A couple people have pointed me to this. I'll save you the time, observation I've also made often. Simulation theory nudges materialists to imagine a creator.
https://twitter.com/RedPilled_USA/status/1259865542715781120
I read @ScottAdamsSays book amazon.com/How-Fail-Almos… right after the Trump election. It had a lot of good advice about a number of things. I think a young person can learn some practical things from that book to succeed in the business world.
Adams gives a list (he's given most of the items at one time or another) of things to "get what you want to make you happy". It's a good list. He never gets beneath the level of "why do I want what I want" or "what does 'happy' mean"? 
People exchange happy for meaning all the time. I don't know that learning that you are programmed by your animal ancestry or programmed by some anonymous programmer will necessarily impact one's meaning crisis.
His claim that "evolution was debunked" is an especially fun one in the video. He's learned a lot from DJT about influence. That much is clear.
In some ways this is @ScottAdamsSays being his most @jordanbpeterson -ian. He's trying to help individuals be happy, successful, effective, feel better about themselves. Not a bad goal. Compare this to
Peterson (who believes in evolution) makes similar arguments. The question of the simulation in @ScottAdamsSays argument is actually secondary. What is interesting is that Adams makes an argument based on statistics.
If you read amazon.com/Metaphysical-C…, a book recommended by JBP you'll note that Darwinian evolution's point is purposelessness, not material process.
What makes this video by @ScottAdamsSays is that he sort of wants to support a religious tribe even though he remains a thorough going nihilistic epicurean.
@threadreaderapp unroll
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
