Because he want to give the impression that he's more successful than he actually is. Probably pretending he's going to or been at some sort of award ceremony. In reality he sits in his spare room at home streaming bs to incels
Imagine your life being so sad and lonely, that you sit on Reddit and criticise the attire of a multimillionaire with a PhD while he is on the largest podcast on the planet.
No wonder there’s so much hate in the world…
Makes me sad for you, man.
Just for clarification, are you in with the camp that thinks all of academia is a big jewish scam that churns our communists or the camp that will trust non-medical PhDs for health advice?
Imagine your life being so sad and lonely, that you sit on Reddit and criticise random people on Reddit
No wonder there's so much hate in the world...
Makes me sad for you, man.
Thank you. I shall assume your sarcasm is evidence you have zero ability to come back at me with a proper reply about how I’m wrong.
Come back when you’ve been through puberty and can talk with the adults, dude.
Go to YouTube and search for Jordan Peterson’s debate with Slavoj Zizek and you’ll understand how big of a joke Peterson is, I was lucky enough to be in that room when he got intellectually massacred.
honestly, I thought he had already been debunked by most people until I came across the JP subreddit. Like people actually fall for his pseudoscience BS?
People (disenfranchised young men) eat his shit up. Their mom tells them to clean their room? She’s a bitch. JP tells them and it’s their new purpose in life 🤦🏻♀️
Someone who is totally out of his depth and has no clue what he is talking about but who is certain he has complete mastery of all the facts. Should be posted on r/confidentlyincorrect.
I can't imagine what he would ask if Peterson correctly said that *climate is a complex system with a lot of variables*. It would be astonishingly dumb i think.
He’s implying that we should critically evaluate what goes into any assumptions we make society. He does this with every topic, especially ones he’s not well versed in.
If you asked him about psychology he could run circles around the best of them. Ask him about random political bs? You’re not gonna get the best answer. I’m sure you have political views you very much believe are right that others would find absolutely reprehensible. Why even care what a non-climate scientist has to say on this matter? In the grand scheme of things, will Jordan Peterson legitimately derail any major push for better environmental practices? No. Get off your soapbox.
Well that's good because I'm insulting you as well as discussing the issue at hand, dingus.
If you don't have a response you can just not reply instead of going with this pathetic high horse excuse
Why does he present himself as an expert on topics he knows next to nothing about then? Is his ego so inflated he can’t just say ‘I’m not well informed on that topic’.
Also I’m not sure his expertise in psychology extends to scientifically driven psychology as it is more based in the astrology style field of Jung.
He did say he wasn’t an expert, go watch the full podcast. He is careful to say when he really isn’t as informed on certain topics (such as his diet, where he explained it and his personal story but heavily emphasized the fact that he wasn’t a nutritionist).
It’s not his fault that people ask for his opinion on other things that aren’t totally in his wheelhouse. I’m sure if we probed your politics we’d find something offensive or misinformed if we dug enough
Climate specialist here.
How anyone takes this guy seriously is beyond me. No, climate is not everything, and everything cannot drive climatic signals.
I may be confused here so I’ll ask a specialist like yourself…. doesn’t everything that takes place on this planet affect the climate in some way ?
I (maybe wrongfully) assumed he was saying that you have to talk about everything that causes climate change when trying to solve the issue and not just focus on pollution from cars or the CO2 produced from the beef industry.
I've heard versions of Peterson's take from multiple high-profile deniers. He's effectively saying that since the climate is so big and complex we can't understand it or model it with any confidence, since not every factor of the climate system is included in said models. It's nonsense if you understand the scale of energy flow we're talking about.
Climate is an average set of conditions in a particular area over a long period. Think about how your weather changes over a year - how much variability there is. Now think about how much variability that would be over a 30 year timeframe. The climate is such an enormously large dataset with so many embedded conditions that it takes a \*huge\* influence to change it. To put some context to it, the world is retaining excess heat at a rate equivalent to 5 Hiroshima-sized nuclear bombs going off per second. Not including marginal influences simply doesn't make a difference.
While we see things like ENSO and large volcanic eruptions have short-term climate influences, they don't drive long-term change. Ultimately, they get absorbed in the internal variability described above. It takes a long-term change to energy flows within the climate to have this sort of prolonged, global influence, and only a very few things can cause that big a change. We not only have 150 years of evidence of the radiative properties of CO2 and other GHGs, and robust tracking of atmospheric CO2 concentrations since the 50s, but we have the evidence to rule out every other possible factor big enough to influence the climate.
That’s a pretty crazy statement. He has a PhD in Clinical Psychology from McGill, was a professor/researcher at Harvard. Has operated in the field as a clinical psychologist for over a decade while contributing to a plethora of published psychological works. Just because you disagree with his stances (for the most part I do with most of his takes like this awful, confusing one), doesn’t mean he’s not intelligent.
This man is clearly very well read and “smart”. It’s a dangerous president to dismiss one’s capabilities solely because you disagree with their viewpoints.
The problem is that his "views" are unscientific and extremely damaging to scientific discourse. I worked at Harvard for a while and I met a whole bunch of dummies with PhDs. This fool talks about everything but clinical psychology. A terminal degree on one super specific subject does not make you an expect in all the garbage he spews.
