Opinion Russell Brand

[Hacky McAxe]

He quotes scientific knowledge though

There's a difference between having scientific knowledge, or even quoting scientists, and actually being a scientist working in the field of choice. I have scientific knowledge about many fields of science, but I'm not going to claim that I know enough to say that the scientists and everyone else are lying. And if he isn't involved in the research and his point opposes the findings of the scientists, then he's probably cherry picking and doesn't understand the science.

Brand also has the "critical thinking" fallacy. It's where he claims that he's critically thinking, but he's actually doing the opposite. He's taking a question, then providing the most outlandish answer he can come up with, and ignoring any critique of his opinion.

 

[Hacky McAxe]

Critical thinking is extremely important. But too many now days mistake "critical thinking" for "blind opposition"

An example is his media rant. Many media companies print similar headlines and similar stories. But the independent media (himself, Tucker Carlson, and Joe Rogan as he stated), say other things. His conclusion is that it must be a cabal controlling the media to influence the masses.

If he actually thought critically then he would think of the possible other reasons for this. For example the much more logical:

- maybe they're all printing a similar story because the stories are based on the same information each media organisation has received

- maybe the independent media is printing the opposite because they are ignoring the information provided and are making blind assumptions

 

[D0GMATIC]

There's a difference between having scientific knowledge and actually being a scientist working in the field of choice. I have scientific knowledge about many fields of science, but I'm not going to claim that I know enough to say that the scientists and everyone else are lying.

Brand also has the "critical thinking" fallacy. It's where he claims that he's critically thinking, but he's actually doing the opposite. He's taking a question, then providing the most outlandish answer he can come up with, and ignoring any critique of his opinion.

So you can debunk anything he has said scientifically ? Or are you just validating your decisions ? Did you even watch the clip lol

 

[Hacky McAxe]

So you can debunk anything he has said scientifically ? Or are you just validating your decisions ?

I could and I'm trying to actually listen to his stuff again but I'm travelling between Melbourne and Sydney and have very spotty internet.

I can raise a few points though while I wait for Internet:

- he claims that the government and media shutting down anti-vaxination and other similar discussion was to control the narrative, or control the population, or something like that. The reason they did it (and they stated this multiple times), was because the false information being published everywhere was dangerous. It encouraged people to avoid vaccination which leads to more deaths

- the claims he's making go against the vast majority of the scientific community. I have said this many times in the past. No matter who you are. No matter how knowledgeable you are. If your opinion is the opposite of the vast majority of experts, then you're probably wrong

 

[D0GMATIC]

I could and I'm trying to actually listen to his stuff again but I'm travelling between Melbourne and Sydney and have very spotty internet.

I can raise a few points though while I wait for Internet:

- he claims that the government and media shutting down anti-vaxination and other similar discussion was to control the narrative, or control the population, or something like that. The reason they did it (and they stated this multiple times), was because the false information being published everywhere was dangerous. It encouraged people to avoid vaccination which leads to more deaths

- the claims he's making go against the vast majority of the scientific community. I have said this many times in the past. No matter who you are. No matter how knowledgeable you are. If your opinion is the opposite of the vast majority of experts, then you're probably wrong

Watched it yet ?How can you disagree, if you haven't taken the time to watch it ?

 

[Hacky McAxe]

Yeah, Nah. I tried. Between the spotty internet and Brand's nutjob "a Cartel of legacy media protecting the elite"

Just more of his usual nutjob conspiracy stuff. And now after watching it, I'm going to get spammed with nutjob conspiracy suggestions on YouTube.

 

[Hacky McAxe]

Watched it yet ?

I watched through it initially only half paying attention. Tried to watch it again but there's 5oo much rubbish in there. He's just trying to convince people of the same old media conspiracy that has been around for as long as the media has been around.

The main stream media don't work together in some secret cartel. It's just a bunch of different media companies with different media bias. And they all have different plans. The end goal is to make money for their owners. But most media are run independently even though they have the same owners as other media. It's editorial independence and it's a pillar stone of the media.

And even if editorial independence didn't really exist, they have different owners who don't like each other. They all want to beat other media companies so they can get all the advertising revenue.

