Speaker 1: From UFOs to psychic powers and government conspiracies. History is
Speaker 1: riddled with unexplained events. You can turn back now or
Speaker 1: learn this stuff they don't want you to know. A
Speaker 1: production of iHeartRadio.
Speaker 2: Hello, welcome back to the show. My name is Matt, my.
Speaker 3: Name is Noah.
Speaker 4: They call me Ben.
Speaker 5: We're joined as always with our super producer Dylan the
Speaker 5: Tennessee pal Fagan. Most importantly, you are you. You are here.
Speaker 4: That makes this the stuff they don't want you to know.
Speaker 5: It is time for some strange news. If you are
Speaker 5: listening in the evening this program publishes Welcome to February seventeenth.
Speaker 5: This is the week of our big show at National
Speaker 5: Sawdust and Brooklyn is part of on AirFest, so get
Speaker 5: over that way if you are interested.
Speaker 3: I can't believe it's coming up so soon. Oh it's crazy,
Speaker 3: but it's going to be a good time. Make sure
Speaker 3: to get your tickets. It is a separate ticketed event
Speaker 3: from on AirFest itself, so you can check that out
Speaker 3: on the on AirFest website or I believe it National
Speaker 3: Sawdust's website.
Speaker 2: You can just show up at the National Sawdust and
Speaker 2: say let.
Speaker 3: Me in to see stuff they don't want you to
Speaker 3: know to say, you know Ben cool for you, you
Speaker 3: might have even better luck.
Speaker 5: I appreciate that, nough you might have even better luck
Speaker 5: if you say you're there to see our special guest,
Speaker 5: Justin Richmond, who who's classing up.
Speaker 2: The show with us from Broken Record.
Speaker 3: You may know the show the podcast the music podcast
Speaker 3: featuring Malcolm Gladwell and Rick Rubin on the Pushkin Network,
Speaker 3: really great source for all things music, and we're going
Speaker 3: to talk about some hidden messages in your favorite records
Speaker 3: with Justin, among other things. It's gonna be fun. There's
Speaker 3: gonna be live modular synth music, and we're using this
Speaker 3: immersive sound system. The National Sawdust has to have a
Speaker 3: really good time with some immersive audio, so check it out.
Speaker 3: It'll be a good time.
Speaker 5: And we're also crossing the borders of fact and fiction,
Speaker 5: conspiracy and speculation. Yes, I deft with that. If you
Speaker 5: want to hear more about it, please come join us.
Speaker 5: In the meantime, guys, I thought we could kick off
Speaker 5: tonight's Strange News by uh. I just want to share
Speaker 5: with you my favorite headline I read this week. Ready,
Speaker 5: you probably already saw it, Okay, actually surprised me.
Speaker 4: Okay, here he.
Speaker 5: Goes Man claimed he was warming up his chicken in
Speaker 5: a sauna after becoming aroused by pool jets.
Speaker 3: Going on there, why just keep some unfolding?
Speaker 1: Yeah?
Speaker 3: So wait, yeah, the first of all, that's not what
Speaker 3: a sauna is for. And what does the chronology of
Speaker 3: I mean, okay, you're aroused by pool jets, we don't
Speaker 3: kick here, But what does the chronology have to do
Speaker 3: with eating it? Was he just like one of those
Speaker 3: bacchanalian type folks who just loves to have the juices
Speaker 3: drip down the chest when they're you know, like in
Speaker 3: the Farrell does on.
Speaker 2: And is it actually chicken that were talking about?
Speaker 4: That is a great question, great question. It is indeed
Speaker 4: a chicken.
Speaker 5: Okay, Now, bringing a snack into an unusual place is
Speaker 5: something that's happened to a lot of people.
Speaker 4: We're from Atlanta.
Speaker 5: We've seen plenty of well, I've seen plenty of people
Speaker 5: try to be slick and sneak a rotisserie chicken into
Speaker 5: the movie theater. Everybody goes spaghetti, right, what's just spaghetti policy?
Speaker 5: But it's an excellent question. It is a literal chicken.
Speaker 5: Let's go to Birmingham Live by Chris Slater and Isabelle Bates.
Speaker 4: It did take a.
Speaker 5: Team of journalists to break the case. Here who we're
Speaker 5: going to We're traveling over.
Speaker 4: To the UK.
Speaker 5: The at the Tom Husband Leisure Center at Salford University,
Speaker 5: they discovered fifty nine year old xin Jiang who was
Speaker 5: in the sauna and he was staring at a lady
Speaker 5: outside the sauna after he had taken a swim. He's
Speaker 5: fifty nine years old. He was discovered with his shorts.
Speaker 4: Down to his knees.
Speaker 5: He was touching himself and he told he later told
Speaker 5: the authorities who was roused by feeling the pool jets
Speaker 5: on his tucks, and that he was not pleasuring himself.
Speaker 5: It was not a sexual act. He was cold because
Speaker 5: he had been swimming, and he put his hands into
Speaker 5: his shorts to warm them up.
Speaker 2: Gay huh. Well, look now, I just have to admit
Speaker 2: we've probably all experienced a little accidental jet arousal in
Speaker 2: a hot tub.
Speaker 3: WHOA, what was that? Or otherwise? Yes, largely accidental. And
Speaker 3: I would also like to point out that in finish
Speaker 3: sauna culture, enjoying a nice grilled sausage often prepared on
Speaker 3: the sauna stove along with a finished lagger, very very common.
Speaker 5: Perhaps perhaps Oh man, yeah, this guy's nowhere near as cool.
Speaker 5: I was a little confused about this. Uh, it's worse
Speaker 5: than a literal chicken. When management asked him what he
Speaker 5: was doing, uh, he just said, I'm adjusting myself or
Speaker 5: I'm adjusting my chicken, which is.
Speaker 3: What as a chicken's Wow. Okay, I would have We
Speaker 3: could have left that one with the headline Yeah, but.
Speaker 4: No, no stone left unturned. That's what's straight left. No
Speaker 4: chicken left uncooked.
Speaker 3: Oh boy.
Speaker 5: Uh, so we are going to learn about, uh, some
Speaker 5: stuff on the edge of science fiction.
Speaker 4: We're gonna learn about.
Speaker 5: Some fat bergs, some droning and ongoing Bitcoin saga, and
Speaker 5: much much more. But before we do any of that,
Speaker 5: what what about we pause for an ad break and
Speaker 5: then get to a heist? Yay, and we have returned
Speaker 5: over one million dollars worth of olive oil has been
Speaker 5: stolen from a Montreal trucking company.
Speaker 3: Finally, yeah, finally the time has come. I said, we
Speaker 3: love a weird food heist, and we talk We talked
Speaker 3: about an egg heist last week.
Speaker 5: More than one hundred pallets of olive oil worth over
Speaker 5: one million US dollars were stolen. According to the Montreal Police,
Speaker 5: a transport company was sending product to a client. It
Speaker 5: was supposed it was supposed to arrive early February. It
Speaker 5: didn't show up on the third or the fourth.
Speaker 4: Uh.
