Sabine is the poster child for science populism. She got chewed out by academia for having mediocre research ideas and now she loves to claim that there’s a conspiracy to take funding from her favorite fringe fields and give it to the establishment.

Gotta say you’ve got me sceptical.

I don’t follow her closely and am no mega fan or anything. But it’s not like it’s uncommon for good people to get pushed out of academia for shitty reasons.

Plus, I don’t think you need to conjure conspiracy theories before you start arguing that there are dominant dogmas, cultures, practices and even some sort of “establishment”. I’d wonder how many fields of science don’t have some internally recognised “establishment” and “counter-establishment” ideas.

And I’m not sure I see the “poster child … populism” claim? Sure, she’s probably popular, but for my money she does a decent job of YouTube science. Not sure she’s a household name or all over tv or anything.

Got any more substantive links/sources about her being mediocre or conspiratorial?

[–] bouh 4 points 6 days ago

She's terrible. Her science video are not as good as most others, and she has an extremely negative view of scientists and academia. That's infringing on anti-science propaganda. Which is a weapon of fascism.

[–] Fungah 2 points 6 days ago

Not to detract from the discussion but I just want to highlight that once upon a time virtually every reddit post was like this.

An article or video claiming something, someone in the comments providing a counterpoint, and then further rational counterpoints to those being made.

People rationally discussing two sides of an issue that arguably has two sides. Go figure.