User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 9/22/2014 10:46:23 PM EDT
[#1]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Sounds like Tyson went off on a tangent which he is quite well known for, and made an error in recalling what was actually said. Hardly "making up stories". Quote HistoryQuoted:
Sounds like Tyson went off on a tangent which he is quite well known for, and made an error in recalling what was actually said. Hardly "making up stories". No, the context was completely different. TYSON: Here’s what happens. George Bush, within a week of [the 9/11 terrorist attacks] gave us a speech attempting to distinguish we from they. And who are they? These were sort of the Muslim fundamentalists. And he wants to distinguish we from they. And how does he do it? He says, “Our God” — of course it’s actually the same God, but that’s a detail, let’s hold that minor fact aside for the moment. Allah of the Muslims is the same God as the God of the Old Testament. So, but let’s hold that aside. He says, “Our God is the God” — he’s loosely quoting Genesis, biblical Genesis — “Our God is the God who named the stars.” Neil deGrasse Tyson’s story has three central claims: 1) Bush uttered that precise phrase, 2) in the days immediately after 9/11, 3) in order to distance American religion from that practiced by radical Muslims. As you have probably already guessed, every single claim is false. Every one! Then there’s Tyson’s aside that Bush’s quote was a “loose quote” of the book of Genesis. Yep, that’s false, too. ... Tyson butchered the quote. He butchered the date. He butchered the context. He butchered the implication. And he butchered the biblical allusion, which was to the prophet Isaiah, not the book of Genesis (you can tell Bush was alluding to Isaiah because he explicitly said he was referencing Isaiah). Bush’s statement about the Creator had nothing to do with making “us” look better than “them”: it was an attempt to comfort the families who lost loved ones in the crash. They weren’t nameless creatures who passed anonymously; their ultimate Creator, the one who knit them together in their mothers’ wombs, mourned them by name. Heck, that same Creator even gave up his one and only Son that those lost souls might one day be reconciled to God through Christ’s life, death, and resurrection. It was a message of hope and unity, not a message of division authored in the fog of war. http://thefederalist.com/2014/09/16/another-day-another-quote-fabricated-by-neil-degrasse-tyson/ And we won't go into whether the Islamic Allah is the same as the Christian God, which gets into deep and tricky theological waters rather quickly. (the Christian answer: no.) |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/22/2014 10:53:43 PM EDT
[#2]
That stupid fucker should have stuck to boxing.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/22/2014 10:54:48 PM EDT
[#3]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
No, the context was completely different. http://thefederalist.com/2014/09/16/another-day-another-quote-fabricated-by-neil-degrasse-tyson/ And we won't go into whether the Islamic Allah is the same as the Christian God, which gets into deep and tricky theological waters rather quickly. (the Christian answer: no.) Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Sounds like Tyson went off on a tangent which he is quite well known for, and made an error in recalling what was actually said. Hardly "making up stories". No, the context was completely different. TYSON: Here’s what happens. George Bush, within a week of [the 9/11 terrorist attacks] gave us a speech attempting to distinguish we from they. And who are they? These were sort of the Muslim fundamentalists. And he wants to distinguish we from they. And how does he do it? He says, “Our God” — of course it’s actually the same God, but that’s a detail, let’s hold that minor fact aside for the moment. Allah of the Muslims is the same God as the God of the Old Testament. So, but let’s hold that aside. He says, “Our God is the God” — he’s loosely quoting Genesis, biblical Genesis — “Our God is the God who named the stars.” Neil deGrasse Tyson’s story has three central claims: 1) Bush uttered that precise phrase, 2) in the days immediately after 9/11, 3) in order to distance American religion from that practiced by radical Muslims. As you have probably already guessed, every single claim is false. Every one! Then there’s Tyson’s aside that Bush’s quote was a “loose quote” of the book of Genesis. Yep, that’s false, too. ... Tyson butchered the quote. He butchered the date. He butchered the context. He butchered the implication. And he butchered the biblical allusion, which was to the prophet Isaiah, not the book of Genesis (you can tell Bush was alluding to Isaiah because he explicitly said he was referencing Isaiah). Bush’s statement about the Creator had nothing to do with making “us” look better than “them”: it was an attempt to comfort the families who lost loved ones in the crash. They weren’t nameless creatures who passed anonymously; their ultimate Creator, the one who knit them together in their mothers’ wombs, mourned them by name. Heck, that same Creator even gave up his one and only Son that those lost souls might one day be reconciled to God through Christ’s life, death, and resurrection. It was a message of hope and unity, not a message of division authored in the fog of war. http://thefederalist.com/2014/09/16/another-day-another-quote-fabricated-by-neil-degrasse-tyson/ And we won't go into whether the Islamic Allah is the same as the Christian God, which gets into deep and tricky theological waters rather quickly. (the Christian answer: no.) I'm not saying what he said is right, but hyperbole, which is all too common here on arfcom, seems like a much stronger possibility here than making up stories. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/22/2014 10:56:51 PM EDT
[#4]
Tyson was better 15 yrs ago when he was a virtual unknown scientist but his celabrty has gone to his head. Worse, he's let his own personal biases interfere with the scientist he is, really this is true of most scientist. They WANT something to be true so their research is in search to validate their own biases.
