Podcasts about Uncertain

Arizona's public universities start their fall semesters in the coming weeks and are facing a good deal of uncertainty. A longtime regent on what the near future may hold. Plus, the memoir of a child held in a migrant detention facility during the first Trump administration.

In this episode of Volunteer Nation, Tobi Johnson dives into the heart of what makes a volunteer team truly thrive: community. Drawing from both personal experience and well-established sociological principles, Tobi explores five essential pillars that foster a sense of belonging and connection among volunteers and between volunteers and staff. This episode is a must-listen for volunteer leaders who want to create a more collaborative, motivated, and mission-driven team. Whether you're just getting started or looking to reinvigorate your program, you'll walk away with simple, actionable steps to strengthen your community and boost engagement. Full show notes: 171. Practical Community Building Tips for Your Volunteer Team Community Building - Episode Highlights [04:36] - The Importance of Community in Volunteer Organizations [05:31] - Five Pillars of Community Building [07:23] - Pillar 1: Membership [10:01] - Pillar 2: Influence [12:35] - Pillar 3: Integration and Fulfillment of Needs [14:37] - Break and Resource Promotion [17:46] - Pillar 4: Shared Emotional Connection [22:13] - Pillar 5: Shared Responsibility and Commitment Helpful Links Volunteer Management Progress Report  VolunteerPro Impact Lab  Volunteer Nation Episode #168: Note to Nonprofit Execs – Supporting Volunteers is Everyone's Job  Volunteer Nation Episode #164: Moving from Volunteer Compliance to Building Your Nonprofit Community  Episode #138: Building Community in an Uncertain (and Sometimes Scary) World  Episode #027: Secrets to Building a Sense of Community with Volunteers  McMillan, D. W., & Chavis, D. M. (1986). Sense of community: A definition and theory. Journal of Community Psychology, 14(1), 6–23 Thanks for listening to this episode of the Volunteer Nation podcast. If you enjoyed it, please be sure to subscribe, rate, and review so we can reach more people like you who want to improve the impact of their good cause. For more tips and notes from the show, check us out at TobiJohnson.com. For any comments or questions, email us at WeCare@VolPro.net.

in this episode I am talking about how things approached the end with the college mate it was tricky ever since I was and still am on exploration mode. the concept of tslkimg and getting reliable with someone has always been a big deal for me and seems like it was for the person infront too! well guess what I am exhausted to carry on with this whatever one can call it ! been a sufferer ever since and I can't go on and choose more for myself when God is trying and blessing me . now coming to the Trainer story I have talked a little bit too and the fondness I am growing for this person is insane ! stay tuned for more stories related to this topic !

Our panel considers whether or not countries should retaliate against Trump’s tariffs, if budgets announced by France and others will get deficits in order and if the public will back any of this?See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Tiffany Mann is an extraordinary singer and actor who is often hailed as a powerhouse - and so it might seem surprising that she battles uncertainty just like the rest of us. She shares what it was like to develop her talent in the context of family who are highly successful artists in their own rights, as well as the ongoing uncertainty of navigating a business that both values and minimizes the extraordinary talents of marginalized artists. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Creative Director Josh bring us his message titled "Your Storm Has met Its Match."Uncertain about God and faith? Peak City is a safe place to discover more about God and faith without any pressure. Come and see who Jesus really is and what he's really all about!Our mission is to help people discover Jesus and follow Him fearlessly by being raw, passionate, and clear. Visit ⁠peakcityco.com⁠ to find out more and we hope to see you in person soon!

Scott Petrak joined Baskin and Phelps to share the latest updates with Quinshon Judkins' arrest, what will likely come next for the Browns and their second round draft pick, and how the roster could be shaken up if the NFL decides to step in. He also talked about what the Browns' plans are for the offense this season and why those plans haven't changed, why he doesn't think the off-the-field issues are completely a result of Andrew Berry's leadership, and shared his opinions on Kenny Pickett working out with Jerry Jeudy.

“Playing the residuals” is a better approach than trying to figure out the winning strategy, Arnim Holzer posits. He discusses sectors like utilities and financials and turns attention towards international strategies. He thinks U.S. currency will “continue to underperform,” but not in the same way. He talks about diversification and how to play potential Fed moves this year.======== Schwab Network ========Empowering every investor and trader, every market day. Subscribe to the Market Minute newsletter - https://schwabnetwork.com/subscribeDownload the iOS app - https://apps.apple.com/us/app/schwab-network/id1460719185Download the Amazon Fire Tv App - https://www.amazon.com/TD-Ameritrade-Network/dp/B07KRD76C7Watch on Sling - https://watch.sling.com/1/asset/191928615bd8d47686f94682aefaa007/watchWatch on Vizio - https://www.vizio.com/en/watchfreeplus-exploreWatch on DistroTV - https://www.distro.tv/live/schwab-network/Follow us on X – https://twitter.com/schwabnetworkFollow us on Facebook – https://www.facebook.com/schwabnetworkFollow us on LinkedIn - https://www.linkedin.com/company/schwab-network/ About Schwab Network - https://schwabnetwork.com/about

Send us a textDiscover how experienced investors across real estate, tech, media, AI, art, and sustainability are building antifragile portfolios that don't just survive — they thrive through volatility, disruption, and global change.This panel, recorded live at the Family Office Club Super Summit, explores how investors are navigating market uncertainty, deploying capital into resilient asset classes, and turning passion into performance.Hear insights on:What it means to be an antifragile investorWhy legacy, authenticity, and alignment matter more than everStrategic trends in real estate, AI, sustainability, art, blockchain, sports, and digital mediaWhere capital is flowing in 2024 and what lies ahead

In the final message of our UNCERTAIN series, Pastor Kim brings a powerful and timely word about what it means to follow Jesus when life doesn't make sense.This episode dives into three key truths:Trusting Jesus brings peace — even when nothing around you is peaceful.Uncertain trials grow our faith — if we lean in instead of pulling away.Jesus' strength sustains us — especially in the middle of persecution and pressure.Whether you're facing personal storms or walking through a season of doubt, this message will remind you that Jesus is not just present — He is peace.

Defender of the Faith – Vol. 1This study, Defender of the Faith, is designed to recognize and deprogram individuals from cults, including certain Christian-identifying groups. Rooted in John 8:32, the core message is that freedom comes from knowing and following the pure doctrine of Christ as revealed solely in Scripture. Any addition—man-made doctrines or extra-biblical revelations—creates "another gospel" and leads to deception.22 Signs of a CultBern identifies 22 characteristics common to cults, whether non-Christian, pseudo-Christian, or even within accepted denominations: Exclusive, unscriptural doctrines: Unique teachings not found in the Bible. Salvation by works: Grace is supplemented with human effort. Uncertain eternal future: Members lack assurance of salvation. Extra-biblical authority: Truth claimed from sources outside Scripture. Authoritarian leadership: Leaders assume roles meant for the Holy Spirit. False teachings accepted as truth. Syncretism: Mixing pagan elements with Christian worship. Scripture manipulation: Twisting verses to support specific beliefs. Mind control: Fear-based or doctrinal manipulation. Absurd lies taught as truth. Exploitation of members. Blind submission to human authority. Another gospel: A distorted salvation message. Religious spirit: Legalism disguised as holiness. Antichrist spirit: Denying Christ's true nature. Pharisaical spirit: Overemphasis on outward law. Jezebel spirit: Manipulative control. Control spirit: Excessive control over members' lives. Spirit of error: Leading others from biblical truth. Nicolaitanism: Clergy-layperson divide and domination. Fear-based control. Resistance to the Holy Spirit. Understanding Those in CultsTo effectively help someone out of a cult, it's essential to understand their mindset: Lack of "Sola Scriptura": They don't view Scripture as the final authority. Reliance on human interpretation: Trusting doctrines about God over God's word itself. Ingrained beliefs: Lifelong teachings make them resistant to new ideas. Deep investment: Their identity or career may be tied to the group. Tactics to avoid truth: They may redefine terms, dismiss Scripture, or claim subjective interpretation. Brainwashing: Indoctrination is gradual, persistent, and difficult to undo. Pre-programmed responses: Members are trained to deflect objections instinctively.

Send us a textDeath catches us all by surprise – even when we think we're prepared for it. In this deeply moving episode, Dr. Robert Jackson opens his heart to share personal encounters with life's brevity that have shaped his perspective on faith and preparedness.The journey begins with a teenage Dr. Jackson standing in a rural emergency room, watching his physician father battle unsuccessfully to save a crash victim's life. This foreshadows the devastating loss of his own father in a plane crash years later – the last memory being his dad kneeling in prayer over him before departing for a flight that would never return. The recent tragic deaths of his dear friends Philip and Cheryl Porter in similar circumstances reopens these wounds while reinforcing timeless truths about how we should live.Philip Porter wasn't just a patient but a kindred spirit who used his piloting skills to transport medical patients, pastors, and even rescue victims of sex trafficking. His and Cheryl's lives exemplified genuine Christian service – giving generously of their time, talents and finances to advance God's kingdom. Their sudden departure prompts Dr. Jackson to share crucial wisdom: be ready to meet Jesus at any moment, keep short accounts in relationships, share the gospel with loved ones, and prepare practically for death with wills, insurance, and funeral arrangements.The episode concludes with the beautiful aviation poem "High Flight," celebrating those who have "slipped the surly bonds of earth" and "touched the face of God." Dr. Jackson's testimony that "Praise God, Philip's gone to glory" echoes the comforting words once shared with him about his own father – a reminder that for believers, death isn't the end but a homecoming. What preparations have you made for your final flight? Are you living so everyone knows where you're headed?Support the showhttps://www.jacksonfamilyministry.comhttps://bobslone.com/home/podcast-production/

