It was really not.. Im not saying that the most extreme conspiracy theories are true. But in terms of a debate, this was an older, smarter guy debating for the easy side, the high ground, against a kid that doesn't even have a clue what he's talking about. Good debates are best when there are participants of the same caliber going at it. Not this. This was just cringe.
Many worlds theory, multiverse.. David Deutch? Nick Bostrom, simulation theory.. Fine, the debate was won, but not because of good arguments, it was because he debated a kid. ruclips.net/video/dzKWfw68M5U/видео.html
I think that it's not that people who believe these crazy theories are more open minded or even "skeptics," they're just overly skeptical of evidence that challenges their beliefs, but overly gullible when it comes to evidence that confirms their beliefs. It's why you hear people who are so distrusting of the "mainstream media" and "lies pushed by the scientific establishment," but then when they read a single article that they agree with on some shady blog, or hear some rumor that says what they wanted to hear, they immediately trust it and spread it around.
But in a lot of his videos he does sound close to it. You can tell there are certain topics that would make him mad. All that said, why waste it on a poor dumb kid like this? The guy is a moron but he seems nice and he’s a kid...
@@martymcflyy6775 Aye. To hide that fact, he changes haircut or facial hair every now and then. Like he looks identical to he teenage self when he showed a pic of himself then.
@@christiandevey3898 Drop an object from a height, see if it falls (in which case gravity exists), or if it jumps up, does a shake, bounces onto a windowsill, and does the Macarena.
Not gonna lie, watching the audio spectrum slowly creep towards a solid bar as JJ got more passionate was a beautiful thing. Listening to an articulate, intelligent adult disassemble so readily, contrived and ignorant ideas, was a beauty to behold. You are a rockstar JJ!
This man’s entire argument relied on “but a lot of people believe it” so the minute JJ said “lots of people can misremember the same trivial thing” it was over.
Not only that, implanted memories are very real AND imagined ones. Lemino did a great video on this, but I believe many of 'Mandela Effect' believers just can't admit that they were wrong. They have a memory and assume it is a correct fact, then rationalize things backwards. Taking Mandela as an example: if there were news papers that printed his death and could be verified, then that is unquestionable bases of investigating. An example that the Lemino video covered had this point of evidence provided. When he found the news printing he looked at the source. It was literally a book compiling contest entries of fiction by South African youth. The student wrote about a hypothetical scenario where Mandela died in prison. The argument lost all credibility. You don't attack the theory, you tackle the evidence.
That's legit the argument Ted Cruz used to object to the election lol. He said something like "39% believe this nonsense we've been peddling for months, so let's spend millions of tax dollars investigating it and delay the certification of results. This is totally out of genuine concern and not some sort of ploy to cozy up to Trump's base for 2024 haha"
@@Waldzkrieger The election was fucking stolen. The point Cruz was making is that if people don't have trust in their elections, then democracy will fail to exist.
@@dapigbear312 Right of centre in the USA may be. But if they popped up here in Scotland, they'd probably be considered right-wing extremists. We're by and large pretty left-wing here. UKIP for instance, are very right-wing and got almost no traction here.
I do hate that aliens are lumped into conspiracy theories by UFO sightings. Skeptics like Sagan believed they were aliens were the simple fact the universe is unimaginably vast, physical law is universal, and life did arise in the universe for certain.
This is where failure of education comes into play and not realizing that scientific semantics defines "theory" differently than the rest of the population. This kid's teachers did not distinguish between "theory" and "scientific theory"
@@Findeeney Gravity isn't a theory though. Gravity is an objectively observed phenomenon. The theory of relativity is a theory which (in part) is used to explain why gravity exists.
It feels really scary for some reason. Feels like hearing your favorite cool teacher who hangs out with every students to be serious and quite angry for the first time.
UUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM ACTUALLY ALBERT EINSTEIN PROVIDED A MORE COMPELLING EXPLANATION THAT GRAVITY IS NOT A FORCE AND THAT IN FACT GRAVITY IS JUST WELLS FORMED IN SPACE-TIME 🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓
As a physics instructor, I'd like to say a few things: Theories do not become facts. Theories contain many facts (worded statements) and laws (mathematical statements) within them. All of the facts and laws are assumed truths until there's reason not to, at which point the theory is tweaked so as to be that much more rigorous going forward. Thus, a theory is mankind's best understanding of a particular natural phenomena. Outside of the scientific community, the word "theory" is far to often used as a synonym for "hypothesis". Hypothesis only get elevated to that of a theory because they actually "work"; meaning they are able to make repeatable definitive predictions.
You explained this perfectly! Only thing I want to add is that theories in social sciences are a lot more flexible as to their basis in observable fact. Generally, they tend to reflect broad truths in, for example, comparative politics, international relations, etc. but cannot account for all small inconsistencies. I think this is a matter of how underlying assumptions of different schools of thought in a given social science tend to vary a lot, which results in less concrete theorisation. You get this especially in economics, where you have Neoclassicism, Keynesianism, Hetorodox schools, etc. Generally, these underlying assumptions still require a lot of work to address, but this will take time since the social sciences are a lot newer and more interdisciplinary
Thanks for the distinction. The term Conspiracy Theories has become more of an oxymoron to me than anything. I think it's high time we dropped "theories" and just start calling them plain conspiracies.
As soon as he said "Gravity is a theory, not a fact" I know we were dealing with a lunatic, not that believing in the Mandela effect didn't already make him a lunatic, but I was just like: "Oooooooh nooooooo......" and was crying for disappointment
Exactly, there is a difference between Einstein’s theories of relativity, and a alternate universe created just so reality could mess with you by making the Bernstein bears the Bernstain bears 😂. One is grounded in science and intelligence, and one is profoundly absurd.
It is true, gravity is a theory. But gravity has been proven to be correct by experiments and calculations done by numerous scientists, proving its validity. At any point, a wave of new experiments, observations and calculations could make the theory of gravity invalid, but that has simply not happened. That is why we consider the theory of gravity factual. The Mandela Effect has not been proven through any sort of valid method, only through personal memory, which is very fluid and not helpful for experimentation.
J.J. sounds like he's lecturing his drop out nephew to turn his life around and I'm here for it...also I'm 21, don't let this guys age excuse his idiocy.
For sure. I wasn’t this dumb when I was 11. Not sure I even knew many 20 year olds this dumb when I was 20. But it is both. Maybe in 10 years he’ll be just about able to string a coherent sentence or argument together and not believe in this shit.
J. J., I'm a scientist who has spent his life to understanding the realities of the physical world. And I cannot tell you how frustrating it is to deal with antivaxxers, climate change deniers, flat earthers, etc. I'm so glad to see someone like you who is similarly passionate and certain about conspiracy theories. This video was great. I understand and appreciate your passion
Physicist here, just wanted to drop few words. The concept of “belief” itself is something that triggers me every single time it comes up in the internet sphere culture. Every time a topic is faced, listening to the fact and following the logic is only the first stage of the approach to the problem in a lot of people’s mind. Then comes the need to take a personal position that can bypass anything there was before as long as it’s “your personal opinion”. And that is honestly damaging: when, facing the same facts people go out their way to draw different conclusions. It’s not a discussion or a confrontation anymore, it’s cheering for your favorite sport team no matter the situation you are in. The fact that half the guy’s sentences are “yes but do you personally believe....” despite how JJ’s tries to move the focus of the debate away from personal biases is just a huge symptom of that. And it’s fucking sickening. As 21th century boyzz we grew up being told that censure is bad, that you always need to think with your head, but it seems that the virtue of listening and learning from who knows more than you instead than talking shit still is oblivious to many.
@@ND-gm2vs I wish I could like your comment more than once. Just today I provided someone with the dictionary definition of the word allegation and they responded with "that's your opinion".
