Speaker 1: Good evening, ladies and gentlemen, and welcome all members of
Speaker 1: the retinue and all members joining us today on Thursday,
Speaker 1: as it's being released, being recorded Wednesday night.
Speaker 2: Welcome to another edition of The Cajun Night Live.
Speaker 1: I am your host, Jacob Mook the Cajun Night, And
Speaker 1: before we get started, I do want to tell everybody that's.
Speaker 2: Listening to this listen. I see the analytics.
Speaker 1: I see that there are thousands of y'all listening to
Speaker 1: this show right now on Spotify, on Apple Podcasts. If
Speaker 1: you would like to join in these conversations, if you
Speaker 1: would like to be a part of supporting the Cajun
Speaker 1: Night in itself, then please come to the Cajun Night
Speaker 1: on Patreon. The link is in the description below. There's
Speaker 1: only one tier for entry. We're out here doing this wildness.
Speaker 1: We're out here just trying to have good, constructive, intellectual
Speaker 1: conversations with some debate, of course, about just the comings
Speaker 1: and goings of the day to day. Sometimes it's current events,
Speaker 1: sometimes it's religious, sometimes it's conspiratorial. Sometimes it's military base.
Speaker 1: It could be all over the place, all over the place.
Speaker 1: But if you would like to join in again, link
Speaker 1: is in the description below. So before we get started,
Speaker 1: I want to say hey to everybody here. I see
Speaker 1: Tony has already put in some things into the chat
Speaker 1: that he wanted to talk about and very interested to
Speaker 1: hear more things about it because I keep hearing about
Speaker 1: this India Pakistan situation. They were about to make a
Speaker 1: ceasefire situation. Then they said, nah, I don't even know
Speaker 1: what the current status is. I know that Trump just
Speaker 1: came back from Saudi Arabia. He was talking about a
Speaker 1: lot of money being done with Katar.
Speaker 2: We're going to talk.
Speaker 1: About that here in a few but let's go ahead
Speaker 1: and check the chat real quick. Let's see de salt
Speaker 1: stockpile price dropped nine percent because of Pakistan shooting down
Speaker 1: Indian raph aala rafale jets. I could be mispronouncing that,
Speaker 1: but I checked and it has been up fifty percent
Speaker 1: for the year, so not too bad. Are you talking
Speaker 1: about like the military industrial complex for India?
Speaker 3: Yeah, well, also France, it's a French company. I saw
Speaker 3: the headlines saying they're down nine percent because India is
Speaker 3: shot down like two or three of those jets, And
Speaker 3: at first they were saying, I mean sorry, Pakistan shot
Speaker 3: down two or three of the jets, and the first
Speaker 3: India said no, those are just fuel tanks. Those are
Speaker 3: meant to be jettison But then with closer inspection of
Speaker 3: the photos, they were the engines. So yeah, they did
Speaker 3: shoot down a couple and the stock suffered. But I
Speaker 3: checked in Google just like an hour ago and it
Speaker 3: looks like it's up over fifty percent for the year.
Speaker 3: So whatever this nine percent thing is is within the
Speaker 3: volatility of the stock anyway. Yeah, but yeah, that whole situation.
Speaker 3: I think there's been a couple more missiles launched and
Speaker 3: shot down since last week, and not much else. I
Speaker 3: think both militaries are really itching to put some of
Speaker 3: their equipment to the test and see how the other
Speaker 3: side reacts. But they don't really want a full blown war.
Speaker 3: They just really want to see how the other side reacts.
Speaker 3: And there's a big test in the whole world's watching,
Speaker 3: same for Ukraine, same with Israel. Everyone's looking in at
Speaker 3: how do these weapons systems actually perform? Because the manufacturers
Speaker 3: always claim that they'll you know, take on the world, sure,
Speaker 3: but then in real life, you know American systems, French systems,
Speaker 3: Russian systems, Chinese systems, all end up having drawbacks.
Speaker 2: For sure.
Speaker 1: And I mean that's the military dustro complex and not
Speaker 1: just the American one whenever we say that. And of
Speaker 1: course we're Americans, so we're a bit biased and skewed
Speaker 1: in our perspective. And I get that. But the global
Speaker 1: military industrial complex, the weapons manufacturers from around the world,
Speaker 1: they like when wars pop off, not maybe not big,
Speaker 1: long drawn out wars, but quick skirmishes that are super violent,
Speaker 1: very quickly. Absolutely, they could test their new hardware, you
Speaker 1: know what I mean. They it's one thing to pump
Speaker 1: it into a simulation and see what this jet is
Speaker 1: able to do, what this anti rocket system is able
Speaker 1: to do?
Speaker 2: One hundred percent. I get that.
Speaker 1: But there's there's nothing like real boots on the ground
Speaker 1: training in the field, you know what I mean. That
Speaker 1: data is something that is invaluable to all types of
Speaker 1: system development. So I get it now. I haven't looked
Speaker 1: much into the Raffaula.
Speaker 3: Yeah it's their fighter. Yeah it's rafale. I'm pretty sure
Speaker 3: you're pronouncing it.
Speaker 2: Right, Okay.
Speaker 1: I haven't looked into the data points for that jet itself.
Speaker 2: I don't know. I believe that's more of a fighter jet.
Speaker 2: If I'm not mistaken.
Speaker 1: I don't believe it's a stealth bomber and I don't
Speaker 1: believe it's a reconnaissance type of plane. But even still,
Speaker 1: so I don't know what that's compared against. I'm sure
Speaker 1: that France is saying that it's their fifth gen or
Speaker 1: sixth gen, you know, best thing money can buy. But
Speaker 1: in reality, like, how does that actually stack up against
Speaker 1: what America would consider a sixth gen fighter? Because Russia
Speaker 1: has a completely different understanding of what sixth gen means
Speaker 1: than China. China has a completely different misunderstanding of what
Speaker 1: that means.
Speaker 2: In India, India has a completely you know what I'm saying.
Speaker 1: Every country has classifications of what they call this generation.
Speaker 2: Usually those don't see eye to eye.
Speaker 1: So I don't know what that compares against as far
Speaker 1: as like the American jets that we have in combat
Speaker 1: or in theater, so to speak. But okay, so you're
Speaker 1: saying that Pakistan was able to shoot down two of
Speaker 1: the fringe planes.
Speaker 3: Yeah, I think it was too at least confirmed with
Speaker 3: the engines and raphale I just looked it up. It
Speaker 3: came out in nineteen ninety one. I remember them from
Speaker 3: older flight simulator video games, and so.
Speaker 2: This is antiquated tech. This isn't cutting edge of shit.
Speaker 3: Uh huh. I've heard that F sixteens are still like
Speaker 3: highly respected and they're the number one fighter jet in
Speaker 3: the world in terms of numbers. Everyone's got one, MiG
Speaker 3: twenty nine is number two. I've heard nothing but great
Speaker 3: things about F sixteen's. They're better than They're more maneuverable
Speaker 3: than a lot of the newer stuff, more durable. They're
Speaker 3: a little lower tech, but they can be upgraded. But
Speaker 3: lower tech means less complicated and less prone to breaking down.
Speaker 3: F twenty two I mean sorry that F war twenty
Speaker 3: two is more expensive, but the F thirty five has
Speaker 3: a lot of complaints because of the maintenance crews that
Speaker 3: need to be going around with them anywhere they go,
Speaker 3: and F sixteen doesn't have that problem.
Speaker 1: So I'm not Even when I was in the Marine Corps,
Speaker 1: I was a grunt. I wasn an air wing guy.
Speaker 1: But from what I was told, if we're gonna try
Speaker 1: to compare side by side here, the F sixteen in
Speaker 1: the modern airspace is kind of equivalent to the Sherman
Speaker 1: tank of World War Two?
Speaker 2: Is it the greatest tank out there. Absolutely not.
Speaker 1: The Panzer tank trounced it in every situation, right, But
Speaker 1: it was cheap, it was reliable, you could mass produce them,
Speaker 1: and honestly, they did the job right. F Sixteen's from
Speaker 1: what I've been told. And again I'm sure there's somebody
Speaker 1: in the comments that's gonna say things and stuff because
Speaker 1: they know more about planes than I do. Fine, not
Speaker 1: an expert here, but from what I've been told, the
Speaker 1: F sixteen has been around for quite some time. They're
Speaker 1: tried and true, you know what I mean. They get
Speaker 1: the job done. Are they the fastest, Are they the greatest?
Speaker 1: Are they can they carry the most?
Speaker 4: No?
Speaker 1: But they are reliable, and there's enough of them to
Speaker 1: go around to where you can buy one, you know,
Speaker 1: like nobody's buying the F thirty five. That's, if not mistaken,
Speaker 1: that's like America's premiere, latest and greatest, cutting edge technology.
Speaker 1: So they're not gonna sell it to anybody until it
Speaker 1: becomes antiquated. F sixteen it's been around for a minute,
Speaker 1: kind of like the meg MiGs. And I know that
Speaker 1: there's so many people that watch top Gun right, and
Speaker 1: they will original top gun right, not the new one,
Speaker 1: and they will say, oh, well, the MiG is nothing
Speaker 1: compared to American airlines, But I get it.
Speaker 2: That's true.
Speaker 1: Fine, the MiG is also a very sophisticated plane and
Speaker 1: it has nothing to turn your nose up at. Yes,
Speaker 1: it might be cheaper to produce because it came from
Speaker 1: Soviet air Russia.
Speaker 2: Fine, fine, But like it's still an extremely capable fighter jet.
Speaker 1: So with that being said, it's like, yeah, it might
Speaker 1: be not as good quote unquote, it's better than the
Speaker 1: jet that other countries have, which would be none.
Speaker 2: So I mean, you know, everything with a bit of
Speaker 2: a grain of salt here.
Speaker 1: But yeah, So you're saying that the rafale kind of
Speaker 1: compares to the F sixteen.
Speaker 3: Yeah, I would say it kind of does. Another piece
Speaker 3: of information I just read is that the US didn't
Speaker 3: want India to use F sixteens against Pakistan. India's bought
Speaker 3: some F sixteens.
Speaker 2: Yeah.
Speaker 3: But I've heard similar things between the US and Ukraine
Speaker 3: and Israel, where the US reserves the best of its
Speaker 3: technology for itself and it doesn't want to give Ukraine
Speaker 3: or Israel all the pass codes and passwords to get
Speaker 3: all the upgrades that make it as good as it
Speaker 3: can be. So maybe that's why the US was telling India,
Speaker 3: don't use your F sixteens. So that's why India was
Speaker 3: using the rafales even though they have F sixteens and
Speaker 3: they could.
Speaker 1: Have that would make sense. But same time, like okay,
Speaker 1: and I can understand, like because if it gets shot
Speaker 1: down behind quote unquote behind enemy lines, right, our adversaries,
Speaker 1: America's adversaries could take that and reverse engineer for themselves.
Speaker 1: But it's not like the F sixteen is still got
Speaker 1: some sort of state secrets about it.
Speaker 2: It's been out and about for quite some time now.
Speaker 1: The F thirty five, yeah, yeah, we don't want nobody
Speaker 1: getting that. That's why we don't even let them come
Speaker 1: out of the hangar except for training. Like, they have
Speaker 1: yet to get a single interception on that platform, and
Speaker 1: they're not going to right until something is warranting that
Speaker 1: level of aggression. But the F sixteen, that's kind of
Speaker 1: crazy to me that they would tell them to hold
Speaker 1: back on using those, because that's something that has been
Speaker 1: understood reverse engineering. I mean, hell, war Thunder has an
Speaker 1: F sixteen on their video game. It's not a state secret,
Speaker 1: bind I mean, so that's kind of I understand the
Speaker 1: mindset behind it.
Speaker 2: But I just don't get it, you know, I don't know.
Speaker 2: That's interesting.
Speaker 3: Yeah, I wish I had more info, But that's about
Speaker 3: it for Pakistan for me.
Speaker 1: Yeah, and that's about what I've heard. It's a bit
Speaker 1: of a dick measuring contest at this time. They're both
Speaker 1: kind of taking this opportunity to flex their wings a bit,
Speaker 1: test their tech, test their military capabilities, kind of, you know,
Speaker 1: they're playing a little bit of a one up in game.
Speaker 1: I don't know at this moment if this situation is
Speaker 1: going to be wrapped up in six months. I don't
Speaker 1: know if this situation is going to be something that
Speaker 1: draws on for three, four or five years, like the
Speaker 1: Ukraine situation seems to be. I can't make that judgment
Speaker 1: call at this moment. I do know that India and
Speaker 1: Pakistan have been looking for a reason to take this
Speaker 1: to the next level for quite some time. And like
Speaker 1: you said, twenty nineteen they had a little bit of
Speaker 1: a skirmish. I think it was twenty thirteen they had
Speaker 1: something similar happen. It's every few years they kind of
Speaker 1: pissing each other's cheerios a bit, and then they chill
Speaker 1: and this. The Kashmir region has been dispute for quite
Speaker 1: some time.
Speaker 3: Yeah, since forty seven. Well, I'm actually kind of more
Speaker 3: optimistic about this. I'm pretty pessimistic on a lot of
Speaker 3: wars like Ukraine, Russia, Israel, Godza, But I'm optimistic that
Speaker 3: this India Pakistan thing is wrapping up. They've gotten the
Speaker 3: information they wanted out of the situation and all the
Speaker 3: drama that they're comfortable with, And yeah, I would bet
Speaker 3: this is going to be over really soon. My other
Speaker 3: bet with regard to Russia is that it's we got
Speaker 3: until March next year.
Speaker 1: You think you'll have another year in it, because a
Speaker 1: couple episodes ago you said six months?
Speaker 2: What's changed your mind on this?
Speaker 3: No, No, that's like back in March you asked how
Speaker 3: long do I think it'll go on? And I said,
Speaker 3: let's I'd say another year, So that'll be March of
Speaker 3: twenty twenty six. So I think I'm.
Speaker 2: Sticking with that.
Speaker 1: Okay, maybe I'm trying to remember who it was that
Speaker 1: said that it'd be done. Somebody said it was going
Speaker 1: to be done before Christmas, and I don't even know
Speaker 1: if that was on this show or if it was
Speaker 1: somewhere else that I heard, But what a horrible phrase.
Speaker 3: Who is that person? I considered that phrase before opening
Speaker 3: their mouth.
Speaker 1: Yeah, because, like every single war has always been said, oh,
Speaker 1: let's wrap it up by Christmas. Five years later, here
Speaker 1: we are, I know, I know. But okay, so you're
Speaker 1: still thinking that it's going to be springtime next year.
Speaker 2: Yeah, it's just kind of crazy because that's when.
Speaker 1: Each side launches their spring offensive. You're saying that they're
Speaker 1: not gonna have the juice. Either side won't have the
Speaker 1: willpower or the juice to launch another spring offensive.
Speaker 3: I think that Ukraine is well. I thought they were
Speaker 3: depleted a while ago, but I think they're gonna they're
Speaker 3: gonna cry Ontal and they're gonna want a PCD, and
Speaker 3: they're gonna want to solidify the border pretty much where
Speaker 3: it is now. In fact, I get the sense they're
Speaker 3: already trying to do that. But Russia, to my chagrin,
Speaker 3: actually is not taking them up on that pargain.
Speaker 2: Right now. I don't know what Putin is hoping for.
Speaker 1: And let's let's just assume that he is not trying
Speaker 1: to take over the whole of Ukraine, Okay, because that's
Speaker 1: what at least one side of the isle believes. Let's
Speaker 1: just assume that that's not true, and he's only going
Speaker 1: for the majority Russian speaking oblasty in Ukraine, and which
Speaker 1: would be the sides that he's pretty much already taken
Speaker 1: as of this moment. Is he holding out, like really,
Speaker 1: you're holding out for a better deal than what's being
Speaker 1: offered at this moment, Like, I don't, And I'm sure
Speaker 1: there's like backdoor deals that the public is not privy to.
Speaker 2: I'm sure of it.
Speaker 1: I just don't see what more he stands to gain
Speaker 1: unless he really trying to push all the way to Kiev.
Speaker 3: I think he thinks he might be able to get
Speaker 3: Arkov and Odessa, probably not Kiev, certainly not anything west
Speaker 3: of Kiev. But that's all right.
Speaker 2: We're in Odessa.
Speaker 3: No, not right now? Okay, Okay, they Odessa. I mean
Speaker 3: they almost seceded back in twenty fourteen.
Speaker 1: Yeah, after Crimea, they tried to seceed his Well, okay,
Speaker 1: that's what I'm thinking here. So do we still have
Speaker 1: Ukrainians in the Curse region. I haven't checked in on
Speaker 1: Kurskan a little bit. I know that they had you know,
Speaker 1: they took a decent sized swath of land, and then
Speaker 1: it was pushback, pushback, push back to where it was
Speaker 1: like three hundred square meters or something like that. It
Speaker 1: was like barely any Russian territory was held by Ukraine.
Speaker 1: Is there currently still Russian territory held by Ukrainian forces?
Speaker 3: I'm ninety nine percent sure not. They've been kicked out.
Speaker 3: I can check real quick, right though, right now though,
Speaker 3: and get back to you on that.
Speaker 1: Yeah, man, hit that Google real quick, because I'm I
Speaker 1: honestly have not. I haven't looked into Kurskan a little while.
Speaker 1: There's too much stuff going on around the world to
Speaker 1: where the whole Ukraine Russia situation is kind of like, yep,
Speaker 1: that's a that's the thing that's still happening.
Speaker 2: It's just it's it. Yep.
Speaker 3: Yeah. On X it looks like, okay, there might still
Speaker 3: be a little bit going on there, but they lost
Speaker 3: the big city Suja. Ok So they're like ninety nine
Speaker 3: percent of the way out or something.
Speaker 1: Does it say when they took back Suja, because I
Speaker 1: want to say I heard about that.
Speaker 2: A few weeks ago.
Speaker 3: That was like a month ago.
Speaker 2: Yeah, okay, something like that.
Speaker 3: I forget too.
Speaker 1: So it's still that slow grinding, maybe gaining a meter
Speaker 1: a day.
Speaker 2: Kind of situation trench warfare going on there.
Speaker 3: Okay, yeah, I'm seeing maps, but they're really zoomed in
Speaker 3: and the Russia Ukraine borders right on the map. So
Speaker 3: they've lost Suja according to Russia. Russia claims they inflicted
Speaker 3: seventy six thousand casualties. You can do with that number
Speaker 3: whatever you will, maybe divide it by three or something. Yeah, yeah,
Speaker 3: it was bad for Ukraine.
