Bill Nye VS Pseudoscience (Part Two!) | Measured Response - General

[video=youtube;LqYgjGDaMYg]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LqYgjGDaMYg[/video] Full disclosure, I haven't finished watching this yet so I don't know if it's good. The first one was tho.

That racist woman with the nose piercing is a fucking asshole, god damn.

I thought this was going to be the exact opposite video, happily surprised that was great.

part 1 for the lazy [hd]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dklVypazQsA[/hd]

[QUOTE=Ganerumo;52646147]That racist woman with the nose piercing is a fucking asshole, god damn.[/QUOTE] I can't figure out her accent. It sounds like a cup of tea, hamburger and dingo mixed in a blender.

[QUOTE=Dan The Man;52663355]I can't figure out her accent. It sounds like a cup of tea, hamburger and dingo mixed in a blender.[/QUOTE] She's some kind of brit at least, based on her previous job. It's hard to research more since she's deleted all of her shit after kraut & tea got her fired from her job [url]https://archive.fo/PDyjC[/url]

[QUOTE=343N;52646249]part 1 for the lazy [hd]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dklVypazQsA[/hd][/QUOTE] I'm not going to sit though the full video because I find hbomberguy insufferable outside of his gaming videos but he's straight up wrong at ~8:30 mark when he sides with Mark Jacobson. Jacobson [I]is[/I] a hack and his 100% renewable studies are really bad science that have been refuted in many other studies. It really is a fantasy to go about believing the only thing stopping us from being free of the evil petroleum and nuclear companies is politics. His studies make so many poor assumptions and fail to account for how electricity grids actually work. He then goes on and talks about how the only thing blocking Jacobson's plan is politics and business, completely ignoring that the thing stopping nuclear power is also politics and business. It's 1am so I won't sit through the rest of his video or the sequel but if it's anything like his anti-gamergate video it is going to be garbage and he'll misrepresent everyone. Some studies: [url]http://www.pnas.org/content/114/26/6722.full[/url] [url]http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1364032117304495[/url]

i didnt watch the video but he said something mean about one particular thing so i'm gonna disregard this person and attack him

Maybe it's just me but I can't stand videos where you shit on dumb people who are clearly dumb. Just makes you look like an ass.

[QUOTE=Geos88;52664327]Maybe it's just me but I can't stand videos where you shit on dumb people who are clearly dumb. Just makes you look like an ass.[/QUOTE] Most of those people get more views than this guy's political videos. Picking some small weirdo with 500 subscribers would be weird, but these people have a certain amount of reach and their ideas do need to be publicly challenged.

[QUOTE=Mud;52664195]i didnt watch the video but he said something mean about one particular thing so i'm gonna disregard this person and attack him[/QUOTE] Well I shut the video off at that point as well (I've seen other Hbomberguy stuff, but honestly I didn't find this one very entertaining), but considering that Hbomberguy is trying to discredit Armoured Sceptics argumentation (that science needs to be """balanced"""), it really threw me off that he's so (seemingly) quick to accept one of the guy's argumentation and completely disregard the other's. Kinda sounds like partisanship to my ears, something he's just been criticising Armoured Sceptic for. Like he literally chastises AS for setting it up like one of them's living in a fantasy world and the other one isn't, and then he turns around and does the exact same thing but in reverse. Not that I doubt that Armoured Sceptic is an idiot, but Hbomberguy could probably criticise him without coming off as a hypocrite. He's not an authority on these matters, and he probably shouldn't make the call on whether 100% renewables or a 100% nuclear powered grid would be more feasible (especially while dismissing one option as "magic"). Yes, it does ruin the video for me, because the video is titled "vs pseudoscience".

