I can think of only 1 reason why Bush would increase budgets in those areas of science - He wanted space lasers to fight the "demons" in the middle east.
But this is probably may be unfair, as I have never met Bush in person. :P
@TrAnCeLoVeR83 Human caused global warming is a fraud. CO2 has no affect on global temperature. The only way humans can cause MINOR temperature change, is by destroying ozone layer and that does not contribute to global changes. Climate change is real, always was, but is a natural process. Governments are using people like this to push the lie, so they can tax you in all ways.
@Xeppen Yes just look at real historic data there is absolutely no correlation between CO2 and temperature warming. There is however direct correlation between sunspot activity and temperature. The magnetic fields on the sun cause the biggest global change. But we also should not ignore human caused ozone destruction, which is real but has no global effect
@TheRightThinker Since I am a layman I used to think climate science skeptics might have had something going for them for a while.. then I saw potholer54's videos. Worth checking out. As for you first claim, watch this: watch?v=PTY3FnsFZ7Q - There are alarmist claims that are very much exaggerated but climate change is very real.
@TheRightThinker You are part of the problem, not of the solution. Denialism is a very dangerous attitude. What makes you think that you are smarter then the scientist? The education system in USA is producing a bunch of illiterate. It as long been demonstrated everywhere in the world that the global warm-up is man made. Yet in the USA the corporations and media are saying that it ain't so. 99.9% of American scientist would tell you that it is very real.
@nononsenseinrational You are the stupid one. I never denied climate change, of course there is climate change, but its part of a natural process, all you need to do is look at historic data and see there is no correlation between CO2 and climate change. Also who told you most scientists believe this, most scientists outside of UN IPCC circles, do NOT buy this at all, do a little research please. The scientists who support this, have hidden gains
@TheRightThinker You lose all credibility when you question the credentials of Neil deGrasse Tyson. You obviously haven't read up on the man at all or you wouldn't be calling him a so-called physicist. BTW what "hidden gains" are you talking about for these conspiring scientists, when it is the oil and gas conglomerates like ExxonMobil who dominate the industrialized world. 6 out of the 10 most profitable corporations by revenue in the world are oil and gas.
@TheRightThinker And companies like those are the ones wanting to keep the status quo, and prevent a transition away from traditional energy to clean energy. If anything, why aren't scientists lining up to defend the positions of these companies? What sense does it make for a scientist to take a different position on global warming and CO2? That makes no sense at all. "Hidden gains" come on man
@IllegalAmigo07 What??? I lose credibility because I question a scientist. The whole essence of science is questioning, science is NEVER settled. Back in history people that went against scientists and questioned Earth being flat, were laughed at. What are you saying, you don't even know how the scientific method works. Do you even know that 1/3rd of all IPCC papers on global warming, are NOT peer reviewed, which means in the scientific community it is considered irrelevant
@TheRightThinker You didn't question him (as in Mr Scientist, I disagree). You denigrated him by labeling him a so-called scientist. So don't bother with conjecture about flat-earth history, it's irrelevant. The IPCC doesn't have papers that are peer-reviewed precisely BECAUSE they aren't a primary-source think-tank. They publish reports of the existing scientific literature which are themselves peer-reviewed. For that matter, what's stopping you from questioning scientists who
@IllegalAmigo07 Not true at all, every paper needs to be peer reviewed to be credible in todays publishing. If I cite a non-peer reviewed paper in a basic college biology/chemistry course, the professor would not accept my paper. Being peer reviewed makes a publication valid, otherwise anyone can publish a paper based on a fake study concluding things
@TheRightThinker themselves are producing whatever this information is that you're eating up. You're blowing smoke and throwing out misinformation like "IPCC papers aren't peer reviewed omg omg". How about questioning the works of whatever scientific community that you happen to be affirming?
