Jordan Peterson is the guests name

Jordan Peterson is a very educational man

Yes, very articulate. Joe Rogan, on the other hand, is an intellectual and literal midget. He was babbling some horrible nonsense about secret Nibiru planet back in 2012. The man was in his early forties. His profound teacher persona and benevolent superiority over brainwashed university students is a bit much.

He believed in bigfoot, fake moonlandings, and that the earth would end in 2012 into his mid 40s. That's why it's so laughable to see him try to reinvent himself as skeptic science man now.

It's awesome. It shows growth. There are so many things I used to believe, and looking back is just so cringey. I couldn't imagine half of what I used to believe being available online for anyone to see, let alone the celebrity status he has. Good on him.

Bloody Marxists, they are abzurd bucko!

Sort yourself out, clean your room, and rescue your father.

>2017

>not sorting yourself out by traveling to the underworld to rescue your father from the belly of the whale and reform the blown-out metaphysical columns that hold up our culture

Rogan said he's getting 120 million downloads per month. He is the king of all media.

I invented midgets broadcasting, Robing.

Rogan has more listeners in 1 month than people on planet earth who have ever heard the name Howard Stern.

Idk... my dad listened to him in 82, and called me a faggot when I mentioned Opie and Anthony 25 years later

Well he's not wrong

Pissy-eyed, too.

The bit has passed you by

Fair enough. I shall fuck myself.

One of my biz locations has a bunch of young black guys working there. Ages 21-28 ... a lot of them listen to rogan. I couldnt believe it.. they dont even watch ufc so im not sure where they found him.. the one kid watches rogan on youtube everyday on his lunch.

Rogan is like npr for dumb people.

Npr without the extreme leftist cuck slant?

Bite your tongue, NPR is great & I sincerely mean that.

I used to listen to NPR all the time but I heard some shit about how Donald Trump reminds people of the villains from Harry potter and my little pony and I swear to god care bears and I haven't listened since

Fair enough but there's still a lot of interesting & intelligent programming that I find entertaining even if some of it ,but not most, might be overtly partisan.

Npr is mostly lefty horseshit but S-town was amazong

There's a ton of things like shit-town, I even have the subrcibe to the pobcast All Things Considered with my girl Terry Gross. I don't like overtly partisan programming weather it be left or right, tv or radio but NPR has intelligent interesting programming & I don't see a leftist underlining agenda. I'm don't have the sjw mindset so I can listen & enjoy others who politics may not be a mirror imagine of mine, like this sub for example.

I truly hate to do this but since we are in the context of intelligent radio: whether / underlying.

I loved S-town, but the his is such a whinny loser! I almost gave up when he cried the first time!

he's a cuck but his show was great

He totally is, but boy can he tell a story. Really S-Town shouldn't be good - there's really not much of a story - but he makes it great.

Fake news: "young black guys working"

The guy works for the NBA.

panera, faggot

ufc?! I could've swore you said kfc!? EHHHHH!!!!

"Savannah, Georgia you're on the air"

"I just wanted to ask DO YOU RESPECT JOE ROGANS PENIS!"

Yes

It also took him a while to process that 120 million x 12 is > a billion.

Not everybody was a childhood math whiz ya know.

Damn, let's say 100M per month: - if he made 1 Cent per view/listener that would be 1M $ per month - if he made 1/10th of a Cent, it would still be 100K $ a month from his podcast alone.

And I'm being incredibly conservative since Rogan doesn't push ads at all. But I read the rate for successful podcast is between 2.5 and 4 cents per listener.

Plus while it's nothing compared to radio, I think many of the other successful podcasts have a way bigger overhead compared to Rogan's.

I wonder if rogan is still paying Brian redban 60k a year out of pity.

Lol

Brian is full retard. He could have just dedicated his life to the JRE and made tons of money. Rogan is smart enough to fire his friend and hire the Jamie guy. I hate Rogan but I have to respect him.

Brian 'brother joe' redban

Advertisement with Rogan is priceless, then.

A while ago there was an article on what some podcasters make. I think it said based on his typical hits and industry advertising rates etc they estimated his revenue is something around 25-30k per episode.

How do they work it out?

Is it just ad revenue?

You get paid X amount by show sponsors (live reads) based on the number of audio downloads. Then you get ad revenue sharing from hosting it on YouTube. He also gets the revenue from people who host his clips illegally on YouTube; instead of having them taken down I believe he's got the option to leave them up and just take over the revenue stream.

I couldn't find the article where they mentioned Rogan, but I saw some other one from '15 where Carolla said he'd get about five million in revenue that year.

I can't find the Rogan article but here's a good breakdown that's pretty close to anything I've ever read about podcast revenue.

Ant should ask lil joe Rogan how to make a successful podcast. Rogan has no paywall and wipes the floor with Ant in profits.

Joe doesn't go on alcohol fueled rants about black crime for hours on end.

This is his problem, I subscribed for 6 months to show some loyalty and I think ant is hilarious, butni couldn't take it anymore.

i think rogans doing a streaming deal with Twitch.TV too. Ditching that nigger youtube

Idk where i read it but it said that Rogan is making like 60k per episode.

well deserved

The most popular podcast right now is S-Town. Which got 16 Million downloads it's first week. It has since exploded in popularity since then and still is #1 on the iTunes overall list even though the last episode was at the end of March.

JRE sits at #15 currently.

To be fair, anyone can claim any internet numbers they want when it comes to their own website. No one but them sees the numbers. As for YouTube, those numbers can be bought. I forget what the going rate is for 10,000 views, but it's out there if you know where to look.

The internet is completely unregulated, no one really knows how good or bad anyone else is doing. Which isn't to say Rogan isn't getting those numbers, maybe he is... but if he wasn't, he could still claim he was and no one would have any tangible proof to contradict him.

What changed the game for networks and what they can charge for ads is the existence of an independent tracking firm like Nielsen. That doesn't exist online. The closest thing would be Alexa, but Alexa doesn't have access to site traffic data. All it does is guess based on various algorithms and they're less reliable than a Wikipedia fact.

Not trying to be a dick, just trying to spread the info a bit.

What about constantly being in the top 30 itunes podcasts, though? http://www.itunescharts.net/us/artists/podcast/joe-rogan/podcasts/the-joe-rogan-experience/

"People" are just IP numbers on the net. Read up on bot farms and what they do. You can hire 'em to comment on social media (FB comments, tweets) which is also used to get undeserving stories trending. These phantom IP armies exist to serve anyone willing to poney up the dough.

Know how most of Opie's Twitter followers are showing zero engagement with him and have been deemed to be fakes? How do you think those hundreds of thousands of phantom accounts got there? Either he or SiriusXM pony'd up the cash. What they don't tell the clients 'til later is that if you want those followers to actually INTERACT with you, it'll cost you more. It's a whole racket. There's no internet police. Well, there's the NSA, but if they gave away that they can see everything, everyone would stop sharing and giving themselves away.

He does 24 podcasts a month though, that's basically 5 million listeners. So it's like an amazing cable show or a cult classic on the big 4.

I've gotten bigger laughs from the cable access Lamb's Farm News Show that aired from 1996-98 in Chicago that this lousy fucking podcast. Retards = Laughs.

I bet the interviews with hunting people from the travel channel make up .01% of that number

considering most of the country and world probably find that part interesting I highly doubt it, not my cup of tea either though.

Fucking incredible numbers when you think about it, especially when you remember it when it was still a bit of a goof. As easy as it is to poke fun at Rogan he's created something pretty special with his podcast and it's been a constant in my life since he started it.

Still miss the old days tbh but you have to be a bit of a curmudgeon if you complain about this volume of free, quality content even if some of the episodes are a bit "meh"

Yeah, I'm sure more than 1/3 of the US population downloads Rogan's podcast every month. That's why he works out of his garage and has his house boy do google searches on a nigga rigged TV screen.

Imagine if the downloads were actually dicks? Joe would be well chuffed.

I don't doubt that number, whenever I do work on my house , mow the grass or work on my cars I'll replay one of this old good podcasts with people I enjoy

/s?

Something gay about French philosophy. Maybe it's because they were all faggots.

Ha! Suck it Pascal!!!

🏋

I've already listened to it twice. His first interview with Peterson was the best podcast i ever heard and this tops it.

Great to hear - first podcast with Peterson was one of my favorites as well.

I refuse to learn from a man that's 5 foot 4.

i will agree with you if you dont listen to fattington because no fattie deserve any respect

You're a bit cringey yourself guy

Lol found the fat worthless sack of shit. Go eat some french fries you pathetic slob.

