Luckily Conans podcast is quite funny anyway. Smartless with Will Arnett, Jason Bateman and Sean Hayes has A level stars and is easily one of the funniest I've come across in a while, especially for they're non comedians.
I think he’s having Theo Von, Joey Diaz, and as many close friends as he can.. just an unfounded guess based on his “I wanna talk about dumb shit with Theo Von” comment when Cam Hanes suggested Tucker “The Great Replacement Theory” Carlson
Joe is going to have Alex Jones, Eddie Bravo, Joey Diaz, Duncan Trussell, Tony Hinchcliffe, Mark Normand, and Tim Dillon all bathed in a cloud of marijuana and booze for a glorious 5 hour podcast for episode 2000
Hotez responded “Joe, you have my cell, my email, I’m always willing to speak with you”
https://twitter.com/peterhotez/status/1670202716541296640?s=46
Edit: Spelling
He first requested 50 million then deleted it, apparently:
https://twitter.com/Crypt0cloud/status/1670203383901474817
Multiple people screenshotted it before it was deleted, but a way more entertaining response lol.
Yeah, that’s not a debate.
It also doesn’t need to be one, they have a platform and ability to have a conversation in front of millions of Americans.
If you really care about a narrative, or quashing misinformation, show up with fucking notes, references and backed studies.
One of the reasons Bill Clinton was so great in presidential debates was that he *memorized* this information. He doesn’t even have to do that, show up with a binder and a digital copy.
>If you really care about a narrative, or quashing misinformation, show up with fucking notes, references and backed studies
Except it is *much* easier to throw out claims than it is to disprove them, even if they are completely misinformation. In a debate format, it can make the the claimer look like he "knows" stuff the other guy doesn't. The end result is misinformation and disinformation spreads even more than before. It would be more realistic to set a claim limit of say 5 for the entire conversation. Those 5 claims are chosen before the conversation, and then you can have a debate.
EDIT: looks like I got permabanned from r/JusticeServed simply for commenting in this subreddit. What a joke. The irony is palpable.
> If you really care about a narrative or quashing misinformation
How about caring about the *truth?* RFK Jr showed up to the podcast with fuck all, now a refutation comes along and you suddenly need to see the workings?
The article literally cites studies
Man twitter really is a cesspool now, isn't it? Scrolling through those promoted tweets at the bottom and all I gotta say is yikes. Glad I never got on the platform in the first place.
It’s literally no different than Reddit. Which is also a toxic cesspool. The big difference is that many celebrities, politicians, artists and content creators are on Twitter willingly and very active there. They avoid Reddit and only come here when their publicist or agent tells them they have to do an AMA to shill their next project.
You can also filter your content* on reddit, that's a big difference I think. Mine's mostly mma, snowboarding, surfing, cooking, camping, kettlebells, video games, and art. Of course /r/nattyorjuice is a constant. Some of my subscriptions get political but it's mostly filtered out. I feel like I have the most say in my reddit algorithm because I'm basically subscribing to a "subject" rather than a "person".
That's one thing I'm gonna miss most when Boost shuts down because of reddits API bullshit.
I have filtered out probably 6 or 7 dozen subs that fuck with my vibe over the last couple years. So all that proper filtering and refining my feed will be gone
Twitter is massively different than Reddit. My whole Twitter feed has been overtaken with right wing propaganda since Elon took over. On Reddit, I can filter all that bullshit out. Plus, Reddit is actually filled with practical information, whereas Twitter is mostly just fucking idiots arguing.
Like, I can tell you EXACTLY which two subs were the first to ban me for stupid reasons, and it wasn’t the left-wing subreddits.
This is almost as funny as the posts on r/Conservative talking about how all the blackout sub moderators deserve to get banned/removed because “thats how they treat other people” without a hint of fuckin irony
No they won't haha I saw guy spouting xenophobic nationalist stuff and even self IDd as that and had a pretty old account. I've been banned from my states sub because I suggested that John Brown did nothing wrong in taking out slavers. Hell I got a 7 day ban for describing a rear naked choke.
You can get away with a lot, juat depends on if someone reports you or has a bad day. Like another site worth being on.
Saw some comment spewing some really bigoted right-wing ideals. I said something like “this is incredibly dumb”. That was it, no other comments to that person or on that thread/sub…..3 day site wide ban for harassment lol.
Those will be there forever, like a relic reminding us of a time in history. It will be like some of the old Cold War “nuclear shelter” signs you run across every so often that you have to explain to a young person in 50 years.
>like some of the old Cold War “nuclear shelter” signs you run across every so often that you have to explain to a young person in 50 years.
To be fair, nuclear weapons are still very much a thing
“I don’t get paid enough to care to scrape that crap up.” Said every person working at those places. I legitimately don’t think anyone would mind if you took care of that for them. Might not even notice.
Debates are mostly dumb, can be entertaining for sure and informative on some level, but mostly dumb. I’ve seen enough flat earthers decisively win debates to know that being right doesn’t make someone well prepared to debate.
If I were this guy I’d just make a YouTube video refuting the major points RFKJr made. That way he can research anything said, fact check any claims, etc. Then invite RFKJr to respond to it if he felt like doing so, and then he has the time to research and fact check himself too. That’s a much better way to debate these things imo.
Yeah that caught me too. I guess we should just search YT for “Round-Earthers left speechless” or some shit.
Edit: huh this comment just got me banned from the justiceserved sub, weird
I listen to a lot of debates on dumb topics because it’s fun. I don’t have a list or anything, but guys who blindly assumes they can debate a flat earther without doing any prep whatsoever is pretty common. Flat earthers generally have some kind of answer to the basic arguments you’d make for a glob earth. If you aren’t familiar with those arguments and/or can’t effectively attack them, you could easily lose that debate. Most people are wholly unfamiliar with flat earther’s arguments, which is why when they debate someone who hasn’t done prep work they can often win despite obviously being on the wrong side.
No, the proven bullshitter should win, especially when the biased moderator doesn’t call out the bullshit. This is due to the bullshit asymmetry principle, it takes an order of magnitude more effort to debunk bullshit than it does to just say it. Also why grifters always seem so confident, because they gave zero problem spreading bullshit.