Speaker 5: The the people waiting for their olive oil fortune reported
Speaker 5: it to the cops on February fifth. Uh, it is
Speaker 5: missed in transit. And we know that there are some
Speaker 5: CCTV snaps of what looks to be the possible the
Speaker 5: possible oil thieves. We're really just mentioned there's not too
Speaker 5: much of this at this point yet. We're really just
Speaker 5: mentioning it because we love a heist. We are stands
Speaker 5: for heist. So let's do a couple of fun ones.
Speaker 5: There's much more important news that we'll get to. We'll
Speaker 5: get to hear in and listener mail. But you may
Speaker 5: have heard, fellow conspiracy realists some scuttle butt about a
Speaker 5: politician who has not only proposed that we buy Greenland.
Speaker 5: We the US not only backed up President Trump there,
Speaker 5: but additionally said, you know what, while we're at it,
Speaker 5: while we when we acquire it, we should rename it
Speaker 5: not Greenland, but red, white and Blueland.
Speaker 4: Did you guys, hear about this.
Speaker 3: This is a joke.
Speaker 2: Yes, this is I thought it was as well. Yeah,
Speaker 2: I thought it was too. No it is not.
Speaker 5: Okay, Yeah, this one comes to us from our home
Speaker 5: state of Georgia. The Representative Buddy Carter of Georgia introduced
Speaker 5: a new bill to Congress. This we're gaming to rename
Speaker 5: Greenland to red Comma, White Comma, and Blueland, Bluelands being
Speaker 5: all one word. This is a real thing. It is
Speaker 5: Hr one one six ' one, Red, White, and Blueland
Speaker 5: Act of twenty twenty five. Now, before Google officially renamed
Speaker 5: the Gulf of Mexico to the Gulf of America, I
Speaker 5: would have said this was an onion article, you know.
Speaker 4: I would have said this was a clear prank.
Speaker 3: Yes, how do you introduce something like that as a
Speaker 3: serious matter. I don't understand. This is like body mcboat
Speaker 3: face type stuff.
Speaker 4: Yeah.
Speaker 5: Here's what Carter said in a statement on Tuesday, said
Speaker 5: America is back and will soon be bigger than ever
Speaker 5: with the addition of Red, White, and Blue Land. President
Speaker 5: Trump has correctly identified the purchase of what is now
Speaker 5: Greenland as a national security priority, and we will proudly
Speaker 5: welcome its people to join the freest nation to ever exist.
Speaker 5: When our negotiator in chief inks this monumental deal, Here's
Speaker 5: what I think.
Speaker 4: Is going on.
Speaker 5: I am certain that Representative Carter, whether or not you
Speaker 5: support him, I'm certain he doesn't genuinely believe that this
Speaker 5: bill will pass or maybe garner enough support in larger Congress.
Speaker 5: I think instead it is meant as a political signal
Speaker 5: that he supports the new administration.
Speaker 4: That's what I think the way is.
Speaker 3: Yeah, yeah, I will say though, that Red, white, and
Speaker 3: blue Land certainly would be an appropriate name for a
Speaker 3: America themed amusement park, you know, So it's not all bad.
Speaker 5: Well, to be clear, there are maybe sillier names throughout
Speaker 5: the span of history we've run into.
Speaker 4: You know.
Speaker 5: Maybe let's say this does pass, then how long would
Speaker 5: it take for it to be normalized and for people
Speaker 5: to just start calling it Blueland and general, you know,
Speaker 5: and then kids are born and they don't know about Greenland,
Speaker 5: and the name feels That's my question. Does it feel
Speaker 5: silly to us now because it's objectively a silly name,
Speaker 5: or does it feel silly just because we're used to Greenland.
Speaker 3: Greenland was always kind of a bit of a misnomer
Speaker 3: in and of itself, right, because it's like Iceland is
Speaker 3: more green and Greenland is more icy or something I
Speaker 3: can't remember. There was always a mayor.
Speaker 4: The old conspiracy. Yeah that's right.
Speaker 5: Yeah, yeah, So folks, please let us know your thoughts.
Speaker 5: Maybe the name is awkward because it's red Comma, white Comma,
Speaker 5: and blue land. So that's a that's an odd agglomeration
Speaker 5: of names. There's some stuff that we we can't get
Speaker 5: to that hopefully we'll explore in a listener mail program
Speaker 5: later this week. There is a plague of rats, that's true,
Speaker 5: laying waste the cities thanks to climate change.
Speaker 4: There is a new there's a new.
Speaker 5: Overly if sperm donor that's made the news, so check
Speaker 5: out that story. And maybe this is a good segue
Speaker 5: to another conversation we're going to have later in this program.
Speaker 5: Various professors are now arguing I got some flak when
Speaker 5: I brought elon Musk versus the US to last week's recording,
Speaker 5: but it was the right thing to.
Speaker 4: Do, and it was curious to It was curious.
Speaker 5: To me to find that a lot of a lot
Speaker 5: of in the no tech experts are feel that they
Speaker 5: have identified the overall goal of Elon Musk. In their opinion,
Speaker 5: they think he wants to replace representative government with Silicon
Speaker 5: Valley controlled AI, so technological oligarchy run by machines.
Speaker 3: Didn't he in a consortium of his other tech oligarch bros,
Speaker 3: put together some sort of proposal to buy open AI
Speaker 3: for billions of dollars but also less than the valuation
Speaker 3: of it.
Speaker 5: And then Altman replied by offering to buy Twitter for
Speaker 5: about a tenth of that price.
Speaker 3: Yeah, there you go. I have heard this kind of
Speaker 3: scuttle butt as well, Ben, this idea that they would
Speaker 3: be the terrifying notion that they would be potentially behind
Speaker 3: closed doors testing AI in an effort to streamline government systems.
Speaker 3: You know, they have now been given access to and
Speaker 3: I don't think anybody wants that right, not at all.
Speaker 4: Yeah, they are just too many.
Speaker 5: You know, whether you consider yourself a Luddite or a
Speaker 5: blade Runner esque pioneer bleeding edge sci fi, the reality
Speaker 5: is right now, what we know about large language models
Speaker 5: and AI and the quest for AGI is simply that
Speaker 5: it's not up to the task of fully running something
Speaker 5: is massive and complicated and self contradicting as a government.
Speaker 2: That was the big problem in the real world, in
Speaker 2: the world of West World, right, once you get in
Speaker 2: and once you got into later seasons, didn't they have
Speaker 2: it wasn't a governance by the massive AI of some sort, right,
Speaker 2: I'm just thinking about all the problems that society faced,
Speaker 2: at least within that fictional world.
Speaker 5: And predictive models being an issue there as well. There's
Speaker 5: probably one of the best write ups, at least that
Speaker 5: I have found about this comes from Eric Salvaggio, writing
Speaker 5: for Tech Policy Press.
Speaker 1: Uh.
Speaker 5: Savaggio definitely is not a fan of Musk, just to
Speaker 5: be clear, he has he has a perspective and a
Speaker 5: bias and a horse in the race. But his article
Speaker 5: Anatomy of an AI Coup is a must read if
Speaker 5: you want to learn more about this, more about these demands,
Speaker 5: and more about why critics are concerned that statements about
Speaker 5: government efficiency might just be sheep's clothing over a wolf.
