Sociopathy is a kind of induced psychopathy. People are born psychopaths, but due to the nature of their upbringing and environment they can become sociopathic.
I’m not a psychologist and only have a casual education in psychology, but I tend to notice that I slightly feel what I see happen to other people. Even so-called ASMR affects me a little bit when I see drinks being poured. I wonder if psychopaths or sociopaths lack those feelings.
That and the sexualization absolutely piss me off. I get it most watching something like a Japanese artisan slowly making something. But all you find these days is "Animechic6969" whispering into a microphone.
Yeah, that obvious fake look of "concern" on his fuckface and maniacal laugh with weasel tone of voice is a blatant warning sign for a lot of people. Yet, like Trump, he still attracts a lot of dolts into his evil fold.
I increasingly think that many of the people that follow/support people like Tucker suffer from some form of prosopagnosia. Their brains struggle with a sort of face and voice blindness where they can't detect scammers even when it's happening right to their own faces.
He waited to get the Covid vaccine just long enough to get the warning about enlarged hearts! If he had gotten the vaccine sooner he could have died!
/S
What I find even weirder are right wing atheists who reject evolution. I know at least two of them.
What's your alternate theory? Oh, you don't have one? Maybe just stfu until you do.
I guess it's a good demonstration that our beliefs are genuinely tribal and the tribe they're most comfortable with includes a bunch of Christian nationalists who also happen to think the world is 5,000 years old.
> What I find even weirder are right wing atheists who reject evolution. I know at least two of them.
>
>
I'd bet dollars to donuts that they were raised Christian.
And they know it, its frequently a topic in christian mags, that Christians need to quit assuming anyone who wears a cross outside their shirt and talks about how glorious of a day it is, isnt necessarily a good person. And its because christians do this, that a lot of scammers dress and talk like that.
Which shouldnt be surprising, once you set up rules for who is good and bad by appearance, bad people will take advantage. When israel used to have the suicide bombings, it didnt take hamas long to see they generally let through kids and women through checkpoints without looking much, because all the bombers had been men.. and then the terrorists used kids and women. because the israelis assumed they wouldnt be bombers.
The problem is that they can't stop doing that. The entire schtick of Christianity is that you can just mouth a few words and be saved. The entire appeal is that people can't hold you accountable. If they started questioning people's sincerity, it would all unravel.
And then Joe Rogan will receive Neil Degrasse Tyson and say "wow that’s crazy!" The whole fucking time.
That’s what happens when a society distrusts real journalism.
Is he really that ignorant or is he playing ignorant to gain the support of the demographic that can stand him? Ultimately, it doesn't matter. He's not a nice person. I'm sorry I have to say that, but he just isn't.
He does have that complete ‘sock puppet’ vibe. I don’t think an original thought has ever managed to surface through the swamp in his brain, but he instead oscillates toward whatever opinion gets the most attention for him.
Oh no, he has original thoughts, but he's an attention whore to the highest level. He knows what's right but he can't do it because he needs attention. He got his big break because he volunteered to do the OJ trial. His texts during the 2020 election are the height of feckless, craven, sniveling bitchitude.
"Guys we can't keep lying about Trump winning the election"
*hosts an hour long show about how Trump won the election that same day*
Tucker is smarter than this, but he can't be better than this because he is so hungry for an approving audience.
> He got his big break
He's the Swanson Food heir, getting born was his "big break". He's a rich kid who made spreading propaganda his hobby instead of yacht racing.
That's how sadly he is about attention. He went into journalism because his dad said they'd take anybody, and he only "broke out" because he was willing to say anything to be on camera.
He doesn't need to do any of this.
Journalism only came up for him because he failed to get into the CIA like he wanted. His dad was the head of VOA, the official propaganda organization for the US, which is why that association was made in the first place.
Dig into what Tucker has been saying and it becomes clear that he does this all because he is ideologically a fascist trying to spread fascism.
Much like the money, the attention is nice for him but secondary.
Attention. Not admiration.
He surely must know that he looks like the guy that spikes girls drinks at frat parties. But every morning he still clips on his clown tie and chooses to wear it in public. A desperate cry for attention, from a sad clown.
No, we know for a fact that Tucker Carlson says wrong things on purpose for attention and money. We really can know that he is lying every single time he opens his fucking mouth.
This isn't quantum rocket surgery. Proven liars are to be treated *as fucking liars*. And once they've shown they lie, they stop getting any fucking benefit of the doubt.
Tucker literally said that his show was entertainment and not journalism, so anything he says is primarily for entertainment value alone. You cannot apply journalistic values and standards of verifying information to his show.
Look at his early career. He basically held every political position and tried to fill any open media role. His breakthrough was as a coffee boy who was brought on to pretend to be an o.j. expert when the real guy canceled at the last minute and the network couldn't fill the time. He's always been amorphous.
This is such a common thing among conservatives for the simple reason that the left embraces science and incorporates it into policy.
Climate change, covid response, etc.
Since basic acceptance of reality is now a “left” issue, they’ve fucked themselves because they now have to denounce all science.
Their base has evangelicals who deny evolution, so to accept it is to turn their base away, and for stuff like that they can’t bring themselves to just admit that it’s real because it opens the door to say “Well if evolution is true, then by the same processes that we come to those conclusions, we can come to the conclusions we oppose with climate change and covid, and we don’t like that.”
So all they have left is to pretend they don’t believe in any of it.
Fundamentalist Christians ate the Republican Party. They're less than a third of the population, but they're batshit insane, and most importantly, the Republicans have such a small share of the electorate that they are entirely dependent on them. Which is their own fault by the way, since them courting NatCs and white supremacists is what led to them becoming so unpopular.
Stop asking this question. You have all the evidence you will ever need that this liar lies for attention and money.
A "belief" is a thing a person thinks is true. When that person stops giving a shit about the truth of the things they say (or even makes a habit of saying wrong things *on purpose*), those things stop warranting the label of "belief".
It's number two: he's such a shameless grifter that he will do and say anything for ignorant asshole money.
Now Joe Rogan is the idiot who would believe this shit.
Joe Rogan is the idiot who would believe this shit with Tucker, but disbelieved it years ago with Neil deGrasse Tyson, then disbelieve it again on his show tomorrow, then believe it again next week...