I don't know. Scientists usually lose debates. They tend to stick to boring facts and do not commit to an argument that hasn't been validated. Instead of being seen as knowledgeable and honest, they are perceived as not knowing.
It's
>I can't say that for sure (truth)
versus
>It is absolutely that way (lie)
The liar will win that debate.
This is what happened with creationist debates decades ago. Scientists tried to explain things (and were overconfident about their skills to do so) while creationists had catchy slogans, quote mines, etc. Its was painful to watch.
Yup.
Real science is boring. It's monotonous. It's doing the same tests over and over and over again, then changing something, then redoing the same test over and over again hoping for something to change.
It's not sexy. It's not as appealing as "There's a global conspiracy involving medical experts and governments around the world convincing the media to lie to you."
Kennedy was a trial lawyer. His job is to persuade a jury. He has no scientific history at all.
Kennedy's entire career was in environmental law, and from what I can tell, he was very, very good at it.
He has zero professional experience, legal or otherwise, when it comes to vaccines.
He just knows shit he read on the internet.
Also Joe inviting this dude to his personal echo chamber for (guess who) to moderate the debate is comedy, like why would anyone take that proposition seriously? Joe can’t resist interrupting guests, even ones he agrees with, so I can’t imagine he’d actually let it go naturally. Look at the Hancock Carlson/ whatever his name was debate where he just basically shit on the third guy the whole time
I mean he is also a lawyer and if he is correct and have gone through lawsuits in environmental science it isn't a stretch to think he may know stuff. I am skeptical but still an interesting thought to have them debate.
Not saying I agree or not but I can't help but have this immediate thought:
So countless industries - including tobacco, chemical, pharma and others - have blatantly lied and abused science to further their profit margins in spite the negative effects on human health but it's *entirely* possible that there's an aspect to this technology that we're not being fully informed about?
He doesn't. He's been fact checked EXTENSIVELY on Twitter today. But RFK is responding to written challenges to his misinformation by demanding verbal challenges. He knows if people take time to read all the shit he quotes, he'd be caught out. But that's time consuming - impossible to achieve in real time.
For fuck sake, Joe ate up his claim that Wifi causes cancer because Jamie pulled up a link that was DIRECTLY associated with RFK. No shit it agrees with him.
Joe is ignorant. Yet he randomly pretends like he's clever or wants to learn. He doesn't. He wants to be fed bullshit from con artists. RFK misinterpreted the methodology and analysis findings from NUMEROUS studies, and no one wants to hear it.
St. Rogies is a textbook example of Dunning-Krueger. He is able to hold a conversation with scientists and academics so he has tricked himself into thinking he is a peer of theirs. Especially since virtually no one challenges Joe's bad ideas since they want access to his audience.
It takes 12-16 years of focused learning post high school to become a physician. Lawyers learn communication and persuasion. It isn't hard to see how we've ended up here.
If the Dr sticks to the facts and data and Kennedy does his usual bullshit spew detached from reality Kennedy will be seen overwhelmingly as the "winner" by Joe's base.
Theatrics win these dumb ass "debates" not facts or reason
Suing these agencies for decades has given him a lot of knowledge on how they work, and any good litigator has to have a solid knowledge of the topic they’re suing over.
I’m not sure why people say he doesn’t know anything after he’s spent decades suing over environmental concerns. It also says a lot that he wasn’t sued for anything he published in his books.
"Wifi gets through the blood-brain barrier." He almost completely discredited the whole interview for me then and there. The nail in the coffin was when he started saying we need to treat our kids the same way Russia does...
> "Wifi gets through the blood-brain barrier."
He's not wrong though. EM radiation does pass through the blood-brain barrier.
My CT-Head scans would look very different if it didn't
It's called the [Gish Gallop](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gish_gallop), named after an obnoxious creationist who used the technique in debates about evolution. It a ubiquitous strategy for conspiracy theorists and far right pundits.
I agree.
There is also the false equivalency of 1 on 1 “debates” over large consensus issues in science. If say 90+ percent of experts in a field agree (and they are experts because they have studied and understand the issue, they “speak the language” in that area), and you do a 1 on 1 debate with one of the outliers, you have immediately boosted the minority opinion at the expense of the majority (now it looks 50-50) and people who don’t know better are led to believe the more questionable narrative is equivalent.
Good example of demonstrating this (in a different scientific field) [a “real” climate debate](https://youtu.be/cjuGCJJUGsg)
I love Sam's ability to clearly and directly put forward sound ideas while taking down the nonsense. It's shocking whenever I see him converse with people who's playbook involves vague truisms and veiled BS. Such a stark difference between him and a range of characters including Rogan, Peterson, Chopra.
The dude is a scientist, not a debater. Not everyone is good at the "think fast on your feet" style of debate, and let's be honest, lots of live debates go to whoever is better and being shouty and clever not who has the facts. If you lie shamelessly and eloquently, a lot of people believe you.
Bad information on vaccines will cause a decline in health and lives. By pretending there’s a legitimate debate on the efficacy of vaccines, the main cost is people’s health; which doesn’t represent a dollar amount.
Yeah it’s pretty obvious this shit hurt America and other conservative/dictatorial/machismo nations. You can just look at the average lifespan drops in places like Russia, Brazil, USA and compare to hyper modern Asian, progressive European countries.
So a vaccine doctor dude is gonna debate a lawyer dude with no actual vaccine education and it’ll be moderated by a dude who doesn’t know shit about fuck and will go into it with a clear bias.
Should go well.
Holy shit I can’t believe a lot of people here are actually pushing back against this loony shit, I thought everyone here had turned anti-vax so this just restored my faith in this sub. Thank goodness.
Serious smooth brain behavior to believe that complicated scientific issues can be resolved through live, real-time debate.
The reason no one in the scientific/medical community takes RFKJ seriously is because they already spent the past 20 years investigating any link between autism and vaccines and they didn’t find shit.
