-
Features
3I/ATLAS: Probably NOT an alien interstellar probe
- Thread starter Swammerdami
- Start date
pood
Contributor
- Joined
- Oct 25, 2021
- Messages
- 7,108
- Basic Beliefs
- agnostic
Yeah. Too bad.
Swammerdami
Squadron Leader
In one video she explained that she diverged because she was being ostracized. I don't remember details; her gender may have played a role.
Shadowy Man
Contributor
Please watch Professor Dave’s critiques of her and then we can discuss. If you don’t want to then I can see about rewatching them and bringing up his most salient points for discussion here.
She is also critiqued a little in a video by Angela Collier called “conspiracy physics and you” with points I also agree with.
bilby
Fair dinkum thinkum
- Joined
- Mar 6, 2007
- Messages
- 40,113
- Gender
- He/Him
- Basic Beliefs
- Strong Atheist
I am left wondering why a cosmologist would be a better source of information about the trade-offs of different electricity sources than an engineer who specialises in that field, or for that matter than any other random person with a YouTube channel and expertise in an unrelated scientific discipline.
Swammerdami
Squadron Leader
She's an opinionated person not ashamed to discuss a variety of topics. If I refused to watch her, it would follow that I should ignore almost all the posters here at IIDB. And Sabine is much more fun than a vast majority of the posters here.
In fact she DOES do a good job of making recent discoveries and speculations in cosmology accessible to laymen.
The future of technologies like AI and quantum computing is of IMMENSE importance, even in the very near term. I listen to various opinions on these topics -- including Sabine's -- though without forming any definite conclusions.
Swammerdami
Squadron Leader
If I promised to click would you take time off from your busy schedule to post link(s)?
Shadowy Man
Contributor
Swammerdami
Squadron Leader
A main claim seems to be
Seeking revenue has degraded content all over the Internet. I think we can all agree with that.
Generally scientists tend to be MUCH less likely than other people to pursue greed: They get their kicks from using their brains rather than from wealth.
Sabine once explained that she was somewhat ostracized from academia. The details seemed unimportant to me and I forgot them. (Did her gender play a role?) But that explains why she focuses on her YouTube channel rather than writing papers.
Her video about 3I/ATLAS was very brief, very factual and seemed like a good source for anyone, like myself, who wanted a very brief summary of 3I/ATLAS. THAT is why I posted it to this thread. It had zero crackpottery AFAICT. I'm sorry if mentioning her name provoked bad feelings.
I was very sincere, and intended to watch your linked videos to improve my understanding of Sabine. I find her a bit outlandish sometimes, devote minimal time* to trying to learn physics, and watch her mainly because she's FUN!
(* - I HAVE devoted MANY hours to reading about quantum physics and cosmology, but remain confused and ignorant on the topic. I've hinted at my peculiar intuitions about temporal paradoxes in some discussions here. I still watch Veritasium, Mathologer and some other such YouTubes but I have lots of other priorities for my very limited time.)
The videos you link to total about two hours in length. Two with a T.
The first spends a while complimenting Sabine, and then complains that science deniers may twist her message and use it to support their wrong ideas. You're welcome to think I'm a science denier if you wish. Anyway life is short, and I didn't watch the remaining half-hour.
The 2nd Prof Dave video begins by complaining about real scientists who complained about the 1st video. IOW ... WHO is complaining about real physicists? Sabine? Or Dave? But it's not fair for me to comment on the entirety of his half-hour screed: After several minutes with Sabine UNMENTIONED. I clicked off.
The third video spent several minutes on meta-comments about string theory without mentioning Sabine. Click.
The underlying question is Which videos are worth the time spent? If you prefer the two hours of videos you pointed me to ... we can agree to disagree.
Thanks for your offer ("rewatching them and bringing up his most salient points for discussion here") but further debating of Sabine's efficacy is VERY low on my list of priorities.
Shadowy Man said:
Seeking revenue has degraded content all over the Internet. I think we can all agree with that.
Generally scientists tend to be MUCH less likely than other people to pursue greed: They get their kicks from using their brains rather than from wealth.
