What does /his/ think of him? Are his ideas and videos sound?

>climate change denial

>>550000
>youtubers
wasted digits

>>550005
No? I think I know what video you're referring to, and he was addressing the logic of an argument with sarcasm, not the actual issue of climate change

>>550020
I saw it a pretty long time ago but I seem to remember him outright denying it

>>550038
I think you're remembering wrong then.
Why did you pick one of the non-historical videos on his channel to talk about anyways?
>>550016
>guy talks in depth about hypothetical or overlooked elements in history
>but this is somehow not valid because he communicates through youtube

>>550060
>Why did you pick one of the non-historical videos on his channel to talk about anyways?
because he might not be all that reliable if he's a climate change denier

>>550065
Well again, I have never seen any evidence to that, quite the opposite.
And plenty of brilliant people have stupid beliefs, being irrational in one area doesn't at all mean you're irrational in another field you have more expertise in.

>>550000
his historical videos and movie critiques are good, everything else is shit

>>550000
No, he bases his ideas of history off fucking Larping ffs.

>>550005
All his political and scientific opinions are typical pretentious "I'm so much smarter than everyone else that I have to be contrarian to my peers".

He bases a lot of his videos on LARP experience with replicas and his own personal preferences.

>It's awkward for me to hold this like that, so historical people did it THIS way because this is how I do it

Still makes interesting videos when they aren't about climate change or something. Just don't cite him like the gospel.

Who is this guy?

>>550145
Dan Carlin

>>550145
Linda Magenta

>>550132
It's a basic scientific method to try to reproduce results. He never bases his beliefs purely on that.
>>550140
He makes arguments as to why something would generally be preferable based on issues he found that aren't justified/adressed in historical literature, that's not personal basis.
I agree though, he has some interesting theories but it isn't necessarily right.

>>550145
Schola Gladiatora

>>550000
He said the Normans weren't french because it hurts its british pride

>>550172
Normans weren't french though.
His national pride is fucking obnoxious and clearly blinds him sometimes, though. If something is british you can be sure he'll argue for it being brilliant.

>>550183
Saying Normans were Germans is like all the Americans who scream about MUH HERITAGE and being 110% Irish.

His bounce is a bit shitty for a teacher

>>550183
>Normans weren't french though.
Spoke french, vassals of the french king, adopted french customs, always viewed Normandy as more important than England, and are the main reason english is full of french words.
Pretty much french, or at least culturally french.

>>550191
Normans were Normans.

>>550193
Are you saying the roman republic was italian because it was latin? Or that really any client kingdom of rome was Roman? I mean, they were vassals, many spoke greek or latin.

Egyptians and Romans had Greek customs, did that make them greek? They were there own cultures, and so were the Normans.

>>550217
>Egyptians and Romans had Greek customs, did that make them greek?
You could argue the later empire could be considered a muddled Neo-Hellenic culture with them all mixed together.

>>550226
hellenic =! greek.
Will we sit on mars in 400 years with you calling USA british?

>>550230
They WERE British at first, and both are part of a greater Anglo culture.

>>550234
What they were is irellevant. Who they're vassals of is also irellevant, it will never make them part of that nation unless they were actually absorbed into the culture. Normans were Normans, heavily influenced by France as they might have been.

>>550239
they were francienic, just as the ptolemays were hellenic :^)

>>550172
I believe in the same video he says the normans are french, when they are losing a battle, and comments "I get to call them french when we are winning".
I think he is aware of it and made a joke, that sadly flew outside your radar range.

>>550250
France is gaulish :^) So Normans were actually celtic.

>>550000
strong get

>>550000
lindybeige/nikolas lloyd

>>550324
>>550145
opps

>>550005
His critic on the theory of climate change was more sound than every fabricated computer model that get's thrown around.

Aside from that, he's pretty entertaining, but his own theories can be misleading when he argues from his background of HEMA. Just watch his vid about over-arm and under-arm usage of spears versus Matt Eastons video on this.