[QUOTE=343N;52646249]part 1 for the lazy [hd]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dklVypazQsA[/hd][/QUOTE] I can't possibly take anybody seriously who would actually defend that musical bit about 'MY EXPRESSION IS O-O-O' and say it's pretty good lol The segment about "HEY WHITE PEOPLE" was also naively dismissive. Why is the guy calling out white people specifically? Multiple times? The dude literally goes up and talks about how white people are stupid and gullible for believing in Asian mysticism. I don't know what else needs to be said about it, you can't just handwave that away as "don't worry, it's just a comedy bit". Like, yeah, I know it's a "comedy" bit, it just sucks ass and is childishly condescending, that's why everybody hates it. I've never encountered this YouTuber before but his way of speaking is so unbearable. It's so cutesy with all the little pauses, it reminds me of anime kids in high school that would talk in a really over-dramatic fashion, taking small breaks in between phrases so they could laugh at their own jokes internally. I'm not going to watch 2 hours of some pretentious British kid telling me that "MY VAGINA IS OH OH OH" is the epitome of comedy and I'm a dumb asshole for disagreeing lol

[QUOTE=Vodkavia;52664976]Why am I not surprised you made a post after not even watching the video where you just bitch about the video maker because he dared to touch subject matter that make you can't handle even an [I]assumed[/I] disagreement on. [url]https://facepunch.com/showthread.php?t=1575803&p=52595722&viewfull=1#post52595722[/url] Oh yeah.[/QUOTE] I'm no fan of download but don't you find it kind of ironic that you don't attack his claims but just him?

HBomberGuy's point was more that science doesn't have to be "balanced". Very often when it comes to scientific questions there's going to be one answer that's the most valid and a lot of other answers that are not as valid - it doesn't have to be a constant game of rope walking. What he denounces in armored skeptic is his expressed requirement that Science must be this ultimate neutral ground, where all options are considered on an equal footing but only if these options are absolutely sanitized from the outside world, especially from politics. He shows this practically is an impossible demand to fulfill since a large part of putting science into practice involves political play to some level, especially in a nation like the US where politics are often very religiously motivated, and those religions clash with scientific fact very often leading to science indirectly becoming somewhat of a political statement. As for him "fucking up" and somewhat agreeing with a guy whose scientific claims have supposedly been debunked thoroughly, it's a very minor mistake that does not really unmake any of his points and is of relatively small importance in the grand scheme of a 35 minute long video. Like, he's still right when he says that Armor Skeptics and other people of the same community absolutely loathe citing sources, he's right when he says their expectations of science as this neutral ground wonderland that functions exclusively in a vacuum is ridiculous and impractical, he's right when he says that science is not a game of balance but a game of who's the most right - because there can not be absolute certainty does not mean that every option is suddenly worth the same weight. That's why we put the theory of evolution on such a pedestal compared to some other silly theories such as "the earth is 5000 years old" and "a spiritual, non-tangible being put really old bones in the dirt to fuck with us". That's why shit like the classification of human beings as "true humans" and "sub-humans" with significant variations in intelligence were thrown into the trash a long time ago: the theory of "we're not different from any level deeper than benign physical appearance" is simply more plausible and backed by more data and is therefore the right one to follow. That's why a lot of scientific "debates", for instance a debate between a racist scientist claiming Negroids are dumber than true-human Caucasoids and a level-headed scientist claiming there aren't any intrinsic differences in mental faculties run the risk of not being actual debates, they're often just a freak show that serves a purpose of validation by means of ridiculing an extreme opposing viewpoint.