@TheRightThinker There is a very strong correlation between CO2 and climate change. Virtually every scientist believe global warm-up is man-made, it is a fact. Corporate profit is the culprit in the misinformation as every asshole that rank on your side is the one that profit from the destruction of this world. Quit blaming the scientist, your ignorance is the culprit in propagating more ignorance.
@nononsenseinrational You drank the cool-aid. Keep persisting in your delusion. You belong to a minority of scientifically illiterate people that reinforce their beliefs trough a bias confirmation mechanism.
@nononsenseinrational I'm sorry but you have no idea what youre talking about. 1. There is no correlation between CO2 and climate change, as I gave examples before. 2. Solar magnetic fields (ie: sunspots) have DIRECT correlation between temperature changes. The only way humans can cause temperature change, is by damaging ozone layer (O3 molecule), but that will not cause global climate changes.
@nononsenseinrational Very strong correlation HAHA. Look at historic data son, Midevil warming period from 950 to 1250, extremely high temperatures, yet very low CO2. It was followed by Little ice age, very cold temperatures, with no change in CO2. I can continue to name historic data but you are too stupid to understand. You have not even taken chemistry 101 to know what CO2 is and what it's structure is.
@TheRightThinker Also you do not know who you are calling stupid, young punk. you have absolutely no knowledge of my academic background. I got ten years of formation on you and very probably 50 IQ points on you. So I take you took chemistry 101 and you think that makes you smarter then Degrassi. I recommend that you watch potholer54 serie on the topic.Now get lost, I had enough of you. Over.
@TheRightThinker If you actually know the structure of C02, you will realize that it traps heat. It can be and is a huge contributor to global warming.
I really like Dr. Tyson's strive to make the population scientifically literate. We don't all need to be scientists, but if we're able to think critically and think things through then I think we'd see several (though, obviously, not all) of our problems eventually die down, if not disappear completely.
If you measure support for science by flow of money, you should look more to Congress, not the President. Congress ultimately determines the budget for agencies like NIH and NASA. To the extent the President does, it's by proposal that needs to be confirmed in Congress. Under Clinton, the Republican Congress cut spending to those organizations, and under Bush, the Democratic Congress increased it.
2:00 Literally minutes ago I was telling that to my asshole friend. He's starting his car with his GPS enabled smartphone in his pocket while arrogantly spouting "You give science and scientists too much credit... " What a dick.
The problem is we live in a kneejerk society. If the President makes a decision at noon, people want to see the results on CNN that same evening. There is almost nothing in life that works like that. That's like meeting a girl, asking her name, then immediately asking her to marry you. Things take time to develop - with governmental programs, many of which are termed in DECADES, money takes time to flow, plans take time to get enacted, and results are usually long term.
@tnekkc No it is not. The reason he could say that is because on the top level, you know the people who actually made it their job to investigate phenomena like these, there is NO debate. If you want to reject scientific consensus you need a very good reason and until such reason is presented the debate IS over. We *have* observed enough to say global warming is a fact. Stop saying otherwise!
Global warming is now an exposed scam, for back door Marxism. It has failed. We now need to look to the next scam that the subversive Marxist professors will try.
It requires eternal vigilance to prevent liberals from destroying society.
@tnekkc Explain in concrete details how global warming is positive for marxist ideals, what does marxism gain by saying that observations lead to this ? Also post sources of the top scientists being in favor of marxism. Also how the fuck do you go from marxism to liberals.
The most important, and destructive vector on earth for 100 years is collectivism.
Collectivism in a family is good. But at the national level it is a nightmare.
Social security, welfare, unemployment, public housing, food stamps, etc. are all liberal programs that inch us closer to communism and cause subversive Marxist professors to salivate over the brainwashing they can do.
Doesn't it seem backwards? Today, we make breakthroughs in our physical science very often, but it has been years since our economic social or political inventions did us any good. Why on earth do men of business have greater influence than men of science, they are cerebral insufficient's, they cannot efficiently solve our problems? The application of the scientific method applied to social concern can.
