Subscribe
Share
Share
Embed
95% of biologist agree--life begins at conception . . . but apparently the party the "follows the science" is no longer following the science. Leftism has become the anti science party and is spreading dangerous and deadly disinformation.
Tired of being gaslit by progressive media?
Wanna fight back against deceptive narratives being pushed across the globe?
At the Lucas Skrobot show we tear down cultural & geopolitical events giving you the context you need to expose the worldviews driving the cultural agendas of our day.
Ultimately connecting back to why it matters to your world, and how to order our lives and society to own the future.
Join Lucas Skrobot and follow the show on your favorite podcasts app today to understand the world, discern the truth, own the future.
The party that's.
So bravely followed the science for the
past two years and held the line and what
was true and real and real information
now seems to become the party of the
anti-science party that is promoting
this information, Mao information,
misinformation that is dangerous and
is leading to the death of thousands
of people in America every day, the
science and the biology is unequivocally.
95% of biologists worldwide agree
that life begins at fertilization.
And at no other point, can you
look at the human development
and say, ah, ha, there it is.
Now it's a human.
Now it's a human being.
It is only at conception.
It is only at the fertilization of an
egg to science degree and biologists
agree that that is when life begins, but
the left wants to bring society back.
Literally hundreds of years into
the dark ages of science, where we
didn't have microscopes where we
didn't understand DNA, we didn't
know what that a woman had an egg.
And then a man had a sperm.
We didn't know that.
Back in 1875 didn't know, but that's
where the progressive party wants
to bring us in a regressive manner.
Due to back to a time where we didn't
understand science back to a time when
the birth of a child was just a mystery.
No, no, no one really knows
blatantly denying science, but
today the science is clear.
The science is.
And don't be anti science
because it is misinformation,
disinformation that is leading to
the death of millions of people.
This anti-science party is doubling
down on their lies of misinformation,
ignoring the science, and it is
dangerous rhetoric that has killed 63
million people since 1973 in America.
Today three to 4,000 people will
die because of this dangerous
misinformation that abortion is safe.
When in fact abortion is
murder, abortion is not safe.
Two heartbeats go into abortion
clinic and one heart beat comes out.
Ironically enough, the killing
of the life of an innocent baby.
Is disproportionately affecting the black
and the minority people of color community
with ties to the KK cut K ties to the
Nazi party ties to the democratic party
because the democratic party was the
one that started the KKK who pushed this
eugenics of abortion for Margaret singer.
Who's part of the Nazi.
To come in to say, Hey, this is
a great way that we can do away
with people of color and limit the
population growth that people of color
absolutely bold face racist ideology.
Well, as it turns out, the progressive
party is actually the regressive party
turns out that the party that quote
unquote fights for the most violent.
Truly wants to kill the most vulnerable.
The party of science turns out
to be completely anti-science the
party that is anti-racist actively
promotes eugenics against people
of color with 95% of biologists.
Agreeing that life begins
when the egg is fertilized.
Why do people seek to
continue to deny science?
Well, Twitter, Facebook and Google
begin to flag this misinformation
and disinformation as misinformation,
this information, when will the fact
checkers step in and say, you know
what, actually science is pretty clear.
Life begins at conception.
This is dangerous misinformation,
disinformation that can lead
to the death of a child.
Why for instance, With this party of science
denied the basic biological facts of
science that a man has an X, Y chromosome,
and a woman has an X, X chromosome.
And that can not be changed.
Maybe it is because that they are
no longer a liberal party, but they
have post liberal post progressive.
With a postmodern worldview that
believes there is no objective morality.
There is no objective truth.
There is no reasoning or rationality.
There's only tools that can be used
to push forward their ideology and
agenda because in this post liberal
progressivism, the ends of a new world,
Marxist socialist, communist dystopian.
Justifies the means of being
anti-science in anti-human.
Hey, it's Lucas Skrobot.
And you're listening to the Lucas Skrobot
show where we uncover purpose, pursue
truth and own the future episode 281.
