Why do women think Joe Rogan is bad?

Your first paragraph is ridiculous. No one is saying this. We are criticizing the platforming of crackpots who have zero evidence for their claims.

As for your second paragraph, the question posted here and being addressed is why folks DON'T like Rogan. You're welcome to make another thread discussing the positives of Rogan.

Rogan is not a journalist nor is he a deep thinker, he's an entertainer. It does however speak to the deep mistrust of our system that he is given a large platform.

This is all ad hominem. You’re not actually making an argument. And, even Alex Jones is sometimes partly correct. For example, he once claimed that there are things in the water turning the frogs gay. Sounds like typical Jones conspiracy theorizing. In fact, there are drug metabolites (hormones) in water that disrupt sex development in frogs.

Of course it is. People asked why folks don't like Rogan. The thread is literally asking for criticism of the person, not his arguments.

Because, in many ways, men and women (especially the maladjusted majority of us) hate each other, and Joe is a paragon of typical male thought.

He’s no Lex Fridman. But, like Two and a Half Men, he connects with the masses despite not doing anything for me.

My theory is that if you give an otherwise intelligent human being excessive amounts of hallucinogenic drugs, steroids, money, and social media exposure, their brain will calcify into a similar state as an 85 year old fox news grandpa. Mark my words, when guys like Jogan and Elon Musk die of heart failure in the next 5-7 years, the autopsy results will be fascinating.

Note the classic leftist tactic of weaponizing language in the above: "Conspiracy theorists"

On the bright-side, note that in the above's (largely correct) understanding of the scientific process, the person wrote evidence instead of proof, novel (excellent, however replication should be encouraged in a way that isn't in publish or perish), and testable (ruh roh, regiments are in for a tough one!)

Note the classic Trumper tactic of being a huge, whiny baby.

I find it very funny that many in this thread are saying he pretends to be an intellectual, and many are claiming he pretends to be stupid.

His appeal is that he is authentic in his multi-hour conversations, will host anyone who interests him, and is largely down the middle in terms of ideological slant. In many ways, he still comes across as a normal person, which is lacking in regime media

Note again the classic leftist tactic of name-calling in the above. "All emotions, no substance" is a criteria for leftists that has been incredibly successful. Republicans would be wise to adopt this strategy.

P.S. it's my belief that Trump belongs in prison. Nothing about him is right-wing; our politics are much different.

I don't listen to Rogan because as a Catholic I don't want to hear or support his use of Jesus' name as an epithet (totally serious for those of you coming forma different background).

However, I have watched and been entertained by some of his clips (as noted above, just because I enjoyed the clips didn't mean I believe what Rogan or his guest was saying. I also don't think Rogan is particularly intelligent.). I realized that probably the main reason I liked the clips was that it reminded me of a bull session with other guy friends, particularly fellow Gen X friends who pre-existed current wokeism and other silly societal trends. I don't always get to hang out or have a beer with my buddies anymore as most have families, but it's a reminder of a saner world and being unapologetically male (not that I think Rogan is the example of being a man, it's just that people can exist as men on his show and just be themselves.).

Joe Rogan is an ignorant fool who doesn't understand science. When I hear anyone regularly listens to him, as opposed to just listening to an interview of someone they like, my opinion of them instantly drops.

Example?

Believing anything your told without question isn't "understanding science".

You don't seem to understand the difference between "intellectual" and "smart." Many anti-intellectual people claim they are "smarter" than those intellectuals.

Wow, talk about the Kettle calling the Pot black... Maybe you should practice what you preach.

No. Science sells out to the highest bidder for its "truth". Show the $$ and watch the data magically say exact opposite of what it demonstrates. Just ask Dr. Ignaz Semellweis! As a trained science major, I recognized years ago that science is a faith based philosophy like most meta-narrative based religions. All theories are just unproven assumptions. Even "laws" arent 100% sure because all possible contexts can never be exhaustively studied. (Can entropy occur in a vaccum?) And most scientists don't even follow Occam's Razor or Law of Noncontradicton anymore, seeking to prove, rather than disprove, their hypotheses for grant money. So I have to disagree with that. Everything you feel science may have "proven" was a conspiracy to others at first.

Joe Rogan isn't the sharpest tool in the logic shed but he does entertain opposite views on issues and invites people of different opinions to come on, even at same time. When's the last time a news outlet of any political leaning did that! Joe doesn't present you the problem-reaction-guided solution model you see in most media outlets. It's why people listen to him, crazy or not. For the record...I don't listen to him or the Jordan Petersons of the age. But I do recognize why they gave gained a niche.

Ad hominem

Wny do women thing Joe Rogaine is bald?