Avi Loeb announced to lead new "UAP Science Advisory Council" for White House

[MyMatesBrainwashed]

(Let's not argue about the definition of) Professor Dave Explains has some videos highlighting why Avi's the perfect stooge for this administration that I'm sure some members will enjoy...


Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fCSTjnyxBdU

 

[FatPhil]

(Let's not argue about the definition of) Professor Dave Explains has some videos highlighting why Avi's the perfect stooge for this administration that I'm sure some members will enjoy...
Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fCSTjnyxBdU

I'm only ten whole minutes in and he's poked his rusty screwdriver between most ribs already and twisted several times (so let that be a warning to readers and potential viewers of a more delicate disposition) - does the trashtalk reach "most punchably smug face since since Martin Shkreli" levels later?

As science communication, I still don't think Professor Dave is doing a good job here.

However, as trashy entertainment - I've just pressed pause and am waiting for the microwave to go ping...

[EDIT, 50 mins later: It took only *2 minutes* before Dave insulted Avi's face ("creepy smile", IIRC) so I'm calling that a hit. However, at half an hour later he does actually start proper science communication - he brings a real scientist for a very useful interview.]

 

[John J.]

Professor Dave Explains has some videos highlighting why Avi's the perfect stooge for this administration that I'm sure some members will enjoy...

I feel criticism of Loeb's pronouncements about possible evidence of ETI is more than justified. I don't like the style of "Professor Dave's" videos, but I guess that's down to personal taste.

Dave's comment at 5 mins 10 secs into the video,

The blatant manipulation, opportunism and perpetual victim complex is par for the course when dealing with disgusting Zionist frauds like him

accompanied by the caption "typical Zionist fraud" and arrow pointing at a picture of Loeb go way beyond robust evidence-based criticism.
Which people are "typical Zionist frauds?" Why is anything Loeb has said about astronomy/ ETI connected with Zionism?

A troubling and (at the very least) unhelpful comment. This isn't part of scientific discourse or good science communication.

 

[Fritzkquzerk]

I feel criticism of Loeb's pronouncements about possible evidence of ETI is more than justified. I don't like the style of "Professor Dave's" videos, but I guess that's down to personal taste.

Dave's comment at 5 mins 10 secs into the video,

The blatant manipulation, opportunism and perpetual victim complex is par for the course when dealing with disgusting Zionist frauds like him

accompanied by the caption "typical Zionist fraud" and arrow pointing at a picture of Loeb go way beyond robust evidence-based criticism.
Which people are "typical Zionist frauds?" Why is anything Loeb has said about astronomy/ ETI connected with Zionism?

A troubling and (at the very least) unhelpful comment. This isn't part of scientific discourse or good science communication.

I honestly can't stand the guy, too much anger and aggression.
It's just not my cup of tea.
Avi is surely someone who needs to be criticized (just like any other scientist, they're all human), and I also think he comes to conclusions too easily, but I think there's many better ways to convey such a critic.

 

[JMartJr]

I was at one time a fan of Dave's videos. They have become more strident, less entertaining and in many ways less informative and useful. It's a shame.

For those not familiar with him, he seems to have originally focused on online tutorials on a variety of subjects, and those were very useful if comparatively dry. AT some point, he did a debunking video. I think I recall the first was about Flat Earth, which gave him opportunity to exercise a snarky sense of humor. It got a lot of views, and was probably fun to do, and he started mixing debunking vids into his channel. It is my impression that as the algorithm steers more people toward more divisive content, he's been rewarded for getting angrier and less fun.

I would steadfastly defend his right to make whatever content he wants, and to hold whatever political views he holds. Injecting his politics into his debunking vids is his right, doing so as an ad hominem attack on the person expressing views that need debunking is not a great tactic, though, in my opinion. If Avi is wrong (as he clearly seems to be) about alien stuff, he would not be less (or more) wrong about that stuff if his opinions on Middle East issues was the same as Dave's...

 

[Fritzkquzerk]

I was at one time a fan of Dave's videos. They have become more strident, less entertaining and in many ways less informative and useful. It's a shame.

For those not familiar with him, he seems to have originally focused on online tutorials on a variety of subjects, and those were very useful if comparatively dry. AT some point, he did a debunking video. I think I recall the first was about Flat Earth, which gave him opportunity to exercise a snarky sense of humor. It got a lot of views, and was probably fun to do, and he started mixing debunking vids into his channel. It is my impression that as the algorithm steers more people toward more divisive content, he's been rewarded for getting angrier and less fun.

I would steadfastly defend his right to make whatever content he wants, and to hold whatever political views he holds. Injecting his politics into his debunking vids is his right, doing so as an ad hominem attack on the person expressing views that need debunking is not a great tactic, though, in my opinion. If Avi is wrong (as he clearly seems to be) about alien stuff, he would not be less (or more) wrong about that stuff if his opinions on Middle East issues was the same as Dave's...

I think good debunking content should avoid ad hominem, this sometimes has actually reinforced the conspiracy theorists in their beliefs, but regardless of that, it's really just not very productive in my opinion.
Even if Avi is really just a fraud.
And also, it's not like he's a certified hoaxer or something.
I'm not even positive he'll find any evidence of aliens but still.
Is Neil Tyson also a fraud? He also wrote a book on aliens, so what?