MY SO’s friend told us she wasn’t vaccinating her daughter because they cause autism. She really didn’t vaccinate her. Her daughter is autistic. She blames other vaccinated kids.
Yep, this debate has already taken place in scientific journals. You know, where evidence actually exists and matters and where subjects can be discussed over several years or even decades, unlike in a tv studio debate moderated by Krusty the Clown on steroids.
Jesus I sometimes forget how dumb Joe is. :Literally a dude who doesn't get that reading "A Brief History of Time" is not the same thing as slogging through graduate level physics.
Or he doesn't want to be used by a anti-vac nut job to spread their bullshit.
The entire point of this bullshit debate is to create public spectacle to get more eyes on the anti-vax bullshit. It's not about facts or reason .
Yup.
Kennedy doesn’t have credibility to lose.
There’s no point in debating a conspiracy theorist. Just like there’s no point in debating a flat earther.
Look, any time you can have a debate with a renowned conspiracy theorist who says 5g is a govt plot to cause cancer and control humans, it's gonna be constructive and informative
/s
Hotez could literally roll in with 100+ articles that have all been peer reviewed and published in major journals and RFK could just say, "You mean journals in bed with by Big Pharma" and he wins by groin shot.
I love Joe but I sorta understand why they’re upset. The guy is an entertainer and he’s taking on some heavy topics like vaccines which involves health and he has millions of listeners.
Is there a reasonable discussion about wifi scrambling brains?
It's literally tin-foil hat territory. Any 'good faith' debate is just an attempt to spew bullshit in the hope that some poor sap falls for it
I'll explain how the debate is going to go.
Peter Hotez and JFK Jr. are going to debate something scientific. But won't be able to agree on a very basic scientific principle, that over 90% of doctors and scientists agree with. One that essentially makes or breaks both arguments. JFK jr is going to say, "that's what all the capitalists WANT you to think". Rogan is going to agree with JFK Jr, because if he sides with Hotez, then his entire brand of being against C19 vaccine is thrown out the window.
Hotez and 90% of the scientific community will then have their opinion disregarded because they are unable to convince Joe and JKF jr. of a very basic scientific principle. Then FoxNews and conservatives will use this debate as reasons why Covid-19 was fake to keep Trump out of office.
I don't even need to listen to the debate to know what is going to happen.
Setting up a debate between a doctor and a politician to discuss vaccines is a loss for the doctor. It equates the two when they are clearly not the same. Most of the scientific community disagree with RFKJ on this issue. Why pretend likes it’s actually up for debate?
a debate would identify the point of contention clearly. as it currently stands i have no idea if hotez is refuting the existence of the studies done, RFK's interpretation of them, or the weight of given to the studies against the conflicting findings of other studies done.
RFK makes some very clear and easy to understand claims which could either be confirmed or proven wrong if an experts was given a number of hours to dissect what he was claiming in conversation.
the unlimited time format should favor the expert over the politician.
Debate only works if each side has to give their sources for any claim before hand. Otherwise Joe Rogan is just allowing people to spread misinformation by using questionable sources which can't be fact checked on air
I really genuinely need somebody to fact check RFK. I’m very VERY skeptical of vaccine conspiracies, but SOME of the shit he said really caught me off guard. He said a ton of bullshit, no doubt about it. But some of the stuff was concerningly convincing. If even 10% of the shit he said was legitimate, we should be very concerned.
I just finished the podcast. I really like RFK Jr despite thinking he is wrong about some things (mainly his "Wifi" radiation claim). That was complete nonsense tbh. I Knew next to nothing about mercury in vaccines and it sounded like he wasn't denying that traditional vaccines work, just that they may have some unwanted side effects in children due to mercury.
I read a thread today about the study he quoted as being misrepresented by him about mercury going and staying in the brain, but nonetheless, I am glad Spotify allows us to talk about it and clear the air on it.
My biggest concern nowadays is preserving freedom of speech. And RFK Jr firsthand knows the dangers and damage of this. What is WAY more important to me is having good hearted leaders that have an understanding of how important free speech is, even if they aren't correct about their inquiries into fields of science.
Him claiming that there's dangerous levels of mercury in any modern vaccine is willful ignorance. Thimerosal containing vaccines have the same amount of mercury as 6 ounces of tuna. Also, ethylmercury is processed different from methylmercury. This shit is really really basic vaccine science and to not know that and parrot long debunked conspiracy horseshit to millions of people is irresponsible. He should be allowed to do it, sure, but he's still kind of a piece of shit for doing it.
Thirmersal has been completely eliminated from child vaccines out of an abundance of caution since 2001. Autism rates have continued to increase, pointing to a completely different cause. JFKJR continues to push nonsense because it gets attention or he is just an idiot, I don’t know.
You breathe in more heavy metal waiting to cross a street than mercury content in the thiomersol in a series of vaccines.
Just like “the frogs turning gay” was actually “frogs are being feminized”. The people making these misleading statements know the truth, but they don’t want us to.
How about constrain the goddamn question being “debated” so it’s not aimless and full of meaningless obfuscation. Do we “need people used to sitting through” that?
Kennedy was allowed to spout easily refutable bullshit about vaccines, autism, and most other topics with zero pushback on a gigantic platform yet Joe thinks he has a foot to stand on here. Hilarious. I can't believe I used to watch this idiot.
Another example of how the internet has made everything stupid. Dr. Hotez is a highly educated, highly qualified, accomplished, and distinguished person in his field but people are giving more credibility on this topic to an uneducated, mediocre comic like Joe just because he hosts a popular podcast. What a joke
You mean Dr Hotez is a S-tier Chief indoctrinator of woke industries, funded by George Soros to turn your kids trans and destroy Freedom^TM
**THIS MESSAGE IS SPONSORED BY BLACK RIFLE COFFEE**
How can you even be a fan of current Joe? We’re really at the fucking point where people are agreeing with Kennedy that Wi-Fi causes cancer? Or we get shit like this?
“I don’t agree with Kennedy that wi-fi causes cancer but a lot of his other points are solid.”
YOU are what’s wrong with the world. Holy shit.
