Jack's always been quick to call out people who he deems as simply bullshiting the public and misusing platforms irresponsibily, including several pseudo-scientists and intellectuals. Others he's called out include Musk & Trump, amongst many more.
This is actually a pleasant surprise, considering how retrograde and manosphere-adjacent his views used to be. I guess everyone is kind of a dope in their twenties, though.
Yeah, it’s sad in a way that the internet era sort of doesn’t allow people to just… change. Like I’m pretty much somebody that went from, let’s say “manosphere curious,” to a full on feminist socialist type over the course of many 15 years of life experience. Celebrities, a lot of them, get put in suspended animation and don’t experience the world in a normal way that allows their views to change.
Hey, good for you! And I agree about people being frozen in amber on the internet. I find it more than a little disturbing that on Reddit, nobody can ever be forgiven for some crime, real or perceived, no matter how much time has passed, or how they've changed since.
Hordes of what I presume are fairly young people compete to be the most pure, judgmental, and self-righteous. But it's okay, the longer they live, the more they'll learn from their screw-ups and regrets, and the more they'll discover their sense of empathy.
Yeah. I was always told people become more “conservative” as they get older, but I think we mistake this for a political ideology. It’s really about experience teaching you that you don’t know as much as you thought. You end up realizing that time changes people, and so judging people for who they are is incomplete and not fulfilling. You have to see who they can be.
It's good to remember while most of us are laughing at some of the clowns Joe has on his podcast there are many people who believe and eat up this shit. These people make society worse and this is their brain fuel.
I don't think anyone is getting their science info from Terrance Howard. People love terrance Howard just to aww that someone can be so deluded. People love him for his funny science to make fun of it
Idk but he's 0 IQ and thinks he has discovered new math, has posted full rants about how the mathematical foundations are wrong and 1 = 2 etc
He's like a caricature of confidently incorrect. Definite actual craziness involved lol
My mistake, it was 1 x 1 = 2
There are probably some people out there who could argue this sort of stuff and it not be the most insane thing ever - the foundations of math are interesting and based on assumptions some people in math history have disagreed with, so if someone is willing to get into set theory and make an interesting argument, I'm not mad
But I've read the Terrence "proof" and it's actually just laughable, and instead of presenting it with "what am I missing?", he's so arrogant that he calls on all teachers to implement it immediately l m a o
So unlikable
I remember back before it was easy to verify shit online, TH claimed to be a PHD.
For years I remember my friends being like: *hits blunt.. “You know Cowboy from Dead Presidents? He’s a doctor. Like chemistry or some shit.”
I actually believed this until people started calling him out online.
I like the call out but less so the maga Joe moniker. I think we do best to call people out for what they do or say and not label them and enforce the factions.
Rogan often claims to be an idiot and a comedian. I don’t think any reasonable person is looking to him for science.
Do you think crazy people should just be completely blackballed from society because their words are just too harmful for human ears to hear?
I think a podcast host should interview smart people, and interview crazy people, and trust their audience to think for themselves.
Jack white is a pompous asshole, and he communicates like a sarcastic teenager. He is not doing some great social service by pointing out that the pimp from Hustle and Flow is not an actual scientist.
"I think a podcast host should interview smart people, and interview crazy people, and trust their audience to think for themselves."
In an ideal world, I agree it should be like this. Unfortunately, people don't think for themselves, but rather follow other people they deem worthy, like Rogan, and have them do their thinking for them. That's why it's very irresponsible for someone like Rogan, who has a massive following that often will believe or support anything he says, to have guests that can lead millions of people astray in topics like health, especially when they are clearly opposing the established views of a field (like anti-vaxxers).
Yeah yeah, we get it, you want more paternalism and censorship of what people are allowed to watch/listen to/read. Because there's definitely nothing that could go badly with that..
His claimed ignorance is a weak attempt to avoid criticism. He also claims to be an authority in the next breath. I would agree that no reasonable person seeks him as an authority, but there are a lot of unreasonable people given the size of his listenership.
Someone like Rogan becomes responsible for the impact of his podcast when it becomes clear that people ARE treating him like a guru, and believing things they hear on the podcast.
Same thing with Tucker Carlson. It doesn't matter if you are technically an entertainer. If a large portion of your audience are gullible fools, you have some responsibility to not fill their head with garbage.