We all have biases on a great number of topics, scientists are no different. Scientist method is supposed to teach impartiality but many times is perverted so Tyson is far from being alone. He's more of a charcture of his old self now, sad really because he's a smart cat and will know a shit ton more about physics than I ever will yet somehow I maintain an 'open' mind on such stuff. In the community he's not really all that respected not to the level he thinks he is, why not cash in on his stardom. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/22/2014 10:57:42 PM EDT
[#5]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I'm not saying what he said is right, but hyperbole, which is all too common here on arfcom, seems like a much stronger possibility than making up stories. Saying it could have been an honest mistake. An honest mistake he most likely would not make with the current president, because he's got an agenda, but still an honest mistake. His response is what damages his credibility. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/22/2014 10:59:23 PM EDT
[#6]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
SUCCESS!!!! Nice job Sean David Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Here is where I get pissed off. Who the fuck cares if Tyson heard 1. exactly what Bush said. 2. Misunderstood him. 3. paraphrased. or 4 made it completely. It has nothing to do with the scientist and the science that Tyson has contributed to the cause. Lying, then defending it after the fact, has nothing to do with the scientist doing the lying? Sure, that's reasonable.  SUCCESS!!!! Nice job Sean David Boy your knickers get really twisted deffending this Tyson guy |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/22/2014 11:02:09 PM EDT
[#7]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Typical case of Ph.D. wander. This is an under appreciated post. Sort of like a biologist talking about philosophy and cosmology. Happens all the time. Popularizers drift off into lands they believe to be uncharted and suspect could use their unique brilliance. Can happen to anyone. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/22/2014 11:02:10 PM EDT
[#8]
Quote HistoryAnd we won't go into whether the Islamic Allah is the same as the Christian God, which gets into deep and tricky theological waters rather quickly. (the Christian answer: no.) Question about the Christian answer. Are you referring to the Trinity in that God is incomplete without Jesus? Technically their both monotheistic Abrahamic religions. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/22/2014 11:03:38 PM EDT
[#9]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Question about the Christian answer. Are you referring to the Trinity in that God is incomplete without Jesus? Technically their both monotheistic Abrahamic religions. Quote HistoryQuoted:
And we won't go into whether the Islamic Allah is the same as the Christian God, which gets into deep and tricky theological waters rather quickly. (the Christian answer: no.) Question about the Christian answer. Are you referring to the Trinity in that God is incomplete without Jesus? Technically their both monotheistic Abrahamic religions. You seemed all smart until the part in red. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/22/2014 11:07:12 PM EDT
[#10]
Quote HistoryBoy your knickers get really twisted defending this Tyson guy Yea- In a shitty mode today. Got my bell rung pretty good yesterday. Getting old, got complacent, and let someone get me good. Almost done ;) |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/22/2014 11:23:27 PM EDT
[#11]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
You think his goal is science? Look at this scene from his show Cosmos. It's sad because I used to actually like him. http://blogs.ajc.com/news-to-me/files/2014/03/cosmos-bruno-animated-clip.jpg This.... I really liked and admired De Gasse, then I watched his update of the Carl Sagan "Cosmos". I could barely make it through the first episode. Thought, maybe a fluke, watched maybe 30 minutes of the next and totally wrote the guy off. He can't shine Sagan's shoes. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/22/2014 11:59:16 PM EDT
[#12]
Quoted:
A hero of the left and noted 'climate change' expert has some explaining to do. http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2014/09/22/does-neil-degrasse-tyson-make-up-stories/ Hero of the left? I think he is pretty apolitical in most of the things I've seen. People misremember and misquote things ALL THE TIME. EVERYONE does it. It's part of what makes us human. It's why we quote "Play it again, Sam." and "Luke, I am your father." even though neither of those lines were uttered. So I don't know what this whole "gotcha" journalism hopes to prove, other than Tyson isn't an robot. He is the best face of science we have had since Carl Sagan. But I am sure you and others like you are wary of the brainy smarties. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/23/2014 12:02:00 AM EDT
[#13]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
You think his goal is science? Look at this scene from his show Cosmos. It's sad because I used to actually like him. http://blogs.ajc.com/news-to-me/files/2014/03/cosmos-bruno-animated-clip.jpg Thats how a lot of Christians on Arfcom view The Pope. Actually, they view him as surrounded by Sauroid lizard people instead of monks or whatever those are supposed to be. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/23/2014 12:05:22 AM EDT
[#14]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
You think his goal is science? Look at this scene from his show Cosmos. It's sad because I used to actually like him. http://blogs.ajc.com/news-to-me/files/2014/03/cosmos-bruno-animated-clip.jpg Which scene do you have a problem with, because history is full of Catholic leaders doing bad things and science being shunned because it went against the paradigm. This coming from a Catholic. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/23/2014 12:09:56 AM EDT