It is May 5th, 2022.
And if you haven't heard by now,
then you actually probably have a
life worth living if you haven't
heard by now, but political leaked a.
By the United States Supreme court,
a draft of a ruling that they
are planning on giving on Roe vs.
Wade Roe V.
Wade was put into place back in 1973,
where the United States Supreme court.
Not just made an interpretation
of a law, created a lot.
So the way that the us government works
it's that elected officials create laws.
And the United States Supreme court
decides whether that law is constitutional
or unconstitutional in 1973, with the
case of Roe V Wade, the United States
Supreme court created a law saying that.
Have a right to abort their babies.
That was the law.
And it became a federal mandate and a
federal law rather than the lobbying
created by each state and the power
being given to the people of that state.
Well, this leaked document is
actually very, very rare in the
history of the United States Supreme.
And the other times that has happened to
does not happen to this extent, ironically
enough, there was a leak leading up to
the very first decision of Roe, Roe V.
Wade back in 1973, but that was after the
decision had been made only a few hours
before they were posting the decision.
This was a draft that was leaked months
before the decision will actually be made.
Where we'll will actually be
published as a, an official ruling,
which causes a lot of people to
scratch their head and wonder.
Hmm.
I wonder where this came from a
wonder how this information got
leaked as it is, as it is a way for
people to persuade and manipulate and
intimidate the court, which is blatant.
Just blatant.
You do not want to live in a society
where the tyranny of the masses
or even a tyranny of a minority
is using threats and coercion of
violence to sway a justice system.
Definitely not the way
that you want to live.
So there's a couple of theories
out there of who might've leaked.
This one.
It could have been someone with
very liberal standings within the
court, not necessarily on the.
But that works within the Supreme court,
a clerk, they would of course lose their
job, but they would have opened up to
them, a world, a world of opportunity
on the left and been staged as a hero.
It could be someone on
the conservative, right.
Again, a clerk who would leak this to try
to solidify some of the justices votes
so that if they were overturned later,
The conservatives actually lost this.
They would be able to point
to say, actually, you used
to stand on this months ago.
You were for the overthrowing.
If Roe V.
Wade.
And the third potential is that it
was an outside act that someone hacked
the U S Supreme court and access these
documents and then leaked it to political.
No one knows there's active
investigations going on to find
out, but Alito who wrote the.
He says Roe was an egregious wrong
from the start a leader wrote,
according to Politico, it is time
to heed the constitution and return
the issue of abortion back to the
people's elected representatives.
So what does it mean that Roe V
Wade very likely could be overturned
within the next coming months?
Does it mean that abortion is now
out loud, out loud in all of America?
All it means is that the power is
given back to the people to vote on
it and create laws in their state,
which is where the power ought to lie.
In the Republic system of America.
America is not a democracy.
It is a Republic when Alito says that
this was an egregious wrong, he's
saying the egregious wrong is the United
States Supreme court creating a law
rather than interpreting laws that.
And that is the egregious wrong.
And he's giving that
power back the states.
What does that mean?
It means that of the 50 states, 13
states, once this is over current
13 states will likely and currently
have laws in place that would make
abortion completely illegal or very,
very, very limited in that state.
It does not mean that abortion
across America, uh, writ
large would be done with.
The, the arguments that I've been
hearing on the pro abortion side,
I wouldn't say are pretty astounding.
Th th they're pretty run of the mill,
which is people bringing it back to
the issue of rape on the issue of rape.
Uh, first I would say.
Rape is an egregious crime.
So the consequences for rape are hardly
sufficient for how wicked and file of
a crime rape is that it's in America.
You get a slap on the wrist.
And many other cultures,
the man is protected in rape
and women are prosecuted.
Women can have a death penalty
on them, whereas men are
able to pretty much go free.
This is agregious agregious.
We need massive reform when it
comes to laws surrounding rape.
But the argument is, well, if a woman
gets raped, which in America, out
of the million plus abortions that
happen every year, less than 1% is
because of rape or insets less than 1%.