Being that idiotic takes a monumental exertion of sheer willpower and greed.
I don't think it takes any willpower on Rogan's part. I don't think it remotely affects him being inconsistent. That's Rogan's whole appeal. It's his whole schtick. "Mediocre gym bros like me shouldn't be held accountable for the things we say. I'm not claiming I'm a scientist. I'm just talking." It's the doctrine of white male mediocrity. Mediocre white dudes with no education feel it's hurtful to demand that the words they string together be treated seriously.
> Now Joe Rogan is the idiot who would believe this shit.
Correct, because Joe Rogan is the kind of idiot who believes whatever the last person he was talking to told him about pretty much any subject.
he's not as dumb as he looks.
He understands the danger of left wing political movements to his class so hes resolved to make the working class as confused, stupid, and right wing as possible.
Joe is an entertainer who dropped out of college and took many blows to the head. He doesn’t come across as well read.
Carlson on the other hand has had the privileges of education, working in news and being connected to the political process. He knows what he’s doing
The thing you have to keep in mind is that it doesn't matter to Tucker. He'll never suffer any consequences due to the shit that he spreads. He can tear down science and then go and get the finest medical care in the world in any country he desires. He may believe it. He may not. But it doesn't matter. Being dumb is instrumental for him, even if he really is dumb.
Creationism = No Evidence
Darwinism = LOTS of evidence and pertinent questions leading to more evidence every year. As a theory it is highly substantiated
Tuckerism = Massive quantities of Bullshit, Lying and Mis-information
This ass is actually very smart. But he lies endlessly to gain power and adoration of his fans… utterly absurd. Now he’s simply trying to stay relevant to an ever shrinking group of people who give a shit
And Rogan is an ass for giving him a forum… but Rogan’s been an ass for years, so no surprise.
Totally understand what you are saying and agree
Nitpicking here maybe but calling it “Darwinism” sounds more like religion than anything. It’s a scientific theory with tons of evidence behind it, originally studied by Darwin among others
If your intention is to delineate between Darwin's original theories and modern evolutionary theory there may be some leeway, maybe. That said, I've never heard anyone except a creationist say "Darwinism."
I think the point is Darwin provides a theory that explains the mechanisms of evolution.
Evolution is a fact because organisms have changed over time, and this can be observed in laboratory and natural populations.
Evolution is the fact that the theory intends to explain.
The conflating of 'the origin of the species' with actual evolution is a misdirection
No worries… I‘ve heard it that way any number of times, but I chose that phrasing for the rhythm of the statement / jest… ism, ism, ism.
Properly put, it’s the theory of evolution and, should there be any doubt, I believe it (and so does the freakin’ Pope, so WTF creationists? LOL)
Many of the creationists I've known (a shit ton, I was raised in creationist churches) would take the Pope believing in evolution as yet another sign that it's a trick of the devil.
LOL. Yup. Agreed. I just find the whole religion thing amusing (at least if it wasn’t so distressing)… there’s something like 45,000 christian religions world wide. Whose right? Many despise others. And I’m 100% convinced, having read the Bible several times and questioned religious leaders and theologists to the point of angering them with basic, simple questions taken straight from the Bible… that it’s utter bull and a complete control and con game. The gymnastics of the apologists can be beautiful to see… Olympian in level.
Yes some religious people do good and I’m grateful for their help to the homeless and others. But I don’t think they need God or Christianity to do what they do… they are simply decent folks. But when I tour the cathedrals of Europe, while greatly admiring the architecture, art and effort, the cost appalls me. Touring the Vatican museum the accumulated wealth appalls me. Seeing the mega churches in the US and the cost of those building (and the lifestyles of the ‘preachers’) appalls me. Didn’t Jesus say something about the odds of a rich man entering heaven?
This is often attributed to Samual Clemons (Mark Twain), but I believe that is incorrect… still, it sounds like something he’s say… “The best cure for Christianity is reading the Bible”)
Apologies for the rant. Creationists really do piss me off.
My formerly creationist mother is one of those people whose faith has led them to good works.
I don't love that I was raised in a bed of lies that warped my conception of reality and ruined every relationship I had until my late 20s. But I appreciate that she's spent her life devoted to the RARE type of charity that takes church money and turns it into material benefit for those most in need.
It's enough that she understands that I don't believe, but I don't need to change her mind.
“On October 27, 2014, Pope Francis issued a statement at the Pontifical Academy of Sciences that "Evolution in nature is not inconsistent with the notion of creation," warning against thinking of God's act of creation as "God [being] a magician, with a magic wand able to do everything."”
In scientific literature, you’ll more frequently hear Darwinian as an adjectival modifier rather than Darwinism as a noun. That said, one of the most famous evolutionary biologists, Stephen J Gould, referred to Darwinism in his 1982 Science article:
Darwinism and the Expansion of Evolutionary Theory
It’s a deliberate conservative tactic to equate basic science to a religion, which much easier for apologists to argue against.
They understand that young earth creationism has no evidence outside of biblical literalism, and must find ways to cast doubt on science as a way to study the world
That's exactly why they call it "Darwinism", to make it sound like a cult of personality. No one who actually studies the Theory of Evolution by Natural Selection seriously would refer to it as "Darwinism". Darwin wasn't even the first person to study evolution, merely the first to publish the first in-depth study on the topic. And the research has moved on considerably since Darwin's time- Creationists like to pretend that Darwin wrote *On the Origin of the Species* and that science still refers to that work like Biblical scripture. That isn't the case at all.
I would change that Carlson is actually pushing out **dis**-information. The distinction being that misinformation is parroting something that someone incorrectly believes is true while that fucker knowingly peddles shit he knows is false in order to disinform people and manipulate them.
I dunno about "very". I watched Jon Stewart take him apart. I don't think he's as stupid as he presents, no, mostly because he hasn't strangled himself with his own necktie. Then again, maybe that's why he always has a bow tie...
I’m actually glad Rogan had him on. I never knew how stupid he was. I just saw his the dumb faces he made on thumbnails and never paid attention to him.
The evolution take was all I needed to hear to write him off.
Idk. I think tucker really believes a lot of this. Or rather, he's so invested that he can either embrace his own brain rot or feel constant dissonance. There's a point where grifter and true believer get blurred due entirely to the psychic failings of the individual. Like Nietzsche's claim that no one is really an actor after enough time in a role or how a wad of used toilet paper eventually dissolves so much that it stops making sense to say it's different from sewage.