Speaker 1: Okay, got you all right, So getting back to the
Speaker 1: chat here real quick, Tony. Also, you know the Circumcision
Speaker 1: episode from Cosmic Peach I'm assuming was four hours long?
Speaker 3: Yeah it was. It was crazy.
Speaker 2: Wah.
Speaker 1: Okay, well yeah, to answer your question, Royce, before we
Speaker 1: started shooting, you asked if I had gone and listened
Speaker 1: to it. No, no, I have not, and I probably won't,
Speaker 1: not because of having any kind of like beef with
Speaker 1: Julia or nothing. I love her to desk. She's great,
Speaker 1: she's cool, bro. I don't have four hours to sit
Speaker 1: and listen to anything. I tell you what the last
Speaker 1: thing I actually sat and really listened to was, And
Speaker 1: it took me three days to listen to this, I
Speaker 1: might add, was Wes Huff on The Flagrant Podcast, which
Speaker 1: was like a three hour pod or something like that,
Speaker 1: And it took me days to listen to that, just
Speaker 1: because I have to find thirty minutes of time, usually
Speaker 1: driving when I don't have my kids in the car,
Speaker 1: obviously because we'd be jamming the music. But whenever I'm
Speaker 1: driving by myself, it's pretty much the only time I
Speaker 1: get to sit and listen to stuff. I very rarely
Speaker 1: listen to my own show, like and like I said
Speaker 1: before we started, if I if I think back on okay,
Speaker 1: a point of continue between Jonathan and I or something,
Speaker 1: and I want to go back and make sure I
Speaker 1: didn't sound like I, you know, did my tone sound good?
Speaker 2: Was the delivery good? Was this or this? I might
Speaker 2: go back and find a section.
Speaker 1: I can't tell you last time I went back and
Speaker 1: listened to an entire Cult to Conspiracy episode or a
Speaker 1: Cajun Knight episode, or any of our affiliates honestly, and
Speaker 1: I mean Josh Monday. I would love to go and
Speaker 1: listen to his show, because the man is just amazing.
Speaker 2: He's great.
Speaker 1: Tony also said, I talked with Josh Monday recently about numbers.
Speaker 2: Did you mean the book.
Speaker 3: Yeah, I meant the book. I was asking him because
Speaker 3: I actually messaged him on Instagram a month ago and
Speaker 3: didn't get to check my messages again because I never
Speaker 3: go on there. But that's like the only way to
Speaker 3: connect with him anyway. What I was asking about was
Speaker 3: the controversial alleged human sacrifice version verse in numbers thirty one.
Speaker 1: Have you heard of this human sacrifice from the Jews
Speaker 1: or from their adversaries?
Speaker 3: The alleged human sacrifice performed by Moses in Numbers, chapter
Speaker 3: thirty one, verse forty. It's after it says that there
Speaker 3: was a tribute to the Lord of sixty one thousand
Speaker 3: donkeys and now like maybe sixty one hundred and so
Speaker 3: many sheep and so many cows and then so many
Speaker 3: thirty two Midianite virgins. And what does tribute actually mean?
Speaker 3: Depending on how you interpret that word, it could mean
Speaker 3: human sacrifice, or it could just mean, oh, they were
Speaker 3: consecrated to the temple and served as temple slaves, or
Speaker 3: something could be could be uh roy Carge might have
Speaker 3: a comment about that, But I was talking about to
Speaker 3: Josh one on one about it. I didn't want to
Speaker 3: blast us all over the internet, but well, here we are.
Speaker 3: I'm it's talking about in the podcast.
Speaker 1: No, no, no, Josh Monday is absolutely the best of us, bro.
Speaker 1: And I mean I'm not saying he is the all
Speaker 1: knower of things, but as far as getting a little
Speaker 1: deeper understanding, especially on biblical texts like Oh my God,
Speaker 1: I see him as such a source.
Speaker 2: Honestly, he's just awesome. But Royce correspondent numbers.
Speaker 3: Thirty ten thirty one, verse forty thirty one.
Speaker 4: You know, give me a quick second, I'm looking.
Speaker 2: I'm about to look up the same thing.
Speaker 1: Dude, numbers thirty one forty And are you which version
Speaker 1: of the Bible? I know it doesn't necessarily matter for
Speaker 1: this one, but just so we're all on the same page.
Speaker 2: Here were you looking at King James?
Speaker 3: Oooh not me, I don't remember. Okay, if you google it,
Speaker 3: Bible Gateway gives you all the translations for Yeah, in English,
Speaker 3: there's a whole bunch o very.
Speaker 1: Not really, I just looked it up on Bible Gateway.
Speaker 1: As matter of fact, King James and says and the
Speaker 1: persons were sixteen thousand, of which the Lord's tribute was
Speaker 1: thirty and two persons ASV and the persons were sixteen thousand,
Speaker 1: of whom Jehovah's tribute was thirty and two persons. Amp
Speaker 1: the persons were sixteen thousand, for whom the lord's levee
Speaker 1: was thirty two persons levee.
Speaker 2: That's another one.
Speaker 1: Now, levy doesn't necessarily mean sacrifice. It could mean, you know,
Speaker 1: also press ganged into service. You know, I know that
Speaker 1: the knights of all would bring their levees or their
Speaker 1: servants with them. That was thirty two persons, But that
Speaker 1: could be a translation issue.
Speaker 2: A lot of it talks about tribute.
Speaker 1: Let's see the CEV says here, each half included three
Speaker 1: hundred and thirty seven five hundred sheep, excuse me, three
Speaker 1: hundred and thirty seven thousand, five hundred sheep and goats,
Speaker 1: thirty six thousand cattle, thirty thousand, five hundred donkeys, and
Speaker 1: sixteen thousand young women. From the half that belonged to
Speaker 1: the soldiers, Moses counted out six hundred and seventy five
Speaker 1: sheep and goats, seventy two cattles, sixty one donkeys, and
Speaker 1: thirty two women, and gave them to a laisar to
Speaker 1: be dedicated to Lord. Then from the half that belonged
Speaker 1: to the people. Moses set aside one out of every
Speaker 1: fifty animals and women, as the Lord had said, and
Speaker 1: gave them to his levites. Very interesting. Okay, so I
Speaker 1: understand your reason of questioning. Does this mean human said definitely?
Speaker 5: Not definitely, not definitely, And I there's I mean, Jews
Speaker 5: are completely against it.
Speaker 4: We don't. We don't believe in human.
Speaker 5: Sacrifices, even even the one time that we're that there
Speaker 5: was a quote unquote sacrifice, which was with isa Isaac,
Speaker 5: and but God still stopped it. Like we don't believe
Speaker 5: in that same thing with with drinking blood. It's like
Speaker 5: we're we have a complete prohibition of drinking blood.
Speaker 4: So like that's not a thing now.
Speaker 3: With that being said, also okay, I mean I agree
Speaker 3: that that's the way things are now. But it's hard
Speaker 3: to tell what the text means, and it seems pretty ambiguous,
Speaker 3: and I sure hope it means there's no sacrifice going
Speaker 3: on back then. But human sacrifice was a tradition practically
Speaker 3: everywhere in the world, probably everywhere in the world, including Europe,
Speaker 3: the Americas, maybe East Asia. I don't know so much
Speaker 3: about that, but if you go back you know far
Speaker 3: enough it was a tradition everywhere.
Speaker 4: That's not much us.
Speaker 5: So for sure, I'm not arguing that it was done
Speaker 5: in many cultures. But I mean, I've read the Tour
Speaker 5: a number of times, and that there's no I don't
Speaker 5: there's no commentary that I've ever read that says that
Speaker 5: this is a human sacrifice.
Speaker 3: Now, it's just when it says tribute to the sheep
Speaker 3: and the everything else. You know, for the animals, that's
Speaker 3: interpreted as some kind of burnt offering probably, but then
Speaker 3: for the people, we got to kind of interpret it differently.
Speaker 3: And I wasn't there. I'm not one hundred percent sure
Speaker 3: this all happened the way the way it's been pasted down,
Speaker 3: but I sure hope there weren't sacrifices. And anyway, there
Speaker 3: was one other human sacrifice part. It was this guy
Speaker 3: named Jefftha in the Old Testament. But yeah, that wasn't
Speaker 3: commanded by God either. That was something he did kind
Speaker 3: of by accident, to my understanding.
Speaker 1: Yeah, so all right, so I just looked up a
Speaker 1: little bit more context to this one. And as far
Speaker 1: as Jeff that goes, if I'm not mistaken, he did
Speaker 1: that kind of out of like. I don't want to
Speaker 1: use the term bloodlust. It's been a while since I
Speaker 1: read that parable in that story and everything, but like
Speaker 1: fair enough, So all right, in numbers thirty one forty
Speaker 1: this is from Kor. As a matter of fact, what
Speaker 1: was the meaning of this? How was it worked out?
Speaker 1: Why were thirty two chosen for the lord? And what
Speaker 1: did he do with them?
Speaker 2: It says the spoils of war.
Speaker 1: Those thirty two people were the text to the levites,
Speaker 1: or what would also be called tithe I believe, to
Speaker 1: be put to work caring for the tabernacle.
Speaker 2: It was all there, It was all there earlier in
Speaker 2: the chapter.
Speaker 1: So in number thirty one twenty seven, divide what is
Speaker 1: plundered into two parts, to be shared between those in
Speaker 1: the army who took part in the battle and all
Speaker 1: the rest of the assembly. Twenty eight As a tax
Speaker 1: for Jehovah, you should take from the soldiers who went
Speaker 1: out into the battle one soul out of every five
Speaker 1: hundred of the people. The herd, the excuse me, the herd,
Speaker 1: the donkeys, and the flock. You should take it from
Speaker 1: their half to give it to Eliazar the priest as
Speaker 1: Jehovah's contribution verse thirty. From the half given to the Israelites,
Speaker 1: you should take one out of fifty of the people,
Speaker 1: the herd, the donkeys, the flock, and every sort of
Speaker 1: domestic animal, and give them to the Levites who care
Speaker 1: for the responsibilities connected with Jehovah's tabernacle.
Speaker 2: So then it goes on in thirty one.
Speaker 1: Yeah, so Moses and Eliezar the priest did just as
Speaker 1: Jehovah had commanded Moses in verse thirty two. The spoils
Speaker 1: the rest of the plunder that the people of the
Speaker 1: expedition had t an amounted to, And those were the
Speaker 1: big numbers that gave earlier six hundred and seventy five
Speaker 1: thousand of the flock, thirty three thousand and seventy two
Speaker 1: of the herd, thirty four and sixty one thousand donkeys
Speaker 1: verse thirty five. The women who had not had sexual
Speaker 1: relations with a man amounted to thirty two thousand women
Speaker 1: verse thirty six. And the half that was to share
Speaker 1: of those who went out into the battle amounted to
Speaker 1: three hundred and thirty seven thousand, five hundred of the flock.
Speaker 1: The tax for Jehovah from the flock amounted to six
Speaker 1: hundred and seventy five verse thirty eight. And there were
Speaker 1: thirty six thousand of the herd, and the tax from
Speaker 1: them from Jehovah was seventy two verse thirty nine. And
Speaker 1: there was thirty thousand, five hundred donkeys, and the tax
Speaker 1: of them for Jehovah was sixty one and verse forty.
Speaker 1: And there was sixteen thousand humans, and the tax on
Speaker 1: them for Jehovah was thirty two persons verse thirty or
Speaker 1: forty one. Then Moses gave the t as Jehovah's contribution
Speaker 1: to Elie's R, the priest, just as Jehovah had commanded
Speaker 1: Moses so. And to the point here, Yeah, I could
Speaker 1: see why you would put them as servants of the
Speaker 1: temple in one regard. However, if you're kind of forced
Speaker 1: into service of the temple, I don't feel like your
Speaker 1: heart would be in it. But I also don't know
Speaker 1: all of what went into the upkeep of the tabernacle. Right,
Speaker 1: we're not talking about the finished temple. We're talking about
Speaker 1: when it was still a series of tints and things.
Speaker 2: So is it possible that these thirty two.
Speaker 1: People were put to work you know, breaking down and
Speaker 1: rebuilding the tent everywhere they went. I could see that
Speaker 1: being a possibility.
Speaker 4: Royce your thoughts, I mean, that's it could be a possibility.
Speaker 4: I don't know. I will have to look greater in depth.
Speaker 5: I'm trying to look at give if there's any commentary
Speaker 5: that I can find on it.
Speaker 2: Because the Book of Numbers, this is your torah, this
Speaker 2: is your shit.
Speaker 5: No, no, for sure, which is the reason why I'm like,
Speaker 5: I've read the Tour a number of times and nobody
Speaker 5: has ever written that this is I think, as you
Speaker 5: said before, when they say a tribute, I think it's
Speaker 5: more putting them.
Speaker 4: To work that but not for sure, not sacrifices.
Speaker 1: And I mean the Levites were the priests, so they
Speaker 1: were not allowed to have land, they were not allowed
Speaker 1: to farm. And as far as having slaves slash servants,
Speaker 1: because correct me if I'm wrong, the Hebrew word for
Speaker 1: slave and servant is the same word.
Speaker 2: Context tells you what the difference is between the two.
Speaker 1: So yeah, right, So for the Levite priests to have
Speaker 1: let's even say one hundred slaves slash servants, they would
Speaker 1: only be performing.
Speaker 2: Like basically sub priestly duties.
Speaker 1: They wouldn't be working fields, they wouldn't be mending fences,
Speaker 1: they wouldn't be you know, collecting tides and tributes things
Speaker 1: like that. For that, I guess they would just be
Speaker 1: kind of doing the grunt labor of the temples in
Speaker 1: the tabernacle.
Speaker 2: Was correct.
Speaker 5: No, So as far as like was to say, if
Speaker 5: a Levite or Cohen had a slave, they would not
Speaker 5: be doing anything of the officiation. They would they would
Speaker 5: like if it was, it would be in their house,
Speaker 5: so like basically it'd be a house.
Speaker 4: Servant or slave. But definitely not because the.
Speaker 5: Only people that were allowed to officiate were the Levites
Speaker 5: and the Cohens, and they each had different drip of roles.
Speaker 5: With the Cohen the Kohanim were actually the ones who
Speaker 5: performed the sacrifices, and then the Levites the Levine were
Speaker 5: the ones who sang and they chanted during that point,
Speaker 5: and they like they assisted.
Speaker 1: Also another question, now, the terms or at least the
Speaker 1: terms of agreement so to speak for slaves slash servants,
Speaker 1: Correct me if I'm wrong, but it couldn't exceed seven
Speaker 1: years in the most extreme cases, it could only go
Speaker 1: to fourteen years.
Speaker 2: Would these people have been okay? Explain this to me now.
Speaker 6: So if.
Speaker 2: Like wasn't it generally sold.
Speaker 1: Himself into slavery for a life, and then the dead
Speaker 1: kind of duped him and gave him the older sister.
Speaker 1: So he had to resell himself to the dead to
Speaker 1: slavery for seven more years to get it right.
Speaker 5: But he wasn't like, he wasn't a slaver, a servant
Speaker 5: as far as the tour was concerned, as far as that,
Speaker 5: but no, like generally, what that term is used for
Speaker 5: is if let's just say, if you.
Speaker 4: Stole something and you didn't have the means to pay.
Speaker 5: It back, you would then sell yourself to slay or
Speaker 5: to try to pay off that debt.
Speaker 2: Right, That the honorable way to pay off that debt, right.
Speaker 4: More or less.
Speaker 5: But if you wanted to go past it, then you
Speaker 5: would have an all drilled through your ear.
Speaker 4: And then he could continue being a servant.
Speaker 7: Say that again, an awl like so like you you
Speaker 7: would basically be put on the door post and like
Speaker 7: they would nail something through your ear and give you
Speaker 7: like an earring if you want to if if after
Speaker 7: that seven years period of time, if you still wanted
Speaker 7: to continue to serve that person, then you were allowed
Speaker 7: to basically become a servant basically almost indefinitely.
Speaker 2: So basically are we talking like a gauge.
Speaker 4: Whatever gauge and all would be I mean probably, I
Speaker 4: don't know, maybe eighth di minage. I have no idea.
Speaker 1: Okay, And I said the term, I said Jacob was
Speaker 1: the one that did that. I don't actually know that
Speaker 1: off top, has been a while since I read into
Speaker 1: the ot.
Speaker 2: Now I know that that was a that was one
Speaker 2: of them.
Speaker 1: He he sold himself into the servanthood of the Dad
Speaker 1: to do all of that.
Speaker 2: But anyway, but.
Speaker 5: Okay, and Lovin tried try to screw out of a
Speaker 5: lot of things and just and Jacob was was was
Speaker 5: actually able to.
Speaker 4: Get out of there with a lot of wealth thanks
Speaker 4: to God's help.
Speaker 1: Yeah, for sure, for sure, So that was Jacob. I
Speaker 1: was thinking, Yes, okay, I was on point. Okay, because
Speaker 1: because they called Jacob a trickster and he wasn't. I mean,
Speaker 1: because even in the songs that says you should deal
Speaker 1: cunning to those who tried to deal with you cunningly.
Speaker 1: So if you if you're dealing with the swiller, then
Speaker 1: you're allowed to swindle them.
Speaker 2: Okay, fair enough.
Speaker 1: So now, yeah, I'm wondering if these religious servants would
Speaker 1: have or house slaves as we could call them. I
Speaker 1: wonder if their term of service was a lifelong term
Speaker 1: or because it was a spoils of war type of situation,
Speaker 1: or if.
Speaker 5: There's a different So there's there's also different I'm sorry,
Speaker 5: there's also difference between a Jewish servants lash slave and
Speaker 5: some like a servant like for.
Speaker 4: A spoil of war. That's that's a completely different thing.
Speaker 4: A a spoiler of war.
Speaker 5: There's no such thing as seven years like basically up
Speaker 5: until you free them.
Speaker 2: So it was a lifelong occupation, so yes, okay.
Speaker 5: And and then you can have like children and their children, so.
Speaker 1: Yeah, for sure, for sure. Yeah, And that what happened
Speaker 1: with Abraham and Sarah. It was her handmaid slash slave
Speaker 1: slash servant.
Speaker 4: What what what about how Gar?
Speaker 2: That was That's what I'm saying.
Speaker 1: That was Abraham and that was Sarah's handmaid, that was
Speaker 1: her servant. And depending on the context, that term being
Speaker 1: slave or servant, but same thing and correct.
