Latest / The Epstein Chronicles / Mega Edition: Jeffrey Epstein And The Specific Type Of Scientist He Liked To Collect (5/10/26)

Transcript

Mega Edition: Jeffrey Epstein And The Specific Type Of Scientist He Liked To Collect (5/10/26) · The Epstein Chronicles

0:00
Speaker 1: So like I said. Sciencemag dot org is where this
0:03
article was published. The author is Jeffreymrvis and this article
0:08
was produced in September nineteenth, twenty nineteen, the headline what
0:14
kind of researcher did sex offender? Jeffrey Epstein liked the fund?
0:19
He told Science before he died. In August twenty seventeen,
0:23
I received an email an email from publicist Masha Drokhova
0:28
asking whether I wanted to interview her client, Jeffrey Epstein.
0:32
I saw your piece on President Donald Trump's science budget,
0:35
she wrote, referring to a story on the president's proposed
0:38
massive cuts to research in his twenty eighteen budget request
0:42
to Congress. Jeffrey has an interesting perspective on what it
0:46
will take to fill the gaps. Would you like to
0:48
speak with him next week? And now, mind you, folks,
0:50
this is in twenty seventeen. This is long after he
0:55
did his bid. This is long after he was back
0:58
in society. And he was already right back in good
1:04
graces with New York's so called polite society right when
1:08
he got out of jail. And then obviously he was
1:12
still working the back room channels, in the backroom networks
1:17
to get his hands in on more of these scientific
1:20
type projects so he could have more influence. You think
1:22
he was just doing this out of the kindness of
1:24
his heart. We know Jeffrey Epstein didn't do anything out
1:27
of the kindness of his heart. Everything that he did
1:29
was hoping that in two moves later it would pay off,
1:33
and pay off in spades for him, not for you,
1:36
not for any of the core four. It was all
1:38
about him. Why would science talk to a shadowy financier
1:43
and a convicted sex offender. I queried my editors, How strange?
1:48
One said, wonder why he's seek and pressed now? Another asked.
1:51
Eventually we decided I should accept the invitation on the
1:55
chance that Epstein would say something newsworthy, and on September eighth,
1:59
two thousand seventeen, I reached him via Skype at his
2:02
mansion in New York City's fashionable Upper East Side. According
2:06
to federal prosecutors, that is also where Epstein engaged in
2:10
sex acts with teenage girls during naked massage sessions. Oh,
2:13
according to federal prosecutors on yeah, them and as well
2:16
as the girls themselves. Yeah, that's definitely what occurred there. Okay,
2:20
you don't have to be worried, don't be timid. Nobody's
2:22
gonna sue you, okay, mister author. Epstein began the eighty
2:27
minute interview by asking me to agree, if we wrote
2:30
a story based on the interview, not to use any
2:33
quotes without first getting his permission. I have lots of detractors,
2:37
he said, so certain things phrased the wrong way could
2:40
make trouble for you and I. I you and I
2:42
I agreed to his terms. I mean, really, you agree
2:46
to his terms. Huh, that's nice. This author what's his name?
2:49
Hold on, let's go back and take a look here.
2:51
Jeffrey Jeffrey Mervis agreed to Jeffrey Epstein's terms just to
2:58
get the interview with him. That's what's wrong with our media, folks.
3:01
I'll let you know right now. I'm not agreeing to
3:03
any terms for any sort of interview. I'm going to
3:07
ask the questions that I want to ask, and I'm
3:09
not going to run them by anybody to make sure
3:12
that they're okay. That's not how any of this works.
3:15
We're not going to play that game where I give
3:18
you a bunch of answers before a bunch of questions beforehand.
3:21
So you can rehearse your answers. No way, that's not
3:24
how this game is played. Now, two years later, a
3:29
more complete picture of Epstein's alleged predations has emerged, and
3:32
last month, the disgraced financier Pedophile hanged himself in jail
3:37
after being arrested on federal charges of sex trafficking. My
3:41
editors and I concluded that, given Epstein's death and the
3:44
intense interest in his support of science, we could quote
3:47
him in this story. What follows are Epstein's views on
3:51
scientific philanthropy and the experiences of a few of the
3:54
many scientists drawn into his orbit. Oh so he dies,
3:59
and and thesciencemag dot Org get some courage and they're like,
4:03
oh now we'll quote him. This shoddy work. You know,
4:06
this is the kind of shit that makes me really
4:08
agitated as an independent content creator, as an independent journalist.
4:12
This doesn't fly. How could the hell hell? How does
4:15
this kind of stuff fly? So two years later you'd decide, oh, yeah, well,
4:17
I'm gonna run it now after he's dead. Why were
4:20
you so scared of him? Why was everybody so scared
4:22
of him? I just don't understand it. It doesn't compute
4:25
with me. Money I understand. In the interview, Epstein was,
4:31
by turns modest. I'm not the most I'm not more
4:34
than a hobbyist in science and boastful. But money I understand,
4:38
and I'm a pretty good mathematician. He was eager to
4:41
discuss his philosophy of giving and how science works. However,
4:45
some of those views struck me as contradictory, and others
4:48
were outdated or discredited. The overarching goal of his charity.
4:54
Of his charity, he said, was to compensate for the
4:57
Trump administration cutting back on pure research. It seemed like
5:01
a grandiose claim. Although he repeatedly dodged my request for
5:05
specific amounts, his scientific donations over the past twenty years
5:09
are unlikely to have exceeded a few tens of millions
5:12
of dollars. That's some pales next. That's some pales next
5:16
to the US government's annual research budget of one hundred
5:19
and fifty billion. And it's small even compared with the
5:22
nine and ten figure gifts to science from many super
5:26
wealthy individuals. Yeah, but you guys all took it right. Oh,
5:30
it pales in comparison, And oh, Jeffrey Epstein really wasn't
5:33
that big of a donor to the scientific world. Yeah right,
5:37
mister Nervis. Millions and millions and tens of millions of
5:41
dollars donated, And how much was donated behind the scenes,
5:44
How much was given into the palms of these scientists,
5:47
how much money was given for secrets? I asked who.
5:56
I asked who he chooses to fund. I'm looking for
5:59
smart people who might have a great idea, he answered.