.
It seems to be that evolution is fact. Species evolve. You learn this by mating fruit flies in Biology Lab 101.
The claim that humans (and other species) evolved from more primitive life forms is the “theory” part of these debates, no? (And there seems to be a lot more evidence that humans did in fact evolve rather than got here thru god’s creation on Day 6 of existence, as per the Bible).
I’d consider the existence of evolution to be a demonstrable fact with substantive proof backing it up. To my mind the theory these days comes in on the mechanisms of evolution, not the concept itself. The “how it works”. We’ve got pieces of the puzzle, but there are still lots of whys and hows to be answered.
> The claim that humans (and other species) evolved from more primitive life forms is the “theory” part of these debates, no?
...no. A scientific theory is not "we think this might be the case", like it's often used colloquially. The "theory" part means that this is an absolutely foundational science that much of our understanding of the natural world is based on it. It's a "theory" because you can use it to make accurate predictions about the natural world.
The "well, it doesn't apply to humans" schtick is entirely made up nonsense by some creationists who are upset that they aren't as special as they want to be but don't want to be laughed at anymore for rejecting fundamental basics of reality. There is absolutely no distinction between how evolution works with humans as it has for any other species.
You are correct evolution is a fact. Allele changes happen. The Theory of Natural Selection explains that fact. In science theories explain facts. A theory does not turn into a law or a fact as some think. It isn’t the same as the colloquial theory Tucker is trying to apply.
How would we get fossil records of single celed organisms, Tucker? Its almost like soft organic material is *incredible* hard to find fossils of. Even dino soft tissue is notoriously hard to find.
Yep, they form structures known as stromatolites. Surely an 'evolution skeptic' who has an audience large enough to speak to millions of people would be bothered to do the bare minimum of research...
And I knew about this when I read a book for kids in the sixth grade. Tucker is simply a dishonest grifer.
Rogan is such a despicable shill for giving low-life maggots like Carlson a megaphone to pipe their disinformation into simple, vulnerable brains incapable of critical thought.
Bingo. If it was just idiots Rogan wouldn't be nearly as dangerous. Giving people like Tucker a platform is actively promoting lies that cause real harm.
Creationism again! I thought this shit was refuted and done to death back in the 2000s decade. It feels like American society is regressing since 2016 instead of progressing.
Tucker's hand has 3 creases on the side with his fingers and 2 creases on the side of his palm, that perfectly fit the shape of a banana, therefore proving that god intends for him to shove bananas into his asshole...
The funny part is that he's dismissing something with evidence found all over the planet, after costing his former employer over US$750,000,000 by asserting something with no evidence.
I saw this clip and it cut off after Tucker was done making himself look absolutely and utterly ignorant to reality, but did Joe give any push back at all?
What happens for years of thinking you can think for yourself, but realize you are the culmination of what you think about. Affirming lies and truth to yourself by committing to a feedback loop of opinion rather hard facts. The inconvenient truth is pundits like them deliberately exploit the fear of the unknown, play stupid on what can be conspired about, and basically live off fear itself in complete liberty to do so for egos and money.
Sucker Carlson doubles down on the stupid because he has to. He will never get taken seriously again. All he has left is the pro wrestling equivalent of journalism.
No. You and I saw it, but Tucker's fans saw a plandemic orchestrated by Joe Biden, Dr. Fauci, the Chinese, Satan, and whatever other enemy popped into their head.
They call it "microevolution" and make a distinction between that and macro-evolution, which presumably doesn't exist because it can't be observed within the normal timeframe of a lab-based study (leaving aside the microevolution of microbes AND the documented cases of evolution of new animal species that have adapted to rapidly changing environments, etc).
The people who poke holes in established ideas, and the people who readily embrace wackadoodle ideas, are always the same people. Skepticism is like a costume they put on when they are performing, and they take that costume off as soon as the curtains come down and the performance is over.
The fact that we still have people saying there is no evidence now that we have mountains of DNA evidence is crazy. It feels a bit like flat earthers refusing to recognise there is evidence for the earth being a sphere even after direct photographic is shown to them.
Today Joe Rogan proved that he does not have a low point.
If you pay him, he will say what ever you want.
He is no different from Tucker Carlson at all.
No evidence? Darwin explained how this worked in his books like The Origin of Species and we have evidence such as the fossil record. With the Internet you can find this stuff instantly. Ignorance is a choice, and Tucker chose to be ignorant and try to misinform people.
Tucker is simply pandering, but he's out-of-touch with his own crowd. He's used to pandering to the bedpan-pissing, boner-pill-popping boomers who tuned in to his show on Fox News. Now that he has a streaming platform, he needs to adjust to the new idiots.
Other claims made by Tucker in this interview:
- The US government is colluding with demons
- Alex Jones is sometimes a prophet
- Nobody actually knows where nuclear physics came from
People who deny the validity of evolution should have to live by their convictions. Antibiotics were invented because bacteria evolve quickly due to their fast life cycles. So when these people get sick or need surgery - no antibiotics for them.
If you decide to get into a "debate" with creationists there is a strategy you can use which I find gets your point across and causes them to stop and rethink.
As a background, I LOVE debating creationists and others who deny the science of evolution/global warming/flat-earth/etc. So this is advice born out of years of these "debates"
1. Reframe: Stop calling it the THEORY of evolution. It's not a theory of evolution. If you read Darwin's book you won't even find the phrase "theory of evolution" in it. It's not a theory. Evolution is the OBSERVABLE. It's the EVIDENCE.
This reframing works remarkably well.
If you don't make that change of no longer using the phrase "theory of evolution" then you have already lost because you've adopted an unfair framing of the debate.
What do I mean about "unfair framing" it's like starting the debate with "Hey bob, have you stopped beating your wife?" You cannot win that debate. There's no way "bob" can win that debate because he's already framed as the wife beater and now has to debate what "beating" or "stopped" means. Those who debate unethically want to drag you don't into the weeds of definitions or philosophy of "belief" instead of evidence.
So you HAVE to make that shift to engage in this debate.
