Joe Rogan * Mod Warning Post 234*

Arghus · 15-05-2020 10:26pm

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BKrf7mX_R6M

kowloon · 15-05-2020 10:51pm

Cienciano wrote: »

Dan Carlin could talk about what womens underwear he finds comfortable for 3 hours and I guarantee it would make it sound interesting.

Dan Carlin puts a lot more time into his podcasts, quality over quantity.

16-05-2020 2:02am

Sir Oxman wrote: »

The one with Alex Jones was epic.

What happened.

I'd watch but I can't tolerate that ass hat Jones.

Mister Vain · 16-05-2020 10:55am

He has had some big stars too like Mel Gibson and Jamie Fox.

Tilikum17 · 16-05-2020 10:59am

Can’t understand how he has a career as a stand up, he brutal. I liked the one with Teddy Atlas. Atlas spoke about Tyson for 10-15 straight without that clown interrupting. It was excellent.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=3wCZY_vW860

Ash.J.Williams · 16-05-2020 11:07am

irishguitarlad wrote: »

His podcasts aren't great are they? He only has a good guest on maybe every two months. The only two good ones I can remember recently were the one with black guy on about the kkk and the guy that wrote that new book on Manson. I also find he talks about himself too much, I'm sorry Joe I don't give a **** about your opinions. Normally he has on his unfunny comedian friends or journalists that spout shít for about two hours. I also find his podcast is influencing a lot of Irish people who are beginning to act like they are living in the states.

It’s just not for you is it ?

statesaver · 16-05-2020 1:08pm

This was awkward for Joe.

Joe Rogan on the art of "stool fcuking" in comedy

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M5s1mrcgi_c

silverharp · 22-05-2020 4:30pm

Rogan is moving to Spotify from YouTube, liked the young Jamie comment

https://twitter.com/MMAHistoryToday/status/1262853921657294849

Thelonious Monk · 22-05-2020 5:44pm

They seem to go forever and I don't like his voice. I read a book called The Science of Sleep once and just found that the author had been on his show, Matthew Walker, it's very interesting if you're into that kind of thing.

xtal191 · 22-05-2020 5:50pm

Thelonious Monk wrote: »

They seem to go forever and I don't like his voice. I read a book called The Science of Sleep once and just found that the author had been on his show, Matthew Walker, it's very interesting if you're into that kind of thing.

Thats a great watch

completedit · 22-05-2020 9:00pm

My problem with Rogan is not so much himself. He says stupid things and has weird opinions but he has like 3 podcasts a week, speaking for 2 hours at a time, he's gonna have some things that people disagree or find odd, but it's more I don't get the point of getting some superficial knowledge on some subject that I'll just forget in a week. He's a great conversationalist to be fair to him and has some insights worth noting but I'm not sure, just not a big fan of the conveyor belt of subject matter.

22-05-2020 9:02pm

Thelonious Monk wrote: »

They seem to go forever and I don't like his voice. I read a book called The Science of Sleep once and just found that the author had been on his show, Matthew Walker, it's very interesting if you're into that kind of thing.

Have you seen that movie?.. It's absolutely brilliant..

(Although probably not related to the book, and like, not factual..)

cj maxx · 22-05-2020 9:08pm

I've never heard of Joe Rogan.
Should I have had ?

22-05-2020 9:13pm

cj maxx wrote: »

I've never heard of Joe Rogan.
Should I have had ?

Podcaster..some of them are good.. you'll probably take up ju jitsu in a couple of months..

Ultrflat · 22-05-2020 9:39pm

Joe Rogan is a pretty decent guy, he seems to have some what of a thirst for knowledge to a degree, Stuff like injury's and stuff. But it gets a little boring when he spends an hour talking to some one like Lard Hamilton about injury's for an hour instead of talking about big wave surfing. He's done some pretty amazing interviews and then some not so much. Like the tony hawk one was disappointing he could of gonna a lot deeper in that but he didn't which was disappointing.

of late I've found hes been obsessing about injurys and treatment rather than talking/learning about the people who hes got on.
I do think he's a good person tho.