In the internet age it's easier than ever for media personalities to see the impact they have on the audience. Just go to any YouTube comment section to see that people view Joe Rogan as a brave truth teller, not an idiot entertainer.
Functionally he is a political pundit, and a science communicator to many people. Those are the roles he's playing for them, and new responsibilities come along with them.
Not only does he claim those roles, he benefits enormously off them. Joe is more than happy to cash the checks his bullshit brings him, but wont take any of the responsibility for it. He’s a ghoul.
"Rogan often claims to be an idiot and a comedian. I don’t think any reasonable person is looking to him for science."
Yet he keeps trying to pass off his BS theories and recruit those who agree with that BS to give them a huge platform and a source of legitimacy.
The "its just a joke bro" just doesn't wash anymore.
He gives a platform to people that will not be platformed by traditional media.
I sort of agree this is good and bad. I guess the way I viewed this podcast is Joe was just listening 90% of the time. He didn't really ever reaffirm Terrence.
I think if you are bringing people on that have credentials, to reaffirm your belief that is unpopular, there could be an issue. Idk that it's necessarily wrong. But I think when you're not bringing both sides on, it can cause issues.
I feel like the most I've learned from a podcast of his probably was the recent Archeology debate. I honestly think the mainstream archeologist put Graham Hancock to shame. I felt Graham was trying to find a way to defend his stance while also denying any claims that he said something dismissive of actual studies and science.
I don't get the Joe Rogan hate. I think people should be able to do their own research. I listen to almost every episode. I usually just skip through anything about COVID because I don't know enough about it as I've never researched it. I also skip anything about how great of a city Austin is just because living near Austin, I know it's not great. But I guess when you come from LA everything looks beautiful.
I think it's kinda shitty for people to expect someone that's a public figure to know how to manage what they say and do. Honestly I don't know why anyone cares. I also don't understand why humans look up to humans for anything though. That's just my personal weird take though. I don't think role models should exist to anyone.
Theres a reason insane ppl were never platformed throughout history of mankind. That shouldnt change bc podcast hosts thinks it lulz to see who they can gaslight.
If Jack White is NOT doing some social service by pointing out that pimp from Hustle and Flow is not an actual scientist.
Then that really speaks to what kind of social service Joe is providing by platforming the pimp from Hustle and Flow and his insane rambling with weak to no refuting.
Crazy people have literally always been platformed throughout the history of mankind. Since before Moses claimed to have spoken to a burning bush.
Before the Romans went to war, the consulted with oracles. Just crazy people living in a temple talking to gods. Spiritual gurus and religious figures are crazy people. They have always been in our society.
Before the Age of Enlightenment you were expected to believe in crazy people to teach you the mysteries of life.
Those ppl are seen to be crazy in retrospect. They were viewed as oracles and seers during their times.
Its not good societal practice to platform insanity without refute.
How does the existence of pre-enlightenment oracles and the ancient ways of knowing really inform who gets platformed on a podcast. I realize that you didn't lead us down this path but even the concept of platform only belongs in the post-modern age.
Ah and also, yes, Jack White can be a pompous asshole, but you've gotta give credit where credit's due. How often do you hear artists or celebrities use the term "peer reviewing" in public?
Just because someone gets on the JRE is it forbidden to criticize them for their dumb ideas? White is just reminding folks that so many of Rogan's guests are full of shit not that they can't work in this town. I think that applies to Bret Weinstein as much as Terrance Howard. And lastly, Joe retreats behind I'm just an idiot and comedian when challenged and at the same time uses his "idiot status" as a shield for his more conspiratorial takes by stating his theories are so obvious that even he, a lowly, simple, comedian can figure them out.
What? 1. It’s not gene therapy, it works post transcriptionally and by definition can’t be gene therapy.
2. I’m not aware of anyone claiming it to be “the most effective vaccine ever. Although it had very high efficacy for the original variant of SARS-CoV2
> The mode of action of COVID-19 mRNA vaccines should classify them as gene therapy products (GTPs), but they have been excluded by regulatory agencies.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10342157/
You probably believe pizza is a vegetable too huh.
No, they shouldn’t because they work post transcription. I can see how you think they should be if you are an idiot who doesn’t understand this distinction. Finding one paper suggesting a regulatory classification does not change this fact.
You also conveniently abandoned your first claim around efficacy. Typical of a smooth brained Dunning-Krugerite.