@teewilson333 most people tend to think in the short term and ignore the long term. People want instant satisfaction, that's scienctists are often ignored in the mainstream cause their discoveries wont have an effect on society immediately but in the long term can be great
At 2:48 the question "Did Bush damage science" appears and neil answers "yes i do". Seems like big think is twisting his words with a false question. Neil always says bush wasnt that bad on science. Wtf bigthink?
I don't know if anyone is wondering or not.. but I know how to get the ties Neil is always wearing... Just Google Hubble Ties. Kinda pricey but worth it if you are active in public speaking on the topic of Astronomy... or if you just have extra money to spend to look awesome at your next business meeting..
i partly watched this for his views on Science and Politics, and partly watched this to get 5 minutes, 21 seconds of Neil deGrasse Tyson! (not nearly my recommended daily dose)
But but... but... I wanted to see mo stem cell research rather than the other stuff... I love that field of Bioengineering with the blastula the.. all the stuff, which shall not be named because of too long a list. so hence... in my list, I still disliked Bush's decision on science.
Here's a crazy Obama and most politicians don't seem to like: get out of other countries, stop fighting wars, and then invest in education, research and technology.
You'd think this is simple enough to understand, but I guess you go to Harvard law school to get dumber. Or bought out by corporate interest groups.
@EDKsurly Obama has supported a great deal more science than his predecessor. Unfortunately for Neil Tyson, these increases in funding have been in medical science, especially Molecular Biology.
@KenMacMillan There's great evidence for this when you consider the tripling of the cost of a degree in England now.
Shit like that only happens when the elite are "officially" in power and making the policies. We have a great shortage of working class heroes just now, and I fear our voices will be muffled at best, silenced at worst.
@KenMacMillan not the smart ones those whom make us smarter make us remember them more and live on in good light in all history because he taught us how to remember the important things such as the leaders that make things better.
@KenMacMillan I wouldn't say that is completely true. Many politicians understand the advances brought about by scientific knowledge which can not only boost economy but has the potential to further a political agenda.
@KenMacMillan "Politicians don't want mass education. It undermines their pursuit of power."
Sure they do. "Mass" being the operative word. When education is a one-size-fits-all program that seeks educational goals over which government has large control, you're gonna have issues. That being said i wouldn't just go nuclear on public education like Ron Paul, for example.
@KenMacMillan For unscrupulous politicians, true enough. Which is why democracy is so important. The OCCUPY AMENDMENT is getting no corporate media attention at all - though it would certainly be the logical (and fair) outcome of the movement.
@KenMacMillan Correct. Otherwise they wouldn't make 75% of all those who get into the university fail their exams. It's not because they are stupid. It's because the exams are unfair. 4 months training, 3 hours long exam? Come on... and then they have to pai more money to take them again, and again... and the tax goes too.....
@Jaelra I'm amazed at this statement. When did you learn that scientific advances emerged from bureaucratic diktat? When our forefathers discovered the wheel or how to make fire it wasn't because the tribal chief said they should, it was because they knew that there was a demand for their efforts. The great societal advances - by and large - do not come from government investment but rather from economic demand.
I can think of only 1 reason why Bush would increase budgets in those areas of science - He wanted space lasers to fight the "demons" in the middle east.
But this is probably may be unfair, as I have never met Bush in person. :P
Eriance 3 days ago
Why is this so called physicist pushing the human caused global warming myth
TheRightThinker 4 days ago
@TheRightThinker Myth?
TrAnCeLoVeR83 3 days ago
@TrAnCeLoVeR83 Human caused global warming is a fraud. CO2 has no affect on global temperature. The only way humans can cause MINOR temperature change, is by destroying ozone layer and that does not contribute to global changes. Climate change is real, always was, but is a natural process. Governments are using people like this to push the lie, so they can tax you in all ways.
TheRightThinker 3 days ago
@TheRightThinker Are there any proof to what you are saying? I hope your right though.
