u/Outrageous-Novel7839

I recently lost my day job. I’m starting the search for another job, but in the meantime, I’m thinking about treating YouTube like a part-time job and spending around 3–4 focused hours a day creating content.

My channel currently has 581 subscribers and 823 of the 4,000 qualified public watch hours needed for full monetization.

My content focuses on science communication, correcting science misunderstandings, and debunking science denial. I know that is not necessarily the fastest or easiest niche to grow, but it is something I genuinely enjoy making.

I’m not expecting YouTube to suddenly replace a full-time income, and I’m definitely not putting the job search on hold. Even a little extra income would help, though, and I finally have enough time to see what happens if I give the channel consistent, focused effort.

For anyone who had a similar situation and suddenly had the time to go much harder on YouTube:

How long did it take before you noticed meaningful growth?

Did increasing the amount of time you spent on your channel actually accelerate its growth?

What made the biggest difference: posting more, improving thumbnails and titles, choosing better topics, or something else?

I’d especially love to hear from people who were already partway toward monetization when they decided to take YouTube more seriously.

I recently lost my day job. I’m already starting to look for another one, but while I have the extra time, I’m considering spending 3–4 focused hours each day working on YouTube.

I currently have 581 subscribers and 823 of the 4,000 qualified public watch hours needed for full monetization.

My channel is focused on science communication, science misunderstandings, and debunking science denial. I’m not counting on YouTube replacing a full-time job, especially anytime soon, but earning even a little money from something I enjoy would certainly help.

For those of you who experienced a job loss, career change, or some other situation that gave you the opportunity to go much harder on YouTube, how long did it take before the channel reached a solid point?

Did spending more time on it lead to noticeably faster growth, or did you eventually find that topic selection and packaging mattered more than the number of hours you put in?

I’d appreciate honest answers, including from people who tried this and didn’t see the results they expected. I’m trying to set realistic expectations while making the most of the time I currently have.

I just got the Dwarf3 and I was shooting NA nebua last night, I set the scope up at about 9:40PM and have it EQ mountaed.

I was like, let me try 30 second exposures instead of 15 seconds. but that said it would take over 8 hours. the sun would have rissen by then, so I went back to 15 seconds 999 photos.

But this morning was thinking, what if I change it to 30 secodns, but half the photos.

What do you all think is better?

we usually watch Jeopardy daiy on Hulu, but we fell behind. and over last weekend we powered through Pop Culture Jeopardy season 2 on Netflix, then caught up, so 6 episodes of Regular Jeopardy on Hulu over a 3 day period.

One of the clues and answers was pretty much Paris Hilton and thats hot. but I dont remmeber which was clue and which answer. does anyone have any ideas?

It would have been Pop culture jeopardy, or a regular episode in the last 2 weeks. I just want to shoq someone that clue

I’m in the Phoenix area at about 33.5° north.

If I want to use the DWARF 3 for longer exposures and better tracking in EQ mode, do I need to mount it on a wedge set to roughly 33.5°?

Does the tripod need to be angled and aligned precisely with the celestial pole, or does the DWARF 3 have some kind of built-in adjustment that allows EQ tracking while sitting level?

I’m new to EQ tracking with smart telescopes, so I may be misunderstanding how the DWARF 3 handles it. Hopefully my question makes sense.

I just got my Dwarf3 yeasterday and am looking to try and use it this weekend. we have had storms lately so I dont know if I can.

What are cool and good objects to shoot right now? I found a site called telescopius that looks like a good planner, but honestly right now its pretty much a forign language to me.

I run a science communication and debunking channel, and I’m looking for help with a visual demonstration comparing equatorial telescope alignment in the Northern and Southern Hemispheres.

I’m located at approximately 33°N. I’m looking for astrophotographers in the Southern Hemisphere—preferably below the Tropic of Capricorn, and ideally at relatively high southern latitudes—who have a telescope on an equatorial mount.

For the comparison, I would need:

• A clear photo of the EQ-mounted telescope
• A compass visible in the same photo, showing that the polar axis is aimed generally south
• Your approximate latitude rounded to the nearest whole degree, such as 33°S, 31°S, or 27°S
• No exact address, longitude, or decimal coordinates

A location near 33°S would be especially helpful because it would allow a nearly symmetrical comparison with my location at 33°N. Sydney, Adelaide, Buenos Aires, Cape Town, and similar locations would all work well, but I’m interested in responses from anywhere in the Southern Hemisphere.

