[tastroder]

I kind of see what you're saying in regards to leaving no room for subtleties but that argument goes both ways.

I tried to find accurate information on the technology and how they differentiate from the regular old dehumidifier spiel when I first heard about the prize, even spending a few minutes on Google scholar searches for their contributors. It was all drowned out by marketing materials and fancy graphics.

On one side we have a person with a Youtube brand that lives off of these kinds of debunkings, including their over the top tone. On the other side we have multiple companies with a product and accompanying marketing budgets. Both clearly lacking in room for discussion and subtlety. Could the youtuber get their point accross more objectively and clear? Sure. Would somebody listen or even discover their argument? I kind of doubt that. Just like the product would not gain traction from scientific papers alone.

Trying to make my point clearer, I do not feel like that the Youtube person is solely at fault for a weirdly framed discussion here. If the XPrize winners have more innovation to show than combining two technologies that they seem to have used before they should clearly communicate that, including scientific analysis that are easy to discover. They got a prize for a product that claims to be better than competition with similar tech in a space that previously saw players that absolutely were pure snake-oil. Just put facts next to your pitch decks and fancy marketing materials people.