• nightshade [they/them]
    ·
    edit-2
    5 months ago

    Sabine Karin Doris Hossenfelder (born 18 September 1976)

    In July 1977, a senior scientist of Exxon, James Black reported to the company's executives that there was a general scientific agreement at that time that the burning of fossil fuels was the most likely manner in which mankind was influencing global climate change.

    Exxon's research confirming the existence of manmade climate change is almost as old as you are.

    • EmoThugInMyPhase [he/him]
      ·
      5 months ago

      fossil fuels was the most likely manner in which mankind was influencing global climate change.

      flowey-smug it says it right there: man influenced climate change!

    • EllenKelly [comrade/them]
      ·
      5 months ago

      Ive seen articles from the early 20th c detailing a rudimentary understanding of greenhouse effects from carbon dioxide lol

    • Owl [he/him]
      ·
      5 months ago

      Isn't her main science take that MOND is the only sensible theory of dark matter?

      • lil_tank [any, he/him]
        ·
        5 months ago

        No idea, I didn't see this one

        However I remember her making a whole video about being skeptical of nuclear fusion, which made sense for me at the time except now we're seeing so much progress in that field I'm wondering if she could be also wrong about this lol

      • impartial_fanboy [he/him]
        ·
        edit-2
        5 months ago

        From when I still watched her, Superdeterminism seemed to be her thing. Its a non-theory, totally unprovable. I don't think she's a MOND believer, could be wrong though but either way she's not a cosmologist.

          • impartial_fanboy [he/him]
            ·
            5 months ago

            Oh yeah it wouldn't change a god damn thing, arguing about it would be literally pointless. Same thing as arguing against free-will, either it exists or it doesn't. Debating it is pointless, finding out one way or the other is pointless since in both cases nothing changes.

        • immutable@lemm.ee
          ·
          5 months ago

          She is truly awful, her take in her own field is extremely dumb but it’s her takes in other fields that are even worse. Like a lot of science YouTubers she doesn’t stay in her lane, she thinks the fact someone gave her a phd for her ridiculous idea of superdeterminism gives her license to opine about other field she knows fuck all about.

          If you can find any video of hers from a field you have first hand knowledge about her takes are wrong, and not just wrong, but that special kind of wrong where you completely misunderstand the basics of something and then extrapolate out from there the stupidest fucking conclusions imaginable.

  • Tabitha ☢️[she/her]
    ·
    5 months ago

    Next video probably going to be about how CRT is "scientificly" ruining Christmas.

  • ValpoYAFF [comrade/them]
    ·
    5 months ago

    Watch the video. The headline claim is that oil companies would never have stopped selling oil and the public would never have stopped buying it no matter how much information was out there - it does not actually deny that oil companies knew about climate change very early on. Less than a minute into the video Sabine starts blaming oil companies for climate change denial misinformation. It's just a clickbait title.

    • plinky [he/him]
      ·
      5 months ago

      The headline claim is that oil companies would never have stopped selling oil and the public would never have stopped buying it no matter

      the public would never have stopped buying

      no matter how much information was out there

      clickbait title.

      thirty episodes of the-podcast in the gulag for you

    • sahuaro
      ·
      edit-2
      4 months ago

      deleted by creator

  • Annakah38 [she/her]
    ·
    5 months ago

    I disliked her for promoting super determinism. It's a real theory, but a frankly ridiculous one.

    Now I can dislike her for promoting capitalism too.

        • AlpineSteakHouse [any]
          ·
          5 months ago

          wtf is super determinism too

          It just means that every minute decision you make was predetermined by various material factors. I.E. the reason you make the decision you do is because your brain was in a state which was determined by various material factors. Those material factors were predetermined by other material factors so on and so forth. It's mostly used as a way to get around seemingly faster-than-light information sharing in quantum physics.

          If you run a physics simulation with the exact same parameters then it should have the exact same results right? Super Determinism postulates that the universe operates in a similar way. That if you could simulate the entire universe and it started out exactly the same, then the simulated universe and the current universe would be identical.

          • robinnn
            ·
            5 months ago

            No no this is plain WRONG :( These “super determinists” need to read Gramsci and understand that the subject IS NOT a slave!!

            • AlpineSteakHouse [any]
              ·
              5 months ago

              No offense, but there's a big difference between economic determinism and physical determinism. Gramsci was writing about humans in a sociological context, not sub atomic particles and quantum mechanics. They do not contradict the other. Unless you mean to imply that particles behave like human beings for some reason.

              • robinnn
                ·
                5 months ago

                From the comment I responded to:

                It just means that every minute decision you make was predetermined by various material factors. I.E. the reason you make the decision you do is because your brain was in a state which was determined by various material factors. Those material factors were predetermined by other material factors so on and so forth.

          • Tomorrow_Farewell [any, they/them]
            ·
            5 months ago

            Not really sure why people think so poorly of physical determinism. Why do people think that if the universe were to be put into the same state twice then we would get two different 'histories' of its states from that point on?

  • plinky [he/him]
    ·
    edit-2
    5 months ago

    someone needs ludovigo technique, but with the-podcast

    dipshit

  • xkyfal18@lemmygrad.ml
    ·
    5 months ago

    Exxon literally knew since the fucking 70s and that didn’t stop them from paying for fake studies and propaganda campaigns against climate change activists

  • iByteABit [comrade/them]
    ·
    5 months ago

    Imagine being so fucking shameless and immoral that you go absolutely against all the scientific data despite being a scientist during a world changing crisis. She is 100% getting paid for this directly or indirectly from the oil industry.

    Add her to the list of people to send to live in the worst affected coastal region in 50 years barbara-pit

  • conditional_soup@lemm.ee
    ·
    5 months ago

    Sabine has some good takes and highly dubious takes, watch with a pinch of salt. And bullshit, they knew then; hell, they know now and they're still fighting climate change action tooth and nail.

    • ElHexo
      ·
      edit-2
      3 months ago

      deleted by creator

  • heatenconsumerist [he/him]
    ·
    5 months ago

    I followed her channel for quite a while before I noticed her veering to the right to "burn the poors for big oil."

    Her takes on dark matter also seem...off to me. Idk how to place it w/o a background in the subject though.

    • kot
      ·
      edit-2
      4 months ago

      deleted by creator

  • Findom_DeLuise [she/her, they/them]
    ·
    5 months ago

    SMDH my dick head, they got Sabine with the CIA YouTube clickbait title gun. And the CIA shitty takes gun set to three-round burst mode, multiple times now. They're using her for target practice at this point.