Jeremy Jones joins Michael Shermer to talk about DOGE AI, government fraud, and the strange reality that some of the biggest problems in public life are both widely known and somehow never fixed. Jones explains how his team uses AI to sort through enormous government datasets, isolate suspicious billing patterns, and surface waste at a scale that would be almost impossible to catch by hand.

They also get into Jones’s own background—growing up in Luxembourg, landing in Chicago, and seeing firsthand how different systems shape people’s lives—before moving into a broader argument about immigration, education, bureaucracy, media, and why trust in institutions is falling.

It’s a blunt conversation, and at times a confrontational one, about fraud, incentives, and what happens when everybody knows something is broken but nobody seems able, or willing, to stop it.

Jeremy Jones is the co-founder of Rhetor, an AI-powered intelligence and strategy company for campaigns, advocacy orgs, and government departments. Rhetor began with DOGEai, the viral autonomous AI-powered government watchdog on X that has drawn engagement from The White House, Elon Musk, and members of Congress, which was created as a public good and out of Rhetor’s commitment to restore accountability in the ruling class.

Why do some world-changing ideas get ignored, attacked, or buried for years before anyone takes them seriously?

Michael Shermer sits down with The Economist science correspondent Matt Kaplan to discuss the scientists who got there first and paid the price. They talk about why institutions resist new ideas, why careers can depend on defending the status quo, and why being right is often not enough.

They discuss figures like Katalin Karikó, whose work on mRNA was dismissed long before it helped transform modern medicine, and Oliver Wendell Holmes, who faced fierce backlash for arguing that doctors themselves were spreading deadly infections.

This is a fascinating look at what happens when evidence collides with ego, reputation, and scientific orthodoxy. It’s also a conversation about truth, status, intellectual courage, and the deeply human side of science.

Matt Kaplan is a science correspondent at The Economist. He has written about everything from paleontology and parasites to virology and viticulture over the course of two decades. His new book is I Told You So! Scientists Who Were Ridiculed, Exiled, and Imprisoned for Being Right.

Michael Shermer responds to a remarkable letter from a group of eighth graders at a Christian school in Texas who say they’ve been praying for him and want to talk about Christianity, Jesus, and the Bible.

For decades, developmental psychologist Jay Belsky has focused on one of the biggest questions in human development: how do early experiences shape the lives we go on to live?

In this conversation with Michael Shermer, he explains why childhood adversity can leave deep marks, why some children are far more affected by experience than others, and why averages often hide the most important part of the story.

Belsky revisits the old nature-versus-nurture debate, but pushes past the usual framing. His argument is not that childhood determines everything in some simple, uniform way. It’s that children differ in how developmentally “plastic” they are. The same divorce, the same stress, the same family conflict, or the same support can have very different effects depending on the child.

The discussion moves through attachment theory, father absence, family conflict, puberty, epigenetics, and the evolutionary logic of development.

Belsky also returns to one of his central ideas: the children who are most vulnerable under harsh conditions may also be the ones most likely to flourish when conditions improve. That insight has major implications for how we think about parenting, intervention, and social policy.

Jay Belsky is a developmental psychologist and one of the field’s most influential and highly cited researchers. Over a four-decade career at Penn State, the University of London, and UC Davis, he studied how early-life experience shapes attachment, family relationships, and child development. His new book is The Nature of Nurture: Rethinking How Childhood Adversity Shapes Development.

Publishing likes to imagine itself as a marketplace of ideas with a strong immune system: good arguments win, bad ones fade, and editors act as principled gatekeepers. In practice, it’s also an industry with thin margins, status anxiety, and a constant fear of reputational damage.

Adam Szetela argues that a lot of what gets called “cancel culture” in books is better understood as risk management under social media conditions. Outrage compresses timelines, collapses context, and turns interpretation into a moral referendum. A handful of motivated actors can create the impression of a mass consensus—and once that perception takes hold, institutions often move first and ask questions later.

We talk about how “sensitivity reading” functions in this environment: sometimes as thoughtful critique, sometimes as a liability shield, and sometimes as a tool that quietly shifts a book’s meaning toward whatever ideology currently feels safest. The result is a distributed system of incentives that nudges publishers toward caution, self-censorship, and blandness … while occasionally rewarding controversy because conflict drives attention.

This conversation doesn’t treat every public criticism as illegitimate, or every publisher decision as cowardice. The point is to map the machinery: how reputations get threatened, how moral language expands, why apologies can backfire, and why the incentives often select for the loudest framing over the most accurate one.

Adam Szetela earned his PhD in English from the Department of Literatures at Cornell University. Before Cornell, he was a visiting fellow in the Program on the Study of Capitalism at Harvard University. He writes for The Washington Post, The Guardian, Newsweek, and other publications. Among other places, his writing has been honored by the Society for Features Journalism. His new book is That Book Is Dangerous! How Moral Panic, Social Media, and the Culture Wars Are Remaking Publishing.

Documentary filmmaker Marcie Hume (BBC alum; Magicians: Life in the Impossible) joins Michael Shermer to talk about her new verité film Corey Feldman vs. the World—shot over a decade, starting in the “Corey’s Angels” era and following a tour that unravels in real time.

It goes to some uncomfortable places: how celebrity can create cult-ish dynamics (not just with fans, but with the people working around them as well), how “truth” becomes a slogan—used to frame criticism as persecution and to keep tight control of the story, and how living on camera can turn real life into performance where every moment becomes part of the persona.

Then the story folds back on itself—the release of Marcie’s film becomes its own drama, with last-minute legal threats and a cease-and-desist landing right before the premiere.

Marcie Hume is a documentary filmmaker, television executive, and immersive experience creator focused on how people manufacture meaning under pressure, while the story is still being written. A BBC alumna, she has originated and executive produced unscripted series for the BBC, Channel 4, Discovery, National Geographic, and A&E. Her feature documentaries Hood to Coast, Magicians: Life in the Impossible, and Corey Feldman vs. the World trace endurance, obsession, and the narratives people construct to live with extraordinary choices. Corey Feldman vs. the World is currently available to rent or buy on YouTube, Google, or Apple, even though Corey is still trying to have it removed.

Watch the trailer
Rent the film

Christopher Beha grew up Catholic in Manhattan, walked away during the New Atheist era, and spent years trying to build a secular worldview sturdy enough to live inside. It didn’t hold. So he kept reading—Hume, Kant, Russell, the existentialists—and kept chasing the questions that don’t let you sleep: what counts as evidence, what belief even is, and what you do when reason can’t answer the things you still have to decide.

In this conversation with Michael Shermer, Beha makes a case that skepticism and belief aren’t enemies—and that some debates go nowhere because people are arguing about the “branches” while standing on totally different foundations.

Christopher Beha is the former editor of Harper’s Magazine and the author of four previous books, including The Index of Self-Destructive Acts, which was nominated for the 2020 National Book Award. His new book is Why I Am Not an Atheist: The Confessions of a Skeptical Believer.

Michael Shermer recounts the moment he discovered his name in the Jeffrey Epstein files and uses it as a jumping-off point to tell a few unforgettable stories about con men he’s encountered over the years, and how their tactics work.