AlphabetCards · 22-05-2020 10:21pm

cj maxx wrote: »

I've never heard of Joe Rogan.
Should I have had ?

I'm sorry, did you say Roe Jogan?

blinding · 23-05-2020 7:16am

JohnnyFlash wrote: »

His podcast can occasionally be good despite Rogan hosting it. Like when he had Bernie Sanders on. Or the physicist Brian Greene.

He also shïtes on far too much about smoking weed. Like all stoners.

Brian Greene and Sean Carroll ( another physicist ) were excellent on it.

Sean Carroll has been on twice at least. Great episodes.

Agricola · 23-05-2020 12:20pm

As Americans go, he's fairly tolerable.

Homelander · 23-05-2020 2:23pm

cj maxx wrote: »

I've never heard of Joe Rogan.
Should I have had ?

I don't listen to his podcasts though they're very popular, but he'd also be very well known for being a high-profile UFC commentator and stand-up comedian.

Years ago he was the host of Fear Factor as well.

I'd say he's the sort of guy most people within a certain age bracket would've at least heard of, even if they're not familiar with him.

I don't rate him as a comedian, not hugely interested in his podcasts but he's a great UFC color commentator.

blinding · 23-05-2020 2:55pm

He is becoming a very very wealthy man from it ( the podcast ) and his other stuff.

Quandary · 23-05-2020 3:06pm

Im not a fan of his stand up stuff, but some of his podcasts are great. Some are sh1te, but that's going to be the case if you're churning out the volume he is.

Joe sometimes forgets how wealthy he is when he talks about the things he says everyone should be doing or trying. Slow your roll there Joe, the vast majority of us can't afford to spend 20 mins in our own personal sauna at insanely high temperatures each day to get the benefit of heat shock proteins!

Overall, I quite like his podcasts. He's up there with the very best when it comes to MMA.

Woke Hogan · 23-05-2020 3:23pm

I find it difficult to put my finger on why I find Joe Rogan so endlessly fascinating. On the one hand he seems to have to an endless curiosity about the world and genuine interest in learning as much as he can about loads of different topics.

On the other hand he’s incredibly stupid and suggestible to the point that he will accept almost anything told to him by some of these “alternative facts” lunatics he has on without offering any real resistance to their points of view.

Similarly with his stand up: On the one hand I admire that he has made it to the top of a very competitive industry through hard work, discipline and drive after grinding away at it for decades.

On the other hand he’s incredibly stupid and struggles to engage in any kind of back and forth encounters with anyone who isn’t in his circle of meathead close friends/sycophants. In terms of drive he’s at 10/10 but in terms of actually being funny he’s 0/10. He’s not a funny or witty man.

He absolutely refuses to accept any responsibility for offering dangerous nutters like Alex Jones, Ben Shapiro, Ted Nugent and so on a platform for sharing their odious views as well.

Away from going to the sauna or the gym, he needs to learn how to conquer his “inner bitch” when it comes to behaving ethically as a prominent broadcaster while enjoying the windfalls of having developed such a huge following for himself.

If he ever decides to nut up I will have a lot more respect for him and I feel that he will be remembered more fondly in the future after his career is over.

Rodin · 23-05-2020 3:25pm

Woke Hogan wrote: »

I find it difficult to put my finger on why I find Joe Rogan so endlessly fascinating. On the one hand he seems to have to an endless curiosity about the world and genuine interest in learning as much as he can about loads of different topics.

On the other hand he’s incredibly stupid and suggestible to the point that he will accept almost anything told to him by some of these “alternative facts” lunatics he has on without offering any real resistance to their points of view.

Similarly with his stand up: On the one hand I admire that he has made it to the top of a very competitive industry through hard work, discipline and drive after grinding away at it for decades.

On the other hand he’s incredibly stupid and struggles to engage in any kind of back and forth encounters with anyone who isn’t in his circle of meathead close friends/sycophants. In terms of drive he’s at 10/10 but in terms of actually being funny he’s 0/10. He’s not a funny or witty man.

