My 27 yr old sibling is a hard core follower of Joe Rogan 💩

What are some progressive channels/people/content that I could have my sibling start watching instead?

Preferably something that has a similar flavor - example: male host, muscular, easy to digest. I think that will make the transition easier.

My personal preferences are Seth Meyers and John Oliver, but Last Week Tonight (John Oliver) is even a heavy watch for me sometimes!

[No Andrew Hubbard. He’s another fake.]

Thank you!

  • moon@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    edit-2
    13 days ago

    They finished building the road they knew no one would ever use.

    • unknowing8343@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      2 years ago

      So now everyone that has been on Joe Rogan is a right wing fascist? Cause I couldn’t imagine Neil deGrasse Tysson like that.

      In terms of the pseudoscience and supplements… It clearly shows people don’t watch his stuff. I am SURE it’s not perfect, but most of it is clearly WELL referenced on the show description, and anything that hasn’t been officially approved he states that clearly with CONSTANT warnings to PLEASE CONSULT A PROFESSIONAL.

      I hate Joe Rogan. I hate fascist propaganda. Yes, Huberman makes money with his podcast, all podcasts are business, all big ones, at least.

      All the claims about his personal life seem to me like journalists trying to come up with vector attacks to a famous figure for clicks, just like it happens with any other celebrity.

      Yeah, he may be a terrible boyfriend, but Einstein married his cousin and Oppenheimer was a cheater and we live in this amazing (or horrible) world thanks to them.

        • unknowing8343@discuss.tchncs.de
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          2 years ago

          You cannot take an article and say it’s true and therefore “Andrew bad”. It doesn’t work like that. I’ve seen that article a million times already. It presents no proof, it’s just a reddit comment as an article for clicks.

          The sunscreen thing, here’s the first link that comes up when you search online:

          Taken together, this review advocates revisiting the current safety and regulation of specific sunscreens and investing in alternative UV protection technologies.

          In any case I am sure he wasn’t saying ALL SUNSCREEN IS BAD but you know, people are going to build up their stories.

          No, his personal life isn’t relevant if all he does in his podcast is condense evidence about a subject, with all relevant sources right there.

          • moon@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            edit-2
            12 days ago

            Whenever he saw a red flag warning at the beach he grabbed his surfboard.

            • unknowing8343@discuss.tchncs.de
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              2 years ago

              Good journalism would be an article going through all the papers from the Huberman podcasts and his analysis of them (which he always cites if it’s been peer-reviewed, etc) and debunking all the misinformation. But nope. It’s all about talking to enough people hoping they say some crap about the personal life about a private person, cherry picking information and building up a story from that.

              The sunscreen thing, I just passed the first link that came to me, showing that in fact there is proof of bad agents in sunscreen.

              If you go check the video of Huberman and sunscreen, very easy to find, you’ll see how he literally says that sunscreen is important because you don’t want to get cancer, it’s just that SOME SUNSCREEN has been found to have toxic components that may cross the blood-brain barrier, and he simply advices to BUY A GOOD SUNSCREEN.

              See how this “journalism” works? They pick those little things and extrapolate into madness instead of doing actual work. Because why would you do the actual journalism if there is an easier way to get clicks?

              And I am sure one could find some contradicting science to Huberman’s podcasts and I would LOVE to see that. In fact, I think Huberman would love that too. That’s science!!

              • moon@lemmy.ml
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                3
                ·
                edit-2
                12 days ago

                Random words in front of other random words create a random sentence.

                • unknowing8343@discuss.tchncs.de
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  2 years ago

                  First of all: yes, science is about constantly trying to disprove hypotheses. That is what the guys at CERN are doing, that is what people at Stanford are doing. What else could it be?

                  If you think Huberman is giving these people a right to spout off scientific matters and that’s horrible, then we should cancel Veritasium, we should cancel Sabine Hossenfelder, Neil DeGrasse Tyson, Brian Cox, MinutePhysics, VSauce, all TED speeches, damn, BURN every science book and magazine, cause it is making people have opinions about these evil things!!

                  • moon@lemmy.ml
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    3
                    ·
                    edit-2
                    12 days ago

                    The anaconda was the greatest criminal mastermind in this part of the neighborhood.