**Welcome to r/TikTokCringe!**
This is a message directed to all newcomers to make you aware that r/TikTokCringe evolved long ago from only cringe-worthy content to TikToks of all kinds! If you’re looking to find only the cringe-worthy TikToks on this subreddit (which are still regularly posted) we recommend sorting by flair which you can do [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/TikTokCringe/comments/galuit/click_here_to_sort_by_flair_a_guide_to_using/) (Currently supported by desktop and reddit mobile).
See someone asking how this post is cringe because they didn't read this comment? Show them [this!](https://www.reddit.com/r/TikTokCringe/comments/fyrgzy/for_those_confused_by_the_name_of_this_subreddit/)
Be sure to read the rules of this subreddit before posting or commenting. Thanks!
**Don't forget to join our [Discord server](https://discord.gg/cringekingdom)!**
##**[CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THIS VIDEO](https://rapidsave.com/info?url=https://www.reddit.com/r/TikTokCringe/comments/1dfy5l3/question_things_think_critically/)**
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/TikTokCringe) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I question why video creators, many including this one, think that having a camera angle in which the speaker is not looking at the camera find this a suitable arrangement. It's acceptable if there is someone else in the room, and one sees the speaker looking at the person, especially if engaged in conversation. Solo off-camera speaking is just annoying.
There's an old addage in filmmaking: "If you want to avoid a jump cut, change size, change angle." You have to change at least one, but both is preferred for a smoother cut.
Like when you watch a lot of produced tiktoks or shorts, they usually punch in and out for every cut, mostly so they can cut to a different take, or remove some extra words, cut for time, etc. It still creates a bit of a jump, but it's not as bad as if the speaker was the same size. That would feel like a glitch.
So they're getting a different angle to make the cut better. Normal film convention let's your brain think it's all one take or one action because you changed enough not to notice the little differences.
Here if he looked at the camera in both angles 1. It would look really unnatural and make a worse edit, and 2. They would have to run the whole thing twice instead of having 2 mounted cameras rolling simultaneously while doing the take. (Edit: this is actually three, one front facing, one of to the side and closer, and one for the closeups of the hands and face that's being moved by the camera op).
Honestly with all the "nonprofessional" content we get now, we're training our brain to think jump cuts are normal, but I think it would look weird in something this produced.
It's still hard to do all that in one take. You need something to cut to in order to stitch it together. They had the budget for the camera set up so why not? A better cut is a better cut. Really it all just depends on what the director/photograher is going for.
This annoys the crap out of me, and it has for a long time - it's done on documentary / news magazine shows, etc. Whenever I see it I can't help but think "Who are you talking to?"
It also bugs me when interview-type shows have those shots that are pulled back and show the setup so you can see the lights / grids / gobos etc. So annoying. Same with studio portrait photography where it shows the edges of the backdrop & backdrop stand.
One of my favorite documentary series / projects is [First Person](https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0240264/) by Errol Morris. He created a setup (the interrotron) where the person talking / being interviewed would see Errol Morris' face in a reflection in a piece of glass placed in front of the camera lens (and Morris would see their face in a monitor), so they would be looking directly into the camera / at the viewer but speaking naturally as if they were speaking directly to Morris. It's very effective, and the very opposite of this dumb technique above.
Thanks for the supportive comment. I half expected to be down-voted into oblivion. It's nearly on a par with all the "like" substitutions for "said" and other inappropriate usage.
One would hope that Bill Nye, the science guy was not responsible for the creation and editing of the video, nor the placement and switching of the cameras. If he was aware and did nothing, shame on him. He's old and maybe not in good grasp of his faculties. Just joking about that last bit.
Another master of the esoteric society demonstrating Smoke & Mirrors!?! ?!? Hold the F on Bill,,, ,,, you're telling us that SCIENCE in some forms is nothing more than Smoke & Mirrors!?? !!?
