> or why post a video of a non-scientist confronting other non-scientists about all the things none of them know anything about Well, the origin post is also a

> or why post a video of a non-scientist confronting other non-scientists about all the things none of them know anything about Well, the origin post is also about someone not specialized in this area speaking about the issue. I don't think "no being a scientist" disqualifies anything you say: what we should care about are merely the facts that the person exposes. I actually went through the first link you posted. The first paragraph is no more than a Argumentum Ad Hominem, while the rest is a lot of claims, with many interlinked articles, but no strong raw data to back most of it up. > Scott dealt with him correctly. http://www.scottaaronson.com/blog/?p=2316#comment-639452 http://www.scottaaronson.com/blog/?p=2316#comment-639452 He basically disregarded the information provided because the video was on youtube. He made no reference to the data provided in various talks by Mockton. He the procuded to another falacy: Argumentum ad populum. "Since most people think it's right, it must be right". --- Here's one of several interesting talks on the subject, if you're interested on the data: https://youtu.be/ppQl6KYyMqA?t=139 https://youtu.be/ppQl6KYyMqA?t=139