Speaker 2: The man of that.
Speaker 1: Situation could have well, Sarah gave him permission to go
Speaker 1: fuck Hey, Gar, let's be honest here, like she she
Speaker 1: told him to do that because she was not.
Speaker 5: So I hold up, But but God also told him, hey,
Speaker 5: listen to your wife, So it wasn't it wasn't just her, Like,
Speaker 5: I understand that argument, Like, but I'm not saying whether
Speaker 5: whether Sarah was right, right or wrong. But now the case, basically,
Speaker 5: God still gave is approbation. He's like, He's listened to her,
Speaker 5: and you will still be a father of many nations.
Speaker 2: Oh no, I've understood that too.
Speaker 1: Like, and even if I'm not putting fault on Sarah, right,
Speaker 1: I'm not putting fault any I'm not putting fault anybody
Speaker 1: wasn't there.
Speaker 2: I'm not the guy to start throwing guilt on anyone.
Speaker 1: Here, I'm throwing a rock inside of a glasshouse with
Speaker 1: very thin walls.
Speaker 2: Here, I get this. But that being said, like, Sarah
Speaker 2: was also way up.
Speaker 1: There in age, So whenever she told Abraham to do this,
Speaker 1: it wasn't because some sort of weird guilt trip or
Speaker 1: some sort of weird cuck situation.
Speaker 2: It was because the will of God needed to be done.
Speaker 1: And since probably not happening from my womb, let's try
Speaker 1: to make it happen this way, it was.
Speaker 2: It was you know, I see the nuances with it
Speaker 2: for sure, but yeah, it.
Speaker 3: Was a change. But did you hear about the sixty
Speaker 3: six year old German woman who just had her tenth
Speaker 3: child naturally well actually see section but without any fertility enhancements.
Speaker 3: That's as old as my mom.
Speaker 2: Yeah, East German Wilmhen they're just built different. Boy.
Speaker 1: I'm oh, hell, goa's out there still getting after it, boy,
Speaker 1: tenth child at.
Speaker 3: Sixty sixty six, she was as old as my mom.
Speaker 2: Good for her.
Speaker 1: Good for her, still getting at it and not just
Speaker 1: like not just you know, pro creating, but like producing
Speaker 1: a child and bringing all the way through the whole nine.
Speaker 1: I mean, please, Raven Lee, you being the doula and
Speaker 1: having so much background with birthing practices, a sixty six
Speaker 1: year old this is that's not like unheard of. But
Speaker 1: also that's pretty wild.
Speaker 8: There's actually been quite a few mothers, so technical grandmothers
Speaker 8: that have carried their grandchildren for their children because they
Speaker 8: could not the wives could not be able to carry
Speaker 8: the babies, and it's either their their daughter or their
Speaker 8: husband's you know wife and stuff, and they end up
Speaker 8: carrying the child. There's there's quite a few stories been
Speaker 8: happening of that, and they're like in their sixties seventies
Speaker 8: carrying children. And there's that grandma that just made like
Speaker 8: all over TikTok and Instagram. It's like, what I think,
Speaker 8: she's like seventy one that just had like another child.
Speaker 8: And the woman that holds the record for the most children.
Speaker 8: I think her last baby, I want to say, is
Speaker 8: like either sixty nine or seventy was like her last child,
Speaker 8: and she had like an obscene amount of children. Like
Speaker 8: how her uters didn't blow up, like straight up, Like
Speaker 8: I don't know how she did that.
Speaker 1: But there are women that's good.
Speaker 8: Look, there are women that are able to have oh shit,
Speaker 8: that are able to have lots of like babies like
Speaker 8: into their later times. Like it wasn't until men like
Speaker 8: and it wasn't until like obi started to change, is
Speaker 8: when like the geriatric term came about, right, So, like
Speaker 8: geriatric terms starts at thirty five now, so you're a
Speaker 8: thirty five year old and you're geriatric.
Speaker 1: That blows my mind also because and before I even
Speaker 1: heard about the sixties and seventy year olds having babies,
Speaker 1: which I'm still having a hard time really putting all
Speaker 1: those pieces together in my brain. Gonna be honest with you,
Speaker 1: but all right, I know personally women in their early
Speaker 1: forties that have had children successfully, and I know there's
Speaker 1: gonna be people out there, well, they were on bed
Speaker 1: rest for nine months. No, No, they weren't. They were
Speaker 1: still working and working out and doing their thing. They
Speaker 1: were healthy. Now I understand that it's case by case.
Speaker 1: I get that, but like to say that thirty five
Speaker 1: is considered geriatric for child rearing, I think.
Speaker 2: That's a bit. That's a bit, it's incorrect.
Speaker 8: It's because of so like your hormones some people, because
Speaker 8: and it all kind of contributes into what they're putting
Speaker 8: in our food and stuff like that. Sure, so it
Speaker 8: starts pre menopausal symptoms, it can be so.
Speaker 1: Menimosus usually hit women, and I thought this was somewhere around.
Speaker 8: The late forties early fifties is when it normally starts.
Speaker 8: But honestly, like my generation has started to see premenopausal
Speaker 8: symptoms as early as like thirty four years old because
Speaker 8: of the increased eschigen and all the food and what
Speaker 8: they're putting in stuff. So it's kind of contributing. Like
Speaker 8: just on that same hand, how little girls are now
Speaker 8: starting to see more puberty happening at nine, ten years
Speaker 8: old instead of thirteen, fourteen, fifteen years old. Sure, it's
Speaker 8: it's like it's the same thing.
Speaker 1: So so thirty years from now, this nine year old
Speaker 1: that's going through puberty right now will start seeing metopausal
Speaker 1: things about like thirty five, thirty nine.
Speaker 2: They could be really experiencing metopause.
Speaker 8: Yes, they really can be. And there's a lot more
Speaker 8: women that have been experiencing breast cancer and ovarying cancer
Speaker 8: earlier and earlier because of a lot of contributing factors
Speaker 8: in the environment or food or water and stuff like that.
Speaker 8: And so the whole idea behind the you know, geriatric
Speaker 8: is because you do start to lose your eggs, Like
Speaker 8: your eggs aren't as viable sure as you are when
Speaker 8: you're nineteen twenty years old. But I know tons of
Speaker 8: women and I actually belong to an old it's called
Speaker 8: an old Mom's group. It's a lot of women that
Speaker 8: are over thirty five years old. It's all women over
Speaker 8: thirty five that have been pregnant, and tons of women
Speaker 8: have just started having babies at forty years old. But
Speaker 8: in America, it's like this whole taboo thing of like,
Speaker 8: oh my god, you're forty, you're gonna die, you need
Speaker 8: a C section, your body can't handle it. But these
Speaker 8: women are perfectly fine too.
Speaker 1: As far as the obgy ns and genders, me and
Speaker 1: you have had this discussion before offline. It blows my
Speaker 1: mind how many men there are in the gynecology field.
Speaker 1: That that's a bit insulting in my personal opinion strictly
Speaker 1: because like that's like me, I have a beard. If
Speaker 1: I'm going to a barber to get my beard trimmed,
Speaker 1: I don't want it to be a woman. I want
Speaker 1: it to be a guy, you know, with a beard.
Speaker 1: That that would make sense to me. In other countries,
Speaker 1: is obg y ns and gynecology seen more as a
Speaker 1: female craft or is that the male dominated field. Is
Speaker 1: that more of an American and Western thing or is
Speaker 1: that pretty much worldwide standard these days?
Speaker 8: So the male men being present in OBI actually started
Speaker 8: a long time ago, and so they it's more inherently
Speaker 8: towards England. Scotland is where it originated, and then it
Speaker 8: transferred over to America. There are doctors like in other
Speaker 8: places that are OB's that are men, but they I've
Speaker 8: noticed that a lot of more cultures that are more
Speaker 8: centralized around feminine health and like feminine like energy, they
Speaker 8: tend to have mostly women. We tend to have mostly
Speaker 8: men because inherently, the patriarchy is what wanted to dominate,
Speaker 8: and that's what's kind of been the thing, and women
Speaker 8: were you know, you're less educated, you're not as you know,
Speaker 8: we we know what's best for your body. It's kind
Speaker 8: of been the standard for a long time years ago.
Speaker 1: That makes sense, right, because now we're the ones that
Speaker 1: were going to college and could read and all these things.
Speaker 2: Like, I get that.
Speaker 1: But even today, you would think, in even in Western
Speaker 1: society and in America and in Europe, you would think that,
Speaker 1: especially nowadays, with women being so empowered and having so
Speaker 1: many more opportunities available to them now than they have
Speaker 1: had arguably in the last thousand years, you would think
Speaker 1: that they would be kind of taking back that title.
Speaker 8: They are, Yeah, slowly, they slowly. But there are amazing
Speaker 8: male obs. My mom had an amazing male obi for
Speaker 8: forty something years, doctor Dickerson. That is a fantastic man,
Speaker 8: and he actually opened up the birth center of Baton Rouge.
Speaker 8: He is very natural minded and like he is one
Speaker 8: of the best doctors I've ever seen. So I don't
Speaker 8: think it's really down to the gender. I've seen terrible
Speaker 8: obs that are females, like god awful, should never practice
Speaker 8: on females period into story, and I've seen amazing male doctors.
Speaker 8: So I don't think it's a gender thing. I think
Speaker 8: it's really comes down to the person and what they feel.
Speaker 8: I do think that we have a technocratic way of
Speaker 8: looking at things here in America instead of they really
Speaker 8: shun the natural way of doing things, and they really
Speaker 8: hyper emphasize the fact that people need medication and they
Speaker 8: need you know, pain medication, and women can't do this
Speaker 8: and you know, it's just so painful, instead of encouraging
Speaker 8: and supporting women that they can actually do birth naturally
Speaker 8: and that we are made to do this, not all women,
Speaker 8: Like the percentage of women that actually have a pelvis
Speaker 8: set is too small, is quite low. But they have
Speaker 8: gone with that narrative very hard, and so people just
Speaker 8: need to actually do a lot more research. But I
Speaker 8: will say in the last decade that women have started
Speaker 8: to take back birth in the Western cultures and are
Speaker 8: doing more natural methods and going more natural that's why
Speaker 8: the hospitals are including water bursts and tubs and are
Speaker 8: allowing you to have the monitors that are free moving
Speaker 8: instead of attached to a monitor where you can't get
Speaker 8: out of bed. So things that are progressing, it's just
Speaker 8: very slowly. So we're progressing, but we're reverting back to
Speaker 8: what was inherently the way to give birth, which is
Speaker 8: very interesting.
Speaker 1: Now let me ask you this from again from your experience,
Speaker 1: because you at one time were adula, You've worked in
Speaker 1: midwifery for years. Let me ask you this the as
Speaker 1: far as the more natural and the older ways of childbirth,
Speaker 1: are some of these I could understand as being seen
Speaker 1: as arcane? And I guess my question is does it
Speaker 1: depend on where the source is from to dictate whether
Speaker 1: it is being implemented more these days?
Speaker 2: Like water birth's fine, absolutely, why not?
Speaker 1: But I could imagine that there's probably some birthing practices
Speaker 1: that is being used in parts of the world right
Speaker 1: now that would seem barbaric to Americans today, whether it's
Speaker 1: female centric or not.
Speaker 2: Are we seeing that they're kind of accepting all the above.
Speaker 1: As far as the older and more traditional natural quote
Speaker 1: unquote ways, are they being selective with which things they're
Speaker 1: trying to implement in America.
Speaker 8: So to get things implemented in America, you have to
Speaker 8: have a lot of clinical studies and trials done, and
Speaker 8: that is quite difficult. Actually, one of the midwives here
Speaker 8: in the SA Louisiana has been working for a good
Speaker 8: number of years to prove that v backs are safe.
Speaker 8: So that's a vaginal birth after cesareans in water at
Speaker 8: home and what she has to what she's been doing
Speaker 8: is having to take her clients because it's illegal here
Speaker 8: in the state and it's not legal everywhere else.
Speaker 1: What is v backs, So that having a vaginal birth
Speaker 1: after a C section is illegal in Louisiana.
Speaker 8: It's illegal to have at home with a midwife. So
Speaker 8: they're very selected. So the wording is very careful, and
Speaker 8: it's to do to complications like that. Yes, there can
Speaker 8: be extreme complications, sure, but the problem is is that
Speaker 8: you have to have scientific data. But how do you
Speaker 8: get scientific data when it is not acceptable, when it
Speaker 8: is against the law to have it. And it's kind
Speaker 8: of one of those things where they pick and choose.
Speaker 8: When I say they, I'm talking about the national associations
Speaker 8: of like OB and like ebs ceterric. Since staff they
Speaker 8: pick and choose what they feel is necessary. But overseas
Speaker 8: they are doing more clinical trials and producing more more
Speaker 8: information to be able to try to allow other countries
Speaker 8: to add in things I wouldn't say things are barbaric.
Speaker 8: A lot of the countries that practice mainly the postpartum
Speaker 8: practices are what considered barbaric. So like in certain cultures
Speaker 8: they are inherent to ignore the women's please of like
Speaker 8: I'm really sick, I'm passing a lot of blood dot
Speaker 8: dot dot, And so how the morbidity rates rise is
Speaker 8: because of cultural beliefs and like you have the devil
Speaker 8: within you, so we're gon, we're going to call someone
Speaker 8: over here, and so those are where you see it.
Speaker 8: Birth inherently seems to be kind of a method where
Speaker 8: everybody understands a lot. Like women need to move. They
Speaker 8: inherently understand in an unconscious way of like I need
Speaker 8: to get up, I need to move, I need to
Speaker 8: do this. And a lot of the hospitals they want
Speaker 8: to shap you to a bed, put you on your back,
Speaker 8: which is not an optimal position. To give birth in
Speaker 8: hands and knees is the best position so there's a
Speaker 8: lot of pushback lately. When I say lately, over the
Speaker 8: last I would say at least as far as I've
Speaker 8: been in it, so eight years. The last eight years,
Speaker 8: I've seen a growing trend of women standing up and saying, no,
Speaker 8: this is incorrect. I want my own autonomy, I want
Speaker 8: to be able to birth the way I want a birth,
Speaker 8: and I do not want these things done to me.
Speaker 8: There is a lot of it's called birth rape or
Speaker 8: birth trauma, depending on the way you want to talk
Speaker 8: about it is where things are done to their bodies
Speaker 8: that are against their will or not discussed before they're done,
Speaker 8: and that kind of happens. And so that's gaining those
Speaker 8: conversations are gaining popularity. Free birth is gaining popularity, and
Speaker 8: that can be very dangerous because these women are birthing
Speaker 8: at home with no birth attendance, that have medical training period.
Speaker 8: They're just going at it and just like hoping for
Speaker 8: the best, which I've seen a lot of beautiful videos,
Speaker 8: but also you have to be very careful because it
Speaker 8: can go from amazing to dangerous in a matter of
Speaker 8: a minute.
Speaker 2: Yeah, so I.
Speaker 8: Don't advise it for that, but I definitely say that
Speaker 8: there's a lot to do with birth culture, and like
Speaker 8: I could talk forever and I'm not going to take
Speaker 8: up your whole time about it, but it is definitely
Speaker 8: our thing. It is gaining popularity, the conversation to become
Speaker 8: more natural thankfully.
Speaker 2: Yeah, no, I agree. And that seems like you said,
Speaker 2: it's becoming.
Speaker 1: More widely accepted and more talked about to do natural childbirth,
Speaker 1: or at least more women are wanting to attempt it now,
Speaker 1: depending on what area of the country are in. A
Speaker 1: lot of women say they would like to do an
Speaker 1: all natural childbirth, and then when they when rubber really
Speaker 1: meets the road, they say, screw that, give me drugs,
Speaker 1: give me a sea section, and just get it out
Speaker 1: of me. And you know, and I'm not I am
Speaker 1: not disparaging women who need to have a sea section.
Speaker 1: I you know, three of my children have been through
Speaker 1: sea section. They're all healthy and happy, so like there's
Speaker 1: no shade being thrown here. But I am seeing more,
Speaker 1: a lot of more these days of women who are
Speaker 1: going out of their way to try to do everything
Speaker 1: they can to have natural childbirths, whether that be at
Speaker 1: home or at a birthing center, or even at a hospital.
Speaker 1: Women are wanting to do it the natural way, the
Speaker 1: traditional way more in the last decade, and that makes
Speaker 1: me happy.
Speaker 8: So yeah, there's it depends on the culture, so like
Speaker 8: I can't like it depends on the culture. Considering like
Speaker 8: there is a lot of women in the South that
Speaker 8: tend we have the highest sea section rate in Louisiana
Speaker 8: out of the country. Now that can be from a
Speaker 8: cultural view, that can be from the doctor point of view.
Speaker 8: There's a lot of contributing factors to that. I will
Speaker 8: say that there is a growing trend of women here
Speaker 8: that would like natural. There is also still the very
Speaker 8: present My aunt, my mama, and my grandma did this,
Speaker 8: and I'm going to do this too. So I'm going
Speaker 8: to have a sea section because I can put it
Speaker 8: on the books. I'm going to take the epidural because
Speaker 8: you know, this is what everyone else did and I
Speaker 8: don't want to feel pain. Which is that's the case
Speaker 8: that a woman wants to do, then that's her freedom
Speaker 8: and her right to do that, And I have no
Speaker 8: I don't judge and I have no feelings towards it.
Speaker 8: You know, if the baby's born healthy and the mom
Speaker 8: is healthy, that's the best thing. Possible. I will say
Speaker 8: where I am from on the West Coast, it is
Speaker 8: very very heavy natural based. We're very crunchy, we're very uh,
Speaker 8: we're very like have a baby in the in the
Speaker 8: water kind of vibe in the river, you know, Like
Speaker 8: that's just but it's a cultural thing, and that's just
Speaker 8: not just seen here in America. That's seen globally of
Speaker 8: different sections of where people have different types of birth.
Speaker 8: So people are moving towards going back to being healthy.
Speaker 8: And that's not just with birth. That's with food, that's
Speaker 8: with growing with food, like growing your food. That's with
Speaker 8: questioning what they're putting in the food and water supply,
Speaker 8: like you know RFK, taking out the you know, the
Speaker 8: dyes and stuff. That's a huge power move to being like,
Speaker 8: look at what this is doing to our children, look
Speaker 8: at the what this is doing to us. And it's
Speaker 8: all based on each other. Because whatever we consume as women,
Speaker 8: that goes into our babies, and that does inherently change
Speaker 8: the genetic makeup of what's being done as they're growing.