[#15]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Which scene do you have a problem with, because history is full of Catholic leaders doing bad things and science being shunned because it went against the paradigm. This coming from a Catholic. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
You think his goal is science? Look at this scene from his show Cosmos. It's sad because I used to actually like him. http://blogs.ajc.com/news-to-me/files/2014/03/cosmos-bruno-animated-clip.jpg Which scene do you have a problem with, because history is full of Catholic leaders doing bad things and science being shunned because it went against the paradigm. This coming from a Catholic. The Church didn't shun science. It preserved knowledge and helped to cultivate science, philosophy, etc. Also, the Inquisition was a political institution, not a church one, something that often seems to be forgotten. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/23/2014 12:27:11 AM EDT
[#16]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Which scene do you have a problem with, because history is full of Catholic leaders doing bad things and science being shunned because it went against the paradigm. This coming from a Catholic. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
You think his goal is science? Look at this scene from his show Cosmos. It's sad because I used to actually like him. http://blogs.ajc.com/news-to-me/files/2014/03/cosmos-bruno-animated-clip.jpg Which scene do you have a problem with, because history is full of Catholic leaders doing bad things and science being shunned because it went against the paradigm. This coming from a Catholic. Great evil has been committed in the name of religion. And great evil has been committed in the name of science. Religion was probably ahead in the evil quotient until the 20th century when the evil committed in the name of science raced past it mid century. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/23/2014 12:53:13 AM EDT
[#17]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
The Church didn't shun science. It preserved knowledge and helped to cultivate science, philosophy, etc. Also, the Inquisition was a political institution, not a church one, something that often seems to be forgotten. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
You think his goal is science? Look at this scene from his show Cosmos. It's sad because I used to actually like him. http://blogs.ajc.com/news-to-me/files/2014/03/cosmos-bruno-animated-clip.jpg Which scene do you have a problem with, because history is full of Catholic leaders doing bad things and science being shunned because it went against the paradigm. This coming from a Catholic. The Church didn't shun science. It preserved knowledge and helped to cultivate science, philosophy, etc. Also, the Inquisition was a political institution, not a church one, something that often seems to be forgotten. Both are true. During the dark ages they were one of the few entities keeping books from being used a fuel and toilet paper. During the Renaissance there were repeated instances from Copernicus to Galileo of new discoveries clashing with existing doctrine. Yes I am aware it wasn't that simple as both had supporters in the church, and in the case of Galileo what got him in trouble more was his mouth about religious matters, not his discoveries. And today they certainly lead the other denominations with an Academy of Sciences, and allowing the teaching of an old earth and evolution to not clash with scripture. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/23/2014 12:55:45 AM EDT
[#18]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Great evil has been committed in the name of religion. And great evil has been committed in the name of science. Religion was probably ahead in the evil quotient until the 20th century when the evil committed in the name of science raced past it mid century. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
You think his goal is science? Look at this scene from his show Cosmos. It's sad because I used to actually like him. http://blogs.ajc.com/news-to-me/files/2014/03/cosmos-bruno-animated-clip.jpg Which scene do you have a problem with, because history is full of Catholic leaders doing bad things and science being shunned because it went against the paradigm. This coming from a Catholic. Great evil has been committed in the name of religion. And great evil has been committed in the name of science. Religion was probably ahead in the evil quotient until the 20th century when the evil committed in the name of science raced past it mid century. What evil was done in the name of science? You mean secular forces like communism? Because other than niche scientific concepts like eugenics and flawed pseudo-sciences like Phrenology or flawed techniques like lobotomies, I don't see evil being committed in the name of science. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/23/2014 1:12:33 AM EDT
[#19]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
What evil was done in the name of science? You mean secular forces like communism? Because other than niche scientific concepts like eugenics and flawed pseudo-sciences like Phrenology or flawed techniques like lobotomies, I don't see evil being committed in the name of science. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