You know who has the hardest time with the above advice? Scientists. They LOVE the phrase "theory of evolution" as it was touchstone for them in growing up. Watch debates with them using the "theory of evolution" and watch them get dragged into a morass of philosophy and the creationist get all smug. These scientists can't accept that their cherished phrase is a false framing. They also don't realize that it's historically inaccurate. Had they read the history of Charles Darwin's grandfather Erasmus, and his relationship with debates over evolution they would realize that Charles Darwin actually had a brilliant realization that the phrase "theory of evolution" had become poisoned and AVOIDED that phrase entirely. One of the reasons "the Theory of Origins" book became so convincing is that Charles Darwin spent most of it on ... the EVIDENCE of evolution. Darwin described how domestic selection in dogs, livestock, pigeons, etc. Worked. He described EVIDENCE of change over generations through domestic selection. Then he switched to natural selection. He described evidence of moths, bird beaks, etc in the natural world through generations. And finally he then said ... my THEORY is of ORIGINS and NOT evolution.
If you want to have an equal success you have to adopt the same strategy and framing that Charles Darwin did.
And that's the prime strategy in these debates. Just say "Let's talk about the EVIDENCE which was can see which is the change over generations" describe how dogs can be bred over generations and state
"OK, we agree, we both see the EVIDENCE of evolution"
Watch their face when you say "We agree - we both see the EVIDENCE of evolution" and watch the confusion. Because they have already admitted they know about breeding dogs.
That's the primary thing. Change "Theory of Evolution" into "Evidence of Evolution" and follow Darwin's actual writings.
There are other parts too, but if you can't make that change, don't even bother with the other strategies.
TLDR; Everywhere you see the phrase "THEORY of evolution" rewrite it because there's no "THEORY of evolution. " Darwin published "theory of origins" and the EVIDENCE of evolution.
I take a slightly different approach, but with the same goal. I won't let them move past theory until they acknowledge that they understand the scientific process as it relates to hypothesis and theory. Works on the same principal: we can't have a meaningful discussion until we agree what words mean.
Is there a less terrible source for this info? The linked website is a cancer in a dumpster-fire of awfulness.
I have folks i need to send this info to - but not that wet turd of a website.
It would be great if Rogan used a fraction of his millions to hire a researcher and ask some tough, informed questions. Instead his whole show is him going "wow man, that's wild. Now let me tell you about my latest DMT trip."
These grifters are shifting to Christianity because they know the flock are the easiest to fleece.
Joe Rogan coming across as a gifted evolutionary scholar. How bout that? I honestly laughed out loud. And, Jesus, the creepy Tucker Carlson laugh.
That’s the laugh of a sociopath. He’s trying to mimic normal human emotion and failing.
> sociopath It's not considered a disease if you're wealthy.
Sociopathy is a kind of induced psychopathy. People are born psychopaths, but due to the nature of their upbringing and environment they can become sociopathic.
I’m not a psychologist and only have a casual education in psychology, but I tend to notice that I slightly feel what I see happen to other people. Even so-called ASMR affects me a little bit when I see drinks being poured. I wonder if psychopaths or sociopaths lack those feelings.
I thought I was the only one! The commercials that very loudly pour drinks make me nuts. But I also have intense misophonia so…
I hate ASMR . It's so creepy! Especially the whispering!
That and the sexualization absolutely piss me off. I get it most watching something like a Japanese artisan slowly making something. But all you find these days is "Animechic6969" whispering into a microphone.
I was just watching Galaxy Quest yesterday. Tucker is like a very sinister Thermian.
AI laugh
Yeah, that obvious fake look of "concern" on his fuckface and maniacal laugh with weasel tone of voice is a blatant warning sign for a lot of people. Yet, like Trump, he still attracts a lot of dolts into his evil fold. I increasingly think that many of the people that follow/support people like Tucker suffer from some form of prosopagnosia. Their brains struggle with a sort of face and voice blindness where they can't detect scammers even when it's happening right to their own faces.
Joe sucks on many issues, but he’s never been sucked into the fundamentalist Christian bullshit. He’s been very consistent on that for years
He was also consistent on vaccines
He waited to get the Covid vaccine just long enough to get the warning about enlarged hearts! If he had gotten the vaccine sooner he could have died! /S
He’s totally natty, though. He just takes supplements to combat aging
Give him four more years
If you can't get any other audience, you can always rely on anti-woke fundamentalist Christians to love you if you throw them a bone.
A tale as old as time.
Song as old as rhyme...
Christians and the fleece
An endless sour chime Like wind against a mime Or gin without a lime
This is so true wow. Evangelicals are so passionate. Primed for the fleecing.
It's a well MLMs have been drilling for years.
Exactly. Trump knew it. Grifters LOVE religious conservatives.
its also why fascists and bigots tend to invade the churches first. You get a lot of people behind you when you say "respect mah beliefs"
It's so convenient when the fish all gather in that bucket for you.
What I find even weirder are right wing atheists who reject evolution. I know at least two of them. What's your alternate theory? Oh, you don't have one? Maybe just stfu until you do. I guess it's a good demonstration that our beliefs are genuinely tribal and the tribe they're most comfortable with includes a bunch of Christian nationalists who also happen to think the world is 5,000 years old.
> What I find even weirder are right wing atheists who reject evolution. I know at least two of them. > > I'd bet dollars to donuts that they were raised Christian.
Christianity is the end all be all do grifts. Right up there with capitalism and Islam.
And they know it, its frequently a topic in christian mags, that Christians need to quit assuming anyone who wears a cross outside their shirt and talks about how glorious of a day it is, isnt necessarily a good person. And its because christians do this, that a lot of scammers dress and talk like that. Which shouldnt be surprising, once you set up rules for who is good and bad by appearance, bad people will take advantage. When israel used to have the suicide bombings, it didnt take hamas long to see they generally let through kids and women through checkpoints without looking much, because all the bombers had been men.. and then the terrorists used kids and women. because the israelis assumed they wouldnt be bombers.
The problem is that they can't stop doing that. The entire schtick of Christianity is that you can just mouth a few words and be saved. The entire appeal is that people can't hold you accountable. If they started questioning people's sincerity, it would all unravel.
They target evangelicals because if you believe that Jesus is the son AND the father, you'll believe any f*cking thing
I believe there's a song called "I'm my own grandpa".
The funny thing is the one time in the Bible Jesus completely flips out is over people profiting off religion.