@@ND-gm2vs "Belief" is a concept we can't do without. It's a specific mental state regarding a claim. Even if we were all automatons who automatically came to the conclusions you regard as reasonable, we'd still all "believe" in some claims rather than others. Right? The idea of belief wouldn't magically disappear.
@@altrag He asked because of how naive he sounds. Just the way he talks you can tell he doesn't have a whole lot of life experience. His generation is different in that he probably doesn't remember a time when the internet didn't exist or at least was all that interesting.
@@kylem1112 Oh I realize why he asked. Just that in my experience, older conspiracy nuts are just as nutty as young ones. Often even more so specifically because they have lived long enough to know better yet still cling to their delusions.
I couldn't help but think as I was listening that as a 26-year-old, JJ would probably think I'm a dumb kid like MJ AND MJ would probably think I'm a crotchety old man like JJ.
The way he's using theory is how people casually use the term. He doesn't understand that a theory is essentially a proper scientific explanation for something based on evidence.
Your response to "there is always 2 sides of the story" is just absolutely perfect. I hate the "both sides" argument, and you just summed up why better than I ever could.
Honestly I agree that there's only one correct answer. However the more I research and dig into things, the more I'm convinced that the authority position is damn near wrong about everything.
I think the internet peaked a decade ago... it went from "wow, we have access to all this information" to "oh no, people gravitate to the wrong information".
I kinda agree with this. I think gen z and millennials really know how to filter out the bs. I also think the idiots also get pushed to the spotlight as well because its just so funny seeing them be idiots. Theres around 5,000,000,000 people on the internet. Like the answer to pretty much anything its a bit more complex
Haha yea or it got so big and corporate that people could hide misinformation in plain sight then beckon viewers into obscure corners... Gaw it sounds like London Soho poor bastards
Scientists do consider gravity a theory, it's a very credible theory that is regarded as the best explanation for why things fall, but regardless, it is classified as a theory. Source: my college biology professor
@@chiwengalopez1501 why? He’s a kid interested in stuff he’s interested in , he’ll grow out of it and if he doesn’t who cares America and Canada are free countries , don’t pity those with different belife sets then you
The real test of this theory is to see how many *South Africans* think Nelson Mandella died in prison. I'm willing to bet that the number of people willing to argue with a straight face that their nation's greatest hero never ascended to its highest office is pretty damn close to 0.
Exactly. As a South African you can't go anywhere without seeing some tribute or reference to Mandela. It's like if people believed that George Washington was killed by the British in the 1770s
Hey JJ, I'm 23 and I completely agree on your assessment of conspiratorial thinking and what it can lead to. I just wanted to add that it's not only affecting the younger population. I just hope the majority of Canada and the world shares the same train of thought as you and I.
I remember being this kid's age and being completely consumed by Alex Jones conspiracies like the New World Order etc. And i can say honestly it CAN be damaging to your sense of reality.
Loved the guy asking "So do you believe in parallel universes or you dont?" After JJ has just finished going off for a full minute on how stupid the idea is
He sounds like a dumb kid who thinks he’s a great influencer host. JJ was basically repeating himself 50 times and even after explaining about the robber emoji, the guy asks that one again.
Critical thinking and analysis skills (particularly when it comes to the internet) are super important to teach, and I believe should be part of the education curriculum before post-secondary education. I also believe that social psychology should be taught in high school because it seems like concepts like groupthink and confirmation bias are high in conspiracy theory circles.
@@lukegriffin5596 true but then if we want to use scientific terms, the Mandela effect isn't a theory, it's a hypothesis! There is a huge difference and people saying thet everything that can't be proven is a theory are a problem!
@@TonyF1MMA True but a theory is accepted by many scientists and has scientific, objective evidence behind it. The Mandela effect is a hypothesis with limited evidence with no objective truth. That’s what keeps the Mandela effect a hypothesis as opposed to a theory like gravity which is backed up by equations and empirical data in physics.
I love how J.J. basically dismantles the entire theoretical underpinning of the Mandela Effect within the first three minutes of the interview. The rest of it is just M.J. responding with "ok i got u" as J.J. progressively loses the last few tattered shreds of hope he had left for humanity.
This guy seems like he wants to know what hes talking about, and is trying to be unbiased in the interview, but obviously believes that the Mandela Effect is real and is so entrenched in this believe that he just can't not be personally hurt by the denial of the effect, even though said denial is based in fact and reasoning
Like that comment above mine it seems he was genuinely convinced by some of these comments (or he has been a fraud from the start) yet his whole business relies on this conspiracy theory so has had to maintain the idea
Listening to this, I lived out a lot of my pent up annoyance and distaste for this conspiracy fake crap that's poisoning our society these days. JJ it may not have been comfortable for you to have this conversation, but it was a very cathartic breath of fresh air for me at least. Keep up the good work, but don't burn yourself out with the crazies these days. I think all of us subscribers would agree that a sane & healthy JJ is more important than the volume of content :)
I think you're at your best when you're a little riled up. A simple experiment; Ask someone to draw a dollar bill, or any routinely seen object with a complex design. They can't do it, of course, they will come up with a highly simplified symbolic representation. People think they can do it because people think they know more details about the world than they really do. Hence; Mandela effect ...
Our language is terrible for that (probably other languages as well, but I'm only fluent in one..) We have at least three definitions of "theory": - A mathematical "theory" is a collection of theorems, axioms and other individual components that together form a useful way of viewing mathematical models. They are always 100% correct, because we straight up define the axioms and the theorems and other constructs are mathematically proven based on those axioms. You can't disprove a (complete) mathematical theorem, other than through violating the axioms. - A scientific theory is a mathematical theory that corresponds to some real-world data. You can't "prove" gravity, nor can you even "prove" that our theory of gravity (ie: General Relativity) corresponds to the real world with 100% accuracy. But you can _disprove_ a scientific theory. The math will still be correct, but if the math doesn't correspond to the real world data then the "theory" as a whole is wrong. In a very loose sense you can think of "corresponds to real world data" as an axiom and finding a data set that doesn't correspond would be equivalent to violating that axiom. - The layman concept of a "theory" is anything they dream up to explain something, regardless of evidence or mathematical rigor (or having a mathematical basis at all). People often like to state that this definition of "theory" should really be called a "hypothesis", but there's a lot of people who have invented "theories" with so little thought and rigor behind them that even the phrase "hypothesis" doesn't really apply. And this is hardly the only example.. as I said, our language is terrible for things like that. And its even worse when there are bad actors who intentionally abuse the differences between technical and lay terminology to produce bad faith arguments in the hopes that most people don't know enough to second-guess them while still being "technically correct" and not running afoul of things like laws against reporting false news (not "fake news" as in things the right wing don't like, but explicitly false information).
What I learned in school is that a theory is assumed to be correct, but can’t be fully proven based on the current evidence we have, for example the theory of relativity is constantly either being proven to be correct or expanded on further with each new hypothesis that is explored to further support or try to disprove the current theory. When a theory eventually has been tested to a certain point and new discoveries continue to support it (for example the first observations of gravity waves), it gets reclassified as a principle or a law, for example the law of thermodynamics.
@@davidgodfrey8751 Nope. Absolutely wrong. Laws and theories are two different things. Theories explain why a phenomenon occurs, whereas a law describes what phenomena happens. One is not "better" than the other. The hierarchy is just a hypothesis, which can either become a theory or law. A theory never graduates to a law.
