Tyson has doubled down on his fabricated quotes. He's pulling a Dan Rather here. Tyson isn't so much smart, as he's a useful token, and his lack of qualifications are becoming evident.
Wow, they really want to start a controversy here, don't they? The Bush quote always sounded odd to me, probably misremembered it and he should just come out and say 'Could be mistaken, I'm going on memory here' instead of double downing on a decades old quote.
But, what exactly is this a smoking gun of? He's not falsifying data or plagiarizing his work, and the other evidence they point to is laughably unimportant (like pointing out that he used apocryphal quotes in a powerpoint lecture? really?).
(10-01-2014 09:16 AM)UCF08 Wrote: [ -> ]Wow, they really want to start a controversy here, don't they?
Yeah, nothing like what happened to Trent Lott.
Quote:But, what exactly is this a smoking gun of? He's not falsifying data or plagiarizing his work, and the other evidence they point to is laughably unimportant (like pointing out that he used apocryphal quotes in a powerpoint lecture? really?).
Actually, he is. Which is the point. You seemed to miss it. That's funny.
(10-01-2014 09:16 AM)UCF08 Wrote: [ -> ]Wow, they really want to start a controversy here, don't they?
Yeah, nothing like what happened to Trent Lott.
Quote:But, what exactly is this a smoking gun of? He's not falsifying data or plagiarizing his work, and the other evidence they point to is laughably unimportant (like pointing out that he used apocryphal quotes in a powerpoint lecture? really?).
Actually, he is. Which is the point. You seemed to miss it. That's funny.
But, why would you defend this?
Mis-attributing quotes from memory is fairly common, and unless I missed it, he didn't cite the quotation in an academic paper. He's an idiot for being so defensive about it, but you're being absolutely intellectually dishonest if you're claiming that a statement he made in that context relates to falsifying data. And the fact that same article points to his usage of apocryphal quotes in a powerpoint presentation as supporting evidence of his gross misdeeds makes it hard for me to take this criticism seriously, as it's obviously feigned outrage based purely in an opposing viewpoint.
(10-01-2014 09:16 AM)UCF08 Wrote: [ -> ]Wow, they really want to start a controversy here, don't they? The Bush quote always sounded odd to me, probably misremembered it and he should just come out and say 'Could be mistaken, I'm going on memory here' instead of double downing on a decades old quote.
You're assuming that he was not lying...
Quote:But, what exactly is this a smoking gun of? He's not falsifying data or plagiarizing his work, and the other evidence they point to is laughably unimportant (like pointing out that he used apocryphal quotes in a powerpoint lecture? really?).
Using his standing to slander another, to push the "republicans are anti science and religious bigots."
What Bush said after Columbia...
"The same Creator who names the stars also knows the names of the seven souls we mourn today. The crew of the shuttle Columbia did not return safely to Earth; yet we can pray that all are safely home. "
It's actually a nice line, especially for a Bush Speech...
What Tyson has been gleefully and snidely saying...
"Here’s what happens. George Bush, within a week of [the 9/11 terrorist attacks] gave us a speech attempting to distinguish we from they. And who are they? These were sort of the Muslim fundamentalists. And he wants to distinguish we from they. And how does he do it?
He says, “Our God” — of course it’s actually the same God, but that’s a detail, let’s hold that minor fact aside for the moment. Allah of the Muslims is the same God as the God of the Old Testament. So, but let’s hold that aside. He says, “Our God is the God” — he’s loosely quoting Genesis, biblical Genesis — “Our God is the God who named the stars.”"
(10-01-2014 09:16 AM)UCF08 Wrote: [ -> ]Wow, they really want to start a controversy here, don't they? The Bush quote always sounded odd to me, probably misremembered it and he should just come out and say 'Could be mistaken, I'm going on memory here' instead of double downing on a decades old quote.
You're assuming that he was not lying...
Quote:But, what exactly is this a smoking gun of? He's not falsifying data or plagiarizing his work, and the other evidence they point to is laughably unimportant (like pointing out that he used apocryphal quotes in a powerpoint lecture? really?).
Using his standing to slander another, to push the "republicans are anti science and religious bigots."
What Bush said after Columbia...
"The same Creator who names the stars also knows the names of the seven souls we mourn today. The crew of the shuttle Columbia did not return safely to Earth; yet we can pray that all are safely home. "
It's actually a nice line, especially for a Bush Speech...
What Tyson has been gleefully and snidely saying...
"Here’s what happens. George Bush, within a week of [the 9/11 terrorist attacks] gave us a speech attempting to distinguish we from they. And who are they? These were sort of the Muslim fundamentalists. And he wants to distinguish we from they. And how does he do it?
He says, “Our God” — of course it’s actually the same God, but that’s a detail, let’s hold that minor fact aside for the moment. Allah of the Muslims is the same God as the God of the Old Testament. So, but let’s hold that aside. He says, “Our God is the God” — he’s loosely quoting Genesis, biblical Genesis — “Our God is the God who named the stars.”"
He's come out and said the exact opposite, actually -
“It’s wrong to simply attack the right for science denial. Liberals cannot claim to fully embrace science, there is plenty of science denial from the left.”
“Liberals always assert scientific literacy, and that just isn’t the case. Funding for science under Republican administrations has been historically higher than under Democrats, Under Bush, the big denial issue was stem cells, but he increased military research. Republicans just invest in things like military research instead of biology and NASA. Both sides fund scientific research, and they just fund different projects.
If you are running the government, I care where the money is.”
(10-01-2014 09:16 AM)UCF08 Wrote: [ -> ]But, what exactly is this a smoking gun of? He's not falsifying data or plagiarizing his work, and the other evidence they point to is laughably unimportant (like pointing out that he used apocryphal quotes in a powerpoint lecture? really?).
Actually, that's exactly what he's doing UCF.. he's falsifying data (or in this case a statement) that didn't exist.
Heck, I like listening to NTG, don't agree with his opinions on God... But in this case, he stepped in it big time.
I think it's misplaced affection for Ron Glass.![[Image: tve6615-19750220-30.gif]](http://www.wearysloth.com/Gallery/ActorsG/tve6615-19750220-30.gif)
![[Image: abou-tyson2.jpg]](http://www-tc.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/sciencenow/about/images/abou-tyson2.jpg)