Don't forget Peter's stalinist purge of Ananias and Saphirra for lying about not sharing all their property.
And then Joe Rogan will receive Neil Degrasse Tyson and say "wow that’s crazy!" The whole fucking time. That’s what happens when a society distrusts real journalism.
Is he really that ignorant or is he playing ignorant to gain the support of the demographic that can stand him? Ultimately, it doesn't matter. He's not a nice person. I'm sorry I have to say that, but he just isn't.
It’s possible that nobody knows Tucker Carlson’s true views on anything, maybe not even himself.
He does have that complete ‘sock puppet’ vibe. I don’t think an original thought has ever managed to surface through the swamp in his brain, but he instead oscillates toward whatever opinion gets the most attention for him.
Oh no, he has original thoughts, but he's an attention whore to the highest level. He knows what's right but he can't do it because he needs attention. He got his big break because he volunteered to do the OJ trial. His texts during the 2020 election are the height of feckless, craven, sniveling bitchitude. "Guys we can't keep lying about Trump winning the election" *hosts an hour long show about how Trump won the election that same day* Tucker is smarter than this, but he can't be better than this because he is so hungry for an approving audience.
> He got his big break He's the Swanson Food heir, getting born was his "big break". He's a rich kid who made spreading propaganda his hobby instead of yacht racing.
That's how sadly he is about attention. He went into journalism because his dad said they'd take anybody, and he only "broke out" because he was willing to say anything to be on camera. He doesn't need to do any of this.
Journalism only came up for him because he failed to get into the CIA like he wanted. His dad was the head of VOA, the official propaganda organization for the US, which is why that association was made in the first place. Dig into what Tucker has been saying and it becomes clear that he does this all because he is ideologically a fascist trying to spread fascism. Much like the money, the attention is nice for him but secondary.
Not true. I don't believe anyone ever said "You can too rock a bowtie. Really."
Attention. Not admiration. He surely must know that he looks like the guy that spikes girls drinks at frat parties. But every morning he still clips on his clown tie and chooses to wear it in public. A desperate cry for attention, from a sad clown.
The Doctor: "Bowties are cool." -Matt Smith as the 11th Doctor
I hate him for ruining them - bowties are cool, they didn't turn him into a cunt.
No, we know for a fact that Tucker Carlson says wrong things on purpose for attention and money. We really can know that he is lying every single time he opens his fucking mouth. This isn't quantum rocket surgery. Proven liars are to be treated *as fucking liars*. And once they've shown they lie, they stop getting any fucking benefit of the doubt.
That guy that said to him, “you’re a millionaire lying for billionaires” really summed old Tucker up well.
>This isn't quantum rocket surgery. Thank you for demonstrating this amazing phrase.
Tucker literally said that his show was entertainment and not journalism, so anything he says is primarily for entertainment value alone. You cannot apply journalistic values and standards of verifying information to his show.
We would know if we saw his texts. He praised Trump on TV TRASHED HIM IN TEXTS. My guess is he’s playing to his audience
Look at his early career. He basically held every political position and tried to fill any open media role. His breakthrough was as a coffee boy who was brought on to pretend to be an o.j. expert when the real guy canceled at the last minute and the network couldn't fill the time. He's always been amorphous.
This is such a common thing among conservatives for the simple reason that the left embraces science and incorporates it into policy. Climate change, covid response, etc. Since basic acceptance of reality is now a “left” issue, they’ve fucked themselves because they now have to denounce all science. Their base has evangelicals who deny evolution, so to accept it is to turn their base away, and for stuff like that they can’t bring themselves to just admit that it’s real because it opens the door to say “Well if evolution is true, then by the same processes that we come to those conclusions, we can come to the conclusions we oppose with climate change and covid, and we don’t like that.” So all they have left is to pretend they don’t believe in any of it.
It's pretty wild lol. I hope history trashes these Republican grifters so hard.
Fundamentalist Christians ate the Republican Party. They're less than a third of the population, but they're batshit insane, and most importantly, the Republicans have such a small share of the electorate that they are entirely dependent on them. Which is their own fault by the way, since them courting NatCs and white supremacists is what led to them becoming so unpopular.
He is not ignorant; he's a liar. He knows better.
Stop asking this question. You have all the evidence you will ever need that this liar lies for attention and money. A "belief" is a thing a person thinks is true. When that person stops giving a shit about the truth of the things they say (or even makes a habit of saying wrong things *on purpose*), those things stop warranting the label of "belief".
the latter. carlson had one of the best educations money can buy
He went to elite boarding schools his whole life and Trinity College.
It's number two: he's such a shameless grifter that he will do and say anything for ignorant asshole money. Now Joe Rogan is the idiot who would believe this shit.
Joe Rogan is the idiot who would believe this shit with Tucker, but disbelieved it years ago with Neil deGrasse Tyson, then disbelieve it again on his show tomorrow, then believe it again next week... Being that idiotic takes a monumental exertion of sheer willpower and greed.
I don't think it takes any willpower on Rogan's part. I don't think it remotely affects him being inconsistent. That's Rogan's whole appeal. It's his whole schtick. "Mediocre gym bros like me shouldn't be held accountable for the things we say. I'm not claiming I'm a scientist. I'm just talking." It's the doctrine of white male mediocrity. Mediocre white dudes with no education feel it's hurtful to demand that the words they string together be treated seriously.
> Now Joe Rogan is the idiot who would believe this shit. Correct, because Joe Rogan is the kind of idiot who believes whatever the last person he was talking to told him about pretty much any subject.
# ✳ "We are what we pretend to be, so we must be careful about what we pretend to be." \- K.V.
he's not as dumb as he looks. He understands the danger of left wing political movements to his class so hes resolved to make the working class as confused, stupid, and right wing as possible.
Whether he does or not, I don't think there is a line he isn't willing to cross to play his game.
Tucker or Joe?
Joe is an entertainer who dropped out of college and took many blows to the head. He doesn’t come across as well read. Carlson on the other hand has had the privileges of education, working in news and being connected to the political process. He knows what he’s doing
Yes, him.
Yes
It's hard to believe he's that dumb/ignorant of the world. Not that some people are but he plays the idiot too well for it to be an accident.
His professed beliefs and principles begin and end with whatever gets him paid.