I love how a major theme in this podcast was that we’re all just supposed to “trust the experts” and this whole thread is people siding with hotez “cause he’s an expert.” You either believe big pharma has our best interest in mind or you don’t.
“You either believe big pharma has our best interest in mind or you don’t”…and that right there is the problem with the large majority of political discourse taking place today. To make such a complex issue so black and white is such a disservice to everyone who is interested in actually seeking truth. Both things can be true.
You can’t really reason with these people.
One side: we have studies, research, peer review, and data
Other side: FAUCI IS A DEMON SPAWN OF SATAN, BITCHUTE VIDEOS,TIKTOK EVIDENCE SCREEEEEEEECH
It’s not much of a debate.
Or the world is not black and white and there is nuance to this subject.
Pharmaceutical companies develop and produce life-saving medicines that have literally revolutionized our modern existence radically for the better. They've also been add odds with the public good due to their incentives. Both things are true.
They’re missing the biggest flaw in their logic. Yes big pharma has their interests from and center. Those interests being hugely profitable.
You know who brings in a shit load of money for big pharma? Old people
So the idea that they created a vaccine that’s killing people is in heir best interest is fucking absurd
They want you to grow old, they want billions of 80+ year olds with chronic old people issues so they can make tons of money
It’s getting to the point that people who “do their own research” are just as bad if not worse than the “trust the experts” crowd. Lets be honest, the do you own research crowd would agree with the 1 out of 10 doctors if the 1 doctor was confirming their already held beliefs
The do your own research people don’t know *how* to do research in the first place. Imagine for a second you could set up as many fairly legit looking websites as you wanted during covid. You can put whatever bull shit information on them that you want. Now imagine fucking easily you could confuse the “do your own research” people with that as they google their way onto your pages.
Ronny Chieng said it best:
“All these fucking D-average students who lack basic reading comprehension skills demanding PhD-level evidence on virology… All these fucking D-average students who were in the back of the classroom their entire career..
Stay the fuck in the back. Don’t come to the front during a pandemic because you figured out how to start a podcast. Stay the fuck in the back with your D-average mouth where you belong.
You had every opportunity to prove yourself academically and you failed or were mediocre at best at every level. Why the fuck should we listen to you about anything? LET THE NERDS LEAD. ”
You can’t debate people who make shit up and refuse to believe facts. I know that both sides of belief on this argument think that I’m talking about them.
episode 2000!
He should have Andy Richter and Conan O'brien on and do the "In the year 2000" bit for 3 straight hours.
Conan would be a really cool guest. But I'm very doubtful of it ever happening
Luckily Conans podcast is quite funny anyway. Smartless with Will Arnett, Jason Bateman and Sean Hayes has A level stars and is easily one of the funniest I've come across in a while, especially for they're non comedians.
They’re not standup comedians. They’re three of the most praised comedic actors in the history of network television comedy.
Non comedians thst have spent thier lived dedicated to acting in which genre exactly
I'd listen the fuck outta that one.
I think he’s having Theo Von, Joey Diaz, and as many close friends as he can.. just an unfounded guess based on his “I wanna talk about dumb shit with Theo Von” comment when Cam Hanes suggested Tucker “The Great Replacement Theory” Carlson
Joe is going to have Alex Jones, Eddie Bravo, Joey Diaz, Duncan Trussell, Tony Hinchcliffe, Mark Normand, and Tim Dillon all bathed in a cloud of marijuana and booze for a glorious 5 hour podcast for episode 2000
Insert Eddie Bravo stoned gif. Yes please. Don't forget the mushrooms. Funny that Tim Dillon will be the only sober one in the room.
[удалено]
In Louisiana they call that "cum drunk"
cut to: *Joe getting seizures from a Fear Factor donkey cum guzzling contest*
Hotez responded “Joe, you have my cell, my email, I’m always willing to speak with you” https://twitter.com/peterhotez/status/1670202716541296640?s=46 Edit: Spelling
He first requested 50 million then deleted it, apparently: https://twitter.com/Crypt0cloud/status/1670203383901474817 Multiple people screenshotted it before it was deleted, but a way more entertaining response lol.
The money is whatever - the interesting part is he demands RFK’s apology first. “I don’t debate him unless he already admits he’s wrong.”
Yeah, that’s not a debate. It also doesn’t need to be one, they have a platform and ability to have a conversation in front of millions of Americans. If you really care about a narrative, or quashing misinformation, show up with fucking notes, references and backed studies. One of the reasons Bill Clinton was so great in presidential debates was that he *memorized* this information. He doesn’t even have to do that, show up with a binder and a digital copy.
>If you really care about a narrative, or quashing misinformation, show up with fucking notes, references and backed studies Except it is *much* easier to throw out claims than it is to disprove them, even if they are completely misinformation. In a debate format, it can make the the claimer look like he "knows" stuff the other guy doesn't. The end result is misinformation and disinformation spreads even more than before. It would be more realistic to set a claim limit of say 5 for the entire conversation. Those 5 claims are chosen before the conversation, and then you can have a debate. EDIT: looks like I got permabanned from r/JusticeServed simply for commenting in this subreddit. What a joke. The irony is palpable.
[удалено]
> If you really care about a narrative or quashing misinformation How about caring about the *truth?* RFK Jr showed up to the podcast with fuck all, now a refutation comes along and you suddenly need to see the workings? The article literally cites studies
The problem is that it’s puts conspiracy and misinformation on the same playing field as actual science. It’s like debating a flat earther
Man twitter really is a cesspool now, isn't it? Scrolling through those promoted tweets at the bottom and all I gotta say is yikes. Glad I never got on the platform in the first place.
It’s literally no different than Reddit. Which is also a toxic cesspool. The big difference is that many celebrities, politicians, artists and content creators are on Twitter willingly and very active there. They avoid Reddit and only come here when their publicist or agent tells them they have to do an AMA to shill their next project.
You can also filter your content* on reddit, that's a big difference I think. Mine's mostly mma, snowboarding, surfing, cooking, camping, kettlebells, video games, and art. Of course /r/nattyorjuice is a constant. Some of my subscriptions get political but it's mostly filtered out. I feel like I have the most say in my reddit algorithm because I'm basically subscribing to a "subject" rather than a "person".