Speaker 2: Heard heard, Indeed, that's a creepy thought. Really want to
Speaker 2: have humans at the wheel if we can, for as
Speaker 2: long as we can, if that's cool.
Speaker 5: And you know, yeah, and maybe that makes us sound old,
Speaker 5: But the thing is governance by humans. We already know
Speaker 5: all the problems that can occur with that particular kind
Speaker 5: of structure. We do not know the problems that can
Speaker 5: occur with a brand new form of intelligence running the structure.
Speaker 3: Well, I know, for my two sents, I guess I'm
Speaker 3: certainly not opposed to AI as a tool, you know,
Speaker 3: with eyes wide open, using it for you know, certain
Speaker 3: things that maybe aren't nearly as high stakes. But I
Speaker 3: just I really resent and am sort of offended by
Speaker 3: this tech bro move fast break stuff mentality that just
Speaker 3: doesn't seem to take into account, like the ramifications on
Speaker 3: literally the entire world of just shoving this stuff through
Speaker 3: because they think it's neat you know.
Speaker 2: No, yeah, or they can they can control it, right,
Speaker 2: maybe maybe if I build it, I can control the
Speaker 2: thing that then runs everybody.
Speaker 4: But that's the thing too, right, like think of.
Speaker 5: I know I probably overdo analogies, but thanks to everybody
Speaker 5: who writes in if we if we go one right
Speaker 5: think of the film Snow Piercer spoilers for Snow Piercer
Speaker 5: three to one spoilers. Uh, you know the guy who
Speaker 5: is the conductor of the train, he nominally runs the
Speaker 5: entire civilization right, because he runs the train. However, the
Speaker 5: train cannot deviate from its path because it is on rails. Right,
Speaker 5: So you could have a nominally run AI government, right,
Speaker 5: that's controlled by a person. But does the AI have
Speaker 5: its own set of rails, and if so, how much
Speaker 5: autonomy and latitude does the human ruler actually possess?
Speaker 3: Minor spoiler alerts as well for West World three two
Speaker 3: one spoiler alert, Harris, who plays the conductor in Snow Piercer,
Speaker 3: is very much the guy kind of in charge of
Speaker 3: Westworld and faces a very similar conundrum of like, you know,
Speaker 3: you may be the god of a thing as a human,
Speaker 3: but then once you've let that being, that that genie
Speaker 3: out of the bottle, it takes on a life of
Speaker 3: its own, and you really no longer have control, even
Speaker 3: if you built in rails, so to speak, like you're
Speaker 3: talking about. I just think it's an interesting parallel those
Speaker 3: two characters that are both played by Ed Harris.
Speaker 2: Dude, that guy, I don't know, maybe there's something, maybe
Speaker 2: we need to talk to Ed. Maybe he knows.
Speaker 3: Something, he knows what's up.
Speaker 5: M Yeah, and he's probably a really good hang too,
Speaker 5: you know who else. It's totally unrelated. You know who
Speaker 5: else turns out to be super into exploring conspiracies, Rick Rubin,
Speaker 5: imagine that I had no idea, but apparently it makes sense.
Speaker 5: Apparently so Rick, if you're listening.
Speaker 4: Uh, come a hang.
Speaker 5: And there's so much more to get to, including some updates,
Speaker 5: some of which we mentioned on the ongoing weird thing
Speaker 5: with eggs in the United States.
Speaker 4: Will it expand abroad?
Speaker 5: Will pause for a word from our sponsors, will keep
Speaker 5: this one short, and we'll return with more strange news.
Speaker 2: And we're back. Guys, is going to be rapid fire
Speaker 2: update time. Here we go. Start your engines, GIOO. Everybody
Speaker 2: remember that guy Eric Adams, mayor of New York City
Speaker 2: we've been talking about over and over and over and over.
Speaker 4: Again, huge in Turkey, huge and.
Speaker 2: Really big in Turkey. Well, guys, the new acting Deputy
Speaker 2: Attorney General, Emil I think is how you say, Emil
Speaker 2: bove Bove has ordered federal prosecutors in New York to
Speaker 2: drop the corruption charges against Eric Adams that we've been
Speaker 2: talking about. Yeah, the orders for all the charges against
Speaker 2: him to be dismissed, and the dismissal is quote without prejudice,
Speaker 2: which means charges could be refiled in the future, but
Speaker 2: for now, go away charges, says the acting whatever Attorney General. Interesting, right,
Speaker 2: feels a little weird that corruption charges would just go
Speaker 2: away like that. It seems like there's a lot of
Speaker 2: stuff that was going through the courts that is just
Speaker 2: kind of dissipating into nothingness as we speak. This formal
Speaker 2: dismissal would have to be filed in a court, you know,
Speaker 2: by the same prosecutors that originally filed those charges out
Speaker 2: there in the Southern District of New York. An a
Speaker 2: motion to dismiss the whole thing would have to be
Speaker 2: reviewed by a judge and you know, approved in everything.
Speaker 2: But the reasoning here, guys, is that the indictment of
Speaker 2: Mayor Eric Adams in September of last year came too
Speaker 2: close to the mayoral primary in June, and that it
Speaker 2: limited his ability to aid President Donald Trump's crackdown on
Speaker 2: immigrants and to fight crime.
Speaker 3: Oh so a political maneuver or a greater good.
Speaker 2: Argument, That's exactly what it is, a greater good argument
Speaker 2: for the folks who are now in charge. So the
Speaker 2: same person both said Eric Adams case would be reviewed
Speaker 2: by a new Trump appointed US Attorney after the general
Speaker 2: election for mayor in November. So there you go. It's
Speaker 2: it's all in who you know, right, And.
Speaker 3: You know, I mean this is maybe stating the obvious,
Speaker 3: but I just think, you know, corruption should be considered corruption.
Speaker 3: You shouldn't get it pass just because it's inconvenient for
Speaker 3: somebody else. But it would appear that we are moving
Speaker 3: more and more into a nineteen eighty four esque, you know,
Speaker 3: model of truth, where like that you don't know what
Speaker 3: you think you know says the powers to be. You know,
Speaker 3: just because you think something is a certain way, it
Speaker 3: doesn't make it true, even though if you know it
Speaker 3: to be true. And I just I find that mind boggling,
Speaker 3: and it really does my head in.
Speaker 2: I'm fully with you on that. I do feel like
Speaker 2: this kind of thing happens no matter who's you know,
Speaker 2: elected over office.
Speaker 4: Right.
Speaker 2: It's true the friends or the people who are political
Speaker 2: allies get a little pick me up from the folks
Speaker 2: that get in.
