and one of those pages was a drawing.
AND he flunked out of the University of Texas. This explains why he's constantly screwing up and the movies he consults are borderline retarded like Interstellar.
Diversity hire? Seems so
I don't think that this is right, because it should be against requirements and he couldn't be that insolent. He has some credibility as a communicator of astronomy. However, he produces dumb statements about many other things. I'm not following him, so maybe I have heard just the dumb stuff.
shareI disagree with him on many things, and I know that he talks about things that he has not studied as if he is an authority ... so, that is bad enough, but what I find really sad is how he feels free to interrupt anyone wherever he is and correct them. I can't stand the guy, and the only place I find it hard to avoid him every year or so is on the Bill Maher show.
share"I know that he talks about things that he has not studied"
Hypocrite
Both of you, give examples of these statements or things he talks about that he hasn't studied upon or know a bit about. I don't find him annoying at all and feels more an info entertainer.
shareIt is pretty easy:
https://twitter.com/neiltyson/status/1409579223795355649
https://twitter.com/neiltyson/status/1409308565127450631
https://twitter.com/neiltyson/status/1409603257140396040
https://twitter.com/neiltyson/status/1409306803297345536
These are all written on the same day? I remember him saying that Galileo proved that the Earth is round and this was shortly after he (mis)presented the story of science in "Cosmos", but OK - this is a common mistake and it is nitpicking. As I said, I'm not following him but have this impression of him that he often talks bullshit with a zest.
He is a cool and funny guy though.
He can regurgitate information without having any real understanding of it (as proven by the things he tweets and has to correct after being pointed out basics) but he should not be an authority on ANYTHING. That's why he runs a planetarium and nothing important.
share[deleted]
Damn, is this for real? He got a PhD for presenting some data taken with a telescope? I mean, this looks more like a homework.
I'm surprised that it is not written in jive: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RrZlWw8Di10
Columbia should have their accreditation revoked for allowing such a joke. That rhymed. I wonder if they'll give me a masters for poetry now.
shareThis guy is just a first step in "sciencing" for young school children. He gets your interest up, tells you some things that you already should know since high school but thats it, then you move on to other things. The dude basically googles "less known facts" before an interview simply to impress. The fact that he is a celebrity just tells us how uneducated the general population with access to internet is.
share
A doctoral dissertation (it’s not called a thesis) must have 6 parts: (1) a statement of the problem (because doctoral work must be a contribution to the literature of the field and not merely a summary of the work of others); (2) a review of the literature in the field; (3) the research design for the dissertation; (4) the results of the research; (5) a discussion of what the results mean; (6) a summary and conclusion. You can’t do that in 4 pages.
Apparently there is a lost fourth page, but I found it. This must have been the key to his PhD
https://sci-hub.se/https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-011-0922-2_41
[deleted]
He's an over-hyped tour guide.
shareI can't seem to find anything that debunks this... he wrote like five paragraphs for this PhD.... My undergrad research paper was 50 pages
Edit - Looks like it is 12 pages when published in a journal, that was a shortened version.
you dont have to debunk it, the OP is some completely unsubstantiated bullshit
Also this seems to debunk it
https://docdrop.org/video/l7f4MSSkDp4/
https://youtu.be/l7f4MSSkDp4
Apparently it's around 400 pages long
looks like the 4 pages bit is just an abstract of all 4 sections of the thesis paper.
I'd heard this claim several times so it's nice to get some clarification, thanks for posting.
shareIts 12 pages in the journal. Published about 6 months after submission. . https://neildegrassetyson.com/media/pdf/1991-ApJ-367,547.pdf
It appears the short version of it was released a couple years later
The document she's looking at is 370 pages long - divided into chapters - it's very different from the document you've mentioned, but it is also seems quite unlikely that a magazine would publish anything of that length by one person - it's a journal, not a book series - lol
https://youtu.be/l7f4MSSkDp4?t=393 - it says here 'to be submitted to the astophysical journal' - early draft? It comes with an overview, intro quotation, dedication page - scientific journals don't do dedication pages, I reckon.
https://youtu.be/l7f4MSSkDp4?t=868 again - the title of the paper is different, so perhaps what you are seeing is just a variation on a similar topic? Seems like Tyson turned himself into an expert on bulges - lol
It wouldn't surprise me if some dickheads saw a journal article he wrote that was on the same topic as his thesis or got their hands on an abstract and assumed it was his thesis.