So it's a very, very small minority of
the abortions that happen every year.
The argument thing goes well, if, if
a young girl or woman is raped, she
should be able to abort her child.
The problem with this argument
is that is grossly injust.
Biologists agreed.
Life begins at conception.
Therefore that is a human life,
which has a right to life.
They did, they are not
guilty of any crime.
They were conceived out of a crime.
Is it fair that the woman has to
carry that child through conception?
That that trauma is ongoing?
Absolutely not, but that
is not the child's fault.
That is the man who created an egregious
crime against that woman's fault.
He should be held liable, not
the child, the child is innocent.
So there's a, you have a situation
where there's something that's
terribly wicked and injustice that
happened and you're seeking to make it.
You're seeking to bring healing
and restoration to the situation,
killing an innocent bystander.
The child does not make
the situation more, right.
It only makes the situation more wrong.
It only brings further injustice to an
already dark and vial wicked situation
that's done by wicked and evil men who
should be absolutely punished to the.
Extent of the law.
When I, and in these conversations with
people, I always bring it back to this.
When does life begin?
They kick it around the Bush.
Well, I don't, I don't know.
I'm not a biologist.
Okay.
Well, I've, I've done the research.
I've looked at the biologists
and the research that they do.
And unequivocally, they say
that life begins at conception.
There's no point that you can look in the
development from of a human from a baby
onwards to say, this is when life begins.
And if life begins at conception,
which it does, then that individual
has rights as a human being.
And no.
No individual has the right
to take someone else's life.
Well, here's the president of the
United States of America, president
Joe Biden, agreeing with just
this statement more, more or less.
I said, I believe I have
the rights that I have.
Not because the government gave
them to me, which you believe, but
because I'm just a child of God, I.
I delegated by joining this union here
to delegate some obligates, some rights
I have to the governments for, for
social good president, Joe Biden, right?
During this clip claims that he has
rights because he is a child of God.
Not because the government gave them
to him and because the government
did not give him those rights,
but God gave him those rights.
The government can not take them away.
A baby in the womb has God given rights
because they are a what that's right.
President Joe Biden, a child of God.
And since God has given them that
right to life, no one, no mother
and no government has the right
to take that life away from them.
It seems pretty obvious to me if.
To life is given by God than a
mother does not have the right.
A woman does not have the right
to take the life of her child.
Here's Biden again, weighing
in on his religious views.
Remember president Joe Biden is
a quote unquote devout Catholic.
And if you don't know, devout Catholics,
all Catholics, the Catholic church
declares that life begins at conception.
Life begins at conception, the
Catholic church out of all the
churches or the Christian Christian,
the dome of Christian dumb.
Has held the line on abortion, stronger
than anyone else across the globe.
But this is what president
Joe Biden has to say.
All basically mainstream religions have
historically concluded that, right.
That the existence of the human life.
And B is the question, is it
at the moment of conception?
Is it six months?
Is it six months?
Is it quickening?
Aquinas argued?
I mean, so the idea of.
We're going to make a judgment that is
going to say that no one can make the
judgment to choose to abort a child
based on decision by the Supreme court.
I think goes way overboard.
The president saying that
all the religions are saying,
well, it's really a question.
When does life begin?
I don't know.
He's he's referring to this term
installment, which religions, Islam,
Judaism included the Abrahamic faiths.
Look to you and say, we don't know.
And this was hundreds of years
ago when there wasn't microscopes.
When we didn't understand DNA, who would
say, we don't know the development of a
child in its womb, in the mother's womb.
And.
In Islam.
Some generally believe that it's at
120 days after fertilization others
in Islam, other Muslims and hadeeds
and schools of Islamic thought say
that the embryo has installment 14
days post fertilization, 14 days.
Now he refers to here Aquinas, Aquinas.
In 19 who's was born in 1974 or, sorry.
Excuse me.
Who's born in twelve seventy four, twelve
seventy four, eight hundred years ago.
Lived Aquinas, even DaVinci and Einstein.