Welcome back to Equipping ELLs! In Episode 185, host Beth Vaucher delivers an empowering and practical message tailored to ESL and ELL educators navigating the often-overwhelming world of multilingual teaching. This episode, titled “How to Lead with Confidence in the Classroom,” tackles the ever-present feeling of imposter syndrome and the unrealistic expectation for ESL specialists to have all the answers.Beth kicks off the episode by acknowledging the emotional weight many educators carry, especially when stepping into leadership roles without feeling fully equipped. She reminds listeners that confidence is not about perfection—it's about presence, purpose, and persistence.Listeners are guided through three actionable strategies that can be implemented right away to foster confident teaching:Build a "Confidence Go-To File" – A powerful tool filled with student notes, success stories, affirmations, and progress data to remind educators of their impact.Collaborate with Purpose – Beth breaks down how to form strong partnerships with homeroom teachers through mutual respect, curiosity, and clear communication—avoiding the “dumping ground” dynamic.Set Boundaries to Protect Energy – Prioritize one to two focus areas to grow expertise without burning out. Learn how to say “not right now” with confidence and clarity.This episode also highlights common challenges faced by ESL teachers such as unclear job expectations, lack of curriculum, and managing multiple grade levels. Beth offers mindset shifts and practical advice, including how to align with administrators and how to focus deeply on areas that make the biggest impact.Listeners will also learn about the Equipping ELLs Membership, which offers ready-to-use resources and trainings designed to ease lesson planning and improve student outcomes. Use code TAKE10OFF for 10% off tier three plans.This heartfelt episode will resonate with new and veteran ESL teachers alike who are looking to lead with confidence, not fear, and create lasting change for their multilingual learners. Don't miss the bonus encouragement and invitation to the live webinar: From Overwhelmed to On Track.If you've ever questioned your readiness or role, this episode is a must-listen. Share it with a fellow educator, subscribe for weekly insights, and leave a review to help support the global community of passionate ELL teachers.Sign Up for the FREE Webinar⁠⁠⁠Join the Equipping ELLs Membership Shop our TpT Store

Summary In this article, I argue most of the interesting cross-cause prioritization decisions and conclusions rest on philosophical evidence that isn't robust enough to justify high degrees of certainty that any given intervention (or class of cause interventions) is “best” above all others. I hold this to be true generally because of the reliance of such cross-cause prioritization judgments on relatively weak philosophical evidence. In particular, the case for high confidence in conclusions on which interventions are all things considered best seems to rely on particular approaches to handling normative uncertainty. The evidence for these approaches is weak and different approaches can produce radically different recommendations, which suggest that cross-cause prioritization intervention rankings or conclusions are fundamentally fragile and that high confidence in any single approach is unwarranted. I think the reliance of cross-cause prioritization conclusions on philosophical evidence that isn't robust has been previously underestimated in EA circles [...] ---Outline:(00:14) Summary(06:03) Cause Prioritization Is Uncertain and Some Key Philosophical Evidence for Particular Conclusions is Structurally Weak(06:11) The decision-relevant parts of cross-cause prioritization heavily rely on philosophical conclusions(09:26) Philosophical evidence about the interesting cause prioritization questions is generally weak(17:35) Aggregation methods disagree(21:27) Evidence for aggregation methods is weaker than empirical evidence of which EAs are skeptical(24:07) Objections and Replies(24:11) Aren't we here to do the most good? / Aren't we here to do consequentialism? / Doesn't our competitive edge come from being more consequentialist than others in the nonprofit sector?(25:28) Can't I just use my intuitions or my priors about the right answers to these questions? I agree philosophical evidence is weak so we should just do what our intuitions say(27:27) We can use common sense / or a non-philosophical approach and conclude which cause area(s) to support. For example, it's common sense that humanity going extinct would be really bad; so, we should work on that(30:22) I'm an anti-realist about philosophical questions so I think that whatever I value is right, by my lights, so why should I care about any uncertainty across theories? Can't I just endorse whatever views seem best to me?(31:52) If the evidence in philosophy is as weak as you say, this suggests there are no right answers at all and/or that potentially anything goes in philanthropy. If you can't confidently rule things out, wouldn't this imply that you can't distinguish a scam charity from a highly effective group like Against Malaria Foundation?(34:08) I have high confidence in MEC (or some other aggregation method) and/or some more narrow set of normative theories so cause prioritization is more predictable than you are suggesting despite some uncertainty in what theories I give some credence to(41:44) Conclusion (or well, what do I recommend?)(44:05) AcknowledgementsThe original text contained 20 footnotes which were omitted from this narration. --- First published: July 3rd, 2025 Source: https://forum.effectivealtruism.org/posts/nwckstt2mJinCwjtB/we-should-be-more-uncertain-about-cause-prioritization-based --- Narrated by TYPE III AUDIO. ---Images from the article:Apple Podcasts and Spotify do not show images in the episode description. Try Pocket Casts, or another podcast app.

More than 200,000 federal workers have been fired, resigned, or taken early retirement since President Donald Trump's inauguration. Now, this week, the Supreme Court ruled that Trump can proceed with additional job cuts at federal agencies. We'll unpack the sort of labor market fired federal employees face and hear how some job hunters are faring. Also, this spring's power outage in the Iberian Peninsula highlighted the vulnerability of modern payment systems.

More than 200,000 federal workers have been fired, resigned, or taken early retirement since President Donald Trump's inauguration. Now, this week, the Supreme Court ruled that Trump can proceed with additional job cuts at federal agencies. We'll unpack the sort of labor market fired federal employees face and hear how some job hunters are faring. Also, this spring's power outage in the Iberian Peninsula highlighted the vulnerability of modern payment systems.

Today, Taiwan is caught in the crosshairs of two imperial rivals: the US and China. This is nothing new for the island nation, which has been a battleground for competing empires for centuries, but what is new is the critical role Taiwan plays in the 21st-century world economy. For example, Taiwan manufacturers 90% of the world's most advanced microchips—the key component in everything from consumer electronics to the US military's F-35 fighter jets. In this episode of Solidarity Without Exception, co-host Ashley Smith speaks with Brian Hioe, journalist and editor of New Bloom magazine, about the history of Taiwanese struggles for self-determination, the country's position in the contemporary US-China rivalry, the increasing threat of imperial war, and the urgency of building solidarity among working-class people in Taiwan, the US, and China.Guests:Brian Hioe is a freelance journalist, translator, and one of the founding editors of New Bloom, an online magazine featuring radical perspectives on Taiwan and the Asia-Pacific. A New York native and Taiwanese-American, Hioe has an MA in East Asian Languages and Cultures from Columbia University and graduated from New York University with majors in History, East Asian Studies, and English Literature. He was Democracy and Human Rights Service Fellow at the Taiwan Foundation for Democracy from 2017 to 2018 and is currently a Non-Resident Fellow at the University of Nottingham's Taiwan Studies Programme, as well as board member of the Taiwan Foreign Correspondents' Club.Additional resources:New Bloom website, Facebook page, X page, and InstagramEli Friedman, Kevin Lin, Rosa Liu, & Ashley Smith, Haymarket Books, China in Global Capitalism: Building International Solidarity Against Imperial RivalryBrian J. Chen, Boston Review, “Semiconductor Island: The colonial making of Taiwan's chip supremacy”Credits:Pre-Production: Ashley SmithStdio Production / Post-Production: TRNNHelp us continue producing radically independent news and in-depth analysis by following us and becoming a monthly sustainer.Sign up for our newsletterFollow us on BlueskyLike us on FacebookFollow us on TwitterDonate to support this podcast

How can a simple shift in mindset unlock the potential within your team? In this episode, Kevin sits down with Phillip B. Wilson to discuss the power of four key leadership mindsets that can help leaders not only improve their effectiveness but also inspire exceptional performance in others. These include believing in your impact, believing in yourself, believing in others, and believing in your relationships. Kevin and Phil also explore topics such as overcoming the hero assumption, building psychological safety, and navigating the pitfalls of overconfidence. Listen For 00:00 Welcome to the Remarkable Leadership Podcast 00:46 How to Join Our Community 01:12 Introducing Flexible Leadership Book 02:04 Meet Phillip Wilson 03:06 From Law School to Leadership Consulting 04:02 Early Leadership Journey 05:18 Crisis Moments and Leadership Lessons 06:26 Studying Leadership and Approachable Leadership 07:29 Why Mindset Matters in Leadership 08:09 The Evolution of The Leader Shift Playbook 10:02 Leadership Lessons from Personal Experience 10:47 Understanding the Dunning-Kruger Effect 12:12 Mount Stupid and Leadership Overconfidence 13:29 Self-Awareness and Asking for Feedback 15:16 The Four Leadership Mindsets Overview 16:04 Believe in Yourself 17:34 Actor-Observer Bias and Leadership 18:34 Confirmation Bias and Self-Confidence 19:21 Confidence vs Overconfidence 20:51 Believe in Your Impact 22:30 Placebo vs Nocebo Leadership 24:10 Believe in Others 25:15 The Hero Assumption 25:42 Story of Daniel Kish 27:48 The Power of Belief from Others 29:03 Believe in Your Relationships 30:24 Three Core Questions of Psychological Safety 31:38 What Does Phil Wilson Do for Fun? 32:47 What Phil Is Reading Now 34:14 Where to Learn More About Phil and His Book 35:04 Your Leadership Call to Action Phillip's Story: Phillip B. Wilson is the author of The Leader-Shift Playbook: 4 Simple Changes to Score Big and Unleash Your Team's Potential. He is the founder of Approachable Leadership, where he and his team help clients thrive and create extraordinary workplaces. He is a national expert on leadership, labor relations, and creating positive workplaces. He is regularly featured in the business media, including Fox Business Network, Fast Company, Bloomberg News, HR magazine, and The New York Times. Wilson regularly delivers keynotes, workshops, and webinars and has been called to testify before Congress as a labor relations expert. He graduated magna cum laude from Augustana College in Rock Island, Illinois, and went on to earn his JD from the University of Michigan Law School. This Episode is brought to you by... Flexible Leadership is every leader's guide to greater success in a world of increasing complexity and chaos.  Book Recommendations The Leader-Shift Playbook: 4 Simple Changes to Score Big and Unleash Your Team's Potential by Phillip B. Wilson  Data: Harness Your Numbers to Go from Uncertain to Unstoppable by Mark O'Donnell, Angela Kalemis, Mark Stanley  Outgrow: How to Expand Market Share and Outsell Your Competition by Alex Goldfayn  Finish Big by Bo Burlingham  Like this? Becoming the Leader Your Team is Waiting For with Jonathan Raymond Nurturing a Team That Flourishes with Dan Pontefract Join Our Community If you want to view our live podcast episodes, hear about new releases, or chat with others who enjoy this podcast join one of our communities below. Join the Facebook Group Join the LinkedIn Group   Leave a Review If you liked this conversation, we'd be thrilled if you'd let others know by leaving a review on Apple Podcasts. Here's a quick guide for posting a review. Review on Apple: https://remarkablepodcast.com/itunes    Podcast Better! Sign up with Libsyn and get up to 2 months free! Use promo code: RLP  

