Comments by "Mark Zuckergecko" (@markzuckergecko621) on "Is Joe Rogan Complicit In The Ivermectin Grift?" video.

@doctorthirteen5499 still mad because Joe didn't die so you could score political points?
3
So you liked him until you became a full blown cult member that let's your masters do all your thinking for you?
2
@Addamo I couldn't tell you, I've never voted for a democrat in my life, and I plan on putting it in my will and getting a tattoo somewhere clearly visible when I'm older and closer to death, to make sure I don't vote for one after I die either.
2
@mrwaltermathews it's not anti science to ask questions. That's kind of what science is.
2
@mrwaltermathews but you have to ask questions to get answers. Science isn't some mystical deity figure, it's just a process. Nothing should be beyond question, absolutely nothing whatsoever. If the science is correct then it will stand up to scrutiny. If you don't understand this, then you don't understand science. That's why I'm saying you're in a cult. Because you're in a cult. What you weirdos are doing isn't science, it's idol worship. It's creepy as hell.
1
@mrwaltermathews again, of your science is correct, it will stand up to scrutiny. Pretending like your cult teachings can't be questioned only makes people ask more questions. If you actually cared about science and your tiny little brain was capable of understanding science, you would welcome any and all questions.
1
@mrwaltermathews so what's the problem then? If it's just stupid people asking stupid questions then it should be pretty easy to shoot them down. No need for all the censorship and panic.
1
@mrwaltermathews I would say censoring people for "wrongthink" is creating a lack of trust.
1
@mrwaltermathews I would say that's a nonsense argument, if you extend the meaning of words that far then he's censoring me too, since he hasn't offered for me to be on his podcast. And I'm also censoring him because I haven't offered for him to be on my podcast, even though I don't have one. But, by your logic, I'm censoring him by not starting a podcast just to invite him on.
1
@mrwaltermathews they're either a platform or a publisher, gotta pick a lane. And if you honestly don't see the difference between actively suppressing information and not actively going out of your way to give it a platform, I don't know what to tell you, that's pretty basic shit. If you have a microphone and I come and take it from your hands, I'm censoring you, but if I have a microphone and I don't give it to you, I'm not censoring you.
1
@mrwaltermathews if they want to police what their users post, then they shouldn't have any special protections under the law as they do currently. Meaning if a user posts something false or defamatory, then another user or users can sue YouTube for that. The same as you would be able to sue the NYT if they published a defamatory article about you.
1
@mrwaltermathews I can't answer your question until you stop being dishonest. And that's not going to happen, because you aren't capable of honesty. You're a leftist.
1
@mrwaltermathews you tell me, you're the one being dishonest. This is your chance, come clean and admit to what you've deliberately misrepresented. Give it a shot, you might like being honest. Most people do. That's your last shot though, you know what you've been dishonest about and I do too, we both know and you know that we both know. I'm not responding again unless your next response is admitting to how you've twisted my words and why you did it.
1