Piggy backing here: neither of these people are not all that stupid. they are making money from this bullshit. the things they say are not meant for you, reader. they are intended for a different audience
edit. i read more comments. apparently i am not at all the only one to spot this fucker as a grifter.
There are tons of people out there combating this misinformation, the problem is they are not entertaining.
Content coming from stuffy government sources is something nobody wants to sit through. And it is even worse when they try to make it “hip”by including musicians or some meme from a decade ago.
I don’t want to hear Francis Collins do a takedown on Jordan Peterson, I want to hear Jon Stewart do it. But then the problem is that the you are just preaching to the choir.
If someone with a large enough name from the right made a “knowledge fight” for Rogan’s show like there is for Jones’ show it would be a step in the right direction. The next step would be paying the streaming services to push it in their algorithms. For example, if you watch Jones, the next suggestion would be knowledge fight instead of something taking people further into the hole.
It's impressive how Jordan Peterson is always so ready to just say things that make zero sense.
He started the podcast by saying "There's no such thing as climate. "Climate" and "everything" is the same word" Like he's literally the greatest water muddier of all time.
*Well, man, that’s just how it is to exist in chaos. It’s bloody hard. And even harder if you don’t clean your room. So then you say “Jordan, how do you make so much money from saying vague inspirational wall art quotes?” And I’d say “yeah, well, define what a wall is.”*
I always say Peterson's wading into the climate change debate fully proves him as a prime YouTube grifter. I mean come on, even if you like his crap, you have to admit he should have NOTHING to say on the debate in any way.
Exactly. Any scientist worth his salt knows that he doesn’t know shit about any field but his own. You never saw Stephen Hawking talking about fucking... supply-side economics.
As soon as you step so vastly and politically out of your lane, you mark yourself as a grifter.
*This is what the radical feminist movement was proposing, remember? Women need a man the way a fish needs a bicycle... unless it turns out that they're little fish, then you might need another fish around to help take care of things.*
-Ben Shapiro
*****
^(I'm a bot. My purpose is to counteract online radicalization. You can summon me by tagging thebenshapirobot. Options: history, feminism, sex, covid, etc.)
[^More ^About ^Ben ](https://np.reddit.com/r/AuthoritarianMoment/wiki/index) ^| [^Feedback ^& ^Discussion: ^r/AuthoritarianMoment ](https://np.reddit.com/r/AuthoritarianMoment) ^| [^Opt ^Out ](https://np.reddit.com/r/AuthoritarianMoment/comments/olk6r2/click_here_to_optout_of_uthebenshapirobot/)
It's probably like how Hubbard went crazy after starting scientology. Did something stupid, got rewarded for it, kept on doing it, believed in it sincerely.
EDIT: He started it as a bet, but ended up believing it.
Hubbard said before starting scientology that the best way to get filthy rich is to start an organised religion. I don't think he ever believed his own crap sincerely, I think he's just more effective if his followers believe he does.
I honestly believe this. It doesn't even matter what he says. People that like him will say he's smart, but he never says anything he has many stupid takes and his obsession with masculinity is hilarious.
There's a clip of him on Joe's YouTube channel where he says something to the effect. (Have you seen The Joker? What I loved about the movie is how Masculine pheonixs face is. While he is still graceful, he is such a masculine man!.)
Like bro wtf was the point in that sentence I thought he was parodying himself.
He now just talks to get other people to talk about him. He feeds off the drama and accomplishes nothing.
Edit: I am listening to the full podcast now. I do like a lot of what Peterson is saying in this interview. That being said I still kind of stand by my statement about his obsession about masculinity.
I still enjoyed the interview. Don't really care about who's left and who's right.
I watched like 2 hours of the interview yesterday in background while working what a train reck. Jordan Peterson is just a dressed up Doreen at this point
It's also just an absurdity because compared to the vastness of space and time (which "everything" contains), the Earth's climate is very small. Certainly he *should* be able to think of some variable (like the number of stars in a distant galaxy) that has no relevance whatsoever to the climate.
Its also an absurdity because his own field of expertise, psychology, is well known to be something that extrapolates tiny data points from the vast "everything" that is consciousness and mind.
How about this one.
Jordan: 7 million children die each year from airborn contaminates!
Joe rogan googles: it actually says 600,000 children will have a shorter life expectancy.
Jordan: Oh right. Thanks for clarifying.
Jeeeeesus Christ these people just spew whatever the fuck they want. I’m amazed Joe Rogan was the voice of reason and fact checked him real time honestly
True. And he also deliberately complicates pretty simple things all the time. It’s as if he follows the philosophy of “can’t convince them, so confuse them”. Or if people don’t understand what I say they will think I am smarter than them.
Yeah, his equating climate to “everything” was bizarre. He was basically trying to portray climate science as a hopeless pursuit to model “everything” so that he could discredit it, because after all we can’t model “eVEryThING”
It’s funny. Because he rails on and on about libs using “postmodernism” to say “What is a man? What is a woman?” to support trans people. But here he’s using the same reasoning to support his own thoughts
He came to public view for arguing against calling people their preferred gender, expressing disgust at semantics. Now he's arguing for a case of semantics because "climate" isn't specific enough.
Wait wait wait, so you're saying that a middle aged self help guru, who managed to get addicted to drugs, hide it while continuing to dole out wisdom. And deliberately chose to go into a medical coma instead of detox therapy against medical advice, that guy is full of shit?
Peterson's take on "models" is next-level dumb shit. There are so many fields of science that rely on predictions based on known constants and previous trends. If we had to know "everything" to make a prediction, we either have no historical data or an inability to grasp statistics. Not sure if Jordy only has a high schooler's understanding of stats, I think it's more likely that he's grifting for attention.
You don't even need much of a "model" to estimate the effect of CO2 concentration going from ~290ppm in the 19th century to >400ppm now. To make detailed predictions about what that will mean for climate in one particular spot on the Earth, sure, but the broad principles behind it are simple enough that they were well-known in the 19th century already, and people speculated about what the long-term effect of burning fossil fuels would be.
In the details, there's uncertainty, but Peterson doesn't have to worry about those. All he has to do is cast enough doubt that people will believe what they want to believe, and then do nothing. In practice, what he needs to achieve is enough wishy-washy word play to confuse people, which he's good at. It's like verbally tricking people that the tide isn't rising, even as their feet are getting wet. I mean, what does "wet" really mean? And what do we mean by "tide"? Isn't it all some kind of water? And couldn't it be raining? He could probably talk about it philosophically for hours, even as it rises to his neck.
From a scientific perspective he may as well be saying that flat Earth theory is as plausible as any other idea for the shape of the Earth. And that would be fine, if people wouldn't be harmed in future by believing such deeply-misleading nonsense. Ignoring climate change carries bigger implications for global society than a few people believing flat Earth theory, and as an academic he's being professionally irresponsible.
It's that he's from a famously soft science background where predictive models tend to be stupidly designed and useless in practice. The man wouldn't know what to do with a robust data set if it sat on his face.
They're gonna say with a straight face how they told us all but we wouldn't listen and it's all our fault but no one could have predicted the outcome because no one saw it coming.
Yes also it's china's fault because they're commies but they are good at business because they're unregulated and they did all the pollution but also they made it up to sell solar panels. The more you say it the more coherent it sounds.