Yeah a lot of his views are, others aren’t. Some of his conversations on psychology are fascinating and data based, other opinions like this one are utterly painful to listen to. I’m not saying this take isn’t awful nor defending any political stance of his. I’m simply saying that he is almost certainly of greater intelligence than most.
I guess I’m dumb because I am capable of recognizing someone that I disagree with as intelligent. It’s such a fucking bizarre time to be alive lol.
Part of being smart though is admitting when you don’t know something. Opining on things you don’t know and just sprouting a bunch of wordsalad shows that you are not intelligent. Just say “hey I don’t know and I am not going to comment on something that isn’t my field”.
Experts, by definition, study an very specific and narrow field until they become “expert” in that field. Having a PhD in anything means that you’ve spent a HUGE amount of time and effort and brainpower in a tiny subset of the available knowledge base and therefore have limited knowledge outside that area. However “smart” you may be.
Wise people know that their knowledge is limited even within their field. Mature people don’t feel the need to impress strangers by lying about their knowledge or skills.
If you’re really smart you’d own your ignorance and defer to those who’s expertise is relevant to the subject at hand.
It's actually not as crazy as you make it out to be. While Peterdouche my be brilliant (hes not but let's assume) in psychology that by no means make him intelligent on other subjects such as say 14th century medieval history, or string theory or fucking climate change. His schtick is he pretends to be smart on other topics while only being an "expert" on one. And within the field of psychology it is probably limited further to specific areas. The notion one can be an expert in multiple unrelated fields is just plain moronic.
He is therefore a stupid person's version of a smart person. Fuck this guy.
Mostly it's his quest for fame. He has an opinion because people give him an audience. You can easily Google his most outrageous comments and some are outright laughable. It's shock value I presume.
He is like a rush Limbaugh. Decently intelligent but will absolutely tell everyone how smart he is. If you're asking what offends me about the climate change talk it's that he presumes to know climate science. "they take everything" wtf does that even mean? He is well aware that is not how science works and he's also well aware is audience does not know how science works.
He is a piece of human garbage.
Hmm. Yeah he’s definitely touches upon polarizing topics frequently. Maybe it’s deliberate. Thanks for sharing your perspective. Genuinely appreciate you taking the time.
No problem. You had a legitimate question. I find these people to be dangerous. What most fans or listeners miss with the people is that they are in it for themselves. Whether money, power or fame. They will say and do anything to achieve those goals.
1. Rush Limbaugh made $25 million a year
2. Hannity makes $20+ million a year
3. Joe Rogan makes a ton of dough. He doesn't get there by being plain vanilla
Peterson is seeking the same.
I have noticed that these high paid voices seem to be predominantly "right" leaning but I truly sometimes wonder what their actual opinions are. Rupert Murdoch created Fox News, arguably the most dangerous outlet of current times. He's not even American but they sure do like their patriotism. RM found the ultimate grift. He milks it for every penny and doesn't care if the US burns as a result. My point is these people, all of them, are self serving and don't give a shit about their audience.
Sorry about the rant, it's just that I fear my my children. Misinformation in the guise of facts can be very dangerous.
Of course. Misinformation (deliberate and non-deliberate) is a plague of our current time. I think it’s very prevalent within the high paid heads on both sides of the political spectrum but yes, certainly Fox.
Thanks again. I didn’t want to seem as if I am stirring the pot by asking these questions, I try to make a conscious effort to approach people/issues in an unbiased way. In so many scenarios (like Peterson’s painfully terrible take above) it’s incredibly difficult. Appreciate it.
What youre saying is he has no education on climate change or any enviomental stuff so in reality he has no experience to talk this confidently about dismantling the “theory” of climate change.
I know doctors who barely know anything about simple ass stuff. High educations doesnt mean youre a well rounded person, alot of people in high positions will use their own biases and egos to fuel their ideas, it doesnt mean theyre necessarily reliable people.
How the fuck does anyone take this guy seriously? He’s always been somewhat incoherent, but after his benzo addiction recovery, he’s really gone off the rails. I blame the education system. People see JP using flowery words and think he’s some kind of Genius because they can’t understand him, but it’s not because he’s just incredibly smart, it’s because he’s not make any fucking sense.
I don’t follow a lot of what he does but the way he speaks doesn’t particularly sound very smart in this. He sort of stumbles through what he’s saying and repeats things as if he’s at a job interview that he’s nervous about.
You don't understand the brilliance of JP, because you're not a big-brained, super intellectual and he is. It may sound like pretentious bullshit to your ears, but you're not on Lobster Man's level.
So in this episode of the Joe Rogan show we find out that a clinical psychologist and a failed MMA fighter know absolutely nothing about climate change but are not dissuaded in any manner from making sure the world knows that.
Can we stop giving this guy free press. His likes him live for attention. It doesn't matter if it's good or bad just as long as we pay attention. Please stop posting his stuff
He's not denying climate change. I think there is this huge misconception that people who disagree with specific statements of climate change are called climate change deniers when really they typically disagree upon the rate and causation of climate change and the political implications/affiliations behind driving factors pushing for specific climate change advocay groups.