Xeppen 2 days ago
@Xeppen Yes just look at real historic data there is absolutely no correlation between CO2 and temperature warming. There is however direct correlation between sunspot activity and temperature. The magnetic fields on the sun cause the biggest global change. But we also should not ignore human caused ozone destruction, which is real but has no global effect
TheRightThinker 2 days ago
@TheRightThinker Since I am a layman I used to think climate science skeptics might have had something going for them for a while.. then I saw potholer54's videos. Worth checking out. As for you first claim, watch this: watch?v=PTY3FnsFZ7Q - There are alarmist claims that are very much exaggerated but climate change is very real.
TheHandGlove 1 day ago
@TheRightThinker Because people who are educated know what they're talking about.
Eriance 3 days ago
@TheRightThinker You are part of the problem, not of the solution. Denialism is a very dangerous attitude. What makes you think that you are smarter then the scientist? The education system in USA is producing a bunch of illiterate. It as long been demonstrated everywhere in the world that the global warm-up is man made. Yet in the USA the corporations and media are saying that it ain't so. 99.9% of American scientist would tell you that it is very real.
nononsenseinrational 1 day ago
@nononsenseinrational You are the stupid one. I never denied climate change, of course there is climate change, but its part of a natural process, all you need to do is look at historic data and see there is no correlation between CO2 and climate change. Also who told you most scientists believe this, most scientists outside of UN IPCC circles, do NOT buy this at all, do a little research please. The scientists who support this, have hidden gains
TheRightThinker 1 day ago
@TheRightThinker You lose all credibility when you question the credentials of Neil deGrasse Tyson. You obviously haven't read up on the man at all or you wouldn't be calling him a so-called physicist. BTW what "hidden gains" are you talking about for these conspiring scientists, when it is the oil and gas conglomerates like ExxonMobil who dominate the industrialized world. 6 out of the 10 most profitable corporations by revenue in the world are oil and gas.
IllegalAmigo07 1 day ago
@TheRightThinker And companies like those are the ones wanting to keep the status quo, and prevent a transition away from traditional energy to clean energy. If anything, why aren't scientists lining up to defend the positions of these companies? What sense does it make for a scientist to take a different position on global warming and CO2? That makes no sense at all. "Hidden gains" come on man
IllegalAmigo07 1 day ago
@IllegalAmigo07 What??? I lose credibility because I question a scientist. The whole essence of science is questioning, science is NEVER settled. Back in history people that went against scientists and questioned Earth being flat, were laughed at. What are you saying, you don't even know how the scientific method works. Do you even know that 1/3rd of all IPCC papers on global warming, are NOT peer reviewed, which means in the scientific community it is considered irrelevant
TheRightThinker 1 day ago
@TheRightThinker You didn't question him (as in Mr Scientist, I disagree). You denigrated him by labeling him a so-called scientist. So don't bother with conjecture about flat-earth history, it's irrelevant. The IPCC doesn't have papers that are peer-reviewed precisely BECAUSE they aren't a primary-source think-tank. They publish reports of the existing scientific literature which are themselves peer-reviewed. For that matter, what's stopping you from questioning scientists who
IllegalAmigo07 1 day ago
@IllegalAmigo07 Not true at all, every paper needs to be peer reviewed to be credible in todays publishing. If I cite a non-peer reviewed paper in a basic college biology/chemistry course, the professor would not accept my paper. Being peer reviewed makes a publication valid, otherwise anyone can publish a paper based on a fake study concluding things
TheRightThinker 1 day ago
@TheRightThinker themselves are producing whatever this information is that you're eating up. You're blowing smoke and throwing out misinformation like "IPCC papers aren't peer reviewed omg omg". How about questioning the works of whatever scientific community that you happen to be affirming?