I don't get it. I'm slightly overweight but I'm not even 2 bills. We're you trying to reply to something else

Fatass

and ur gay

He's 5'4 you body shaming sack of shit

I like Jordan Peterson and hate the Left. That being said all of the 4chan faggots with a Pepe the Frog avatar leaving comments about "praise kekistan" are so fucking embarrassing

that pepememe thing is cringey as shit

They actually discuss this in the episode. Jordan discusses the phenomenon of pepe frogs and the cult of kek. I didn't really understand it but it was fascinating.

Peterson is great but the fanbase he's cultivating is vomit inducing. Those people think "sort yourself out" means "build the gas chambers".

THe only people who mistake what hes saying for "build the gas chambers" is delusional SJW's like yourself who spend your time "punching nazis" and railing against the "alt right" and racism...

Thanks for proving my point.

Was the point that you are a whiny faggot? Interesting way to go about proving that point...

Yeah i am definitely the one whining here.

Glad you are gaining some self awareness. Next you should ask you therapist about your paranoia surrounding "kkk white supremacist nazis dat wanna throw you in tha chamberz!"

I would be really surprised if someone with your level of cognitive ability understood 5% of what Peterson is talking about.

Congratulations. I wouldn't be surprised if you got pounded by large black dick while enjoying Moshe Kasher's "problematic".

Let me ask you this. Do you think Peterson is cool with racism?

"cool with racism"? I have no idea but I would love to hear your thoughts...

I have no idea

The first smart thing you've said all night.

Still one more smart thing than you have said.

I don't know why you are so butthurt but i am glad.

You mean, you don't know why I am picking on you for being a whiny faggot and that it hurts you? Yes, thats pretty easy to tell.

Let me ask you, how many hours a day do you spend "fighting racism", Moshe?

Approximately zero but have fun arguing against a straw man retard.

Ahh, so not only a delusional SJW slav faggot, but a dishonest one at that.

You are a retarded ape. Go play with your own shit and leave me alone.

"leave you alone". Whats a matter? Have I "triggered" you? Am I "oppressing" you? You could just walk away from the computer an stop responding within minutes you fucking crybaby.

I aaaam riiiiiiight. Meeeeeeee.

After begging for mercy you should probably retreat to your safespace , sweetie. Im starting to feel bad for you.

Noooo i am riiiiight. Waaaah waaaah.

Time to change your tampon..

Actually that's my fault for telling him I'm going to put him in the gas chambers.

He's not cultivating that fanbase. A Gavin or a Milo cultivate that fanbase by edgelording at max speed. Peterson just speaks his mind.

You are right, my English is too shit because i am a slav faggot. I didn't mean to say he's trying to attract people like that.

Peterson is telling people not to go to college because even he realizes psychology is faggy as is Toronto. Also Peterson became famous for him calling out the pronoun bullshit

the reason Peterson is so good is because he's a genius-level guy and pretty normal otherwise. He's been taken in by the same creeps who watch Gavin and Lauren Southern and all that shit, so he's out here talking about history and political science and it's just comment sections asking him what his opinion on Kek is. This is some All Your Base shit.

He said something once about the MGTOW guys probably ending up sad and alone and it's not something you want to be long term and someone called him a "trad-cuck." The fact that there's someone confident enough to say something that retarded even anonymously makes me think Peterson's going to be chased off at some point. There's just too much acute meme autism being thrown around.

peterson is not a genius, listen to his appearances on sam harris's podcast he was exposed as a intellectual FRAUD

Hey dogshit, has Harris explained why he thinks every western country except Israel needs to take in Muslims and why Jews deserve Israel even though according to him the God that gave the Jews Israel doesn't even fucking exist?

No because those aren't his beliefs cockface

Lol yes they are

I would said [citation needed] but I know you don't actually have one

He is pretty pro-Israel. There's a long post on his website (I think it's just a transcript of an interview, from before he had his podcast) with Andrew Sullivan, a former self-described Zionist who's slowly come around to being pretty anti-Israel. He presses Sam pretty hard on a lot of things, Sam does eventually admit to disagreeing with certain settlement policies, but otherwise he's pretty staunchly in favor of Israel. Sullivan quotes a few Israeli officials saying things like 1000 gentile lives are not worth a single Jewish fingernail, gentiles exist to serve Jews, etc., Sam basically brushes that off, though he does say he's against the idea of a religious state, but he essentially makes an exception for Israel.

Sam even says of his own positions on Israel that they are "paradoxical." Sullivan actually says to him point blank something like "Sam, do you honestly think you being Jewish has nothing to do with your double standards about this?"

I like how Andrew Sullivan gets away with being a neo-Nazi for some reason.

No explanation necessary. It's (((obvious))).

Anyone who types like Joe Cumia should be disregarded.

San Harris is a tard with a big vocabulary.

the reason Peterson is so good is because he's a genius and pretty normal otherwise

Peterson is the closest neo-nazis have to Gobbels since ww2 ended. Peterson isn't normal, he's going to call for all communists and Jews to be exterminated in like a year and a half. It's only been 6 months and he went from "these right leaning people are nuts" to "college is a sham meant to brainwash your kids into being communists. Don't sent your kids to college, Hitler was a pretty smart guy, praise kek!'

This is clearly insane but you're so certain about it I want you to keep going.

You are a total idiot.

I'm pretty sure 4chan hates that shit the most, those are Sargon/ T_D type queers.

It's not 4chan. It's the_donald faggots

There's a huge crossover there.

No one on 4chan has ever made more than $50k a year or had more than a dozen sexual encounters.

Most people are moderates with slight leans. Both the extreme left and extreme right are shitheads

first Peterson EP was great... are they kind of rehashing the same shit or is it different enough that I should listen?

Yeah I hate Rogan and his podcasts mostly but this was pretty great

This sub is chalk full of edge lords lol

I would even go so far as to say it's chock-full, you moron.

Fuck I've never had to type that out before lol

lol, lol, lol, lol, lol.

It really is. Bunch of fags with VERY IMPORTANT OPINIONS on social issues and are scared as fuck that some tumbler kid is going to ruin their world. Fags.

Welcome to reddit sockcucka! New users are able to submit posts after 2 days. If you think your post is a fair contribution to the subreddit, message the moderators for a faster approval.

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

Eat shit

Okay

I really dislike Derrida and Foucault. I tried to give JP a chance but he loses me when he starts talking about "Cultural Marxism". There's parts of academia that I have no idea wtf they are talking about half the time--but the gap of it being this huge Marxist conspiracy has not been bridged for me personally.

I used to roll my eyes whenever righties went on about "Marxists in the universities," but I've come to find out it's not all that ludicrous. Postmodernism (which tends to favor Marxist ideals heavily) truly has infected the social sciences and humanities departments in most Western Universities, and there are a fair number of professors in these fields who profess Marxist beliefs. There's a reason you will find a ton of hammer and sickle flag waving faggots in campus activist groups.

If you'd like a good example, look up "Crash Course Human Geography" on Youtube. The popular channel Crash Course featured a woman lambasting Guns Germs and Steel by Jared Diamond, calling it "racist" and basically just casting a bunch of baseless aspersions at the novel. To the channels credit, it was eventually taken down. Sargon of Akkad has a long video tearing it apart, and at the end of it he highlights the presenter's ties to Marxist professors.

nigga please. motherfuckers go to college where they're first exposed to views/ideas contrary to America is always right, everything we do we #1 shit so of course many of them take their new knowledge and run with it. there's no fucking Marxist conspiracy.

eventually they graduate and get banking jobs. and anybody that claims gg&s is racist is a fucking moron because the point of the book is made clear in the fucking preface.

God, you guys are stupid.

If you want to see what a real "infection" of 'social sciences and humanities departments' looks like go look at nazi Germany, idiot. (something they failed at as they couldn't outmaneuver many professors but not without consequence).

A melding of hatred, resentment, chauvinism, antisemitism and anti-intellectualism. Chairs and institutions dedicated to racial studies and racial hygiene, brilliant.

Look up Phillip Lenard (saved by right-wing students), Johannes Stark, Wilhelm Müller,. Aryan Physics. Attacks on 'Western' rationalism and attempts to Nazify studies by attacking 'degenerate art' as 'liberal and leftist trends', favoring instead German romantics concepts and theories.

like that other dude said, lay off the Alex jones its rotting your brain fucking idiot.

Guns Germs and Steel may not be "racist," but it's also an extremely inaccurate and oversimplified book that any serious history major could tear to shreds. Also it's not a "novel," you might want to look up the definition of that word.

Sargon of Akkad

lol ok

How exactly is it innaccurate?

Ohhhhh you're from SRS. Say no more fam.

My tag is pretty obviously a kind of joke, since I'm a regular poster here.

/r/AskHistorians has lots of quality threads explaining the numerous issues with the book. Or are they part of SRS too?

