Not one of them, not a single one, even mentions the possibility that they understand why the British voted to Leave on the grounds of sovereignty and democracy. Most of them claim to love the UK, they do not love it, because love means understanding. Nor does the concept that Britain is admirable BECAUSE it is different and seeks self-rule and tries to be properly democratic even enter their tiny minds
Fuck em
Your post is a great example of world leading empathy and self awareness.
Roughly a minimum of 10x those who chose to leave, even after Covid destroyed many EU citizens jobs here.
But, whatever. Remainers need to moan, we get that.
Brexiteers need to moan about Remainers, we get that. Indeed it's the very lifeblood of some PBers.
And some pro-Indy Scot PBers need to moan about how bad the rest of the U.K. is, the country is awful etc etc. We get that too.
When I moan about the UK I am including Scotland , it is no paradise and is almost as crap as UK at present.
Funnily enough, I wasn’t thinking of you when I made that comment but more the likes of @Theuniondivvie who seems to portray Scotland as some sort of paradise as compared to the hell hole of the U.K.
I was not insinuating you were MrEd , just adding my tuppence worth. I for one don't see Scotland as it is as any paradise, big changes needed for sure and they will never happen whilst we are in the union. May not happen when independent but at least there will be a chance then.
You may even vote in a Scon government post independence
Unlikely, Scotland would become like Sweden, generally voting in social democratic governments like now, whether SNP or Labour. Only way the Conservatives would get in is with a broad alliance with the Liberals as in Sweden
Excuse me but you have no idea what the Scots would do post independence and away from Boris and Westminster
Someday Sturgeon and the SNP will have run their course and a Scon government is not at all impossible
An independent Scotland would be one of the most leftwing nations in the world. A centre right party might get about 30% on a good day, that is it. It would need the Liberals to ever form a government.
Scotland is only marginally more left wing than England. The SNP soak up a lot of @malcolmg types, so obscure the number of right wingers.
And centre-right is relative. The Tories are nearer US Dems than GOP nowadays.
Where do you get me for SNP, I am interested in independence NOT some two bit political party. @Eabhal
Hence "type". I would never accuse you of such a thing
I see its gets Joe Rogan day again....i thought it was highly amusing that Neil Young has been a big fan of RFK jnr, a massive conspiracy theorist and an anti-vaxxer...due to also spreading bullshit about GMO crops. So RFK good, despite spreading antivaxxer nonsense, Joe Rogan bad.
I would imagine far more people subscribe to Spotify for Joe Rogan than they do for Joni Mitchell….
He gets 11m listeners per show. it is enormous. And they last 3-4 hours sometimes
i actually listened to the Robert Malone interview. It was exhaustive, often boring, highly detailed, and I still do not believe the anti vax stuff
But it was not hysterical misinformation. Malone is an important scientist and was a key figure in the invention of mRNA tech. He has to be listened to
WTF with some decrepit old billionaire rock star telling me what I can and cannot hear?
I find Joe Rogan very interesting and the idea that he is a right wing conspiracy theory peddler is bollocks. What he does - and I suspect why he gets specifically targeted - is allow guests who views are unorthodox (but, crucially, not nut job) to state their point of view. He also does his research and asks very targeted and detailed questions.
Yes, he’s brilliant and he does his research and he knows his shit and he lets interesting people of all types say their stuff, but then challenges them
There is a reason he gets 11m people a show and CNN gets 800,000
800,000! It is risibly poor
Rogan is the essence of American Free Speech and if a bunch of woke old rockstars get him cancelled it will be the saddest thing, and Putin might as well invade all of us, and we can let Xi take over the whole internet, because then the West is over
There is something incredibly ironic that all these liberal hippy types want him cancelled....
Yes. For some reason they have forgotten… the 1960s and 70s
I've heard the Rogan name. Could you or somebody else summarise his views? (I'll not hang you on it)
Anti-authority, anti-Government, anything that stirs it all up. Personally I find some of his views over the top and too extreme but not in a BNP sort of way. I don't object to him, just don't really get much out of him as it is difficult to pick the wheat from the chaff. Some stuff he is very right on, a lot he is very wrong on - in my opinion.
If you are interested in a particular niche subject, from UFOs to vaccines to boxing to atheism to AI, you will often learn more from a JR podcast with an absolute insider, than you will watching any amount of normal TV. The equivalent is probably reading three or four quality books, but more timely and contemporary than books (because books are always a bit out of date)
You do need to sieve them out tho. Here’s a pretty handy list detailing some of the best
He doesn't have a deep carefully crafted consistent intellectual world ideology, he is a cage fighting commentator who likes talking to interesting people. He doesn't seem himself like Prof Peston as some amateur expert on every subject.
Its the fact that interesting people are happy to go and talk to him, because he gives them time and space to explain their subject and bright enough to ask the sort of question most normal people want to ask an expert.
"cage fighting commentator " - surely therefore an idiot? Am I missing anything?
Yes, everything
The funniest part is that what Rogan, Sam Harris et al. have shown is there is real appetite for long form conversations with interesting people.
What does the mainstream do, 5 min interviews which they interrupt most of the time, ask the most irrelevant questions missing the key points or start arguing with an expert that they are wrong / they know better e.g. Peston with JVT. Or CNNs towering intellectuals like Don Lemon and formerly Chris Cuomo at peak time. And their ratings tank.
I see its gets Joe Rogan day again....i thought it was highly amusing that Neil Young has been a big fan of RFK jnr, a massive conspiracy theorist and an anti-vaxxer...due to also spreading bullshit about GMO crops. So RFK good, despite spreading antivaxxer nonsense, Joe Rogan bad.
I would imagine far more people subscribe to Spotify for Joe Rogan than they do for Joni Mitchell….
He gets 11m listeners per show. it is enormous. And they last 3-4 hours sometimes
i actually listened to the Robert Malone interview. It was exhaustive, often boring, highly detailed, and I still do not believe the anti vax stuff
But it was not hysterical misinformation. Malone is an important scientist and was a key figure in the invention of mRNA tech. He has to be listened to
WTF with some decrepit old billionaire rock star telling me what I can and cannot hear?
I find Joe Rogan very interesting and the idea that he is a right wing conspiracy theory peddler is bollocks. What he does - and I suspect why he gets specifically targeted - is allow guests who views are unorthodox (but, crucially, not nut job) to state their point of view. He also does his research and asks very targeted and detailed questions.
Yes, he’s brilliant and he does his research and he knows his shit and he lets interesting people of all types say their stuff, but then challenges them
There is a reason he gets 11m people a show and CNN gets 800,000
800,000! It is risibly poor
Rogan is the essence of American Free Speech and if a bunch of woke old rockstars get him cancelled it will be the saddest thing, and Putin might as well invade all of us, and we can let Xi take over the whole internet, because then the West is over
There is something incredibly ironic that all these liberal hippy types want him cancelled....
Yes. For some reason they have forgotten… the 1960s and 70s
I've heard the Rogan name. Could you or somebody else summarise his views? (I'll not hang you on it)
Anti-authority, anti-Government, anything that stirs it all up. Personally I find some of his views over the top and too extreme but not in a BNP sort of way. I don't object to him, just don't really get much out of him as it is difficult to pick the wheat from the chaff. Some stuff he is very right on, a lot he is very wrong on - in my opinion.
If you are interested in a particular niche subject, from UFOs to vaccines to boxing to atheism to AI, you will often learn more from a JR podcast with an absolute insider, than you will watching any amount of normal TV. The equivalent is probably reading three or four quality books, but more timely and contemporary than books (because books are always a bit out of date)
You do need to sieve them out tho. Here’s a pretty handy list detailing some of the best
He doesn't have a deep carefully crafted consistent intellectual world ideology, he is a cage fighting commentator who likes talking to interesting people. He doesn't seem himself like Prof Peston as some amateur expert on every subject.
Its the fact that interesting people are happy to go and talk to him, because he gives them time and space to explain their subject and bright enough to ask the sort of question most normal people want to ask an expert.
"cage fighting commentator " - surely therefore an idiot? Am I missing anything?
I think your personal prejudices are showing. Dan Hardy and Dominick Cruz also commentate on cage fighting, both highly intelligent and articulate.
Joe Rogan isn't a genius, but he doesn't pretend to be. He is a normal bloke, who does some reading, but has the ability to bring the best out of guests by asking pertinent questions.
I partly disagree. I suspect he is a bit of a genius. His ability to master any of a trillion subjects (in a few days?) so he can ask exactly the right questions, is almost unique. If it weren’t unique he wouldn’t be earning $30m a year. It’s not like he\s amazingly handsome or whatever. Anyone could do what he does, theoretically, but he does it better than anyone. And he knows how to charm and disarm - which is crucial
So often I’ve listened to a podcast and thought, OK, so ask him or her THIS, and then Rogan does exactly that. This is not a feeling you get in TV news interviews, which are brief, perfunctory, embarrassingly trivial and in politics generally just a series of gotcha moments when the journalist tries to get famous. Rogan does not do that
If not quite a genius he is very very smart, and has a vanishingly rare talent for spoken interviews
Johnson 16 years ago explaining strategy of "making so many gaffes media doesn't know which to concentrate on." Hat tip @david_herdson
Good spot.
Highlights the problem that Boris (and by extension, the rest of us) has.
If you are a journalist, setting off squibs for the amusement of the public, it's easy and cost-free to do dozens of gaffes all at once. Words will never hurt me, right?
If you're running a real country inhabited by real people, it's not just a game any more. Those bricks you chuck hit actual objects, damage actual lives.
The fundamental trouble with Johnson, Cummings, the Spiked crowd, Sunak, Truss, the whole rancid lot of 'em, is they are behaving as if it is just a game.
I think your personal prejudices are showing. Dan Hardy and Dominick Cruz also commentate on cage fighting, both highly intelligent and articulate.
Joe Rogan isn't a genius, but he doesn't pretend to be. He is a normal bloke, who does some reading, but has the ability to bring the best out of guests by asking pertinent questions.
normal blokes tend not to take horse worming pills when they catch covid.
If you're running a real country inhabited by real people, it's not just a game any more. Those bricks you chuck hit actual objects, damage actual lives.
The fundamental trouble with Johnson, Cummings, the Spiked crowd, Sunak, Truss, the whole rancid lot of 'em, is they are behaving as if it is just a game.
But the lives that get damaged are never their own.
I see its gets Joe Rogan day again....i thought it was highly amusing that Neil Young has been a big fan of RFK jnr, a massive conspiracy theorist and an anti-vaxxer...due to also spreading bullshit about GMO crops. So RFK good, despite spreading antivaxxer nonsense, Joe Rogan bad.
I would imagine far more people subscribe to Spotify for Joe Rogan than they do for Joni Mitchell….
He gets 11m listeners per show. it is enormous. And they last 3-4 hours sometimes
i actually listened to the Robert Malone interview. It was exhaustive, often boring, highly detailed, and I still do not believe the anti vax stuff
But it was not hysterical misinformation. Malone is an important scientist and was a key figure in the invention of mRNA tech. He has to be listened to
WTF with some decrepit old billionaire rock star telling me what I can and cannot hear?
I find Joe Rogan very interesting and the idea that he is a right wing conspiracy theory peddler is bollocks. What he does - and I suspect why he gets specifically targeted - is allow guests who views are unorthodox (but, crucially, not nut job) to state their point of view. He also does his research and asks very targeted and detailed questions.
Yes, he’s brilliant and he does his research and he knows his shit and he lets interesting people of all types say their stuff, but then challenges them
There is a reason he gets 11m people a show and CNN gets 800,000
800,000! It is risibly poor
Rogan is the essence of American Free Speech and if a bunch of woke old rockstars get him cancelled it will be the saddest thing, and Putin might as well invade all of us, and we can let Xi take over the whole internet, because then the West is over
There is something incredibly ironic that all these liberal hippy types want him cancelled....
Yes. For some reason they have forgotten… the 1960s and 70s
I've heard the Rogan name. Could you or somebody else summarise his views? (I'll not hang you on it)
Anti-authority, anti-Government, anything that stirs it all up. Personally I find some of his views over the top and too extreme but not in a BNP sort of way. I don't object to him, just don't really get much out of him as it is difficult to pick the wheat from the chaff. Some stuff he is very right on, a lot he is very wrong on - in my opinion.
If you are interested in a particular niche subject, from UFOs to vaccines to boxing to atheism to AI, you will often learn more from a JR podcast with an absolute insider, than you will watching any amount of normal TV. The equivalent is probably reading three or four quality books, but more timely and contemporary than books (because books are always a bit out of date)
You do need to sieve them out tho. Here’s a pretty handy list detailing some of the best
He doesn't have a deep carefully crafted consistent intellectual world ideology, he is a cage fighting commentator who likes talking to interesting people. He doesn't seem himself like Prof Peston as some amateur expert on every subject.
Its the fact that interesting people are happy to go and talk to him, because he gives them time and space to explain their subject and bright enough to ask the sort of question most normal people want to ask an expert.
"cage fighting commentator " - surely therefore an idiot? Am I missing anything?
Yes, everything
Educate me!
Subscribe to Spotify. Choose your niche subjects. Listen to five of the most recommended JRE podcasts on those subjects. Give them a go
You can listen to them while you are cooking, walking, exercising, lying in bed, drinking in bed, recovering from filthy sex, preparing for filthy sex, choosing a cigar in Havana, whatever
If you still think he’s an idiot cage fighting commentator, then fair enough, you tried
I was very skeptical until I got into them a couple of years ago
I see its gets Joe Rogan day again....i thought it was highly amusing that Neil Young has been a big fan of RFK jnr, a massive conspiracy theorist and an anti-vaxxer...due to also spreading bullshit about GMO crops. So RFK good, despite spreading antivaxxer nonsense, Joe Rogan bad.
I would imagine far more people subscribe to Spotify for Joe Rogan than they do for Joni Mitchell….
He gets 11m listeners per show. it is enormous. And they last 3-4 hours sometimes
i actually listened to the Robert Malone interview. It was exhaustive, often boring, highly detailed, and I still do not believe the anti vax stuff
But it was not hysterical misinformation. Malone is an important scientist and was a key figure in the invention of mRNA tech. He has to be listened to
WTF with some decrepit old billionaire rock star telling me what I can and cannot hear?
I find Joe Rogan very interesting and the idea that he is a right wing conspiracy theory peddler is bollocks. What he does - and I suspect why he gets specifically targeted - is allow guests who views are unorthodox (but, crucially, not nut job) to state their point of view. He also does his research and asks very targeted and detailed questions.
Yes, he’s brilliant and he does his research and he knows his shit and he lets interesting people of all types say their stuff, but then challenges them
There is a reason he gets 11m people a show and CNN gets 800,000
800,000! It is risibly poor
Rogan is the essence of American Free Speech and if a bunch of woke old rockstars get him cancelled it will be the saddest thing, and Putin might as well invade all of us, and we can let Xi take over the whole internet, because then the West is over
There is something incredibly ironic that all these liberal hippy types want him cancelled....
Yes. For some reason they have forgotten… the 1960s and 70s
I've heard the Rogan name. Could you or somebody else summarise his views? (I'll not hang you on it)
Anti-authority, anti-Government, anything that stirs it all up. Personally I find some of his views over the top and too extreme but not in a BNP sort of way. I don't object to him, just don't really get much out of him as it is difficult to pick the wheat from the chaff. Some stuff he is very right on, a lot he is very wrong on - in my opinion.
If you are interested in a particular niche subject, from UFOs to vaccines to boxing to atheism to AI, you will often learn more from a JR podcast with an absolute insider, than you will watching any amount of normal TV. The equivalent is probably reading three or four quality books, but more timely and contemporary than books (because books are always a bit out of date)
You do need to sieve them out tho. Here’s a pretty handy list detailing some of the best
He doesn't have a deep carefully crafted consistent intellectual world ideology, he is a cage fighting commentator who likes talking to interesting people. He doesn't seem himself like Prof Peston as some amateur expert on every subject.
Its the fact that interesting people are happy to go and talk to him, because he gives them time and space to explain their subject and bright enough to ask the sort of question most normal people want to ask an expert.
"cage fighting commentator " - surely therefore an idiot? Am I missing anything?
I think your personal prejudices are showing. Dan Hardy and Dominick Cruz also commentate on cage fighting, both highly intelligent and articulate.
Joe Rogan isn't a genius, but he doesn't pretend to be. He is a normal bloke, who does some reading, but has the ability to bring the best out of guests by asking pertinent questions.
I partly disagree. I suspect he is a bit of a genius. His ability to master any of a trillion subjects (in a few days?) so he can ask exactly the right questions, is almost unique. If it weren’t unique he wouldn’t be earning $30m a year. It’s not like he\s amazingly handsome or whatever. Anyone could do what he does, theoretically, but he does it better than anyone. And he knows how to charm and disarm - which is crucial
So often I’ve listened to a podcast and thought, OK, so ask him or her THIS, and then Rogan does exactly that. This is not a feeling you get in TV news interviews, which are brief, perfunctory, embarrassingly trivial and in politics generally just a series of gotcha moments when the journalist tries to get famous. Rogan does not do that
If not quite a genius he is very very smart, and has a vanishingly rare talent for spoken interviews
Well if you stooping baldheads can't agree why it's pointless then I guess I may have to find out for myself. Sunday morning Rogan. Perhaps little Josh.
normal blokes tend not to take horse worming pills when they catch covid.
Except he didn't take "horse deworming pills". He went to his doctor and said I will take whatever your think will help. He was prescribed a whole load of things, including the human form of Ivermectin, monoclonal antibodies etc.
It is still very doubtful if Ivermectin does anything, but it has been given to billions of people for various conditions and is safe for human consumption.
I see its gets Joe Rogan day again....i thought it was highly amusing that Neil Young has been a big fan of RFK jnr, a massive conspiracy theorist and an anti-vaxxer...due to also spreading bullshit about GMO crops. So RFK good, despite spreading antivaxxer nonsense, Joe Rogan bad.
I would imagine far more people subscribe to Spotify for Joe Rogan than they do for Joni Mitchell….
He gets 11m listeners per show. it is enormous. And they last 3-4 hours sometimes
i actually listened to the Robert Malone interview. It was exhaustive, often boring, highly detailed, and I still do not believe the anti vax stuff
But it was not hysterical misinformation. Malone is an important scientist and was a key figure in the invention of mRNA tech. He has to be listened to
WTF with some decrepit old billionaire rock star telling me what I can and cannot hear?
I find Joe Rogan very interesting and the idea that he is a right wing conspiracy theory peddler is bollocks. What he does - and I suspect why he gets specifically targeted - is allow guests who views are unorthodox (but, crucially, not nut job) to state their point of view. He also does his research and asks very targeted and detailed questions.
Yes, he’s brilliant and he does his research and he knows his shit and he lets interesting people of all types say their stuff, but then challenges them
There is a reason he gets 11m people a show and CNN gets 800,000
800,000! It is risibly poor
Rogan is the essence of American Free Speech and if a bunch of woke old rockstars get him cancelled it will be the saddest thing, and Putin might as well invade all of us, and we can let Xi take over the whole internet, because then the West is over
There is something incredibly ironic that all these liberal hippy types want him cancelled....
Yes. For some reason they have forgotten… the 1960s and 70s
I've heard the Rogan name. Could you or somebody else summarise his views? (I'll not hang you on it)
Anti-authority, anti-Government, anything that stirs it all up. Personally I find some of his views over the top and too extreme but not in a BNP sort of way. I don't object to him, just don't really get much out of him as it is difficult to pick the wheat from the chaff. Some stuff he is very right on, a lot he is very wrong on - in my opinion.
If you are interested in a particular niche subject, from UFOs to vaccines to boxing to atheism to AI, you will often learn more from a JR podcast with an absolute insider, than you will watching any amount of normal TV. The equivalent is probably reading three or four quality books, but more timely and contemporary than books (because books are always a bit out of date)
You do need to sieve them out tho. Here’s a pretty handy list detailing some of the best
He doesn't have a deep carefully crafted consistent intellectual world ideology, he is a cage fighting commentator who likes talking to interesting people. He doesn't seem himself like Prof Peston as some amateur expert on every subject.