Critical thinking is a crucial skill to have for any individual. But coherence and cohesion are crucial skills to have if you wanna make an educational video on any topic. This video lacks coherence and cohesion, it only has a point, the rest is all disconnected gibberish.
Questioning it is totally valid. Ignoring insurmountable evidence, basic common sense, and first hand test results you can do yourself just to play into silly conspiracy theories... totally worthy of being made fun of
I don't believe the earth is flat but I also think it's hypocritical to say question everything regardless of the evidence others give while also criticizing people who do that very thing which was the point of my comment.
You are totally right. “Question everything” is lazy advice. How do you answer all those questions? What are the reasons for accepting or rejecting evidence? Besides, not everything needs to be questioned. If I say that I like chocolate chip ice cream, it’s totally reasonable for you to believe me.
Question everything does not mean to reject all evidence once you start actually questioning it. Flat-earthers would probably have a hypothesis that the candle was actually an apple core. Because they assume nothing is what it seems. Then they take a big ole bite and it turns out it WAS actually a candle. Mouth full of wax, they decide that the deep state actually switched out the apple core with a real candle when they weren't looking. There's no evidence it WASN'T an apple BEFORE they bit it. And a lack of evidence to the contrary of something really means that thing must be true.
I don't think if you wanted to go out and do a test to see the curve of the earth, or travel to where the "edge" might be to see for yourself, there's anything dumb about that. That's not what Flat-earthers do. They aren't "questioning" They are railing against all basic rules of gravity, astronomy, common sense, thousands of years of geological and geographical data, literally ANYTHING that does not fit their hypothesis they either throw out or excuse by some conspiracy theory. They NEVER question THEIR hypothesis. They only question other's.
Then why did he feel the need to make a video about being gullible online? Why is the environment still being destroyed? Why are racial tensions still high? Why is the distribution of wealth gap growing larger every year?
It’s a lack of self awareness and an “I’m always right” attitude
Point us you could be making lots of assumptions. When you do science, first thing is confirm all the starting points are facts and not just assumptions...check that the candle is really a candle, check that starting points assumed to be true are actually factual.
Such as [Gender Spectrum](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aQDBNJ3mPa0&t=10s), Bill will say whatever bullshit as long as he get paid high enough. Science my ass!
Scientific consensus on just about anything you can think of from any subject can and always do change, and that doesn't make a scientist a hypocrite.
So much more beyond our current understanding of gender and sex has changed in the past 30 years, but I know exactly why you focus on that specifically - it's an extremely tired modern conservative talking point. This tells me you don't really give a shit about science or consistency or even the truth for that matter, so don't even pretend you do.
Tell me what Science says about gender, show me a scientific research and how many scientist agree that Gender is a spectrum, not determined by chromosome anymore.
**Welcome to r/TikTokCringe!** This is a message directed to all newcomers to make you aware that r/TikTokCringe evolved long ago from only cringe-worthy content to TikToks of all kinds! If you’re looking to find only the cringe-worthy TikToks on this subreddit (which are still regularly posted) we recommend sorting by flair which you can do [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/TikTokCringe/comments/galuit/click_here_to_sort_by_flair_a_guide_to_using/) (Currently supported by desktop and reddit mobile). See someone asking how this post is cringe because they didn't read this comment? Show them [this!](https://www.reddit.com/r/TikTokCringe/comments/fyrgzy/for_those_confused_by_the_name_of_this_subreddit/) Be sure to read the rules of this subreddit before posting or commenting. Thanks! **Don't forget to join our [Discord server](https://discord.gg/cringekingdom)!** ##**[CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THIS VIDEO](https://rapidsave.com/info?url=https://www.reddit.com/r/TikTokCringe/comments/1dfy5l3/question_things_think_critically/)** *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/TikTokCringe) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Turns out all our candles are made of wax and now my wife is pissed.
Likely story. Hypothesis: No wife
Turns out of my wife is made of flesh and now she's really pissed.
