That post seems to be missing.
load all comments
chickenwing -3 points 3 years ago

I don't like articles like this. Like it or not Rogan has a big audience and scientists shouldn't be afraid to explain things to your average person. Robert Kennedy is getting antivax people riled up and it would be a good time to counter that. If every scientist decides to boycott Rogan it will just embolden crackpots.

path: 0 665084, hotness: undefined, score: -3, children: 14
Grant_M 23 points 3 years ago

Rogan is himself a propaganda pusher and chaos operative. Discussion is impossible on his platform.

path: 0 665084 665494, hotness: undefined, score: 23, children: 5
chickenwing 6 points 3 years ago

Rogan is a conspiracy prone bonehead. He normally is receptive to anyone who comes on his broadcast and sounds halfway convincing. He will listen to scientists and people who believe that Atlantis was real. But if only kooks and cranks go on his podcast then he and his big audience will say that the scientists must be hiding something. Why won't they defend their views yada yada.

path: 0 665084 665494 667657, hotness: undefined, score: 6, children: 4
fossilesque 18 points 3 years ago
path: 0 665084 666392, hotness: undefined, score: 18, children: 0
bobthened 16 points 3 years ago

A debate would not be at all productive though. Firstly it would give credibility to the antivaxx side, make it seem like it was roughly as credible as vaccine science. Secondly (and more importantly) Debates as a format are heavily biased towards whoever can blurt out the most talking points as quickly as possible – it takes a long time to deconstruct and debunk misinformation and by the time you've finished taking apart one thing your opponent has already spewed out 25 other lies. By the time the debate has ended the scientist will not have had time to take apart everything the anti-vaxxer said, and will therefore seem like they lost the debate.

The best thing to do is to not engage in their debates.

path: 0 665084 685444, hotness: undefined, score: 16, children: 1
FlyingSquid 10 points 3 years ago

Exactly right. People on his side seem to think that RFK Jr. is somehow entitled to a debate. He isn't. Someone else in this thread even implied (if I understood them correctly) that it was somehow a violation of free speech to refuse to debate him. Just craziness.

path: 0 665084 685444 685882, hotness: undefined, score: 10, children: 0
hawkwind 11 points 3 years ago

I used to like Joe. I went to a stand-up show way back when. I laughed. I do not like Joe anymore.

path: 0 665084 669855, hotness: undefined, score: 11, children: 2
fossilesque 16 points 3 years ago
path: 0 665084 669855 674692, hotness: undefined, score: 16, children: 0
WheeGeetheCat 6 points 3 years ago

Hahaha same here buddy. Although Joey Diaz was the highlight of the standup set for me. Joe was ok.

path: 0 665084 669855 674224, hotness: undefined, score: 6, children: 0
Beegzoidberg 4 points 3 years ago

But, the article mentions that the vaccine scientist would go on his show. He refused to have a debate, which doesn't sound productive at all.

path: 0 665084 675603, hotness: undefined, score: 4, children: 0
stochasticity 2 points 3 years ago

The whole Rogan thing is fascinating. He's such a shiity interviewer.

path: 0 665084 675279, hotness: undefined, score: 2, children: 0

thanks for using Leebra!

go to feed...