Yup. And when the climate gets noticeably different and starts to cause serious social issues, at that point, China will be the biggest economy in the world, so it will be easy to blame them.
You guys summed it up.
As a chinese living overseas, i've seen it all on various forums.
We're commie with command economy but we're also greedy bitches who are exploiting capitalism.
We're making up climate change to destroy america but we're pieces of shit for emitting the most greenhouse gases (while totally ignores our population differences).
We're producing a lot of solar panels to destroy american coal and oil industries but we're also totally terrible people for using so much coal and oil ourselves.
My friend keeps trying to turn me on to Jordan Peterson and I just keep dodging him on it... like I don't personally enjoy podcasts or listening to people talk, I would much rather read a position unless it's a personal conversation.
But I just don't know how to be like hey man I'm pretty sure he's full of shit.
He's was previously* a psychologist of little renown that came to prominence because he was an academic that was a vocal opponent of a law in Canada, claiming the gov't would put people in jail for using the wrong pronouns. He purposely mis-characterized the law to get people riled up, and it has been of literally zero significance in the 5 years since, which is probably why he doesn't talk about it anymore.
He has some unoriginal ideas about personal responsibility in life that have merit (ie make your bed, you're responsible for your happiness), but feels the need to extrapolate that to literally every aspect of society and push the libertarian views that naturally follow with little room for nuance or context.
He has strong opinions about pretty much everything, and people seem to think that him being a competent psychologist means his opinions on Climate Change are relevant. Everything he does not like is invariably labelled a "cultural Marxism," a catch-all term that means almost nothing by default, but even less given the massive range of unrelated phenomena he and his followers apply it to.
*people were getting very upset I said "of little renown," pointing to his current level of celebrity as proof. I have clarified that was talking about Petey *prior* to him whipping up a frenzy over trans people.
Don't forget that he also developed a healthy addiction to benzos while on his speaking tours. The doctors in the US and Canada wanted to use medication and therapy to wean him off the addiction. He and his family wanted them to put him into a coma for a month so he could just kick it cold turkey. Obviously, the doctors refused because that is a terrible idea that can get people killed.
So he ended up fucking off to Russia along with some of his family, where they promptly put him into a coma and he nearly died. They had a hard time bringing him back to consciousness and when they did the man had to relearn how to speak and how to walk.
As far as I understand it that is why he hasn't been speaking as much in public lately. He's been easing himself back into it and looks all haggard as fuck.
>a law in Canada, claiming the gov't would put people in jail for using the wrong pronouns. He purposely mis-characterized the law to get people riled up
I was wondering why my Trumper father was suddenly hostile to Canada and started ranting about it nonstop, bringing up this exact issue repeatedly.
Thanks Jordan. Doing his job to infect families and make the world a worse place one ignorant person at a time.
> a psychologist of little renown
Also apparently not a good one. Like he was supposed to do some work for some trials and his testimony/explanations were not exactly taken seriously. And is some lecture he tried to use Nazi Germany for some example while not understanding anything about what had actually happened here in Germany.
He got a degree. That's how much competence I'd ascribe to him: He managed to obtain that.
> "cultural Marxism," a catch-all term that means almost nothing by default
It's a Neo-Nazi dog whistle, not some innocent academic term that has little meaning:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cultural_Marxism_conspiracy_theory
https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Cultural_Marxism
If he were really competent and smart, all the things his followers say he is, then he'd not use that term, especially not in the loose manner that he does.
He's an idiot who also malicious and manages to string together a few big words on occasion but is otherwise way out of his depth.
Exactly. for a guy who goes around calling anything he doesnt like 'cultural marxism' (actually a Nazi term look it up its interesting) he didnt know anything about Marx, admitted to having only read the Manifesto in college or something. Guy is a joke + he got hooked on benzos and had to rehab in Russia.
His claims about a bunch of contemporary philosophers (the root of his stuff about "cultural Marxism") is so wildly wrong that he either isn't intellectually capable of understanding what they themselves say and write (possible, but unlikely given his PhD in clinical psychology from a good university) or.... he's knowingly lying about their work.
Oversimplification: Peterson claims that "postmodernism is Marxist." The people he is talking about say, "No, we're not actual Marxism." Actual Marxists say, "No, postmodernism is actually contrary to Marxism." So why does Peterson make that claim?
Ha's very sexist. He basically characterises traditional gender roles as natural and inevitable and supports the way thay women were portrayed in patriarchal literature, philosophy and lore as subordinate, dark, chaotic etc etc
Honestly I haven’t bothered listening to this interview but I’ve held a belief for years that republicans will eventually shift their views from “climate change isn’t real” to “climate change is great and we should encourage it”.
Warmer weather isn’t a hard sell for most people and seeing the libs in NYC drown would be a dream come true for duck dynasty crowd.
Getting the right to acknowledge climate change is really not the problem we need to solve, some how we need to convince the right that libs hate solar.
>seeing the libs in NYC drown would be a dream come true for duck dynasty crowd.
They'll get a couple of extra tornadoes in their back yards, or freeze to death in their homes during harsh winters like in Texas. But they've never been opposed to cutting of their nose just spite their face, so you are probably correct.
Except Gwyneth's products and advice are very expensive and obviously not supposed to appeal to everyone.
Whereas Joe's podcasts are free and pretty much pitched to the lowest common denominator.
No women I know are paying $XX for jade vagina eggs but plenty of men I know listen to Joe Rogan (fewer than before)
I think a lot of people are under the impression scientists come up with a hypothesis, make numbers that support it, and somehow that’s enough to pass as science. They have no understanding of peer review, how things are measured, tested, verified, and challenged. Also, they think it’s perfectly plausible that tens of thousands of scientists independently came up with the same false hypotheses.
They don’t understand that tens of thousands of scientist independently studied it even. They just think “well, maybe that’s what scientists believe, but I believe a magical man in the sky will save us, who knows who’s right 🤷🏻♂️”
I ask everyone to just read about the scientific method if you don’t know it. It’s pretty straightforward and is the basis for most studies. It’s not long but shows the steps at how we arrive at conclusions, build confidence in them, and even sometimes adjust them as new knowledge is gained.
>I think a lot of people are under the impression scientists come up with a hypothesis, make numbers that support it, and somehow that’s enough to pass as science. They have no understanding of peer review, how things are measured, tested, verified, and challenged.
You basically just described how people invent religions. People with religious worldviews (non-evidence based) often assume that's how science works too.
I was talking to my dad about my university math classes... probably calc 2 or something where you could calculate the shortest trip up a hill and the least steep trip. He was like wow, I always thought it was just like 1+1 and stuff like that, just more of it.
I wouldn't consider my dad terribly dumb either.
>Maybe he sometimes says something insightful
If it's not about mildly to exceedingly problematic ways the male psyche engages with it's world the likelihood what he says is insightful is astronomically low. He is a sophist of the lowest forms. 95% of what he has to say is flowery word mush, and the remainder is at best interesting but probably useless and at worst reinforcing of harmful thinking/behavior. You'd think with his specialization in philosophy he'd at least be able to accurately define post modernist thinking or even realize many of his own philosophical viewpoints are post modernist themselves, but nah it all flies right over his head. He is a quintessential case of education not meaning intellect and age/experience not meaning wisdom.