You think his goal is science? Look at this scene from his show Cosmos. It's sad because I used to actually like him. http://blogs.ajc.com/news-to-me/files/2014/03/cosmos-bruno-animated-clip.jpg Which scene do you have a problem with, because history is full of Catholic leaders doing bad things and science being shunned because it went against the paradigm. This coming from a Catholic. Great evil has been committed in the name of religion. And great evil has been committed in the name of science. Religion was probably ahead in the evil quotient until the 20th century when the evil committed in the name of science raced past it mid century. What evil was done in the name of science? You mean secular forces like communism? Because other than niche scientific concepts like eugenics and flawed pseudo-sciences like Phrenology or flawed techniques like lobotomies, I don't see evil being committed in the name of science. You could add the Japanese Unit 731 and Josef Mengele's experiments at Auschwitz, as well as the Tuskeegee syphilis experiment to the atrocities directly committed in the name of science. The idiot in my avatar caused a famine in Russia when he enforced his belief that vernalization was an inherited property of plants. Too bad, the guy had some good ideas aside from that one that killed all those people. Science is done by people. People are capable of bad things, and scientific research has dipped into that well more than once. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/23/2014 1:18:51 AM EDT
[#20]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I'm not saying what he said is right, but hyperbole, which is all too common here on arfcom, seems like a much stronger possibility here than making up stories. Quote HistoryQuoted:
I'm not saying what he said is right, but hyperbole, which is all too common here on arfcom, seems like a much stronger possibility here than making up stories. Here's NDT's quote: TYSON: Here’s what happens. George Bush, within a week of [the 9/11 terrorist attacks] gave us a speech attempting to distinguish we from they. And who are they? These were sort of the Muslim fundamentalists. And he wants to distinguish we from they. And how does he do it? He says, “Our God” — of course it’s actually the same God, but that’s a detail, let’s hold that minor fact aside for the moment. Allah of the Muslims is the same God as the God of the Old Testament. So, but let’s hold that aside. He says, “Our God is the God” — he’s loosely quoting Genesis, biblical Genesis — “Our God is the God who named the stars.” https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h_jG5kKfacY#t=109 Here's Bush's words, from 2003, when speaking to the families of astronauts killed in the shuttle crash. In the skies today we saw destruction and tragedy. Yet farther than we can see, there is comfort and hope. In the words of the prophet Isaiah, “Lift your eyes and look to the heavens. Who created all these? He who brings out the starry hosts one by one and calls them each by name. Because of His great power, and mighty strength, not one of them is missing.” The same Creator who names the stars also knows the names of the seven souls we mourn today. The crew of the shuttle Columbia did not return safely to Earth; yet we can pray that all are safely home. That isn't divisive. It isn't a claim that the Christian religion is superior, or that Arabic astronomy didn't know anything about stars, or how to name them. It certainly wasn't a week after 9/11, does not refer to it at all, nor does it refer to Islam. It's a claim that God has knowledge of and values every person--an entirely appropriate sentiment for a memorial ceremony. NDT's gloss is so far from Bush's words that he cannot have read them. For NDT to go on and say two thirds of all stars have Arabic names. I don't think he knew this! That would confound the point that he was making. Arabic start names (shows three slides with star names.) He [Bush] said that before I was on his rolodex, because I could have looked them up. To say something different. Because this is wrong. What do we see here? That at the least, NDT didn't read Bush's words; instead he probably got it from a Daily Kos chain mail. That he was so pleased to have his beliefs confirmed that he didn't bother to check up on it. And that he puts himself into the story by smugly instructing the audience on what point Bush was making (wrongly on NDT's part!) and parading his superior knowledge of star name origins, which was beside the point. It's indefensible. Yet he has not yet retracted his remarks. And, worse, NDT fanbois are defending his remarks. Because nothing says "commitment to rational discourse" like phony straw man arguments designed to flatter the audience and the vanity of the speaker. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/23/2014 1:31:53 AM EDT
[#21]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Question about the Christian answer. Are you referring to the Trinity in that God is incomplete without Jesus? Technically their both monotheistic Abrahamic religions. Supreme Deities aren't interchangeable units. The relationship between worshipped and worshipper is quite different in Islam and Christianity. Islam just happened to ransack some texts from religions that were at hand in the area, plus some more that Mo made up. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/23/2014 1:42:11 AM EDT
[#22]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
What evil was done in the name of science? You mean secular forces like communism? Because other than niche scientific concepts like eugenics and flawed pseudo-sciences like Phrenology or flawed techniques like lobotomies, I don't see evil being committed in the name of science. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
