OT: Covid-19 (Part 55) Cold & Snowy Edition

[SlappyHabby]

Glen Greenwald speaking truth to power? The dude is quickly devolving into a hyper partisan hack

Look at his tune in August:



Then his tune last week:



Greenwald is as full of shit as the rest on your list.

Also, my opinion of Rogan's podcast is independent of what traditional media thinks of him. I honest DGAF.



The problem which has explained several times is that this philosophical ideal isn't what is actually happening in practice. People are not recognizing bad opinions, they are repeating them. The bad opinions being hosted on his show is giving them an air of legitimacy, they are getting repeated. People with these claims use the podcast to back up misinformation about a variety of topics. This is a problem with real tangible consequences on public health and election integrity.



No you don't give them more visibility. When you refuse to host conspiracy theorists and pesudo scientists, you force them on to parts of the internet that the common person has trouble finding. You also force people to use effort to find those opinions, which seldom people do. The problem with Rogan's podcast is the ease of accessibility to fringe opinion that is harmful to society.

Just as you believe that Rogan has the right to host who he wants, so do the platforms that host Rogan's podcast.



I'm sorry man, I just cannot get behind anyone who tries to apologize and find excuses for Alex Jones, regardless of what he said about Epstein. The man is a cancer to healthy discourse. And it isn't even Sandy Hook, he flatout says stupid and false shit that with tangible real world consequences like the harassment of parents of murdered children.

I wasn’t planning on posting again today, but you forced my hand by accusing me of apologizing and making excuses for Alex Jones when I did no such thing.

So the likes of Greenwald, Tahibi, Weiss, Krystal & Saager from Breaking Points podcast among others and anyone who doesn’t support or questions the current narrative or thinks the same way as you do is a partisan hack in your eyes eh?

Well then, once again, do pray tell us oh wise one who are the people or organizations that you prefer to follow, obey and listen to and why?

You conveniently avoided answering the question when I posed it earlier, so perhaps now you can educate the rest of us and help us find the light.

And I find it especially comical that you would label individuals as pseudo scientists who have spent decades in their respective fields and been employed by various governmental agencies and collaborated on scientific advances and studies, yet you will blindly listen to and follow what other scientists have to say because their ideological views and opinions align with your own.

So you are just as guilty as the very people you are accusing of being misinformed, ignorant and being deliberately obtuse, yet you are blind to your own biases as so many others are on both sides of this issue.

You accuse people of not recognizing bad opinions and repeating them, and yet that is an accusation that can just as easily be levelled against people on the other side of this issue and yourself included.

And that, as you pointed out, is a problem with real tangible consequences on public health and election integrity, yet you willingly participate in making the situation worse by “othering” those you disagree with.

But, as a firm believer in freedom of speech, you have a right to your opinions as I have a right to mine, and just because I do not agree with you doesn’t mean that I am wrong or that you are right.

And I never apologized for Jones or his actions, however I’m quite capable of separating my personal opinions about an individual and give credit where it’s due when merited, and this rule applies whether I like a person or not.

Unfortunately, far too many people allow their feelings and emotions to cloud their logic and ability to reason, and sink and descend into the muck and mud of tribalism as a result, and the only people who benefit from it are those stirring the cauldron from above while they mock and laugh at society for being so gullible and easily misled.

Anyway, carry on.

 

[dcyhabs]

We discovered these ideas how? You'd rather have them on forums outside of the public view only?

That's dumb.

Well I wouldn't try to push my intelligence, not many authorities or peer-reviewed articles on that. I don't even know the immunological basics, glad to have treb around to correct me. I try to look at peer-reviewed and credible sources, and I check the SSL of the web sites I visit to at least try to validate them, and, yes, I know some of the limitations of SSL.

No question that debate is good, but pharma/medical studies reach a point where it is unethical to continue giving placebos to a control group and watch them have worse outcomes. We are long past that. It takes a pretty vivid imagination to doubt the medical info from Health Canada on ICU numbers. It's disingenuous to keep desperately searching out some data, any data that could conceivably be squinted at to affirm your position, to continually try to move the goalposts to try to get to a conclusion, and then to claim others don't want discussion.

