Credulous is the word.
Under the guise of objectivity he gives all fringe opinions equal significance.
Edit: here's a good explanation: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zZAQYI_hYp0
this post was submitted on 17 Aug 2023
771 points (100.0% liked)
> Greentext
77 readers
10 users here now
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
His mind's so open his brain fell out
But it was so small nobody could find it
I'm okay with skeptical and verifying but he doesn't challenge all his guests equally. I'm not saying he should be perfect, but there are some really far out ideas that need more questioning before I'm personally satisfied.
His show is entertainment first and foremost. That means glorifying stupid bullshit for the entertainment value of it.
Most hard science is boring. Most fringe theory thinking is dramatic and thrilling.
Speak for yourself. Hard science isn't boring to me.
Spot on
I would rather someone excitedly tell me about how gravitational lensing is usedto view a black hole over listening to some fuckwit go on about how there is an Ice wall around the flat earth patrolled by Navies to prevent the truth that Nasa faked Australia coming out.
Nasa faked Australia
As an Australian, this is wild and I want to know more.
Edit: Woah. https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/australia-doesnt-exit-people-who-live-actors-paid-nasa-kurt-nielsen
I guess this is why he is successful. Entertaining.
I love that though. I want to hear these wack jobs talk. I don’t listen to get smarter, just like I don’t go to McDonalds for a fine cooked meal.
load more comments
(3 replies)
He is a moron
Can't tell if you're referring to Rogan or the Anon in the post?
Joe - of course! :D
The problem with Rogan is that he doesn't have the knowledge or qualifications to push back against people spewing bullshit on his show, and so he ends up essentially making fringe, pseudo-scientific ideas seem equal to the mainstream expert consensus view.
the problem with rogan is that he agrees with the worst people on his show. he doesn't push back because he doesn't want to. he peaked on news radio.
And the outspoken wrong on the show people are oftentimes cool and charismatic, so people trust them.
This is good shit
I stopped listening to his podcasts when I realised he doesn't know the facts and spews what he believes are facts. I admire him to hold a conversation for as long as he does and keep it somewhat entertaining but beyond that it's nothing more than pseudo science.
Seems to me a lot of people here pretty hostile to Joe. I can only say he has been more than open and interacted with good faith with guests that I listen to than anyone in "media". His talk with Bernie Sanders and his agreement with certain aspects of Sanders agenda should dismiss the claim that he's a libertarian shill. I try to approach him as a topic in good faith as well.
He's being called a neandertal because he seems to agree with a lot of fringe opinions. I try to think of how I would react if talking to a person who I have no idea about their area of expertise and how I would deal with claims that they make. Sure he gives a voice to cranks, but he also gives voice to people across the spectrum, some that I actually want other people to hear from. That's kind of what free speech is about right there.
Sure he has some left-leaning guests, but he also claims that January 6th was instigated by the FBI, and pushes an anti-healthcare agenda. The ire he gets is well earned and justified.
Do you really trust someone who took numerous traumatic hits to the head to give solid political and health advice?
I'd have to look at those claims to know if that's actually true. It may be, but media/internet hyperbole is so overplayed I'd wager it isn't actually true. Like I said though. I don't know about that specific instance.
The thing is, if the FBI hadn't framed so many Muslims in the US, during the war on terror or fascilitated the Whitmer kidnapping, maybe claims like that wouldn't gain traction as easily.
He’s being called a neanderthal because he seems to agree with a lot of fringe opinions.
I mean that's just a symptom of the biggest complaint about him. He's really gullible. He's not malicious, but god damn he does not notice a liar when a liar is in front of him. Genuinely I do love his long form content, I love how people can go off topic with him, but some of the people he brings on really should be going in front of Jon Stewart instead.
Like... here's an example of someone clearly lying, dodging questions, and genuinely being sketchy. He's gotten a bit better but would Joe Rogan push this hard against somebody? If someone dodges his question, how well does he bring the topic back to it? Joe Rogan is great when everyone is there in good faith, but would you want him in your corner if you're stuck in a timeshare conference?
This is kind of where I'm coming from. I'm not a regular listener of his so my views may be outdated. I just think a lot of malice is dumped on him that I don't think is necessarily fair. That being said, he is a public figure so being dumb only gets you so far as an excuse.
I also like long form stuff, and I like to talk to people who know things, so at least in an ideal sense I'm positive on his format. B
😂 for the timeshare conference
Pushing a livestock dewormer as effective protection against COVID puts him about the same level as Gwyneth Paltrow selling pussy candles and whatever other dumb shit she's hawking these days.
I'm also tired of "libertarian" being a dirty word. Far as I know, classical libertarians aren't the Randian capitalist sociopaths the right fawns over, yet it's another thing the right has co-opted and fucking soiled, much like the Gadsden Flag.
Thank you for sharing this gift with us
Fuck me this is hilarious
Listening to the podcast "History of philosophy without any gaps" there's some philosophers, specially in middle age Arabic societies, that had the patronage of warlords, and would change patron for the new warlords who killed their previous one.