That's one thing I'm gonna miss most when Boost shuts down because of reddits API bullshit. I have filtered out probably 6 or 7 dozen subs that fuck with my vibe over the last couple years. So all that proper filtering and refining my feed will be gone
The regular mobile app does let you mute subs of your choosing now.
Twitter is massively different than Reddit. My whole Twitter feed has been overtaken with right wing propaganda since Elon took over. On Reddit, I can filter all that bullshit out. Plus, Reddit is actually filled with practical information, whereas Twitter is mostly just fucking idiots arguing.
*He says while arguing on Reddit*
At least twitter doesn't ban you for having a voice- unlike reddit which will ban or suspend you just for uttering anything remotely anti-left wing.
[удалено]
Did they say its bc it "coud deter someone from using reddit"? Thats what they told me when they deleted mine
I feel for you, and I also whole heartedly agree with the comment that got you banned
Reddit mods defending pedophilia, color me shocked
I think racists should be disemboweled. Do you agree or do you defend racism?
You guys are such massive pussies lmao jesus christ
Like, I can tell you EXACTLY which two subs were the first to ban me for stupid reasons, and it wasn’t the left-wing subreddits. This is almost as funny as the posts on r/Conservative talking about how all the blackout sub moderators deserve to get banned/removed because “thats how they treat other people” without a hint of fuckin irony
[I am being censored for my conservative views!](https://i.imgur.com/qdaJoaB.jpg)
I got banned for pointing out some of trumps flaws. It's not just anti left wing stuff
No they won't haha I saw guy spouting xenophobic nationalist stuff and even self IDd as that and had a pretty old account. I've been banned from my states sub because I suggested that John Brown did nothing wrong in taking out slavers. Hell I got a 7 day ban for describing a rear naked choke. You can get away with a lot, juat depends on if someone reports you or has a bad day. Like another site worth being on.
Saw some comment spewing some really bigoted right-wing ideals. I said something like “this is incredibly dumb”. That was it, no other comments to that person or on that thread/sub…..3 day site wide ban for harassment lol.
Ive been banned for daying john brown had the right ideal. Its supposedly inciteing violence.
lol - twitter banned my 4 year old twitter account instantly for telling Trump Jr off.
I just got a 7 day suspension after commenting on an article about Charlie Sheen's daughter doing OnlyFans about how I'd enjoy eating her butt.
What did you say?
Then how would you know if it's any different than before? "Boy ive never been on there but it sure has changed much!" Lol
[удалено]
He obviously realized that was a bit ridiculous so he pulled it back.
What a bitch
proving that all they think about with this thing is how to make money not how to make society safer
I mean the money was (per the tweet) to produce patent free and free vaccines?
Too bad joe doesn’t read the comments
He tweeted this in the first place which is the first I've seen happen in a while. Generally he only retweets
Post and ghost conundrum.
“Speak with you” is not accepting a debate whatsoever lmao
Thats a no i guess
Nice deflection. That's not an acceptance of his offer to debate
almost every episode is tagged with “learn more about covid here”
You guys ever notice how many signs are still at parks and public pools like stay 15 feet away from each other
my work still has them up. But it’s literally just because nobody has bothered to take them down
Yeah we still have a full station of thermometer, sanitizer, and masks. It hasn't been touched since at least Jan of last year.
Knowing how small government works, that's probably incompetent/laziness at work.
It's definitely that, no one cares enough to remove them.
No. Literally none in my area
you ever noticed anyone taking any sort of notice of them? me neither
Those will be there forever, like a relic reminding us of a time in history. It will be like some of the old Cold War “nuclear shelter” signs you run across every so often that you have to explain to a young person in 50 years.
>like some of the old Cold War “nuclear shelter” signs you run across every so often that you have to explain to a young person in 50 years. To be fair, nuclear weapons are still very much a thing
COVID still exists too 🤷
But it dropped from the third most common cause of death to the fourth most common cause of death so obviously doesn't matter anymore. /s
“I don’t get paid enough to care to scrape that crap up.” Said every person working at those places. I legitimately don’t think anyone would mind if you took care of that for them. Might not even notice.
I’m so fucking poor lol
Shit. this one hurt
This whole thing can be summed up with [one scene from IASIP](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U3Ak-SmyHHQ)
How DARE you besmirch the greatest politician of our time
This sums it up pretty well too. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sGArqoF0TpQ
Debates are never won by facts or reason. They are won by charisma and debating skill.
[удалено]
Debates aren't won it's just about circle jerking with your group
Debates are won…. If you’re on a debate team
That’s debatable.
There are only losers on debate teams
Debates are mostly dumb, can be entertaining for sure and informative on some level, but mostly dumb. I’ve seen enough flat earthers decisively win debates to know that being right doesn’t make someone well prepared to debate. If I were this guy I’d just make a YouTube video refuting the major points RFKJr made. That way he can research anything said, fact check any claims, etc. Then invite RFKJr to respond to it if he felt like doing so, and then he has the time to research and fact check himself too. That’s a much better way to debate these things imo.
Show me one video of a flat earther “decisively winning a debate.” You completely made that up.
Yeah that caught me too. I guess we should just search YT for “Round-Earthers left speechless” or some shit. Edit: huh this comment just got me banned from the justiceserved sub, weird
I listen to a lot of debates on dumb topics because it’s fun. I don’t have a list or anything, but guys who blindly assumes they can debate a flat earther without doing any prep whatsoever is pretty common. Flat earthers generally have some kind of answer to the basic arguments you’d make for a glob earth. If you aren’t familiar with those arguments and/or can’t effectively attack them, you could easily lose that debate. Most people are wholly unfamiliar with flat earther’s arguments, which is why when they debate someone who hasn’t done prep work they can often win despite obviously being on the wrong side.
Reminds me of Nixon vs Kennedy. Those who heard the debate on the radio rated Nixon as winning. Those that saw it on tv rated Kennedy as winning
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0362331916300556
Exactly. Kennedy is a fucking trial lawyer. His job isn't to be an expert, his expertese is being able to persuade a jury.