Speaker 5: So it's it's quid pro quo, and we need to
Speaker 5: stop for a second and check in on this. It's
Speaker 5: no secret that the Department of Justice has met with
Speaker 5: a lot of controversy in just a few weeks. Right now, especially,
Speaker 5: I'm thinking about what have been portrayed as a conspiracy
Speaker 5: of reprisals. The Justice Department has fired twelve officials who
Speaker 5: had investigated Trump activities, some of which were related to
Speaker 5: the previous administration, and then I think it was the
Speaker 5: acting Attorney General of the DJ Right now, James McHenry
Speaker 5: has sent out termination letters that are kind of speaking
Speaker 5: to that quid pro quo that I'm getting a spider
Speaker 5: sense about when I hear the Eric Adams stories. McHenry
Speaker 5: says in the termination letter for officials investigating some aspect
Speaker 5: of Donald Trump's companies or previous administration, he says, Look,
Speaker 5: I don't believe you can quote be trusted to faithfully
Speaker 5: implement the president's agenda because of your significant role in
Speaker 5: prosecuting the president end quote. So I have a question there,
Speaker 5: does that logic? Is that logical or is that a
Speaker 5: rationalization to punish people or both?
Speaker 2: Well, you're not folks who have already been engaged in
Speaker 2: actions that view let's say person A as a potential criminal.
Speaker 2: Right you're investigating this person for criminal activities, You're not
Speaker 2: going to view that person as an objective, you know,
Speaker 2: actor for other things that that that person is doing.
Speaker 2: Right if you if you have been actively investigating that person.
Speaker 2: So I can see the logic. It is unfortunate that
Speaker 2: there is no form of objectivity when it comes or
Speaker 2: thought of objectivest when it comes to someone who is
Speaker 2: in that prosecutor prosecutorial role. I don't know anything. Yeah,
Speaker 2: but it's just a it's a freaking weird situation.
Speaker 5: I would say, Yeah, that's that's the pickle too, right,
Speaker 5: because is this a a straight up qui pro quo
Speaker 5: transactional relationship now that the DOJ is sort of brokering
Speaker 5: or are they still just doing their job according to
Speaker 5: you know, their mandate, which makes them historically super unpopular
Speaker 5: by the way with powerful people.
Speaker 2: Well, yeah, and it is putting the attorneys general against
Speaker 2: the you know, the district attorneys they like, the acting
Speaker 2: US attorneys in the different districts. In this case, it's
Speaker 2: the the acting Deputy Attorney General versus the acting US
Speaker 2: Attorney for the Southern District of New York versus all
Speaker 2: these other prosecutors and all the other districts versus the
Speaker 2: Department of Justice itself. And it's it's all infighting and
Speaker 2: chaos and again, I think the whole thing goes back
Speaker 2: to that. Maybe some of the strategies we've talked about
Speaker 2: make the whole thing chaos, so every good thing seems amazing.
Speaker 5: Oh god, yeah, yeah, create the problem that you purport
Speaker 5: to solve, right, yes, yeahsh is one on one, the.
Speaker 3: Use and the cobra.
Speaker 2: You gotta yes, exactly who's going to win? It's usually
Speaker 2: the mongoose.
Speaker 3: Well no, no, no, there was that whole thing. Sorry
Speaker 3: I wasn't mongoos, it was there was a thing in India, yeah,
Speaker 3: the cobra effect, where in India there was a massive
Speaker 3: rat problem and in order to deal with that, somebody
Speaker 3: had the hair brained, slash genius idea of releasing a
Speaker 3: bunch of cobras, which led to them eating and killing
Speaker 3: the rats, but then it led to them having a
Speaker 3: cobra problem.
Speaker 5: And then to solve the cobra problem, they incentivized hunting cobras,
Speaker 5: giving you a lum sun per cobra carcass that you returned,
Speaker 5: And what that did was create more cobras, because people
Speaker 5: figured out they could farm a cobra quite profitably and
Speaker 5: then just sell the dead cobras or some kinds live
Speaker 5: Cobra's back to the authorities, so that's the Cobra effect.
Speaker 2: And then Totino's pizza roles comes in and it's like,
Speaker 2: what is happening here?
Speaker 5: Totino's pizza role, the Cobra of the frozen food aisle.
Speaker 3: That's right, what's the alien's name? And the Chasmo Chasmo
Speaker 3: so funny. If y'all haven't seen that, it's so good,
Speaker 3: it's really there's also like an uncensored version where Chasmo's
Speaker 3: eyeball pops out and rolls across the floor. That they did,
Speaker 3: and Totino's leaned right into it. They posted it themselves,
Speaker 3: but apparently the Super Bowl and Standards and Practices did
Speaker 3: not approve that one.
Speaker 2: Oh yeah, guys, we got to keep moving rapid fire here.
Speaker 2: Remember that guy, Luigi Mangioni. Yeah, yes, okay, Well we
Speaker 2: talked about how there was some funding going on for
Speaker 2: him for his legal fees and all of that stuff.
Speaker 2: Well we've got a bit of an update. The legal
Speaker 2: fees were flowing in. There was originally a give Send
Speaker 2: Go fund for him. That's a that's a service or
Speaker 2: a website, give send to Go, and there was a
Speaker 2: goal of two hundred and fifty thousand dollars set for
Speaker 2: Luigi Mangioni's legal fees. They smashed through that really quickly,
Speaker 2: and now it has been capped at five hundred thousand
Speaker 2: dollars and today, as we record, it is sitting at
Speaker 2: three hundred and fifty nine thousand, nine hundred and twenty
Speaker 2: two dollars at least as I the last time I
Speaker 2: checked the website.
Speaker 3: Is this like a gofund me?
Speaker 2: Mm hmm.
Speaker 5: When we say capped, does it mean it cannot exceed
Speaker 5: five hundred k or does that just mean like that's
Speaker 5: their stretch.
Speaker 2: Goal, that's the goal. The goal is five hundred thousand
Speaker 2: right now. Surely it can become much much huger if
Speaker 2: they wanted to. But it is just nuts because the
Speaker 2: reporting that came out recently was that donations had kind
Speaker 2: of topped off and slowed down a lot for Luigi's funds,
Speaker 2: and now they're going back up like gangbusters.
Speaker 3: Ah. And it is a site that I'm not familiar with.
Speaker 3: It's called give Send Go, which is very similar to
Speaker 3: gofund me situation. But I don't know what differentiates them
Speaker 3: why I would be used instead of that. But yeah,
Speaker 3: man Wow five hundred K goal three hundred and sixty
Speaker 3: four to twenty two raised.
Speaker 4: YEP.
Speaker 2: It is headed by the December fourth Legal committee, which
Speaker 2: is apparently connected with Mangioni's attorney Karen Friedman and Jiffiloh.
Speaker 2: I don't know how to say that name. And this
Speaker 2: is all this is in the actual news. This is
Speaker 2: like a real appears to be a real thing. ABC
Speaker 2: News is confirming that this is the actual you know,
Speaker 2: funding site and everything.
Speaker 5: And I could answer the question why it's not go
Speaker 5: fund Me, which I'm sure I just.
Speaker 4: Want to get in front of the emails folks.
Speaker 5: I know a lot of our fellow listeners are probably
Speaker 5: shaking their headphones right now. Go fund Me was originally
Speaker 5: the crowdsourcing apparatus or platform for Luigi Mangioni until in
Speaker 5: December twenty twenty four they canceled all pro Luigi campaigns.
Speaker 5: So this other platform is fighting the power there. And
Speaker 5: this was This came amid the big move by mainstream
Speaker 5: media and a lot of platform owners to scrub discourse
Speaker 5: about mangion or to shift the narrative, which we discussed
Speaker 5: in previous previous episodes, as well as strange news can.
