Stumbled on Kurzgesagt – In a Nutshell on youtube. Seem pretty decent on vulgarisation with nice animations on pure science thing, but boy, things seem to get political and biased fast. ( ended on addiction, where they say that it can be cured with the power of love. )
Is there is a decent channel on scientific vulgarisation that don't get preachy ?
pict unrelated.
>>8019234
Vsauce, smarter every day.
>>8019234
academia and science tends to swing politically left.
this is because the left wing is more likely to fund public science and research programs. if you wish to work in STEM, you will probably have to swing liberal yourself. sorry OP.
>>8019261
Vsauce is shit.
"Hey, Michael here. What's up with X? Let me talk about Y now for 2 minutes. But what about Z? And that's what's up with X. -[end video]"
>>8019291
Aren't hard science usually not giving a shit about politics ? I mean, social and economic is already linked, and can't go without politics, but harder science shouldn't be bothered with.
I don't care about it leaning right or left, just that the medium stop trying to shoehorn it into the subject.
>>8019333
>biologists have to tip-toe around race, gender, sexual orientation
>rockets look like penises, ergo physics is sexist
>>8019333
The former conservative government of Canada didn't allow scientists to release their research to their colleagues. Many medical institutions, among others missed out on good research because the shitty government decided to cut funding and muzzle scientists.
>>8019333
I'm sorry you feel that way. It is just fact that the more conservative a government is, the less they support the freedom of math and science research to do whatever they want.
You may not care about politics, but politicians are who will pay for grants and research funding.
>>8019525
liberals are the ones who refuse to examine race at all on a physical level.
>>8019532
and conservatives want all research to just confirm their already held beliefs. didn't say either was good, just that one side is much more supportive than the other.
>>8019540
Conservatives do fund science though; where do you think the Military-Industrial Complex gets the money for all their crazy research?
A lot of which has reached the civilian sector too. Nuclear power, GPS satellites, the internet are just a few examples.
>>8019544
But liberals do that, as well as funding the education system that is a necessary prerequisite to working for the government.
you will even see liberal spins in military industrial programs and scholarships. this military scholarship for example:
https://smart.asee.org/
the front page picture is filled with "diversity" nonsense.
Conservatives, at least in the U.S., are frequently rather religious. While they will fund military research, they do not tend to work in favor of a lot of research outside of defense. They also do not support the public educations systems that are fundamental to scientific research today.
Are we going to start getting dogmatic now...
>>8019552
But the libs seem to think they can improve education by just throwing money at the problem.
I live in a town of 2k people. The amount of money they can waste in a school where there's only ~100 kids in a graduating class is amazing. For instance, they bought all the kids laptops two years ago, because hurrdurr tech automagically makes kids learn better. And they did it because if they had a surplus, they would get less money the next year. The whole system encourages waste. The libs just enable it by dumping more money in.
>>8019532
why does race matter so much to you holy fuck
liberals not wanting to deeply quantify race (which has been studied to some serious depth already) > conservatives who halt scientific advancement because god
>>8019597
It matters because they insist that we're all equal in every way, and they blow huge amounts of taxpayer money to "fix systemic oppression". When really it's completely possible that some groups are doing worse than others because they're worse. Not because whitey is keepin them down.
>>8019610
I mean, hasn't this already been studied? it seems pretty obvious that the "systematic oppression"'s existence and prevalence in the past would have far reaching consequences in today's world. Black ghetto neighborhoods exist simply because they are poor, and were raised by a generation that was raised by a generation that was raised by a generation which the whiteys DID keep down
seems pretty reasonable to me, especially given that black people who grow up and are raised in white, affluent areas turn out just as intelligent and capable as anyone else. A genetic flaw making black people do worse simply because "they're worse" shouldn't exist then from this evidence, unless you're saying that a black person raised in the exact same social conditions as someone of another ethnicity will inherently be worse than them
funding this research would only fuel and justify the racism and ideology that people truly believe black people are inherently worse, regardless if its true or not
>>8019630
>unless you're saying that a black person raised in the exact same social conditions as someone of another ethnicity will inherently be worse than them
They do perform worse given the same social conditions. Black people perform worse regardless of their socioeconomic background.
Either you compare poor, white people with poor, black people; or rich white people with rich black people, and in both circumstances the result is the same. Black people do worse.
>>8019660
That'd be great if you could provide some sources, because I've always heard the opposite.
>>8019234
Since I can't recall ever seeing one that does not preach, I suggest you'd do the needful and start a quality channel.
Wait I do recall enjoying PBS Space Time slightly more than the average lolscience-channel. If you can look past the obnoxious pandering to the brony and other meme fandoms in the ealier videos of course.
Also for goodness sake don't watch any other channel from PBS, they are all trite and instant cancer. Especially the ideal channel, that balding fucking cunt of a host can go kill himself.
Are we not going to answer the question?