They didn't understand.
The human anatomy of the human body.
They didn't understand DNA.
And they didn't even know that
women had an aide and men had sperm.
They thought that we were all just kind
of Russian, a nestled in, and that in
Adam I existed and it was, it's just
these eggs that keep on popping out.
That's what they believe.
But he is now trying to reference
acquaintance, which we talked about.
Aquinas.
I love Aquinas.
And Aquinas said yet.
I don't really know.
I think there must be some
sort of quickening where all
of a sudden it becomes human.
I don't understand it.
So here's Biden trying to reach back
to literally bringing people back to
19 or to 12, 13, hundreds to 1274.
And the good Norine the
science ignoring that.
Absolutely insane.
Here's the, who, here's a tweet by the who
claiming that women should have the right.
This is the director of the who, Dr.
Tedros, the women should always have a
right to choose when it becomes, when
it comes to their bodies and their.
Restricting access to abortion does
not reduce the number of procedures.
It drives women and girls
towards unsafe ones.
Access to safe abortion saves lives.
The problem is here.
Abortion does not save lives.
There is no such thing as a safe
abortion, abortion kills people.
End of story.
And the science is clear.
A person begins.
At conception, but the party of science
can't get their, their science in
row, uh, justice pending justice.
Uh, Jackson, who's just put in
by the Biden administration.
We played these clips probably
a few weeks ago in her hearing.
She was asked about what a woman is.
Here's here's justice step.
Uh, can you provide a
definition for the word woman?
Can I provide a definition?
No.
Yeah, I can't.
You can't not in case
context, not a biology.
I'm not a biologist.
If she's not a biologist, then
shouldn't we go and look at a
biologist and see what a biologist.
Hmm, next clip.
When a one dish life began
in your opinion, Senator?
Um, I don't know.
Ma'am I don't know.
Here's the truth, ladies
and gentlemen, here's the.
95% of biologists from the biological view
that human life begins at fertilization.
That is when life begins,
but you know what?
It's not about science.
It's not about biology.
It is about the killing
of unborn children.
The shedding of innocent
blood through unborn children.
It empowers, this is where we get
a little swirly and spiritual,
but Hey, we talked, we talked
about Megan Fox just on the last.
We're we, we talked about the drinking
of blood and satanic rituals and I WASA
and opening up portals and having these
spiritual encounters and spiritual beans.
The practice of killing your unborn child
is the practice of Baal and Moloch, where
they would put the they'd have this brass.
Put a burning, flaming fire in the brass
statue and alter to the brass became red
hot, and then they take their newborn
babies and put it in the hands of this,
of this idol that was glowing red,
hot and sacrifice their baby to these
gods for the sake of prosperity and
to have a good harvest and fertility.
That's what these.
They have ritual satanic,
uh, prostitution.
And this is the route that
is driving these ideologies.
It is a spiritual route.
It is a spiritual empowerment of
the dark and demonic realms through.
Through the shedding of baby's blood,
which opens up the demonic powers
and portals and empowers people.
It is why Hitler was mass killing.
It is why it is why abortion
is still such a massive issue.
It's because people are sacrificing
their babies on the alter of prospects.
And it is, it is an, a demand.
It is a demonic activity and ritual,
and it needs to be absolutely rejected.
It needs to be absolutely rejected because
this is what it leads to in Canada.
Switching gears a little bit in
Canada, they have begun euthanizing.
The poor sounds far fetched, but when you
know what, when life is no longer valid,
When a human being loan longer has value
as an individual, but only has value
when they are adding value to a society.
This becomes the norm pulling Canada.
They have the maids law, which
is medically assisted suicide.
Medically assisted assistance in
dying is what it's called, sorry,
medical, medical assistance in dying.
Well, they also have another law
called the bill C7, which is extended.
That euthanasia law.
And now if you were suffering from
an illness, which cannot be relieved
under conditions that are acceptable
to you, you can now take advantage of
a medically assisted suicide in Canada.
Well, what this has led to
is euthanasia euthanizing of.