IllegalAmigo07 1 day ago
@TheRightThinker There is a very strong correlation between CO2 and climate change. Virtually every scientist believe global warm-up is man-made, it is a fact. Corporate profit is the culprit in the misinformation as every asshole that rank on your side is the one that profit from the destruction of this world. Quit blaming the scientist, your ignorance is the culprit in propagating more ignorance.
nononsenseinrational 1 day ago
@nononsenseinrational You drank the cool-aid. Keep persisting in your delusion. You belong to a minority of scientifically illiterate people that reinforce their beliefs trough a bias confirmation mechanism.
nononsenseinrational 1 day ago
@nononsenseinrational I'm sorry but you have no idea what youre talking about. 1. There is no correlation between CO2 and climate change, as I gave examples before. 2. Solar magnetic fields (ie: sunspots) have DIRECT correlation between temperature changes. The only way humans can cause temperature change, is by damaging ozone layer (O3 molecule), but that will not cause global climate changes.
TheRightThinker 12 hours ago
@nononsenseinrational Very strong correlation HAHA. Look at historic data son, Midevil warming period from 950 to 1250, extremely high temperatures, yet very low CO2. It was followed by Little ice age, very cold temperatures, with no change in CO2. I can continue to name historic data but you are too stupid to understand. You have not even taken chemistry 101 to know what CO2 is and what it's structure is.
TheRightThinker 1 day ago
Comment removed
nononsenseinrational 1 day ago
Comment removed
nononsenseinrational 1 day ago
Comment removed
nononsenseinrational 1 day ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@TheRightThinker Also you do not know who you are calling stupid, young punk. you have absolutely no knowledge of my academic background. I got ten years of formation on you and very probably 50 IQ points on you. So I take you took chemistry 101 and you think that makes you smarter then Degrassi. I recommend that you watch potholer54 serie on the topic.Now get lost, I had enough of you. Over.
nononsenseinrational 1 day ago
@TheRightThinker If you actually know the structure of C02, you will realize that it traps heat. It can be and is a huge contributor to global warming.
hjklhjklhjkl2008 11 hours ago
Didn't call this one, obama talked the talked, but it turns out he was just a republican in liberal clothes.
Polydynamix 4 days ago
* talking on the cell phone...while checking the gps... *
"I dont need science,what do i need science for?!" hahahahahaha hilarious!!!!
kypselialani14 1 week ago 3
@kypselialani14 That makes you the consumer, and us the scientits, scientits use science, like mechatronical engineers such as myself.
CognitiveNetwork 1 week ago
Wow, bigthink, I thought you were better than that. A lot of he editing makes Neil look SUPER political, which is garbage.
Oblic008 1 week ago
So much hands in the pictures of these thumbnails.
MasterDonut 2 weeks ago
Can someone explain to me how he said bush was harmful to the science then seemed to try and explain why he wasn't I'm confused.
SmilingJack100 2 weeks ago
@SmilingJack100 The question was, "Did Bush *damage* science." And his answer was basically, "Yes, but only in a couple of areas of study."
dakkaidotnet 2 weeks ago
BLACK MICHIO KAKU IS PRETTY COOL
luisr12491 2 weeks ago
major monies
boyentenbi 2 weeks ago
Neil the Gas Typhoon!
DemiathDoomhammer 3 weeks ago
Carl Sagan + the Awesome Lando Calrissian = Neil deGrasse Tyson! The Intellectual Descendent of Carl Sagan and Isaac Newton!
RaptorLewis 3 weeks ago
1:37 - 1:55 Is just beautiful
Username4Youtub 1 month ago
watch out, we got a badass over here!
MrBestTrance 1 month ago 26
Dr.Tyson for president!!!!!!
mrninjap00p 1 month ago
I really like Dr. Tyson's strive to make the population scientifically literate. We don't all need to be scientists, but if we're able to think critically and think things through then I think we'd see several (though, obviously, not all) of our problems eventually die down, if not disappear completely.
BatmanOneOhOne 1 month ago 6
Space program go bye-bye.
HarharHagrid 1 month ago
If you measure support for science by flow of money, you should look more to Congress, not the President. Congress ultimately determines the budget for agencies like NIH and NASA. To the extent the President does, it's by proposal that needs to be confirmed in Congress. Under Clinton, the Republican Congress cut spending to those organizations, and under Bush, the Democratic Congress increased it.