>>550595
>HEMA
Sorry, wanted to say LARP

File: nigel.jpg (55KB, 500x500px) Image search: [Google]

55KB, 500x500px

The guy is a legend, he makes up the triforce of Youtubers who admittedly, spend too much time and money on swords and shit but its still cool anyway. Lindybeige being that guy, Scholagladatoria being another, and Skalligrim being the last..who desu is kind of a neckbeard

>>550631
ye skallagrim is kinda a neckbeard, He's not half as likeable as the other two you mentioned.

>>550631
Lindybeige just speculates, Skallagrim is a fucking day neopagan, Scholagladiatoria is the only one who's done real study into what he's talking about; also when he speculates he makes it clear that it is speculation.

He is entertaining enough and makes valid cliff notes

>>550709
Lindybeige does hema, is an educated archeologist, a historian, and spends a lot of time travelling to historically significant places. What do you mean real study? All three read the literature(skallagrim at the very least has read some fighting manuals, Schola and Lindy are definitely well read in history), all three make it very clear that when they're speculating it's speculation. I really don't like Skallagrim, but credit where credit is due, it seems to me that you're kinda speaking from ignorance.

>>550723
He took a couple of HEMA classes where daggers were used and stopped because he thought they were doing it incorrectly.

>>550734
no, he very clearly didn't think they were doing it incorrectly and has expressly stated so. You might be referring to a video in which he was reciting a poem, referring to a non-historical context.
And he has never indicated how much hema he did to my knowledge

>>550723
>is an educated archeologist,
No he isn't. He's an archaeology enthusiast. He isn't accredit or trained in any formal study of archaeology.

Big fan of his.

>>550145
Nikola Tesla

>muh British Empire did nuffin wrong
>by Jingo, this pleb is actually questioning the ethics of muh sacred royal family (which was morally justified in its subjugation and exploitation of such a wide array of ethnic groups, the number of which had never been seen before)

>>550000
He's not too bad, as long as you realize that he's putting forward his personal opinions rather than sound historical studies. He's no Matt Easton, but at least he's not an opinionated retard like 99.9% of other youtube "historians".

>>550595
>His critic on the theory of climate change was more sound than every fabricated computer model that get's thrown around.
And I'm sure both you and him say this as professional, certified climatologists.

>>550000
Who is he?

>>551764
Lindybeige on youtube

>>550145
Beige shit man

>>552626
Sorry, I meant to put shirt.

>>550005
>equating your opponents with holocaust denial to make their argument appear weaker
>implying that there aren't any valid criticisms of AGW and that disagreeing with or being skeptical of it is "denial"

I don't mean to drag that debate here, it isn't /his/, but come on.

He is really pretentious despite being wrong about a lot of things, but other than that his videos are quite good.

>>551708
There are literally climatologists critical, skeptical, or outright against the idea of AGW. The idea that only climate change skeptics have to have a background in climatology is beyond retarded. Where's your degree?

File: 1406403430411.jpg (23KB, 305x323px) Image search: [Google]

23KB, 305x323px

>>552894
>A survey of 3146 earth scientists asked the question "Do you think human activity is a significant contributing factor in changing mean global temperatures?" (Doran 2009). More than 90% of participants had Ph.D.s, and 7% had master’s degrees. Overall, 82% of the scientists answered yes. However, what are most interesting are responses compared to the level of expertise in climate science. Of scientists who were non-climatologists and didn't publish research, 77% answered yes. In contrast, 97.5% of climatologists who actively publish research on climate change responded yes.
https://www.skepticalscience.com/global-warming-scientific-consensus-intermediate.htm

The vast majority of climate scientists agree on this. Yes there are those that don't agree, but I'm also sure there's biologists that don't believe in evolution. Yet, it's disingenuous to try and say that there's still debate between biologists on the validity of evolution.

>The idea that only climate change skeptics have to have a background in climatology is beyond retarded
What's retarded is when someone who only casually knows the subject if at all thinks they know it better than actual researchers devoted to it. I don't need a degree to simply trust the expert opinions, just like I don't have to have a degree in biology to accept evolution.