There's a couple of just horrible
stories from this article.
One, a woman in Ontario was forced
into euthanasia because her housing
benefits did not allow her to get a
better housing situation, which didn't
aggravate per crippling allergies.
Another disability, disabled woman
applied to die because quote, she
simply cannot afford to keep on.
Another sought to be euthanized
because COVID related debts debt,
which left her unable to pay for
treatment, which kept her chronic pain
bearable under the present government
disabled Canada Canadians got $600
in financial assistance during COVID
whereas university students got $5,000.
So here is Canada allowing people
to say, yeah, you know what I
want, I want to get knocked out.
Knock me off because I can't pay
my debts because I can't afford to
keep on living rather than creating
the system to help these people.
Remember, it's all about helping the
most vulnerable instead of helping
really helping the most vulnerable
Canada has found a way to save.
$6.9 million a year in cost
reduction from the old maid system,
the medically assisted assistance
in-depth and we'll save this bill.
C7 would create an additional
$62 million of savings per year.
That's what 160, about $160 million
or $150 million per year in savings
by killing people rather than.
Helping them another man was just
living in his feces and urine
asking for, to be admitted into this
euthanasia program because of his
disability and his inability of his
family or himself to take care of.
And this is, this is the image of mercy
and compassion that leftism wants to
bring to the world, not to help the.
Not to help the sick, not to help
the dine, but to euthanize them
because life does not have meaning or
value unless you're adding something
meaningful and valuable to the society.
This is the issue.
When you say that life doesn't begin at
conception because there is no other point
that you can then say, life begins here.
If it's at installment at 120 days.
Well, if the baby's 119 days
under 18 days with a beating
heart brainwave, Can feel pain.
You can see its fingers tips.
Does that, does that now?
You know, one day difference now.
Okay.
Well that's okay.
You can, you can kill the baby.
What about the day before you give birth?
The water breaks gives
birth about to give birth.
Can you, can you kill the child then?
What about afterwards?
Because this whole argument, well,
that child is dependent on the
mother and therefore the mother
shouldn't be held hostage to the.
Well, there was that law that
was recently put in place.
HR 2, 2, 2, 3 in California
that says that a mother or
doctor would not be held liable.
If a and no investigation would happen.
If a die, a child died
seven to 28 days post birth.
So if after birth, you've just
lay your baby down on the table
and decide not to take care of.
It dies because you
didn't take care of it.
Well, you're not held liable because after
all, it's not really a human with then
people with disabilities or down syndrome.
Do they have a soul?
Do people with amnesia, do
people with Alzheimer because
they've forgotten who they are.
Have they lost their.
There are so there's so many issues
when life does not have value.
And when life does not begin at
conception, there are so many issues that
are being manifested right before our eyes
in Canada, they're pushing to allow quote
unquote, mature minors to euthanize too.
This is where.
Not just a slippery slope fallacy
that one day it might end up
going there, but it is there now.
And it is there today
in a post-truth society where we
have exchanged truth for lies and
reason for postmodern irrationality.
The absurd finally makes sense.
Well, the Biden administration
is so committed to combating
disinformation and misinformed.
And when we say disinformation and
misinformation, it really means
things that they don't agree with.
They want to combat ideas
that they don't agree with.
Such as a man is man.
And a woman is a woman that's hate
speech that needs to be reined in a
little bit, but actual disinformation,
such as safe abortion save lives when
really safe abortions, quote, unquote
safe abortions, kill people every time.
That's not disinformation, but me saying
that would likely become this information
or misinformation as this moves on.
Well, they, the United States government
is, has created the department
of disinformation, which is being
really called the department, the
ministry of truth, which Parkins back
to the 1984 book of George Orwell,
where the dystopian book, which is.
Incredible book.
I absolutely recommend that you read
it where everything is controlled.
Every thought is controlled.
Every sentence is controlled.
Everything is monitored the way,
what is true is being controlled
and told you by the government.
And you're not allowed to think.