He absolutely refuses to accept any responsibility for offering dangerous nutters like Alex Jones, Ben Shapiro, Ted Nugent and so on a platform for sharing their odious views as well.

Away from going to the sauna or the gym, he needs to learn how to conquer his “inner bitch” when it comes to behaving ethically as a prominent broadcaster while enjoying the windfalls of having developed such a huge following for himself.

If he ever decides to nut up I will have a lot more respect for him and I feel that he will be remembered more fondly in the future after his career is over.

I'd never considered Ben Shapiro a dangerous nutter.
Alex Jones is full of 5h1tt

23-05-2020 3:27pm

How exactly is Ben Shapiro dangerous?

Royale with Cheese · 23-05-2020 3:28pm

I'll watch clips of his podcast on Youtube, if he has someone on I'm interested in then I'll check it out. For a comedian, I've never heard him say one single funny/witty thing on his podcasts. Ever. I've never even heard him try and crack a joke. I know his standup (which is terrible) and podcasts are two completely separate things, but you'd think any comedian wouldn't be able to resist cracking the odd joke now and then.

blinding · 23-05-2020 3:34pm

Ben Shapiro is perfectly fine. Politically Centre Right = Absolutely nothing wrong with that !

Woke Hogan · 23-05-2020 3:39pm

https://twitter.com/benshapiro/status/25712847277?s=20

The words of a dangerous nutter.

Turquoise Hexagon Sun · 23-05-2020 4:13pm

Woke Hogan wrote: »

He absolutely refuses to accept any responsibility for offering dangerous nutters like Alex Jones, Ben Shapiro, Ted Nugent and so on a platform for sharing their odious views as well.

Not all people think no-platforming is a constructive way handle differing views. I certainly am not a person that believes that. I think people should have the right to be wrong. They have the right to be ****ty and vile it they want to. Censorship snd shutting people down by the way of no-platforming is harmful. It's not good for discourse, not matter how much you think you are on the side of righteousness.

Everyone thinks they are the side of righteousness, so you are biased to you own self-righteousness. I think Joe sees through that.

Alex Jones is mental and Shapiro can say some disagreeable and contentious things but never would the first thought be not to give them a platform. In the marketplace of ideas, these people should have every right to say whatever they want and we can accept their ideas or we can argue with with logic, reasons and facts.

It's the beauty of public discourse and engaging with people with differing views.

I find it highly arrogant when some people or insitututions feel the need to police who and who I shouldn't listen to because they think X or Y is dangerous. It amounts to authoritarianism, censorship and control. I'm not a fan of either of them. Like it wasn't enough that we had church and government telling us what we can and can't see.

I'd rather live in a more liberal society.

Blowfish · 23-05-2020 4:44pm

blinding wrote: »

Brian Greene and Sean Carroll ( another physicist ) were excellent on it.

Sean Carroll has been on twice at least. Great episodes.

As an aside, Sean Carroll's own podcast is fantastic if you love the nerdier topics like Physics.

Lex Fridman is another guest of Joe Rogan's who's started their own really good podcast for the nerdier stuff.

Ipso · 23-05-2020 4:46pm

blinding wrote: »

Ben Shapiro is perfectly fine. Politically Centre Right = Absolutely nothing wrong with that !

He done sterling work on the friends of hammas topic.

23-05-2020 4:47pm

blinding wrote: »

Ben Shapiro is perfectly fine. Politically Centre Right = Absolutely nothing wrong with that !

Obama is centre right.

Obama and Shapiro are rather different.

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts · 23-05-2020 6:29pm

I like him overall. Sometimes he can be such an American buff though.

Once he was talking about the Clinton Lewinsky scandal. He was talking about the power differential between Clinton and Lewinsky. All grand. Then he said re: Clinton: “Dude, she was an intern and you were the Leader Of The World. THE LEADER OF THE WORLD!”. Aaaaah, calm done there, Joe. There are over 200 countries in the world and the American president is leader of one of them (and its dependencies). I know the US is a superpower but I just thought it was such a clueless, arrogant statement.