Multiple submissions would be even better. With enough locations, I may be able to build a broader comparison showing how polar alignment changes with latitude.

Please comment or message me if you’re willing to contribute. I’ll credit contributors if desired, or keep submissions anonymous.

create science communication and debunking videos, and I’m putting together a Northern Hemisphere vs. Southern Hemisphere comparison involving equatorial alignment and the celestial poles.

I’m located at roughly 33°N. I’m hoping to find Seestar users in the Southern Hemisphere—preferably below the Tropic of Capricorn, and ideally as far south as possible—who use an equatorial wedge or EQ-mounted setup.

I’m looking for:

• A photo of your Seestar on its EQ setup
• A compass visible beside it, showing that the setup is aimed generally south
• Your approximate latitude rounded to a whole degree, such as 34°S, 31°S, or 27°S
• No precise location or decimal coordinates

A submission from somewhere like Sydney, Adelaide, Buenos Aires, Cape Town, or another location near 33°S would make for a particularly clean comparison with my location at 33°N. That said, any Southern Hemisphere location would be useful.

I’d also be interested in collecting multiple examples at different latitudes, since the combined information could support a larger demonstration later.

Reply here or message me if you’d be willing to help. Thanks!

I run a science communication and debunking channel, and I’m working on a simple Northern Hemisphere vs. Southern Hemisphere comparison involving telescope alignment and the celestial poles.

I’m located at approximately 33°N. I’m looking for DWARF users in the Southern Hemisphere—preferably south of the Tropic of Capricorn, and ideally as far south as possible—who have their telescope set up on an equatorial mount.

What I need is:

• A clear photo of the telescope and mount
• A compass visible in the photo, showing that the mount is aimed generally south toward the South Celestial Pole
• Your approximate latitude, rounded to a whole degree, such as 31°S or 27°S
• No exact address or precise coordinates are needed

Sydney, Adelaide, Buenos Aires, Cape Town, or anywhere at a similar southern latitude would be especially useful, since I’m at 33°N and could make a close north-versus-south comparison. However, submissions from anywhere in the Southern Hemisphere would help.

The more locations I can collect, the better. I may also be able to use the combined photos and latitude data for a larger follow-up demonstration.

Please reply here or send me a message if you’re interested. Thank you!

I want to make a timelaspe type video of the Shadow moving across the moon. Is the Dwarf 3 able to do this?

I am trying to get a better idea of what normal growth and performance look like for smaller YouTube creators.

Most of the comparisons we see are either brand-new channels with only a few uploads or established creators with hundreds of thousands of subscribers. I thought it might be useful to anonymously compare actual numbers from regular creators.

Here are my channel statistics from my first upload on May 7, 2025 through June 15, 2026:

Channel totals

Channel age covered: 404 days
Videos published: 52
Total views: 21,236
Total impressions: 283,197
Total watch time: 735.7 hours
Subscribers gained: 84
Subscribers lost: 2
Net subscribers: 82
Overall impressions CTR: 4.65%
Overall average percentage viewed: 34.81%
Total likes: 745
Total comments: 323
Total shares: 141

Average performance per video

Average views: 408
Median views: 143

Average impressions: 5,447
Median impressions: 2,944

Average CTR: 3.84%
Median CTR: 3.22%

Average percentage viewed: 36.88%
Median percentage viewed: 34.25%

Average watch time: 14.1 hours
Median watch time: 5.2 hours

Average subscribers gained per video: 1.58
Median subscribers gained per video: 1

Average video length: 6 minutes, 41 seconds
Median video length: 6 minutes

Best Video

Published: February 10, 2026
Upload number: 35 of 52
Views: 4,277
Impressions: 18,194
CTR: 10.90%
Average percentage viewed: 24.72%
Watch time: 70.8 hours
Subscribers gained: 7

Worst Video

Published: July 12, 2025
Upload number: 11 of 52
Views: 25
Impressions: 567
CTR: 3.17%
Average percentage viewed: 37.95%
Watch time: 0.6 hours
Subscribers gained: 1

The best video received about 171 times more views than the worst video, which shows how wildly performance can vary even on the same channel.