Fair enough, you're probably right. I'm just being a pissant faggot. I think more people need to learn to challenge their biases and engrained beliefs, and instead of doing that they make ad hominems and fail to address actual arguments. Like I just did.

Thanks for the link.

This is literally an insane and unprecedented level of civility for /r/O&A, especially considering the subject at hand. You're a remarkable human being, pissant faggot or not. Now I feel like I have to apologize for being kind of catty to you in return. So yeah, I'm sorry awrite?

Maybe there is hope afterall.

I don't buy that it was a conscious conspiracy, but the ideas referred to as Cultural Marxism do seem to appeal to a lot of academics and they are widely pushed on campuses and it kinda seems like the end result is almost the same whether it was a conspiracy or a coincidence.

I personally think that there are many layers to this onion, but have you seen Yuri Bezmenov's interview stuff from the 80's talking about this stuff? Pretty amazing how prescient he is in some of this stuff:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vLqHv0xgOlc

TFW your superpower collapses and your psyops go off the rails resulting in this 30 years down the line.

Putin was KGB during the 80's and I would imagine that at least some other former KGB guys have survived the various purges and are in his inner circle. For example the head of the current KGB incarnation, the FSB, Bortnikov is also former KGB where he worked from the 70's until its dissolution in 2004.

I knew it was going to be sex junk. It really is our Germanic tribes at the gates moment.

/u/heyitsbobby loves that song

Pandering Millenial tripe. Give me more credit than that!

I had to cleanse my palate with this video after watching that.

but the gap of it being this huge Marxist conspiracy has not been bridged for me personally.

It doesn't need to be a huge conspiracy, but there is a conspiracy. But at the same time it's not really because they're open about it, they're saying exactly what they want to do and it's pretty much Marxist doctrine but using identity instead of economic class. It's not really far-fetched.

Colin Quinn and Patrice oneal can talk about any amount of bullshit and you took it as gospel, but the idea that universities are leftist is where you draw the line?

I'm not denying that they lean left on some issues. Hop on the O&A discord if you want to discuss this.

Yeah, but he's gay and won't admit it

Username checks out

It's funny because JoeRoganisaqueer's username is very applicable to their comment.
^{beep bop if you hate me, reply with "stop". If you just got smart, reply with "start".}

shut the fuck up

anal fissures>reddit humor

Agreed, Rogan may be a total faggot but he does provide an awesome platform for all sorts of interesting or suppressed topics. Nice to see someone else willing to cut the mong some slack.

His anti-postmodernism shtick is bullshit. He uses postmodernism as a strawman for all this other identity stuff, but postmodernism is not an ideology. It's just a description for our condition in which there is no absolute truth in anything. Saying postmodernism is bullshit is like saying words or world views have one true, inherent meaning like a natural law.

But now Peterson has become a Messiah and has decided that "postmodernism" is bad, and so people will just accept and repeat that.

Ugh, peckahs

t. derrida

Ya sure dweebgoose, imma believe u over a brilliant professor

Peterson is a professor of psychology, not philosophy or literary or cultural studies. And I actually agree with a lot of his ideas; it's just that he's using theory from humanities academics completely out of context, and without being very much well-read in them.

Derrida, Foucault, Lyotard, Deleuze, all of those were also "brilliant professors", all of whom he dismisses because of people complaining over bathrooms and pronouns.

I think it's more that the way postmodernism denies objectivism and logic have been made part of the ideology of the idpol types is bad. I mean I'm pretty far from an expert but I see people who clearly don't understand postmodernism any more than I do, but they also buy into this idea that logic and objective knowledge can be dismissed and that's where I agree with Peterson that it's a problem.

strawman

gay post discarded

Peterson is actually a terrible philosopher, which is why he should stick to psychology. Even there, he often interprets various ideas (hero myths, for example) suit his own ends. It is mostly theory driven and you can tell who is a dumbass by waiting to see if they praise him.

Peterson doesn't present himself as a philosopher and doesn't argue philosophically. He is a psychotherapist and his interpretation of the hero myths is pretty standard, even uninventive for a Jungian.

It also theory driven, which is a problem.

Can you be more specific? What Zoroastrian myth does Peterson misinterpret in an "anthropomorphic, moralistic way"? And can you detail what moral does Peterson embed into the myth that wasn't already a part of traditional interpretation?

His attempts to draw parallels between druj and the Judeo-Christian Satan. Druj is just an abstract concept in Zoroastrianism. Also, his interpretation that the good vs. evil dichotomy existed before the Zoroastrians showed up contradicts all historical records. Not to mention his take on the Babylonian deity Marduk, which he argues was a heroic figure that represented order - in reality, the Babylonians did not look at their gods in such a way.

Peterson's interpretation of druj is far from anomalous. The term is not solely circumscribed to an abstract concept, any cursory revision of a Zoroastrian handbook (The Zoroastrian Faith: Tradition and Modern Research) would clarify how this term was first conceived in the Gaethas and how it mutated in the religion later.

What do you mean that the good vs evil dichotomy didn't exist before Zoroastrianism? The most ancient texts in literature are moral codes instructing on behavior and they are predicated on the most basic understanding of good vs evil, correct from incorrect, bad vs right.

You're not very familiar with mythology, are you? To Peterson, just like for Jung and Eliade and Campbell, it doesn't matter how the Babylonians "looked at their gods" The societal function and benefit of the myth was for many civilization an unconscious phenomenon. The hero mythology was merely a framework, a useful postmortem to see how many concepts had common themes. Curious to know where you get this reductionist interpretation of Peterson's work anyway?
If you have a problem with him, be frank about it. Don't make obscure claims thinking you won't get push back because you're in a forum full of rubes.

I am familiar with mythology, but I am confused as to why you seem to exclude yourself from the rubes. From what I can tell, you fit right in.

Druj is the abstract concept of deception and is in no way evil. In Zoroastrian mythology, it is born of Mazda and nothing evil was created by Mazda.

What I meant when I said that the good vs. evil dichotomy did not exist prior to Zoroastrianism is that, while concepts of good and evil existed, they were not given personas.

It matters that the Babylonians did not look at their gods as heroic figures because Peterson claims they did during his 2nd conversation with Sam Harris.

I didn't separate myself from the rubes. You obviously have poor reading skills and widely imaginative interpretive ones, judging not only from that, but from the bullshit you're trying to pull.

Druj is intimately tied to the concept of evil and you have absolutely no idea what you're talking about.

druj (Av.): embodiment of evil and pollution, demon of the lie, falsehood. (Var: 'drug', OP. 'drauga')

"The domain of the Evil Spirit was ruled by the principle of Deception (druj), by which one may be confused as to the true nature of the world and fail to make the right choices about whom to ally oneself with: the forces of good or those of evil. According to the Old Avesta, this is what happened to the old gods, the daêwas, who were confused and made the wrong choices (1.30.6), and, according to Darius’s inscriptions, this was also what happened to his political adversaries." -from Introduction to Zoroastrianism by Prods Oktor Skjærvø.

Harsh experience had evidently convinced the prophet that wisdom, justice and goodness were utterly separate by nature from wickedness and cruelty; and in vision he beheld, co-existing with Ahura Mazda, an Adversary, the 'Hostile Spirit' Angra Mainyu, equally uncreated, but ignorant and wholly malign. These two great Beings Zoroaster beheld with prophetic eye at their original, far-off encountering: 'Truly there are two primal Spirits, twins, renowned to be in conflict. And when these two Spirits first encountered, they created life and not-life, and that at the end the worst existence shall be for the followers of falsehood (drug), but the best dwelling for those who possess righteousness (asha). (...) An essential element in this revelation is that the two primal Beings each made a deliberate choice (although each, it seems, according to his own proper nature) between good and evil. -from Zoroastrians: Their Religious Beliefs and Practices By Mary Boyce.

I could go on sourcing how your intellectually dishonest claim about Peterson being the outlier in his interpretation of how druj is defined in Zoroastrianism is flat out wrong, but that should suffice since you seem to be getting your information mostly from podcast discussions.

I won't even get into the other claims you make about things Peterson has supposedly said because they are either idiotic misinterpretations like the above or willful misrepresentations.

Either way, it's pretty sad and gay for you to come to the O&A subreddit pretending to be smart by stating deceitful, abstruse objection to Peterson, thinking it's going to make you look smart or something. That's some major league faggotry, right there.

Stop. Enough with your "you obviously have poor reading skills" nonsense. Such a boring, typical response. You clearly saw yourself as a smart, well-educated individual.

Druj is not seen as evil. Wherever you are getting your information, consider getting an education on the subject or a better source.

Speaking of poor reading comprehension: I am not getting my information on Zoroastrianism from podcast discussions. I am getting my information on Peterson's stance from podcast discussions. That is what I stated. You're kind of an idiot, aren't you?