Its the fact that interesting people are happy to go and talk to him, because he gives them time and space to explain their subject and bright enough to ask the sort of question most normal people want to ask an expert.
"cage fighting commentator " - surely therefore an idiot? Am I missing anything?
Yes, everything
Educate me!
Subscribe to Spotify. Choose your niche subjects. Listen to five of the most recommended JRE podcasts on those subjects. Give them a go
You can listen to them while you are cooking, walking, exercising, lying in bed, drinking in bed, recovering from filthy sex, preparing for filthy sex, choosing a cigar in Havana, whatever
If you still think he’s an idiot cage fighting commentator, then fair enough, you tried
I was very skeptical until I got into them a couple of years ago
An idea is valid no matter it's source - I think I first heard that idea from the film 'Darkstar'.
I think your personal prejudices are showing. Dan Hardy and Dominick Cruz also commentate on cage fighting, both highly intelligent and articulate.
Joe Rogan isn't a genius, but he doesn't pretend to be. He is a normal bloke, who does some reading, but has the ability to bring the best out of guests by asking pertinent questions.
normal blokes tend not to take horse worming pills when they catch covid.
PB is awash with silly comments (including mine), but that is irredeemably stupid.
If you're going to go after someone for spouting nonsense, don't talk shit yourself. A quick look on wiki suggests it can be a useful drug for humans, particularly in the developing world.
I see its gets Joe Rogan day again....i thought it was highly amusing that Neil Young has been a big fan of RFK jnr, a massive conspiracy theorist and an anti-vaxxer...due to also spreading bullshit about GMO crops. So RFK good, despite spreading antivaxxer nonsense, Joe Rogan bad.
I would imagine far more people subscribe to Spotify for Joe Rogan than they do for Joni Mitchell….
He gets 11m listeners per show. it is enormous. And they last 3-4 hours sometimes
i actually listened to the Robert Malone interview. It was exhaustive, often boring, highly detailed, and I still do not believe the anti vax stuff
But it was not hysterical misinformation. Malone is an important scientist and was a key figure in the invention of mRNA tech. He has to be listened to
WTF with some decrepit old billionaire rock star telling me what I can and cannot hear?
I find Joe Rogan very interesting and the idea that he is a right wing conspiracy theory peddler is bollocks. What he does - and I suspect why he gets specifically targeted - is allow guests who views are unorthodox (but, crucially, not nut job) to state their point of view. He also does his research and asks very targeted and detailed questions.
Yes, he’s brilliant and he does his research and he knows his shit and he lets interesting people of all types say their stuff, but then challenges them
There is a reason he gets 11m people a show and CNN gets 800,000
800,000! It is risibly poor
Rogan is the essence of American Free Speech and if a bunch of woke old rockstars get him cancelled it will be the saddest thing, and Putin might as well invade all of us, and we can let Xi take over the whole internet, because then the West is over
There is something incredibly ironic that all these liberal hippy types want him cancelled....
Yes. For some reason they have forgotten… the 1960s and 70s
I've heard the Rogan name. Could you or somebody else summarise his views? (I'll not hang you on it)
Anti-authority, anti-Government, anything that stirs it all up. Personally I find some of his views over the top and too extreme but not in a BNP sort of way. I don't object to him, just don't really get much out of him as it is difficult to pick the wheat from the chaff. Some stuff he is very right on, a lot he is very wrong on - in my opinion.
If he's wrong on it, at least is it interesting?
Yes what I have heard has been very interesting. Even when it is several hours long. My problem, and the reason I don't listen to him as much as perhaps I would otherwise do, is that on some subjects such as the anti-vax stuff I do find him very partial and that frustrates and angers me.
Thinking back on the Graygate saga, feels like one of two things is true: 1. She has uncovered some serious shit that the police really need to dig into with a clear slate. Like Perverting the Course of Justice 2. Its a cover-up. Doesn't look good for the system to have the PM and civil service breaking the rules on such a grand scale, so go all in and have a compliant Met bury it.
Still not sure which it is. Would be good news for Boris and his off-shore fan club if it wasn't for this simple truth: there is more to come. Boris is not an honest politician, not a competent politician and is almost certain to have done a lot more than we already know. And thats not just parties, its the flat refurb, PPE contracts, the whole smash.
So the "he'll get away with this and people will move on" hope is built on this being the lot. Such hopes have been expressed before. And every time more pain is leaked to the press...
The storm is already blowing over. People are moving on. The Conservatives have had a strong poll recovery this week with one poll even having a tiny 4% Labour lead.
Tonight's poll with opinium will confirm a further swing towards the Conservatives.
There's been a couple of MOE moves. I'm not convinced people are moving on based on reportage / vox pops / Daily Mail comments. The opposite in fact.
I see its gets Joe Rogan day again....i thought it was highly amusing that Neil Young has been a big fan of RFK jnr, a massive conspiracy theorist and an anti-vaxxer...due to also spreading bullshit about GMO crops. So RFK good, despite spreading antivaxxer nonsense, Joe Rogan bad.
I would imagine far more people subscribe to Spotify for Joe Rogan than they do for Joni Mitchell….
He gets 11m listeners per show. it is enormous. And they last 3-4 hours sometimes
i actually listened to the Robert Malone interview. It was exhaustive, often boring, highly detailed, and I still do not believe the anti vax stuff
But it was not hysterical misinformation. Malone is an important scientist and was a key figure in the invention of mRNA tech. He has to be listened to
WTF with some decrepit old billionaire rock star telling me what I can and cannot hear?
I find Joe Rogan very interesting and the idea that he is a right wing conspiracy theory peddler is bollocks. What he does - and I suspect why he gets specifically targeted - is allow guests who views are unorthodox (but, crucially, not nut job) to state their point of view. He also does his research and asks very targeted and detailed questions.
Yes, he’s brilliant and he does his research and he knows his shit and he lets interesting people of all types say their stuff, but then challenges them
There is a reason he gets 11m people a show and CNN gets 800,000
800,000! It is risibly poor
Rogan is the essence of American Free Speech and if a bunch of woke old rockstars get him cancelled it will be the saddest thing, and Putin might as well invade all of us, and we can let Xi take over the whole internet, because then the West is over
There is something incredibly ironic that all these liberal hippy types want him cancelled....
Yes. For some reason they have forgotten… the 1960s and 70s
I've heard the Rogan name. Could you or somebody else summarise his views? (I'll not hang you on it)
Anti-authority, anti-Government, anything that stirs it all up. Personally I find some of his views over the top and too extreme but not in a BNP sort of way. I don't object to him, just don't really get much out of him as it is difficult to pick the wheat from the chaff. Some stuff he is very right on, a lot he is very wrong on - in my opinion.
If you are interested in a particular niche subject, from UFOs to vaccines to boxing to atheism to AI, you will often learn more from a JR podcast with an absolute insider, than you will watching any amount of normal TV. The equivalent is probably reading three or four quality books, but more timely and contemporary than books (because books are always a bit out of date)
You do need to sieve them out tho. Here’s a pretty handy list detailing some of the best
I will give that a view. Until this morning I had never heard of him. Then (and I think it was from here) there was a link to a start of one of his interviews. It tried to find it again and I can't. Obviously posted by someone who is not a fan and the interviewee was talking drivel; in the nutter realms. Can't remember the details but dismissing stats because you can't test everything. No clue about the maths of samples. I thus assumed Rogan might be of the same ilk if this was the sort of person he was interviewing but found his views were more eclectic according to Wikipedia. Will give it a try, but I am going in biased from this mornings experience I am afraid.
I see its gets Joe Rogan day again....i thought it was highly amusing that Neil Young has been a big fan of RFK jnr, a massive conspiracy theorist and an anti-vaxxer...due to also spreading bullshit about GMO crops. So RFK good, despite spreading antivaxxer nonsense, Joe Rogan bad.
I would imagine far more people subscribe to Spotify for Joe Rogan than they do for Joni Mitchell….
He gets 11m listeners per show. it is enormous. And they last 3-4 hours sometimes
i actually listened to the Robert Malone interview. It was exhaustive, often boring, highly detailed, and I still do not believe the anti vax stuff
But it was not hysterical misinformation. Malone is an important scientist and was a key figure in the invention of mRNA tech. He has to be listened to
WTF with some decrepit old billionaire rock star telling me what I can and cannot hear?
I find Joe Rogan very interesting and the idea that he is a right wing conspiracy theory peddler is bollocks. What he does - and I suspect why he gets specifically targeted - is allow guests who views are unorthodox (but, crucially, not nut job) to state their point of view. He also does his research and asks very targeted and detailed questions.
Yes, he’s brilliant and he does his research and he knows his shit and he lets interesting people of all types say their stuff, but then challenges them
There is a reason he gets 11m people a show and CNN gets 800,000
800,000! It is risibly poor
Rogan is the essence of American Free Speech and if a bunch of woke old rockstars get him cancelled it will be the saddest thing, and Putin might as well invade all of us, and we can let Xi take over the whole internet, because then the West is over
There is something incredibly ironic that all these liberal hippy types want him cancelled....
Yes. For some reason they have forgotten… the 1960s and 70s
I've heard the Rogan name. Could you or somebody else summarise his views? (I'll not hang you on it)
Anti-authority, anti-Government, anything that stirs it all up. Personally I find some of his views over the top and too extreme but not in a BNP sort of way. I don't object to him, just don't really get much out of him as it is difficult to pick the wheat from the chaff. Some stuff he is very right on, a lot he is very wrong on - in my opinion.
If he's wrong on it, at least is it interesting?
Ys what I have heard has been very interesting. Even when it is several hours long. My problem, and the reason I don't listen to him as much as perhaps I would otherwise do, is that on some subjects such as the anti-vax stuff I do find him very partial and that frustrates and angers me.
It boils down to him being brave enough to ask stupid questions of very smart people.
I really struggle with that myself - recently, when trying to ask a surgeon just how long the screws were going to be.
I think your personal prejudices are showing. Dan Hardy and Dominick Cruz also commentate on cage fighting, both highly intelligent and articulate.
Joe Rogan isn't a genius, but he doesn't pretend to be. He is a normal bloke, who does some reading, but has the ability to bring the best out of guests by asking pertinent questions.
normal blokes tend not to take horse worming pills when they catch covid.
PB is awash with silly comments (including mine), but that is irredeemably stupid.
If you're going to go after someone for spouting nonsense, don't talk shit yourself. A quick look on wiki suggests it can be a useful drug for humans, particularly in the developing world.
Not one of them, not a single one, even mentions the possibility that they understand why the British voted to Leave on the grounds of sovereignty and democracy. Most of them claim to love the UK, they do not love it, because love means understanding. Nor does the concept that Britain is admirable BECAUSE it is different and seeks self-rule and tries to be properly democratic even enter their tiny minds
Fuck em
Your post is a great example of world leading empathy and self awareness.
Roughly a minimum of 10x those who chose to leave, even after Covid destroyed many EU citizens jobs here.
But, whatever. Remainers need to moan, we get that.
I suspect that most Unionists will stay on in Independent Scotland too, but it doesn't mean that they will like it, and mourn their losses.
If it comes to that I am not sure what we would do to be honest. A lot depends on family which is more important than countries but I can see the balance of our family edging south over the next few years. As a Scots lawyer I will have to hang around until I retire. After that I am not so sure. But the views of those who choose to remain will still be more relevant than the views of those who choose to depart.
Scotland - at least my corner of it - is already far more welcoming to incomers than England is. I can't see how independence suddenly creates an anti-English or anti-Unionist hate that would force people out
How are you judging these things? If my corner of England is very welcoming does that prove all England is? If my corner is less so does that prove the other way?
How am I judging it? I've lived in various parts of England, I've seen the way that the English national psyche has turned more insular and nasty towards the other (the rise of the BNP then UKIP then Brexit and "fuck em" upthread). That England is no longer as open and tolerant as it was feels self-evident though I know the fuck em brigade will disagree.
And Scotland? I totally accept that my corner is not automatically representative. But then again I look at the Scottish government's "New Scots" policy and them having just won a 4th term on a record vote in a record turnout and conclude that there must be some merit in my argument.
There are so many wonderful people in England. There will be many nobbers in Scotland. But the direction of travel south of the wall feels a lot worse than north of it - and I have friends living in England in despair at what is happening to society.
Oh good grief. I know actual snowflakes who are less snowflakey than you, and recently-crippled jackals that are less whiney
Ironically they seem heavily formed by coming from Rochdale, home of the race riots. No doubt living in a massively less diverse country now feels very harmonious and welcoming.
Yes, the multiculti and hyper-tolerant Mr Pioneers has, oddly, moved from one of the most racially diverse parts of the UK to probably the whitest part of the UK, an area which he thoroughly prefers, as it is supposedly more “welcoming” to others. There just aren’t any others being welcomed
Strange
Its pretty multi-ethnic up here. A lot of Russians and Poles, families in our village school from places like Hungary and Latvia. A lot of English.
Incidentally, @maaarsh commenting about Rochdale and race riots - just wondering what actual lived experience he - or you - have of such things?
Many of the Lancashire cotton towns welcomed multiple waves of migrants from the commonwealth. Rochdale has sizeable Indian and Pakistani and Kashmiri and Bangladeshi populations, with similar seen in other neighbouring towns like Oldham (where I did my A-levels) and Burnley.
So, these "riots". The BNP came and worked away at some morons. Because communities tend to congregate together you would have different groups in different areas. Some of the shitkicker WWC thought they were being discriminated against because money was spent in a non-white area, the BNP picked at it, some got elected until they were very quickly laughed out of town.
I remember two "riots". One in the centre of Rochdale where BNP skinheads and anti-nazi skinheads went at each other. And one in Rochdale where two different ethnic groups had a scrap. When there are little townlets divided by hills its easy to segregate - Rochdale describes these as "townships" FFS
To be fair though, Oldham did have some pretty bad trouble between the two communities and it wasn’t just stirred up by one side. Don’t know if it has improved.
Yeah I meant Oldham with my second example. It was use of "race riots" that made me chuckle - were they buggery. The exact kind of group from x and group from y townlet kicking off has happened between two different white groups as well. I remember one raging outside our school one evening (was there for a club) where we were kept locked in until the police dispersed it. Bored idiots fighting people from the next place - sometimes it may be different races, other times not.
I don't think it is that, it is one poster's naive misunderstanding of the reason for the absence of racial intolerance in his new surroundings
I didn't mention racial though. Most of the people that Brexiteers wanted to leave were the exact same white European race as them. Its about nationalism, not race.
Given there’s no jury trial involved there’s nothing to stop some new revelations and some party photos appearing in the papers.
I expect Cummings still hasn’t given up on getting Johnson out of no 10.
It's a sideshow though. A very fantastic sideshow, and a sideshow that has very likely torpedoed the Tories for a while. Government isn't really about individuals, and it is about policy.
I see its gets Joe Rogan day again....i thought it was highly amusing that Neil Young has been a big fan of RFK jnr, a massive conspiracy theorist and an anti-vaxxer...due to also spreading bullshit about GMO crops. So RFK good, despite spreading antivaxxer nonsense, Joe Rogan bad.
I would imagine far more people subscribe to Spotify for Joe Rogan than they do for Joni Mitchell….
He gets 11m listeners per show. it is enormous. And they last 3-4 hours sometimes
i actually listened to the Robert Malone interview. It was exhaustive, often boring, highly detailed, and I still do not believe the anti vax stuff
But it was not hysterical misinformation. Malone is an important scientist and was a key figure in the invention of mRNA tech. He has to be listened to
WTF with some decrepit old billionaire rock star telling me what I can and cannot hear?
I find Joe Rogan very interesting and the idea that he is a right wing conspiracy theory peddler is bollocks. What he does - and I suspect why he gets specifically targeted - is allow guests who views are unorthodox (but, crucially, not nut job) to state their point of view. He also does his research and asks very targeted and detailed questions.
Yes, he’s brilliant and he does his research and he knows his shit and he lets interesting people of all types say their stuff, but then challenges them
There is a reason he gets 11m people a show and CNN gets 800,000
800,000! It is risibly poor
Rogan is the essence of American Free Speech and if a bunch of woke old rockstars get him cancelled it will be the saddest thing, and Putin might as well invade all of us, and we can let Xi take over the whole internet, because then the West is over
There is something incredibly ironic that all these liberal hippy types want him cancelled....
Yes. For some reason they have forgotten… the 1960s and 70s
I've heard the Rogan name. Could you or somebody else summarise his views? (I'll not hang you on it)
Anti-authority, anti-Government, anything that stirs it all up. Personally I find some of his views over the top and too extreme but not in a BNP sort of way. I don't object to him, just don't really get much out of him as it is difficult to pick the wheat from the chaff. Some stuff he is very right on, a lot he is very wrong on - in my opinion.
If he's wrong on it, at least is it interesting?
Yes what I have heard has been very interesting. Even when it is several hours long. My problem, and the reason I don't listen to him as much as perhaps I would otherwise do, is that on some subjects such as the anti-vax stuff I do find him very partial and that frustrates and angers me.
I personally pick and choose when I listen to his show. I don't really care to listen to 3hrs about aliens, but I will listen to 3hrs talking with Steven Pinker.
I think your personal prejudices are showing. Dan Hardy and Dominick Cruz also commentate on cage fighting, both highly intelligent and articulate.
Joe Rogan isn't a genius, but he doesn't pretend to be. He is a normal bloke, who does some reading, but has the ability to bring the best out of guests by asking pertinent questions.
normal blokes tend not to take horse worming pills when they catch covid.
PB is awash with silly comments (including mine), but that is irredeemably stupid.
If you're going to go after someone for spouting nonsense, don't talk shit yourself. A quick look on wiki suggests it can be a useful drug for humans, particularly in the developing world.
looks like we caught another roganite.
Wasn't unlikely - it's the top podcast in the UK. I've only listened to a few myself - hate not finishing them, and they're too long.
Just checking my Spotify:
Scotland Outdoors Arseblog Arsecast Newscast Freakonomics Red Box Peter Crouch 538 You're dead to me Rogan
I see its gets Joe Rogan day again....i thought it was highly amusing that Neil Young has been a big fan of RFK jnr, a massive conspiracy theorist and an anti-vaxxer...due to also spreading bullshit about GMO crops. So RFK good, despite spreading antivaxxer nonsense, Joe Rogan bad.
I would imagine far more people subscribe to Spotify for Joe Rogan than they do for Joni Mitchell….
He gets 11m listeners per show. it is enormous. And they last 3-4 hours sometimes
i actually listened to the Robert Malone interview. It was exhaustive, often boring, highly detailed, and I still do not believe the anti vax stuff
But it was not hysterical misinformation. Malone is an important scientist and was a key figure in the invention of mRNA tech. He has to be listened to
WTF with some decrepit old billionaire rock star telling me what I can and cannot hear?
I find Joe Rogan very interesting and the idea that he is a right wing conspiracy theory peddler is bollocks. What he does - and I suspect why he gets specifically targeted - is allow guests who views are unorthodox (but, crucially, not nut job) to state their point of view. He also does his research and asks very targeted and detailed questions.
Yes, he’s brilliant and he does his research and he knows his shit and he lets interesting people of all types say their stuff, but then challenges them
There is a reason he gets 11m people a show and CNN gets 800,000
800,000! It is risibly poor
Rogan is the essence of American Free Speech and if a bunch of woke old rockstars get him cancelled it will be the saddest thing, and Putin might as well invade all of us, and we can let Xi take over the whole internet, because then the West is over
There is something incredibly ironic that all these liberal hippy types want him cancelled....
Yes. For some reason they have forgotten… the 1960s and 70s
I've heard the Rogan name. Could you or somebody else summarise his views? (I'll not hang you on it)
Anti-authority, anti-Government, anything that stirs it all up. Personally I find some of his views over the top and too extreme but not in a BNP sort of way. I don't object to him, just don't really get much out of him as it is difficult to pick the wheat from the chaff. Some stuff he is very right on, a lot he is very wrong on - in my opinion.
If he's wrong on it, at least is it interesting?
Yes what I have heard has been very interesting. Even when it is several hours long. My problem, and the reason I don't listen to him as much as perhaps I would otherwise do, is that on some subjects such as the anti-vax stuff I do find him very partial and that frustrates and angers me.
