Just to play devils advocate, I imagine a lot of powerful right wingers think he's a useful idiot?

@@MrRancidity Well Putin used him like a tool certainly and it had real impact on people. There are legitimately people in the US who think Putin is a strong leader and they advocate for the same in the US.

I feel like that’s the point of calling him a creationist tool? He is a tool used by creationists to push their agenda. Not all tools are for good purposes. I think this joke works better when the insult is “pig” or something.

And tools are created, Tucker was not.

There are tools that serve bad purposes. Tucker's one of them.

👏

sure eyeglasses exist, but I'm not foolish enough to believe in contact lenses

@-Me_ a good effort, first comment still wins atm

Adapting is a fact of life, and we've all experienced it. Adapting multiple times, especially over a long period, is called evolution. Someone needs to give Tucker a dictionary. Or a first grade education.

I think they don't believe organisms can change *THIS* much. Still stupid, but yk

And that's the scariest part of all of this

No need to be polite, tell him that he is a useful idiot next time.

And that was the only argument his lawyers could provide for him because that's all they had to work with. "Please forgive my client, your honor, because he's a shite-talking idiot."

​@dtcdtc8328 nice attempt at deflection

​@@dtcdtc8328cope

The term "decently reasonable" coming from a judge is a loaded term. What is reasonable is only reasonable if we agree with it.

​@@dtcdtc8328There's a key difference between the rulinga though. The ruling on Maddow found that she was using hyperbole because her segment was a comedic talk show, not a news source of any kind. She never broke news, only repeated other news in an exaggerated way. She has no problem with this because she does not pretend to be a journalist/newsbreaker. Tucker didn't get this same treatment, instead having to rely on the claim that "his reputation" was such that nobody reasonable would believe him. It's nothing to do with the context of his show, they're basically saying the ruling for him is a personal one given his reputation of insane and false statements. He isn't exaggerating a fact for comedic effect. He just straight up lies sometimes.

Exactly! Say rather that Tucker laughs like the ape he is.

lets see your giggle then.

You gotta crazy laugh don't you? Tucker not you. Crap this isn't RM Brown. Toilets

Yeah it's a psychopathic laugh. That's the correct term for it.

I stopped watching the video at this point, as it is clearly offensive to giggly schoolgirls.

Fabulous comment! This is what I was feeling, but I could not express it as succinctly as you did! Well Done! My God: no wonder FOX "News" viewers are so profoundly uneducated about civics.

And is as unscientific to also reject the arguement to simply "lack of evidence" is a flawed arguement

@@hasannawaz228no it’s not… rejecting an argument isn’t necessarily saying it’s false.. it’s just not being able to just “accept” as true because… well.. why would you accept as true if there’s lack of evidence? That’s just another concept the right wing religious science deniers can’t grasp is that the rejection of an argument isn’t saying it’s false… it’s just NOT accepting as true yet.. This stuffs so easy. So no, it’s not “unscientific” to reject something based on lack of evidence. The only other alternative would be to accept it based on lack of evidence which is possibly THE dumbest thing you can do

Step 3: Creationists completely ignore any provided proof, evidence etc.

@@hasannawaz228 Eherm, an argument from incredulity or requesting to prove a negative are intellectual bankrupcy and that's all that believers can invoke... A creationist saying "evolution is too complex to happen at macro scale because I say so, why don't you prove that god doesn't exist first and then I'll believe an alternative reason you suggest" it's moronic

@@yakopc6600 well the arguement of god requires both sides to prove claims hence why no scientists will entertain it properly as there's no way to measure a abstract being you can throw fancy words and phrases towards me to make it sound like you know what your on about but both sides need a claim this is why philosophy exists

He isn't wrong about fox viewers

Is he referring to the time when Christians were burning each other at the stake? Not that we aren't still ignorant, I'll give him that one.

Only maybe concerning the shape of the earth, that's quite a new one. I've yet to find any evidence that there was any belief at the time that there was another stabber on the grassy knoll when Caesar was killed, so there is that.

