131–140 of 145 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Anything Tim Pool says should be treated with a ten foot poll.
Regardless of what you think about Tim Pool, the speculation that censorship was a primary motivator of this move came from Alex Jones. So...
Taking into account that all Rogan does these days is defend Trump, I could care less. Let his podcast shrivel away hidden behind a Spotify paywall.
Not every decision trump or his administration does is bad. That's a fact. Is he a manchild only interested in himself? Absolutely but,
If trump says 2+2=4 are you going to argue with that? Does agreeing that 2+2=4 makes you trump supporter?
Taking into account that all Rogan does these days is defend Trump, I could care less. Let his podcast shrivel away hidden behind a Spotify paywall.
haha, he is a democrat and had ton of dem candidates on his show. Just because he thinks biden is an awful candidate doesn't make him trump fan. Not every decision trump or his administration does is bad. That's a fact. Is he a manchild only interested in himself? Absolutely but, If trump says 2+2=4 are you going to argue with that? Does agreeing that 2+2=4 makes you trump supporter?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
From the article: "We've never seen numbers like this, in such a short period of time," he said. "I mean we've seen a year's worth of suicide attempts in the last four weeks."
In one hospital. That alone makes it pseudoscience. A years worth of suicides is likely between 10-40 suicides, which is tragi but doesn't show that the quarentine is causing the problems it says. For example, the rise could be due to medical workers being overtaxed due to the pandemic, or some change in which hospital is receiving patients like this.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Joe Rogan typically makes a point to say what he doesn't know and tries to get interesting experts in his show. Have you watched much of his show?
He typically has no idea what they're talking about and thus lobs softball after softball at them, even when he pretends to disagree for devil's advocate sake. Most of his bigger named guests have carved out echo chambers for themselves, and Rogan lends them credibility.
You're free to listen to the uninterrupted hours of talk directly from the guest and form your own opinion. That's usually a far better way to learn about someone than following an opinionated interviewer asking "hardball" questions that don't get clear answers anyway and will reduce the caliber of guests to appear in the first.
I have no idea if it’s true, but I’ve heard that a major factor was recent pushback he was getting from YouTube with respect to contrarian coverage of the pandemic. Apparently he wanted to have guests who would provide alternative public health narratives and was told that this was a no-go on YouTube. Much of his audience consumes the show as video on YouTube and Spotify is another major brand that will offer a simil…
>Apparently he wanted to have guests who would provide alternative public health narratives and was told that this was a no-go on YouTube. As it should be. >He is hoping that Spotify will give him more creative freedom Spreading pseudoscience isn't creative, its destructive.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
In one hospital. That alone makes it pseudoscience. A years worth of suicides is likely between 10-40 suicides, which is tragi but doesn't show that the quarentine is causing the problems it says. For example, the rise could be due to medical workers being overtaxed due to the pandemic, or some change in which hospital is receiving patients like this.
That's not how science works. Please stop calling it pseudoscience just because you don't agree with the findings.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's not how science works. Please stop calling it pseudoscience just because you don't agree with the findings.
What two people say they experienced is not science. Even calling is pseudoscience is generous, it's an anecdote.
Furthermore, economic depressions lead to suffering and death. This is a fact that's widely known and studied. Ignoring all the coming secondary effects to focus on only acute deaths from a single cause is clearly not scientific either.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What two people say they experienced is not science. Even calling is pseudoscience is generous, it's an anecdote.
Science is based on observations. And I hope you realize the pseudoscience is far worse than anecdote (which is a personal observation). Furthermore, economic depressions lead to suffering and death. This is a fact that's widely known and studied. Ignoring all the coming secondary effects to focus on only acute deaths from a single cause is clearly not scientific either.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Science is based on observations. And I hope you realize the pseudoscience is far worse than anecdote (which is a personal observation). Furthermore, economic depressions lead to suffering and death. This is a fact that's widely known and studied. Ignoring all the coming secondary effects to focus on only acute deaths from a single cause is clearly not scientific either.
Science is based on observations, an observation isn't science. That article was taking one data point, assuming the same thing was happening everywhere, and decided there was only one possible cause.