YouTube content providers that you follow?

[cytg111]

Agree to disagree. Once you made content you want it to sell. There is a certain type of thumbnail that does this best. This is small potatoes right?

On the science guy, he got a masters in chemistry right? And is weighing in on Sabines take on the theoretical physics state of affairs. I think that was a crank video, I saw it way back so the details may be fuzzy.

Sabine was like "stop funding crank string studies that goes nowhere for a decade and use it on something else" and these clout chasing baboons scream "science denialism, sabine is a fraud". Shut the fuck up.

Edit: was supposed to trail Amused post

Edit2: she is very clear about her bias so you can adjust accordingly and when the vid is heavily opinionated she doesn't monetize it. Shrugs

 

[Reflex]

Yes I am aware of these, lessor opinions from lesser minds . IMO she is not really pandering either left or right, she just cuts with the data and facts - fuck your feelings. I mean I think Weinstein is a tool however I can appreciate how she will use him as an example of non-group-think.. Something that has apparently dragged their field down for decades of string theory.
So she will hate on String Theory for years .. until a paper comes along and she be like "well maybe I got something wrong".
You can tell when people are in pursuit of the factual and real and not polishing the ego and vanity over past positions.

I understand you are a fan but she wrecked her credibility when she started asserting things about subjects she has little to no training in. Her videos on climate change are a travesty for instance. You mention string theory and quite frankly those are quite good, it's her wheelhouse, she actually can speak with authority and I've seen little to no pushback from other physicists on her takes. On everything else? No, just no. And if you don't think she's pandering to the right, read the comments under her videos, those are her main fanbase and you should ask yourself what they are seeing that you are not.

 

[Reflex]

Can't say I'd ever heard of this person before.

But this is interesting to me.

Those videos actually leave me slightly sympathetic to her position (presumably the opposite to what they are trying to do?).

She has a valid point that "science" is hugely affected by social, economic and political influences - there are countless examples of that, particularly in medicine, psychology and (most of all) economics.

And I've heard similar criticisms of string theory, and the general direction of contemporary physics, before (my degree was in physics and at least one friend I had went on to do a PhD in string theory - but the truth is I wasn't a very good physicist - not least because I had serious undiagnosed medical issues - and my experience with how doctors deal with rare medical conditions is one of the reasons why I'm skeptical about how our culture treats 'science').

The arguments about string theory strike me as by far the least important aspect of the status of science in our culture - it's a pretty esoteric and minor issue - but seems as if she has a point on that topic. I've heard people arguing that it's become almost theology - or at least just pure maths - at this point, as there's no experimental way of deciding between the different theories. But I don't know enough to have an opinion, and don't much care either.

One argument I have encountered was the question of why so much more prestige and funding is attached to esoteric science topics like String theory vs more practical areas like, say, studying climate change.

Why do you, supposedly a leftist, disagree with questioning the authority of 'science'? It gets invoked relentlessly to support right-wing political agendas (cf that bogus 'lockdowns didn't work' study that used the authority of Johns Hopkins).

No leftist should buy into an uncritical worship of anything that calls itself 'science' (whether it's "IQ studies", sociobiology, or neo-classical economics).

One of the main issues with her approach is her framing of the situation, she sets herself up as a loan dissenting voice speaking the truth against the supposed hive mind. In reality all useful science is built on dissent. She is lending credence to the right wing claims that science is a politically driven force not built on evidence. In reality the opposite is true, and she does the field no favors by framing herself as the truth telling hero, in fact she's erasing the real work and dissenters.

Secondly, using terms like 'worship' is again how the far right pushes the concept of science, as simply an alternative to religion as though there are no inherent tests and validation in the process and acknowledgement in the methodology itself that those practicing it are biased and imperfect.

And finally, she proposes no meaningful reforms, most of what she suggests is vague, misleading about the problems or profoundly ignorant (again I point at her videos on climate change or transgender topics). She is contributing nothing but 'vibes' that attract the worst kind of people who use her videos to promote anti-science.

 

[Reflex]

Their point is you can be critical without empowering science denialism and anti-academia conspiracy theories. She's not doing that. She's doing the opposite and increasingly so because those videos get her a magnitude more hits and make her significantly more money.

In my opinion, she is falling down the same hole Russel Brand fell down.

And if I am correct, she will increasingly produce videos that appeal to science denialism and anti-academia at the expense of her credibility for money. So far, she is doing just that.

It's the you tube trap.

This right here. She started in a very different place than where she's been going. I used to like her content but it started getting....weirdly suspicious a couple years ago.

 

[pmv]

Secondly, using terms like 'worship' is again how the far right pushes the concept of science, as simply an alternative to religion as though there are no inherent tests and validation in the process and acknowledgement in the methodology itself that those practicing it are biased and imperfect.

Well, an awful lot of people _do_ seem to treat science as just a form of religion. As if it were a set of unchanging and unchallengable eternal truths, set out in the Holy Scriptures (aka textbooks). Rather than the provisional results of an always-potentially-flawed process, conducted by fallible human beings within a social context.

