Kristine Vike - 2025-09-06
Hi. Welcome to my channel. We are about to roast one of the biggest science educator channels out there. No biggie. 😅 @hankschannel @SciShow Now, I think this goes without saying, but still, no hate to Hank Green and the SciShow team. They do amazing work bringing science education to the masses and have for years at this point. They are amazing, and these things happen to everyone. If you've been around here long enough, you'll know that I've done a few of them in the history of this channel too! Physicists Don't Understand Why Knitting Works, SciShow: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iTLvD6-X8WQ Want to know more about textile terms making their way into our vocabulary? https://youtu.be/ePFYirFDTMU Find me elsewhere: ❤️ Support my work on Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/kristinevike 📸 Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/kristine.vike/ 💌 Website: https://kristinevike.com/ 💬 Our Discord server! https://discord.gg/kgvEqpuusT And of course, I brought the receipts 📜: 1. 12th C. Islamic Sock https://collections-gwu.zetcom.net/en/collection/item/2960/ 2. The history of hand-knitting · V&A. Victoria and Albert Museum https://www.vam.ac.uk/articles/the-history-of-hand-knitting. 3. The Bolivian women who knit parts for hearts. BBC News (2015). https://www.bbc.com/news/health-32076070#:~:text=The%20indigenous%20Aymara%20women%20have,some%20babies%20are%20born%20with 4. St. Clair, K. The Golden Thread: How Fabric Changed History. 5. Zarrelli, N. The Wartime Spies Who Used Knitting as an Espionage Tool. Atlas Obscura http://www.atlasobscura.com/articles/knitting-spies-wwi-wwii 6. Petersen, G. A. J. & McClintock, M. A Guide to Codes and Signals: International Flag Code, Secret Ciphers, Weather Signals, Morse Code, Sign Language, Etc. ; with Flags of All Nations. (Whitman publishing Company, 1942). 7. The story of the Jacquard loom | Science and Industry Museum. https://www.scienceandindustrymuseum.org.uk/objects-and-stories/jacquard-loom.
Next episode of SciShow: Hank learns the meaning of frogging. As in, they have to go and undo an entire video's worth of (mis)information.
I strongly believe SciShow has significantly made poorly researched and badly written episodes this entire year. Its... kinda alarming. Thank you to those in our community who have the expertise, time, and compassion to provide correction videos or even constructive feedback in their video comments.
I think you should offer this video idea to Scishow 😂
@@larka.sonder Maybe they are using AI bots to write their scripts.
@@draco1811 🤣
Yes, please.
As a scientist I get wanting to understand the "hard science" behind why a craft works but you can't just swoop in after artisans have laid out all the groundwork then turn around and say "wow you guys had no idea what you were actually doing".
SciShow video: Trial and error!!!!!
Knitting patterns: Am I a joke to you?
Yeeeessss!!! Exactly
Yes, like this form of textile engineering just developed over centuries through "intuition".
@@Nero_Jero The thing is, if you read the original study, the scientists are just trying to model how knitting makes 3D shapes mathematically. One of them knits, and one of them is a textiles expert. The weird "nobody understood this until SCIENCE got involved" tone is all down to the scishow video script.
It’s called mansplaining.
the knitting community beefing with hank green was not on my 2025 bingo card
@@Mali-kr2yu last week he had us all locked in with his little knitting bean app…this week I’m convinced he does know a since person whose ever knit anything
Hank's had it coming.
Dude it's like 2010 ravelry forums (I'm lookin at you, LSG) all over again in here; this is WILD
@@shadetreader Hank as an individual or the Sci Show writers collectively?
Repeat after me, Hank; YOU DON’T GET TO DECIDE THE NOTCH-SITUATION! 😂
Saying skilled knitters "don't understand the effect certain stitch combinations will produce" is kinda like saying a programmer doesn't understand how writing programs works. That's also "trial and error", and pretty similar methodologically.
@@gothicanimeangel96 I mean programming was literally knitting during the apollo days. The software programs were metal loops knitted together. The history of women in software development is mostly glossed over on top of that. Hidden figures is a good movie to learn about that
@@xWood4000 I am aware. Women's role in the development and handling of "computers" is really downplayed on the whole, especially considering "computer" used to be a mainly female job.
@gothicanimeangel96
Yaas! Lovelace!!!
My mind is blown at that statement. There are literally whole books dedicated to just stitch patterns, and more than one YouTube video/blog post showing the very mechanics of stitches from basic knits to cables.
A lot of it is trial and error, and intentional dissection, and that’s where a lot of the magic is, but it’s not just blundering along hoping for the best.
Exactly this! 👆
Oh boy. I am a man, a knitter, and a scientist (biologist). I cringed when Hank made the comment about the physicists showing up. Yikes. The math and physics involved in just one example, short rows that make knitted fabric change direction, such as at the heel of a sock, is not "just" art, but a clear application of scientific and mathematic principles.
The "then the physicists showed up" statement isn't the overt, in-your-face sexist attitude typical of the "manosphere", but really demonstrated how deeply and buried in the subconscious are the ideas of the value of men and women.
Ooof. 🙈
The worst part for me is probably seeing how the video could have been so good with just a few tweaks to the tone! It could still fit their ten minute format.
To use another stereotype: they could have simply send the scripts to their grannies before the shoot ;)
Reminds me of his "hydrpgen is a slut" comparison. Bro never learns.
One of my favorite bits of knit/crochet history is how a female mathematician started demonstrating hyperbolic geometry using knitting and crochet (works better with crochet solely because you don't have to hold an infinitely-increasing number of stitches on the hook), where the best models before were very delicate and mostly made of paper. Check out the Coral Reef Project if you've never heard of it!