You think his goal is science? Look at this scene from his show Cosmos. It's sad because I used to actually like him. http://blogs.ajc.com/news-to-me/files/2014/03/cosmos-bruno-animated-clip.jpg Which scene do you have a problem with, because history is full of Catholic leaders doing bad things and science being shunned because it went against the paradigm. This coming from a Catholic. Great evil has been committed in the name of religion. And great evil has been committed in the name of science. Religion was probably ahead in the evil quotient until the 20th century when the evil committed in the name of science raced past it mid century. What evil was done in the name of science? You mean secular forces like communism? Because other than niche scientific concepts like eugenics and flawed pseudo-sciences like Phrenology or flawed techniques like lobotomies, I don't see evil being committed in the name of science. Communism was all about science. It was a "scientific theory" that was alleged to be superior to old notions such as democracy and capitalism specifically because it was formed with the benefit of knowledge gained from the scientific revolution. It was deeply sold on the basis of it being a scientific theory in an era where great stock was placed on that sort of thing. Now, you may respond that it was a perversion or a misunderstanding of science and not truly a scientific theory at all, but the Christian would respond with exactly the same retort to your allegations about the evil committed in the name of Christianity. Spend some time and read up on Marxism and Communism and how it became a dominate movement in the early part of the 20th century. Particularly read up on Dialectical Materialism and how it was sold as a scientific approach to ...... well just about everything. Culture, economics, politics, etc. Now today we all know that it was complete bullshit, but that does not mean that it wasn't perceived to be a scientific theory at that time, as undoubtedly some scientific theories we believe to be correct today will later be proved to be bullshit (such is the nature of science). It even had hypothesis and made predictions just as a real scientific theory should. Of course, Communism probably killed something on the order of 50 to 100 million people in the previous century. Was it science? Through today's eyes no. Through the eyes of the people of that era, yes it was accepted as a part of science by a significant portion of the world. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/23/2014 1:48:04 AM EDT
[#23]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Yep. been doing it more and more lately. I really like NDT too. 95% of the time I totally agree with him, but it's the 5% that will discredit you. Shame too. And frankly, it is just laziness. Almost all the points he was trying to make with those fabricated quotes he could have made with perfectly real quotes if he had spent a few minutes on Google. But when you show 1) Intellectual dishonesty and 2) laziness in even your basic research it casts a spotlight on everything else you have done. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Seems like he's putting celebrity over science. Yep. been doing it more and more lately. I really like NDT too. 95% of the time I totally agree with him, but it's the 5% that will discredit you. Shame too. And frankly, it is just laziness. Almost all the points he was trying to make with those fabricated quotes he could have made with perfectly real quotes if he had spent a few minutes on Google. But when you show 1) Intellectual dishonesty and 2) laziness in even your basic research it casts a spotlight on everything else you have done. If 5% of what a chef serves you is either intentional or incompetent dogshit and the other 95% is high class food, I'd still never eat anything he serves. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/23/2014 1:50:54 AM EDT
[#24]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
This is really a big pile of bullshit. News Flash...science tends to dislike colorful statements often made from politicians. Tyson is a good guy and has made significant contributions to science. Tyson is a liberal biggot. He hates religion but many scientists have had and do have religion and many of them did things that were actually important enough to get mentioned in history books where as Tyson seems to be most noted for his work as a public talking head on TV shows. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/23/2014 1:52:15 AM EDT
[#25]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
You could add the Japanese Unit 731 and Josef Mengele's experiments at Auschwitz, as well as the Tuskeegee syphilis experiment to the atrocities directly committed in the name of science. The idiot in my avatar caused a famine in Russia when he enforced his belief that vernalization was an inherited property of plants. Too bad, the guy had some good ideas aside from that one that killed all those people. Science is done by people. People are capable of bad things, and scientific research has dipped into that well more than once. Excellent point. People flatter themselves when they believe that their claims to have a scientific basis for their personal political and ideological beliefs makes them less likely to be wrong or evil in these area as compared to the average person. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/23/2014 1:54:36 AM EDT
[#26]
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/23/2014 2:38:14 AM EDT
[#27]
Quote HistoryQuoted: The Church didn't shun science. It preserved knowledge and helped to cultivate science, philosophy, etc. Also, the Inquisition was a political institution, not a church one, something that often seems to be forgotten. The church was also usually defending Aristotelian models not bible one. Like they support global warming now, they were just supporting the popular science of the time.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/23/2014 2:39:35 AM EDT
[#28]
Quote HistoryQuoted: What evil was done in the name of science? You mean secular forces like communism? Because other than niche scientific concepts like eugenics and flawed pseudo-sciences like Phrenology or flawed techniques like lobotomies, I don't see evil being committed in the name of science. The banning of DDT has killed millions. Science giveth, and science taketh away. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/23/2014 7:47:04 AM EDT
[#29]