Probably the same sort who are convinced that Barrack O'Bama is not a US citizen despite evidence like birth announcements in local newspapers and his birth certificate. Gee, I wonder what could be motivating them?
Tyson is a shill - a consensus scientist, as he likes to call himself these days. (a good reason not to listen to anything he says)
He should be criticized for many things, but the thesis paper is prolly not it.
a consensus scientist to me would just be a communicator who explains what the vast majority of scientists and their research shows.
like how there is a consensus on evolutionary theory. you can find an outlier or two who doesnt agree, and the anti science clowns like to use "consensus" as "proof" its not real science. and point to the handful as the "real scientists" not the "government shills faking research. but they dont understand why there is consensus to begin with. its because the experts and those that study and peer review all agree on the best available evidence pointing to supporting the theory.
yeah in theory. but that's not how it works at all when you have a bunch of hacks in the industry like this guy, someone of which who only have a job because of "reasons" and are easy to manipulate because they are holding on to their job by a thread and will gladly do and say anything to maintain their employment. When Tyson went around trying to promote the vax he literally killed all his credibility but tried so damn hard because like those people, "agree on all the best evidence" wouldn't even know how to decipher what is best evidence or not, and how it's researched but needed to push the agenda. No different than failing entertainment company trying to gain more revenue by doing everything to boost their ESG score, or a crack head who will go down on anyone for crack. A bunch of unsuccessful sycophants who know they are one misstep from being kicked to the curb.
shareohh you are an anti vaxxers and conspiracy theorist..........
where did you get your degree in vaccinology or virology? how many studies have you published and peer reviewed?
where was he specifically wrong? go into detail i need to hear an expert virologists opinion on moviechat
Credentialism doesn't work. I dont need to be any of those things if I can read. Where did he and everyone on the vax go wrong? Oh I don't know, the fact that IT DIDN'T WORK. Didn't prevent the spread, didn't stop people from contracting it, didn't make it milder, so the better question is, where did it go right and it what way did it do anything better than a place like Sweden that used a different approach? Then compare it to places like Australia who have had exponential increases in miscarriages. But yeah, guess you gotta be a genius like Ol' Neil here, with h-score of 15 lol to understand it all.
sharecredentials are a real thing. showing somone has the education in a topic as complex as virology, vaccinology, and actually understands the trials and has worked in the field and is familiar with the latest data and information is a thing. especially something this complex where the virus RNA has been analyzed and the extremely complex work and research it takes to develop a vaccine.
You should scream that next time you visit your family doctor or physician. "credentials arent a thing!!! im self taught!!!"
what have you read? it did work in preventing death, it did make it milder. https://www.cdc.gov/media/releases/2021/p0607-mrna-reduce-risks.html
How did it work out for the USA? 3X the deaths of Canada even adjusting for population. damn ignoring and scattered implementation of measures sure worked out well for them! "muhhh freedom! to die at 3X the rate of Canadians!"
then compare it to places like Australia who have had exponential increases in miscarriages
CITATION PLEASE
https://obgyn.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/uog.23655
the miscarriage rate actually rose TWO YEARS BEFORE THE COVID VACCINE ROLLOUT.
this is why you are a joke
You're a goal post moving fool, who makes leaps in logic out of desperation. LOL
So your link says "our study finds" and it's a group of 3,975 and you think that's proper science? Welp that settles it. LOL What are your credentials? HAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHA I sure hope it's in virology because surely you'd need to be one to know when a bullshit study is a bullshit study LOL
Wanna make more appeals to authority like a good NPC sheep? People like you are so easily duped, it's no wonder we have fools and crooks in office. Please, SNEED me another link with zero sources. No wait, the cdc sourced themselves LOL Not even the study.
what was goalpost moving?
i addressed everything you said in order.
So you link says "our study finds" and it's a group of 3,975 and you think that's proper science? Welp that settles it. LOL What are your credentials? HAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHA I sure hope it's in virology because surely you'd need to be one to know when a bullshit study is a bullshit study LOL
They're not an authority or experts on anything you claim is needed to be. And it's clear by the terrible study with such a low sample size, that isn't even needed when numbers are easily and available to such "experts"
Meanwhile, you're over here pretending having a skill in medicine is the same as being a scientist who can't even perform proper studies. Yeah, credentials totally mean the same as someone who performs a skill to someone who thinks they're a scientist. You got me there. Didn't totally go off the rails with that one. So sad.
