4chan archive /sci/ (index)
similar threads
2013-04-09 05:45 5671561 Anonymous (tumblr_lphk0mnUEa1qzozj1.gif 470x300 75kB)
Has anyone seen Neil deGrasse Tyson speak? I went to a event of his recently and I have developed a very firm opinion on him. Has anybody else seen him? What did you think? Just want to see if anybody else felt the same way.

0 min later 5671563 Anonymous
He is enlightened by his own intelligence.

2 min later 5671569 Anonymous
>>5671563 Is this sarcasm that I am not really catching? If not, please explain why you feel that way.

3 min later 5671574 Anonymous
>>5671569 yes it's a meme from redddit

4 min later 5671575 Anonymous
>>5671561 Right before his first appearance on The Daily Show I watched everything I could find of his. I discovered him through that Amazing Meeting lecture/talk/debate. I think he's a sharp guy. I haven't followed him much lately.

5 min later 5671578 Anonymous
>>5671574 Ah, fair enough. Sorry to have missed the joke.

6 min later 5671580 Anonymous
>>5671575 What do you think makes him sharp? Do you have any opinions on his contribution to the scientific community?

8 min later 5671585 Anonymous
>>5671580 What contributions to the scientific community?

8 min later 5671586 Anonymous
>>5671561 He spoke at my university in a classroom with about 70 people in it. He talks in person just like he does on TV, and he has a great sense of humor in person. His hands are larger than mine.

10 min later 5671588 Anonymous
>>5671585 Touche, nothing besides the Pluto thing (which I wouldn't consider a contribution)... I suppose I meant more his contribution to the exposure of science..

12 min later 5671592 Anonymous
>>5671588 In that instance yeah he's good. He doesn't really distort science the way Michio Kaku does(seriously, fuck that asshole). And he's an interesting guy regardless of how retarded his fanbase is.

14 min later 5671595 Anonymous
Saw him live last year. Golddigger and Heartless are still my favorite songs by him. Hes great with Jay-Z

17 min later 5671599 Anonymous (Asteroid.jpg 1000x675 107kB)
>>5671592 Have you ever been to an untelevised lecture of his?

18 min later 5671601 Anonymous
>>5671599 Nope, i've seen quite a few of his recorded appearances though if thats at all relevant.

20 min later 5671604 Anonymous
I saw him last weekend at ASU Origins. He was pretty cool, I quite enjoyed the talk. I can't say it lead to me developing a "firm opinion" on him though. Why do you feel strongly OP, and what are those feelings?

22 min later 5671608 Anonymous
>>5671574 Faggot. Go back there then. We don't like your kind around here

23 min later 5671611 Anonymous
>>5671601 He acts differently in his live unrecorded shows. >>5671604 I'll just be honest and say I thought it seemed very much like propaganda in several ways. It almost really scared me, plus the group dynamic from the audience... haunting.

24 min later 5671614 Anonymous
>>5671592 I'm glad I'm not the only one who hates that gook

28 min later 5671623 Anonymous
>>5671614 Seriously, I don't know how nobody calls him on his quantum warp tunnelling in 2020 bullshit, he's like the guys in the 50's who said we would have flying cars in 10 years tops.

29 min later 5671626 Anonymous
>>5671580 Well if you put him in the room with a bunch of atheists, he seems to have his own opinion. I mean you got Lawrence Krauss and Richard Dawkins sucking each other off, and Tyson obviously looks at the problem in a different way. He asks questions they don't. He also does this when advocating the funding of science and space exploration. The idea that anyone who doesn't come up with relativity and invent calculus is not worth anything to REAL science is juvenile.

31 min later 5671630 Anonymous
>>5671561 is he trotted out as a speaker for any other reason than he is a token minority? >what accomplishments has be made in the hard sciences, ie. astrophysics?