Well, in this dystopian world
of 1984, there's the ministry of
truth where two plus two equals.
And everyone has to believe it.
Everyone has to agree with it, but
it's under this to keep you safe.
It's under the guise of helping society
to moderating the conversation of society.
So everyone can live
happy life and get along.
This is what is being created
in America, even though in the
constitution of America, it says
the federal government and the state
government cannot infringe upon.
Speech and the freedom of speech, even
though this is the war that we have
been seen with Twitter, and this is
why Elon Musk bought Twitter was to
do away with the moderation of speech.
This word moderation is just a
clever way to say the control of
speech and the control of thoughts.
If you can control speech control
thought, and if you can control
thought you can control belief.
Well, Nina Jenkins.
Was put in as the director of the,
the department of misinformation.
And I was looking through her stuff
for website and all her media.
And I found one interesting interview.
There there's a lot of, a lot of
things that she's put out there.
Uh, funny theatrical songs, which I can,
I can appreciate the wit and the humor
and the satire of it, even though it's
like, well, This is legitimately crazy.
This is, I don't think
she's just being funny.
I really think this is what she believes,
but instead of playing that for you,
cause you might've already seen it.
I found this incredible
little piece from NPR with her
talking about this information.
On pregnancy apps of all things.
These pregnancy apps are just incredibly
popular among the expecting parents.
And I have to imagine that people
who download them, they are not
expecting to encounter disinformation.
Give us some examples of
what that can look like.
I was being peddled to.
There was a ton of advertising.
I was subscribed immediately
to a bunch of mailing lists.
I started getting mail in my home.
Okay.
This is.
Advertisements on pregnancy apps,
a pregnancy app, by the way,
is there as a service and they
need to make money to survive.
So if you're not purchasing the pregnancy
app, if you're not paying the 2 99 or
9 99 to buy the app, the person who
made it for free is getting zero money
to provide you with that service.
So how are they going to monetize that?
Well, they're going to put advertisements.
Here is Nina saying that advertisements
on an app, the advertisements ladies
and gentlemen is this information.
This is the person who is being placed
in the federal government of the United
States, which is which people move
to because they can have freedom of
thought, freedom of faith, freedom of.
But now it's, it's going to the
point where there's not even freedom
of advertising, not even false
advertising, just advertising.
Here's another clip by
Nina, um, headlines.
Like, can you have sex while pregnant?
Which in the disinformation world,
we know that those questioning
headlines are just clickbait.
And so we encourage people to write
them a little bit differently to
include the main idea in the headlines.
Now, apparently.
Is this information.
Copywriting is the writing
of words to sell something
or to cause people to engage.
So if I write a headline or a
title of the show that makes you
say, Hmm, this is interesting.
I'm going to click on
it to see what it says.
That is quote unquote clickbait.
But now it's not just a good
article that stirred up interest.
It caused you to want to
go and read because if.
Or someone else doesn't write a good
headline for you to click and read you
won't click and read, but now according
to Nina that's dis information and w in
what ways are we going to encourage, are
we going to shadow banned people on the
internet for writing a good headline?
Because it could be clickbait, even though
in that article they're explaining, well,
yeah, you can have sex while you're.
Here's the last clip by Nina.
This information is the false
or misleading information that
is shared with malign intent.
And the malign intent here is to
make money off of pregnant people.
And we can have, you know,
disinformation prep for profit.
And we've seen that in
the political realm.
And we've seen that, uh, outside
of it as well, especially with the
anti-vaccination rhetoric we've seen
during the coronavirus pandemic.
So I would say they are one
in the same pregnant people.
Pregnant people, this information is
making money off of pregnant people.
This is, this is the world
that they want to bring to you.
One pregnant people.
I think that's just so hilarious.
I think it's just so funny too,
that it's disinformation to
sell a woman pregnant woman.
However, I have a sneaking suspicion
that saying that an abortion is safe.
We'll never be flagged as
misinformation, even though let's
play, let's play this clip again.