They already tried the same bullshit with an Erythritol study to try and blame that for all the increased heart problems, when they got like 12 unhealthy fat people (who naturally produce Erythritol) and blamed the sugar substitute on their heart issues as a scapegoat. Eggs are bad for you, eggs are great for you. Which is it? Who's credentials are the most credentially for you? These are things you don't even ask yourself, because you're all ready to kneel and bootlick the first authority figure who makes a claim, while your peabrain forgets all the backtracking and contradictions they said early.
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2022-08-12/fact-check-no-link-between-vaccines-and-miscarriages/101322266
Remember this is a coverup because the legal ramifications of forcing a dangerous, deadly medicine on people would be insane. So you will find many people coming up with phony "studies" like your cdc link to disprove things, while also suppressing reality to prevent the outcry of injustice. And here you are, defending monsters like the good corporate stooge you are. I bet you Grand father is so proud of you and glad he died for Israel to get to this point.
Mater has not observed any change in the rate of miscarriage over the last five years or specifically since the introduction of COVID-19 vaccinations."
Other experts also poured cold water on the suggestion that COVID-19 vaccines were unsafe during pregnancy.
Shaun Brennecke, who leads the Department of Maternal-Fetal Medicine and the Pregnancy Research Centre at Melbourne's Royal Women's Hospital, told CheckMate via email that the published data "indicate that such vaccination does NOT increase the risk of or cause miscarriage
"There is no evidence of an increased risk of miscarriage, stillbirth, preterm birth or other adverse pregnancy outcomes," it said in a December 2021 statement.
"Conversely, infection with COVID-19 is associated with an increased risk of severe disease, hospitalisation, admission to intensive care, mechanical ventilation, and death, in pregnant women, and an increased risk of prematurity and stillbirth."
".
You bring up Sweden and compaire it to Australia... Instead maybe compaire it to Denmark which is right next to Sweden (I am dansih with half my family living in Sweden)...
Denmark took a much stricter approach to corona than Sweden and it paid of... With Sweden having a much higher infection rate and a much higher death toll per 100.000 citizens.
So claiming Sweden's approach was not a failure is simply not true...
If you are a real scientist - you should always stay away from the 'consensus scientist' label - meanwhile, NTD embraces it. That alone should make one ponder.
Do keep in mind, he's started embracing it only quite recently - I'm thinking 3-5 years?
It should also be noted that 'consensus science' has been particularly heavily promoted since the fraudulent human-caused climate change paper from 2013, which stated that 97 percent of scientists agree that.... (how that particular 'consensus' was reached is fascinating on its own). https://www.forbes.com/sites/uhenergy/2016/12/14/fact-checking-the-97-consensus-on-anthropogenic-climate-change/?sh=7ea335611576
She is looking at journal that is 300+ pages long and what she talks about takes up 12 pages. The 12 pages in that format (small text, two column) would likely be 30-40 pages in other styles (APA, MLA)
Please share the link to the paper... otherwise you just making shit up
She doesn't show many pages, but the content in the pages that she does show are different from what I've seen in those 3-page and 12-page papers. I've posted several timestamps for instances where she shows several full pages - look through the video for more examples.
And don't ask me for the link, why would I have it? Ask her instead and good luck getting it - lol
I think NDT is full of shit as of late - and we should question everything he's said in the past as well, given his logical fallacies that are becoming more frequent with each day. I can see that you are married to the idea that he's gotten PHD based on 4 or 12 page paper - is that possible? I'm thinking.... perhaps, which is what caused me to look for confirmation - and how I stumbled upon this youtube vid and it's very possible that she is indeed looking at the real thesis paper. Still, unis are corrupt, and it's possible that NDT was pushed through the system not due to his knowledge but due to his connections - unis like Harvard, Yale, etc are well known for it - but they do a good job of masking it by also admitting the children of corrupt AND the best of the crop and paying big bucks for some very high profile educators and researchers. Fauci has a degree in medicine, but there are at least a few scientists who claim his knowledge in the field is primitive at best, so that should make you ponder. He's definitely skilled in presenting BS to the public - just like NTD - isn't that curious?
"She is looking at journal that is 300+ pages long and what she talks about takes up 12 pages."
Your conclusion that this information means the 300+ page document is 12 pages long is ludicrous.