Like “What do you call the guy who finished last in his class at med school?”
The variant of that that I like is: there must exist, by the nature and definition of any system of ranking, the worst doctor in the world. And somebody, somewhere, has an appointment with him tomorrow.
First person I thought of when I saw the title was NdGT. Whenever I’ve heard him on shows talking about something other than science his lack of intellectual horsepower shines through. Then when I heard him once say something about IQ meaning nothing, I realized he must have been speaking from personal experience.
Uh, I would not say that to Stephen Hawking.
And context is important AFAIR Tyson and Hawking was talking either about the flaws of using IQ as a measure, and also about how likely dumb we all would sound to an Alien from an advanced civilization.
Meh, the verdict on NdGT depends on who you compare him to. Sometimes I get the impression he fancies himself the new Carl Sagan, and he is no Carl Sagan. OTOH he’s an enthusiastic and reasonably eloquent popularizer of science, and to the extent that he makes science more accessible to the unwashed masses, more power to him. There’s far too much scientific ignorance about, so every little candle in the dark is helpful.
This is the worst sentence I’ve read all week—and I’ve spent much of the week grading undergraduate philosophy papers.
Your attack on Yiannopoulos is obviously biased because you inexplicably financially supported toxic person who got completely annihilated by Yiannopoulos: Randi Harper.
I’m not sure if you’re being ironic, but I read Yiannopolos’s piece and Harper’s, and Harper strikes me as more reasonable, although each of them refers to incidents I’m not familiar with so I couldn’t make a final judgement at this time.
It means, “None of the shit you said relates to any of the shit I said.”
I think you can do stupid things, - and be a complete idiot in some areas - but I don’t think you get through that path if you are what most people consider stupid.
(One of my girlfriends has a PhD in Public Health - she is really stupid when it comes to men.)
In case the Nobel Disease has not already been cited:
http://skepdic.com/nobeldisease.html
The same site features a long list of M.D.s who espouse stupidity.
Does Ben Carson count as a scientist?
A lot of it is easy to fact check. From the article:
From the source Milo links to support his claim:
Evidently a fairly bold faced lie by Milo there. Or just very very sloppy journalism. Back to Milo:
Partly true. I don’t know about “again and again”, but he did misquote Bush. And it isn’t fair to say that he showed no interest in correcting the record or addressing the mistake, but he did give a very grumbling, downplaying admission of error with words to the effective of “I can’t believe you jerks are making a big deal out of this”.
Most of Milo’s article is not worth addressing, though, for what I’d hope would be obvious reasons.
No shit.
This is getting way off-topic but I’m not really sure what pieces you’re talking about and what strikes you as being or not being reasonable? My point is that Banquet Bear made an ad-hominem attack on Yiannopoulos without any content related to the “scientists” topic. Still, I wondered what his/her problem with Yiannopoulos was, so I actually read the post (s)he linked and it turns out (s)he gave money to Harper and Harper’s terrible behavior got exposed by Yiannopoulos. Recently, the FreeBSD foundation even asked Harper to stop using their name in her username.
I started to read some of the backstory of this particular nerdwar until I got the uneasy feeling the abyss was gazing also into me, so I’m just left with the impression that Yiannopoulos is an asshole based on his own writing, Harper’s writing strikes me as more reasonable and leaves me with a neutral opinion of her, I don’t care in the least what the Banquet Bear budget gets spent on, and if you want to defend or champion or even mildly praise Yiannopoulos, that’s your right, but keep in mind (or don’t) that he’s an asshole.
The Tyson one is BS. It mentions he failed to get his PHd at University of Texas it fails to mention he transfered to Columbia and got it there.
The rest of it is basically complaining about Tyson posting stuff that he disagrees with politically.