She has perfected a kind of down to earth rage bait that vibes with the intelligent outsider, the high school edge lord that grew up and now know some statistics.

She is often wrong, both in magnitude and direction.

> She is often wrong, both in magnitude and direction.

Since even the one of the authors of the paper agree with her I'd say she's probably not wrong this time.

I appreciate her original intent, shining light on hypocrisy and bad science. 20% of what she puts out is great.

Watching her maul some crappy paper is like watching a high school wrestler take down a 6th grader. It gets old quickly, esp when she is way outside of her domain knowledge.

Still not as bad when a CS person thinks their years of solving hard problems translates into a domain they know nothing about.

> Watching her maul some crappy paper is like watching a high school wrestler take down a 6th grader.

What makes you think this is "some crappy paper" not worth criticizing, especially after it's been picked up by the mainstream media?

https://www.worldweatherattribution.org/climate-change-incre...

I am not talking about this specific paper, it could "deserve it", I am talking about the format of her channel, where she picks apart some poor postdocs publish or perish paper and smokes it into the ground.

She amps everything up like she is performing for MSNBC and it is exhausting.

I am good with this thread, I capitulate, just not as much a Schumer.