Speaker 8: So a lot of things are shifting very much.
Speaker 1: So you know what, this is actually a perfect segue
Speaker 1: to one of the articles I have pulled up here
Speaker 1: as a matter of fact, speaking on RFK and all
Speaker 1: the things that he is doing. So he just decided
Speaker 1: that he is going to be banning like thirty five
Speaker 1: different types of food. These foods will be banned under
Speaker 1: RFK Junior. This is from a lot Living dot alt
Speaker 1: dot com. RFK Junior has been nominated as the next
Speaker 1: Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services under
Speaker 1: the upcoming Trump administration. So I do believe there's an
Speaker 1: older article, but these are some of the things that
Speaker 1: he is going to be banning. Mountain dew because of
Speaker 1: the dies, if I'm not mistaken. Another one is candy.
Speaker 1: There are certain types of candies and flavors that use
Speaker 1: dyes and flavorings that are chemicals that are not good
Speaker 1: for our bodies.
Speaker 2: Chee its chee.
Speaker 1: It's a flavor snack uses artificial colors like yellow number
Speaker 1: six to achieve their iconic look. However, studies have linked
Speaker 1: such dies to allergic actions and behavior changes in children,
Speaker 1: raising concerns among health advocates and consumers alike. Which sucks
Speaker 1: because I love cheese its McDonald's. He is trying to
Speaker 1: change menu options, if not trying to bam McDonald's completely.
Speaker 1: I don't know how well it's going to go, but
Speaker 1: we'll see French fries something else. He's trying to get
Speaker 1: rid of ketchup and if not mistaken, thiss yep, it's here.
Speaker 1: It's offer relies on high fruitos, corn syrup, and artificial
Speaker 1: preservatives and flavors of shelf life. These ads have been
Speaker 1: linked to chronic conditions like obesity and diabetes, raining concerns
Speaker 1: or raising concerns among health advocates. And yeah, for the record,
Speaker 1: if anybody is unaware, yo, go check out the nutrition
Speaker 1: facts on your ketchup.
Speaker 2: There is way more sugar in that than what needs
Speaker 2: to be.
Speaker 1: Traditional ketchups are actually like legit like mushroom based ketchups
Speaker 1: are so good, but they keep going for the brown
Speaker 1: sugar based ones like we have today.
Speaker 2: Anyway.
Speaker 1: Ice cream again, not really happy about that, but RFK
Speaker 1: is waging a war against ice cream right now as well.
Speaker 1: Skittles again for the red dye number forty and yellow
Speaker 1: number five.
Speaker 2: Instant noodles.
Speaker 1: He's hitting on the college kids now, so yeah, he's
Speaker 1: basically going after top ramen and other types of instant
Speaker 1: noodles because to be fair, if you look at the
Speaker 1: nutrition facts on this one as well, and how they're made.
Speaker 1: That's like sixty percent wax in these instant noodles. They're
Speaker 1: not exactly like grain based noodles or even rice based noodles.
Speaker 1: It's it's pretty much wax, and like, we know that
Speaker 1: it's not healthy. But RFK has decided that he's gonna
Speaker 1: do some things to try to stop that lucky charms.
Speaker 1: This is also for yellow number five and red dye
Speaker 1: number forty. Not to mention the fact that there are marshmallows,
Speaker 1: which leads me to well, I'm gone to it to
Speaker 1: many he's trying to ban marshmallows.
Speaker 2: We'll get to that. Lunch meats.
Speaker 1: Lunch meat is a staple for packed lunches across the
Speaker 1: United States. Where will we be if it couldn't If
Speaker 1: we couldn't make our kids quick turkey and cheese sandwiches. Well,
Speaker 1: with the new administration and the new food safety regulation,
Speaker 1: we might have to figure out what to do instead.
Speaker 1: Processed meats like deli meats and hot dogs use preservatives
Speaker 1: such as nitrates and nitrates. Nitrates and nitrites, excuse me,
Speaker 1: to maintain color and freshness. These chemicals have already been
Speaker 1: banned in other countries because of links to higher risk
Speaker 1: of certain cancers. Processed cheeses yep Craft singles They're about
Speaker 1: to go by the wayside if far if Cake gets
Speaker 1: his way.
Speaker 2: Frozen dinners.
Speaker 1: I'm not too mad about this, but there's tons of
Speaker 1: single men out there that are Frozen Dinnors often rely
Speaker 1: on artificial flavors, preservatives, and coloring agents to maintain taste
Speaker 1: and appearance, but these additives have been tied to health
Speaker 1: concerns such as obesity and high sodium intake.
Speaker 2: I mean, yeah again, that kind of makes sense.
Speaker 1: Red Bull A drinks like Red Bull are known for
Speaker 1: their high caffeine and sugar content, which have been linked
Speaker 1: to health issues such as hard problems and obesity. Shirtter
Speaker 1: food regulations could target these ingredients from prompting increased scrutiny
Speaker 1: from health advocates.
Speaker 2: Flavored yogurt.
Speaker 1: Flavored yogurts off rely on artificial sweeteners and colors to
Speaker 1: enhance taste and appearances, special specifically to target children, but
Speaker 1: these additives have been linked to health concerns like metabolic
Speaker 1: issues and allergic reactions. Farmed salmon. Wild salmon is fine,
Speaker 1: but apparently farmed salmon. He's saying no more to give
Speaker 1: farm salmon its famous pink color. The fish is often
Speaker 1: fed synthetic ass stuff as taxathlene. Sure, I am butchering
Speaker 1: that pronunciation. Basically, they're fed synthetic materials, a practice raising
Speaker 1: concerns about potential health effects and transparency.
Speaker 2: Stricter regulations under RFK Junior could lead to scrutiny.
Speaker 1: Of such additives in a aquaculture. Artificial sweeteners. I'm here
Speaker 1: for that ban. All of the artificial sweeteners like aspartame
Speaker 1: and sucralose are common in sugar free food and drinks.
Speaker 1: Both studies have shown that they can cause gut problems
Speaker 1: or affect how our bodies handle sugar. Stricter rules could
Speaker 1: mean a closer look at their safety. Not to mention,
Speaker 1: there has been so many links to brain cancer when
Speaker 1: it comes to aspartame and sucralose. Microwave popcorn. Microwave popcorn
Speaker 1: bags often contain pfo AA chemical link to health risks
Speaker 1: like cancer and thyroid issues. Strict regulate good Lord, I
Speaker 1: can't speak. Stricter regulations may push manufacturers to eliminate these substances,
Speaker 1: raising questions about safety of everyday snacks, frozen pizza. Frozen
Speaker 1: pizzas often contain sodium nitrite in processed meats preserved as
Speaker 1: linked to potential cancer risk and cardiovascular concerns.
Speaker 2: I think that's also the same thing with the lunch meats.
Speaker 2: Canned tomatoes.
Speaker 1: You've probably never thought about what's in actual cans that
Speaker 1: your food comes in, but health officials have stricter Food
Speaker 1: regulations could target BPA, a chemical in canned.
Speaker 2: Linings, due to concerns over effects on hormone functions and
Speaker 2: brain health. Energy bars.
Speaker 1: Energy bars could face elimination under our case policies due
Speaker 1: to the reliance on artificial sweeteners, preservatives, and ultra processed ingredients.
Speaker 1: Add Is like sucralose and sugar alcohol's harm gut health
Speaker 1: and may contribute to metabolic disorders and inflammation. Non organic
Speaker 1: strawberries not gonna lie, didn't see that one coming, but okay.
Speaker 2: Due to pesticide heavy.
Speaker 1: Farming practices, non organic strawberries are at high risk of
Speaker 1: being banned. Tests have revealed residues from dozens of harmful pesticides,
Speaker 1: including carcinogens like carbondism and indocrine.
Speaker 2: Distributors or disruptors.
Speaker 1: Rather, these post threats to consumer health, especially to vulnerable populations.
Speaker 2: Cake frosting.
Speaker 1: Mass market cake frosting could disappear under our off case
Speaker 1: policies due to its reliance on transfats from hydrogenated oils
Speaker 1: and artificial dyes like red forty and yellow five marshmallows. Again,
Speaker 1: I think this ties into Lucky charms and what his
Speaker 1: big thing about that is. Yeah, the dyes are bad,
Speaker 1: but marshmallows might face scrutiny due to their questionable ingredients
Speaker 1: such as gelatin source from in dust animal processing, and
Speaker 1: artificial flavorrings. Many contain corn syrup and refined sugars, both
Speaker 1: tied to insulin resistance and chronic diseases. Flavored oatmeals pumpkin
Speaker 1: spice is being shown right here, which there's there's gonna
Speaker 1: be a certain demographic of human being that will be
Speaker 1: upset that pumpkin spice is going by the wayside, but
Speaker 1: all right. Flavored oatmeal brands often use artificial flavorings, excessive sugar,
Speaker 1: and stabilizers like multidextrine, which pose help risks like blood
Speaker 1: sugar spikes and gut issues. Pre Cooked shrimp. Pre cooked
Speaker 1: shrimp could be targeted for bands due to the use
Speaker 1: of sodium, tripulp phosphate, tripolyphosphate, excuse me, and sulfites as preservatives.
Speaker 1: These chemicals can cause allergic reactions insensitive individuals and may
Speaker 1: disrupt gut flora when consumed frequently pickled and jarred vegetables.
Speaker 1: Pickled in jarged vegetables are often preserved with sodium benzoate
Speaker 1: and artificial dyes, which are to potential carcinogenic effects when
Speaker 1: combined with certain foods. Their high sodium content also raises
Speaker 1: concern about cardiovascular health. Store bought rotisserie chicken. Okay, well,
Speaker 1: now he's just gone too damn far now I'm joking.
Speaker 1: Rotisserie chicken seasoning typically includes phosphate additives to retain moisture,
Speaker 1: which may contribute to kidney problems and calcium depletion. Additionally,
Speaker 1: these chickens have had high sodium levels, raising health risks
Speaker 1: for consumers.
Speaker 2: Ranch dressing.
Speaker 1: Store bought ranch dressings contain hydrogenated oils and artificial flavor
Speaker 1: enhancers like monosodium glutamate. All right, now, okay, now calm
Speaker 1: down there, RFK, I love my MSG, leave me alone.
Speaker 8: Uh.
Speaker 1: These ingredients are linked to inflammation, heart disease, and other
Speaker 1: chronic illnesses, making them incompatible with clean eating ideologies.
Speaker 2: Flavored potato chips.
Speaker 1: The sodium causing the metabolic disorders and increase obesity risks.
Speaker 1: I get it, Taco kids. I feel like he's just
Speaker 1: kind of going out of his way on this one.
Speaker 1: But yeah, pre seasoned taco kits often contain high levels
Speaker 1: of sodium and artificial flavors. MSG's frozen chicken nuggets, same thing,
Speaker 1: the sodium, phosphates, autolized yeast extract and fillers to preserve
Speaker 1: texture and flavor.
Speaker 2: Frozen fish sticks same thing, same thing.
Speaker 1: Low quality fish mixed with binders, sodium, heavy coatings, and
Speaker 1: artificial additives.
Speaker 2: Imitation crab meat.
Speaker 1: You know the sushi industry is gonna have something to
Speaker 1: say about that one, But I mean, why don't we
Speaker 1: use real crab meat.
Speaker 2: I know it's more expensive, but it tastes so much better.
Speaker 2: It does. It tastes so much better.
Speaker 1: Imitation crab meat combines sera meine, processed fish paste with starches,
Speaker 1: soor bid all and artificial colorings to mimic the taste
Speaker 1: and texture. These additives contribute to low nutritional value, which
Speaker 1: conflicts with initiatives encouraged encouraging whole nutrient rich foods. So anyway, yeah,
Speaker 1: those are just a quick thirty five food item list
Speaker 1: of things that RFK is trying to ban.
Speaker 2: Go ahead, Raven Lee.
Speaker 8: What I find interesting is that if you go over
Speaker 8: sees to other countries and you actually like eat if
Speaker 8: they're McDonald's, for example, like the McDonald's in Okinawa, Japan
Speaker 8: is like the best food ever. It's a gourmet food
Speaker 8: because they have to adhere to the health standards in
Speaker 8: which that country is in. Yet America has like pretty
Speaker 8: much no standards and they get away with feeding you
Speaker 8: like absolute dog shit. And people are upset that these
Speaker 8: things are being changed. And I don't quite undestand why.
Speaker 1: I remember when I was in Paris, I went to
Speaker 1: McDonald's and the only reason why was because they sold
Speaker 1: Heineken there.
Speaker 2: I don't even drink Heineken.
Speaker 1: But like where else in my life am I going
Speaker 1: to be able to order a beer with my burger?
Speaker 2: Like? I thought that was dope to do it at McDonald's.
Speaker 1: So I did, I will say, and yes, the pulp
Speaker 1: thing of a Royala cheese and the whole I did that.
Speaker 1: I ordered that it tasted different, but not worse by
Speaker 1: any means it I'm I don't wouldn't call it necessarily better,
Speaker 1: but I will say that it definitely tasted healthier, like
Speaker 1: by and large.
Speaker 2: So as far as.
Speaker 1: Like, like you said, they have to maintain the food
Speaker 1: standards of the country that the McDonald's is currently in,
Speaker 1: so in Okinawa, Japan, Japan cares about what their people
Speaker 1: are putting into their bodies, like they truly care France.
Speaker 1: I would think, not as much as Japan, but they
Speaker 1: definitely care more than America.
Speaker 2: So yeah, RFK is trying.
Speaker 1: To ban these items, and it's because of the dies,
Speaker 1: it's because of the sodium intake, it's because of the
Speaker 1: artificial sweeteners, it's because of the uh phosphates and phost fights.
Speaker 1: I get it, and I'm not mad at it. But
Speaker 1: he also needs to stop his hatred towards MSG. I
Speaker 1: draw the line there. I'm probably gonna die on the
Speaker 1: hill of loving MSHG.
Speaker 2: Go ahead, Raven.
Speaker 8: So him banning these things like this is such a
Speaker 8: huge move for a lot of people that have been
Speaker 8: like saying and preaching this myself included for a long
Speaker 8: time of like these things are terrible for you, Like
Speaker 8: this is causing a lot of it's like an epidemic,
Speaker 8: really like the sugar epidemic. Like there's a fascinating there's
Speaker 8: a lot of document Uh, there's a lot of like
Speaker 8: videos that I've been made. There's actually one on Netflix
Speaker 8: about the sugar epidemic. And it's really interesting because childhood
Speaker 8: obesity is blown up over the last decade and there's
Speaker 8: a lot of contributing factors. But it's amazing to me
Speaker 8: because Americans get super angry about like healthy changes happening,
Speaker 8: yet overseas like they have a lot of restrictions on
Speaker 8: their foods that make sure that they are eating healthy
Speaker 8: food and like, I don't understand the argument, Like if
Speaker 8: you ever looked at the model it's supposedly what Michelle
Speaker 8: Obama was going to use, but the model for lunches,
Speaker 8: and how oversees what those lunches look like comparative to
Speaker 8: our lunches. It's like, Okay, why wouldn't we want to
Speaker 8: feed the best food possible to our children that we
Speaker 8: know aren't going to contribute to ADHD or contribute to
Speaker 8: them having some autoimmune disease or you know, DOTTA dot
Speaker 8: sleep issues, focus issues, you neme it I don't understand
Speaker 8: how this is such like a rough topic for Americans.
Speaker 8: I never understood. So like for me, RFK is like
Speaker 8: fucking the savior for the rest of us that have
Speaker 8: been crunchy and like trying to get people to you know,
Speaker 8: band together and be angry about this.
Speaker 2: But yeah, I get it.
Speaker 1: But we also and I'm not even trying to take
Speaker 1: the side of the people getting mad about this. But
Speaker 1: the reason why is because a people do not like change.
Speaker 1: Like by and large, like a person can get down
Speaker 1: with it, the masses is very, very very hesitant towards change,
Speaker 1: even if it's shown to be a good and healthy change,
Speaker 1: they don't typically like it. That being said, also, you
Speaker 1: look at countries in Europe throwing it out, they have
Speaker 1: way stricter food requirements.
Speaker 2: That they allow their people to ingest than we do
Speaker 2: in America.
Speaker 1: Right, they also have a fraction of the population, and
Speaker 1: so when you talk about like their version of public school,
Speaker 1: for instance, they have more money that they could put
Speaker 1: towards good food. When in America we have money. We
Speaker 1: have a really good economy. I know that depends on
Speaker 1: who you ask, but like, as compared to most of
Speaker 1: the world, America is not doing poorly.
Speaker 2: I think that's a pretty understood fact. And we could
Speaker 2: put twenty more, twenty more money.
Speaker 1: Towards food for our children and towards the public school system,
Speaker 1: but that would mean less money for the rich people.
Speaker 1: That means that they're not getting as much of a
Speaker 1: bonus at the end of every quarter, at the end
Speaker 1: of every year, and like that's just crazy, you know.
Speaker 1: So I think it's a mixture of things. It's like
Speaker 1: a compound issue. I think that greed plays a lot
Speaker 1: into it. I think that people not liking change plays
Speaker 1: a lot into it. Not to mention, like Michelle Obama
Speaker 1: with her initiative to try to make school lunches better,
Speaker 1: that would have done great if the food was like,
Speaker 1: at least somewhat edible. She tried replacing like mid range
Speaker 1: food with food that was on paper healthier but tasted gross.
Speaker 1: Like that was the biggest swing in a miss I've
Speaker 1: ever seen in my life. It doesn't cost that much money.
Speaker 1: I actually used to be related to somebody who works
Speaker 1: in the cafeteria at a private school, and if you
Speaker 1: were to compare, and I mean they actually cooked the
Speaker 1: food for the children every day. It wasn't mass producing
Speaker 1: a big tray you heated up in a hot box
Speaker 1: or an oven or something inserved.
Speaker 2: They actually were cooking the food for the children. It
Speaker 2: was like fifty.
Speaker 1: Cents more per meal than what the public schools were paying.
Speaker 1: And somehow that just was what it was, and it
Speaker 1: was way more nutritious. And like he was showing me,
Speaker 1: he broke it down, your average meal for one of
Speaker 1: the students that he cooked for, and the average meal
Speaker 1: for one of the students that the public school is given,
Speaker 1: especially like the free lunch systems and all that which
Speaker 1: not here to throw shade at. I understand everybody's got
Speaker 1: their shit. My point is fifty cents more per meal.
