Posted on 12/27/2015 1:39:12 AM PST by Rummyfan
Neil deGrasse Tyson made the decision a long time ago to be a sort of media cheerleader for science instead of an actual scientist, and although he isn’t a great communicator, it was the right decision because he was unlikely ever to trouble the Nobel committee. Also, he is stupid and his politics are dumb.
Tyson, whom liberals love because they are racists who can’t believe a black guy could be smart enough to be a scientist and so spontaneously ejaculate and soil themselves every time they see him on TV, hasn’t published anything of note for years. The advantage of being a celebrity scientist is that you don’t actually have to do any science. You’re exempted from the usual “publish or perish†rules.
Even when he was making a go of being a proper academic, Tyson didn’t exactly have the most glittering record. He didn’t get the PhD he was studying for at the University of Texas and had to go elsewhere for his qualification. Obviously, rather than take responsibility for his academic performance, Tyson has blamed racism. In reality, Tyson was playing in bands and appearing on stage instead of completing essays. Typical science PhD students are at any given time either studying, teaching or sleeping.
(Excerpt) Read more at breitbart.com ...
He got a masters degree from UT. How is that washing out?
His argument was that Pluto, being ice, would not survive in Earth's obit.
Fine. Yes, the Sun's really hot, but he's with the "civilization causes AGW" crowd.
He must have taken political science Relativity, rather than the physics one, while at Columbia.
Masters is a consolation prize for PhD students who don’t cut it.
A masters is a prerequisite for a PhD in every doctoral program I'm aware of. And it's not uncommon for students to get their advanced degrees from different institutions depending on what quality of program. And advanced degrees in different disciplines that related. Tyson got a masters in Astronomy from UT, which has a very good astronomy program. He got a masters and doctorate in Astrophysics from Columbia, which is one of the top schools in that department.
Didn’t he bite somebody’s ear off?
You haven’t missed much. He’s a propagandist for the cult of “science” and a public scoffer who smugly mocks Christians and Christianity.
Tyson is the long time director of New York’s Hayden Planetarium. He gained some notoriety by banishing Pluto from the planetary canon and casting him out to the Kuiper Belt a few years before the IAU did the same in 2006.
He played the role of Negro Scientist in the Fox network 2014 remake of Cosmos, the 1980 series with Carl Sagan. The role was based on the role of Ivy League Scientist (Cornell) that Sagan played in the original. (Zuben Elgenubi took courses with Sagan.) Thanks in large part to Tyson, the remake was a major disappointment. In fairness, Tyson was a symptom, it was a major disappointment because of the ignorance of the producers and their total lack of respect for the audience’s intelligence. Tyson was a symptom, as I said.
Prior to the Fox series he had made a career of being an obnoxious know-it-all (think: Bill Nye) who always carefully toed the conventional wisdom and was touted as a role model for the colored children. So listen up, ye unfavored Children of Ham, be liken unto Dr. Tyson, always make oblation unto the Democratic Party and thou shalt walk in light and have soft employment and speaking gigs, all the days of thy life. Amen
Sagan hosted the series Cosmos on TV. Tyson hosted a new version of it; ergo, he's the new Sagan
UT dissolved his doctoral committee. What does that tell you? He was dancing more than hitting the books. Later he got it together on the Upper West Side.
Tried to watch the first Cosmos segment with Tyson.....unwatchable.
Yes, and that stance got him on Dr. Sheldon Cooper’s doodoo list.
Some months ago, he tweeted something to the effect of "I'm waiting to enter a country because there are invisible lines somebody drew a long time ago." I agree in principle that on some level, borders are idiotic and we as human beings should be able to come and go without any political or bureaucratic procedures, but I'm also an adult who recognizes the need to keep track of who's in your country. But I get his point and on some level admire that he holds onto such idealism.
My wife and I were excited about the new series. She is not in the least technical, but she likes "The Universe" on the History Channel (so do I, mostly) and we planned to record it for our grandson. What a dud. BTW, Tyson did get to beclown himself at least once on "The Universe", but his role was minor and could be ignored. (He was spouting the conventional ignorance about Ptolemaic astronomy, a subject about which he knows less than my grandson.)
Tyson is NASA’s propaganda tool, somewhat akin to Baghdad Bob.
Depends on the school.
Actually the way I would put it is ‘depends of if you started for a Masters or a PhD. ‘
If you came to a program just looking for a Masters, then a masters is a fine accomplishment. If you came to a program looking for a PhD, and left with a Masters, it is pretty well accepted than you f-ed up along the way and got a consolation prize (and could hack the classes, if you couldn’t even do that, well no Masters, but they go to some lengths to make sure people can hack the classes).
I don’t care much for Tyson, but if he did collect a PhD from Columbia, he can’t be a complete hack.
Some schools allow you to skip the Masters’ altogether.
So much negativity! Give the man a break, already. He’s entitled, as an American, to express his opinion on warmism any way he wants. I think warmism is bunk, but that’s just MY opinion.
The new “Cosmos” is stunningly beautiful, as was the first one. In fact, Carl’s “Cosmos,” and it’s remarkable vision for its time greatly affected me and the specialty I worked with in my career as a photographer in film and video — bluescreen (and greenscreen) special effects shooting.
But Tyson’s role as a “presenter” on television is the point here, and he is as dignified, capable, “comfortable,” and effective a presenter as ever comes along.
It’s not likely that The Scientific Method” will ever be stifled effectively for long. “The truth will out,” over time, as it always does.
Most of the world — from colleges to media — is deeply bent to the liberal side these days, but that pendulum will also swing in time. “Cosmos,” both new and original, are products of their respective times and the opinions of their writers and shooters.
It’s not our opinion as conservatives, but it DOES bear “doing some honest Science” on it and determine where the real truth is.
I will say this: ultra long term, the sun and bio-produced liquid fuels are the only possible answer to all the energy we will ever need. Some 700 watts, approximately, falls on every square yard (or meter) as long as the sun is out. That’s a lot, and should be the First Source for most ordinary power requirements — as it inescapably will be, long-term.
So, watch “Cosmos” — either one — for its Vision and graphic beauty, and filter the politics in it out with your mind. But let the beauty, power, and visualizations through.
Reputable Scientists of their day believed in “Phlogiston,” too, and that was a crock, as Honest Science eventually determined.
If I needed a spokes of Neil’s type, I’d hire him in a New York second.
Yep, he’s really good at constantly promoting himself.
I wouldn’t I haven’t forgiven him for his denigration of Pluto!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.