@astrochuck, hahaha!

So what would Tyson's design be? Putting his dick on his forehead?

Tyson isn't competent to do even very straightforward calculations like spin grav of a space station or pressure of a football. I wouldn't trust him to design a ceiling fan.

@HopDavid how is the 'spin grav of a space station' straight forward? As far as the comment referring to intelligent design I would submit that this is the point: there is no intelligent design. There is no optimal solution, and why would a 'dick on his forehead' be any worse then the current state of affairs (apart from the obvious boost in hat sales)?

@HopDavid He seems to be more than competent enough to make a simple, straightforward joke that doesn't require overthinking to "get it."

@RavenMunnin Spin grav is ω^2 r. A freshman physics student should have that down. But Tyson doesn't.

@RavenMunnin, @Paul628 Apparently my joke zoomed over your head.

@HopDavid I guess it did.

@HopDavid so you think that is all it takes to get micro gravity on a space station? I bet you also just think they throw the luggage on a plane and take off. (also I have never heard of that referred to as 'spin grav' it looks like centripetal acceleration to me).

@RavenMunnin
Item 15 of this list is where Tyson botches a very straightforward calculation that should be simple for a freshman physics student:
[hopsblog-hop.blogspot.com]

Inertia in a rotating frame is known as centrifugal force. Not truly a force but can be treated as such when you're on board a spinning space station or any sort of centrifuge. Here's an XKCD cartoon for you:

I think a lot of people shortchange themselves. At its core, science is a method if observation, hypothesis, and testing. We all do these things as children, yet we get bogged down by the equations and vocabulary and memorization of science classes and we forget to remain curious about the world. But we all have the capacity to be scientific, even if we aren't professional scientists. If you still have interest in what the smart people are saying, you still have the heart of the scientist you were as a little kid.

Well I guess I' ll let him off on that one then. ; )

I entirely agree that science is better than blind faith in literal interpretations of a religious book. However one has to be careful not to replace one religion with another, eg science.

Just because we don't currently understand something doesn't mean we won't understand it in the future. Science is the best tool we have for that understanding. Also, just because we DO understand something doesn't take away the awe and wonder at it's mechanism or function. The mechanism and function of our universe becomes only more awe inspiring with our ever increasing knowledge. Oh, and thanks for the NdGT quotes. He is fantastic! If you get a chance check out the new Cosmos.

Also science is not religion. It relies on evidence rather than faith. You can believe in religion just 'because' but not science. Even if there is a mistake science is self-correcting. One issue with science is when our knowledge outstrips our morals which can have disastrous consequences. Plenty of examples of that.

It's only a matter of time. Man once thought the sun revolved around the Earth. Fuck, some still think the Earth is flat. I bet there's a lot of information about the questions you're asking that's available, but you just haven't looked for it yet. Don't blame what you don't see on science not showing.

@JeffMurray,this is what I find odd about this argument,atheists criticise believers because of blind faith yet they are demonstrating the exact same behaviour by putting blind faith in science coming up with "all the answers,well they haven't (as yet) and seem to me a very very long way from doing so. So until then how can you be so sure as to what they will eventually discover.Don't get me wrong if science proves something I;m happy to go with it,but science doesn't answer all my questions.

@VinceRichardson I don't see those as the same at all. I'm not proclaiming what the answer will be, just that there is an answer and given our history of discovery, it's likely only a matter of time before we develop the tools necessary to obtain it. Also, "demonstrating the exact same behaviour by putting blind faith in science coming up with all the answers" isn't correlative because the scientific community is actively working on finding answers to their questions (while the religious community generally hopes for the exact opposite). Would you call it blind faith that a parent has that their daughter will become a doctor while she's busting her ass in medical school?

@JeffMurray

Fair points I'm not gonna argue much other than there are many variant views about atheism ,just the strident ones seem as ridiculous as the religious exteremists to me.

@VinceRichardson We're not arguing, we're having a philosophical discussion. I think. But I think even if you took the absolute extremes of both, they would still not be equivalent. On one hand you'd have someone who absolutely believes in the existence of a thing for which there is no evidence, and on the other, someone who denies the existence of a thing for which there is no evidence. Supplant "thing for which there is no evidence" with any example of it to see. I like, "The Cleveland Browns will win the Super Bowl next year."

