It's a textbookcase of an event being so shocking that 397 00:19:38,039 --> 00:19:42,039 the human mind demands an explanation for the coincidence that 398 00:19:42,240 --> 00:19:44,200 feels equally significant. 399 00:19:44,400 --> 00:19:48,720 Speaker 1: A random statistical fluke just feels too chaotic to arbitrary. 400 00:19:48,799 --> 00:19:52,319 Speaker 2: It feels insufficient, so the necessity arises for an external, 401 00:19:52,400 --> 00:19:53,519 high level explanation. 402 00:19:53,759 --> 00:19:56,640 Speaker 1: And this is why we see the proliferation of these claims, 403 00:19:57,039 --> 00:20:00,759 often cited by prominent figures in the conspiracy world, suggesting 404 00:20:00,759 --> 00:20:04,319 that the show's creator, Chris Carter, was told to make. 405 00:20:04,160 --> 00:20:07,200 Speaker 2: That episode, maybe by a high ranking intelligence figure or 406 00:20:07,240 --> 00:20:08,400 someone in the know, and. 407 00:20:08,279 --> 00:20:13,359 Speaker 1: That theory, however unsubstantiated it is, serves a critical cognitive function. 408 00:20:13,599 --> 00:20:16,279 Speaker 2: It provides a necessary piece of high level foreknowledge to 409 00:20:16,319 --> 00:20:19,160 account for the shocking anomaly. It shifts the event from 410 00:20:19,160 --> 00:20:22,720 being an unnerving fluke to being a necessary, intentional part 411 00:20:22,839 --> 00:20:23,880 of a planned deception. 412 00:20:24,119 --> 00:20:26,839 Speaker 1: So when we contrast our two main case studies, The 413 00:20:26,839 --> 00:20:30,640 Simpsons is all about statistics and satire. It's designed for 414 00:20:30,720 --> 00:20:33,960 high volume and occasional educated accuracy, while the. 415 00:20:33,880 --> 00:20:37,279 Speaker 2: Lone Gunman is a statistical fluke, a highly specific and 416 00:20:37,359 --> 00:20:40,799 improbable hit which was then magnified retrospectively by an immense 417 00:20:40,920 --> 00:20:41,920 national trauma. 418 00:20:41,960 --> 00:20:45,559 Speaker 1: But for the true believer in predictive programming, the underlying 419 00:20:45,599 --> 00:20:47,960 mechanism doesn't even matter, does it not. 420 00:20:48,200 --> 00:20:52,839 Speaker 2: Really, they both serve the same purpose. They reinforce the 421 00:20:52,920 --> 00:20:56,039 idea that someone knows what's coming, whether it's through luck, 422 00:20:56,359 --> 00:21:00,720 informed pres fence, or something much deep, deeper and far 423 00:21:00,759 --> 00:21:01,480 more sinister. 424 00:21:01,880 --> 00:21:05,119 Speaker 1: We've gone through the statistical and the psychological explanations for 425 00:21:05,160 --> 00:21:08,160 why people believe in this, but for millions of adherents, 426 00:21:08,200 --> 00:21:12,640 this isn't just about probabilities. It's a deeply spiritual, almost 427 00:21:12,680 --> 00:21:14,160 religious conviction that. 428 00:21:14,119 --> 00:21:16,960 Speaker 2: The elite are required to forewarn us exactly. 429 00:21:17,319 --> 00:21:20,000 Speaker 1: We have to pivot now to the magic ritual component 430 00:21:20,079 --> 00:21:23,559 of this. This is the esoteric mandate that really provides 431 00:21:23,599 --> 00:21:26,119 the spiritual scaffolding for the whole conspiracy theory. 432 00:21:26,480 --> 00:21:29,400 Speaker 2: The belief is that the ruling elite, whether you think 433 00:21:29,400 --> 00:21:33,839 their interdimensional entities or global financiers, are bound by these 434 00:21:33,880 --> 00:21:35,079 ancient occult. 435 00:21:34,720 --> 00:21:37,440 Speaker 1: Laws, and these laws dictate that they must subtly disclose 436 00:21:37,480 --> 00:21:40,240 their plans to the public before they carry them out right. 437 00:21:40,359 --> 00:21:44,200 Speaker 2: The disclosure is a key required part of the ritual itself. 438 00:21:44,559 --> 00:21:46,920 It's this moment where they have to acknowledge their actions, 439 00:21:47,119 --> 00:21:49,319 even if the general public has no idea what they're seeing. 440 00:21:49,519 --> 00:21:54,359 Speaker 1: This view often falls under that contemporary umbrella of conspirituality, which. 441 00:21:54,160 --> 00:21:57,200 Speaker 2: Is the fusion of New Age beliefs, spiritual seeking, and 442 00:21:57,279 --> 00:22:01,960 political conspiracy theories. A prime example is the cosmology promoted 443 00:22:02,000 --> 00:22:03,279 by figures like David. 