I am not sure you can dismiss the rest of my claims as idiotic misinterpretations or willful misrepresentations when you haven't heard the source material.

You're just not doing any of this right. Your defense of Peterson is weak.

Should I get this "education on the subject" from some pseudo-intellectual faggot on an Opie & Anthony board? Yeah, that's a good plan.
On this particular issue, I'd rather stick to the 4 different, established scholarly sources on Zoroastrianism that I cited. By the way, I can cite many, many more that confirm what's above in direct opposition to your absurd claims. Again, you have absolutely no idea what you're talking about and instead of admitting it, you are making a bigger fool out if yourself. It's hilarious. Maybe when it comes to sucking cock and being butthurt I'll take life lessons from you.

I know what you said about podcasts. And I never said you got your information on the religion itself from them. I was referring to your intellectually dishonest claim about Peterson, which you either misinterpreted or misrepresented and how you got that from a podcast, not from his written work or lectures, which would provide a better more nuanced understanding. But reading and smart rebuttals really aren't your thing.

At this point, I think I can disregard anything you say since your strongest comeback was "get an education". Pathetic

I was thinking more of a school.

Yes, how many "scholarly" sources can you google? Surprise us.

I actually, you did imply that I got my information about the religion itself from podcasts. How do you know I misrepresented anything when you haven't even listened to the podcasts? I've been doing nothing but burning you down with every reply, but keep on pretending that isn't my thing. Yes, I will seek out his written work and lectures. It sounds like this guy who can't get basic facts about the Babylonians right will know what he is talking about.

Come back when you have a strong rebuttal to my argument that isn't couched in sophomoric books you googled. That education remark really hurt, huh? I guess that tends to happen when you never attend a serious university.

I asked you to build your original argument against Peterson by citing sources that gave some mainstream backing to your claim and your response to that was some butthurt retort about how I should get an education. This education, which you apparently have and I lack, sure did you a disservice teaching you that arguing at a primary school level, with responses like those, is somehow an acceptable form of intellectual discourse for an adult probing serious topics or answering an honest question. Man, you really "burned me down" there. How will I ever recover?

All four sources I cited are far from sophomoric. They are mainstream works on Zoroastrianism that directly contradict your astoundingly ignorant claim. The book by Mary Boyce in particular is considered one of the most authoritative academic volumes on the religion. And yes, they're all available online, indexed by google, like a lot of academic work is these days. You should know that, since you know, you're an educated man. An uppity, uneducated rube like me shouldn't have to point these things out to you.

And yes, at this point, I know you misrepresented what he said in a podcast because when pressed on the first argument you put forth, all you did was ignore the established interpretation on the word you brought up as a point of contention with Peterson and proceeded to be a huge faggot. Your pretense against him was transparent from the beginning and instead of being honest about it you tried to seem smarter than you really are and you were put back in your sad, sad place, not by me, but by the scholars of the subject you decided to bring up.

Now let me go back to my dubious online business degree. Because you know, that's what happens when you don't attend a serious university. Maybe when I get my degree I can argue like you do on the O&A subreddit?

That wasn't my response. I simply told you what I know about the subjects Peterson mentioned and where he was wrong. You googled some things and sucked Peterson's cock.

I am far from a Peterson fanboy (I haven't even mentioned his work) but you were dishonest in your reservations about him and keep claiming that you are right about a particular point without providing any reference that might give that any weight. Do you have some pathological need to always put in the last word? If so at least contribute some reference, something of value. If not just let it go.

Oh look, two replies. Faggot.

Sorry, but your claim that you are smarter than Peterson and me was too much to let slide.

Clearly, your intellectual prowess wasn't at it's strongest in this thread, so perhaps you'd like to share your academic achievements with us or any intellectual accomplishments so we can stack them up against Peterson's and we can make an objective comparison?
Tell us more about your dazzling smarts.

I am getting my PhD in Physics from UC Berkeley, so yes, I am smarter than Peterson and you.

Wow, a doctorate in physics? Get the fuck out friend, Any interesting papers you'd like to share with us? We might not get them around here, being the uneducated simpletons we are, and all, but just to confirm that you're not some sad shitposter that reads like a community college sociology major and lies about his credentials to save face. Just want to confirm that is not the case. Thanks buddy.

I work mainly in ELKO field theory, but I am not giving you my name. Just google papers on it, since you're so good at googling everything. Keep railing against sociology majors, faggot.

That's sad, would have loved to see more of your intelligence on display. But I will google your alleged discipline, thanks friend.
Keep railing? Jeez, don't be so sensitive, it's the first time I've mentioned sociology and I only did because a quick revision of your post history shows an unhealthy obsession with defending and talking about it. That, compounded with the muddled thinking displayed here leads me to believe you probably would have been better suited for a career in that field. Or maybe you are, who knows.

Yes, I tend to defend academic disciplines from idiot conservatives. It's sort of like how you defend Peterson because he hates trannies and you get an uncomfortable chub around them so you hate them too.

Hey have you learned that you're wrong about zoroastrianism yet? Lol muddled. Good god.

Wow mister. You don't know anything about me, settle down. I'm a post-op transexual who identifies intersexual. I didn't defend Peterson. I just challenged something you said which was proven wrong by the academic authorities on the issue that you decided to bring up. Peterson and his political stances were completely irrelevant in a discussion about his work on mythology anyway. But you keep bringing them up, further demonstrating that your real issue with him was not with his interpretation of Zoroastrian concepts or whatever else, but with his politics. Come on now, I thought you were the smartest one here, shouldn't you be able mask your pretense in a better way?

I have a better idea: Why don't you tell us a little bit about your work on ELKO field theory in more detail? Again, a revision of your post history shows an absolute disinterest for participating in discussions about the physical sciences, even at a pedestrian level. You seem more consumed by left wing politics and insult which doesn't seem like the most astute way for a brilliant physicist to spend his days. Maybe you can start anew and enlighten on us on your field and share your real brilliance. For real this time.

I am sure you are all those things.

Why do you think that I have to have a post history that represents my area of expertise? Why do you think you'd understand anything about ELKO field theory? Why are you so insecure about your own intellect? Why do you think I spend my days on reddit? Just, why?

My issue with Peterson is the dumb shit he says. I don't know if you realize this, but that encompasses his politics, too.

Of course I am all those things and you are a brilliant physicist. We're all honest people and we come together on this amazingly egalitarian Opie and Anthony board. Brilliant physicist and trannies in one infinite shitpost.

I didn't say you spent your days on reddit. I wrote that the time you do demonstrably spend here (that is, your post history) is overwhelmingly devoted to left wing politics and other things outside your alleged professional realm and merely commented how that wasn't a wise way for a brilliant physicist to spend his time. I also simply pointed out that in no point of your prolific commenting career did you ever participate even tangentially in any discussions remotely related to your field. There's plenty of subreddits for it, you know? It would certainly be more productive to share with the unwashed masses some of your scientific expertise than arguing about sociology in a thread on r/television about Ron Howard, don't you think? After all, how many people work in ELKO field theory? Wouldn't it be a disservice to all their hard work and intellectual capacities if they spent their time in a dead radio show's subreddit? I also don't know how simply pointing that out translates to a reflection of my intellectual insecurities, but it just might be that my inferior intellect can't grasp that connection. Someday I'll have at least your confidence and will brazenly declare how much smarter I am than other people, even after being proven wrong on something. That surely won't be read as an alarming sign of intellectual insecurity, right?

But in the meantime, maybe you should help me breakthrough my own intellectual limitations and insecurities by sharing some of your brilliant work on particles with unusual spins. Surely, your superior intellect also manages the ability to facilitate and simplify concepts for us.

"I don't know if you realize this, but everything is political." See friend, your spending way too much time in the sociology department instead of working on those particles with unusual spin patterns.

"I didn't say you..." shut it. You said it and backtracking won't change how dumb you are. I don't see you posting about sucking cock, so I guess neither of us posts about our areas of expertise.

Also, you didn't prove me wrong on anything. When are you going to get that through your stupid little head? And no, I can't simplify it for you, business degree major.

"I only did because a quick revision of your post history shows an unhealthy obsession with defending and talking about it."

"Again, a revision of your post history shows an absolute disinterest for participating in discussions about the physical sciences, even at a pedestrian level."

"You seem more consumed by left wing politics and insult which doesn't seem like the most astute way for a brilliant physicist to spend his days."

Those are the quotes regarding your post history. The only ones. Again, you are inexact, I didn't claim you spent all your time on here. (I know you are consumed by theorizing about anomalies in particle spin pattern, I wouldn't say such a dumb thing about a brilliant physicist duh!) I don't blame you on making another mistake though. Some scientists sometimes have limited linguistic capacities. Kind of disappointing since I thought your abilities encompassed the entire range of human intellect.