[QUOTE=Ganerumo;52665157]HBomberGuy's point was more that science doesn't have to be "balanced". Very often when it comes to scientific questions there's going to be one answer that's the most valid and a lot of other answers that are not as valid - it doesn't have to be a constant game of rope walking. What he denounces in armored skeptic is his expressed requirement that Science must be this ultimate neutral ground, where all options are considered on an equal footing but only if these options are absolutely sanitized from the outside world, especially from politics. He shows this practically is an impossible demand to fulfill since a large part of putting science into practice involves political play to some level, especially in a nation like the US where politics are often very religiously motivated, and those religions clash with scientific fact very often leading to science indirectly becoming somewhat of a political statement. [B]As for him "fucking up" and somewhat agreeing with a guy whose scientific claims have supposedly been debunked thoroughly, it's a very minor mistake that does not really unmake any of his points and is of relatively small importance in the grand scheme of a 35 minute long video.[/B] Like, he's still right when he says that Armor Skeptics and other people of the same community absolutely loathe citing sources, he's right when he says their expectations of science as this neutral ground wonderland that functions exclusively in a vacuum is ridiculous and impractical, he's right when he says that science is not a game of balance but a game of who's the most right - because there can not be absolute certainty does not mean that every option is suddenly worth the same weight. That's why we put the theory of evolution on such a pedestal compared to some other silly theories such as "the earth is 5000 years old" and "a spiritual, non-tangible being put really old bones in the dirt to fuck with us". That's why shit like the classification of human beings as "true humans" and "sub-humans" with significant variations in intelligence were thrown into the trash a long time ago: the theory of "we're not different from any level deeper than benign physical appearance" is simply more plausible and backed by more data and is therefore the right one to follow. That's why a lot of scientific "debates", for instance a debate between a racist scientist claiming Negroids are dumber than true-human Caucasoids and a level-headed scientist claiming there aren't any intrinsic differences in mental faculties run the risk of not being actual debates, they're often just a freak show that serves a purpose of validation by means of ridiculing an extreme opposing viewpoint.[/QUOTE] If I only "somewhat agreed" with one side I wouldn't call the other side out for being "magic" - sure the point wasn't about who was right between the two (if anyone), but on the other hand, when you're calling people out, you don't want to be able to be called out for the exact same thing, especially not within a 30 second segment. Hbomberguy could've just as easily made his point without any of that, because the example he chose isn't even apt to illustrate his point; energy policy is hardly a "hard science" where one solution is always "right" and any other is completely wrong. What I'm saying is that if you're calling someone out for misrepresenting an issue and being unscientific, you probably shouldn't show yourself to be susceptible to exactly that. It casts doubt on whatever other point you might make. But yeah, I think I've made my fairly limited point - I haven't watched the whole video and perhaps everything from there on and out is great; I'm just saying that it's important to be aware of your biases.

Yeah that one part is more or less just hbomberguy fucking up for 30 seconds, but it's really not that important and Vodkavia does have a point that Download's kind of got a pattern going on of throwing bitchfits at those sorts of things and not even bothering with watching the full source before whining about it.

[QUOTE=Vodkavia;52664976]Why am I not surprised you made a post after not even watching the video where you just bitch about the video maker because he dared to touch subject matter that make you can't handle even an [I]assumed[/I] disagreement on. [url]https://facepunch.com/showthread.php?t=1575803&p=52595722&viewfull=1#post52595722[/url] Oh yeah.[/QUOTE] Nice job completely ignoring the bulk of what I said and focussing on one line where I say this is a common theme in hbomberguy's videos. How does it feel to be so intellectually dishonest? [editline]10th September 2017[/editline] The hbomberguy circlejerk is absurd in this section of facepunch. [editline]10th September 2017[/editline] [QUOTE=GoDong-DK;52665011]I'm no fan of download but don't you find it kind of ironic that you don't attack his claims but just him?[/QUOTE] I'm used to it at this point. It just feeds my ego seeing people attack me instead of the points I made.

So is the new Bill Nye series considered good by this section now? I am genuinely curious.

[QUOTE=Geos88;52664327]Maybe it's just me but I can't stand videos where you shit on dumb people who are clearly dumb. Just makes you look like an ass.[/QUOTE] But when these dumb people are out there spreading a load of ignorant and racist shit you need to shit on them.

