I can remember two.
I can't help you with that. Your inexplicable memory lapses (which just gosh darn happen to make you forget things you were wrong about and should have learned from) are truly mysterious, but I lack the expertise to help you with those. Folk wisdom suggests it could be magnesium or B-12 deficiency, but you shouldn't rely on just folk wisdom when your health is concerned.
The one about Americans has a somewhat of a click-baity headline but basically it puts FE belief about 2%.
This is desperately incorrect,
and you know it!!!1!I'd still regard that as alarmingly high, but it's nowhere near the 5-10% I've seen you claim.
Indeed. And even if we pretend that you didn't just fudge one statistic you dislike, we can still point out that you completely ignored the other one, which flatly states >7%, and falls square in the middle of my estimate.
As always, you cherry-pick poorly analysed data, and only present what you think makes you look good. You're not even good enough to get that going, but the intention here is more worrisome than the outcome.
Even the most generous estimate I could find, that study in Brazil, put it at 7%. And that was a survey of 2000 adults. I'd suggest that in a country of 200 million that's not a statistically significant sample.
And what would you base this suggestion, which completely defies how statistical research is done, on? Once again - it is convenience. You don't like the results, so you're ready to throw out all research methods out the window in favour of... YouTube videos. Are you perhaps beginning to see the irony of this situation? You are everything you accuse the FE'ers of being.
I'm interested what you think your previous research revealed about him - obviously that pre-dated the Omegle video so it can't have been to do with that.
Of course - the Omegle case is more readily available because you presented it to us, and thus are unlikely to deny it happened (you'll only pretend that you didn't understand what was happening, but you won't suddenly "not remember" his video, at least for another few days). When SciManDan approached me for an interview on his podcast, I spoke to other FE content creators and activists about their experiences with him, and the many attempted "interviews", the troll mobs he sends after people, the hilarious failures at doxxing by said mobs, and his tendency to outright ban people when an argument isn't going his way (or when any of the above is highlighted) - you know, the kind of nasty stuff that put him on everyone's naughty list. I was warned by people I trust to disengage, and I have done so.
I was immediately suspicious because, when I pointed out that he appears to be a "debunker" channel (in the nicest possible way) and (more to the point) that we're not interested in inviting people to harass us, he told me that I shouldn't worry about that, because this podcast is totally different from all of his other content. Extreme red flag, and I'm grateful for it.
Not his finest work, I'd agree, although "abusing a child porn site" is a ridiculous mischaracterisation of him and Omegle and you know it.
Which part?
- Omegle is predominantly a porn site running under the guise of "anonymous discussion", and a significant portion of the users are underage.
- If you don't believe me and the Beeb (reminder for the mysteriously forgetful here), go ahead and check it for yourself. I mean, I strongly suggest you don't, shit's kinda gross, but if you really want to, you can verify it.
- If I were you, I'd simply look at the mainstream media reports on the site and assume that they're not a complete lie. Too many witnesses, too much evidence.
- He is abusing the site - he is not using it for its intended purposes.
- He is doing so for personal profit - his videos are monetised, he's unable to bait any more FE'ers into interacting with him because the word of his misdeeds has spread far and wide, but the channel needs to keep ticking on. After all, how else is he gonna make rent?
Which part is a ridiculous mischaracterisation?
Dude, that isn't going to happen.
And yet it continues to happen, no matter how long you cry about it.
Again, take a step back and observe your desperation: you keep proposing that we should abandon statistics and data science in favour of:
- a poll on an IT forum
- some guy browsing child porn sites, finding some of his fans (quelle surprise), but not finding any FE'ers who'd reveal themselves to him
- you personally not having met many people whom you go out of your way to call inferior to yourself (egads, I wonder why they might not be willing to talk to you...)
- urbandictionary
You wouldn't need to do that were it not for the continued growth of FET.
And as I alluded to above, it's not exactly a "delusion" of superiority. RET is a demonstrably better model which can explain and predict things better than FE. [...]
Oh, no no no, you're not getting away with this. You don't get to call us bad people who deserve to be harassed only to then go "hnyeh all I meant was I don't think your theories are very good teehee". Either back up your belief that we are "baddies" who "cannot go unchallenged", and that the people who seek to harass, dox and marginalise us are "the good guys" from your perspective, or admit that placing yourself in a position of moral superiority was a dumb move that needs serious reconsideration.
This kind of stuff, by the way, is why I call you lot reprehensible, and ultimately one of the factors that fuels some of the nastier parts of the FE movement. Arrogant RE'ers who aren't nearly as smart as they think they are, but who think they can lord over others because they watched a YouTube video once. Despicable stuff, and it's gonna shoot us both in the foot.
I think you know that FE has had it's day. You've had a good run but you admitted the interview requests have dried up a bit.
We have had this discussion at least seven times now, so I'll give you the briefest of reminders: interview requests follow media hype when
Elon make funny tweet. They're a bad thing, and while we made the best out of a bad thing with successful interviews, it is good that they've dried up. I much prefer talking to normal people and the occasional academic than brain-dead bloggers who pretend to be journalists. The actual growth of FE adherents also does not follow the media hype - unsurprisingly, dumb schoolkids visiting us to say "hehehe erth rund" are not our target audience.
I am not denying that interest in FE has grown.
We have made considerable progress. Now we just need you to concede on all the other things you're demonstrably wrong about, and your extremely twisted sense of moral righteousness.
But don't confuse interest and curiosity with acceptance.
Keep in mind that it's you and the other RE twerps in here who keep mixing up those metrics. You don't need to warn me about the risk of confusing them, but rather you need to think real hard about your own warning.
FE won't gain serious traction until you have a model which [I personally view as] consistent and [which I personally think] does a better job of explaining observations than RE.
Keep thinking that if you'd like. Just don't come crying to me when you realise your side had lost, purely due to ignoring the early warnings.