444 00:22:02,960 --> 00:22:06,279 Speaker 1: Dick Right, the idea that humanity is secretly ruled by 445 00:22:06,319 --> 00:22:10,160 interdimensional reptilian beings called arcans or the Illuminati. 446 00:22:10,720 --> 00:22:14,359 Speaker 2: In that cosmic model, fictional media is transformed. It's no 447 00:22:14,400 --> 00:22:18,559 longer just entertainment. It becomes a mandatory, esoteric broadcast. The 448 00:22:18,599 --> 00:22:20,799 manipulation becomes ritualistic. 449 00:22:20,359 --> 00:22:23,640 Speaker 1: A necessary act of spiritual disclosure that these ruling entities 450 00:22:23,720 --> 00:22:27,480 must perform, maybe to satisfy some cosmic law or to 451 00:22:27,599 --> 00:22:29,759 achieve a kind of unconscious public consent. 452 00:22:30,119 --> 00:22:33,240 Speaker 2: But this raises a really critical question. Where did this 453 00:22:33,359 --> 00:22:37,240 idea that digital creation and modern technology are inherently magical 454 00:22:37,359 --> 00:22:38,759 or occult even come from. 455 00:22:38,799 --> 00:22:40,640 Speaker 1: To understand that, we have to look back at the 456 00:22:40,680 --> 00:22:44,160 philosophical and cultural origins of early cyberspace development. 457 00:22:44,400 --> 00:22:47,359 Speaker 2: Our sources cite this fascinating history from the nineteen nineties 458 00:22:47,400 --> 00:22:50,200 when some of the foundational coders and visionaries in Silicon 459 00:22:50,279 --> 00:22:54,079 Valley adopted a distinctly technopagan worldview. 460 00:22:53,599 --> 00:22:56,799 Speaker 1: A pagan religious view towards cyberspace and virtuality. 461 00:22:57,079 --> 00:22:59,960 Speaker 2: Yeah. Mark Peshi, who was a key figure in developed 462 00:23:00,240 --> 00:23:04,359 VRML that's virtual reality modeling language. He was central to 463 00:23:04,400 --> 00:23:05,359 this movement, and. 464 00:23:05,319 --> 00:23:10,160 Speaker 1: Pesse explicitly asserted quote that the divine is present in 465 00:23:10,279 --> 00:23:11,000 all creation. 466 00:23:11,440 --> 00:23:14,400 Speaker 2: So for these thinkers, technology wasn't just a practical tool, 467 00:23:14,839 --> 00:23:17,160 it was a sacred spiritual environment. 468 00:23:17,279 --> 00:23:19,640 Speaker 1: So the act of coding was less like engineering and 469 00:23:19,720 --> 00:23:22,039 more like spiritual creation. 470 00:23:22,359 --> 00:23:26,799 Speaker 2: Pretty much pess essentially replaced the word of God or 471 00:23:26,839 --> 00:23:30,880 logos with code as the primary force shaping this new 472 00:23:31,039 --> 00:23:34,400 digital world. He argued that this new environment could only 473 00:23:34,400 --> 00:23:37,440 be properly described using ancient magical. 474 00:23:37,000 --> 00:23:40,519 Speaker 1: Concepts, suggesting that technological and magical ways of seeing the 475 00:23:40,559 --> 00:23:42,440 world were converging. 476 00:23:42,119 --> 00:23:45,200 Speaker 2: And he even structured the foundational manual for VRML to 477 00:23:45,240 --> 00:23:48,240 reflect these beliefs. The manual was reportedly built like a 478 00:23:48,279 --> 00:23:51,119 pagan ritual, with its four parts dedicated to the four 479 00:23:51,160 --> 00:23:54,200 cardinal directions east, southwest, and north. 480 00:23:54,440 --> 00:23:57,920 Speaker 1: That's incredible so the early digital architecture was intentionally infused 481 00:23:57,960 --> 00:24:01,440 with these magical and esoteric beliefs as from the very beginning, and. 482 00:24:01,480 --> 00:24:04,160 Speaker 2: This belief in the sacredness of code extended to the 483 00:24:04,200 --> 00:24:07,279 objects created within it. What do you mean, Well, Pess 484 00:24:07,279 --> 00:24:10,559 made this striking assertion. He said that since every object 485 00:24:10,559 --> 00:24:13,480 in cyberspace is just made epistoles that all the users 486 00:24:13,480 --> 00:24:17,720 agreed to treat as the object, an avatar or virtual desk, whatever, OK, 487 00:24:17,960 --> 00:24:21,680 then every object in cyberspace is a magical object. It's 488 00:24:21,720 --> 00:24:24,880 an item that is imbued with power and function solely 489 00:24:24,960 --> 00:24:26,799 by our collective consensus belief. 490 00:24:27,119 --> 00:24:31,519 Speaker 1: This philosophical history provides the intellectual source code for the 491 00:24:31,519 --> 00:24:33,319 whole predictive programming thesis. 492 00:24:33,359 --> 00:24:37,559 Speaker 2: It does it transforms fictional content into a mandatory subtle 493 00:24:37,599 --> 00:24:39,799 forewarning that's required by cult doctrines. 