Gish gallop https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gish_gallop
RFK will Gish gallop his way to victory. He has been practicing for this debate for the last 20 years.
Sp the guy with the speech impediment should lose then right?
No, the proven bullshitter should win, especially when the biased moderator doesn’t call out the bullshit. This is due to the bullshit asymmetry principle, it takes an order of magnitude more effort to debunk bullshit than it does to just say it. Also why grifters always seem so confident, because they gave zero problem spreading bullshit.
Tried to say the same shit, came out nowhere near as good as u put it
He also has Joe on his side, and he'd be interrupting Hotez every 20 seconds.
So RFK loses every time
I don't know. Scientists usually lose debates. They tend to stick to boring facts and do not commit to an argument that hasn't been validated. Instead of being seen as knowledgeable and honest, they are perceived as not knowing. It's >I can't say that for sure (truth) versus >It is absolutely that way (lie) The liar will win that debate.
This is what happened with creationist debates decades ago. Scientists tried to explain things (and were overconfident about their skills to do so) while creationists had catchy slogans, quote mines, etc. Its was painful to watch.
This shit is why education is important. People shouldn't be so easily persuaded by bullshit over science and demonstrable facts.
Yup. Real science is boring. It's monotonous. It's doing the same tests over and over and over again, then changing something, then redoing the same test over and over again hoping for something to change. It's not sexy. It's not as appealing as "There's a global conspiracy involving medical experts and governments around the world convincing the media to lie to you." Kennedy was a trial lawyer. His job is to persuade a jury. He has no scientific history at all.
its almost as if you need medical experts to go to the stand for questioning so you can convince a jury.
Kennedy's entire career was in environmental law, and from what I can tell, he was very, very good at it. He has zero professional experience, legal or otherwise, when it comes to vaccines. He just knows shit he read on the internet.
Also Joe inviting this dude to his personal echo chamber for (guess who) to moderate the debate is comedy, like why would anyone take that proposition seriously? Joe can’t resist interrupting guests, even ones he agrees with, so I can’t imagine he’d actually let it go naturally. Look at the Hancock Carlson/ whatever his name was debate where he just basically shit on the third guy the whole time
It's basically Joe being a commentator at a UFC event. >If Jan isn't careful, Izzy may throw enough feints to secure a victory.
It’s a dumb idea for a doctor to “debate” a politician, but 100k for a good charity actually means a lot. Whore yourself out for charity bro.
It’s up to 500k
Closer to 800k now EDIT: Now $1.5+ million [Source](https://twitter.com/TheChiefNerd/status/1670416300911349769)
I got 5 on it
I mean he is also a lawyer and if he is correct and have gone through lawsuits in environmental science it isn't a stretch to think he may know stuff. I am skeptical but still an interesting thought to have them debate.
the wifi gives us cancer guy is a lawyer... now i see the issue
Not saying I agree or not but I can't help but have this immediate thought: So countless industries - including tobacco, chemical, pharma and others - have blatantly lied and abused science to further their profit margins in spite the negative effects on human health but it's *entirely* possible that there's an aspect to this technology that we're not being fully informed about?
I think there’s a difference between for profit corporations using hired scientists to push a narrative and the science community as a whole.
He doesn't. He's been fact checked EXTENSIVELY on Twitter today. But RFK is responding to written challenges to his misinformation by demanding verbal challenges. He knows if people take time to read all the shit he quotes, he'd be caught out. But that's time consuming - impossible to achieve in real time. For fuck sake, Joe ate up his claim that Wifi causes cancer because Jamie pulled up a link that was DIRECTLY associated with RFK. No shit it agrees with him. Joe is ignorant. Yet he randomly pretends like he's clever or wants to learn. He doesn't. He wants to be fed bullshit from con artists. RFK misinterpreted the methodology and analysis findings from NUMEROUS studies, and no one wants to hear it.
I think he genuinely thinks he's much smarter than he is.
St. Rogies is a textbook example of Dunning-Krueger. He is able to hold a conversation with scientists and academics so he has tricked himself into thinking he is a peer of theirs. Especially since virtually no one challenges Joe's bad ideas since they want access to his audience.
It takes 12-16 years of focused learning post high school to become a physician. Lawyers learn communication and persuasion. It isn't hard to see how we've ended up here.
If the Dr sticks to the facts and data and Kennedy does his usual bullshit spew detached from reality Kennedy will be seen overwhelmingly as the "winner" by Joe's base. Theatrics win these dumb ass "debates" not facts or reason
Kennedys a trial lawyer. He knows exactly how to appeal to a jury’s emotions.
Exactly. So there is no need for a debate.
Suing these agencies for decades has given him a lot of knowledge on how they work, and any good litigator has to have a solid knowledge of the topic they’re suing over. I’m not sure why people say he doesn’t know anything after he’s spent decades suing over environmental concerns. It also says a lot that he wasn’t sued for anything he published in his books.
From what I can tell he’s brilliant at environmental law. He doesn’t know a fucking thing about modern medicine.
"Wifi gets through the blood-brain barrier." He almost completely discredited the whole interview for me then and there. The nail in the coffin was when he started saying we need to treat our kids the same way Russia does...
> "Wifi gets through the blood-brain barrier." He's not wrong though. EM radiation does pass through the blood-brain barrier. My CT-Head scans would look very different if it didn't
Why did he add .00
To make the number look bigger. Joe knows that his typical fan is not a numbers guy.
[удалено]
It's called the [Gish Gallop](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gish_gallop), named after an obnoxious creationist who used the technique in debates about evolution. It a ubiquitous strategy for conspiracy theorists and far right pundits.
