Thank you, Spleen Cringe....

Several have called it 'preachy' or the equivalent. That can be a criticism of 'tone' or of attitude, but not of content. (Some folks go to church to BE preached at, and don't consider it an imposition.)

John Hardly at least makes a clear claim about the logic & content, though I disagree about it being a 'straw man' argument. (wishing I had a transcript, rather than just sound to cite details).

It begins with a comment about 'folks who DO believe in non-scientific concepts' calling those who don't "closed minded". It then asserts this is a mis-understanding of what 'open-minded' and what 'science' really is, and that, on the contrary, *can* even show 'close-mindedness'. (Note 'can'..not 'always does') Most of the rest is just an elaboration of those assertions...with illustrations.

In fact, the assertions made be the video can also be a reminder TO skeptics to treat the assertions or beliefs of others with due thought and not dismiss them out of hand.

The point is, assertions & claims DO require evidence...except to those who already basically believe the ideas already. I personally, many times, have been told directly that I "need to open my mind" to certain inputs, and that if I did, I might see them better. My answer was 'you mean, I need to believe in order to believe?

   I'm sorry that the guy was quite so 'preachy', but I doubt that a gentler, more 'subdued' version would get any better response from some.

(and if you eliminate the 'cement heads' comment, are YOU any more convinced of the basic approach?)