@@SilverTwilight I Googled and found Margaret Wertheim's TED talk about the Crochet Coral Reef and can hardly believe I hadn't heard of this before, but I'm also not a marine biologist, I spent my entire working life and most of my research in Alaska, so I can use that as an excuse! 😆 This project is a great example that shows how closely knitting and crochet are tied to mathematics, especially when making garments that have to curve around body parts.
How many times do we see videos that demonstrate a pattern where the demonstrator will apologize for having to show the math, and then usually will state that they have done the math for you so you can look at a chart instead of having to do the math for your own size or number of stitches. But I also know of many knitters and crocheters who swear they can't do math, but they have a truly innate sense of mathematical relationships and have no problem constructing perfectly fitting garments, which belies their insistence that they don't "know math".
It’s “craft” when women do it, and “technology” when men do it.
Exactly!!
Yes, you just explained the unconscious bias that so many (mostly) men can't see. My husband is fairly open-minded, but he listened to both videos with me and he couldn't understand where the bias was in it.
Me At the Thrift store. When I see a beautiful cotton handmade crochet table cloth with 3 d flowers or a hand knit patterned colorful comforter for the price of 10$ I marvel at the injustice.
@@rileybaker8294 that was exactly what I felt the entire video.
He litterally said it was "mostly art" until science came along XD
Textile arts created the computer, not the other way around! Great video
What depresses me the most, I think, is how drastically the tone of the knitting video would change if it was a stereotypically male craft. There was a stark absence of desciptors like "ingenius," "clever," "methodical," "invaluable," etc. that I would have expected when talking about knitters and fiber artists of the past. The more mundane something appears to be, the more powerful its effects on society! The same ingenius brain that engineered the roof over your head and the phone in your hand also engineered the clothes on your back, and it deserves the same level of respect!!
I have a huge amount of respect for Hank Green, and I'm grateful that his knitting fans are being respectful and not turning the comments into a flame war. I think that more than anything, we just want a simple acknowledgment of the video's shortcomings and a PROPER REVISION that consults ACTUAL KNITTING EXPERTS because oh my god that would be awesome!!!!!!!!!!
I'd like to see how the podcast 99% Invisible would handle knitting. The premise of that show is to explain the details of things that function so well they are generally overlooked.
Misogynists deserve to get flamed.
The thing is, is that for a moment it WAS a male craft. From what I remember there was a male only knitters guild and women were not allowed.
No reason to respect somebody who built their entire identity online on "fighting worldsuck" and "imagining the universe complexly" and being fundamental in shaping the internet ecosystem and then being completely silent about the world's first livestreamed genocide.
That is my only real problem with scishow. I love it and I understand it can't go into the weeds of a topic, when most people wouldn't understand the weeds, so sometimes there would erupt random warfare in the replies of a single comment about the scientific opinions on the mechanics of a language mentioned in passing in the video (which is so fun to see, I learn a lot, and people usually are pretty respectful) and sometimes I think that a video breaks through to the more lay person audience, so in the comments of the Moon mining video I saw a STARK lack of anyone saying anything along the lines of that might be dumb actually, at least in the sense of bringing resources back on Earth and creating a complete disbalance, because...it's easier? I hoped to see some more educated opinions, but found none. Yet I do realise that the channel is MEANT to pique your interest and not teach you everything, but I have seen videos that bother me like this more than once.
There was a video on gift giving which...from a non-mega-consumerist perspective is TERRIFYING. With a strange insistence that grandparents gifts are tacky and annoying and not...I think it was a blender, that you like asked for? They might not be able to afford such an appliance, but it gets worse as they decide in the end that the best gift is money....HUH?! I understand they report the data, but like...maybe don't perpetuate a mentality that is driving a further wedge between people and stop implying old people are annoying, that is weird! Trying to research this was starting from a strange perspective of not even looking at the culture you are in, or doing much comparing with others(which is a huge problem in science as a whole, called WEIRD, standing for western, educated, industrialised, rich and democratic people making up a majority of study participants, as it is often college students participating in all sorts of studies, that usually come from the west) and not even continuing to see what might be the cause or much the level of closeness to the person you are talking about.
My understanding is that they have multiple writers for all videos, as well as a long process of checking sources, but sometimes they completely mess up in the tone like this precisely because of sticking to the research so much. If you only read research, you'd be a terrible psychologist for example, because you'd never see real people experiencing real issues. You need to see the real world too and it would be so much easier to implement that in their videos if they got some people or even their own personhood involved. There was a whole mess about a trans video they uploaded, not because the facts of it were all that off, but because the language around it was, and more importantly, it entirely skirted the real world issues those people face, so rather than helping solve those by teaching a wider audience, they just kind of talked about other things, kind of incorrectly, continuing the potential of further harm.
I respect the team immensely, but that is an issue that just pops up every now and then, in probably a good hearted effort to be more approachable, but nonetheless doing more harm than good.
It’s all a “mystery” until a man figures it out.🙄
👆 THIS
Until a *white man figures it out
Correction: until a white man figures it out.
So many ancient technologies and theories were figured out by Africans, people of the Middle East, Chinese, and Indigenous peoples throughout the world, but not acknowledged in the West until white men "discovered" them.
@@lyrebird9749very true!
@@lyrebird9749 other races have the same issue. It's not a white man issue. Stop throwing other women of other ethnicities under the bus to suck up to a different race of man.
"Knitting evolved purely through intuition and trial and error. But those knit patterns that emerged from generations of knitters tipped off scientists that there might be something useful here."
Ooof... my ancestors just received a punch in the gut with that one...
🙈
That Newton guy sure was intuitive and trial and errory. Pascal, what a quirky trial and error guy, dropping different things into water for fun.
that line definitely made me wince.
it's that women feel, men think mindset and its dumb.
yeah I had to pause after that line to let out a very deep sigh. 😬
Has anyone used Hank Green’s Focus Friends app? Bc while I like the app, a pet peeve of mine is that socks are the default reward and scarves are the upgraded reward.