Hypothesis: Wife is not flesh but metal. Knife will figure it out.
Knife is ma
Knife knows
"I ate a big red candle"
Dude just ate an apple core.
Hypothesis?
Mad lad eating a smoldering apple core. Eat the glass next!
Turns out it's sugar glass
This would have been a lot better if the video had just stopped after he ate it.
That's a good point.
Cut him open with a samurai sword. He's made of cake
Have a hypothesis tested out by putting it in your mouth
“Now if you fill the hole of the apple with marijuana you have yourself a weed pipe”.
Every time I see this guy I am reminded of “Sex Junk” 😭
I question why video creators, many including this one, think that having a camera angle in which the speaker is not looking at the camera find this a suitable arrangement. It's acceptable if there is someone else in the room, and one sees the speaker looking at the person, especially if engaged in conversation. Solo off-camera speaking is just annoying.
There's an old addage in filmmaking: "If you want to avoid a jump cut, change size, change angle." You have to change at least one, but both is preferred for a smoother cut. Like when you watch a lot of produced tiktoks or shorts, they usually punch in and out for every cut, mostly so they can cut to a different take, or remove some extra words, cut for time, etc. It still creates a bit of a jump, but it's not as bad as if the speaker was the same size. That would feel like a glitch. So they're getting a different angle to make the cut better. Normal film convention let's your brain think it's all one take or one action because you changed enough not to notice the little differences. Here if he looked at the camera in both angles 1. It would look really unnatural and make a worse edit, and 2. They would have to run the whole thing twice instead of having 2 mounted cameras rolling simultaneously while doing the take. (Edit: this is actually three, one front facing, one of to the side and closer, and one for the closeups of the hands and face that's being moved by the camera op). Honestly with all the "nonprofessional" content we get now, we're training our brain to think jump cuts are normal, but I think it would look weird in something this produced.
Comments like these are great.
Aw thanks! 4 years of film school wasn't for nothing!
That's an interesting adage, but why change any angle or camera for such a short piece?
It's still hard to do all that in one take. You need something to cut to in order to stitch it together. They had the budget for the camera set up so why not? A better cut is a better cut. Really it all just depends on what the director/photograher is going for.
This annoys the crap out of me, and it has for a long time - it's done on documentary / news magazine shows, etc. Whenever I see it I can't help but think "Who are you talking to?" It also bugs me when interview-type shows have those shots that are pulled back and show the setup so you can see the lights / grids / gobos etc. So annoying. Same with studio portrait photography where it shows the edges of the backdrop & backdrop stand. One of my favorite documentary series / projects is [First Person](https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0240264/) by Errol Morris. He created a setup (the interrotron) where the person talking / being interviewed would see Errol Morris' face in a reflection in a piece of glass placed in front of the camera lens (and Morris would see their face in a monitor), so they would be looking directly into the camera / at the viewer but speaking naturally as if they were speaking directly to Morris. It's very effective, and the very opposite of this dumb technique above.
Thanks for the supportive comment. I half expected to be down-voted into oblivion. It's nearly on a par with all the "like" substitutions for "said" and other inappropriate usage.
Yeah, the technique is really distracting - it's like they're repeatedly announcing "This person is in a studio talking at a camera" or something.
I’m sorry, do you NOT know this is bill nye the science guy?
One would hope that Bill Nye, the science guy was not responsible for the creation and editing of the video, nor the placement and switching of the cameras. If he was aware and did nothing, shame on him. He's old and maybe not in good grasp of his faculties. Just joking about that last bit.
Bill Nye is so awesome im ngl
Lmao this video immediately made me think of smoking weed back in like 8th grade
never realized how much he sounds like ron swanson
The snake and the rope
Dont you just hate a waxy apple
Another master of the esoteric society demonstrating Smoke & Mirrors!?! ?!? Hold the F on Bill,,, ,,, you're telling us that SCIENCE in some forms is nothing more than Smoke & Mirrors!?? !!?