Speaker 3: I also just say that maybe this is something that
Speaker 3: go fund me offers. But I'm seeing there's a lot
Speaker 3: of comments attached to folks who have donated, along with
Speaker 3: the dollar amounts that they have contributed, and some of
Speaker 3: them are very interesting. Here's one from anonymous giver. Jury
Speaker 3: nullification refers to a jury's knowing and deliberate rejection of
Speaker 3: the evidence or refusal to apply the law, either because
Speaker 3: the jury wants to send a message about some social
Speaker 3: issue that is larger than the case itself, or because
Speaker 3: the result is dictated by law is contrary to the
Speaker 3: jury's sense of justice, morality, or fairness. Team Luigi, nothing
Speaker 3: more need to be said. Freedom for all those the
Speaker 3: system has failed miserably. If we keep this as another one,
Speaker 3: we keep this momentum, we can easily be the biggest
Speaker 3: fundraising campaign on the site. Free Luigi. We need to
Speaker 3: make a change. Good luckilyuis Luigi for president. Those are
Speaker 3: all different ones.
Speaker 2: Just yeah, hey, And speaking of eating the rich and
Speaker 2: the rich in general, remember a company called Bear b A.
Speaker 3: Y e R.
Speaker 4: Oh my god, I love Bear.
Speaker 2: Right all the chemical folks. Of course, they make this
Speaker 2: other thing called round Up, round Up. Ready or whatever
Speaker 2: all that other stuff, the weed killer round up specifically, Well,
Speaker 2: we've talked before and very recently about how their product
Speaker 2: round up appears to be causing cancer, at least according
Speaker 2: to scientists who are studying the stuff who are not
Speaker 2: directly hired by Bear or paid by Bear. And uh, well,
Speaker 2: Bear is fighting back, you guys.
Speaker 4: Right.
Speaker 2: There are protesters all over the place in Iowa, especially
Speaker 2: outside the Iowa Capitol Building this this Monday, specifically as
Speaker 2: we're recording this week, because there is legislation being proposed.
Speaker 2: They're in Iowa at the Capitol Building as well as
Speaker 2: in seven other states that would protect pesticide companies like
Speaker 2: Bear from claims they failed to warn their customers that
Speaker 2: their product causes cancer, because this is what this legislation says,
Speaker 2: because their labels on their products complied with the US
Speaker 2: Environmental Protection Agencies regulations. So what they're saying is, what
Speaker 2: this legislation is saying is that Bear and other companies
Speaker 2: who make these weed killers that do cause cancer put
Speaker 2: on their labels the stuff that the EPA required them to,
Speaker 2: and one of those requirements is not this may cause cancer.
Speaker 5: Right, So the question isn't the science that it's the
Speaker 5: amount or the threshold of legal compliance, and these exactly right, okay,
Speaker 5: and these grassroots activist whatever, I'll take the applause.
Speaker 4: I'll take the check for that one. Get it? Grassroots pesticide.
Speaker 2: Well yeah, the people who are saying, hey, this is
Speaker 2: the right legislation. Bear didn't do anything wrong. But you've
Speaker 2: also got protesters who were saying, what the heck, guys,
Speaker 2: Bear definitely did something wrong, and then you get signs
Speaker 2: and they're all like, no, you're wrong.
Speaker 4: So this reminds me of a previous episode, Matt.
Speaker 5: Do we know if whether Bear is paying the pro
Speaker 5: bear activist or pro bear protesters.
Speaker 3: I do not know. I do not know.
Speaker 2: I know they're paying the you know, the firms essentially
Speaker 2: that are on the PR side, that are working to
Speaker 2: fight against us.
Speaker 5: And it is legal to do that. It's just it's
Speaker 5: very ethically fraught. But it wouldn't be the first time
Speaker 5: large companies or even political groups have have paid people
Speaker 5: to be sort of astro turf protesters.
Speaker 2: Yes, yes, And let's jump really quickly to ap news.
Speaker 2: This was written on April sixteenth, twenty twenty four, so
Speaker 2: a while back, but specifically back then when we were
Speaker 2: talking about Bear. It discusses how they are about one
Speaker 2: hundred and sixty seven thousand legal claims against Bear and
Speaker 2: specifically round Up at that time last year in April.
Speaker 2: They've settled several of those, but they've lost several others
Speaker 2: where there are huge judgments. We talked about one I
Speaker 2: think it was ten billion dollars that was awarded for
Speaker 2: plaintiffs against Bear because of this whole roundup cancer thing.
Speaker 2: And then you jump to now and there's still a
Speaker 2: ton of these lawsuits. So basically Bear is attempting to say, hey,
Speaker 2: none of these lawsuits are worth their salt anymore because
Speaker 2: of this thing. Right, we didn't do anything wrong according
Speaker 2: to the EPA regulations specifically for our labels.
Speaker 5: Yeah, which I've just said again, and far be it
Speaker 5: for me to accuse anybody of conspiracy. It sounds like
Speaker 5: a really weird and specific, hair splitting legalistic point for
Speaker 5: people to get organically fired up about, such that they
Speaker 5: would go protest, you know what I mean? Yeah, Like
Speaker 5: I don't see the occupy EPA warning labels take it
Speaker 5: a big move in this direction exactly.
Speaker 2: A couple other stories coming out that are worth your
Speaker 2: time to check out there is a weird one that
Speaker 2: CNN Science reported on about the shape of Earth's core
Speaker 2: and how it is changing and altering, and then it
Speaker 2: connects back to previous reporting again, kind of like that
Speaker 2: last story reporting for twenty twenty four that talked about
Speaker 2: Earth's core slowing down its spin compared to the spin
Speaker 2: of the exterior of the Earth that we experience, you know,
Speaker 2: that's how we get our days. But the Earth's interior
Speaker 2: core seems to have slowed down and is now rotating
Speaker 2: the opposite direction that Earth is rotating. And now scientists
Speaker 2: have discovered, just through studying earthquakes and a bunch of
Speaker 2: other a bunch of other stuff that is a little
Speaker 2: over my head, they are noticing that the actual shape
Speaker 2: of that solid metal, extremely hot ball that is the
Speaker 2: Earth's core is like altering. It's not a sphere, and
Speaker 2: it is moving in weird ways and causing volcanic activity
Speaker 2: in different places on the Earth's surface because of its
Speaker 2: weird shape. Just strange stuff.
Speaker 3: Check it out, we'll do.
Speaker 2: And also check in on that artificial sun ben that
Speaker 2: I think you brought to us, the one in China
Speaker 2: that is potentially going to change the entire planet with
Speaker 2: infinite energy. They just broke another record, they smashed it
Speaker 2: and just came out today. So just keep your eyes
Speaker 2: and ears open for stuff about the core and the
Speaker 2: sun and the cancer and.
Speaker 4: Oh and just by the way, by the way too.
Speaker 5: To add on to that, also check out our previous
Speaker 5: episodes from years ago. Yes, sometimes the magnetic bulls just switch. Yeah,
Speaker 5: so that's.
