Re:Joe Rogan vs. Phil Plait! - 2007/02/27 09:53I'm glad to see others here hated that Rogan "debate" too.
Here's a message I sent to Goudeau: Subject: Plait/Rogan Round II Date: Sat, 24 Feb 2007 13:42:07 -0500 From: John Huntington To: Michael Goudeau CC: Phil Plait
I have listened to every single broadcast you guys have done, but I have to say that after listening to the Plait/Rogan Round II "debate", I'm not likely to go out of my way to listen any more.
Here's a great idea: Why don't you have a loud mouth, ignorant Christian comedian (like this guy http://www.bradstine.com/ ) in the studio, put Richard Dawkins on a crappy phone connection, and have the loudmouth comic yell over Dawkins every time he attempts to explain a complex facet of evolution?
I'm all for the marketplace of ideas, and I believe some in your audience (like me) lost all respect for Rogan when he said things like "they shot Kennedy in the street" and "we're in Iraq for the money". But you guys also have some esponsibility to make sure that any "debate" on your program is fair, and having one person on a shitty phone connection makes the whole forum asymmetrical. It worked last time (not only because I agree with Phil but) because Phil is far more polite than Rogan, and I don't recall Phil ever yelling over Rogan.
Rogan supposedly is open minded, didn't have a position, and peppered Phil with "questions", but then every time Phil attempted to actually >answer< the question, or explain some complex topic, Rogan just yelled "that's not true" and moved on to some other stupid point. You guys as "moderators" should have told Rogan to shut the fuck up and let Phil finish. Phil could have pushed that point too, of course, but that's awfully hard to do sitting on a phone somewhere.
If (Xenu forbid) you really are going to do another round of this, please make sure that both Phil and Rogan are in the same studio at the same time. Better yet, ask Rogan what it would take for him to believe that we landed on the moon. Chances are, there is >nothing< anyone could say to change Rogan's mind. And if that's the case, then this whole thing is not a debate--it's a circus act, and not a very good one at that.
I don't think you have any responsibility to "protect" your audience, but as proponents of critical thinking, I would hope you would realize that your program may have ended up planting seeds of nonsense in those who have not studied these issues, and may have happened across your show on that day. That means that it's a circus act with (sadly) real consequences for the audience. If I want that, I'll change the station over to Rush Limbaugh, or Randy Rhodes.
| | The administrator has disabled public write access.
Lostdawill
User Karma: 0
Re:Joe Rogan vs. Phil Plait! - 2007/02/27 11:03What bothered me most about the Rogan/Plait debate (other than the fact that Rogan is an idiot) was that Penn and Mike didn't call bullshit when Rogan went wacko. I was surprised that a magician and showman like Penn with all his years of experience didn't point out the obvious misdirection that Rogan was using - there was far too much "Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain" going on for my liking. I understand, and enjoy (most of the time), Penn's liking for the nut point of view but what I can't understand is Penn allowing Rogan to ride roughshod over Plait every time he was making a valid point. Let's hope that there are no more "debates" with Mr. Rogan as that man takes the terms "nutjob" and "wacko" to a whole new and scummier level.
| | The administrator has disabled public write access.
Snerd
User Karma: 20
Re:Joe Rogan vs. Phil Plait! - 2007/02/27 13:14The whole thing with debating people in general is that no one wants to admit they're wrong. Every time I've argued for atheism, God-Squad people always try to drown me out with their own bullshit as opposed to listening. I always try to extend the the courtesy of hearing what they have to say. I think I'm just gonna take the Dawkins approach to those things from now on and just leave it alone.
| | The administrator has disabled public write access.
Gus_Lan
User Karma: 7
Re:Joe Rogan vs. Phil Plait! - 2007/02/27 15:30Not only Rogan pissed me off with his shoutting and all, but I didn't believe him just cause I have seen Phil's presentation about the Monn hoax, the show didn't let Phil speak at all.
GUS
| | The administrator has disabled public write access.
Squee
User Karma: 5
Re:Joe Rogan vs. Phil Plait! - 2007/02/27 15:39Joe was really obnoxious. I liked him in the first "debate", but the second one, he just ended up pissing me off. I'm sure I said aloud to the radio, directed at Joe, "please just shut the hell up."
I kind of expected Goudeau or Penn to tell Joe to calm down a little and let Phil speak, or just plain 'shut the hell up for a minute'.
Ah well. At least we have the first one.
| | The administrator has disabled public write access.
mddawson
User Karma: 5
Re:Joe Rogan vs. Phil Plait! - 2007/02/27 17:55Perhaps this is exactly what Penn and Michael wanted. In the end Joe lost any respect amongst the listeners he may have had after RD1 - he just came over as an ignorant lunatic. They gave Joe enough rope to hang himself.
We can learn many lessons from this episode: 1) Believers will not listen to any argument opposed to their views. 2) Shouting over your opponent is the first weapon against rational argument. 3) Changing topics is the second weapon against rational argument. 4) Believers will not listen to any argument opposed to their views.
| | The administrator has disabled public write access.
Sesh
User Karma: 8
Re:Joe Rogan vs. Phil Plait! - 2007/02/27 21:11Response to this debate at their respective websites.
| | The administrator has disabled public write access.
Snerd
User Karma: 20
Re:Joe Rogan vs. Phil Plait! - 2007/02/28 00:12mddawson wrote: Perhaps this is exactly what Penn and Michael wanted. In the end Joe lost any respect amongst the listeners he may have had after RD1 - he just came over as an ignorant lunatic. They gave Joe enough rope to hang himself.