>>550000
Matt Eason/scholagladiatoria is infinitely better.

>>550266
>France is Gallic
Jokes aside, this triggers me deeply. It would practically be more accurate to say they were Gothic.

>>552919
You can't compare "random changes can occur in an organism's DNA, and over time these changes can accumulate and lead to a larger shift in the physical structure of a population" to "Human activity is the PRIMARY contributor to global temperature increase since 1800". One is proven about as close to "beyond a doubt" as you can get, the other is... a bit more tenuous.

I'm not saying there's no evidence for it, and man certainly has an effect on the climate, but there's never been a direct proof that the majority of the warming is actually due to human activity, at least to the best of my knowledge.

pure unadulterated nitpicking autism

>>550060
>guy talks in depth about hypothetical or overlooked elements in history
>but this is somehow not valid because he communicates through youtube
I don't directly have an issue with the format, but common to most youtubers is shitty methodology and conjecture dressed as fact, but because of the ease of consumption of the format they become elevated into minor celebrities.

File: 1440000568736[1].jpg (14KB, 480x360px) Image search: [Google]

14KB, 480x360px

>>553100

>>553125
im talking about Lindy not 4chan

>>553095
And simply understand that your layman opinion is in contradiction to the VAST majority of climatologists. Saying that there are a tiny minority against it is meaningless as saying there's a minority of young earth creationist geologists.

>>553135
I literally just said I had never seen any evidence to prove AGW, and to the best of my knowledge none exists.

You responded by saying that the majority of climatologists think otherwise. That's fine, but I'd like to know why, seeing as how there's no conclusive evidence.

>>553191
https://www.skepticalscience.com/empirical-evidence-for-global-warming.htm

This is a youtuber thread on the history board of a Mongolian yarn knitting site. I'm not going to go into detail, but searching for these details can be easy online.

>I literally just said I had never seen any evidence to prove AGW, and to the best of my knowledge none exists.
I know what you said, and like I said the vast, vast majority of people who are professionally educated, trained and spend their lives studying and researching the topic will disagree with there being "no evidence".

>>550104
I liked his unnecessary yet logical(based on ideas at the time) debunking of Amazons during antiquity existing once and for all. A lot of his historical trivia videos tend to be the best.

>>550758
He has a bachelor's degree in Archaeology...
It's only in our day(millennials) that you need a MS or PHd to do actual work in historical subjects, especially archaeology.

>>553134
I didn't his point still stands considering OP obviously watches it and posts on 4chan. Not to mention, most of these anons recognize him.

>>553134
Woops I >>553698 meant think*

>>553686
No he doesn't.

>>550000

Interesting to listen to and then completely forget because it's mostly factually wrong.

>>550631

Skallagrim is a loser, furry HEMA practitioner with a river troll for a girlfriend and stupid reviews with an annoying voice and vocal inclinations that make me want to punch him in the face. He, like Lindybeige, talks too much when he could just say a sentence.

That's what I find wrong with most youtubers; they talk too fucking much. There's so much padding in whatever it is they're trying to say but they can't get to the point and fluff it up like a new girl at a porn shoot. GET TO THE FUCKING POINT.

>>554157
What yes he does. Someone wrote an artivle about him getting kicked out from Newcastle University (where he does research and teaches part time for evolutionary psychology) for one of his videos about vegans being retarded. He does teach professional dancing too though elsewhere.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-393381/Lecturer-rebuked-essay-force-feeding-vegetarians-lard.html
apparently you can access the university research archives to check for your self.

>>554201
>>554157
Not videos, sorry. I meant essays online.
also *article

>>550191
>>550183
Normans were Carolingian Norsemen. Simple as that.

>>553111
He makes his methodology very clear, and it's valid.