@@jimb9063 It’s not that recent, it’s quite old actually, ancient really. Unless you’re talking about the belief in a flat Earth that is popular among the conspiracy theorists across the internet, then yes that is a recent development that has grown above what it originally was

@@MetastaticMaladies Yes, the second! Edit. Would've made more sense if I'd ended with 'so there is that too'.

Yes

He would probably talk about fighting and been in shape and would try to push a macho sort of vibe as he has done in the past with guest’s that he doesn’t feel the smartest o coolest guy around. No hate on joe but someone needs to talk about that shit.

Rogan interviews people with interesting ideas, not people without interesting ideas

​@@sarsaparillasunset3873 Science is interesting.

@@sarsaparillasunset3873 Rogan has invited hundreds of scientists who discuss science on the platform like Roger Penrose, Sam Harris, Brian Cox, etc. Science is interesting and Rogan knows that.

Not to mention his crazy laugh.

If I were his parents, I'd be demanding the money I spent on his education, back!

@@capt.bart.roberts4975 wdym education?

@@capt.bart.roberts4975 Yeah, it's like all those bribes to get him passing grades at [Entitled White Boys Only] prep school were utterly wasted.

As an european the interview with putin and the part about convenience stores was so fucking hilarious. How disconnected from reality is this guy? WOW RUSSIANS HAVE BREAD ... WOOOOAAAH

Mindless, spineless, soulless husk spewing any talking point that will make him money.

That's what all liars for Jesus do.

Typical science-denier.

Really? I mean I have no doubt that he does, but that he'd actually say out loud?

Link, or it didn't happen

Shuuuut uuuuup, we're meant to deny it.

I mean, I had a child as soon as I went into AI just to cover for it, apparently that didn't work as a distraction.

As a childless software developer myself, I was not aware of these plans. Did I miss a meeting? Perhaps it's because I'm not in California.

Don't worry guys, they'll just call anyone who believes that a conspiracy nut. There's always a flock of contrarians about every little detail on the Internet these days.

@@mikesimms1 No meeting, it's just the result of taking optimisation to its logical conclusion

Creationism is just a theory!

@@alexalke1417 It’s not even a theory.

Not even a hypothesis. Falsifiability sucks bro

That's in the Bible! Praise God. *Yoko Ono Noises* Sorry, force of habit.

B-but my holy scriptures!!!

🤣 All those "theories" based on "scientific" guesswork on EVERYTHING. It's hilarious to watch obnoxious, self-aggrandizing d-heads like "Professor Dave" argue with everybody about EVERYTHING. Let's start with the so-called "missing link" from millions of years ago and keep it going to present day disputes about the Theory of Relativity and why general relativity doesn't work with quantum theory. Hilarious. Done with you charlatans.

​​@@robertlaney9343 Darwin predicted that if evolution was true and only if evolution was true, we should find something in between human and apes. He went into detail of what morphological features this fossil would have, and he also perdicted it would be found in africa. His exact description has been found plenty of times. The genus Australopithecus has many species who all are exactly in between humans and apes. For example australopithecus sediba. In fact we have so many transitional forms between humans and apes that shows such a smooth gradient that the world's best experts have a hard time telling what is what. Now will you admit that there are transitional forms connecting humans to apes?

Magarats

you need to cope and seethe in ignorance. the uneducated will believe anything if it involves one side making fun of the other side

The intelligence agencies have mastered mass mind control and convinced them to hate and attack the people that try to tell them the truth. It is very frustrating and at the same time fascinating to watch play out in real time.

Sadly, some take tucker as the most serious tv personality they have ever seen

@@user-kx7iz6qk6b they will retaliate and call you a Libtard so it's checkmate as far as name calling goes. Try harder to make your point

And "population genetics," which is basically what boosted the science of evolution into scientific stardom back in the early 1900s.

To be fair, none of that is Darwinian except the fossils. To me, the Darwinian aspect of evolution is natural selection. His main discovery and contribution.

