Here is his channel, if you haven't seen it. He makes videos often purporting to debunk common historical misconceptions. He seems fairly decent about citing at least some source usually, and his claims are usually anti-sensationalist, which makes him a little more trustworthy in my eyes.

However, some of his claims, especially regarding historical fighting/weaponry, seem to me to be either too speculative or general.

Regarding the speculation, in many of his videos, he demonstrates that some weapon or fighting technique would or wouldn't be practical, based on some physical manoeuvres he does on screen. He seems to have some sort of training in "medieval fighting" (whatever that means), but I'm also skeptical of almost any information based on that, because probably very few people today have ever actually been in a swordfight (or whatever) where their life was actually on the line.

Regarding the generalities, he often makes claims based on some assumption that seems like it would often be untrue. For example, maybe based on the fact that most people fighting in a war wouldn't have any armor. This may be true, but there were also plenty of people who did wear armor, so they might use a less common technique.

A concrete example of this is his video on why knife throwing probably didn't really exist. He says that knives were expensive, and throwing yours meant that you now don't have one, and that it's probably too hard to do reliably.

Maybe that's true for many people, but you can certainly imagine a skilled, well supplied assassin having several knives and lots of training. Maybe very few people historically used knife throwing, but very few people are astronauts, yet it's clearly a well established institution.

What do you real historians think? Is he reliable or mostly just a speculating hobbyist?