You are viewing a single thread.
View all comments View context
2 points

The entire thrust of my argument is this: They are trying very hard, and cannot try much harder. The task they are trying to do gets harder every year, though. It became practically impossible some time in the past 100 years, and we just started noticing. What makes it steadily and inevitably harder, primarily and at its root, is advancing technology.

What enables some youtubers to do a better job is the fact they’re doing investigative journalism, usually, and have a lot of time to verify their facts and try to get it right. Or they themselves are a subject matter expert, working within their area of expertise, and speaking to a specific audience of people with some pre-existing knowledge on whatever subject.

permalink
report
parent
reply

Skeptic

!skeptic@lemmy.world

Create post

A community for Scientific Skepticism:

Scientific skepticism or rational skepticism, sometimes referred to as skeptical inquiry, is a position in which one questions the veracity of claims lacking empirical evidence.

Do not confuse this with General Skepticism, Philosophical Skepticism, or Denialism.

Things we like:

  • Civility
  • Thoughtful discussion based on evidence and facts
  • Humor

Things we don’t like:

  • Personal attacks or disrespectful attitude
  • Wild speculation on events with no evidence
  • Low-effort comments and posts

Other communities of interest:

“A wise man proportions his belief to the evidence.” -David Hume

Community stats

  • 577

    Monthly active users

  • 120

    Posts

  • 801

    Comments