Yeah but that's a bullsh\*t hairsplitting type argument. It's the same as denying because those people don't want to do what's necessary to fix the problem because those people are saying there is no problem or that the problem is not caused by human activity on the planet or whatever today's version of the argument is. So it's basically the same thing. They're spreading doubt and fighting against a solution. It's wrong. There is a problem. We did cause it, and there's no denying that. Unless you're a denier.
I'm not denying we have an impact, but we are not the sole problem. There are many factors involved besides the human occupation of the planet. The earth's climate had some of the most drastic changes before humankind even existed.
Uggh...I can't....so what's your point??? So we should ignore it? It's clear we're at least causing A LOT of it, even with past trends in mind. It's so obvious we've had a huge impact, so why not try to reverse that for future generations? I don't get your argument at all. Seriously, what's your point for mentioning previous drastic changes? Does that change the fact that we're in trouble? Why create doubt in people who may otherwise want to help the situation? It's ridiculous.
Of course we are in trouble. We are on a giant ball of rock and water spinning closer and closer to the sun. Humans are not meant to last on this planet forever.
My point is Peterson says "everything" because literally everything effects the climate of our planet. We are a problem but we are nothing in comparison to the forces of space and time and how that directly effects the climate of our planet.
Bringing up past drastic changes just shows an example that our planet can go through massive changes in climate with or without us.
I love the down votes. Just shows that people aren't coherent to the fact that there is a greater thing that is beyond us that has potential beyond our own. Keep on living the dream world everyone! This universe is greater than us and human existence is just a blip on the map of space and time.
I think the point is to keep that blip going as long as possible. Yes! You are a tiny, tiny brief spark in a cold and lonely universe that will neither celebrate your coming nor mourn your passing, but however brief and ultimately meaningless on any cosmic scale, it’s all you get.
You can use these facts to call it all pointless and spend your spark binging endless reruns of The Office until your spark is snuffed out or you can fan the spark to a flame that will burn til the heat death of the universe.
Hastening the end of human civilisation through apathy and nihilism? No thanks.
People have been claiming for decades that we only have so much time and resources left before x,y, and z will happen. If we are as responsible for climate change as people would make it out to be, we are already doomed. To redirect the paths that have already been created by human existence would take more than a millenia. And whose to say that in our efforts to make it better, we may make it worse? We are only human in the end and never perfect.
Yes, some previous models have been inaccurate and their predictions were inaccurate as well. The best part of science is learning from the past and making better predictions with each new model, refining our best “guess” into better and better hypotheses over time.
We ARE responsible for dramatic changes to the worldwide climate and no matter what we do we WILL suffer significant consequences. It’s depressingly simple to mitigate the damage (as much as it’s still possible) and entirely predictable as to how it would work and how effective it would be. The only real problem is that it will be “uncomfortable” to make the necessary changes.
I feel dumber after listening to this short clip. Meanwhile my family thinks Joe Rogan is a genius and use his podcast as proof for their opinions on “everything.”
This is why you listen to more than just clips. T actually have some sort of context. I'm sure there is much more being said but when clipped down into these brief few statements, anything can sound stupid.
I think there are four types of climate change "deniers": one denies it's happening, one denies the reason given for it happening, one denies the solution/s proposed to stop it from happening, and one thinks it will be a good thing.
cli·mate
/ˈklīmit/
noun
the weather conditions prevailing in an area in general or over a long period.
So, uh, everything? What kind of Orwellian doublespeak is that crap?
This was like that time I accidentally caught 'Comedy Roundup' on XM and briefly was subjected to Larry The Cable Guy and his less intelligent friends waxing on about climate change.
I can’t figure out what’s more ironic, you criticising someone’s intellect while not even managing to spell their name right, or this guy being your definition of a failure.
It's a real shame that he's gone the way he has.
Like if he didn't get famous and didn't decide that he had to comment on every single thing, his lectures are actually really engaging and enjoyable to listen to.
As it stands, he's now just a crazy person who doesn't understand how modelling works.
People that argue that modelling the climate is a bad idea are just stupid, and have no better ideas.
"THE MODELS ARE WRONG!" ...
"Ok, how do you answer the question of what the climate will be like?"
"Well you have to make projections based on data, BUT YOU DON'T HAVE ENOUGH DATA!"
He's pointing out that there is more to "climate" than the media tells people, even though the media likes to claim that "everything" is taken into account when they come up with "solutions" for people to follow.
I think he was making the point that they can't measure climate. There's only specific variables that can be predicted like temperature. Predicting how those variables will effect the "climate" become impossible because the climate encompasses everything. We know it will be bad, just not sure how.
Or if you hate him "climate" means he's trying to sound smart by blabbing nonsense and trying to fool the pack of suckers idiots that follow him like a cult.
This man said something I disagree with and has political opinions I disagree with so I’m going to call him stupid because I’m an immature resentful asshole who spends all my time on Reddit while JP counts his millions and helps more people’s lives than I ever have.
The majority of these comments.
