I’m guessing the length matches the depth in this discussion. Thanks Lex, for taking on the big questions with straightforward thinking and logic, every time.,(reply>), Great episode,(reply>), I've watched it and I'd disagree. The length is indicative of the number of different topics opined on. It's not particularly deep, but it could be described as wide. The host and guest indulge in going off on tangents or recounting personal anecdotes and this makes for a fragmented experience. There's a perfect example of this when Lex says he's frustrated that the media focus is on whether Fauci funded gain of function research, and not why we're doing gain of function research at all. Shortly later he himself interrupts Metzl to derail the discussion onto whether Fauci was right to say he "represents Science". It takes them 40 minutes to return to a topic related to the lab leak theory.<br><br>They make very many interesting points and on the whole the content is interesting and insightful, but I wish they'd done two videos: the 5 hour version for people interested in Metzl or who appreciate the free-rolling discourse, and a 2 hour edit for people who are just interested in hearing evidence for the 'lab leak' theory.<br><br>For anyone only interested in that topic, here's the chapters you can skip:<br>- Anthony Fauci (not super relevant)<br>- Francis Collins<br>- Joe Rogan, Brett Weinstein and Sam Harris<br>- Future of Reproduction<br>- John Stewart<br>- Joe Rogan and Sanjay Gupta<br>- Ultramarathons<br>- One Shared World<br>- Hope for the future<br><br>In other words you can ignore 2h25 minutes of the 4h55 minutes of content if that's the topic you're interested in.,(reply>), subjectively, it's 90% about the stuffed hedgehog on the desk. 10% Fuji water marketing.,(reply>), the depth scales logarithmically with the length of the video,(reply>), WERD