6:02
I'm making a bet that certain people, not a lot
6:04
of them, can do great things if they simply can
6:06
be freed up to think and freed up from writing
6:09
grants and having to worry about the necessities of life. Remember,
6:12
I'm not building a laboratory, so my money goes to
6:15
support them in a nicer way than being on a
6:17
postdoc salary. I asked him how that approach differs from
6:21
the so called Genius Awards from the John D. And
6:24
Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation, which gives out five year grants
6:28
of six hundred thousand dollars and asks nothing in return.
6:32
That's completely different from Jeffrey Epstein. If Jeffrey Epstein was
6:36
giving you money, he expected something at some point. It
6:39
might not be now, it might not be tomorrow, but
6:42
eventually you would pay the piper. I asked him how
6:46
that approach differs. Excuse me, we read that already. It's
6:49
night and day, he replied. If you look at the
6:51
MacArthur Awards origins, there were scientists like physics Nobel Laureate
6:56
Murray Gellman on the committee looking for the world's smartest people.
7:00
But over the years, big institutions like MacArthur have become
7:03
politically correct. If you look at their awards in the
7:06
past five years, they're concerned with diversity. Again, Epstein was
7:10
not concerned with diversity. Okay, Epstein was very racist. From
7:15
inside sources that I've spoken to Epstein and his whole
7:18
entire circle, they were very, very racist. They did not
7:22
like minorities whatsoever, and in fact, they didn't even like
7:26
poor white people. They were very They were very sick people.
7:30
It was a very sick group of people. Now, I'm
7:33
all for diversity, but all for diversity of excellent ideas,
7:37
not for diversity and the people who received grants. Epstein continued,
7:41
he seemed to view science as something done by a
7:43
self perpetuating scientific priesthood that ignored anyone not like themselves. Well,
7:48
that's because the scientists in his circle, like Murray, Gellman
7:51
and Minski and the rest of these sick bastards Kraus,
7:54
these were all fellow travelers. These were all people who
7:58
had the same predilio predilction as Epstein, the same proclivities
8:01
as Epstein. They might have not acted upon them the
8:05
way he did, But these people that were around him,
8:08
these scientists that these girls were given to, they were
8:11
just as sick as Epstein. His next comment was even
8:15
more retrograde. Now, the MacArthur grants are sort of a
8:19
good citizen award for being exemplary citizens, as opposed for
8:22
being a great scientist. Something you're able to tell being
8:27
smart is the sign, the sign qua non for Epstein.
8:31
So how I wondered did he go about identifying such
8:35
budding talent. One way was to ask teachers. I talked
8:39
to lots of professors, he told me, And I asked them,
8:41
how long does it take you to figure out in
8:43
a class of three hundred who the three smartest kids are,
8:46
he explained, And usually they'll say they know by the
8:49
end of the first class. I don't believe that. I
8:52
definitely don't believe that that's how it happens. And again,
8:55
Jeffrey Epstein is very boisterous. We know that he was
8:57
very boastful. He always he's we used a bit of
9:03
embellishment when telling his stories. Right, he wasn't very very
9:08
truthful when telling these stories. According to people that knew him,
9:12
and we see it. He was very very bombastic in
9:16
a sense. But Epstein also thought that a science writer
9:21
might do just as well. Okay, jeff who would you fund?
9:24
He asked me. At one point, You've met a lot
9:27
of interesting people and talked to them. Who stood out?
9:30
I demurred, saying I was a journalist, not a scientist,
9:33
and that there were many people much more qualified to
9:36
judge someone's scientific potential. He responded with flattery. I've listened
9:40
to the way you asked questions, Epstein replied, You ask
9:43
good questions. When you interview someone, you must get a
9:46
sense of whether they are quick, smart, or creative or
9:50
all three. I think that people don't trust their sense
9:52
of who's smart. Epstein, on the other hand, obviously he
9:56
was just the best judge of who was smart. He
9:59
was the greatest talent judge in the whole world. He
10:02
was just the absolute pinnacle of finding out who the
10:06
best scientists were. According to Jeffrey Epstein. Anyway, when I
10:11
refused to take the bait, he abruptly shifted the conversation
10:14
to animals. Do you have any pets, he asked, I don't,
10:17
but I offered up my adult daughters. My adult daughter
10:20
has a dog, a hamster, and several fish. Epstein plowed ahead.
10:24
I'm not sure about the hamster, he responded, But if
10:26
you asked if your daughter's dog was smart or not,
10:29
my guess is that you'd say it was either a
10:30
smart dog or a dumb dog. And it wouldn't be
10:33
because you're an expert on dogs. It's just something that
10:35
you're able to tell after a while. And again, this
10:38
was the opinion he had of the rest of us folks.
10:40
He thought we were all so stupid. He thought everybody
10:43
was so damn dumb that nobody was ever going to
10:46
catch on to him. He thought that he had a
10:47
beautiful mind. In reality, he was nowhere near as smart
10:52
as he thought he was, and he was nowhere near
10:54
as slick as he thought he was. He was being
10:56
protected by people that were much more powerful than him,
10:59
and people that were using him. At the end of
11:02
the day, Jeffrey Epstein was an object that was used
11:05
and tossed away when it had no use to them anymore. Certainly,
11:10
my opinion on it tippy tip of the top. Epstein
11:16
said his approach to giving was aimed at achieving scientific breakthroughs,
11:19
but his view of the current state of innovation was
11:22
surprisingly gloomy. Frankly, jeff, since the discovery of penicillin in
11:26
nineteen twenty eight, there's been no really remarkable discovery, he said.
11:30
I followed the genome project, and there's lots of hope,
11:33
but in terms of a real product, there's probably nothing
11:36
that has kept more people alive than penicillin. I can't
11:38
really disagree with that. I hate to agree with Epstein
11:41
on anything, but penicillin was a serious game changer. Now.
11:44
I don't know if there hasn't been any remarkable discovery
11:49
since then. I'm not qualified to make that assertion, but
11:52
I will say that penicillin was a fantastic find. Epstein
11:57
was quick to distinguish his approach from the path taken
11:59
by other people, by others both dead and alive, many
12:03
of them with wealth that far exceeded his own. The
12:05
Bill and Melinda Gates foundation doesn't search for smart people.
12:08
He asserted. Bill wants to cure polio, he wants to
12:11
eliminate poverty. But in terms of coming up with new
12:14
theories of biology or some new form of mathematics, zero interest.
12:19
And I'm not I'm not gonna even begin to pretend
12:23
that I like Bill Gates or what he's about. I
12:26
think that Bill Gates had a much more cozy relationship
12:28
with Jeffrey Epstein than he likes to let on, and
12:30
I think he should come forward with that information, and
12:33
he should be very transparent. He shouldn't be hiding his
12:36
relationship with Epstein, especially when it's going to come out eventually.
