• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

The false histories of Neil deGrasse Tyson

C

Clara Tea

Well-Known Member
Debater Slayer said:
He was also one of the figureheads responsible for hundreds of thousands of Iraqi deaths. While it's helpful that you've clarified why Tyson was incorrect in his claims, intentionally or unintentionally polishing Bush's reputation is certainly not the best way to go about it. He should be summarily condemned for his war crimes, and I doubt telling those of us in the Arab world that such a person wasn't a xenophobe helps much in the grand scheme of things.
Click to expand...
911 SPEECH OF W. BUSH:



TOLERANCE?:



Time was of the essence, live bodies were trapped in the rubble of the World Trade Center, and rescue workers needed to listen for screams for help (some were faint moans), and move a lot of debris. Grandstanding, W. Bush stood on the rubble pile, halted rescue efforts, and while emergency workers screamed that they couldn't hear the cries for help over his bullhorn, after which W. Bush changed their meaning and said "they (the terrorists) can hear us."



Was W. Bush making a "call for tolerance and inclusion," as you asserted? No. W. Bush was making a call for war. But it was a war directed at the Middle East and Islam...directing his followers (Religious Right Christians) to wage war in Afghanistan.



Again, W. Bush pushed for war in Iraq, which had no ties to terrorism, claiming that they would find the proof that they needed after they destroy them. An attack on an Islamic nation isn't the same as an attack against terrorists.



Again, W. Bush pushed for war in Niger, knowingly making the false claim that they were selling yellow-cake Uranium to Iraq. Wilson wouldn't lie for W. Bush (knowing that the consequences would be devastating to a peaceful population), so W. Bush and Cheney outed wilson's wife, CIA agent Valery Plame, which exposed embedded agents that she had contacted...resulting in their death.



Again, W. Bush made torture camps...further showing his cruelty.



A "call for tolerance and inclusion" is different than wars and torture camps.



W. Bush constantly said that he was "fightin' evil" (meaning fighting Islamics using his Christian values). He dubbed them part of the "Axis of Evl." He bore false witness against his Islamic neighbors, call one Dr. of Death. W. Bush tried to make them evil for doing their jobs....the same jobs that were in the United States.



"Tyson managed to confuse Bush's eulogy for the Space Shuttle Columbia astronauts with his 9-11 speech." As long as Tyson didn't take W. Bush's speech out of context, the meaning still applies.



Which Islamic scholar from the Golden Age decried math as 'of the devil'? - Quora



Quora's Cyril Anderson: "The only caution Ghazali had with respect to math and science is that math and science are such effective means of finding truth within their areas, that some believers will unquestioningly follow the mathematicians and scientists even in areas outside math and science, particularly religion."



Very few Egyptians have college degrees, and those who do (the few who return to Egypt) are treated like Gods.



I agree with other posters that Tyson is an expert in physics, not religion. However, we all have a right to our own opinions (even Tyson). As long as he doesn't bite off the ear of Holifield in his next prize fight (maybe I'm thinking of a different Tyson?).
 
Debater Slayer

Debater Slayer

Vipassana
Staff member
Premium Member
Clara Tea said:
Very few Egyptians have college degrees, and those who do (the few who return to Egypt) are treated like Gods.
Click to expand...

This isn't correct at all. There are actually so many college graduates in Egypt that, coupled with certain issues the country has, many of them have difficulty finding employment.

I couldn't find many sources about this in English, but this one is accurate to official figures from Arabic ones (including official statistics from Egypt):

The number of those who finished their undergraduate studies in 2019 (604,200) surpasses that of 2018 (568,900) with a rise of 6.2 percent.

The graduation rate at private universities increased significantly as it rose by 17.8 percent to record 28,000 up from 23,800 in 2018. The rise for public universities – already taking in large numbers – is just 5.5 percent hitting 428,600 in 2019 against 406,400 in 2018.

The shares of public and private universities in class 2019 are 70.9 percent and 4.6 percent, respectively. The rest goes to private colleges (14.2 percent), public colleges (9.1 percent) and academies (1.1 percent).

Regarding private colleges, 85,800 graduated in 2019 compared to 84,500 in 2018 with a rise of 1.5 percent. Speaking of public colleges, 55,300 graduated in 2019 compared to 47,600 in 2018 with a remarkable rise of 16.1 percent. As for academies, 6,600 graduated in 2019.
Click to expand...

Egypt's CAPMAS releases 2019 fact book on undergraduate, graduate students
 
Kooky

Kooky

Freedom from Sanity
Clara Tea said:
I agree with other posters that Tyson is an expert in physics, not religion. However, we all have a right to our own opinions (even Tyson). As long as he doesn't bite off the ear of Holifield in his next prize fight (maybe I'm thinking of a different Tyson?).
Click to expand...
And, likewise, all of us have the right to an opinion on his opinions, and to call out errors, factual or otherwise, in his truth claims.