Speaker 1: And yes, I understand that stacks up. I understand that
Speaker 1: adds up. I get it. Just speaking on behalf of
Speaker 1: myself here, right, Jacob, speaking on behalf of Jacob.
Speaker 2: I don't mind my tax dollars.
Speaker 1: Going towards making sure these babies are eating better food.
Speaker 1: I know that's probably a controversial hot take for some people.
Speaker 2: I'm good with it. I'm good with that.
Speaker 1: I'm good with Rather than I'm just gonna use the
Speaker 1: USAID group that Doge found all the crazy fraud and
Speaker 1: all that stuff. I know there's a lot more, but
Speaker 1: that's an easy one to pick right, low hanging fruit.
Speaker 1: Rather than spend so much money for Iraqi sesame streep
Speaker 1: and bearded.
Speaker 2: Circus ladies on ice to teach us.
Speaker 1: About global warming, if we are to hawk that and
Speaker 1: put it towards our food for our children in our
Speaker 1: public school system, I see that as more of an investment.
Speaker 2: That's just me.
Speaker 1: I don't know, but yeah, we will see. RFK is
Speaker 1: trying to push these things forward. I don't know if
Speaker 1: they will absolutely happen. I know that he is pushing
Speaker 1: it further and further every day, but we will see.
Speaker 1: I'm gonna keep everybody posted on it as things progress,
Speaker 1: all right, Getting back to the chat here, Tony, give
Speaker 1: me a little context on this one. Here rates very widely,
Speaker 1: from ninety nine to nine in Morocco and high rates
Speaker 1: in many Muslim majority countries, to ninety one seven in Israel,
Speaker 1: eighty percent in the United States, and twenty point seven
Speaker 1: percent in the United Kingdom, fourteen percent in China, thirteen
Speaker 1: point five in India, nine in Japan, and one in Honduras.
Speaker 2: What are these numbers about?
Speaker 3: This goes back to when we were talking about circumcision
Speaker 3: the beginning of the episode. Okay, wow, yeah, we kind
Speaker 3: of moved on from that. It just varies a lot.
Speaker 3: Wid Yeah, I definitely believe it's it's really high here,
Speaker 3: and I think most males in this country kind of
Speaker 3: had to figure out what it was after they had
Speaker 3: already been seeing their friends' penises and elementary school. But yeah,
Speaker 3: maybe this is oversharing. But I was the only uncircumcised guy.
Speaker 3: I did not know why mine looked so different, but
Speaker 3: my parents protected me from that. And I saw like
Speaker 3: fifty or one hundred other my friends dix and in
Speaker 3: elementary school, and they just always looked so different. And
Speaker 3: I was like, your red thing is is there? But
Speaker 3: doesn't it hurt? Because if you're if you're uncircumcised and
Speaker 3: you pull it back and you touch the red part
Speaker 3: when you're a little boy, it really hurts fair enough.
Speaker 1: I do know that it is more on the rise
Speaker 1: in America, and there's some people that believe that that's
Speaker 1: because of the illegal immigrant conversation, but that's that's kind
Speaker 1: of a cop out. There's so as far as the yeah,
Speaker 1: and we kind of touched on it. Wow wow oo
Speaker 1: bad phrasing. We kind of brought it up in conversation
Speaker 1: earlier in the episode, and to kind of bring it
Speaker 1: around here, evangelical christendom in America is why the circumcision
Speaker 1: conversation was so prevalent for so long. Like I brought
Speaker 1: up earlier, my grandfather was born in nineteen thirty. He
Speaker 1: didn't get circumcised until he deployed to go to Korea
Speaker 1: during the Korean War in the fifties. I mean, it
Speaker 1: was if you didn't have money, or if your mom
Speaker 1: just didn't do that for your parents didn't choose that
Speaker 1: for you when you were a baby, it just wasn't done.
Speaker 2: But it wasn't you know, it was seen as a
Speaker 2: cleanliness thing.
Speaker 1: If you're going to deploy, they don't want you to
Speaker 1: get I mean, you know part in the expression here,
Speaker 1: but they didn't want you to have dick cheese and
Speaker 1: get dick rot when you go overseas.
Speaker 2: So it was for cleanliness and hygiene issues. I get that.
Speaker 1: But with the way the world is now and what
Speaker 1: we know about germ theory now more than then, I mean, realistically,
Speaker 1: we didn't I'm not mistaken.
Speaker 2: We didn't even know that there was.
Speaker 1: Different blood types until the late fifties, like real. So
Speaker 1: that being said, yeah, it's more of a esthetic thing,
Speaker 1: and there's religious reasons for some of it. I get
Speaker 1: that one hundred percent, But more often than not, it's
Speaker 1: an aesthetic thing and it is a just a preference thing.
Speaker 1: It's not it's not for the betterment of one's health
Speaker 1: like it once was, at least not in America. Now,
Speaker 1: some of these other countries on this list, some of
Speaker 1: them might have better hygiene practices than others. You know,
Speaker 1: that varies country to country, but it's there's not as
Speaker 1: much of a stigma on it now as it used
Speaker 1: to be, for sure, And I personally know more and
Speaker 1: more people that are like going out of their way
Speaker 1: to choose to not have their son circumcised. You know,
Speaker 1: I have my own opinion on that for my own
Speaker 1: personal religious reasons. But you know, I'm not Jewish. I'm
Speaker 1: not Jewish, but you know still that I think a
Speaker 1: little bit that holds true. But yeah, it's not like
Speaker 1: nobody's judging on this program regardless whatever somebody wants to
Speaker 1: choose to do with their children. Everybody's making their own
Speaker 1: choices as best they can. Here, all right, let's move on, Anthony.
Speaker 1: Ever since India and Pakistan are prepping for war, I
Speaker 1: have not received any spam calls, So let them go
Speaker 1: at it. Ella, Yo, Anthony, he left earlier, but you
Speaker 1: know you might be onto something. I haven't received one
Speaker 1: spam call since the shots started getting fired. So I'm
Speaker 1: not saying that there's a connection. I'm just saying that
Speaker 1: it's a funny coincidence. And you know, I'm okay with that, Raven.
Speaker 1: I saw your hand raise. Go ahead, Okay, maybe not.
Speaker 8: I I was trying to get to it. I was
Speaker 8: looking at statistics on a type of disorder for penises considered.
Speaker 8: Since you're I.
Speaker 1: Can hear him, okay, kind of cutting in and out
Speaker 1: on that one, Raven. I don't know what the situation
Speaker 1: is there, but you were looking at penis disorders. Felt
Speaker 1: like that was about to be a very charged conversation.
Speaker 9: Okay, can you hear me now?
Speaker 2: I can?
Speaker 9: Okay, No, So I was looking at statistics because so
Speaker 9: speaking of like different countries, hypospadism is a type of
Speaker 9: disorder where your urethra hole is not where it's supposed
Speaker 9: to be and it's actually gained. I wouldn't I'm not
Speaker 9: going to say a popularity, but it's gained traction, so
Speaker 9: there's a lot more people seeing cases. It's inherently a
Speaker 9: third world country problem. But what's interesting is starting to
Speaker 9: happen more and more in America as well, and they
Speaker 9: can't quite figure out, like what the contributing factor did
Speaker 9: actors are? Is it like an environmental thing? Is it
Speaker 9: what we're ingesting? Is it vaccines? Like what is causing it?
Speaker 9: But there are disorders. I think when the conversation comes
Speaker 9: about when and I didn't hear her entire four hour
Speaker 9: thing about what she said. I and my phone broke
Speaker 9: up earlier, so I didn't get to hear all of
Speaker 9: what you guys talked about. But there is just like
Speaker 9: natural birth that is a huge thing that's making a
Speaker 9: way with everyone. Is like they are not circumcising their
Speaker 9: shild anymore. But what I find interesting is that the
Speaker 9: rise of the need to circumcise. So like with hypospatus correction,
Speaker 9: you use a foreskin to create a penis head to
Speaker 9: be able to put the urethra where it needs to be,
Speaker 9: and so like there's more need for that because there's
Speaker 9: more cases happening. On the other hand, there is a
Speaker 9: lot of people that are deciding not to circumcise because
Speaker 9: it's they don't want to take the autonomy away from
Speaker 9: the child.
Speaker 8: So it all kind of is tying in.
Speaker 9: With natural birth as well. And that's what I was
Speaker 9: trying to get to it before you guys moved on.
Speaker 8: But I was like, damn, so yeah, I feel that.
Speaker 2: I mean, I get it.
Speaker 1: My former father in law, as a matter of fact,
Speaker 1: he had to have I mean, this is within the
Speaker 1: realm of the circumcision conversation, but kind of adjacent in
Speaker 1: a way. So long story short, he caught swine flu
Speaker 1: back when that was like the thing that they thought
Speaker 1: was going to be.
Speaker 2: The new plague.
Speaker 4: Right.
Speaker 1: He is the only human being I know that actually
Speaker 1: caught it and almost died because of it. He was
Speaker 1: laid up in the hospital for months and months, had bedsores.
Speaker 1: He had to have skin grafts put on, And where
Speaker 1: they got the skin grafts from was stem cells from
Speaker 1: the foreskins of circumcised babies. They you know, the parents
Speaker 1: that opted to let the foreskins be used for medical
Speaker 1: research and whatever else. They were actually able to take
Speaker 1: them and use stem cells from that to make skins.
Speaker 1: So I I see the benefit to it of using
Speaker 1: that for good purposes. I mean, there's there's a lot
Speaker 1: of levels to this. One hundred percent Royce, go ahead, sir.
Speaker 4: So just for just.
Speaker 5: On the religious aspect of it, pretty much anybody who's
Speaker 5: not Jewish, I think doesn't need to be. I mean
Speaker 5: the obviously that's everybody's prerogative and their choice in general,
Speaker 5: at least where it came from, at least how I
Speaker 5: always taught, or how the Jews believe it originally came
Speaker 5: from from Abraham was the covenant between you know, him
Speaker 5: and God and the Jewish people.
Speaker 4: So that's one of those things.
Speaker 5: However, even in Judaism and sol believe they talk about
Speaker 5: if there are people that have died from circumcisions in
Speaker 5: the past, that you know, you should not get your
Speaker 5: sun cervicised circumcised. So there are cases even in Judaism
Speaker 5: where people, even though they should get circumcises, there are.
Speaker 4: Medical reasons in which you know they don't.
Speaker 5: So but you know, anybody who's not Jewish, like, it's
Speaker 5: for sure a choice, Yeah.
Speaker 2: For sure, for sure.
Speaker 1: I actually was just reading, uh, I forgot about that
Speaker 1: part in the Bible where David made a covenant with
Speaker 1: God and he had to get a hundred was it
Speaker 1: Philistine foreskins something like that.
Speaker 2: Yeah, something like that.
Speaker 1: And they were talking about in that Flagrant episode with
Speaker 1: Wes Halff, and it's like, bro, how do you get that?
Speaker 1: He's like with a sword, he did what like, look,
Speaker 1: God said he needed one hundred four skins from these people,
Speaker 1: and David was about all the smoke.
Speaker 2: So you know, he did what he had to do.
Speaker 1: And I thought that was a of all the flexes
Speaker 1: that you could have done for your God like that.
Speaker 2: You know, I'm here for it.
Speaker 1: I'm here for that as fuck the Philistines, you know, Philistines,
Speaker 1: however you want to pronounce that anyway, super off topic.
Speaker 1: We could totally move on here. Let's see here. Ooh,
Speaker 1: kind of on topic though. Zombie aka raven Le shared
Speaker 1: this other article.
Speaker 2: It's fascinating.
Speaker 1: At the height of US slavery, seventy eight of the
Speaker 1: slave owners were Jewish. Seventy eight percent of the slave
Speaker 1: owners were Jewish. Since only one point six of the
Speaker 1: total population owned slaves, and the Jews made up three
Speaker 1: point one two five percent of the population, this means
Speaker 1: that forty percent of the Jews owned slaves in America
Speaker 1: while only point three to five percent of White's own slaves.
Speaker 1: Now that's at the height of it. And I'm gonna
Speaker 1: be honest, I've never heard this personally. I know that
Speaker 1: the South were not really fond of Jewish people, but
Speaker 1: to be fair, neither was the North. Ulysses as Grant,
Speaker 1: who was a you want to call him a big
Speaker 1: time general of the Union, he was a unker that
Speaker 1: got lucky and kind of Robert E. Lee dropped the
Speaker 1: ball and Ulysses S. Grant was there to pick it up.
Speaker 1: It's not that Ulysses S. Grant was like a good general.
Speaker 1: He was a He was a clown that was in
Speaker 1: the right place at the right time too many times.
Speaker 1: He wrote a essay on the Jews and he hated them, big.
Speaker 2: Big anti Semite.
Speaker 1: So maybe there was something to be said for that,
Speaker 1: Maybe because he thought that most of the slave owners
Speaker 1: in the South were Jewish.
Speaker 2: I don't know.
Speaker 1: As we as we watch documentaries that could or may
Speaker 1: or may not have been based off of true events
Speaker 1: like Django Unchained, I have a hard time seeing Leo
Speaker 1: DiCaprio's character being Jewish. But like I don't know that
Speaker 1: for a fact, I do a lot of things unpack
Speaker 1: on this one. Everybody please chime in, Tony, what you got.
Speaker 3: Yeah, if I remember the anecdote right, Ulysses S. Grant
Speaker 3: was trying to occupy some town in one of the Carolinas,
Speaker 3: and some of the Jewish residents were smuggling things and
Speaker 3: circumventing the blockade on the south. So he kicked them
Speaker 3: all out of that town. But then I think Lincoln
Speaker 3: overrode him, and then I was not aware of he
Speaker 3: Grant wrote anything antisemitic or not, But in that one instance,
Speaker 3: that's the one anecdote I remember. As for the slave ownership,
Speaker 3: I've seen figures ranging from the slave traders being like
Speaker 3: ten percent to fifty percent Jewish. I don't know what
Speaker 3: to believe. They had a lot down in South America too,
Speaker 3: in Guyana, for example, Yeah, there was a big Jewish
Speaker 3: colony there and it's not there anymore because it actually
Speaker 3: perished in a slave uprising. But in the context of
Speaker 3: North America, I don't know how represented or overrepresented they
Speaker 3: might have been in the slave trade, but I've seen
Speaker 3: numbers that very widely with the bias of the presenter,
Speaker 3: for sure.
Speaker 1: Sure, And I do know for a fact, I've read
Speaker 1: the paper that Ulysses as Grant wrote, and it's scathing,
Speaker 1: is being very kind. He was hateful towards the Jews,
Speaker 1: and maybe it does go back to that smuggling situation.
Speaker 1: Maybe there was something that he was brought up believing
Speaker 1: on this maybe had to do with the slave trade.
Speaker 2: I have no idea.
Speaker 1: What his like, what his stigma against them was, but
Speaker 1: he absolutely was a vehement anti semi which is crazy
Speaker 1: to me that anybody of the North had any kind
Speaker 1: of real, like inherent racism, because Abraham Lincoln was a
Speaker 1: malungion like he was a mixed race individual himself, and
Speaker 1: you know, and I'm not sure if that was like
Speaker 1: mixed with Native blood or if he was part black
Speaker 1: or whatever the case was. I'm sure there's some expert
Speaker 1: that's gone back and pulled DNA samples and all this.
Speaker 2: But like.
Speaker 1: You know, and I also love the belief that he
Speaker 1: was a high functioning autistic as well, along with Stonewall Jackson.
Speaker 1: As you read some of the journals and reports from
Speaker 1: their contemporaries, I think that these were like high functioning
Speaker 1: either aspergers or autism or some sort of like social disorder.
Speaker 1: Their brains were next level on certain regards, but also
Speaker 1: like they were not quote unquote normal men by any
Speaker 1: of their contemporary standards. So I mean, I don't know,
Speaker 1: but you listened that Grant. Yeah, he was a drunkard
Speaker 1: who got to that position because early in his career
Speaker 1: he was a pretty solid soldier. Then he crawled into
Speaker 1: the bottle around the rank of major and didn't leave
Speaker 1: it until he left the presidency, if he left it
Speaker 1: at all. So I mean, you know, I don't know
Speaker 1: there's things on that, Raven.
Speaker 2: I saw your hand raise, go ahead.
Speaker 8: I was just gonna say that, like, and I just
Speaker 8: dropped that in the chat. I don't actually believe that.
Speaker 8: I just was said that by people. Lots of anti
Speaker 8: Jew stuff being like circulated through the interwebs, and I
Speaker 8: get that constantly from people send me stuff. It seems
Speaker 8: like there's a heavy push in the conspiracy community that
Speaker 8: there is a lot of like anti Jew stuff. So
Speaker 8: I just wanted since you guys were talking about it,
Speaker 8: I was like, well, here's what I just was sent
Speaker 8: like twenty minutes ago. So you know, I don't actually
Speaker 8: particularly believe in it, but it is something that's being
Speaker 8: shared quite often.
Speaker 1: Yeah, in the conspiracy world, it is like it's in
Speaker 1: vogue to hate the Jews.
Speaker 2: Again.
Speaker 1: I personally don't like that at all, but yeah, I'm serious.
Speaker 1: I'm gonna start like keeping a tracker of every episode
Speaker 1: of the Cult of Conspiracy when we have like a
Speaker 1: guest on and just like, see how many episodes per
Speaker 1: month we have a person blaming the Jews for one
Speaker 1: thing or another because like, for instance, we all know
Speaker 1: the Jews control the weather, and it's like, bro okay,
Speaker 1: like that's a joke. You hear conspiracy stand up comics
Speaker 1: make that joke all of the time. I've heard I
Speaker 1: don't know how many of them there. Ari Shafir has
Speaker 1: been a part of a roast and the guy will
Speaker 1: get up and be like, I want to thank Ari
Speaker 1: Shafir and his people for allowing us good weather to
Speaker 1: have this today, and the crowd laughs.
Speaker 2: It's a joke. But my god, so many people.
Speaker 1: Are no longer joking when they make crazy claims like this.
Speaker 2: And you know, yes, I understand the roth Childs are Jewish.
Speaker 1: Yes, I understand that Lennon was a Jew and the
Speaker 1: I get that, but we're also talking about like way
Speaker 1: down the bloodline Jewish. It's not like these people are
Speaker 1: like going to temple and like celebrating Hanukkah and shit.