12:40
He should just be very upfront about it and tell
12:43
people what the deal was, because being hiding in the
12:47
shadows the way he does with his relation in regard
12:50
to his relationship with Epstein, it's just a bad look
12:53
for him. It does not serve him well, and it
12:55
leaves questions, and those questions we're going to ask them.
12:59
We're not gonna away from them because it's Bill Gates
13:02
or anybody. It does not matter if you were brought
13:05
up in this case and you're in court documents or
13:07
it's found out that you are very friendly with Jeffrey Epstein,
13:10
especially after his conviction. Then I have some questions that
13:13
are going to be asked on this podcast. Epstein said.
13:18
He also dispensed with the accountability that typically goes with
13:21
a grant. When I've given money to a scientist, they're
13:24
usually somewhat surprised, and then they say, what type of
13:27
reports would you like? Is it for a milestone for
13:30
my next grant? And I giggle and say no. The
13:32
concept is you know your field best. Letting people with
13:36
lots of money have input into what you do doesn't
13:38
make any sense to me. I don't know if I
13:41
buy that. I honestly, look, there's a reason Jeffrey Epstein
13:45
wanted all of these scientists in his sphere, and of
13:48
course it had to do with his own crazy ass
13:51
genome projects and seeding of the human race with his DNA.
13:56
Of course it has to do with that. But a
13:58
lot of these scientists we're working on very secure projects,
14:05
projects that are classified in some cases, et cetera, et cetera,
14:08
And now they're receiving money from Jeffrey Epstein, and not
14:11
only receiving money, they're also being invited to his island,
14:15
and once they get to the island, if they engage
14:18
in any activity with an underage girl, well now he
14:20
has them, he owns them. So now not only did
14:23
he give you money, but he has video of you
14:26
being engaged of engaged with minors in very compromising situations.
14:34
So if we believe the intelligence angle, and we believe that,
14:39
I certainly believe that there were multiple intelligence apparatus at
14:44
work here, not just the Masade. But look, let's be
14:48
very clear, the Massade is the younger brother. The Massad
14:51
does not operate without the CIA being involved on this
14:55
sort of scale in America. Zero chance of that happening.
14:58
Just go ahead and squash that and get it out
14:59
of your mind right now. The CIA is the big
15:02
bad wolf, folks. Okay, the Masad, you know, Look, they
15:05
have their own problems. There's no doubt. I'm not going
15:07
to sit here and sing the praises of the Masad
15:10
because I'm not a fan. But the real problem in
15:12
the world, in my opinion, is the CIA. As to
15:18
whose approach to charity he admired, Epstein said his sole
15:22
role model was billionaire James Simmons, a fellow hedge fund
15:25
manager and a PhD mathematician Simmons has poured some of
15:29
his great wealth into found into the into a foundation
15:32
that supports budding mathematicians and math educators. But unlike Simmons,
15:36
Epstein said he felt no obligation to help foster a
15:39
more scientific, literate population. Exactly he did. Again, this article
15:45
is showing better than anything we've read about how he
15:47
feels about normal people, the average folks. He doesn't care
15:52
about a more literate population. His goals weren't for uh
15:57
civilization as a whole. His goals were very, very self serving.
16:00
He was trying to find the scientists that could help
16:03
him out with his goals, and the scientists also that
16:06
we're working on projects that were not only of interest
16:09
to him but to his people. I'm interested in rarefied peaks,
16:15
he said, in response to why he hasn't funded any
16:17
efforts to improve science education. I have no insight into
16:20
that area. Zero. Again, I'm trying to reach the smartest
16:24
of the smart It's the same issue in terms of money.
16:27
My clients are not in any way near the middle.
16:29
They're at the tippy tip of the top of the pyramid.
16:32
Oh you're so special, Jeff isn't that great. You know,
16:35
the rest of us should just bow down to you,
16:37
and we should all just look up at you in awe. Meanwhile,
16:41
you're the sickest, disgusting bastard in the history of the
16:44
world and the lowest poorest person amongst us. Is more
16:48
important than you'll ever be. The legacy you have left
16:52
on this earth, Jeffrey Epstein is one that is going
16:55
to go down in infamy. Rebels who don't fit in
17:02
the researchers Epstein chose to support. It was becoming clearer
17:06
fit the old stereotype of scientists whose brilliance makes them
17:09
social outcasts. The MIT Media Lab is a good example,
17:13
he said. The Cambridge based university has launched an independent
17:16
investigation into what it's president called the deeply disturbing relationship
17:21
between Epstein and the lab, whose director Joi Eto, resigned
17:25
following media reports that Epstein had invested in his private
17:28
companies as well as donating to the lab. And I
17:32
kind of mentioned that earlier today about how it wasn't
17:35
only donations on a level of all, right, here you're
17:39
working on a science a project, I'm going to give
17:41
you this money for that project. No, he was funding
17:43
these guys as well, giving them money for them to
17:46
do whatever they want to live their best lives. And
17:49
again back to the RICO situation, if they slap them
17:53
with RICO, well they'd have to trace this money. And
17:56
if anyone received money from this criminal enterprise, then they're
18:00
caught up in the Rico investigation as well. I would
18:06
say twenty five percent of the kids there are autistic
18:09
on the spectrum, Epstein opined. They don't really work in groups,
18:12
they're not taking classes, they're not given teaching assignments, they
18:15
don't have lots to do. They're there to think. I
18:18
don't really have much to say about that. I have
18:20
no idea how many people are on the spectrum at MIT,
18:24
or how operations work within the building. What I will
18:27
say is this, I'm not impressed because it's MIT. I'm
18:30
not impressed because it's Harvard. What. Sick people don't go
18:33
to Harvard, Oh they sure do. Sick people don't go
18:35
to MIT, Oh they sure do. Just because you're smart,
18:39
just because you're successful, just because you're rich, doesn't mean
18:43
that that's a shield for you, That that's not armor.
18:46
That doesn't make me say, oh, well he's rich or
18:48
he's super smart. He couldn't be involved in any of this.
18:51
It's actually the opposite. At this point, those traits appeal
18:57
to Epstein on two levels. It's my natural bent to
18:59
move toward the maverick and rebels who don't fit in.