I personally pick and choose when I listen to his show. I don't really care to listen to 3hrs about aliens, but I will listen to 3hrs talking with Steven Pinker.
That’s the great thing about podcasts. Also, you can just skip the ads - well, until the monetisers stop you from doing it, which will probably happen at some point.
As an aside on the Rogan/Young spat, I see that James Blunt once again goes up even further in my estimation with his self awareness, if not my appreciation for his music.
Whilst Young and Mitchell have removed their music from Spotify, Blunt has said that unless Rogan is removed, he will release new music onto the platform.
Now that is a threat everyone should take seriously.
Sky News are leading on Ukraine - Russia and Boris travelling there next week
It seems even they have given up on Sue Gray's filleted report and the appalling behaviour of Cressida Dick
It's a slam dunk for Johnson. Bringing the Met Commissioner on board to spike the Gray report was an absolute stroke of genius. Hats off to Big Dog. He's played us all like a penny whistle.
As an aside on the Rogan/Young spat, I see that James Blunt once again goes up even further in my estimation with his self awareness, if not my appreciation for his music.
Whilst Young and Mitchell have removed their music from Spotify, Blunt has said that unless Rogan is removed, he will release new music onto the platform.
Now that is a threat everyone should take seriously.
If only the rest of twitter was more like his account.
I see its gets Joe Rogan day again....i thought it was highly amusing that Neil Young has been a big fan of RFK jnr, a massive conspiracy theorist and an anti-vaxxer...due to also spreading bullshit about GMO crops. So RFK good, despite spreading antivaxxer nonsense, Joe Rogan bad.
I would imagine far more people subscribe to Spotify for Joe Rogan than they do for Joni Mitchell….
He gets 11m listeners per show. it is enormous. And they last 3-4 hours sometimes
i actually listened to the Robert Malone interview. It was exhaustive, often boring, highly detailed, and I still do not believe the anti vax stuff
But it was not hysterical misinformation. Malone is an important scientist and was a key figure in the invention of mRNA tech. He has to be listened to
WTF with some decrepit old billionaire rock star telling me what I can and cannot hear?
I find Joe Rogan very interesting and the idea that he is a right wing conspiracy theory peddler is bollocks. What he does - and I suspect why he gets specifically targeted - is allow guests who views are unorthodox (but, crucially, not nut job) to state their point of view. He also does his research and asks very targeted and detailed questions.
Yes, he’s brilliant and he does his research and he knows his shit and he lets interesting people of all types say their stuff, but then challenges them
There is a reason he gets 11m people a show and CNN gets 800,000
800,000! It is risibly poor
Rogan is the essence of American Free Speech and if a bunch of woke old rockstars get him cancelled it will be the saddest thing, and Putin might as well invade all of us, and we can let Xi take over the whole internet, because then the West is over
There is something incredibly ironic that all these liberal hippy types want him cancelled....
Yes. For some reason they have forgotten… the 1960s and 70s
I've heard the Rogan name. Could you or somebody else summarise his views? (I'll not hang you on it)
Anti-authority, anti-Government, anything that stirs it all up. Personally I find some of his views over the top and too extreme but not in a BNP sort of way. I don't object to him, just don't really get much out of him as it is difficult to pick the wheat from the chaff. Some stuff he is very right on, a lot he is very wrong on - in my opinion.
If you are interested in a particular niche subject, from UFOs to vaccines to boxing to atheism to AI, you will often learn more from a JR podcast with an absolute insider, than you will watching any amount of normal TV. The equivalent is probably reading three or four quality books, but more timely and contemporary than books (because books are always a bit out of date)
You do need to sieve them out tho. Here’s a pretty handy list detailing some of the best
He doesn't have a deep carefully crafted consistent intellectual world ideology, he is a cage fighting commentator who likes talking to interesting people. He doesn't seem himself like Prof Peston as some amateur expert on every subject.
Its the fact that interesting people are happy to go and talk to him, because he gives them time and space to explain their subject and bright enough to ask the sort of question most normal people want to ask an expert.
"cage fighting commentator " - surely therefore an idiot? Am I missing anything?
Yes, everything
Educate me!
Subscribe to Spotify. Choose your niche subjects. Listen to five of the most recommended JRE podcasts on those subjects. Give them a go
You can listen to them while you are cooking, walking, exercising, lying in bed, drinking in bed, recovering from filthy sex, preparing for filthy sex, choosing a cigar in Havana, whatever
If you still think he’s an idiot cage fighting commentator, then fair enough, you tried
I was very skeptical until I got into them a couple of years ago
Cage fighting, filthy sex and cigars Sean?
Pull the other one. We all know you love chintzy curtains, dainty tea sets and the missionary position.
Anyone else think he’s holed under the waterline, what with Agnew’s fraud comments?
£4.3bn pissed up against the wall, ffs?!
He’s a screaming lay @ ~2/1, surely?
Sunaks problem is that while he might be the most successful when in post, there is no sure fire way to get there. I don't sense that he has the parliamentary support to be sure of reaching the final two, or the membership support needed to win.
As an aside on the Rogan/Young spat, I see that James Blunt once again goes up even further in my estimation with his self awareness, if not my appreciation for his music.
Whilst Young and Mitchell have removed their music from Spotify, Blunt has said that unless Rogan is removed, he will release new music onto the platform.
Now that is a threat everyone should take seriously.
I liked the comment; Joe Rogan couldn't write "Keep on rockin' in the free world", but Neil Young if he so wished could Google stuff, and misinterpret it live on air.
Anyone else think he’s holed under the waterline, what with Agnew’s fraud comments?
£4.3bn pissed up against the wall, ffs?!
He’s a screaming lay @ ~2/1, surely?
Sunaks problem is that while he might be the most successful when in post, there is no sure fire way to get there. I don't sense that he has the parliamentary support to be sure of reaching the final two, or the membership support needed to win.
That said, he's the current Chancellor, which historically puts him in a good position.
I see its gets Joe Rogan day again....i thought it was highly amusing that Neil Young has been a big fan of RFK jnr, a massive conspiracy theorist and an anti-vaxxer...due to also spreading bullshit about GMO crops. So RFK good, despite spreading antivaxxer nonsense, Joe Rogan bad.
I would imagine far more people subscribe to Spotify for Joe Rogan than they do for Joni Mitchell….
He gets 11m listeners per show. it is enormous. And they last 3-4 hours sometimes
i actually listened to the Robert Malone interview. It was exhaustive, often boring, highly detailed, and I still do not believe the anti vax stuff
But it was not hysterical misinformation. Malone is an important scientist and was a key figure in the invention of mRNA tech. He has to be listened to
WTF with some decrepit old billionaire rock star telling me what I can and cannot hear?
I find Joe Rogan very interesting and the idea that he is a right wing conspiracy theory peddler is bollocks. What he does - and I suspect why he gets specifically targeted - is allow guests who views are unorthodox (but, crucially, not nut job) to state their point of view. He also does his research and asks very targeted and detailed questions.
Yes, he’s brilliant and he does his research and he knows his shit and he lets interesting people of all types say their stuff, but then challenges them
There is a reason he gets 11m people a show and CNN gets 800,000
800,000! It is risibly poor
Rogan is the essence of American Free Speech and if a bunch of woke old rockstars get him cancelled it will be the saddest thing, and Putin might as well invade all of us, and we can let Xi take over the whole internet, because then the West is over
There is something incredibly ironic that all these liberal hippy types want him cancelled....
Yes. For some reason they have forgotten… the 1960s and 70s
I've heard the Rogan name. Could you or somebody else summarise his views? (I'll not hang you on it)
Anti-authority, anti-Government, anything that stirs it all up. Personally I find some of his views over the top and too extreme but not in a BNP sort of way. I don't object to him, just don't really get much out of him as it is difficult to pick the wheat from the chaff. Some stuff he is very right on, a lot he is very wrong on - in my opinion.
If you are interested in a particular niche subject, from UFOs to vaccines to boxing to atheism to AI, you will often learn more from a JR podcast with an absolute insider, than you will watching any amount of normal TV. The equivalent is probably reading three or four quality books, but more timely and contemporary than books (because books are always a bit out of date)
You do need to sieve them out tho. Here’s a pretty handy list detailing some of the best
I will give that a view. Until this morning I had never heard of him. Then (and I think it was from here) there was a link to a start of one of his interviews. It tried to find it again and I can't. Obviously posted by someone who is not a fan and the interviewee was talking drivel; in the nutter realms. Can't remember the details but dismissing stats because you can't test everything. No clue about the maths of samples. I thus assumed Rogan might be of the same ilk if this was the sort of person he was interviewing but found his views were more eclectic according to Wikipedia. Will give it a try, but I am going in biased from this mornings experience I am afraid.
My guess is you are referring to his latest Jordan Peterson interview. Where Peterson starts spouting off about climate change being a load of intellectual vagueness, what exactly is “climate”, surely it is everything, there are too many variables
This made people angry and they got viral on Twitter
The thing is, Rogan then comes back and asks Peterson to clarify exactly this. He asks the questions you want to say. Again
I’m not a huge fan of Peterson, unlike my ex wife, age 26, who adores him! For me he is the reedy voiced inferior offspring of Roger Scruton. But Peterson is a massively valuable contrary voice, and is no Nazi or racist. We need people like him. Whereas Cambridge is happy to cancel him
Rogan gives him airtime. Good
The thing about the whole anti-Rogan Neil Young left cancel culture shit is that they are going after one of the last sane spaces where alternative and also - horror! - right wing or libertarian views are aired. Or just heterodox views. Beyond Rogan there is just a sea of Neo Nazi bollocks. Do we really want to cede all that thought-space to the truly nasty and insane? No. So we must allow sane right wing views, even hard right wing views, just as we do allow them on the left, with avowed communists sitting on SAGE
As an aside on the Rogan/Young spat, I see that James Blunt once again goes up even further in my estimation with his self awareness, if not my appreciation for his music.
Whilst Young and Mitchell have removed their music from Spotify, Blunt has said that unless Rogan is removed, he will release new music onto the platform.
Now that is a threat everyone should take seriously.
The long form podcast is one of the truly great things about the internet. Especially with AirPods
I have a few that I listen to. It has created a lot of innovation, but the editorial standards that exist in radio broadcasting don't apply to podcasts. There is a bit of a problem with the sheer amount of podcasts. A lot of them are just crap, and misleading if you don't know your stuff. The worst are property development podcasts. I've heard people advising people that they can do things to buildings and land without requiring planning permission which do; and which lead to expensive mistakes.
The flipside is that some are really good. Talking Politics was good for a long time. Triggernometry is good. Rogan is good but in my view, it is just too long. When does anyone have 2 and a half hours to listen to a podcast?
I see its gets Joe Rogan day again....i thought it was highly amusing that Neil Young has been a big fan of RFK jnr, a massive conspiracy theorist and an anti-vaxxer...due to also spreading bullshit about GMO crops. So RFK good, despite spreading antivaxxer nonsense, Joe Rogan bad.
I would imagine far more people subscribe to Spotify for Joe Rogan than they do for Joni Mitchell….
He gets 11m listeners per show. it is enormous. And they last 3-4 hours sometimes
i actually listened to the Robert Malone interview. It was exhaustive, often boring, highly detailed, and I still do not believe the anti vax stuff
But it was not hysterical misinformation. Malone is an important scientist and was a key figure in the invention of mRNA tech. He has to be listened to
WTF with some decrepit old billionaire rock star telling me what I can and cannot hear?
I find Joe Rogan very interesting and the idea that he is a right wing conspiracy theory peddler is bollocks. What he does - and I suspect why he gets specifically targeted - is allow guests who views are unorthodox (but, crucially, not nut job) to state their point of view. He also does his research and asks very targeted and detailed questions.
Yes, he’s brilliant and he does his research and he knows his shit and he lets interesting people of all types say their stuff, but then challenges them
There is a reason he gets 11m people a show and CNN gets 800,000
800,000! It is risibly poor
Rogan is the essence of American Free Speech and if a bunch of woke old rockstars get him cancelled it will be the saddest thing, and Putin might as well invade all of us, and we can let Xi take over the whole internet, because then the West is over
There is something incredibly ironic that all these liberal hippy types want him cancelled....
Yes. For some reason they have forgotten… the 1960s and 70s
I've heard the Rogan name. Could you or somebody else summarise his views? (I'll not hang you on it)
Anti-authority, anti-Government, anything that stirs it all up. Personally I find some of his views over the top and too extreme but not in a BNP sort of way. I don't object to him, just don't really get much out of him as it is difficult to pick the wheat from the chaff. Some stuff he is very right on, a lot he is very wrong on - in my opinion.
If he's wrong on it, at least is it interesting?
Yes what I have heard has been very interesting. Even when it is several hours long. My problem, and the reason I don't listen to him as much as perhaps I would otherwise do, is that on some subjects such as the anti-vax stuff I do find him very partial and that frustrates and angers me.
I personally pick and choose when I listen to his show. I don't really care to listen to 3hrs about aliens, but I will listen to 3hrs talking with Steven Pinker.
I'm always going to back my man, Neil Young, whatever the fight. I see Joni has pitched in as well now. Go Laurel Canyon.
I see its gets Joe Rogan day again....i thought it was highly amusing that Neil Young has been a big fan of RFK jnr, a massive conspiracy theorist and an anti-vaxxer...due to also spreading bullshit about GMO crops. So RFK good, despite spreading antivaxxer nonsense, Joe Rogan bad.
I would imagine far more people subscribe to Spotify for Joe Rogan than they do for Joni Mitchell….
He gets 11m listeners per show. it is enormous. And they last 3-4 hours sometimes
i actually listened to the Robert Malone interview. It was exhaustive, often boring, highly detailed, and I still do not believe the anti vax stuff
But it was not hysterical misinformation. Malone is an important scientist and was a key figure in the invention of mRNA tech. He has to be listened to
WTF with some decrepit old billionaire rock star telling me what I can and cannot hear?
I find Joe Rogan very interesting and the idea that he is a right wing conspiracy theory peddler is bollocks. What he does - and I suspect why he gets specifically targeted - is allow guests who views are unorthodox (but, crucially, not nut job) to state their point of view. He also does his research and asks very targeted and detailed questions.
Yes, he’s brilliant and he does his research and he knows his shit and he lets interesting people of all types say their stuff, but then challenges them
There is a reason he gets 11m people a show and CNN gets 800,000
800,000! It is risibly poor
Rogan is the essence of American Free Speech and if a bunch of woke old rockstars get him cancelled it will be the saddest thing, and Putin might as well invade all of us, and we can let Xi take over the whole internet, because then the West is over
There is something incredibly ironic that all these liberal hippy types want him cancelled....
Yes. For some reason they have forgotten… the 1960s and 70s
I've heard the Rogan name. Could you or somebody else summarise his views? (I'll not hang you on it)
Anti-authority, anti-Government, anything that stirs it all up. Personally I find some of his views over the top and too extreme but not in a BNP sort of way. I don't object to him, just don't really get much out of him as it is difficult to pick the wheat from the chaff. Some stuff he is very right on, a lot he is very wrong on - in my opinion.
If you are interested in a particular niche subject, from UFOs to vaccines to boxing to atheism to AI, you will often learn more from a JR podcast with an absolute insider, than you will watching any amount of normal TV. The equivalent is probably reading three or four quality books, but more timely and contemporary than books (because books are always a bit out of date)
You do need to sieve them out tho. Here’s a pretty handy list detailing some of the best
I will give that a view. Until this morning I had never heard of him. Then (and I think it was from here) there was a link to a start of one of his interviews. It tried to find it again and I can't. Obviously posted by someone who is not a fan and the interviewee was talking drivel; in the nutter realms. Can't remember the details but dismissing stats because you can't test everything. No clue about the maths of samples. I thus assumed Rogan might be of the same ilk if this was the sort of person he was interviewing but found his views were more eclectic according to Wikipedia. Will give it a try, but I am going in biased from this mornings experience I am afraid.
My guess is you are referring to his latest Jordan Peterson interview. Where Peterson starts spouting off about climate change being a load of intellectual vagueness, what exactly is “climate”, surely it is everything, there are too many variables
This made people angry and they got viral on Twitter
The thing is, Rogan then comes back and asks Peterson to clarify exactly this. He asks the questions you want to say. Again
I’m not a huge fan of Peterson, unlike my ex wife, age 26, who adores him! For me he is the reedy voiced inferior offspring of Roger Scruton. But Peterson is a massively valuable contrary voice, and is no Nazi or racist. We need people like him. Whereas Cambridge is happy to cancel him
Rogan gives him airtime. Good
The thing about the whole anti-Rogan Neil Young left cancel culture shit is that they are going after one of the last sane spaces where alternative and also - horror! - right wing or libertarian views are aired. Or just heterodox views. Beyond Rogan there is just a sea of Neo Nazi bollocks. Do we really want to cede all that thought-space to the truly nasty and insane? No. So we must allow sane right wing views, even hard right wing views, just as we do allow them on the left, with avowed communists sitting on SAGE
Rogan is the sanest right-winger you can think of. Wow.
Anyone think this BJ thing is over listen to Any Answers. Listen particularly for ex John Major's Private Secretary (or similar). Hilarious. I'm not not talking studio audience I'm talking about the phone in afterwards. As a human being Johnson's finished
As an aside on the Rogan/Young spat, I see that James Blunt once again goes up even further in my estimation with his self awareness, if not my appreciation for his music.
Whilst Young and Mitchell have removed their music from Spotify, Blunt has said that unless Rogan is removed, he will release new music onto the platform.
Now that is a threat everyone should take seriously.
I liked the comment; Joe Rogan couldn't write "Keep on rockin' in the free world", but Neil Young if he so wished could Google stuff, and misinterpret it live on air.
I see Rogans twitter feed is full of anti-vax stuff. Doesn't inspire confidence in listening to any of his longer pieces. Not that I care much for Neil Young either.
I also now see where Leon gets his nuttier Wokefinder General stuff from.
The long form podcast is one of the truly great things about the internet. Especially with AirPods
During the first wave of the podcast boom (early/mid-2000s) the traditional media (radio in particular) were hosting events giving 'guidance' to the upstarts. One of the things I remember most is them preaching that they should all stick with shorter shows (20-30minutes) as they had 'proof' that listeners would switch off after that.
Sadly, quite a lot of the enjoyable, rambling, eccentric podcasts followed their advice and withered on the vine.
On the long (or long-ish) format podcasts, I really enjoy Dan Carlin's 'Hardcore History' (the 'Ghosts of the Ostfront' one was what really hooked me and I've still to finish the recent 'Supernova in the East'). 'EconTalk' is another - though generally only runs to a paltry 1.5hrs
Anyone else think he’s holed under the waterline, what with Agnew’s fraud comments?
£4.3bn pissed up against the wall, ffs?!
He’s a screaming lay @ ~2/1, surely?
Sunaks problem is that while he might be the most successful when in post, there is no sure fire way to get there. I don't sense that he has the parliamentary support to be sure of reaching the final two, or the membership support needed to win.
That said, he's the current Chancellor, which historically puts him in a good position.
The long form podcast is one of the truly great things about the internet. Especially with AirPods
I have a few that I listen to. It has created a lot of innovation, but the editorial standards that exist in radio broadcasting don't apply to podcasts. There is a bit of a problem with the sheer amount of podcasts. A lot of them are just crap, and misleading if you don't know your stuff. The worst are property development podcasts. I've heard people advising people that they can do things to buildings and land without requiring planning permission which do; and which lead to expensive mistakes.
The flipside is that some are really good. Talking Politics was good for a long time. Triggernometry is good. Rogan is good but in my view, it is just too long. When does anyone have 2 and a half hours to listen to a podcast?
Anyone think this BJ thing is over listen to Any Answers. Listen particularly for ex John Major's Private Secretary (or similar). Hilarious. I'm not not talking studio audience I'm talking about the phone in afterwards. As a human being Johnson's finished
When you say 'he's finished as a human being,' do you mean as in:
I see its gets Joe Rogan day again....i thought it was highly amusing that Neil Young has been a big fan of RFK jnr, a massive conspiracy theorist and an anti-vaxxer...due to also spreading bullshit about GMO crops. So RFK good, despite spreading antivaxxer nonsense, Joe Rogan bad.