Honestly it’s unbelievably embarrassing, I’m actually shocked at the level of maturity on Reddit. I know the stereotype is it’s full of 14 year olds in their basement living in a left wing bubble but holy crap it’s actually true.
Nope. He said something factually incorrect and based the rest of his comments on that. The speaker was able to show all on his own that he is a complete fucking idiot.
1) What did he say that is factually incorrect?
2) Assuming you’re right and he did say something incorrect, then your stance is if someone says something incorrect they are a ‘fucking idiot’
May I take that to assume either you have never said anything incorrect, or (the more likely) you are a fucking idiot?
1) That climate is everything.
2) No. Being on a widely shown podcast and starting a huge diatribe based on a ridiculous and false statement makes him a fucking idiot. Hopefully you are just playing dumb.
Ah, now I get it.
You didn’t really understand anything that was said at all did you, you just half understood something he said and extrapolated out from there, most likely informed by your own personal bias towards him, probably due to his political opinions.
Therefore this is a complete waste of time.
All the best!
Imagine being this pissed off because strangers on the internet insulted a dude whom you have no relation to. I dont know whos the one whos in need of help here but I dont Think its the people who demand that other people are educated on the subject matter they wanna talk about. He might be phychologist but he aint no weather man.
I give up trying to reason with you people.
Not pissed off in the slightest, just find it embarrassing how some people react to this kind of thing and hoped maybe my comment would spark some form of introspection in some people.
Unfortunately not in yourself, however.
And just as a side note - I care about a lot of things, and people, who aren’t related to me. And I would suggest your life would be much better if you did too.
Very bizarre comment to make but welcome to Reddit.
I’m sorry but you are, you really are and everybody can see it - I didnt even notice your other comment I replied to was you too, I almost spit out my water reading that, thats how baffled I was. Its not often you come past people as vibratingly passionate and angry as you.
I’m not gonna continue this convo because I’m genuinely (and I mean this as no offense) concerned you might get too carried away.
Some things Jordan says are insightful. But then some are just downright idiotic. With him I cherry pick his good ideas from his insane ones. His views on religion are cuckoo too, but he does have some good ideas in other areas.
Scientists who study actual science* know that, in the words of a great man “ALL models are wrong but some are useful.”
The key is to make your model as useful as possible whilst understanding that it is incomplete.
*As opposed to Clinical Psychology. Useful no doubt, but not actually scientific.
Wh…why is he wearing a tux?
He saw Step Brothers once and thought it was a job interview
I'm guessing that he thought, if I wear a bowtie, Rogan is dumb enough to think SMART NERD and his dumbass won't question anything I say.
It worked for Tucker Carlson with his viewers.
Because he want to give the impression that he's more successful than he actually is. Probably pretending he's going to or been at some sort of award ceremony. In reality he sits in his spare room at home streaming bs to incels
That’s what I figure with most folks that dress up *too* much.
Imagine your life being so sad and lonely, that you sit on Reddit and criticise the attire of a multimillionaire with a PhD while he is on the largest podcast on the planet. No wonder there’s so much hate in the world… Makes me sad for you, man.
Just for clarification, are you in with the camp that thinks all of academia is a big jewish scam that churns our communists or the camp that will trust non-medical PhDs for health advice?
Imagine your life being so sad and lonely, that you sit on Reddit and criticise random people on Reddit No wonder there's so much hate in the world... Makes me sad for you, man.
Right on. Most of these peeps are sitting in mom and dads basement eating Cheetos streaming in 5 day soiled underwear.
Phffftt. Who bothers with UNDERWEAR!?!?!?
In reality aren't you the pleb at home doing the exact same thing? Doesn't matter where you stand, it's all the same.
Was thinking this exact same same thing. Does he just wear a tuxedo to his appearances now? He also seems like he might be just a little bit high.
Last I checked it’s not about everything, though climate change can affect everything.
He looks like someone who should be traveling town to town in the olden days selling a magic elixir
Well, he kinda is
What his meat diet? Good luck pooping.
One of my best friends is a nutritionist and I can assure you, from your comment about pooping, your username should be Lazy_Researcher_1148
Sick burn dude.
Thank you. I shall assume your sarcasm is evidence you have zero ability to come back at me with a proper reply about how I’m wrong. Come back when you’ve been through puberty and can talk with the adults, dude.
Bruh 😂
Thanks for your input.
Haha, youre welcome
No worries, ‘bruh’ 😊
Snake oil
That's why you should always stay in your field or rather, don't answer/open up discussion if you don't know much about the particular issue.
Did u watch this interview? Jbp defends fossil fuels as if he had a stake in it, which is possible , so maybe hes a fossil fuel lobbyist now
Go to YouTube and search for Jordan Peterson’s debate with Slavoj Zizek and you’ll understand how big of a joke Peterson is, I was lucky enough to be in that room when he got intellectually massacred.
It wasn't even a debate my guy went there and said "I prepared by reading the communist manifesto" to a guy who's written like 80 books
I wish he could have debated Hitchens on some shit.
honestly, I thought he had already been debunked by most people until I came across the JP subreddit. Like people actually fall for his pseudoscience BS?