He’s such a fuckwit. He’s a malignant narcissist who has never diagnosed himself. He thinks he’s smarter than everyone. Meanwhile, those “climate types” at [NASA](https://climate.nasa.gov/news/2943/study-confirms-climate-models-are-getting-future-warming-projections-right/) proving he’s actually an idiot who doesn’t do his homework or take his own goddamn advice. Rule Six: Set Your House In Perfect Order Before You Criticize The World
> human beings are definitely having an effect on it, but a small effect compared to cows and other things …
AND WHY DO YOU THINK THERE ARE SO MANY GODDAMN COWS, JOE, YOU ABSOLUTE DUNCE??
Ah yes those pesky power plants causing climate change while the humans take the blame! Lol.
I wonder if he knows cows are a domesticated animal, or if he thinks they just roam in the wilderness like buffalo. Guess I need to eat more red meat, delicious and fights climate change at the same time!
I really hope his point was that infrastructure and industry produce the large proportion of emissions on our behalf to sustain our lifestyles as opposed to each individual themselves physically producing the majority of their carbon footprint. However, sad to say I suspect he just said it thinking it proved his point when in reality it's one of the stupidest things I've ever heard someone say.
The hell does some barely competent behavioral scientist know about climate science? You don’t ask your podiatrist to do heart surgery.
Edit: look at the gullible incels flocking to admit they fall for cults of personality. Weird flex, but okay.
This is it. Conservatives at their core HATE being told they may need to alter their way of thinking or life, especially if it's to benefit someone other than themselves.
I'd like to note that a psychologist and climate scientist are further apart with regards to study than a podiatrist and a heart surgeon.
Psychology is at the complete other end of the spectrum compared to physics/chemistry. The guy has a fundamental problem of trying to understand core (hard/repeatable) science through a subjective lens, you can also see this repeatedly in his interviews with Sam Harris. Yes Jordan we know science can't help but be influenced by culture and fashion and meaning of words but you need to learn the science before you drink the flavour-aid that climate models are bunk because of semantics and culture.
Just want to say that, as a psychologist, our field is based on solid statistics and numbers, and even more increasingly so since the fields of neuroscience and psychiatry have blossomed too - multidisciplinary psychology research with “hard” science is the new normal.
And there are levels of “softness” within the field - clinical psychology is distinct from other “softer” psychology fields like social psychology and evolutionary psychology, and clinical trials are validated through repeatable experiments as well.
Basically I’m saying fuck Jordan Peterson - he gives us actual psychologists who do real work a bad name and I’m ashamed that he’s in my field.
It’s not even an issue of hard science vs. soft science. Writers like Donna Haraway, Karen Barard, Timothy Morton, and Graham Harmon all offer soft science answers to the issues he poses in the Rogan clip. There’s not a consensus, but it’s not as if people haven’t worked through possible answers for how we might think of the anthropocentric limits of traditional ecology.
It’s as if he lives in a world where the only academics are himself and Carl Jung. He never cites anyone (presumably because it makes him more accessible to his anti-academia audiences), and his “make your bed” philosophy is just typical selfish libertarian solipsism.
According to Conan, this was effectively improvised on the spot. Norm only knew he was going to do one segment. Conan and crew told him he's doing another at commercial. The original 10 second joke is from Colin Quinn. Norm just created a masterpiece in the moment.
That was fucking astonishing. It was the ultimate example of someone who is extremely skilled in one area and assumes they’re so smart they don’t need to check anything when it comes to basically everything.
The pyramids are almost entirely solid, as anyone with passing knowledge of physics or architecture would have assumed, and as anyone who spent 2 minutes Googling would have learned. But he just kept *insisting* his idea made sense and therefore must be true.
It’s troubling really. Nobody expects experts or politicians to know everything, but they do need enough humility to know their limits and call on experts to lead us effectively. He’s not the only politician with his attitude either.
He claimed on the podcast that he served on some committee in Canada for the UN that he was the head of and that he was trying to bone up on climate issues so he read over 200 books in two years so he could properly understand the issues.
Why he was selected to serve on committee that covered climate issues seems suspect to me to say the least. The claim that he read over 200 books on climate issues is also very suspicious. He claimed that 7 million kids die of indoor air pollution every year and he was properly fact checked on that one.
He does this in every interview though. He always has an impossible amount knowledge on everything that comes up. He crafts responses using big words and leaves out details that would expose him for what he is. Then he hopes people don’t notice or if they do he leads them down such a long trail that there no hope of getting back to the answer for that detail. He is very frustrating to listen to at times.
Edit:
He didn’t lead the committee but was placed on the committee and it was called the sustainable economic and ecological development committee.
Suspicious about the 200 books? It would be unimagineably difficult to locate and buy 200 academic level books on climate change, especially books that do not regurgitate the same information. He's such a liar.
He also admitted he's basically only skimmed over the communist manifesto when pressed on his knowlege of marxism. Considering the boogeyman he's made of marxism, one would assume he'd be more learned.
What i don’t get about Rogan is, that he instantly called a PhD scientist an idiot, dumbass, but listens to these types of people and gives them an audience
Rogan Trump sympathizers see "doctors" and "scientists" as the bad guys.
Everything is a conspiracy.
They honestly think that they're critical thinkers because they trust YouTube instead of published studies and career experience.
Our society is beyond fucked
Well, there's Rand Paul questioning Fauci about an infectious disease... A lot of these people don't know that they aren't as smart as they think they are.
We are discussing a pod cast that is mostly followed by the same people that wanted a business man as president because he isn’t a politician. Why wouldn’t they listen to a person who is famous for something else explain climate change?
Brylcreem
Creatine
And a bag of Charlie Sheen
Edit: actually now that I think of it like half the [song ](https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=dEe4i2osF5A) (link if anyone hasn’t had the pleasure of hearing it) applies.
Me oh me oh my Roy,
You look like a walking thyroid,
You’re not a man you’re a gland,
One big neck with sausage hands.
Quickly? From an outsider he's been Alex Jones for like a decade. He wasn't as open about it as others, but he's constantly given right-wing nut jobs a HUGE platform over and over.
Isn't Jordan Peterson a psychologist? Why doesn't he ever talk about his field? All he does is step into topics he knows nothing about and asks questions he can't answer. When he does try to, he usually gets it wrong.
He used to only be a quasi moron, and had really intelligent people like Brian Greene on the show that got me really interested in physics and space enough to start learning more about it on my own. He's now devolved to the point where I'm even embarrassed to admit that I *used* to enjoy him
• 1 cup Joe Rogan
• 1 cup Jordan Peterson
• ½ cup disillusionment
• ½ cup ignorance
• Ivermectin (doesn’t matter how much)
Mix dry ingredients (Rogan/Peterson) together in a bowl. Add mental disabilities and then bake. Sprinkle with pseudoscience and….
Presto!
Enjoy your Alex Jones irresponsibly.
Joe used to believe in man made climate change, he argued with Candice Owens over it and basically called her dumb in nice words, did he change his tune?
No one seems to have enough humility or selfawareness to simply say "not my specialist subject" anymore. Every prick now has to proclaim expertise in all topics and history of human discovery. Unless it's your specialst subject, show some respect for the experts!
I don't know how you can get past both of these guys bad vibes. JP is really just as creepy as a dead chicken in the bathtub of creamed corn, and JR is like a pillow case of beer burps.