I would imagine far more people subscribe to Spotify for Joe Rogan than they do for Joni Mitchell….
He gets 11m listeners per show. it is enormous. And they last 3-4 hours sometimes
i actually listened to the Robert Malone interview. It was exhaustive, often boring, highly detailed, and I still do not believe the anti vax stuff
But it was not hysterical misinformation. Malone is an important scientist and was a key figure in the invention of mRNA tech. He has to be listened to
WTF with some decrepit old billionaire rock star telling me what I can and cannot hear?
I find Joe Rogan very interesting and the idea that he is a right wing conspiracy theory peddler is bollocks. What he does - and I suspect why he gets specifically targeted - is allow guests who views are unorthodox (but, crucially, not nut job) to state their point of view. He also does his research and asks very targeted and detailed questions.
Yes, he’s brilliant and he does his research and he knows his shit and he lets interesting people of all types say their stuff, but then challenges them
There is a reason he gets 11m people a show and CNN gets 800,000
800,000! It is risibly poor
Rogan is the essence of American Free Speech and if a bunch of woke old rockstars get him cancelled it will be the saddest thing, and Putin might as well invade all of us, and we can let Xi take over the whole internet, because then the West is over
There is something incredibly ironic that all these liberal hippy types want him cancelled....
Yes. For some reason they have forgotten… the 1960s and 70s
I've heard the Rogan name. Could you or somebody else summarise his views? (I'll not hang you on it)
Anti-authority, anti-Government, anything that stirs it all up. Personally I find some of his views over the top and too extreme but not in a BNP sort of way. I don't object to him, just don't really get much out of him as it is difficult to pick the wheat from the chaff. Some stuff he is very right on, a lot he is very wrong on - in my opinion.
If you are interested in a particular niche subject, from UFOs to vaccines to boxing to atheism to AI, you will often learn more from a JR podcast with an absolute insider, than you will watching any amount of normal TV. The equivalent is probably reading three or four quality books, but more timely and contemporary than books (because books are always a bit out of date)
You do need to sieve them out tho. Here’s a pretty handy list detailing some of the best
I will give that a view. Until this morning I had never heard of him. Then (and I think it was from here) there was a link to a start of one of his interviews. It tried to find it again and I can't. Obviously posted by someone who is not a fan and the interviewee was talking drivel; in the nutter realms. Can't remember the details but dismissing stats because you can't test everything. No clue about the maths of samples. I thus assumed Rogan might be of the same ilk if this was the sort of person he was interviewing but found his views were more eclectic according to Wikipedia. Will give it a try, but I am going in biased from this mornings experience I am afraid.
My guess is you are referring to his latest Jordan Peterson interview. Where Peterson starts spouting off about climate change being a load of intellectual vagueness, what exactly is “climate”, surely it is everything, there are too many variables
This made people angry and they got viral on Twitter
The thing is, Rogan then comes back and asks Peterson to clarify exactly this. He asks the questions you want to say. Again
I’m not a huge fan of Peterson, unlike my ex wife, age 26, who adores him! For me he is the reedy voiced inferior offspring of Roger Scruton. But Peterson is a massively valuable contrary voice, and is no Nazi or racist. We need people like him. Whereas Cambridge is happy to cancel him
Rogan gives him airtime. Good
The thing about the whole anti-Rogan Neil Young left cancel culture shit is that they are going after one of the last sane spaces where alternative and also - horror! - right wing or libertarian views are aired. Or just heterodox views. Beyond Rogan there is just a sea of Neo Nazi bollocks. Do we really want to cede all that thought-space to the truly nasty and insane? No. So we must allow sane right wing views, even hard right wing views, just as we do allow them on the left, with avowed communists sitting on SAGE
PB is the only place where I think I can get away with this. And even then I'm nervous.
I studied climate change economics at uni. I'm fully on board with the consensus, scientific view.
But. If SAGE can't model Covid properly, with loads of good data, and only forecasting a few months in advance, what chance do we have with something as fickle as mother nature? Over a 100 year period?
I don't doubt that the earth has warmed, and that we are the reason for it. But looking forward...
Anyone think this BJ thing is over listen to Any Answers. Listen particularly for ex John Major's Private Secretary (or similar). Hilarious. I'm not not talking studio audience I'm talking about the phone in afterwards. As a human being Johnson's finished
Has he has ever claimed to be a human being?
World King, world beater and an inordinate amount of other superlatives to self-agrandise himself, but human? That just seems a little too ordinary.
I see its gets Joe Rogan day again....i thought it was highly amusing that Neil Young has been a big fan of RFK jnr, a massive conspiracy theorist and an anti-vaxxer...due to also spreading bullshit about GMO crops. So RFK good, despite spreading antivaxxer nonsense, Joe Rogan bad.
I would imagine far more people subscribe to Spotify for Joe Rogan than they do for Joni Mitchell….
He gets 11m listeners per show. it is enormous. And they last 3-4 hours sometimes
i actually listened to the Robert Malone interview. It was exhaustive, often boring, highly detailed, and I still do not believe the anti vax stuff
But it was not hysterical misinformation. Malone is an important scientist and was a key figure in the invention of mRNA tech. He has to be listened to
WTF with some decrepit old billionaire rock star telling me what I can and cannot hear?
I find Joe Rogan very interesting and the idea that he is a right wing conspiracy theory peddler is bollocks. What he does - and I suspect why he gets specifically targeted - is allow guests who views are unorthodox (but, crucially, not nut job) to state their point of view. He also does his research and asks very targeted and detailed questions.
Yes, he’s brilliant and he does his research and he knows his shit and he lets interesting people of all types say their stuff, but then challenges them
There is a reason he gets 11m people a show and CNN gets 800,000
800,000! It is risibly poor
Rogan is the essence of American Free Speech and if a bunch of woke old rockstars get him cancelled it will be the saddest thing, and Putin might as well invade all of us, and we can let Xi take over the whole internet, because then the West is over
There is something incredibly ironic that all these liberal hippy types want him cancelled....
Yes. For some reason they have forgotten… the 1960s and 70s
I've heard the Rogan name. Could you or somebody else summarise his views? (I'll not hang you on it)
Anti-authority, anti-Government, anything that stirs it all up. Personally I find some of his views over the top and too extreme but not in a BNP sort of way. I don't object to him, just don't really get much out of him as it is difficult to pick the wheat from the chaff. Some stuff he is very right on, a lot he is very wrong on - in my opinion.
If you are interested in a particular niche subject, from UFOs to vaccines to boxing to atheism to AI, you will often learn more from a JR podcast with an absolute insider, than you will watching any amount of normal TV. The equivalent is probably reading three or four quality books, but more timely and contemporary than books (because books are always a bit out of date)
You do need to sieve them out tho. Here’s a pretty handy list detailing some of the best
I will give that a view. Until this morning I had never heard of him. Then (and I think it was from here) there was a link to a start of one of his interviews. It tried to find it again and I can't. Obviously posted by someone who is not a fan and the interviewee was talking drivel; in the nutter realms. Can't remember the details but dismissing stats because you can't test everything. No clue about the maths of samples. I thus assumed Rogan might be of the same ilk if this was the sort of person he was interviewing but found his views were more eclectic according to Wikipedia. Will give it a try, but I am going in biased from this mornings experience I am afraid.
My guess is you are referring to his latest Jordan Peterson interview. Where Peterson starts spouting off about climate change being a load of intellectual vagueness, what exactly is “climate”, surely it is everything, there are too many variables
This made people angry and they got viral on Twitter
The thing is, Rogan then comes back and asks Peterson to clarify exactly this. He asks the questions you want to say. Again
I’m not a huge fan of Peterson, unlike my ex wife, age 26, who adores him! For me he is the reedy voiced inferior offspring of Roger Scruton. But Peterson is a massively valuable contrary voice, and is no Nazi or racist. We need people like him. Whereas Cambridge is happy to cancel him
Rogan gives him airtime. Good
The thing about the whole anti-Rogan Neil Young left cancel culture shit is that they are going after one of the last sane spaces where alternative and also - horror! - right wing or libertarian views are aired. Or just heterodox views. Beyond Rogan there is just a sea of Neo Nazi bollocks. Do we really want to cede all that thought-space to the truly nasty and insane? No. So we must allow sane right wing views, even hard right wing views, just as we do allow them on the left, with avowed communists sitting on SAGE
Well spotted. Yes it was and my description above was way off. If you had to ask me to guess I would have said the clip was on vaccines, but you have correctly reminded me of the actual subject. I saw the clip, presumably as you say it is doing the rounds. Thought well that is absolute bollocks and put it out of my mind, other than thinking I won't be viewing Rogan. I didn't even remember the subject matter only it was bollocks! I did pause though to look him up and that did mellow my view slightly as has PB this afternoon.
Will give it a try. Not promising a positive outcome though.
Anyone else think he’s holed under the waterline, what with Agnew’s fraud comments?
£4.3bn pissed up against the wall, ffs?!
He’s a screaming lay @ ~2/1, surely?
Sunaks problem is that while he might be the most successful when in post, there is no sure fire way to get there. I don't sense that he has the parliamentary support to be sure of reaching the final two, or the membership support needed to win.
That said, he's the current Chancellor, which historically puts him in a good position.
I see its gets Joe Rogan day again....i thought it was highly amusing that Neil Young has been a big fan of RFK jnr, a massive conspiracy theorist and an anti-vaxxer...due to also spreading bullshit about GMO crops. So RFK good, despite spreading antivaxxer nonsense, Joe Rogan bad.
I would imagine far more people subscribe to Spotify for Joe Rogan than they do for Joni Mitchell….
He gets 11m listeners per show. it is enormous. And they last 3-4 hours sometimes
i actually listened to the Robert Malone interview. It was exhaustive, often boring, highly detailed, and I still do not believe the anti vax stuff
But it was not hysterical misinformation. Malone is an important scientist and was a key figure in the invention of mRNA tech. He has to be listened to
WTF with some decrepit old billionaire rock star telling me what I can and cannot hear?
I find Joe Rogan very interesting and the idea that he is a right wing conspiracy theory peddler is bollocks. What he does - and I suspect why he gets specifically targeted - is allow guests who views are unorthodox (but, crucially, not nut job) to state their point of view. He also does his research and asks very targeted and detailed questions.
Yes, he’s brilliant and he does his research and he knows his shit and he lets interesting people of all types say their stuff, but then challenges them
There is a reason he gets 11m people a show and CNN gets 800,000
800,000! It is risibly poor
Rogan is the essence of American Free Speech and if a bunch of woke old rockstars get him cancelled it will be the saddest thing, and Putin might as well invade all of us, and we can let Xi take over the whole internet, because then the West is over
There is something incredibly ironic that all these liberal hippy types want him cancelled....
Yes. For some reason they have forgotten… the 1960s and 70s
I've heard the Rogan name. Could you or somebody else summarise his views? (I'll not hang you on it)
Anti-authority, anti-Government, anything that stirs it all up. Personally I find some of his views over the top and too extreme but not in a BNP sort of way. I don't object to him, just don't really get much out of him as it is difficult to pick the wheat from the chaff. Some stuff he is very right on, a lot he is very wrong on - in my opinion.
If you are interested in a particular niche subject, from UFOs to vaccines to boxing to atheism to AI, you will often learn more from a JR podcast with an absolute insider, than you will watching any amount of normal TV. The equivalent is probably reading three or four quality books, but more timely and contemporary than books (because books are always a bit out of date)
You do need to sieve them out tho. Here’s a pretty handy list detailing some of the best
I will give that a view. Until this morning I had never heard of him. Then (and I think it was from here) there was a link to a start of one of his interviews. It tried to find it again and I can't. Obviously posted by someone who is not a fan and the interviewee was talking drivel; in the nutter realms. Can't remember the details but dismissing stats because you can't test everything. No clue about the maths of samples. I thus assumed Rogan might be of the same ilk if this was the sort of person he was interviewing but found his views were more eclectic according to Wikipedia. Will give it a try, but I am going in biased from this mornings experience I am afraid.
My guess is you are referring to his latest Jordan Peterson interview. Where Peterson starts spouting off about climate change being a load of intellectual vagueness, what exactly is “climate”, surely it is everything, there are too many variables
This made people angry and they got viral on Twitter
The thing is, Rogan then comes back and asks Peterson to clarify exactly this. He asks the questions you want to say. Again
I’m not a huge fan of Peterson, unlike my ex wife, age 26, who adores him! For me he is the reedy voiced inferior offspring of Roger Scruton. But Peterson is a massively valuable contrary voice, and is no Nazi or racist. We need people like him. Whereas Cambridge is happy to cancel him
Rogan gives him airtime. Good
The thing about the whole anti-Rogan Neil Young left cancel culture shit is that they are going after one of the last sane spaces where alternative and also - horror! - right wing or libertarian views are aired. Or just heterodox views. Beyond Rogan there is just a sea of Neo Nazi bollocks. Do we really want to cede all that thought-space to the truly nasty and insane? No. So we must allow sane right wing views, even hard right wing views, just as we do allow them on the left, with avowed communists sitting on SAGE
Well spotted. Yes it was and my description above was way off. If you had to ask me to guess I would have said the clip was on vaccines, but you have correctly reminded me of the actual subject. I saw the clip, presumably as you say it is doing the rounds. Thought well that is absolute bollocks and put it out of my mind, other than thinking I won't be viewing Rogan. I didn't even remember the subject matter only it was bollocks! I did pause though to look him up and that did mellow my view slightly as has PB this afternoon.
Will give it a try. Not promising a positive outcome though.
Why don't you start with an interview with somebody who definitely isn't a nutter / fringe / etc e.g. say his interviews with Pinker.
If you don't like those, there isn't much more point continuing.
I see its gets Joe Rogan day again....i thought it was highly amusing that Neil Young has been a big fan of RFK jnr, a massive conspiracy theorist and an anti-vaxxer...due to also spreading bullshit about GMO crops. So RFK good, despite spreading antivaxxer nonsense, Joe Rogan bad.
I would imagine far more people subscribe to Spotify for Joe Rogan than they do for Joni Mitchell….
He gets 11m listeners per show. it is enormous. And they last 3-4 hours sometimes
i actually listened to the Robert Malone interview. It was exhaustive, often boring, highly detailed, and I still do not believe the anti vax stuff
But it was not hysterical misinformation. Malone is an important scientist and was a key figure in the invention of mRNA tech. He has to be listened to
WTF with some decrepit old billionaire rock star telling me what I can and cannot hear?
I find Joe Rogan very interesting and the idea that he is a right wing conspiracy theory peddler is bollocks. What he does - and I suspect why he gets specifically targeted - is allow guests who views are unorthodox (but, crucially, not nut job) to state their point of view. He also does his research and asks very targeted and detailed questions.
Yes, he’s brilliant and he does his research and he knows his shit and he lets interesting people of all types say their stuff, but then challenges them
There is a reason he gets 11m people a show and CNN gets 800,000
800,000! It is risibly poor
Rogan is the essence of American Free Speech and if a bunch of woke old rockstars get him cancelled it will be the saddest thing, and Putin might as well invade all of us, and we can let Xi take over the whole internet, because then the West is over
There is something incredibly ironic that all these liberal hippy types want him cancelled....
Yes. For some reason they have forgotten… the 1960s and 70s
I've heard the Rogan name. Could you or somebody else summarise his views? (I'll not hang you on it)
Anti-authority, anti-Government, anything that stirs it all up. Personally I find some of his views over the top and too extreme but not in a BNP sort of way. I don't object to him, just don't really get much out of him as it is difficult to pick the wheat from the chaff. Some stuff he is very right on, a lot he is very wrong on - in my opinion.
If you are interested in a particular niche subject, from UFOs to vaccines to boxing to atheism to AI, you will often learn more from a JR podcast with an absolute insider, than you will watching any amount of normal TV. The equivalent is probably reading three or four quality books, but more timely and contemporary than books (because books are always a bit out of date)
You do need to sieve them out tho. Here’s a pretty handy list detailing some of the best
I will give that a view. Until this morning I had never heard of him. Then (and I think it was from here) there was a link to a start of one of his interviews. It tried to find it again and I can't. Obviously posted by someone who is not a fan and the interviewee was talking drivel; in the nutter realms. Can't remember the details but dismissing stats because you can't test everything. No clue about the maths of samples. I thus assumed Rogan might be of the same ilk if this was the sort of person he was interviewing but found his views were more eclectic according to Wikipedia. Will give it a try, but I am going in biased from this mornings experience I am afraid.
My guess is you are referring to his latest Jordan Peterson interview. Where Peterson starts spouting off about climate change being a load of intellectual vagueness, what exactly is “climate”, surely it is everything, there are too many variables
This made people angry and they got viral on Twitter
The thing is, Rogan then comes back and asks Peterson to clarify exactly this. He asks the questions you want to say. Again
I’m not a huge fan of Peterson, unlike my ex wife, age 26, who adores him! For me he is the reedy voiced inferior offspring of Roger Scruton. But Peterson is a massively valuable contrary voice, and is no Nazi or racist. We need people like him. Whereas Cambridge is happy to cancel him
Rogan gives him airtime. Good
The thing about the whole anti-Rogan Neil Young left cancel culture shit is that they are going after one of the last sane spaces where alternative and also - horror! - right wing or libertarian views are aired. Or just heterodox views. Beyond Rogan there is just a sea of Neo Nazi bollocks. Do we really want to cede all that thought-space to the truly nasty and insane? No. So we must allow sane right wing views, even hard right wing views, just as we do allow them on the left, with avowed communists sitting on SAGE
PB is the only place where I think I can get away with this. And even then I'm nervous.
I studied climate change economics at uni. I'm fully on board with the consensus, scientific view.
But. If SAGE can't model Covid properly, with loads of good data, and only forecasting a few months in advance, what chance do we have with something as fickle as mother nature? Over a 100 year period?
I don't doubt that the earth has warmed, and that we are the reason for it. But looking forward...
"we're only showing models for things that would need a decision" really does become an interesting line.
Anyone else think he’s holed under the waterline, what with Agnew’s fraud comments?
£4.3bn pissed up against the wall, ffs?!
He’s a screaming lay @ ~2/1, surely?
Sunaks problem is that while he might be the most successful when in post, there is no sure fire way to get there. I don't sense that he has the parliamentary support to be sure of reaching the final two, or the membership support needed to win.
That said, he's the current Chancellor, which historically puts him in a good position.
Does it?
Not many of them have made it.
Brown Major Callaghan Macmillan
I think that's it since the War.
It's still three of the last five to take over between General Elections, albeit having been three in a row at one point.
Think the (infamous) newspaper rule has to come in here strong for podcasts. Look at what newspapers report on topics you do know. If they're nonsense, what does it imply for the rest?
I see its gets Joe Rogan day again....i thought it was highly amusing that Neil Young has been a big fan of RFK jnr, a massive conspiracy theorist and an anti-vaxxer...due to also spreading bullshit about GMO crops. So RFK good, despite spreading antivaxxer nonsense, Joe Rogan bad.
I would imagine far more people subscribe to Spotify for Joe Rogan than they do for Joni Mitchell….
He gets 11m listeners per show. it is enormous. And they last 3-4 hours sometimes
i actually listened to the Robert Malone interview. It was exhaustive, often boring, highly detailed, and I still do not believe the anti vax stuff
But it was not hysterical misinformation. Malone is an important scientist and was a key figure in the invention of mRNA tech. He has to be listened to
WTF with some decrepit old billionaire rock star telling me what I can and cannot hear?
I find Joe Rogan very interesting and the idea that he is a right wing conspiracy theory peddler is bollocks. What he does - and I suspect why he gets specifically targeted - is allow guests who views are unorthodox (but, crucially, not nut job) to state their point of view. He also does his research and asks very targeted and detailed questions.
Yes, he’s brilliant and he does his research and he knows his shit and he lets interesting people of all types say their stuff, but then challenges them
There is a reason he gets 11m people a show and CNN gets 800,000
800,000! It is risibly poor
Rogan is the essence of American Free Speech and if a bunch of woke old rockstars get him cancelled it will be the saddest thing, and Putin might as well invade all of us, and we can let Xi take over the whole internet, because then the West is over
There is something incredibly ironic that all these liberal hippy types want him cancelled....
