thunderf00t is usually spot on / correct, but his videos are extremely demeaning to the people that are wrong.
It gives off an extremely elitist feeling, which usually gets everyone just to double down on their opinions.
He's just not actually trying to teach people why things don't work, he instead does long videos showing how dumb various people are to believe the bullshit they believe in.
I wish some of the people that valued musks corps would watch some of them, as their presentations are usually pure scify that's not doable with current technology, as can be shown by literally all their product launches.
(Tesla's arent going to be self driving cars. Not 3 yrs ago when he said he'd deliver it, nor anytime soon - remember how musk said each Tesla would earn their owner $30k per year? Vacuums for Hyperloops remain impossible at scale and the solar roofs are plain uneconomical, which is why they never shipped them.)
Ah, thanks. To get some sense of scale: If you have any experience (or anyone else who has, please chime in!), how much more down-putting is he than, say, SciManDan; how bad is he "on a SciManDan scale"? :-) An appropriate comparison IMO, seeing how Dan is also famous for debunking dumb stuff.
N.B: I think Dan is pretty darn nice, even when he's being what for him is snarky. As I recall, I was much more of an arrogant a-hole myself when I was younger. (Yup, that's my exc^H^H^Hstory: I've mellowed out now, all that was only when I was young.)
Follow-up: FWIW, now that I've seen a few of his videos, he doesn't seem all that mean to me. Could be that I watched the "wrong" ones: I saw two or three of the "Why do people laugh at creationists" series, but they were very old, some 12-13 years IIRC. Maybe he's gotten meaner since? But then I also watched a couple other ones -- also not totally new, but some two, three years old I think -- and they weren't particularly "toxic" in tone either, IMO.
Either I just happened to randomly miss his most typical toxic videos, or I have a very different -- higher -- threshold for what I consider toxic than you do.
Idunno... I guess what I was trying to say was that if it's just the "delivery", but the actual contents are actually correct, then can that really be called "toxic"?
I mean, if what he is saying is not "Black people / women / poor people are all inferior, and deserve to suffer!", but just "Hey assholes, black people / women / poor people are not inferior, and don't deserve to suffer just because they're black / women / poor!", then "toxic" doesn't feel like the right word to describe it. IMO. To me that feels like it should relate to the actual content of the message,as in "White supremacists are spreading their toxic views online" etc.
But but, guess I'm just arguing semantics, YMMV, so never mind.
(Genuinely asking, haven't looked at him yet. Just seems to stand to reason.)