90 replies to this topic

[RalphMeisterTigerMan]

While YouTube may be a great platform for uploading videos which are both usefull and full of correct information, it is also a platform for the undereducated and...well, basically they are whackjobs of the first order.

 

Someone to watch is England's very own, "the creaky blinder". This man makes no bones about debunking those that love to unashamedly proclaim their ignorance, their complete lack of education and sheer stupidity. The problem isn't so much that their videos preach the worst of the worst, their "theories" regarding flat-earth, but that equally ignoreant people think that these videos are true. That those that have uploaded these videos comehow actually know what they are talking about.

 

Luckily, actualy smart people like "the creaky blinder" monitor these "false prophets" and counter them with actual real science which have been verified. To see what I mean, watch his videos debunking the likes of; Mark Sargent, Daniel Prat, C.C. Chris from Westchester county New York, Mikey Smith. I'm thank-ful that there are those that keep these pseudo-science, fact-fracturing, "because-I-watched-it-on YouTube" crayon-munching weirdos in check.

 

Srtiously! You would not believe what conspiracy, flearfs (flat-earthers are saying). I would love to write some of them here but they are so crazy, whack-a-doodle nonesene that have to watch them for your self. Plus you will also get a good laugh!

 

Clear skies and keep looking up!

RalphMeisterTigerMan

Edited by RalphMeisterTigerMan, 25 March 2024 - 02:11 AM.

[jwheel]

While YouTube may be a great platform for uploading videos which are both usefull and full of correct information, it is also a platform for the undereducated and...well, basically they are whackjobs of the first order.

 

Someone to watch is England's very own, "the creaky blinder". This man makes no bones about debunking those that love to unashamedly proclaim their ignorance, their complete lack of education and sheer stupidity. The problem isn't so much that their videos preach the worst of the worst, their "theories" regarding flat-earth, but that equally ignoreant people think that these videos are true. That those that have uploaded these videos comehow actually know what they are talking about.

 

Luckily, actualy smart people like "the creaky blinder" monitor these "false prophets" and counter them with actual real science which have been verified. To see what I mean, watch his videos debunking the likes of; Mark Sargent, Daniel Prat, C.C. Chris from Westchester county New York, Mikey Smith. I'm thank-ful that there are those that keep these pseudo-science, fact-fracturing, "because-I-watched-it-on YouTube" crayon-munching weirdos in check.

 

Srtiously! You would not believe what conspiracy, flearfs (flat-earthers are saying). I would love to write some of them here but they are so crazy, whack-a-doodle nonesene that have to watch them for your self. Plus you will also get a good laugh!

 

Clear skies and keep looking up!

RalphMeisterTigerMan

Sci Man Dan is another good one.

[CrazyPanda]

I didn't read all the answers , but what irritates me the most , is somebody , making a review , unpacking with one hand

filming with the other one and HAVE ABSOLUTELY NO IDEA of what they're talking about.

The good youtubers to follow (from my pov) is Ed Ting and Jason (small optics)

Glad I'm not the only one. Not only is it frustrating to watch them fumble about trying to unpack the equipment with one hand, but the information they give is generally just poor.

 

The same lack of effort to put a camera on a tripod so they can have both hands free, translates to the same lack of effort doing basic planning or fact checking about what they want to say.

 

I immediately navigate away from those "one hand unboxing" reviews, whether it's astronomy or woodworking.

Edited by CrazyPanda, 25 March 2024 - 10:59 AM.

[areyoukiddingme]

If we think of YouTube like TV, then I'd be inclined to worry about the effect of bad advice. But YT is two way--you can read the comments, add comments and questions of your own, and almost instantly find several other videos on the same subject.

 

So long as you are proactive and not credulous, you'll most likely be able to sort the wheat from the chaff.

[areyoukiddingme]

One point to add, is that YT algorithm is designed to make money for advertisers and thus google. The more difficult issue is really "view point curation" (what the rest of us call censorship and favoritism). The trouble with these effects is that they can be hard to detect.

[LHermer88]

As in the Topic Title, are poorly educated YouTube channels as much a hobby killer as a cheap scope? I ask this as I'm seeing a lot of new wannabee's looking to cash in on the popularity of established and informative astronomy YouTubers of late.