At this point can you corroborate your claim that druj is unrelated to evil in the Zoroastrian tradition by citing sources for me, that contradict or vary from the ones I provided? I should take your superior intellect as being valid enough (who wouldn't?) but I want to adhere to more scientific methods, since I want to strive to be like you, at least in a small way.

I love that your idea of entertainment is posting on left wing politics and sociology on r/television on a Ron Howard post. Such a curious insight into the mind of a brilliant physicist! I honestly want to know even more about you know now.

Please tell me about your PHD and your research.

Yes, I spend all my time on reddit. Although why are you sweating on exact wording when we both know you absolutely implied it?

Druj is unrelated to evil simply because it spawns from a being incapable of evil.

Again, I am unsure why you're obsessed with my posting history. Particles with an unusual spin are purely theoretical. That means lots of math. Can you handle it, business major?

No, my posts regarded the nature of the content of your posts. In no place was there a suggestion that you spent all your time here. Either your abilities include mind reading or you do in fact have wild interpretive skills. That's not backtracking, it's a brief explanation for the purpose of clarity itself. I want my words to be as clear as possible when addressing a brilliant physicist.

Prods Oktor Skjærvø, a professor of Iranian studies at the department of Near Eastern Languages and Civilizations at Harvard, Mary Boyce of the The School of Oriental and African Studies at the University of London among others, seem to dispute your understanding of druj and side with Peterson. Surely you would also defend their disciplined academic work on reddit and wouldn't be dismissive of it so easily, right? Since that's what you do here regarding your appreciated hobby of sociology. You could at least come up with other credentialed academics that would give some heft and rigor to your claims. For the purpose of scientific clarity,, of course.

I love mathematics. Tell us, what were you working on specifically today? Dark matter seems to be a broad terrain in physics. What breakthrough research have you been conducting as of late in the field?

You can deny your intentions all you want, but it isn't going to work.

I would defend their work, were they right. See, this is the problem with googling your facts and parroting them instead of employing some critical thought.

ELKO field theory is pretty clear on its goals, which part did you not understand? We seek to explain dark matter within the standard model currently employed. No string theory or any of that nonsense. Tell me more about your love of mathematics. What area of mathematics interests you the most? And please, be detailed.

By the way, Peterson now believes that Zoroastrianism was the first belief system in which good and evil existed. He not only backtracked, but not disagrees with you. Hahahahaaha.

I didn't ask you to defend them only, you should be able to corroborate your counterclaim with other sources of similar academic validity, right? After all that's what any brilliant physicist, committed to defending the academic disciplines would do, right? Don't worry you don't have to use google to find them. You can go to your local library, take a picture of a tome and attach it. I'll wait.

Oh, you know, I love adding and subtracting, multiplying and dividing. The whole nine yards really.
All I can really learn about ELKO field theory would be from googling it, and we know by now that's a no no. I'd rather not pollute my mind and parrot on about it uncritically. I'd like something a bit more insightful and fascinating. Something a brilliant physicist would share, and since I have the privilege of speaking to one at such great length, it be great to know something about it other than what any layman like myself could claim to know simply by reading the wikipedia entry.

I countered your claims and those of your sources with some basic facts about the mythology. Are you denying basic facts?

Also, you are not equipped for a discussion on physics.

Some sources to corroborate your original claim would still be nice to have.

No,obviously I'm not equipped for such a highly specialized field as ELKO field theory but that doesn't matter since it wouldn't be a discussion, it would be a demonstration. Please demonstrate your work to us in more detail. We rarely get such brilliant minds in the O&A board. Or even better, why don't we organize a little AMA for you over at /r/Physics/?
Can you believe that a search for your field of specialty brings up no results in that place? I'm sure they'd be thrilled to ask you about it. They're probably be better equipped than I am to ask you in detail. I'll contact the mods, you won't have to do a thing other than show up. What do you think?

Do what you want, faggot.

Excellent. Already contacted the mods there and they said you can create your post whenever you want. I can start the post and tag you in it? Exciting isn't it? A first step to show off how much smarter you are than Jordan Peterson, me and so many more. Please let me know what information to include in the AMA.

Include that I owned you.

No, no, about your lines of research. What would be of interest to fellow physicists?

ELKO Feeeeelllllldssss

No, that's too broad for a crowd of self-described physicists and scientists. We have to be way more specific. What are you working on now? Spinor coupling, eigenspinors, boundary condition, Dirac spinors? Your most recent area of research would probably be the most interesting and engaging thing to share, wouldn't it?

Hahahaaha did you google all that to appear knowledgeable? HAHAHAHAHAHAA

It's clearly been established that I don't know anything about that field in physics, so no, I'm not trying to appear knowledgeable I just want to understand what brilliant minds like you work on all day.
The other purpose was for you to share your precise line of investigation in the ample field of ELKO theory for your upcoming AMA. Call me crazy but it's beginning to seem a bit strange that when pressed on your precise lines of investigation you seem extremely cagey.

I just love the amount of effort you're putting into trying to appear smart.

No, no, you got this all wrong. I'm just trying to help. I'm sorry if I appeared like the smart ass here. Plus it's already been established that you're smarter than Peterson and me, so we can get that topic out of the way.

So again, what kind of research do you do in ELKO field theory? Let's get you engaged in some high level discussion on the topic in an AMA in a subreddit with other physicists and scientists, instead of rubes like me.

Please, it is ELKO feeeeeelldsss.

Yes, we know that's what an incredibly pathetic faggot, who pretends to have a doctorate in Physics on the board of a defunct radio show, would say. He would just google a concept in physics, talk about it in the vaguest terms possible and make a bad in-joke to somehow seem less desperate. Good impression my friend! You really are super smart.

What we're looking for is scientific specificity. Remember, you'll be addressing a crowd of your peers. What lines of investigation, in the realm of ELKO field theory, have you worked on lately?

No, I don't have a doctorate. I am getting a doctorate. Keep straight, dummy.

Oh, excellent. Then everything should be fresh in your mind. What's your dissertation going to be about?

ELKO Fields and whether we can integrate it into the standard model.

Ok, but writing: "ELKO Fields and whether we can integrate it into the standard model." isn't very representative of your brilliance or abilities specially when communicating with other scientists. Hell, it isn't even grammatically correct.
Please describe your doctoral dissertation in terms more akin to those currently used in your field

Titles like those of the following studies:

-From inflation to recent cosmic acceleration: The Elko spinor field driving the evolution of the universe
-Creation of Elko particles in asymptotically expanding universe
-The local vicinity of spins sum for certain mass dimension one spinors

I am sorry that my area of research doesn't have such a catchy title?

No, it's not about how catchy it is, just find it odd how these other dissertations are very specific, even from the title alone, they are very precise about the aspect of the field they are problematizing, while yours sounds like something made up after a quick revision of the entry on wikipedia. Broad and unspecific. Again, like a gruesomely pathetic faggot who pretends to be getting a doctorate in Physics on the board of a defunct radio show, would make up. But we've established that isn't you, right?

I guess being suspiciously vague and guarded when it comes to your alleged field of expertise while being extremely engaged, defensive and involved when it comes to seemingly unimportant topics (what is it, your 50th reply to me? I'm so lucky!) is just another quirk that makes up that incredible universe that is your brilliant mind.

I am nothing like you, so how could I be a pathetic faggot?

NBut surely you'd agree with me that it would be pathetic to pretend to have academic credentials, yet be surprisingly cagey and aloof about alleged expertise while at the same time answering every single provocation thrown your way, as minuscule and unimportant as it were. That would be a level of unparalleled faggotry and autism, even for this place. But we've established that you're not pretending. You're different. That's why in this next response you'll prove how intricate your field of study is and how brilliantly you really master it. Ready? GO!

It would be pathetic to pretend. Good thing I am not.

Yes, good thing. For example, what was your specific line of investigation and study this week?

I was mostly checking equations this week.

Oh come on, that's so incredibly vague, don't be shy. What were you demonstrating? What was the precise application and project? Are they applications towards your final dissertation or towards a separate paper?

I don't concern myself with application, I am entirely within the realm of theory.

I was asking about the precise demonstration you were applying those particular equations to. Of course, I didn't mean real world applications, that would be silly in a discussion about theoretical physics. I think some of your smarts are rubbing off on me.

That would take a very long time. Are you worth it?

Well, you've already devoted over 30+ replies to me so far. I'm very grateful for the copious, copious attention you've dedicated to this interaction. Plus, don't be silly, we both know that a proper description of a paper or a study can be synthesized in a single paragraph (abstract). You've already written much more than that. I'll be waiting.

