Joe Rogan fact checks Bernie Sanders on Global Warming hoax

[DrH. Lecter]

I'm sorry but any 'study' that says the sun does not affect the temperature of the earth is fiction. It is, in fact, the SOURCE of heat for earth. How can anyone with half a brain state that the sun's fluctuations have no affect on the earth's temperature? I don't have to have a PhD in climate science to use just a bit of common sense to know that's unadulterated BS. The earth's path around the sun is not a perfect ellipse - would these same scientists state that being a bit closer or further from the sun would also not have any effect on the earth's temperature? You can quote all the 'scientific research' you'd like but common sense refutes much of what is 'settled science' - an oxymoron if ever there was one. What did 'settled science' tell us about the COVID vaccine, reactions among young/healthy individuals, efficacy of the vaccine, etc.?

I am not denying that the earth may, in fact, be warming. I struggle to trust that we have the technology to accurately assess whether it is and to what extent as the earth is a damn big ecosystem. However, to disregard the SUN and blame 'global warming' on man is where I throw up my resistance. It is a political issue more than an science issue. And, singling out CO2 as a huge culprit is, as I stated above, asinine. Let's take CO2 levels to zero and see what happens to life on earth. So, there is some level of CO2 that is necessary. Is it .04%? How would one go about determining that? If mankind somehow reduced CO2 levels to .03% - what would the outcome be? A rebirth of Garden of Eden? Or worldwide famines with millions/billions of humans starving to death? If CO2 levels were .05% - how would that change the ecosystem? Would the changes be positive or negative for human life? I don't believe we have the ability to model situations like that with any expectation of accuracy. And, to restate, I am 100% in favor of preserving and enhancing the environment. Spending trillions of dollars unnecessarily to put the world's economies into a New Stone Age is species suicide, imo.

Academic research has, for years, been accused of reaching conclusions that the funder of said research is looking for. If Big Oil funds a climate study, does anyone believe the researchers are going to conclude anything other than fossil fuels do not affect the climate? And the converse is also true. If Big Pharma did a study on COVID vaccines, I'm guessing I can tell you what the conclusion will be before the first egghead begins to gather data. There is a whole industry dedicated to 'climate change' and 'alternative energy' - why? Because there is potentially trillions of dollars to be made in the transition. If all these eco-terrorists were serious about CO2 and the environment, why aren't they championing nuclear power generation and hydrogen combustion engines, etc.? Because it's NOT about the environment. It's about $$$$$. How many eco-catastrophes have been dreamed up in my lifetime? About 25 and counting. 'Global warming' is just one more in a long line. There will be others - trust me.

These articles from the true believers always use "weasel words" like recent. That can be used to avoid any contradictory data. The 1950s was not recent...they say while hoping a reader of a headline can project RECENT to mean back to the 1800's. People read headlines and then believe what they want.

Well the sun or global warming is not responsible for the RECENT warm few days we will have this week. Its a heat bubble trapped over the mid-west. So I could write a giant headline, scientists say global warming NOT responsible for recent heat wave.

Unfortunately the issue is more political than science. Too much money to be made from studies promoting man-made warming, none available for opposing data. Just mocking and name calling. You are a DENIER.

 

[JumperJack]

I'm not characterizing what happens I'm just posting and referencing data which supports that we are now in an accelerated period of warming.

Agree

I think you are talking about that email thing. That's been address on here previously and fact checked to show the conversation which mis understood. At any rate I choose to accept the opinions of the world climate scientist and reputable scientific reorganization over a questionable email. You and others are welcome to arrive at a different cnclusiton.


I do not accept that most scientific agencies and climate phDs are dishonestly rendering false options for money.

Here is a list of major scientific organizations worldwide that have publicly stated that global warming is real and primarily caused by human activities. I don't think they are all dishonest.