 

[Gary C]

I think good debunking content should avoid ad hominem, this sometimes has actually reinforced the conspiracy theorists in their beliefs, but regardless of that, it's really just not very productive in my opinion.
Even if Avi is really just a fraud.
And also, it's not like he's a certified hoaxer or something.
I'm not even positive he'll find any evidence of aliens but still.
Is Neil Tyson also a fraud? He also wrote a book on aliens, so what?

It's not that Avi has engaged in the sort of behavior we normally associate with fraud. But he has both the training and the experience to recognize that his rash of claims about ETs based on interstellar comets and sea floor particles have been unjustified speculation. While he may be getting more funding because of it, he's produced nothing of scientific value in this area. Contrast that to his previous work in astrophysics and it's hard to say that society has seen any benefit from his excursion into the realms of woo.

NdT OTOH is just using popular interest in ETs to wrap his latest popularization of science book in some humor and try to get a few believers to think a little more carefully about the UFO genre.

 

[Gary C]

Apparently Shermer has gotten enough feedback on email and social media that he decided to address his participation directly.


Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6z-VuyAv_W8


Times:

• 0 ~ 15 min - His participation, opinions on the subject, background on UFOs, disclosure on his bet with Avi
• 15 ~ 20 - Comments on Disclosure Day, the Fermi Paradox, and an AI generated UFO hallucination
• 20 - end - Updates on Skeptic Magazine and related topics

The only thing I saw that was new was the story about AI.

 

[jarlrmai]

Was it just me or was that just more confused and confusing than anything else?

random thoughts and paraphrasing below:

Avi was tasked by the government to investigate the videos that are being released by the government, but we are actually using the Galileo project to get our own new data? Also what is AARO for then if not to do the 1st part?

I guess he also mentions applying modern science methods to current reports, which ones? Will any sacred cows held by the members of the UFO community be a part of this?

Avi says "Since UAP are physical objects that interact with humans"

They are? Since when?

Also I thought going from UAP to UFO was literally to allow for non physical objects..

He mentions "angry UAP people that want to own the subject and have podcasts and books" which he says on his Youtube vodcast with his books displayed on a shelf behind him...

Says the missing scientist thing was nonsense they debunked, sure I agree it was nonsense, but where is this debunking shown?

He also says "biologics" at one point how has this Grusch word just become a part of the vocab so quickly, and for an apparent sceptic like Shermer?

If I was writing a TV show script, this guy would be being setup to be the token "boo, hiss" villain who has a turnaround..

It's all very odd, the way he references Grusch and Graves disparagingly but not Avi not so even though I don't seem much difference between them and most of the other council members, some of whom who Grusch probably references as a part of his general "insider" retelling of UFO lore.

It almost feels like a "aliens, but our way" split, like the old school people re-asserting control.

Maybe as a sceptic Shermer might give @Mick West an interview to actually clarify stuff...

 

[Gary C]

Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PvrHX0qRRMs

 

[Mendel]

Why is anything Loeb has said about astronomy/ ETI connected with Zionism?

I'm glad you asked, because I can now quote what I read on Wikipedia a minute ago.

Article:

According to Loeb, the "fundamental question" is if the Ark of Covenant was a device used to communicate with extraterrestrials and if the Jewish people were chosen by a race of aliens and imbued with "information from beyond our planet".[94] As reported by The Forward, Loeb contends that Earth may not be safe for the Jewish people and leaving Earth could be advantageous due to the absence of antisemitism in outer space.[95] Writing on his Medium blog, he has posited that "with long-term thinking, Jewish eschatology could be extended to trillions of years if a Jewish community with its synagogues and extraterrestrial Temple is established".[96]

In 2024, Loeb delivered a speech in which he declared his view that the Messiah will be an alien who arrives from outer space.[97]

Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Avi_Loeb#Judaism_and_extraterrestrials

 

[JMartJr]

Avi was tasked by the government to investigate the videos that are being released by the government, but we are actually using the Galileo project to get our own new data? Also what is AARO for then if not to do the 1st part?

AARO was not tasked with finding the desired answer.

 

[John J.]

Avi says "Since UAP are physical objects that interact with humans"

They are? Since when?

Agreed, I'm surprised Shermer quoted this but didn't challenge it.

He also says "biologics" at one point how has this Grusch word just become a part of the vocab so quickly, and for an apparent sceptic like Shermer?

Strongly agree.
We need to understand what claimants and UFO enthusiasts mean, but that doesn't mean we should adopt examples of pseudoscientific jargon.
As mentioned in other posts, "biologic" has a well-established meaning in biochemistry and medicine, and it isn't a synonym for "organism" or "creature". Biologists, biochemists, medical doctors studying hypothetical aliens/ their remains would not call them "biologics".

 

[Ann K]

We need to understand what claimants and UFO enthusiasts mean, but that doesn't mean we should adopt examples of pseudoscientific jargon.
As mentioned in other posts, "biologic" has a well-established meaning in biochemistry and medicine, and it isn't a synonym for "organism" or "creature". Biologists, biochemists, medical doctors studying hypothetical aliens/ their remains would not call them "biologics".

What word would you suggest be used in the sense that Grusch uses the term?

 

[jarlrmai]

What word would you suggest be used in the sense that Grusch uses the term?

Well part of the problem with Grusch using that term is we don't know the sense in which he is using it

But maybe biological material, organism, creature etc