The likes of Joe Rogan, Russell Brand, and Tucker Carlson have realised that the best way to get viewers is to spout crazy stuff. If the media really wanted to put money ahead of the truth, they would just do what they do. As Joe Rogan and Tucker Carlson are two of the highest paid media personalities because people love listening to shock jocks

 

[D0GMATIC]

I watched through it initially only half paying attention. Tried to watch it again but there's 5oo much rubbish in there. He's just trying to convince people of the same old media conspiracy that has been around for as long as the media has been around.

The main stream media don't work together in some secret cartel. It's just a bunch of different media companies with different media bias. And they all have different plans. The end goal is to make money for their owners. But most media are run independently even though they have the same owners as other media. It's editorial independence and it's a pillar stone of the media.

And even if editorial independence didn't really exist, they have different owners who don't like each other. They all want to beat other media companies so they can get all the advertising revenue.

The likes of Joe Rogan, Russell Brand, and Tucker Carlson have realised that the best way to get viewers is to spout crazy stuff. If the media really wanted to put money ahead of the truth, they would just do what they do. As Joe Rogan and Tucker Carlson are two of the highest paid media personalities because people love listening to shock jocks

People are interested in the truth and transparency . . .well me anyway

 

[Hacky McAxe]

People are interested in the truth and transparency . . .well me anyway

I refer you to my earlier meme...

 

[D0GMATIC]

I refer you to my earlier meme...

View attachment 99745

Lol check mate when you use Simpson's memes

 

[The DoggFather]

Lol check mate when you use Simpson's memes

There is a simpsons meme for everything bro lol

 

[DinkumDog]

Being a fluent shite talker doesn’t make you intelligent or a decent human being. He is a predator who has made a living out of shite talking.

Not to mention he’s not funny…

 

[Trinfly]

There is a simpsons meme for everything bro lol

Oh Shit. EXORCIST is not dead

 

[CroydonDog]

 

[Doogie]

People are interested in the truth and transparency . . .well me anyway

There is no truth and there is no transparency. And tbh - reckon if you're chasing it - you just setting yourself up for more stress.

Here is some truth for you.
- Was Covid a disease that could kill people. Yes.
- Was it killing enough people to warrant a vaccine. Well if you judge by other diseases you get vaccinated for (say measles), the answer is yes.
- Was it nasty enough to mandate vaccination. This is where I think you'll have a number of different opinions. My gut feeling is no. But I'm sure you'll find others that say yes. There is no truth on this.
- Is there an issue with pfizer etc. In my view yes. But thats my view with the short circuited testing done on mRNA vaccines. Doesn't mean there's a problem with it. Just means that I'm happy to let others be the guinea pig if I have an alternative (which I did). Again, there is no truth on this, just my professional opinion. You'll find others who know enough in this space who will tell you otherwise.

Now pretty much all of the above info and what underpins it is in the public domain - the question is always are you asking the right questions. If people chose not to get vaccined, fair enough, their call. If they had to get vaccined and were not happy about it, fair enough, can understand that. And if they did get vaccined and are putting shite on people with other choices, that is shite in itself.

What I don't understand is why you think we are not educated and need to see a comedians view of the world to truly understand. Its almost like fishing, you'll see this and then you'll understand. I won't, mainly as I know the subject matter. I work for govt, trust me, theres shite that happens that would blow your mind. But if you think the govt would shut down Australia, smash the economy, force people to get needles without a choice etc. etc etc for some big plot or conspiracy, no pollie is that stupid.

Plus old mate is obviously an idiot. You'd have to be to be shagging Katy Perry and break up. Then, even better, refuse your divorce payout. $25M I believe. Lolz....

 

[EL Hefe]

Alex Jones just entered the chat......

 

[Doogie]

The vast majority of doctors are told what to do by a governing body funded by the pharmaceutical companies who make billions from sales of vaccines.. most professors work for universities that are heavily funded by pharmaceutical companies so it’s also in their best interest to follow the narrative of pushing vaccines that weren’t trialled on humans hence why there were millions of vaccine injuries including cardiovascular injuries that are killing young fit healthy men and woman a daily basis.

Hmmm. AHPRA is funded by doctors themselves through a registration fee. Professors funded directly by pharma have to present their conflict of interest in the research. Health related research in Oz is funded mainly by the NHMRC or ARC. Big pharma does its own internal research to maintain control of their IP.

Nice story though.

 

[Dyldog]

Much prefer to listen to Russel than the rubbish we see on free to air.

 

[Hacky McAxe]

Alex Jones just entered the chat......

 

[Berries]

I love AsmonBald