In this heartfelt episode of Faith Fueled Woman, host Kristin Fitch reflects on the recent loss of a close friend—and how it has brought renewed clarity about what really matters in life.If you've ever felt like you're just going through the motions, this episode is your reminder that life is both precious and unpredictable. Kristin invites you to take an honest look at how you're spending your time, using your gifts, and showing up for the people you love.Through faith-filled encouragement, she shares how to live with intention, let go of what doesn't matter, and pursue a legacy that reflects God's calling on your life. Because this moment—the one you're in right now—is your opportunity to live fully, faithfully, and with purpose.If you're ready to trade inner criticism for clarity, and overwhelm for lasting peace, this episode is for you. And if you'd like to jump start shifting your thoughts and experiencing more joy go grab my free Rewire Your Mind Guide to help you get started. Rewire Your Mind GuideDownload My Free Joyful Living Devotional: https://kristinfitch.com/devotionalReady to take your first step towards a more joyful, faith-filled life? Download our Reignite Your Passion Workbook and start living with purpose today!What to feel more energized in midlife? Grab my 5 Day Energy Reset Jump Start Guide here.Ready to work with Kristin to make a shift in your life? Click here to get started.✅ Key TakeawaysTime is not promised—what we do with today truly matters.You don't have to have it all figured out to live with purpose—you just have to start showing up.Your gifts were given to you for a reason—use them to build legacy and community.Stepping outside your comfort zone is often where the most joy and impact are found.Legacy isn't just about the future—it's about being present and intentional right now.God calls us to live fully, love boldly, and serve faithfully—even when life feels uncertain.Christian podcast for women, living with purpose, biblical encouragement for women. Christian mindset in hard seasons, using your spiritual gifts, leaving a legacy of faith, faith-based personal growth, time management for Christian women, living intentionally with God, embracing uncertainty with faith, finding meaning in loss, spiritual growth for midlife women, showing up with purpose. making an impact with your life, how to live fully in faith, prioritizing what matters most, daily faith-filled living, faith-based reflection podcast, encouragement for Christian women, navigating change with faith

The Reserve Bank says the economic outlook remains highly uncertain. Finance and Mortgage Advisers Association's Leigh Hodgetts spoke to Corin Dann.

Charles Schwab's Cooper Howard says this week's jobless claims data will be the next key data point investors will need to watch. With tariff dates moving later and uncertain inflation impact yet to be felt, Cooper believes the Fed will face an uncertain path for cutting rates by the September meeting. Later, he discusses global trends in yields and provides the case for why the U.S. yield curve will likely steepen this year.======== Schwab Network ========Empowering every investor and trader, every market day.Subscribe to the Market Minute newsletter - https://schwabnetwork.com/subscribeDownload the iOS app - https://apps.apple.com/us/app/schwab-...Download the Amazon Fire Tv App - https://www.amazon.com/TD-Ameritrade-...Watch on Sling - https://watch.sling.com/1/asset/19192...Watch on Vizio - https://www.vizio.com/en/watchfreeplu...Watch on DistroTV - https://www.distro.tv/live/schwab-net...Follow us on X – / schwabnetwork Follow us on Facebook – / schwabnetwork Follow us on LinkedIn - / schwab-network About Schwab Network - https://schwabnetwork.com/about

In today's financial world, headlines shift by the hour, and uncertainty feels like the new norm.  But what if this volatile environment is actually full of opportunity? In this insightful episode, Robert Curtiss speaks with Zachary Levenick, a seasoned hedge fund executive turned family office investor, about why today's market isn't just chaotic, it's promising. … Read More Read More

In this week's episode, Pastor Chris continues our Uncertain series with a powerful message on navigating seasons of uncertainty. He unpacks three key principles: letting go of our own plans, trusting God's timing, and staying focused on the mission He's given us.www.thejourneychurch.cc

In this episode, I chat with Samuel Albanie about the Google DeepMind paper he co-authored called "An Approach to Technical AGI Safety and Security". It covers the assumptions made by the approach, as well as the types of mitigations it outlines. Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/axrpodcast Ko-fi: https://ko-fi.com/axrpodcast Transcript: https://axrp.net/episode/2025/07/06/episode-45-samuel-albanie-deepminds-agi-safety-approach.html   Topics we discuss, and timestamps: 0:00:37 DeepMind's Approach to Technical AGI Safety and Security 0:04:29 Current paradigm continuation 0:19:13 No human ceiling 0:21:22 Uncertain timelines 0:23:36 Approximate continuity and the potential for accelerating capability improvement 0:34:29 Misuse and misalignment 0:39:34 Societal readiness 0:43:58 Misuse mitigations 0:52:57 Misalignment mitigations 1:05:20 Samuel's thinking about technical AGI safety 1:14:02 Following Samuel's work   Samuel on Twitter/X: x.com/samuelalbanie   Research we discuss: An Approach to Technical AGI Safety and Security: https://arxiv.org/abs/2504.01849 Levels of AGI for Operationalizing Progress on the Path to AGI: https://arxiv.org/abs/2311.02462 The Checklist: What Succeeding at AI Safety Will Involve: https://sleepinyourhat.github.io/checklist/ Measuring AI Ability to Complete Long Tasks: https://arxiv.org/abs/2503.14499   Episode art by Hamish Doodles: hamishdoodles.com

On Episode 625 of The Core Report, financial journalist Govindraj Ethiraj talks to Ravi Hegde, Founding PartnerRHP Partners, Lloyd Pinto, Partner - US Tax at Grant Thornton Bharat as well as  Shishir Lagu, Partner – Tax services at KNAV Advisory Inc.SHOW NOTES(00:00) The Take(05:19) Markets set for uncertain week as trade talks inconclusive(06:35) OPEC to hike production further(07:49) India says it won't be held to deadlines on trade deals(11:46) The Jane Street phenomenon and the legal wrangle(22:33) Trump's Big Beautiful Bill, what it means for Indian companies⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://www.investing-referral.com/aff303⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Check out ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠thecore.in⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Subscribe to our Newsletter⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Follow us on:⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Twitter⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ | ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Instagram⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ | ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Facebook⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ | ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Linkedin⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ | ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Youtube⁠

We learn from Saint Alphonsus Liguori's sermon for the fourth Sunday after Pentecost.Please support the Our Lady of Fatima Podcast:Buymeacoffee.com/TerenceMStantonLike and subscribe on YouTube:@OurLadyOfFatimaPodcastFollow us on X:@FatimaPodcastThank you!

There's a special kind of dread that comes from driving a car that is about to run out of gas or power. That may be why electric vehicle advocates say highways need to have more EV charging stations for people who make the switch to electric. Those advocates had a recent win. A federal judge ordered the Trump Administration to unfreeze funding for EV infrastructure. But Minnesota's funding is still in limbo.Minnesota was one of 16 states plus the District of Columbia that sued over the funding freeze. But the court order only applied to 14 states, not including Minnesota. Great Plains Institute Senior EV Policy Specialist Moaz Uddin Mian joins MPR News host Nina Moini to explain.