19:02
He noted, they were probably overlooked in school. They were
19:05
definitely never class president. Such outsiders, in Epstein's opinion, are
19:09
also less likely likely to kowtow to the scientific establishment,
19:13
which he regarded as inherently conservative. He wanted people that
19:18
were willing to walk a separate way, willing to dance
19:25
to Jeffrey Epstein's drum, and not the norms in the
19:28
scientific community. He'll say all this other crap, this other garbage.
19:31
Oh it was still conservative and blah blah blah blah blah.
19:34
But in reality he wanted people that were going to
19:36
march to his tune. The older guys usually just tell
19:41
you what what doesn't work, he asserted, And the referees
19:45
of pure reviewed journals have also become politically sensitive. Everybody
19:49
knows who the reviewer is that has turned them down
19:52
because he's been asking the same question any number of times.
19:56
Yet Epstein readily admitted to asking prominent members of the
19:59
scientific is STA establishment to assess the potential contribution of
20:03
these so called outcasts. So I had Jim Watson to
20:08
the house, and I asked Watson, what does he think
20:11
about this idea, a proposal to study how the cellular
20:14
mechanisms of plants might be relevant to human cancer. Watson
20:17
is a Nobel laureate and co discoverer of the structure
20:20
of DNA. Likewise, with Noam Chomsky on artificial intelligence, he said,
20:25
referring to one of the pioneers in the field, isn't
20:29
that nice, hun? Noam Chomsk and Chomsky hanging out with Epstein,
20:31
another guy that likes to yell down from the rooftops
20:34
about how he's so much smarter than the rest of us,
20:37
and how none of us know how civilization's supposed to work. Meanwhile,
20:41
he's paling around with Jeffrey Epstein. Remember that next time
20:44
you quote your boy Gnome. In fact, Epstein expressed great
20:50
respect for the opinions of these elder statesmen. It's funny
20:53
to watch Noam Chomsky rip apart these young boys who
20:56
talk about having a thinking machine. Epstein noted, he takes
21:00
a dagger and slices them very kindly into shreds. Nobody cares.
21:04
I've never liked Chomsky anyway, and this puts an even
21:07
a worst taste in my mouth about the dude. We
21:09
know Chomsky is a sick dude probably as well. Right,
21:12
all of these dudes that were running together, at the
21:14
very least they were enabling Jeffrey Epstein, So you can
21:18
miss me with the Noam Chomsky bullshit from here on out.
21:22
A notorious name dropper. Epstein clearly savored his access to
21:26
scientific superstars. As you might know, I was very close
21:30
to Marvin Minsky for quite a long time. I funded
21:33
some of Marvin's projects. Yeah, you also provided a young
21:36
girl for him to abuse. Remember Marvin's one of the
21:41
people that Virginia has named directly. He he said about
21:47
one of the founders of artificial intelligence, a long time
21:50
MIT professor who died in twenty sixteen. And Marvin told
21:54
me there was this young guy in Germany who had
21:56
a very unique idea about artificial intelligence or so. I
22:01
was just with Roger Penrose as a distinguished theoretical physicist
22:06
who leads an institute in San Diego, California. And Roger
22:10
told me about an Indian woman physicist who has come
22:13
up with the idea of using a Bose Einstein condensate
22:17
a collection of super cooled atoms to find gravitational waves.
22:22
Again with the name dropping, So has anybody talked to
22:25
Roger Penrose about his relationship with Jeffrey Epstein? Maybe I
22:29
should get on that. Maybe I should figure out who
22:31
Roger Penrose was and what his relationship to Jeffrey Epstein
22:34
was when he was accepting this money. You know, again,
22:38
like I said last night reading the Daily Beast article,
22:41
when they were talking about how one of the survivors
22:44
slapped a rico suit on top of her civil suit,
22:47
I had no idea about that, And that's the same here.
22:50
I'm not familiar with Roger Penrose in this story. But
22:53
that's why these drops and these daily updates are so important,
22:57
because we unearthed things that we might have missed. I
23:01
let them decide. Epstein said he usually gave out his
23:04
money anonymously because he had no interest in publicity and
23:08
because he understood that his notoriety might be a burden
23:11
to grantees. It's not really a secret, but it's private,
23:15
he explained about his gifts. I let them decide. If
23:18
you want to tell people you got it from me, fine,
23:20
If you prefer not to for your own personal reasons,
23:22
that's okay too. Come on, really, Jeffrey Epstein wanted everybody
23:31
to know who he was giving his money to. Now,
23:33
maybe after the fact he was a little bit more
23:35
coy about it, but the overall idea remains the same.
23:40
The reason for him giving this money remains the same.
23:43
The reason for him funding these scientists remain the same.
23:47
I wondered how the recipients saw it. The researcher Minsky
23:50
had flagged for Epstein, Joshka Back, declined repeated requests from
23:54
me to discuss his ties to Epstein, but a twenty
23:57
eighteen paper on his theory of consciousness acknowledged support from
24:01
the Jeffrey Epstein Foundation, and Bach has been listed in
24:04
media italies of Epstein's grantees. Bach represents the type of
24:08
scientists for whom Epstein claimed his money can make a
24:11
big difference. You don't have to think about money for
24:13
the next five years, Epstein said, he told Bach as
24:16
the researcher prepared to move to MIT's Media Lab in
24:19
twenty fourteen. Epstein says Minsky helped arrange the appointment. Minsky
24:25
is a huge part of Epstein's scientific wait. Minsky was
24:31
one of the big dogs that had Jeffrey Epstein. That
24:34
really gave him credibility in the science, in the world
24:37
of science, because everybody respected Minsky as a scientist. And
24:41
when he vouched for Epstein, well, the rest of the
24:43
boys came on board. And once Epstein was there, and
24:46
once he started talking to them and you know, drawing
24:50
them into his bubble, well, money, access to girls, et cetera,
24:55
et cetera. That story, talk to these folks. Two years later,
25:00
Back moved to Harvard University's Program for Evolutionary Dynamics, which
25:04
was founded by Martin Noak, another beneficiary beneficiary of Epstein's charity.
25:10
In February, Bach left Harvard and became vice president of
25:13
Research at the AI Foundation, based in San Francisco, San Francisco, California.
25:19
For SETH. Lloyd, a self described quantum engineer, taking Epstein's
25:22
money initially seemed a no brainer. Already a tenured MIT professor,
25:26
when he met Epstein in two thousand and four at
25:28
a party hosted by his literary agent, John Brockman, Lloyd
25:32
was charmed by Epstein during several subsequent meetings at Harvard.