One thing I found interesting is that the worst video actually had a higher average percentage viewed than the best video. The biggest difference was reach and click-through rate, not necessarily retention.

How do these numbers compare with your channel?

You can keep your channel completely anonymous. It would be helpful to share whatever you are comfortable sharing:

Channel age:
Number of videos:
Total or average views:
Average impressions:
CTR:
Average percentage viewed:
Subscribers gained:
Best video views:
Worst video views:

I am hoping this can give smaller creators a more realistic benchmark for how we are doing compared with other normal people building channels, rather than comparing ourselves with the tiny percentage of channels that become massive.

I’ve been involved in the flat Earth versus globe Earth conversation for a while now, mostly on TikTok, and I still have not seen any actual, repeatable evidence that Earth is flat.

I’ve seen plenty of globe denial, science denial, misunderstood observations, moving goalposts, and blatant lying. But none of that is positive evidence for a flat Earth.

I’ve been told that ships can be “zoomed back in” after disappearing over the horizon, so I bought a Nikon P950. I still have not been able to restore the hidden lower portion of anything once it has passed beyond the horizon.

I’ve been told, “We can see too far.” But whenever I break down those claims, the observations usually match what the globe predicts once the correct distances, elevations, camera heights, tides, and atmospheric conditions are considered.

I performed an Eratosthenes-style experiment with eight other people at different locations. Using our measurements, we calculated Earth’s circumference to within 81 miles of the accepted value.

I tested the claim that moonlight is cold. My measurements did not support it.

I measured the Sun’s angular size throughout the day. It did not noticeably shrink as it moved across the sky, as a small and nearby Sun should.

All of those are really just attempts to deny the globe, and so far, those claims have failed.

So where is the actual flat Earth proof?

Does anyone have repeatable, positive evidence that Earth is flat, not just another argument against the globe, that I can go out and test for myself?

Please provide a specific method, a predicted result, and an explanation of how the test distinguishes a flat Earth from a globe.

Im building out an experiment where I will need 2 different breadboard settups, going into one breadboard setup, then all of that going to my UNO thats outside of a box. The experiment will run for about 3 hours, but It will be transported in a car between two points.

Whats the best way to ensure all the wires hold in place on the breadboards. I do have those hard flexible wires, for wiring on the same breadboard, But I need ot make sure my Dupont jumper wires stay in place.

Thank you.

I’ve seen this claim in flat Earth circles where people say the Davis Besse nuclear power plant can be seen from across Lake Erie, and that this should be impossible on a curved Earth.

The version I saw claims the observation is from roughly 27 miles away, usually from the Michigan side of Lake Erie looking toward the power plant in Ohio.

The argument is basically:

If Earth were curved, the plant should be hidden by curvature.
Since part of the plant is visible, Earth must be flat.

Is this bullshit?

From what I can tell, the cooling tower is very tall, the exact observer location and height matter a lot, and the lower part of the tower appears to be missing in the images people use for the claim. So it seems like seeing the upper part of a tall structure across water does not automatically prove the surface is flat.

I’m trying to understand whether this claim is actually valid, or if it leaves out important details like observer height, tower height, distance, refraction, and the fact that only part of the structure is visible.

I’ve been looking into the Tartaria claim, especially the argument that old maps showing “Tartary” prove there was a hidden global empire that was erased from history.

The part that seems to get skipped is that old maps often used broad regional labels. “Tartary” appears to have been used by European mapmakers as a large geographic label for parts of Central Asia, Siberia, and surrounding regions. That does not automatically mean it was one unified empire, one advanced civilization, or a worldwide power that was secretly removed from history.

To me, the conspiracy argument usually jumps from:

“Old maps say Tartary”

to

“Therefore there was a hidden advanced global civilization”

without proving the steps in between.

The questions I think matter are:

What did mapmakers at the time mean by Tartary?

Was it a political state, a region, or a broad outside label?

Do historical records from the region support the hidden empire claim?

Why do conspiracy versions usually ignore the difference between a map label and a government?

Are people confusing real history with modern internet mythology?

I’m not saying every old map is perfectly accurate or that history is never simplified. I’m saying the existence of the word “Tartary” on maps seems to prove that mapmakers used that label, not that there was an erased worldwide empire.

What is the strongest actual evidence people use for the hidden empire version, beyond old maps and photos of old buildings?