Comments by "Michael Deierhoi" (@michaeldeierhoi4096) on "Angela Collier " channel.

  1. ​ @4grammaton  Your comment is what I would expect from somebody who didn't watch the video or someone who still clings to their idea that there has been no new physics discovered in 70 years. Your comment is pretending that theoretical predictions are equivalent to actually testing the theory as was the point of each of these criteria in this video. Just compare society a hundred years ago to now and anyone should quickly see how absurd it is to conclude that no real progress has been in physics in 70 years let alone a hundred years.
    24
  2. That procedure of replacing cerebralspinal fluid with air is still an invasive procedure compared to the MRI.
    9
  3. Thanks for posting this video. It enhances my understanding to use in challenging the backward or pessimistic talk about the lack of progress in space and other fields in science. The very people making those comments have a limited background in science and physics especially. Thus they are projecting their own ignorance with their comments!!
    1
  4. This video had me laughing a few times because I recognized how true it is. I'm glad you come right out and say what crack pot physicists are like. That question that some ask 'well what if they are right' is an example of how naive people are. It's only the people who know little or nothing about science who make comments like that. It is also narcissism that leads people to think they are right and all of those other scientists are wrong. And that is what makes them delusional. I saw a recent example of this on a harmless level when the astrophyscist Scott Manley was explaining why returning vehicles from space have to be protected by a heat shield to avoid burning up in the atmosphere. He went into some detail explaining why slow propulsive landing from orbit is not pracrical because of the amount of fuel needed to make that happen. The Falcon 9 booster could never land for example because of the amount of extra fuel it would have to take into orbit in order to slow its return. It's a penny wise pound foolish idea and an unnecessary waste of fuel. And yet numerous commenters raised several points trying to explain their idea of how a rocket could return slowly from safe and avoid heating up during reentry. Dunning Krueger effect comes to mind here. 😅😂
    1