You wanted equations, though...

No, it should be fairly obvious that no one here would comprehend the complex equations you are brilliantly resolving everyday. A description, in the regular format of an abstract is more than enough.

I already gave you that.

No, you mentioned a sub-fiel in very vague ¿terms. It was non-descriptive in terms of methodology and subject matter. But ok, I'll ask more exact questions: Since the fermions studied in your field of study are fundamentally distinct from the standard model particles, how do you attempt to integrate or bridge this difference? What do you mean exactly by integration?

Well, the methodology is me doing equations and checking them. The subject matter is ELKO fields. To answer your more exact questions: all through math.

You didn't answer my question. How do you integrate mass dimension one fermions into our current understanding of the standard model particle, given that the former are theoretical dark matter candidates, rendering them completely incompatible with protons, neutrons and electrons.

That is exactly what I am trying to figure out as part of my research.

Wow, your alleged research tries to unify dark matter with standard model particles!! Amazing/1 Through which variables in theoretical dark matter particles are you studying and noting this differentiation with sm particles? Considering that one fermions of spin one half, are a wholly unique theoretical outlier in terms of movement and characteristics, what would be the characteristic that would unify them, (or integrate them, as you put it) with standard model theory?
If research of fermions is devoted to studying their characteristics in terms of anomalous spin patterns and mass abnormality, why is your study solely devoted to trying to "integrate them" to standard model theory of particles when, spin and mass dimension of fermions are theoretically unique and wholly incompatible with anything resembling standard particle characteristics? If the theoretical research you are describing is true, you would have managed to completely revolutionize theoretical physics.
I can't believe that the first mention of this scientific achievement was here on the o&a board.

You googled your little heart out, didn't you?

Anyway, I am not the only one trying and we are very far away from such an achievement.

Thankfully I didn't have to google any of that. Can you imagine, my head would have exploded. I have very smart friends though. They insist I ask you this question in particular:
Through which variables in theoretical dark matter particles are you studying, noting and bridging this differentiation with sm particles? Considering that one fermions of spin one half, are a wholly unique theoretical outlier in terms of movement and characteristics, what would be the unifying or "integrating" qualities with standard model theory particles? If theoretical movement and mass dimension are not, what exactly are you studying in fermions?

I am surprised your friends don't already know this.

How could they know that? It's a question about your specific research.

But they are so smart...

Smart, but not brilliant like a cagey theoretical physicist on the o&a subreddit. They're beginning to worry you really are larping. Come on, you should be as enthusiastic about this as you were talking about sociology and prove them wrong.

I have confidence in your friends. You should, too.

Confidence in what they say? That you're a larping faggot? Who knew it would take so little for you to admit it.

No, I am the real deal. I simply meant that you should ask your friends to answer these questions for themselves rather than thinking they won't be able to.

And please, cool it with the homophobia. Enough with your self-hate.

I'm beginning to think you really are a pathetic larper since you seem so ignorant and/or evasive about your work under the most minimal scrutiny.

Are you really that pathetic? You claimed to be in theoretical physics to make yourself look smarter on the o&a board? Why dude? Serious question. There's nothing wrong with saying you studied sociology in a community college, most people here probably didn't even graduate high school.

I think the only pathetic thing is your obsession. You need to accept the fact that I am simply smarter than you. I can't believe you are this insecure.

No, I wouldn't contest that if you weren't a larping faggot. But you are, which is sad.

I am actually the real deal. Thanks.

Except you're not. As soon as we started discussing your alleged profession with the most minimal level of scrutiny you started being evasive. Funny, because when challenged on any other trivial things you write answers that are at least a couple paragraphs long. You can't even keep a cohesive facade together. That's how smart you are.

Evasive? How? I just didn't want to waste my time explaining things to someone who would never understand them.

Yes, I answer things at length in earnest discussions.

Just accept the fact I am smarter than you. Bitch.

Your concern is wasting time yet you've replied over 40 times to me? Just another manifestation of your brilliance, I guess.
The answers to the specific questions I asked don't require a long explanation, you lying faggot. Asking you through which variables in theoretical dark matter particles are you studying, noting and bridging this differentiation with sm particles, simply requires you to state the exact nature of your research and that's it. A paragraph would suffice. Stop larping, community college sociology major.

40 replies like these don't take up much time. Equations and explanations require time. Particularly when talking to faggot laymen. Although, if I am not mistaken, a sociology degree actually takes more work than a business degree.

Again ,no one asked for the equations in your dissertation, that's not even a good excuse. Any scientific study is described first and foremost in precise linguistic terms. Equations are the actual subject matter, not the descriptors or abstracts. Go back to sociology discussions, genius. You're clearly wasting your brilliance here.
And yeah, I'm a business major just like you are a theoretical physicist. Go back to sociology discussions, genius. You're clearly wasting your brilliance here anyway.

How would you properly understand anything without the equations?

Because that's how every scientific study that is published by a peer-reviewed journal works? You'd know if you were at least a bit familiar with science. A hypothesis, methodology and result are presented in a few lines, a bunch of equations aren't put together as a summary. I gave you the opportunity to present a summary of your work with very precises questions and you failed massively, because you're not even familiar with theoretical physics.
I suggest you familiarize yourself with the field next time you want to larp. Stick to social science discussions fag, you're not even good at pretending to be anything else. But yeah, you're smartest one here, lol.

The equations are included in those, idiot.

You got destroyed... Again.

Equations are mentioned as the methodology, they are not carried out and resolved in full in an abstract, you painfully slow larper.
Furthermore, you don't even have to mention what equation you used to describe what variables and qualities in fermions you are allegedly studying. Your ability to come up with unimportant tangents to avoid any substantive description of your alleged work is impressive. Your sociology major really is showing.

An abstract does not give you a full understanding of the situation. You are the one who is painfully slow here.

No one asked you to give a "full" explanation of your work. I asked for a minimal description and answers to pointed questions but you can't specify the simplest things about your alleged work. Keep larping with vagueries and excuses faggot, it's hilarious. How pathetic are you? Tell us, what other things make up this fake online identity you have in the o&a subreddit?

A full explanation is necessary in order to understand it. But you couldn't keep up.

Every study in the field of mass dimension one fermions available in databases have abstracts in which familiarity with the precise breakdown of the algebraic formulas is unnecessary to grasp the intent stated. They just cite the formulas and what the methodology was used. I asked you exactly what properties of mass dimension one fermions you are studying. The question doesn't need a complex equation to be addressed. If you had any real knowledge about what that means you'd be able to answer it in two sentences.

Keep making excuses. You've already proved to be the most pathetic person on this sub (and that's hard) by claiming you study theoretical physics when you don't even understand the field.
hahaha Dude, that is so sad. I almost feel bad for you.

To understand it, you need more than just the abstract. Way to reply with a non-sequitur and repeat yourself, though.

An abstract is the most accepted convention in the scientific world to introduce a study, and I didn't even ask you for that, I asked you to answer very precise questions that you can't even address:

What properties are you studying in mass dimension one fermions?

Dude seriously stop, you're not a scientist. You're a pathetic faggot on the board of a defunct radio show with a pretend personality.

But you need more than the introduction. This pathetic attempt to catch me is faggotry in the flesh. You're weak.

More than enough for what? An abstract is more than enough to state what a study intends That's why it's the standard in science idiot.. What a fucking amateur you are. You have no familiarity with science whatsoever.

Stop evading the question faggot, it's very simple:

What properties are you studying in mass dimension one fermions?

You should have at least larped to be in something you had vague knowledge about.

You are such a dumb faggot: it is not enough for you to understand the material. Holy shit! How can you not understand that? Fuck! How am I unfamiliar with science because you are a dumb motherfucker who can't read a sentence? This is why I don't even want to bother to explain something to you!

Stop ascribing your reluctance to even give the simplest details about your alleged line of work to my inability to comprehend it, it's transparent. If you were actually what you say you were you'd be able to convey things clearly (you would need to in order to present a dissertation and as a matter of fact, you would have done so already several times in other studies to arrive at a postgraduate level). This is not a board for a physics journal you lying fag. I don't need an entire study when you can't even produce a descriptor for your alleged line of work or answer a very simple question about it.
You are blatantly unfamiliar not only with mass dimension one fermions but with scientific literature in general. You're a failure in life that pretends to have a degree in physics on the o&a board. That's all there is to it. This entire thread is testament to that. I'll wait for you again to answer this question:
What properties of mass dimension one fermions are you studying?
Oh wait, I already asked that several times and you can't answer it.

Your weak-minded faggotry must be stopped. You must enroll in a college class.

Oh how cute, the resident o&a faux physicist thinks I should go to college.

What properties of mass dimension one fermions do you study?