Speaker 4: On the way too. We don't know when, but you know,
Speaker 4: keep your wits about you.
Speaker 2: Good luck with that pole a shift rabbit hole you're
Speaker 2: about to go down. All right, We'll be right back
Speaker 2: with more strange news.
Speaker 3: And we have returned with more strange news. Got a
Speaker 3: couple of handful of fun ones. I thought i'd start
Speaker 3: with one relating to some kind of landmark international case
Speaker 3: precedents involving the flying of drones. Dateline, Sweden. Man convicted
Speaker 3: of drunk driving a drone in Sweden's first case of
Speaker 3: its kind, Ben, have you heard about this one?
Speaker 5: This one is new to me, Noel, and I think
Speaker 5: the first question everybody has just to clear things up.
Speaker 5: I'm pretty sure I know the answer. This guy who
Speaker 5: got convicted is not physically himself on the drone, right, because.
Speaker 3: That's why This is important, Ben, because this is a
Speaker 3: first of its kind case in terms of the penalty
Speaker 3: on a fifty four year old ratvik Man just a
Speaker 3: town in Dalarna in central Sweden. He was at a
Speaker 3: classic car event flying a drone in a temporary no
Speaker 3: fly zone, and police flying their own drone that was
Speaker 3: monitoring the event happened to notice this, you know, invader,
Speaker 3: this electronic invader. They then traced it back to the
Speaker 3: spot where this man was piloting the drone and determined
Speaker 3: that he had a blood alcohol content of point sixty
Speaker 3: nine parts alcohol per one thousand parts blood. I've never
Speaker 3: heard it quite put that way. Maybe this is a
Speaker 3: Guardian piece, by the way, so maybe I don't know, Ben,
Speaker 3: Is that the same way we measure blood alcohol content here?
Speaker 4: Yeah, you could.
Speaker 5: It's it's not the it's the same concept, but it's
Speaker 5: not the same threshold.
Speaker 3: Didn't think so, So that makes sense why it's a
Speaker 3: little unfamiliar to me. So under Swedish law anything above
Speaker 3: point two parts alcohol and when that in Bart's blood,
Speaker 3: I don't know why. I think that's funny. It is
Speaker 3: very specific is punishable for d w I d uy
Speaker 3: one point oh is a mega serious crime. Drunk driving
Speaker 3: laws in Sweden are a little bit stricter than they
Speaker 3: are in other parts of Europe. In the UK the
Speaker 3: limits point eight. In France and Belgium point five. In
Speaker 3: Spain it is point five as well. In Romania and
Speaker 3: Hungary it's zero. I don't understand. How is that less
Speaker 3: strict than point eight? Isn't zero? Like no, no zero
Speaker 3: alcohol content? Yeah, right, sorry, maybe it requires a little clarification.
Speaker 3: But they do point out in this article in the
Speaker 3: Guardian by Miranda Bryant, who is a Nordic correspondent for
Speaker 3: The Guardian, that Swedish law is a little bit more
Speaker 3: strict than other parts of Europe. However, the paragraph referencing
Speaker 3: those different blood alcohol levels ends with in Romanian Hungary
Speaker 3: it is zero. Romanian Hungary would be the strictest.
Speaker 4: Yeah, that seems like it might be possibly a typo.
Speaker 3: It does seem that way.
Speaker 2: It's oh, actually, dope, Nope, it's in comparison.
Speaker 5: Any blood alcohol at all, any blood alcohol at all
Speaker 5: over like just the tiniest drop, you know, they'll take
Speaker 5: your robtuscin or whatever.
Speaker 4: Yeah, that is a crime.
Speaker 3: Romania and Hungary serious business. They did determine again that
Speaker 3: this man had a point sixty nine part parts alcohol
Speaker 3: per one thousand parts blood. He admitted to find the drone,
Speaker 3: he claimed that he did not fly, later on claiming
Speaker 3: he didn't fly the drone under the influence and he
Speaker 3: actually blamed a friend who was at presence when the
Speaker 3: police arrived. He was fined thirty two thousand Swedish kroner
Speaker 3: or two three hundred and forty one pounds or euros,
Speaker 3: to be paid across eighty days daily, with daily allotments
Speaker 3: of four hundred Swedish croner or about twenty nine euro
Speaker 3: The big deal about this is that they imposed the
Speaker 3: same penalty on this dude who is flying a remote
Speaker 3: controlled aerial device as they would if he were driving
Speaker 3: an automobile or you know, a scooter some other kind
Speaker 3: of road faring vehicle. Jenny Holden Nystrom, who's the prosecutor,
Speaker 3: told SVT, which is a Swedish broadcaster, I have not
Speaker 3: seen a case like this before. I am satisfied with
Speaker 3: the verdict. Karen Holmant, who is the district court president,
Speaker 3: said that they chose to apply the same punishment scale
Speaker 3: as it would for drunk driving to the drone case
Speaker 3: because quote. It is an aircraft. Even though it is
Speaker 3: flown by itself, it is controlled by someone down on
Speaker 3: the ground and can fall from a high height and
Speaker 3: injure someone. As you said, I'm behind all of this, guys,
Speaker 3: I think it makes a lot of sense. You can
Speaker 3: wreak a lot of havoc even if you're sober and
Speaker 3: flying a drone, let alone, if you are under the influence.
Speaker 3: I think this is a precedent that maybe should be
Speaker 3: adopted elsewhere in the world.
Speaker 5: Yeah, it makes sense because you can even if you
Speaker 5: yourself are not in the vehicle or in the device,
Speaker 5: you can create a crash, you can make a collision.
Speaker 5: There's a reason drones are such a huge part of warfare,
Speaker 5: and with the economy of scale, they're going to continue
Speaker 5: to become more sophisticated and more affordable. So regulation or
Speaker 5: further regulation, I should say, is inevitable.
Speaker 4: It has to be on the.
Speaker 3: Way and potentially larger, wouldn't you say, I mean, like,
Speaker 3: the type of drones that we see in warfare are
Speaker 3: the size of like, you know, a small aircraft, a
Speaker 3: very small aircraft, but they are much larger than the
Speaker 3: consumer drones that we see. And as we know, technology
Speaker 3: that the government and the military gets first over time
Speaker 3: does seem to inch its way into consumer availability.
Speaker 5: Right, Yeah, absolutely, we know that we'll see early adopter
Speaker 5: behavior play a huge role in what kind of laws
Speaker 5: get made for the rest of us. So, just like
Speaker 5: just like with any other technology rolling out, it just
Speaker 5: takes a few knuckleheads to ruin it for everybody else, right,
Speaker 5: And this guy was being a little bit knuckleheaded, especially
Speaker 5: with the uh the story of the invisible disappearing pilot
Speaker 5: friend that Oh yeah, yeah, that's like, yeah, I think
Speaker 5: you've had to You had to have a few drinks
Speaker 5: to think that one was gonna work.
Speaker 3: Isn't that also very similar to like if you're drunk
Speaker 3: driving and you've got a passenger who's sober trying to switch,
Speaker 3: you know, switch seats at the last minute to fool
Speaker 3: the coppers.
Speaker 5: Yeah, but at that point you have to wonder, like,
Speaker 5: why wasn't that person driving in the first place?