@@davidgodfrey8751 That's not quite accurate. Theories and laws are in general pretty much equivalent. The only real difference is that a theory provides a "why" something happens while a law just says "here's some math that works". For example, Newton provided us a law of gravity. He gave us an equation and that equation solved the problems (at least until our measurement capabilities got good enough to find edge cases). But nothing in Newton's gravity tells us _why_ it happens so we got people theorizing angels blowing on things and other such goofiness that was mostly based in either trying to explain science through religion or trying to denounce religion through science (religion was taken much more seriously back when you could get your head chopped off for not believing the same thing your king did). Einstein on the other hand gave us a theory of gravity (general relativity). It not only corrected for those edge cases that Newton didn't know about, but it tells us _why_ gravity works (the curvature of spacetime). That "why" is also very much subject to being disproven (for example, if gravitons are ever shown to be a real particle) but simply having a "why" is the main difference between a theory and a law. Principles are a different beast. They're more of a guiding .. well, principle .. than anything. For example the "principle of superposition" just reminds you that you have to consider combined states - it doesn't tell you how the states in whatever system you're working on should combine or let you predict what the outcome of combining them might be. There are of course often some extremely well-known examples associated with a particular principle and that can confuse the issue a bit (eg: superposition is almost always considered in terms of quantum mechanics.. but it actually applies to all waves, including more "normal" waves like sound waves or even water waves on the ocean).
This was a breath of fresh air. A conservative that believes in reality and objectivity. I was starting to go crazy with what is happening right now. Thank you so much for posting this JJ.
@@hightower2277 that's (probably) not what he was talking about. Conservatives no longer believing in reality and objectivity doesn't exactly begin and end with QAnon; climate change deniers are a good example.
@@hightower2277 Large swaths of the Qanon populations are most definitely republicans. There are also alot of new age spirtuality people indoctrinated into this stuff as well.
What a great listen. Thanks, both of you for a really intelligent conversation. I'll admit, that I too am a fairly regular listener to Coast To Coast AM and I'm 79 now. But, for me, it's mostly just humorous to hear these characters go on and on about anti-vax and big foot and flat earth and OMG. Thank you for all your hard work and passion, love your stuff.
I quite enjoyed this, your more aggressive side. I like how you called him out as soon as he was going down the “well there’s two sides to a story” argument, I think you really nailed it by calling it for what it is, a postmodern rejection of truth.
@@jessocity9964 I think The dude felt like this conversation can go really bad for him so he didn't really try to oppose or compete he opted to survive , I don't think the kid is stupid or actually believe in conspiracy stuff he just found it profitable to talk about it online
Should this have been a debate, or should JJ have gone in so hard? When MJ said "gravity is just a theory, so the Mendala is equivalent", it was absurd, but maybe that's the last time to start shouting. Maybe JJ could have calmly explained that the Theory of Relativity is constantly being supported with new discoveries in physics, and how it's been proven to be instrumental in Science research even 80 years later. He could've demonstrated why MJ was innocently mistaken, instead of just shutting him down and implying some sort of malice or negligence on MJ's part.
Mr McCullough made his opening statement, and I was just like "yeah thats pretty convincing, open and shut case really, don't know how anyone could argue with that" And then the video goes on another 20 minutes.
It goes to show how bankrupt the “theory” of the Mandela Effect really is. I mean what could he even have said beyond that the misrememberings people have are sometimes really common? There aren’t any arguments in favor of it, good or otherwise. There are certainly many false beliefs that do have their scholars of sorts... but with this... it would even be generous to call it pseudoscience.
i think he wanted to interview him. He never said he wanted a debate, he actually just said i wanted to talk with you to get your side of the story - not try to convert him. Calling this a debate is disingenuous
I've a feeling this young man was overwhelmed with all this info - but you planted a large amount of seeds, JJ. Give him some time to decant all this. This is an amazing conversation!
My grandfather saw the so-called aliens on the examining tables and he concluded that they looked like burnt scorched test monkeys.... Which makes more sense to me than actual aliens
No way. Talked to him like he was Grandpa Simpson and had lost all patience. JJ is always better alone talking to the camera than talking to other humans. Check out that old channel he had with the liberal gay guy where they debated different topics. JJ always sounded nuts while the other guy sounded calm and sane and rational. But JJ's main RUclips content sounds almost educational when he isn't talking down to and curling his lip at other human beings with differing viewpoints.
You’re definitely right JJ. I fell down some regrettable rabbit holes a few years ago. Pulled myself out before I started looking at anything too serious though.
Respect to MJ Patek he listened and took JJ's onslaught on the chin on his own show. And turned it round best he could to be a discussion somewhat in his control as host. Really good for him :)
Although I 100% agree with everything ur saying, and I think you’re right in debunking a lot of this seudo-science theories propagated through unregulated, click-baity media, you should really have change the title of the video to: ‘Old JJ yells at cloud’
@@summers7554 maybe if he gets better rhetoric. I'm halfway through and it already looks like he's attacking the guy for no reason. (I mean, he could have made the reason apparent, and then this would be the better debate)
JJ’s take on conspiracy theories, the thought process of accepting them, and modern internet culture was one of the first times in a while where an internet video really illuminated something so prevalent that I wasn’t paying attention to.
I have never commented on a RUclips video ever, and I just want to profess my love and admiration for your willingness to put conspiracy theories in their place.
Yeah, it is so important to put conspiracy theories in their place. Anyone who believes a theory about two or more people planning something in secret that is either harmful to others or illegal has got to be a total moron. People never do that! What a crazy 🤪concept.
Conspiracy Theory: I remember turning on the TV one day, and Prime Minister JJ Mccullough said that he would declare war on America, and take over the world.
I love that story about the burglar emoji because emojis are essentially small cartoons that express emotion. So when they describe the supposed emoji, it the most literal cartoonish portrait of a robber you can think. If I said “Burglar emoji”, your first thought would be what she described.
Because for his generation, feelings are more important than facts. Whereas an older person might sympathize with another's feelings then bury them with facts in a debate, younger people tend to acknowledge understanding the words in the facts presented and fall back on feelings. It comes, in part , from receiving participation trophies simply for saying something no matter how inane. At some point, "there are no stupid questions," became, "there are no stupid answers."
@@JJLiu-xc3kg There is no judgement in the first two sentences, and the last two cite the cause as a generation prior to MJ's. If that constitutes bitterness in your mind, then you are not a rational person.
@@Hi11is You would do well to remember that it was older generations that invented Participation trophies for their kids to soothe THEIR OWN ego rather than their childs' ego.
When talking about opinions, there is always room for “the other side of the story”. But when talking about facts, there are just objective facts. It is important to understand the difference between opinions and facts. Otherwise the distinction would not make any sense..
As a youngster myself, I wholeheartedly agree. It is scary that the whole idea of a reality that is agreed upon by almost a whole civilisation is crumbling down in all layers of society. I, for a time, didn't believe in the evolution theory but after a lot of consideration, I had to come to terms with the fact that it was indeed true. The fact that people are rarely confronted with different opinions nowadays is sad and the more people float apart, the harder it becomes to have a (somewhat) civilised conversation about things. I try my best to do that but you always have blindspots
Being confronted with different viewpoints is invaluable. However, what JJ said, “in a post-modern, nihilistic, no truth, no morality world you can’t have civilization” (paraphrased slightly). Is both conflationary (nihilism doesn’t mean ‘no objective facts or truth,’ eg gravity) and is an argument for having some sort of moral system in order to retain “civilization” (whatever that means) and not an argument for the truth of that moral system. It seems JJ assumes that “civilization” is what is most important, as opposed to truth. Or beauty, or really chill tunes, or whatever each individual deems important, which i guess is post modern?
@@JJMcCulloughAfter finding out the main host also has run a similar TV talk show that can now be viewed on Amazon Video, my assumption is the majority is staged. Though there have been a handful of people that give me the impression they truly believe what they are saying.
He feels like the kind of friendly teacher who usually is nice all the time and you hear him being mad for the first time. It's oddly terrifying and I want my mommy.
This actually was an amazing conversation.
Where do you dispose the bodies of the children you kill?