They have a book full of really disgusting, outdated bullshit that a child could debunk and that's all they need

I wouldn't even call it evidence because evidence exists in relation to a model. Creationism doesn't have a model. Magic does poof doesn't tell us anything.

Okay then, how about "Let there be cladistic phylogenetics, fossils, DNA, etc". How does that theory work for you

I unironically agree Mr. Rick Sanchez from the hit Adult Swim television series Rick and Morty (no hate just having a laugh)

@curtis1905 I feel like it's more "not enough people are calling them out *correctly"*_ Great thing about Dave (one of them, anyway) is he doesn't use arguments or talking points people can worm their way out of by "agreeing to disagree" or such things without looking like their perspective has _little to _*_no_* basis in fact

@@ivoryas1696 I agree I just think he would reach more people of he wasn't so hostile to anyone who doesn't already know what he knows

@@spoon8754 The hostility isn't necessarily that bad to people who simply don't know and act in good faith. But people who _clearly_ are ignorant or dishonest in making statements they say are "correct" relative to people who _aren't_ such, are being disrespectful by their nature, and so he throws it back at them. I'd advocate for more patience but honestly... I feel like it's fine if some people go the harsh approach as long as we don't *_all_* -Also... it's funny 💀-

@@spoon8754 or willing to consider things that he isn’t capable of.

Ouch! Bullseye

What false things has Joe Rogan said? I'm not stating you're wrong.

@@Maraien _"What false things has Joe Rogan said? I'm not stating you're wrong"_ I never said false, I said smart and reasonable. But if you look at all the false information that Joe entertains, you can easily claim he's also saying false things. His support of Hancock is one example or his continued support of dangerous medical misinformation including HIV isn't linked to AIDS. Is Joe spreading that false information on purpose? Or is he just a moron who has been fooled? Does it matter? He's insanely popular with a huge platform and that should demand he have responsibility for what he says or promotes. But since he appeals to the anti-woke crowd, he ends up bulletproof to responsibility.

Joe Rogan is reasonable stupid, Tucker Carlson is unreasonable stupid, so of course Rogan sounds smart in comparison

@@Maraien I believe Rogan is in good faith, he has that attitude of “I’m just asking questions,” unfortunately many of his questions are stupid. He has many questionable guests too.

In fairness to first graders, most of them know that a hypothesis is as-yet-unproven speculation. Tucker and his ilk think their "theory" is divine truth provided by the creator of the universe.

Also DUHH GOD DID IT is not a hypothesis

​@@ProfessorDaveExplainscare to provide your reasoning?

@@yag-yet_another_gamer I'd argue that a key aspect of a hypothesis- or one that's useful, anyway- is falsifiability. If your "hypothesis" entails the existence of an eternal, omnipotent, nonphysical consciousness that exists somewhere beyond space and time, I'm not sure how you falsify that.

@@ProfessorDaveExplains wrote, "Also DUHH GOD DID IT is not a hypothesis." You beat me to the punch here.

It's funny 'cause it's true.

And what makes it even better, is that segregation is far from the worst thing America has ever done (it still wasn’t a good thing though).

I was shocked to learn that Lincoln advocated for segregation and wanted to encourage blacks to return to Africa: "On August 14, 1862, Lincoln met at the White House delegation of Black leaders to make his case for the voluntary emigration of African Americans to countries outside the U.S. “Your race suffer from living among us, while ours suffer from your presence… It is better for us both, therefore, to be separated,” Lincoln told the delegation." Intermarriage between the races and political equality were too much even for Lincoln - today we would label such views as white supremacist.

okay tucker is a bloke but that was obviously just him stumbling over his words. using that against him is unreasonable. everyone messes up their words sometimes.

@@tma2001Yeah, kinda wild how backwards progressivism was then. I try to focus on appreciating the steps taken back then that let us criticize them for being so small today.

