• TalkBass has been independent since 1998. Add your voice.
    Create a free account to reply to discussions, view embedded media, and browse with fewer display ads.
    Join freeLog in
    Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.

What are your favorite YouTube channels?

Music: I like Todd in the Shadows a lot. Digging the Greats is a cool channel if you’re interested in hiphop, soul, and related genres.

Not sure how to classify it, but Benn Jordan’s channel is great. Often music/audio tech related, but other interesting stuff as well
Benn Jordan is brilliant. Digging the Greats is a lot of fun.
 
As a huge "animation nerd", there are a number of channels that scratch that itch, but one of my favorites is Vivian Medrano's "Vivziepop" channel, home of "Helluva Boss" and "Hazbin Hotel". Fair warning, this is seriously NSFW stuff!



There are a few music-related channels I frequent, but the ones that mash-up different songs, styles and/or genres really stand out in my mind! :headphone:



 
Over the years she's also said a few harsh words about certain money-wasting general trends in Academia, and it seems they hit a few nerves...

She'd rather blame one person than mention the recent takedowns of her in places like the Wall St Journal which discussed her critiques in the orbit of 'conspiracy physics', and her hyped-up rhetoric which uses terms like 'corrupt' and 'scam' and 'dishonest' in discussing physics, and using misleading metaphors (eg physics as religion), and accusing scientists as bad actors and lacking integrity. At least now she gets clicks from bring a martyr. 🤷🏼‍♂️
 
 
I enjoy her videos but was surprised to see that there is a small but organised group that has something of a vendetta against her, basically accusing her of being a pseudoscientific hack.

I'm not exactly certain what that's all about, but I strongly suspect it's because she's one of the more vocal physicists who are expressing serious doubts about the validity of string theory, as well as skepticism about certain
other significant dogmas in physics, like cosmic inflationary models, singularities, and the nature of entropy.

Her views are shared by such renowned physicists like Roger Penrose, Sheldon Glashow, and the late Richard Feynman, but they're a lot more difficult targets to make a plausible case against for being pseudoscientific hacks.
:D
My understanding of the issue is not that she has dissenting opinions, which are the basis of the scientific method, but that she is claiming her issues as clickbait YouTube videos instead publishing a paper with evidence refuting current theories. I personally always felt that her videos lacked evidence to back up the claims.
 
 
  • Like
Reactions: hbarcat
My understanding of the issue is not that she has dissenting opinions, which are the basis of the scientific method, but that she is claiming her issues as clickbait YouTube videos instead publishing a paper with evidence refuting current theories. I personally always felt that her videos lacked evidence to back up the claims.
I've been following these specific controversies in physics for the past 30 years and my take on it is that the burden of proof is on those who make extraordinary claims about string theory, cosmic inflation theory, singularities, and other ad hoc speculatory ideas.

During that time, some of the most highly respected physicists have expressed polite skepticism of these ideas that are widely accepted by scientists as virtually proven theories, without their passing the required tests of being both reliable and robust. They were all initially viewed as so very promising because they're mathematically elegant ideas, but as years passed and more and more scientists joined the fields and published more papers, these ideas became widely accepted simply because so many scientists were working on them. They were essentially the only viable game in town, simply by default.

The bottom line is the scientific method is brutal and impersonal. There are no authorities whose word must be believed of past achievements. Claims require evidence. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. Without that supporting evidence, your claims are worthless to science.

She may very well be rude and disrespectful, and she may even be making money on YouTube videos being rude and disrespectful to other scientists, but that's completely irrelevant. The evidence is all that matters.

For what it's worth, I've only been aware of her existence for less than a year, but she's not saying anything that I haven't heard and read about before during the last several decades of following the latest ideas in physics and cosmology. If she disppears tomorrow, her criticism of string theory, cosmic inflation theory, singularities, and other similar ad hoc ideas will continue without her.
 
if you guys are into dogs, shield k9 is the best resource for training information i've seen online for free.

I love james hoffman for coffee stuff. I know he's wildly popular and not needing the recommendation but.. his way of testing things from a scientific perspective is always very interesting.

for amazing historically informed performances, netherlands bach society.

that's about it for me. although i'm sure there are others.

really highly recommend shield K9 for my dog folks, though.

oh and if you want goofy one-man arrangements of mostly baroque music then of course my youtube videos are highly recommended :laugh:
 
A couple more that I forgot (I think of them more as podcasts, than YouTube channels), and nobody else seems to have mentioned :

Bass specific (ostensibly), but usually hilarious




General media, and entertainment industry related

 
As a doctor, these two channels have the best research basis, really easy to watch/ understand for the average Joe, and concise.
(These two channels keep me up to date for my patients. So just go to my source).

Weight loss, fasting, metabolic health/ insulin resistance.He’s successfully lost a heap of weight and kept it off for years (a decade?).


Everything exercise, fitness and health. He has an PhD, a natural communicator, and also critiques other people’s content with a great sense of humour.
(The YouTube channel is free & has heaps of content - 3,544 videos and 1.9 billion views).
 
Last edited:
"Lehto's Law" is short interviews with the Michigan lawyer Steve Lehto, where he analyzes recent court cases of some public importance (or just plain bizarre or outrageous).


One example is where an attorney was caught using bad AI in a court case and he tried to defend himself during disciplinary proceedings by using more bad AI.



Here's another example where police cite driver of EV for exhaust being "way too loud".



And this one: Police arrest 10 year old for picture she drew.




I find these interviews to be insightful and informative, and Steve often covers legal topics of particular significance, such as regarding free speech, civil asset forfeiture, property rights, or due process issues.

One note of criticism: It seems to me that Lehto's interviews get the main point across and cover all of the relevant material withing the first ten minutes, but then he tends to ramble on and repeat himself for awhile, for no particular reason. Still, I think he does a good job overall.