494 00:24:39,960 --> 00:24:42,920 Speaker 1: And this esoteric mandate gets worven right into the very 495 00:24:43,039 --> 00:24:46,680 language of computing, specifically hexadecimal coding. 496 00:24:46,720 --> 00:24:50,400 Speaker 2: Base sixteen calculation, which is used for color description in 497 00:24:50,440 --> 00:24:50,960 web design. 498 00:24:51,119 --> 00:24:54,519 Speaker 1: Right, hex code uses sixteen distinct symbols, the number zero 499 00:24:54,519 --> 00:24:56,680 to nine and the letters A to F, so that's 500 00:24:56,759 --> 00:24:57,640 ten plus. 501 00:24:57,359 --> 00:25:01,240 Speaker 2: Six, and conspiracy theorists draw these really compelling, though definitely 502 00:25:01,440 --> 00:25:02,680 esoteric connections. 503 00:25:02,680 --> 00:25:05,720 Speaker 1: Here they connect the sixteen symbols to the sixteen figures 504 00:25:05,720 --> 00:25:08,880 of geomancy, an ancient system of divination. 505 00:25:08,920 --> 00:25:12,039 Speaker 2: And the hex part itself using the number six, is 506 00:25:12,119 --> 00:25:15,920 often linked to the six sided hexagram, reinforcing a linguistic 507 00:25:15,960 --> 00:25:18,880 link to the German root hexin, which means which. 508 00:25:19,440 --> 00:25:22,200 Speaker 1: This is how digital engineering gets layered with all this 509 00:25:22,440 --> 00:25:23,640 magical significance. 510 00:25:23,839 --> 00:25:27,680 Speaker 2: But the ontology goes even deeper, drawing connections between cyberspace 511 00:25:27,720 --> 00:25:30,200 and West African vodoom traditions. 512 00:25:29,759 --> 00:25:34,000 Speaker 1: Which Pesia himself cited as a twin ancestry for virtual reality. 513 00:25:34,440 --> 00:25:37,720 Speaker 2: And this connection is drawn through the binary structure of code. 514 00:25:37,799 --> 00:25:41,519 Cyber Reality is symbolized by the damballa double snake Dambala 515 00:25:41,799 --> 00:25:45,319 and his partner Ada Weed coiling together in a way. 516 00:25:45,160 --> 00:25:48,279 Speaker 1: That precisely mimics the DNA double helix right, so. 517 00:25:48,200 --> 00:25:51,160 Speaker 2: It represents the binary structure of life's beginnings and the 518 00:25:51,240 --> 00:25:52,599 dualistic nature of creation. 519 00:25:52,839 --> 00:25:56,559 Speaker 1: That's a powerful metaphor the fundamental building blocks of life. 520 00:25:56,799 --> 00:26:00,759 DNA are structurally mirrored in the fundamental building life of computing, 521 00:26:01,119 --> 00:26:03,039 the binary code of zeros and ones. 522 00:26:03,119 --> 00:26:06,480 Speaker 2: And this link was absorbed and amplified by influential. 523 00:26:05,880 --> 00:26:08,039 Speaker 1: Sci fi writers like William Gibson exactly. 524 00:26:08,400 --> 00:26:11,839 Speaker 2: Gibson famously populated his vision of cyberspace with the Vodu 525 00:26:11,880 --> 00:26:14,279 Loa or gods in his Sprawl trilogy. 526 00:26:14,480 --> 00:26:17,240 Speaker 1: In Count zero, the Lowa Dumbala is depicted as a 527 00:26:17,279 --> 00:26:20,720 serpent or an icebreaker program that rides the hackers when 528 00:26:20,759 --> 00:26:21,720 they connect to the net. 529 00:26:22,000 --> 00:26:25,119 Speaker 2: The idea is that cyberspace isn't just a structure, it's 530 00:26:25,160 --> 00:26:28,480 a vector, a medium through which these spiritual entities can 531 00:26:28,519 --> 00:26:30,279 operate and influence our reality. 532 00:26:30,359 --> 00:26:32,559 Speaker 1: And the mathematical roots of this are even older. 533 00:26:33,119 --> 00:26:37,200 Speaker 2: Ethnomathematics research suggests that African geomancy, which is built on 534 00:26:37,240 --> 00:26:40,920 a long tradition of binaries in base two calculation, might 535 00:26:40,960 --> 00:26:43,680 actually pre date comparable Arabic systems. 536 00:26:43,960 --> 00:26:46,640 Speaker 1: This tradition involves something called iterative looping. 537 00:26:46,839 --> 00:26:49,519 Speaker 2: It's where you pass the output of an operation back 538 00:26:49,640 --> 00:26:53,200 as a new input in this reflexive self generating process. 539 00:26:53,640 --> 00:26:58,000 It's mathematically similar to how complex nonlinear systems operate, and 540 00:26:58,119 --> 00:27:00,000 is the core mechanism of Bamana sand difis. 