@@tma2001 That’s why people today say that the founding fathers and hero’s of the revolution were white supremacist, yet they get shouted down at by others that worship them with no historical context and lots of bias. There is lots of propaganda about our history and the notable people in it.

This is something that pisses me off as a biomedic, they act as if we don't understand evolution or as if we don't have evidence of it, this shows a complete illiteracy on the subject because evolution theory has almost two centuries of research and evidence to back It up, so much that the whole field of modern biology is based in evolution.

Av yes and you're a genius I presume? 😅

@@AboveEmAllProduction You wrote, "Ah yes and you're a genius I presume?" Did he say he was a genius? What does being a genius or not being one have to do with knowing that Carlson is full of horse-pucky in his remarks about evolution? Everything Tucker stated - I mean, literally, every statement he made - displayed complete ignorance of any of the science. So, did you have any actual point? Or not?

@@AboveEmAllProductionjackass

​@@AboveEmAllProduction You don't need to be a genius to understand evolution, you only need a basic knowledge about biology, which tucker shows little of.

It's like saying childhood is real and godzilla is not

No, not necessarily. One could be of the view that god created very flexible animals that are able to adapt to environmental changes. So "adaption" could mean that they are able to mostly adapt through the life time. Maybe you can add some inheritence genetically and epigenetically. Then someone could also only hold to microevolution. This would not include something like the theory of common descent or macroevolution.

Everyone is entitled to contribute their opinion.

​@@CATKYBNM Even on topics they very clearly and provably know nothing about?

@@JohnGardnerAlhadis I would say that if someone believes in a religion, they're entitled to argue how the world was created. Regardless of whether you beleive it to be inaccruate or not. There are credible scientists from cambridge that argue similar arguments (maybe a bit more structured). Why would gatekeeping bhuddist monks, hindus, christians, muslims etc from creation debates be beneficial? If people think Tucker doesn't have a leg to stand on and science is irrefutable then that's okay, but to gatekeep anyone with an opinion is wrong.

⁠​⁠@@CATKYBNMif you want to have a scientific discussion about how people came to be, you need have evidence for your theory. People aren’t gatekeeping, they are simply ignoring theories that add no value to the discussion.

Drunk on the misguided feedback of their self importance.

"The theory of gravity is just a theo r r r y!!" The ground definitely exists though.

Never mind the applied sciences. Music Theory is also "just a theory."

They would if they could monetize it

Along the lines of questioning Germ Theory. Unsurprisingly, massive amounts of people still avoid washing their hands because they can’t see the microorganisms with their unaided eyes.

I'm sure the flat earthers Peter and Pete would call it "just a theory".

His function is to spread Russian propaganda and white christian nationalism

True, but don't forget that tools are used by others, not themselves

The function is to appeal to his in groups propaganda. Without people like him the doubt for creationism will increase and people will stop believing in it. Though intuitively the evidences are different, in terms of structure and quality of evidence flat earth and evolution denial are equally ridiculous positions. You could chalk this up to how the round earth is just way more intuitive to explain and understand. But even creationist believe in quantum physics despite the evidence and explanation for that science is all over the place. Many flat earthers even will appeal to quantum physics. Confirmation bias is more of a factor in my opinion Without this function evolution denial becomes an equivalent position to flat earth

Look how divided the US is right now, are you really going to suggest he had no part to play in this?

Oh, he has a function. It’s terrible and detrimental to those who aren’t into his brand of fascism, but it’s a function.

​@@SimrealismLet your participation in it end. 😆 Feigning superiority 🥱 My husband and I are expecting!!!

​@@Simrealism it's an observation based on his behavior to simply adhere to and parrot those "above" him, that's what that is

Congrats, you just figured out a political media pundits job.

@@Simrealism You mean that thing Tucker did constantly on his failed opinion show? "This infernal species"? And what're you, Posadis? A Nephilim baby?