Yes. For some reason they have forgotten… the 1960s and 70s
I've heard the Rogan name. Could you or somebody else summarise his views? (I'll not hang you on it)
Anti-authority, anti-Government, anything that stirs it all up. Personally I find some of his views over the top and too extreme but not in a BNP sort of way. I don't object to him, just don't really get much out of him as it is difficult to pick the wheat from the chaff. Some stuff he is very right on, a lot he is very wrong on - in my opinion.
If you are interested in a particular niche subject, from UFOs to vaccines to boxing to atheism to AI, you will often learn more from a JR podcast with an absolute insider, than you will watching any amount of normal TV. The equivalent is probably reading three or four quality books, but more timely and contemporary than books (because books are always a bit out of date)
You do need to sieve them out tho. Here’s a pretty handy list detailing some of the best
I will give that a view. Until this morning I had never heard of him. Then (and I think it was from here) there was a link to a start of one of his interviews. It tried to find it again and I can't. Obviously posted by someone who is not a fan and the interviewee was talking drivel; in the nutter realms. Can't remember the details but dismissing stats because you can't test everything. No clue about the maths of samples. I thus assumed Rogan might be of the same ilk if this was the sort of person he was interviewing but found his views were more eclectic according to Wikipedia. Will give it a try, but I am going in biased from this mornings experience I am afraid.
My guess is you are referring to his latest Jordan Peterson interview. Where Peterson starts spouting off about climate change being a load of intellectual vagueness, what exactly is “climate”, surely it is everything, there are too many variables
This made people angry and they got viral on Twitter
The thing is, Rogan then comes back and asks Peterson to clarify exactly this. He asks the questions you want to say. Again
I’m not a huge fan of Peterson, unlike my ex wife, age 26, who adores him! For me he is the reedy voiced inferior offspring of Roger Scruton. But Peterson is a massively valuable contrary voice, and is no Nazi or racist. We need people like him. Whereas Cambridge is happy to cancel him
Rogan gives him airtime. Good
The thing about the whole anti-Rogan Neil Young left cancel culture shit is that they are going after one of the last sane spaces where alternative and also - horror! - right wing or libertarian views are aired. Or just heterodox views. Beyond Rogan there is just a sea of Neo Nazi bollocks. Do we really want to cede all that thought-space to the truly nasty and insane? No. So we must allow sane right wing views, even hard right wing views, just as we do allow them on the left, with avowed communists sitting on SAGE
PB is the only place where I think I can get away with this. And even then I'm nervous.
I studied climate change economics at uni. I'm fully on board with the consensus, scientific view.
But. If SAGE can't model Covid properly, with loads of good data, and only forecasting a few months in advance, what chance do we have with something as fickle as mother nature? Over a 100 year period?
I don't doubt that the earth has warmed, and that we are the reason for it. But looking forward...
Covid has made me more sceptical of science as a whole. The way in which 'science' closed ranks on any suggestion which differed from the consensus -like, for example, on lab leak - was quite alarming.
Not one of them, not a single one, even mentions the possibility that they understand why the British voted to Leave on the grounds of sovereignty and democracy. Most of them claim to love the UK, they do not love it, because love means understanding. Nor does the concept that Britain is admirable BECAUSE it is different and seeks self-rule and tries to be properly democratic even enter their tiny minds
Fuck em
Your post is a great example of world leading empathy and self awareness.
Roughly a minimum of 10x those who chose to leave, even after Covid destroyed many EU citizens jobs here.
But, whatever. Remainers need to moan, we get that.
I suspect that most Unionists will stay on in Independent Scotland too, but it doesn't mean that they will like it, and mourn their losses.
If it comes to that I am not sure what we would do to be honest. A lot depends on family which is more important than countries but I can see the balance of our family edging south over the next few years. As a Scots lawyer I will have to hang around until I retire. After that I am not so sure. But the views of those who choose to remain will still be more relevant than the views of those who choose to depart.
Scotland - at least my corner of it - is already far more welcoming to incomers than England is. I can't see how independence suddenly creates an anti-English or anti-Unionist hate that would force people out
How are you judging these things? If my corner of England is very welcoming does that prove all England is? If my corner is less so does that prove the other way?
How am I judging it? I've lived in various parts of England, I've seen the way that the English national psyche has turned more insular and nasty towards the other (the rise of the BNP then UKIP then Brexit and "fuck em" upthread). That England is no longer as open and tolerant as it was feels self-evident though I know the fuck em brigade will disagree.
And Scotland? I totally accept that my corner is not automatically representative. But then again I look at the Scottish government's "New Scots" policy and them having just won a 4th term on a record vote in a record turnout and conclude that there must be some merit in my argument.
There are so many wonderful people in England. There will be many nobbers in Scotland. But the direction of travel south of the wall feels a lot worse than north of it - and I have friends living in England in despair at what is happening to society.
Oh good grief. I know actual snowflakes who are less snowflakey than you, and recently-crippled jackals that are less whiney
Ironically they seem heavily formed by coming from Rochdale, home of the race riots. No doubt living in a massively less diverse country now feels very harmonious and welcoming.
Sometimes, when hardcore remainers mock brexit voters, saying that brexit will mean more brown and black immigrants, which they claim brexit voters don’t want, I wonder if perhaps those hardcore remainers quite liked that freedom of movement ensured that most immigrants were white, european, and christian. Different and exotic, but not actually brown or muslim.
But this may be too cynical, even for me.
I think some of them thought Leavers couldn’t tell the difference between an Indian with a Phd and a Romanian Big Issue seller. And of course a “Polish Plumber” was a boon to some and not to others.
It’s funny how many of the most ardent Remainers were also keen on cheap Labour coming in but seemed to be far less keen on allowing opening up the borders when it came to professional services such as the Law…
Where on earth did you get that from?
It’s fair to say a very disproportionate number of the most ardent Remainers - Grieve, Soubry, Clarke etc - were Barristers, a profession that, when it comes to putting up barriers to stop outside competition from coming in, makes China look like a rank amateur.
I think it is bizarre in the extreme to suggest remainers were against free movement of anyone. Certainly in some professions there has to be checks on competence. I think the NHS is a good example. Encouraged people from anywhere, but need to ensure they are qualified. For most professions where harm can't be done there were no restrictions.
Your last sentence should be modified to “for most professions where harm couldn’t be done to their own interests, there were no restrictions”.
If you work in the NHS, you don’t care if more immigrants come in (and welcome it if it means less work) because your pay / pensions are protected and the increased numbers make no difference. Same goes for areas such as teachers etc.
In the Law and Accounting, though, I’m always surprised at how few people from EU countries there were (ex-Ireland) especially as the firms were international groups that could move people around between offices.
If your point is on loss to life and limb, arguably you could say that someone who was selling their services fiddling around with plumbing, electrics and the construction of a house should be more subject to regulations given there is a direct risk to life / harm if they screw things up.
Re your first sentence that is very cynical, although as a cynic myself I accept there may be some of that (free movement, but we are a special case). I don't have experience of law but I do of accounting and I have found none of that there and I have not found it in professions that don't require professional qualifications.
Re construction there are regulations (I have no idea how good) but certainly stuff like gas, electrics, beams, etc have to be signed off by a qualified person and they are inspected by a building inspector as well. If not someone has been ripping me off.
Anyone else think he’s holed under the waterline, what with Agnew’s fraud comments?
£4.3bn pissed up against the wall, ffs?!
He’s a screaming lay @ ~2/1, surely?
Sunaks problem is that while he might be the most successful when in post, there is no sure fire way to get there. I don't sense that he has the parliamentary support to be sure of reaching the final two, or the membership support needed to win.
That said, he's the current Chancellor, which historically puts him in a good position.
Does it?
Not many of them have made it.
Brown Major Callaghan Macmillan
I think that's it since the War.
That's a pretty good hit rate, isn't it?
Who else has come into office other than through an election?
Johnson - former Foreign Secretary May - Home Secretary Douglas-Home - Foreign Secretary Eden - Foreign Secretary
It's not a guarantee, but sitting Chancellors are in a pretty decent position to take the Crown if a vacancy arises whilst in Government.
As an aside on the Rogan/Young spat, I see that James Blunt once again goes up even further in my estimation with his self awareness, if not my appreciation for his music.
Whilst Young and Mitchell have removed their music from Spotify, Blunt has said that unless Rogan is removed, he will release new music onto the platform.
Now that is a threat everyone should take seriously.
I liked the comment; Joe Rogan couldn't write "Keep on rockin' in the free world", but Neil Young if he so wished could Google stuff, and misinterpret it live on air.
I see Rogans twitter feed is full of anti-vax stuff. Doesn't inspire confidence in listening to any of his longer pieces. Not that I care much for Neil Young either.
I also now see where Leon gets his nuttier Wokefinder General stuff from.
Early Young stuff from the early 70s is particularly good, the Harvest Album etc
After the Goldrush is a great song, and of course he p***** off Lynard Skynard with "Southern Man" which resulted in "Sweet Home Alabama" where "old Neil", and "Mr Young" get name checked.
Think the (infamous) newspaper rule has to come in here strong for podcasts. Look at what newspapers report on topics you do know. If they're nonsense, what does it imply for the rest?
That rules out all form of media, though. The BBC included - their stuff on inflation had been driven by social media campaigns, not on the actual data from ONS.
Think the (infamous) newspaper rule has to come in here strong for podcasts. Look at what newspapers report on topics you do know. If they're nonsense, what does it imply for the rest?
The point with Rogan podcast, is it is undoubtable there are some fringe types on, there are some nutters, there are occasionally conspiracy types, but there are also genuinely serious people e.g. Pinker, Philip Goff, Lex Fridman.
I see its gets Joe Rogan day again....i thought it was highly amusing that Neil Young has been a big fan of RFK jnr, a massive conspiracy theorist and an anti-vaxxer...due to also spreading bullshit about GMO crops. So RFK good, despite spreading antivaxxer nonsense, Joe Rogan bad.
I would imagine far more people subscribe to Spotify for Joe Rogan than they do for Joni Mitchell….
He gets 11m listeners per show. it is enormous. And they last 3-4 hours sometimes
i actually listened to the Robert Malone interview. It was exhaustive, often boring, highly detailed, and I still do not believe the anti vax stuff
But it was not hysterical misinformation. Malone is an important scientist and was a key figure in the invention of mRNA tech. He has to be listened to
WTF with some decrepit old billionaire rock star telling me what I can and cannot hear?
I find Joe Rogan very interesting and the idea that he is a right wing conspiracy theory peddler is bollocks. What he does - and I suspect why he gets specifically targeted - is allow guests who views are unorthodox (but, crucially, not nut job) to state their point of view. He also does his research and asks very targeted and detailed questions.
Yes, he’s brilliant and he does his research and he knows his shit and he lets interesting people of all types say their stuff, but then challenges them
There is a reason he gets 11m people a show and CNN gets 800,000
800,000! It is risibly poor
Rogan is the essence of American Free Speech and if a bunch of woke old rockstars get him cancelled it will be the saddest thing, and Putin might as well invade all of us, and we can let Xi take over the whole internet, because then the West is over
There is something incredibly ironic that all these liberal hippy types want him cancelled....
Yes. For some reason they have forgotten… the 1960s and 70s
I've heard the Rogan name. Could you or somebody else summarise his views? (I'll not hang you on it)
Anti-authority, anti-Government, anything that stirs it all up. Personally I find some of his views over the top and too extreme but not in a BNP sort of way. I don't object to him, just don't really get much out of him as it is difficult to pick the wheat from the chaff. Some stuff he is very right on, a lot he is very wrong on - in my opinion.
If you are interested in a particular niche subject, from UFOs to vaccines to boxing to atheism to AI, you will often learn more from a JR podcast with an absolute insider, than you will watching any amount of normal TV. The equivalent is probably reading three or four quality books, but more timely and contemporary than books (because books are always a bit out of date)
You do need to sieve them out tho. Here’s a pretty handy list detailing some of the best
I will give that a view. Until this morning I had never heard of him. Then (and I think it was from here) there was a link to a start of one of his interviews. It tried to find it again and I can't. Obviously posted by someone who is not a fan and the interviewee was talking drivel; in the nutter realms. Can't remember the details but dismissing stats because you can't test everything. No clue about the maths of samples. I thus assumed Rogan might be of the same ilk if this was the sort of person he was interviewing but found his views were more eclectic according to Wikipedia. Will give it a try, but I am going in biased from this mornings experience I am afraid.
My guess is you are referring to his latest Jordan Peterson interview. Where Peterson starts spouting off about climate change being a load of intellectual vagueness, what exactly is “climate”, surely it is everything, there are too many variables
This made people angry and they got viral on Twitter
The thing is, Rogan then comes back and asks Peterson to clarify exactly this. He asks the questions you want to say. Again
I’m not a huge fan of Peterson, unlike my ex wife, age 26, who adores him! For me he is the reedy voiced inferior offspring of Roger Scruton. But Peterson is a massively valuable contrary voice, and is no Nazi or racist. We need people like him. Whereas Cambridge is happy to cancel him
Rogan gives him airtime. Good
The thing about the whole anti-Rogan Neil Young left cancel culture shit is that they are going after one of the last sane spaces where alternative and also - horror! - right wing or libertarian views are aired. Or just heterodox views. Beyond Rogan there is just a sea of Neo Nazi bollocks. Do we really want to cede all that thought-space to the truly nasty and insane? No. So we must allow sane right wing views, even hard right wing views, just as we do allow them on the left, with avowed communists sitting on SAGE
I was a big fan of Jordan Peterson for a while, and read his 'rules for life' book a couple of times. I then tried out his online course which promised to explain personality, at quite significant cost to myself, which I found to be very disappointing. I didn't find the framework which he uses to explain human behaviour, including the psychometric testing that he believes in, to be particularly convincing at all. I didn't persevere with it, ultimately through lack of interest.
I find that I agree with much of his general perspective, and he is a great as a sort of virtual life coach for lots of people, particularly young men, including myself on occasion. The main problem that I can see is that he has a tendency for over enthusiasm and drama, missing out on nuance, certainly this criticism is often made of him by scientists and biologists. His crab analogy which he often gets criticised for was poor and a significant misjudgement in my view.
I believe he is a very sincere figure and has had a remarkable influence on peoples lives. I don't think he courts drama, but it doesn't harm his book sales. The attempts to cancel him are based on prejudice and ignorance.
Think the (infamous) newspaper rule has to come in here strong for podcasts. Look at what newspapers report on topics you do know. If they're nonsense, what does it imply for the rest?
That rules out all form of media, though. The BBC included - their stuff on inflation had been driven by social media campaigns, not on the actual data from ONS.
The BBC coverage of COVID has been utter shit.
I am reminded of Trump going, WRRRRRONNNNGGGGG, for the past 2 years.
Think the (infamous) newspaper rule has to come in here strong for podcasts. Look at what newspapers report on topics you do know. If they're nonsense, what does it imply for the rest?
That rules out all form of media, though. The BBC included - their stuff on inflation had been driven by social media campaigns, not on the actual data from ONS.
I wouldn't go quite that far, no, but it is rather close to the conclusion I came to.
FU - I was speaking more generally. But if I was to invest a regular 3 hours into Joe Rogan, I'd be careful to pick the first one to be something I felt I was pretty confident on or someone whose wider work I'd come across before. If that makes sense.
I see its gets Joe Rogan day again....i thought it was highly amusing that Neil Young has been a big fan of RFK jnr, a massive conspiracy theorist and an anti-vaxxer...due to also spreading bullshit about GMO crops. So RFK good, despite spreading antivaxxer nonsense, Joe Rogan bad.
I would imagine far more people subscribe to Spotify for Joe Rogan than they do for Joni Mitchell….
He gets 11m listeners per show. it is enormous. And they last 3-4 hours sometimes
i actually listened to the Robert Malone interview. It was exhaustive, often boring, highly detailed, and I still do not believe the anti vax stuff
But it was not hysterical misinformation. Malone is an important scientist and was a key figure in the invention of mRNA tech. He has to be listened to
WTF with some decrepit old billionaire rock star telling me what I can and cannot hear?
I find Joe Rogan very interesting and the idea that he is a right wing conspiracy theory peddler is bollocks. What he does - and I suspect why he gets specifically targeted - is allow guests who views are unorthodox (but, crucially, not nut job) to state their point of view. He also does his research and asks very targeted and detailed questions.
Yes, he’s brilliant and he does his research and he knows his shit and he lets interesting people of all types say their stuff, but then challenges them
There is a reason he gets 11m people a show and CNN gets 800,000
800,000! It is risibly poor
Rogan is the essence of American Free Speech and if a bunch of woke old rockstars get him cancelled it will be the saddest thing, and Putin might as well invade all of us, and we can let Xi take over the whole internet, because then the West is over
There is something incredibly ironic that all these liberal hippy types want him cancelled....
Yes. For some reason they have forgotten… the 1960s and 70s
I've heard the Rogan name. Could you or somebody else summarise his views? (I'll not hang you on it)
Anti-authority, anti-Government, anything that stirs it all up. Personally I find some of his views over the top and too extreme but not in a BNP sort of way. I don't object to him, just don't really get much out of him as it is difficult to pick the wheat from the chaff. Some stuff he is very right on, a lot he is very wrong on - in my opinion.
If you are interested in a particular niche subject, from UFOs to vaccines to boxing to atheism to AI, you will often learn more from a JR podcast with an absolute insider, than you will watching any amount of normal TV. The equivalent is probably reading three or four quality books, but more timely and contemporary than books (because books are always a bit out of date)
You do need to sieve them out tho. Here’s a pretty handy list detailing some of the best
I will give that a view. Until this morning I had never heard of him. Then (and I think it was from here) there was a link to a start of one of his interviews. It tried to find it again and I can't. Obviously posted by someone who is not a fan and the interviewee was talking drivel; in the nutter realms. Can't remember the details but dismissing stats because you can't test everything. No clue about the maths of samples. I thus assumed Rogan might be of the same ilk if this was the sort of person he was interviewing but found his views were more eclectic according to Wikipedia. Will give it a try, but I am going in biased from this mornings experience I am afraid.
My guess is you are referring to his latest Jordan Peterson interview. Where Peterson starts spouting off about climate change being a load of intellectual vagueness, what exactly is “climate”, surely it is everything, there are too many variables
This made people angry and they got viral on Twitter
The thing is, Rogan then comes back and asks Peterson to clarify exactly this. He asks the questions you want to say. Again
I’m not a huge fan of Peterson, unlike my ex wife, age 26, who adores him! For me he is the reedy voiced inferior offspring of Roger Scruton. But Peterson is a massively valuable contrary voice, and is no Nazi or racist. We need people like him. Whereas Cambridge is happy to cancel him
Rogan gives him airtime. Good
The thing about the whole anti-Rogan Neil Young left cancel culture shit is that they are going after one of the last sane spaces where alternative and also - horror! - right wing or libertarian views are aired. Or just heterodox views. Beyond Rogan there is just a sea of Neo Nazi bollocks. Do we really want to cede all that thought-space to the truly nasty and insane? No. So we must allow sane right wing views, even hard right wing views, just as we do allow them on the left, with avowed communists sitting on SAGE
PB is the only place where I think I can get away with this. And even then I'm nervous.
I studied climate change economics at uni. I'm fully on board with the consensus, scientific view.
But. If SAGE can't model Covid properly, with loads of good data, and only forecasting a few months in advance, what chance do we have with something as fickle as mother nature? Over a 100 year period?
I don't doubt that the earth has warmed, and that we are the reason for it. But looking forward...