YourLovelyMan 1 month ago
thank you Mr. DeGrasse,
iDeist 1 month ago 2
2:00 Literally minutes ago I was telling that to my asshole friend. He's starting his car with his GPS enabled smartphone in his pocket while arrogantly spouting "You give science and scientists too much credit... " What a dick.
amjams 1 month ago 3
Watch out, we got a badass over here
TheSpleenmaster 1 month ago 3
The problem is we live in a kneejerk society. If the President makes a decision at noon, people want to see the results on CNN that same evening. There is almost nothing in life that works like that. That's like meeting a girl, asking her name, then immediately asking her to marry you. Things take time to develop - with governmental programs, many of which are termed in DECADES, money takes time to flow, plans take time to get enacted, and results are usually long term.
clokverkorange 1 month ago
Science institutions (NASA) should be lifted above politics as they hold more value when considering the future of humanity.
ElBarto1193 1 month ago
It's the African American version of Michio Kaku.
CognitiveNetwork 1 month ago 36
@CognitiveNetwork He isn't the anything version of anyone. He is a great man in his own right.
camgan1 3 weeks ago 6
@CognitiveNetwork African American Carl Sagan**
DrAugustusValdes 1 week ago
Lol stop with the stereotypes. Liberal and conservative..talk about science instead.
paigerocks884 1 month ago
Sorry but, the tie should be dark brown, blanding and still contrasting with the west. It should not have galaxies and such on them :P
SuperAntonboy 1 month ago
This guy is made out of win.
ForYeensSake 2 months ago 4
Liberals are destroying science.
Obama said, "the time for debate is over" about global warming.
That is an attack on science.
Neil deGrasse Tyson could not get a job as dog catcher if not for his race... like Obama.
tnekkc 2 months ago
@tnekkc No it is not. The reason he could say that is because on the top level, you know the people who actually made it their job to investigate phenomena like these, there is NO debate. If you want to reject scientific consensus you need a very good reason and until such reason is presented the debate IS over. We *have* observed enough to say global warming is a fact. Stop saying otherwise!
ForYeensSake 2 months ago
@ForYeensSake
Global warming is now an exposed scam, for back door Marxism. It has failed. We now need to look to the next scam that the subversive Marxist professors will try.
It requires eternal vigilance to prevent liberals from destroying society.
tnekkc 2 months ago
@tnekkc Explain in concrete details how global warming is positive for marxist ideals, what does marxism gain by saying that observations lead to this ? Also post sources of the top scientists being in favor of marxism. Also how the fuck do you go from marxism to liberals.
ForYeensSake 2 months ago
@ForYeensSake
Global warming in back door Marxism.
Liberalism is back door Marxism.
The most important, and destructive vector on earth for 100 years is collectivism.
Collectivism in a family is good. But at the national level it is a nightmare.
Social security, welfare, unemployment, public housing, food stamps, etc. are all liberal programs that inch us closer to communism and cause subversive Marxist professors to salivate over the brainwashing they can do.
To control Carbon is to enslave.
tnekkc 1 month ago
@tnekkc Thanks for missing the point and just restating your beliefs. (Beliefs which are frankly quite laughable :P).
ForYeensSake 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@tnekkc Thanks for missing the point and just restating your beliefs. (Beliefs which are frankly quite laughable :P).
ForYeensSake 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@tnekkc Thanks for missing the point and just restating your beliefs. (Beliefs which are frankly quite laughable :P).