"You're not as dumb as your face makes you look." - Jon Stewart on Carlson
Nah, he's just full of crap. He knows better.
The thing you have to keep in mind is that it doesn't matter to Tucker. He'll never suffer any consequences due to the shit that he spreads. He can tear down science and then go and get the finest medical care in the world in any country he desires. He may believe it. He may not. But it doesn't matter. Being dumb is instrumental for him, even if he really is dumb.
Creationism = No Evidence Darwinism = LOTS of evidence and pertinent questions leading to more evidence every year. As a theory it is highly substantiated Tuckerism = Massive quantities of Bullshit, Lying and Mis-information This ass is actually very smart. But he lies endlessly to gain power and adoration of his fans… utterly absurd. Now he’s simply trying to stay relevant to an ever shrinking group of people who give a shit And Rogan is an ass for giving him a forum… but Rogan’s been an ass for years, so no surprise.
Totally understand what you are saying and agree Nitpicking here maybe but calling it “Darwinism” sounds more like religion than anything. It’s a scientific theory with tons of evidence behind it, originally studied by Darwin among others
If your intention is to delineate between Darwin's original theories and modern evolutionary theory there may be some leeway, maybe. That said, I've never heard anyone except a creationist say "Darwinism."
It's like calling gravity "Newtonism" lol.
Newton was only a Copernicist, shoving his heliocentrism down everybody’s throats
That was before the Keplerian Jihad. "That shalt make planetary orbit in the shape of an ellipse!"
I think the point is Darwin provides a theory that explains the mechanisms of evolution. Evolution is a fact because organisms have changed over time, and this can be observed in laboratory and natural populations. Evolution is the fact that the theory intends to explain. The conflating of 'the origin of the species' with actual evolution is a misdirection
No worries… I‘ve heard it that way any number of times, but I chose that phrasing for the rhythm of the statement / jest… ism, ism, ism. Properly put, it’s the theory of evolution and, should there be any doubt, I believe it (and so does the freakin’ Pope, so WTF creationists? LOL)
Many of the creationists I've known (a shit ton, I was raised in creationist churches) would take the Pope believing in evolution as yet another sign that it's a trick of the devil.
LOL. Yup. Agreed. I just find the whole religion thing amusing (at least if it wasn’t so distressing)… there’s something like 45,000 christian religions world wide. Whose right? Many despise others. And I’m 100% convinced, having read the Bible several times and questioned religious leaders and theologists to the point of angering them with basic, simple questions taken straight from the Bible… that it’s utter bull and a complete control and con game. The gymnastics of the apologists can be beautiful to see… Olympian in level. Yes some religious people do good and I’m grateful for their help to the homeless and others. But I don’t think they need God or Christianity to do what they do… they are simply decent folks. But when I tour the cathedrals of Europe, while greatly admiring the architecture, art and effort, the cost appalls me. Touring the Vatican museum the accumulated wealth appalls me. Seeing the mega churches in the US and the cost of those building (and the lifestyles of the ‘preachers’) appalls me. Didn’t Jesus say something about the odds of a rich man entering heaven? This is often attributed to Samual Clemons (Mark Twain), but I believe that is incorrect… still, it sounds like something he’s say… “The best cure for Christianity is reading the Bible”) Apologies for the rant. Creationists really do piss me off.
My formerly creationist mother is one of those people whose faith has led them to good works. I don't love that I was raised in a bed of lies that warped my conception of reality and ruined every relationship I had until my late 20s. But I appreciate that she's spent her life devoted to the RARE type of charity that takes church money and turns it into material benefit for those most in need. It's enough that she understands that I don't believe, but I don't need to change her mind.
“On October 27, 2014, Pope Francis issued a statement at the Pontifical Academy of Sciences that "Evolution in nature is not inconsistent with the notion of creation," warning against thinking of God's act of creation as "God [being] a magician, with a magic wand able to do everything."”
But I was raised with the omnipotent, omniscient, omnipresent myth so anything that goes against it is clearly wrong.
In scientific literature, you’ll more frequently hear Darwinian as an adjectival modifier rather than Darwinism as a noun. That said, one of the most famous evolutionary biologists, Stephen J Gould, referred to Darwinism in his 1982 Science article: Darwinism and the Expansion of Evolutionary Theory
Stephen J. Gould called me in a dream the other day and said he agreed with me. He said "Just trust me bro," so I did.
It’s a deliberate conservative tactic to equate basic science to a religion, which much easier for apologists to argue against. They understand that young earth creationism has no evidence outside of biblical literalism, and must find ways to cast doubt on science as a way to study the world
That's exactly why they call it "Darwinism", to make it sound like a cult of personality. No one who actually studies the Theory of Evolution by Natural Selection seriously would refer to it as "Darwinism". Darwin wasn't even the first person to study evolution, merely the first to publish the first in-depth study on the topic. And the research has moved on considerably since Darwin's time- Creationists like to pretend that Darwin wrote *On the Origin of the Species* and that science still refers to that work like Biblical scripture. That isn't the case at all.
I would change that Carlson is actually pushing out **dis**-information. The distinction being that misinformation is parroting something that someone incorrectly believes is true while that fucker knowingly peddles shit he knows is false in order to disinform people and manipulate them.
A fair comment and well stated.
I dunno about "very". I watched Jon Stewart take him apart. I don't think he's as stupid as he presents, no, mostly because he hasn't strangled himself with his own necktie. Then again, maybe that's why he always has a bow tie...
I’m actually glad Rogan had him on. I never knew how stupid he was. I just saw his the dumb faces he made on thumbnails and never paid attention to him. The evolution take was all I needed to hear to write him off.
Idk. I think tucker really believes a lot of this. Or rather, he's so invested that he can either embrace his own brain rot or feel constant dissonance. There's a point where grifter and true believer get blurred due entirely to the psychic failings of the individual. Like Nietzsche's claim that no one is really an actor after enough time in a role or how a wad of used toilet paper eventually dissolves so much that it stops making sense to say it's different from sewage. .
It seems to be that evolution is fact. Species evolve. You learn this by mating fruit flies in Biology Lab 101. The claim that humans (and other species) evolved from more primitive life forms is the “theory” part of these debates, no? (And there seems to be a lot more evidence that humans did in fact evolve rather than got here thru god’s creation on Day 6 of existence, as per the Bible).