1. American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS)
2. American Chemical Society (ACS)
3. American Geophysical Union (AGU)
4. American Meteorological Society (AMS)
5. American Physical Society (APS)
6. Geological Society of America (GSA)
7. National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA)
8. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA)
9. United States National Academy of Sciences
10. United Kingdom Royal Society
11. Australian Academy of Science
12. Canadian Meteorological and Oceanographic Society
13. Chinese Academy of Sciences
14. European Academy of Sciences and Arts
15. European Geosciences Union (EGU)
16. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC)
17. International Council for Science (ICSU)
18. Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences
19. German Academy of Sciences Leopoldina
20. French Academy of Sciences
21. Indian National Science Academy
22. Russian Academy of Sciences
23. Science Council of Japan
24. Brazilian Academy of Sciences
25. African Academy of Sciences
26. Academia Mexicana de Ciencias (Mexico)
27. Royal Society of Canada
28. Royal Flemish Academy of Belgium for Sciences and the Arts
29. Royal Irish Academy
30. Swiss Academy of Sciences
31. Norwegian Academy of Science and Letters
32. Finnish Academy of Science and Letters
33. Polish Academy of Sciences
34. Hungarian Academy of Sciences
35. Academy of Science of South Africa

The old Appeal to Authority.

The next logical step that anyone who truly seeks truth would be to determine which of those organizations rely on public funding.

 

[hmt5000]

I'm sorry but any 'study' that says the sun does not affect the temperature of the earth is fiction. It is, in fact, the SOURCE of heat for earth. How can anyone with half a brain state that the sun's fluctuations have no affect on the earth's temperature? I don't have to have a PhD in climate science to use just a bit of common sense to know that's unadulterated BS. The earth's path around the sun is not a perfect ellipse - would these same scientists state that being a bit closer or further from the sun would also not have any effect on the earth's temperature? You can quote all the 'scientific research' you'd like but common sense refutes much of what is 'settled science' - an oxymoron if ever there was one. What did 'settled science' tell us about the COVID vaccine, reactions among young/healthy individuals, efficacy of the vaccine, etc.?

I am not denying that the earth may, in fact, be warming. I struggle to trust that we have the technology to accurately assess whether it is and to what extent as the earth is a damn big ecosystem. However, to disregard the SUN and blame 'global warming' on man is where I throw up my resistance. It is a political issue more than an science issue. And, singling out CO2 as a huge culprit is, as I stated above, asinine. Let's take CO2 levels to zero and see what happens to life on earth. So, there is some level of CO2 that is necessary. Is it .04%? How would one go about determining that? If mankind somehow reduced CO2 levels to .03% - what would the outcome be? A rebirth of Garden of Eden? Or worldwide famines with millions/billions of humans starving to death? If CO2 levels were .05% - how would that change the ecosystem? Would the changes be positive or negative for human life? I don't believe we have the ability to model situations like that with any expectation of accuracy. And, to restate, I am 100% in favor of preserving and enhancing the environment. Spending trillions of dollars unnecessarily to put the world's economies into a New Stone Age is species suicide, imo.

Academic research has, for years, been accused of reaching conclusions that the funder of said research is looking for. If Big Oil funds a climate study, does anyone believe the researchers are going to conclude anything other than fossil fuels do not affect the climate? And the converse is also true. If Big Pharma did a study on COVID vaccines, I'm guessing I can tell you what the conclusion will be before the first egghead begins to gather data. There is a whole industry dedicated to 'climate change' and 'alternative energy' - why? Because there is potentially trillions of dollars to be made in the transition. If all these eco-terrorists were serious about CO2 and the environment, why aren't they championing nuclear power generation and hydrogen combustion engines, etc.? Because it's NOT about the environment. It's about $$$$$. How many eco-catastrophes have been dreamed up in my lifetime? About 25 and counting. 'Global warming' is just one more in a long line. There will be others - trust me.

It's like when they compare rising co2 levels on Earth to that of venus.... Earth went from about 300ppm co2 to about 440ppm. ppm stands for parts per million. Venus is 97% co2.... that means Venus has 970,000 co2 molecules per 1,000,000 molecules in their atmosphere... Earth has 440 co2 molecules for every 1,000,000. It just isn't the same in any way yet you hear experts site it all the time.

 

[DrH. Lecter]

Right, because if you go back say a century there was no accelerated warming trend. The data shows it increasing more rapidly in the last two decades.

Understood. But saying that the solar impact has been debunked is not correct. On a geological time scale 1950 and 2 decades are simply too recent to get freaked out about. Accelerated can easily become decelerated on a dime. In any event making the USA bend ourselves into a pretzel as China and India laughs at us is not something I am in support of. JMHO

 

[hmt5000]

Right, because if you go back say a century there was no accelerated warming trend. The data shows it increasing more rapidly in the last two decades.

You mean coming out of the little ice age the Earth was cooler than it is now? Wow.