541 00:27:00,519 --> 00:27:03,480 Speaker 1: So in this divination, you draw random dashes in the sand, 542 00:27:03,559 --> 00:27:05,759 you pair them up and you record odd or even 543 00:27:05,839 --> 00:27:08,079 results to generate a binary symbol. 544 00:27:07,839 --> 00:27:11,400 Speaker 2: And this looping process creates self generated variety. It seems 545 00:27:11,400 --> 00:27:15,200 to perfectly mirror the complex iterative processes of computing and 546 00:27:15,279 --> 00:27:16,680 even artificial intelligence. 547 00:27:16,759 --> 00:27:19,960 Speaker 1: And central to this whole system is the trickster god Legba. 548 00:27:20,079 --> 00:27:23,799 Speaker 2: Legba is the guardian of the crossroads. He controls communication 549 00:27:23,920 --> 00:27:28,000 between worlds. He's the ultimate communicator and miscommunicator, and he 550 00:27:28,119 --> 00:27:30,799 uses inverted logic and paradox. 551 00:27:30,519 --> 00:27:34,160 Speaker 1: That sounds exactly like the complex, unpredictable nature of emergent 552 00:27:34,200 --> 00:27:35,680 behavior in digital systems. 553 00:27:36,000 --> 00:27:41,160 Speaker 2: Precisely, the divination mythology captures this paradox. In faw divination, 554 00:27:41,759 --> 00:27:45,039 Legba places one palm nut in the Godfa's hand to 555 00:27:45,119 --> 00:27:47,880 indicate two eyes should be open, but two nuts to 556 00:27:47,920 --> 00:27:49,519 indicate only one eye should be open. 557 00:27:49,680 --> 00:27:52,599 Speaker 1: So it's this inverted logic where the input doesn't cleanly 558 00:27:52,680 --> 00:27:54,680 match the expected output, and that. 559 00:27:54,599 --> 00:27:58,759 Speaker 2: Reflects the pairing of determinism and unpredictability that characterizes digital 560 00:27:58,759 --> 00:28:00,880 existence and algorithm make complexity. 561 00:28:01,079 --> 00:28:04,319 Speaker 1: So we can conclude that this rich, deep occult ontology 562 00:28:04,480 --> 00:28:08,799 provides the necessary spiritual justification for the predictive programming thesis. 563 00:28:09,079 --> 00:28:11,640 Speaker 2: For the adherent. This explains why the elites must hide 564 00:28:11,640 --> 00:28:14,359 their plans in plain sight. It's not just a game. 565 00:28:14,640 --> 00:28:18,160 It's a non negotiable spiritual obligation that's written into the 566 00:28:18,279 --> 00:28:19,880 very fabric of the digital world. 567 00:28:20,119 --> 00:28:23,319 Speaker 1: We've established that the mechanism is either statistics or this 568 00:28:23,440 --> 00:28:26,759 deeply complex occult ritual rooted in the history of coding. 569 00:28:27,000 --> 00:28:30,079 Speaker 2: But what is the mechanism that holds this entire belief 570 00:28:30,119 --> 00:28:33,519 structure together. Regardless of whether you prefer the statistical or 571 00:28:33,599 --> 00:28:35,240 the magical explanation. 572 00:28:34,920 --> 00:28:36,960 Speaker 1: The answer lies inside your own head. 573 00:28:37,440 --> 00:28:40,720 Speaker 2: We have to shift our analysis now entirely to the powerful, 574 00:28:41,200 --> 00:28:45,640 ubiquitous cognitive biases that sustain this belief. These biases act 575 00:28:45,640 --> 00:28:49,400 as highly effective filters, making selective evidence seem like definitive, 576 00:28:49,640 --> 00:28:51,720 irrefutable proof of a conspiracy. 577 00:28:51,759 --> 00:28:55,960 Speaker 1: And the ultimate unifying psychological factor here is confirmation bias. 578 00:28:56,680 --> 00:29:02,000 Speaker 2: This is the hardwired human tendency to actively favor, seek out, interpret, 579 00:29:02,079 --> 00:29:06,160 and recall information that already confirms your pre existing beliefs 580 00:29:06,200 --> 00:29:06,759 or values. 581 00:29:07,079 --> 00:29:10,480 Speaker 1: This isn't a modern failing, it's a historical constant. Thinkers 582 00:29:10,480 --> 00:29:11,839 throughout history have observed it. 583 00:29:11,960 --> 00:29:15,039 Speaker 2: The philosopher Francis Bacon noted that This biased assessment is 584 00:29:15,079 --> 00:29:21,119 what drives all superstitions, whether in astrology, dreams, omens, divine judgments. 585 00:29:20,720 --> 00:29:23,519 Speaker 1: Or the like. Bacon described it perfectly. He said, once 586 00:29:23,559 --> 00:29:26,839 the human understanding has adopted an opinion, say that Hollywood 587 00:29:26,880 --> 00:29:30,079 is controlled by a secret cabal, it then draws all 588 00:29:30,119 --> 00:29:31,960 things else to support and agree with it. 589 00:29:32,240 --> 00:29:36,279 Speaker 2: And critically, the person who believes this will systematically neglect 590 00:29:36,519 --> 00:29:40,759 or despise, or just reject any contrary evidence that shows 591 00:29:40,799 --> 00:29:43,200 the connection is just a coincidence. 