Of course I want a discussion. I want a discussion in good faith that considers the facts. There are still lots of things to argue, closed, open, how much so, but I don't think it's possible to argue in good faith that people who don't vaccinate are not increasing their own risks and contributing, as a group, to the deaths of others. I don't think it's mean to say so, either, it's really tough for cancer patients now, and for a lot of other people who need surgery.

 

[Andy]

I wasn’t planning on posting again today, but you forced my hand by accusing me of apologizing and making excuses for Alex Jones when I did no such thing.

So the likes of Greenwald, Tahibi, Weiss, Krystal & Saager from Breaking Points podcast among others and anyone who doesn’t support or questions the current narrative or thinks the same way as you do is a partisan hack in your eyes eh?

Well then, once again, do pray tell us oh wise one who are the people or organizations that you prefer to follow, obey and listen to and why?

You conveniently avoided answering the question when I posed it earlier, so perhaps now you can educate the rest of us and help us find the light.

And I find it especially comical that you would label individuals as pseudo scientists who have spent decades in their respective fields and been employed by various governmental agencies and collaborated on scientific advances and studies, yet you will blindly listen to and follow what other scientists have to say because their ideological views and opinions align with your own.

So you are just as guilty as the very people you are accusing of being misinformed, ignorant and being deliberately obtuse, yet you are blind to your own biases as so many others are on both sides of this issue.

You accuse people of not recognizing bad opinions and repeating them, and yet that is an accusation that can just as easily be levelled against people on the other side of this issue and yourself included.



And that, as you pointed out, is a problem with real tangible consequences on public health and election integrity, yet you willingly participate in making the situation worse by “othering” those you disagree with.

But, as a firm believer in freedom of speech, you have a right to your opinions as I have a right to mine, and just because I do not agree with you doesn’t mean that I am wrong or that you are right.

And I never apologized for Jones or his actions, however I’m quite capable of separating my personal opinions about an individual and give credit where it’s due when merited, and this rule applies whether I like a person or not.

Unfortunately, far too many people allow their feelings and emotions to cloud their logic and ability to reason, and sink and descend into the muck and mud of tribalism as a result, and the only people who benefit from it are those stirring the cauldron from above while they mock and laugh at society for being so gullible and easily misled.

Anyway, carry on.

Greenwald, Weise and co do not speak truth power. They, like all the "mainstream" media that you cite, take positions that suit their needs, even now. You claim they now truth seekers only because they now support your views, but they are equally as full of shit as before. The difference is I thought they were full of shit before as I do now. It's not because they now agree with my view points that they are now truth seekers.

Yes, you did apologize for Alex Jones by playing off his Sandy Hook shit by claiming he was drinking heavily at the time and has since apologized. He caused insane pain for the family of the victims, several of them had to move because of death threats because of Alex Jones misinformation. And the Sandy Hook shit is but a small rain drop on an ocean of insane false shit. So please, do not try to diminish how evil Alex Jones is by reducing his shit to alcoholism and an apology once he lost in court. He currently feeds false election narratives that may literally bring down American democracy next election. Is Alex Jones drunk when he says democrats and liberals are pedophiles that eat babies? Or how about when because Jones' misinformation people actually visit pizza shops armed to kill folks hosting a pedophile ring that doesn't exist? Don't dismiss this shit as alcoholism and say "but he apologized". When you do, you defend alex jones. When you say his insane musings are "outlandish", but at least he called out Epsetin, yes you apologize for Alex Jones.

As I said before, I did not say all his guests are pseudo scientists. Please do not use sophistry. That he hosts scientists on occasion does not somehow absolve all the other pseudo science and misinformation that is advanced on the podcast.

And yes, people are clearly not recognizing bad opinions because those everyday folk who advance bad opinions explicitly reference Joe Rogan's podcast. He is a contributor to misinformation.

