>>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
>>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.
>>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.
>>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.
>>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.
>>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.
>>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.
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 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.
>>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.
>>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
>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.
>>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.
>>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?
>>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.
>>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.
>>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.
>>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.
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".
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.
>>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.
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.
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.
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.
>>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.
>>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.
>>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.
>>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.
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.
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.
This is a 4chan archive - all of the shown content originated from that site. This means that 4Archive shows their content, archived. If you need information for a Poster - contact them.
If a post contains personal/copyrighted/illegal content, then use the post's [Report] link! If a post is not removed within 24h contact me at firstname.lastname@example.org with the post's information.