Bill Ackman offers 150k for vaccine doctor to debate RFK Jr.
From his Twitter: https://twitter.com/BillAckman/status/16702368112…
Bill Ackman's Twitter is so entertaining lmao
Trending Content - Off Topic Forum
Career Resources
The total offerings from Rogan, Bill, Tim Pool, and a bunch of others exceeds $2.5m at this point. The fact this doctor is still going with the "I won't do it because it would legitimize this conspiracy theorist" when RFK has already gone up against Fauci and been proven right about the lack of vaccine safety testing just makes him look like an even bigger idiot than the Twitter back-and-forth does.
RFK got legitimized whether he likes it or not by going on Rogan and having him pull up the various studies he cited in front of millions of people. Hotez is an expert. He's being given a chance to speak on the largest show in the world to increase his profile and sell more of his books, shut down speech which he's claiming causes harm, deal a potential death blow to the most popular opposition candidate for the DNC, and give millions to charity. That he won't do it to me just proves he's a bad actor.
But RFK jr. is isn’t open to an honest debate. He goes on these shows all the time and is always dishonest and operating with bad faith. It’s like debating Trump who just bullshits. No upside for the good guys so best not to bother.
How can you claim this when no one with "expert" status has actually tried debating him or directly refuting any of his claims? The one time that Fauci did on the issue of lack of safety testing for certain vaccinations, he was proven to be wrong and neither the NIH nor FDA were able to provide documentation proving otherwise. I'm not saying he's right or wrong, and I personally don't agree with or follow some of the leaps and assumptions he makes. But he does cite specific studies and correlations in changes within public health over time which I've yet to see an expert actually address on an individual basis and explain why the conclusions were wrong/incorrectly determined.
That's false. He has citations from legitimate research institutions, will readily state when an argument is moving beyond his purview/knowledge of the source material, and he has a track record of being correct in identifying other instances of corporate malfeasance involving chemical products having adverse health effects on large swaths of people. He's not some rando walking into a council meeting with a stack of pages printed off the 150th page of google. Perfect examples are everything he said on the recent Rogan podcast with respect to the effects of atrazine contaminating water resources and glyphosate contaminating food supplies in the US - every single thing said on those topics was demonstrably correct. Does that mean everything he said about vaccines is right? No. But it does demonstrate he's doing actual research and coming to these discussions somewhat prepared.
This is a silly statement. How is $2.5m+ to charity not upside? How is educating people with correct information via the largest media platform on the planet not upside?
Hotez is by every perceivable metric an expert on vaccines.
The government and healthcare institutions have entirely lost their right to just assert something and say "because I said so" after they got so many things so incredibly wrong for the last 3 years. He claims that the podcast is filled with disinformation yet is not willing to go out and disprove said disinformation or propose a different perspective when given the opportunity - how does that make sense?
If the science is settled, then it should be straightforward for him to debunk each of the studies RFK presents and bury the man in his own claims no? Wouldn't that be the best outcome? Even if he doesn't manage to convince RFK to change his position, wouldn't an expert coming in and presenting the expert's perspective, in detail, convince even a small portion of the tens of millions of people who watch Rogan's show to change their view? Even if it's just a few % that's tens of thousands of lives potentially saved.
Refusing to debate a subject in an open setting where studies can be pulled up and fact-checked in real-time is not settling any arguments and only makes the challenging argument look that much stronger. This is not dissimilar from the phenomenon we're seeing with "red pill" content and the rise of characters like Andrew Tate. Some of what they are saying is true, some is not, but the opposition simply declaring them "bad" and refusing to engage them further does not resolve anything. If you do not present someone with an alternative after saying their chosen option is wrong, you give them nothing to work with and by default they will lean into their "wrong" choice that much harder. If we want these things to go away, you have to confront them not just say they're bad and ignore them as if they'll simply stop existing.
This montage of him constantly shifting his statements should make it clear to everyone he's as disingenuous as most of the covid pushers and watching his dumbass get roasted on Twitter is hilarious. The fact people take health advice from someone who has admitted publicly he doesn't even take basic steps to care for himself is amusing.
He looks completely trustworthy...
RFK doesn’t know what he’s talking about, neither does Biden or Trump. Sell outs
Anyone heard of Marianne Williamson ? She seems like the best alternative out of anyone else in the presidencial race.
The guy who has fought and won numerous cases against both corporations and government agencies about negative health effects stemming from chemical exposure, environmental pollution, and medical malpractice... and cites sources for almost every one of his claims... doesn't know what he's talking about... I suppose that's an argument.
You still ranting about COVID ? It’s been 3 years now come on
It's been 3 years?