KNEEEL BEFORE MEEEEEEE

At least you're now accepting speech reflective of your community college education.

lol uc berkeley, you dumb fuck

What properties of mass dimension one fermions do you study there?

You wouldn't understand them.

There's no need to explain them. Name them.

So that they will be a meaningless string of names to you?

It's an incredibly simply question and you're still being evasive about it. First you claimed you couldn't share info because muh equations, now you can't produce a simple list of particles properties, the most basic information of your supposed line of work. How evasive and faggoty can you get?

Why don't you stick to talking about the evils of capitalism in a Ron Howard thread, sociology major. That seems to be more your pace.

You condescending belies your insecurities.

It's not condescending to cite your past interest in defending your real major in threads about Ron Howard. That's how you've decided to spend your time in the past. If you had at least a fraction of that interest in mass dimension one fermions you would have been able to uphold your fake persona a little longer.

You keep going on about Ron Howard. What a bitch you are...

Dude don't be mad at me for pointing out how you like to cultivate your brilliance in your free time. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ygr5AHufBN4&t=8s

As I said, you are simply incapable of understanding the material. This proves you are just trolling.

Relax, it's over.

If you want to take comfort in the idea that your absolute inability to produce the most modest descriptor of a study, to discuss specific questions about it and to not be able to name properties of fermions (all of those in numerous occasions), is all because I won't understand them, be my guest.

But just a word of advice, since you seem so keen on pretending to be smart. Next time, pick a different field, something you actually are knowledgeable in (something like Happy Days or Naomi Klein-tier capitalism critique) and overplay your hand by transmitting your authority, not by declaring it, but by showing precisely how knowledgeable you are. Don't cower in fear at every question or challenge like you did here and pretend to be above the fray because others "won't understand". It's transparent and pathetic, just like here every one of your refusals to engage in your alleged field of expertise were.

I think we can all agree that I am smart and you are dumb. Now back to my PHYSICS work. Thank you.

Yes, go back to your physics playpen. We all agree with you.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ygr5AHufBN4&t

Physics, you know, the thing you are too stupid to understand...

Relax, it's over.

If you want to take comfort in the idea that your absolute inability to produce the most modest descriptor of a study, to discuss specific questions about it and to not be able to name properties of fermions (all of those in numerous occasions), is all because I won't understand them, be my guest.

But just a word of advice, since you seem so keen on pretending to be smart. Next time, pick a different field, something you actually are knowledgeable in (something like Happy Days or Naomi Klein-tier capitalism critique) and overplay your hand by transmitting your authority, not by declaring it, but by showing precisely how knowledgeable you are. Don't cower in fear at every question or challenge like you did here and pretend to be above the fray because others "won't understand". It's transparent and pathetic, just like every one of your refusals to engage in your alleged field of expertise was.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ygr5AHufBN4&t

Relax, you must understand that you cannot comprehend what I study and my words would be wasted on you.

Relax, it's over.

If you want to take comfort in the idea that your absolute inability to produce the most modest descriptor of a study, to discuss specific questions about it and to not be able to name properties of fermions (all of those in numerous occasions), is all because I won't understand them, be my guest.

But just a word of advice, since you seem so keen on pretending to be smart. Next time, pick a different field, something you actually are knowledgeable in (something like Happy Days or Naomi Klein-tier capitalism critique) and overplay your hand by transmitting your authority, not by declaring it, but by showing precisely how knowledgeable you are. Don't cower in fear at every question or challenge like you did here and pretend to be above the fray because others "won't understand". It's transparent and pathetic, just like every one of your refusals to engage in your alleged field of expertise was.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ygr5AHufBN4&t

Relax, you need to understand the material before I even bother detailing my research.

That was some quality entertainment. Thankful to those who participated a special thanks to the larping autist dsbnh

I took horticulture and I'm pretty sure I'm smarter than this chooch

Cool it with the homophobia

Thanks for the pure gold. I'm laughing out loud.

Didn't you call this guy a faggot several times....

Criiiiiiiinnnnnge

"Uhhh ya that thing that's what I do."

Also, you might notice that the entry on wikipedia on "ELKO Fields" was changed by Dharam Vir Ahluwalia himself, citing that the title was imprecise and outdated. Do you have any insight on this change?

We still use the term.

After reading to this point i conclude dsbnh is a dumb neckbeard who lives with mommy.

"Dude, I am smarter than you and certainly Peterson."
Lol, ok. Again, how do I worship Peterson? I know his work in passing. I have no reason to worship him. Must be that superior intellect of yours showing off.

Keep replying.

This is where you really start to lose this argument. God you're a dumb faggot haha

It's not a "shtick, you dimwit.
He is strictly referring to the postmodernist canon in philosophy, not to the overarching usage the term postmodern is given these days. When he criticizes postmodernism he speaks of the shared tenants that gave way to the treaties of various philosophers (Derrida, Lacquan, Foucault) in direct opposition with other philosophical currents, particularly existentialism which Peterson seems to be an adherent of.

It was excellent.

Did you hear JRE #952 - THADDEUS RUSSELL, this dude's attempt to claim there is no such thing as gender or race? It was brought up because of Peterson's stance on the issue.

He got cringey when he thought he had solidarity with joe on the issue.

Radio shows need someone to 'steer the ship' and Joe Rogan does it better than Sam Roberts or Jim Norton.

I haven't listened to one of the episodes with a hunter is years. I have to imagine they're all the exact same thing.

Yall niggas might hate but its awesome. Joe rogan 4 lyfe

I love Joe Rogan.

Joe Rogan's entire being condensed into 20 seconds

http://youtu.be/BKrf7mX_R6M

Now I feel much more connected to moose.

I hate how Peterson always looks like he's on the verge of tears because of trannys. Butch up dude.

He's just sleepy give the fella a break

He's just sleepy give the fella a break

Shush up

Mind your manners friendo

Thinking is exhausting. Try it out!

Tell me what u learned young man.

Love Jordan Peterson. He gets real into Jungian psychology which I like.

He's great, but I don't think you should like him because he mentioned the one topic you're into. If someone talks about polygon counts in videogame character's heads or displacement maps, I might be into it but I understand that most people won't give a crap or know what that means. What's good is he's interested in a lot of things and has time to read about stuff to the point where he can have conversations about most topics, which makes him appealing to a lot of people.

There is literally nothing wrong with French postmodernist thought.

^ hasn't sorted himself out by venturing into the underworld to rescue his dead father

When applied to certain fields of study and context, no, not really I suppose. When used to justify anti-science/anti-objective-reality thought like some idpol types seem to do, I think there's a lot wrong with it. In not an expert or anything but that's what I see happening.

When applied to certain fields of study and context, no, not really I suppose. When used to justify anti-science/anti-objective-reality thought like some idpol types seem to do, I think there's a lot wrong with it. In not an expert or anything but that's what I see happening.

When applied to certain fields of study and context, no, not really I suppose. When used to justify anti-science/anti-objective-reality thought like some idpol types seem to do, I think there's a lot wrong with it. In not an expert or anything but that's what I see happening.

"Rogan Board plays a huge part when it comes to giving him ideas on personalities to book on the show. Imagine that, someone with a podcast who listens to the fans"

This place likes to forget that Anthony was very receptive to feedback from here.

He sounds a bit like Kermit the Frog but Peterson is a great talker and a very smart guy; an all round excellent podcast guest and both his appearances on JRE have been very good.

Some of the fans he's attracting though are the same ilk of identity chameleon zilches that Gavin appeals to, i.e. guys who grew up without a dad or with a shit one and are looking for a father figure to tell them how to be a big boy.

Lol he sounds nothing like kermit the frog. He sounds like a stereotypical Canadian though.

I thought Winnie the Pooh.

Rogan is only as good as his guests.

Now that you mention it I've noticed I only listen when he has someone really good on and it's actually tolerable to listen to stoner talk for 3 hours straight.

another one with Jordan Peterson?!? Joe Rogan is killing it!!! GIVE THE PEOPLE WHAT THEY WANT!

Yuck. You cringey fag. Take that ironic caps lock enthusiasm somewhere else.

Welcome to reddit sockcucka! New users are able to submit posts after 2 days. If you think your post is a fair contribution to the subreddit, message the moderators for a faster approval.

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

this dude does everything right

He actually has the worst possible show format out there for regular content. His personality isn't very dominant and most his shows are about his guests, so if the guest is shitty he isn't interesting enough to stick with the show. Noone else does this and this is the reason. I very rarely listen to Rogan because I have to do research on his guests every time and they are mostly terrible.

He's also non-confrontational and lets the guests talk and lay out their philosophy, which is a plus.

100% bulshit. Listen to his interviews with right wing guys. He keeps interrupting them and asking Jamie for double checking, while he lets feminists/communists get away with insanely inaccurate shit. He's a biased little feller and he's VERY confrontational with the people he dislikes.