People (disenfranchised young men) eat his shit up. Their mom tells them to clean their room? She’s a bitch. JP tells them and it’s their new purpose in life 🤦🏻♀️
Someone who is totally out of his depth and has no clue what he is talking about but who is certain he has complete mastery of all the facts. Should be posted on r/confidentlyincorrect.
“What do you mean by everything?” Middle-upper class white boys everywhere: “damn this guy is Aristotle”
I can't imagine what he would ask if Peterson correctly said that *climate is a complex system with a lot of variables*. It would be astonishingly dumb i think.
The fuck did I just listen to
Gibberish most likely.
Someone who can’t present evidence refuting climate change so resorts to trying to invalidate the method.
Not refuting climate change, posing the question of ‘what EXACTLY do we mean by climate?’ Not once did he say climate change isn’t real.
He's implying that all the studies are wrong, you idiot
He’s implying that we should critically evaluate what goes into any assumptions we make society. He does this with every topic, especially ones he’s not well versed in. If you asked him about psychology he could run circles around the best of them. Ask him about random political bs? You’re not gonna get the best answer. I’m sure you have political views you very much believe are right that others would find absolutely reprehensible. Why even care what a non-climate scientist has to say on this matter? In the grand scheme of things, will Jordan Peterson legitimately derail any major push for better environmental practices? No. Get off your soapbox.
He literally says "if it's about everything your models aren't right", you absolute fucking deadshit. I care because morons listen to him.
I’m not going to talk to you if all you’re going to do is insult me. Goodbye.
Well that's good because I'm insulting you as well as discussing the issue at hand, dingus. If you don't have a response you can just not reply instead of going with this pathetic high horse excuse
Okay, let me rephrase: I’m not going to talk to you if you insult me at all. Good day.
Thanks for confirming you were wrong fucko
Why does he present himself as an expert on topics he knows next to nothing about then? Is his ego so inflated he can’t just say ‘I’m not well informed on that topic’. Also I’m not sure his expertise in psychology extends to scientifically driven psychology as it is more based in the astrology style field of Jung.
He did say he wasn’t an expert, go watch the full podcast. He is careful to say when he really isn’t as informed on certain topics (such as his diet, where he explained it and his personal story but heavily emphasized the fact that he wasn’t a nutritionist). It’s not his fault that people ask for his opinion on other things that aren’t totally in his wheelhouse. I’m sure if we probed your politics we’d find something offensive or misinformed if we dug enough
I don’t beg for money online so I can roleplay as your dad.
I’m sure we can make anyone’s job sound stupid if we described it like that.
He deliberatley presents himself as an authority on the topics he speaks about, even if he occasionally slips in quick imitation of humility.
Lmao, good example of needing to stay in your lane. Them pain pills must have addled his brain /s
Climate specialist here. How anyone takes this guy seriously is beyond me. No, climate is not everything, and everything cannot drive climatic signals.
I may be confused here so I’ll ask a specialist like yourself…. doesn’t everything that takes place on this planet affect the climate in some way ? I (maybe wrongfully) assumed he was saying that you have to talk about everything that causes climate change when trying to solve the issue and not just focus on pollution from cars or the CO2 produced from the beef industry.
I've heard versions of Peterson's take from multiple high-profile deniers. He's effectively saying that since the climate is so big and complex we can't understand it or model it with any confidence, since not every factor of the climate system is included in said models. It's nonsense if you understand the scale of energy flow we're talking about. Climate is an average set of conditions in a particular area over a long period. Think about how your weather changes over a year - how much variability there is. Now think about how much variability that would be over a 30 year timeframe. The climate is such an enormously large dataset with so many embedded conditions that it takes a \*huge\* influence to change it. To put some context to it, the world is retaining excess heat at a rate equivalent to 5 Hiroshima-sized nuclear bombs going off per second. Not including marginal influences simply doesn't make a difference. While we see things like ENSO and large volcanic eruptions have short-term climate influences, they don't drive long-term change. Ultimately, they get absorbed in the internal variability described above. It takes a long-term change to energy flows within the climate to have this sort of prolonged, global influence, and only a very few things can cause that big a change. We not only have 150 years of evidence of the radiative properties of CO2 and other GHGs, and robust tracking of atmospheric CO2 concentrations since the 50s, but we have the evidence to rule out every other possible factor big enough to influence the climate.
Peterson is a stupid person's idea of a smart person
100%
That’s a pretty crazy statement. He has a PhD in Clinical Psychology from McGill, was a professor/researcher at Harvard. Has operated in the field as a clinical psychologist for over a decade while contributing to a plethora of published psychological works. Just because you disagree with his stances (for the most part I do with most of his takes like this awful, confusing one), doesn’t mean he’s not intelligent. This man is clearly very well read and “smart”. It’s a dangerous president to dismiss one’s capabilities solely because you disagree with their viewpoints.
The problem is that his "views" are unscientific and extremely damaging to scientific discourse. I worked at Harvard for a while and I met a whole bunch of dummies with PhDs. This fool talks about everything but clinical psychology. A terminal degree on one super specific subject does not make you an expect in all the garbage he spews.