Sabine once explained that she was somewhat ostracized from academia. The details seemed unimportant to me and I forgot them. (Did her gender play a role?) But that explains why she focuses on her YouTube channel rather than writing papers.
Her video about 3I/ATLAS was very brief, very factual and seemed like a good source for anyone, like myself, who wanted a very brief summary of 3I/ATLAS. THAT is why I posted it to this thread. It had zero crackpottery AFAICT. I'm sorry if mentioning her name provoked bad feelings.
I was very sincere, and intended to watch your linked videos to improve my understanding of Sabine. I find her a bit outlandish sometimes, devote minimal time* to trying to learn physics, and watch her mainly because she's FUN!
(* - I HAVE devoted MANY hours to reading about quantum physics and cosmology, but remain confused and ignorant on the topic. I've hinted at my peculiar intuitions about temporal paradoxes in some discussions here. I still watch Veritasium, Mathologer and some other such YouTubes but I have lots of other priorities for my very limited time.)
The videos you link to total about two hours in length. Two with a T.
The first spends a while complimenting Sabine, and then complains that science deniers may twist her message and use it to support their wrong ideas. You're welcome to think I'm a science denier if you wish. Anyway life is short, and I didn't watch the remaining half-hour.
The 2nd Prof Dave video begins by complaining about real scientists who complained about the 1st video. IOW ... WHO is complaining about real physicists? Sabine? Or Dave? But it's not fair for me to comment on the entirety of his half-hour screed: After several minutes with Sabine UNMENTIONED. I clicked off.
The third video spent several minutes on meta-comments about string theory without mentioning Sabine. Click.
The underlying question is Which videos are worth the time spent? If you prefer the two hours of videos you pointed me to ... we can agree to disagree.
Thanks for your offer ("rewatching them and bringing up his most salient points for discussion here") but further debating of Sabine's efficacy is VERY low on my list of priorities.
Shadowy Man
Contributor
No worries. I used to enjoy her videos too. When she sticks to discussing physics she was fine. I just didn’t get value from her hyperbolic discussions about how physics is dying because she personally had a bad experience with academia (and many, may do) and has an issue with string theory.
When I was in grad school, string theory was just something that a few people in our department did but it played zero role in my work and I and plenty of others were binding science and pursuing greater understanding of the universe. None of us were going to make great discoveries like Einstein but that didn’t mean we weren’t contributing to advancing science.
Anyway, I stopped watching her videos and only questioned her credibility because it seemed she was taking out her personal issues on the field and so I wasn’t sure i could trust her to give an unbiased analysis.
I also found that she sometimes misunderstood or misrepresented some aspects of science that weren’t her specialty, though I don’t recall exactly an example right now (something about either astronomy or earth science, at least it was a subject I likely know more about than she).
When I was in grad school, string theory was just something that a few people in our department did but it played zero role in my work and I and plenty of others were binding science and pursuing greater understanding of the universe. None of us were going to make great discoveries like Einstein but that didn’t mean we weren’t contributing to advancing science.
Anyway, I stopped watching her videos and only questioned her credibility because it seemed she was taking out her personal issues on the field and so I wasn’t sure i could trust her to give an unbiased analysis.
I also found that she sometimes misunderstood or misrepresented some aspects of science that weren’t her specialty, though I don’t recall exactly an example right now (something about either astronomy or earth science, at least it was a subject I likely know more about than she).
bilby
Fair dinkum thinkum
- Joined
- Mar 6, 2007
- Messages
- 40,113
- Gender
- He/Him
- Basic Beliefs
- Strong Atheist
The Big Dipper cannot be seen from my location at any time, because the humans have left their planet in the way (again). Also, Sunday October 19 was yesterday. Now what?
Shadowy Man
Contributor
Unfortunately, you still won’t be able to see it after the 19th because it will still be in the vicinity of the Big Dipper. And the humans have not cleaned up their mess (yet).
DBT
Contributor
Never mind, anyway, we who live on the underside of the world only see things upside down.