Philosophical Vegan Forum

Allright, thanks for the feedback.

bobo0100 wrote: 6:56
This feels awkward. I see two possible fixes, I can read and upload the full comment (when I recover from my cold), or you can underline the part of the text I read. TVA's treatment of comments his read, that others authored, is to use an effect to deepen or slow down his voice, (with this he went overboard on the shark rescue video) the effects I have on my computer are minimal so I did not do this myself but you may be able to now.

I think this sounds allright: https://youtu.be/M-zzSiwHd8Y
I'll underline the text + make it a bit more graphically interesting

It would be nice if you (or anyone, really) could read this comment:


On a side note, US military pictures are awesome and in the public domain

"Most of the people who commented about [open letter to matt] didn't even know who you were"

I don't like this sentence. Our forum is hardly representative of the vegan community, and the argument stands without it. Are you guys okay with it if I delete it?

miniboes wrote:It would be nice if you (or anyone, really) could read this comment:

I will read it when I am fully recovered from my cold.

miniboes wrote:I don't like this sentence. Our forum is hardly representative of the vegan community, and the argument stands without it. Are you guys okay with it if I delete it?

While our forum is not representative of the vegan community, I don't think it matters. We only ever claimed to represent the vegan atheist forum, and I think it is obvious that we meant this. However I didn't like this sentience for other reasons, mainly that I have not seen the comments that proclaim this. I was far less active when this letter was started. It would be strange if this one comment is the only one not supported by visual proof in the video, and make the the arguments of the letter seem far less impressive. Although the claim is true, outside the atheist community Matt is mostly unknown.

I listened to the audio addressing matt, but I have a question. I've google searched for info about cholesterol, but all the articles about dietary cholesterol effects on blood levels are usually talked about as if there is almost no correlation, and it's a myth. The studies I've found where a positive correlation are shown seem very minor. Does anyone have a good knock down resource to back this cholesterol thing up?

Mr. Purple wrote:I listened to the audio addressing matt, but I have a question. I've google searched for info about cholesterol, but all the articles about dietary cholesterol effects on blood levels are usually talked about as if there is almost no correlation, and it's a myth. The studies I've found where a positive correlation are shown seem very minor. Does anyone have a good knock down resource to back this cholesterol thing up?

https://theveganatheist.com/forum/viewt ... %3F#p10429

https://theveganatheist.com/forum/viewt ... %3F#p10429

Ok, I read it and it seems to say the same things as I read elsewhere. Eating dietary cholesterol doesn't do much to raise your blood levels unless you have diabetes or are a special case. The main way i'm reading LDL blood levels are affected negatively has much more to do with trans fats, saturated fats, and carbohydrates than dietary cholesterol. Maybe i'm misunderstanding something, but I still haven't found anything that justifies the way you guys were talking about cholesterol in the audio.

Here's a second sample, reworked with bobo's criticism:
https://youtu.be/Ojp_Yd5HE0Q

Sound effects are louder than intended; something went wrong with rendering.
6:50 I am not satisfied with, I will look for another way to make this look interesting. Ideas are welcome.

Mr. Purple wrote:I listened to the audio addressing matt, but I have a question. I've google searched for info about cholesterol, but all the articles about dietary cholesterol effects on blood levels are usually talked about as if there is almost no correlation, and it's a myth. The studies I've found where a positive correlation are shown seem very minor. Does anyone have a good knock down resource to back this cholesterol thing up?

There are a lot of studies out there constructed by the egg industry:
http://nutritionfacts.org/video/how-the ... g-studies/

To answer your question, this meta-analysis is pretty big:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/1534437

There are tons of videos on cholesterol on nutritionfacts.org, all based on peer reviewed science.
http://nutritionfacts.org/?s=cholesterol

miniboes wrote:Sound effects are louder than intended; something went wrong with rendering. 6:50 I am not satisfied with, I will look for another way to make this look interesting. Ideas are welcome.

It's looking really good. The improvements are massive.

Two criticism remains.
In video uniformity is the Key to professionalism. Although the video's background reflects a massive improvement throughout the video, I cant help but feel the improvement would amplified if you where to use the same background throughout (if loop-able). This uniformity is sometimes also achieved by filters, lenses, and white balance, but you don't need to worry about that.

The section in which liar pops up in different locations on the screen has a white background. If the white background is connected to the image It may be worth doing it again, but I would suggest you use a range of titles. What program are you doing this in, because title are annoying in Adobe Premiere, which I am most accustomed to.

For the most part the sound effects where spot on, and in some spaces maybe too low. When editing the audio try to work with speakers rather than a headset, especially buds, and confirm that the audio sounds right on a range of different outputs, so its audible with speakers, but not deafening with buds.

Again its looking great.