My flat earther forums have a stickied Q&A where you can find the real truth on any topic. Did you know that dolphins are aliens sent to spy on us?
So long and thanks for all the fish!
Oh boy
deleted by creator
Wikipedia rabbit holes every time lol.
I am fascinated by medical stuff, especially conditions I have and similar conditions. Spent like 2 weeks reading about so many kinds of diseases.
The same way as topics in my field of expertise, of course.
YouTube.
Follow up question: how do you find actual good and trustable channels on a specific topic?
Youtube comments can be strangely helpful here, sometimes. If there’s a lot of “akshually” comments on every video, it may be a sign the youtuber is full of it. Not always true, but anything helps. Can also look up the youtuber’s credentials as well.
I’m going to think about that and get back to you. I think it’s mostly intuitive, based on many years of experience, but I’m not sure at this point.
I also have to mention that I was half joking. I don’t use YT all that much for my profession. I would, but it’s just not entirely relevant.
Read. Write. Execute. RWX. I’m going to piss some people off. Here goes: you are wasting your time if you watch videos. At all. A video moves at the pace it plays. It is linear. You can’t jump around easily. Reading? You can jump wherever you need immediately. You can have multiple sources at once. If you use a book, yes a physical book, you learn where things are and jump right to them. Read
Write down a paraphrased version of what you read. Do not copy. Include references so you can return to source if needed. Note taking is a skill. Your notes should be organized in a way you can skim what you wrote as easily as the sources themselves.
Execute. You don’t learn anything unless you do it. I’ve had too many students who watch Khan Academy, and think they understand it when they haven’t done it. They don’t score well on exams. Not my fault. I told them they have to do it to understand it.
RWX. I await the flame war I just started with the video people.
It might depend from person to person? I agree with you, tho. That’s also my preferred method.
However, if the stuff you’re reading is fairly dense and not that well organized, you’re gonna have a harder time than watching a well written educational video or lecture and taking notes along the way.
I can see where you are coming from, but that is a skill in and of itself. Go far enough into any technical field and you reach that boundary. Especially if you do research.
It’s this kind of thing that develops into imposter syndrome. You’ve gotten this far doing things this way, and it’s always worked. You are told you are smart. Fixed mind set. Maybe you aren’t that smart at all. It effects your mental health dramatically. I’ve literally seen it hundreds of times.
But I do get it. Students are expected to perform at a high level. That approach is expedient and it works well to get everything done.
I recognize things are different than they were ‘back in my day’, but I was a C student. I did the bare minimum, except for the subjects I cared about. Those I was exemplary.
Now ‘kids these days will’ say "no that’s bullshit. It doesn’t work anymore’. That I can tell you isn’t true. I have those students. You just need to figure out how to get around the artificial red tape that keeps you from focussing entirely on what you want.
(Sorry for sp. I haven’t installed spell check on this phone)
I watch videos and read articles and use LLMs to give me the key points to grasp the basics. Then build upon that knowledge with more focused learning.
I do this plus follow competent people in those fields on Mastodon/reddit/etc for current news relevant to practitioners in the field
My first stop is always Wikipedia. The rest of the internet is a minefield.
I read everything I can find about it, especially if its people arguing thoughtfully, or sharing their advice/experience, or if its about the history of the topic. I get kind of obsessive about researching things so I usually come at a topic from a lot of directions.
Isaac Asimov wrote books on a wide range of topics.
Start with him
Same way I’d inform myself on topics that are my field of expertise: reading, talking to experts, doing my own experiments and exploration, writing about it
I prefer to make unfounded comments to tired experts and note their answers, whilst spamming them with severe negative feedback to the point that they develop other interests out of exhaustion… leaving me the new expert in the field!
Wikipedia link hopping. Other sources may not be reliable at all.
The Internet.
That’s what a forum is for.
Youtube u gotta get the widest set of opinions possible. Unfortunatly peertube just lacks content.
I repeat what I said to the other commenter: how do you find actual good and trustable channels on a specific topic?
I highly disagree with looking for the widest set of opinions. Some opinions are stupid and/or baseless and just muddy the conversation (that’s part of how you get screaming talking heads on cable news shows).
Personally I look for those with expertise who speak to their expertise. Just because someone has an advanced degree in one field does not mean their opinions in other fields are worth listening to. Also, I do a gut check. If is smells like BS, such as unfounded blanket statements or it seems like they’re pushing/selling something, I look into their qualifications a bit more or find someone else.
You can learn a lot from the stupid baseless opinions. Learning what they are omitting what they are lieing about what they are pushing.
Finding a trustworthy source is the hardest part. I generally avoid anyone speaking too loudly of the subject. Someone who’s knowledgeable and confident, most times, can present calmly with context that’s accessible to most people.
Neil deGrasse Tyson is a good example. He’s a good place to start for a broad range of topics. Then if I want more details I can dig deeper on my own. A lot of times, his commentary requires digging deeper because he speaks too broadly.
I always check the source of a report or article; if there is no source, I don’t trust it. The source is usually a good place to ‘bookmark’ for further research.
Edit: a few days later and I’ve come across the perfect example. Here Tyson explains “the tide doesn’t come in and out”. What I think he should more clearly say is there’s no “high tide” and “low tide”. To me, and I could be an idiot, I thought he was going to explain the action of the waves coming in and out at the cost line every 30 seconds or so. It’s not that he’s wrong but sometimes his choice of words isn’t super on point. Here’s more info about Tidal Range https://oceanservice.noaa.gov/facts/tides.html
Go with people who are willing to use their real name, a lot of times it’ll be in the channel description, or sometimes in a channel trailer or intro video. Sometimes in an interview some other outlet/creator has done on the content creator. Then google that real name and check their work history and education credentials. You can usually find a LinkedIn. If they’re a proper academic, their university will usually have a brief page on them on the official university website. If they’re an alumni, they can sometimes be found in an alumni list, various class lists, or publicly accessible projects they worked on, though not always. Work history often cannot be as easily verified, but sometimes can be if you dig a little. Depends on field.
It’s not too different from what you’d do if you wanted to hire someone to work for you in a small business or something.
Once you have a significant knowledge base yourself, you can start to use the sniff test, though that’s always far from perfect. Less time consuming though.
Well u need to know enough about sonthing before you cant tell if your being bullshit or not. Generally i just try get every single perspective i can and make my own decision. I assume everyone has a slant but by watching everyone u can cancel that out.
Escalate. Start with early digestible low quality sources (AI chat bots, short YouTube videos, old Reddit threads, etc.) to build a general familiarity with the subject matter space.
Once you grasp the basic vocabulary and concepts, you know well enough what questions to ask to find more nuanced discussions and the right Wikipedia rabbit holes.
If you need more comprehensive understanding than that, use your newfound familiarity to start skimming primary sources.
Once you get more involved than deep dives into primary sources, you start blurring the lines of developing a new area of relative expertise.
deleted by creator