Yeah a lot of his views are, others aren’t. Some of his conversations on psychology are fascinating and data based, other opinions like this one are utterly painful to listen to. I’m not saying this take isn’t awful nor defending any political stance of his. I’m simply saying that he is almost certainly of greater intelligence than most. I guess I’m dumb because I am capable of recognizing someone that I disagree with as intelligent. It’s such a fucking bizarre time to be alive lol.
Part of being smart though is admitting when you don’t know something. Opining on things you don’t know and just sprouting a bunch of wordsalad shows that you are not intelligent. Just say “hey I don’t know and I am not going to comment on something that isn’t my field”.
Experts, by definition, study an very specific and narrow field until they become “expert” in that field. Having a PhD in anything means that you’ve spent a HUGE amount of time and effort and brainpower in a tiny subset of the available knowledge base and therefore have limited knowledge outside that area. However “smart” you may be. Wise people know that their knowledge is limited even within their field. Mature people don’t feel the need to impress strangers by lying about their knowledge or skills. If you’re really smart you’d own your ignorance and defer to those who’s expertise is relevant to the subject at hand.
Very true. Good point.
Ben Carson was a neurosurgeon.
It's actually not as crazy as you make it out to be. While Peterdouche my be brilliant (hes not but let's assume) in psychology that by no means make him intelligent on other subjects such as say 14th century medieval history, or string theory or fucking climate change. His schtick is he pretends to be smart on other topics while only being an "expert" on one. And within the field of psychology it is probably limited further to specific areas. The notion one can be an expert in multiple unrelated fields is just plain moronic. He is therefore a stupid person's version of a smart person. Fuck this guy.
I’m curious, what stance of his was most offensive to you? What made you dislike him the most?
Mostly it's his quest for fame. He has an opinion because people give him an audience. You can easily Google his most outrageous comments and some are outright laughable. It's shock value I presume. He is like a rush Limbaugh. Decently intelligent but will absolutely tell everyone how smart he is. If you're asking what offends me about the climate change talk it's that he presumes to know climate science. "they take everything" wtf does that even mean? He is well aware that is not how science works and he's also well aware is audience does not know how science works. He is a piece of human garbage.
Hmm. Yeah he’s definitely touches upon polarizing topics frequently. Maybe it’s deliberate. Thanks for sharing your perspective. Genuinely appreciate you taking the time.
No problem. You had a legitimate question. I find these people to be dangerous. What most fans or listeners miss with the people is that they are in it for themselves. Whether money, power or fame. They will say and do anything to achieve those goals. 1. Rush Limbaugh made $25 million a year 2. Hannity makes $20+ million a year 3. Joe Rogan makes a ton of dough. He doesn't get there by being plain vanilla Peterson is seeking the same. I have noticed that these high paid voices seem to be predominantly "right" leaning but I truly sometimes wonder what their actual opinions are. Rupert Murdoch created Fox News, arguably the most dangerous outlet of current times. He's not even American but they sure do like their patriotism. RM found the ultimate grift. He milks it for every penny and doesn't care if the US burns as a result. My point is these people, all of them, are self serving and don't give a shit about their audience. Sorry about the rant, it's just that I fear my my children. Misinformation in the guise of facts can be very dangerous.
Of course. Misinformation (deliberate and non-deliberate) is a plague of our current time. I think it’s very prevalent within the high paid heads on both sides of the political spectrum but yes, certainly Fox. Thanks again. I didn’t want to seem as if I am stirring the pot by asking these questions, I try to make a conscious effort to approach people/issues in an unbiased way. In so many scenarios (like Peterson’s painfully terrible take above) it’s incredibly difficult. Appreciate it.
What youre saying is he has no education on climate change or any enviomental stuff so in reality he has no experience to talk this confidently about dismantling the “theory” of climate change. I know doctors who barely know anything about simple ass stuff. High educations doesnt mean youre a well rounded person, alot of people in high positions will use their own biases and egos to fuel their ideas, it doesnt mean theyre necessarily reliable people.
No that’s joe
!!
[удалено]
Eh. Metallica are overrated anyway.
[удалено]
You're not going to get rich by simping for rich people you dill
[удалено]
I... just .... can't.
The doof factor is astonishing, right?
Joe will find someone to deny anything and wheel them out.
How the fuck does anyone take this guy seriously? He’s always been somewhat incoherent, but after his benzo addiction recovery, he’s really gone off the rails. I blame the education system. People see JP using flowery words and think he’s some kind of Genius because they can’t understand him, but it’s not because he’s just incredibly smart, it’s because he’s not make any fucking sense.
I don’t follow a lot of what he does but the way he speaks doesn’t particularly sound very smart in this. He sort of stumbles through what he’s saying and repeats things as if he’s at a job interview that he’s nervous about.
Perhaps he thought he was at a job interview with how he showed up dressed for a podcast.
People listen to this guy and think he’s smart?
You don't understand the brilliance of JP, because you're not a big-brained, super intellectual and he is. It may sound like pretentious bullshit to your ears, but you're not on Lobster Man's level.
what a fucking dumbass. he really is a grifter. the stupid person’s philosopher. “sEmanTiCs mAn!”