It was really not.. Im not saying that the most extreme conspiracy theories are true. But in terms of a debate, this was an older, smarter guy debating for the easy side, the high ground, against a kid that doesn't even have a clue what he's talking about. Good debates are best when there are participants of the same caliber going at it. Not this. This was just cringe.
Many worlds theory, multiverse.. David Deutch? Nick Bostrom, simulation theory.. Fine, the debate was won, but not because of good arguments, it was because he debated a kid. ruclips.net/video/dzKWfw68M5U/видео.html
JJ rendered this man into tallow on the internet in front of both of their audiences over the course of like a 15 minute conversation.
@@bushwhackedonvhs Honestly, he did it in the first three.
Boomer JJ slaughters the younglings
#massmurdermoment
#Post Modernism
go nazbol furries
Have a goodnight Jreg
Can centrist ever become normal people or are they a lost cause? Also are you okay with griller centrist?
"On the TikTok"
And I see JJ is very popular on the RUclipss lmao
I am going to go back to watching The RUclips.
I loved that. Time to go and flip through the reddits
Reminds me of George bush’s the internets
The Internets
I perceived that “the” as an intentionally derogatory/critical way of referring to it 😂 If it was so, then it’s funny.
As a Gen Z I must say, it was pretty funny to watch JJ go all dad mode with his lecture to the Tik Tokker
That Gen Z kid is soo corny ugh I'm ashamed to be zoomer.
@@urania3652 honestly same I hate it. I don't mean to sound egotistic but god the rest of gen z is horrible.
much of gen Z is fucking aweful.
Agreed
as another Genz I can't believe he gives us such a bad wrap
JJ: *absolutely rips this guy apart for over 5 minutes straight*
MJ: "so, I get what you're saying"
JJ: thirty page dissertation
MJ: “ok well I’m glad we had this conversation”
"STOP! stop, he's already dead!"
It's like he's not even listening.
@@Waldzkrieger I think it's because he really just wanted to discuss the Mandela Effect.
JJ: you're entire worldview is distorted and false
MJ: aight I gotchu I gotchu
Truly an award winning interview. Sure to win the Pull It Surprise.
haha laughing rn
It's mr. bettttt
My history teacher last year memorized every lyric to your songs.
Yes, the award named after the man who printed conspiracy theories that caused the spanish american war.
Hey MrBetts could you do me a huge favor and say something to my old History teacher Mr.Paradis?
I forget who said it, but this quote came to mind,
"Don't be so open-minded your brain falls out."
I'm stealing that quote.
Carl Sagan.
Carl Sagan said something like this, but I think he was paraphrasing someone else.
no that's too good
I think that it's not that people who believe these crazy theories are more open minded or even "skeptics," they're just overly skeptical of evidence that challenges their beliefs, but overly gullible when it comes to evidence that confirms their beliefs.
It's why you hear people who are so distrusting of the "mainstream media" and "lies pushed by the scientific establishment," but then when they read a single article that they agree with on some shady blog, or hear some rumor that says what they wanted to hear, they immediately trust it and spread it around.
Everyone gangsta till JJ goes berserk mode
Berserker Barrage!! (Wolverine reference anyone?)
Dude I’ve never heard JJ ticked off lmao
Tik Tok off
@@xavierluck2512 lol tiktok off😂
And it's so good!
The tiktoker is lucky he went with JJ, had he picked any of the seasoned youtube skeptic he would have been torn to shreds.
But in a lot of his videos he does sound close to it. You can tell there are certain topics that would make him mad.
All that said, why waste it on a poor dumb kid like this? The guy is a moron but he seems nice and he’s a kid...
When he said “I’m 36”, I can confidently come to the conclusion: JJ does not age. Like he will look the same at 99.
I thought he was in his 20s like 25 maximum
dam he look fine
He and the queen will be sitting together having tea as the world ends
@@martymcflyy6775 Aye. To hide that fact, he changes haircut or facial hair every now and then. Like he looks identical to he teenage self when he showed a pic of himself then.
@@CancerGaming56 yes
Or he might be aging very slowly
“Mandela effect is a theory just like gravity” LOL fkin ded
Lmao, worst part is he thought it made him sound smarter.
Can’t prove gravity
Wtf is nuance bro doing here?
Oh hello there bro
@@christiandevey3898 Drop an object from a height, see if it falls (in which case gravity exists), or if it jumps up, does a shake, bounces onto a windowsill, and does the Macarena.
Tiktok influencer and conspiracy theorist. A combination made in hell.
TikTok really is Twitter on steroids isn’t it?
@@RoseEyed I've never thought of it like that before, but that's true.
@@RoseEyed yeah but one has more "cool kid" teens and thots
@@gpedre21 and man-hoes/wanna be pickup artists
First legislation proposed: a proposal for a treaty of union with the United States
Not gonna lie, watching the audio spectrum slowly creep towards a solid bar as JJ got more passionate was a beautiful thing. Listening to an articulate, intelligent adult disassemble so readily, contrived and ignorant ideas, was a beauty to behold. You are a rockstar JJ!
This man’s entire argument relied on “but a lot of people believe it” so the minute JJ said “lots of people can misremember the same trivial thing” it was over.
True
Not only that, implanted memories are very real AND imagined ones. Lemino did a great video on this, but I believe many of 'Mandela Effect' believers just can't admit that they were wrong. They have a memory and assume it is a correct fact, then rationalize things backwards. Taking Mandela as an example: if there were news papers that printed his death and could be verified, then that is unquestionable bases of investigating. An example that the Lemino video covered had this point of evidence provided. When he found the news printing he looked at the source.
It was literally a book compiling contest entries of fiction by South African youth. The student wrote about a hypothetical scenario where Mandela died in prison.
The argument lost all credibility.
You don't attack the theory, you tackle the evidence.
That's legit the argument Ted Cruz used to object to the election lol. He said something like "39% believe this nonsense we've been peddling for months, so let's spend millions of tax dollars investigating it and delay the certification of results. This is totally out of genuine concern and not some sort of ploy to cozy up to Trump's base for 2024 haha"
That was the only thing he can say that can get anyy traction whatsoever but still weak
@@Waldzkrieger The election was fucking stolen. The point Cruz was making is that if people don't have trust in their elections, then democracy will fail to exist.
Honestly I think all conspiracists could learn a thing or two about Occam‘s Razor
Yeah but it’s actually pronounced Occam’s Razor. Did you know that?
Conspiracy theorists don’t like the idea of the null hypothesis. Confirmation bias is never ending
Fair point, but do you deny that powerful people and organizations conspire for any reason.
@@Zenith_123 the existence of one conspiracy doesn’t prove all conspiracies
hmm
JJ is my favorite conservative. He is the epitome of someone that I disagree with politically but still respect a ton.
JJ I feal is more fiscally conservative and socially Neutral that’s just what I would report from what I saw of him
He’s a Red Tory.
In Canada “Conservatives” are what we call Centre-Lefties. He’s not Right wing at all.
@@JesusFriedChrist ok Because I’m American and obviously we have the republican party which is usually center right if not right of center
@@dapigbear312 Right of centre in the USA may be. But if they popped up here in Scotland, they'd probably be considered right-wing extremists. We're by and large pretty left-wing here. UKIP for instance, are very right-wing and got almost no traction here.
@@grahamlive yeah
JJ: "Listen kid, conspiracy theories are dumb and this is why"
MJ: "Ok, different topic. Do you believe in aliens?"
Mj: "well thats your opinion"
I do hate that aliens are lumped into conspiracy theories by UFO sightings. Skeptics like Sagan believed they were aliens were the simple fact the universe is unimaginably vast, physical law is universal, and life did arise in the universe for certain.
Just a warm up for when JJ goes into the Prime Minister's Debates.
He'll likely be our last prime minister because he will probably just invite the US to annex us so he can fulfill his fetish of becoming an american
J.J. would be a great prime minister, but he wouldn't be able to make videos.
love to see it
He'd be a dope prime minister
Dude he’d be the fucking best. He’s what Canada needs.