Do you ever feel stuck about what to do with your life, relationship, or career? What's really going on when we say, “I don't know what to do”? And how do we move forward without a clear vision or plan? Today, Alyson and I discuss feeling stuck and uncertain about what to do next. We explore what fuels anxiety, why comfort is different than peace, as well as some ways we can move from uncertainty into clarity.   https://www.thenewmanpodcast.com/2025/07/stuck-and-uncertain   COACHING   → To learn more about coaching with Tripp Lanier visit https://TrippLanier.com → To learn more about working with Alyson Lanier visit https://AlysonLanier.com   BOOK   → We live in a world with more possibilities than ever before. So why do most men settle for lackluster, cookie-cutter lives that leave them feeling stuck, drained, and uninspired? _This Book Will Make You Dangerous_ is a guide for the rare, few men who refuse to sleepwalk through life. → Visit https://TrippLanier.com/book

This week on the Anchored by the Sword Podcast, I had the joy of sitting down with my friend, Katie Reid—author of Made Like Martha, her newest fiction release A Very Bavarian Summer, and her powerful new Bible study God, What Do I Do? A Study of Judges 1–5.Katie shares how her personal journey of trusting God in the unknown—including a big move from Michigan to Florida—is being shaped by the very truths she's teaching in her new study. We talk about obedience when the next step is unclear, collaboration over competition, and how to walk in godly confidence like Deborah from Judges.From childhood faith to adult grace, Katie opens up about trying to earn God's love for years until she finally embraced what was already hers. Her story is a reminder that God's grace isn't a reward for our performance—it's a gift we receive.Bio:Katie M. Reid is a Bible teacher and the author of Made Like Martha and God, What Do I Do? Trained in education, Katie teaches around her kitchen table, in the classroom, and around the country. She co-hosts The Martha + Mary Show and runs the Martha + Mary Show Sisterhood group on Facebook. Katie is a pastor's wife and worship leader. Following Jesus, marrying her husband, and being a mom to five are the best decisions she's made.Anchor Verses: Psalm 78: 4-8Connect with Katie: Website: https://www.katiemreid.comIG: https://www.instagram.com/katie_m_reidFB: https://m.facebook.com/KatieMReidWriter/

P.M. Edition for June 30. Senators have spent hours voting on amendments and procedural motions as Republicans race to pass President Trump's “big, beautiful bill” by their self-imposed July 4 deadline. WSJ tax policy reporter Richard Rubin gives us the latest from the U.S. Capitol. Plus, a Trump administration investigation finds that Harvard University violated students' civil rights. We hear from Journal higher education reporter Doug Belkin about where the president's battle against elite U.S. universities stands. And investors love stocks that pay dividends, even though finance professors have long said that dividends don't matter. But as WSJ investing columnist Spencer Jakab tells us, it's what people do with the dividends that really makes those investments worthwhile. Alex Ossola hosts. Sign up for the WSJ's free What's News newsletter. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Brian Windhorst is joined by ESPN's Tim Bontemps and Tim MacMahon to discuss LeBron opting in with the Lakers including the fascinating statement that went with it. Then, the guys talk a few teams who spent big in Minnesota & Houston discussing the dangers of overspending with the extra restrictions in the modern NBA. Plus, what does the future hold for Deandre Ayton and more. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Lead pastor Petie bring us the last message from our Galatians series titled "The Truth Is In The Middle."Uncertain about God and faith? Peak City is a safe place to discover more about God and faith without any pressure. Come and see who Jesus really is and what he's really all about!Our mission is to help people discover Jesus and follow Him fearlessly by being raw, passionate, and clear. Visit ⁠peakcityco.com⁠ to find out more and we hope to see you in person soon!