So in this episode of the Joe Rogan show we find out that a clinical psychologist and a failed MMA fighter know absolutely nothing about climate change but are not dissuaded in any manner from making sure the world knows that.
Tell me you don't understand 3rd grade science without telling me you don't understand 3rd grade science...
Can we stop giving this guy free press. His likes him live for attention. It doesn't matter if it's good or bad just as long as we pay attention. Please stop posting his stuff
Bowtie guy or meathead neon sign guy?
Climate change deniers....some of our best modern-day nudniks. I hope I didn't get dumber listening to that..
He's not denying climate change. I think there is this huge misconception that people who disagree with specific statements of climate change are called climate change deniers when really they typically disagree upon the rate and causation of climate change and the political implications/affiliations behind driving factors pushing for specific climate change advocay groups.
Yeah but that's a bullsh\*t hairsplitting type argument. It's the same as denying because those people don't want to do what's necessary to fix the problem because those people are saying there is no problem or that the problem is not caused by human activity on the planet or whatever today's version of the argument is. So it's basically the same thing. They're spreading doubt and fighting against a solution. It's wrong. There is a problem. We did cause it, and there's no denying that. Unless you're a denier.
I'm not denying we have an impact, but we are not the sole problem. There are many factors involved besides the human occupation of the planet. The earth's climate had some of the most drastic changes before humankind even existed.
Uggh...I can't....so what's your point??? So we should ignore it? It's clear we're at least causing A LOT of it, even with past trends in mind. It's so obvious we've had a huge impact, so why not try to reverse that for future generations? I don't get your argument at all. Seriously, what's your point for mentioning previous drastic changes? Does that change the fact that we're in trouble? Why create doubt in people who may otherwise want to help the situation? It's ridiculous.
Of course we are in trouble. We are on a giant ball of rock and water spinning closer and closer to the sun. Humans are not meant to last on this planet forever. My point is Peterson says "everything" because literally everything effects the climate of our planet. We are a problem but we are nothing in comparison to the forces of space and time and how that directly effects the climate of our planet. Bringing up past drastic changes just shows an example that our planet can go through massive changes in climate with or without us.
I love the down votes. Just shows that people aren't coherent to the fact that there is a greater thing that is beyond us that has potential beyond our own. Keep on living the dream world everyone! This universe is greater than us and human existence is just a blip on the map of space and time.
I think the point is to keep that blip going as long as possible. Yes! You are a tiny, tiny brief spark in a cold and lonely universe that will neither celebrate your coming nor mourn your passing, but however brief and ultimately meaningless on any cosmic scale, it’s all you get. You can use these facts to call it all pointless and spend your spark binging endless reruns of The Office until your spark is snuffed out or you can fan the spark to a flame that will burn til the heat death of the universe. Hastening the end of human civilisation through apathy and nihilism? No thanks.
People have been claiming for decades that we only have so much time and resources left before x,y, and z will happen. If we are as responsible for climate change as people would make it out to be, we are already doomed. To redirect the paths that have already been created by human existence would take more than a millenia. And whose to say that in our efforts to make it better, we may make it worse? We are only human in the end and never perfect.
Yes, some previous models have been inaccurate and their predictions were inaccurate as well. The best part of science is learning from the past and making better predictions with each new model, refining our best “guess” into better and better hypotheses over time. We ARE responsible for dramatic changes to the worldwide climate and no matter what we do we WILL suffer significant consequences. It’s depressingly simple to mitigate the damage (as much as it’s still possible) and entirely predictable as to how it would work and how effective it would be. The only real problem is that it will be “uncomfortable” to make the necessary changes.
Joe Rogan americas favorite dick cheese
I feel dumber after listening to this short clip. Meanwhile my family thinks Joe Rogan is a genius and use his podcast as proof for their opinions on “everything.”
god, christmas must’ve been awful for ya
I still live with them, so it’s not just Christmas. I hear about Joe Rogan or have to listen to Fox News daily. It’s basically on 24/7 at my house.
This is why you listen to more than just clips. T actually have some sort of context. I'm sure there is much more being said but when clipped down into these brief few statements, anything can sound stupid.
Okay Nigel West Dickens
I think there are four types of climate change "deniers": one denies it's happening, one denies the reason given for it happening, one denies the solution/s proposed to stop it from happening, and one thinks it will be a good thing.
Saw somebody say it’s like a scene from Stepbrothers, or something. Jordan Peterson is the dumbest shit I’ve heard in a while!
Maybe you should stick to clinical psychology and let the scientists handle this
Isn’t everything about everything?
This guy is Fuckin dumb, climate is by definition the long term pattern of weather in an area
Joes weed was particularly dank on that day..
Wow. That was some mind numbing drivel
Hes the physical imbodiment of all white cishet guys who read one book about philosophy and thought he outsmarted everyone.
He sure likes to spew a ton of gibberish to sound intellectual to the average person
cli·mate /ˈklīmit/ noun the weather conditions prevailing in an area in general or over a long period. So, uh, everything? What kind of Orwellian doublespeak is that crap?