*mj:* 'its like gravity its just a theory' *me:* get him, canadian dad, finish him
Boomer destroys degenerate who thinks gravity is a theory
This is where failure of education comes into play and not realizing that scientific semantics defines "theory" differently than the rest of the population. This kid's teachers did not distinguish between "theory" and "scientific theory"
@@johnjingleheimersmith9259 I'm not at all defending him, but, scientific theory can still be wrong. Gravity most definitely is real though
@@Findeeney Gravity isn't a theory though. Gravity is an objectively observed phenomenon. The theory of relativity is a theory which (in part) is used to explain why gravity exists.
JJ really go medieval after
it’s scary hearing jj this passive-aggressively angry but god this guy is dense
Passive aggressive. A true canadian
It feels really scary for some reason. Feels like hearing your favorite cool teacher who hangs out with every students to be serious and quite angry for the first time.
JJ: PASSIONATELY SCREAMS ABOUT THE YOUTH THESE DAYS
MJ: i gotcha
That one made me laugh good
MJ:OK, ok yeah.
I don't know about anyone else, but I can't stand the sound of that kid's voice.
for sure, for sure
"Like Gravity, it's a theory"
My god. That hurt me physically.
UUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM ACTUALLY ALBERT EINSTEIN PROVIDED A MORE COMPELLING EXPLANATION THAT GRAVITY IS NOT A FORCE AND THAT IN FACT GRAVITY IS JUST WELLS FORMED IN SPACE-TIME 🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓
As a physics instructor, I'd like to say a few things:
Theories do not become facts. Theories contain many facts (worded statements) and laws (mathematical statements) within them. All of the facts and laws are assumed truths until there's reason not to, at which point the theory is tweaked so as to be that much more rigorous going forward. Thus, a theory is mankind's best understanding of a particular natural phenomena. Outside of the scientific community, the word "theory" is far to often used as a synonym for "hypothesis". Hypothesis only get elevated to that of a theory because they actually "work"; meaning they are able to make repeatable definitive predictions.
Yesss
Yes!!
Exactly! This is an important distinction
You explained this perfectly! Only thing I want to add is that theories in social sciences are a lot more flexible as to their basis in observable fact. Generally, they tend to reflect broad truths in, for example, comparative politics, international relations, etc. but cannot account for all small inconsistencies. I think this is a matter of how underlying assumptions of different schools of thought in a given social science tend to vary a lot, which results in less concrete theorisation. You get this especially in economics, where you have Neoclassicism, Keynesianism, Hetorodox schools, etc. Generally, these underlying assumptions still require a lot of work to address, but this will take time since the social sciences are a lot newer and more interdisciplinary
Thanks for the distinction. The term Conspiracy Theories has become more of an oxymoron to me than anything. I think it's high time we dropped "theories" and just start calling them plain conspiracies.
As soon as he said "Gravity is a theory, not a fact" I know we were dealing with a lunatic, not that believing in the Mandela effect didn't already make him a lunatic, but I was just like: "Oooooooh nooooooo......" and was crying for disappointment
How could someone be 20 and not believe in GRAVITY.
@@Sjnnnssmsnsmsnsnsmsmsmzkxixkd Or better yet, not understand what a "theory" means in scientific terms compared to every day normal speech.
Exactly, there is a difference between Einstein’s theories of relativity, and a alternate universe created just so reality could mess with you by making the Bernstein bears the Bernstain bears 😂. One is grounded in science and intelligence, and one is profoundly absurd.
It is true, gravity is a theory. But gravity has been proven to be correct by experiments and calculations done by numerous scientists, proving its validity. At any point, a wave of new experiments, observations and calculations could make the theory of gravity invalid, but that has simply not happened. That is why we consider the theory of gravity factual. The Mandela Effect has not been proven through any sort of valid method, only through personal memory, which is very fluid and not helpful for experimentation.
yeah, like mandela effect may at best be termed to be hypothesis and can be easily discarded using occam's razor
J.J. sounds like he's lecturing his drop out nephew to turn his life around and I'm here for it...also I'm 21, don't let this guys age excuse his idiocy.
For sure. I wasn’t this dumb when I was 11. Not sure I even knew many 20 year olds this dumb when I was 20. But it is both. Maybe in 10 years he’ll be just about able to string a coherent sentence or argument together and not believe in this shit.
JJ: goes off speaking logic, disproving this kid's thinking
mj: "ok cool next question"
Lol. Exactly
J. J.,
I'm a scientist who has spent his life to understanding the realities of the physical world. And I cannot tell you how frustrating it is to deal with antivaxxers, climate change deniers, flat earthers, etc.
I'm so glad to see someone like you who is similarly passionate and certain about conspiracy theories.
This video was great. I understand and appreciate your passion
Physicist here, just wanted to drop few words. The concept of “belief” itself is something that triggers me every single time it comes up in the internet sphere culture. Every time a topic is faced, listening to the fact and following the logic is only the first stage of the approach to the problem in a lot of people’s mind. Then comes the need to take a personal position that can bypass anything there was before as long as it’s “your personal opinion”. And that is honestly damaging: when, facing the same facts people go out their way to draw different conclusions. It’s not a discussion or a confrontation anymore, it’s cheering for your favorite sport team no matter the situation you are in. The fact that half the guy’s sentences are “yes but do you personally believe....” despite how JJ’s tries to move the focus of the debate away from personal biases is just a huge symptom of that. And it’s fucking sickening. As 21th century boyzz we grew up being told that censure is bad, that you always need to think with your head, but it seems that the virtue of listening and learning from who knows more than you instead than talking shit still is oblivious to many.
@@ND-gm2vs I wish I could like your comment more than once. Just today I provided someone with the dictionary definition of the word allegation and they responded with "that's your opinion".
@@pattygould8240 ... s'ok... I did it for you... 😁
@@ND-gm2vs "Belief" is a concept we can't do without. It's a specific mental state regarding a claim. Even if we were all automatons who automatically came to the conclusions you regard as reasonable, we'd still all "believe" in some claims rather than others. Right? The idea of belief wouldn't magically disappear.
@@ND-gm2vs I completely agree with you, but it is my personal opinion that...( 😂 just kidding)
When JJ said "HOW OLD ARE YOU?!" I really felt that
How do you think my generation (GenX) feels, roaming around the world today...
I felt that that was a bad question. There are a lot of complete nutter conspiracy theorists out there of every age.
@@altrag He asked because of how naive he sounds. Just the way he talks you can tell he doesn't have a whole lot of life experience. His generation is different in that he probably doesn't remember a time when the internet didn't exist or at least was all that interesting.
@@kylem1112 Oh I realize why he asked. Just that in my experience, older conspiracy nuts are just as nutty as young ones. Often even more so specifically because they have lived long enough to know better yet still cling to their delusions.
I couldn't help but think as I was listening that as a 26-year-old, JJ would probably think I'm a dumb kid like MJ AND MJ would probably think I'm a crotchety old man like JJ.
"Theory" is one of the most misunderstood words there is. In a scientific sense, theory does NOT mean something can't be proven.
But that’s just a theory
A gAmE tHeOrY
The way he's using theory is how people casually use the term. He doesn't understand that a theory is essentially a proper scientific explanation for something based on evidence.
@@eaglebearer Exactly! Drives me nuts. I was hoping JJ was going to explain that, but he went into a different, but still valid, direction.
@@houseofleaves126 "OK everyone, gather around for some gAmE tHeOrY!"
@@houseofleaves126 you made me laugh😂😂😂😂
Your response to "there is always 2 sides of the story" is just absolutely perfect. I hate the "both sides" argument, and you just summed up why better than I ever could.