 

[FtWorthCat]

Joe is a great interviewer but he's not a scientist. The fact is the earth has been heating rapidly over the last several years as we can see from this chart which covers the industrial age:

This is the fact. Too many people want to make facts fit their beliefs, instead of the other way around. This phenomenon started in no small part when the Southern Baptist Convention was taken over by the far right in the year 2000 and adopted the before then fringe belief of biblical inerrancy. If you believe the Bible, strictly, over your sense of reason and what can be proven, you are likely in a cult.

 

[Caveman Catfan]

I'm not characterizing what happens I'm just posting and referencing data which supports that we are now in an accelerated period of warming.

Agree

I think you are talking about that email thing. That's been address on here previously and fact checked to show the conversation which mis understood. At any rate I choose to accept the opinions of the world climate scientist and reputable scientific reorganization over a questionable email. You and others are welcome to arrive at a different cnclusiton.


I do not accept that most scientific agencies and climate phDs are dishonestly rendering false options for money.

Here is a list of major scientific organizations worldwide that have publicly stated that global warming is real and primarily caused by human activities. I don't think they are all dishonest.

1. American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS)
2. American Chemical Society (ACS)
3. American Geophysical Union (AGU)
4. American Meteorological Society (AMS)
5. American Physical Society (APS)
6. Geological Society of America (GSA)
7. National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA)
8. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA)
9. United States National Academy of Sciences
10. United Kingdom Royal Society
11. Australian Academy of Science
12. Canadian Meteorological and Oceanographic Society
13. Chinese Academy of Sciences
14. European Academy of Sciences and Arts
15. European Geosciences Union (EGU)
16. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC)
17. International Council for Science (ICSU)
18. Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences
19. German Academy of Sciences Leopoldina
20. French Academy of Sciences
21. Indian National Science Academy
22. Russian Academy of Sciences
23. Science Council of Japan
24. Brazilian Academy of Sciences
25. African Academy of Sciences
26. Academia Mexicana de Ciencias (Mexico)
27. Royal Society of Canada
28. Royal Flemish Academy of Belgium for Sciences and the Arts
29. Royal Irish Academy
30. Swiss Academy of Sciences
31. Norwegian Academy of Science and Letters
32. Finnish Academy of Science and Letters
33. Polish Academy of Sciences
34. Hungarian Academy of Sciences
35. Academy of Science of South Africa

You admit that there are climate scientists who assess human involvement to warming at less than 10%, right?

Do you believe this is an existential threat?

 

[Get Bucket$]

I'm not characterizing what happens I'm just posting and referencing data which supports that we are now in an accelerated period of warming.

Agree

I think you are talking about that email thing. That's been address on here previously and fact checked to show the conversation which mis understood. At any rate I choose to accept the opinions of the world climate scientist and reputable scientific reorganization over a questionable email. You and others are welcome to arrive at a different cnclusiton.


I do not accept that most scientific agencies and climate phDs are dishonestly rendering false options for money.

Here is a list of major scientific organizations worldwide that have publicly stated that global warming is real and primarily caused by human activities. I don't think they are all dishonest.

1. American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS)
2. American Chemical Society (ACS)
3. American Geophysical Union (AGU)
4. American Meteorological Society (AMS)
5. American Physical Society (APS)
6. Geological Society of America (GSA)
7. National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA)
8. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA)
9. United States National Academy of Sciences
10. United Kingdom Royal Society
11. Australian Academy of Science
12. Canadian Meteorological and Oceanographic Society
13. Chinese Academy of Sciences
14. European Academy of Sciences and Arts
15. European Geosciences Union (EGU)
16. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC)
17. International Council for Science (ICSU)
18. Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences
19. German Academy of Sciences Leopoldina
20. French Academy of Sciences
21. Indian National Science Academy
22. Russian Academy of Sciences
23. Science Council of Japan
24. Brazilian Academy of Sciences
25. African Academy of Sciences
26. Academia Mexicana de Ciencias (Mexico)
27. Royal Society of Canada
28. Royal Flemish Academy of Belgium for Sciences and the Arts
29. Royal Irish Academy
30. Swiss Academy of Sciences
31. Norwegian Academy of Science and Letters
32. Finnish Academy of Science and Letters
33. Polish Academy of Sciences
34. Hungarian Academy of Sciences
35. Academy of Science of South Africa

Wait are you Z? He used to do this all the time.