In my years of knitting, I’ve knitted dozens of scarves but only half of one sock…bc it’s hard! 😂
Ok, rant over.
I haven't used focus friend but just hearing that makes me mad. A scarf is just a rectangle. Clearly he's never tried to knit a heel!
Seriously
Right?! After over a decade of knitting lace scarves and shawls, I'm just now finishing my first pair of socks. Short rows are daunting! Plus, gauge matters in socks. Not so much in a scarf.
@@trainzelda1428Or close up a toe without leaving an uncomfortable seam. (I'm a dedicated toe-up gal, which is its own variety of porcupine wrestling.) Or for that matter bind off a cuff (sock, sweater, anything) so it's not too loose or too tight and looks good with the rest of the fabric.
I downloaded it, but quickly realized that all the good stuff, including the super basic concept of being able to allow my music app to be used while in focus mode (so I can listen to music while crafting) was behind a paywall. Disappointing.
As a knitter and someone who studied physics, the thing that strikes me about the SciShow video is that they seemed to start from the assumption that the audience finds both knitting and physics boring. You’ve described the bias against knitting in your video, but as someone equally interested in the physics, there is a lot they didn’t bother to mention:
Modelling knit and purl stitches is difficult for physicists because…
Adding other stitches would be too difficult for physicists because…
Early attempts to predict the fabric shape were wrong because…
Predicting the shape of knitting and purl patterns has led to improved physics models because…
I think that if the main idea of the video was “studying knitting helps physicists get better at physics” then it would be possible to talk about the achievements of the physicists without downplaying the expertise of knitters. But that take wasn’t considered interesting enough, so the SciShow needed to create something more “exciting” and came up with “physicists make knitting better!”. Sigh…
Oooooh. Your list of questions are so engaging too. I would have loved to learn more about the intersection of fibre arts and physics with those angles! 👀
@@ruthmills4228 I think there were also plenty of missed opportunities to talk about how physicists can help knitters without being so dismissive.
There are so many things knitters have strong intuition/rules of thumb for that are not explicitly defined.
Going with the example from the video, wouldn’t it be great to know exactly how much a stockinette fabric of a given size would curl, given the type and thickness of yarn, and needle size? Think of how much time that would save pattern designers!
@@ruthmills4228 yeah I was really confused by the video, the title and the contents didn't really seem to make a lot of sense. The thesis statement was extremely unclear
This is a really good point!
@@ruthmills4228agreed! For me it’s the description of scientists and knitters as if those couldn’t be the same person.
I am a textile engineer who works for one of the research groups cited. It's very interesting to see how our work has been combined with other researchers, and where the SciShow writers stumbled in communication. (Also, the textile side of our group did not know this video was happening and literally found out when the physicists sent a link. I certainly have some questions for them if there was a fact checking process.)
I wrote a longer comment, but it feels like a wall of text. So I'd like to suggest people read the first two sources in the list. One is an article and the second is a research paper. Internally, we never refer to loops as knots, but the article does still reference the Egyptian sock (which I've told them should be called a "looped structure" not knitting). I have insights I could share on how terms might have been misunderstood by the writers or to better explain why this type of research is valuable to industrial textile development. But I wanted to share that at least one of the research teams does have a deep knowledge and respect for the complexities of textiles. I've been hand knitting for 20+ years and programming/operating industrial equipment for 6 years.
I'd wondered about that, considering how many scientists I know who either are or live with knitters (and other textile crafters). The communities are not nearly as divided as that video makes it sound.
I tried not to pull out your work, since there could so quickly be things lost in adaptation. We know there is a lot of science-crafting enthusiasm overlap. It’s a large part of this community, after all! ❤️
i tried to follow up on the references but met with a security check wall. very disappoiinting.
@robina.9402
Is there a way that the public can read your work? I really does seem fascinating, particularly if those knitted samples were part of your teams investigations.
@@lisascenic I know the first two links are us, and if you search for Drexel University Center for Functional Fabrics, you'll find the work we can publish. Another paper linked is "Characterizing and predicting the self-folding behavior of weft-knit fabrics."
Editing to add: we aren't able to share most of our current work as it's funded by the Army and is considered controlled information. There are some papers in the works, but that process is not fast!
Omggg the part where he suggests that knitters didn’t know how certain combinations of stitches work until the “scientists” got involved is the most infuriating part. Yes we do! We intentionally design designs and choose stitches based on how they will react and perform in the long run!! The amount of detail I see knitters go into to explain the physics of a stitch and why you should or should not use it just to control how a button band lays or a decrease looks is soooo meticulously preplanned!!
I own several stitch dictionaries, cable patterns have existed for at least several decades, what about the technology that went into building/using domestic (and industrial) knitting machines (a descendant, so to speak, of hand knitting)? All those things are products based on understanding how knitting works.
I don’t know whether to laugh or tear my hair out.
It makes me want to cry 😭 I can’t knit but I’ve seen enough cardigans to notice. I noticed as a SMALL CHILD because I was looking from a perspective of respect and admiration. For my Grandmother, specifically 🥹
When I watched the video it was my understanding that at the point in the video when they make that statement, they're not referring to modern knitters, instead referring to ancient knitters who developed knitting. And at that time of course they would have no idea what combining different patterns would do.
Not to mention, we usually knit things with functionality, and all that work going into something that would just be used to cushion in packaging would be a remarkable waste of time! It's not that we don't KNOW that knitting can do that, it's that we usually make things that have a different use-value (and beauty) than the items he speaks about.
@@darsynia they're not trying to understand the physics of knitting to find more uses for knitting. They're doing it so they can combine it with other technology and improve those other technologies.
To quote a character i read:
"Simple doesn't always mean easy."
Absolutely! 💯
Yes! Simple, NOT easy
If it IS so simple, let's have Hank make a toe-up sock. Easy, right?