Speaker 4: Right?
Speaker 3: It is a very very good point then, But we
Speaker 3: know humans are very interesting and complex creatures and often
Speaker 3: quite idiotic ones as well. It's very interesting. There's another
Speaker 3: article about this on The Independent by Jane Dalton Man
Speaker 3: find for a drunk driving drone. I love drunk driving
Speaker 3: drone in Sweden. It does point out that very few
Speaker 3: countries have outlawed drunk drone driving, but Japan, in a
Speaker 3: forward thinking move as they are wont to do, did
Speaker 3: this way back in twenty nineteen. So that's pretty interesting,
Speaker 3: and I feel like this case may well be noticed
Speaker 3: by other countries and adopted, you know, as a precedent.
Speaker 3: It It just makes sense because we know drones already
Speaker 3: are always in the news for nuisance type behavior, and
Speaker 3: this just kind of adds maybe another layer of protection,
Speaker 3: you know, to regular folks who might be being menaced
Speaker 3: by drones.
Speaker 5: Right, and then we'll see early or we'll see later
Speaker 5: iterations of regulatory policy come out, like the kinds of
Speaker 5: licenses you may need to obtain when there are larger
Speaker 5: drones that are more affordable for people. Do you have
Speaker 5: something like the equivalent of a drone trucker license? When
Speaker 5: drone deliveries become or if they become a normalized thing,
Speaker 5: then you would have to have a license to operate
Speaker 5: that commercial drone in that way, Should you have to put.
Speaker 3: In hours like you would as you know Ben with
Speaker 3: trying to get a pilot's license, you know, have to
Speaker 3: kind of prove that you are qualified to make those
Speaker 3: kinds of maneuvers, especially as we start seeing areas getting
Speaker 3: denser with these drones, like we were seeing in New Jersey,
Speaker 3: right with all of these crazy sightings that turned out
Speaker 3: to largely many of them being drones. And then when
Speaker 3: there was talk about oh maybe they're UFOs, that caused
Speaker 3: more people to send their own drones up, adding to
Speaker 3: the chaos. Yeah, well put thanks Ben AnyWho. I think
Speaker 3: this is something to keep an eye on and hopefully,
Speaker 3: you know, as we know, the law often most always
Speaker 3: lags behind the exponential improvement and availability of technology. So
Speaker 3: maybe this will be a lesson to be learned throughout
Speaker 3: the world. I'm going to move on to another story
Speaker 3: if you guys don't mind. This one involves a Brian
Speaker 3: Adams concert. Remember Brian Adams Summer of sixty nine. Oh,
Speaker 3: she also recently did an interview I think as he's
Speaker 3: doing this tour, this kind of like legacy, you know,
Speaker 3: nostalgia tour, where he said to an interviewer that the
Speaker 3: song Summer of sixty nine is actually about doing the nasty,
Speaker 3: It's about like the sex position what not. The year
Speaker 3: it was the summer where all he did was sixty
Speaker 3: nine baby uh dude, guys, Yeah, he's definitely big uping himself.
Speaker 3: Maybe he was being coy, but you know, there certainly
Speaker 3: are some interludes implied in that song, which I have
Speaker 3: to say. There was a fabulous headline that summed this
Speaker 3: whole thing up the story here, and that came from
Speaker 3: the website rte dot Ie Plumber of sixty nine. Sewage
Speaker 3: blockage halts Brian Adams concert in Perth, Australia. A series
Speaker 3: of fat bergs, which we've talked about before and we'll
Speaker 3: talk about outside the context of this story. So these
Speaker 3: are of course fat grease, toilet tissue rags all built
Speaker 3: up into this kind of whole other thing that can
Speaker 3: cause massive chaos and sewer systems. So these massive fat
Speaker 3: bergs created a huge blockage that caused a sewer backup,
Speaker 3: a sewage backup in Western Australia. The Canadian singer songwriter
Speaker 3: Brian Adams concert was set to take place at a
Speaker 3: local arena and the organizers, the proprietors of the arena,
Speaker 3: shut it down while people were already waiting in line
Speaker 3: to get in due to what they referred to as
Speaker 3: the risk of sewage backing up within the venue's toilets.
Speaker 3: Actually that came from the State Water Corporation. They said
Speaker 3: that their crews were working to clear the blockage of fat,
Speaker 3: grease and rag, which has caused several wastewater overflows at properties.
Speaker 3: This came from a statement according to the water authority
Speaker 3: the blockage could not be easily dislikes and venue management
Speaker 3: took this information very seriously and made the tough call
Speaker 3: to cancel the Brian Adams concert. This was of course,
Speaker 3: very disappointing to the Brian Adams fans set to attend
Speaker 3: Brian Adams Roll with the Punches tour as it made
Speaker 3: its way across Australia. Unfortunately, the venue was not able
Speaker 3: to reschedule the concert. I would imagine and hope that
Speaker 3: concert goers would get a refund wherever they made the
Speaker 3: purchase for those tickets, and yeah, we'll call it a day.
Speaker 3: But this caught my eye, Matt, because you've been teasing
Speaker 3: us with a story for weeks now that you keep
Speaker 3: holding back on and into this idea that somewhere in
Speaker 3: the world I want to say in the UK, these
Speaker 3: fat bergs. These absolutely disgusting, massive globs of congealed grease,
Speaker 3: cooking products and other ways that are often kind of
Speaker 3: ratking style, held together by wipes and rags and toilet
Speaker 3: tissue and can cause all kinds of chaos and municipal
Speaker 3: sewer system are actually being used. Like what is it
Speaker 3: amber grease or something like that? That disgusting whale, you know,
Speaker 3: fatty goo, that is such a sought after material to
Speaker 3: make perfume. What is the deal with that, Matt, I've
Speaker 3: got to know, dude.
Speaker 2: It's even cooler. Yeah, I do apologize guys, this this
Speaker 2: story has been stuck in the pipes ha ha for
Speaker 2: a long time. Take Hey, this is it's actually really awesome.
Speaker 2: I think we found it in January of this year
Speaker 2: early on. It was posted in the BBC. You can
Speaker 2: look it up right now. The title is Fatberg's Turned
Speaker 2: into Perfume Inside Britain's Bizarre New Industrial Revolution And when
Speaker 2: you check this out, it's crazy. There are people from
Speaker 2: the University of Edinburgh who are they're in a specialized
Speaker 2: program there that they're attempting to find ways to use bacteria,
Speaker 2: and mostly bacteria, but other biological life forms like that
Speaker 2: to break down stuff that we need as a species
Speaker 2: to break down because it's mostly trash or waste or
Speaker 2: something that we can't make use of right now, how
Speaker 2: do we turn it into something else? Well, it's pretty incredible.