592 00:29:43,559 --> 00:29:46,759 Speaker 1: This is the exact fuel for the predictive programming thesis. 593 00:29:47,119 --> 00:29:51,519 Speaker 2: Adherents actively select and amplify the hits, the WTC plot, 594 00:29:51,839 --> 00:29:56,319 the Nobel prediction, the Disney merger, while completely ignoring the 595 00:29:56,359 --> 00:29:59,880 massive volume of fictional plots and scenarios that never happened. 596 00:30:00,200 --> 00:30:05,640 Speaker 1: This systematic selective recall and attention creates a fundamental statistical distortion. 597 00:30:05,920 --> 00:30:08,440 Speaker 2: And we can see how powerful this selective recall is 598 00:30:08,519 --> 00:30:12,799 in controlled psychological studies. Take that classic experiment where participants 599 00:30:12,799 --> 00:30:15,000 read a profile of a woman that had a balanced 600 00:30:15,000 --> 00:30:18,519 mix of traits, some introverted, some extroverted. Okay, when they 601 00:30:18,519 --> 00:30:20,680 were asked to assess her for a job as a librarian, 602 00:30:20,960 --> 00:30:25,119 participants overwhelmingly recalled more examples of her being introverted. 603 00:30:24,680 --> 00:30:26,440 Speaker 1: But when asked to assess her for a job in 604 00:30:26,559 --> 00:30:28,960 high energy real estate sales, they recalled. 605 00:30:28,599 --> 00:30:31,799 Speaker 2: More examples of her being extroverted. The brain efficiently and 606 00:30:31,880 --> 00:30:35,920 automatically recalled the traits that confirmed the initial hypothesis, making 607 00:30:35,920 --> 00:30:38,200 her scene perfect for whatever role they were considering. 608 00:30:38,400 --> 00:30:42,200 Speaker 1: The same cognitive efficiency applies to conspiracy theories. We see 609 00:30:42,200 --> 00:30:45,000 this in studies about paranormal beliefs too, like. 610 00:30:45,359 --> 00:30:49,920 Speaker 2: ESP right, when strong believers in extrasensory perception were shown 611 00:30:50,039 --> 00:30:53,000 evidence that did not support the existence of ESP, what 612 00:30:53,160 --> 00:30:56,839 happened They either remembered significantly less to that contradictory information 613 00:30:57,319 --> 00:31:00,880 or and get this, they actively miss remembered the non 614 00:31:00,880 --> 00:31:03,559 supportive results as actually supporting ESP. 615 00:31:04,000 --> 00:31:07,960 Speaker 1: The brain literally edits the data to fit the existing narrative. 616 00:31:07,680 --> 00:31:11,519 Speaker 2: And in our current media ecosystem, this selective focus isn't 617 00:31:11,559 --> 00:31:15,599 just a mental flaw, it's a systemic problem. Confirmation bias 618 00:31:15,680 --> 00:31:18,720 is massively amplified by the structure of social media. 619 00:31:18,960 --> 00:31:22,440 Speaker 1: You mean filter bubbles and personalized content feeds exactly. 620 00:31:22,599 --> 00:31:26,160 Speaker 2: Algorithmic editing ensures that you are primarily exposed to information 621 00:31:26,440 --> 00:31:28,839 news and commentary that you already agree with. 622 00:31:29,000 --> 00:31:32,799 Speaker 1: It creates a closed loop, contributing heavily to opinion polarization 623 00:31:32,920 --> 00:31:35,880 and reinforcing the narrative that the small number of hits 624 00:31:35,920 --> 00:31:39,279 you see is actually this vast, undeniable pattern. 625 00:31:39,519 --> 00:31:43,160 Speaker 2: Okay, moving on. The second crucial bias is related to 626 00:31:43,200 --> 00:31:46,319 the sheer emotional shock of a major world event and 627 00:31:46,440 --> 00:31:49,839 how that trauma affects our memory and judgment after the fact. 628 00:31:50,160 --> 00:31:51,960 Speaker 1: This is hindsight bias. 629 00:31:51,559 --> 00:31:53,640 Speaker 2: Also known as the I knew it all along effect. 630 00:31:53,759 --> 00:31:57,519 Speaker 1: Hindsight bias occurs when after a major event a stock 631 00:31:57,519 --> 00:32:02,200 market crash, a terrorist attack, and a shock retroactively distorts 632 00:32:02,200 --> 00:32:03,160 how we see the past. 633 00:32:03,440 --> 00:32:06,519 Speaker 2: We judged that a past event or a coincidence like 634 00:32:06,559 --> 00:32:10,200 the Lone Gunman plot seems like an intentional warning, or 635 00:32:10,240 --> 00:32:12,880 that the outcome was far more predictable than it ever 636 00:32:12,960 --> 00:32:14,119 really was in real time. 637 00:32:14,440 --> 00:32:17,519 Speaker 1: This perfectly explains the power of the Lone Gunman anomaly. 