You seem to judge Rogan based on his best shows. That's a big no-no around here and you should know why.

the worst is when he wants to counter something someone says but has nothing so he just goes "wowwww" or just "fascinating". its passive aggressive and he just does it to derail, cuz it's always followed up by completely moving on to another topic

Damn this is so true.

It was a fantastic episode, and I'm glad he brought Peterson back on for a second round. TJRE by night, all day!

TJRE by night, all day!

What does this mean? Every time I hear it I ponder.

Listen to the intro music to the podcast while Redban was the producer. You'll get it :D

I was always a big fan of Low Rogan artwork and an even bigger fan of Rogans Podcast.

Anything interesting that happens on Rogan's podcast is an accident. I don't dislike Peterson, but his entire life now seems to be consumed with interviews in which he repeats the same 6 points over and over and over and over.

I don't like Sam Harris's podcast, but at least when he had Peterson on they had a discussion and he challenged his guest. Rogan is incapable of challenging, or even really discussing something with, anyone with an IQ over 80.

Rogan still doing his shows stoned out of his mind?

I stopped listening once I figured out it was almost entirely pot babble. Kevin Smith has the same issue.

Kevin Smith can make a fucking great Clerks movie but sucks at everything else.

The worst thing he ever did was star in a show with Andy Dick.

Welcome to reddit sockcucka! New users are able to submit posts after 2 days. If you think your post is a fair contribution to the subreddit, message the moderators for a faster approval.

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

You should have titled the post "Joe Rogan is the man we need right now" and punctuated it with reaction gifs from Glee

I mistakenly thought that Jordan Peterson was the Sausage King of Chicago...

''Gender studies classes would absolutely fuck you up, Jamie pull up that video.''

I'm hearing two people saying obvious things. When does it get deep and philosophical?

Every time somebody writes Derrida, Joe gets a child to spit in his mouth, or is it Joe spitting in a child's mouth? Who can tell.

Jordan "I love Jesus" Peterson

Good podcast, somethinks irks me about Rogan looking like an angry ape everytime he's trying to wrestle with something in his mind though. Long ''yeah....'' confused pauses.

In saying that Rogan is a good fucking guy, he's 75% ape 25% humanoid but he makes it work and embraces it

The world can be a confusing place.

I may just be a bot, but I hope you have a good day! If you think I am annoying, send me a PM!

Welcome to reddit sockcucka! New users are able to submit posts after 2 days. If you think your post is a fair contribution to the subreddit, message the moderators for a faster approval.

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

something irks me about Rogan looking like an angry ape everytime he's trying to wrestle with something in his mind though

Insufficient Alpha Brain supply.

like he said, Rogan is a clear thinker. I never gave a shit about his comedy or 420 stuff but the guy is a very good interviewer and this one shows it

I thought the masses turning to Jon Stewart for all their news was the bottom of the barrel. That was before they looked to a third-tier comedian who loves kickboxing and psychedelic mushrooms and once hosted a game show where contestants ate horse rectums.

Joe is niche and not some kike product.

Niche 120 million downloads a month

Jordan Peterson is a fucking hack.

No wonder your a failure and dropout who wasted 4 years of your academic life failing philosophy studies.

Say hack more pls

hack

your

failure

failing

hack

I want to hate Joe sometimes but I just can't. For a dumb guy he just has an incredible amount of knowledge. He could have an interesting conversation with almost anyone.

He's deep man

Funny how a subreddit full of nihilist who hate on everyone & everything are always overly concerned & upset with state of the world when it concerns anything left of center.

What Peterson speaks about has little to do with politics. It's more to do with the psychological and philosophical factors that are driving the surface level politics.

was pretty fascinating tbh.

Joe Rogan looks up to mushrooms.

I like Jordan Peterson because he's Canadian and has my back.

fine, but jordan peterson is that english teacher that always read way too far into metaphors in literature

Rogan has more listeners than Howard Stern.Fuck you Scott Greenshitstien.

sniff pure ideology

Get the fuck out of here with this gay philosophy shit!

Ohhhh what a hot take... Michel Foucault and all those assholes led to kids be snowflakes.

Fuck Rogan. He's a midget on a power trip.

I'm a big Jordan Peterson fan, I'll definitely check this out.

I was a Philosophy major too - thought about going to grad school and becoming an academic, but four years of that bullshit was enough for me.

lets the guests talk and lay out their philosophy

I take it you have not listened to many of Joe's podcasts. I like his show, but he is bad about interrupting guests.

On my third run through of maps of meaning 2015 and 2016 and did 2017 once. The personality lecture series is fantastic but god damn maps of meaning changed me to the core. Peterson has got to one of the most respectable men living. The disrespect people show him without listening to anything he says is so pathetic.

Really looking forward to his biblical series in the coming weeks. Never thought id say that one...

I personally think that there are many layers to this onion, but have you seen Yuri Bezmenov's interview stuff from the 80's talking about this stuff? Pretty amazing how prescient he is in some of this stuff:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vLqHv0xgOlc

Rogan is like npr for dumb people.

Fake news: "young black guys working"

Lol found the fat worthless sack of shit. Go eat some french fries you pathetic slob.

I've gotten bigger laughs from the cable access Lamb's Farm News Show that aired from 1996-98 in Chicago that this lousy fucking podcast. Retards = Laughs.

ufc?! I could've swore you said kfc!? EHHHHH!!!!

Joe is niche and not some kike product.

Kevin Smith can make a fucking great Clerks movie but sucks at everything else.

and ur gay

"I only did because a quick revision of your post history shows an unhealthy obsession with defending and talking about it."

"Again, a revision of your post history shows an absolute disinterest for participating in discussions about the physical sciences, even at a pedestrian level."

"You seem more consumed by left wing politics and insult which doesn't seem like the most astute way for a brilliant physicist to spend his days."

Those are the quotes regarding your post history. The only ones. Again, you are inexact, I didn't claim you spent all your time on here. (I know you are consumed by theorizing about anomalies in particle spin pattern, I wouldn't say such a dumb thing about a brilliant physicist duh!) I don't blame you on making another mistake though. Some scientists sometimes have limited linguistic capacities. Kind of disappointing since I thought your abilities encompassed the entire range of human intellect.

At this point can you corroborate your claim that druj is unrelated to evil in the Zoroastrian tradition by citing sources for me, that contradict or vary from the ones I provided? I should take your superior intellect as being valid enough (who wouldn't?) but I want to adhere to more scientific methods, since I want to strive to be like you, at least in a small way.

I love that your idea of entertainment is posting on left wing politics and sociology on r/television on a Ron Howard post. Such a curious insight into the mind of a brilliant physicist! I honestly want to know even more about you know now.

Please tell me about your PHD and your research.

Include that I owned you.

No, I don't have a doctorate. I am getting a doctorate. Keep straight, dummy.

ELKO Fields and whether we can integrate it into the standard model.

You wanted equations, though...

Wow, your alleged research tries to unify dark matter with standard model particles!! Amazing/1 Through which variables in theoretical dark matter particles are you studying and noting this differentiation with sm particles? Considering that one fermions of spin one half, are a wholly unique theoretical outlier in terms of movement and characteristics, what would be the characteristic that would unify them, (or integrate them, as you put it) with standard model theory?
If research of fermions is devoted to studying their characteristics in terms of anomalous spin patterns and mass abnormality, why is your study solely devoted to trying to "integrate them" to standard model theory of particles when, spin and mass dimension of fermions are theoretically unique and wholly incompatible with anything resembling standard particle characteristics? If the theoretical research you are describing is true, you would have managed to completely revolutionize theoretical physics.
I can't believe that the first mention of this scientific achievement was here on the o&a board.

I am actually the real deal. Thanks.

An abstract does not give you a full understanding of the situation. You are the one who is painfully slow here.

There's no need to explain them. Name them.

You condescending belies your insecurities.

Relax, it's over.

If you want to take comfort in the idea that your absolute inability to produce the most modest descriptor of a study, to discuss specific questions about it and to not be able to name properties of fermions (all of those in numerous occasions), is all because I won't understand them, be my guest.

But just a word of advice, since you seem so keen on pretending to be smart. Next time, pick a different field, something you actually are knowledgeable in (something like Happy Days or Naomi Klein-tier capitalism critique) and overplay your hand by transmitting your authority, not by declaring it, but by showing precisely how knowledgeable you are. Don't cower in fear at every question or challenge like you did here and pretend to be above the fray because others "won't understand". It's transparent and pathetic, just like every one of your refusals to engage in your alleged field of expertise was.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ygr5AHufBN4&t

"Uhhh ya that thing that's what I do."