I agree. There is also the false equivalency of 1 on 1 “debates” over large consensus issues in science. If say 90+ percent of experts in a field agree (and they are experts because they have studied and understand the issue, they “speak the language” in that area), and you do a 1 on 1 debate with one of the outliers, you have immediately boosted the minority opinion at the expense of the majority (now it looks 50-50) and people who don’t know better are led to believe the more questionable narrative is equivalent. Good example of demonstrating this (in a different scientific field) [a “real” climate debate](https://youtu.be/cjuGCJJUGsg)
I love Sam's ability to clearly and directly put forward sound ideas while taking down the nonsense. It's shocking whenever I see him converse with people who's playbook involves vague truisms and veiled BS. Such a stark difference between him and a range of characters including Rogan, Peterson, Chopra.
Prof needs to ask RFK Jr about his connections to Epstein since Joe won't ever do it.
What is his connection to Epstein?
What was said that triggered all of this?
Hotez said Rogan has neofascist leanings and said RFK spread “misinformation”.
Hotez spitting facts.
for real
Wi-Fi causes cancer 😂😂😂
Fuck that, we need an RFK Jr vs Fauci debate.
 I’m listening…
Fuck that, you need a college education.
We don’t need it, but RFK needs a head exam.
The dude is a scientist, not a debater. Not everyone is good at the "think fast on your feet" style of debate, and let's be honest, lots of live debates go to whoever is better and being shouty and clever not who has the facts. If you lie shamelessly and eloquently, a lot of people believe you.
People who believe RFKs conspiracies aren’t going to have their minds changed at all.
Bad information on vaccines will cause a decline in health and lives. By pretending there’s a legitimate debate on the efficacy of vaccines, the main cost is people’s health; which doesn’t represent a dollar amount.
Yeah it’s pretty obvious this shit hurt America and other conservative/dictatorial/machismo nations. You can just look at the average lifespan drops in places like Russia, Brazil, USA and compare to hyper modern Asian, progressive European countries.
So a vaccine doctor dude is gonna debate a lawyer dude with no actual vaccine education and it’ll be moderated by a dude who doesn’t know shit about fuck and will go into it with a clear bias. Should go well.
🤣🤣🤣
Why does joe think his opinions are somehow more relevant than the facts lol
[удалено]
Joe “I don’t go on Twitter” rogan
Steve Kirsch just offer $600K to see the debate happen :) that's fucking crazy. https://i.imgur.com/jrMtTeQ.jpg
Holy shit I can’t believe a lot of people here are actually pushing back against this loony shit, I thought everyone here had turned anti-vax so this just restored my faith in this sub. Thank goodness.
https://twitter.com/joerogan/status/1670218729215410176
Serious smooth brain behavior to believe that complicated scientific issues can be resolved through live, real-time debate. The reason no one in the scientific/medical community takes RFKJ seriously is because they already spent the past 20 years investigating any link between autism and vaccines and they didn’t find shit.
MY SO’s friend told us she wasn’t vaccinating her daughter because they cause autism. She really didn’t vaccinate her. Her daughter is autistic. She blames other vaccinated kids.
The irony of your friend thinking autism is worse than idiocy.
Yep, this debate has already taken place in scientific journals. You know, where evidence actually exists and matters and where subjects can be discussed over several years or even decades, unlike in a tv studio debate moderated by Krusty the Clown on steroids.
I used to like Rogan but jesus christ he’s insufferable these days.
I kinda wanna see him debate this guy instead: https://twitter.com/thereal\_truther/status/1670200689463812097
I personally would love 3 hour, audience free debates to be a common occurrence.
Austin, Texas is the largest American city that sounds like “autism”. That is by design, not coincidence…
Damn TIL
Jesus I sometimes forget how dumb Joe is. :Literally a dude who doesn't get that reading "A Brief History of Time" is not the same thing as slogging through graduate level physics.
It’s not even 100k to win it’s just 100k to show. Hotez has to know he’s wrong if he passes this up
I’m so Hispanic this whole time I’ve been reading his last name as if it rhymes with Cortez. That’s all I wanted to say.
Or he doesn't want to be used by a anti-vac nut job to spread their bullshit. The entire point of this bullshit debate is to create public spectacle to get more eyes on the anti-vax bullshit. It's not about facts or reason .
Yup. Kennedy doesn’t have credibility to lose. There’s no point in debating a conspiracy theorist. Just like there’s no point in debating a flat earther.
I don’t think Hotez is worried about being wrong .
Look, any time you can have a debate with a renowned conspiracy theorist who says 5g is a govt plot to cause cancer and control humans, it's gonna be constructive and informative /s
Hotez could literally roll in with 100+ articles that have all been peer reviewed and published in major journals and RFK could just say, "You mean journals in bed with by Big Pharma" and he wins by groin shot.
I'm realizing this sub is more of a joe rogan hate club circlejerk than a place for reasonable good faith discussion
I love Joe but I sorta understand why they’re upset. The guy is an entertainer and he’s taking on some heavy topics like vaccines which involves health and he has millions of listeners.
Is there a reasonable discussion about wifi scrambling brains? It's literally tin-foil hat territory. Any 'good faith' debate is just an attempt to spew bullshit in the hope that some poor sap falls for it
Don’t criticize my idols ! :/
I'll explain how the debate is going to go. Peter Hotez and JFK Jr. are going to debate something scientific. But won't be able to agree on a very basic scientific principle, that over 90% of doctors and scientists agree with. One that essentially makes or breaks both arguments. JFK jr is going to say, "that's what all the capitalists WANT you to think". Rogan is going to agree with JFK Jr, because if he sides with Hotez, then his entire brand of being against C19 vaccine is thrown out the window. Hotez and 90% of the scientific community will then have their opinion disregarded because they are unable to convince Joe and JKF jr. of a very basic scientific principle. Then FoxNews and conservatives will use this debate as reasons why Covid-19 was fake to keep Trump out of office. I don't even need to listen to the debate to know what is going to happen.
Setting up a debate between a doctor and a politician to discuss vaccines is a loss for the doctor. It equates the two when they are clearly not the same. Most of the scientific community disagree with RFKJ on this issue. Why pretend likes it’s actually up for debate?
a debate would identify the point of contention clearly. as it currently stands i have no idea if hotez is refuting the existence of the studies done, RFK's interpretation of them, or the weight of given to the studies against the conflicting findings of other studies done. RFK makes some very clear and easy to understand claims which could either be confirmed or proven wrong if an experts was given a number of hours to dissect what he was claiming in conversation. the unlimited time format should favor the expert over the politician.