Burn.

@JeffMurray.
Yes we'll call it an philosphical discussion then.Cant see any difference personally eg atheism is like saying Browns will not win he Superbowl...no one knows for sure they just might.

Both believe in something totally that has yet to be happen or pass into common acceptance, Science has also proven many things that were not thought possible at one time or another. You have to keep an open mind.They may just turn around in 3 billion years asnd say hey look we found god....hes under a rock in Belgium....(though he is of course under every rock and every atom).

Its also a personal issue,I feel there is something out there or some force that created all this.Why, I don't quite know,My gut feeling is there is and it makes more sense to me than there isn't.

It's a personality thing for sure,some or prone to believe it and some are not. For me its a good thing not a bad thing,I see life more clearly now and it makes more sense than when I was an atheist.

In conclusion Agnosticsim is then only really logical answer,but we are not robots and do not think logically ,thankfully, it'd be a hell of a dull planet otherwise. Sorry but atheism is rather a rather dour outlook if you ask me and not conducive to looking outside black and white issues. I know I used to be like that but I was just stickig my fingers in my ears and refusing to listen

.This is hard to put into words,its just more of a feeling.
After reading this site though, I now have a newfound sympathy for many suffering in the USA from religious bigotry,you just don't get that here in the UK. So I'm trying to go easy ,I am in a minority as a believer of a sort I know.

@VinceRichardson I was obviously exaggerating how shitty the Browns are for comedic effect. I mean, they are terrible, but not equivalent to the lack of evidence we have for the existence of god (which is what I thought would make it funny, but unless you live in the US, people may not get it). The Browns are a professional football team that exists, and there have been crazy underdog stores, so it is technically possible for a series of unlikely events and trades that result in a championship win. Heck, 2 years ago the Cleveland Cavaliers were down 3-1 in the Finals and came back to win, the first time a team has ever come back to win in the Finals from that deficit. God, however, has no evidence to suggest existence whatsoever. So claiming he definitely exists is significantly crazier than claiming he definitely doesn't. Luckily, one need not make such a claim to be an atheist.

@JeffMurray,sorry I do like US football, I do follow it a bit...Browns are the ones that used to throw dog biscuits onto the pich,used to make me laugh .....that and the dog pound.,

I support an equally lousy Uk football team called Sunderland.

God/creators existance is not crazy at all.Firstly we are living and conscious on a a lump of rock spinning at great speed in a hostile vacuum,no one knows how we got here,why we are here and what happens next.Does that sound sensible in any way,?I think crazy got here way before I did. Having a creator, whether you call it god,nature,Brahman,Allah is what we have been doing throughout history .I don't worship it but I believe there is /was one...and we are also part of it not separate from it. Makes perfect sense to me.

Who is your tip for the superbowl by the way,..saw the amazing Vikings win last week so Im rooting for them.....anyone but the Patrioits

@VinceRichardson I don't care about football. At all. Living next to a team as shitty as the Browns will do that to you. I also missed this Vikings thing, guess I should YouTube it?

Saying there is/was a god that everything is part of is basically saying nothing. So that doesn't make any sense to me. And saying there was an entity that created everything as imperfectly and downright nonsensically as it exists doesn't make much sense either. There are scientific explanations for a lot of this, however, if you're willing to do some reading instead of blind attribution to a "god".

@JackMurray,ok what would you like me to read?I like science,but it hasn't impressed me that much as far as the fundamentals are concerned,in fact it seems to throw up more questions than answers.It s pretty much still in its infancy as far as understanding how the Universe works ,they can't even explain how it all started,and quantum theory is really difficult to get our heads round.

Can you imagine Dr Tyson as president?! Who would make an appropriate running mate?

@rsmith61616 Dr Phil

More difficult than some places at least rarely is it life-threatening. Don't know of any well known politicians but some in other fields. Probably more common in the UK

and 8 I think was pointed out by a comedian, just don't remember which. Carlin maybe? Still love Tyson but yeah these arent all original thoughts for sure. Just great ones nonetheless.

@Wurlitzer If he's taking credit for other people's material he's a plagiarist.

@HopDavid HO HUM!

...total agreement-take away
the platform/megaphone