>>554605
Uh, let me just clarify that his theories aren't CONCLUSIVE, just that generally what he bases his beliefs or ideas on are things that you could make these assumptions from.
The thing that a lot of people seem to not realize is that Lindy mostly proposes ideas, it doesn't mean that he necessarily believes this to be true, neither does it mean that he is trying to teach these things, he's simply sharing interesting perspectives. At least that's how I see it, seeing as he often says as much, and he's always on point when he references actual literature or other sources.

File: 1432314622769.png (16KB, 309x266px) Image search: [Google]

16KB, 309x266px

he is alright, i like matt easton more because he tends to be more scientific on things but they are both channels where people that read into history and practiced medieval style combat talk about their opinions and experiences on these subjects

>>554195
>with an annoying voice and vocal inclinations that make me want to punch him in the face
holy shit this, every time someone talks in that style i can't help but feel annoyed

>>554620
>holy shit this, every time someone talks in that style i can't help but feel annoyed
thirded. He sounds very smug and arrogant.
He reminds me of a friend I had in elementary. He was misanthropic and looked down on everyone, yet he was very clearly in the lower end of the IQ score and not particularly insightful, he also couldn't control his drooling. His vocal inflection was very similar to Skallagrims.

BEIGE

>>550000
A shitwick.

>>550000

Should have a "For entertainment purposes only" disclaimer at the start of each video.

He's one of those people who is fun and informative until he covers something you know about and realise he's talking such a lot of rot with such confidence.
Bases too much on modern perception and thinking rather than what was actually done, as well as applying his own specific interest (vikings) to an entire period.


Examples:

The constant moaning about too many candles. Makes sense until you read about how royal and noble households worked and that people were issued candles as part of their pay. In the Household of Edward IV for instance staff were given between 12 and 6 candles each, per day, with someone going and gathering up used candle remnants to make into new candles for the next batch.

In the rope making video he says how he'd be annoyed if he were a rope maker and someone toed up prisoners with his rope, then cut it to set them free. Um, why? Hes basing this on making a few feet of rope, once, while on holiday. As a rope maker, your job is to make rope, all day every day and then SELL it to people. If somebody purchased some rope from you and then destroyed it, shouldn't you be delighted, because now they need to buy MORE rope from you?

There's plenty more I can't be bothered to go through.

>>555523

Forgot my most annoying one. Complaining about the lighting in general.

In the Black Death review he specific points out there's a big light used in the outdoor scenes. Yes. And? He is litterally bitching about how you can see too well, in a visual medium.

If he ever reviews Wolf Hall and complains it's too dark I will personally drive up to Newcastle or where he is hidden, and set his shirts on fire. With a candle.

In the same video he also states that physicians were regarded as quacks, in their own time. Absolute nonsense, but not my area of expertise so will leave it at that.

>>550000
>his video on pikes
He might actually be retarded. The fuck are pikemen supposedly doing then? Staring at each other angrily? There are pictures and written accounts of pikemen fucking each other up. It makes no sense for them not to fight. It's an outrageously ridiculous assertion, similar to someone today claiming that the Iraq War was a hoax.

>>555541
Uhm I can actually answer with evidence. In Ancient Rome, Physicians were basically shat on for not knowing what they were doing most of the time or lacking effective treatments. Not really their fault, there was no formal training for doctors like we do now or a large data base of knowledge.
I felt a little ill and called Dr. symmachus. Well, you cam Symmachus, but you brought 100 students with you. One hundred ice cold hands poked and jabbed me. I didn't have a fever, Symmachus, when I called you -but now I do.
-Martial, Epigrams
In Medieval europe, not much changed in way of medicine. Doctors had no real procedures to actually help people besides tasting sugar in pee for diabetes and perhaps wound care...but you don't really need a doctor for the latter. They just didn't have good diagnostics tools. More over, we really didn't know much about the mechanisms behind things like cancer, the flu, or diabetes until last 100 years so treating it was also impossible.
Surgery(along with gynecology) was essentially shit until germ theory. People had a high risk from dying from many "procedures" done at the time, thus no one really trusted doctors unless they had nothing to lose. Of course, this wasn't really fair considering the lack of knowledge cells and microorganisms.
Though I would consider in a case of plague, that might be one of those desperate situations...