Yes, the anti-science science on display during Covid - especially over “lab leak” - has entirely upended my previously respectful views towards Establishment Science. The fact is, they all lied. Grievously. Some to protect China, some to protect their careers, some to protect “the future of virology” (or “research” or “epidemiology” or you-name-it) and some did it for outright partisan political reasons, to damage or hinder Trump
Even if Lab Leak is wrong (unlikely, but possible), all the above happened, unquestionably
And then you think, Hmm, climate change
Like you I believe it is almost certainly happening, it is probably but less certainly man-made, but as for the modelling towards the future, and possible ways of “solving it”. Hmmmmmmmm
I see its gets Joe Rogan day again....i thought it was highly amusing that Neil Young has been a big fan of RFK jnr, a massive conspiracy theorist and an anti-vaxxer...due to also spreading bullshit about GMO crops. So RFK good, despite spreading antivaxxer nonsense, Joe Rogan bad.
I would imagine far more people subscribe to Spotify for Joe Rogan than they do for Joni Mitchell….
He gets 11m listeners per show. it is enormous. And they last 3-4 hours sometimes
i actually listened to the Robert Malone interview. It was exhaustive, often boring, highly detailed, and I still do not believe the anti vax stuff
But it was not hysterical misinformation. Malone is an important scientist and was a key figure in the invention of mRNA tech. He has to be listened to
WTF with some decrepit old billionaire rock star telling me what I can and cannot hear?
I find Joe Rogan very interesting and the idea that he is a right wing conspiracy theory peddler is bollocks. What he does - and I suspect why he gets specifically targeted - is allow guests who views are unorthodox (but, crucially, not nut job) to state their point of view. He also does his research and asks very targeted and detailed questions.
Yes, he’s brilliant and he does his research and he knows his shit and he lets interesting people of all types say their stuff, but then challenges them
There is a reason he gets 11m people a show and CNN gets 800,000
800,000! It is risibly poor
Rogan is the essence of American Free Speech and if a bunch of woke old rockstars get him cancelled it will be the saddest thing, and Putin might as well invade all of us, and we can let Xi take over the whole internet, because then the West is over
There is something incredibly ironic that all these liberal hippy types want him cancelled....
Yes. For some reason they have forgotten… the 1960s and 70s
I've heard the Rogan name. Could you or somebody else summarise his views? (I'll not hang you on it)
Anti-authority, anti-Government, anything that stirs it all up. Personally I find some of his views over the top and too extreme but not in a BNP sort of way. I don't object to him, just don't really get much out of him as it is difficult to pick the wheat from the chaff. Some stuff he is very right on, a lot he is very wrong on - in my opinion.
If you are interested in a particular niche subject, from UFOs to vaccines to boxing to atheism to AI, you will often learn more from a JR podcast with an absolute insider, than you will watching any amount of normal TV. The equivalent is probably reading three or four quality books, but more timely and contemporary than books (because books are always a bit out of date)
You do need to sieve them out tho. Here’s a pretty handy list detailing some of the best
I will give that a view. Until this morning I had never heard of him. Then (and I think it was from here) there was a link to a start of one of his interviews. It tried to find it again and I can't. Obviously posted by someone who is not a fan and the interviewee was talking drivel; in the nutter realms. Can't remember the details but dismissing stats because you can't test everything. No clue about the maths of samples. I thus assumed Rogan might be of the same ilk if this was the sort of person he was interviewing but found his views were more eclectic according to Wikipedia. Will give it a try, but I am going in biased from this mornings experience I am afraid.
My guess is you are referring to his latest Jordan Peterson interview. Where Peterson starts spouting off about climate change being a load of intellectual vagueness, what exactly is “climate”, surely it is everything, there are too many variables
This made people angry and they got viral on Twitter
The thing is, Rogan then comes back and asks Peterson to clarify exactly this. He asks the questions you want to say. Again
I’m not a huge fan of Peterson, unlike my ex wife, age 26, who adores him! For me he is the reedy voiced inferior offspring of Roger Scruton. But Peterson is a massively valuable contrary voice, and is no Nazi or racist. We need people like him. Whereas Cambridge is happy to cancel him
Rogan gives him airtime. Good
The thing about the whole anti-Rogan Neil Young left cancel culture shit is that they are going after one of the last sane spaces where alternative and also - horror! - right wing or libertarian views are aired. Or just heterodox views. Beyond Rogan there is just a sea of Neo Nazi bollocks. Do we really want to cede all that thought-space to the truly nasty and insane? No. So we must allow sane right wing views, even hard right wing views, just as we do allow them on the left, with avowed communists sitting on SAGE
PB is the only place where I think I can get away with this. And even then I'm nervous.
I studied climate change economics at uni. I'm fully on board with the consensus, scientific view.
But. If SAGE can't model Covid properly, with loads of good data, and only forecasting a few months in advance, what chance do we have with something as fickle as mother nature? Over a 100 year period?
I don't doubt that the earth has warmed, and that we are the reason for it. But looking forward...
Agree. The only rational ground of hope is uncertainty. If the science is right in the narrow sense we are stuffed, as the relevant changes are not going to happen fast enough, or at least there is no reason to think so.
But the common sense things we need to do we need to do anyway. Electrification with renewables; carbon capture; rewilding; diminishing use of gas/oil etc. I don't think this can happen fast enough to save the planet if the predictions are correct, but they might not be.
Not only are we as of now putting more CO2 into the air, we are doing so on an increasing trajectory; this despite 30+ years of talk.
I see its gets Joe Rogan day again....i thought it was highly amusing that Neil Young has been a big fan of RFK jnr, a massive conspiracy theorist and an anti-vaxxer...due to also spreading bullshit about GMO crops. So RFK good, despite spreading antivaxxer nonsense, Joe Rogan bad.
I would imagine far more people subscribe to Spotify for Joe Rogan than they do for Joni Mitchell….
He gets 11m listeners per show. it is enormous. And they last 3-4 hours sometimes
i actually listened to the Robert Malone interview. It was exhaustive, often boring, highly detailed, and I still do not believe the anti vax stuff
But it was not hysterical misinformation. Malone is an important scientist and was a key figure in the invention of mRNA tech. He has to be listened to
WTF with some decrepit old billionaire rock star telling me what I can and cannot hear?
I find Joe Rogan very interesting and the idea that he is a right wing conspiracy theory peddler is bollocks. What he does - and I suspect why he gets specifically targeted - is allow guests who views are unorthodox (but, crucially, not nut job) to state their point of view. He also does his research and asks very targeted and detailed questions.
Yes, he’s brilliant and he does his research and he knows his shit and he lets interesting people of all types say their stuff, but then challenges them
There is a reason he gets 11m people a show and CNN gets 800,000
800,000! It is risibly poor
Rogan is the essence of American Free Speech and if a bunch of woke old rockstars get him cancelled it will be the saddest thing, and Putin might as well invade all of us, and we can let Xi take over the whole internet, because then the West is over
There is something incredibly ironic that all these liberal hippy types want him cancelled....
Yes. For some reason they have forgotten… the 1960s and 70s
I've heard the Rogan name. Could you or somebody else summarise his views? (I'll not hang you on it)
Anti-authority, anti-Government, anything that stirs it all up. Personally I find some of his views over the top and too extreme but not in a BNP sort of way. I don't object to him, just don't really get much out of him as it is difficult to pick the wheat from the chaff. Some stuff he is very right on, a lot he is very wrong on - in my opinion.
If you are interested in a particular niche subject, from UFOs to vaccines to boxing to atheism to AI, you will often learn more from a JR podcast with an absolute insider, than you will watching any amount of normal TV. The equivalent is probably reading three or four quality books, but more timely and contemporary than books (because books are always a bit out of date)
You do need to sieve them out tho. Here’s a pretty handy list detailing some of the best
I will give that a view. Until this morning I had never heard of him. Then (and I think it was from here) there was a link to a start of one of his interviews. It tried to find it again and I can't. Obviously posted by someone who is not a fan and the interviewee was talking drivel; in the nutter realms. Can't remember the details but dismissing stats because you can't test everything. No clue about the maths of samples. I thus assumed Rogan might be of the same ilk if this was the sort of person he was interviewing but found his views were more eclectic according to Wikipedia. Will give it a try, but I am going in biased from this mornings experience I am afraid.
My guess is you are referring to his latest Jordan Peterson interview. Where Peterson starts spouting off about climate change being a load of intellectual vagueness, what exactly is “climate”, surely it is everything, there are too many variables
This made people angry and they got viral on Twitter
The thing is, Rogan then comes back and asks Peterson to clarify exactly this. He asks the questions you want to say. Again
I’m not a huge fan of Peterson, unlike my ex wife, age 26, who adores him! For me he is the reedy voiced inferior offspring of Roger Scruton. But Peterson is a massively valuable contrary voice, and is no Nazi or racist. We need people like him. Whereas Cambridge is happy to cancel him
Rogan gives him airtime. Good
The thing about the whole anti-Rogan Neil Young left cancel culture shit is that they are going after one of the last sane spaces where alternative and also - horror! - right wing or libertarian views are aired. Or just heterodox views. Beyond Rogan there is just a sea of Neo Nazi bollocks. Do we really want to cede all that thought-space to the truly nasty and insane? No. So we must allow sane right wing views, even hard right wing views, just as we do allow them on the left, with avowed communists sitting on SAGE
PB is the only place where I think I can get away with this. And even then I'm nervous.
I studied climate change economics at uni. I'm fully on board with the consensus, scientific view.
But. If SAGE can't model Covid properly, with loads of good data, and only forecasting a few months in advance, what chance do we have with something as fickle as mother nature? Over a 100 year period?
I don't doubt that the earth has warmed, and that we are the reason for it. But looking forward...
One of the things is how poor we are at predicting the future, even though we think it obvious how the present arose. We are very good at deciding that present circumstances are the inevitable result of history. Yet we have very poor records of forecasting. Anyone on PB sees that constantly even when we have plenty of data and short horizons.
As such, climate change predictions are often wrong, even though we see about us the inevitable changes from past behaviour. Sure some pandemic models were way out, on the other hand new variants were underestimated. I think with pandemics people change their behaviour, which alters the curve, but I think that we see little similar individual change when it comes to climate change.
I am quite fatalistic and pessimistic about the climate. I don't think action will be taken in time or type to stop it, and that much of the world and its wonders will be destroyed in the next century. Mankind will survive. We are like cockroaches or rats in our versatility.
I see its gets Joe Rogan day again....i thought it was highly amusing that Neil Young has been a big fan of RFK jnr, a massive conspiracy theorist and an anti-vaxxer...due to also spreading bullshit about GMO crops. So RFK good, despite spreading antivaxxer nonsense, Joe Rogan bad.
I would imagine far more people subscribe to Spotify for Joe Rogan than they do for Joni Mitchell….
He gets 11m listeners per show. it is enormous. And they last 3-4 hours sometimes
i actually listened to the Robert Malone interview. It was exhaustive, often boring, highly detailed, and I still do not believe the anti vax stuff
But it was not hysterical misinformation. Malone is an important scientist and was a key figure in the invention of mRNA tech. He has to be listened to
WTF with some decrepit old billionaire rock star telling me what I can and cannot hear?
I find Joe Rogan very interesting and the idea that he is a right wing conspiracy theory peddler is bollocks. What he does - and I suspect why he gets specifically targeted - is allow guests who views are unorthodox (but, crucially, not nut job) to state their point of view. He also does his research and asks very targeted and detailed questions.
Yes, he’s brilliant and he does his research and he knows his shit and he lets interesting people of all types say their stuff, but then challenges them
There is a reason he gets 11m people a show and CNN gets 800,000
800,000! It is risibly poor
Rogan is the essence of American Free Speech and if a bunch of woke old rockstars get him cancelled it will be the saddest thing, and Putin might as well invade all of us, and we can let Xi take over the whole internet, because then the West is over
There is something incredibly ironic that all these liberal hippy types want him cancelled....
Yes. For some reason they have forgotten… the 1960s and 70s
I've heard the Rogan name. Could you or somebody else summarise his views? (I'll not hang you on it)
Anti-authority, anti-Government, anything that stirs it all up. Personally I find some of his views over the top and too extreme but not in a BNP sort of way. I don't object to him, just don't really get much out of him as it is difficult to pick the wheat from the chaff. Some stuff he is very right on, a lot he is very wrong on - in my opinion.
If you are interested in a particular niche subject, from UFOs to vaccines to boxing to atheism to AI, you will often learn more from a JR podcast with an absolute insider, than you will watching any amount of normal TV. The equivalent is probably reading three or four quality books, but more timely and contemporary than books (because books are always a bit out of date)
You do need to sieve them out tho. Here’s a pretty handy list detailing some of the best
I will give that a view. Until this morning I had never heard of him. Then (and I think it was from here) there was a link to a start of one of his interviews. It tried to find it again and I can't. Obviously posted by someone who is not a fan and the interviewee was talking drivel; in the nutter realms. Can't remember the details but dismissing stats because you can't test everything. No clue about the maths of samples. I thus assumed Rogan might be of the same ilk if this was the sort of person he was interviewing but found his views were more eclectic according to Wikipedia. Will give it a try, but I am going in biased from this mornings experience I am afraid.
My guess is you are referring to his latest Jordan Peterson interview. Where Peterson starts spouting off about climate change being a load of intellectual vagueness, what exactly is “climate”, surely it is everything, there are too many variables
This made people angry and they got viral on Twitter
The thing is, Rogan then comes back and asks Peterson to clarify exactly this. He asks the questions you want to say. Again
I’m not a huge fan of Peterson, unlike my ex wife, age 26, who adores him! For me he is the reedy voiced inferior offspring of Roger Scruton. But Peterson is a massively valuable contrary voice, and is no Nazi or racist. We need people like him. Whereas Cambridge is happy to cancel him
Rogan gives him airtime. Good
The thing about the whole anti-Rogan Neil Young left cancel culture shit is that they are going after one of the last sane spaces where alternative and also - horror! - right wing or libertarian views are aired. Or just heterodox views. Beyond Rogan there is just a sea of Neo Nazi bollocks. Do we really want to cede all that thought-space to the truly nasty and insane? No. So we must allow sane right wing views, even hard right wing views, just as we do allow them on the left, with avowed communists sitting on SAGE
PB is the only place where I think I can get away with this. And even then I'm nervous.
I studied climate change economics at uni. I'm fully on board with the consensus, scientific view.
But. If SAGE can't model Covid properly, with loads of good data, and only forecasting a few months in advance, what chance do we have with something as fickle as mother nature? Over a 100 year period?
I don't doubt that the earth has warmed, and that we are the reason for it. But looking forward...
Yes, the anti-science science on display during Covid - especially over “lab leak” - has entirely upended my previously respectful views towards Establishment Science. The fact is, they all lied. Grievously. Some to protect China, some to protect their careers, some to protect “the future of virology” (or “research” or “epidemiology” or you-name-it) and some did it for outright partisan political reasons, to damage or hinder Trump
Even if Lab Leak is wrong (unlikely, but possible), all the above happened, unquestionably
And then you think, Hmm, climate change
Like you I believe it is almost certainly happening, it is probably but less certainly man-made, but as for the modelling towards the future, and possible ways of “solving it”. Hmmmmmmmm
I see its gets Joe Rogan day again....i thought it was highly amusing that Neil Young has been a big fan of RFK jnr, a massive conspiracy theorist and an anti-vaxxer...due to also spreading bullshit about GMO crops. So RFK good, despite spreading antivaxxer nonsense, Joe Rogan bad.
I would imagine far more people subscribe to Spotify for Joe Rogan than they do for Joni Mitchell….
He gets 11m listeners per show. it is enormous. And they last 3-4 hours sometimes
i actually listened to the Robert Malone interview. It was exhaustive, often boring, highly detailed, and I still do not believe the anti vax stuff
But it was not hysterical misinformation. Malone is an important scientist and was a key figure in the invention of mRNA tech. He has to be listened to
WTF with some decrepit old billionaire rock star telling me what I can and cannot hear?
I find Joe Rogan very interesting and the idea that he is a right wing conspiracy theory peddler is bollocks. What he does - and I suspect why he gets specifically targeted - is allow guests who views are unorthodox (but, crucially, not nut job) to state their point of view. He also does his research and asks very targeted and detailed questions.
Yes, he’s brilliant and he does his research and he knows his shit and he lets interesting people of all types say their stuff, but then challenges them
There is a reason he gets 11m people a show and CNN gets 800,000
800,000! It is risibly poor
Rogan is the essence of American Free Speech and if a bunch of woke old rockstars get him cancelled it will be the saddest thing, and Putin might as well invade all of us, and we can let Xi take over the whole internet, because then the West is over
There is something incredibly ironic that all these liberal hippy types want him cancelled....
Yes. For some reason they have forgotten… the 1960s and 70s
I've heard the Rogan name. Could you or somebody else summarise his views? (I'll not hang you on it)
Anti-authority, anti-Government, anything that stirs it all up. Personally I find some of his views over the top and too extreme but not in a BNP sort of way. I don't object to him, just don't really get much out of him as it is difficult to pick the wheat from the chaff. Some stuff he is very right on, a lot he is very wrong on - in my opinion.
If you are interested in a particular niche subject, from UFOs to vaccines to boxing to atheism to AI, you will often learn more from a JR podcast with an absolute insider, than you will watching any amount of normal TV. The equivalent is probably reading three or four quality books, but more timely and contemporary than books (because books are always a bit out of date)
You do need to sieve them out tho. Here’s a pretty handy list detailing some of the best
I will give that a view. Until this morning I had never heard of him. Then (and I think it was from here) there was a link to a start of one of his interviews. It tried to find it again and I can't. Obviously posted by someone who is not a fan and the interviewee was talking drivel; in the nutter realms. Can't remember the details but dismissing stats because you can't test everything. No clue about the maths of samples. I thus assumed Rogan might be of the same ilk if this was the sort of person he was interviewing but found his views were more eclectic according to Wikipedia. Will give it a try, but I am going in biased from this mornings experience I am afraid.
My guess is you are referring to his latest Jordan Peterson interview. Where Peterson starts spouting off about climate change being a load of intellectual vagueness, what exactly is “climate”, surely it is everything, there are too many variables
This made people angry and they got viral on Twitter
The thing is, Rogan then comes back and asks Peterson to clarify exactly this. He asks the questions you want to say. Again
I’m not a huge fan of Peterson, unlike my ex wife, age 26, who adores him! For me he is the reedy voiced inferior offspring of Roger Scruton. But Peterson is a massively valuable contrary voice, and is no Nazi or racist. We need people like him. Whereas Cambridge is happy to cancel him
Rogan gives him airtime. Good
The thing about the whole anti-Rogan Neil Young left cancel culture shit is that they are going after one of the last sane spaces where alternative and also - horror! - right wing or libertarian views are aired. Or just heterodox views. Beyond Rogan there is just a sea of Neo Nazi bollocks. Do we really want to cede all that thought-space to the truly nasty and insane? No. So we must allow sane right wing views, even hard right wing views, just as we do allow them on the left, with avowed communists sitting on SAGE
I was a big fan of Jordan Peterson for a while, and read his 'rules for life' book a couple of times. I then tried out his online course which promised to explain personality, at quite significant cost to myself, which I found to be very disappointing. I didn't find the framework which he uses to explain human behaviour, including the psychometric testing that he believes in, to be particularly convincing at all. I didn't persevere with it, ultimately through lack of interest.
I find that I agree with much of his general perspective, and he is a great as a sort of virtual life coach for lots of people, particularly young men, including myself on occasion. The main problem that I can see is that he has a tendency for over enthusiasm and drama, missing out on nuance, certainly this criticism is often made of him by scientists and biologists. His crab analogy which he often gets criticised for was poor and a significant misjudgement in my view.
I believe he is a very sincere figure and has had a remarkable influence on peoples lives. I don't think he courts drama, but it doesn't harm his book sales. The attempts to cancel him are based on prejudice and ignorance.
Peterson is a strange individual with a lot of his own demons.
IMO the problem with say Peterson versus Rogan. Rogan isn't professing to be an expert in anything, he is explicating saying well I'm just the bloke from the cage fighting talking to interesting people.
Where as, Peterson is supposed grounded in academic thought and rigour and you are supposed to take him seriously having an alternative narrative to a lot of the mainstream because of this grounding. However, while some of it is just common sense and mostly harmless, he also has some very odd takes on things that don't seem grounded in anything, and a lot of people appear to have a rather cultish following on his every word.