The Leah Remini episode is great though. I like how she explains what it’s like to get pulled into the church as a child.

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts · 23-05-2020 8:18pm

completedit wrote: »

Just terrible on so many levels, if you're putting out that many shows a week you're forgoing quality for quantity.

I like his curiosity but he lacks any self awareness.

That’s a good summation. He flip flops a lot.

silverharp wrote: »

I would have assumed being curious and lacking self awareness are contradictory ideas? you are essentially saying he is a person who approaches things with an open mind but simultaneously lives his life uncanny valley style.

Not at all. You can be curious about other people and ideas whilst having a blind spot about your own shortcomings.

nullzero · 23-05-2020 8:35pm

Another source of interesting content gone from YouTube.

It's quickly becoming a wasteland filled with boring useless fluff.

completedit · 23-05-2020 8:40pm

Do people not have the impression that Rogan puts out information for information sake? All this identity politics chat, perhaps it is important because of the spillover American culture can have but to me most of the chat is just inane. I like MMA but wouldn't listen to the fight shows which I presume are actually the best shows because he actually knows what he's talking about. I don't think the 'just letting experts on for a chat' format works really. You need to have concrete knowledge and research done because too often Rogan goes down these paths of false information with nobody to check him.

Woke Hogan · 23-05-2020 8:44pm

Turquoise Hexagon Sun wrote: »

Not all people think no-platforming is a constructive way handle differing views. I certainly am not a person that believes that. I think people should have the right to be wrong. They have the right to be ****ty and vile it they want to. Censorship snd shutting people down by the way of no-platforming is harmful. It's not good for discourse, not matter how much you think you are on the side of righteousness.

Everyone thinks they are the side of righteousness, so you are biased to you own self-righteousness. I think Joe sees through that.

Alex Jones is mental and Shapiro can say some disagreeable and contentious things but never would the first thought be not to give them a platform. In the marketplace of ideas, these people should have every right to say whatever they want and we can accept their ideas or we can argue with with logic, reasons and facts.

It's the beauty of public discourse and engaging with people with differing views.

I find it highly arrogant when some people or insitututions feel the need to police who and who I shouldn't listen to because they think X or Y is dangerous. It amounts to authoritarianism, censorship and control. I'm not a fan of either of them. Like it wasn't enough that we had church and government telling us what we can and can't see.

I'd rather live in a more liberal society.

My main issue is that he gives these people a platform without challenging them, fact checking and so on. By all means he can interview Shapiro and Jones but he should also realise that he has a reach similar to a large international newspaper and that he needs similar stringent editorial scrutiny. Presenting evidence for wild claims should be easy if you’re using “logic, reason and facts,” after all, m’gentlesir.

I have listened to dozens of his podcasts and you could count on one hand how often he actually counters people like Shapiro, Jordan Peterson and so on while they’re promoting the dangerous ideas they’re shovelling.

I believe that this is for two reasons: 1) he’s personally too stupid to actually counter their arguments and 2) he doesn’t have the nuts to face up to his responsibilities an influential broadcaster while reaping all of the rewards and perks and hiding behind his weak “I’m just a comedian bro” bleatings.

Earendil · 23-05-2020 8:55pm

[Deleted User] wrote: »

How exactly is Ben Shapiro dangerous?

This is how they work when they don’t agree with someone - brand them as ‘dangerous’.

I disagree with most of the far left ideology, but would not be in favour of deplatforming a single one of those commentators. Ironically I feel that would be an infringement on their civil liberties, which I would find unacceptable...regardless of their ‘woke’ crap.

23-05-2020 8:57pm

Woke Hogan wrote: »

My main issue is that he gives these people a platform without challenging them, fact checking and so on. By all means he can interview Shapiro and Jones but he should also realise that he has a reach similar to a large international newspaper and that he needs similar stringent editorial scrutiny. Presenting evidence for wild claims should be easy if you’re using “logic, reason and facts,” after all, m’gentlesir.