Honestly I agree that there's only one correct answer. However the more I research and dig into things, the more I'm convinced that the authority position is damn near wrong about everything.
I think the internet peaked a decade ago... it went from "wow, we have access to all this information" to "oh no, people gravitate to the wrong information".
I kinda agree with this. I think gen z and millennials really know how to filter out the bs. I also think the idiots also get pushed to the spotlight as well because its just so funny seeing them be idiots. Theres around 5,000,000,000 people on the internet. Like the answer to pretty much anything its a bit more complex
Cause they don't expend time reading a textbook and learning complex things takes long time
@@ingridsantos7815 Exactly, if it isn't capable of being shortened into a five minute video...then it must be either unimportant or a lie.
Haha yea or it got so big and corporate that people could hide misinformation in plain sight then beckon viewers into obscure corners... Gaw it sounds like London Soho poor bastards
No, _idiots_ gravitate to it 🤣
JJ: Completely disproves MJ's theory
MJ: "I totally get that, *forgets everything that was just said and moves on*"
JJ>MJ. I may be a bit biased though
@@JJLiu-xc3kg nah that's factual
@@truedarklander Read my name lol, I was joking
"Gravity is just a theory."
This kid's maybe dropped his phone on his face one too many times as a result of said theory.
Scientists do consider gravity a theory, it's a very credible theory that is regarded as the best explanation for why things fall, but regardless, it is classified as a theory.
Source: my college biology professor
@@andrewsutherland133 I thought very credible theories were called laws
@@communismwithgiggles2515 apparently there's a difference.
The way he described it Is laws are completely proven and "there's no gravity in space"
@@andrewsutherland133 How can the absence of gravity in space be a law but not the presence of gravity on Earth?
@@communismwithgiggles2515 dude I don't know I'm not a scientist. I'm just telling you what a college scientist told me.
“Why don’t you agree with me my friend” JJ’s attempt at being polite while wanting to punch him in the face 😂😂
Jj absolutely destroyed mj lol😂
Canadian nice?
I'm not your friend, buddy!
Hey hey punching isn't good, especially against someone who he basically sees as a child.
@@Corwin256 I'm not your buddy, guy!
“It’s hard to argue with a genius, it’s impossible to argue with an idiot”
Because they will drag you down to their level and beat you with experience.
The kid doesn't sound like an idiot though
@@uioplkhj i agree i kinda pity him
@@chiwengalopez1501 why? He’s a kid interested in stuff he’s interested in , he’ll grow out of it and if he doesn’t who cares America and Canada are free countries , don’t pity those with different belife sets then you
@@chiwengalopez1501 he’s wrong obviously but in the end he can belive that
The real test of this theory is to see how many *South Africans* think Nelson Mandella died in prison. I'm willing to bet that the number of people willing to argue with a straight face that their nation's greatest hero never ascended to its highest office is pretty damn close to 0.
Exactly. As a South African you can't go anywhere without seeing some tribute or reference to Mandela. It's like if people believed that George Washington was killed by the British in the 1770s
Hey JJ, I'm 23 and I completely agree on your assessment of conspiratorial thinking and what it can lead to. I just wanted to add that it's not only affecting the younger population. I just hope the majority of Canada and the world shares the same train of thought as you and I.
Alarmingly, a huge proportion of people aged 40+ seem to be jumping on the conspiracy train as well. Just spend a few minutes on Facebook!
@@TomJohnson67 Facebook users are not a representative group, so don’t worry too much about that lol
I remember being this kid's age and being completely consumed by Alex Jones conspiracies like the New World Order etc. And i can say honestly it CAN be damaging to your sense of reality.
He explained it so well, but yes I agree it is most definitely not limited to young poeple
@@kylem1112 I also wonder whether or not Alex Jones believes in the piffle he's spreading.
Loved the guy asking "So do you believe in parallel universes or you dont?" After JJ has just finished going off for a full minute on how stupid the idea is
My jaw dropped, I swear. I was like oh no hunny🤣😭😭😭😭
If there is a multiverse then there is a infinite number of parallel universe's.
He sounds like a dumb kid who thinks he’s a great influencer host. JJ was basically repeating himself 50 times and even after explaining about the robber emoji, the guy asks that one again.
Critical thinking and analysis skills (particularly when it comes to the internet) are super important to teach, and I believe should be part of the education curriculum before post-secondary education. I also believe that social psychology should be taught in high school because it seems like concepts like groupthink and confirmation bias are high in conspiracy theory circles.
I learned Psychology for 2 years in my HS. Alongside with 15 other subjects every year 😐💀
They need to run that house hippo PSA nowadays as a RUclips ad, perhaps
Do you think that it's possible to teach critical thinking like it's a skill? Is it a skill, or a capacity?
I always forget how old JJ is, until he reminds us he is in his 30s. I am imagine him being in his late 20s.
Exactly! J.J. will look 30 when he's 50.
When I first watched him I thought he was like 21 or something
Im sure thats because of his hair
Hard to take him seriously when he doesn't believe that gravity is real.
I don't disagree that he used the term errenously, but he wasn't technically incorrect in saying gravity is a theory
@@lukegriffin5596 true but then if we want to use scientific terms, the Mandela effect isn't a theory, it's a hypothesis! There is a huge difference and people saying thet everything that can't be proven is a theory are a problem!
He said gravity is a theory. That’s true. He was just using it as an example of a theory that is treated as fact.
@@TonyF1MMA Well he seemed to misunderstand that the colloquial definition of "theory" and the scientific definition are drastically different.
@@TonyF1MMA True but a theory is accepted by many scientists and has scientific, objective evidence behind it. The Mandela effect is a hypothesis with limited evidence with no objective truth. That’s what keeps the Mandela effect a hypothesis as opposed to a theory like gravity which is backed up by equations and empirical data in physics.
I love how J.J. basically dismantles the entire theoretical underpinning of the Mandela Effect within the first three minutes of the interview. The rest of it is just M.J. responding with "ok i got u" as J.J. progressively loses the last few tattered shreds of hope he had left for humanity.
JJ has become possibly my favourite RUclips person in less than 1 month. I can’t believe he stayed off of my radar til now. Way to go again JJ.
I remember you said “coca cola to be a type of blue apple juice like drink” but in this new interview it turns to “pineapple like drink” 😂
I guess you could say he *pined* to use that reference... I'll see myself out
Omg he misquote his own quote omg the mandela effect's real
I knew REALLY started when you asked: "How old are you?"
Thank you for this very insightful conversation. Wonderful.
I feel bad for when mj patek cringes looking back on this in 10 years time.
Hopefully he does cringe...
hope he does not have a shitstorm now because of the interview
Omg I thought the exact same thing lmao
This guy seems like he wants to know what hes talking about, and is trying to be unbiased in the interview, but obviously believes that the Mandela Effect is real and is so entrenched in this believe that he just can't not be personally hurt by the denial of the effect, even though said denial is based in fact and reasoning
That and/or he's just trying to make money.
Like that comment above mine it seems he was genuinely convinced by some of these comments (or he has been a fraud from the start) yet his whole business relies on this conspiracy theory so has had to maintain the idea
The only person taking this personally here I think is JJ. MJ, whilst admittedly wrong, and less articulate is far more level headed here.
Listening to this, I lived out a lot of my pent up annoyance and distaste for this conspiracy fake crap that's poisoning our society these days. JJ it may not have been comfortable for you to have this conversation, but it was a very cathartic breath of fresh air for me at least. Keep up the good work, but don't burn yourself out with the crazies these days.
I think all of us subscribers would agree that a sane & healthy JJ is more important than the volume of content :)
I think you're at your best when you're a little riled up. A simple experiment; Ask someone to draw a dollar bill, or any routinely seen object with a complex design. They can't do it, of course, they will come up with a highly simplified symbolic representation. People think they can do it because people think they know more details about the world than they really do. Hence; Mandela effect ...