 

[the nail at the foul line]

Many of your ancestors came to KY and tried cotton farming. It failed. I suggest some of you invest in cotton equipment and begin farming it as the data suggest you will be successful unlike your ancestors. Let us know how it goes.

 

[bigblueinsanity]

Understood. But saying that the solar impact has been debunked is not correct. On a geological time scale 1950 and 2 decades are simply too recent to get freaked out about. Accelerated can easily become decelerated on a dime. In any event making the USA bend ourselves into a pretzel as China and India laughs at us is not something I am in support of. JMHO

Often i wonder if some people pushing some of these views ever just saw aloud their position before saying or typing.

The sun doesn't contribute to heat is certainly an opinion.

 

[FtWorthCat]

Ask ChatGPT about global warming.

 

[MegaBlue05]

Without offering an opinion, it’s still wild to me that “we should all take better care of the earth” is a political issue.

Whatever. Lol.

 

[Caveman Catfan]

Without offering an opinion, it’s still wild to me that “we should all take better care of the earth” is a political issue.

Whatever. Lol.

Arguably, emitting carbon into the atmosphere IS taking care of the earth.

 

[JumperJack]

Without offering an opinion, it’s still wild to me that “we should all take better care of the earth” is a political issue.

Whatever. Lol.

That can be true while it can also be true that “we need to force humanity to pre-industrial living standards” is a completely moronic position.

 

[trueblujr2]

Actually, the Little Ice Age ended in the mid-1800s and, in order to revert to the long term mean, the earth should be warming.

To assert man is the cause of global warming is not science - it is 100% conjecture. The sun and the rotation of the earth around the sun (not a perfect ellipse) are orders of magnitude more influential on global temperatures than anything man is being accused of doing.

Mankind needs to be better stewards of the globe re: pollution and I'm all for spending the necessary funds to keep the earth clean. Carbon capture and carbon credits and all the other malarkey surrounding global warming hysteria is pure theater, imo. 97% of scientists believed the sun revolved around the earth, too. 97% of scientists believed Einstein's theory of relativity was the last word in physics. Science is the never-ending search for truth. The whole idea of 'the question is settled' and 'if you question it, you're a denier' is the antithesis of science.

Carbon dioxide makes up .04% of the earth's atmosphere and is critical to plant life on earth. Since plants take in CO2 and give off oxygen, doesn't it make sense that, within reason, we as a species should desire MORE CO2, not less? Wouldn't that make the earth even more fertile? Who among modern scientists is wise enough to determine what the 'ideal' level of CO2 is and what level would be catastrophic? How would such levels even be able to BE determined over an ecosystem as large and complex as the earth's?

Stating that the oceans have risen so many inches (I've read 9" more recently) in the past 20 years is so laughably stupid it should be considered a parody. The oceans are vast and ever changing. And changing the land masses they crash against. The average depth is 2.3 miles. That's > 144k inches. 9 inches represent .01% of the average depth of the ocean. Do you think 1) it's possible to accurately measure the vast body of water to that accuracy, and 2) that maybe, just maybe, a deviation of .01% of the level of the ocean is to be expected over the thousands of years that natural cycles almost assuredly occur?

Neither Joe nor Bernie are scientists, obviously. But Bernie and the global warming cult certainly want everyone to believe that there is no dissent, all the evidence is consistent with their viewpoint and to question anything about the subject is to be 'uneducated' and 'a denier'. Science has never progressed unless someone questioned the prevailing opinion.

Great Post, you have to realize we're dealing with the same people who insisted the Covid vaccine was safe and insisted we "follow the science" on wearing masks and social distancing.

 

[FtWorthCat]

The same idiots who wouldn't take the vaccine said it caused heart attacks. Ask Chat GPT.

Deaths from heart attacks are way down. Here’s what’s killing us instead

Your chance of dying from a heart attack has dropped dramatically, but other deadly heart conditions are on the rise, a new study found.

www.aol.com

 

[WildcatFan1982]

The firmament needs a good polishing.

 

[MegaBlue05]

That can be true while it can also be true that “we need to force humanity to pre-industrial living standards” is a completely moronic position.

I haven’t taken a position either way.

I just find it weird that “Let’s try our best to not eff up the one planet we get” is such a controversial stance.

It’s either “the world will end tomorrow because of cow farts!!” on the left or “nothing is wrong at all, oil and coal rules!” on the right.