In the podcast he says Darwin’s theory of evolution wrong, he was already talking about Darwin’s theory of evolution

I also learned Creationism as a kid. However, my parents allowed me to study real science on my own Religion is 👎😫

@@kaudsiz Some religion that which makes the news. Plenty of devout Scientists supporting evolution.

There is irony in that these are on the Protestant side when in the early Protestant movement they would reject the creationist argument because they believed in Predestination . Especially the Calvinist movement. This was from Theology that realized over time that if you worshiped an all knowing, present everywhere and all powerful God that God could insure everything thing they wanted to happen at the moment of creation that God would not need to do anything after that point other than direct talk to leaders and have a Son. Predestination in part what got the Catholic Church to switch sides to the Evolution side after the evidence for Evolution became overwhelming. That evolution is how god expressed god's will in the area. Note under Predestination God can hear prayer and answer it at the moment of creation no need to modify things currently. Here is God is not limited by time a logical theologic thought. Predestination fell out of favor over time as it meant your dammed to hell or to heaven when the Universe was created you don't actually have a choice it a very anti free will doctrine. Of course you were still expected to pray and follow all the teachings it just that what seamed to be a free will choice on your part to do so or not was illusionary.

It's fantastic that you've managed to crawl out of that shroud of ignorance your family pulled you into. For every one person who escapes it, there's probably a few who don't...

To give you a further perspective beyond the debunking of biblical literalism, i recommend reading some of Friedrich Nietzsches work. He does a lot of critiques against modern culture and Christian morality that are very thought-provoking.

​​@@bean7039Considering the fact we have extensive evidence of something at least resembling the Big Bang Cosmological Model, then yes it sounds perfectly reasonable. That we don't know exactly what caused it yet is irrelevant. Once upon a time we thought a deity was responsible for rain and sacrificed people to it. Now we understand climate science. That science has not yet got a specific for explanation something doesn't mean it will never be explainable.

I don't think the Tucker even believes in THAT. It's just going to be a new and convenient pivot.

@@TheDarkSide11891 but that also doesn't mean we need to subscribe to mythology without any reason to believe it, either.

@@j0j0dartiste21 I'll say one thing - if the Tucker Carlson's of the world are right about the Biblical god, they are going to be in for an unpleasant surprise in the afterlife...

​@@jhouck1969You, on the other hand, will be totally fine, of course...

Theres no way you watched it from start to finish. Because youre anti Rogan/Carlson, youre just throwin leftist crap for fun. Like theres no way id watch 2 hours of the leftist democratic lunatics podcasting together.

Yes!

I assumed it was like a meme following. Like people just followed the bow tie guy John Stewart destroyed for laughs. The fact that old people take him serious is concerning and hilarious.

It's fairly small, all told. He was such a big draw for Fox prime time that they kept him on even though they had no ads to show on his slot, but eventually he became too much of a problem for even them so they dumped him. If people were truly invested in him, they would've turned wherever he went into the new megahit, but they didn't. Turns out the prime time Fox News slot is what makes a conservative pundit successful, not the other way around.

@@Nothingseen Sure, but he still has some following. And when he was on Fox and more popular he was already spewing garbage.

@@chlorophyllphile Oh yeah I agree. I watched Jon Stewart tell him to stop hurting America like 15 years ago and I thought "oh, dude's done for" AND YET, here he still is! The conservative movement is beyond shame, and seems to take a measure of glee in being hated by most people. It's a real anti-social personality disorder type thing.

I think (sadly) he's more popular than we'd like to believe. e.g. he was ahead of the curve in being pro-Russia. The MAGA / QAnon nutters love him, which is probably about a quarter of the country.

It seems to be a product of habitually small thinking. Inches? Sure! But miles? No way!

Yeah I believe 2+2 equals 4! But 2+2+2+2+2 equals 10 is crazyy!

​​@@0okaminoRight! I always thought the whole "microevolution" argument was the stupidest argument among the myriad of stupid arguments science deniers use. "You can have small adaptation, but not major changes leading to speciation"? Guess what happens when you take something, and then make small changes to it for a hundred million years? You get a damn different result than what you started with, that's for sure. Many, many small changes make for a big difference in the "end" result.