“To navigate proof, we must reach into a thicket of errors and biases. We must confront monsters and embrace uncertainty, balancing — and rebalancing —our beliefs. We must seek out every useful fragment of data, gather every relevant tool, searching wider and climbing further. Finding the good foundations among the bad. Dodging dogma and falsehoods. Questioning. Measuring. Triangulating. Convincing. Then perhaps, just perhaps, we'll reach the truth in time.”—Adam KucharskiMy conversation with Professor Kucharski on what constitutes certainty and proof in science (and other domains), with emphasis on many of the learnings from Covid. Given the politicization of science and A.I.'s deepfakes and power for blurring of truth, it's hard to think of a topic more important right now.Audio file (Ground Truths can also be downloaded on Apple Podcasts and Spotify)Eric Topol (00:06):Hello, it's Eric Topol from Ground Truths and I am really delighted to welcome Adam Kucharski, who is the author of a new book, Proof: The Art and Science of Certainty. He's a distinguished mathematician, by the way, the first mathematician we've had on Ground Truths and a person who I had the real privilege of getting to know a bit through the Covid pandemic. So welcome, Adam.Adam Kucharski (00:28):Thanks for having me.Eric Topol (00:30):Yeah, I mean, I think just to let everybody know, you're a Professor at London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine and also noteworthy you won the Adams Prize, which is one of the most impressive recognitions in the field of mathematics. This is the book, it's a winner, Proof and there's so much to talk about. So Adam, maybe what I'd start off is the quote in the book that captivates in the beginning, “life is full of situations that can reveal remarkably large gaps in our understanding of what is true and why it's true. This is a book about those gaps.” So what was the motivation when you undertook this very big endeavor?Adam Kucharski (01:17):I think a lot of it comes to the work I do at my day job where we have to deal with a lot of evidence under pressure, particularly if you work in outbreaks or emerging health concerns. And often it really pushes the limits, our methodology and how we converge on what's true subject to potential revision in the future. I think particularly having a background in math's, I think you kind of grow up with this idea that you can get to these concrete, almost immovable truths and then even just looking through the history, realizing that often isn't the case, that there's these kind of very human dynamics that play out around them. And it's something I think that everyone in science can reflect on that sometimes what convinces us doesn't convince other people, and particularly when you have that kind of urgency of time pressure, working out how to navigate that.Eric Topol (02:05):Yeah. Well, I mean I think these times of course have really gotten us to appreciate, particularly during Covid, the importance of understanding uncertainty. And I think one of the ways that we can dispel what people assume they know is the famous Monty Hall, which you get into a bit in the book. So I think everybody here is familiar with that show, Let's Make a Deal and maybe you can just take us through what happens with one of the doors are unveiled and how that changes the mathematics.Adam Kucharski (02:50):Yeah, sure. So I think it is a problem that's been around for a while and it's based on this game show. So you've got three doors that are closed. Behind two of the doors there is a goat and behind one of the doors is a luxury car. So obviously, you want to win the car. The host asks you to pick a door, so you point to one, maybe door number two, then the host who knows what's behind the doors opens another door to reveal a goat and then ask you, do you want to change your mind? Do you want to switch doors? And a lot of the, I think intuition people have, and certainly when I first came across this problem many years ago is well, you've got two doors left, right? You've picked one, there's another one, it's 50-50. And even some quite well-respected mathematicians.Adam Kucharski (03:27):People like Paul Erdős who was really published more papers than almost anyone else, that was their initial gut reaction. But if you work through all of the combinations, if you pick this door and then the host does this, and you switch or not switch and work through all of those options. You actually double your chances if you switch versus sticking with the door. So something that's counterintuitive, but I think one of the things that really struck me and even over the years trying to explain it is convincing myself of the answer, which was when I first came across it as a teenager, I did quite quickly is very different to convincing someone else. And even actually Paul Erdős, one of his colleagues showed him what I call proof by exhaustion. So go through every combination and that didn't really convince him. So then he started to simulate and said, well, let's do a computer simulation of the game a hundred thousand times. And again, switching was this optimal strategy, but Erdős wasn't really convinced because I accept that this is the case, but I'm not really satisfied with it. And I think that encapsulates for a lot of people, their experience of proof and evidence. It's a fact and you have to take it as given, but there's actually quite a big bridge often to really understanding why it's true and feeling convinced by it.Eric Topol (04:41):Yeah, I think it's a fabulous example because I think everyone would naturally assume it's 50-50 and it isn't. And I think that gets us to the topic at hand. What I love, there's many things I love about this book. One is that you don't just get into science and medicine, but you cut across all the domains, law, mathematics, AI. So it's a very comprehensive sweep of everything about proof and truth, and it couldn't come at a better time as we'll get into. Maybe just starting off with math, the term I love mathematical monsters. Can you tell us a little bit more about that?Adam Kucharski (05:25):Yeah, this was a fascinating situation that emerged in the late 19th century where a lot of math's, certainly in Europe had been derived from geometry because a lot of the ancient Greek influence on how we shaped things and then Newton and his work on rates of change and calculus, it was really the natural world that provided a lot of inspiration, these kind of tangible objects, tangible movements. And as mathematicians started to build out the theory around rates of change and how we tackle these kinds of situations, they sometimes took that intuition a bit too seriously. And there was some theorems that they said were intuitively obvious, some of these French mathematicians. And so, one for example is this idea of you how things change smoothly over time and how you do those calculations. But what happened was some mathematicians came along and showed that when you have things that can be infinitely small, that intuition didn't necessarily hold in the same way.Adam Kucharski (06:26):And they came up with these examples that broke a lot of these theorems and a lot of the establishments at the time called these things monsters. They called them these aberrations against common sense and this idea that if Newton had known about them, he never would've done all of his discovery because they're just nuisances and we just need to get rid of them. And there's this real tension at the core of mathematics in the late 1800s where some people just wanted to disregard this and say, look, it works for most of the time, that's good enough. And then others really weren't happy with this quite vague logic. They wanted to put it on much sturdier ground. And what was remarkable actually is if you trace this then into the 20th century, a lot of these monsters and these particularly in some cases functions which could almost move constantly, this constant motion rather than our intuitive concept of movement as something that's smooth, if you drop an apple, it accelerates at a very smooth rate, would become foundational in our understanding of things like probability, Einstein's work on atomic theory. A lot of these concepts where geometry breaks down would be really important in relativity. So actually, these things that we thought were monsters actually were all around us all the time, and science couldn't advance without them. So I think it's just this remarkable example of this tension within a field that supposedly concrete and the things that were going to be shunned actually turn out to be quite important.Eric Topol (07:53):It's great how you convey how nature isn't so neat and tidy and things like Brownian motion, understanding that, I mean, just so many things that I think fit into that general category. In the legal, we won't get into too much because that's not so much the audience of Ground Truths, but the classic things about innocent and until proven guilty and proof beyond reasonable doubt, I mean these are obviously really important parts of that overall sense of proof and truth. We're going to get into one thing I'm fascinated about related to that subsequently and then in science. So before we get into the different types of proof, obviously the pandemic is still fresh in our minds and we're an endemic with Covid now, and there are so many things we got wrong along the way of uncertainty and didn't convey that science isn't always evolving search for what is the truth. There's plenty no shortage of uncertainty at any moment. So can you recap some of the, you did so much work during the pandemic and obviously some of it's in the book. What were some of the major things that you took out of proof and truth from the pandemic?Adam Kucharski (09:14):I think it was almost this story of two hearts because on the one hand, science was the thing that got us where we are today. The reason that so much normality could resume and so much risk was reduced was development of vaccines and the understanding of treatments and the understanding of variants as they came to their characteristics. So it was kind of this amazing opportunity to see this happen faster than it ever happened in history. And I think ever in science, it certainly shifted a lot of my thinking about what's possible and even how we should think about these kinds of problems. But also on the other hand, I think where people might have been more familiar with seeing science progress a bit more slowly and reach consensus around some of these health issues, having that emerge very rapidly can present challenges even we found with some of the work we did on Alpha and then the Delta variants, and it was the early quantification of these.Adam Kucharski (10:08):So really the big question is, is this thing more transmissible? Because at the time countries were thinking about control measures, thinking about relaxing things, and you've got this just enormous social economic health decision-making based around essentially is it a lot more spreadable or is it not? And you only had these fragments of evidence. So I think for me, that was really an illustration of the sharp end. And I think what we ended up doing with some of those was rather than arguing over a precise number, something like Delta, instead we kind of looked at, well, what's the range that matters? So in the sense of arguing over whether it's 40% or 50% or 30% more transmissible is perhaps less important than being, it's substantially more transmissible and it's going to start going up. Is it going to go up extremely fast or just very fast?Adam Kucharski (10:59):That's still a very useful conclusion. I think what often created some of the more challenges, I think the things that on reflection people looking back pick up on are where there was probably overstated certainty. We saw that around some of the airborne spread, for example, stated as a fact by in some cases some organizations, I think in some situations as well, governments had a constraint and presented it as scientific. So the UK, for example, would say testing isn't useful. And what was happening at the time was there wasn't enough tests. So it was more a case of they can't test at that volume. But I think blowing between what the science was saying and what the decision-making, and I think also one thing we found in the UK was we made a lot of the epidemiological evidence available. I think that was really, I think something that was important.Adam Kucharski (11:51):I found it a lot easier to communicate if talking to the media to be able to say, look, this is the paper that's out, this is what it means, this is the evidence. I always found it quite uncomfortable having to communicate things where you knew there were reports behind the scenes, but you couldn't actually articulate. But I think what that did is it created this impression that particularly epidemiology was driving the decision-making a lot more than it perhaps was in reality because so much of that was being made public and a lot more of the evidence around education or economics was being done behind the scenes. I think that created this kind of asymmetry in public perception about how that was feeding in. And so, I think there was always that, and it happens, it is really hard as well as a scientist when you've got journalists asking you how to run the country to work out those steps of am I describing the evidence behind what we're seeing? Am I describing the evidence about different interventions or am I proposing to some extent my value system on what we do? And I think all of that in very intense times can be very easy to get blurred together in public communication. I think we saw a few examples of that where things were being the follow the science on policy type angle where actually once you get into what you're prioritizing within a society, quite rightly, you've got other things beyond just the epidemiology driving that.Eric Topol (13:09):Yeah, I mean that term that you just use follow the science is such an important term because it tells us about the dynamic aspect. It isn't just a snapshot, it's constantly being revised. But during the pandemic we had things like the six-foot rule that was never supported by data, but yet still today, if I walk around my hospital and there's still the footprints of the six-foot rule and not paying attention to the fact that this was airborne and took years before some of these things were accepted. The flatten the curve stuff with lockdowns, which I never was supportive of that, but perhaps at the worst point, the idea that hospitals would get overrun was an issue, but it got carried away with school shutdowns for prolonged periods and in some parts of the world, especially very stringent lockdowns. But anyway, we learned a lot.Eric Topol (14:10):But perhaps one of the greatest lessons is that people's expectations about science is that it's absolute and somehow you have this truth that's not there. I mean, it's getting revised. It's kind of on the job training, it's on this case on the pandemic revision. But very interesting. And that gets us to, I think the next topic, which I think is a fundamental part of the book distributed throughout the book, which is the different types of proof in biomedicine and of course across all these domains. And so, you take us through things like randomized trials, p-values, 95 percent confidence intervals, counterfactuals, causation and correlation, peer review, the works, which is great because a lot of people have misconceptions of these things. So for example, randomized trials, which is the temple of the randomized trials, they're not as great as a lot of people think, yes, they can help us establish cause and effect, but they're skewed because of the people who come into the trial. So they may not at all be a representative sample. What are your thoughts about over deference to randomized trials?Adam Kucharski (15:31):Yeah, I think that the story of how we rank evidence in medicines a fascinating one. I mean even just how long it took for people to think about these elements of randomization. Fundamentally, what we're trying to do when we have evidence here in medicine or science is prevent ourselves from confusing randomness for a signal. I mean, that's fundamentally, we don't want to mistake something, we think it's going on and it's not. And the challenge, particularly with any intervention is you only get to see one version of reality. You can't give someone a drug, follow them, rewind history, not give them the drug and then follow them again. So one of the things that essentially randomization allows us to do is, if you have two groups, one that's been randomized, one that hasn't on average, the difference in outcomes between those groups is going to be down to the treatment effect.Adam Kucharski (16:20):So it doesn't necessarily mean in reality that'd be the case, but on average that's the expectation that you'd have. And it's kind of interesting actually that the first modern randomized control trial (RCT) in medicine in 1947, this is for TB and streptomycin. The randomization element actually, it wasn't so much statistical as behavioral, that if you have people coming to hospital, you could to some extent just say, we'll just alternate. We're not going to randomize. We're just going to first patient we'll say is a control, second patient a treatment. But what they found in a lot of previous studies was doctors have bias. Maybe that patient looks a little bit ill or that one maybe is on borderline for eligibility. And often you got these quite striking imbalances when you allowed it for human judgment. So it was really about shielding against those behavioral elements. But I think there's a few situations, it's a really powerful tool for a lot of these questions, but as you mentioned, one is this issue of you have the population you study on and then perhaps in reality how that translates elsewhere.Adam Kucharski (17:17):And we see, I mean things like flu vaccines are a good example, which are very dependent on immunity and evolution and what goes on in different populations. Sometimes you've had a result on a vaccine in one place and then the effectiveness doesn't translate in the same way to somewhere else. I think the other really important thing to bear in mind is, as I said, it's the averaging that you're getting an average effect between two different groups. And I think we see certainly a lot of development around things like personalized medicine where actually you're much more interested in the outcome for the individual. And so, what a trial can give you evidence is on average across a group, this is the effect that I can expect this intervention to have. But we've now seen more of the emergence things like N=1 studies where you can actually over the same individual, particularly for chronic conditions, look at those kind of interventions.Adam Kucharski (18:05):And also there's just these extreme examples where you're ethically not going to run a trial, there's never been a trial of whether it's a good idea to have intensive care units in hospitals or there's a lot of these kind of historical treatments which are just so overwhelmingly effective that we're not going to run trial. So almost this hierarchy over time, you can see it getting shifted because actually you do have these situations where other forms of evidence can get you either closer to what you need or just more feasibly an answer where it's just not ethical or practical to do an RCT.Eric Topol (18:37):And that brings us to the natural experiments I just wrote about recently, the one with shingles, which there's two big natural experiments to suggest that shingles vaccine might reduce the risk of Alzheimer's, an added benefit beyond the shingles that was not anticipated. Your thoughts about natural experiments, because here you're getting a much different type of population assessment, again, not at the individual level, but not necessarily restricted by some potentially skewed enrollment criteria.Adam Kucharski (19:14):I think this is as emerged as a really valuable tool. It's kind of interesting, in the book you're talking to economists like Josh Angrist, that a lot of these ideas emerge in epidemiology, but I think were really then taken up by economists, particularly as they wanted to add more credibility to a lot of these policy questions. And ultimately, it comes down to this issue that for a lot of problems, we can't necessarily intervene and randomize, but there might be a situation that's done it to some extent for us, so the classic example is the Vietnam draft where it was kind of random birthdays with drawn out of lottery. And so, there's been a lot of studies subsequently about the effect of serving in the military on different subsequent lifetime outcomes because broadly those people have been randomized. It was for a different reason. But you've got that element of randomization driving that.Adam Kucharski (20:02):And so again, with some of the recent shingles data and other studies, you might have a situation for example, where there's been an intervention that's somewhat arbitrary in terms of time. It's a cutoff on a birth date, for example. And under certain assumptions you could think, well, actually there's no real reason for the person on this day and this day to be fundamentally different. I mean, perhaps there might be effects of cohorts if it's school years or this sort of thing. But generally, this isn't the same as having people who are very, very different ages and very different characteristics. It's just nature, or in this case, just a policy intervention for a different reason has given you that randomization, which allows you or pseudo randomization, which allows you to then look at something about the effect of an intervention that you wouldn't as reliably if you were just digging into the data of yes, no who's received a vaccine.Eric Topol (20:52):Yeah, no, I think it's really valuable. And now I think increasingly given priority, if you can find these natural experiments and they're not always so abundant to use to extrapolate from, but when they are, they're phenomenal. The causation correlation is so big. The issue there, I mean Judea Pearl's, the Book of Why, and you give so many great examples throughout the book in Proof. I wonder if you could comment that on that a bit more because this is where associations are confused somehow or other with a direct effect. And we unfortunately make these jumps all too frequently. Perhaps it's the most common problem that's occurring in the way we interpret medical research data.Adam Kucharski (21:52):Yeah, I think it's an issue that I think a lot of people get drilled into in their training just because a correlation between things doesn't mean that that thing causes this thing. But it really struck me as I talked to people, researching the book, in practice in research, there's actually a bit more to it in how it's played out. So first of all, if there's a correlation between things, it doesn't tell you much generally that's useful for intervention. If two things are correlated, it doesn't mean that changing that thing's going to have an effect on that thing. There