And in other gender swapping news...

Not all of it.

This thread is full of awesome!

Ooookay. Slow down.

Citing sources is a virtue in science, but it is not the scientific method.

WF posts, and engaged political speech in general, are not the same as writing papers.

Most importantly, my point is that you very often use dumb YouTube videos to make your point. The operative word in that phrase is not YouTube, not video, and not using them to make your point. It's "dumb".

Conveniently, any source you find disagreeable is dumb.

You think they're dumb, it's your opinion. The scientific method requires one to build upon past sources, does it not?

Thank you.

Exactly.

The difference in reading something versus watching something is that, generally, you can do the former more quickly than the latter. With video, you're restricted to the length of the clip. Unless you skip through it, in which case you might miss something.

From what I've seen, far too many YouTubers don't understand how to edit themselves and go on and on and on, which is tiresome. There was somebody who used to post here (KamelReds?) who started some YouTube review channel or something and their videos were entirely too long. Half an hour when ten minutes would suffice.

Remember how Einstein's papers were peppered with such fancy science jargon as "soy boy", "beta", and "cuck"?
Remember that?
No?
Why?
Because it never happened?
Really?
Huh.

Remember when Dicky provided a link to whatever story the OP is supposed to be about? Me neither because it didn’t happen.

Remember when those terms were around when Einstein was alive?
Remember that?
No?
Why?
Because it never happened?
Really?
Huh.
See, I can play your stupid game too.

Preach on, brother! I've seen entirely too many Youtubers who take forever to get to their point, who waste time telling me to "make sure to like and subscribe," or who spend sixty seconds of their five minute video on their "look how kewl I am" intro sequence. Holy Jeebus, just get to the fucking point of your video already!!

There are far too many writers that don't know how to edit themselves. Does this mean the profession of writing should be casually dismissed?

You think he would've used those terms if they were around then?
Go on, say "yes", with a straight face.
In front of everyone.
To remember forever and ever.
Dooo eeet.

I try to find videos that don't do that. The ones that I post, that Dicky is complaining about, are mostly less than five minutes and straight to the point. All they are are visual aides to help illustrate a point. I'm a visual learner, I can much easier learn something if you show me rather than tell me something. If that's a learning disability, then so be it, but it works for me.

Who fucking cares? It's an non sequitur.

How do you know he would not have used those terms? Also, could you write in proper English?

So you think videos riddled with non sequiturs are smart.
Surrender accepted.

That's not what I said. Learn to read.

You've said it with your actions.

The is federal fetus. They are called bootie straps when they are toddlers.

Anyhooo - I like Karen. There were female pirates. It's a fantasy movie. I may watch when it hits cable.

even pedophiles toss federal fetus back.

The scientific method continues to be something else entirely. And building on past knowledge is something very different from accepting bullshit as true just because it happens to be already there.

Nope, they're going with Margot Robbie instead.
Harley instead of Nebula.

Dammit, Amy Pond as Sparrow would've been awesome.

I suppose the question could be answered by looking at the slang terms of the day. Did Einstein use them?

Clearly when writing publications he did not, we are yet to get to the stage where netspeak makes it into scientific papers even now.

In point of fact I've noticed a greater focus on linguistic accuracy in the scientific literature in recent years, which I'm told is also reflected in the way undergraduate papers are now marked. Perhaps @matthunter or @K. could offer insights here. I sat a part time MSc a couple of years back and certainly noticed what at times seemed like an over emphasis on the minutiae of language. I was straddling the line here as having marked papers myself it seemed people were dropping over grade boundaries for individual and quite minor grammatical or referencing errors which to me warranted nothing more than taking into account and viewing in the wider context of overall standards.

In any case, I have no idea whether Einstein would have used slang in day to day life or in his private communications, but that has no bearing on his academic work.

Incidentally "beta" and "cuck" have been in use in the literature for many decades, albeit correctly. Beta does not in actually mean "submissive male", nor does "cuck" actually mean "male whose partner is unfaithful".

I was always taught to avoid conversational writing and use of slang, but when marking my own students we are taught to point out examples of bad grammar/spelling but not mark down (since we don't know if the student has dyslexia or other learning disabilities, or English may be a second language). Some of what they write is very poor. Referencing, however, is always highlighted in marking schema.