It's like believing in adolescence but not 200' tall giants

@@cosmictreason2242 Who claims that there were ever 200' tall giants?

Idiocracy for the win! 😂

he's not dealing with ppl like this. tucker doesn't even know who this guy is, so, there's no dealing of any kind, on anyone's part. he seeks out ppl minding their own business, and then attacks them, in this case he goes after one of rare anti imperialist voices in the media, up until recently, the only anti imperialist voice in the mainstream media, and attacks him on the grounds that he, who never claimed to know jack about science, doesn't know jack about science. this reminds me of those right wing guys (who differ from "dave" only in being aware that they are right wing) who whine about r-word left, cause some rando had a meltdown somewhere in public. both are just trying to cash in on the outrage and 5 minutes of hate, w/o either contributing to science, I mean, if this is your first time hearing about evolution, I stand corrected, but I'm pretty sure you haven't learned anything from this video, or in case of those guys contributing jack to improving lives of ordinary people, cause instead of attacking that f-ist in white house, they go after ordinary ppl who hold no power and no one asks them about anything. no one asks tucker about science either. no one watches tucker for science either, I've also never heard anyone say that tucker is an intelligent man. so what in the world was the purpose of this stupid video? you ppl need to learn about communism, and start uniting instead of hating. not "dave", he's flat out f-ist, he literally made this video to showcase how much he hates tucker, but you know, ppl like you

He sings himself that theme song of his before he starts. It gives him the strength of 10 men.

Fr fr professor Dave 💪😎

fr

His name is MR. FARINA!

@bpa5721 My dog has been struggling with differential calculus. Must be something in the food he eats.

@@LetsCook64 let me know if he gets the hang of it, cause i also struggle with it

Lucky you. My dog has trouble having any thought at all. Very much a "No thoughts, head empty" type of dog.

It's the same talking points they all have to use because they're running out of justifications for their made-up imaginary and delusional nonsense.

Belief isn't disinformation, it might be wrong but he believes it. You're getting close to totalitarianism and no matter the brand it's not good.

they all are, i call them "new christian" no interest in the teachings of jesus, solely interested in subs, likes, patron, course sales and book sales. if you want to be a good christian, be atheist....

All political pundits are grifters and type of audience U have doesn't really matter much

Isn't he a journalist?

@@AboveEmAllProductionDid you ask that in the “I’m just asking” Tucker voice? Because objectively no he is not. He is a washed up bow-tie wearing ex cnn employee who also got fired from fox’s opinion show.

​@@AboveEmAllProduction well-paid propagandist.

@@AboveEmAllProductionwhoosh

@@mikelxanadu Hahaha. No sir, the wooosh is on you

Either God created us or nothing created everything which is scientifically impossible... If you look at a building, how do you know someone built it? Because buildings don't build themselves.

@@TheWordImmanuel You are certain of this and have no proof.

​@@tinyPaleBlueDotAnd so are you.

@@thstroyur No, I would be the opposite: having proof but not certainty.

@@tinyPaleBlueDot The proof being?

How is Rogan unreasonable ?

Y'all portray him as way more of an unreasonable idiot than he really is, he's a smart guy who listens to really varied perspectives

Give 3 examples of joe rogan being unreasonable.

I’m not a loyal Joe Rogan fan by any means, but I’ve seen a ton of clips during my times of mindless scrolling on KZfaq. I’ve never seen anything from him that really screams unreasonable, I’ve heard some of his opinions that I completely disagree with, but he honestly seems quite open minded if given good reason or evidence.

@@user-vt3vo1yd3v I don't need to give you three. Just one. I am taking the kitchen sink approach to unreasonableness. I see one instance of unreasonableness, and I throw out the whole show. And I refuse to give even one, until you watch 14 hours of Professor Dave content

Hey, it’s not being wrong that is really bad; it’s being unwilling to be corrected. You have allowed yourself to do better, and be better, and that’s great.

