It was a great message, and it was well delivered. I haven't seen any of their other stuff, but I wanted to reply to your comment because of a word you used - but I'll get back to that in a sec.
I have one minor criticism about the video. I think it was unintentional, but it's worth mentioning. Their initial message about using a single term to group all types of "conspiracy theorists" together is right on point. But at the end of their video they ask their viewers to suggest an alternate name under which to group everyone. They accidentally go back on the same point I thought they were trying to make. To people here who likely already 'get' the message and are mainly appreciating their delivery of it, the ending is of little consequence and is easily overlooked. But if they're hoping to influence viewers' opinions with this video, they may want to consider that their call at the end (at least IMO) detracts from the message.
And now I'm going to do the same thing, because the word that you used - the word that we could easily use to replace 'conspiracy theorist' - is skeptic.
EDIT - FWIW, I just created a new sub called /v/skeptical. You are all welcome there. Please post whatever you want, and we as a skeptical community will all share our thoughts (ideally) in a positive, respectful, constructive way.
view the rest of the comments →
Some ago
Very concise! Better to hear it from these guys opposed to faceless baseless YouTube bloggers who are primarily motivated by ad revenue.
old_soul ago
They have a lot of talent in what they do. They explore wild stuff, yet they always express the skeptic point of view. Very entertaining series.
qwerasdf ago
It was a great message, and it was well delivered. I haven't seen any of their other stuff, but I wanted to reply to your comment because of a word you used - but I'll get back to that in a sec.
I have one minor criticism about the video. I think it was unintentional, but it's worth mentioning. Their initial message about using a single term to group all types of "conspiracy theorists" together is right on point. But at the end of their video they ask their viewers to suggest an alternate name under which to group everyone. They accidentally go back on the same point I thought they were trying to make. To people here who likely already 'get' the message and are mainly appreciating their delivery of it, the ending is of little consequence and is easily overlooked. But if they're hoping to influence viewers' opinions with this video, they may want to consider that their call at the end (at least IMO) detracts from the message.
And now I'm going to do the same thing, because the word that you used - the word that we could easily use to replace 'conspiracy theorist' - is skeptic.
EDIT - FWIW, I just created a new sub called /v/skeptical. You are all welcome there. Please post whatever you want, and we as a skeptical community will all share our thoughts (ideally) in a positive, respectful, constructive way.