Courtesy of Breitbart. I know, red flags go up immediately.
The first one is on Neil deGrasse Tyson.
The next on Bill Nye.
Are these just hit jobs or is there some truth to them? I got this from a very liberal friend of mine who just happens to have a PhD in EE and he seems to agree.
Breitbart was an ignorant, evil man, and if anything, after his death, his shitty nonsense website got worse.
I read the first couple hundred words of that article, and I suspect the author thinks that anyone who disagrees with the fantasy RW media view of the world is stupid. He takes issue with some of NDT’s tweets because they make him angry, not because they’re indicative of stupidity.
Your “liberal PHD” friend is a dipshit.
You never fail me.
Yes.
As with everything that spews out of the Breithole[sup]TM[/sup], there are kernels of truth in both articles–kernels which are massaged, misrepresented, exaggerated, and packaged to serve the desires of the site. The goal is getting clicks and making money from True Believers (and hopefully luring in brand new True Believers) with dishonesty.
So yeah, hit jobs.
Both critiques are fairly summarized as: “I disagree with their political views, and that makes them stupid.”
If you believe either commentary contains any legitimate, non-political basis for questioning the intelligence of either man, I invite you to post it.
Is it possible that NdT is a bit overrated and that some of his success is due to him being black and a handsome man? On another site, some woman declared him perhaps the most brilliant man in the world.
Bill Nye is hardly impressive.
The secret is to be right all the time. 
I’ve never been impressed with NdGT, either as a scientist or a science popularizer, but he’s not stupid. I don’t know much about Bill Nye, but I also wonder what qualifications Breitbart has to be criticizing scientists. He’s a political hack’s hack, and I don’t expect anything to come out of him that isn’t slanted towards his political beliefs.
Remember that NdGT was the narrator, not the writer, for the new Cosmos series. It’s hard to blame him for errors in the history part. Granted, I didn’t last more than an episode and a half into that show, but I certainly never thought the narrator was the writer and editor.
Anything out of Breitbart lately is going to be pretty impressive. Since he’s dead.
(I couldn’t resist)
I know it is incredibly biased, but there are a few things that I found interesting. Bill Nye only has a B.S. in Mechanical Engineering. I’m not sure how that qualifies him as an expert.
Well. If “some woman” said it, it must be true.
Of course some of his success, much of his success, comes from being handsome, clever, charismatic, and very skilled at communication. He uses those gifts to communicate and popularize science. As a side effect, “some woman” thinks he’s Stephen Hawking. She’s an idiot, but that happens. It’s evidence that he is overrated by “some woman,” not generally.
My ass he isn’t. Again: charismatic, clever, and extremely well-spoken. He uses his platform to teach and spread the ideals of empiricism and critical thinking, and he does it very well.
Neither are Nobel candidates, true. Good thing neither presents himself as one.
ETA: to John Mace’s point, I absolutely agree that both men have political leanings…but they’ve hardly made a secret of it. And with something like, say, climate change, they are hardly responsible for the politicization of the science.
.
I knew that, I just didn’t remember. 
But put it all in past tense, and nothing changes.
On what subjects has he claimed expertise?
Bill Nye is a smart guy, but I don’t believe he was ever a scientist. Indeed, the moniker Bill Nye the Science Guy comes from his days as a stand-up comedian. I lack the interest necessary to sit through his debate with Ken Ham, but I gather that his qualified to engage in such a debate.
Sure that’s possible. Those articles, though… I have no strong feelings towards either Tyson or Nye, but I couldn’t even finish reading the first link because it was a such vituperative hack job. If either scientist is getting a little full of himself or needs to be de-hyped (and I have no idea if they do) there are more rational, persuasive ways to do it. It reminded me of one of those articles you sometimes see that goes on and on about Martin Luther King Jr.'s alleged plagiarism, as though that obliterated all of the man’s accomplishments. :rolleyes:
Can I nominate myself?
Honestly, I’m not real familiar with is show, but I watched him on Bill Maher’s show and Maher led him around like a bull with a ring in his nose.
This is mainly about Climate Change. BNN (or whatever “Breitbart” is these days) is the anti-science force here as they crusade against what 99.9% of scientists agree on.
Bill Nye isn’t a scientist, he’s a science educator. Different job.
The article should be re-named “12 people I hate because they believe in evolution and climate change”, for accuracy. Seriously. That’s his main complaint.
Just Climate Change. They appear to be OK with evolution.