638 00:32:17,599 --> 00:32:18,200 Speaker 2: It really does. 639 00:32:18,400 --> 00:32:21,440 Speaker 1: Before nine eleven, that plot was an obscure element of 640 00:32:21,440 --> 00:32:25,720 a default show. After the attacks, the specificity became overwhelming. 641 00:32:26,079 --> 00:32:29,759 Speaker 2: The past gets psychologically reconstructed to align with the dramatic, 642 00:32:29,920 --> 00:32:33,440 tragic reality of the present. And that retrospective judgment is 643 00:32:33,480 --> 00:32:36,640 what transforms mere coincidence into undeniable prophecy. 644 00:32:36,759 --> 00:32:39,240 Speaker 1: It's why when you ask people after a major event 645 00:32:39,279 --> 00:32:42,839 how predictable was that, they invariably rate it as much 646 00:32:42,880 --> 00:32:44,759 more predictable than they would have afford happened. 647 00:32:45,000 --> 00:32:49,440 Speaker 2: The outcome seems inevitable, and therefore any fictional hint of 648 00:32:49,480 --> 00:32:51,680 that outcome starts to feel intentional. 649 00:32:51,880 --> 00:32:55,720 Speaker 1: Okay. The third powerful cognitive phenomenon at work is the 650 00:32:55,839 --> 00:32:59,000 human tendency to see non existent patterns or. 651 00:32:58,920 --> 00:33:04,599 Speaker 2: Connections, which, when applied specifically to correlating events, is called 652 00:33:04,680 --> 00:33:05,880 illusory correlation. 653 00:33:06,160 --> 00:33:09,359 Speaker 1: This is when you incorrectly perceive a relationship between two 654 00:33:09,440 --> 00:33:12,720 events that are actually unrelated in the data. Your mind 655 00:33:12,759 --> 00:33:15,480 is searching for a pattern, finds a few isolated points 656 00:33:15,480 --> 00:33:19,039 that match up, and then concludes a relationship exists. 657 00:33:19,319 --> 00:33:23,319 Speaker 2: A great illustration comes from studies of arthretic patients. Nearly 658 00:33:23,400 --> 00:33:26,359 all the participants reported that their joint pain was correlated 659 00:33:26,359 --> 00:33:30,119 with the weather. They believe bad weather made their discomfort. 660 00:33:29,680 --> 00:33:32,960 Speaker 1: Worse, But careful data collection over a long period showed 661 00:33:32,960 --> 00:33:33,680 that the real. 662 00:33:33,480 --> 00:33:36,839 Speaker 2: Correlation was zero. There was no link, So why did. 663 00:33:36,720 --> 00:33:37,839 Speaker 1: They believe it so? Strongly. 664 00:33:38,000 --> 00:33:41,799 Speaker 2: The illusory correlation happened because the patients were focusing intensely 665 00:33:42,240 --> 00:33:45,039 on the positive positive cases at times when they had 666 00:33:45,079 --> 00:33:47,039 both joint pain and bad weather. 667 00:33:46,920 --> 00:33:50,720 Speaker 1: And they were selectively ignoring all the other times when 668 00:33:50,720 --> 00:33:53,319 they had no pain or when they had pain during 669 00:33:53,359 --> 00:33:53,799 good weather. 670 00:33:54,039 --> 00:33:55,200 Speaker 2: The only recalled the matches. 671 00:33:55,440 --> 00:34:00,440 Speaker 1: This perfectly mirrors the predictive programming analysis. Adherents focus only 672 00:34:00,480 --> 00:34:03,720 on the hits, the movie plot that matches reality, and 673 00:34:03,799 --> 00:34:07,359 ignore the immense amount of non hits, non events, and 674 00:34:07,440 --> 00:34:08,559 failed prophecies. 675 00:34:08,599 --> 00:34:11,199 Speaker 2: You're looking for a pattern, and your brain is designed 676 00:34:11,199 --> 00:34:13,519 to give you one, even if it has to invent it. 677 00:34:13,639 --> 00:34:18,320 Speaker 1: A classic illustration of this is numerological pyramidology. 678 00:34:17,880 --> 00:34:20,599 Speaker 2: The practice of finding profound meaning in the proportions of 679 00:34:20,639 --> 00:34:23,920 the Great Pyramid of Giza. Since the pyramid allows for 680 00:34:24,000 --> 00:34:28,440 countless length measurements, angles, and combinations of those measurements. 681 00:34:28,039 --> 00:34:31,519 Speaker 1: It's inevitable that by selectively focusing on certain calculations you 682 00:34:31,559 --> 00:34:36,159 can find superficially impressive correspondences with things like the Earth's 683 00:34:36,159 --> 00:34:38,599 dimensions or astronomical constants. 