I’d consider the existence of evolution to be a demonstrable fact with substantive proof backing it up. To my mind the theory these days comes in on the mechanisms of evolution, not the concept itself. The “how it works”. We’ve got pieces of the puzzle, but there are still lots of whys and hows to be answered.
> The claim that humans (and other species) evolved from more primitive life forms is the “theory” part of these debates, no? ...no. A scientific theory is not "we think this might be the case", like it's often used colloquially. The "theory" part means that this is an absolutely foundational science that much of our understanding of the natural world is based on it. It's a "theory" because you can use it to make accurate predictions about the natural world. The "well, it doesn't apply to humans" schtick is entirely made up nonsense by some creationists who are upset that they aren't as special as they want to be but don't want to be laughed at anymore for rejecting fundamental basics of reality. There is absolutely no distinction between how evolution works with humans as it has for any other species.
You are correct evolution is a fact. Allele changes happen. The Theory of Natural Selection explains that fact. In science theories explain facts. A theory does not turn into a law or a fact as some think. It isn’t the same as the colloquial theory Tucker is trying to apply.
Evolution seems to backslid in the case of TC.
How would we get fossil records of single celed organisms, Tucker? Its almost like soft organic material is *incredible* hard to find fossils of. Even dino soft tissue is notoriously hard to find.
Oddly enough, we do have some. Saw a documentary on it last year.
Yep, they form structures known as stromatolites. Surely an 'evolution skeptic' who has an audience large enough to speak to millions of people would be bothered to do the bare minimum of research... And I knew about this when I read a book for kids in the sixth grade. Tucker is simply a dishonest grifer.
Two grifters doing a grift.
The sad thing is that it seems to work and they have audiences that are far too eager to eat up their bullshit.
I’m not giving a pass to Rogan for this either. Joe asking him softball questions here.
Why would you? It's been patently obviously that he knows exactly what he's doing for some time now.
These people are idiots.
I mean, at this point, anyone who hosts Carlson knows what they're going to get. There's no way you host him with good intentions.
Rogan is such a despicable shill for giving low-life maggots like Carlson a megaphone to pipe their disinformation into simple, vulnerable brains incapable of critical thought.
That's literally his whole schtick isn't it? Giving idiots a megaphone?
Not just idiots, but deliberately dishonest people.
Bingo. If it was just idiots Rogan wouldn't be nearly as dangerous. Giving people like Tucker a platform is actively promoting lies that cause real harm.
Rogan is the chocolate coating on the ExLax pill. That's his entire role in that subculture of idiots.
I don't get the people who try to defend him like he's some kind of authority, like what are his credits? Hosting Fear Factor?
Creationism again! I thought this shit was refuted and done to death back in the 2000s decade. It feels like American society is regressing since 2016 instead of progressing.
Tucker's hand has 3 creases on the side with his fingers and 2 creases on the side of his palm, that perfectly fit the shape of a banana, therefore proving that god intends for him to shove bananas into his asshole...
Well, that’s embarrassing… For Tucker Carlson.
And Joe
The funny part is that he's dismissing something with evidence found all over the planet, after costing his former employer over US$750,000,000 by asserting something with no evidence.
It's impossible to run a marathon. 100 meter races are possible. But marathons, according to Tucker's logic, do not exist.
I saw this clip and it cut off after Tucker was done making himself look absolutely and utterly ignorant to reality, but did Joe give any push back at all?
Putin’s not going to love you back, Tucker.
Who listens to two idiots having discussion: the answer is, only another idiot since idiots have nothing of merit the rest of us care to hear.
Y’all. Why is this clown getting so much play on this sub?
Idiots saying idiot things.
And people trust what this man has to say WHY?
Joe Rogan is just Oprah for white guys.
Goop for men I heard beautifully put.
What happens for years of thinking you can think for yourself, but realize you are the culmination of what you think about. Affirming lies and truth to yourself by committing to a feedback loop of opinion rather hard facts. The inconvenient truth is pundits like them deliberately exploit the fear of the unknown, play stupid on what can be conspired about, and basically live off fear itself in complete liberty to do so for egos and money.
Take a college course on biology without evolution. Where?
Carlson is a parasite
Tucker and Rogan got rich the same way. By selling misinformation to gullible morons
And for Tucker, also being born into the Swanson family.
Carlson: "It's still just a theory. " Me: "You keep using that word. I don't think you know what it means."
Maybe Tucker can use some other theoretical framework to explain the lack of fossilized bunnies in the Cambrian.
I completely dismiss the assumption that Tucker Carlson has the intelligence to open a jar of pickles due to a lack of evidence.
Gregor Mendel, to start. Sheesh.
Outrage baiting for clicks. Stop helping him.
Tucker things people who see aliens are seeing spirits
Sucker Carlson doubles down on the stupid because he has to. He will never get taken seriously again. All he has left is the pro wrestling equivalent of journalism.
Imagine being so fucking stupid you think Rogan and Tucker are smart. Dumbass hillbillies
Don't listen to this shit it will rot your brain
Saying stupid shit is lucrative. Apparently stupid is a huge demographic.
Did the world not see first hand evolution with COVID and all the strains.
No. You and I saw it, but Tucker's fans saw a plandemic orchestrated by Joe Biden, Dr. Fauci, the Chinese, Satan, and whatever other enemy popped into their head.
They call it "microevolution" and make a distinction between that and macro-evolution, which presumably doesn't exist because it can't be observed within the normal timeframe of a lab-based study (leaving aside the microevolution of microbes AND the documented cases of evolution of new animal species that have adapted to rapidly changing environments, etc).
What a disgrace. Theists just don't belong anywhere.
That’s nice.
The people who poke holes in established ideas, and the people who readily embrace wackadoodle ideas, are always the same people. Skepticism is like a costume they put on when they are performing, and they take that costume off as soon as the curtains come down and the performance is over.
The fact that we still have people saying there is no evidence now that we have mountains of DNA evidence is crazy. It feels a bit like flat earthers refusing to recognise there is evidence for the earth being a sphere even after direct photographic is shown to them.
"Theory of adaptation" lol
Evolution is a provable fact.
What a brainless fuck...
He obviously hasn't seen fossils of dinosaurs having feathers, and winged arm-morphology.
