This is an odd looking graph of traffic to my latest YouTube video.
You might want to congratulate me on that sudden surprising surge of traffic in the middle of the night, but don’t. Apparently, that’s when the magical YouTube algorithm started recommending the video to others, and it brought an influx of Peterson worshippers, as the comments reveal.
all these years and you still can’t get 10 k subs??? JP just hit 5 million and growing. You’re in the final stage of your life, stop being so jelous. Btw, you shpould check out JP’s interview with Roger Penrose, eat your heart out.
But here’s the thing: I’m not concerned about traffic. I look at the most popular videos on the medium, and it’s garbage like Pewdiepie and the Paul brothers and bizarre twisted animated children’s videos designed to milk clicks out of babies. I’m content with my tiny little niche. I’ve also got a real job, fortunately, and the $50 my channel brings in every month is fine.
Then there are the feeble defenses of Peterson:
Peterson clearly states that what he is saying is highly speculative. If your going to critique the man at least do it honestly.
There’s a whole bit in my video where I point out that Peterson is flinging about the word “speculation” as a get-out-of-jail-free card. Useful speculation has to be built on some kind of empirical, testable framework. Peterson is lazy and doesn’t do the work of justifying it.
Most common, though, are the people who deny his transphobia (the thing that made him famous!) and have a knee-jerk hatred of social justice.
I realize Peterson’s claims about consciousness traveling up and down the micro and macro levels is nonsense, but so are the accusations of transphobia towards Peterson and Dawkins. Myers never really bothers to explain how they’re transphobic. At least not in this video. I think Myers should maybe spend more time investigating his own biases and irrationalism than those of Peterson if he has such obvious blind spots.
I thought Peterson’s transphobic comments have been so thoroughly covered elsewhere that I didn’t have to discuss them, and could focus on where he intrudes stupidly on my area of expertise, biology. I guess I was wrong. Do I need to make my next video about that? I’d rather not, because Peterson is such a twit.
Of course, there are still swarms of anti-SJW clowns out there.
I am not going to talk much about Peterson, but here is my problem. PZ Myers is supposed to be a scientist and yet he let’s social justice which has nothing to do with Science leak in.
I help a Transgender person overseas and help feed him and fix his bike, so this isn’t about hate or anything, but pronouns and having many sexes is against the Scientific data.
It’s more like a problem with the mind itself and social justice should not be mixed with Science.This is why I am upset, because if you are a Scientist, you should have NOTHING TO DO WITH STUFF THAT”S NOT SCIENCE AT ALL, it’s more pseudoscience than actual real science.
Disappointed in you PZ, I thought you would be better than that.
This is really shameful and I think that’s worse than whatever Peterson is going on about.
What Scientific data
is against pronouns and having many sexes
? I suspect he couldn’t name anything.
I’m also unsurprised that there are people who think social justice should not be mixed with Science
, but then have no problem at all with the irrational, unjust garbage that Peterson freely mixes in to his science-free babbling.
I guess I’m going to have to make more spider videos to flush away these clowns and get my traffic down where it’s supposed to be.
By the way, I’m afraid to look at the dialogue between Penrose & Peterson. Penrose has always had a weird streak to him, and it could be a real freak show.
Sorry för crashing the thread, here is a public service announcement:
.
Boris Johnson is facing a vote of no confidence by his fellow tories today.
Whatever the outcome is, it will be bad for the tories who will need a competent leader in the election within two years.
It is the analogy of the Republicans losing the presidency and both houses.
(Evil schadenfreude laighter)
That last complaint looks like the scientist’s version of the “shut up and dribble” trope that sports stars like LeBron James and Colin Kaepernick get when they speak up about social issues. Apparently these chumps want a world where no one ever strays outside their profession to offer an opinion on how to make society better and healthier.
Which is another cute way of shutting down any and all discussion on social justice topics. Right up there alongside the “don’t politicize a tragedy” and “let’s just move forward.”
if you are a Scientist, you should have NOTHING TO DO WITH STUFF THAT”S NOT SCIENCE AT ALL
Since Peterson is a psychologist he should have nothing to do with other fields.
