Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Neil deGrasse Tyson AMA

reddit.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 68 posts

Re: Neil deGrasse Tyson AMA

#31

Post by lobster_johnson »

davidhollander wrote: post #27

Anyone interested in NdGT, check out the show he hosts: Nova Science Now http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/sciencenow/ You can watch full episodes online, no commercial interruptions after they start. It does a good job at filling the popular science video niche, in addition to Through the Wormhole with Morgan Freeman.

I have been looking for a good science show, but Nova scienceNOW wasn't it. Not so much the content as the absolutely juvenline format.

Can someone explain how I have misunderstood and the show really is meant for kids? Because it's designed like a kid's show, complete with silly music, wacky editing, colourful demonstrations/analogies to illustrate scientific principles, and narration that sounds as if written for a toddler. In this respect it's almost as unwatchable as Michio Kaku's (who's ordinarily a bright guy) weirdly infantile Science of the Impossible series. (It's also an incredibly American show, formatwise, extremely brash and loud and fluffy.) I started watching the show as I'm a fan of Tyson, but I ended up disappointed.

For now, the only regular series (as opposed to one-offs like Jim Al-Khalili's excellent shows on atoms and chemistry, or Sagan's Cosmos) I consider worth watching is BBC's Bang Goes the Theory (http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b00lwxj1), which is fairly obviously targeted at teens, but has some good content. Two of the hosts are fairly annoying generic twentysomethings who do the show as though it's some kind of music video programme, but the third guy is an adorable geek with an obvious passion for science and engineering, and they have some assisting hosts who are quite quirky.

Re: Neil deGrasse Tyson AMA

#32

Post by omarchowdhury »

malkia wrote: post #24

He is one of my heroes. So charming, funny and educating at the same time. His speech on the islam downfall in the 13th century due to some "prophet" claiming that math and devil were interconnected was much enlightening on how religion actually stops scientific progress.

Does that one instance preclude all of the other people that contributed to science, who also had faith?

Re: Neil deGrasse Tyson AMA

#33

Post by bluedanieru »

omarchowdhury wrote: post #32
malkia wrote: post #24

He is one of my heroes. So charming, funny and educating at the same time. His speech on the islam downfall in the 13th century due to some "prophet" claiming that math and devil were interconnected was much enlightening on how religion actually stops scientific progress.

Does that one instance preclude all of the other people that contributed to science, who also had faith?

It would help if their faith is what drove them to pursue scientific endeavors. And that is sometimes the case, in fact. But for every "understand the mind of god" faith-driven scientist there are at least one thousand screaming, irrational, dangerously unbalanced regressives who are one papal bull or fatwa or Dianetics away from ushering us into a brutal and stupid dark age. Like many human inventions religion can be a great thing, but it often isn't.

Re: Neil deGrasse Tyson AMA

#34

Post by omarchowdhury »

bluedanieru wrote: post #33
omarchowdhury wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Does that one instance preclude all of the other people that contributed to science, who also had faith?

It would help if their faith is what drove them to pursue scientific endeavors. And that is sometimes the case, in fact. But for every "understand the mind of god" faith-driven scientist there are at least one thousand screaming, irrational, dangerously unbalanced regressives who are one papal bull or fatwa or Dianetics away from ushering us into a brutal and stupid dark age. Like many human inventions religion can b…

It would seem then the indoctrination of individuals is the issue here, not religion in itself. The current process of propagating religion through the oral teachings of priests and the dead letter of holy texts has given rise to fanaticism, pitting groups against one another.

Re: Neil deGrasse Tyson AMA

#35

Post by sskates »

bluedanieru wrote: post #33
omarchowdhury wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Does that one instance preclude all of the other people that contributed to science, who also had faith?

It would help if their faith is what drove them to pursue scientific endeavors. And that is sometimes the case, in fact. But for every "understand the mind of god" faith-driven scientist there are at least one thousand screaming, irrational, dangerously unbalanced regressives who are one papal bull or fatwa or Dianetics away from ushering us into a brutal and stupid dark age. Like many human inventions religion can b…

Not disagreeing/agreeing, but do you have any evidence to back up the claim "for every "understand the mind of god" faith-driven scientist there are at least one thousand screaming, irrational, dangerously unbalanced regressives"?

Re: Neil deGrasse Tyson AMA

#36

Post by kloncks »

malkia wrote: post #29
kloncks wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I was in the middle of one of his talks and heard this exactly. I agree...but allow me to just correct one thing. The "prophet" was a sheikh/imam in Iraq (?) that said math and Satan were connected. Islam had - up until that time - managed to have some pretty amazing feats. That said, it's interesting how we blindly take advice from men with authority. Whether that's religious figures, famous people, or politicians.

Thanks for the correction kloncks! Not trying to excuse myself, but I'm simply not good at remembering details. Would have to watch the video again!

No worries!

It's my view that religion often isn't the thing that impairs scientific learning. Rather it's men's interpretation of those events.

Just needed to make that subtle correction :)

Re: Neil deGrasse Tyson AMA

#37

Post by sskates »

md224 wrote: post #28
cbo wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They're two very different ideas, even if they're often shared by the same people. The singularity is all about AI surpassing human intelligence. On this front, I can tell you after having studied a lot of AI for the past three years, we are not close. We're a lot further than many people think, but still not quite that far. As for extending lifespans, this is something we've been doing from the dawn of medicine. We'…

Has anyone considered the idea that perhaps this "AI" has already arrived in the form of the collective intelligence of the Internet? That perhaps the "Singularity" is simply a shift of scope in terms of consciousness from the individual to the group? Much like multicellular organisms evolving from single-celled creatures? I just think this makes a lot more sense than the whole "we will build a conscious robot" thing…

This isn't quite the feedback loop that the AI singularity folks talk about, but the Internet is one heck of a positive feedback loop, much much tighter than technological progress feedback loop before it. Makes me excited for where we'll be 5, 10, 20 years from now as the rate of acceleration speeds up.

Re: Neil deGrasse Tyson AMA

#38

Post by lukifer »

kloncks wrote: post #36
malkia wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thanks for the correction kloncks! Not trying to excuse myself, but I'm simply not good at remembering details. Would have to watch the video again!

No worries! It's my view that religion often isn't the thing that impairs scientific learning. Rather it's men's interpretation of those events. Just needed to make that subtle correction :)

Ideology is a superset of religion, and like fire, it can be used for either creation or destruction.

Re: Neil deGrasse Tyson AMA

#40

Post by Waxbar1 »

feralchimp wrote: post #9

So, so many excellent quotes in that discussion. My favorite: "Kids are never the problem. They are born scientists. The problem is always the adults. The beat the curiosity out of the kids. They out-number kids. They vote. They wield resources. That's why my public focus is primarily adults." Preach it, dude.

Interestingly, South Park has been conveying this message message for over 10 years, and I think the generation that grew up watching South Park innately understands this already and at a younger age.
Post reply on HN