Quote HistoryQuoted: So we have a speech where Bush Says "The same Creator who names the stars also knows the names of the seven souls we mourn today.” and we have Tyson Saying Bush said "Our God is the God who named the stars". Those sound pretty close to me. He didn't pull this out of his ass. Sounds like Tyson went off on a tangent which he is quite well known for, and made an error in recalling what was actually said. Hardly "making up stories".  Look, people in the media say things that are untrue all the time. If I took the time to dig, I bet I could find examples of every single person with a talk radio show (especially popular ones like Beck, or Limbaugh) in these exact same type of lies. That's life. You've to realize people for what they are. NDT is a science promoter, talk radio hosts are political entertainers, Bill Nye is a nutjob. If you walk around quoting things that these people say without looking into it yourself, you have a problem. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/23/2014 7:52:07 AM EDT
[#30]
Quote HistoryQuoted: The banning of DDT has killed millions. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: What evil was done in the name of science? You mean secular forces like communism? Because other than niche scientific concepts like eugenics and flawed pseudo-sciences like Phrenology or flawed techniques like lobotomies, I don't see evil being committed in the name of science. The banning of DDT has killed millions. Science giveth, and science taketh away. Clearly it is evil. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/23/2014 7:53:48 AM EDT
[#31]
Petty grievance is petty.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/23/2014 8:04:38 AM EDT
[#32]
meh, i never liked him anyways,
something about him just rubs me the wrong way. i dont trust him, never did, not going to start now |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/23/2014 8:21:32 AM EDT
[#33]
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/23/2014 8:32:57 AM EDT
[#34]
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/23/2014 8:42:09 AM EDT
[#35]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Didn't know there were such things! Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Who th hell is this guy? Everyone else here seems to know but me. Why do we care about him? Didn't know there were such things! What do you think Richard Dawkins is? The Bizzare and Expensive Cult of Richard Dawkins [The] Richard Dawkins website offers followers the chance to join the ‘Reason Circle’, which, like Dante’s Hell, is arranged in concentric circles. For $85 a month, you get discounts on his merchandise, and the chance to meet ‘Richard Dawkins Foundation for Reason and Science personalities’. Obviously that’s not enough to meet the man himself. For that you pay $210 a month — or $5,000 a year — for the chance to attend an event where he will speak.
When you compare this to the going rate for other charismatic preachers, it does seem on the high side. The Pentecostal evangelist Morris Cerullo, for example, charges only $30 a month to become a member of ‘God’s Victorious Army’, which is bringing ‘healing and deliverance to the world’. And from Cerullo you get free DVDs, not just discounts. But the $85 a month just touches the hem of rationality. After the neophyte passes through the successively more expensive ‘Darwin Circle’ and then the ‘Evolution Circle’, he attains the innermost circle, where for $100,000 a year or more he gets to have a private breakfast or lunch with Richard Dawkins, and a reserved table at an invitation-only circle event with ‘Richard’ as well as ‘all the benefits listed above’, so he still gets a discount on his Richard Dawkins T-shirt saying ‘Religion — together we can find a cure.’ The website suggests that donations of up to $500,000 a year will be accepted for the privilege of eating with him once a year: at this level of contribution you become a member of something called ‘The Magic of Reality Circle’. I don’t think any irony is intended. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/23/2014 8:44:36 AM EDT
[#36]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
This is an under appreciated post. Sort of like a biologist talking about philosophy and cosmology. Happens all the time. Popularizers drift off into lands they believe to be uncharted and suspect could use their unique brilliance. Can happen to anyone. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Typical case of Ph.D. wander. This is an under appreciated post. Sort of like a biologist talking about philosophy and cosmology. Happens all the time. Popularizers drift off into lands they believe to be uncharted and suspect could use their unique brilliance. Can happen to anyone. It's pretty rampant in academia. Ask me how I know. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/23/2014 8:46:09 AM EDT
[#37]
Quote HistoryQuoted: So you are telling me those who said that Bush never said anything remotely close to that were....lying! Look, people in the media say things that are untrue all the time. If I took the time to dig, I bet I could find examples of every single person with a talk radio show (especially popular ones like Beck, or Limbaugh) in these exact same type of lies. That's life. You've to realize people for what they are. NDT is a science promoter, talk radio hosts are political entertainers, Bill Nye is a nutjob. If you walk around quoting things that these people say without looking into it yourself, you have a problem. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: So we have a speech where Bush Says "The same Creator who names the stars also knows the names of the seven souls we mourn today.” and we have Tyson Saying Bush said "Our God is the God who named the stars". Those sound pretty close to me. He didn't pull this out of his ass. Sounds like Tyson went off on a tangent which he is quite well known for, and made an error in recalling what was actually said. Hardly "making up stories". Look, people in the media say things that are untrue all the time. If I took the time to dig, I bet I could find examples of every single person with a talk radio show (especially popular ones like Beck, or Limbaugh) in these exact same type of lies. That's life. You've to realize people for what they are. NDT is a science promoter, talk radio hosts are political entertainers, Bill Nye is a nutjob. If you walk around quoting things that these people say without looking into it yourself, you have a problem. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/23/2014 8:51:11 AM EDT