Anyone think this BJ thing is over listen to Any Answers. Listen particularly for ex John Major's Private Secretary (or similar). Hilarious. I'm not not talking studio audience I'm talking about the phone in afterwards. As a human being Johnson's finished
Most of the habitual Tories I know would not vote Tory today, or so they say. (I generally vote Tory in GEs but certainly would not so right now). But there is no sense of having given up on the Tories as such, any more than centrists gave up on Labour in the dark days of Corbyn.
Currently my Rogan research has bored me to death. Are there worthwhile Rogan things?
This is the Andrew Doyle one on comedy, Wokeness etc
Remember this is in-depth stuff, 2-4 hours of interview, Way beyond what most people - you? - are used to.You have to give yourself time to adjust to a new but richer framework
I see its gets Joe Rogan day again....i thought it was highly amusing that Neil Young has been a big fan of RFK jnr, a massive conspiracy theorist and an anti-vaxxer...due to also spreading bullshit about GMO crops. So RFK good, despite spreading antivaxxer nonsense, Joe Rogan bad.
I would imagine far more people subscribe to Spotify for Joe Rogan than they do for Joni Mitchell….
He gets 11m listeners per show. it is enormous. And they last 3-4 hours sometimes
i actually listened to the Robert Malone interview. It was exhaustive, often boring, highly detailed, and I still do not believe the anti vax stuff
But it was not hysterical misinformation. Malone is an important scientist and was a key figure in the invention of mRNA tech. He has to be listened to
WTF with some decrepit old billionaire rock star telling me what I can and cannot hear?
I find Joe Rogan very interesting and the idea that he is a right wing conspiracy theory peddler is bollocks. What he does - and I suspect why he gets specifically targeted - is allow guests who views are unorthodox (but, crucially, not nut job) to state their point of view. He also does his research and asks very targeted and detailed questions.
Yes, he’s brilliant and he does his research and he knows his shit and he lets interesting people of all types say their stuff, but then challenges them
There is a reason he gets 11m people a show and CNN gets 800,000
800,000! It is risibly poor
Rogan is the essence of American Free Speech and if a bunch of woke old rockstars get him cancelled it will be the saddest thing, and Putin might as well invade all of us, and we can let Xi take over the whole internet, because then the West is over
There is something incredibly ironic that all these liberal hippy types want him cancelled....
Yes. For some reason they have forgotten… the 1960s and 70s
I've heard the Rogan name. Could you or somebody else summarise his views? (I'll not hang you on it)
Anti-authority, anti-Government, anything that stirs it all up. Personally I find some of his views over the top and too extreme but not in a BNP sort of way. I don't object to him, just don't really get much out of him as it is difficult to pick the wheat from the chaff. Some stuff he is very right on, a lot he is very wrong on - in my opinion.
If you are interested in a particular niche subject, from UFOs to vaccines to boxing to atheism to AI, you will often learn more from a JR podcast with an absolute insider, than you will watching any amount of normal TV. The equivalent is probably reading three or four quality books, but more timely and contemporary than books (because books are always a bit out of date)
You do need to sieve them out tho. Here’s a pretty handy list detailing some of the best
I will give that a view. Until this morning I had never heard of him. Then (and I think it was from here) there was a link to a start of one of his interviews. It tried to find it again and I can't. Obviously posted by someone who is not a fan and the interviewee was talking drivel; in the nutter realms. Can't remember the details but dismissing stats because you can't test everything. No clue about the maths of samples. I thus assumed Rogan might be of the same ilk if this was the sort of person he was interviewing but found his views were more eclectic according to Wikipedia. Will give it a try, but I am going in biased from this mornings experience I am afraid.
My guess is you are referring to his latest Jordan Peterson interview. Where Peterson starts spouting off about climate change being a load of intellectual vagueness, what exactly is “climate”, surely it is everything, there are too many variables
This made people angry and they got viral on Twitter
The thing is, Rogan then comes back and asks Peterson to clarify exactly this. He asks the questions you want to say. Again
I’m not a huge fan of Peterson, unlike my ex wife, age 26, who adores him! For me he is the reedy voiced inferior offspring of Roger Scruton. But Peterson is a massively valuable contrary voice, and is no Nazi or racist. We need people like him. Whereas Cambridge is happy to cancel him
Rogan gives him airtime. Good
The thing about the whole anti-Rogan Neil Young left cancel culture shit is that they are going after one of the last sane spaces where alternative and also - horror! - right wing or libertarian views are aired. Or just heterodox views. Beyond Rogan there is just a sea of Neo Nazi bollocks. Do we really want to cede all that thought-space to the truly nasty and insane? No. So we must allow sane right wing views, even hard right wing views, just as we do allow them on the left, with avowed communists sitting on SAGE
I was a big fan of Jordan Peterson for a while, and read his 'rules for life' book a couple of times. I then tried out his online course which promised to explain personality, at quite significant cost to myself, which I found to be very disappointing. I didn't find the framework which he uses to explain human behaviour, including the psychometric testing that he believes in, to be particularly convincing at all. I didn't persevere with it, ultimately through lack of interest.
I find that I agree with much of his general perspective, and he is a great as a sort of virtual life coach for lots of people, particularly young men, including myself on occasion. The main problem that I can see is that he has a tendency for over enthusiasm and drama, missing out on nuance, certainly this criticism is often made of him by scientists and biologists. His crab analogy which he often gets criticised for was poor and a significant misjudgement in my view.
I believe he is a very sincere figure and has had a remarkable influence on peoples lives. I don't think he courts drama, but it doesn't harm his book sales. The attempts to cancel him are based on prejudice and ignorance.
Peterson is a strange individual with a lot of his own demons.
IMO the problem with say Peterson versus Rogan. Rogan isn't professing to be an expert in anything, he is explicating saying well I'm just the bloke from the cage fighting talking to interesting people.
Where as, Peterson is supposed grounded in academic thought and rigour and you are supposed to take him seriously having an alternative narrative to a lot of the mainstream because of this grounding. However, while some of it is just common sense and mostly harmless, he also has some very odd takes on things that don't seem grounded in anything, and a lot of people appear to have a rather cultish following on his every word.
As i say: he is the poor man’s Roger Scruton. And yes, some weird mental glitches in his head
God, I would love to hear Rogan with yer actual Scruton
Currently my Rogan research has bored me to death. Are there worthwhile Rogan things?
This is the Andrew Doyle one on comedy, Wokeness etc
Remember this is in-depth stuff, 2-4 hours of interview, Way beyond what most people - you? - are used to.You have to give yourself time to adjust to a new but richer framework
I see its gets Joe Rogan day again....i thought it was highly amusing that Neil Young has been a big fan of RFK jnr, a massive conspiracy theorist and an anti-vaxxer...due to also spreading bullshit about GMO crops. So RFK good, despite spreading antivaxxer nonsense, Joe Rogan bad.
I would imagine far more people subscribe to Spotify for Joe Rogan than they do for Joni Mitchell….
He gets 11m listeners per show. it is enormous. And they last 3-4 hours sometimes
i actually listened to the Robert Malone interview. It was exhaustive, often boring, highly detailed, and I still do not believe the anti vax stuff
But it was not hysterical misinformation. Malone is an important scientist and was a key figure in the invention of mRNA tech. He has to be listened to
WTF with some decrepit old billionaire rock star telling me what I can and cannot hear?
I find Joe Rogan very interesting and the idea that he is a right wing conspiracy theory peddler is bollocks. What he does - and I suspect why he gets specifically targeted - is allow guests who views are unorthodox (but, crucially, not nut job) to state their point of view. He also does his research and asks very targeted and detailed questions.
Yes, he’s brilliant and he does his research and he knows his shit and he lets interesting people of all types say their stuff, but then challenges them
There is a reason he gets 11m people a show and CNN gets 800,000
800,000! It is risibly poor
Rogan is the essence of American Free Speech and if a bunch of woke old rockstars get him cancelled it will be the saddest thing, and Putin might as well invade all of us, and we can let Xi take over the whole internet, because then the West is over
There is something incredibly ironic that all these liberal hippy types want him cancelled....
Yes. For some reason they have forgotten… the 1960s and 70s
I've heard the Rogan name. Could you or somebody else summarise his views? (I'll not hang you on it)
Anti-authority, anti-Government, anything that stirs it all up. Personally I find some of his views over the top and too extreme but not in a BNP sort of way. I don't object to him, just don't really get much out of him as it is difficult to pick the wheat from the chaff. Some stuff he is very right on, a lot he is very wrong on - in my opinion.
If you are interested in a particular niche subject, from UFOs to vaccines to boxing to atheism to AI, you will often learn more from a JR podcast with an absolute insider, than you will watching any amount of normal TV. The equivalent is probably reading three or four quality books, but more timely and contemporary than books (because books are always a bit out of date)
You do need to sieve them out tho. Here’s a pretty handy list detailing some of the best
I will give that a view. Until this morning I had never heard of him. Then (and I think it was from here) there was a link to a start of one of his interviews. It tried to find it again and I can't. Obviously posted by someone who is not a fan and the interviewee was talking drivel; in the nutter realms. Can't remember the details but dismissing stats because you can't test everything. No clue about the maths of samples. I thus assumed Rogan might be of the same ilk if this was the sort of person he was interviewing but found his views were more eclectic according to Wikipedia. Will give it a try, but I am going in biased from this mornings experience I am afraid.
My guess is you are referring to his latest Jordan Peterson interview. Where Peterson starts spouting off about climate change being a load of intellectual vagueness, what exactly is “climate”, surely it is everything, there are too many variables
This made people angry and they got viral on Twitter
The thing is, Rogan then comes back and asks Peterson to clarify exactly this. He asks the questions you want to say. Again
I’m not a huge fan of Peterson, unlike my ex wife, age 26, who adores him! For me he is the reedy voiced inferior offspring of Roger Scruton. But Peterson is a massively valuable contrary voice, and is no Nazi or racist. We need people like him. Whereas Cambridge is happy to cancel him
Rogan gives him airtime. Good
The thing about the whole anti-Rogan Neil Young left cancel culture shit is that they are going after one of the last sane spaces where alternative and also - horror! - right wing or libertarian views are aired. Or just heterodox views. Beyond Rogan there is just a sea of Neo Nazi bollocks. Do we really want to cede all that thought-space to the truly nasty and insane? No. So we must allow sane right wing views, even hard right wing views, just as we do allow them on the left, with avowed communists sitting on SAGE
PB is the only place where I think I can get away with this. And even then I'm nervous.
I studied climate change economics at uni. I'm fully on board with the consensus, scientific view.
But. If SAGE can't model Covid properly, with loads of good data, and only forecasting a few months in advance, what chance do we have with something as fickle as mother nature? Over a 100 year period?
I don't doubt that the earth has warmed, and that we are the reason for it. But looking forward...
One of the things is how poor we are at predicting the future, even though we think it obvious how the present arose. We are very good at deciding that present circumstances are the inevitable result of history. Yet we have very poor records of forecasting. Anyone on PB sees that constantly even when we have plenty of data and short horizons.
As such, climate change predictions are often wrong, even though we see about us the inevitable changes from past behaviour. Sure some pandemic models were way out, on the other hand new variants were underestimated. I think with pandemics people change their behaviour, which alters the curve, but I think that we see little similar individual change when it comes to climate change.
I am quite fatalistic and pessimistic about the climate. I don't think action will be taken in time or type to stop it, and that much of the world and its wonders will be destroyed in the next century. Mankind will survive. We are like cockroaches or rats in our versatility.
Yup. I don't know in which direction we might be getting it wrong.
The hope is that we can at least mitigate it a bit in your scenario. In the @algarkirk view, there are enough positive externalities in going green to make it worth it.
The worst case is we've made a massive investment for very little impact on climate change - whether it's actually ok in the end, or catastrophic.
I see its gets Joe Rogan day again....i thought it was highly amusing that Neil Young has been a big fan of RFK jnr, a massive conspiracy theorist and an anti-vaxxer...due to also spreading bullshit about GMO crops. So RFK good, despite spreading antivaxxer nonsense, Joe Rogan bad.
I would imagine far more people subscribe to Spotify for Joe Rogan than they do for Joni Mitchell….
He gets 11m listeners per show. it is enormous. And they last 3-4 hours sometimes
i actually listened to the Robert Malone interview. It was exhaustive, often boring, highly detailed, and I still do not believe the anti vax stuff
But it was not hysterical misinformation. Malone is an important scientist and was a key figure in the invention of mRNA tech. He has to be listened to
WTF with some decrepit old billionaire rock star telling me what I can and cannot hear?
I find Joe Rogan very interesting and the idea that he is a right wing conspiracy theory peddler is bollocks. What he does - and I suspect why he gets specifically targeted - is allow guests who views are unorthodox (but, crucially, not nut job) to state their point of view. He also does his research and asks very targeted and detailed questions.
Yes, he’s brilliant and he does his research and he knows his shit and he lets interesting people of all types say their stuff, but then challenges them
There is a reason he gets 11m people a show and CNN gets 800,000
800,000! It is risibly poor
Rogan is the essence of American Free Speech and if a bunch of woke old rockstars get him cancelled it will be the saddest thing, and Putin might as well invade all of us, and we can let Xi take over the whole internet, because then the West is over
There is something incredibly ironic that all these liberal hippy types want him cancelled....
Yes. For some reason they have forgotten… the 1960s and 70s
I've heard the Rogan name. Could you or somebody else summarise his views? (I'll not hang you on it)
Anti-authority, anti-Government, anything that stirs it all up. Personally I find some of his views over the top and too extreme but not in a BNP sort of way. I don't object to him, just don't really get much out of him as it is difficult to pick the wheat from the chaff. Some stuff he is very right on, a lot he is very wrong on - in my opinion.
If you are interested in a particular niche subject, from UFOs to vaccines to boxing to atheism to AI, you will often learn more from a JR podcast with an absolute insider, than you will watching any amount of normal TV. The equivalent is probably reading three or four quality books, but more timely and contemporary than books (because books are always a bit out of date)
You do need to sieve them out tho. Here’s a pretty handy list detailing some of the best
I will give that a view. Until this morning I had never heard of him. Then (and I think it was from here) there was a link to a start of one of his interviews. It tried to find it again and I can't. Obviously posted by someone who is not a fan and the interviewee was talking drivel; in the nutter realms. Can't remember the details but dismissing stats because you can't test everything. No clue about the maths of samples. I thus assumed Rogan might be of the same ilk if this was the sort of person he was interviewing but found his views were more eclectic according to Wikipedia. Will give it a try, but I am going in biased from this mornings experience I am afraid.
My guess is you are referring to his latest Jordan Peterson interview. Where Peterson starts spouting off about climate change being a load of intellectual vagueness, what exactly is “climate”, surely it is everything, there are too many variables
This made people angry and they got viral on Twitter
The thing is, Rogan then comes back and asks Peterson to clarify exactly this. He asks the questions you want to say. Again
I’m not a huge fan of Peterson, unlike my ex wife, age 26, who adores him! For me he is the reedy voiced inferior offspring of Roger Scruton. But Peterson is a massively valuable contrary voice, and is no Nazi or racist. We need people like him. Whereas Cambridge is happy to cancel him
Rogan gives him airtime. Good
The thing about the whole anti-Rogan Neil Young left cancel culture shit is that they are going after one of the last sane spaces where alternative and also - horror! - right wing or libertarian views are aired. Or just heterodox views. Beyond Rogan there is just a sea of Neo Nazi bollocks. Do we really want to cede all that thought-space to the truly nasty and insane? No. So we must allow sane right wing views, even hard right wing views, just as we do allow them on the left, with avowed communists sitting on SAGE
Well spotted. Yes it was and my description above was way off. If you had to ask me to guess I would have said the clip was on vaccines, but you have correctly reminded me of the actual subject. I saw the clip, presumably as you say it is doing the rounds. Thought well that is absolute bollocks and put it out of my mind, other than thinking I won't be viewing Rogan. I didn't even remember the subject matter only it was bollocks! I did pause though to look him up and that did mellow my view slightly as has PB this afternoon.
Will give it a try. Not promising a positive outcome though.
Why don't you start with an interview with somebody who definitely isn't a nutter / fringe / etc e.g. say his interviews with Pinker.
If you don't like those, there isn't much more point continuing.
@FrancisUrquhart Excellent suggestion. Watched it. It was excellent, helped bizarrely because it pandered to my beliefs as I agreed with it all and it touched on a couple of points I agreed with strongly and also one piece of info that I was not aware of which I then looked up.
I will now try a more way out one. No point in just having your own beliefs reinforced.
I see its gets Joe Rogan day again....i thought it was highly amusing that Neil Young has been a big fan of RFK jnr, a massive conspiracy theorist and an anti-vaxxer...due to also spreading bullshit about GMO crops. So RFK good, despite spreading antivaxxer nonsense, Joe Rogan bad.
I would imagine far more people subscribe to Spotify for Joe Rogan than they do for Joni Mitchell….
He gets 11m listeners per show. it is enormous. And they last 3-4 hours sometimes
i actually listened to the Robert Malone interview. It was exhaustive, often boring, highly detailed, and I still do not believe the anti vax stuff
But it was not hysterical misinformation. Malone is an important scientist and was a key figure in the invention of mRNA tech. He has to be listened to
WTF with some decrepit old billionaire rock star telling me what I can and cannot hear?
I find Joe Rogan very interesting and the idea that he is a right wing conspiracy theory peddler is bollocks. What he does - and I suspect why he gets specifically targeted - is allow guests who views are unorthodox (but, crucially, not nut job) to state their point of view. He also does his research and asks very targeted and detailed questions.
Yes, he’s brilliant and he does his research and he knows his shit and he lets interesting people of all types say their stuff, but then challenges them
There is a reason he gets 11m people a show and CNN gets 800,000
800,000! It is risibly poor
Rogan is the essence of American Free Speech and if a bunch of woke old rockstars get him cancelled it will be the saddest thing, and Putin might as well invade all of us, and we can let Xi take over the whole internet, because then the West is over
There is something incredibly ironic that all these liberal hippy types want him cancelled....
Yes. For some reason they have forgotten… the 1960s and 70s
I've heard the Rogan name. Could you or somebody else summarise his views? (I'll not hang you on it)
Anti-authority, anti-Government, anything that stirs it all up. Personally I find some of his views over the top and too extreme but not in a BNP sort of way. I don't object to him, just don't really get much out of him as it is difficult to pick the wheat from the chaff. Some stuff he is very right on, a lot he is very wrong on - in my opinion.
If you are interested in a particular niche subject, from UFOs to vaccines to boxing to atheism to AI, you will often learn more from a JR podcast with an absolute insider, than you will watching any amount of normal TV. The equivalent is probably reading three or four quality books, but more timely and contemporary than books (because books are always a bit out of date)
You do need to sieve them out tho. Here’s a pretty handy list detailing some of the best
I will give that a view. Until this morning I had never heard of him. Then (and I think it was from here) there was a link to a start of one of his interviews. It tried to find it again and I can't. Obviously posted by someone who is not a fan and the interviewee was talking drivel; in the nutter realms. Can't remember the details but dismissing stats because you can't test everything. No clue about the maths of samples. I thus assumed Rogan might be of the same ilk if this was the sort of person he was interviewing but found his views were more eclectic according to Wikipedia. Will give it a try, but I am going in biased from this mornings experience I am afraid.
My guess is you are referring to his latest Jordan Peterson interview. Where Peterson starts spouting off about climate change being a load of intellectual vagueness, what exactly is “climate”, surely it is everything, there are too many variables
This made people angry and they got viral on Twitter
The thing is, Rogan then comes back and asks Peterson to clarify exactly this. He asks the questions you want to say. Again
I’m not a huge fan of Peterson, unlike my ex wife, age 26, who adores him! For me he is the reedy voiced inferior offspring of Roger Scruton. But Peterson is a massively valuable contrary voice, and is no Nazi or racist. We need people like him. Whereas Cambridge is happy to cancel him
Rogan gives him airtime. Good
The thing about the whole anti-Rogan Neil Young left cancel culture shit is that they are going after one of the last sane spaces where alternative and also - horror! - right wing or libertarian views are aired. Or just heterodox views. Beyond Rogan there is just a sea of Neo Nazi bollocks. Do we really want to cede all that thought-space to the truly nasty and insane? No. So we must allow sane right wing views, even hard right wing views, just as we do allow them on the left, with avowed communists sitting on SAGE
PB is the only place where I think I can get away with this. And even then I'm nervous.
