Neil once lost a scientific argument on Twitter with Steak-ums. I'm going to withhold judgment until the meat sheets tell me what to think.

Echo Chambers were originally designed by Social Media networks like Facebook, literally hardcoded, to create higher retention rates.. their entire goal at one point was just get people to stay on the site as long as possible at any cost.. probably still is, but new hot 'It' social networks pop up every few years.. we're about due for TikToks replacement..

confirmation bias is a killer of common sense in these cases

@@StayFractalesquei low key kinda blame facebook for a lot of this culture war bullshit. they made our society so tribal with these echo chambers. i know facebook isnt the only one to do it, but they did set the trend in a lot of ways so i still put some blame on them

It's also easier than ever to refuse bad ideas thanks to the internet, which makes it even more strange that there's this much willful ignorance.

​@@StayFractalesque I think they always existed. If you think about it, a room full of stupid people with the same ideas will start to reinforce their beliefs in those ideas. I bet that goes back to the start of civilization

yeah i was a lot like this when i was younger, ah, still am to a degree, i try not to fall in that route but it happens sometimes.

We are on the verge of a new dark ages.

I feel the frustration

Meanwhile Neil out here parroting PRO establisment propaganda and parroting LGBT propaganda.

There’s nothing wrong with anti-establishment sentiment, but when one throws out standard knowledge and scientific method, that’s some dangerous terrain

@@marvinthemartian6788 there absolutely IS something wrong with anti-establishment sentiment. It leads people to adopting criticisms that are often times unfounded, or abject lies because they are not informed critics of any sort of establishment. It's the type of blanket blind criticism that is completely unconstructive, simplistic, and destructive. Be critical of power structures, but to be anti-power structures is to be a fool, just like Terrance.

Isnt there like a this one super basic addiction, subtraction, division, multiplication problem, where you take 4 numbers, they add up to 50, but when you reverse the equation, you dont get back down to zero, you get 1.. something like that..

Only if you do it wrong

Except Terry would be asking about sqrt(1.9)+sqrt(1.9), which absolutely is less than 1.9². The range of values disproving Terry's assertion is between 0 and the cube root of four.

What’s sad is that exactly what they are going to say too 😂😂

Neil couldn't follow it because it's complete nonsense, he's just too nice to say that. As Professor Dave said, it's like I told you that you need six hammer to ice cream eleven monkey dizzy.

@@SonicFrake yeah that video is so good 😂 Dave just cooks him

Joe Rogan says he's a genius

It may sound crazy because people can’t understand him. So it’s up to him to prove his idea in a useful way.

Like Terrence... Show me what you talking about. Do it.

@@blackrahk2037 you want me to show you how 1*1=1? Ok, simple, so if you put 1 thing on the table, you have 1 pile containing 1 thing. How many total things do you have? Let me make it even easier, everyone understand money, you have a pile of money containing a single dollar bill, how much money do you have? $1. Therefore, 1*1=1, not 2.

@@alexanderg.i1991 oh no bro. I agree with you. Well not just you basic math as well. I was talking to Terrence. ✌️ And 💕

@@blackrahk2037 oh, my bad lol. I misunderstood your message. People always want to disprove the established norms to the point where now we see people saying 1*1=2

​@@alexanderg.i1991what a lovely refreshing exchange between you and the other person. Even when you thought they were being mean you took time to explain what you meant. Have a great day 😊

They should have offered him 10 million times zero.

@@monster762 ..im almost certain, that over time, RDJjr got there.. if we could ask him, im sure he would say hes been compensated to his satisfaction..

@@StayFractalesque yeah, but they should offer Terrence 10 million (or 15 million, or 100 million) times zero, then see if he still believes 1 times zero equals 1.

Ive always seen it as a generalization of the stupidity of the ignorant, just expressed on a graph.. doesnt make it, like, mathematically provable, its just the reality of mastering any subject..

​@@StayFractalesque You should be a bit more humble. All of us have strengths and weaknesses. Stupidity and ignorance are very different concepts and you're talking down to these people, which you shouldn't. Neil didn't. I can see one of your weaknesses is your writing. My grammar, spelling and general English knowledge is terrible as well and it is my first language, but I'm not talking down to people. Just on the side, not everything is mathematically provable. Nothing about human psychology is mathematically provable. Not all graphs are used mathematically, sometimes they are used to convey an idea.

I think the term is “lack of whole object relations” which is tied to a “lack of object constancy.” He thinks in terms of “all good” or “all bad” when it comes to himself, others and institutions. Regular people that don’t lack OC can see themselves and others as an integrated whole with both positive and negative attributes. Terrence is unable to make appropriate predictions about others or himself because of the way he splits his negative attributes away from her identity (and subsequently how he projects negative or positive attributes onto others), usually caused by the immense emotional sting of shame. So the adaption he and other narcissists develop is essentially a feedback loop that avoids self shame. Primary reason why he doesn’t need evidence because evidence in many cases is “all bad” and would lead to an enormous amount of shame for Terrence. This also goes into why narcissists avoid empathy, if they were ever able to empathize with someone who sees a flaw in them they’d self destruct. You can see it in his Oxford speech when several of the students challenge him on his ideas, he quickly changes the subject or snaps (due object constancy), or uses his patents and weirdly constructed drone device as evidence, though 1x1=2 couldn’t have possibly been used in the formation of that drone.

