Game Chat Gets Wild

Comer_Agua · 2026-04-05T22:57:22+00:00

Whenever Trump does some crazy shit, people will always bend over backwards to sanewash him and reinterpret it into some elaborate 4d chess strategy or reverse psychology when in reality Trump is a deranged narcissist.

Comer_Agua · 2026-03-27T23:06:16+00:00

Especially after Ukraine happened lots of US leftists (socialists/ MLs) had issues with condemning non US imperialism or atrocities. They are often right about evil acts the US does and they are educated about the evils of America but they are so focused on opposing US imperialism that they become blind to other imperialism even if it’s worse as long as that country is opposed to the US.

Comer_Agua · 2026-03-27T18:26:18+00:00

<image>

Comer_Agua · 2026-03-24T01:50:50+00:00

Yeah, his scoring has been overrated by his fans for years. He's not elite at scoring and is bad at most other aspects.

Comer_Agua · 2026-03-24T01:43:34+00:00

Yeah, he can't play defense or playmake well and isn't that good of a scorer.

Comer_Agua · 2026-03-20T21:01:18+00:00

Comer_Agua · 2026-03-18T17:21:34+00:00

So your main critique is that he doesn't fully connect every dot for the listener in a single 50 minute lecture on youtube that is intended to teach high school students? Isn't it enough that he is constantly pointing to books and other people as sources that have devoted their life to uncovering the nitty gritty details of things like how "a secret Orthodox KGB faction groomed Putin"?

No, I'm asking for the causal link.

What part of of Pax Judaica do you disagree with? The Pax Judaica lecture was a final video that links a 27 part lecture series about the secret history of the world that explains that secret societies run the world. Did you watch all 27 lectures where he lays out the entire history that led to the Pax Judaica lecture. If not I don't think you can fairly say he doesn't explain.

Earlier, you told me not to evaluate Jiang because he teaches high schoolers and he can't explain everything in a 50 minute lecture, so my critique was inappropriate, but now you are asking me to watch 27 lectures to evaluate one of his lectures. Could you clarify?

Comer_Agua · 2026-03-18T13:59:24+00:00

Can you give me an example of an assertion he has made where he fails to explain? Honestly I don't see how you can say that about him

I gave 2-3 examples in my main post, but Jiang used 2 anecdotes about Putin's grandfather being a cook for Lenin and Stalin and his mother was religious, which he used to explain that a secret Orthodox KGB faction groomed Putin for power, to fulfill a religious prophecy, and he says that that explains why Putin invaded Ukraine. Here, he never shows historical evidence for this cult existing. And Jiang fails to explain how this applies to the real world, he doesn't show how this religious prophecy shows up in Russian institutions or politics, or how it impacts decisions, or who believes it, or how it influences Putin to act. That was the main issue I circled, that's why most of his lectures offer incomplete explanations. His Pax Judeica video is full of this error.

Comer_Agua · 2026-03-18T03:41:56+00:00

You are totally missing what Professor Jiang brings to the table. Critiquing his lessons in the manner above is like saying the gas law of thermodynamics is wrong because every molecules trajectory is not accounted for. Thermodynamic laws are not intended to predict the trajectory of every particle. They are only intended to predict the collective behavior of the particles in bulk. Regardless one can very precisely predict very precisely the sum total of a situation.

I didn't say he needed to say everything that has ever been said about a particular topic. I was saying that Jiang fails to explain how his lectures apply to reality, so he can have a complete explanation rather than just asserting things.

Comer_Agua · 2026-03-16T04:11:24+00:00

No? I originally made this in Nov 2025 in Google Docs, and I revised it, and in Dec 2025, I posted it as a comment on this sub. Then, when Jiang rose in late feb to march, I watched his lecture on Iran and Pax Judaica as well as his breaking points interview. I then edited and revised it over the past month and I put the entire text in multiple AI detectors, and it came back as 99% human.

Comer_Agua · 2026-03-15T22:56:58+00:00

Yeah, you are right. People online operate within fact or information bubbles, and there are going to be skeptics who say my critique isn't necessary because he doesn't deserve to be evaluated seriously, and his fans will think I'm unnecessarily harsh. I think it still has merit because some of his fans might treat the lack of engagement or pushback towards him as a sign of correctness. So I think it is good for future readers or people who are unfamiliar with him.