@@Jilbertb the magic type that at knit 2 at a time and one inside the other
Are we having him do a turned heel, or a heel flap like in Nordic knitting?
Thank you so much for this! Did you notice SciShow's peculiar choices when it came to clips of people knitting? They only showed us people making slow, awkward movements with needles and yarn, and to me, that really underscores their apparent anti-"craft" bias. We longtime knitters have skilled, experienced hands, and had they done their homework, it would have been easy enough to showcase that.
I think that's just the awkwardness of stock footage - it's always just a bit uncanny. So, I doubt it's intentional but I agree with you it adds to the overall tone of this video which is so off.
It could have been that they wanted slow clips to make it easier for non-knitters to follow along too. But if memory serves there are some old clips of Shetland women and people in speed knitting competitions having a go. And goodness, my hands could never!
@@KristineVike I can see that being the goal during the portion where they're trying to explain how knitting works, but at 9:46, when they've almost managed to recognize that knitting has been a sophisticated technology for centuries -- the clip they pair with it totally undermines the almost-compliment and plunges us right back into the vibe of "those wacky creatives did something cool, but only the scientists can make it important."
@@riveranalyse It doesn't need to be intentional to be a problem. The careless mistakes and oversights in this video make me question the images this channel shows and the statements they make about every topic they cover. In the best of circumstances, that kind of sloppiness would be disappointing coming from a self-identified science channel, but in the current environment of weaponized misinformation, it's unacceptable. There's already such a low bar for what people are willing to accept as fact, and a science channel - even an entertaining popsci one - should be pushing back against that by at least doing their due diligence.
All of those knitters were old, which suggests that young women don’t knit.
Thank you. I was SO EXCITED by the Title of SciShow's Video. AND SO UPSET at how bad it was. I have listened to Computer Scientists who are Knitters talk about their papers. The whole 'knitting is just for grannies until Scientists Came Along' was just 🤮
This! Especially considering how long we have used fiber art to explore mathematics.
I looove when science nerds get obsessive about fibre arts. Enthusiasm of all kinds is contagious, but there is just something about the two that makes my heart sing!
@@DawnBurn not to mention the whole dedicated field of mathematical knot theory, which by no way predates complicated knots for different purposes.
I lost track of SciShow a long time ago because I just couldn't keep up with it, but the algorithm suggested this knitting video, and I was disappointed with how little research seemed to have gone into it, and it was obvious to me as someone who has never knitted or crocheted, but who does have a theoretical physics degree. I agree that it gave me the ick when it was so dismissive of the expertise of centuries of craftspeople (mostly women).
@@DavidBeddardI should be the perfect intersection of target audiences for this, but now I'm just mad at my (former?) favorite hyperactive nerd.
I’ve never seen a more polite or eloquent reaction video in my life. So well done.
I recently (a month ago) applied for a sewing teacher job, where experience teaching sewing was required. They offered me the job … at $15USD an hour. I said, “My trade and skills are just as valuable as mechanics, plumbers, carpenters, and electricians, and you’re paying them $85USD an hour.” The response, “we know, but $15 an hour is what we’re paying for this position.” I said, “And you already mentioned that people with sewing skills are hard to find.” And that concluded that job offer. I’m still appalled at such an insulting offer.
Ooof. That is so frustrating, and yet so clearly underlining the point too. 🫠
I was tailor, in the early 80's, made $15/hr back then, which is equivalent to $58 today.
Don't even get me started about quilting and the insulting prices people offer to pay to make them a custom quilt + longarming it...
@@Jilbertb- I was a seamstress in the early 80s and I think I also charged about $15-20 per hour for labor.
I still sew but do more knitting lately, which takes SO MUCH MORE TIME. If I had a penny for every time someone admired my work and then said "you should sell that" I'd be a gazillionaire.
Most people have zero concept of what is involved in making a garment. The human body is not a 2-dimensional paper doll.
I’m absolutely delighted that you stuck up for the value of the skills you have. I’m sure someone will unfortunately accept that job, but at least one person told them correctly. Well done.
@@ladyjusticesusan I was paid $8 at a sewing store. It was my hobby job. The robber barrens who claimed to be good Christians gave us a 10 cent raise. Insulting! While they drove a $100,000 custom made corvette!!!
Yep, women are devalued and our skills are devalued.
I’m a LMT now and I make good money for a change!!!
Another comment for knitting being "more" useful: in Women's Work by Elizabeth Wayland Barber, she suggests that our ability to spin thread and make fabric to keep ourselves warm could be one of the essential factors in human beings' spread across the globe into areas previously very difficult to live in (this is just a bad summary of my own, please go read it if you haven't yet!). The tone in the SciShow video hurts and I hope they take to heart all the feedback they're getting.
The BBC series Human, presented by paleoanthropologist Ella Al-Shamah, mentions the invention of textiles as most likely having been essential to our distant ancestors’ survival during the last ice age.
@@kellydalstok8900 Most definitely. Tanning of hides, how to sew them together to make jackets, pants, shoes/boots... It was essential for survival. Without these, humans would have frozen to death. Later we would need clothing that was more seasonal...as in lighter weight. In comes the study of available plant fibers and what could be created out of those. Lots of credit to our ancestors and us building on their discoveries as time went on. 👍
I LOVE that book.
I really hope Hank Green sees this! He seems pretty good at owning mistakes and correcting himself when he learns some of the information he shared was wrong. I would love for him to set the record straight on this one too
Sometimes…
no it took them a year to take down their extremely crappy very factually wrong video about trans people after a lot of complaining, and then they put back up kind of a still cruddy video. they are very bad at it.
@@artosbear- I didn't know that. SO disappointing to hear.
I stopped following them because of their dismissive tone & factual inaccuracies.
It's not that deep. Ya'll are over dramatic.