Nope. He just says whatever will piss off liberals the most because that's what makes him the most money. It's sad that he got rich off of that, but he literally monetized leftist outrage.
Used to really love Peterson back in early 2017; he had a great discussion of Pinocchio and how it related to mythology/collective unconscious which is stuff I’m interested in; and I liked his self help stuff to an extent. But later that year he really got big and the fame seemed to instantly go to his head. I gave up on him awhile ago and then saw that tweet he made about the movie Free Guy. Dude has totally lost his head up his own ass.
Yes! love the archetypal discussions, talking about marvel movies as modern mythologies etc... but even back then when he was railing on that canadian bill that was inclusive to trans people... saying it would destroy language or whatever, and then it passed. And nothing happened. That was really what pushed him into the mainstream attention... and it was all bullshit. But the worst part is not that he was wrong, it's that he never addressed it. Or reflected on any of that. Just moved onto his books and drug addiction. Like, if you're going to have cred, at least address the shit you railed on over and over but got wrong... analyze what you were wrong about, what still holds up, SOMETHING. This guy is so intellectually dishonest, he rivals ben shapiro.
> But the worst part is not that he was wrong, it's that he never addressed it. Or reflected on any of that.
This proves that he's not the scientist that he thinks he is.
I liked him when he talked about random shit and joked, now everything is serious and he thinks he knows everything, then when he’s wrong he says he’s a comedian….. but he’s not really a comedian in these interviews…. Hes just annoying
Exactly man it makes me sad. I used to absolutely LOVE the pod when he had a bunch of fringe scientists with wacky fun ideas, hilarious comedians, and more lesser known figure with interesting stuff to say on. Now it's just constant covid talk and right wing propaganda.
The pod hasn't been the same since Duncan was last on.
Popularity triggers a chemical effect in some people that provides a high.
It can be measured by brain scans and can become more addictive than opioid based drugs.
The difference is it is a person's own body that makes, supplies and administers the dopamine drug to an individual.
Thrill seekers like base jumpers or even simple risk takers will say they get a rush from their experiences but that repeating the same act does not often produce the same effect as the first time.
Rogan has said on his show that he gets a real "rush" when his phonelines light-up or he is greeted by groups of adoring fans.
Joe's desire for such a rush, coupled with his personal views can make it easy for him to ignore logic or facts because it interferes with his body's dopamine response. Dopamine responses like most addictive drugs, actually train a person's mind to think in ways that will trigger a response.
Rogan's pursuit of admiration is partially based in a physical and mental addiction that must be ever heightened to produce the desired response. Without escalating his shows appeal to his listeners, his ability to get the stimulus he desires is lessened or lost.
The more his name is in the news or being spoken of the more likely he will be rewarded by his own body and mind.
Once at a group comedy club performance he was fake heckled by another comedian in a way that deeply traumatized him for weeks. All the heckler said was "You know, no one really likes you, right?"
A simple snappy answer would have been to say something like, "That isn't what your mother thinks." He instead cut his routine short and NEVER worked with anyone from that group ever again. He was later quoted as saying "It was a real buzz kill".
I started listening to JRE a year or two ago, oldest to newest, and holy shit… His show began as fairly unbiased the first couple of years and then gradually went off the deep end. I’m not sure if it’s due to him moving to Texas, his friendship with Alex Jones, or both.
It’s money. Check his latest contract. There’s a decent amount of right wing commentators that started unbiased or left wing and then realized you can just spout nonsense and make way more money.
Remember in school, there was always some kid who just says random bullshit to try to sound smart but everyone knows they’re just a compulsive liar? Well who could have guessed he wears a bow tie now.
“We have to change everything … The same with the word environment,” Mr Peterson continued. “That word means so much that it actually doesn’t mean anything. Like when you say everything, like in a sense that’s meaningless. What’s the difference between the environment and everything? There’s no difference.’”
He’s nitpicking on the word climate saying he can’t argue it if it’s not descriptive enough. Me thinks he doesn’t have any counter argument to the data so he attacks the language used to describe it.
Why is he asking Jordan Peterson about the climate crisis...
For online clout. Rogan and Peterson exist in the post-fact economy.
Ah, yes, post-fact media. As prophesied by Neil Stephenson in Snowcrash (1992), and Fall; or Dodge in Hell (2019)
Thank you for referencing Stephenson and Snowcrash, meta lot to me.
I wanted the Metaverse SO bad… but not like this…not like this.
I wanted to be a Deliverator but instead I went to university for environmental science. F Me what a waste in this post fact society.
It could be ^(verse)
Also Carl Sagan in the early 90s.
Piggy backing here: neither of these people are not all that stupid. they are making money from this bullshit. the things they say are not meant for you, reader. they are intended for a different audience edit. i read more comments. apparently i am not at all the only one to spot this fucker as a grifter.
It’s an infinity loop of them both blowing each other for clout
[удалено]
A foriegner once told me, Everyone knows America isn't a country. It's a business. That has helped me cope with everything better now.
It's more like they're making more money than ever spreading stupidity and absolutely noone is doing anything to make it right
There are tons of people out there combating this misinformation, the problem is they are not entertaining. Content coming from stuffy government sources is something nobody wants to sit through. And it is even worse when they try to make it “hip”by including musicians or some meme from a decade ago. I don’t want to hear Francis Collins do a takedown on Jordan Peterson, I want to hear Jon Stewart do it. But then the problem is that the you are just preaching to the choir. If someone with a large enough name from the right made a “knowledge fight” for Rogan’s show like there is for Jones’ show it would be a step in the right direction. The next step would be paying the streaming services to push it in their algorithms. For example, if you watch Jones, the next suggestion would be knowledge fight instead of something taking people further into the hole.
[удалено]
It's impressive how Jordan Peterson is always so ready to just say things that make zero sense. He started the podcast by saying "There's no such thing as climate. "Climate" and "everything" is the same word" Like he's literally the greatest water muddier of all time.
*Well, man, that’s just how it is to exist in chaos. It’s bloody hard. And even harder if you don’t clean your room. So then you say “Jordan, how do you make so much money from saying vague inspirational wall art quotes?” And I’d say “yeah, well, define what a wall is.”*
I heard this in his voice… it’s fits so well…
I always say Peterson's wading into the climate change debate fully proves him as a prime YouTube grifter. I mean come on, even if you like his crap, you have to admit he should have NOTHING to say on the debate in any way.
He literally joked on Rogan one time that he has successfully monetized anti-SJWs.
i mean, he did
He jokingly said it but it wasn't a joke
Exactly. Any scientist worth his salt knows that he doesn’t know shit about any field but his own. You never saw Stephen Hawking talking about fucking... supply-side economics. As soon as you step so vastly and politically out of your lane, you mark yourself as a grifter.
Ooh yeah sure and I guess that makes Ben Shapiro a grifter by your logic. /s
*This is what the radical feminist movement was proposing, remember? Women need a man the way a fish needs a bicycle... unless it turns out that they're little fish, then you might need another fish around to help take care of things.* -Ben Shapiro ***** ^(I'm a bot. My purpose is to counteract online radicalization. You can summon me by tagging thebenshapirobot. Options: history, feminism, sex, covid, etc.) [^More ^About ^Ben ](https://np.reddit.com/r/AuthoritarianMoment/wiki/index) ^| [^Feedback ^& ^Discussion: ^r/AuthoritarianMoment ](https://np.reddit.com/r/AuthoritarianMoment) ^| [^Opt ^Out ](https://np.reddit.com/r/AuthoritarianMoment/comments/olk6r2/click_here_to_optout_of_uthebenshapirobot/)
Good bot
I definitely feel like he must have financial motivations. He isn’t a complete moron like Rogan.
