denydenydeny123

If there are any take-aways from the previous year, they might include that "well-researched, well-evidenced claims" may later turn out to be false.

The process of understanding is a continuum that we strive towards.

There is an entire replication crisis in scientific literature debunking "well-researched, well-evidenced claims".

The only way out is to think.

This is demonstrably false.

YouTube endorses everything it does not censor.

edit: And you should not put blind trust in any "news" organization either. Every observation deserves your full cognition to figure out what is plausible, consistent, implausible, inconsistent, let alone "true" or "false".

YouTube today and for the last few years engages in strong censorship and in no way represents diversity of free ideas.

I would expect YouTube only to report honestly (as a news source) for things align with it's commonly held beliefs.

This should be the goal of (higher) education.

I couldn't argue that someone is educated (regardless of degree) or wise without a practiced mind geared toward (critical) thinking.

Critical thinking is the best strategy. Censorship is paternalistic, imperfect, often nefarious and in many subtle ways far worse than having an unreliable brain.

Any site that engages in censorship can never serve as a trusted news source.

The onus is always on the reader to engage in critical thinking. You should be able to read "misinformation" and easily discern it as such. You should also be able to read "information" and easily discern as "misinformation" as well as the ability to read "misinformation" and discern it to be factually consistent and potentially correct.

Do not trust others where your own brain is needed to figure shit out.