This information is the false or
misleading information that is shared
with malign intent shared with.
St an abortion is safe, is being shared
with align intent, to make a profit off
of pregnant women, to kill their babies
that is being shared with malign intent.
And it's a little.
It is a lie because biologists and science
agrees that life begins at conception.
And therefore there's no such thing as
a PR, a safe abortion, the who should
be flagged, the CDC should be flagged.
Anyone who's claiming
that abortion is safe.
Anyone is claiming that life
does not begin at abortion
is being is anti-science.
And if we're going to have flat.
On all of our, all of our posts
leading back to the CDC or the wha
O or the whoever, the fact checkers,
the fact checkers need to check this.
The fact checkers need to come in
and say, well, actually the science
is in and life begins at conception.
Abortion is killing a child.
Well, this show is brought to
you by listeners and viewers.
I want to thank you for
being here and listening.
If you get value out of the show, I ask
that you give value back to the show
and the value that you get out of it.
We have people who give $1 an
episode, four bucks a month, and
that is a great encouragement.
So thank you for doing that.
And we have others who
give 20 bucks a month.
We have others who give hundreds a month.
So thank you for supporting the show.
If you want to support the show, you
can give value for value by visiting.
Scroll bot.com backslash support.
And you can give your
heart cold Fiat there.
Well, don't go away.
We'll be right back with our
closing Weaver and loom segment.
How do you feel about the
welcome back to Weaver Luma?
Part of the show where we take
ancient wisdom and we leave
it in with our everyday lives
so that we can own our future.
And we.
Our destiny, man.
I have been on a Warren buffet kick.
I think it's probably because
I've been thinking a lot about
the economic situation and turmoil
that we are going into, that we are
in the middle of with inflation.
And I know it's a big thing that
we've been talking about here on the
show and in the zeitgeists of media.
So I pulled a quote.
But from Warren buffet, from the latest,
uh, Berkshire Hathaway board meeting or
members meeting, partner meeting, and
here's this one minute brilliant one
minute clip of how to defend yourself
and the best thing that you can do to
protect yourself against inflation.
The best thing you can do is to be
exceptionally good at something.
If you're the best, if you're the
best doctor in town, if you're
the best lawyer in town, if you're
the best, whatever it may be.
Uh, no matter whether people are paying
you with a zillion dollars or panga,
they're going to, they're going to
give you some of what they produce
in exchange for what you deliver.
And.
If you've got it.
And if you're the one they pick out to
do any particular activity saying or
Playbase ball or, or be their lawyer,
whatever, it may be, whatever abilities
you have, can't be taken away from them.
They can't actually be
inflated away from you.
Somebody else will give you some
of the wheat they produce or
the cotton or whatever, maybe.
And they will trade you
for the skill you have.
So the best investment by far as
anything that develops yourself
and again, not taxed and all that.
So that's what I would do if you are
in a place, which I'm assuming who's
not, that's thinking about worried
about inflation and wondering what
is the best thing that I can do.
To own my future.
What is the best thing that
I can do to weave my destiny?
How can I create an atmosphere
and a life that is able to support
my kids for generations to come?
Where can I invest, invest in your self?
Because as Warren buffet said
that cannot be taken from you,
that can not be taxed yourself.
Cannot be taxed and it can
never be inflated away from you.
Well, that is all for this episode.
Thank you so much for listening.
If you want to get more out of
this episode, please share this
with a friend and talk about it.
And through that you will get
more won by building community and
friendship to when you share something.
When someone shares something
with me, I always feel loved.
And then.
You then having a conversation around
these ideas, especially around the
idea of abortion and the fact that
life begins at conception, we'll
help you articulate these ideas.
Better also, if you have any
questions, feel free to WhatsApp
me a plus 1 2 0 2 9 2 2 0 2 2 0.
And I will love to hear from them.
And if you ask a question,
that's bad enough, we'll play
it right here on the show.
That's all for today.
Go out this week.
Remember be pro science, pro biology.
Life begins at conception.
Invest in yourself and own your future.