Ooooh my husband has one of these 'umbrellas' in his heart. I didn't know these were handmade!
Oh my goodness! How amazing! I hope he continues in good health. ❤️
@@MijnWolden i never knew either! How amazing is that
That was the most polite, non cynical, educational BURN i've seen in a while!
No hate to Hank or the team at SciShow whatsoever. We all make mistakes, and if you've been around here long enough, you'll know that I've made a fair few of them in the time of this channel too.
Still... what are science educators to do, if not roast one another in friendly spirits, once in a while? 🔬
I would deeply like to see science educators do friendly, good natured, diss tracks to each other.
they make gross mistakes about things constantly their research is typically very shoddy.
@@KristineVike hate to them from me. i’ve been hating them for almost 15 years and i will never stop
What "mistakes" are you talking about? You've only disagreed about your preference of term use and strawmanned their vaguer claims.
@@DarrenMcStravick go back to doing "debates" with those you have a vague understanding of. knitting is not your craft.
I watched the scishow video yesterday and was already admiring those comments educating the team on what went wrong. Your video excellently brings it all together and adds to it. Thank you!
I do have to say: seeing so many blips and mistakes in a scishow video on a topic I am quite well versed in made me wonder how many of those I missed in topics I don‘t know much about.
Exactly. When I see this stuff I have to question all the others.
I do hope and think most of their work is better. I certainly wouldn’t want their job trying to bring snapshots of… pretty much the entire field of (primarily STEM) science. I already feel my own interests in textile history and environmental chemistry stretches me thin enough!
@@NeonGlowRainbow I think any show like scishow, which does quick summaries of a huge variety of topics, should be assumed to be a general and basic summary with small errors in it. The amount of research and fact checking you would have to do to get each and every topic vetted at the level an expert wouldn't take issue with is just not realistic for something in that format. They've had some guest goats who are all practicing scientists who do videos related to their field, and those ones are probably quite accurate, but the rest I would take as a good intro reference, but that's about it.
@erinm9445 i loved the kurzgesagt video about references and trying to make an informative video. it reminded me why I gave up on sci show years ago. just too many 'wait, that's not right I'm gonna look it up. it's wrong.'
*Guest goats, hahaha! I think you all knew I meant guest hosts, but I'm gonna leave that unchanged because it's too funny, lol.
That video honestly felt like stepping on knitters to lift up scientists and I'm super disappointed in the team that developed it for not doing their due diligence and playing the one-up game.
How could you even possibly gather that from the sci show without mental gymnastics?
@DarrenMcStravick - there were so many errors that were so deftly pointed out in this video, how could you ask that question in any serious manner?
The most glaring and lazy one IMO being showing a photo of REVERSE STOCKINETTE when talking about stockinette- ESPECIALLY when the difference between the two was the whole point.
Lifting up both at the same time would not have taken anything away from the science they wanted to highlight!
@@KristineVike How did they fail to lift both up? They drew major attention to knitting's contemporary scientific significance, which literally gets a lot of sciency people on board with zero cost to the current knitting community.
@@EsmereldaPea You didn't even read what I'm responding to, did you? I'm asking them how they gathered that SciShow's video was "stepping on knitters to lift up scientists" and that they "developed it for ... playing the one-up game". This was what I was responding to, and it's incredibly obvious that that was what I was doing.
You very eloquently addressed the points that bothered me about the SciShow video in this vid. Thank you for coming to the defense of knitters' honor 😂
Glad I could be of service! 😂🪡
Subscribing. I watched his video and was struck by the casual sexism, the misinformation about the history of knitting, the rampant sexism, the stupidity of assuming that the people who created these intricate works had no idea what was going on, and the "art was just art till the SCIENTISTS showed up" left me wondering how on earth Hank Green became so famous as the internet's science dad.... This was my first full video I've seen of his, and now I'm questioning everything I've ever seen him share in a short...
This really healed my heart today. I was incredibly grumpy after watching that original video. I expected better from SciShow than that level of undervaluing the incredible skill, innovation, and artistry of past generations. Like the science is cool, but they didn’t need to be so disrespectful to make it sound cooler. Listening to your rebuttal made me feel so much better that at least some of us understand the history and craft more reverently.
Yeah, I felt like there was no need to dismiss knitting to uplift the really cool science they wanted to highlight. There’s room for both!
Yes. Like, why not approach it like, look at this amazing human technology, and here is the math that describes it. ??????
@@victoriabaker4400 This exactly!
@@victoriabaker4400 I misread that as “here is the man that describes it” and had a mental image of a guy shrugging his shoulders 😂 I haven’t watched that video but after reading the comments, I don’t want to!
@@ShintogaDeathAngel heheh
This reminds me of hearing about how many "computers" were used to calculate the math needed for the industrial revolution, then I learned "computer" just meant women.
Also a note about the "trial and error" vs scientific method dichotomy in Hank's video: Clearly no one on the team is part of the knitting community, because they have no clue how either modern or historical knitters used their intuitive knowledge about how various stitches, fiber content and configuration, needle size, and resulting fabric behave to scientifically hypothesize, test, iterate, refine and develop patterns to achieve a desired result exactly the same way physicists working on these materials do. Only for the large part of human history, knitters didn't have computers and AI to do the mental and manual aspects of the work for them.
I mean, sure, there are always "happy accidents" in all technologies, sciences, and arts that lead to new discoveries. But throughout humankind's engagement with the technology of knitting, knitters have worked with clear intention, an engineering and scientific mindset, and a deep understanding of material properties to know at a theoretical and experiential level what should work *before* they start (or at least what will come close enough as a prototype to determine whether they should refine or discard any given approach) to develop new stitch patterns, new designs, new materials with new properties, new tools, new skills, and even entirely new categories of materials and products with new uses. And, in addition to expanding the technology, "like" scientists (they are scientists, but here we are) they have shared the knowledge of and skills required to replicate those new techniques and technologies to others in both organic and structured ways, worked together to create more effective and efficient ways to do the work, and thus expanded both the technological knowledge base as well as the skill level and numbers of knowledgable practitioners.