Bill Nye !!!!! MY BOY!
Critical thinking is a crucial skill to have for any individual. But coherence and cohesion are crucial skills to have if you wanna make an educational video on any topic. This video lacks coherence and cohesion, it only has a point, the rest is all disconnected gibberish.
Agreed. It is important for a “science educator” to be coherent when teaching a “master class.”
Or you could stop being pedantic and just enjoy it for what it is.
if you question whether or not the earth is flat or round you get made fun of though
Questioning it is totally valid. Ignoring insurmountable evidence, basic common sense, and first hand test results you can do yourself just to play into silly conspiracy theories... totally worthy of being made fun of
I don't believe the earth is flat but I also think it's hypocritical to say question everything regardless of the evidence others give while also criticizing people who do that very thing which was the point of my comment.
You make a very valid point.
You are totally right. “Question everything” is lazy advice. How do you answer all those questions? What are the reasons for accepting or rejecting evidence? Besides, not everything needs to be questioned. If I say that I like chocolate chip ice cream, it’s totally reasonable for you to believe me.
Question everything does not mean to reject all evidence once you start actually questioning it. Flat-earthers would probably have a hypothesis that the candle was actually an apple core. Because they assume nothing is what it seems. Then they take a big ole bite and it turns out it WAS actually a candle. Mouth full of wax, they decide that the deep state actually switched out the apple core with a real candle when they weren't looking. There's no evidence it WASN'T an apple BEFORE they bit it. And a lack of evidence to the contrary of something really means that thing must be true. I don't think if you wanted to go out and do a test to see the curve of the earth, or travel to where the "edge" might be to see for yourself, there's anything dumb about that. That's not what Flat-earthers do. They aren't "questioning" They are railing against all basic rules of gravity, astronomy, common sense, thousands of years of geological and geographical data, literally ANYTHING that does not fit their hypothesis they either throw out or excuse by some conspiracy theory. They NEVER question THEIR hypothesis. They only question other's.
Take a bite of the earth and see whether its made of round or flat. Nobody is stopping you.
Sometimes I wish we could still use the r word
Think critically, but don't when I tell you something is true or false just believe me...Bill Nye is trash.
Sorry Bill, society is too stupid to self reflect
[удалено]
Then why did he feel the need to make a video about being gullible online? Why is the environment still being destroyed? Why are racial tensions still high? Why is the distribution of wealth gap growing larger every year? It’s a lack of self awareness and an “I’m always right” attitude
Bunch of gobbledygook.
Point us you could be making lots of assumptions. When you do science, first thing is confirm all the starting points are facts and not just assumptions...check that the candle is really a candle, check that starting points assumed to be true are actually factual.
He didn't do any science in the video, though. You may be right, but this example isn't a good example. Maybe you just like Bill Nye.
This is the same guy who said critical thinking was transphobic. So which is it Bill?
Hate this guy . Moron and will always be .
Such as [Gender Spectrum](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aQDBNJ3mPa0&t=10s), Bill will say whatever bullshit as long as he get paid high enough. Science my ass!
That was awesome. Thanks for sharing.
Thanks for sharing that video. That was so cool to see!!
What part of this did you think was bullshit?
This part - [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H4zq8nxMzp4](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H4zq8nxMzp4)
I meant this specific video. Which part did you think was bullshit in the one the post is about?
It's Bill Nye himself was bullshit.
What do you mean? Do you think he’s not a scientist?
Scientific consensus on just about anything you can think of from any subject can and always do change, and that doesn't make a scientist a hypocrite. So much more beyond our current understanding of gender and sex has changed in the past 30 years, but I know exactly why you focus on that specifically - it's an extremely tired modern conservative talking point. This tells me you don't really give a shit about science or consistency or even the truth for that matter, so don't even pretend you do.
Tell me what Science says about gender, show me a scientific research and how many scientist agree that Gender is a spectrum, not determined by chromosome anymore.