theres a difference in a difference in opinion and putting on the 3-5% of people that disagree and can't bring facts and evidence to the table constantly.
As for Joe Rogan and his controversial guests, one was Dr. Peter McCullough, the most widely published cardiologist in the world. He brought many claims to the podcast - all included citations and verifiable sources - from his grand rounds slides.
Did you watch the podcast so you could criticize it intelligently or are you purely spewing hate based on what you read/heard in MSM? Seems the latter.
Perhaps you or OP would like to share details of the misinformation you claim was shared on Joe Rogan’s show? I watched both episodes and found lots of controversial claims - all backed by citations.
I would challenge that most of Joe Rogan’s critics have never watched the episodes in question. I wouldn’t be willing to stake my life on it however.
Really? exactly 3-5% disagree with the majority?
OP made bold and uncited claims amounting to disinformation and I called them out asking for them to back their claims or back down.
I think he once said his show is the intersection of meatheads and potheads, but I think it's really just WWE.
I'm refrencing over all also, I should have specificed scientists. I'm pulling those numbers from having climate skeptics on...
>Did you watch the podcast so you could criticize it intelligently or are you purely spewing hate based on what you read/heard in MSM? Seems the latter.
I'm sorry I upset you... However I do listen and I had to stop cause I fact check if I have a question so naturally I started hating it. The podcast cause instead of having interesting scientists on that are controversal cause they speak on risky new research and techniques, he brings people that spew fake info on covid a life or death severity repeatedly.