ForYeensSake 1 month ago
Comment removed
thuglifenos 1 month ago
@tnekkc Here comes another 'true' conservative...... I bet Rush Limbaugh is your favorite person LOL.
thuglifenos 1 month ago
I love his tie
xrbk17x 2 months ago
2:21 Fuck, I'm so racist.
guyonthebenchful 2 months ago
@guyonthebenchful i fucking love neil but thats hilarious hahaha
Ender0410 1 month ago
Neil deGrasse Tyson 2012
NICKELDUBZ 2 months ago
Doesn't it seem backwards? Today, we make breakthroughs in our physical science very often, but it has been years since our economic social or political inventions did us any good. Why on earth do men of business have greater influence than men of science, they are cerebral insufficient's, they cannot efficiently solve our problems? The application of the scientific method applied to social concern can.
teewilson333 2 months ago
@teewilson333 most people tend to think in the short term and ignore the long term. People want instant satisfaction, that's scienctists are often ignored in the mainstream cause their discoveries wont have an effect on society immediately but in the long term can be great
rameez92 2 months ago
At 2:48 the question "Did Bush damage science" appears and neil answers "yes i do". Seems like big think is twisting his words with a false question. Neil always says bush wasnt that bad on science. Wtf bigthink?
highlander2107 2 months ago
I don't know if anyone is wondering or not.. but I know how to get the ties Neil is always wearing... Just Google Hubble Ties. Kinda pricey but worth it if you are active in public speaking on the topic of Astronomy... or if you just have extra money to spend to look awesome at your next business meeting..
agronoxdt 2 months ago
no one dislikes Neil deGrasse Tyson
it is impossible
TheDoctorWholigan 2 months ago 3
@TheDoctorWholigan
1) Doctor Who!
2) As much as i hate to admit it, it actually is possible.
3) Religious Fundementalists
4) See 3
synchronium24 2 months ago
This is why scientists should have political power when it comes to these issues
superstrok99 2 months ago
PLUTO KILLER!
smithjim1961 2 months ago 5
@smithjim1961 Nah. He was just the get away driver.
SonOfNye 2 months ago
i partly watched this for his views on Science and Politics, and partly watched this to get 5 minutes, 21 seconds of Neil deGrasse Tyson! (not nearly my recommended daily dose)
:)
pravkdey 2 months ago
i have immense respect for this man and his knowledge and perspective.. but am i crazy or does he seem really baked around the 2:40 mark?
Ryanbear42 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
George Bush is smart, but people like to tlak shit.
truthseeker010101 2 months ago
Where I can I get that tie?
XtQfH 2 months ago
watch out! we got a badass over here!
sry i just had to
xgraharax 2 months ago 4
I was a nerd before it was mainstream.
ekeeywaka 3 months ago
Objective analysis and commentary. I dig it.
rencewelltube 3 months ago
But but... but... I wanted to see mo stem cell research rather than the other stuff... I love that field of Bioengineering with the blastula the.. all the stuff, which shall not be named because of too long a list. so hence... in my list, I still disliked Bush's decision on science.
Th3Sh1n1gam1 3 months ago
He makes a strong point.
uriituw 3 months ago
Here's a crazy Obama and most politicians don't seem to like: get out of other countries, stop fighting wars, and then invest in education, research and technology.
You'd think this is simple enough to understand, but I guess you go to Harvard law school to get dumber. Or bought out by corporate interest groups.
rhinnawi95 3 months ago
Obama talks the talk but never actually walk the walk. I got hope in him.
GenTsoChicken1 3 months ago
Neil is no ones pawn, nice try liberal website
redstate86 4 months ago
I wish I had that tie
ClawsOfLaughterDead 5 months ago
It doesn't seem like Obama is supporting science much either.
EDKsurly 6 months ago
@EDKsurly Obama has supported a great deal more science than his predecessor. Unfortunately for Neil Tyson, these increases in funding have been in medical science, especially Molecular Biology.
bloodyhel151 3 months ago
Grand Theft iPod
6reatJ0ke 6 months ago
Comment removed
6reatJ0ke 6 months ago
Politicians don't want mass education. It undermines their pursuit of power.