I fall squarely in the middle of the climate change issue is probably not as catastrophic as climate alarmists claim and probably not absolutely nothing to worry about like climate deniers claim.

 

[trueblujr2]

All I'm doing is letting you know what NASA, NOAA and other scientific organization have to say on these issues. It's the opinions of their scientists, not mine. If you find fault with what they are publishing you'll have to take it up with them.

Who funds NASA and NOAA?

Jus sayin'

 

[BigBlueDave]

Wait are you Z?

Now you're cooking with greenhouse gas.


A decade ago he had over 100 and would double space them. A guess this is progress?


Nigerian Dept of Sanitation was a fav.

 

[PhDcat2018]

Good for WaPo to have the courage to report facts.

View embedded media

It's complete horseshit. Glad wapost actually posted that article

 

[PhDcat2018]

Joe is a great interviewer but he's not a scientist. The fact is the earth has been heating rapidly over the last several years as we can see from this chart which covers the industrial age:

One hole degree! What ever will we do???

Actually, the Little Ice Age ended in the mid-1800s and, in order to revert to the long term mean, the earth should be warming.

To assert man is the cause of global warming is not science - it is 100% conjecture. The sun and the rotation of the earth around the sun (not a perfect ellipse) are orders of magnitude more influential on global temperatures than anything man is being accused of doing.

Mankind needs to be better stewards of the globe re: pollution and I'm all for spending the necessary funds to keep the earth clean. Carbon capture and carbon credits and all the other malarkey surrounding global warming hysteria is pure theater, imo. 97% of scientists believed the sun revolved around the earth, too. 97% of scientists believed Einstein's theory of relativity was the last word in physics. Science is the never-ending search for truth. The whole idea of 'the question is settled' and 'if you question it, you're a denier' is the antithesis of science.

Carbon dioxide makes up .04% of the earth's atmosphere and is critical to plant life on earth. Since plants take in CO2 and give off oxygen, doesn't it make sense that, within reason, we as a species should desire MORE CO2, not less? Wouldn't that make the earth even more fertile? Who among modern scientists is wise enough to determine what the 'ideal' level of CO2 is and what level would be catastrophic? How would such levels even be able to BE determined over an ecosystem as large and complex as the earth's?

Stating that the oceans have risen so many inches (I've read 9" more recently) in the past 20 years is so laughably stupid it should be considered a parody. The oceans are vast and ever changing. And changing the land masses they crash against. The average depth is 2.3 miles. That's > 144k inches. 9 inches represent .01% of the average depth of the ocean. Do you think 1) it's possible to accurately measure the vast body of water to that accuracy, and 2) that maybe, just maybe, a deviation of .01% of the level of the ocean is to be expected over the thousands of years that natural cycles almost assuredly occur?

Neither Joe nor Bernie are scientists, obviously. But Bernie and the global warming cult certainly want everyone to believe that there is no dissent, all the evidence is consistent with their viewpoint and to question anything about the subject is to be 'uneducated' and 'a denier'. Science has never progressed unless someone questioned the prevailing opinion.

Brilliant response. Saying something is settled is anti-science.

 

[PhDcat2018]

I haven’t taken a position either way.

I just find it weird that “Let’s try our best to not eff up the one planet we get” is such a controversial stance.

It’s either “the world will end tomorrow because of cow farts!!” on the left or “nothing is wrong at all, oil and coal rules!” on the right.

I fall squarely in the middle of the climate change issue is probably not as catastrophic as climate alarmists claim and probably not absolutely nothing to worry about like climate deniers claim.

I can respect this position. At least you acknowledge the hysterics of the left

 

[AustinTXCat]

6 pages, +/- 1

 

[Caveman Catfan]

6 pages, +/- 1

The climate change of Neptune thread is 74 pages long. I am going to say this thread gets to at least 7 pages.

 

[Tskware]

6 pages, +/- 1

And no one's opinion will change, which is why I am not getting into yet another climate change insult fest.

However, I will disagree with a post above that Joe Rogan is a "great interviewer". I have listened to several of his hours long podcasts and about 80% of his "insightful" comments and questions consist of "Its F ing unbelievable", "Its nuts", "you can't make this stuff up". That is what we now call a good interview?