I have listened to dozens of his podcasts and you could count on one hand how often he actually counters people like Shapiro, Jordan Peterson and so on while they’re promoting the dangerous ideas they’re shovelling.

I believe that this is for two reasons: 1) he’s personally too stupid to actually counter their arguments and 2) he doesn’t have the nuts to face up to his responsibilities an influential broadcaster while reaping all of the rewards and perks and hiding behind his weak “I’m just a comedian bro” bleatings.

Is it only the people you oppose ideologically that you want him to question?..
Have you seen what happened anyone that tried to argue with Peterson or Shapiro?..

Woke Hogan · 23-05-2020 8:59pm

Earendil wrote: »

This is how they work when they don’t agree with someone - brand them as ‘dangerous’.

I disagree with most of the far left ideology, but would not be in favour of deplatforming a single one of those commentators. Ironically I feel that would be an infringement on their civil liberties, which I would find unacceptable...regardless of their ‘woke’ crap.

Which civil liberties are being infringed exactly when it is suggested that someone like Joe Rogan shouldn’t have certain (let’s call them) ideologues on his programme without fact checking or employing any kind of journalistic scrutiny?

Woke Hogan · 23-05-2020 9:04pm

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Is it only the people you oppose ideologically that you want him to question?..
Have you seen what happened anyone that tried to argue with Peterson or Shapiro?..

I think everyone on a far reaching programme like that should be scrutinised.

I saw this interview with Ben Shapiro. He’s such an effective debater that he managed to get into an argument with himself and had to flee the studio.

https://youtu.be/6VixqvOcK8E

I also watched Peterson debate Zizek. It was the intellectual equivalent of a cat (Zizek) toying with a mouse (Peterson) before killing it. It really showed how much of a complete lightweight Peterson is.

nullzero · 23-05-2020 9:08pm

Woke Hogan wrote: »

Which civil liberties are being infringed exactly when it is suggested that someone like Joe Rogan shouldn’t have certain (let’s call them) ideologues on his programme without fact checking or employing any kind of journalistic scrutiny?

What you really mean when you say "employing any kind of journalist scrutiny" is, "finds a means of having a world view that is exactly the same as mine".

Most of us can listen to even the most ridiculous ideas without mindlessly aping them.

Its all a moot point anyway, the ideal you subscribe to is winning hands down. Nobody will be allowed to have an opinion that is outside "terms of service" parameters of youtube or twitter in the real world within a few years.

Three cheers for the nanny state, freedom of speech thought and expression is/was evil, good riddance to it.

Earendil · 23-05-2020 9:09pm

Woke Hogan wrote: »

Which civil liberties are being infringed exactly when it is suggested that someone like Joe Rogan shouldn’t have certain (let’s call them) ideologues on his programme without fact checking or employing any kind of journalistic scrutiny?

There is either freedom of speech or there isn’t.

23-05-2020 9:11pm

Woke Hogan wrote: »

I also watched Peterson debate Zizek. It was the intellectual equivalent of a cat (Zizek) toying with a mouse (Peterson) before killing it. It really showed how much of a complete lightweight Peterson is.

This tells me all I need to know..

Earendil · 23-05-2020 9:11pm

Woke Hogan wrote: »

I think everyone on a far reaching programme like that should be scrutinised.

I saw this interview with Ben Shapiro. He’s such an effective debater that he managed to get into an argument with himself and had to flee the studio.

https://youtu.be/6VixqvOcK8E

I also watched Peterson debate Zizek. It was the intellectual equivalent of a cat (Zizek) toying with a mouse (Peterson) before killing it. It really showed how much of a complete lightweight Peterson is.

Would you have a link for the Peterson/Zizek debate please?

23-05-2020 9:11pm

Turquoise Hexagon Sun wrote: »

Not all people think no-platforming is a constructive way handle differing views. I certainly am not a person that believes that. I think people should have the right to be wrong. They have the right to be ****ty and vile it they want to. Censorship snd shutting people down by the way of no-platforming is harmful. It's not good for discourse, not matter how much you think you are on the side of righteousness.