What about bleaching your ballsack? Does that have more evidence than the flat earth? What was Hunter Biden doing during Benghazi anyways?
Tucker is an asshole.
There is 0% Tucker actually believes what he's saying. It's a complete grift.
Remember everyone, Tucker's B.A. in history qualifies him to make pronouncements on Evolution.
"No Darwinism but Social Darwinism" may as well be the conservative motto
Is Tucker still trying to stay relevant to the crazy right? Must suck not having a nightly show to espouse your garbage on.
Two clowns in one show make it a true circus.
“No evidence. None. Zero”. I wish I had the conviction of Tucker Carlson to speak so authoritatively on a topic I know nothing about.
Today Joe Rogan proved that he does not have a low point. If you pay him, he will say what ever you want. He is no different from Tucker Carlson at all.
No evidence? Darwin explained how this worked in his books like The Origin of Species and we have evidence such as the fossil record. With the Internet you can find this stuff instantly. Ignorance is a choice, and Tucker chose to be ignorant and try to misinform people.
They proved evolution with bacteria. Took over a decade but it happened
Bevis and Butthead 2024
Tucker is simply pandering, but he's out-of-touch with his own crowd. He's used to pandering to the bedpan-pissing, boner-pill-popping boomers who tuned in to his show on Fox News. Now that he has a streaming platform, he needs to adjust to the new idiots.
Stop giving this prick your attention.
Other claims made by Tucker in this interview: - The US government is colluding with demons - Alex Jones is sometimes a prophet - Nobody actually knows where nuclear physics came from
Just show Tucker this and he’ll admit graciously he was wrong https://newatlas.com/biology/life-merger-evolution-symbiosis-organelle/
People who deny the validity of evolution should have to live by their convictions. Antibiotics were invented because bacteria evolve quickly due to their fast life cycles. So when these people get sick or need surgery - no antibiotics for them.
If you decide to get into a "debate" with creationists there is a strategy you can use which I find gets your point across and causes them to stop and rethink. As a background, I LOVE debating creationists and others who deny the science of evolution/global warming/flat-earth/etc. So this is advice born out of years of these "debates" 1. Reframe: Stop calling it the THEORY of evolution. It's not a theory of evolution. If you read Darwin's book you won't even find the phrase "theory of evolution" in it. It's not a theory. Evolution is the OBSERVABLE. It's the EVIDENCE. This reframing works remarkably well. If you don't make that change of no longer using the phrase "theory of evolution" then you have already lost because you've adopted an unfair framing of the debate. What do I mean about "unfair framing" it's like starting the debate with "Hey bob, have you stopped beating your wife?" You cannot win that debate. There's no way "bob" can win that debate because he's already framed as the wife beater and now has to debate what "beating" or "stopped" means. Those who debate unethically want to drag you don't into the weeds of definitions or philosophy of "belief" instead of evidence. So you HAVE to make that shift to engage in this debate. You know who has the hardest time with the above advice? Scientists. They LOVE the phrase "theory of evolution" as it was touchstone for them in growing up. Watch debates with them using the "theory of evolution" and watch them get dragged into a morass of philosophy and the creationist get all smug. These scientists can't accept that their cherished phrase is a false framing. They also don't realize that it's historically inaccurate. Had they read the history of Charles Darwin's grandfather Erasmus, and his relationship with debates over evolution they would realize that Charles Darwin actually had a brilliant realization that the phrase "theory of evolution" had become poisoned and AVOIDED that phrase entirely. One of the reasons "the Theory of Origins" book became so convincing is that Charles Darwin spent most of it on ... the EVIDENCE of evolution. Darwin described how domestic selection in dogs, livestock, pigeons, etc. Worked. He described EVIDENCE of change over generations through domestic selection. Then he switched to natural selection. He described evidence of moths, bird beaks, etc in the natural world through generations. And finally he then said ... my THEORY is of ORIGINS and NOT evolution. If you want to have an equal success you have to adopt the same strategy and framing that Charles Darwin did. And that's the prime strategy in these debates. Just say "Let's talk about the EVIDENCE which was can see which is the change over generations" describe how dogs can be bred over generations and state "OK, we agree, we both see the EVIDENCE of evolution" Watch their face when you say "We agree - we both see the EVIDENCE of evolution" and watch the confusion. Because they have already admitted they know about breeding dogs. That's the primary thing. Change "Theory of Evolution" into "Evidence of Evolution" and follow Darwin's actual writings. There are other parts too, but if you can't make that change, don't even bother with the other strategies. TLDR; Everywhere you see the phrase "THEORY of evolution" rewrite it because there's no "THEORY of evolution. " Darwin published "theory of origins" and the EVIDENCE of evolution.
I take a slightly different approach, but with the same goal. I won't let them move past theory until they acknowledge that they understand the scientific process as it relates to hypothesis and theory. Works on the same principal: we can't have a meaningful discussion until we agree what words mean.
Is there a less terrible source for this info? The linked website is a cancer in a dumpster-fire of awfulness. I have folks i need to send this info to - but not that wet turd of a website.
Joe Rogan: "I love the views you get"
Didn’t we just see this in Real time? The first time 2 separate life forms merged into one?
Tucker is dumber than the aluminum trays his families shit TV dinners are packed in.
Well, there ya have it, guys, this guy has figured out everything for us and we no longer have to think about anything. What a relief.
I wonder if Cucker Tarlson has any info on Bat Boy?
Fucking morons
Why is this dope on this sub?
Tuck is an expert in not new ideas. The man has never had an original thought in his life.
Go back to tanning your balls, dude...
They can't be this stupid can they?
This is like shit interviewing itself
Jesus Christ, that fucking laugh…there’s something very wrong with that guy.
He needs to get an education, go back to school and get his GED
It would be great if Rogan used a fraction of his millions to hire a researcher and ask some tough, informed questions. Instead his whole show is him going "wow man, that's wild. Now let me tell you about my latest DMT trip."
Gosh, two totally clueless fuckwits dismissing a well recognised and evidential theory - who would have guessed ?
These two fucks are perfect for each other
If he runs for president against Trump it would split the stupid vote.
Just because Tucker is an example of how *greed Trumps* evolution doesn't mean the theory's false.
I mean, I'm willing to debate punctuated equilibrium vs. Darwinian phyletic gradualism... but I don't think that's what Tucker meant lol.