tyler comments on Is this a rope hanging under a helicopter?

Is this a rope hanging under a helicopter? (sh.itjust.works)

submitted 3 months ago by silverchase@sh.itjust.works to c/science_memes@mander.xyz

84 comments fedilink hide all child comments

"Loss" formed with drawings of helicopters from a physics contest problem

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] tyler@programming.dev 10 points 3 months ago (17 children)

He created fake science experiments to sell products and slipped them into normal videos, like the video where he claimed wet wipes are flushable, then created a fake experiment “proving” they were flushable. He’s incredibly untrustworthy and also, not a scientist! He’s an art major or business, can’t remember which.

parent

hideshow 17 child comments

[–] KoalaUnknown@lemmy.world 23 points 3 months ago (7 children)

According to Wikipedia

In 2004, Muller graduated from Queen's University in Kingston, Ontario, with a Bachelor of Applied Science in Engineering Physics. Muller moved to Australia to study film-making; however, he instead enrolled for a PhD in physics education research from the University of Sydney, which he completed in 2008 with the thesis, Designing Effective Multimedia for Physics Education.

parent

hideshow 7 child comments

[+] tyler@programming.dev -15 points 3 months ago (6 children)

He himself claimed he’s not a scientist so /shrug

parent

hideshow 6 child comments

[–] Renohren@lemmy.today 12 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (3 children)

He is correct: Having a Bachelor in science does not make one a scientist unless actively pursuing research. He has a solid science background but like many others with science diplomas, he's not a scientist. He is an entertainer, like all YouTube science channel figureheads unless their daily job is at a lab ( and even then: they are not necessarily talking about subjects they know well, science is a wide area of knowledge).

parent

hideshow 3 child comments

[–] Zagorath 4 points 3 months ago (2 children)

He is an entertainer

I'll preface this by saying I don't particularly like the direction the channel has gone. He's sold out big time, as described by many comments above (both literally, by selling the channel to VC, and metaphorically, by selling out whole videos and the integrity of their content to advertisers as the Tom Nicholas video explains). And his ties to grifters like Colin Grey and Philipp Dettmer (of CGP Grey and Kurzgesagt fame) definitely don't work in his favour.

But that said, I think this comment you made is a bit reductive. He has a PhD in effective science communication. He can legitimately claim expertise in communicating science to the public via YouTube in a way most popsci content cannot. Obviously not the same as doing scientific research himself, but he also doesn't claim to be doing that.

parent

hideshow 2 child comments

[–] Quibblekrust@thelemmy.club 3 points 3 months ago (1 child)

Kurzgesagt are grifters?

parent

hideshow 1 child comment

[–] Zagorath 0 points 3 months ago

Yup. I've got two main stories in evidence of it, but I'll just share one here because the other is much longer.

Both Kurzgesagt and CGP Grey were early members of the creator-owned streaming platform Nebula. Creators literally have an ownership stake in the business, and are paid out a slice of revenue based on their viewership.

But early on, when it was still taking the shape we know it in today, Grey and Kurzgesagt were members with an ownership stake. They left it a long time ago citing "creative differences" (or some vague nonsense like that). From little pieces that have come out on the rare occasions that existing Nebula creators have said something about it, apparently those two were less interested in the vision of Nebula as a place where multiple creators support each other in growing their collective revenue; instead they wanted to take more of a parasitic approach where they could profit off of the backs of other, smaller creators. Because the then-co-owners weren't interested in that, Grey and Kurzgesagt ended up leaving.

I can share the other if you're interested, but chiefly, it demonstrates that Kurzgesagt is deeply mistrusting, a quality known to map to mistrustful people, and it shows Dettmer behaving in a very dishonest way towards a fellow creator who went by Coffee Break (now Coffeezilla).

parent

[–] 14th_cylon@lemmy.zip 10 points 3 months ago (1 child)

you yourself said he is an art or business major, so, you know, fuck off and stop trying to spin your lies.

parent

hideshow 1 child comment

[–] tyler@programming.dev -4 points 3 months ago

I’m not trying to spin anything. He literally made a video where he states he is a liberal arts or business major. I’m not going to go find it cause I’m not going to support him. You can either support the liar or not, I don’t give a fuck. You can also either believe Wikipedia or his own mouth.

parent

[–] turdas@suppo.fi 10 points 3 months ago (8 children)

To be fair some wet wipes are flushable (as in they disintegrate when flushed), the problem is that not all of them are and there's no standard they have to adhere to, so even the ones that shouldn't be flushed are allowed to advertise themselves as flushable.

parent

hideshow 8 child comments

[–] tyler@programming.dev 12 points 3 months ago (6 children)

No that’s literally the experiment that Derek did. He “showed” that the wet wipes “disintegrated”. What they actually did was break apart under a large weight he put on top of them. That’s not what happens in a sewage system. Along with that, unless they completely dissolve they will still cause issues as the broken up strands.

Unless you are a civil engineer you should not be deciding what goes in a sewer. And no one making wet wipes are civil engineers.

parent

hideshow 6 child comments

[–] turdas@suppo.fi 4 points 3 months ago (5 children)

I haven't seen his experiment and don't really care what he did. Other independent experiments have shown that some wet wipes do disintegrate. The reason authorities recommend against their use is what I said: there is no standard for what constitutes "flushable" and the industry is rife with false advertising.