I've seen some shocking videos recently where the channel host has clearly no idea what they are doing. In one recent video someone was showing outright dangerous (to health and equipment) practices in their 'mods'. These new YouTubers obviously and typically have very few subscribers so generally I wouldn't think anything of it, however the comments replying to the videos are from other new astronomers who comment as if to suggest that those videos are educating them or teaching them something important.

The early stages of astronomy are those key moments where people either jump all in or put that scope at the back of the cupboard in my experience. Are YouTubers potentially adding to that hobby killer kill list, like department store kits?

What exactly is the cut off for a cheap scope? 350? 500? 1500? 5k?

I paid around 200 for my first scope and we enjoy the heck out of it. Couldn't jump into the hobby at 1000+ price point and justify it. Wish I could afford a 10k rig to really enjoy the sites. But would I even be capable of using said rig? When I haven't used the cheaper less involved scope to learn what I'm doing, or what I need exactly to accomplish my viewing goals?

[Urban Uraniborg]

It’s always great when you actually find a Professor posting the equivalent of multiple semesters of curriculum.  

 

Dr. Chad Davis

The Scientific Odyssey Podcast
@thescientificodysseypodcas1308

http://www.youtube.c...ysseypodcas1308

 

…and as a woodworker of gouge chisels I know that finding teachers closer to me than YouTube was unlikely. 
 

However the number of views in both areas I found these credible videos(& more) do not reflect their value, when compared to the poorly educated. I surmise that it’s an Algorithm for Idiocracy pushing the misinformation to the top of the search engine. Perhaps a marketing ploy to provoke you to do something better?

 

An for the later…,

If a cheap scope has the ability to kill this hobby for you, then you are not pointing it in the right direction!

 The VERY TOP of my Astro Bucket List was achieved with not only cheap but a FREE 60mm Meade. 

Venus Transit 2012

 

 

Mercury Transit 2019  (Celestron 60mm used $30)

 

 

Solar Eclipse 2012

 

 

 

After I met my optical mentor, I realized that M31,M81 & M82 w/60mm scope from Bortle 8 is possible. Then I began pointing where I could have twenty years earlier, had I known. 

Edited by Urban Uraniborg, 28 March 2024 - 03:13 PM.

[David Knisely]

I just hate the YouTube videos of people with cameras on telescopes imaging the moon or the sun and claiming "strange" unknown UFOs crossing the disk, when it is obvious they mostly are:

 

1. children's mylar balloons

2. birds or bats

3. meteorological balloons

4. flying insects

5. wind blown debris

6. Space Station passes

7. deliberate fakes.

 

Almost as bad are the ones that claim to show artificial structures on the lunar surface near the terminator.  Clear skies to you.  

[Matt78]

I don’t look at much astronomy info on YouTube, so I can’t speak to its quality. The main reason I haven’t bothered is I’ve become really disheartened by what someone or other has termed the ensh*tification of the internet. The algorithms mostly seem to reward content that resembles content that leads to more engagement in the past. My wife was telling me that you basically can’t find expert-evaluated canning recipes because Google will flood your searches with home-brew recipes that may or may not give you botulism. Apparently a lot of people want to can cheese now, even though the USDA has long maintained it can’t be done safely at home.

These days, when I see someone describe something as a hack, I run the other way. More and more people seem to be realizing that the online experience is degrading, and I’m hoping that will mean young people will turn to a local library or an astronomy club rather than YouTube or (heaven help us) TikTok.

[25585]

As in the Topic Title, are poorly educated YouTube channels as much a hobby killer as a cheap scope?  I ask this as I'm seeing a lot of new wannabee's looking to cash in on the popularity of established and informative astronomy YouTubers of late.

 

I've seen some shocking videos recently where the channel host has clearly no idea what they are doing.  In one recent video someone was showing outright dangerous (to health and equipment) practices in their 'mods'.  These new YouTubers obviously and typically have very few subscribers so generally I wouldn't think anything of it, however the comments replying to the videos are from other new astronomers who comment as if to suggest that those videos are educating them or teaching them something important.

 

The early stages of astronomy are those key moments where people either jump all in or put that scope at the back of the cupboard in my experience.  Are YouTubers potentially adding to that hobby killer kill list, like department store kits?