That's exactly the same way physicists are going about the science the video talks about. So either knitters are also doing as much science as the physicists are, or the physicist are just "proceeding through trial and error" in the same way knitters are said to have done.
Yup. There is sooo much science and maths in crafts. I have sciency friends who loves tablet weaving because it is so mathematical. Other friends who love colourwork knitting or filet crochet because they get to draw the whole design out on grid paper. Not to mention weavers, who do a whole lot of maths to figure out how much yarn for a warp!
@@KristineVike Yes, the mathematical aspects of fiber crafts are intense. Not just tablet weaving,, filet croshet and Fair Isle knitting, but also patterns for warping and weaving on four harness looms -- there's nothing "intuitive" there! And don't forget plane geometry and patchwork quilting.
Yes to all of this!
Also, just all the stuff about "trial and error" and "happy accidents" just gives the vibe people are wandering around blindly and then come up with something 😂
Most people won't be wasting hours of time randomly crocheting/knitting/doing other fiber crafts hoping they'll end up with something. There's intention in trying to get a specific pattern as well as stuff like swatching and blocking to get an idea of the final size. We don't just hope for "happy accidents", not when a piece made with intention takes hours of work (and an experimental one made without a pattern and with lots of frogging takes even more hours).
@@ulexite-tv This is it perfectly, just because the pioneering knitters weren’t describing the geometry and kinetic storage of textiles with mathematical equations it doesn’t mean they didn’t understand the principals and use those with sophistication.
GOD I'm glad I'm subscribed to you and seeing this. I am also a knitter and a scientist, and my partner had to wake up this lovely Saturday morning to me shrieking outrage at my screen at the disrespect (and perhaps casual sexism?) of the "trial and error" comment. There is NO way Hank would talk about things more commonly imagined as male-aligned in this way. Can you imagine him showing photos of roman arches and saying ancients discovered all sorts of architecture by "trial and error," but modern skilled architects are here to really understand the physical science that goes into making it? No, because when translated to these terms is sounds exactly as ridiculous as it is. Belittling both older civilizations and women in one go like that is a really big display of a myopic world view and I honestly expected better of Hank.
TL;DR - I'm so glad you're saying something and I hope Hank Green sees this and takes in every word. Thank you for saying something and adding your incredibly knowledgeable voice to the subject!
You are a better person than I am. I started watching his video yesterday and was so disgusted/enraged that I couldn’t watch to the end.
That analogy is excellent!
@wheeeee115 "There is NO way" you're a scientist. How is "trial and error" disrespectful or a casually sexist descriptor? Absolutely ridiculous.
Further, how are you this distraught because you weren't able to imagine Hank using it to describe things that are "male-aligned" (whatever that tripe means). Awfully strange that a "scientist" would be this furious, self-righteous and confident in opposition to a description on the basis of their imagination and emotion.
Also, ancients did discover all sorts of architecture by trial and error, to which modern architects simply investigated the physical science that went into making it. If you think this is false, present your argument.
@@DarrenMcStravick "ancients did discover all sorts of architecture by trial and error". There are loads and loads of calculations for ancient building tech, even as far back as clay tablets. "Trial and error" is a gross misrepresentation of ancient engineering.
@@TinaWiman Yes, aaaand what do you think led them to determine which calculations should be used for a given project?
My claim is not as controversial as you think it is. Denying early engineers used trial and error to arrive at the calculations is tantamount to saying they chose the right system of calculation parameters by divine foreknowledge.
Wonderful commentary! I think an analogy we could use here is music - with modern recording tools scientists can measure the precise waveforms of sound, and model how certain techniques in music work, such as harmony, dissonance, etc etc. However, until this point it’s not as if symphonies were written through trial and error! We drastically undervalue the intelligence and problem solving that humans exhibit when interacting with tools through learned skills and knowledge gained from teaching in their local community of practice. A model of knowledge can still exist before it is described in the language of another particular academic discipline.
I think that is an excellent analogy! Just because we couldn’t measure a thing, that does not mean it did not exist.
Great analogy!
As someone who is obsessed with classical music, this is a great analogy!
And if they don't do their basic research with a knitting video, makes you wonder what else they aren't researching, eh?
Yes! Thank you for making this video! :) I wish people would wake up and see that textile craft is not a result of mindless experimentation but a combination of experience and thoughtful planning.
AND textile crafts are technology! It doesn’t cease to be technology just because it is soft and fuzzy. 😅
@@KristineVike I agree! :D
@KristineVike , textiles also don't cease to be technology because it's ancient. We still use ancient technology every day.
The last few years I’ve been seeing much more respect for what used to be classed as “women’s work”. The low point for me was 10 years ago a young friend of mine was in a graduate Art degree program at the University of Houston. I was stunned when the department head told her, “If it’s useful, it’s not art”. That’s blatant snobbery. I told her to ask him if he thought Shaker Furniture was art. She did; he stared at her in anger, and stomped off. Because obviously the answer was “yes”. Engineers and scientists of all kinds are SO much like fiber artists. We want to get our HANDS on things and figure out how they work. Our minds work the same way. Working my career at NASA, I’ve run across many people knitting at work while they think. It’s very calming. I’m also a weaver, and it was no surprise to me at how many of our weavers guild members have careers in physics, math, chemistry, biology; and how many were also woodworkers.
