He uses a lot of wire diagram noting "now this can't work" or words to that effect. They are produced for the novice that can easily grasp the "simple" concept of what he is trying to describe.
And I would say that's because his own understanding is simplistic. He can say "It's supposed to be like this," and a layman can understand that. 28V DC circuits are not, by themselves, rocket science. If you've installed your own lawn sprinklers, you can grasp something of what's going on. But advanced concepts like modulation or switch-in spares aren't intuitively obvious from that perspective.
At the broader scope, this is mostly how a lot of fringe theories work. "It's supposed to be like this, but it's like that instead -- therefore conspiracy." It's an argument meant to jump over the rationale for "it's supposed to be like this." Most of those arguments come from lay claimants relying on intuition or poor research. Some few, like Hunchbacked, claim expertise. In most cases that brand of claimant is careful not to expose his expectations to those who really know the field because they'll quickly be found out. But as many have noted, Hunchbacked doesn't seem bothered by being revealed as ignorant time after time and creating controversy over whether he really believes his own hype. I've seen a very few who are so far gone as to think their fantasy world is real to everyone else too.
The real kicker that I have with him is his lack of visual perception. Many times he will describe in his videos what the observers should see, then shows that to be correct only to indicate it doesn't show what he described. I find it difficult to describe because he actually shows the phenomenon he discusses.
That sort of person is the kind I generally leave alone. If they don't understand their own arguments, no amount of correct refutation will be effective. Analogously what has happened in the past with a few is that they get so wound up in fighting the good fight, discrediting their critics, etc. that they don't bother to connect the argument
du jour with any of their claims. The argument never rises beyond casting random aspersions. But beyond that there is a small class of people who really don't get how a line of reasoning works, how
ipso facto works, or what a logical inference is. They are left to a cargo-cult style of argumentation. I remember when Hunchbacked was trying to argue about the hardware and software of the guidance computer, and based all his expectations on modern Intel-based personal computers. It didn't seem to occur to him that a computer could be designed and built any other way. It's very difficult to argue with someone who doesn't know what he doesn't know, and isn't the least suspicious that there might be things he doesn't know.
As for spatial perception, this is important if you want to be an aerospace engineer. I give all my design engineering candidates a standardized spatial reasoning test, and you have to score pretty high on it to advance. And you need a high score because spatial reasoning is the heart and soul of any brand of engineering that involves actual objects in a three-dimensional environment. The same skills are required of a successful airplane pilot. There is a rigorous framework of mathematics that governs the science of spacecraft dynamic control. And that formalism is important to guaranteeing a correct solution. But the nuts and bolts of a practical solution comes from second-nature understanding of spatial relationships. It has to exist in your head first, and then you adjust it to the formalism. And this is why I have a hard time believing Hunchbacked has any sort of real qualification in aerospace engineering.