Speaker 2: But yeah, Tony, go ahead, bro.
Speaker 3: Yeah, I got a little bit more. I was looking
Speaker 3: into this. There's a website called Reform Judaism dot org
Speaker 3: with a long article on Ulysses S. Grant, and it
Speaker 3: says that he kind of evolved his position. So by
Speaker 3: the time he was president, he quote spoke out forcefully
Speaker 3: against an order expelling two thousand Jews from border border
Speaker 3: areas of Russia following persecution of Jews in Romania in
Speaker 3: eighteen seventy, So it seems like he changed his mind
Speaker 3: a bunch, but a lot of his his letter or
Speaker 3: his order is quoted up top from eighteen sixty two.
Speaker 3: He apparently wrote the Jews as a class violating every
Speaker 3: regulation of trade established by the Treasury Department, and also
Speaker 3: Department orders, are hereby expelled from the Department. Within twenty
Speaker 3: four hours from receipt of disorder, post commanders will see
Speaker 3: that all of this class of people be furnished passes
Speaker 3: and required to leave, and anyone returning after such notice
Speaker 3: will be arrested and held in confinement until an opportunity
Speaker 3: occurs of sending them out as prisoners dot dot dim.
Speaker 1: Okay, so you're saying that, yeah, during the war, that
Speaker 1: was his position, but then towards the I'm trying to
Speaker 1: remember when the first Russian pogram happened against the Jews,
Speaker 1: but that sounds like it was actually around the time
Speaker 1: where he was president, and we're talking like the two
Speaker 1: thousand people that were being like exiled from the border
Speaker 1: areas of Russia that he was spoke out against.
Speaker 2: So his position changed, Okay.
Speaker 3: Yeah, he was elected president in eighteen sixty nine. The
Speaker 3: Russian situation with the collapse of the Polish Lithuanian Commonwealth
Speaker 3: in seventeen ninety eight, meant the Russian Empire took over
Speaker 3: a lot of territory with a lot of Jews in it.
Speaker 3: It was called the Palist Settlement. They weren't supposed to leave,
Speaker 3: but it was a very poorous border and it was
Speaker 3: kind of like how illegal immigrants can come to the
Speaker 3: United States and have for decades. And you know, Jews
Speaker 3: couldn't move about with some freedom in Russia, but they
Speaker 3: weren't supposed to, and they mostly stayed in the western
Speaker 3: parts in what is now Ukraine, Belarus, Poland and Romania,
Speaker 3: and that's where it's talking about here in eighteen seventy.
Speaker 1: Okay, Royce, I'm actually going to ask you to weigh
Speaker 1: in on this one. You everybody's heard me make the
Speaker 1: jokes about the Gypsies and how they're actually the ones
Speaker 1: running the world. It's a joke doing the good Aroma
Speaker 1: gypsies listening good God.
Speaker 2: There's no hatred being set. It's all in jest.
Speaker 1: That being said, you know what does the Jews take
Speaker 1: on the Gypsies like as a whole? I know you
Speaker 1: can only speak for yourself, but does judaism in as
Speaker 1: a whole have an opinion.
Speaker 2: On the Roma?
Speaker 5: I don't believe so. I mean, in the orthologic circles
Speaker 5: that I've roamed in, I've never heard them be brought
Speaker 5: up like most Jews are trying to study Taura. Do
Speaker 5: midst of us have a family to go to school,
Speaker 5: serve god like and do their business so like I.
Speaker 4: Would? Don't?
Speaker 3: I'll okay, I do have one little thing on this.
Speaker 3: Have you ever seen the TV series Car fifty four,
Speaker 3: a black and white TV show from the early sixties.
Speaker 3: It was made by Nat and Gerald Hiken. I believe
Speaker 3: they were Jewish, but and some Jewish stuff comes up
Speaker 3: in it, like bar Mitzvah's and it's treated very nicely.
Speaker 3: But they had this one episode called the Gypsy Curse.
Speaker 3: With all the Gypsy stereotypes, you can imagine it very
Speaker 3: very negative, like what are you doing, son, You're getting
Speaker 3: a job, You'll be kicked out of the family. You're
Speaker 3: not supposed to get a job, You're supposed to steal.
Speaker 1: Yeah, oh, those old Gypsy stereotypes for sure. And I
Speaker 1: mean there's stereotypes for Jewish people and apparently Polish people,
Speaker 1: like I didn't realize that Poland was seen as the
Speaker 1: Florida of Europe, but like that that is one hundred percent,
Speaker 1: so the whole the they're seen as and taking the
Speaker 1: good Polish people listening.
Speaker 2: Don't get mad at me.
Speaker 1: I didn't make the stereotype there seems like the dumbest
Speaker 1: of the whites and the heaviest of drinkers outside of
Speaker 1: the Irish. But apparently the Pollocks and I've you hear
Speaker 1: movies and you see these references where they dropped these
Speaker 1: like racial slurs towards Polish people. And I've always grown
Speaker 1: up thinking like, I had no idea there was racism
Speaker 1: towards Polish people. That's a new one on me. Same
Speaker 1: with the Gypsies. But yeah, yeah, okay, fair enough.
Speaker 3: Well even here in the US they used to be
Speaker 3: all the football players they were Polish. There was this
Speaker 3: episode of The Jetsons where there was this football game
Speaker 3: in the future and all the football players were robots,
Speaker 3: but they still all had Polish names like Kotchinski and
Speaker 3: potent Ski.
Speaker 2: They were all Skis. Yeah, yes, indeed.
Speaker 1: I remember when I was in the Marine Corps there
Speaker 1: was a couple of buddies that we were having this
Speaker 1: conversation one day and they were like, you know, they
Speaker 1: were trying to figure out their family lineage.
Speaker 2: You were trying to.
Speaker 1: Guess based off of how people look, because that's what
Speaker 1: you do. And pretty much I was like, dude, you're white,
Speaker 1: your last name ends in a vowel, you're Italian. And
Speaker 1: you're like, wait what, And I'm like, unless your last
Speaker 1: name is Ski, then you're Polish. Other than that, you're
Speaker 1: it's like a ninety five percent shot that if your
Speaker 1: last name ends in a vowel and you're white, you're
Speaker 1: of Irish or I'm sorry of Italian or Sicilian descent,
Speaker 1: and that was accurate. That was accurate Ski. And there's
Speaker 1: a few examples from Germany and France, but for the
Speaker 1: most part that's a standard rule. So yeah, when you
Speaker 1: see a ski, it's understood that's a that's a pollock.
Speaker 1: But also in the realm of talking about you versus
Speaker 1: Gypsy Royce, one more question and I don't know how
Speaker 1: this plays into you, right, So for example, in the
Speaker 1: Italian community, everybody looks for some sort of a connection
Speaker 1: in their family lineage to the Italian mafia. Right, Sometimes
Speaker 1: there is, sometimes there's not. There was a pretty substantial
Speaker 1: Jewish mafia in America for a good while there, I
Speaker 1: mean mayer Lansky being one of the most famous people
Speaker 1: that was of Jewish descent that was involved with the mafia.
Speaker 1: Gypsies also had their own version of a mafia. Irish
Speaker 1: did too, all all the things, all the people, all
Speaker 1: the marginalized groups.
Speaker 2: And I get that. Is that a thing in the
Speaker 2: Jewish community, like in.
Speaker 1: Today's world that people try to look back and see
Speaker 1: if they had a connection to some sort of like
Speaker 1: a Jewish mafia element or is that seen as like
Speaker 1: like something that people don't even want to be associated
Speaker 1: with How is that viewed?
Speaker 5: I'll probably imagine this family by family, I think, So
Speaker 5: I don't, frankly, I don't know. I was never really
Speaker 5: I was never brought up religious exactly, and so I
Speaker 5: can't tell you. I tell you who was raised, you know,
Speaker 5: religious from birth, who was in or fox their entire life.
Speaker 4: Life my general associally, it would be through.
Speaker 5: The family, like, oh, by the way, you know, you're
Speaker 5: a great grandfather or great great or whatever had ties
Speaker 5: or through that.
Speaker 10: That's why I think fair enough, I think, yeah, I
Speaker 10: was just curious.
Speaker 1: Yeah, my ex wife was Sicilian, so she had like
Speaker 1: three uncles that were involved in the mafia in New
Speaker 1: Orleans and they all were under Carlos Marsalis. So I mean,
Speaker 1: like that's a thing within the Italian and Sicilian community.
Speaker 2: Now a lot of them hate that.
Speaker 1: A lot of Italian Americans like don't want to be
Speaker 1: associated with that because that makes them look bad. The
Speaker 1: other side of that is like there's a sense of
Speaker 1: pride that comes with that being associated with something as
Speaker 1: powerful as Casinostra. So like, you know, all that included
Speaker 1: didn't know what that was like on the Jewish side
Speaker 1: of things.
Speaker 2: But that makes sense.
Speaker 1: You were brought up Messianic and then you went to
Speaker 1: more orthodox, so you Christian.
Speaker 4: Yeah yeah, wait say again Christian.
Speaker 1: Right, so you were kind of removed from the whole
Speaker 1: quote unquote jewness of things. So yeah, yeah, fair enough.
Speaker 1: All right, let's get back to the chat here, uh,
Speaker 1: says har G Royce. According to Jewish law, even one
Speaker 1: who owns slaves don't or not supposed to treat any
Speaker 1: slave with disrespect or some par the phrase acquire a slave,
Speaker 1: acquire a master because of all of the responsibilities a
Speaker 1: slave owner has.
Speaker 2: Okay, that's one of the things.
Speaker 1: By the way, Royce, we're gonna put a pin in
Speaker 1: this one, and me and you could talk about it offline,
Speaker 1: because I don't know if you have the capabilities of
Speaker 1: looking this up now.
Speaker 2: Apparently I don't.
Speaker 1: I don't know where it says this in the Talmud,
Speaker 1: but in the Talmud it says that if a Jewish
Speaker 1: slave master beats one of their slaves to death and
Speaker 1: they're exonerated by Talmudic law or something along those lines.
Speaker 1: I've heard Jonathan mention that so many times. I'm like,
Speaker 1: there's no way that's in the book. He's pulled it
Speaker 1: up before. I'm not sure if it's a misquote or
Speaker 1: what the context was, but that's one of the things
Speaker 1: that I've heard a lot of haters of the Jews
Speaker 1: bring up. As far as the talent it's concerned.
Speaker 11: So as you've said, like it's the place in time,
Speaker 11: Like some of these laws that are spoken about or
Speaker 11: things that are spoken about in there are not applicable right now,
Speaker 11: Like we don't have a temple.
Speaker 5: We don't we don't have a Sanhedrin, Like we don't
Speaker 5: have slaves, we don't have we don't administer the four.
Speaker 4: Ways of death. So like bringing up things.
Speaker 5: That are thousands of years ago, It's like, this is
Speaker 5: kind of gets on my nerves.
Speaker 2: Speaking of saying san Hedrin. Do I say it right?
Speaker 2: Good job, perfect, Finally got it right? All right.
Speaker 1: Have you heard of Rabbi mir Yakov hakkuk Hallivi.
Speaker 2: Apparently he is.
Speaker 1: The president of the.
Speaker 2: What they are now calling.
Speaker 1: The new sand Heedron, and they are trying to get
Speaker 1: him ready to perform the sacrifices when the temple is rebuilt.
Speaker 1: I've been seeing a lot of videos about this guy.
Speaker 1: He doesn't look like the priests from on high and
Speaker 1: he he doesn't adorn himself with like the fanciest and like, nah,
Speaker 1: he looks like your average Jewish dude living in Israel
Speaker 1: right now.
Speaker 2: But apparently this guy is the guy. Have you heard
Speaker 2: of him?
Speaker 4: So I have not, But also tell you, like you,
Speaker 4: unless there's a temple, you can't, like the high.
Speaker 5: Priest can't adorn himself with the garments, like there's a.
Speaker 4: Go for it.
Speaker 1: Go ahead, well, I mean, like yeah, to to go
Speaker 1: into the temple, into the Holy holies and perform the sacrifices.
Speaker 2: That's when he would wear the whole garb and stuff.
Speaker 2: I get that.
Speaker 1: I'm saying like he doesn't even as a regular guy.
Speaker 1: He's not dressed in like fine suits and like he's
Speaker 1: not some sort of super wealthy, well to do guy.
Speaker 2: He looks like your average Joe blow.
Speaker 1: But he is the dude that has been chosen and
Speaker 1: if I'm not mistaken, he is of the bloodline of Levi.
Speaker 1: He's a Cohen all the things, and he's like the
Speaker 1: dude that when the temple gets rebuilt, if it gets
Speaker 1: rebuilt in his lifetime, he is the guy that's going
Speaker 1: to be going in to perform the sacrifices. I didn't
Speaker 1: know if you had heard of him or anything about him.
Speaker 1: I would love to hear you two, since.
Speaker 4: You'll also send me an article later on.
Speaker 5: That would be very interesting that I believe, at least initially, maybe.
Speaker 10: The Coen guzzle is chosen. I don't know, but it's
Speaker 10: supposed to be like father or the son. But if
Speaker 10: the son isn't worthy of it, I think they can
Speaker 10: definitely choose somebody else. But there's a lot of things
Speaker 10: that would have to have happened. So the red the
Speaker 10: red heifer, that that's one.
Speaker 1: They got like nine of them right now, and they're
Speaker 1: trying to breed them to make.
Speaker 2: More of them.
Speaker 5: I mean so according to to what I just learned
Speaker 5: not too long ago, there's only ever been ten red
Speaker 5: heifers in history, or like nine, and there will be
Speaker 5: a tenth so like that have actually been used.
Speaker 4: For for the ashes. So there really haven't have not
Speaker 4: been very many of them.
Speaker 1: Yeah, because that's only a thing that happens the first
Speaker 1: go round to like consecrate the altar.
Speaker 2: It's not like the thing that happens yearly.
Speaker 6: So and right.
Speaker 5: So whenever they were when whenever all of the vessels
Speaker 5: were being concentrated from the tumble. You're right, so they
Speaker 5: were sprinkled. However, when somebody, after somebody has been made
Speaker 5: pure again after their time of impurity, you need to
Speaker 5: go out and be sprinkled. Yeah, so it's a it's
Speaker 5: supposed to happen with with a lot and you just
Speaker 5: basically just use a little.
Speaker 4: Bit of ash and then a lot of water and
Speaker 4: you know, dipping and stuff in the stuff.
Speaker 2: Yeah.
Speaker 1: So while things are happening, I will send you some
Speaker 1: articles about the guy. And I'm not like, I have
Speaker 1: no shade to throw at him. I know nothing about
Speaker 1: him of a positive or negative nature. He was, from
Speaker 1: what I've been given to understand, chosen by other rabbis
Speaker 1: his peer group to be the.
Speaker 2: High priest, so to speak.
Speaker 1: So I'm sure his credentials are long and his knowledge
Speaker 1: base is beyond repute.
Speaker 2: I'm sure of these things.
Speaker 1: But yeah, yeah, but anyway, yeah, we can talk more
Speaker 1: about that at a later time. Let's see here, Tony says,
Speaker 1: my wife has some issues. We have five kids, but
Speaker 1: probably won't have any more. Things started going wrong with
Speaker 1: the last press. See though our last child was fortunately healthy,
Speaker 1: we have also seen some horrible things with some of
Speaker 1: our friends. One couple son died during birth basically was
Speaker 1: on life support for one week and then pulled off.
Speaker 1: Another one has abrupted placenta. Oh yeah, yeah, absolutely, dude,
Speaker 1: Birthing is And that's the thing, man, Whenever you look
Speaker 1: back in the day to see that, like women had
Speaker 1: like a one and four shot of dying during childbirth
Speaker 1: your child, if it was a successful childbirth. I mean, hell,
Speaker 1: some sort of fever, some sort of anything could just
Speaker 1: take them out a moment's notice. So when you look
Speaker 1: back in time, you see these farmers had like fifteen
Speaker 1: kids and stuff, It's like, so, how many of them
Speaker 1: lived to adulthood five And it's like, uh oh, oh, okay, sure,
Speaker 1: But like that was that was human nature for the
Speaker 1: vast majority of human history as a matter of fact.
Speaker 2: So yeah, that's the thing.
Speaker 1: I feel like we as humanity, not just in America
Speaker 1: but across the world, are in a really good place
Speaker 1: as far as the We have all of the natural
Speaker 1: sources of things that we can and should be using
Speaker 1: at our disposal, but we also have the miraculous world
Speaker 1: of modern medicine that can save so many lives.
Speaker 2: And I think that we're in a really good place.
Speaker 1: But because of that, a lot of people are not
Speaker 1: having as many children as they did back in the day,
Speaker 1: you know, and a lot, like you said, complications have
Speaker 1: come up these days, and men are not just like
Speaker 1: willing to lose their wives because that's just.
Speaker 2: How childbirth works, like you know.
Speaker 1: It's yeah, a lot of things have come a long
Speaker 1: way as far as that's concerned. Alexandra, he banned Lucky Charms.
Speaker 1: Oh hell no, I'm gonna come. Yeah, I'm with you.
Speaker 1: I love Lucky Charms. I don't even eat much cereal
Speaker 1: these days, but if I do have my choice, like
Speaker 1: Lucky Charms is a solid grab. But you make saying
Speaker 1: marshmallows being so dangerous, all the dies being in this
Speaker 1: mixed so dangerous, even the grain part of that, because
Speaker 1: as general mills, you know, it's good, it's whole grain.
Speaker 1: When you look at those themselves, that's mostly like cardboard
Speaker 1: and filler product too, it's not good. I love the taste,
Speaker 1: but I think that's the point. All the things we
Speaker 1: listed tasted great, but apparently they're killing.
Speaker 2: Us slowly, so, you know.
Speaker 1: But there's what's that one cereal company they sponsor so
Speaker 1: many YouTube channels with it real spoon, I think it's
Speaker 1: called and they have healthy all natural alternatives to lucky
Speaker 1: charms for instances and all of these things. So like,
Speaker 1: there are other things that we could be consuming that
Speaker 1: are just as good but healthier, and hopefully possibly America
Speaker 1: could start shifting more into that direction, that would be amazing.
Speaker 1: Jackie says, it's crazy how dangerous food is here in America.
Speaker 1: Agreed one hundred percent. No more black force ham, not pumpkin.