We can learn many lessons from this episode: 1) Believers will not listen to any argument opposed to their views. 2) Shouting over your opponent is the first weapon against rational argument. 3) Changing topics is the second weapon against rational argument. 4) Believers will not listen to any argument opposed to their views. 5) Joe Rogan is now the new Denis Leary, which is to say, he has become the new poor man's Bill Hicks.
| | The administrator has disabled public write access.
mddawson
User Karma: 5
Re:Joe Rogan vs. Phil Plait! - 2007/02/28 00:16Snerd wrote: 5) Joe Rogan is now the new Denis Leary, which is to say, he has become the new poor man's Bill Hicks.
Do you mean?:
(Sung) I'm an asshole (I'm an asshole, he's an asshole) I'm an asshole (He's the world's biggest asshole) A S-S H-O L-E Everybody, A S-S H-O L-E Ay Ay-Ay Ay-Ay Ay-Ay A-thoom A-thoom-thoom A-thoom-thoom A-thoom-thoom Oooooooo
(Spoken) I'm an asshole and I'm proud of it!
| | The administrator has disabled public write access.
Harry Clark
User Karma: 1
Re:Joe Rogan vs. Phil Plait! - 2007/02/28 10:05I really enjoyed round 2 and feel the match is currently even, with the studio participant winning each time. I'm all for a rubber match with both sides in studio. Maybe you can get O.J. in as a judge, since he is somewhat connected to the event. Also, I want to say how refreshing it was to hear Joe scream about Werner Von Brawn being a Nazi - we just never get enough of that. And it wasn't just the space program that got a boost from the Reich, our wonderful national intelligence agencies were all greatly aided by the nazi Reinhard Gehlen. If you want to lose sleep, look this guy up.
| | The administrator has disabled public write access.
Jersey Nick
User Karma: 7
Re:Joe Rogan vs. Phil Plait! - 2007/02/28 11:265) Joe Rogan is now the new Denis Leary, which is to say, he has become the new poor man's Bill Hicks.
| | The administrator has disabled public write access.
Snerd
User Karma: 20
Re:Joe Rogan vs. Phil Plait! - 2007/02/28 13:22Jersey Nick wrote: 5) Joe Rogan is now the new Denis Leary, which is to say, he has become the new poor man's Bill Hicks.
That seems awfully unfair to Hicks and Leary. BTW, Rogan is among those who have accused Leary of stealing from Hicks. I meant just going off on the conspiracy theory shit. I don't think Leary does it, but he has lifted from Hicks.
| | The administrator has disabled public write access.
bugamok
User Karma: 0
Re:Joe Rogan vs. Phil Plait! - 2007/02/28 16:03I actually stopped listening to the podcast because my biggest pet peeve is arrogant assholes like Joe Rogan who think they're right just because they can yell loud and refuse to even listen to logic.
"Isn't that WEIRD?" and "Nazis everywhere!" are NOT ARGUMENTS FOR ANYTHING. Fucking logical fallacies left and right.
I'm a damn good debater but is there really much you can say in response to someone who makes no sense?
On my more despotic days I think everyone should be forced to learn how to debate correctly instead of just dodging issues and throwing up smoke. Nothing's more exciting than a good debate but there is a serious lack of them in the world since too many people would rather just puff themselves up and scream then listen and respond accordingly.
| | The administrator has disabled public write access.
Snerd
User Karma: 20
Re:Joe Rogan vs. Phil Plait! - 2007/02/28 17:59I think the absolute best way to debate someone is to take everything they say at face value and repeat it with logic. Example: "The reason we die is because Eve ate of the fruit..." Okay... we don't die because of diseases or because our organs deteriorate over time. We die because a talking snake made a naked lady eat some fruit. IT ALL MAKES SENSE NOW! Generally, people won't change their whole way of thinking because someone proved them wrong. That's just part of being human. You might as well have fun with your argument. Be funny and make your friends laugh. You may not change the mind of the person you are arguing with, but you may change the minds of the spectators.
| | The administrator has disabled public write access.
ResIpsa
User Karma: 0
Re:Joe Rogan vs. Phil Plait! - 2007/02/28 20:17I'm glad to see I'm not the only one who was appalled by Joe Rogan and annoyed by Penn's and Michael's (and Phil's) failure to point out the glaring problems with his argument.
His entire argument was based on suggesting that if a given set of facts are possibly susceptible to another interpretation, then the conventional interpretation has thereby been brought under successful challenge and can be disregarded until all of the remote possibilities have been specifically rebutted.
Nonsense.
So where were Penn and Michael and Phil to point out that almost everything is possible, but fewer things are probable, and that the mere possibility of an alternative argument does not negate another, highly probable argument?
Penn said once or twice that the "debate" between Phil and Joe exemplified the "marketplace of ideas," but he seems to have forgotten that show he did a while back on "mandatory false dichotomies," and how stupid it is to give every possible contrary statement airtime. Why is that? Because there are always possible contrary statements but most of them are completely worthless. Like the ones coming out of Joe Rogan's mouth.
There's the "marketplace of ideas" and then there's encouraging inanity by giving voice to people who just want to drown out more reasoned opinions with loudmouthed, middle school level skepticism.
| | The administrator has disabled public write access.