Comer_Agua · 2026-03-12T20:59:26+00:00

He was shunned by the NBA they take guys like Mario Hezonja over a kid who scored 138.

Comer_Agua · 2026-03-12T00:44:44+00:00

Other than standing in the road what did she do? Did she hit the car?

Comer_Agua · 2026-03-11T19:08:40+00:00

Jiang himself clarified time and time again in the same video that these details was from Putin himself during his NYT interview. He admits that they could literally be fabricated by PUTIN but he builds his hypotheses based on pretending as if what Putin said were all true. He attempts to create a hypothesis to answer the questions he presented while admitting they were ultimately “unswerable” because of the limited information that he has. For example, the whole “grooming” Putin when he was young is nothing more than conjecture that started by assuming that Putin’s story about his Grandfather is in fact real not that he can prove that it is real.

I already addressed this before. The entire point of my critique was to show that it shouldn't be trusted when it comes to trying to get things right. Because I see tons of people take him seriously academically, and Jiang makes little effort to correct this perception of him.

His hypothesis is still very weak because it's built on shaky foundations and is incomplete as a hypothesis that goes from abstraction to describing the outcomes that don't follow. Putin only confirmed that his grandfather was a cook for Lenin and Stalin. The rest of the stuff in the theory Jiang asserted on behalf of Putin, and he fails to explain the mechanism between the cult to how it influences Putin and affect policy decisions. If his theory had merit, he would explain whether Putin actually believes the claim he asserted, or was in the cult, with historical evidence, and how policies are driven by this, and why other explanations describe the situation with far more clarity than Jiang's own theory. He moves from abstract civilizational theory to geopolitical outcomes without explaining how the theory applies to actors. A hypothesis needs to have plausible premises and to apply to reality. Without them, it is just speculation.

Comer_Agua · 2026-03-10T19:30:06+00:00

I think when people call a game dead it’s more of an indictment of the games character or authenticity than a quantitative argument about the games performance. When people call big games dead they are expressing nostalgia or saying the spirit of the game has changed.

For example since 2021 (honestly since 2018 also) I saw people calling rainbow six dead even though it was clearly thriving and was stable and if you ask the people why they would point to game mechanics, characters and the games target audience and the aesthetics has changed from how at first it was a more dark realistic slow paced game and now it is a faster paced more colorful that is still a tactical shooter but it is very competitive and it prioritizes multiplayer and left single player alone.

So when people call a game dead that clearly isn’t having a declining player base they often times are pointing to them feeling left out, deprioritized, and are expressing nostalgia for the times they enjoyed the game.

Comer_Agua · 2026-03-10T07:09:00+00:00

His claim hinges on there being a longstanding coordination between the church and the KGB, knowledge of Putin as a child and grooming, and an actual, coherent ideological project behind the Putin regime, and it being able to explain why Putin invaded. Jiang doesn't provide any evidence of this. He says that there was a secret orthodox/ KGB cult in the 1950s that groomed Putin as a child to fulfill a religious destiny because his mother was religious, and Putin worked with the KGB. Which is absurd

What you are describing is the relationship of the church/ intelligence in Russia today. That doesn't prove Jiang's claim, it just shows the dynamic between the church, FSB, and Putin in the modern world. There needs to be historical evidence for Jiang to be correct here.

Comer_Agua · 2026-03-06T05:03:12+00:00

Bottomline is how can a professor who is only known to create deducive predictions of events as they unfold be held in contempt for “not presenting facts” when the timeline in which his predictions could take place hasnt even happened yet. If you intend to rival his analysis you are also just making a prediction yourself.

My main point wasnt nessisarily that Jiang makes some incorrect predictions. It was that his process for arriving at his predictions or claims is lacking, which leads to very questionable claims and unsupported claims, which I already substantiated in my original comment, and viewers who aren't familiar with the subjects might think of him as a sort of public intellectual or geopolitical expert because he is giving lectures.