Speaker 1: What's I if I hear beer on this list? I swear, oh, well,
Speaker 1: alex depends on the brand of beer. But there was
Speaker 1: actually a list that came out a few years back,
Speaker 1: and it showed all the horrible ingredients in most of
Speaker 1: the beer products, right. A lot of it was grains
Speaker 1: that were sourced with GMO, and you know, the genetically
Speaker 1: modified grains that were going into the beer, which is
Speaker 1: never necessarily a good thing. And I saw Guinness on
Speaker 1: the list, which is my you know, beer of choice.
Speaker 1: Guinness on tap Cannon bottle is gross. Fresh Guinness on
Speaker 1: tap is beyond comparing, my opinion, and the ingredient in
Speaker 1: it that they were saying was so bad it was
Speaker 1: like a product that was a byproduct of a fish bladder.
Speaker 1: And I wasn't mad at that because it still sounds
Speaker 1: like a natural source to me. So like, okay, I'm
Speaker 1: good with that now. I love blue raspberry flavored candy
Speaker 1: and that's sourced from the anal glands of beavers, So
Speaker 1: I mean like, it sounds like it's a natural source
Speaker 1: to me, So.
Speaker 2: I'm not you know, that didn't shake me.
Speaker 1: But uh yeah, Bush and most most Anheuser Busch products,
Speaker 1: cores h Miller. These were all on the list of
Speaker 1: things that we probably shouldn't be ingesting.
Speaker 2: But again, this is Amurica.
Speaker 1: We're gonna drink what we're gonna drink, So yeah, I'm
Speaker 1: not too worried about it at this point.
Speaker 2: Let me see here. Merlin shared a picture.
Speaker 1: What is this China science deal with Russia to build
Speaker 1: a power plant on the moon, potentially leaving the US
Speaker 1: in debt. Oh, for the love of God, Merlin, please
Speaker 1: tell me you read this article and have some more
Speaker 1: context on this.
Speaker 2: Please, Merlin, you with us, sir? There you go?
Speaker 12: Yeah, yeah, no, not yet. I was reading that Alchemist
Speaker 12: when I saw last night we're into.
Speaker 2: That alchemists wanted to saw that interesting.
Speaker 13: What do you mean, Oh, well, I saw this reads
Speaker 13: this article where they're saying at certain they basically prove
Speaker 13: that you can turn lead into gold by removing protons.
Speaker 1: Yeah yeah, yeah, so they're splitting the atom and reconfiguring
Speaker 1: it to make it a new element.
Speaker 2: But it's only temporary.
Speaker 12: Yeah, but how did alchemists in the past even though
Speaker 12: that would be a possibility.
Speaker 1: So, and I'm not trying to throw shade on alchemy,
Speaker 1: because I do believe that that is the basis.
Speaker 2: For what we would now call chemistry and true science.
Speaker 1: The oldest written alchemical text is essentially a book of
Speaker 1: what we would now call how could I say this
Speaker 1: without sounding insulting, sleight of hand, how to make things
Speaker 1: look like there's something else when it's not there was,
Speaker 1: And again this is before the oldest text has nothing.
Speaker 2: Spiritual about it whatsoever.
Speaker 1: Now, alchemy absolutely went into the realm of spirituality as well,
Speaker 1: especially when you look at Mary the Jew or Maria
Speaker 1: the Jew, or whatever you want to call her. She
Speaker 1: was the mother of modern alchemy, and if I'm not mistaken,
Speaker 1: she's the one that created distillation and invented.
Speaker 2: The double boiler.
Speaker 1: As a matter of fact, the way she was writing
Speaker 1: things is when it started getting more into the esoteric
Speaker 1: and spiritual side of things. But basically, if you read
Speaker 1: what she wrote in the context that she was actually
Speaker 1: writing it, and remove our modern interpretations of the words
Speaker 1: and look at what she was saying, she was talking
Speaker 1: about a divine masculine and divine feminine. If you look
Speaker 1: at what she wrote next to the equations that she
Speaker 1: had wrote out on the side of it, we would
Speaker 1: call that you mix an acid with a base and
Speaker 1: you would get assault from that, and then you would
Speaker 1: purify that salt to create a new element. But per
Speaker 1: the wording that she was using at the time, it
Speaker 1: was a divine masculine and a divine feminine to create
Speaker 1: a new a She I think even used the term
Speaker 1: virgin offspring or virgin birth of a new thing. It's
Speaker 1: the way she was writing. It was very, very esoteric,
Speaker 1: and she was doing that on purpose. But she also
Speaker 1: believed in most alchemists, true alchemists, not Middle Ages, not
Speaker 1: those guys the originators of alchemy, believed that you could
Speaker 1: only perform it if you were not doing it in Hebrew,
Speaker 1: then it wasn't true alchemy. And if you weren't doing
Speaker 1: it during a certain month of the year, which was
Speaker 1: somewhere between the middle of March to the middle of April.
Speaker 1: Then it was not going to work for you anyway.
Speaker 1: But the earliest, the earliest, earliest, earliest source that we
Speaker 1: have is from Egypt, and basically it shows you how
Speaker 1: to take a silver spoon and you put it in
Speaker 1: this liquid and stir it around a little bit and
Speaker 1: it comes out looking gold. It was the earliest form
Speaker 1: of what we would currently call like plating. And it
Speaker 1: wasn't plating it with gold either. It was literally just
Speaker 1: to give the appearance of gold. It was for like
Speaker 1: the sleight of hand or the practical magic quote unquote
Speaker 1: of ancient Egypt, and it was nothing spiritual whatsoever. It's
Speaker 1: like a eighty page document and each page has different
Speaker 1: methods and things that you could do to make things
Speaker 1: look like they transform, but not necessarily.
Speaker 2: When you started getting more.
Speaker 1: Into the chemical compounds and the breakdowns that were started
Speaker 1: to happen around the turn of the millennia, right when
Speaker 1: we're going from like one hundred BC to one hundred AD.
Speaker 1: I'll even give you the wide birth of two hundred
Speaker 1: BC to like five hundred AD. This is when they
Speaker 1: were really starting to get down and dirty with what
Speaker 1: we would now call like early chemistry. Cut to the
Speaker 1: Renaissance and into the Middle eight where the Age of
Speaker 1: Enlightenment was happening, and these people were mixing true spiritual
Speaker 1: esotericness with true chemical alchemy. I don't know of any
Speaker 1: that successfully created new elements from the experiments that they
Speaker 1: were doing in the day and age, but I mean
Speaker 1: even I mean China. That's how they got gunpowder. They
Speaker 1: were trying to create the elixir of life, the fountain
Speaker 1: of youth, and they ended up making gunpowder. Isaac Newton,
Speaker 1: the guy who, if I'm not mistaken, invented calculus to
Speaker 1: explain the stars, he died from drinking mercury because a
Speaker 1: part of it was something called spiritual water, which is water,
Speaker 1: but it's mixed with mercury and it's mixed with a
Speaker 1: couple of other elements to create some sort of solution
Speaker 1: that you would use in a lot of alchemy. And
Speaker 1: he drank that because he believed that it was the
Speaker 1: elixir of life, and he died from it. And then
Speaker 1: as far as transfiguring one element to another, we just
Speaker 1: did an episode on monotomic gold and loidal silver. The
Speaker 1: guy who invented ormus or monotomic gold, essentially was taking
Speaker 1: an element and shoving so much electricity through it that
Speaker 1: it was temporarily breaking off electrons from their outermost ring,
Speaker 1: and it was reading that it was turning into gold.
Speaker 1: And it was until he turned the machine off and
Speaker 1: tried to take the gold out of it, and it
Speaker 1: was no longer gold. It's only like a temporary thing.
Speaker 1: But it to that point, I would say that that
Speaker 1: is true alchemy. At least for that split second, you
Speaker 1: turned one element into another. And that's kind of what
Speaker 1: CERN's doing too.
Speaker 2: It's fascinating.
Speaker 1: Yeah, yeah, Sorry I went on a crazy long tangent
Speaker 1: on them, but yeah, I find alchemy to be extremely fascinating.
Speaker 1: I think that a lot of people put way more
Speaker 1: weight behind it than what it's due. But then in
Speaker 1: another regard, a lot of people just dismissed it as
Speaker 1: wu wu hook them, and it's like, no, there's this
Speaker 1: is true science, you know, just because they use a
Speaker 1: spiritual sigil to you know, be the symbol on the
Speaker 1: equation for something that they didn't fully understand. They knew
Speaker 1: at least there was something happening that was beyond their
Speaker 1: scope of the technology they had at their hands at
Speaker 1: that moment, but they knew that there was something there.
Speaker 2: So yeah, I find alchemy to be just fascinating anyway.
Speaker 1: With SERN doing what they're doing though, Bro, one second,
Speaker 1: they're over here splitting time portals and they got some
Speaker 1: sort of a living entity inside of the hydrant collider
Speaker 1: and all that. Now they're over here doing alchemy. They
Speaker 1: they're just doing the most over there.
Speaker 2: It's wild. Ah.
Speaker 1: So all right, is there more to that article that
Speaker 1: you read or not so much as far as the
Speaker 1: China the power plant on the Moon with Russia.
Speaker 2: That's that's pretty wild.
Speaker 4: Wow, remember to help my life with a few things.
Speaker 2: But heard that was dark?
Speaker 4: Was that part?
Speaker 2: Now? I'm just curious.
Speaker 1: Now I'm gonna google that on my own because okay,
Speaker 1: China and Russia Moon power plan.
Speaker 2: Let's just see what comes up on the old jujul.
Speaker 8: Ah.
Speaker 1: Oh yeah, nope, that is that is a real thing
Speaker 1: that is happening. Shut up. Okay, yep, we're gonna have
Speaker 1: to talk about this one.
Speaker 2: Let's do it.
Speaker 1: We' go go ahead and share the screen at this time,
Speaker 1: and let's learn a little something together. Good uh nights
Speaker 1: members of the round table. So this is from LiveScience
Speaker 1: dot com. China Science deal with Russia to build a
Speaker 1: power plant on the Moon, potentially leaving the US in
Speaker 1: the dust. A new memorandum has firmed up China and
Speaker 1: Russia's intent to lead the construction of a new lunar base,
Speaker 1: to be completed by twenty thirty six, as NASA talks
Speaker 1: about scaling back its own louterar ambitions. Well, yeah, NASA
Speaker 1: has to because SpaceX just trounce.
Speaker 2: Them in every regard. But anyway, when.
Speaker 1: You let's see, Russia has signed to deal with China
Speaker 1: to build a nuclear power plant on the Moon. The
Speaker 1: Russian reactor will be used to power the International Lunar
Speaker 1: Research Station the ILRS, jointly led by China and Russia,
Speaker 1: and should be completed by twenty thirty six, according to
Speaker 1: a memorandum of cooperations signed by the two nations. The
Speaker 1: announcement comes we just kind of read that one here.
Speaker 1: The construction of the Chinese Russian reactor will lightly be
Speaker 1: carried out autonomously without the presence of humans.
Speaker 2: According to a twenty.
Speaker 1: Twenty four interview with Yuri Borisov, director General of Russia's
Speaker 1: space agency ross Cosmos. Yeah, on the Russian state owned
Speaker 1: news site THASS. While details of how this can be
Speaker 1: achieved remained unclear, Borsov added that the technology steps are
Speaker 1: almost ready. The station will conduct fundamental space research and
Speaker 1: test technology for long term uncrewed operations of the ILRS with.
Speaker 2: The prospect of a human beings presence on the Moon.
Speaker 1: Roskamoas wrote on in a May eighth announcement following the
Speaker 1: signing of the memorandum.
Speaker 2: The new research station, a permanent, manned lunar base located
Speaker 2: on the Moon's south pole, has so far attracted seventeen
Speaker 2: countries to join the program, including Egypt, Pakistan, Venezuela, Thailand,
Speaker 2: and South Africa. Yeah. I feel like it would. Yeah.
Speaker 1: I can see more bricks nations coming forward on this one, honestly.
Speaker 1: Its groundwork will be laid by China's twenty twenty eight
Speaker 1: Chung changey eight mission, which will be the nation's first
Speaker 1: time landing an astronaut on the lunar surface.
Speaker 4: Wow.
Speaker 1: The roadmap for the ILRS was first unveiled in June
Speaker 1: twenty twenty one, with China and Russias announcing they would
Speaker 1: lofty pieces for a robotic moon base using five super
Speaker 1: heavy lift rockets launched from twenty thirty to twenty thirty five.
Speaker 1: Once these basic pieces are established, China plans additional launches
Speaker 1: that will extend the base further, connecting it to a
Speaker 1: space station orbiting the Moon and two nodes located at
Speaker 1: the Moon's equator and its far side. Wu yan Hua,
Speaker 1: the chief designer of the China's Deep Exploration project, said
Speaker 1: at a twenty twenty four media conference, According to a
Speaker 1: state media outlet, Jinhua, I'm probably mispronouncing those, but as Chinese,
Speaker 1: I don't speak it. The extended model laying the foundations
Speaker 1: for manned landings on Mars should be completed by twenty fifty.
Speaker 1: It will be powered by solar power, radio radiosotope, radioisotope
Speaker 1: excuse me.
Speaker 2: Be powered by solar, radioisotope and nuclear generators. Woo said.
Speaker 1: It will also include lunar Earth and high speed lunar
Speaker 1: surface communication networks, as well as lunar vehicles like a hopper,
Speaker 1: an unmanned long range vehicle, and pressurized and unpressurized manned
Speaker 1: rovers WHOA. The memorandum comes at a time of growing
Speaker 1: ambition for China space programs. The country has had lunar
Speaker 1: present since twenty thirteen, landing the Change three's mission, which
Speaker 1: placed a rover on the Moon. Subsequent missions landed more
Speaker 1: rovers on the Moon and Mars while collecting samples from
Speaker 1: the Moon's near and far sides and mapped out the
Speaker 1: lunar surface. China's race to build a lunar outpost has
Speaker 1: also also has an American rival in the Artemis program,
Speaker 1: which has recently beset by delays. Artemis three, which will
Speaker 1: see NASA's astronauts return to our nearest natural satellite for
Speaker 1: the first time in over fifty years, is expected to
Speaker 1: launch sometime in twenty twenty seven. Meanwhile, the future of
Speaker 1: NASA's own plan lunar space station, dubbed Gateway and initially
Speaker 1: slated for launch as soon as twenty twenty seven, has
Speaker 1: been thrown into question with the release of the Trump
Speaker 1: administration's proposed twenty twenty six budgets. The budget calls for
Speaker 1: the canceling of the Gateway mission, despite significant progress on
Speaker 1: building these station's modules. Wow, okay, I honestly didn't know
Speaker 1: that we were still trying to get to the Moon,
Speaker 1: but a lot to unpack.
Speaker 2: There, both Merlin and Tony got y'all's hand raised.
Speaker 1: Whoever wants to go first, go for it, No, right, Donny.
Speaker 3: Yeah. I was wondering how is this nuclear power going
Speaker 3: to work if it's using steam or not steam? Because
Speaker 3: the reason they use steam on Earth is waters everywhere,
Speaker 3: but you can't have water on the Moon. And I'm
Speaker 3: trying to google around and see how else they can
Speaker 3: make it work. I've heard of something called nuclear thermo
Speaker 3: electric generators, but those are only good for like a
Speaker 3: couple of watts, and they must be looking for more
Speaker 3: than that. The last thing is you pronounced shin hua
Speaker 3: pretty well, and I can teach you how to pronounce
Speaker 3: this romanized Chinese someday if you want.
Speaker 1: I might need your help on it, bro, because I've
Speaker 1: I've heard videos where these dudes pronounce it, but they
Speaker 1: also pronounce it where they thick Chinese accent, and I
Speaker 1: never really know if I'm doing it justice or not.
Speaker 1: So yeah shin whah okay? So the change three? Is
Speaker 1: that change three or chung e three?
Speaker 3: Sorry? Yeah, chuned uh. It's two syllables chung u.
Speaker 1: Chung uh Okay, not fair enough. You can't win them all,
Speaker 1: but I appreciate it. Uh Merlin, hand raised what you got?
Speaker 12: Okay, So it leaves me to speculate what do they
Speaker 12: what do they think is on the Moon that's going
Speaker 12: to help them with the power plant?
Speaker 6: Why do they need a power plant on the Moon?
Speaker 6: Where are they going to power?
Speaker 1: Like they're trying to make a lunar space station and
Speaker 1: they need power to operate it. So they're trying to
Speaker 1: build a nuclear power plant to power their lunar research lab.
Speaker 2: I guess I'm kind of what Tony on this.
Speaker 1: You need water in order to make a nuclear power
Speaker 1: plant work, because that's all it is, is a steam
Speaker 1: turbine essentially. I don't I don't know what they're trying
Speaker 1: to do here because water doesn't do water things in space,
Speaker 1: so unless they're trying to use But even that, even
Speaker 1: with that being said, like heat heat rises, but the
Speaker 1: Moon doesn't have the same gravity as Earth, So how
Speaker 1: does heat react as far as that goes like a
Speaker 1: heat generator? Does it go up? Does it go out?
Speaker 1: In all directions? I have no idea how they're trying
Speaker 1: to spin a turbine on the Moon with this type
Speaker 1: of power, But okay, right.
Speaker 6: And what I've been like, what happens if something explodes.
Speaker 4: On the Moon?
Speaker 2: I guess we lose the moon.
Speaker 1: I mean it's gonna stay accrescent for the rest of time, man,
Speaker 1: I mean I but even still like it. As I'm
Speaker 1: saying that, it's like, yeah, how many things have to
Speaker 1: go wrong to have a lunarture nobile?
Speaker 2: But also like, yo, how many things have to go wrong?
Speaker 1: Like could one thing go wrong and we have a
Speaker 1: lunar chernobyl situation?
Speaker 6: Yeah, then the moon has such an effect on Earth,
Speaker 6: you know, gravity like everything. Yeah, like they say, it's
Speaker 6: in the perfect position for us to actually be functioning,
Speaker 6: so something severe like I don't know, like how much
Speaker 6: weight you would have to add to the Moon or
Speaker 6: how much weight you have to take away from the
Speaker 6: Moon for it to start, you know, shifting positions. But
Speaker 6: none of this seems like a good idea, Like Mars.
Speaker 6: I cant nderstand Mars.
Speaker 12: It's really far away by all means, go be dumb,
Speaker 12: really far away from our homes.