Just because you say you believe in freedom of speech, doesn't mean anything. All freedoms have limits. Do I have the freedom to spread rumors that you are a pedophile and sell drugs to toddlers? Are you okay if I made it my life's mission to disparage your character in that way? No. So this idea that you are some freedom figher because you label yourself as a free speech warrior doesn't make you some sort of superior moral intellect, it just makes you immature. Speech has consequences, some are negative. Like every other freeedom that affects the public good in a negative way, there exists limits. So please spare me this faux libertarian principles.

 

[dcyhabs]

So many distractions. Shock jock radio hosts are not authorities on public health. I suppose it's conceivable they could have some valid input in the debate, but I'll go with the medical researchers and doctors. Call me crazy but I prefer to make health decisions based on information from people who have studied in the field for decades over people who yell loudly and do anything for attention.

 

[Frozenice]

There's a difference between being proven wrong later and being wrong from the the start.

It's ok to be wrong.

It's not ok to voluntarily say something wrong to mislead people.

Jail Fauci, in other words.

 

[WeeBey]

Fear mongering yes, don't think I've seen much gaslighting. Lot of strawmanning, though, which is kinda lame and not very intellectually stimulating.

Well...as long as we're on two thirds of the same page!

 

[Licou]

Jail Fauci, in other words.

Lol cancel culture beta snowflake

 

[WeeBey]

So no wonder traditional news mediums are threatened by him, they are going the way of the dodo bird whereas people like himself and others online such as true investigative journalists like Mat Tahibi, Glen Greenwald and Bari Weiss to name a few also speak truth to power to those in charge, which they absolutely hate.

In what word is Bari Weiss an investigative journalist??

As for hosting guests that you consider unsavoury, if they are so odious then surely giving them a platform to show the whole world who they are and what they believe in is a good rather than a negative thing.

That way people can see for themselves how silly and outrageously wrong they are, and they’ll bury themselves under an avalanche of their ignorance and fall out of the public eye on their own.

But when you try to censor such people, you ironically give them more visibility, as many people will wonder why they aren’t allowed to speak publicly, especially by people who are very much pro freedom of speech like myself and others.

I say let them speak, if they talk nonsense at least we all know and can see their true colours, and if they turn out to be not what others accused them of being, then we can turn our gaze towards those who made the accusations and start asking them questions as to why they did so.

Good idea in theory but unfortunately this isn't the case in the real world. If you're a good orator, you can pass off horrible ideas as reasonable.

 

[McGuires Corndog]

 

[Forum93]

These are some of the truckers for you, be proud Canada.

 

[Andy]

These are some of the truckers for you, be proud Canada.

 

[snakeye]

NBC is pretty clear in its intentions too. I mean Fox News is actually an okay cable news channel, all things considered, but their opinion shows are insane sometimes. But yeah, they don't hide their colours that's for sure. Anyway, I don't like cable news, I don't understand those that do. It's a relic of past generations and I am glad it's disappearing.

As far as this topic is concerned, I like to discuss covid related science a lot because I find it really interesting. I inform myself a lot using scientific sources. Through this, I can say with certainty that our governments and most traditional media are pretty bad at science communication. That being said, I see a lot of argumentation that simply ignore established science and that bothers me.

Yes science is obviously not static and by definition, can and will change. But this doesn't mean it can be ignored. Massive amounts of data have been gathered in regards to the virus and the different treatments. It really bothers me when someone brings up cancel culture or whatever because his opinion is ignore when in fact, he simply ignoring or distorting science.

I see 3 categories. Those who ignore science (for political reasons, conspiracies etc), those who use it appropriately as it's intended, and those who hijack it and force it into discussions it has no business being part of, which is just as bad as ignoring it. For instance, science can describe the vaccine's efficacy, the death toll, risk factors etc. What science can not do it determining whether mandates and measures should be instated, because those are complex issues that reach way beyond its scope. It's completely inappropriate to say things like "if you're against mandates, you don't trust the science", yet it's become all too common rhetoric in politics and in the media.

But yeah, I agree, we could use more thorough scientific discussions in the media.

 

[Natey]

These are some of the truckers for you, be proud Canada.

What a dork

 

[Canadienna]

Anyone out there like me?