When he said, “gravity is just a theory.” I cringed.
I wish JJ corrected him on the theory/hypothesis thing
Our language is terrible for that (probably other languages as well, but I'm only fluent in one..) We have at least three definitions of "theory":
- A mathematical "theory" is a collection of theorems, axioms and other individual components that together form a useful way of viewing mathematical models. They are always 100% correct, because we straight up define the axioms and the theorems and other constructs are mathematically proven based on those axioms. You can't disprove a (complete) mathematical theorem, other than through violating the axioms.
- A scientific theory is a mathematical theory that corresponds to some real-world data. You can't "prove" gravity, nor can you even "prove" that our theory of gravity (ie: General Relativity) corresponds to the real world with 100% accuracy. But you can _disprove_ a scientific theory. The math will still be correct, but if the math doesn't correspond to the real world data then the "theory" as a whole is wrong. In a very loose sense you can think of "corresponds to real world data" as an axiom and finding a data set that doesn't correspond would be equivalent to violating that axiom.
- The layman concept of a "theory" is anything they dream up to explain something, regardless of evidence or mathematical rigor (or having a mathematical basis at all). People often like to state that this definition of "theory" should really be called a "hypothesis", but there's a lot of people who have invented "theories" with so little thought and rigor behind them that even the phrase "hypothesis" doesn't really apply.
And this is hardly the only example.. as I said, our language is terrible for things like that. And its even worse when there are bad actors who intentionally abuse the differences between technical and lay terminology to produce bad faith arguments in the hopes that most people don't know enough to second-guess them while still being "technically correct" and not running afoul of things like laws against reporting false news (not "fake news" as in things the right wing don't like, but explicitly false information).
What I learned in school is that a theory is assumed to be correct, but can’t be fully proven based on the current evidence we have, for example the theory of relativity is constantly either being proven to be correct or expanded on further with each new hypothesis that is explored to further support or try to disprove the current theory.
When a theory eventually has been tested to a certain point and new discoveries continue to support it (for example the first observations of gravity waves), it gets reclassified as a principle or a law, for example the law of thermodynamics.
@@davidgodfrey8751 Nope. Absolutely wrong. Laws and theories are two different things. Theories explain why a phenomenon occurs, whereas a law describes what phenomena happens. One is not "better" than the other. The hierarchy is just a hypothesis, which can either become a theory or law. A theory never graduates to a law.
@@davidgodfrey8751 That's not quite accurate. Theories and laws are in general pretty much equivalent. The only real difference is that a theory provides a "why" something happens while a law just says "here's some math that works".
For example, Newton provided us a law of gravity. He gave us an equation and that equation solved the problems (at least until our measurement capabilities got good enough to find edge cases). But nothing in Newton's gravity tells us _why_ it happens so we got people theorizing angels blowing on things and other such goofiness that was mostly based in either trying to explain science through religion or trying to denounce religion through science (religion was taken much more seriously back when you could get your head chopped off for not believing the same thing your king did).
Einstein on the other hand gave us a theory of gravity (general relativity). It not only corrected for those edge cases that Newton didn't know about, but it tells us _why_ gravity works (the curvature of spacetime). That "why" is also very much subject to being disproven (for example, if gravitons are ever shown to be a real particle) but simply having a "why" is the main difference between a theory and a law.
Principles are a different beast. They're more of a guiding .. well, principle .. than anything. For example the "principle of superposition" just reminds you that you have to consider combined states - it doesn't tell you how the states in whatever system you're working on should combine or let you predict what the outcome of combining them might be. There are of course often some extremely well-known examples associated with a particular principle and that can confuse the issue a bit (eg: superposition is almost always considered in terms of quantum mechanics.. but it actually applies to all waves, including more "normal" waves like sound waves or even water waves on the ocean).
This was a breath of fresh air. A conservative that believes in reality and objectivity. I was starting to go crazy with what is happening right now. Thank you so much for posting this JJ.
The QAnon people aren't conservatives lol
@@hightower2277 that's (probably) not what he was talking about. Conservatives no longer believing in reality and objectivity doesn't exactly begin and end with QAnon; climate change deniers are a good example.
@@lucasharvey8990 meh he was talking about 'whats happening right now' so i just assumed
@@hightower2277 That's fair. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
@@hightower2277 Large swaths of the Qanon populations are most definitely republicans. There are also alot of new age spirtuality people indoctrinated into this stuff as well.
"He's a bigger deal on the TikTok."
At least he wasn't on JJ's lawn.
I have a friend that likes to “debate” like this. Hearing JJ talk like this really validates me
Does he genuinely believe in the bs tho, or just fuckin around? Cuz i do that shit purely to mess with people, but dont actually believe shit
What a great listen. Thanks, both of you for a really intelligent conversation. I'll admit, that I too am a fairly regular listener to Coast To Coast AM and I'm 79 now. But, for me, it's mostly just humorous to hear these characters go on and on about anti-vax and big foot and flat earth and OMG. Thank you for all your hard work and passion, love your stuff.
I quite enjoyed this, your more aggressive side. I like how you called him out as soon as he was going down the “well there’s two sides to a story” argument, I think you really nailed it by calling it for what it is, a postmodern rejection of truth.
hearing two sides does not mean you believe both sides have equal merit.
everyone has a right to be heard, nobody has a right to be believed.
This wasn't really a debate, sounded more like a scolding. xD
But like how could you really debate that issue tho. And the kid really didn’t say anything to compete with JJ’s argument.
@@jessocity9964
I think The dude felt like this conversation can go really bad for him so he didn't really try to oppose or compete he opted to survive , I don't think the kid is stupid or actually believe in conspiracy stuff he just found it profitable to talk about it online
Should this have been a debate, or should JJ have gone in so hard? When MJ said "gravity is just a theory, so the Mendala is equivalent", it was absurd, but maybe that's the last time to start shouting. Maybe JJ could have calmly explained that the Theory of Relativity is constantly being supported with new discoveries in physics, and how it's been proven to be instrumental in Science research even 80 years later.
He could've demonstrated why MJ was innocently mistaken, instead of just shutting him down and implying some sort of malice or negligence on MJ's part.
Ok for sure.
@@jessocity9964 well, it's more of an opinionated topic. some may not believe it, some do. so we can't prove that any of it is fake, nor real.
JJ: birds fly, grass grows, and brother, i hurt people!
He really hit him with the “young man”. Love to see it.
I'm sure some of the fans of this kid will pull the "Ok boomer" card after listening to the whole conversation they had.
That’d be funny
@@nickhueper2906 not really it's the most over used joke
@@gametimewithjamie ok Boomer
@@nickhueper2906 ruclips.net/video/1ESHXxInoAs/видео.html
@@gametimewithjamie lmao nice
Were you raised Amish and forced to argue with the dining room table as a kid? Because your patience here is remarkable.
How is this even real? Can't talk to him seriously, J.J. clearly is the only sane one here. Good conversation, an interesting listen.
"Okay JJ, I completely get what you are saying but why does"
Mr McCullough made his opening statement, and I was just like "yeah thats pretty convincing, open and shut case really, don't know how anyone could argue with that"
And then the video goes on another 20 minutes.
JJ getting passionate in discussion is the same energy as your favorite teacher whos always chill screaming at you 😢
Yeah. I’d douse my trousers if he was my teacher and went off like that
Patek: There are always two sides to the story-
JJ: No
I just love it when he says, "my friend."
JJ is so Canadian and it's amazing
JJ is the type of guy to make all the kids cry at a school assembelly.
