view the rest of the comments
Ask Lemmy
A Fediverse community for open-ended, thought provoking questions
Rules: (interactive)
1) Be nice and; have fun
Doxxing, trolling, sealioning, racism, toxicity and dog-whistling are not welcomed in AskLemmy. Remember what your mother said: if you can't say something nice, don't say anything at all. In addition, the site-wide Lemmy.world terms of service also apply here. Please familiarize yourself with them
2) All posts must end with a '?'
This is sort of like Jeopardy. Please phrase all post titles in the form of a proper question ending with ?
3) No spam
Please do not flood the community with nonsense. Actual suspected spammers will be banned on site. No astroturfing.
4) NSFW is okay, within reason
Just remember to tag posts with either a content warning or a [NSFW] tag. Overtly sexual posts are not allowed, please direct them to either !asklemmyafterdark@lemmy.world or !asklemmynsfw@lemmynsfw.com.
NSFW comments should be restricted to posts tagged [NSFW].
5) This is not a support community.
It is not a place for 'how do I?', type questions.
If you have any questions regarding the site itself or would like to report a community, please direct them to Lemmy.world Support or email info@lemmy.world. For other questions check our partnered communities list, or use the search function.
6) No US Politics.
Please don't post about current US Politics. If you need to do this, try !politicaldiscussion@lemmy.world or !uspolitics@lemmy.world
7) No Hit-and-Run questions.
Please don't delete your post for no apparent reason. If you plan on deleting a question later, say so in the post, or if you feel that you have a good reason to remove it, message a mod beforehand. It's not fair to the ones who took their time to answer, and it's not in the spirit of the community.
Reminder: The terms of service apply here too.
Partnered Communities:
Logo design credit goes to: tubbadu
How do you go full anti-science?
Just because she questions mainstream consensus science which has very little evidence going for it?
That's what a good scientist does. They formulate hypothesis... Theories. Maybe they're right or maybe they're wrong. Who knows.
You don't have to be infallibly correct to be a scientist.
Can you please name an example one or two of things that have reached "scientific consensus" yet have very little evidence?
How about just one. One thing.
I'm really curious to see what it is that you think words mean.
She pretty much always picks a non-mainstream opinion on any given topic, even when confronted with evidence counter her position.
Contrarianism isn't "what a good scientist does", it's stupidity.
If you are genuinely asking and not just defending, this blog post is a starting point to explain: https://timothynguyen.org/2025/08/21/physics-grifters-eric-weinstein-sabine-hossenfelder-and-a-crisis-of-credibility/
Others can say it better than me, but her videos went from well-researched science education to takedowns of the scientific process itself, hybothesis, experiment, analysis, forming new hypotheses. And takedowns of scientist in general. Conspiracies like "they're all trying to waste taxpayer money," which did GREAT numbers on YouTube.
I enjoyed her early videos saying "String theory is too difficult to verify experimentally, offers too little in predictive power, and gets way too much funding compared to other areas like X Y Z." That's a fair opinion and a discussion where rational minds can support their argument, and even agree to disagree.
"Science is sick, academia is dying, the whole field is corrupt, you can't trust scientists" is her vibe now. You can't have good faith arguments in that framing.
Roflmao, "mainstream science" 😂
She's a right-wing demagogue (likely Thiel-funded) that whines about DEI, 'cancel culture', and 'communism' while lying about physics. That's it.
She also got dunked on by six actual physicists, who debunked her rhetoric around how 'physics is failing' and how 'Eric Weinstein is actually a super awesome physics guy' pretty well: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oipI5TQ54tA
Speaking of Sabine, I unsubscribed from Alex O'Connor because he kept having pseudo science guests on and wasn't being critical at all, just letting them yap. Gave me Rogan vibes but hosting Sabine was my last straw.
I’ve been so disappointed in the direction he has taken his channel. Rogan vibes is such a good way of putting it.
Or at least a whiff of Rogan, I'm pretty sensitive to any potential red flags these days even if he doesn't ever fall off as hard as that. Glad someone else agrees, I haven't looked in a year to know if he's fallen out of online atheist graces or not.
I’ve seen concerns in comment sections in videos on other channels when he comes up in clips and seen a single video addressing some concerns about his direction, but nothing major to my knowledge.