"I think most of his videos are very poor,"
Why do you think so? (Most to me seem reasonable but one on speed of electricity stands out as badly done (he redid the video but it too could have been better).)
Why do you think so? (Most to me seem reasonable but one on speed of electricity stands out as badly done (he redid the video but it too could have been better).)
The worst example I remember, which is actually what drove me to unsubscribe, was when he said that the golden ratio was "a pretty five-y number" because it can be written as 0.5 + 0.5 * (5^0.5). Anyone with a good mathematical background could tell you there's nothing five-y about 0.5 at all. I'll grant him, the golden ratio is still a little bit five-y because of the sqrt(5).
The whole context and presentation seemed like it was designed to make the viewer feel like they'd learnt something even though nothing of substance was really delivered in those 20 seconds. He does that a lot.
Um, I disagree? Visually, the 5 is memorable here. "Fivey" just seems to mean "lots of the number 5"?
I can't disagree with that. He's not only a YouTube presenter but also a documentary maker, His documentary Uranium: Twisting the Dragon's Tail https://www.imdb.com/title/tt4847012/ has been repeated on TV where I am, I think, at least three times. He's also made others.
Unfortunately, that type of presentation is all too common in modern docos (probably couldn't get it past the director otherwise). As you'd know, this and similar techniques (which I find highly irritating) are also used to pad out half-hour shows to an hour and or to multi episodes when one would do adequately (thankfully, my PVR comes to the rescue and I rarely watch them in real time).
Kind of sad that a expensive camera + clickbait thumbnail/title > Experts communicating clearly and accurately.
I imagine he/his team is scouring youtube for the experts, and remaking their videos with more production value.