How would a "debunking product" become a scam if it's correct?
Because if the author is not an expert in that particular field, does not present any of their own data, and simply does a lot of sensationalistic hand waving, video graphics and use of technical jargon then it is a product being sold under false pretenses. Just because it might sound "correct" does not mean it is. (Your Solar Roadways and Batterizer debunk videos were not like that BTW).
Err, yeah, that's called making mistakes. People make mistakes in videos all the time.
Yes, the Hyperloop video is a prime example. His debunking videos have been debunked by both experts in the relevant field (which he is not) and others (e.g. Jose's blog post re: the process of idea --> product) . He never adequately addressed those criticisms (yes, I know he made more of the same type of sensationalistic videos in response).
That doesn't mean that the Hyperloop will become reality(I doubt it will) - just that TFs videos on the subject were senstionalistic, ill-informed and IMO little better than the videos by the Solar Roadways proponents. But in his case, the videos are the product he's selling.
OK, so I looked at the blog post:
http://sitacuisses.blogspot.com.au/2016/07/product-prototype-technology-idea.htmlI have not read it all yet, so bare that in mind.
But right off the bat I see a problem here.
TF is attacking the
hype and
viability of a
product idea.
Hyperloop is not saying "Hey, this sounds cool, lets do some research and see where it goes, it might work, it might not, it might have some interesting spin-off's" etc. No, they are selling and marketing the crap out of
the completely viable product idea.
Now, you can argue TF got some technical things wrong in the video (I don't know, I haven't double checked), but most of the concerns and showstopper seemed completely founded to me, and that's what he's trying to do, debunk the
viability of the product idea. In that he's 100% right.
Would you prefer to live in a world where
no one questions product/idea marketing like this? I doubt you would, in which case who else is stepping up to the plate to do it? I think the TF haters should cut him some slack.
You and others are attacking him for not being 100% correct, or this or that detail, or what he didn't say etc. Are you not thankful that
someone is saying something? That
someone is having a go?
Does he have to be either the pinnacle of debunking greatness or GTFO?
That what these arguments seem like to me.
How has it gone from the person making the product/idea claim having to defend it, to the person doing the rightly questioning of the idea having to defend themselves? It's arse backwards.
If you take the approach in that article then Solar Roadways is a worthy idea to be pursuing.
BTW, IIRC I saw the official(?) response to TF's Hyperloop debunking, and IIRC they just waved their hands around and said "you don't understand" instead of actually proving the technical viability of their concept.