harvard & aliens & crackpots: a disambiguation of Avi Loeb

This isn't the first time Loeb has shouted "aliens!" Previously he said Ouamuamua was aliens based on a hunch, and after the news got their hands on it and declared aliens to the public, astronomers were understandably peeved with him and asked him not to shout "aliens!" unilaterally based on a hunch. Loeb didn't take it well. There's an amazing clip where he rants about how he is the only one serious about finding extraterrestrial intelligence... To a room full of career SETI astronomers. Here's a video essay about him. (People who have a strong preference for direct/to the point videos would probably be better served seeking out another source, I feel like this video adds interesting context but I know a lot of you would feel it's fluff.) this video

Since it's on topic, I'd like to share a small youtuber who does science communication. She covered Loeb and the topics of crackpots in science [1]. Her other video on string theory and how it damaged science communication is really good too. [1] this video

Thanks to hikingsimulator's link below, here is Loeb interacting with Tarter [0]. The entire video is worth listening to and the vlogger is refreshingly fair minded. 0. this video

> He's written "over 800 scientific papers". Is that... a good thing in his field? No...it really isn't. If you want a very accurate and in depth breakdown of why, i suggest you watch this: this video If you don't want to do the whole thing, just jump to his lovely little interaction with Jill Tarter. Then look at all the comments trying to somehow give this snake oil salesman credibility. He's a publicity chaser who's past his prime and cashing in on his reputation and abusing his position. The fact harvard is profiting from it frankly is a disgrace.

OK so maybe I should've just linked e.g. to that very detailed (and sort of lengthy, but entertaining) video by acollierastro "harvard & aliens & crackpots: a disambiguation of Avi Loeb" ( this video ) which is definitely not flamewar-ish. Guess I've gotten somewhat thin-skinned given the volume of faux / overblown science news of late. For those reading this, there's yet another post here ( link ) that links to a harvard.edu article that gives more details on why the collectors of the spherules believe they have reason to assume that (1) they are really from the suspected meteorite, (2) the material's composition doesn't resemble materials known from other meteorites. Many questions remain though; for those interested in spherules from outer space, there's yet another earlier post ( link ) that links to a video that shows how excrutiating it is to collect and sort out teeny meteorites from the environment. Having seen that and a clip about the expedition's method of collecting (lowering a strong magnet to the seafloor) I wonder how often they lifted the thing up to collect material because otherwise they could not produce statistics about abundance in relation to the asteroid's flight path.