KenMacMillan 7 months ago 167
@KenMacMillan THEY NEED DUMB AND OR POOR PEOPLE TO FIGHT THEIR WARS un caps
GOD2sodomyME 3 months ago
@KenMacMillan There's great evidence for this when you consider the tripling of the cost of a degree in England now.
Shit like that only happens when the elite are "officially" in power and making the policies. We have a great shortage of working class heroes just now, and I fear our voices will be muffled at best, silenced at worst.
HarrysSecret 3 months ago
@HarrysSecret Here's what Michio Kaku has to say about education in America.
/watch?v=d70KhYzBhT4
KenMacMillan 3 months ago
@KenMacMillan not the smart ones those whom make us smarter make us remember them more and live on in good light in all history because he taught us how to remember the important things such as the leaders that make things better.
duchashes 2 months ago
@KenMacMillan I wouldn't say that is completely true. Many politicians understand the advances brought about by scientific knowledge which can not only boost economy but has the potential to further a political agenda.
camgan1 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@KenMacMillan "Politicians don't want mass education. It undermines their pursuit of power."
Sure they do. "Mass" being the operative word. When education is a one-size-fits-all program that seeks educational goals over which government has large control, you're gonna have issues. That being said i wouldn't just go nuclear on public education like Ron Paul, for example.
synchronium24 2 months ago
@KenMacMillan For unscrupulous politicians, true enough. Which is why democracy is so important. The OCCUPY AMENDMENT is getting no corporate media attention at all - though it would certainly be the logical (and fair) outcome of the movement.
euromut555 2 months ago
@KenMacMillan
Subversive professors want lots of education for brainwashing young minds of mush into liberal collectivists.
Surrender your guns, property rights, cars, freedom of speech. It is for the good of the great gov.
Global warming is just the current song and dance of the commie.
It is being discredited, and soon there will be another.
tnekkc 1 month ago
@tnekkc Lol... your fucking hilarious man. Ever thought of doing stand up? Because what you just said is really funny.
xxMrFablexx 1 month ago
@KenMacMillan Correct. Otherwise they wouldn't make 75% of all those who get into the university fail their exams. It's not because they are stupid. It's because the exams are unfair. 4 months training, 3 hours long exam? Come on... and then they have to pai more money to take them again, and again... and the tax goes too.....
CognitiveNetwork 1 month ago
All world leaders should play Civilization. It can really illustrate why investing in education and research can lead to great advances!
Jaelra 8 months ago 210
@Jaelra I agree.
ShizumaTaka 7 months ago
@Jaelra I'm amazed at this statement. When did you learn that scientific advances emerged from bureaucratic diktat? When our forefathers discovered the wheel or how to make fire it wasn't because the tribal chief said they should, it was because they knew that there was a demand for their efforts. The great societal advances - by and large - do not come from government investment but rather from economic demand.
CigaretteSmokingGuy 6 months ago
But then they'll start hiring nothing but Koreans for research, because of their innate civilization bonus. Great for Koreans, bad for everyone else.
DEY TOOK R JERBS.
noodlezombie 3 months ago
@Jaelra Sid Meiers for president!!!
On the other hand... last time I saw him play... he NERVE STAPLED HIS POPULATION!
Gooseman2k2 2 months ago
@Jaelra
That's like saying soldiers should play Call of Duty so they understand how helpful heartbeat sensors are.
Palatard 2 months ago
@Jaelra They think they are already playing the game. And all the leaders want the manhattan project.
stalkingcat123 2 months ago
@Jaelra As a longtime Civ Fan myself, I can agree this is a brilliant idea!
QtheQuartermasterMan 2 months ago
@Jaelra Well said J ;)
CaptainLight 1 month ago
@Jaelra the problem is that the investment in education and science rarely gives positive returns during the same presidential period.
escapeartist80 1 month ago
@Jaelra Of course they'll then feel like bunching 100,000 units on one square is a good idea in reality.
skydome29 1 month ago
Science should be priority for every single government. It's the only tool the genuinely takes humanity to progress!
Lima547 8 months ago