This wasn't a debate, he never argued against any of JJs point xD
It goes to show how bankrupt the “theory” of the Mandela Effect really is. I mean what could he even have said beyond that the misrememberings people have are sometimes really common? There aren’t any arguments in favor of it, good or otherwise. There are certainly many false beliefs that do have their scholars of sorts... but with this... it would even be generous to call it pseudoscience.
i think he wanted to interview him. He never said he wanted a debate, he actually just said i wanted to talk with you to get your side of the story - not try to convert him. Calling this a debate is disingenuous
@@AbeYousef "I debate a TikTok conspiracy theorist"
@@lopadia exactly, jj approached it as a debate, mj rly didn't
@@AbeYousef do you think there COULD even have been a debate, though? Would it have been possible? What could MJ have said that he didn’t?
I've a feeling this young man was overwhelmed with all this info - but you planted a large amount of seeds, JJ. Give him some time to decant all this. This is an amazing conversation!
Jj: a very well worded and structural argument
Also jj: "the tik tok"
Daaang
Daniel
Hi:)
I swear man, these conspiracy nutters over in the states must be unbearable!
Ok mr. beat my beat
@@presenttomato1060 They spend 99% of their time online "researching" so you don't really notice them
I remember this debate being 30 minutes. I swear it was. Who remembers this? No ways it was 22:56 minutes long!!!
"The TikTok" Thanks JJ. That's what I am calling it now.
I was in a pretty bad mood before watching this video, so I would like to thank you for making this video public. It really cheered me up
My grandfather saw the so-called aliens on the examining tables and he concluded that they looked like burnt scorched test monkeys.... Which makes more sense to me than actual aliens
JJ talking to this kid likes he’s his misguided younger brother
Exactly! That gave me the same energy.
Salvador Laurente Jr that Canadian energy
No way. Talked to him like he was Grandpa Simpson and had lost all patience. JJ is always better alone talking to the camera than talking to other humans. Check out that old channel he had with the liberal gay guy where they debated different topics. JJ always sounded nuts while the other guy sounded calm and sane and rational. But JJ's main RUclips content sounds almost educational when he isn't talking down to and curling his lip at other human beings with differing viewpoints.
@@montyollie Yeah, that's true
You’re definitely right JJ. I fell down some regrettable rabbit holes a few years ago. Pulled myself out before I started looking at anything too serious though.
Respect to MJ Patek he listened and took JJ's onslaught on the chin on his own show. And turned it round best he could to be a discussion somewhat in his control as host. Really good for him :)
Although I 100% agree with everything ur saying, and I think you’re right in debunking a lot of this seudo-science theories propagated through unregulated, click-baity media, you should really have change the title of the video to:
‘Old JJ yells at cloud’
I’ve never heard JJ sound like such a dad before, and I loved it.
JJ: “You seem like an intelligent enough young man.”
Uhhhh...about that JJ...
Uh oh. What happened now?
Is JJ gonna join the ranks of Online Debate Bros?? Im OK with that LOL
Can't wait for JJ vs. Destiny
@@joshuafan4419 What gods do I have to pray to so that will happen! lmao
I do not know what this is
JJ debates Destiny
@@summers7554 maybe if he gets better rhetoric. I'm halfway through and it already looks like he's attacking the guy for no reason. (I mean, he could have made the reason apparent, and then this would be the better debate)
Bruh the second the word “Postmodern Nihilism” came out JJs mouth this interview hit peak Jordan Peterson
even with the accent a little
This felt more like JJ being interviewed than being debated
I have never seen anyone say "my friend" with such aggression!
JJ reminds me so much of a typical guy from the praries here.
Canadians. What can you do?
@@eaglebearer That's because his mother and father are from there
I will never think of the opening "Hello friends..." the same again 😂
Never seen an angry South African?
JJ’s take on conspiracy theories, the thought process of accepting them, and modern internet culture was one of the first times in a while where an internet video really illuminated something so prevalent that I wasn’t paying attention to.
Dude, I would actually listen to a podcast where it's just JJ talking to someone else and debate, honestly, it would be amazing.
you should've brought up that when people introduce you to the mandela effect they give you the false memory first before telling you it's wrong
Exactly. You're primed first which inclines agreement.
I have never commented on a RUclips video ever, and I just want to profess my love and admiration for your willingness to put conspiracy theories in their place.
Yeah, it is so important to put conspiracy theories in their place. Anyone who believes a theory about two or more people planning something in secret that is either harmful to others or illegal has got to be a total moron. People never do that! What a crazy 🤪concept.
To give some credit to Mj, he is taking this very well.
Conspiracy Theory:
I remember turning on the TV one day, and Prime Minister JJ Mccullough said that he would declare war on America, and take over the world.
omg me too
@@ElephantSoup me too! Mandela effect!!!!
JJ: "my friend"
Missed opportunity for "I'm not your friend, buddy" "I'm not your buddy guy".
I'm not your guy dude
@@woutermollema I'm not your dude, friend
I’m not your dude pal
I’m pal your buddy guy
@@definitelynotethan7959 Allrighty then, lets grab a beer friend
I love that story about the burglar emoji because emojis are essentially small cartoons that express emotion. So when they describe the supposed emoji, it the most literal cartoonish portrait of a robber you can think. If I said “Burglar emoji”, your first thought would be what she described.
“Ya I get what you’re saying”
*proceeds to completely ignore what J.J. Just said and pedal conspiracy theories*
Because for his generation, feelings are more important than facts. Whereas an older person might sympathize with another's feelings then bury them with facts in a debate, younger people tend to acknowledge understanding the words in the facts presented and fall back on feelings. It comes, in part , from receiving participation trophies simply for saying something no matter how inane. At some point, "there are no stupid questions," became, "there are no stupid answers."
@@Hi11is There’s a difference between recognising generational differences and just being bitter.
@@JJLiu-xc3kg
There is no judgement in the first two sentences, and the last two cite the cause as a generation prior to MJ's. If that constitutes bitterness in your mind, then you are not a rational person.
@@Hi11is You would do well to remember that it was older generations that invented Participation trophies for their kids to soothe THEIR OWN ego rather than their childs' ego.
I already know this gone be good
When talking about opinions, there is always room for “the other side of the story”. But when talking about facts, there are just objective facts. It is important to understand the difference between opinions and facts. Otherwise the distinction would not make any sense..
The question is, who gets to be the arbiter of that distinction?
But in a Nazi's opinion, Jews are bad. So even opinions can be problematic
JJ's Bizarre Adventure
Stardust Canadians
As a youngster myself, I wholeheartedly agree. It is scary that the whole idea of a reality that is agreed upon by almost a whole civilisation is crumbling down in all layers of society. I, for a time, didn't believe in the evolution theory but after a lot of consideration, I had to come to terms with the fact that it was indeed true. The fact that people are rarely confronted with different opinions nowadays is sad and the more people float apart, the harder it becomes to have a (somewhat) civilised conversation about things. I try my best to do that but you always have blindspots
What's ur linux distro?
Being confronted with different viewpoints is invaluable.
However, what JJ said, “in a post-modern, nihilistic, no truth, no morality world you can’t have civilization” (paraphrased slightly). Is both conflationary (nihilism doesn’t mean ‘no objective facts or truth,’ eg gravity) and is an argument for having some sort of moral system in order to retain “civilization” (whatever that means) and not an argument for the truth of that moral system.
It seems JJ assumes that “civilization” is what is most important, as opposed to truth. Or beauty, or really chill tunes, or whatever each individual deems important, which i guess is post modern?
I now no longer feel alone listening to Coast to Coast during high school, and believing there was something off with the call ins.
In retrospect I wonder how many of them were simply staged.
@@JJMcCulloughAfter finding out the main host also has run a similar TV talk show that can now be viewed on Amazon Video, my assumption is the majority is staged. Though there have been a handful of people that give me the impression they truly believe what they are saying.
Damn, an angry JJ is kinda weird to hear lol, he is still right tho
He feels like the kind of friendly teacher who usually is nice all the time and you hear him being mad for the first time. It's oddly terrifying and I want my mommy.