684 00:34:38,800 --> 00:34:41,039 Speaker 2: You will find meaning if you selectively search for it 685 00:34:41,119 --> 00:34:43,079 long enough, even in random data. 686 00:34:43,480 --> 00:34:46,480 Speaker 1: Okay, finally, let's briefly touch on a formal cognitive science 687 00:34:46,519 --> 00:34:50,239 theory totally unrelated to the conspiracy term that explains how 688 00:34:50,239 --> 00:34:52,719 beliefs are formed and crucially, how they become so. 689 00:34:52,719 --> 00:34:54,800 Speaker 2: Stubborn predictive coding. Right. 690 00:34:55,360 --> 00:34:58,840 Speaker 1: This theory is based on Baesian inference and it describes 691 00:34:58,880 --> 00:35:02,519 the brain as a prediction engine. The brain is constantly 692 00:35:02,519 --> 00:35:06,280 trying to make inferences about the world by combining two things. 693 00:35:06,639 --> 00:35:10,639 Speaker 2: It's prior beliefs or priors, and the incoming sensory signals 694 00:35:10,679 --> 00:35:11,199 from the world. 695 00:35:11,400 --> 00:35:14,079 Speaker 1: And when there's a mismatch, when what the brain expects 696 00:35:14,119 --> 00:35:17,920 to see doesn't match what it actually receives, that creates 697 00:35:17,920 --> 00:35:20,880 a prediction error, and that error is what drives new 698 00:35:20,960 --> 00:35:22,440 learning and belief refinement. 699 00:35:22,880 --> 00:35:25,280 Speaker 2: So how does this relate to the persistence of beliefs 700 00:35:25,360 --> 00:35:29,320 like the predictive programming thesis, especially when faced with overwhelming 701 00:35:29,400 --> 00:35:33,000 contradictory evidence like all the non hits from The Simpsons. 702 00:35:33,400 --> 00:35:38,239 Speaker 1: Studies on persistent firm beliefs, often classified as delusions, suggest 703 00:35:38,280 --> 00:35:42,360 that those high level abstract priors, like the conspiracy beliefs themselves, 704 00:35:42,599 --> 00:35:46,760 they become abnormally strong, excessively precise. 705 00:35:46,320 --> 00:35:49,519 Speaker 2: So the belief itself becomes so entrenched that it effectively 706 00:35:49,559 --> 00:35:50,760 starts sculpting perception. 707 00:35:51,000 --> 00:35:54,920 Speaker 1: Essentially, the foundational belief in the conspiracy becomes an impenetrable filter. 708 00:35:55,519 --> 00:35:58,760 It forces the incoming sensory data, the real world events, 709 00:35:58,800 --> 00:36:01,719 or the fictional content to conform with the existing high 710 00:36:01,800 --> 00:36:02,440 level belief. 711 00:36:02,800 --> 00:36:08,039 Speaker 2: It reinforces the idea that all coincidences are intentional, contributing 712 00:36:08,079 --> 00:36:10,880 to the persistence of the belief even in the face 713 00:36:11,000 --> 00:36:15,480 of rational contradictory evidence. It creates a cognitive system where 714 00:36:15,480 --> 00:36:19,440 the conspiracy theory is continuously reinforced from the top down. 715 00:36:19,960 --> 00:36:22,360 Speaker 1: We started with the sheer terror of coincidence and the 716 00:36:22,400 --> 00:36:25,239 lone gunmen and the overwhelming mathematics of the Simpsons. 717 00:36:25,480 --> 00:36:28,039 Speaker 2: We've traveled through the alleged plans of the global lead, 718 00:36:28,480 --> 00:36:32,679 spiritual architecture of the digital occult, and the inescapable biases 719 00:36:32,760 --> 00:36:33,639 of the human mind. 720 00:36:33,960 --> 00:36:36,559 Speaker 1: So what's the synthesis We leave you with the. 721 00:36:36,440 --> 00:36:39,960 Speaker 2: Most robust conclusion, the one supported by our analysis, is 722 00:36:40,000 --> 00:36:44,559 that this phenomenon is driven overwhelmingly by coincidence. Apparent foresight 723 00:36:44,639 --> 00:36:48,480 in media is primarily an inevitable statistical byproduct of massive 724 00:36:48,519 --> 00:36:51,119 output combined with keen cultural observation. 725 00:36:51,480 --> 00:36:54,559 Speaker 1: And the power of these predictions, whether they're statistical or 726 00:36:54,639 --> 00:36:59,360 just anomalies, is magnified and sustained not by intentional signaling 727 00:36:59,480 --> 00:37:01,039 or magic ritual. 728 00:37:00,800 --> 00:37:05,519 Speaker 2: But by universal cognitive biases, specifically confirmation bias, which selects 729 00:37:05,559 --> 00:37:08,480 the hits, and hindsight bias, which makes those hits feel 730 00:37:08,519 --> 00:37:09,480 intentional after. 