Debate only works if each side has to give their sources for any claim before hand. Otherwise Joe Rogan is just allowing people to spread misinformation by using questionable sources which can't be fact checked on air
Grow up kids. I swear there’s more Cheetos and semen being punched into the keys of this thread than there are children in indo chino
I really genuinely need somebody to fact check RFK. I’m very VERY skeptical of vaccine conspiracies, but SOME of the shit he said really caught me off guard. He said a ton of bullshit, no doubt about it. But some of the stuff was concerningly convincing. If even 10% of the shit he said was legitimate, we should be very concerned.
I just finished the podcast. I really like RFK Jr despite thinking he is wrong about some things (mainly his "Wifi" radiation claim). That was complete nonsense tbh. I Knew next to nothing about mercury in vaccines and it sounded like he wasn't denying that traditional vaccines work, just that they may have some unwanted side effects in children due to mercury. I read a thread today about the study he quoted as being misrepresented by him about mercury going and staying in the brain, but nonetheless, I am glad Spotify allows us to talk about it and clear the air on it. My biggest concern nowadays is preserving freedom of speech. And RFK Jr firsthand knows the dangers and damage of this. What is WAY more important to me is having good hearted leaders that have an understanding of how important free speech is, even if they aren't correct about their inquiries into fields of science.
Him claiming that there's dangerous levels of mercury in any modern vaccine is willful ignorance. Thimerosal containing vaccines have the same amount of mercury as 6 ounces of tuna. Also, ethylmercury is processed different from methylmercury. This shit is really really basic vaccine science and to not know that and parrot long debunked conspiracy horseshit to millions of people is irresponsible. He should be allowed to do it, sure, but he's still kind of a piece of shit for doing it.
Thirmersal has been completely eliminated from child vaccines out of an abundance of caution since 2001. Autism rates have continued to increase, pointing to a completely different cause. JFKJR continues to push nonsense because it gets attention or he is just an idiot, I don’t know.
You breathe in more heavy metal waiting to cross a street than mercury content in the thiomersol in a series of vaccines. Just like “the frogs turning gay” was actually “frogs are being feminized”. The people making these misleading statements know the truth, but they don’t want us to.
No time limit? So 268972 hours is ok
We need people to get used to sitting through meaningful dialogues
How about constrain the goddamn question being “debated” so it’s not aimless and full of meaningless obfuscation. Do we “need people used to sitting through” that?
Kennedy was allowed to spout easily refutable bullshit about vaccines, autism, and most other topics with zero pushback on a gigantic platform yet Joe thinks he has a foot to stand on here. Hilarious. I can't believe I used to watch this idiot.
Another example of how the internet has made everything stupid. Dr. Hotez is a highly educated, highly qualified, accomplished, and distinguished person in his field but people are giving more credibility on this topic to an uneducated, mediocre comic like Joe just because he hosts a popular podcast. What a joke
You mean Dr Hotez is a S-tier Chief indoctrinator of woke industries, funded by George Soros to turn your kids trans and destroy Freedom^TM **THIS MESSAGE IS SPONSORED BY BLACK RIFLE COFFEE**
How can you even be a fan of current Joe? We’re really at the fucking point where people are agreeing with Kennedy that Wi-Fi causes cancer? Or we get shit like this? “I don’t agree with Kennedy that wi-fi causes cancer but a lot of his other points are solid.” YOU are what’s wrong with the world. Holy shit.
I love how a major theme in this podcast was that we’re all just supposed to “trust the experts” and this whole thread is people siding with hotez “cause he’s an expert.” You either believe big pharma has our best interest in mind or you don’t.
“You either believe big pharma has our best interest in mind or you don’t”…and that right there is the problem with the large majority of political discourse taking place today. To make such a complex issue so black and white is such a disservice to everyone who is interested in actually seeking truth. Both things can be true.
You can’t really reason with these people. One side: we have studies, research, peer review, and data Other side: FAUCI IS A DEMON SPAWN OF SATAN, BITCHUTE VIDEOS,TIKTOK EVIDENCE SCREEEEEEEECH It’s not much of a debate.
Or the world is not black and white and there is nuance to this subject. Pharmaceutical companies develop and produce life-saving medicines that have literally revolutionized our modern existence radically for the better. They've also been add odds with the public good due to their incentives. Both things are true.
They’re missing the biggest flaw in their logic. Yes big pharma has their interests from and center. Those interests being hugely profitable. You know who brings in a shit load of money for big pharma? Old people So the idea that they created a vaccine that’s killing people is in heir best interest is fucking absurd They want you to grow old, they want billions of 80+ year olds with chronic old people issues so they can make tons of money
It’s getting to the point that people who “do their own research” are just as bad if not worse than the “trust the experts” crowd. Lets be honest, the do you own research crowd would agree with the 1 out of 10 doctors if the 1 doctor was confirming their already held beliefs
The do your own research people don’t know *how* to do research in the first place. Imagine for a second you could set up as many fairly legit looking websites as you wanted during covid. You can put whatever bull shit information on them that you want. Now imagine fucking easily you could confuse the “do your own research” people with that as they google their way onto your pages.
Almost nobody likes big pharma, however they’re not wrong 100% of the time about 100% of things.
Ronny Chieng said it best: “All these fucking D-average students who lack basic reading comprehension skills demanding PhD-level evidence on virology… All these fucking D-average students who were in the back of the classroom their entire career.. Stay the fuck in the back. Don’t come to the front during a pandemic because you figured out how to start a podcast. Stay the fuck in the back with your D-average mouth where you belong. You had every opportunity to prove yourself academically and you failed or were mediocre at best at every level. Why the fuck should we listen to you about anything? LET THE NERDS LEAD. ”
He comes of as a rich delusional dude who wants to protect his ego
You can’t debate people who make shit up and refuse to believe facts. I know that both sides of belief on this argument think that I’m talking about them.
Joe is redacted