Here's some plumbing YouTube guy testing a bunch of them and finding some that do disintegrate while others do not: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dVijZZ2yAtc

Of course the best option is a bidet, but this is as of yet unknown technology to most Americans.

parent

hideshow 5 child comments

[–] tyler@programming.dev 13 points 3 months ago (4 children)

So I just watched that video and I’m sorry, but that dude is just as bad as Veritasium.

Let’s cover some of the bad science:

What is this 24 hour time limit for these wipes sitting in water? Clogs happen in sewage systems immediately, not 24 hours later. And it doesn’t even take that long for sewage to move through a proper system anyway, so any clogs would happen at the processing facility where they are worst, not in “twists and turns” like this guy says
He literally hides what happens to the toilet paper when he flushes it, but he didn’t hide it very well. You can see in later shots (like at 8:26 in the top right) that the toilet paper literally broke up by the time it made it to the concrete. That is how it’s supposed to work. The rest failed by the time they hit the concrete.
He shakes the mason jars before opening them, then claims it is to “simulate the twists and turns”. This dude is just lying out his ass. Do you know the number of turns before you get from a toilet to the street? It’s like 3. I think every toilet in my house actually only has 1 or 2, depending on which floor. Shaking these up is so badly messing with the experiment. And guess what! They’re still completely intact! But the toilet paper one he barely shakes and yet it’s completely dissolved.

And here’s where we find out what he’s looking for: 12:20. He’s seeing whether these will make it through a house plumbing system. NOT a city sewer system.

Guess what. That same guy has this video from 4 months ago: https://youtu.be/6CQ5rMRvn8I. The title: “The Lie of Flushable Wipes”. He proceeds to say no flushable wipe is safe…wait for it…except the brand he’s selling. And he directly refutes all the bits of the exact tests he ran two years ago. He even says “your sewer system doesn’t agitate the wipes, it’s like a lazy river, slowly turning”.

Think of it this way. The wipes are wet in the package they’re sold to you in. If they haven’t disintegrated in the packaging, they’re not disintegrating in the sewage system. Else they would just sell you wet toilet paper.

parent

hideshow 4 child comments

[–] starelfsc2@sh.itjust.works 2 points 3 months ago (3 children)

Based fact-checker

parent

hideshow 3 child comments

[–] tyler@programming.dev 2 points 3 months ago (2 children)

Thanks lol. People being wrong on the internet sucks, but people deliberately spreading misinformation that all experts agree is misinformation is infuriating to me. Just cause some fucking YouTuber said something doesn’t make it true. I’ve stopped watching so many YouTubers because of the bullshit like they make up.

On a topic similar to this though, is plastics recycling, which experts agree that plastics manufacturing hid how difficult it was to recycle for years. But experts say it’s infeasible, while there are companies like Trash Panda disc golf recycling things into disc golf discs hundreds of times. So really the moral is, think critically.

parent

hideshow 2 child comments

[–] starelfsc2@sh.itjust.works 2 points 3 months ago (1 child)

Yeah usually it's a question of does this pass the smell test, "every expert and sanitation workers who actually see it firsthand are saying one thing, but we tested it and they're all wrong!" is like hmmm....

I would be wary of things that purport to be plastics recycling, as the two main issues are 1. It's still cheaper to make new things rather than recycle 2. The recycled plastic is generally less versatile, which is why you'll see it in things like Frisbees and knick-knacks.

Not to say it isn't something we should be doing when it's feasible, but it's sort of like going from ICE cars to electric cars, where we're putting a band-aid on the problem instead of switching to something that isn't as destructive.

parent

hideshow 1 child comment

[–] tyler@programming.dev 1 point 3 months ago

Yeah usually it's a question of does this pass the smell test, "every expert and sanitation workers who actually see it firsthand are saying one thing, but we tested it and they're all wrong!" is like hmmm....

Exactly

I would be wary of things that purport to be plastics recycling, as the two main issues are 1. It's still cheaper to make new things rather than recycle 2. The recycled plastic is generally less versatile, which is why you'll see it in things like Frisbees and knick-knacks.

It completely depends on the product. For example aluminum is vastly easier to recycle than to make new. For plastics it depends on the plastic, but there is always a way. For example, trash panda managed to recycle Crocs, which are an expanded foam plastic. It was not recyclable on its own, it wouldn’t melt down into an injection moldeable plastic, but they managed to use it as an aggregate, kinda like concrete. I don’t agree that it’s less versatile. It’s just more work that companies don’t want to do so they say it’s not possible.

Not to say it isn't something we should be doing when it's feasible, but it's sort of like going from ICE cars to electric cars, where we're putting a band-aid on the problem instead of switching to something that isn't as destructive.

The thing is, plastic isn’t going anywhere. It’s embedded into every part of our lives, both bad uses and good uses. We need to find a way to stop making more of it. It’s wild that we bury so much trash instead of trying to recover it.

parent

[–] blackbrook@mander.xyz 3 points 3 months ago

There's no standard they have to adhere to, but there are certifications you can look for that guarantee they break up properly.

parent