25:36
Mister Epstein offered me a grant to do research, which
25:39
I accepted, Lloyd wrote in an email after declining to
25:42
be interviewed. He seemed to like my work on ideas
25:45
of information and computation being the fundamental substrate of the universe.
25:50
Lloyd received additional donations from Epstein in twenty twelve and
25:53
twenty seventeen to support his MIT lab. There are lots
25:57
of topics in this field that were not funded by
26:00
other grants, Lloyd notes. Last week, MIT president Ralph Reef
26:04
acknowledged signing a thank you letter sent to Epstein after
26:07
his twenty twelve donation, and again both of these donations
26:12
in twenty twelve in twenty seventeen were after he had
26:17
been arrested, and for Seth Lloyd to take that money,
26:20
it's gross. Seth Lloyd is an absolute disgrace for taking
26:23
that money. Last month, however, Lloyd publicly addressed the ethical
26:27
issues involved with taking Epstein's money, and an August twenty
26:31
second blog post titled I Am writing to apologize to
26:34
Jeffrey Epstein's victims, Lloyd related how the job of a
26:37
scientist is to look for truth, and the job of
26:40
a teacher is to help the people to empower themselves.
26:43
I failed to do my job on both counts. Yeah,
26:46
the apology is all fine and well, but you knew
26:48
what he did and you still took the money. My
26:51
comment stands, I don't Lloyd, You're a piece of garbage, buddy. Sorry,
26:56
it would be very tempting. I vet. Fointes is the
27:00
physicist whose work on detecting gravitational waves Penrose described to Epstein,
27:04
But unlike back and Lloyd, Fointes says Epstein's name immediately
27:09
raised a red flag. For the record. Fotes grew Foyintes
27:12
grew up in Mexico, not India, and did her PhD
27:15
at Imperial College London. Penrose and Epstein had met met
27:19
at a June twenty seventeen conference on the Science of
27:22
Consciousness in San Diego. Although the topic of consciousness is
27:26
not what I do. When I saw the list of
27:28
speakers and was offered a plenary talk, I decided that
27:32
it would be a good thing for me and a
27:34
good audience to hear about my experiment, says Fointes, a
27:38
professor at the University of Nottingham in the United Kingdom,
27:42
whose work is supported by the Penrose Institute. Shortly after
27:46
returning home, Foyintes says she and Penrose had a conversation.
27:49
Would I be interested in receiving funding from a wealthy
27:52
man who had been convicted of a sex offense. Fointes
27:55
recalls Penrose asking her, Penro shouldn't even be asking this
27:59
question actually to a woman. Penro should be ashamed of himself,
28:02
and he definitely needs to answer some questions. Foyintez immediately
28:07
said no, citing ethical objections, and quickly forgot about the conversation.
28:11
But two months ago, after reading that Epstein had been arrested,
28:14
she called Penrose. Was it Epstein? She asked him, and
28:17
he said yes, I think it was, And I said,
28:20
oh god. Foyintes is hoping to get a few million
28:24
dollars from a European funding agency to build a prototype
28:27
of her project, a room sized version of an existing facility,
28:31
the Laser Interferometer Gravitational Wave Observatory that has cost the
28:37
US National Science Foundation more than one billion dollars. Epstein's
28:41
money might have accelerated her work, but that was never
28:44
an option for her. Well, yeah, and it shouldn't be
28:47
your resp your resperk. Your work will be more respected
28:51
by doing it the old fashioned way, getting donors who
28:54
actually have, you know, a good, good intentions when when
28:58
they're giving you that money, they at want to see
29:00
the science moved forward. They actually want to see people
29:03
do a good job, and they want to see the
29:05
world be a better place. That was never Epstein's motivation
29:08
with these scientists. That was never what he was about.
29:13
The dream of my life is to build a gravitational
29:16
wave detector and have it work. She says. So if
29:19
someone were to say to me, I'll give you the
29:20
money to make your dream come true, it would be
29:23
very tempting to say yes. But then you have your
29:25
ethical standards, even if you lose some opportunities, saying no
29:29
is the right thing to do. What Epstein has taught
29:32
me is how important it is to do that. You
29:34
should have taught everybody in the science world about that.
29:37
At this point, nobody should be taking money from people
29:39
like Jeffrey Epstein. It doesn't matter the walk of life,
29:42
and it doesn't matter the purpose of this money. Guys
29:44
like Jeffrey Epstein should have been completely and utterly ostracized
29:49
after his first arrest. He should have never been able
29:51
to come back into polite society. He should have never
29:53
been able to continue with his criminal enterprise. But so
29:57
many people like these scientists and others, gave him the
30:00
credibility and offer him a vehicle to insert himself back
30:03
into public life, and the survivors are still left waiting
30:11
for justice. All right, everybody, if you'd like to contact me,
30:15
you can do that at Bobbycapuchi at proton mail dot com.
30:18
That's bobbycap u Cci at ProtonMail dot com. You can
30:24
also find me on Twitter at Bobby Underscore cap u Cci.
30:29
Every one, and welcome back to the Epstein Chronicles. You
30:34
can't talk about Jeffrey Epstein unless you're talking about all
30:38
of the money he was pumping into the world of
30:40
academia and into the pockets of scientists. Yet all we've
30:45
had is silence from these people. None of them have
30:49
come forward and said, well, you know what, we saw
30:51
some goofy shit going on down at Epstein's Island when
30:54
we were there for the Edge Foundation. None of them
30:56
said anything like that. And I have said from the
30:59
very beginning, you know how these scientists are for the
31:02
most part. None of these dudes were picked first in Pe.
