Back at you. You say I haven’t pointed out any science errors from Tyson. I’ve pointed out numerous errors in physics. As well as math and history.

Once again, here is the list: http://hopsblog-hop.blogspot.com/2016/01/fact-checking-neil-degrasse-tyson.html?

Reading comprehension, get some.

Hop David, until you learn to read for comprehension it isn’t worth paying attention to your comments.

Dean writes “The errors you point out aren’t in science ”

False. My list contains errors Tyson has made in science as well as math and history. Some of them are errors in basic physics. Again, here is my list: http://hopsblog-hop.blogspot.com/2016/01/fact-checking-neil-degrasse-tyson.html

Dean writes “No, I did not make an accusation, I asked a question.”

False. Did a search for a question mark in your posts. If you did ask a question, you didn’t use a question mark.

Rather you’ve made several suggestions. You’ve noted some folks object to his opinions that are at odds with current views. Which doesn’t apply. Tyson makes claims that are flat out demonstrably false.

Also you’re suggested people who criticize Tyson are right wing bigots. Some of Tyson’s critics are indeed right wing. But there are also liberals who have criticized Tyson. Should we be concerned if the critics are right wing or left? No. What we need to determine is if the criticisms are valid. Can those calling out Tyson back up their complaints with evidence?

If Sean Davis of the Federalist can back up what he says with citations and evidence, we should take what he says seriously. And Davis gave us an airtight example of Tyson inventing history to support his political talking points.

You would say Tyson’s false account of Bush’s 9-11 speech is correct because Davis is Right Wing and therefore we should discard his criticisms? This is classic ad hominem. Whether someone is on the left or the right we need to examine their claims to see if they’re backed up by evidence.

No, I did not make an accusation, I asked a question. The fact that you can’t realize that doesn’t speak well for you though. Interesting that you are working so hard to “defend” yourself from a non-existent accusation though.

Dean, Tyson has botched basic physics as well as given us bad history. I gave examples in the link you didn’t bother to read.

I am not Schafly. Yet you try to tar me with the same brush. You are not credible.

‘I don’t know which one of these you are.’

You missed my point. I know his comment about the numbers was wrong ( and did when he made it. Stupid comment, but physicists are not mathematicians (I’m a statistician, but have a Master’s in math as well), and I don’t expect him to know much about things outside his area of expertise. The errors you point out aren’t in science (so there is probably a good discussion to be had about whether he should or should not toss off comments when he’s not well-informed), but it concerns his credentials in science that the derogatory comments I from the right are aimed at (Andy Schlafly, of Conservapedia “fame” is famous for referring to NdGT’s degree as “an affirmative action gift”). (Of course, Schlafly’s website is wrong about everything it discusses in math and physics, so…)

Dean, I have given you examples of Tyson’s bad math, science, history.

Some defenders of Tyson will say there certainly are more transcendental numbers than irrationals because Tyson has a doctorate and I’m just some random internet guy (ad hominem and appeal to authority)

Others will say it’s okay if Tyson invents histories if he’s slamming people they don’t like. These are no different from Trump’s birthers.

Still others will say someone pointing out Tyson’s errors is a Flat Earther, a Young Earth Creationist or a moon hoaxer (the straw man argument).

I don’t know which one of these you are.

And to be clear, NdGT understand the nuance, that the link has been a good thing at times.

Personally, I’m glad there was a link during WW2. It is probably not an exaggeration to say that radar saved Britain from invasion by Nazi Germany and its marine counterpart, sonar, had a large part in keeping the Axis submarine fleets from dominating the oceans. Or is there someone here that thinks that either the invasion or the dominance would have been a good thing?