I see he already received a lot of criticism for his Glitter Bomb video, but I watched the first video of his today and was really enjoying the format because it's not as flashy as a lot of other channels and claims to make an effort to present a vaguely scientific approach to things. However, using fake footage invalidates basically everything he claims to stand for.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GYCI58pMGuQ&t=5m16s

Look at the cuts in the olive in the footage from the throw and during presentation afterwards - they're completely different, and the reaction olive isn't even filled. If I want to look at people "reacting" to a script, I can just go watch a movie. It may seem like nitpicking, but take the self-presentation into account - he's (validly) criticizing Mythbusters et al. for unscientific bullshit. Would a paper with this presentation methodology pass peer review? Probably, but only thanks to people behaving like this. Way to inspire young engineers, Mark - Volkswagen needs them.

Note: I only watch a very small number of channels that market themselves as education so I don't know if this crap is so rampant that the community just accepts it. If so, do consider what you're doing.

If you know a better sub to post this, do tell me - both /r/youtube and /r/youtubers ban this kind of content.