Youtube don't censor, only governments can censor.

Censorship is when you are pursued. Not when a company denies you use of their private property.

Youtube, and its shareholders, owe nothing to anyone who doesn't have a contract with them.

Just as Alex Jones or Shapiro can just say 'no thank you' to someone who wants to sell the communist manifesto on their site, youtube retains that same right.

As do you for any website you may own.

There is no high lofty argument about the tenets of free speech vs authoritarianism and its consequences on society and all that horsesht when it comes to youtube.

Youtube never promised free speech - quite the opposite in fact, doesn't owe you use of their property, and wont pursue you if you say what you want elsewhere.

Whats more, they have to filter their content to comply with american law. Or else they'd have all sorts of 'exotic' content, how to build explosives, why you need to kill celebrity x, etc.
why were the patriots never up in arms about this.

rogans recent move to spotify (and russle brands use of luminary) shows alternatives exist.

what happened in the case of youtube not featuring/removing certain content was that basement dwellers decided that their mild inconvenience was of global level importance.

your free speech is out there, in the press, on the internet, at the printers, in conference halls, nobody from youtube will stop you.

blinding · 23-05-2020 9:13pm

Woke Hogan wrote: »

I also watched Peterson debate Zizek. It was the intellectual equivalent of a cat (Zizek) toying with a mouse (Peterson) before killing it. It really showed how much of a complete lightweight Peterson is.

;);)

You are 1 of very few people who saw that debate like that. Talk about confirmation bias.

As the Left /Communism has so little to offer, a Rock would win a debate with a Leftie / Communist.

Jordan Peterson won what was not even a contest. How could it be a contest when the Left / Communism has nothing to offer but the 100 Million Dead that it has already killed ! !

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts · 23-05-2020 9:14pm

iamstop wrote: »

Some of those on here bashing Joe because not every single show he does is up to your high standards, are the same people that binge watch dancing celebs. Get over yourself.

And some of them aren’t. What a daft generalisation.

EagererBeaver · 23-05-2020 9:15pm

Earendil wrote: »

This is how they work when they don’t agree with someone - brand them as ‘dangerous’.

I disagree with most of the far left ideology, but would not be in favour of deplatforming a single one of those commentators. Ironically I feel that would be an infringement on their civil liberties, which I would find unacceptable...regardless of their ‘woke’ crap.

People get deplatformed as a result of breaching the terms and conditions they sign up to when making use of services like Twitter, YouTube, Facebook etc. It's nothing to do with civil liberties.

Ironically, this is very like a Joe Rogan conversation. Someone banging on about rights and entitlements they clearly have no understanding of whatsoever.

Woke Hogan · 23-05-2020 9:16pm

nullzero wrote: »

What you really mean when you say "employing any kind of journalist scrutiny" is, "finds a means of having a world view that is exactly the same as mine".

Most of us can listen to even the most ridiculous ideas without mindlessly aping them.

Its all a moot point anyway, the ideal you subscribe to is winning hands down. Nobody will be allowed to have an opinion that is outside "terms of service" parameters of youtube or twitter in the real world within a few years.

Three cheers for the nanny state, freedom of speech thought and expression is/was evil, good riddance to it.

No, what I mean is what I say. I leave it to the likes of your heroes Alex Jones and David Icke to hide behind wink wink hidden messages when they’re referring to “bankers” (Jews) and “lizards” (Jews).

The ideal I’m subscribe to being journalistic integrity from internet content creators isn’t winning hands down, I’m afraid. I think that you’ll find that there’s significantly more unregulated and unverified news sources out in the wider world than ever before.

Note that I have only spoken about Rogan’s personal responsibility as a broadcaster to millions, without once ever mentioning governmental intervention or censorship. You’re inventing invisible enemies to rail against.

23-05-2020 9:17pm

Jesus Christ lads.. neither of them won it..it was badly designed, they spoke at cross purposes and then came to an agreement on a lot of stuff..

The tragedy of was how you had everyone going "My guy won.."

Joe Rogan * Mod Warning Post 234*

Comments