The angels of non-stupid rejoiced

I am an atheist but I think you can be a christian and believe in evolution. Just don't read a text dating back centuries and millennia literally. There are tons of texts, religious and otherwise, and very few of them are to be taken literally.

Nobody is born knowing anything. We all come from a starting point of total ignorance. There is no shame in growing at different rates, or being at a different spot in your journey of discovery than others. Only in stopping for fear of what's ahead.

I'm sorry you lost your way. Why do you believe man over God?

Unfortunately, that last group comprises like 90% of KZfaq commenters (not including you).

I don’t believe Tucker is really _that_ stupid, but he knows a significant part of his appeal is to people who are. That’s not to say that he’s a disingenuous grifter in all aspects, though, as he is genuinely a right-wing fascist, but a grifter as well.

If someone proves that you exist, do you become a legal chemist, or a chemical law? Lol. Also, look on the bright side, at least you're not a hypothetical chemist.

and he's also said that "the adaptation theory is obviously true" in which case, if such a theory did even exist, why'd he call it a theory?

The only group of people allowed to say "it's just a theory" are the hosts of the Theorist channels

As a fellow (former) theoretical chemist, I just go with the Fallout response: "they asked me if I had a degree in theoretical chemistry; I told them I had a theoretical degree in chemistry" Now I just teach Gen Chem and O-Chem, so I just handwave right past all the math in quantum and most of the 1st and 2nd years seem to be OK with that...But I don't let them off the hook if they can't explain the difference between a scientific law and scientific theory by the final exam

What these science dumbos like Tucker are doing when they say "it's just a theory" is to dumb everything ever done by science down into just everyday theories, like gut instinct or "I have a hunch" types of theories. As if scientists are all sitting around hitting a bong, sipping tea, and saying, "Hell yeah, that sounds cool, we'll publish that," like that's how peer review and research work to them.

That was the whole point. One day Tucker is gonna call for terrorist acts and will excuse himself “it was all just entertainment”.

When a comment that's meant to be a metaphor ends up being literal

Underrated comment😂

“Oh no fossil record? How bout THE FOSSIL RECORD” 😂😂😂

@@jonnyblaze2692How are readers thousands of years later supposed to tell if it’s a metaphor? And a metaphor for what? Aren’t religious metaphors especially tricky because they may be made to say various things?

@@dwightfitch3120 thousands of years what the hell you talking about? The post I replied to was 3 weeks ago. KZfaq user came up with a metaphor for the interview. I just commented that it seemed more real than a metaphor considering who was involved and the topic. Rogan the gorilla Tucker the snake

So true💀

He’s damaged humanity for decades

Yep. this is the problem with the world. Too many stupid people with no self awareness or anyone to tell them they're very stupid, or at best guide them away from their own stupidity. Then they have access to the internet so think they're really really clever because they ''dO thEiR oWn ReSeArCh''. Then tucker Carlson comes along and acts like their saviour (in the same way andrew tate does with basement dwellers) so they hang on every word he says, they don't push back and tucker then feels even more clever, spouting more nonsense that they in-turn lap up.

That's because you have been conditioned to think a certain way. Either God created us or nothing created everything which is scientifically impossible... If you look at a building, how do you know someone built it? Because buildings don't build themselves.

@@TheWordImmanuel „If you look at a building, how do you know someone built it? Because buildings don't build themselves.“ Who build god?

@@TheWordImmanuel Buildings don't build themselves... yet.

Whether you believe or not, the Universe doesn't care either way.

@@TheWordImmanuelseriously? The fucking clockmaker argument?

*she doesn’t even go here

Best nickname, stealing it if you don't mind

none of the creationist are good though....

