Maybe not that interesting for everyone here, but I found no better community for this.

  • dustyData@lemmy.worldEnglish
    923·
    21 days ago

    The channel hat always been disingenuous. It’s not the first video they have where they develop a well written essay that has conclusions that make no sense with the information presented. It’s the theater of research without any of the substance. The editors just do whatever they want, under the expectations that the writing team will support their preconceived notion.

    They’re an entertainment channel, not a science communication channel. They have said some awful, totally not fact supported stuff in the past.

      • dustyData@lemmy.worldEnglish
        34·
        21 days ago

        Climate change whitewashing for corporations with awful conflicts of interest. Others have posted the links to the videos elsewhere in this comment section.

    • Echo Dot@feddit.ukEnglish
      2·
      20 days ago

      Wow look at all of the evidence you’ve provided. It’s going to take me all night to go through it.

      If you going to make claims like that you’re going to need to provide even a shred of evidence

    • BreadstickNinja@lemmy.worldEnglish
      315·
      21 days ago

      As far as science channels go, you’ve got SpaceTime for college students, Veritasium for high schoolers, and Kurzgesagt for newborn infants or maybe a smart dog. It’s probably at about the right level if you want to explain science to an Australian Shepherd.

      • dustyData@lemmy.worldEnglish
        27·
        21 days ago

        Veritasium was bought years ago. No editorial freedom. Never heard of SpaceTime. I have better sources for science than YouTube slop, thank you.

        • Echo Dot@feddit.ukEnglish
          2·
          20 days ago

          Given the fact that you don’t appear to know how to cite your sources I’m not convinced that you in fact do have better sources for science.