might be something that's influencing both of them. If you have more ice cream sales, it will lead to more heat stroke cases. It doesn't mean that changing ice cream sales is going to have that effect, but it does allow you to make predictions potentially because if you can identify consistent patterns, you can say, okay, if this thing going up, I'm going to make a prediction that this thing's going up.Adam Kucharski (22:37):So one thing I found quite striking, actually talking to research in different fields is how many fields choose to focus on prediction because it kind of avoids having to deal with this cause and effect problem. And even in fields like psychology, it was kind of interesting that there's a lot of focus on predicting things like relationship outcomes, but actually for people, you don't want a prediction about your relationship. You want to know, well, how can I do something about it? You don't just want someone to sell you your relationship's going to go downhill. So there's almost part of the challenge is people just got stuck on prediction because it's an easier field of work, whereas actually some of those problems will involve intervention. I think the other thing that really stood out for me is in epidemiology and a lot of other fields, rightly, people are very cautious to not get that mixed up.Adam Kucharski (23:24):They don't want to mix up correlations or associations with causation, but you've kind of got this weird situation where a lot of papers go out of their way to not use causal language and say it's an association, it's just an association. It's just an association. You can't say anything about causality. And then the end of the paper, they'll say, well, we should think about introducing more of this thing or restricting this thing. So really the whole paper and its purpose is framed around a causal intervention, but it's extremely careful throughout the paper to not frame it as a causal claim. So I think we almost by skirting that too much, we actually avoid the problems that people sometimes care about. And I think a lot of the nice work that's been going on in causal inference is trying to get people to confront this more head on rather than say, okay, you can just stay in this prediction world and that's fine. And then just later maybe make a policy suggestion off the back of it.Eric Topol (24:20):Yeah, I think this is cause and effect is a very alluring concept to support proof as you so nicely go through in the book. But of course, one of the things that we use to help us is the biological mechanism. So here you have, let's say for example, you're trying to get a new drug approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), and the request is, well, we want two trials, randomized trials, independent. We want to have p-values that are significant, and we want to know the biological mechanism ideally with the dose response of the drug. But there are many drugs as you review that have no biological mechanism established. And even when the tobacco problems were mounting, the actual mechanism of how tobacco use caused cancer wasn't known. So how important is the biological mechanism, especially now that we're well into the AI world where explainability is demanded. And so, we don't know the mechanism, but we also don't know the mechanism and lots of things in medicine too, like anesthetics and even things as simple as aspirin, how it works and many others. So how do we deal with this quest for the biological mechanism?Adam Kucharski (25:42):I think that's a really good point. It shows almost a lot of the transition I think we're going through currently. I think particularly for things like smoking cancer where it's very hard to run a trial. You can't make people randomly take up smoking. Having those additional pieces of evidence, whether it's an analogy with a similar carcinogen, whether it's a biological mechanism, can help almost give you more supports for that argument that there's a cause and effect going on. But I think what I found quite striking, and I realized actually that it's something that had kind of bothered me a bit and I'd be interested to hear whether it bothers you, but with the emergence of AI, it's almost a bit of the loss of scientific satisfaction. I think you grow up with learning about how the world works and why this is doing what it's doing.Adam Kucharski (26:26):And I talked for example of some of the people involved with AlphaFold and some of the subsequent work in installing those predictions about structures. And they'd almost made peace with it, which I found interesting because I think they started off being a bit uncomfortable with like, yeah, you've got these remarkable AI models making these predictions, but we don't understand still biologically what's happening here. But I think they're just settled in saying, well, biology is really complex on some of these problems, and if we can have a tool that can give us this extremely valuable information, maybe that's okay. And it was just interesting that they'd really kind of gone through that kind process, which I think a lot of people are still grappling with and that almost that discomfort of using AI and what's going to convince you that that's a useful reliable prediction whether it's something like predicting protein folding or getting in a self-driving car. What's the evidence you need to convince you that's reliable?Eric Topol (27:26):Yeah, no, I'm so glad you brought that up because when Demis Hassabis and John Jumper won the Nobel Prize, the point I made was maybe there should be an asterisk with AI because they don't know how it works. I mean, they had all the rich data from the protein data bank, and they got the transformer model to do it for 200 million protein structure prediction, but they still to this day don't fully understand how the model really was working. So it reinforces what you're just saying. And of course, it cuts across so many types of AI. It's just that we tend to hold different standards in medicine not realizing that there's lots of lack of explainability for routine medical treatments today. Now one of the things that I found fascinating in your book, because there's different levels of proof, different types of proof, but solid logical systems.Eric Topol (28:26):And on page 60 of the book, especially pertinent to the US right now, there is a bit about Kurt Gödel and what he did there was he basically, there was a question about dictatorship in the US could it ever occur? And Gödel says, “oh, yes, I can prove it.” And he's using the constitution itself to prove it, which I found fascinating because of course we're seeing that emerge right now. Can you give us a little bit more about this, because this is fascinating about the Fifth Amendment, and I mean I never thought that the Constitution would allow for a dictatorship to emerge.Adam Kucharski (29:23):And this was a fascinating story, Kurt Gödel who is one of the greatest logical minds of the 20th century and did a lot of work, particularly in the early 20th century around system of rules, particularly things like mathematics and whether they can ever be really fully satisfying. So particularly in mathematics, he showed that there were this problem that is very hard to have a set of rules for something like arithmetic that was both complete and covered every situation, but also had no contradictions. And I think a lot of countries, if you go back, things like Napoleonic code and these attempts to almost write down every possible legal situation that could be imaginable, always just ascended into either they needed amendments or they had contradictions. I think Gödel's work really summed it up, and there's a story, this is in the late forties when he had his citizenship interview and Einstein and Oskar Morgenstern went along as witnesses for him.Adam Kucharski (30:17):And it's always told as kind of a lighthearted story as this logical mind, this academic just saying something silly in front of the judge. And actually, to my own admission, I've in the past given talks and mentioned it in this slightly kind of lighthearted way, but for the book I got talking to a few people who'd taken it more seriously. I realized actually he's this extremely logically focused mind at the time, and maybe there should have been something more to it. And people who have kind of dug more into possibilities was saying, well, what could he have spotted that bothered him? And a lot of his work that he did about consistency in mass was around particularly self-referential statements. So if I say this sentence is false, it's self-referential and if it is false, then it's true, but if it's true, then it's false and you get this kind of weird self-referential contradictions.Adam Kucharski (31:13):And so, one of the theories about Gödel was that in the Constitution, it wasn't that there was a kind of rule for someone can become a dictator, but rather people can use the mechanisms within the Constitution to make it easier to make further amendments. And he kind of downward cycle of amendment that he had seen happening in Europe and the run up to the war, and again, because this is never fully documented exactly what he thought, but it's one of the theories that it wouldn't just be outright that it would just be this cycle process of weakening and weakening and weakening and making it easier to add. And actually, when I wrote that, it was all the earlier bits of the book that I drafted, I did sort of debate whether including it I thought, is this actually just a bit in the weeds of American history? And here we are. Yeah, it's remarkable.Eric Topol (32:00):Yeah, yeah. No, I mean I found, it struck me when I was reading this because here back in 1947, there was somebody predicting that this could happen based on some, if you want to call it loopholes if you will, or the ability to change things, even though you would've thought otherwise that there wasn't any possible capability for that to happen. Now, one of the things I thought was a bit contradictory is two parts here. One is from Angus Deaton, he wrote, “Gold standard thinking is magical thinking.” And then the other is what you basically are concluding in many respects. “To navigate proof, we must reach into a thicket of errors and biases. We must confront monsters and embrace uncertainty, balancing — and rebalancing —our beliefs. We must seek out every useful fragment of data, gather every relevant tool, searching wider and climbing further. Finding the good foundations among the bad. Dodging dogma and falsehoods. Questioning. Measuring. Triangulating. Convincing. Then perhaps, just perhaps, we'll reach the truth in time.” So here you have on the one hand your search for the truth, proof, which I think that little paragraph says it all. In many respects, it sums up somewhat to the work that you review here and on the other you have this Nobel laureate saying, you don't have to go to extremes here. The enemy of good is perfect, perhaps. I mean, how do you reconcile this sense that you shouldn't go so far? Don't search for absolute perfection of proof.Adam Kucharski (33:58):Yeah, I think that encapsulates a lot of what the book is about, is that search for certainty and how far do you have to go. I think one of the things, there's a lot of interesting discussion, some fascinating papers around at what point do you use these studies? What are their flaws? But I think one of the things that does stand out is across fields, across science, medicine, even if you going to cover law, AI, having these kind of cookie cutter, this is the definitive way of doing it. And if you just follow this simple rule, if you do your p-value, you'll get there and you'll be fine. And I think that's where a lot of the danger is. And I think that's what we've seen over time. Certain science people chasing certain targets and all the behaviors that come around that or in certain situations disregarding valuable evidence because you've got this kind of gold standard and nothing else will do.Adam Kucharski (34:56):And I think particularly in a crisis, it's very dangerous to have that because you might have a low level of evidence that demands a certain action and you almost bias yourself towards inaction if you have these kind of very simple thresholds. So I think for me, across all of these stories and across the whole book, I mean William Gosset who did a lot of pioneering work on statistical experiments at Guinness in the early 20th century, he had this nice question he sort of framed is, how much do we lose? And if we're thinking about the problems, there's always more studies we can do, there's always more confidence we can have, but whether it's a patient we want to treat or crisis we need to deal with, we need to work out actually getting that level of proof that's really appropriate for where we are currently.Eric Topol (35:49):I think exceptionally important that there's this kind of spectrum or continuum in following science and search for truth and that distinction, I think really nails it. Now, one of the things that's unique in the book is you don't just go through all the different types of how you would get to proof, but you also talk about how the evidence is acted on. And for example, you quote, “they spent a lot of time misinforming themselves.” This is the whole idea of taking data and torturing it or using it, dredging it however way you want to support either conspiracy theories or alternative facts. Basically, manipulating sometimes even emasculating what evidence and data we have. And one of the sentences, or I guess this is from Sir Francis Bacon, “truth is a daughter of time”, but the added part is not authority. So here we have our president here that repeats things that are wrong, fabricated or wrong, and he keeps repeating to the point that people believe it's true. But on the other hand, you could say truth is a daughter of time because you like to not accept any truth immediately. You like to see it get replicated and further supported, backed up. So in that one sentence, truth is a daughter of time not authority, there's the whole ball of wax here. Can you take us through that? Because I just think that people don't understand that truth being tested over time, but also manipulated by its repetition. This is a part of the big problem that we live in right now.Adam Kucharski (37:51):And I think it's something that writing the book and actually just reflecting on it subsequently has made me think about a lot in just how people approach these kinds of problems. I think that there's an idea that conspiracy theorists are just lazy and have maybe just fallen for a random thing, but talking to people, you really think about these things a lot more in the field. And actually, the more I've ended up engaging with people who believe things that are just outright unevidenced around vaccines, around health issues, they often have this mountain of papers and data to hand and a lot of it, often they will be peer reviewed papers. It won't necessarily be supporting the point that they think it's supports.Adam Kucharski (38:35):But it's not something that you can just say everything you're saying is false, that there's actually often a lot of things that have been put together and it's just that leap to that conclusion. I think you also see a lot of scientific language borrowed. So I gave a talker early this year and it got posted on YouTube. It had conspiracy theories it, and there was a lot of conspiracy theory supporters who piled in the comments and one of the points they made is skepticism is good. It's the kind of law society, take no one's word for it, you need this. We are the ones that are kind of doing science and people who just assume that science is settled are in the wrong. And again, you also mentioned that repetition. There's this phenomenon, it's the illusory truth problem that if you repeatedly tell someone someone's something's false, it'll increase their belief in it even if it's something quite outrageous.Adam Kucharski (39:27):And that mimics that scientific repetition because people kind of say, okay, well if I've heard it again and again, it's almost like if you tweak these as mini experiments, I'm just accumulating evidence that this thing is true. So it made me think a lot about how you've got essentially a lot of mimicry of the scientific method, amount of data and how you present it and this kind of skepticism being good, but I think a lot of it comes down to as well as just looking at theological flaws, but also ability to be wrong in not actually seeking out things that confirm. I think all of us, it's something that I've certainly tried to do a lot working on emergencies, and one of the scientific advisory groups that I worked on almost it became a catchphrase whenever someone presented something, they finished by saying, tell me why I'm wrong.Adam Kucharski (40:14):And if you've got a variant that's more transmissible, I don't want to be right about that really. And it is something that is quite hard to do and I found it is particularly for something that's quite high pressure, trying to get a policymaker or someone to write even just non-publicly by themselves, write down what you think's going to happen or write down what would convince you that you are wrong about something. I think particularly on contentious issues where someone's got perhaps a lot of public persona wrapped up in something that's really hard to do, but I think it's those kind of elements that distinguish between getting sucked into a conspiracy theory and really seeking out evidence that supports it and trying to just get your theory stronger and stronger and actually seeking out things that might overturn your belief about the world. And it's often those things that we don't want overturned. I think those are the views that we all have politically or in other ways, and that's often where the problems lie.Eric Topol (41:11):Yeah, I think this is perhaps one of, if not the most essential part here is that to try to deal with the different views. We have biases as you emphasized throughout, but if you can use these different types of proof to have a sound discussion, conversation, refutation whereby you don't summarily dismiss another view which may be skewed and maybe spurious or just absolutely wrong, maybe fabricated whatever, but did you can engage and say, here's why these are my proof points, or this is why there's some extent of certainty you can have regarding this view of the data. I think this is so fundamental because unfortunately as we saw during the pandemic, the strident minority, which were the anti-science, anti-vaxxers, they were summarily dismissed as being kooks and adopting conspiracy theories without the right engagement and the right debates. And I think this might've helped along the way, no less the fact that a lot of scientists didn't really want to engage in the first place and adopt this methodical proof that you've advocated in the book so many different ways to support a hypothesis or an assertion. Now, we've covered a lot here, Adam. Have I missed some central parts of the book and the effort because it's really quite extraordinary. I know it's your third book, but it's certainly a standout and it certainly it's a standout not just for your books, but books on this topic.Adam Kucharski (43:13):Thanks. And it's much appreciated. It was not an easy book to write. I think at times, I kind of wondered if I should have taken on the topic and I think a core thing, your last point speaks to that. I think a core thing is that gap often between what convinces us and what convinces someone else. I think it's often very tempting as a scientist to say the evidence is clear or the science has proved this. But even on something like the vaccines, you do get the loud minority who perhaps think they're putting microchips in people and outlandish views, but you actually get a lot more people who might just have some skepticism of pharmaceutical companies or they might have, my wife was pregnant actually at the time during Covid and we waited up because there wasn't much data on pregnancy and the vaccine. And I think it's just finding what is convincing. Is it having more studies from other countries? Is it understanding more about the biology? Is it understanding how you evaluate some of those safety signals? And I think that's just really important to not just think what convinces us and it's going to be obvious to other people, but actually think where are they coming from? Because ultimately having proof isn't that good unless it leads to the action that can make lives better.Eric Topol (44:24):Yeah. Well, look, you've inculcated my mind with this book, Adam, called Proof. Anytime I think of the word proof, I'm going to be thinking about you. So thank you. Thanks for taking the time to have a conversation about your book, your work, and I know we're going to count on you for the astute mathematics and analysis of outbreaks in the future, which we will see unfortunately. We are seeing now, in fact already in this country with measles and whatnot. So thank you and we'll continue to follow your great work.**************************************Thanks for listening, watching or reading this Ground Truths podcast/post.If you found this interesting please share it!That makes the work involved in putting these together especially worthwhile.I'm also appreciative for your subscribing to Ground Truths. All content —its newsletters, analyses, and podcasts—is free, open-access. I'm fortunate to get help from my producer Jessica Nguyen and Sinjun Balabanoff for audio/video tech support to pull these podcasts together for Scripps Research.Paid subscriptions are voluntary and all proceeds from them go to support Scripps Research. They do allow for posting comments and questions, which I do my best to respond to. Please don't hesitate to post comments and give me feedback. Many thanks to those who have contributed—they have greatly helped fund our summer internship programs for the past two years.A bit of an update on SUPER AGERSMy book has been selected as a Next Big Idea Club winner for Season 26 by Adam Grant, Malcolm Gladwell, Susan Cain, and Daniel Pink. This club has spotlighted the most groundbreaking nonfiction books for over a decade. As a winning title, my book will be shipped to thousands of thoughtful readers like you, featured alongside a reading guide, a "Book Bite," Next Big Idea Podcast episode as well as a live virtual Q&A with me in the club's vibrant online community. If you're interested in joining the club, here's a promo code SEASON26 for 20% off at the website. SUPER AGERS reached #3 for all books on Amazon this week. This was in part related to the segment on the book on the TODAY SHOW which you can see here. Also at Amazon there is a remarkable sale on the hardcover book for $10.l0 at the moment for up to 4 copies. Not sure how long it will last or what prompted it.The journalist Paul von Zielbauer has a Substack “Aging With Strength” and did an extensive interview with me on the biology of aging and how we can prevent the major age-related diseases. Here's the link. Get full access to Ground Truths at erictopol.substack.com/subscribe