Speaker 2: Professor Stephen Wallace is one person that was interviewed for
Speaker 2: this story. He specifically and his team take these fat bergs,
Speaker 2: apply bacteria to them, and it the bacteria breaks the
Speaker 2: fat berg all the way down into this chemical that
Speaker 2: smells a bit of pine, like a lovely pine smell,
Speaker 2: and then you can sell that product to somebody who
Speaker 2: is either making a perfume or is attempting to let's
Speaker 2: say scent. There are other chemical products, right, so, like
Speaker 2: think about something as simple as pine sal which is
Speaker 2: a very it was for a long time a popular
Speaker 2: cleaning product here in the United States. But anything else
Speaker 2: that has that pine smell, there's there's a different chemical
Speaker 2: that is a synthesized chemical that is currently made from
Speaker 2: fossil fuels like petroleum oil. But if you could instead
Speaker 2: make that from the waste, right the leftover fat burg
Speaker 2: that would be revolutionary. And that's exactly what's happening.
Speaker 5: Yeah, And just to jump in here on the note
Speaker 5: about ambergriss, the waxy substance made from those sperm whales,
Speaker 5: civilization does need replacements because I think, obviously due to
Speaker 5: some environmental regulations and due to just you know, the
Speaker 5: nature of hunting sperm whales, it is exceedingly rare to
Speaker 5: find natural amber grease use the way it was in
Speaker 5: the past. So these kind of alternative products, even if
Speaker 5: they might sound a little gross for some people, I
Speaker 5: think we all find the science fascinating and these are
Speaker 5: really cool innovations.
Speaker 2: Oh yeah, come on, if you could find the stuff
Speaker 2: you need to smell good in a fat burg, great,
Speaker 2: because ultimately it is just it's a biological process breaking
Speaker 2: down a chemical into a different chemicals. There a little
Speaker 2: chemical change going on there, but it's also being done
Speaker 2: on plastics, you guys, to break them down to make
Speaker 2: stuff that smells like vanilla. Like, think about that. Instead
Speaker 2: of recycling the way we know recycling to be, what
Speaker 2: if you just break down those plastic bottles into vanilla
Speaker 2: that you could then put into again, think about how
Speaker 2: many candles have vanilla in them somewhere?
Speaker 4: Right? Sure?
Speaker 3: I mean, I guess that reminds me of like kind
Speaker 3: of repurposing graywater for example, or you know, we've talked
Speaker 3: about how certain types of graywater may well be able
Speaker 3: to be purified. I can't remember what municipality was doing this,
Speaker 3: but there was some work being done to figure out
Speaker 3: how to do that, and there was just what was
Speaker 3: referred to often in the reporting as kind of the
Speaker 3: ick factor of it all. This I think would carry
Speaker 3: a very similar ick factor, like is someone really gonna
Speaker 3: be cool with using a product doing them smell good,
Speaker 3: putting it on their body that came from a giant,
Speaker 3: greasy ball of fat and poop and toilet paper.
Speaker 4: Mm hmm.
Speaker 3: I mean I would like to think that people could
Speaker 3: could you know, see the greater good and get their
Speaker 3: heads wrapped around? And I think I certainly could.
Speaker 2: Yeah, if the n product is just in a little
Speaker 2: vial or something, especially if it's used in industrial things,
Speaker 2: the end consumer never sees that stuff, right, You just know, oh,
Speaker 2: it smells of vanilla or it smells of pine. So
Speaker 2: I think the K factor kind of goes away because
Speaker 2: we don't have any K factor thinking, Oh, that pine
Speaker 2: I currently get in the candle or in the whatever
Speaker 2: it is I'm using at home that came from the
Speaker 2: stuff that I put in my car pretty much.
Speaker 5: Or food coloring or any any number of additives. One
Speaker 5: of the big takeaways here, at least from my perspective,
Speaker 5: is that if this gives you a nick factor, it's
Speaker 5: time to sit down give yourself real honest inventory of
Speaker 5: the other things that you run into that should give
Speaker 5: you a nick factor much more so, you.
Speaker 4: Know what I mean.
Speaker 5: But be careful when you open that door, folks. It's
Speaker 5: the equivalent of having a UV light with you at
Speaker 5: your next hotel room.
Speaker 4: Well.
Speaker 3: Hell, even like factory farming and stuff, and like the
Speaker 3: way the conditions in which chickens are kept, you know,
Speaker 3: and beef and things like that, it does seem like
Speaker 3: people are able to kind of ignore that. But then
Speaker 3: things like this that actually could help with conservation might
Speaker 3: be a little tougher for them to swallow.
Speaker 2: There's another thing, as article, guys, that I think would
Speaker 2: be that kind of tough to swallow thing. There are
Speaker 2: folks making like designer handbags out of microbes like that
Speaker 2: wouldn't require you know, high end materials or a bunch
Speaker 2: of other stuff. You basically three D print and then
Speaker 2: sew together a bag that looks like one of these
Speaker 2: high end bags. You know, the people would spend hundreds,
Speaker 2: if not thousands of dollars on, but it's it's made
Speaker 2: by a startup like biology company. I just I wonder
Speaker 2: if people would actually do that.
Speaker 4: Someone would do it.
Speaker 5: They're too many people statistically, someone would for sure.
Speaker 3: Well, guys, I'm gonna keep this one quick because speaking
Speaker 3: of blockages, I actually have a plumber that just showed
Speaker 3: up to help me with some leakage from my zewer
Speaker 3: line and my garage. So yeah, I'm actually gonna bop
Speaker 3: out a little early on this one. But I think
Speaker 3: we mainly got to what we wanted to get to
Speaker 3: on these stories. But I will be back shortly for
Speaker 3: when we record our listener Mail episode.
Speaker 5: And in the meantime, thank you for tuning in, folks.
Speaker 5: There's so much we didn't get to. Of course, a
Speaker 5: lot of a big thank you to a lot of
Speaker 5: folks who had written to me about booby trapped goggles.
Speaker 5: We're saving that for our listener Mail segment. Tune in
Speaker 5: later this week. You can find us online. In the meantime,
Speaker 5: we are conspiracy Stuff show on Instagram, We're conspiracy stuff
Speaker 5: on YouTube or some derivation thereof all over the internet.
Speaker 5: If you don't sip the social meds, we totally get it.
Speaker 5: You can also give us a phone call.
Speaker 2: Yeah, our number is one eight three three std WYTK.
Speaker 2: It's a voicemail system. When you call in, give yourself
Speaker 2: a cool nickname and say whatever you'd like just do.
Speaker 2: Let us know within the message if we can use
Speaker 2: your name and message on the air. If instead you'd
Speaker 2: like to send us an email, Hey, we've got that too.
Speaker 5: We are the entities. You read every single piece of
Speaker 5: correspondence we receive. Be well aware, yet unafraid. Sometimes the
Speaker 5: void writes back. Send us your idea, send us pitches
Speaker 5: for new episodes, send us stories that you think your
Speaker 5: fellow conspiracy realist should know about, or just send us
Speaker 5: you know, a nice how you doing, haiku, a limerick.
Speaker 5: We love all of those. Do we really write back?
Speaker 5: There's one way to find out. Step a little further
Speaker 5: from the light. Join us here in the dark conspiracy
Speaker 5: at iHeartRadio dot com.
Speaker 2: Stuff they Don't Want You to Know is a production
Speaker 2: of iHeartRadio. For more podcasts from iHeartRadio, visit the iHeartRadio app,
Speaker 2: Apple Podcasts, or wherever you listen to your favorite shows,