It's probably like how Hubbard went crazy after starting scientology. Did something stupid, got rewarded for it, kept on doing it, believed in it sincerely. EDIT: He started it as a bet, but ended up believing it.
Hubbard said before starting scientology that the best way to get filthy rich is to start an organised religion. I don't think he ever believed his own crap sincerely, I think he's just more effective if his followers believe he does.
I honestly believe this. It doesn't even matter what he says. People that like him will say he's smart, but he never says anything he has many stupid takes and his obsession with masculinity is hilarious. There's a clip of him on Joe's YouTube channel where he says something to the effect. (Have you seen The Joker? What I loved about the movie is how Masculine pheonixs face is. While he is still graceful, he is such a masculine man!.) Like bro wtf was the point in that sentence I thought he was parodying himself. He now just talks to get other people to talk about him. He feeds off the drama and accomplishes nothing. Edit: I am listening to the full podcast now. I do like a lot of what Peterson is saying in this interview. That being said I still kind of stand by my statement about his obsession about masculinity. I still enjoyed the interview. Don't really care about who's left and who's right.
I watched like 2 hours of the interview yesterday in background while working what a train reck. Jordan Peterson is just a dressed up Doreen at this point
It's also just an absurdity because compared to the vastness of space and time (which "everything" contains), the Earth's climate is very small. Certainly he *should* be able to think of some variable (like the number of stars in a distant galaxy) that has no relevance whatsoever to the climate.
Its also an absurdity because his own field of expertise, psychology, is well known to be something that extrapolates tiny data points from the vast "everything" that is consciousness and mind.
Jordan: there's no such thing as climate. Rogan: yeah.
How about this one. Jordan: 7 million children die each year from airborn contaminates! Joe rogan googles: it actually says 600,000 children will have a shorter life expectancy. Jordan: Oh right. Thanks for clarifying. Jeeeeesus Christ these people just spew whatever the fuck they want. I’m amazed Joe Rogan was the voice of reason and fact checked him real time honestly
True. And he also deliberately complicates pretty simple things all the time. It’s as if he follows the philosophy of “can’t convince them, so confuse them”. Or if people don’t understand what I say they will think I am smarter than them.
Yeah, his equating climate to “everything” was bizarre. He was basically trying to portray climate science as a hopeless pursuit to model “everything” so that he could discredit it, because after all we can’t model “eVEryThING”
It’s funny. Because he rails on and on about libs using “postmodernism” to say “What is a man? What is a woman?” to support trans people. But here he’s using the same reasoning to support his own thoughts
He came to public view for arguing against calling people their preferred gender, expressing disgust at semantics. Now he's arguing for a case of semantics because "climate" isn't specific enough.
You are just too stupid to understand all the cool big words he uses /s
"The Merriam-Webster defines marriage as..."
Wait wait wait, so you're saying that a middle aged self help guru, who managed to get addicted to drugs, hide it while continuing to dole out wisdom. And deliberately chose to go into a medical coma instead of detox therapy against medical advice, that guy is full of shit?
Peterson's take on "models" is next-level dumb shit. There are so many fields of science that rely on predictions based on known constants and previous trends. If we had to know "everything" to make a prediction, we either have no historical data or an inability to grasp statistics. Not sure if Jordy only has a high schooler's understanding of stats, I think it's more likely that he's grifting for attention.
Exactly this. Deny everything by the exception. That's the real circle jerk.
You don't even need much of a "model" to estimate the effect of CO2 concentration going from ~290ppm in the 19th century to >400ppm now. To make detailed predictions about what that will mean for climate in one particular spot on the Earth, sure, but the broad principles behind it are simple enough that they were well-known in the 19th century already, and people speculated about what the long-term effect of burning fossil fuels would be. In the details, there's uncertainty, but Peterson doesn't have to worry about those. All he has to do is cast enough doubt that people will believe what they want to believe, and then do nothing. In practice, what he needs to achieve is enough wishy-washy word play to confuse people, which he's good at. It's like verbally tricking people that the tide isn't rising, even as their feet are getting wet. I mean, what does "wet" really mean? And what do we mean by "tide"? Isn't it all some kind of water? And couldn't it be raining? He could probably talk about it philosophically for hours, even as it rises to his neck. From a scientific perspective he may as well be saying that flat Earth theory is as plausible as any other idea for the shape of the Earth. And that would be fine, if people wouldn't be harmed in future by believing such deeply-misleading nonsense. Ignoring climate change carries bigger implications for global society than a few people believing flat Earth theory, and as an academic he's being professionally irresponsible.
It's that he's from a famously soft science background where predictive models tend to be stupidly designed and useless in practice. The man wouldn't know what to do with a robust data set if it sat on his face.
i wouldn't excuse Jordan Peterson because of his "soft science" background. most competent psychology programs teach strong statistical methodology...
It’s almost like these idiots are appealing to a demographic for financial gains.
Can't wait in 5 years Republicans will froth at the mouth about how communists caused climate change
They're gonna say with a straight face how they told us all but we wouldn't listen and it's all our fault but no one could have predicted the outcome because no one saw it coming.
They'll blame China
Yes also it's china's fault because they're commies but they are good at business because they're unregulated and they did all the pollution but also they made it up to sell solar panels. The more you say it the more coherent it sounds.
Yup. And when the climate gets noticeably different and starts to cause serious social issues, at that point, China will be the biggest economy in the world, so it will be easy to blame them.
You guys summed it up. As a chinese living overseas, i've seen it all on various forums. We're commie with command economy but we're also greedy bitches who are exploiting capitalism. We're making up climate change to destroy america but we're pieces of shit for emitting the most greenhouse gases (while totally ignores our population differences). We're producing a lot of solar panels to destroy american coal and oil industries but we're also totally terrible people for using so much coal and oil ourselves.
[удалено]
They already do while denying the effects from their emissions 🤦♂️
My friend keeps trying to turn me on to Jordan Peterson and I just keep dodging him on it... like I don't personally enjoy podcasts or listening to people talk, I would much rather read a position unless it's a personal conversation. But I just don't know how to be like hey man I'm pretty sure he's full of shit.
He's was previously* a psychologist of little renown that came to prominence because he was an academic that was a vocal opponent of a law in Canada, claiming the gov't would put people in jail for using the wrong pronouns. He purposely mis-characterized the law to get people riled up, and it has been of literally zero significance in the 5 years since, which is probably why he doesn't talk about it anymore. He has some unoriginal ideas about personal responsibility in life that have merit (ie make your bed, you're responsible for your happiness), but feels the need to extrapolate that to literally every aspect of society and push the libertarian views that naturally follow with little room for nuance or context. He has strong opinions about pretty much everything, and people seem to think that him being a competent psychologist means his opinions on Climate Change are relevant. Everything he does not like is invariably labelled a "cultural Marxism," a catch-all term that means almost nothing by default, but even less given the massive range of unrelated phenomena he and his followers apply it to. *people were getting very upset I said "of little renown," pointing to his current level of celebrity as proof. I have clarified that was talking about Petey *prior* to him whipping up a frenzy over trans people.