Clara Tea said:
Quora's Cyril Anderson: "The only caution Ghazali had with respect to math and science is that math and science are such effective means of finding truth within their areas, that some believers will unquestioningly follow the mathematicians and scientists even in areas outside math and science, particularly religion."
Click to expand...
And NDT, Dawkins, Harris et al prove him right.
 
Hop_David

Hop_David

Member
Shadow Wolf said:
Explain with evidence.
Click to expand...

So far as I know Tyson is still giving his false histories on Isaac Newton. I just a made a post on this.

There are two other of Tyson's false histories I plan to post to this forum. But I won't describe them now as I don't want to derail this thread. I am hoping to keeping these comments limited to Tyson's Bush and Star Names story and his claim that Ghazali's writings ended the Islamic Golden Age.
 
Hop_David

Hop_David

Member
Clara Tea said:
911 SPEECH OF W. BUSH:



TOLERANCE?:
Click to expand...

Yes. Tolerance. Here is the text of Bush's 9:11 speech:

Thank you all very much for your hospitality. We've just had a -- wide-ranging discussions on the matter at hand. Like the good folks standing with me, the American people were appalled and outraged at last Tuesday's attacks. And so were Muslims all across the world. Both Americans and Muslim friends and citizens, tax-paying citizens, and Muslims in nations were just appalled and could not believe what we saw on our TV screens.

These acts of violence against innocents violate the fundamental tenets of the Islamic faith. And it's important for my fellow Americans to understand that.

The English translation is not as eloquent as the original Arabic, but let me quote from the Koran, itself: In the long run, evil in the extreme will be the end of those who do evil. For that they rejected the signs of Allah and held them up to ridicule.

The face of terror is not the true faith of Islam. That's not what Islam is all about. Islam is peace. These terrorists don't represent peace. They represent evil and war.

When we think of Islam we think of a faith that brings comfort to a billion people around the world. Billions of people find comfort and solace and peace. And that's made brothers and sisters out of every race -- out of every race.

America counts millions of Muslims amongst our citizens, and Muslims make an incredibly valuable contribution to our country. Muslims are doctors, lawyers, law professors, members of the military, entrepreneurs, shopkeepers, moms and dads. And they need to be treated with respect. In our anger and emotion, our fellow Americans must treat each other with respect.

Women who cover their heads in this country must feel comfortable going outside their homes. Moms who wear cover must be not intimidated in America. That's not the America I know. That's not the America I value.

I've been told that some fear to leave; some don't want to go shopping for their families; some don't want to go about their ordinary daily routines because, by wearing cover, they're afraid they'll be intimidated. That should not and that will not stand in America.

Those who feel like they can intimidate our fellow citizens to take out their anger don't represent the best of America, they represent the worst of humankind, and they should be ashamed of that kind of behavior.

This is a great country. It's a great country because we share the same values of respect and dignity and human worth. And it is my honor to be meeting with leaders who feel just the same way I do. They're outraged, they're sad. They love America just as much as I do.

I want to thank you all for giving me a chance to come by. And may God bless us all.
Click to expand...

I guess when Bush says "Islam is peace" you think he's hating on Islam?


Clara Tea said:
"Tyson managed to confuse Bush's eulogy for the Space Shuttle Columbia astronauts with his 9-11 speech." As long as Tyson didn't take W. Bush's speech out of context, the meaning still applies.
Click to expand...

Tyson sure did take Bush's biblical quote of context. The 9-11 disaster and the Space Shuttle Columbia disaster are two very different events.

And the meaning certainly does not apply. Bush was not attempting to distinguish we from they in either speech.


Clara Tea said:
Which Islamic scholar from the Golden Age decried math as 'of the devil'? - Quora



Quora's Cyril Anderson: "The only caution Ghazali had with respect to math and science is that math and science are such effective means of finding truth within their areas, that some believers will unquestioningly follow the mathematicians and scientists even in areas outside math and science, particularly religion."
Click to expand...

Which is not the same as saying math is the work of the devil.



Clara Tea said:
Very few Egyptians have college degrees, and those who do (the few who return to Egypt) are treated like Gods.
Click to expand...

I doubt this but I don't know. None of your claims include citations to back them up.



Clara Tea said:
I agree with other posters that Tyson is an expert in physics, not religion. However, we all have a right to our own opinions (even Tyson). As long as he doesn't bite off the ear of Holifield in his next prize fight (maybe I'm thinking of a different Tyson?).
Click to expand...

Tyson's not really much of an expert in physics either. If he's going to state his opinions as fact, he needs to back them up. A lot of the stuff he states as fact is demonstrably false.
 
Debater Slayer

Debater Slayer

Vipassana
Staff member
Premium Member
Hop_David said:
I doubt this but I don't know. None of your claims include citations to back them up.
Click to expand...

As I said in post #82, the claim is factually incorrect. (You can see the source I linked to for further info.)