>>8020384
Fuck you and your shitty god
>>8019234
In a Nutshell was talking about the social causes of addiction and how they are as important as the chemical ones. Just because they said that doesn't make it "hurr durr loves fixes everything "
>>8020393
This
>>8020393
This was demonstrated in the rat world expirement. Most people living okay lives don't IV heroin.
>>8019297
Don't you be talkin shot on my boy Michael like dat
>>8020393
This anon understood the actual message of the vid. The vidio wasnt about the neurochemic processes which cause addiction, it rather focused on the social influences which are important when it comes to evaluete how addiction influences society.
I fear that there are not alot of othet yt channels left, the only one i clould think of is scishow but their works usually resolve around really basic stuff, but some of thir vidios can be good while the rest may just be a litle entertaining to watch sometimes, rather than beeing that informative. Going back to kurzgesagt: its always difficult to be politically neutral when it comes to science. Science explains the world areound us, so most poeple tend to mix thier world view and personal opinions into their works, often withour noticing. Tha problem is just caused by human nature. And yes both left and right-wingers are interpreting fact in their favor or supressing scince, because they are humans. Just watch the vidios you like, you could start analysing the sources they use, maybe youl find mistakes in them, maybe not but it could be worth the read. So I hope everyone just ignores all my typos and soneone actually posts a good science channel, I havent heard of.
>>8019297
>Hey guys vsause here. I would like to talk to you about black holes. You see black holes can actually be used as euphemisms for asshole. Take your mums asshole for instance. It's gape reaches across the galaxies. Galaxies are actually a collection of a bunch of stars. Collection coming from Latin word collectus meaning "to collect". You know what else is fun to collect? Stamps. Originated in England they actually were first used in France by Napoleon to order mail brides from Russia. In Russian empire there are these things called babushkas. They are dolls with many layers, each containing a smaller version of itself. According to a new study, the universe could also be made up of such layers. In one layer I could be cock juggling clown having a cock for a penis and you could be straight. But how do we define straight? What Is a line in mathematics? A line goes on forever. Forever is a wonderful concept which is difficult to graps with out tiny brains. According to new research from neuroscience your brain is actually finite. But accoriding to an ancient Greek philosopher. If you were to spank me, you could never actually do it, since your hadn has to travel hakf the way to my voluptuous bottom, and then a fourth and an eight, and so on. Speaking of Greece did you know that they had a steady decline in culture and economy for the past few thousands years, culminating in the poverty that they live in now. Did you know that povery actually originated in the ancient Mesopotamia? It was invented by the aristocracy to keep the man down and impose obedience. Aristocracy did a lot of weird shit. Such has proclaiming themselves to be gods in ancient Egypt and in doing some force themselves to mate with each other, since they couldn't mate with normies, in doing so inventing incest. Inventing was invented in England during the industrial age, and it gave birth to the computers which run on Quantum Mechanics. Quantum luctuations are what gave birth to black holes.
>>8020479
well memed
>>8019297
> Transitivity, the YouTube channel.
>>8019234
Science channels are typically naturally liberal, for a number of reasons, like the fact people on YouTube are generally of younger ages
I don't watch videos for politics or theology, but the rest of Kurzgesagt's videos (and even that video) aren't really preachy. The underlying science was valid (or seemed so at least)
Scishow and life noggin are bretty gud
>>8020479
This is quite accurate.
>>8019570
That is called inefficient bureaucracy, which is not the fault of liberals. In fact, I would argue that someone in favor of such a system is not a liberal at all.
Someone who truly cares about schools would want a large and efficiently spent budget, not a wasted one.
A small budget for an inefficient set of bureaucrats is even worse. I would argue that change is required, but that change should be in structure of the system itself, not in the budget allocated to said system.
>>8019670
Not that guy. There is evidence but it's inconclusive and even if it was conclusive it doesn't mean we should have purposeful systematic oppression based on race. Systematic oppression is inherently bad. "Blowing huge amounts of tax payer money" to treat people fairly is a complaint? inb4 argument about welfare, don't do it, it's a separate argument.
Besides. There are white people who are dumb too and wouldn't be subject to systematic oppression that is based on race.
All in all, studying race to associate skin color with superiority is pointless, and real biologists wouldn't waste research dollars with it. Grouping people on skin color alone already goes against what we know about genetics.
The kurzgesagt on nuclear power was the only one I watched, abd boy, was it full of shit. It was one of those hokey "teach the controversy" situations where the writer clearly had picked a side, but pretended to fairly represent both sides even though the opposing position obviously got patronized to hell abd the whole reason he even made the other viewpoint video was to dodge accusations of bias.
>>8022761
what about the videos were full of shit?
aside from that he had to represent arguments that they don't necessarily agree with
>>8020419
Okay, moving on...
>>8022767
The pro-argument had lots of doubts and counter-points inserted near the end, meanwhile the anti-arguments were usually presented as complete and no doubts were leveled at those conclusions in-video.
I havent watched the video since it came out, but I distinctly remember him slipping in little seeds of doubt into the other side video. Thought he was clever, I believe the comment section noticed as well.