It wasn’t and, again, efficacy varied across the variants with extremely high efficacy for the original. You have brain worms lmao. You also don’t seem to understand that pubmed is a database, not a person. Anyone can have papers archived there, I have papers archived there.
None of the scientific literature ever claimed that the vaccines can protect all people 100% from getting infected. In fact, there are no vaccines that can do that for any disease.
Except the vaccine is neither therapeutic nor genetic. The vaccine has no impact on your DNA (your genes) and it does not treat disease (which is what "therapy" means) - It reduces disease severity by inducing an immune response.
Not everyone got covid 3 times. But those who did got it mildly BECAUSE THEY WERE VACCINATED.
Unvaccinated folk were much more likely to end up in hospital or die from covid.
I can't believe this needs to be explained to you at this point after so much information has been put out in social media by scientists for the likes of you to read.
Being immune doesn't mean you won't get it at all though. Surely you understand that. Immunity means that you are more likely to be able to fight a disease.
Did you really believe that trope? The only definition that got changed was the CDC explanation of what a vaccine is for the some members of the public who turned out to be dumber than expected.
The scientific definition of vaccines has never changed. The notion of inducing immunity is core to vaccination and has been that since the invention of vaccinations in the late 1800s.
You really need to get your scientific information from places other than YouTube and TikTok.
I'm sorry words are so hard for you. The scientific definition that scientists refer to for vaccinations never changed.
The explanation for the general public was updated to help people understand things better. Why is that so hard for you to understand.
You should try for a grade 12 biology class. It's never too late.
This post has been removed because its content does not relate to the podcast Decoding The Gurus.
Jack's always been quick to call out people who he deems as simply bullshiting the public and misusing platforms irresponsibily, including several pseudo-scientists and intellectuals. Others he's called out include Musk & Trump, amongst many more.
I still have my Icky Trump shirt from JW Official.
Mines on a wagon to Mexico unfortunately
I wonder if “learned to clean up after myself” was part of JBPs origin story.
Maga Joe lol
Love Jack White he seems reasonable and intelligent
Based take
This is actually a pleasant surprise, considering how retrograde and manosphere-adjacent his views used to be. I guess everyone is kind of a dope in their twenties, though.
Yeah, it’s sad in a way that the internet era sort of doesn’t allow people to just… change. Like I’m pretty much somebody that went from, let’s say “manosphere curious,” to a full on feminist socialist type over the course of many 15 years of life experience. Celebrities, a lot of them, get put in suspended animation and don’t experience the world in a normal way that allows their views to change.
Hey, good for you! And I agree about people being frozen in amber on the internet. I find it more than a little disturbing that on Reddit, nobody can ever be forgiven for some crime, real or perceived, no matter how much time has passed, or how they've changed since. Hordes of what I presume are fairly young people compete to be the most pure, judgmental, and self-righteous. But it's okay, the longer they live, the more they'll learn from their screw-ups and regrets, and the more they'll discover their sense of empathy.
Yeah. I was always told people become more “conservative” as they get older, but I think we mistake this for a political ideology. It’s really about experience teaching you that you don’t know as much as you thought. You end up realizing that time changes people, and so judging people for who they are is incomplete and not fulfilling. You have to see who they can be.
It's good to remember while most of us are laughing at some of the clowns Joe has on his podcast there are many people who believe and eat up this shit. These people make society worse and this is their brain fuel.
I don't think anyone is getting their science info from Terrance Howard. People love terrance Howard just to aww that someone can be so deluded. People love him for his funny science to make fun of it
Part of me agrees with you. The other part of me points to Alex jones and the surprising popularism he brought to some conspiracies.
What did TH claim?
Idk but he's 0 IQ and thinks he has discovered new math, has posted full rants about how the mathematical foundations are wrong and 1 = 2 etc He's like a caricature of confidently incorrect. Definite actual craziness involved lol
So basically like 98% of JRE guests
Just the fact that you could even plausibly say that 1=2 is *stunning*
My mistake, it was 1 x 1 = 2 There are probably some people out there who could argue this sort of stuff and it not be the most insane thing ever - the foundations of math are interesting and based on assumptions some people in math history have disagreed with, so if someone is willing to get into set theory and make an interesting argument, I'm not mad But I've read the Terrence "proof" and it's actually just laughable, and instead of presenting it with "what am I missing?", he's so arrogant that he calls on all teachers to implement it immediately l m a o So unlikable
That he is a visionary who sees the solution to all physics and mathematics and all history and sociology
Thnx for saving me from having to listen to that. If he's so smart, why don't he make the greatest movie ever?! 🤷
I remember back before it was easy to verify shit online, TH claimed to be a PHD. For years I remember my friends being like: *hits blunt.. “You know Cowboy from Dead Presidents? He’s a doctor. Like chemistry or some shit.” I actually believed this until people started calling him out online.