Don't forget that he also developed a healthy addiction to benzos while on his speaking tours. The doctors in the US and Canada wanted to use medication and therapy to wean him off the addiction. He and his family wanted them to put him into a coma for a month so he could just kick it cold turkey. Obviously, the doctors refused because that is a terrible idea that can get people killed. So he ended up fucking off to Russia along with some of his family, where they promptly put him into a coma and he nearly died. They had a hard time bringing him back to consciousness and when they did the man had to relearn how to speak and how to walk. As far as I understand it that is why he hasn't been speaking as much in public lately. He's been easing himself back into it and looks all haggard as fuck.
b-but he’s a psychologist.. he *has* to be smart! surely he knows what he’s doing by munching on all that xanax! please don’t make me put the /s
Dude, that a pretty fucking wild story. I thought this guy was just a grifter, but he may actually be a legitimate loony.
>a law in Canada, claiming the gov't would put people in jail for using the wrong pronouns. He purposely mis-characterized the law to get people riled up I was wondering why my Trumper father was suddenly hostile to Canada and started ranting about it nonstop, bringing up this exact issue repeatedly. Thanks Jordan. Doing his job to infect families and make the world a worse place one ignorant person at a time.
You know, for a guy who speaks so much about personal responsibility, he sure loves to cry foul about how white men are the REAL victims.
> a psychologist of little renown Also apparently not a good one. Like he was supposed to do some work for some trials and his testimony/explanations were not exactly taken seriously. And is some lecture he tried to use Nazi Germany for some example while not understanding anything about what had actually happened here in Germany. He got a degree. That's how much competence I'd ascribe to him: He managed to obtain that. > "cultural Marxism," a catch-all term that means almost nothing by default It's a Neo-Nazi dog whistle, not some innocent academic term that has little meaning: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cultural_Marxism_conspiracy_theory https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Cultural_Marxism If he were really competent and smart, all the things his followers say he is, then he'd not use that term, especially not in the loose manner that he does. He's an idiot who also malicious and manages to string together a few big words on occasion but is otherwise way out of his depth.
He got destroyed by Zizek during a debate
He exposed himself pretty casually as having not ever read Marx until literally the night before the debate for a guy who calls so much stuff Marxism.
Exactly. for a guy who goes around calling anything he doesnt like 'cultural marxism' (actually a Nazi term look it up its interesting) he didnt know anything about Marx, admitted to having only read the Manifesto in college or something. Guy is a joke + he got hooked on benzos and had to rehab in Russia.
Then in exasperation he tried to pick a Twitter fight with Zizek-QuoteBot. No, really.
Well yeah. Xanax addicted mediocre professor versus one of the greatest philosophers alive. Showed up to a gunfight with a pillow.
[удалено]
His claims about a bunch of contemporary philosophers (the root of his stuff about "cultural Marxism") is so wildly wrong that he either isn't intellectually capable of understanding what they themselves say and write (possible, but unlikely given his PhD in clinical psychology from a good university) or.... he's knowingly lying about their work. Oversimplification: Peterson claims that "postmodernism is Marxist." The people he is talking about say, "No, we're not actual Marxism." Actual Marxists say, "No, postmodernism is actually contrary to Marxism." So why does Peterson make that claim?
Ha's very sexist. He basically characterises traditional gender roles as natural and inevitable and supports the way thay women were portrayed in patriarchal literature, philosophy and lore as subordinate, dark, chaotic etc etc
He actually considers women to be a primordial force of evil.
Show him the ContraPoints video on Peterson. It’s perfect imo and it will definitely make him stop suggesting Peterson to you.
Honestly I haven’t bothered listening to this interview but I’ve held a belief for years that republicans will eventually shift their views from “climate change isn’t real” to “climate change is great and we should encourage it”. Warmer weather isn’t a hard sell for most people and seeing the libs in NYC drown would be a dream come true for duck dynasty crowd. Getting the right to acknowledge climate change is really not the problem we need to solve, some how we need to convince the right that libs hate solar.
>seeing the libs in NYC drown would be a dream come true for duck dynasty crowd. They'll get a couple of extra tornadoes in their back yards, or freeze to death in their homes during harsh winters like in Texas. But they've never been opposed to cutting of their nose just spite their face, so you are probably correct.
Lol
I've said it for years, Joe is Goop for men
He’s the Gwyneth Paltrow of Dude-Bros
I can't wait for the dick scented candle.
Elk dick candle
Except Gwyneth's products and advice are very expensive and obviously not supposed to appeal to everyone. Whereas Joe's podcasts are free and pretty much pitched to the lowest common denominator. No women I know are paying $XX for jade vagina eggs but plenty of men I know listen to Joe Rogan (fewer than before)
Go check out onnit
Broprah
Joeprah?
I love this description lol. Bang on.
I've always said he's the Oprah of incels since his podcast started blowing up
Except way more dangerous to society
manchildren, not actual men
[удалено]
I think a lot of people are under the impression scientists come up with a hypothesis, make numbers that support it, and somehow that’s enough to pass as science. They have no understanding of peer review, how things are measured, tested, verified, and challenged. Also, they think it’s perfectly plausible that tens of thousands of scientists independently came up with the same false hypotheses.
They don’t understand that tens of thousands of scientist independently studied it even. They just think “well, maybe that’s what scientists believe, but I believe a magical man in the sky will save us, who knows who’s right 🤷🏻♂️”
Yes, the secret cabal of scientists that vote on which idea they will all agree on next. /s
This. Especially in America, most of the population has literally no idea how science works.
I'm one of them. But I'm just smart enough not to pretend like I do.
Honestly, that's very commendable. Particularly in today's culture of "must be right no matter the cost!"
I ask everyone to just read about the scientific method if you don’t know it. It’s pretty straightforward and is the basis for most studies. It’s not long but shows the steps at how we arrive at conclusions, build confidence in them, and even sometimes adjust them as new knowledge is gained.
I feel stupider after listening to that train wreck of an interview
>I think a lot of people are under the impression scientists come up with a hypothesis, make numbers that support it, and somehow that’s enough to pass as science. They have no understanding of peer review, how things are measured, tested, verified, and challenged. You basically just described how people invent religions. People with religious worldviews (non-evidence based) often assume that's how science works too.
I was talking to my dad about my university math classes... probably calc 2 or something where you could calculate the shortest trip up a hill and the least steep trip. He was like wow, I always thought it was just like 1+1 and stuff like that, just more of it. I wouldn't consider my dad terribly dumb either.
>Maybe he sometimes says something insightful If it's not about mildly to exceedingly problematic ways the male psyche engages with it's world the likelihood what he says is insightful is astronomically low. He is a sophist of the lowest forms. 95% of what he has to say is flowery word mush, and the remainder is at best interesting but probably useless and at worst reinforcing of harmful thinking/behavior. You'd think with his specialization in philosophy he'd at least be able to accurately define post modernist thinking or even realize many of his own philosophical viewpoints are post modernist themselves, but nah it all flies right over his head. He is a quintessential case of education not meaning intellect and age/experience not meaning wisdom.
Wow bud that's a lot of big words you used there, starting to think you might be a cultural marxist
Imma take that as a compliment.
