Everything NDT says sounds like the most astounding fact he's ever heard, and that you should be astounded by it too. His meter - every enunciation, accentuation, and pause - sounds affected and I, for some reason, can't stand to listen to him. I've tried. He talks about things I'm interested in and I enjoy reading what he has written (I have "Pluto Files" and "Space Chronicles" on my Kindle), but when he starts talking, it just sounds like he's talking to five year-olds to me.

F*ck it, upvote.

>> ^bmacs27:

>> ^Quboid:
I want to have NDT's babies so much, I'm prepared to get gender reassignment surgery. That guy's great!

At first I thought you meant NLG, and I got a little scared. In any event... I don't think it works that way.


It's every man's right to have babies if he wants them! Don't you oppress me!

>> ^Quboid:

I want to have NDT's babies so much, I'm prepared to get gender reassignment surgery. That guy's great!


At first I thought you meant NLG, and I got a little scared. In any event... I don't think it works that way.

I want to have NDT's babies so much, I'm prepared to get gender reassignment surgery. That guy's great!

When the church interferes with science, especially in the historical examples where they wielded a lot of power, I consider religion and science to be clashing, instead of coexisting happily. I see your point in making the distinction between church and religion - but when the church interferes in the name of religion I can't consider religion and science to be "coexisting peacefully." Just my 2c

ed: meant to make this a video reply, whoops! oh well.

In reply to this comment by GeeSussFreeK:
>> ^carneval:

I love NDT, but I don't agree with his statement that science and religion have been happily coexisting for centuries...
What about (for example) heliocentricity? The church was not too happy with that originally.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catholic_Church_and_science
That article indicates that there were, at some points, synergistic effects between the church and scientific establishment; I think happy coexistence is a major exaggeration, though.


Don't confuse, "the church" with the whole of all religious people. One church for one sect of one religion does not the majority of religious minded people make, which was the whole point

Many of the great thinkers, like Newton and Georg Cantor were not the only influential religious people either, the list is huge. I think there has been times where a person has been singled out, like Galileo, but even he was left to his own devices till he got a little more preachy with his ideas; he was a very blunt man

>> ^carneval:

I love NDT, but I don't agree with his statement that science and religion have been happily coexisting for centuries...
What about (for example) heliocentricity? The church was not too happy with that originally.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catholic_Church_and_science
That article indicates that there were, at some points, synergistic effects between the church and scientific establishment; I think happy coexistence is a major exaggeration, though.


Don't confuse, "the church" with the whole of all religious people. One church for one sect of one religion does not the majority of religious minded people make, which was the whole point

Many of the great thinkers, like Newton and Georg Cantor were not the only influential religious people either, the list is huge. I think there has been times where a person has been singled out, like Galileo, but even he was left to his own devices till he got a little more preachy with his ideas; he was a very blunt man

I love NDT, but I don't agree with his statement that science and religion have been happily coexisting for centuries...
What about (for example) heliocentricity? The church was not too happy with that originally.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catholic_Church_and_science

That article indicates that there were, at some points, synergistic effects between the church and scientific establishment; I think happy coexistence is a major exaggeration, though.

>> ^Fletch:

Never really been a fan of NDT. Those who say he is the next Sagan just piss me off. I find him preachy, overly dramatic, and somewhat of an attention whore. Just something about his delivery, I guess. I don't disagree with him, necessarily. I just don't care for him.
And his whole "don't say we can't afford it" spiel was comparing the current NASA budget to a dollar bill, not a future manned Mars mission. When you understand that, his rant falls flat. I understand the point he was trying to make, but his conclusion had nothing to do with it.


I think he could be the next closest-we've-got-to-Sagan but yeah he's a bit too enamoured with himself, or maybe a better way to put it is that his persona seems a bit overly cultivated to me... like he's an actor.

Never really been a fan of NDT. Those who say he is the next Sagan just piss me off. I find him preachy, overly dramatic, and somewhat of an attention whore. Just something about his delivery, I guess. I don't disagree with him, necessarily. I just don't care for him.

And his whole "don't say we can't afford it" spiel was comparing the current NASA budget to a dollar bill, not a future manned Mars mission. When you understand that, his rant falls flat. I understand the point he was trying to make, but his conclusion had nothing to do with it.

I suspect he had a massive argument with krauss before hand...the tension between them in this vid could be cut with a sledge hammer.
Anyone got a link to the NDT speech after this one?

NDT is on coke or what!? Chill out, guy. It's obvious at the start of the video something is bothering him.

Totally true. If we are the most advanced, and the universe is indeed full of life, that signifies one of two things:

1. Other civilzations have been more advanced before us, and died out.
or
2. We are the first to reach this level of advancement

Either proposition is kinda scary to me.

I kinda dig this latest news bit about the star just found to be way off in the expected levels of lithium. One of the proposed explanations is that some advanced civilization sucked all the lithium out of the star, either to make use of it as a resource, or to use it as a signal of their presence.

>> ^brycewi19:

If NdT wants to imagine that there intelligent life out in the cosmos whose intelligence is greater than humans, then I would hope that he might also lay awake at night and imagine the possibility that humans might be the highest level of intelligence in the universe, too.
I'm just saying, if you want to posit theories on the premise that humans might pale in intelligence on the spectrum of intelligent beings, I think it would be equally as wise to question the possibility that we might be at the top of that spectrum. You have to at least rule it out.
Science: consider all hypotheses before running away with a conclusion.

If NdT wants to imagine that there intelligent life out in the cosmos whose intelligence is greater than humans, then I would hope that he might also lay awake at night and imagine the possibility that humans might be the highest level of intelligence in the universe, too.

I'm just saying, if you want to posit theories on the premise that humans might pale in intelligence on the spectrum of intelligent beings, I think it would be equally as wise to question the possibility that we might be at the top of that spectrum. You have to at least rule it out.

Science: consider all hypotheses before running away with a conclusion.

Tags for this video have been changed from 'law, congress, debate, ndt, tyson, bill maher, best arguers' to 'law, congress, debate, neil degrasse tyson, bill maher, best arguers' - edited by xxovercastxx

Tags for this video have been changed from 'law, congress, debate, ndt, tyson, bill maher' to 'law, congress, debate, ndt, tyson, bill maher, best arguers' - edited by calvados