The state of emergency status was revoked barely 2 months ago and they're still pushing ineffective shots en masse that have been marked up >50x. Shots that have never been tested for safety, that have been proven to have vastly more side effects than they were transparent about, and that neither prevent transmission nor infection of the only thing they're designed to treat. You think that governments wasting trillions of dollars, violating the civil rights of 100s of millions, and crippling tens of thousands of businesses over a virus (with a 0.5% fatality rate for normal healthy people) that the US funded (directly or indirectly) the development of via the Wuhan lab is something people should just stop caring about?
I almost envy that level of being able to just not care about anything. Then I remember it's people with attitudes like yours who will just shrug off our government waging pointless wars and killing millions of civilians like we did/are in Iraq, Afghanistan, Vietnam, Libya, Syria, Yemen, etc. Apathy is the definition of the banality of evil and is why quote "the only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing" exists.
Marianne is a radical leftist. She will tax you at 90% and use your tax dollars to pay Black freeloaders and illegal aliens. I am honestly surprised to see this posted on WSO and not Reddit.
Source ?
leaving aside the vaccine stuff, I'm RFKjr curious now, he strikes me as someone who wants to take out corruption (glyphosate), help the poor, and end pointless wars/military industrial complex
more to come but he gives me some nader/rand paul vibes in that he thinks independently and isn't captured by anybody. idk if he's right about the vaccine stuff but if he's going to advocate for safety testing and less corruption in the agencies by big pharma, that's inarguably a good thing for everybody
The glyphosate-focused part of the interview he gave with Rogan was harrowing. I knew the stuff was bad but had no idea the extent to which it's used. I would bet money that's the reason gluten allergies has popped up so much in recent decades and why every foreign friend who comes here dislikes the bread compared to back home.
I have family members who worked for USAID so I've always had admiration for JFK and would love to see his legacy continued. Also love seeing someone who's hardcore anti-war, the left needs more of that in the current climate. He's probably the only person running on the DNC platform (although technically not even that) I would consider supporting at this moment.
RFK Junior said that Putin was "acting in good faith" during the invasion of Ukraine. That's not anti-war, that's pro-war.
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/rfk-russi…
Agreed, he's my preferred candidate at the moment. Kind of a long shot for him to win the nomination, but I'd still count it as a win if he damages Biden enough in the primaries for the Republican candidate to win in the general
Just cannot do 4 more years of Biden, the man has alienated everyone not in the West, killed out energy independence, and aims to push ridiculous stimulus in a hyper-inflationary environment. Probably everything a president can do to damage America he has done. On top of this, he's shifted student loan burden on everyday Americans (many of them who never went to college!). It's inane, hopefully the courts will soon kill his unconstitutional debt forgiveness in coming weeks
The student loan forgiveness would affect 36 million Americans. Are they not 'everyday Americans' to you?
RFK actually cares about the middle class. He does not pander to gender studies majors who can't find a job and want someone else to pay for them.
Because his central campaign issue is that vaccines cause autism, a claim that was based on a falsified study from 1998. The study, since redacted, was completely falsified and was an elaborate conspiracy theory by the doctor who made it to sell a rival vaccine and medicines to treat health issues created by this scare, the exact kind of big pharma conspiracy that anti-vaxxers claim to be against.
Second off, he's not anti-war, he literally said that Putin was "acting in good faith" when he invaded Ukraine. That's as pro-war as you can get.
RFK is against the measles vaccine. MEASLES.
He’s a half wit or worse
He's not right about the vaccine stuff, and him being elected president would lend credibility to a completely deranged and unhealthy belief system based on zero evidence. It would cost a lot of people their lives. On the other hand, I deplore Joe Biden so I'm pro-hurting-Joe-Biden-in-the-primary.
i never understood this argument - "dont want to legitimize by debating".
well how about slam dunk discrediting by debating? surely it should be easy? no? oh well ok then.
Never argue with a fool, onlookers may not be able to tell the difference.
Mark Twain
I've spent a lot of time debating anti-vaxxers.
This is what it's like:
Antivaxxer: prove you didn't kill someone during your morning commute on June 14, 2021
Normal person : um, I don't see how I can prove a negative for one of 10 million possible facts when I couldn't have prepared a defense for all of the possible lines of attack you'd throw
Antivaxxer: then we must conclude its possible you killed someone on June 14, 2021.
You should get your license taken away until you can prove you drive safely! You monster!
They argue in a disingenuous way with only one objective - to sow doubt. They out the burden of proof on everyone else.
All they’re doing is asking questions!!
I would generally agree with you here, but specifically on the general vaccines debate, how can you have a reasonable debate on this in the forum proposed (on a podcast) when either side can cite studies in support of their own positions with the other side not having any time to review those citations and prepare a response? It's not an actually useful forum of debate when it comes to these topics. The vaccine debate demands long-form interviews or competing papers or editorials in direct response to one another.