Listen to the four minute clip in the OP. First he shows Sanders a 500 million year time chart which the interviewee says he hasn't seen and did not read the article, then Rogan goes on a four minute monologue all over the wall with conspiracy comments, conflating pollution with climate change, and just a series of random comments. Sanders hardly speaks. Is that what we call an interview these days?

To his credit, Rogan has made himself wildly popular, but not exactly a hard hitting investigative journalist.

 

[GJNorman]

Meanwhile glaciers are dwindling

Climate change is making Switzerland's ebbing glaciers look like Swiss cheese

The glaciers of Switzerland, which has the most of any country in continental Europe, are fading because of global warming. Their fragility became starkly apparent last month as a mudslide swallowed up the village of Blatten.

www.pbs.org

 

[Irish Beck]

There's a reason Joey Coco blew up on Joe a few weeks ago. Rogan, when bringing his podcast along, interviewed diverse and interesting people and discussed a litany of topics specific to his guest.

About the only monolithic opinion he held was about smoking weed.

Nowadays he could bring in a dietician and end up talking about culture wars within the first hour. Admittedly, it grew the podcast to its current level but his closest friends and regulars don't seem that interested in that part of Joe (save for a few of his friends that also find interest in that).

Also, his UFC commentary is egregiously bad now. I would hate when he wasn't on a ppv up until Covid but something changed in him to where he just drones on and on about leg kicks causing excessive damage (even when they clearly aren't), submissions always being "tight" and presumably inescapable and stating wild opinions like back of the head blows shouldn't be illegal and the round should start on the ground if it ended on the ground.

I miss old Joe.

 

[hmt5000]

Many of your ancestors came to KY and tried cotton farming. It failed. I suggest some of you invest in cotton equipment and begin farming it as the data suggest you will be successful unlike your ancestors. Let us know how it goes.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Year_Without_a_Summer

The year 1816 is known as the Year Without a Summer because of severe climate abnormalities that caused average global temperatures to decrease by 0.4–0.7 °C (0.7–1 °F).[1] Summer temperatures in Europe were the coldest of any on record between 1766 and 2000,[2] resulting in crop failures and major food shortages across the Northern Hemisphere.[3]

Evidence suggests that the anomaly was predominantly a volcanic winter event caused by the massive 1815 eruption of Mount Tambora in April in modern-day Indonesia (commonly referred to as the Dutch East Indies at the time). This eruption was the largest in at least 1,300 years (after the hypothesized eruption causing the volcanic winter of 536); its effect on the climate may have been exacerbated by the 1814 eruption of Mayon in the Philippines. The significant amount of volcanic ash and gases released into the atmosphere blocked sunlight, leading to global cooling.

 

[hmt5000]

Without offering an opinion, it’s still wild to me that “we should all take better care of the earth” is a political issue.

Whatever. Lol.

Plants die below 200ppm co2. We were at around 270ppm co2 before the industrial revolution. We are now at around 440ppm co2. Mammals flourished on Earth at somewhere between 1600ppm co2 and 800ppm co2.

 

[bigblueinsanity]

There's a reason Joey Coco blew up on Joe a few weeks ago. Rogan, when bringing his podcast along, interviewed diverse and interesting people and discussed a litany of topics specific to his guest.

About the only monolithic opinion he held was about smoking weed.

Nowadays he could bring in a dietician and end up talking about culture wars within the first hour. Admittedly, it grew the podcast to its current level but his closest friends and regulars don't seem that interested in that part of Joe (save for a few of his friends that also find interest in that).

Also, his UFC commentary is egregiously bad now. I would hate when he wasn't on a ppv up until Covid but something changed in him to where he just drones on and on about leg kicks causing excessive damage (even when they clearly aren't), submissions always being "tight" and presumably inescapable and stating wild opinions like back of the head blows shouldn't be illegal and the round should start on the ground if it ended on the ground.

I miss old Joe.

That something was the power of the machine coming after him for taking a nobel prize winning medication. That opened his eyes and the covid insanity opened the eyes of many.

Its directly applicable to climate changes because its literally the exact same playbook. *Settled science ", "experts agree", "we're all in this together ", the endless alarmism, and the focused destruction of anyone opposing the machine.

All they did was take climate change nonsense and put that into the covid approach with the handy tag of public health.

Also i have bad news for you if you think rogan is the only one shocked into reality by the actions of the machine. There are many. Thats why this stuff just doesn't get traction any more.