[QUOTE=download;52665895]Nice job completely ignoring the bulk of what I said and focussing on one line where I say this is a common theme in hbomberguy's videos.[/QUOTE] Kind of like how you completely ignored the bulk of what Hbomberguy said (and indeed didn't even bother to [b]listen[/b] to the majority of what he had to say, by your own admission) and focussing (sic) on one line where he makes a slight slip-up in his argument in a context that wasn't even the focus of the counter-point he was making in the first place? [QUOTE=download;52665895]How does it feel to be so intellectually dishonest?[/quote]

[QUOTE=Gmod4ever;52666678]Kind of like how you completely ignored the bulk of what Hbomberguy said (and indeed didn't even bother to [b]listen[/b] to the majority of what he had to say, by your own admission) and focussing (sic) on one line where he makes a slight slip-up in his argument in a context that wasn't even the focus of the counter-point he was making in the first place?[/QUOTE] There's a big difference between reading something and ignoring it, and acknowledging that you only have time to watch a small section and deciding to comment on that. [editline]10th September 2017[/editline] I'm aware of what his argument was; science shouldn't be fair and Jacobson is is the right because his fantasy 100% renewable study is real science while the other guy whose name escapes me is wrong (and his position is wrong) because he can't argue very well.

[QUOTE=download;52665895]Nice job completely ignoring the bulk of what I said and focussing on one line where I say this is a common theme in hbomberguy's videos. How does it feel to be so intellectually dishonest?[/QUOTE] Nice job ignoring my own post which delves far deeper into how you fucked up by actually explaining HBomberGuy's point and how your rancid homolust because he [I]dared[/I] not criticize one guy in particular is not only irrelevant but also extremely childish and very telling of your own fucked up approach to content where you just project your absurd standards and feel the need to start tossing dumb rants about irrelevant shit that no one asked for. [QUOTE=download;52665895]The hbomberguy circlejerk is absurd in this section of facepunch.[/QUOTE] Oh no, people actually watched the two videos in their entirety and called you out on being a baby who very explicitly admitted to have stopped the first video less than halfway through. Surely it must be a circlejerk ! Or maybe people are just calling you out for being dumb because you were acting dumb and you're still acting dumb. [QUOTE=download;52665895]I'm used to it at this point. It just feeds my ego seeing people attack me instead of the points I made.[/QUOTE] What feeds your ego is that you're tapdancing around the actual criticism of your points and your method so you can focus on personal attacks. You're actively in denial of the fact that if people are willing to call you out [I]personally[/I] on shit that you do on a regular basis, it probably means there's something deeply fucked and undesirable in your discourse that needs to be addressed. And I find it double fucking sad that you're just dumping this ridiculous comment about how it feeds your ego to see personal attacks while at the same time admitting that you're thinking less of HBomberGuy's points [I]on principle[/I] because you don't like the guy.

[QUOTE=Slim Charles;52666501]So is the new Bill Nye series considered good by this section now? I am genuinely curious.[/QUOTE] It is possible to dislike both Nye's show and the enlightened centrists failing to understand it at the same time

[QUOTE=Slim Charles;52666501]So is the new Bill Nye series considered good by this section now? I am genuinely curious.[/QUOTE] the two are not mutually exclusive

i concretely refuse to take seriously the points of people who openly admit they did not watch, or watched like 2 minutes of, the video in question and take that as being entitled to whine about it good to see more hbomberguy i like his videos.

[QUOTE=Slim Charles;52666501]So is the new Bill Nye series considered good by this section now? I am genuinely curious.[/QUOTE] Not really, it doesn't do a great job at getting its point across at a lot of stages and has some downright cringey moments. That's going to drive many people on-the-fence away, which is the opposite of what the show needs to be doing. It is fairly accurate though to what our current level of scientific knowledge suggests, which is a big point of this two-parter. It's that no, Bill Nye hasn't fallen down into some strange cult where he began spewing unscientific ideas.

[QUOTE=download;52665895] How does it feel to be so intellectually dishonest? [/QUOTE] mate you just flew into a thread in the video section, said that you didn't like hbomberguy, didn't watch the video and then said that it'd be garbage because you disagreed with his other videos absolutely terrible posting