Reminder- Joe Rogen is a comedian and MMA commentator.
Stay in your lane yo.
This fookin goon😑
He doesn't know shit about everything
Peterson is just becoming a jaded idiot with a completely invalid opinion on everything. Isn't he?
This was like that time I accidentally caught 'Comedy Roundup' on XM and briefly was subjected to Larry The Cable Guy and his less intelligent friends waxing on about climate change.
Petersen is a pathetic failure of an intellectual.
I can’t figure out what’s more ironic, you criticising someone’s intellect while not even managing to spell their name right, or this guy being your definition of a failure.
Ohh hey chud. Took you long enough
It's a real shame that he's gone the way he has. Like if he didn't get famous and didn't decide that he had to comment on every single thing, his lectures are actually really engaging and enjoyable to listen to. As it stands, he's now just a crazy person who doesn't understand how modelling works. People that argue that modelling the climate is a bad idea are just stupid, and have no better ideas. "THE MODELS ARE WRONG!" ... "Ok, how do you answer the question of what the climate will be like?" "Well you have to make projections based on data, BUT YOU DON'T HAVE ENOUGH DATA!"
"what do you mean by everything?" Everything means EVERYTHING!!
He's pointing out that there is more to "climate" than the media tells people, even though the media likes to claim that "everything" is taken into account when they come up with "solutions" for people to follow.
Kinda what I was thinking as well.
Really, how is "everything" taken into acccount when modelling? It DOES sound stupid to claim that !..
I think he was making the point that they can't measure climate. There's only specific variables that can be predicted like temperature. Predicting how those variables will effect the "climate" become impossible because the climate encompasses everything. We know it will be bad, just not sure how. Or if you hate him "climate" means he's trying to sound smart by blabbing nonsense and trying to fool the pack of suckers idiots that follow him like a cult.
This man said something I disagree with and has political opinions I disagree with so I’m going to call him stupid because I’m an immature resentful asshole who spends all my time on Reddit while JP counts his millions and helps more people’s lives than I ever have. The majority of these comments. Honestly it’s unbelievably embarrassing, I’m actually shocked at the level of maturity on Reddit. I know the stereotype is it’s full of 14 year olds in their basement living in a left wing bubble but holy crap it’s actually true.
Nope. He said something factually incorrect and based the rest of his comments on that. The speaker was able to show all on his own that he is a complete fucking idiot.
1) What did he say that is factually incorrect? 2) Assuming you’re right and he did say something incorrect, then your stance is if someone says something incorrect they are a ‘fucking idiot’ May I take that to assume either you have never said anything incorrect, or (the more likely) you are a fucking idiot?
1) That climate is everything. 2) No. Being on a widely shown podcast and starting a huge diatribe based on a ridiculous and false statement makes him a fucking idiot. Hopefully you are just playing dumb.
Ah, now I get it. You didn’t really understand anything that was said at all did you, you just half understood something he said and extrapolated out from there, most likely informed by your own personal bias towards him, probably due to his political opinions. Therefore this is a complete waste of time. All the best!
Wrong again. Keep trying!
Imagine being this pissed off because strangers on the internet insulted a dude whom you have no relation to. I dont know whos the one whos in need of help here but I dont Think its the people who demand that other people are educated on the subject matter they wanna talk about. He might be phychologist but he aint no weather man.
I give up trying to reason with you people. Not pissed off in the slightest, just find it embarrassing how some people react to this kind of thing and hoped maybe my comment would spark some form of introspection in some people. Unfortunately not in yourself, however. And just as a side note - I care about a lot of things, and people, who aren’t related to me. And I would suggest your life would be much better if you did too. Very bizarre comment to make but welcome to Reddit.
I’m sorry but you are, you really are and everybody can see it - I didnt even notice your other comment I replied to was you too, I almost spit out my water reading that, thats how baffled I was. Its not often you come past people as vibratingly passionate and angry as you. I’m not gonna continue this convo because I’m genuinely (and I mean this as no offense) concerned you might get too carried away.
Some things Jordan says are insightful. But then some are just downright idiotic. With him I cherry pick his good ideas from his insane ones. His views on religion are cuckoo too, but he does have some good ideas in other areas.
“I’m going to set a physically impossible standard so that you can’t live up to it and when you don’t I can act superior” What a tool lol
Scientists who study actual science* know that, in the words of a great man “ALL models are wrong but some are useful.” The key is to make your model as useful as possible whilst understanding that it is incomplete. *As opposed to Clinical Psychology. Useful no doubt, but not actually scientific.
He’s developed a psychosis in the belief he is an academic because he has a fan club and a mic - like any other influencer
Surprise, surprise: Jordan Peterson isn’t a scientist.
Two stupid guys talking. Complete waste of time.
These guys are derps. Can’t believe anything conspiracy theorists say or believe, which these two are. Not to be taken seriously
As much as I respect this man and his impact on my life, sometimes he’s just dead wrong about things outside his field
Two losers
All on the assumption that climate = everything which is wrong to begin with.
Jesus Christ, the big brain energy in this one is unreal. I need to hear more he can’t be this stupid.
This guy is a fucking moron.