Besides, he has trouble getting the psychology right, which is sad because bullshittin’ is easy. He just hasn’t got the chops to address broader topics unless he’s hyped on drugs.
Just a wild guess that this person is not a scientist and by their logic should have nothing to say about what scientists do, think, feel, or say. Jeez! The internet boils the dreck to the top.
As PZ points out this is just an excuse.
The fanboys more common excuse is that, “Peterson was quoted out of context.” When you go back and look at the context, no, he wasn’t.
If you have to make excuses for your hero, he isn’t much of a hero.
True, but what really made him famous was his misogyny. There aren’t that many Trans people out there.
Women though, are the majority of the population. People will have to deal with women one way or another, whether they like it or not.
That is why Peterson’s base are called fanboys. They seem to be almost all misogynistic males.
Jordan Peterson is just another Rush Limpbrain, Ann Coulter, Tucker Carlson, Alex Jones, Marjorie Taylor Greene, any Fox NoNews host, etc.. Some guy on the internet selling people’s hate back to them for money.
The truth is, if not for this website I would never have heard of Peterson. I first started coming here a very long time ago because I shared PZ’s views on religion. He gave me a lot of rhetorical tools to use in my arguments with creationists and the many evangelical dolts I’ve come into contact with. But I’ve also learned a lot about many other subjects by following PZ’s discussions over the years. I had no idea what evo-psych was. Nor did I know much about cephalopods (I thought they all had 8 arms and if they got very, very big they could take down a whale.) So, I suppose I should be grateful that I now know so much about Peterson and Hovid and all the rest of that lot. But, on the other hand, ignorance is bliss.
Beanhead:
Actual Real Science:
VA has me on their rolls as a member of Compassionate Contact Corps. So . . . the bigots can’t refuse me the right to be compassionate, even tho’ I’m educated as a Computational Linguist – amirite? I’m quite grateful to Prof PZ for revealing a couple of case studies recently: One was a lass who despaired of having kids and finally diagnosed with the XY pair; she was missing some functional parts that make kids. The other was a woman who also had the XY pair, but was luckier. She had all the needed parts and had produced a daughter – also XY!
I’m happy to have learned biological stuff from Prof PZ and, as with him, compassion is an area I can read, display, and discuss. I suspect that Peterson also has a birth defect. He can live, breathe, and talk, and appears to have no compassion at all. Or, maybe he’s just an example of a successful charismectomy.
@ ^ secmilchap : I believe the usual word for someone lacking all empathy fro others is either sociopath or pyschopath but then I’m not a pyschologist so .. yeah. Take with boulder of halite.
If Charles Manson had been less murdery he could have made a profitable career with this crowd.
@11, Why the “less murdery” qualifier (presuming “this crowd” broadly refers to the commentators of the video in the OP)?
I recommend you every chance I get . Some of that isn’t all JP’s folks
Pronouns are against science now? It’s weird how a simple aspect of grammar that’s been in use forever is suddenly a heretical, SJW evil that must be eradicated. That guy used pronouns in his comment though, so obviously he’s still dealing with leftist indoctrination.
JP’s defenders used to have some weird talking-points. The ones I remember offhand are “Ask me any questions you want. I’m here to help” and “Peterson’s style is descriptive, not prescriptive.” I don’t see such rote nonsense in the comments quoted here. Did the fanboys lose their script? Did JP scrap it?
Also, just ask all Peterson fanboys what a “sea soodle” is. If they can’t answer that, then they can be dismissed as idjits.
@1 re Penrose – Peterson,
Google had recently recommended this interview to me, and so, being on a bit of a Penrose kick lately, I thought I should at least take a look at it. About 20 min of it, I was able to make it through. As I’d suspected, it was mostly Penrose saying very reasoned and cautious things about computability, and Peterson missing the point completely, trying to expand it into his “up and down levels of perception” schtick that you had such fun debunking in a previous post.