@@hilmanh2832 you should read The Genesis Flood, then. PhD fluid dynamics professor at VTech wrote that in 1961. It's a hugely relevant piece of history you owe it to yourself to know about

The Nazis always thought atomic physics was “Jewish science”

If it's in regards to the Manhattan Project, then by definition he is correct: "To make secret plans jointly to commit an unlawful or harmful act." And while it may not have necessarily been unlawful, you can't tell me it wasn't harmful. Don't get me wrong. Fucker KORORL SON! (walking dead meme) is a dangerously confused individual!

Oh, but it is! It all started with this secret cabal of scientists working on "The Manhattan Project". Which, I gotta say, even if the bomb is one of the worst things mankind has ever created, that is a DOPE name for a project. Also, I don't actually know when the study of atomic science started.

No, not a conspiracy, secret demon knowledge

"More attention should be paid to him implying the development of atomic science was part of some sort of conspiracy." To be fair, the Oppenheimer project was in fact a highly secret military "conspiracy." Seriously. It was a Top Secret project. There were severe penalties for disseminating information about it. Now, I actually have no idea what you're referring to specifically - I don't even know who you're referring to by "him."

High ratings doesn’t mean he isn’t stupid.

Exactly my point. In fact, in some ways, his ratings were so high because of how stupid he is.

Its a interview/podcast its not like he is setting up debates with hiya guests. Let the idiots speak. Him arguing south them is not going to change their minds anyway.

I don't have a problem with it at all to be honest. It's kind of the point of an interview. He asks the guest questions so that the audience can learn more about the guest. If the audience ends up learning the guest is an idiot, so be it. It's not his job to protect them. I actually find it really annoying when the interviewer constantly interrupts the guest and derails the conversation. It's actually pretty entertaining listening to people say the most insane shit, to be honest. Lex Fridman also has this interview style. Even when his guests are saying some blatantly ridiculous things he just calmly keeps asking them about it while trying to maintain a straight face. Much prefer that to them randomly debating them then and there. Imagine all the funny quotes we would be deprived of. To use the old sun tzu quote "never interrupt your opponent when he's in the middle of making a mistake"

​@@user-fg5xs9lh7sIt's more of a problem because he's giving these people a platform that people may view as trustworthy. By putting them on the same stage as some of the legitimate professionals he has on the podcast, it gives them an unwarranted air of legitimacy. Now, while people SHOULD be able to distinguish between the two, not everyone will, and for a lot of these hacks it empowers them to spread their quackery to the masses even more when they can say "hey look guys, Joe had me on his podcast! *insert educated individual* was also on the podcast, so my ideas must be real!!".

@TheDarkSide11891 people have brains that are allowed to think. It's a podcast, not a lecture. You cannot silence those you disagree with by deplatforming them. It's amazing that Spotify didn't give in to those who wanted to cancel him and have him removed. It's better to let them speak so that their views can be challenged.

Agreed too many anti gov, anti mainstream and conspiracy theorists love Rogan. He certainly does not want nor pushes enough to expose this fraudsters.

The appropriate response to bullshit is pointing at it and saying “that is fucking bullshit”

@@eeeaten if you want to feel superior then yes go right ahead. I've done that before plenty of times. But if you want to convince people and not just sing to the choir you need to take a different approach. Insulting people causes them to shut down and doubt your intensions.

That's the only problem I have with this guy.

As someone deep down the rabbit hole, joe Rogan has a lot more dirt on him than that lol. Outside of the fake vitamins scam he shares with his buddy Alex jones, he’s also “friends” with multiple p files. That LA comedy scene is a filthy scummy place.

He did have an episode where he argued with a flat earther for an entire 40 minutes. If he can carry a conversation that long without losing his mind or the guest walking off, that’s honestly impressive.

He knows it’s no use. He challenged Terrence Howard who when changed the subject. Obviously Rogan doesn’t want anyone walking out on him.

Out of nowhere fear-laugh

Chimps have better laughs than him.

Well of course he knows he is lying, how else is he going to deny the mountain of empirical evidence. Plus it works. We have seen time and time again that no matter how incorrect someone is, if they say something ridiculous it will ultimately benefit them because of the publicity it generates.