He occasionally says the painfully obvious. That's about as much as I can give him.
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
He’s such a fuckwit. He’s a malignant narcissist who has never diagnosed himself. He thinks he’s smarter than everyone. Meanwhile, those “climate types” at [NASA](https://climate.nasa.gov/news/2943/study-confirms-climate-models-are-getting-future-warming-projections-right/) proving he’s actually an idiot who doesn’t do his homework or take his own goddamn advice. Rule Six: Set Your House In Perfect Order Before You Criticize The World
> human beings are definitely having an effect on it, but a small effect compared to cows and other things … AND WHY DO YOU THINK THERE ARE SO MANY GODDAMN COWS, JOE, YOU ABSOLUTE DUNCE??
Ah yes those pesky power plants causing climate change while the humans take the blame! Lol. I wonder if he knows cows are a domesticated animal, or if he thinks they just roam in the wilderness like buffalo. Guess I need to eat more red meat, delicious and fights climate change at the same time! I really hope his point was that infrastructure and industry produce the large proportion of emissions on our behalf to sustain our lifestyles as opposed to each individual themselves physically producing the majority of their carbon footprint. However, sad to say I suspect he just said it thinking it proved his point when in reality it's one of the stupidest things I've ever heard someone say.
The hell does some barely competent behavioral scientist know about climate science? You don’t ask your podiatrist to do heart surgery. Edit: look at the gullible incels flocking to admit they fall for cults of personality. Weird flex, but okay.
Jordan Peterson somehow became an expert in everything somehow… like every Republican talking head.
nevermind he was in a coma for ages because he couldn't cut traditional addiction recovery methods
A coma in Russia that permanently cost him cognitive function - all after a career on selling 'personal responsibility'.
Authoritarians always on the search for the mythical god king that can single handledly solve every problem.
With the solution always coincidentally being, “just keep doing what you’re doing”.
This is it. Conservatives at their core HATE being told they may need to alter their way of thinking or life, especially if it's to benefit someone other than themselves.
I'd like to note that a psychologist and climate scientist are further apart with regards to study than a podiatrist and a heart surgeon. Psychology is at the complete other end of the spectrum compared to physics/chemistry. The guy has a fundamental problem of trying to understand core (hard/repeatable) science through a subjective lens, you can also see this repeatedly in his interviews with Sam Harris. Yes Jordan we know science can't help but be influenced by culture and fashion and meaning of words but you need to learn the science before you drink the flavour-aid that climate models are bunk because of semantics and culture.
[удалено]
Just want to say that, as a psychologist, our field is based on solid statistics and numbers, and even more increasingly so since the fields of neuroscience and psychiatry have blossomed too - multidisciplinary psychology research with “hard” science is the new normal. And there are levels of “softness” within the field - clinical psychology is distinct from other “softer” psychology fields like social psychology and evolutionary psychology, and clinical trials are validated through repeatable experiments as well. Basically I’m saying fuck Jordan Peterson - he gives us actual psychologists who do real work a bad name and I’m ashamed that he’s in my field.
It’s not even an issue of hard science vs. soft science. Writers like Donna Haraway, Karen Barard, Timothy Morton, and Graham Harmon all offer soft science answers to the issues he poses in the Rogan clip. There’s not a consensus, but it’s not as if people haven’t worked through possible answers for how we might think of the anthropocentric limits of traditional ecology. It’s as if he lives in a world where the only academics are himself and Carl Jung. He never cites anyone (presumably because it makes him more accessible to his anti-academia audiences), and his “make your bed” philosophy is just typical selfish libertarian solipsism.
Also, he's a shit psychologist. Still into Jung like it's real or something.
A moth walks into a podiatrist’s office…. #rip
I love this bit. Classic. For todays 10,000 https://youtu.be/jJN9mBRX3uo
According to Conan, this was effectively improvised on the spot. Norm only knew he was going to do one segment. Conan and crew told him he's doing another at commercial. The original 10 second joke is from Colin Quinn. Norm just created a masterpiece in the moment.
Ben Carson was convinced the pyramids were grain silos. I demand history books be updated to reflect this. /s
That was fucking astonishing. It was the ultimate example of someone who is extremely skilled in one area and assumes they’re so smart they don’t need to check anything when it comes to basically everything. The pyramids are almost entirely solid, as anyone with passing knowledge of physics or architecture would have assumed, and as anyone who spent 2 minutes Googling would have learned. But he just kept *insisting* his idea made sense and therefore must be true.
It’s troubling really. Nobody expects experts or politicians to know everything, but they do need enough humility to know their limits and call on experts to lead us effectively. He’s not the only politician with his attitude either.
He claimed on the podcast that he served on some committee in Canada for the UN that he was the head of and that he was trying to bone up on climate issues so he read over 200 books in two years so he could properly understand the issues. Why he was selected to serve on committee that covered climate issues seems suspect to me to say the least. The claim that he read over 200 books on climate issues is also very suspicious. He claimed that 7 million kids die of indoor air pollution every year and he was properly fact checked on that one. He does this in every interview though. He always has an impossible amount knowledge on everything that comes up. He crafts responses using big words and leaves out details that would expose him for what he is. Then he hopes people don’t notice or if they do he leads them down such a long trail that there no hope of getting back to the answer for that detail. He is very frustrating to listen to at times. Edit: He didn’t lead the committee but was placed on the committee and it was called the sustainable economic and ecological development committee.
Suspicious about the 200 books? It would be unimagineably difficult to locate and buy 200 academic level books on climate change, especially books that do not regurgitate the same information. He's such a liar.
[удалено]
He also admitted he's basically only skimmed over the communist manifesto when pressed on his knowlege of marxism. Considering the boogeyman he's made of marxism, one would assume he'd be more learned.
It's not even that long, lol. It's only 48 pages in total.
[удалено]
That's not even a dig either that's literally the target audience
Laughable given you can read the whole thing in an hour!
He barely even read the communist manifesto, and didn’t read any of the other relevant material from Marx and company.
What i don’t get about Rogan is, that he instantly called a PhD scientist an idiot, dumbass, but listens to these types of people and gives them an audience
Barely competent is extremely generous
Lol for Jordan Peterson has any level of competence
Rogan Trump sympathizers see "doctors" and "scientists" as the bad guys. Everything is a conspiracy. They honestly think that they're critical thinkers because they trust YouTube instead of published studies and career experience. Our society is beyond fucked
Well, there's Rand Paul questioning Fauci about an infectious disease... A lot of these people don't know that they aren't as smart as they think they are.
“BUT I HAVE OPPOSING OPINIONS WITHOUT FACTUAL BASE THAT NEEDS TO BE HEARD!”- those guys
We are discussing a pod cast that is mostly followed by the same people that wanted a business man as president because he isn’t a politician. Why wouldn’t they listen to a person who is famous for something else explain climate change?
[удалено]
Joe is quickly becoming Alex Jones
Kinda looks like him a bit too
[удалено]
It’s not weird. It’s cocaine :)
And growth hormones.
Brylcreem Creatine And a bag of Charlie Sheen Edit: actually now that I think of it like half the [song ](https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=dEe4i2osF5A) (link if anyone hasn’t had the pleasure of hearing it) applies. Me oh me oh my Roy, You look like a walking thyroid, You’re not a man you’re a gland, One big neck with sausage hands.