@@JSCRocketScientist , environmental scientist here. I actually haven’t worked in my field since my son was a baby, but that’s when I discovered fiber crafts. I think sewing, knitting, crochet, etc., fill that part of my brain that loves numbers and patterns. I’ve also always been pretty good at visualizing things in 3d, so taking a flat object and turning it into a three dimensional object makes my brain happy. The type of arts that I really struggle with are the ones that have a random component to it, like painting or decorating. I struggle with asymmetry and artfully arranging things in a random order to be visually appealing. But, following a pattern for sewing or knitting really makes me happy and soothes my brain.
Your mention of the spacesuits, and the expertise needed to make them, was so interesting. And it made me think about the many documentaries and films I have watched about the ‘space race’ which discuss the development of rocket technology which led to the moon landing. But I don’t think I have seen much discussion at all about the development and production of the spacesuits, which were also vital to the whole enterprise.
I can absolutely recommend The Golden Thread for more detail on the cloth and space suit part of the space race. No documentary, as far as I know, and the book does focus more on older history, but still a great and very engaging read!
@yvettewilliamselliott8851 I think I have seen a documentary or film somewhere about thos but can't remember when or where
As a gender nonconforming badass who is struggling with knitting, thank you for making this video. I saw the title of the SciShow episode and was afraid to click it, because I've been disappointed in the past by their presentation for inaccuracies beyond just oversimplification. I'm really really glad that I did not watch it now. I would have been very angry.
There have been several books about the Apollo suit development, IMO the best is "Lunar Outfitters" by Bill Ayrey.
What seldom is mentioned is how much of the 'space race' was pure trial and error. Particularly the development of rocket technology!
The intuition line really got to me. It’s like saying knitters were just going off gut feelings rather than using their brains. Spoken like someone who never had to go off a gauge swatch and measurements to make a sock without a pattern. Believe me, in those moments, the only thing my intuition is telling me is to find a pattern where someone else already did the math! And who would that someone be? The generations of knitters that came before me. Like the old sock you pictured at the start, that pattern probably goes around uninterrupted. That didn’t happen through intuition, but through deliberate math and planning.
I already found the original video oversimplified even for non textile nerds when I watched it for the first time. There were quite a few things in there that rubbed me the wrong way although I couldn't put it into words.
so thank you for finding the words I could not!
I'm still uncertain if he used wikipedia, ai, hearsay, or cursory research, or some combination thereof. Probably some intern that had no clue what they were getting into when told to research the subject of knitting, and its current use in modern technology. They usually do a better job than this, but the history of knitting, and the breadth of its complexity, cannot be summed up in 20 minutes or less.
They didn't treat the topic with proper respect. It was almost as though they were treating it more like art than science, purposefully avoiding being influenced by knitters so it wouldn't impact their "art." He didn't even bother to understand the difference between knitting and other fibre arts.
I don't understand how he thinks knitting patterns are designed. He makes it sound like we just start knitting and see what happens and when we get lucky, we write down our happy accidents.
I mean, I do that sometimes too. I like experimenting and don’t like reading text instructions (diagrams all the way for me!). But I know very well that I am in for a lot of frogging and potentially some cursing when I do a project that way. 😂
No way of knowing what a stitches will do? What??? Knitters know EXACTLY what stitch combinations will do.
I’m a crocheter who doesn’t knit, but it translates the same. We know our crafts. We know our skills. We know the math involved in the shapes we create. Just because YOU don’t understand it, doesn’t mean we don’t.
I saw the original video first, and I think they did a good job of explaining the physics of tension etc to a non physics audience. But as you point out, the tone is very dismissive of textile crafts and that irked me as a scientist who does textile crafts.
Thank you for addressing this in your video. I really hope they see it. And maybe they can release a better informed version of it that is more respectful towards the intelligence of millennia of crafters
Yeah, there were points I enjoyed because I had never thought about knitting in quite those tension-laden terms, and that was fun.
But yeah. Crafts totally are technology. They did not magically sprout up, fully formed! ❤️
Yeah, I actually muted the second half of that scishow video, and scrolled down to read all the comments of people correcting everything so that I didn't have to. >_> I expected better of scishow. but there were SO many good comments, at least!
Whenever i see videos like this i feel like theres a high chance the “advanced 3d knitting” they apparently invented already exists and is just called like lace or tuck stitch or something
@@stooglesgoogles7246 there's a lady I follow on insta who makes knitted cowls and things that look just like the fabric hank was showing off. The minute I saw it I was like "that definitely already exists in knitting!" So frustrating
@@stooglesgoogles7246 some of them do. The swatch he had in his hand contained a square of basket stitch. Made with extremely fine thread, obviously, yeah, some of them definitely already existed.
@@emilygreene6008yeah and theres probably some ridiculous name for it that they made up 💀 worst part of the video is when he mansplained tension. Like i guess its meant for people who dont knit but it felt condescending when he said “there is no way to predict how these will turn out” i guess partially true cause patterns go through tests and iterations, but knitters dont just blindly go into stuff with NO idea of whats going on. Besides, is all engineering and design not trial and error? Why do we need scientists to come along and re-name/ categorize our stuff that we already know into something else? Idk maybe it makes it easier but still feels patronizing
"Now, for centuries, knitting was more of an art than a science. But then, the physicists showed up" I had to pause there and take a break. What a condescending and offensive sentence.
Omg, thank you so much for this response video! I watched the SciShow vid yesterday and was yelling at my screen from the get-go. I love that the comment section on that vid was lovingly, but firmly correcting as much as they could. I truly hope the SciShow team see your vid and correct their misunderstandings of this subject!
I heard several friends and community members vent about it before I watched it myself.
I couldn’t believe the first thing popped up within ten seconds. 🙈
I couldn't make it past the 2 1/2 minute mark myself, I was so frustrated! Lol! Then I found this immediately below and was so gratified!
I took his comment more as if he was implying that artists and crafters are just "playing around" with their craft, but when scientists explain it, it becomes "serious", important and as he says 'sophisticated'. More like 'science is more important than art and craft' mindset. Instead of recognizing its real value and how this amazing skill and knowledge can be applied to many other areas and it's a science in itself.