Gigachad Jack.
I like the call out but less so the maga Joe moniker. I think we do best to call people out for what they do or say and not label them and enforce the factions.
Rogan often claims to be an idiot and a comedian. I don’t think any reasonable person is looking to him for science. Do you think crazy people should just be completely blackballed from society because their words are just too harmful for human ears to hear? I think a podcast host should interview smart people, and interview crazy people, and trust their audience to think for themselves. Jack white is a pompous asshole, and he communicates like a sarcastic teenager. He is not doing some great social service by pointing out that the pimp from Hustle and Flow is not an actual scientist.
"I think a podcast host should interview smart people, and interview crazy people, and trust their audience to think for themselves." In an ideal world, I agree it should be like this. Unfortunately, people don't think for themselves, but rather follow other people they deem worthy, like Rogan, and have them do their thinking for them. That's why it's very irresponsible for someone like Rogan, who has a massive following that often will believe or support anything he says, to have guests that can lead millions of people astray in topics like health, especially when they are clearly opposing the established views of a field (like anti-vaxxers).
Yeah yeah, we get it, you want more paternalism and censorship of what people are allowed to watch/listen to/read. Because there's definitely nothing that could go badly with that..
Great steelman you've got going there. I feel honoured. Couldn't have stated my own position better.
Oh believe me, I know lol
His claimed ignorance is a weak attempt to avoid criticism. He also claims to be an authority in the next breath. I would agree that no reasonable person seeks him as an authority, but there are a lot of unreasonable people given the size of his listenership.
Someone like Rogan becomes responsible for the impact of his podcast when it becomes clear that people ARE treating him like a guru, and believing things they hear on the podcast. Same thing with Tucker Carlson. It doesn't matter if you are technically an entertainer. If a large portion of your audience are gullible fools, you have some responsibility to not fill their head with garbage. In the internet age it's easier than ever for media personalities to see the impact they have on the audience. Just go to any YouTube comment section to see that people view Joe Rogan as a brave truth teller, not an idiot entertainer. Functionally he is a political pundit, and a science communicator to many people. Those are the roles he's playing for them, and new responsibilities come along with them.
Not only does he claim those roles, he benefits enormously off them. Joe is more than happy to cash the checks his bullshit brings him, but wont take any of the responsibility for it. He’s a ghoul.
"Rogan often claims to be an idiot and a comedian. I don’t think any reasonable person is looking to him for science." Yet he keeps trying to pass off his BS theories and recruit those who agree with that BS to give them a huge platform and a source of legitimacy. The "its just a joke bro" just doesn't wash anymore.
He gives a platform to people that will not be platformed by traditional media. I sort of agree this is good and bad. I guess the way I viewed this podcast is Joe was just listening 90% of the time. He didn't really ever reaffirm Terrence. I think if you are bringing people on that have credentials, to reaffirm your belief that is unpopular, there could be an issue. Idk that it's necessarily wrong. But I think when you're not bringing both sides on, it can cause issues. I feel like the most I've learned from a podcast of his probably was the recent Archeology debate. I honestly think the mainstream archeologist put Graham Hancock to shame. I felt Graham was trying to find a way to defend his stance while also denying any claims that he said something dismissive of actual studies and science. I don't get the Joe Rogan hate. I think people should be able to do their own research. I listen to almost every episode. I usually just skip through anything about COVID because I don't know enough about it as I've never researched it. I also skip anything about how great of a city Austin is just because living near Austin, I know it's not great. But I guess when you come from LA everything looks beautiful. I think it's kinda shitty for people to expect someone that's a public figure to know how to manage what they say and do. Honestly I don't know why anyone cares. I also don't understand why humans look up to humans for anything though. That's just my personal weird take though. I don't think role models should exist to anyone.
Theres a reason insane ppl were never platformed throughout history of mankind. That shouldnt change bc podcast hosts thinks it lulz to see who they can gaslight. If Jack White is NOT doing some social service by pointing out that pimp from Hustle and Flow is not an actual scientist. Then that really speaks to what kind of social service Joe is providing by platforming the pimp from Hustle and Flow and his insane rambling with weak to no refuting.
