1. You can look at my comments, I didn't delete anything.

2. You misunderstood me. My argument wasn't that I could make a better video, or that FoTC didn't take time and effort... but that anyone (i.e. some random nobody) could narrate over stock footage and claim to have the "answers," and 90% of the people here would believe it. What I implied to OP was: extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence, a giant list of theories with zero evidence is nothing new (like FoTC).

1. You can look at my comments, I didn't delete anything.

2. You misunderstood me. My argument wasn't that I could make a better video, or that FoTC didn't take time and effort... but that anyone (i.e. some random nobody) could narrate over stock footage and claim to have the "answers," and 90% of the people here would believe it. What I implied to OP was: extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence, a giant list of theories with zero evidence is nothing new (like FoTC).

1. You can look at my comments, I didn't delete anything.

2. You misunderstood me. My argument wasn't that I could make a better video, or that FoTC didn't take time and effort... but that anyone (i.e. some random nobody) could narrate over stock footage and claim to have the "answers," and 90% of the people here would believe it. What I implied to OP was: extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. His giant list of claims with zero evidence is nothing new (like FoTC).

1. You can look at my comments, I didn't delete anything.

2. You misunderstood me. My argument wasn't that I could make a better video, or that FoTC didn't take time and effort... but that anyone (i.e. some random nobody) could narrate over stock footage and claim to have the "answers," and 90% of the people here would believe it. What I implied to OP was: extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. His giant list of claims with zero evidence is nothing new (like FoTC).

1. You can look at my comments, I didn't delete anything.

2. You misunderstood me. My argument wasn't that I could make a better video, or that FoTC didn't take time and effort... but that anyone (i.e. some random nobody) could narrate over stock footage and claim to have the "answers," and 90% of the people here would believe it. What I was saying to OP was, extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. The fact that people can watch FoTC and find it convincing is hilarious to me.

1. You can look at my comments, I didn't delete anything.

2. You misunderstood me. My argument wasn't that I could make a better video, or that FoTC didn't take time and effort... but that anyone (i.e. some random nobody) could narrate over stock footage and claim to have the "answers," and 90% of the people here would believe it. The fact that people can watch FoTC and find it convincing is hilarious to me.

FoTC has glaring inconsistencies, problematic sources, extraordinary claims based on loose assumptions, and on and on. It would take weeks to debunk it, and it wouldn't matter to the people that are already convinced by it anyway.