31:05
None of these dudes were playing football or baseball or
31:08
popular for the most part, I would guess. And then
31:12
they get to this island with all of these beautiful
31:15
girls and they think they literally just hit the lottery. Well,
31:19
guess what for the smartest people amongst us, You're pretty
31:23
damn stupid. And it's laughable to me that the scientific
31:28
community still won't take responsibility, still won't step up to
31:32
the plate. You have very very few people from the
31:35
world of academia who have stepped up and pointed out
31:39
the wrongdoings here and how the science community in general
31:42
was wrong accepting Jeffrey Epstein as a patron. And let's
31:46
not act like it was just one or two people
31:48
he was donating to. Let's not act like it was
31:51
just one or two campuses. This dude was trolling. This
31:55
man had many fingers in many pies. And it's an embarrassment, honestly,
32:02
that there hasn't been more of a spotlight put on academia,
32:05
put on these scientists that took his money. Now, how
32:08
many of these scientists were working on private projects, secure projects,
32:14
and how much of that information found its way into
32:17
Jeffrey Epstein's hands. Now again, look, maybe none of it
32:20
did right, Maybe none of it did, But that's a
32:23
question that surely has to be asked. When you're dealing
32:26
with sensitive material, you're dealing with places like the Santa
32:30
Fe Institute, you're dealing with Los Alamos. There's a lot
32:34
of sensitive projects that are going on in places such
32:37
as that. And when you have a patron like Jeffrey
32:39
Epstein who is donating hundreds and hundreds of thousands of dollars,
32:43
that opens a lot of doors for these people. And
32:46
that was Jeffrey Epstein's goal. What you thought he was
32:49
just some great patron of science. He just wanted to
32:52
make humanity better. That was never his goal. You wear
32:56
what Maria said the other night about Jeffrey Epstein. It
32:59
was always a out how he could increase his own wealth,
33:01
his own power. He never just gave freely. He wasn't
33:04
some charitable man. We've talked about this a million times
33:08
on the podcast, how these people wrap themselves up in
33:11
charity like its armor, and then they expect us all
33:13
to believe that, well, since I donated to this charity
33:16
or started this charity, I can't be involved in any
33:19
of this. Well, newsflash, we're not buying the bullshit anymore,
33:24
and it's about time that the world of academia gets
33:26
called out onto the carpet for their bullshit as well.
33:31
All Right, today we have an article from Evolution News
33:35
and Science Today. Now, this one I pulled out of
33:37
the catalog considering we're a little slow as far as
33:41
what's going on with Juror fifty and the rest of
33:43
the stuff that is currently going on. So we yanked
33:47
this one out of the archive because it's still very
33:50
very relevant. Considering there has not been enough done here
33:54
with these scientists and they continued to just go on
33:57
with their business. How many of them have been swooped
33:59
up by an another Jeffrey Epstein. Again, I don't have
34:02
that evidence to prove that. That's just a question. Headline
34:07
Jeffrey Epstein and the Silence of Scientists. This article was
34:11
authored by Michael Egner. Literary scholars have an adage about
34:18
the interpretation of texts. They point out that the really
34:22
important things in a text are often what is not
34:25
said more so than what is said, And we talk
34:28
about that a lot too. Right the lies of omission
34:32
when you're omitting things. It's still a lie, and there's
34:35
a lot of omission when it comes to the history
34:37
of scientists and Jeffrey Epstein. To really understand the story,
34:43
you have to read between the lines. What should be
34:46
in this story but was left out? What was the
34:49
motive for the emissions? This often reveals deep purposes and
34:54
themes that are obscured in the explicit words on the page.
34:58
It's at it. It's comparable to Sherlock Holmes's dog that
35:03
didn't bark. Silence is often the real meaning in a story,
35:08
and that is for sure right A lot of times
35:10
you'll see these journalists or these print editors or whatever,
35:15
beat around the bush. They'll dance around the edges, they'll
35:18
play touch butt in the park, but they'll never get
35:20
down to it, will they. And those are lies of omission.
35:25
They know the deal, they know what's going on, but
35:27
for whatever reason, they refuse to put pen to paper
35:32
and let everybody else know the deal. The scientific scandal
35:36
involving pedophile Jeffrey Epstein is horrifying, but it's vital that
35:41
we understand the real meaning of the collaboration between Epstein
35:45
and the science elites, and this is very crucial, right,
35:48
because these scientists, these very scientists, are the ones that
35:52
are dictating public policy at this point. And I don't
35:56
know about you, folks, but I'm not comfortable with that.
35:58
I'm certainly not comfortable with a bunch of Jeffrey Epstein's
36:01
friends dictating my future or what's right or what's wrong. Now.
36:05
I'm not saying everybody who's in the scientific community who's
36:09
making policy is friends with Epstein, but you gotta believe
36:12
that some of these people that were close to Epstein,
36:15
these people that were at the edge conferences with them,
36:18
Brockman's friends. I'm not comfortable with it at all, folks. Honestly,
36:24
the most important meaning in the partnership between Epstein and
36:27
the leading Darwinists and computer scientists isn't the depravity of
36:31
the man in his elite scientific friends. The most important
36:35
meaning is in the silence in the scientific community in
36:38
the midst of this atrocity. And honestly, one of the
36:43
only people to speak out as far as academia goes
36:46
is doctor Stephen Delay, and he has been very, very
36:49
forceful with his pushback against his colleagues in academia and
36:54
their behavior. There is no reason that these people should
37:00
be taking money from Epstein. There's no reason that Epstein
37:03
should have the access to the campus or an office
37:08
on a campus. None of that should have occurred. But
37:12
these people that are working on these projects, or these scientists,
37:15
they're like anyone else, right, they can be manipulated and
37:20
a few hundred thousand dollars is a good salve to
37:23
put on the wound. What didn't happen. What didn't happen
37:29
is this, There was no dissent in the scientific profession
37:32
about taking guidance and money from a convicted pedophile who
37:36
was obviously trafficking children for sex. Not a word, and
37:40
he is one hundred percent right. I mean, let's not
37:44
cut corners here. Okay, all of these people who acted
37:47
like they had no idea what Epstein was up to,
37:50
especially after the first arrest, are allying now. The people
37:55
that were associated with him before his first arrest. I
37:58
still don't believe they they had no idea what was
38:01
going on, but at least they can say, hey, look,
38:03
this guy wasn't convicted. At the time, I had no idea,
38:06
But after the fact, I have zero time to listen
38:11
to any excuse you have about how you had no
38:14
idea what was going on. What Google didn't work for you. You
38:17
didn't have a search engine that you could type his
38:19
name into and see what was up. And for some
38:22
of the smartest people in the world, you mofos look
38:27
pretty damn stupid right now. At every stage of this
38:33
repellent saga, from Epstein's early forays into scientific patronage twenty
38:38
years ago, through his conviction for child prostitution in two
38:41
thousand and eight, to his largest as a patron of
38:45
elite Darwinists and computer scientists at MIT, Harvard, the Santa
38:49
Fe Institute, the transhumanist project, Humanity Plus, and many others
38:54
in the decade that followed, there was from the scientific
38:58
community abject silence. And why do you think if these
39:02
scientists would have spoke up, they would have lost their patronage,
39:06
They would have lost this money, this funding, And nobody
39:08
wanted to step on Epstein's toes. They were all terrified
39:11
to this guy. And it's sad, right because now when
39:16
you look back on it and you look at all
39:18
of these scientists and all of these big shots who
39:21
were complicit, it leaves a real bad taste in your mouth,
39:24
doesn't it. How is it that the only person that
39:27
is being held responsible for this is Glaine Maxwell. Now,
39:30
don't get me wrong, she is the most disgusting of
39:33
the group and she should be in prison for the
39:35
rest of her life. But what about these other people
39:38
that these girls were being trafficked to. They don't hold
39:40
any responsibility for their decisions or their actions, no self
39:44
responsibility whatsoever. We should just forget that had happened. Huh, Sorry,
39:48
that is not going to occur. And these scientists that
39:51
were here harboring Epstein's image and enabling his behavior, they
39:57
all need to be called out on the carpet. Thousands
40:02
of elite and pedestrian scientists benefited from Epstein's philanthropy and camaraderie.
