Knowing a lot of the documentaries he uses for clips he basically repeats whatever they say verbatim, except if the documentary says "may have" he treats it as absolute fact. My best example is he says "Dimetrodonprotected its eggs." an idea which basically only exists in that doc (Walking with Monsters).
Plus with the online bit he tweeted about people making a chicken-saurus through "reverse engineering of genes". It was a bunch of grifters who at most had bought a cum-gun to inseminate chickens with quail sperm & the opposite. One of the grifters had their position listed as "boy genius". It was exceedingly clear they were grifters, and he just went all in on trying to raise hype about it.
Yeah the channel's quality got much worse when his partnership with CuriosityStream turned every video of his into some collection of clips from their documentaries.
Is the chicken-saurus thing the same dinosaur resurrection that TreyTheExplainer made a video on?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=frgtm4x2QFI
I wonder, and assume it's much better, but what are the thoughts on Trey in those communities?
Also Trey is generally seen as pretty reasonable. Like he's made mistakes, but seems pretty open to critique, the way people in the sciences should be. He's pivoted to anthropology recently though.
No. The Trey video is an actual scientific research project. What tier zoo tweeted about was basically people who ripped off the idea, with no idea how to do it, and who said they needed funding to get it done.
It was quite literally a group of grifters preying on people who are into the sciences, but don't know how to thoroughly research on their own at all. A simple look at their website would have given it away.
Trey was pretty critical of the initial project as well. The whole thing seems pretty grifty even if they manage to do it, since it would just be an odd chicken.
Glad to hear he's not as disliked as tierzoo, thanks for the info
Knowing a lot of the documentaries he uses for clips he basically repeats whatever they say verbatim, except if the documentary says "may have" he treats it as absolute fact. My best example is he says "Dimetrodonprotected its eggs." an idea which basically only exists in that doc (Walking with Monsters).
Plus with the online bit he tweeted about people making a chicken-saurus through "reverse engineering of genes". It was a bunch of grifters who at most had bought a cum-gun to inseminate chickens with quail sperm & the opposite. One of the grifters had their position listed as "boy genius". It was exceedingly clear they were grifters, and he just went all in on trying to raise hype about it.
Yeah the channel's quality got much worse when his partnership with CuriosityStream turned every video of his into some collection of clips from their documentaries.
Is the chicken-saurus thing the same dinosaur resurrection that TreyTheExplainer made a video on?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=frgtm4x2QFI
I wonder, and assume it's much better, but what are the thoughts on Trey in those communities?
Also Trey is generally seen as pretty reasonable. Like he's made mistakes, but seems pretty open to critique, the way people in the sciences should be. He's pivoted to anthropology recently though.
No. The Trey video is an actual scientific research project. What tier zoo tweeted about was basically people who ripped off the idea, with no idea how to do it, and who said they needed funding to get it done.
It was quite literally a group of grifters preying on people who are into the sciences, but don't know how to thoroughly research on their own at all. A simple look at their website would have given it away.
Trey was pretty critical of the initial project as well. The whole thing seems pretty grifty even if they manage to do it, since it would just be an odd chicken.
Glad to hear he's not as disliked as tierzoo, thanks for the info