I think for equipment, the reverse can be too. People with intricate and/or expensive kit, can give the impression that all you need is that to work, and its easy. 

[Bubbagumps]

I think the biggest hobby killer for novice observers is not related to equipment. It has to do with expectation vs reality.  

 

What a novice thinks they are going to see is greatly influenced by AP photos they have come across as they develop an interest in acquiring equipment.  It doesn't matter if they spent $200 or $20,000. They have visions of seeing spiral bright and colorful galaxies and nebulae. Then they go out and have their first viewing session. Why can't I see these colorful glowing objects in all their glory ? They said this scope can achieve 400X magnification. Why isn't Jupiter filling up the whole view in the eyepiece and why is it so dark and blurry at 400x  ?   This doesn't look like those bright colorful photos. I paid all this money for this ?  After a few times out, the gear goes into the closet or they sell it. 

 

 

[areyoukiddingme]

I think the biggest hobby killer for novice observers is not related to equipment. It has to do with expectation vs reality.  

 

What a novice thinks they are going to see is greatly influenced by AP photos they have come across as they develop an interest in acquiring equipment.  It doesn't matter if they spent $200 or $20,000. They have visions of seeing spiral bright and colorful galaxies and nebulae. Then they go out and have their first viewing session. Why can't I see these colorful glowing objects in all their glory ? They said this scope can achieve 400X magnification. Why isn't Jupiter filling up the whole view in the eyepiece and why is it so dark and blurry at 400x  ?   This doesn't look like those bright colorful photos. I paid all this money for this ?  After a few times out, the gear goes into the closet or they sell it. 

 

That was kind of my experience. I randomly got the idea to buy binoculars, used them to look around the hills a few times and threw them in the corner. One day I wondered what I'd see if I looked at the night sky. Saw something bright and took a look, and was astonished to realize that I was looking at Jupiter and that I could easily make out the moons. 

 

My expectation was that there was no chance I'd be able to see moons, so my expectations shattered .  . .

[Freezout]

I think the biggest hobby killer for novice observers is not related to equipment. It has to do with expectation vs reality.  

 

What a novice thinks they are going to see is greatly influenced by AP photos they have come across as they develop an interest in acquiring equipment.  It doesn't matter if they spent $200 or $20,000. They have visions of seeing spiral bright and colorful galaxies and nebulae. Then they go out and have their first viewing session. Why can't I see these colorful glowing objects in all their glory ? They said this scope can achieve 400X magnification. Why isn't Jupiter filling up the whole view in the eyepiece and why is it so dark and blurry at 400x  ?   This doesn't look like those bright colorful photos. I paid all this money for this ?  After a few times out, the gear goes into the closet or they sell it. 

Completely.

People that have a high chance to be impressed are also those who know astronomy and find it interesting, know the beautiful pictures, but do not imagine that you can actually see galaxies and planets with amateur equipment. They imagine it's the realm of Hubble and observatories, and amateur telescopes are just to look at stars. Just the stars. So when they see the rings of Saturn or Andromeda, even being a grey blub, they are astonished.

[Phil Cowell]

There seems a be quite a spike (for Amateur Astronomy) for the ZWO SeeStar and ASIAIR. Might be an indicator of the market direct.

For much of the general content they seem to target the audience demographic.

[Horologium1959]

Dumb YouTube channels

Internet "experts".

AND

SCREW IN SOLAR FILTERS ON SALE ON EBAY. (IF ONE CRACKS YOU WILL FRY YOUR EYE).

 

OOOOFFFFAAAAAHHHHHH

 

PS------I know one person who has been convinced by YouTube that the Earth is flat.

IT is a technical DARK AGE out there.

 

If I think about it it would make me cry.

Lets NOT EVEN get into the crapanzola I get in my Facebook feed.

[Bivanus]

The Crapanzola [...]

  New slang term uploaded for further use and dissemination 

 

About YouTube , I like Astrobiscuit ( except when he smashes his little Tak , wdh is going on with that mate ?!?) and Nebula Photos ( well, always, but I do mutter a lot when Nico shows us stuff ike that Askar 180mm  ) but I have to admit some of the stuff there are waaay up and above the Raptor 61  then again you also have people like sternenhimmel-fotografieren.de so in the end it kinda balances out