40:08
Thousands more are knew of Epstein's courtship rituals with scientists
40:12
and with children and said absolutely nothing. What happened on
40:15
the Lolita Express and Pedophile Island. While probably known to
40:19
many Epstein's elite science pals were known as well at
40:23
least an outline to the thousands of ordinary scientists and
40:26
administrators who cashed his checks and worked in his labs.
40:31
And again what they'll say is, oh, we had no
40:33
idea they'll distance themselves from all of this and then
40:37
they'll just go on their merry way like it never happened.
40:39
But that's not gonna work. There needs to be accountability,
40:43
right All of these people that were involved in this
40:45
shit need to be held accountable so it doesn't happen again.
40:49
What you think Epstein's the only one out there, the
40:51
only sick fuck running around right now. Unfortunately, we're sharing
40:55
air with a lot of sick and twisted people, folks,
40:58
and there's guarantee to be another Epstein out there as
41:02
we speak. And in your own communities, you don't have
41:05
to look too far for Mini Epstein's dudes that are
41:09
doing this to hookers right now on whatever the track
41:12
is in your city or your neighborhood or whatever. I
41:15
can leave my house right now and go three four
41:18
miles and find a whole area with nothing but hookers.
41:23
Poor people who are you know, stuck doing what they
41:28
have to do to provide for themselves, whether it be
41:30
they have a drug habit or whatever. The fact is,
41:33
they're out on the street. They're in that circumstance. They're
41:36
in the clutches of human traffickers. Only whispered questions There
41:42
were whispered questions, undeniably obvious questions. There must have been
41:47
daily whispers and labs and hallways and coffee rooms. Why
41:51
is doctors so and so taking trips with this guy?
41:54
What do you think is happening with all those little girls?
41:57
Where does the money come from? It's these are all
41:59
legitimate questions that even you know, basic folk like us
42:03
would ask. You mean to tell me that all of
42:06
these scientists and all of these big wigs, big shots,
42:09
had no idea. They didn't ask these questions. They weren't
42:13
interested in where this money came from. I guess when
42:17
the tap is flowing, you don't question it, huh. You
42:20
just put your hands under it and continue to drink
42:22
the water. The answers were in broad daylight. Epstein's life
42:27
was an open Internet page. Thousands of scientists and administrators,
42:32
even those not directly involved with Epstein and the children
42:35
eat Trafficked, asked these questions and knew the answers. No
42:39
one said a word. Why. Well, in my opinion, it's
42:43
because Epstein was so highly placed in society. And when
42:47
you're best friends with Billy boy Clinton, eh, you know,
42:50
it's kind of intimidating. For people to think that they
42:53
can go against you. You know, you walk into Epstein's
42:56
office and you see pictures of Clinton Trump, who would Barock,
43:01
and the list goes on of powerful people. That's intimidating.
43:05
And he wasn't afraid, Jeffrey Epstein to point out that
43:08
he could end your career, end your life. So a
43:12
lot of these scientists were probably a little scared, But
43:15
that doesn't excuse it. You need to have some backbone
43:17
in life. Certain things are worth fighting for, certain things
43:21
are worth losing your career over, in my opinion, and
43:24
this certainly is that. Right. Look, if dying on the
43:27
hill of protecting children isn't worth it to you, then
43:30
you're just a scumbag in my opinion. And I don't
43:33
even have kids, folks, right, I don't have I have
43:36
no desire to have children. I'm not a big fan
43:38
of little kids running around crying, snotty nosed up. But
43:42
as a society, that's our future. Those kids are going
43:46
to carry the torch. They're gonna be the ones to
43:48
make this world a better place, hopefully. And these sick
43:51
fucking people like Epstein abusing them, molesting them, and these
43:54
scientists keeping quiet about it. Well, you know, my big
43:57
fat mouth is going to be moving. We can only
44:00
do what we can do right to try and enact change.
44:03
And I can only do my small little part here
44:05
talking on this podcast to bring some awareness to what's
44:11
going on. But like I always say, they can avoid
44:16
one nat right, swat it away. But when there's ten
44:19
million of us, now it's time for these people to
44:21
suffocate a pariah for life. Some years ago, at a
44:27
scientific conference, I had a private chat with a colleague
44:30
from another university. His research was in a rather obscure
44:34
topic in biology, but he was a scientist of the
44:37
first rank. He was a superb investigator and quite senior
44:41
and widely respected. He told me that he knew that
44:44
I was involved in intelligent design, and he thanked me
44:48
for what I was doing. He told me that he
44:50
was a Christian. He said that a lot of the
44:52
scientists know that Darwinism is a charad, and he was
44:56
thankful for scientists who were speaking out, but he couldn't
44:59
do so, although he desperately wanted to. He said his
45:02
wife was sick and that if he spoke out he
45:04
would never get another grant. Hey, look, I don't know
45:08
one way or the other about any of that. I'm
45:09
not a scientist, right. The point of this story is
45:13
Jeffrey Epstein was an absolute scumbag, and the scientific community
45:17
knew a single public statement endorsing id or critiquing Darwinism
45:25
in any meaningful way would make him a pariah for
45:27
the rest of his life. My career would end the
45:30
day I spoke out. He told me. He said that
45:32
his wife's life depended on her current medical care, and
45:35
that he would be unable to afford her care if
45:37
he lost his position. He said he felt terrible that
45:40
he couldn't speak out publicly, but he had a responsibility
45:43
to his family and that they would suffer if his
45:46
career went into the abyss. That's terrible, man. Look, people
45:49
should be able to speak their mind, right. I don't
45:52
understand how things can be so corrosive, so corrupted. It's
45:57
okay that people have different opinions as long as as
46:00
long as when you have a conversation about it, you
46:02
can defend your opinion in a meaningful way. Scientists, especially
46:10
scientists in academia, are uniquely vulnerable to professional destruction if
46:14
they stray from the herd. Their life hangs on peer review.