Terrance try to scam Uganda... so, i think is ok to be condescending to this asshole.

Oh I totally agree he was brilliant, NDT laid out a perfect example of how to remain objective and firm but in a kind manner that is not going to leave someone with a very negative experience when it comes to the scientific method.

I'm sure he's dealt with many people like this before, people who thought they're right, but turns out they were misguided. So it's best to guide them back on track, rather than be dismissive and make them more delusional in their own thoughts. Howard is way too delusional though.

People are condescending because Terrence is assuming his pseudo-science is more authentic than generations on generations of educated peoples' hard work lol imagine walking into a restaurant and telling the Chef he's cooking wrong when your cooking experience is microwaving popcorn

Professor Dave explains entered the chat

Rogan is the guy that hosted a game show of people eating cow testicles. He’s just an empty vessel that will say anything as long as he thinks there’s an audience that wants to hear it.

It's not that he is dumb, just that he isn't going to oppose his guest when he doesn't have an understanding of what exactly Terrance was wrong about. One thing I always thought about Joe Rogan is that he is willing to hear anything out and is willing to learn and be wrong. He did say that he thought Terrance Howard should send his findings to a lot of different mathematicians and scientists and then see what they all say about it.

Joe Rogan is a moron according to _Joe Rogan_

@@anthonyernst999 lol. No. Joe is willing to let anyone on his show he thinks will improve the buzz, profile, and sensationalism of his show, no matter how deranged. This is the guy that hosted fear factor. Status and money are the only two things operating his compass.

@@Noodles1771 We said the same thing only you're a pessimist and I'm not

Couldn’t disagree more. We need to be blunt and stop treating morons with respect.

@@maxwell8758 ?

Agreed 👍 i didn’t expect that for sure

You obviously haven't seen alot of Tyson's "peaceful logical discussions" recently. Dude flips out when hes called out.

Straight lies 😂😂​@@via_negativa6183

This is probably the best rebuttal to someone like Terrance lol. I have a friend that reads random conspiracy theories online like every other week and I have to reel him back in 😂

You expect Luke to know about Hustle & Flow? 😂

@@SolidSnake240 absolutely not 😂

Indeed. I was wondering about what he thinks about primes. But then... I don't think he "thinks" too much at all about that whole stuff. One of the problems that I found "so bad" in his paper is his inconsistency. He can't follow through with his ideas, contradicts himself, doesn't consider consequences, never tries to build a consistent system. He declares all of maths to be "a lie"... but doesn't have anything to offer as a replacement, except fancy words. Considering that his whole approach is less based on mathematics than on attitude, I don't think any objection might be enough to convince _him_ that he isn't the most genial genius and sole saviour of civilization... but perhaps it might get to reconsider some of those who think he's right, just because he says others are wrong.

I figured it out in my dad's balls. 1x1 = 2 balls. Bisexual wave frequency.

lol, satire at it's finest!

​@@lukaszzylik4437Gotta love Bisexual waves😂😂

In all sincerity: that's why I think (good) teachers are better then "geniuses". Someone might be a genius; their thoughts on a higher level than yours; so much higher than your feeble mind can't fathom them. But if you already admitted that you don't understand them... how could you evaluate if they reakky are a genius... or if they are just bullshitting you? A good teacher on the other hand can _get you to understand..._

Some friend you are, talking shit about them on the internet behind their back

@@bonjour2838 Fair, I suppose? But I would suggest that you miss the bigger picture. The point is not to demean, and I wouldn't mention anyone by name. I think people recognize that to hold patience and make room for friends who can display problematic behavior is both a taxing and altruistic venture.

Terrence Howard calls all the "establishment scientists" for the last millennia "liars". So they must be doing something right. One of TH's many many problems is that he is completely inconsistent in his "reasonings".

Yeah. They don’t need evidence to back their claims but then there are people who don’t know the right answer who actually do value evidence

That alot of words for someone that also does not know what they are talking about Multiplication does not mean to increase....and it certainly isn't right just cause you call it an informal def

@@DD-gi6kxRe-read what I wrote a bit slower this time. We are saying the same thing. I clearly said "...HE explicitly states that to 'multiply' is to 'increase'." I explain that is the informal definition. I then give the formal definition, the repeated addition of equal sets of numbers, which DOES NOT require an increase in the sum. Set theory. The long established and accepted theory. Which includes zero, or a null set. He changes the rules to make his thesis work by eliminating zero.

To be fair, he's addressing someone who claims they remember being born.....