32 min later 5671633 Anonymous
>>5671623 He just says what he says so the sci-fi shows he hosts get good ratings. He is very popular among the plebs

33 min later 5671635 Anonymous
>>5671630 I don't think so. I think he is trotted out as an advocate of science. He is almost too hardcore about it. Religious. Lots of "America needs to build energy to be number one again, we have to dominate science" too. As for accomplishments, he has none that I'm aware of

33 min later 5671636 Anonymous
>>5671623 predicting the future with his crystal ball = science!

34 min later 5671638 Anonymous
>>5671635 so he makes for a good talk show host, got it

36 min later 5671640 Anonymous
>>5671630 He is a very good speaker. Most of the Nobel laurates not be able to do what he does when he gets infront of the camera

38 min later 5671645 Anonymous (t.jpg 300x222 6kB)
What does /sci/ think about Lawrence Krauss? >popularizes science without dumbing it down >still has time to publish papers >loves feynman

39 min later 5671647 Anonymous
>>5671640 This is true, imagine Weinberg trying to get up before a university and actually make the kids stay awake. We do need people like tyson and hawking(he got me interested in physics after reading a brief history) to get more people interested.

40 min later 5671648 Anonymous
>>5671645 Too repetitive.

43 min later 5671654 Anonymous
>>5671635 "America needs to build energy to be number one again, we have to dominate science" Why the fuck is that negative at all? This is a great attitude imo. As for his contributions, he has popularized science substantially and fostered passion and enthusiasm for it in countless individuals. This impact is arguably immeasurable relative to the average contribution of a scientist. What he does is incredible. Instilling this scientifically progressive mindset to modern culture is fantastic, and almost gives me hope for humanity. He's a sharp, likeable character, and anyone giving him shit is likely just an intimidated, contrarian aspie.

44 min later 5671656 Anonymous
>>5671645 you ever held a conversation with him? He's such a goddamn douche, ridiculously full of himself.

46 min later 5671658 Anonymous
>>5671654 so he's a talk show host. got it

47 min later 5671663 Anonymous
>>5671654 It isn't negative on the surface, but his rationale and rhetoric behind it seem very... I don't know how to describe it... I guess that it seems like he wants us to get back on top so we can rule the world again. He also through in a lot about we don't have real freedom. I agree with some of his ideas but his methods seem shaky and two-faced to me.

52 min later 5671670 Anonymous
>>5671635 >Lots of "America needs to build energy to be number one again, we have to dominate science" It's called the late 19th and Early to mid 20th century. Look it up.

52 min later 5671671 Anonymous
>>5671656 When have you talked to him in person?

53 min later 5671672 Anonymous
>>5671658 yeah, basically, but instead of solving issues of disputed paternity he advocates for science. Also he runs a planetarium.

53 min later 5671673 Anonymous
>>5671670 lol in the mid 20th century we were dominating because europe was annihilated by two titanic wars and the rest of the world was still eating tree bark

57 min later 5671680 Anonymous
My class once went to hear him speak on string theory. All I have to say is that he did lay out the information in easy to understand terms; however, it seemed like he tried to come off like he actually had anything to do with what he was speaking about. Kinda annoyed me really. You can't act like you came up with the shit you're talking about when anyone can check and see that you don't even do any research or experiments etc.

58 min later 5671681 Anonymous
>>5671673 Public High-School history at it's best. "Your country is best only because it took advantage of others. You should feel bad. America bad. Being good at science, bad."

58 min later 5671682 Anonymous
>>5671673 I still think if we had an "innovation nation" we would fair better. Too many people don't give a fuck about school.

1 hours later 5671719 Anonymous
>and I have developed a very firm opinion on him cool story bro

1 hours later 5671722 Anonymous
>>5671623 >mfw my friend sent me a video of him calling batteries primitive and that we should be using gasoline more, and my friend tried to defend it

1 hours later 5671757 Anonymous (GeorgeBush1.jpg 379x278 19kB)
>>5671722 >Go to watch orgins video >Bunch of comments from hipsters saying he should be there >mfw

1 hours later 5671763 Anonymous
>>5671671 Not the person you responded to - but I go to ASU and have several friends who have talked to him who all say he's a dick.