He should do it purely because that amount of money is material and will not be something he can afford to do any time soon.
For example, if any of us were offered $5m to dress like a duck and quack around for 2 hours on live TV, we would do it because donating $5m is a good thing to do in exchange for 2 hours of our time.
I definitely think that Dr. Hotez should debate RFK Jr. However I do not think Joe Rogan should be allowed to be the moderator. During his segments with Kennedy, he enthusiastically believes anything he says without doing any kind of due dilligence. For example, Kennedy tells him that Wifi allows poisons to enter the brain and minutes later Rogan is saying we need to stop Wifi. It's clear that Rogan is not willing to challenge any of the crazy things that Kennedy says and will likely rig the debate in his favor. Instead of a shock jockey podcaster they should have someone who is willing to challenge both men's views host the debate.
I agree, a debate should happen and that Rogan would be a terrible moderator as he lets insane, deranged BS claims fly with no pushback whatsoever. The only caveat I have is that I'm not sure how one can have an old-school debate with an anti-vaxxer in the proposed forum. I think it really requires a written debate published in, say, the WSJ. A back and forth so that an anti-vaxxer cannot just make a claim and cite a source without it being challenged. The pro-vaxxer needs an opportunity to look into the citation.
Look man I’m not saying everything RFK says is right, but when the only people arguing with him are politicians, people with pronouns in bio, “science experts” and doctors who say gender isn’t assigned at birth…
The medical establishment has zero credibility--with that I agree. But the deranged anti-vaxxers are the reason a Lyme vaccine is no longer available, which has caused countless people to needlessly suffer. This is like the communists vs Nazis. Both sides are wicked and it's not clear who you'd want to win.
"Trust the science! .....no wait, not that science!"
RFK is at least right about one thing, guy looks amazing for his age, real picture
I'm of mixed views about this. On the one hand, the pro-vaccine people acted horribly during Covid--advocating for unscientific masking mandates and demanding that young people be vaccinated against the evidence, and many of those same people will say with a totally straight face that men have periods and women have penises and they'll unironically say "birthing people." So these people have zero credibility. On the other hand, RFK, jr., et al (the anti-vaxxers), have zero evidence backing their claims on vaccines generally--they often cite "studies" from advocacy organizations and debunked studies, or they'll make claims based on a study that is misrepresentative of the findings. The difficult part about debating an anti-vaxxer is that they can sound really smart and cite "evidence" and on the fly it's very difficult to counter. "Losing" a debate to an anti-vaxxer could be devastating for public health.
So, we're in this weird space where the anti-vaxxers were right (with respect to mandates and efficacy for young people) but for the wrong reasons during Covid (a broken clock is right twice a day), similar to how the anti-war people were right during the Iraq War--they're actually a bunch of America-haters who oppose the U.S. presence in the world and are therefore opposed to all wars regardless of the cause, but were correct in their opposition to the Iraq War. In both instances, this has increased their profiles and given them unearned credibility.
Numquam ducimus quo illo sed. Quia quam facilis ratione non non. Fugiat quia maiores et earum repellat amet consequatur laborum. Aut sit saepe cupiditate maxime odit harum necessitatibus. Rerum accusamus qui quia optio.
Corrupti asperiores aut et exercitationem quis. Molestiae ad magni voluptate ratione repellendus eos sapiente. Numquam modi officia consequatur nesciunt. A voluptates mollitia quo.
Ex velit culpa et quis laborum. Consequuntur vel quo alias voluptates quo omnis est. Minus sequi amet provident ea vero id est. Recusandae neque in officiis voluptate assumenda ducimus autem. Autem at ipsum qui blanditiis perspiciatis ipsum. Quas quia quia eos nostrum sint tempore porro perferendis. Ut reiciendis consequatur eius similique.
See All Comments - 100% Free
WSO depends on everyone being able to pitch in when they know something. Unlock with your email and get bonus: 6 financial modeling lessons free ($199 value)
or Unlock with your social account...
Ut et minima blanditiis necessitatibus. Ad deserunt in ipsum et quia quis animi. Qui enim placeat nihil cumque animi. Voluptatum et est itaque nostrum molestiae.
Quis sit atque sed quae porro et quis. Ducimus veniam ut earum officiis qui. Occaecati illo quia nemo dolores alias laborum sed. Facere laboriosam qui earum tempore aut quo ex. Possimus esse inventore non eos vero repellendus voluptatem.
Et eius est dolor ullam est. Qui ea velit laborum. Et rerum sit molestiae voluptatum reprehenderit mollitia harum.
Quia quod ut voluptatum. Rerum reiciendis omnis eaque mollitia ab sed. Consequuntur excepturi at praesentium corrupti non et error.