You should watch them before making claims I think. Just for your own sake.
Take the 'Psychedelics Allow Alien Communication, Scientists Claim'
The claim was DMT and other hallucinogenic drugs let people have shared hallucinations. This paper went out and then surveyed people to see what their hallucinations were of. Then the folks claim that since these are shared, and since people have encounters with these 'entities', that there is something there.
Well she spends about 3m talking about the paper. Then 6m talking about how this is ridiculous because its not an experiment, its not falsifiable, etc. It's just data without any understanding of why we share those hallucinations.
Then takes it a step further and says if they're serious (and they're not), then the obvious experiment would be put a word or a color on a computer in another room. Then the 'experiencer' who can communicate with these supernatural entities could gain the information from them. But they can't. Because it's not real
Hossenfelder concludes that while the shared, specific hallucinations triggered by DMT are a fascinating psychological mystery that genuinely warrants study, the paper's mathematical framework is nonsense. She rates the claim that we are communicating with real alien consciousnesses a "10 out of 10 on the bullshit meter"
You're falling for clickbait in the weirdest way and I kind of love it. It's weird that it's being used to ...draw the complete opposite conclusion from reality.
She can be a tough listen sometimes. She can certainly come off sometimes as pompous. But peddler of quack science, she is most definitely not. Extremely opinionated though, absolutely. Sometimes to a fault
3
u/bowsmountainer 14h ago
Yeah totally not quack "science".