2 hours later 5671793 Anonymous
Every time I hear Tyson speak, or really any prominent figure in the scientific community, I can't help but feel that they are ridiculously out of touch with society and the world in generally. It seems like they're so enclosed in their own little bubbles, that nothing else matters to them.

2 hours later 5671818 Anonymous (1347219791328.jpg 467x325 35kB)
>>5671608

3 hours later 5671875 Anonymous
He's a pretty good speaker He's likable I would like to have a conversation with him where he doesn't dumb down the material to a level that 5th graders could grasp. I listened to him a bit on a Joe Rogan podcast and he's pretty cool in an uncensored environment. Didn't listen to the whole 3 hour podcast though

3 hours later 5671932 Anonymous
>>5671875 Them talking about the moon landing for 30 minutes was frustrating.

3 hours later 5671937 Anonymous
>>5671763 He's the Richard Dawkins of physics.

3 hours later 5671938 Anonymous
He knows we only went to the moon to beat the russians and that to expect us to go back or go to mars is simply wrong as it was never part of the plan to begin with. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dhcx ffIENBU&feature=player_detailpage#t =2593s Fuck the retard joe rogan. He's just there to ask dumb questions and doubt we went to the moon.

7 hours later 5672132 Anonymous
NDT is basically a recruiter for science. If you don't think that's a valuable contribution in of itself, you're probably autistic.

7 hours later 5672134 Anonymous
le educated negro face

7 hours later 5672137 Anonymous
>>5671592 jesus christ so much shit spills out of kaku's mouth it's hard to keep up

7 hours later 5672156 Anonymous (1357470602887.png 1134x328 182kB)
>>5671569 >Is this sarcasm that I am not really catching? If not, please explain why you feel that way.

7 hours later 5672159 Anonymous
>>5671937 Except Richard Dawkins is not a dick. He's pretty humble and considerate when you don't get on his nerves with a sequence of staged retard questions as often happens in live debates.

7 hours later 5672177 Anonymous
>>5672156 I want to kill that kid.

8 hours later 5672187 Anonymous
>>5672137 >Hating on Kaku There are normal people that admire him too, you know. His visions about future technologies are, in my opinion, plausible.

8 hours later 5672191 Anonymous
>>5672156 oh my god THAT is the origin of the fedorian picture? oh my god what is wrong with leddit

8 hours later 5672211 Anonymous
>>5672159 This. Plus, he writes god-tier books, and is generally a rather sharp and likeable fellow if you wade through the rather repetitive atheist stuff and look at the rest of his bibliography.

20 hours later 5673432 Anonymous
>>5672211 >god-tier books ISWYDT

20 hours later 5673437 Anonymous
>>5671561 He spoke at my uni a few weeks ago. Seemed like a pretty cool guy.

20 hours later 5673445 Anonymous
>>5672191 /r/atheism is a dark and dingy place.

20 hours later 5673484 Anonymous
>>5671645 I've heard other people say he's a douche irl as well, but I don't think you even need that to see it. I mean watch his talks. The way he claims the universe has to be flat due to some religious-esque bias for example. That guy rustles my jimmies.

20 hours later 5673490 Anonymous
>>5671673 You better not be talking shit about tree bark.

20 hours later 5673502 Anonymous
>>5672211 Is fedorian a term we use now?

22 hours later 5673719 Anonymous (1351561977001.gif 252x188 852kB)
>>5672134 holy fuck! LOL well done.

22 hours later 5673738 Anonymous
>>5673432 He has written more then the god delusion, you konw.

23 hours later 5673817 Anonymous
>>5673738 I know. I happen to like Dawkins, particularly for his explanations on evolutionary biology. I just thought it was funny.

3.323 0.133