Right? "You do it with ease after years of practice and educating yourself, but I only got it once it was translated into my own area of expertise. And because my perspective is so limited, I truly believe the topic was only 'understood' once I understood it."
Making things easy enough that it becomes accessible to everyone without big money or complex machines is a crucial step for any methodology. The fact that most modern methods are still only accessible to (theoretical) experts who work at large organisations with big money is a limitation due to their infancy, not a necessary element for a method to be properly valued and appreciated.
My grandfather taught most of his kids how to knit, and even though he died when I was a baby, I still learned from my mother and aunt.
In my 30s, I traded knitting lessons for crochet lessons to a roommate, and I've never looked back. I love to crochet.
I am so insanely grateful for this video, because I watched Hank's and my eye kept twitching in irritation. Thank you for vocalizing my thoughts and feelings, sharing facts, and calling this stuff out. It is appreciated.
Does anyone remember the original "Quilted Northern" commercial that had a group of women gathered around a quilting frame, quilting with knitting needles? It took the company a couple of months to discover and correct the error. Apparently, their highly-paid team of ad people didn't bother to do the research to know and show the correct tools and sewing technique.
And if I remember right, the corrected version had women with both hands on top of the quilt!😂 Apparently 30 seconds of research or asking an actual craftsperson one question is just too much work!
🙈
@@karlahovde 🤔🤔🤦🤦
Do they ever?
The same goes for movies and tv, where the actresses just twiddle around a pair of needles in a shapeless piece of knitted fabric. It makes me shout at the screen: “Why don’t they learn at least the basics of knitting!”
The only actresses in recent times who could actually knit were Geraldine McEwan and Julia McKenzie, who both played Miss Marple.
@@sewwithmsjones1196 I forgot about that commercial, lol. I’ve seen so many examples of mistakes regarding knitting v. crochet as well.
I have a feeling that many of the mistakes could have been avoided if they had consulted with an actual knitter. Thank you for making this rebuttal video. I hope Hank sees it and responds
My immediate thought when I saw the title of the SciShow video was "the physicists ought to talk to knitters then". And your reaction video has not changed my mind. It was a very frustrating video (theirs, not yours) because it was a rollercoaster of "ooh, this is interesting" and "urgh - please stop dismissing textile crafts". Not to mention the bit about scientists discovering knitting could be useful. I think he probably meant useful in other areas, but it really came across wrong. I don't even think any of the sexism and dismissiveness was intentional, just generations of mental programming.
Also - I am now going to use "gender non-conforming badass" when there's an option to specify your gender
Petition to include ‘gender non-conforming badass’ on all future silly little forms that asks that silly question! 😤
@AmAppleton your comment about physicists needing to expand their understanding by talking with knitters made me snort with laughter. Thank you.
Why ought physicists to speak to knitters? What information about textile craft do you think they're going to get from them that is of relevance to the formal physical theory beyond just the techniques and reasons for applying one or another to different types of fabric by their observable qualities?
How is there any sexism at all? It's literally a video about knitting (which exists independently of who did it during what periods) and they're literally drawing massive positive attention and interest to the craft (which, again, is not a gendered activity and exists independent of it). So why read this political continental philosophy gibberish into it just so you can depict a poisoned (projected) image of SciShow?
"The physicists ought to talk to knitters then" ahaha, yes!
@@DarrenMcStravick I'm genuinely curious. Do you not grasp the condescending tone of your comments at all (yes I've read several of them)? You could get better conversation of this topic if you approached it with less negativity.
If we're counting only the knitting time -- not winding balls of yarn, writing patterns, weaving in ends, blocking, photographing, posting sales listings, vending at markets -- I charge literally pennies an hour for my knitting. Thank you for speaking up about the amount of time, knowledge, and skill this stuff takes
Yeah. The pricing on fiber arts at craft fairs makes me both sad and frustrated at the same time. You deserve to be valued so much higher!
@@Treia24 right! 😄I'm making a Gansey for a VERY good friend and they wanted to reimburse me for the yarn. I just laughed and thanked and told them not to worry about it, skipped the "that's the least of it".
A little like "oh you'll build me a house? let me pay for the bricks." so cute.
@@Leanansidhe23 Yeah, I sometimes have to explain that to my bestie -- the yarn for this was $5; I'd charge a paying customer $100 for it because it took my two weeks of full time work to make it!
@newmoonjlp - 2025-09-06
Oh Hank honey I love you but... oof. So many missed opportunities. Just let me show you the magic of short rows while you stand there and tell me knitters don't have a grasp on physics.
Sexism is definitely part of it, but there is a tendency in general for modern scientists to gloss right over the immense achievements of their forebears in developing complex mathematical systems, architectural achievements that amaze us to this day, hydrological miracles to make the desert bloom, the list goes on and on. All apparently discovered by accident, largely by brown people, who had no "technology" whatsoever.
@KristineVike - 2025-09-06
A very good point, and one I should have emphasised in this video as well. Thanks for pointing it out!
@kristelfae5054 - 2025-09-06
Oh yeah racism and sexism and classism!! (Many working class men knew how to knit and mend certainly through WWI and WWII)
@JustSaralius - 2025-09-06
I was gonna comment that colonialism should be added to the sexism, but this expresses it better than my brainfoggy brain can muster atm. 😅❤
@Unicorn_Rancher - 2025-09-06
Yes! This!
@SnakebitSTI - 2025-09-06
I don't disagree that the tendency exists, but I do think it's important to note that a lot of the people doing research on fiber arts are doing so because they are both scientists and fiber artists themselves. Talking about scientists as if they simply don't understand knitting is just mirroring the mistakes of the SciShow video when it talks about knitters as if they don't understand science.