[#38]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
The Church didn't shun science. It preserved knowledge and helped to cultivate science, philosophy, etc. Also, the Inquisition was a political institution, not a church one, something that often seems to be forgotten. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
You think his goal is science? Look at this scene from his show Cosmos. It's sad because I used to actually like him. http://blogs.ajc.com/news-to-me/files/2014/03/cosmos-bruno-animated-clip.jpg Which scene do you have a problem with, because history is full of Catholic leaders doing bad things and science being shunned because it went against the paradigm. This coming from a Catholic. The Church didn't shun science. It preserved knowledge and helped to cultivate science, philosophy, etc. Also, the Inquisition was a political institution, not a church one, something that often seems to be forgotten. This. The modern refracting telescope was invented by a Jesuit priest. And the Big Bang Theory was the work of another Jesuit priest. The field of modern genetics was also pioneered by a priest. The whole 'The Church hates science!' meme is BS. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/23/2014 9:16:30 AM EDT
[#39]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Saying it could have been an honest mistake. An honest mistake he most likely would not make with the current president, because he's got an agenda, but still an honest mistake. His response is what damages his credibility. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
I'm not saying what he said is right, but hyperbole, which is all too common here on arfcom, seems like a much stronger possibility than making up stories. Saying it could have been an honest mistake. An honest mistake he most likely would not make with the current president, because he's got an agenda, but still an honest mistake. His response is what damages his credibility. This. A scientist should acknowledge a mistake and issue a correction. Tomac |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/23/2014 9:22:14 AM EDT
[#40]
NDT is NOT a good dude, or a decent person.
He's an arrogant lying sack of crap who is making up false stories to advance a very specific worldview, a leftist secular progressive one. He's claiming the mantle of "science" while totally fabricating stories deliberately designed to make his political opponents look like uneducated hicks and rubes. When you do that - make up totally fabricated stories to make your ideological opponents look bad - you are an arrogant, lying douchebag. Of course, NDT expects to get away with this because he's black, and all his peeps in the mainstream media share his leftist progressive ideology, and they will have his back. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/23/2014 9:29:07 AM EDT
[#41]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Name some. What theories? What papers? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Tyson is a good guy and has made significant contributions to science. Name some. What theories? What papers? This. The guy is simply a physicist who got lucky enough to have a personality that most people find pleasing. I'm curious how many of his fans have even read one of his abstracts. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/23/2014 9:31:10 AM EDT
[#42]
Quote HistoryQuoted: NDT is NOT a good dude, or a decent person. He's an arrogant lying sack of crap who is making up false stories to advance a very specific worldview, a leftist secular progressive one. He's claiming the mantle of "science" while totally fabricating stories deliberately designed to make his political opponents look like uneducated hicks and rubes. When you do that - make up totally fabricated stories to make your ideological opponents look bad - you are an arrogant, lying douchebag. Of course, NDT expects to get away with this because he's black, and all his peeps in the mainstream media share his leftist progressive ideology, and they will have his back. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/23/2014 9:32:53 AM EDT
[#43]
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/23/2014 9:33:44 AM EDT
[#44]
What story did he fabricate?
This one. Copy and paste, then link. TYSON: Here’s what happens. George Bush, within a week of [the 9/11 terrorist attacks] gave us a speech attempting to distinguish we from they. And who are they? These were sort of the Muslim fundamentalists. And he wants to distinguish we from they. And how does he do it? He says, “Our God” — of course it’s actually the same God, but that’s a detail, let’s hold that minor fact aside for the moment. Allah of the Muslims is the same God as the God of the Old Testament. So, but let’s hold that aside. He says, “Our God is the God” — he’s loosely quoting Genesis, biblical Genesis — “Our God is the God who named the stars.” http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2014/09/22/does-neil-degrasse-tyson-make-up-stories/ Bush NEVER said any sort of thing. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/23/2014 9:39:04 AM EDT
[#45]
Perhaps Bush said it in an alternate universe.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/23/2014 9:40:33 AM EDT
[#46]
Has NDT ever said anything negative about Obama?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/23/2014 9:48:22 AM EDT
[#47]
Internet Atheists Scouring NDT's Wiki Page to Conceal this Scandal
Oh, Wikipedia. After I published my piece about Neil Tyson’s fabrication of the George W. Bush quote, several users edited Neil Tyson’s wiki page to include details of the quote fabrication controversy. The fact-loving, evidence-weighing, ever-objective editors of the online encyclopedia did not appreciate the inclusion of the evidence of Tyson’s fabrication. Not at all.