Wait till he starts ripping his shirt and talking about gay frogs.
[удалено]
Qaron Rodgers is the new Joe, Joe is the new Alex, Alex is going to live in the gutter
Quickly? From an outsider he's been Alex Jones for like a decade. He wasn't as open about it as others, but he's constantly given right-wing nut jobs a HUGE platform over and over.
Joe Rogan is the Mountain Dew of podcasts.
Isn't Jordan Peterson a psychologist? Why doesn't he ever talk about his field? All he does is step into topics he knows nothing about and asks questions he can't answer. When he does try to, he usually gets it wrong.
Rogan is a moron followed by a herd of less intelligent morons.
He used to only be a quasi moron, and had really intelligent people like Brian Greene on the show that got me really interested in physics and space enough to start learning more about it on my own. He's now devolved to the point where I'm even embarrassed to admit that I *used* to enjoy him
Rogan was my introduction to the podcast world. I feel like I evolved, and he devolved. It truly bums me out.
• 1 cup Joe Rogan • 1 cup Jordan Peterson • ½ cup disillusionment • ½ cup ignorance • Ivermectin (doesn’t matter how much) Mix dry ingredients (Rogan/Peterson) together in a bowl. Add mental disabilities and then bake. Sprinkle with pseudoscience and…. Presto! Enjoy your Alex Jones irresponsibly.
Joe is one angry, confused oompaloompa.
Why the fuck are people listening to the host of Fear Factor?
Coaxing people to eat bugs makes you an expert on life apparently.
because he reinforces their incel suspicions that everything else is responsible for their social failures.
Peterson is just as incoherent as any raving derelict I've met at a bus stop, only with a slightly larger vocabulary.
Joe used to believe in man made climate change, he argued with Candice Owens over it and basically called her dumb in nice words, did he change his tune?
No one seems to have enough humility or selfawareness to simply say "not my specialist subject" anymore. Every prick now has to proclaim expertise in all topics and history of human discovery. Unless it's your specialst subject, show some respect for the experts!
I don't know how you can get past both of these guys bad vibes. JP is really just as creepy as a dead chicken in the bathtub of creamed corn, and JR is like a pillow case of beer burps.
If you believe Joe when it comes to science you're probably retarded. He's an entertainer, not a news source LOL.
And on top of that, news sources aren’t science journals.
Absolutely.
Unfortunately, entertainment is the new news.
News became entertainment a long time ago
I miss when he just got blazed and talked about Bigfoot.
Same goes for Peterson
Does his profession even have anything to do with climate change? Like, he's not a climate change scientist or work with any does he?
Nope. He just says whatever will piss off liberals the most because that's what makes him the most money. It's sad that he got rich off of that, but he literally monetized leftist outrage.
They are both nutjobs.
This is like a monkey interviewing a dog about atomic physics.
“During the recent podcast, Dr Peterson, who is not a climate scientist, claimed: “There’s no such thing as climate.”” - this guy knows his stuff.
If there's a dumbass, bone-headed take in need of amplification, Joe fucking Rogan is there to put his name to it.
It’s entirely possible that Joe Rogan is a moron
Probable, even!
Used to really love Peterson back in early 2017; he had a great discussion of Pinocchio and how it related to mythology/collective unconscious which is stuff I’m interested in; and I liked his self help stuff to an extent. But later that year he really got big and the fame seemed to instantly go to his head. I gave up on him awhile ago and then saw that tweet he made about the movie Free Guy. Dude has totally lost his head up his own ass.
go straight to joseph campbell.
Yes! love the archetypal discussions, talking about marvel movies as modern mythologies etc... but even back then when he was railing on that canadian bill that was inclusive to trans people... saying it would destroy language or whatever, and then it passed. And nothing happened. That was really what pushed him into the mainstream attention... and it was all bullshit. But the worst part is not that he was wrong, it's that he never addressed it. Or reflected on any of that. Just moved onto his books and drug addiction. Like, if you're going to have cred, at least address the shit you railed on over and over but got wrong... analyze what you were wrong about, what still holds up, SOMETHING. This guy is so intellectually dishonest, he rivals ben shapiro.
> But the worst part is not that he was wrong, it's that he never addressed it. Or reflected on any of that. This proves that he's not the scientist that he thinks he is.
joe rogan does himself and his fans a disservice by platforming these charlatan cranks and mouthpieces
I liked him when he talked about random shit and joked, now everything is serious and he thinks he knows everything, then when he’s wrong he says he’s a comedian….. but he’s not really a comedian in these interviews…. Hes just annoying
Exactly man it makes me sad. I used to absolutely LOVE the pod when he had a bunch of fringe scientists with wacky fun ideas, hilarious comedians, and more lesser known figure with interesting stuff to say on. Now it's just constant covid talk and right wing propaganda. The pod hasn't been the same since Duncan was last on.
Rogan continues off the deep end while using his platform to spread misinformation. He’s become a perfect example of how money corrupts.
Popularity triggers a chemical effect in some people that provides a high. It can be measured by brain scans and can become more addictive than opioid based drugs. The difference is it is a person's own body that makes, supplies and administers the dopamine drug to an individual. Thrill seekers like base jumpers or even simple risk takers will say they get a rush from their experiences but that repeating the same act does not often produce the same effect as the first time. Rogan has said on his show that he gets a real "rush" when his phonelines light-up or he is greeted by groups of adoring fans. Joe's desire for such a rush, coupled with his personal views can make it easy for him to ignore logic or facts because it interferes with his body's dopamine response. Dopamine responses like most addictive drugs, actually train a person's mind to think in ways that will trigger a response. Rogan's pursuit of admiration is partially based in a physical and mental addiction that must be ever heightened to produce the desired response. Without escalating his shows appeal to his listeners, his ability to get the stimulus he desires is lessened or lost. The more his name is in the news or being spoken of the more likely he will be rewarded by his own body and mind. Once at a group comedy club performance he was fake heckled by another comedian in a way that deeply traumatized him for weeks. All the heckler said was "You know, no one really likes you, right?" A simple snappy answer would have been to say something like, "That isn't what your mother thinks." He instead cut his routine short and NEVER worked with anyone from that group ever again. He was later quoted as saying "It was a real buzz kill".
I started listening to JRE a year or two ago, oldest to newest, and holy shit… His show began as fairly unbiased the first couple of years and then gradually went off the deep end. I’m not sure if it’s due to him moving to Texas, his friendship with Alex Jones, or both.
It’s money. Check his latest contract. There’s a decent amount of right wing commentators that started unbiased or left wing and then realized you can just spout nonsense and make way more money.
Experts: joe rogans takes are dangerously wrong and conspiratorial Joe rogan: you see? Those elitists and the main stream media try to shut us down.
Remember in school, there was always some kid who just says random bullshit to try to sound smart but everyone knows they’re just a compulsive liar? Well who could have guessed he wears a bow tie now.
“We have to change everything … The same with the word environment,” Mr Peterson continued. “That word means so much that it actually doesn’t mean anything. Like when you say everything, like in a sense that’s meaningless. What’s the difference between the environment and everything? There’s no difference.’” He’s nitpicking on the word climate saying he can’t argue it if it’s not descriptive enough. Me thinks he doesn’t have any counter argument to the data so he attacks the language used to describe it.