I'm Egyptian myself. Going to college is basically a must for most children of middle-class families, and it's common enough to have a college degree that you certainly don't get treated "like a god" for having one. It confers some social status, sure, but not in any extraordinary way compared to many other countries.
 
sayak83

sayak83

Veteran Member
Staff member
Premium Member
Kooky said:
When was the last time he was done research in his chosen field of expertise?
Click to expand...
He has a PhD in the topic. So he is a neuroscientist by definition.
He is very active. Has published significant and highly cited works quite recently in the fields of neuroscience and evolutionary psychology. Here is a 2016 article published in Nature Scientific Reports by him.
Neural correlates of maintaining one’s political beliefs in the face of counterevidence | Scientific Reports
Here is another on functional neuroimaging from 2017. So he is quite active researcher.
The neurogenesis of P1 and N1: A concurrent EEG/LFP study - ScienceDirect
 
Debater Slayer

Debater Slayer

Vipassana
Staff member
Premium Member
Kooky said:
Not trying to be mean, honest, but does Harris actually have a field of expertise?
From what I gathered, he seems mostly a writer of anti-theist opinion pieces.
Click to expand...

As others have already mentioned, he's a neuroscientist, although he seems to write more books about religion and philosophy than his field. It's kind of a shame because I suspect he would have a lot more valuable input if he stuck to the latter.

Besides, I don't think his credentials in his field of study, whether good or bad, should have any bearing on his views outside said field. Dawkins has written more than one acclaimed book about evolution, but he has a lot of embarrassingly bad takes in other areas. The two are unrelated, even though from an intuitive perspective, one would think a scientist capable of rigorous thinking and evaluation of evidence shouldn't be so prone to irrationally biased thinking.
 
TagliatelliMonster

TagliatelliMonster

Veteran Member
Hop_David said:
I expect Tyson could stand in the middle of 5th Avenue and shoot somebody and he still wouldn't lose his cult following.
Click to expand...

I look at the guy like a stand-up comedian who gets his jokes from science.
He's very entertaining to watch for sure.

But yes, it nevertheless would be better if he did all his homework. Even if only to make the point that in the sciences, half work is not acceptable.

Having said that, Neil doesn't strike me to be the type to do this on purpose. He's a passionate person and like all humans, whenever he picks up on something that fits his worldview and / or confirms his a priori assumptions, he'll tend to run with it. We all do it.

The important thing is to correct your mistakes when they are pointed out and demonstrated to being mistakes.
That's what learning is.


Because let's be honest here, if I want to learn about the evolution of islamic society / culture and the role a person like Ghazali might have played in it... I'm not going to go to an astro-physicist who's main claim to fame is giving entertaining interviews and talks on popular TV shows with the main goal of getting people interested in the sciences....
 
Altfish

Altfish

Veteran Member
exchemist said:
Tyson is getting blamed, in the OP, for false history, i.e. disseminating untruths.

But what he seems to be claiming, by way of these untruths, is not that religion fails to advance science, but that it stifles it.
Click to expand...
Which it has on many occasions
 
Augustus

Augustus

…
Altfish said:
Which it has on many occasions
Click to expand...

But, in pre-modernity at least, it did far more to help it.

Even celebrity anti-theist Lawrence Krauss acknowledges this (at around 1h 30m 45s), as do basically all historians of science (I'm more interested in their views, but at least Krauss can't be dismissed as an apologist :D).




What he says (paraphrased):
We have religion to thank for the rise of modern science, although it was the only game in town. It functioned as the National Science Foundation of its day and it led to something remarkable. It's ok to acknowledge this historical role, but now we should thank it and move on.
 
Altfish

Altfish

Veteran Member
Augustus said:
But, in pre-modernity at least, it did far more to help it.

Even celebrity anti-theist Lawrence Krauss acknowledges this (at around 1h 30m 45s), as do basically all historians of science (I'm more interested in their views, but at least Krauss can't be dismissed as an apologist :D).




What he says (paraphrased):
We have religion to thank for the rise of modern science, although it was the only game in town. It functioned as the National Science Foundation of its day and it led to something remarkable. It's ok to acknowledge this historical role, but now we should thank it and move on.
Click to expand...
OK, if we're going back to medieval times, it was the only game in town.
 
Augustus

Augustus

…
Altfish said:
OK, if we're going back to medieval times, it was the only game in town.
Click to expand...

And having one game in town that boosts scientific learning is better than having one game in town that doesn't.

Human history clearly shows that investing significant resources in learning that does not have a direct practical benefit (as technology) is far from ubiquitous, or even common among societies.

The idea that religion 'held back science' usually seems to assume unfettered, well funded scientific enquiry is a default unless it is prevented from occurring. In reality it arises from specific and contingent values that only exist in some societies.
 
Altfish

Altfish

Veteran Member
Augustus said:
And having one game in town that boosts scientific learning is better than having one game in town that doesn't.

Human history clearly shows that investing significant resources in learning that does not have a direct practical benefit (as technology) is far from ubiquitous, or even common among societies.

The idea that religion 'held back science' usually seems to assume unfettered, well funded scientific enquiry is a default unless it is prevented from occurring. In reality it arises from specific and contingent values that only exist in some societies.
Click to expand...
I have reservations about heaping any praise on religion though as religion was the only game in town for most things, education comes to mind also.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top