46:18
Just look at the ostracism, ridicule, and even hate reigned
46:21
upon by Mike Beehe or Jonathan Wells or Guillarmo Gonzalez
46:26
or Bill Demski or Richard Sternberg or any of the
46:29
other courageous scientists who had the integrity to question the
46:33
Darwinian consensus. I mean, isn't that what science is about,
46:37
really questioning what the norms are and trying to, you know,
46:41
challenge those. I mean, I don't think science should just
46:45
be all right, well, the science is settled, let's move
46:47
on now. Again. I'm not a scientist, and I'm certainly
46:51
not somebody who is strong enough in biology, human biology,
46:56
or whatever, evolutionary biology to offer an opinion one way
46:59
or the other. I mean, I'm lucky I can tie
47:02
my shoes in the morning, folks. As the Epstein scandal
47:10
shows with striking clarity, dissent on matters of importance is
47:15
forbidden in the scientific community. Scientists will engage in or
47:19
tolerate all manner of lie and vice to protect their careers.
47:23
They go along to get along. They join the consensus
47:26
that Jeffrey Epstein is a wonderful patron and his money
47:30
is untainted, just as they join the consensus that Darwinian
47:33
evolution is a fact. Many, perhaps even most, do not
47:37
do it because they believe it. They do it for
47:40
professional survival. All right. Well, again, I don't know anything
47:43
about any of that. I don't know about the infighting
47:45
and the scientific community about Darwinism or evolution. To me,
47:50
it looks like evolution is the proper way things came about, right,
47:54
I mean, it seems logical. But what do I know.
47:57
I'm agnostic, folks. I don't know shit about they or
48:00
if there's a god or if we were created by aliens. Again,
48:05
I have enough problems on my plate here talking about
48:08
the worldly problems that we can see. I'll leave all
48:11
of that spiritual stuff up to other people. That is
48:14
way above my pay grade. The profound revelation from the
48:24
Epstein scandal is that the scientific community is silent in
48:27
the face of obvious lies, criminality, and moral atrocities. Scientists
48:32
at MIT and Harvard and the institutions on whom Epstein
48:36
reigned Largesse obviously knew enough about Epstein to know that
48:40
association with him was a moral and his money probably
48:44
came from child sex trafficking. They could know with a
48:47
mouse click that Epstein had no college degree and sketchy
48:51
experience in finance. His primary enterprise seemed to be making
48:55
little girls available to rich men. But they stuck with
48:58
the consensus and said nothing. Their scientific careers, of course,
49:03
came first. And you see this paralleled to other industries, right,
49:07
especially the media industry. Jeffrey Epstein and his friends, and
49:12
you know, they have a lot of power. So a
49:14
lot of these media companies don't want to deal with that.
49:17
They don't want to tangle with people like Epstein kept
49:21
in the club. There was a scientific consensus held by
49:24
thousands of scientists at all levels of the profession that
49:28
Jeffrey Epstein was a great patron. Any doubts, and there
49:32
must have been agonizing doubts for twenty years were kept
49:35
in the club. And this is a big problem. This
49:37
is my biggest problem. Sometimes you have to be willing
49:40
to break away from the herd. Sometimes you have to
49:43
be willing to, you know, go your own way, forge
49:45
your own path and figure things out for yourself. But
49:49
when you're part of one of these exclusive scientific CLOBs,
49:53
your whole life depends on getting on to go along, right,
49:58
And for me, that's just a moral like it. I'll
50:01
never be part of the herd mentality, you know, and
50:04
I won't be put into a box either. I have
50:07
my own opinions, my own outlook on life that has
50:10
been shaped by my own life experiences. So when you
50:14
look at people like these scientists who have no sort
50:17
of moral compass and are willing to sacrifice basically their souls, well,
50:24
it's a very very disturbing and disgusting scenario to think
50:29
that these people are so highly respected in society and
50:33
on these campuses. There is also a scientific consensus that
50:42
nothing makes sense except in light of Darwinian evolution, held
50:45
as it turns out by the man of the same
50:48
scientists who cashed Epstein's checks. There was and is no dissent. Well,
50:54
look again, I have no idea about that debate and
50:57
that argument. People are gonna have to make up their
51:02
own minds, right, I'm not gonna sit here and tell anybody, oh, well,
51:05
you shouldn't believe in God or you shouldn't believe in evolution.
51:08
Believe in whatever you believe in. I mean, really doesn't
51:11
affect me one way or the other. This is the
51:17
lesson from the Epstein scandal. Scientists are first and foremost
51:21
devoted to their own professional survival, and they will tow
51:25
any line to survive. They will lie, cheat, and steal
51:28
for professional security. They will even tacitly endorse child rape
51:33
and child sex trafficking and personally profit from it to
51:37
avoid the professional abyss. Science is conducted under a code
51:41
of OMERTA dissent is punished mercilessly as a measure of
51:46
scientific and moral truth. Scientific consensus is worthless. Like I said,
51:52
this article was authored by Michael Egner. He's a professor
51:57
of neurosurgery at UH the State University of New York Stonybrook,
52:02
the director of Pediatric Neurosurgery. Blah blah blah blah blah
52:05
blah blah, a guy who's a scientist and obviously somebody
52:07
who's you know, moved in these circles. The thing about
52:12
this article and why I wanted to share it, is
52:14
that Jeffrey Epstein was well well respected in the scientific community.
52:19
He was somebody who was a patron of a lot
52:21
of these people, and still a lot of these scientists,
52:26
a lot of these people that took his money have
52:28
found a way to fly under the radar. So if
52:31
they were taking money from Jeffrey Epstein, my question is this,
52:36
who else are they taking money from? All Right, folks,
52:41
that's gonna do it for this morning's update. Obviously a
52:44
lot more is on the way. If you'd like to
52:46
contact me, you can do that at Bobby Capuci at
52:48
ProtonMail dot com. That's bo Bby c ap Ucci at
52:54
ProtonMail dot com. You can also find me on Twitter
52:58
at Bobby Underscore c A p U C c I.
53:03
The link that we discussed can be found in the
53:05
description box.