I must say that I don’t agree with Penrose regarding Gödel’s Theorem and why, in his opinion, this makes human understanding non-computational. For us to have a strong feeling that we understand something, all that’s really necessary is some process in the brain to generate that strong feeling. In other words, we don’t have to understand a theorem in any sense that goes beyond following a set of rules — all that’s necessary is that we think we do! But I should speak for myself — Penrose has a brain that I will quite freely admit is not the same as mine, so maybe understanding is different for him.
The “social justice is not science” group will have a big problem with the new issue of Scientific American.
https://www.scientificamerican.com/magazine/special-editions/2022/special-editions-volume-31-issue-3s
I am no expert by any means but if youtube determines how much they pay out to content providers by traffic that provides eyes for the adds then just consider that all those a’hole peterson fan boys are just bringing in some more money for research and other expenses. I do not think there is a requirement to read and respond to all of them. Though responding to some will help drive more traffic and hence more money it is part of the entertainment content potential.
yes in the excerpts he does seem to say directly and in a categorical way that he does and did see the microscopic and the macroscopic without the hedge of it being speculative.
The comments do illustrate rather well that it is easy to heart and see what you want to and ignore what is objectively said. Peterson either believes all his crap or has learned enough psychology to be able to manipulate a large enough number of people to make a lot of money talking shit that is mostly plagiarized and borrowed from others
@16
there are some interesting stuff with penrose on “closer to truth ”
I agree completely his brain is also very different that mine
I am also very upset, because you persist in all of this contemptible sleeping, eating, drinking, moving around, talking, writing things on your blog, reading, listening to music, watching TV/movies, playing games, shopping, voting, being decent to other people occasionally, and so forth.
That is not actual real-science. As a Scientist, you should have nothing to do with them, because they are pseudoscience. Even breathing, you sick fucking bastard, I KNOW YOU”RE DOING IT ALL THE TIME!!~1!!! Why do they just let fake scientists like you get away with it? Who do they think they are? Who do I think they are? What happened to my pills? Where am I? What are you wearing? If you’re not a hack fraud, then why can’t you answer the fucking questions?
Blf @ 12
Yes, I meant the fans of the weirdo guy.
I have not read all comments, it is possible that some are in favor of a Dritten Reich solution to the pronoun question. Sort of a ‘last’ solution.
If De Santos thought it would win him votes, he would go for it.
Obviously. Otherwise, you’d know that engagement like this has only one response: A follow-up video!
And what, pray tell, “science” is Jordan Peterson citing? He’s a psychologist, one of those fake “soft” sciences these clowns love to dismiss.
Actually, he WAS a psychologist, but he gave it up in favor of two-bit riech-wing macho demagoguery…probably because psychology involves studying and listening to people, which JP seems to suck at. He probably finds Jungian archetypes a lot more fun, because it allows him to tell other people what their feelings and problems are (because he knows what archetype to apply to them), without having to listen to them all that much, if at all.
Akira MacKenzie@23 astutely asks, “[What] science is Jordan Peterson
citing[pretending]?”Impossible Bogosity (Hallucinatory).
@9 . secmilchap & my #10. I guess I did forget another term for such a totally empathy lacking peson – billionaire.
PZ and others, I think you’ve all missed a really, really important point:
All of the quoted interlocutors from the YouTube comments spelled “Myers” correctly.
Come on, people! Credit where credit is due. It’s been decades, literal decades, of Meyers, Miers, Meers, Maerz, Nguyen, Bob, Mayrs, Cocksmith-McGillicutty, and Loretta. Which, obviously, are homophones and variant spellings of “Myers”.
I think this shows hope for the future. Truly the kids of today are better than we were.
Louis
Louis @ 27
Yes, but they also think PZ is the brother of Michael Myers in Halloween.
Bigerjohansson @28
Wait…he isn’t?
Well that’s one of my favourite illusions shattered.
Louis
I do have a brother named Michael.
I KNEW IT!
He has the mask and the machete, you have the sample jar and pooter*. Both deadly to their intended victims.
Louis
This is the correct term for those sucky things used to hoover up insects, arachnids, and general creepy crawlies, right?
Does PZ have any third sibling? Someone that got in trouble with Texas authorities for his “natural food” enthusiasm? Someone with forestry tools?
Just gonna say that anyone who spells science with a capital S should be routinely ignored.