" 'I am a sickly man, as you see; and, because death did usually once a day knock at my door, I thought I should never be well at home; so I betook myself to a pilgrim's life, and have travelled hither from the town of Uncertain, where I and my father were born. I am a man of no strength at all of body, nor yet of mind; but would, if I could, though I can but crawl, spend my life in the pilgrim's way.

June 27th, 2025

Nick is joined by Mirror journalist David Yates to discuss the latest from around the racing world. They lead with news that the BHA board met yesterday, and that the future of Lord Allen as the incoming chair remans in the balance. Looking ahead to the Irish Derby, Joseph O'Brien gives us the lowdown on Tennessee Stud and all his key runners at the Curragh this weekend, while Charlie Johnston edges closer to a run with Lazy Griff. Fascinating insight on his four Northumberland Plate runners from James Owen, including a bold shout for an outsider, while Ed Bethell has big plans for at least two of his rising stable stars. JA McGrath has the latest from Hong Kong.

Israel and Iran are still in the thick of an air war, which is really their only option given the several countries between them. But are things going to ramp up here soon? Is nuclear war coming? Will the US get involved?Join the Patreon here: https://www.patreon.com/PeterZeihanFull Newsletter: https://mailchi.mp/zeihan/israels-uncertain-endgame-in-iran

Nick is joined by Mirror journalist David Yates to discuss the latest from around the racing world. They lead with news that the BHA board met yesterday, and that the future of Lord Allen as the incoming chair remans in the balance. Looking ahead to the Irish Derby, Joseph O'Brien gives us the lowdown on Tennessee Stud and all his key runners at the Curragh this weekend, while Charlie Johnston edges closer to a run with Lazy Griff. Fascinating insight on his four Northumberland Plate runners from James Owen, including a bold shout for an outsider, while Ed Bethell has big plans for at least two of his rising stable stars. JA McGrath has the latest from Hong Kong.