Speaker 3: I agree, Yeah, I get one other thing. I think
Speaker 3: they're just going to use lots of solar panels. I
Speaker 3: was talking to a friend of mine who actually works
Speaker 3: on nuclear power plants, and he says the reason they
Speaker 3: don't do any kind of nuclear stuff up in space,
Speaker 3: even it's been speculated in the past we could launch
Speaker 3: you know, nuclear warheads up there just to orbit, orbit
Speaker 3: until we need them. But there's also risk in just
Speaker 3: putting them up there in the first place, because what
Speaker 3: if they blow up on the way up? Sure, because yeah,
Speaker 3: that will spread radiation all over the upper atmosphe and
Speaker 3: all over a white stretch of Earth. And if you
Speaker 3: try to get any enriched uranium or any other radioactive
Speaker 3: material all the way up to the Moon, there's always
Speaker 3: the probability it could explode on the way up, and
Speaker 3: that would be a large potential consequence. So that's another
Speaker 3: reason they might not do it.
Speaker 1: And we've talked about that on the Cult Dude Operation Fishbowl,
Speaker 1: when the US government started launching nukes into the sky
Speaker 1: and blowing them up. Just I've tried, I have tried
Speaker 1: finding what kind of research they were hoping to gain,
Speaker 1: What was the reason for doing that. The best answer
Speaker 1: I can find is just to see what would happen. Like,
Speaker 1: I cannot find one actual credible scientist that was like, oh,
Speaker 1: we were doing it to test this or to see
Speaker 1: what would happen with this. It was just to see
Speaker 1: just to see how far the radiation went spread and
Speaker 1: how big the blast would be. And you know why
Speaker 1: not so high up it wouldn't affect anybody. But but
Speaker 1: but I've also heard theories to say that that is
Speaker 1: where the whole and our ozone layer actually came from,
Speaker 1: was from America launching nukes at it. So I don't
Speaker 1: know that. For a fact, I don't think we need
Speaker 1: nuclear anything on the Moon. It would make way more
Speaker 1: sense to have solar panels. They don't have an atmosphere
Speaker 1: blocking off the Sun's rays. You could have an almost
Speaker 1: perfect energy supply of solar panels for that purpose. But
Speaker 1: the fact that because I know Live Science and they
Speaker 1: don't just it's not a tabloid type of website. They
Speaker 1: usually are reporting on the cutting edge of what's going
Speaker 1: on in the technological world.
Speaker 2: So for them to.
Speaker 1: Wow, for China and Russia to sign a memorandum to
Speaker 1: unanimously put a nuclear power plant on the Moon, there's
Speaker 1: so many questions, y'all.
Speaker 2: And I mean it's not even like, oh, they're colluding,
Speaker 2: like whatever.
Speaker 1: It could be anybody, It could be us, it could
Speaker 1: be us in the UK having this conversation, and the
Speaker 1: same questions would come into my mind. It's like, I
Speaker 1: don't I don't get it. I don't get it, Merlin,
Speaker 1: go ahead, all.
Speaker 12: Right, So the fantastical part of my brain they sitting
Speaker 12: here telling me that maybe that movie, that movie moon Fall,
Speaker 12: where the Moon is actually like a space station, a
Speaker 12: really old space station, and they're using a nuclear power
Speaker 12: plant to somewhat try to jump start it, and that's
Speaker 12: why they picked the south Pole because that's where the
Speaker 12: plugin spot is. Okay, that's It's just nothing that really
Speaker 12: makes sense, Like you're gonna use a power plant to
Speaker 12: power the moon station? But yeah, solar panels will work
Speaker 12: way more effectively.
Speaker 6: And the moon tip generally always gets hit with shit. Yeah,
Speaker 6: like you've got all those craters for a reason.
Speaker 2: Yeah, that's what are we.
Speaker 6: Going to protect a power plant with on the Moon?
Speaker 1: Yeah, I'm I don't know if this is them just
Speaker 1: trying to flex on other countries or if they're there
Speaker 1: is actually some sort of goal they're trying to achieve here,
Speaker 1: like something that we don't see just yet because we
Speaker 1: you know, we just don't have the mind for it yet.
Speaker 2: But like I'm with you.
Speaker 1: I just and even with solar panels, Let's say they
Speaker 1: were to make a solar farm on the moon, like
Speaker 1: same concept. The Moon gets hit with so much shit,
Speaker 1: so many media or so many asteroids, whatever, and it's
Speaker 1: not always big or small. There's no way you're gonna
Speaker 1: be able to repair those solar panels in space like
Speaker 1: you can only you only have the materials you brought
Speaker 1: up there with you. And I mean, I understand you
Speaker 1: have to be resourceful and figured out, but to what
Speaker 1: point and to what end? Like, I just I don't.
Speaker 1: I don't understand it personally. This may all be a
Speaker 1: crazy flex. We get to the year twenty twenty seven
Speaker 1: or twenty thirty, like they were saying, and they're like, hey,
Speaker 1: we're scrubbing the program.
Speaker 2: Uh yeah, we can't do it because we've got other
Speaker 2: stuff going on.
Speaker 1: And all of this was just to get people talking
Speaker 1: it's possible. I just I don't see it. Like you said,
Speaker 1: let's say it is because the Moon is some sort
Speaker 1: of ancient alien spacecraft or so.
Speaker 2: I don't know.
Speaker 1: I don't necessarily believe that, but I've read a lot
Speaker 1: of articles on the cult to conspiracy saying similar things,
Speaker 1: and if the are trying to use nuclear power to
Speaker 1: jump start it, that still begs the question. Nuclear power
Speaker 1: is to produce heat to create steam to turn the turbines,
Speaker 1: unless they have a whole new way of using nuclear power,
Speaker 1: like Tony was saying, maybe with heat induction. But even still,
Speaker 1: you're in space. Heat doesn't do the same thing there
Speaker 1: as it does here. So like I don't I don't know,
Speaker 1: I don't know. That's wild, that is wild as hell. Okay,
Speaker 1: thank you for.
Speaker 3: Bringing out with Yeah, thermoelectric generators have been used with
Speaker 3: nuclear material up in Arctic climate monitoring stations, but it's
Speaker 3: way simpler than a steam turbine. You know how thermocouple works.
Speaker 3: It's just when you put two dissimilar together and put
Speaker 3: them put you know, one end of the wire in
Speaker 3: a hot place and another in a cold blaze. It
Speaker 3: induces a voltage, but the voltage is really small. It's
Speaker 3: like millivolts. But if you put a bunch of those
Speaker 3: in series and you heat up one end of it,
Speaker 3: you can get a couple of volts, but you can
Speaker 3: only get like one watt out of it, So it's
Speaker 3: enough to power a little clock or something, but it's
Speaker 3: not enough to power you know, a heater or anything
Speaker 3: like that.
Speaker 1: There's no way that they could take a load. There's
Speaker 1: no way you can get ambage off of something like that.
Speaker 3: Yeah, it's the kind of thing that's only good for
Speaker 3: weather monitoring stations out in the middle of nowhere, where
Speaker 3: you need something really simple that'll provide a really small
Speaker 3: amount of power. It wouldn't work on the Moon, though.
Speaker 1: And that's what I'm saying, like to build and let's
Speaker 1: say that is their method. That is the nuclear power
Speaker 1: plant that they're trying to build, is something along like that, like,
Speaker 1: unless they've got some sort of a new way, more
Speaker 1: efficient way of doing that. And again, I don't know
Speaker 1: how that even though with a thermal couple like you saying,
Speaker 1: in space, does heat react differently? Does it do different
Speaker 1: things physically than it does on Earth? I know, hot
Speaker 1: things expand cold things contract, and that makes sense in
Speaker 1: the vacuum of space. I don't know if that's a
Speaker 1: more drastic expansion in contraction or if it's kind of
Speaker 1: negligible even further because there's no oxygen for the or
Speaker 1: air I should say, for the heat to transfer through.
Speaker 1: I honestly don't know.
Speaker 3: Well, I'm pretty sure the thermoelectric generator would work. It
Speaker 3: just wouldn't produce anywhere near enough power. And when it
Speaker 3: comes to steam, I think that would just be such
Speaker 3: an engineering nightmare that I don't see that working. But
Speaker 3: maybe they've already answered that question. But I've googled it
Speaker 3: and I'm looking at an AI summary and I don't
Speaker 3: trust it, and I'm trying to find other sources and
Speaker 3: I just couldn't find anything really good on it. So personally,
Speaker 3: I would just use lots of solar panels up there.
Speaker 3: I think that would work. Except you know, nighttime is
Speaker 3: like sixteen days long on the moon, right, maybe that's
Speaker 3: another reason they feel like they need something else. But
Speaker 3: I'm speculating here.
Speaker 2: I'm with you.
Speaker 1: I mean, even our moon getting direct sunlight like it
Speaker 1: does fine, cool, we watch the phases of the moon,
Speaker 1: not all of it gets direct sunlight as often.
Speaker 2: Like, So maybe maybe with.
Speaker 1: A super efficient solar panel you would be able to
Speaker 1: get and attain as much solar energy as you could
Speaker 1: while you had direct sunlight to where it would make
Speaker 1: up for the times when the moon is dark.
Speaker 2: I don't know, but I'm with you.
Speaker 1: I don't see a possible way, at least for my
Speaker 1: knowledge of technology. I'm not the all knowwhere here. I
Speaker 1: don't see a possible way where they could make a
Speaker 1: nuclear reactor on the moon work to power anything other
Speaker 1: than like to show it as a science fair project.
Speaker 1: They're talking about it powering the entire lunar lad that
Speaker 1: they're trying to put up there. I just I can't
Speaker 1: see it make sense in my mind.
Speaker 2: Go ahead, Merlin, Well.
Speaker 13: I just give it.
Speaker 6: And there's ice on the moon.
Speaker 2: Apparently there's ice on the Moon. I know there was
Speaker 2: ice on Mars.
Speaker 6: Yeah, there's ice on the Moon and at the poles.
Speaker 2: But you can't make steam out of ice. Again.
Speaker 1: Look, man, we'll see how it goes. I mean, it's
Speaker 1: very possible. What's up, White boy, Wizard, Welcome to the
Speaker 1: Cage to Night Live. H we're talking right now about
Speaker 1: Chinese and Russian collaboration to put a nuclear power plant
Speaker 1: on the Moon by twenty thirty. There's an article we
Speaker 1: just read about that, and uh yeah, yeah, party time.
Speaker 6: I guess we're gonna throw some bodies of water under the.
Speaker 2: Ice, Okay, okay, if that was would have.
Speaker 12: A heating effect, and then you'd only get so warm,
Speaker 12: but the top layer would stayte so cold.
Speaker 2: Then we're in a vacuum of space, right.
Speaker 1: I don't even know if we actually understand what the
Speaker 1: core of the Moon is made of. I've heard speculations
Speaker 1: to say that it's magma very similar to the Earth's,
Speaker 1: but I don't know that to be a fact. I
Speaker 1: don't know if it's just a giant, cold, dusty rock
Speaker 1: and like all the way through to the core, that's
Speaker 1: all it is. I don't know what to make of it, bro,
Speaker 1: I'm be honest with you. I appreciate the hell out
Speaker 1: of you for bringing it up tonight, though. That's that's
Speaker 1: gonna bake my noodle for quite a few weeks now.
Speaker 3: But yeah, well same here. If there is ice, I
Speaker 3: guess they could make it work theoretically, and you know,
Speaker 3: it would turn into steam for their power generation step,
Speaker 3: and then it would condense back into ice. The thing
Speaker 3: about having a total vacuum is you can't have liquid water,
Speaker 3: but you can still, you know, sublimate steam.
Speaker 4: So that.
Speaker 1: Ice go sublime, and then using that vapor to power
Speaker 1: the turbans. But then even still the collection of that
Speaker 1: vapor to make it go back to a solid Mike
Speaker 1: odd like you said, yeah, good God almighty, maybe they
Speaker 1: will be successful. I don't know. I mean again, I
Speaker 1: don't even know. In space, how hard is it to
Speaker 1: sublimate ice because you're going straight through the phase changes,
Speaker 1: you're skipping straight over a liquid But if is that
Speaker 1: just what happens in the vacuum of space, it just
Speaker 1: does that on its own, I don't know.
Speaker 3: Well, I can actually answer this question. You sum up
Speaker 3: the heat of fusion with the heat of vaporization, which
Speaker 3: is a heat of vaporization is twenty five hundred kilodeweles
Speaker 3: per kilogram for water, and the heat of fusion is
Speaker 3: something maybe like a quarter of that, And the amount
Speaker 3: of energy it takes to get water from zero to
Speaker 3: a hundred celsius is four hundred kilojeweles per kilogram. So
Speaker 3: most of the energy is going to just vaporizing it.
Speaker 3: And this could theoretically work. It's just recovering water in
Speaker 3: the H two on the form of ice instead of
Speaker 3: liquid water. It's difficult, but I guess I could sort
Speaker 3: of see and it work. See it working if they
Speaker 3: have an actual water source, which I assumed that they
Speaker 3: wouldn't have had. But if there really is ice up there,
Speaker 3: I guess they do have it and maybe it would work.
Speaker 1: But like sid, there's no way that that would be efficient. Right,
Speaker 1: we're talking about over one kilo jewel to turn just
Speaker 1: water to steam or ice to steam in the first place,
Speaker 1: there's no way that you're gonna get enough output off
Speaker 1: of a turbine to make that. You're not gonna get
Speaker 1: the output you need off of that. You're gonna take
Speaker 1: more input just to make it work. Then you'll get
Speaker 1: off of it to try to use it to power
Speaker 1: a lab.
Speaker 3: I yeah, I would just use solar panels. Yeah, yeah,
Speaker 3: that's what I would do.
Speaker 2: One hundred percent.
Speaker 1: But again, China and Russia'll be doing China and Russia things,
Speaker 1: So who's to say. I don't know. Merlin, thank you
Speaker 1: again for bringing up that article. My god, that is fascinating. Uh,
Speaker 1: let's see. Uh, just thinking about that song y'all played
Speaker 1: last night that Yo. We are not going to play
Speaker 1: the song on the Cajun Night for obvious reasons. But
Speaker 1: if anybody hasn't heard Kanye West's new song about the
Speaker 1: Funny mustache Man, yo, I understand why people are not
Speaker 1: too happy with o yeezus himself at this moment about it.
Speaker 1: That's uh, that's that's yep. That is one of the
Speaker 1: most songs that have ever been recorded. Some might say
Speaker 1: one of the most, you know, but hey, it's uh
Speaker 1: that's what that is. Uh yeah, Alex, I'm with you.
Speaker 1: That was that was wild. Uh it says y'all y
Speaker 1: new art. Oh yeah, Royce, I do love the art
Speaker 1: that you do.
Speaker 2: Can't wait to get mine. I'm excited.
Speaker 1: Uh let's see here, drink PAP's Blue Ribbon every single day.
Speaker 1: I think Paps as we're talking about, like the beers
Speaker 1: and things that were off that were on the list
Speaker 1: of bad things that we shouldn't drink.
Speaker 2: If I'm not mistaken, PBR was not on the list.
Speaker 2: Oh perhaps blue Ribbon I do believe is safe for
Speaker 2: human consumption. It's a rough drink, but it's also it
Speaker 2: won a Blue Ribbon back in the eighteen hundred. So
Speaker 2: let's get the respect where it's due. You know.
Speaker 1: Let's see if I was in Star Wars, mean, my
Speaker 1: friends would have Oh god, that's funny.
Speaker 2: All right, all right, well we are getting ready. Oh yeah,
Speaker 2: how Hitler.
Speaker 1: Is just like wop from twenty nineteen as as base
Speaker 1: an offensive as possible, trying to get attention. Yeah, one
Speaker 1: hundred percent with you, Tony. It's it's a grab. It's
Speaker 1: just an attention grab for Kanye to try to stay relevant.
Speaker 1: Although you know, I get what he's trying to do,
Speaker 1: but there were so many other things you could have
Speaker 1: done to get attention and stay relevant.
Speaker 2: You just that's that's somebody doing the absolute mostess, you know.
Speaker 1: But anyway, anyway, that's Hollywood for you, that's music industry
Speaker 1: for you.
Speaker 2: It's a dirty place.
Speaker 1: It's a dirty, dirty place with dead bodies and baby
Speaker 1: oil littered everywhere. Speaking of the Diddy trials and everything, Yeah,
Speaker 1: the most recent thing that I just watched about it that.
Speaker 2: These people were like, oh they did what, They used.
Speaker 1: A prostitute like a toilet, which like it's gross, don't
Speaker 1: get me wrong, but like that that's kind of expected.
Speaker 1: When you're talking about this level of disgusting behavior and
Speaker 1: then hiring a male prostitute to hook up with his
Speaker 1: wife while he watched in a cup chair. It's like, yeah,
Speaker 1: I that's not nearly as bad as what I thought
Speaker 1: he was about to say.
Speaker 2: But again, more things are coming out.
Speaker 1: Children are about to be brought in and implemented to
Speaker 1: a lot of disgusting things. I could already see the
Speaker 1: writing on the wall. It's it's gonna be bad. So yeah, again,
Speaker 1: the music industry and Hollywood disgusting places. That's where dreams
Speaker 1: go to die. But anyway, all right, didn't mean to
Speaker 1: end this on such a sour note. We have had
Speaker 1: a pretty fun episode this evening. I want to thank
Speaker 1: everybody for coming out and being a part of the
Speaker 1: Cajun Night Live Again, to anybody listening, if you would
Speaker 1: like to join in the conversation every Wednesday night at
Speaker 1: nine pm Central, then please come check out the Cajun
Speaker 1: Night on Patreon.
Speaker 2: The link is in the description below. There's just one
Speaker 2: tier for entry.
Speaker 1: We are just trying to collect a group of like
Speaker 1: minded people to have these interesting, in depth conversations. Sometimes
Speaker 1: it's geopolitical, sometimes it's religious. Sometimes it's science and technology.
Speaker 1: Sometimes it is media and Hollywood and all of these things.
Speaker 1: Sometimes it's conspiratorial. Sometimes it's all the above, Sometimes it's
Speaker 1: none of the above. Sometimes it's talking about birthing for
Speaker 1: forty five minutes. Like, look, we're all over the place,
Speaker 1: and we're here for all of it. I thoroughly, thoroughly
Speaker 1: enjoy our Wednesday Night conversations. Once again, everybody, I would
Speaker 1: like to thank each and every one of you for
Speaker 1: joining in this evening. I am the Cajun Night and
Speaker 1: as always, ladies and gentlemen, God bless