According to a review of the edit history of Tyson’s page, one long-time Wikipedia editor deleted an entire pending section summarizing the issue of Tyson’s fabricated quotes. Another editor attempted to insert a brief mention of Tyson’s fabrication of the George W. Bush quote. That mention was also deleted. When it was reinserted, it was deleted yet again by an editor who describes himself as a childless progressive and an apostle of Daily Kos (h/t @kerpen). Here are just a few of that user’s political ramblings, in case you were curious about the motivation behind the scrubbing of Tyson’s wiki. Literally every single mention of Tyson’s history of fabricating quotes has been removed from Tyson’s Wikipedia page. [UPDATE: Early this morning, in a discussion thread about whether references to Neil deGrasse Tyson's history of quote fabrication should be added to Tyson's Wikipedia page, an editor stated that "no version of this event will be allowed into the article."] I wonder what aspect of the search for objective truth and the principle of transparent peer review the self-styled atheo-scientific types are serving here? 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/23/2014 9:52:30 AM EDT
[#48]
Quote HistoryQuoted: What story did he fabricate? This one. Copy and paste, then link. TYSON: Here’s what happens. George Bush, within a week of [the 9/11 terrorist attacks] gave us a speech attempting to distinguish we from they. And who are they? These were sort of the Muslim fundamentalists. And he wants to distinguish we from they. And how does he do it? He says, "Our God” — of course it’s actually the same God, but that’s a detail, let’s hold that minor fact aside for the moment. Allah of the Muslims is the same God as the God of the Old Testament. So, but let’s hold that aside. He says, "Our God is the God” — he’s loosely quoting Genesis, biblical Genesis — "Our God is the God who named the stars.” http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2014/09/22/does-neil-degrasse-tyson-make-up-stories/ Bush NEVER said any sort of thing. Tyson's detractors claim Bush never made the exact statement that Tyson claims, because it's not on google and Bush's speechwriter's don't remember it. Is that concrete proof Bush never said that? So Bush did say something kind of similar at a different time and context and he may or may not have said what Tyson claims he said after 911. Seems unlikely as Bush was trying to tamp down anti Islamic rhetoric in the US at the time, I think. But I don't think you can claim that Bush never said anything like that. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/23/2014 9:53:39 AM EDT
[#49]
Ha!
The "money quote" from the link about the frantic Wikipedia edits is this: "What many of Tyson’s cultists really like is the notion that one can become more intelligent via osmosis — that you can become as smart and as credentialed as Tyson by merely clapping like a seal at whatever he says, as long as what he says fits the political worldview of your average progressive liberal. " Bingo, baby! |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/23/2014 9:54:01 AM EDT
[#50]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Internet Atheists Scouring NDT's Wiki Page to Conceal this Scandal I wonder what aspect of the search for objective truth and the principle of transparent peer review the self-styled atheo-scientific types are serving here? Quote HistoryQuoted: Internet Atheists Scouring NDT's Wiki Page to Conceal this Scandal Oh, Wikipedia. After I published my piece about Neil Tyson’s fabrication of the George W. Bush quote, several users edited Neil Tyson’s wiki page to include details of the quote fabrication controversy. The fact-loving, evidence-weighing, ever-objective editors of the online encyclopedia did not appreciate the inclusion of the evidence of Tyson’s fabrication. Not at all. According to a review of the edit history of Tyson’s page, one long-time Wikipedia editor deleted an entire pending section summarizing the issue of Tyson’s fabricated quotes. Another editor attempted to insert a brief mention of Tyson’s fabrication of the George W. Bush quote. That mention was also deleted. When it was reinserted, it was deleted yet again by an editor who describes himself as a childless progressive and an apostle of Daily Kos (h/t @kerpen). Here are just a few of that user’s political ramblings, in case you were curious about the motivation behind the scrubbing of Tyson’s wiki. Literally every single mention of Tyson’s history of fabricating quotes has been removed from Tyson’s Wikipedia page. [UPDATE: Early this morning, in a discussion thread about whether references to Neil deGrasse Tyson's history of quote fabrication should be added to Tyson's Wikipedia page, an editor stated that "no version of this event will be allowed into the article."] I wonder what aspect of the search for objective truth and the principle of transparent peer review the self-styled atheo-scientific types are serving here? |
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