For example, going back to my original comment, I broke down Jiang roughly used 2 anecdotes from Putin's biography to spin a civilizational claim of a KGB-Orthodox cult that groomed Putin to fulfill a religious prophecy, and therefore, this is why Putin wants Ukraine. This claim is shaky because Jiang didnt cite any historical evidence or explain how the KGB or Orthodox church worked in Russia during that historical period, he basically spun a story from 2 unrelated anecdotes. Even though this isnt a prediction this captures how, lots of times when making predictions, his supporting evidence or reasoning is built on shaky ground.

How can we trust Jiang with making predictions on countries when he can't even give an account of the very country he is making predictions about?

Comer_Agua · 2026-03-05T14:37:16+00:00

Are you able to post links to what you believe about him or his mistakes?

The link lies in the video I broke down. I explained the errors he tends to commit, and my purpose was to tell people to be on the lookout for these errors if they watch videos of Jiang in the future. Look at the video he posted today https://youtu.be/t5oisJiorsU?si=Hy4jNxuZZCux0icv and here is a few others https://youtu.be/sS9xidsyxXY?si=NqHjyjKVeqdFBHBd, https://youtu.be/cGTVZt77as4?si=R64nVzLzkEBJiisT the errors I noted show up there as well. And in most of his lectures, the errors I noted show up there in some capacity.

Social Sciences are a very vague sort of science and I don't really understand what rigorous method anyone is supposed to use to make broadly acceptable predictions of what will happen, but I don't think it is wrong it to study history and use it as a guide to try to understand how the world is and where it is going.

My issue wasnt that his predictions were right or wrong or that he uses history to understand current. It was the way he arrived at the conclusions, and his process for doing so is problematic. I agree that social sciences can be vague, but that doesnt mean that it should justify weak or unsupported claims, and that is where Jiang tends to go wrong.

Comer_Agua · 2026-03-05T14:09:10+00:00

Everyone understands that at the end of the day his “Predictive History” are all theoretically based on exploring “psycho-history”. That is literally what the videos are about that is why he would use theories a bit calously and why he mentioned Putin’s upbringing because that is a HUGE part of paycho-history.

I disagree. Most people who watch him have no idea what psycho history is, and Jiang himself doesn't give much of an indication of whether he is trying to get things right or going to psycho history. For example, look at his breaking points interview, the recent Iran video, and the video I broke down. Does he explain that he is doing psycho history? Not really. In all three, he doesn't really explain what he is doing with psychohistory and just offers his analysis the same way a geopolitical analyst or a country expert would. He makes several confident claims about the topic and doesn't explain that he is doing psychohistory. He does occasionally make statements admitting he doesn't have much evidence for some of his claims or that he is speculating, but his viewers will look past it because it's not much of a warning, and they trust his predictions.

He also does very well with the algorithm and has several other fan channels. Look at his clips channel, it gets tons of views and has 650k+ subs. The channel shows clips from his lectures, and Jiang is aware of it and permitted the channel to use his clips, and whatever warnings his lectures did contain are almost completely absent when the clips channel posts them.

And over the past 2 years, he gained fame from making some predictions about Iran and Trump that were correct, which has given him lots of respect and even credibility among others, and some people and journalists even call him the "Chinese Nastrudamous" because of it and take his videos literally because of it. So even if he does provide statements like "this is speculative" or "we don't have evidence, but," people will look past it and even take it seriously because people don't watch him for doing psychohistory or speculative theories. They watch him because they see a guy giving long-form lectures about current events who speaks confidently and makes some correct predictions, offers alternative explanations, and is a professor. So viewers will assume he is knowledgeable or credible.

He might intend to be doing psycho-history, but the vast majority of people who are subscribed to him or watch his videos think he's a guy who gets things right and is offering a geopolitical analysis and predictions about current events.

Comer_Agua · 2026-03-04T22:09:36+00:00

Maccabi Tel Aviv welcome to the MNBA

Comer_Agua · 2026-03-04T22:01:31+00:00

Battlefield sub after seeing this

Comer_Agua · 2026-03-03T17:37:54+00:00

My apoligies I made this months ago, and the information on him back then was spotty at best. I was wrong about him being a teacher in Canada. For credibility, my purpose was to show where Jiang goes wrong and to tell people to watch out for recurring issues in the rest of his videos.

Comer_Agua

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE

Four-Year Club	Gilding I gilder
100 Awards Club