731 00:37:09,320 --> 00:37:12,400 Speaker 1: The fact, and the magic ritual claims rooted in that 732 00:37:12,480 --> 00:37:17,679 fascinating philosophical history of technopaganism and vodoun, they serve a 733 00:37:17,760 --> 00:37:18,599 crucial function. 734 00:37:18,920 --> 00:37:23,599 Speaker 2: They provide a rich, coherent ideological framework that transforms global 735 00:37:23,639 --> 00:37:28,760 complexity and chaos into an understandable, controlled intention. They provide 736 00:37:28,760 --> 00:37:32,400 the necessary spiritual way to validate that deep seated distrust 737 00:37:32,719 --> 00:37:35,480 that so many audiences feel toward official sources. 738 00:37:35,719 --> 00:37:39,920 Speaker 1: Ultimately, the predictive programming theory operates as this sophisticated psychological 739 00:37:40,000 --> 00:37:43,360 framework that alleviates the acute cognitive discomfort of living in 740 00:37:43,400 --> 00:37:47,239 a world of random, inexplicable, or complex global events. 741 00:37:47,440 --> 00:37:51,440 Speaker 2: It gives audiences a comforting, all encompassing conclusion that everything 742 00:37:51,480 --> 00:37:54,159 is intentional and if you can decoe the media, you 743 00:37:54,199 --> 00:37:54,840 are protected. 744 00:37:55,199 --> 00:37:57,519 Speaker 1: So if we want to build resilience against these narratives, 745 00:37:57,559 --> 00:38:00,519 we need to focus rigorously on critical media literacy. 746 00:38:00,599 --> 00:38:03,119 Speaker 2: Yeh, it's not enough to just debunk specific clip of 747 00:38:03,119 --> 00:38:05,920 The Simpsons. We have to address the underlying mechanisms of 748 00:38:05,960 --> 00:38:07,280 cognitive distortion. 749 00:38:07,239 --> 00:38:12,280 Speaker 1: Which requires three primary areas of focus for you, the listener. First, 750 00:38:12,519 --> 00:38:16,599 fully internalizing the law of large numbers to contextualize high 751 00:38:16,679 --> 00:38:20,119 volume media output, understanding that if a show runs for 752 00:38:20,159 --> 00:38:22,960 thirty years, it will get things right just by luck. 753 00:38:23,719 --> 00:38:27,400 Speaker 2: Second, we have to train ourselves explicitly to recognize and 754 00:38:27,440 --> 00:38:31,280 compensate for confirmation bias and hindsight bias, which. 755 00:38:31,119 --> 00:38:34,760 Speaker 1: Means consciously acknowledging the vast quantity of fictional events that 756 00:38:34,840 --> 00:38:38,559 never happened, the statistical distortion. Before you focus selectively on 757 00:38:38,599 --> 00:38:39,480 the hits, you have. 758 00:38:39,480 --> 00:38:42,039 Speaker 2: To actively look for the evidence that contradicts your belief. 759 00:38:42,559 --> 00:38:46,800 Speaker 1: And finally, addressing the fundamental vulnerability, the decline of trust 760 00:38:46,800 --> 00:38:50,840 in official and mainstream information sources. When people are seeking 761 00:38:50,840 --> 00:38:54,559 these esoteric, definitive explanations for world events and fiction. 762 00:38:54,559 --> 00:38:57,079 Speaker 2: It's usually because they have already completely lost faith in 763 00:38:57,119 --> 00:38:59,760 the explanations provided by established institutions. 764 00:39:00,000 --> 00:39:02,639 Speaker 1: The human mind is highly efficient at confirming what it 765 00:39:02,760 --> 00:39:05,800 already believes to be true. Whether your core belief is 766 00:39:05,880 --> 00:39:10,159 rooted in statistical likelihood or the concept of interdimensional entities. 767 00:39:10,280 --> 00:39:14,000 Speaker 2: The cognitive mechanisms that reinforce that belief operate in the 768 00:39:14,039 --> 00:39:17,599 exact same way they make the world feel predictable, intentional, 769 00:39:17,639 --> 00:39:18,440 and controllable. 770 00:39:19,039 --> 00:39:22,559 Speaker 1: So we leave you with this final provocative thought. Given 771 00:39:22,599 --> 00:39:26,079 how powerfully our own cognitive biases reinforce the beliefs we 772 00:39:26,119 --> 00:39:29,519 already hold, whether they are rooted in satire, statistics or 773 00:39:29,519 --> 00:39:32,920 the esoteric. What is one deeply held conviction you are 774 00:39:32,960 --> 00:39:35,840 willing to examine right now for selective evidence, and how 775 00:39:35,920 --> 00:39:38,480 might that effort change your perception of reality? 776 00:39:38,960 --> 00:39:41,119 Speaker 2: Think about it, and thank you for joining us for 777 00:39:41,159 --> 00:39:41,920 this deep dive.