I studied climate change economics at uni. I'm fully on board with the consensus, scientific view.
But. If SAGE can't model Covid properly, with loads of good data, and only forecasting a few months in advance, what chance do we have with something as fickle as mother nature? Over a 100 year period?
I don't doubt that the earth has warmed, and that we are the reason for it. But looking forward...
One of the things is how poor we are at predicting the future, even though we think it obvious how the present arose. We are very good at deciding that present circumstances are the inevitable result of history. Yet we have very poor records of forecasting. Anyone on PB sees that constantly even when we have plenty of data and short horizons.
As such, climate change predictions are often wrong, even though we see about us the inevitable changes from past behaviour. Sure some pandemic models were way out, on the other hand new variants were underestimated. I think with pandemics people change their behaviour, which alters the curve, but I think that we see little similar individual change when it comes to climate change.
I am quite fatalistic and pessimistic about the climate. I don't think action will be taken in time or type to stop it, and that much of the world and its wonders will be destroyed in the next century. Mankind will survive. We are like cockroaches or rats in our versatility.
Yup. I don't know in which direction we might be getting it wrong.
The hope is that we can at least mitigate it a bit in your scenario. In the @algarkirk view, there are enough positive externalities in going green to make it worth it.
The worst case is we've made a massive investment for very little impact on climate change - whether it's actually ok in the end, or catastrophic.
Surely one way to get at least an answer to that question is to let academics freely decide what they research and what conclusions they come to?
There is now a much healthier culture of preprints and appraisal of published work both before and after publication. Another, more recently adapted, tools would include open access to underpinning data. I think most of my recent papers have their data freely available, both to allow proper checks but also to allow potential collaborators a free hit at it.
Not perfect, yet, no, and not the finished article, not yet, no, but allowing some dissent would make the system better not worse.
I see its gets Joe Rogan day again....i thought it was highly amusing that Neil Young has been a big fan of RFK jnr, a massive conspiracy theorist and an anti-vaxxer...due to also spreading bullshit about GMO crops. So RFK good, despite spreading antivaxxer nonsense, Joe Rogan bad.
I would imagine far more people subscribe to Spotify for Joe Rogan than they do for Joni Mitchell….
He gets 11m listeners per show. it is enormous. And they last 3-4 hours sometimes
i actually listened to the Robert Malone interview. It was exhaustive, often boring, highly detailed, and I still do not believe the anti vax stuff
But it was not hysterical misinformation. Malone is an important scientist and was a key figure in the invention of mRNA tech. He has to be listened to
WTF with some decrepit old billionaire rock star telling me what I can and cannot hear?
I find Joe Rogan very interesting and the idea that he is a right wing conspiracy theory peddler is bollocks. What he does - and I suspect why he gets specifically targeted - is allow guests who views are unorthodox (but, crucially, not nut job) to state their point of view. He also does his research and asks very targeted and detailed questions.
Yes, he’s brilliant and he does his research and he knows his shit and he lets interesting people of all types say their stuff, but then challenges them
There is a reason he gets 11m people a show and CNN gets 800,000
800,000! It is risibly poor
Rogan is the essence of American Free Speech and if a bunch of woke old rockstars get him cancelled it will be the saddest thing, and Putin might as well invade all of us, and we can let Xi take over the whole internet, because then the West is over
There is something incredibly ironic that all these liberal hippy types want him cancelled....
Yes. For some reason they have forgotten… the 1960s and 70s
I've heard the Rogan name. Could you or somebody else summarise his views? (I'll not hang you on it)
Anti-authority, anti-Government, anything that stirs it all up. Personally I find some of his views over the top and too extreme but not in a BNP sort of way. I don't object to him, just don't really get much out of him as it is difficult to pick the wheat from the chaff. Some stuff he is very right on, a lot he is very wrong on - in my opinion.
If you are interested in a particular niche subject, from UFOs to vaccines to boxing to atheism to AI, you will often learn more from a JR podcast with an absolute insider, than you will watching any amount of normal TV. The equivalent is probably reading three or four quality books, but more timely and contemporary than books (because books are always a bit out of date)
You do need to sieve them out tho. Here’s a pretty handy list detailing some of the best
I will give that a view. Until this morning I had never heard of him. Then (and I think it was from here) there was a link to a start of one of his interviews. It tried to find it again and I can't. Obviously posted by someone who is not a fan and the interviewee was talking drivel; in the nutter realms. Can't remember the details but dismissing stats because you can't test everything. No clue about the maths of samples. I thus assumed Rogan might be of the same ilk if this was the sort of person he was interviewing but found his views were more eclectic according to Wikipedia. Will give it a try, but I am going in biased from this mornings experience I am afraid.
My guess is you are referring to his latest Jordan Peterson interview. Where Peterson starts spouting off about climate change being a load of intellectual vagueness, what exactly is “climate”, surely it is everything, there are too many variables
This made people angry and they got viral on Twitter
The thing is, Rogan then comes back and asks Peterson to clarify exactly this. He asks the questions you want to say. Again
I’m not a huge fan of Peterson, unlike my ex wife, age 26, who adores him! For me he is the reedy voiced inferior offspring of Roger Scruton. But Peterson is a massively valuable contrary voice, and is no Nazi or racist. We need people like him. Whereas Cambridge is happy to cancel him
Rogan gives him airtime. Good
The thing about the whole anti-Rogan Neil Young left cancel culture shit is that they are going after one of the last sane spaces where alternative and also - horror! - right wing or libertarian views are aired. Or just heterodox views. Beyond Rogan there is just a sea of Neo Nazi bollocks. Do we really want to cede all that thought-space to the truly nasty and insane? No. So we must allow sane right wing views, even hard right wing views, just as we do allow them on the left, with avowed communists sitting on SAGE
Well spotted. Yes it was and my description above was way off. If you had to ask me to guess I would have said the clip was on vaccines, but you have correctly reminded me of the actual subject. I saw the clip, presumably as you say it is doing the rounds. Thought well that is absolute bollocks and put it out of my mind, other than thinking I won't be viewing Rogan. I didn't even remember the subject matter only it was bollocks! I did pause though to look him up and that did mellow my view slightly as has PB this afternoon.
Will give it a try. Not promising a positive outcome though.
Why don't you start with an interview with somebody who definitely isn't a nutter / fringe / etc e.g. say his interviews with Pinker.
If you don't like those, there isn't much more point continuing.
I'm going to sign up for Spotify for the first time, in order to watch Joe Rogan interviews. Used to watch them on YouTube when he was on there.
Sky News are leading on Ukraine - Russia and Boris travelling there next week
It seems even they have given up on Sue Gray's filleted report and the appalling behaviour of Cressida Dick
Last time he went abroad as peacekeeper he almost got Nazanin Zaghai-Ratcliffe executed
He could stand astride a tank at the border with Belarus pointing and shaking the white flag of peace at the Russians to demonstrate his desire for a diplomatic solution and also his solidarity with Ukraine.
Currently my Rogan research has bored me to death. Are there worthwhile Rogan things?
This is the Andrew Doyle one on comedy, Wokeness etc
Remember this is in-depth stuff, 2-4 hours of interview, Way beyond what most people - you? - are used to.You have to give yourself time to adjust to a new but richer framework
Anyone think this BJ thing is over listen to Any Answers. Listen particularly for ex John Major's Private Secretary (or similar). Hilarious. I'm not not talking studio audience I'm talking about the phone in afterwards. As a human being Johnson's finished
Most of the habitual Tories I know would not vote Tory today, or so they say. (I generally vote Tory in GEs but certainly would not so right now). But there is no sense of having given up on the Tories as such, any more than centrists gave up on Labour in the dark days of Corbyn.
I think that is correct
Conservative mps depose Boris and a new leader from Rishi , Truss, Hunt or Tugendhat with a clearance of cabinet inadequates of JRM, Dorries and a few others, would see a change of narrative
I will rejoin on Boris's exit which is more than likely some time this year
Sky News are leading on Ukraine - Russia and Boris travelling there next week
It seems even they have given up on Sue Gray's filleted report and the appalling behaviour of Cressida Dick
Last time he went abroad as peacekeeper he almost got Nazanin Zaghai-Ratcliffe executed
He could stand astride a tank at the border with Belarus pointing and shaking the white flag of peace at the Russians to demonstrate his desire for a diplomatic solution and also his solidarity with Ukraine.
He could ride the zipwire from one guard tower to another right across the border....please...
Sky News are leading on Ukraine - Russia and Boris travelling there next week
It seems even they have given up on Sue Gray's filleted report and the appalling behaviour of Cressida Dick
Last time he went abroad as peacekeeper he almost got Nazanin Zaghai-Ratcliffe executed
He could stand astride a tank at the border with Belarus pointing and shaking the white flag of peace at the Russians to demonstrate his desire for a diplomatic solution and also his solidarity with Ukraine.
He could ride the zipwire from one guard tower to another right across the border....please...
Anyone think this BJ thing is over listen to Any Answers. Listen particularly for ex John Major's Private Secretary (or similar). Hilarious. I'm not not talking studio audience I'm talking about the phone in afterwards. As a human being Johnson's finished
Most of the habitual Tories I know would not vote Tory today, or so they say. (I generally vote Tory in GEs but certainly would not so right now). But there is no sense of having given up on the Tories as such, any more than centrists gave up on Labour in the dark days of Corbyn.
I think that is correct
Conservative mps depose Boris and a new leader from Rishi , Truss, Hunt or Tugendhat with a clearance of cabinet inadequates of JRM, Dorries and a few others, would see a change of narrative
I will rejoin on Boris's exit which is more than likely some time this year
Big Dog is going nowhere.
A superlative performance of deceipt and chicanery with his sidekick Dick has saved the day.
Comments
What does the mainstream do, 5 min interviews which they interrupt most of the time, ask the most irrelevant questions missing the key points or start arguing with an expert that they are wrong / they know better e.g. Peston with JVT. Or CNNs towering intellectuals like Don Lemon and formerly Chris Cuomo at peak time. And their ratings tank.
So often I’ve listened to a podcast and thought, OK, so ask him or her THIS, and then Rogan does exactly that. This is not a feeling you get in TV news interviews, which are brief, perfunctory, embarrassingly trivial and in politics generally just a series of gotcha moments when the journalist tries to get famous. Rogan does not do that
If not quite a genius he is very very smart, and has a vanishingly rare talent for spoken interviews
If you are a journalist, setting off squibs for the amusement of the public, it's easy and cost-free to do dozens of gaffes all at once. Words will never hurt me, right?
If you're running a real country inhabited by real people, it's not just a game any more. Those bricks you chuck hit actual objects, damage actual lives.
The fundamental trouble with Johnson, Cummings, the Spiked crowd, Sunak, Truss, the whole rancid lot of 'em, is they are behaving as if it is just a game.
That's why they keep doing it.
And it keeps on working for them.
You can listen to them while you are cooking, walking, exercising, lying in bed, drinking in bed, recovering from filthy sex, preparing for filthy sex, choosing a cigar in Havana, whatever
If you still think he’s an idiot cage fighting commentator, then fair enough, you tried
I was very skeptical until I got into them a couple of years ago
It is still very doubtful if Ivermectin does anything, but it has been given to billions of people for various conditions and is safe for human consumption.
PB is awash with silly comments (including mine), but that is irredeemably stupid.
If you're going to go after someone for spouting nonsense, don't talk shit yourself. A quick look on wiki suggests it can be a useful drug for humans, particularly in the developing world.
Many doctors in the US order things like blood work in the way people in the UK were using LFT over Christmas.....
I'm not kidding - huge improvement for the boring bits of my life.
By the way, have you read and understood the Court of Appeal judgment in Miller v the College of Policing yet?
Have a good day."
I expect Cummings still hasn’t given up on getting Johnson out of no 10.
I really struggle with that myself - recently, when trying to ask a surgeon just how long the screws were going to be.
If you're going to go after someone for spouting nonsense, don't talk shit yourself. A quick look on wiki suggests it can be a useful drug for humans, particularly in the developing world.
looks like we caught another roganite.
Anyone else think he’s holed under the waterline, what with Agnew’s fraud comments?
£4.3bn pissed up against the wall, ffs?!
He’s a screaming lay @ ~2/1, surely?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bza1gAc8sOA
Wasn't unlikely - it's the top podcast in the UK. I've only listened to a few myself - hate not finishing them, and they're too long.
Just checking my Spotify:
Scotland Outdoors
Arseblog Arsecast
Newscast
Freakonomics
Red Box
Peter Crouch
538
You're dead to me
Rogan
Whilst Young and Mitchell have removed their music from Spotify, Blunt has said that unless Rogan is removed, he will release new music onto the platform.
Now that is a threat everyone should take seriously.
Pull the other one. We all know you love chintzy curtains, dainty tea sets and the missionary position.
More Cynthia Payne than synthetic pain.
I think by the time now that the ball comes loose from the scrum again the caravan will have moved on. To mix my metaphors.
This made people angry and they got viral on Twitter
The thing is, Rogan then comes back and asks Peterson to clarify exactly this. He asks the questions you want to say. Again
I’m not a huge fan of Peterson, unlike my ex wife, age 26, who adores him! For me he is the reedy voiced inferior offspring of Roger Scruton. But Peterson is a massively valuable contrary voice, and is no Nazi or racist. We need people like him. Whereas Cambridge is happy to cancel him
Rogan gives him airtime. Good
The thing about the whole anti-Rogan Neil Young left cancel culture shit is that they are going after one of the last sane spaces where alternative and also - horror! - right wing or libertarian views are aired. Or just heterodox views. Beyond Rogan there is just a sea of Neo Nazi bollocks. Do we really want to cede all that thought-space to the truly nasty and insane? No. So we must allow sane right wing views, even hard right wing views, just as we do allow them on the left, with avowed communists sitting on SAGE
I expect likes from ever more from you now Leon.
The flipside is that some are really good. Talking Politics was good for a long time. Triggernometry is good. Rogan is good but in my view, it is just too long. When does anyone have 2 and a half hours to listen to a podcast?
I also now see where Leon gets his nuttier Wokefinder General stuff from.
Sadly, quite a lot of the enjoyable, rambling, eccentric podcasts followed their advice and withered on the vine.
On the long (or long-ish) format podcasts, I really enjoy Dan Carlin's 'Hardcore History' (the 'Ghosts of the Ostfront' one was what really hooked me and I've still to finish the recent 'Supernova in the East'). 'EconTalk' is another - though generally only runs to a paltry 1.5hrs
Not many of them have made it.
Brown
Major
Callaghan
Macmillan
I think that's it since the War.
But wow, if you really want to know your subject…
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O9Rhdwqjc1k
I studied climate change economics at uni. I'm fully on board with the consensus, scientific view.
But. If SAGE can't model Covid properly, with loads of good data, and only forecasting a few months in advance, what chance do we have with something as fickle as mother nature? Over a 100 year period?
I don't doubt that the earth has warmed, and that we are the reason for it. But looking forward...
World King, world beater and an inordinate amount of other superlatives to self-agrandise himself, but human? That just seems a little too ordinary.
Will give it a try. Not promising a positive outcome though.
If you don't like those, there isn't much more point continuing.
Look at what newspapers report on topics you do know. If they're nonsense, what does it imply for the rest?
The way in which 'science' closed ranks on any suggestion which differed from the consensus -like, for example, on lab leak - was quite alarming.
Re construction there are regulations (I have no idea how good) but certainly stuff like gas, electrics, beams, etc have to be signed off by a qualified person and they are inspected by a building inspector as well. If not someone has been ripping me off.
Who else has come into office other than through an election?
Johnson - former Foreign Secretary
May - Home Secretary
Douglas-Home - Foreign Secretary
Eden - Foreign Secretary
It's not a guarantee, but sitting Chancellors are in a pretty decent position to take the Crown if a vacancy arises whilst in Government.
After the Goldrush is a great song, and of course he p***** off Lynard Skynard with "Southern Man" which resulted in "Sweet Home Alabama" where "old Neil", and "Mr Young" get name checked.
I find that I agree with much of his general perspective, and he is a great as a sort of virtual life coach for lots of people, particularly young men, including myself on occasion. The main problem that I can see is that he has a tendency for over enthusiasm and drama, missing out on nuance, certainly this criticism is often made of him by scientists and biologists. His crab analogy which he often gets criticised for was poor and a significant misjudgement in my view.
I believe he is a very sincere figure and has had a remarkable influence on peoples lives. I don't think he courts drama, but it doesn't harm his book sales. The attempts to cancel him are based on prejudice and ignorance.
I am reminded of Trump going, WRRRRRONNNNGGGGG, for the past 2 years.
Currently my Rogan research has bored me to death. Are there worthwhile Rogan things?
FU - I was speaking more generally. But if I was to invest a regular 3 hours into Joe Rogan, I'd be careful to pick the first one to be something I felt I was pretty confident on or someone whose wider work I'd come across before. If that makes sense.
Even if Lab Leak is wrong (unlikely, but possible), all the above happened, unquestionably
And then you think, Hmm, climate change
Like you I believe it is almost certainly happening, it is probably but less certainly man-made, but as for the modelling towards the future, and possible ways of “solving it”. Hmmmmmmmm
But the common sense things we need to do we need to do anyway. Electrification with renewables; carbon capture; rewilding; diminishing use of gas/oil etc. I don't think this can happen fast enough to save the planet if the predictions are correct, but they might not be.
Not only are we as of now putting more CO2 into the air, we are doing so on an increasing trajectory; this despite 30+ years of talk.
As such, climate change predictions are often wrong, even though we see about us the inevitable changes from past behaviour. Sure some pandemic models were way out, on the other hand new variants were underestimated. I think with pandemics people change their behaviour, which alters the curve, but I think that we see little similar individual change when it comes to climate change.
I am quite fatalistic and pessimistic about the climate. I don't think action will be taken in time or type to stop it, and that much of the world and its wonders will be destroyed in the next century. Mankind will survive. We are like cockroaches or rats in our versatility.
IMO the problem with say Peterson versus Rogan. Rogan isn't professing to be an expert in anything, he is explicating saying well I'm just the bloke from the cage fighting talking to interesting people.
Where as, Peterson is supposed grounded in academic thought and rigour and you are supposed to take him seriously having an alternative narrative to a lot of the mainstream because of this grounding. However, while some of it is just common sense and mostly harmless, he also has some very odd takes on things that don't seem grounded in anything, and a lot of people appear to have a rather cultish following on his every word.
Remember this is in-depth stuff, 2-4 hours of interview, Way beyond what most people - you? - are used to.You have to give yourself time to adjust to a new but richer framework
https://www.mixcloud.com/TheJoeRoganExperience/1423-andrew-doyle/
I only like one in five at most of his podcasts. But there are many many hundreds
God, I would love to hear Rogan with yer actual Scruton
The hope is that we can at least mitigate it a bit in your scenario. In the @algarkirk view, there are enough positive externalities in going green to make it worth it.
The worst case is we've made a massive investment for very little impact on climate change - whether it's actually ok in the end, or catastrophic.
I will now try a more way out one. No point in just having your own beliefs reinforced.
@leon cheers for the info on this.
There is now a much healthier culture of preprints and appraisal of published work both before and after publication. Another, more recently adapted, tools would include open access to underpinning data. I think most of my recent papers have their data freely available, both to allow proper checks but also to allow potential collaborators a free hit at it.
Not perfect, yet, no, and not the finished article, not yet, no, but allowing some dissent would make the system better not worse.
yeah, that would definitely do it!
Nothing to see in my view.
Conservative mps depose Boris and a new leader from Rishi , Truss, Hunt or Tugendhat with a clearance of cabinet inadequates of JRM, Dorries and a few others, would see a change of narrative
I will rejoin on Boris's exit which is more than likely some time this year
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bza1gAc8sOA
A superlative performance of deceipt and chicanery with his sidekick Dick has saved the day.
When did the police decide this extra-legal activity was a good idea ?