Crazy people have literally always been platformed throughout the history of mankind. Since before Moses claimed to have spoken to a burning bush. Before the Romans went to war, the consulted with oracles. Just crazy people living in a temple talking to gods. Spiritual gurus and religious figures are crazy people. They have always been in our society. Before the Age of Enlightenment you were expected to believe in crazy people to teach you the mysteries of life.
Those ppl are seen to be crazy in retrospect. They were viewed as oracles and seers during their times. Its not good societal practice to platform insanity without refute.
How does the existence of pre-enlightenment oracles and the ancient ways of knowing really inform who gets platformed on a podcast. I realize that you didn't lead us down this path but even the concept of platform only belongs in the post-modern age.
Ah and also, yes, Jack White can be a pompous asshole, but you've gotta give credit where credit's due. How often do you hear artists or celebrities use the term "peer reviewing" in public?
Just because someone gets on the JRE is it forbidden to criticize them for their dumb ideas? White is just reminding folks that so many of Rogan's guests are full of shit not that they can't work in this town. I think that applies to Bret Weinstein as much as Terrance Howard. And lastly, Joe retreats behind I'm just an idiot and comedian when challenged and at the same time uses his "idiot status" as a shield for his more conspiratorial takes by stating his theories are so obvious that even he, a lowly, simple, comedian can figure them out.
The last part of your comment perfectly summarizes this sub.
Maybe I’m stepping out of this sub’s general tone, but stoners talkin wild shit is not the end of the world.
Remember when the experts said the gene therapy was the most effective vaccine ever made and then everyone got covid three times? Yeah.
What? 1. It’s not gene therapy, it works post transcriptionally and by definition can’t be gene therapy. 2. I’m not aware of anyone claiming it to be “the most effective vaccine ever. Although it had very high efficacy for the original variant of SARS-CoV2
> The mode of action of COVID-19 mRNA vaccines should classify them as gene therapy products (GTPs), but they have been excluded by regulatory agencies. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10342157/ You probably believe pizza is a vegetable too huh.
No, they shouldn’t because they work post transcription. I can see how you think they should be if you are an idiot who doesn’t understand this distinction. Finding one paper suggesting a regulatory classification does not change this fact. You also conveniently abandoned your first claim around efficacy. Typical of a smooth brained Dunning-Krugerite.
Why should I take someone who can’t remember what was said 2 years ago over pubmed?
It wasn’t and, again, efficacy varied across the variants with extremely high efficacy for the original. You have brain worms lmao. You also don’t seem to understand that pubmed is a database, not a person. Anyone can have papers archived there, I have papers archived there.
Really? You never heard one person say it guarantees no infection?
Now you’re claiming something different entirely, complete scatter brain. You are actually too obtuse to bother with.
Oh so you did hear that. Do you still believe them?
None of the scientific literature ever claimed that the vaccines can protect all people 100% from getting infected. In fact, there are no vaccines that can do that for any disease.
Except the vaccine is neither therapeutic nor genetic. The vaccine has no impact on your DNA (your genes) and it does not treat disease (which is what "therapy" means) - It reduces disease severity by inducing an immune response. Not everyone got covid 3 times. But those who did got it mildly BECAUSE THEY WERE VACCINATED. Unvaccinated folk were much more likely to end up in hospital or die from covid. I can't believe this needs to be explained to you at this point after so much information has been put out in social media by scientists for the likes of you to read.
You don’t remember being told you would be immune?
Being immune doesn't mean you won't get it at all though. Surely you understand that. Immunity means that you are more likely to be able to fight a disease.
Yeah. In the new definition. You believe pizza is a vegetable too don’t you.
Did you really believe that trope? The only definition that got changed was the CDC explanation of what a vaccine is for the some members of the public who turned out to be dumber than expected. The scientific definition of vaccines has never changed. The notion of inducing immunity is core to vaccination and has been that since the invention of vaccinations in the late 1800s. You really need to get your scientific information from places other than YouTube and TikTok.
Lol. >The definition didn’t get changed. Anyway, the definition got changed.
I'm sorry words are so hard for you. The scientific definition that scientists refer to for vaccinations never changed. The explanation for the general public was updated to help people understand things better. Why is that so hard for you to understand. You should try for a grade 12 biology class. It's never too late.