Licensed mental health counselor and author Jill Sylvester discusses strategies and tips, along with trusting your own inner voice, to live your very best life.   Today's discussion: Are You Feeling Uncertain Right Now? Summer Repost Series: June Contact Jill SylvesterFollow us on IG @jillsylvesterSend us questions or feedback at jill@jillsylvester.comFor more information or to check out our other products: www.jillsylvester.comThanks to Carl Sylvester for production, Jon Grabowski for sound engineering, Michelle Sylvester (@michellesyllvester) for social media output, Tracy Colucci for newsletter creation, and Good Health Hanover Massachusetts for sponsorship. With their support, the TYI podcast is made possible for YOU to gain personal development strategies and live your best life. Thanks for listening!

We're starting a new series called Uncertain: The Church in Difficult Times. In this week's episode, Pastor Chris dives into living in the present and seeking first the Kingdom of God.www.thejourneychurch.cc

In a world that often spins faster than we can catch up, trusting anyone—let alone someone you can't physically see—can feel like a leap. But for millions, trusting God isn't blind faith; it's a relationship grounded in experience, wisdom, and love. Whether you're walking through a season of doubt or simply seeking deeper peace, here are five powerful reasons to lean into trust:    1. God's Faithfulness Stands the Test of Time  "Know therefore that the Lord your God is God; he is the faithful God, keeping his covenant of love to a thousand generations..." — Deuteronomy 7:9  History, Scripture, and personal testimonies echo a consistent truth: God shows up. Not always how we expect—but always with purpose.    2. His Love Doesn't Flinch  "But God demonstrates his own love for us in this: While we were still sinners, Christ died for us." — Romans 5:8  There is comfort in being known completely and still unconditionally loved. God doesn't base His love on performance—it's already been fully given.    3. There's Purpose in the Pain  "And we know that in all things God works for the good of those who love him..." — Romans 8:28  Pain doesn't always make sense, but it's never wasted. Trusting God invites us to believe that even brokenness can be used to build something beautiful.    4. He Leads Even When the Map's Blurry  "Trust in the Lord with all your heart and lean not on your own understanding..." — Proverbs 3:5-6  When decisions loom and uncertainty crowds in, God offers a peace-filled path—not always the easiest, but often the most transforming.    5. Peace Isn't Conditional  "And the peace of God, which transcends all understanding, will guard your hearts and your minds..." — Philippians 4:7  God doesn't promise a storm-free life, but He does promise to be our anchor. His peace isn't based on perfect circumstances—it's rooted in His presence.   kenn.blanchard@gmail.com     

This episode of The Texan Explains looks at the recent overturning of the Texas Dream Act and the uncertainty it creates for undocumented students at UT. Reporter Miranda Liguez speaks to news staffers Maryam Ahmed and Catherine Li as they break down the legal developments and share students' experience navigating this moment.Cover art by Lorianne WillettMusic by Top Flow Productions

Guest pastor Lee Coate brings us his message titled "Calling: All of Me."Uncertain about God and faith? Peak City is a safe place to discover more about God and faith without any pressure. Come and see who Jesus really is and what he's really all about!Our mission is to help people discover Jesus and follow Him fearlessly by being raw, passionate, and clear. Visit ⁠peakcityco.com⁠ to find out more and we hope to see you in person soon!

Households and businesses are feeling more uncertain about the future, but the labor market is strong. (00:21) Motley Fool Senior Analysts Asit Sharma and David Meier join Ricky Mulvey to discuss: - The latest Fed meeting, and what Jerome Powell is watching. - What AI means for a consulting giant. - Earnings from Kroger and Darden Restaurants. (19:11) Then, we play a portion of our member's only podcast “Stock Advisor Roundtable.” Brian Stoffel interviews Motley Fool Co-founder and CEO Tom Gardner about how AI has changed his investing process. (33:36) Asit and David share two radar stocks: Ferrari and CAVA. Host: Ricky Mulvey Guests: Asit Sharma, David Meier Engineer: Dan Boyd Advertisements are sponsored content and provided for informational purposes only. The Motley Fool and its affiliates (collectively, "TMF") do not endorse, recommend, or verify the accuracy or completeness of the statements made within advertisements. TMF is not involved in the offer, sale, or solicitation of any securities advertised herein and makes no representations regarding the suitability, or risks associated with any investment opportunity presented. Investors should conduct their own due diligence and consult with legal, tax, and financial advisors before making any investment decisions. TMF assumes no responsibility for any losses or damages arising from this advertisement. We're committed to transparency: All personal opinions in advertisements from Fools are their own. [The product advertised in this episode was loaned to TMF and was returned after a test period.] or [The product advertised in this episode was purchased by TMF.] [Advertiser] paid for the sponsorship of this episode. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

In this episode, I'm unpacking a recent traumatic experience that reminded me just how often we override ourselves and how powerful it is to trust what we feel, even when the world tells us not to.I'm diving into the subtle ways self-trust gets eroded, how that plays out in your day-to-day life, and what it actually looks like to rebuild that trust in small, powerful ways. If you've ever second-guessed yourself, felt like you needed permission to move forward, or wondered if you're just being “dramatic” for having feelings or needs... this one's for you.Are you ready to become the woman who truly backs herself ?LINKSFREE DOWNLOAD THE BAD BITCH BLUEPRINT WORKBOOK⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠efiasulter.com/blueprint⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠SAVE YOUR FREE SPOT IN THE AUDACITY MASTERCLASS⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠efiasulter.com/theaudacity⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠OVERCOMING SELF SABOTAGE MASTERCLASS⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠efiasulter.com/own-your-shft/⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Let's stay connected: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠efiasulter.com⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ | ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Instagram⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠|⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ TikTok⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Remember to review, subscribe, and share!**Enjoyed this episode? Support the podcast here: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ko-fi.com/efias⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠

Dallas Goedert joins Takeoff with John Clark in partnership with Amgen, the makers of Otezla. Dallas shared his story growing up with plaque psoriasis, a skin condition that affects an estimated 7.5 million adults in the United States. Clark also asked the Eagles tight end about his uncertain offseason, the Eagles' transition to new coordinator Kevin Patullo, and much more.NBC Sports Philadelphia serves Philly sports fans 24/7 with the latest news on the Eagles, Sixers, Phillies and Flyers. Watch live games and insightful analysis from our experts on NBC Sports Philadelphia. Subscribe to our channel for the latest Philly sports news and highlights! » Visit NBC Sports Philadelphia: https://www.nbcsportsphiladelphia.com/ » Facebook:  []  / nbcsphilly    » Twitter:  []  / nbcsphilly    » Instagram:  []  / nbcsphilly    

Feeling the pressure of today's economy? You're not alone—but you're also not powerless.In Episode 127 of the Difference Maker Revolution podcast, we're diving into a conversation every photographer needs to hear right now:“Thriving in Uncertain and Challenging Times”Join Jeanine McLeod, Steve Saporito, and Jonathan Ryle as they tackle the tough stuff—from shrinking consumer confidence to shifting buyer behaviour—and share the exact strategies photographers are using to not just survive, but grow.Here's what you'll discover:✅ Why your mindset is either fuelling or freezing your growth✅ How to stay visible when others go silent✅ The real reason Gen X grandparents are your next big market✅ How one photographer booked out April before the month even started✅ Why “just being a photographer” isn't enough—and what to do instead✅ A simple way to fill gaps in your schedule using clients you already haveIf you're tired of hearing “things are slow” and ready to actually do something about it, this episode is your blueprint.

And yet, the market remains close to all time highs. (00:21) Jason Moser and Matt Argersinger join Ricky Mulvey to discuss: - Macro uncertainty and market bullishness. - A record amount of unsold housing stock in the United States. - Chime's IPO. - Earnings from RH and Adobe. (19:11) Malcolm Ethridge, Managing Partner at Capital Area Planning Group and author of "Financial Independence Doesn't Happen by Accident". (35:00) Jason and Matt share two radar stocks: Chipotle and Whirlpool. Companies discussed: RDFN, CHYM, RH, ADBE, CMG, WHR Host: Ricky Mulvey Guests: Jason Moser, Matt Argersinger Engineer: Dan Boyd Advertisements are sponsored content and provided for informational purposes only. The Motley Fool and its affiliates (collectively, "TMF") do not endorse, recommend, or verify the accuracy or completeness of the statements made within advertisements. TMF is not involved in the offer, sale, or solicitation of any securities advertised herein and makes no representations regarding the suitability, or risks associated with any investment opportunity presented. Investors should conduct their own due diligence and consult with legal, tax, and financial advisors before making any investment decisions. TMF assumes no responsibility for any losses or damages arising from this advertisement. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Seattle's best-known indie theater chain is in financial trouble. SIFF laid off 21% of its administrative staff last week. Freelance Arts Reporter and Film Critic Chase Hutchinson says our viewing habits have changed, and SIFF is just the latest in a series of recent struggles for indie theaters. We can only make Seattle Now because listeners support us. Tap here to make a gift and keep Seattle Now in your feed. Got questions about local news or story ideas to share? We want to hear from you! Email us at seattlenow@kuow.org, leave us a voicemail at (206) 616-6746 or leave us feedback online.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Elon Musk attacked the GOP tax bill, calling it an “abomination.” As he leaves government, the Wall Street Journal’s Becky Peterson explains how he is returning to an uncertain future for Tesla. Israel announced that its controversial aid center will be closed for a day, after death and chaos continued to surround the distribution sites. Amid the confusion, the BBC explores what we know and don’t know. The Trump administration is increasingly turning to a specific tactic for deporting migrants whose home country won’t accept them. NPR’s Ximena Bustillo joins to discuss it. Plus, Saudi Arabia is balancing safety with tourism as the mass pilgrimage to Mecca begins, ICE officials detained the family of the man charged with the Colorado attacks, and how Canada is hoping to end a 32-year Stanley Cup drought. Today’s episode was hosted by Shumita Basu.