Pro Vax (and boosted!)
Against lockdowns/charter violations
Against speech censorship (no matter how misinformed)
Pro rights of unvaccinated

I've worked in academia for a while now and am extensively familiar with the mechanisms of science today. What we're doing is turning this beautiful thing into political tools on both sides, and bastardizing the process to do so.

I feel pretty alone these days as everyone's gotten pushed to the edges.

 

[Natey]

So the covid thread has turned into the Joe Rogan thread over the last couple of pages?

I do wonder how many folks here who dislike or outright despise the man actually took the time to listen to his podcasts in their entirety when he had covid/pandemic related guests on such as Gupta, Malone and McCullough.

Because quite frankly, if all the criticism being levelled at him by his detractors and critics are by people who’s only knowledge of the man stems from what traditional and mainstream media outlets are saying about him through heavily edited clips that are manipulated to distort what he actually said, then I’m sorry but your opinions are worth quite literally less than nothing.

And I would say the same about anyone who criticizes someone else with such vehemence, no matter where they fall on the political or ideological spectrum, I mean if you’re gonna have an opinion on something or someone at least make it an informed one.

Above all else, Joe is a fierce advocate and proponent of free speech and is anti-censorship, as well as being an equally fierce advocate for the rights of the individual and limiting government intrusion into peoples lives.

Which I’m also for as I share those same values myself, but with that said I don’t blindly agree with the man on everything because we share similar beliefs, that would be foolish.

However, I do support his decision to give a platform for people who have been de-platformed and censored by big tech with the support and active encouragement of the powers that be.

If all these powerful entities are coalescing and working together to discredit the man and try to censor him in the name of the greater good and prevent him from talking to guests who don’t march in lockstep with the current narrative, it’s because they are threatened by the fact that he and others like him are taking away their monopoly over the flow of information.

And if life has taught me anything, it is to be extremely suspicious and distrustful of people or groups who actively try to suppress and silence others, for their reasons for doing so are never noble nor for the greater good, but rather to prevent any skeletons in their closets from seeing the light of day.

And quite frankly, I find it astonishing that while Rogan is getting all this heat by his detractors, that those same people aren’t equally critical of traditional news outlets who actively engage in both misinformation and disinformation on a much grander scale and have been doing so for decades (Iraq 2.0 anyone?).

Let’s just use a recent and easy example with the attacks on him by CNN where they flat out lied and fabricated the story of him using horse dewormer as a treatment when he caught covid.

That narrative was pushed HARD by CNN and other news outlets in North America, and yet they never retracted their statements or issued any corrections or apologies for flat out lying when it was shown that they did, and yet we should trust these same entities with giving us unbiased information in good faith after consistently exhibiting such behaviour?

Especially as mainstream news media has now become for all intents and purposes nothing more but extensions of the government and become their mouthpieces.

Governments that have shown themselves to be rotten and corrupt to the core, who are bought hook, line and sinker by corporate lobbyists and actively work against the interests of their constituents in favour of wealthy corporations and individuals.

And yet, these people ought to be trusted and blindly obeyed and followed while Rogan vilified and for having conversations with people on his podcast that are considered persona non grata by those in power?

At the end of the day, people will listen and follow others who share their own point of view, and this is equally true of folks who do not like or listen to Rogan as those that do.

Myself, I like to gather as much information from ALL sides and perspectives, and reach a conclusion on my own after having done my own research and due diligence.

And that’s what everyone ought to be doing, making informed decisions for themselves, as above all I believe in freedom of choice and the rights of the individual to make their own decisions.

If more people paid less attention or followed the opinions and dictates of others, and took the time to educate and inform themselves and reach their own conclusions, we’d all be better off, by far.

But of course thinking is hard, that’s why most people judge, it takes far less effort but leads to much more destructive and divisive results, as we have seen and keep seeing, and our politicians just keep stoking the flames of division.

*rolls eyes*

Acting like alternative media is better, just because it reflects your opinions, makes your opinion of little to no value as well... doesn't it?

In reality, everyone spreads misinformation because 99% of people think research is looking up some articles or a couple YouTube videos.

 

[Natey]

Anyone out there like me?