>>557423
>epigram from martial, who was basically a stand-up comedian
>factual evidence
I actually agree with you for the most part, but come on.

As a side, my Latin teacher in HS, sweet kinda crazy old lady who nonetheless knew her shit, would never let us read Martial, who she thought was pretty racy (this coming from a woman who casually made holocaust puns or would "joke" about bringing a cat-of-nine-tails to her freshman class to "improve discipline"). So when I first actually looked his stuff up, I was incredibly surprised. I was expecting a mix of George Carlin, A. Wyatt Mann, and those classic Roman graffiti strats. Good times.

That class was really weird in general. Our guide book for De Bello Gallico translated "tellum" as just "thrown projectile", so we always translated it as "hand grenade". And we used to mess the teacher up by referring to "Hispaniae" as hispanics. It got crazy.

>>557244
what did he say?

>>557549
Comedy is truth though. It comes from somewhere; A general consensus of distrust
Pliny speaks of it was well especially since most were Greek.
Plus Martial was an example is to show that there were many bad ones. I didn't say there weren't ANY good ones( like Soranus). But compare today with most doctors( if not all) having at least a generally idea of what they should do. but even with "good ones" , the problem is still the same. They just didn't know a lot. It was all rial and error to be a good doctor and hit and miss to find that good one to treat your dysentery.

>>557572
Again, I'm not disagreeing with you, I just might have gone for more intellectually rigorous evidence than stand-up. Of course it CAN be very true, but it can also be fairly ridiculous.

>3000 AD
>"Judging from the epigrams of Seinfeld, we can see that airline food was incomprehensible to most people."

Lindy is an entertainer, not a teacher.
I remember seeing his "Why aren't all plants poisonous video" and immediately seeing how out of his depth he was.

>>557555
Pikemen didn't fight eachother with their pikes because the fatalities were too high. They would stand around near the musketeers and ward off the cavalry. When a group of pikemen approached another they would rather rout than actually fight.

Jesus Christ guys, we have a thread about this shit almost every other week. You'd think people finally got the picture by now.

Lindy: entertainer more than anything, knows at least some shit
Schola: Dude knows his shit the mkst, good resource for info, not very entertaining
Skall: almost fucking useless, unentertaining

File: 1403749828807.jpg (7KB, 185x273px) Image search: [Google]

7KB, 185x273px

>>557611
Well depending on the airline it very well can be, especially when they try to make international dishes. pic related.
Also if you aren't rich and can't afford first class, it is even more likely to be true. Sort of like quality doctors in ancient times.

>>557639
>They would stand around near the musketeers and ward off the cavalry.
This was only true late in the history of the pike, such as the English Civil War reenactments Lindy saw the pikes at. And even in the ECW pikes came to blows in hand-to-hand.

During the early 1500s when pikemen made up about 90% of the infantry, does he think that one side just ran away?

Lindy made that video years ago and I wonder if he still holds that opinion, or if he was so BFTO that he's too ashamed to even issue a retraction.

He's not produced many interesting history video lately. Even if he's poorly informed it's nice that they can at least start a discussion.

>>557423

I was referring more to them being regarded as quacks in the middle ages. I'm aware that even a good one was working in a system of quackery but that was the established knowledge of medicine at the time.

look at how much money some of these people make, the properties they own and who their employers are.

If they're quacks, they're certainly well paid and popular quacks.

>>557640

And we have threads on the vikings, byzantines and the holocaust every day.

Popular topics get discussed regularly. Shocking I know.

>>558686
>If they're quacks, they're certainly well paid and popular quacks.
Certainly wouldn't be anything new, just look at Deepak Chopra. There's a lot of money to be made to be a well known quack.

>>558999

The people who believe that nonsense and give him money evidently don't think he's a quack though.