There are inherent tests and validation, but those all occur within institutions and a society subject to the same political and other biases as everything else. Hence they are often flawed, especially in the sciences that relate directly to humans rather than physical objects.

 

[pmv]

This right here. She started in a very different place than where she's been going. I used to like her content but it started getting....weirdly suspicious a couple years ago.

I mean, that I can believe. Not having followed this person, but it seems like something like that happened with that Dr John Campbell YouTuber, with his take on COVID (that very gradually went from entirely orthodox and sensible, to increasingly conspiratorial)

 

[cytg111]

I understand you are a fan but she wrecked her credibility when she started asserting things about subjects she has little to no training in. Her videos on climate change are a travesty for instance. You mention string theory and quite frankly those are quite good, it's her wheelhouse, she actually can speak with authority and I've seen little to no pushback from other physicists on her takes. On everything else? No, just no. And if you don't think she's pandering to the right, read the comments under her videos, those are her main fanbase and you should ask yourself what they are seeing that you are not.

Cheap shot a fan. I like her for the very reason that she doesnt pander to fandom. I dont have to be a fan. She is in the field. Follows scientific principles and is open about her own bias.
I got a hint for you, for free, dont read the comments.
But since you insist on dragging politics into it she has videos about being pro immigration, to an extent, and sensible green transition. She clowns on Trump and Elon if you read between the lines.
I have no idea where you picked this "right" notion from... oh yea the comment section of bots

 

[cytg111]

This is the problem with the scene today, everything is a partisan issue.

For some people its still about the science fuck your political convictions.

 

[Reflex]

Cheap shot a fan. I like her for the very reason that she doesnt pander to fandom. I dont have to be a fan. She is in the field. Follows scientific principles and is open about her own bias.
I got a hint for you, for free, dont read the comments.
But since you insist on dragging politics into it she has videos about being pro immigration, to an extent, and sensible green transition. She clowns on Trump and Elon if you read between the lines.
I have no idea where you picked this "right" notion from... oh yea the comment section of bots

You keep asserting that she isn't pandering when people are pointing out that she literally is. That you can't see it is on you, I can't fix your perception on that, but ignoring her comments is likely why you are ignorant on what she is doing. They are very vocal about her dog whistles, she is aware of them, and continues to perform them.

We've seen this repeatedly with intellectuals who suddenly realize there is far more money to be made validating the far right than improving science communication. Not sure why it's "being political" when people point out that it's happening again. Like it or not, everything is political and there is no getting around that fact.


If Sabine stuck to communicating the science you'd have a better point, but she does not, and she speaks authoritatively on subjects she is literally not an authority on, and ignores when people who are try to correct her. Literally the opposite of following the facts. A real science communicator would communicate on their area of expertise, and when they venture into other areas *recruit an authority in that space to have a conversation with while using their own knowledge of the scientific process to help the audience along* but again, that isn't what she does. She interjects her 'feelings' on the matter, essentially injecting her anecdotes and bias, the opposite of science.

 

[cytg111]

I am not invested beyond what I've already said. Agree to disagree and all that. Peace out .

 

[Fenixgoon]

DW News is excellent. Germany english-speaking news channel.

 

[Brovane]

For Youtube content there is what I consider shorter content, educational, just great story telling or more fun content that I follow.

Sampson Boat Co - https://www.youtube.com/@SampsonBoatCo

Essential Craftsman - https://www.youtube.com/@essentialcraftsman

Battleship New Jersey - https://www.youtube.com/@BattleshipNewJersey

NASA Spaceflight - https://www.youtube.com/@NASASpaceflight

Scott Manley - https://www.youtube.com/@scottmanley

Breaking in the Habit - https://www.youtube.com/@BreakingInTheHabit

Cody Miller - https://www.youtube.com/@CodyMillerAdventures

James Butler - https://www.youtube.com/@JamesButlerWellAndSepticLife



More current events/News-

Very much anything aviation oriented blancolirio - https://www.youtube.com/@blancolirio

Ward Carroll - Aviation, current military events - https://www.youtube.com/@WardCarroll

What is going on with Shipping - https://www.youtube.com/@wgowshipping

Belle of the Ranch - https://www.youtube.com/@BelleRanch

Heather Cox Richardson (Been watching her videos about more recent events) - https://www.youtube.com/@heathercoxrichardson

I also enjoy Peter Santenello's longer format videos about certain subjects- https://www.youtube.com/@PeterSantenello

 

[SteveGrabowski]

The political channels I sub to:

• Status COUP
• Secular Talk
• Second Thought
• More Perfect Union

A few others I really like

• Michael Penn (always some cool bite sized pieces of math)
• Maths 505 (mostly computes difficult definite integrals)
• FloatheadPhysics (gives pretty intuitive explanations to difficult physics concepts)
• Yosemite Television (does a bunch of cool hikes off the beaten path and I def have a couple of them on my to-do list next time I'm there)