Pro Vax (and boosted!)
Against lockdowns/charter violations
Against speech censorship (no matter how misinformed)
Pro rights of unvaccinated

I've worked in academia for a while now and am extensively familiar with the mechanisms of science today. What we're doing is turning this beautiful thing into political tools on both sides, and bastardizing the process to do so.

I feel pretty alone these days as everyone's gotten pushed to the edges.

If our health care system could handle it, you'd have many more people in your corner. Including me.

The problem is, it can't, so we end up far more divided.

However, lockdowns aren't really a violation since everything always circles back to the greater good of the majority of people.

I wish we could be open. My life is downward spiral both at work and at home. I hate being locked down. Hopefully a miracle happens sooner than later.

 

[McGuires Corndog]

Anyone out there like me?

Pro Vax (and boosted!)
Against lockdowns/charter violations
Against speech censorship (no matter how misinformed)
Pro rights of unvaccinated

I've worked in academia for a while now and am extensively familiar with the mechanisms of science today. What we're doing is turning this beautiful thing into political tools on both sides, and bastardizing the process to do so.

I feel pretty alone these days as everyone's gotten pushed to the edges.

Right here buddy.

We are the minority

 

[Licou]

I see 3 categories. Those who ignore science (for political reasons, conspiracies etc), those who use it appropriately as it's intended, and those who hijack it and force it into discussions it has no business being part of, which is just as bad as ignoring it. For instance, science can describe the vaccine's efficacy, the death toll, risk factors etc. What science can not do it determining whether mandates and measures should be instated, because those are complex issues that reach way beyond its scope. It's completely inappropriate to say things like "if you're against mandates, you don't trust the science", yet it's become all too common rhetoric in politics and in the media.

But yeah, I agree, we could use more thorough scientific discussions in the media.

Very well put mate

 

[holy]

These are some of the truckers for you, be proud Canada.

That’s one guy. I was there at the convoy meet up. It was a bunch of families there. Not some right wing bs the media is gonna try and spin it as.

Once again this place shows how brainwashed they are by media. Go outside and actually check things out, I swear it’s not a bunch of boogeymen out there.

 

[McGuires Corndog]

That’s one guy. I was there at the convoy meet up. It was a bunch of families there. Not some right wing bs the media is gonna try and spin it as.

Once again this place shows how brainwashed they are by media. Go outside and actually check things out, I swear it’s not a bunch of boogeymen out there.

You’re right, it’s not boogeymen it’s Joe Rogan and Elon Musk. Equally as scary to some people.

 

[Licou]

That’s one guy. I was there at the convoy meet up. It was a bunch of families there. Not some right wing bs the media is gonna try and spin it as.

Once again this place shows how brainwashed they are by media. Go outside and actually check things out, I swear it’s not a bunch of boogeymen out there.

Yeah, let the RCMP deal with these f*** twits, don't give them air time.

 

[Canadienna]

However, lockdowns aren't really a violation since everything always circles back to the greater good of the majority of people.

That's for the courts to decide, but to be clear everything does not circle back to the greater good of the majority.

That's why we have human rights and don't endorse a purely utilitarian framework for our laws.

The whole reason for rights defined in the charter is to prevent a majority from violating the human rights of a minority. The clauses in the charter for exceptional circumstance and threat are what will be debated.

 

[Andy]

You’re right, it’s not boogeymen it’s Joe Rogan and Elon Musk. Equally as scary to some people.

Don’t have a problem with Elon Musk. He’s just a dude with a cult following because he’s a billionaire. He also thinks that because he’s a billionaire it makes an expert on all topics, as is the case with most billionaires. Natural that all that money and power goes to your head. He’s otherwise harmless.

 

[Forum93]

That’s one guy. I was there at the convoy meet up. It was a bunch of families there. Not some right wing bs the media is gonna try and spin it as.

Once again this place shows how brainwashed they are by media. Go outside and actually check things out, I swear it’s not a bunch of boogeymen out there.

That's why I said "some", I'm sure there's more than one who have the same mindset. The whole thing smells American to me, and if anyone's brainwashed it's those within the Freedom Convoy.

 

[OldCraig71]

Elon Musk will have to be the next one to get cancelled!!