GB
Upload
You're viewing YouTube in English (US).
Switch to another language: | View all
You're viewing YouTube in English.
Switch to another language: | View all

The Moon, the Tides and why Neil DeGrasse Tyson is Colbert's God

by TheScienceFoundation • 300,883 views

Join me on facebook http://www.facebook.com/pages/TheScienceFoundation/277697568961708 Astrophysicist Neil deGrasse Tyson is the Director of the Hayden Planetarium in New York City, host of the PBS...

Why Neil doesn't answer my posts: Because Geology can't explain all the contradictions that constantly arise when one doesn't realize the Earth is GROWING. they must come up with stranger and stranger theories of  stuff, based on FAITH in WHITE COATS, ( Or tan "explorer" jackets.)  and MAGIC invisible forces and concepts.         YOU ARE TO BELIEVE: 1.Even though there is NO FACTUAL EVIDENCE of the existence of deep oceans before 180 million years ago, you MUST BELIEVE they did exist. 2. Even though there is no factual  evidence of the existence of ancient Mountain Ranges before 60 Million Years Ago, you MUST BELIEVE they did exist, and that rain and wind washed/blew them away. 3/ YOU must accept ON FAITH ALONE, that there were deep oceans on Earth for billions of years, even though there are not any fish fossils found in the deep oceans, after 80 years of looking, older than 70 Million Yeas Old.  If fish existed on Earth for well over 300 Million Years, on the continental plate in SHALLOW SEAS, (where we DO find their fossils.)  why did they not also swim in the deep oceans,...if they existed.      SCIENCE does not EVEN have a theory to explain this one, so you simply MUST "BELIEVE"!!!!!           YES, people,...the fish-sea fossils found by YOU and Scientists  and and put in museums,  and  are found literally everywhere,...are exclusively found ON THE CONTINENTS,......NEVER,....NEVER found in the DEEP OCEANS of the Earth. TWO THIRDS of the Earth, the deep oceans has no fish fossils older than 70 Million years old, and DAMN FEW OF THEM! (Evolution, not work in the deep oceans????)
+digg3r Well, not really. So far  You don't know how fossils form.....that there are no fish fossils in the deep ocean until 70 MYAgo.,.....that dense research has been done on/to/for/of the deep oceans for 7 decades. ......So, Ill guess at your areas. MATTER CREATION?  There is ONE and only ONE form of matter creation in the Universe. Pair-Production! We have no choice but to conclude that everything is and must be made of the resultant Electrons and Positrons of "Pair-Production.       Quarks, therefor MUST be made of Electrons and Positrons.   Why?       There is NO OTHER CHOICE!   Quarks have no Origin Moment. They have no place to come from. When they are knocked from the Proton or Neutron they fade and disappear! ,......Just like Pairs before they are activated. and after they join.   Pairs? Hell, we can make Electrons and Positrons in a lab! 2. Expanding Universe vs. Growing Universe?        You lose that one at the gate.  In SCIENCE, there is NO SUCH THING as Expanding without another force being applied. Yet the Universe has no other force applied!  The Universe is GROWING!.....and as long as there is a process of creating NEW MATTER, and there is,.. GROWTH is the best and only  choice! I think my assumptions about you are correct!
+nealadamsdotcom So your "theory" consists of your claim that science is wrong and that your "Theory" is only possible alternative but you have no evidence to back your "Theory". You claim there are no fish fossils in the deep ocean until 70 million years ago but I only have to do a google search and I can find 115 and 450 million year old deep ocean fossils on the first page. All the evidence indicates an expanding universe and that dark energy and dark matter may play a major part in this expansion the fact that you do not acknowledge this research indicates to me you are either intellectually dishonest or just plain stupid and judging by the rest of your comment I think the latter.     
Anyone else thinks he looks like Cleveland off family guy any case I can't get enough off this man
SupernalOne     Neal,....in brackets!,......you argue from a first presumption that you are right and all of science is wrong   (To make a point,...yes! )   - if you were to go through the evidence yourself, with an open mind, you would see it.    ( Totally incorrect! ) Example: where I-68 crosses Sideling Hill in Maryland, the ridge itself is folded downward, but the rock strata underneath are folded upward - one can see that sediment layers were laid down and formed bedrock, then they were folded upward along a fault, then were eroded downward on both sides and eroded away - (You'd sort of have to make some sort of point, here. I do not see it!  There is , and has been buckling and folding  from recurving of the continental crust for billions of years. You say that fish fossil are not found on the bottom of the deep oceans - how could anyone go there and excavate?  Geologists and Paleontologists have been excavating, dredging and sampling the  deep oceans since the 1930's!!!)   The seabed is where sediments accumulate, dead fish get buried deeper and deeper, they wouldn't lie about and fossilize on the ocean floor, for robot submersibles to pick up with their robot claws. (Of course they DO you undereducated idiot!  When the scientific community found mo oceanic floor older than 70-80 Million Years old, and no fish fossils older than 70 Million Years Old, they recruited the U.S. Navy (in the late 60's ) to help and assist science to find the ages of the worlds deep oceanic floors.  This work has been going on since then, and continues to today.)  As to fossils and fossilization. Simple dredging and coring would have found fish fossils easily!  Just as these ancient fossils are found on the continental plate , where Shallow Seas once were!   ALL Ancient Fish Fossils, are found on the continental plate!.      Read a book, you  sad fool!
I really enjoyed listening to this conversation with Neil Degrasse Tyson. I have a new appreciation for the trail that Carl Sagan blazed.
+nealadamsdotcom I know about them. Want me to tell you? Mountains are eroded by wind and water, FACT. If you need me to explain to you how water and wind can grind stone down, go write yourself in a community college and do some 101s. Quarks exhist and have been measured, FACT.  Discovered in the US of A and gave rise to a Nobel prize for the charm quark (The third heaviest quark btw) (1976) and another one for proving the quark structure inside protons and neutrons (1990). Echoes of the Big bang are believed to have been found which makes the big bang theory, a FACT. Not to mention it explains what the universe we live right now better than anything else. As for scientists being an elite trying to deceive the world, well, I am one... I don't try to deceive anyone. All I do is look at the data collected, apply a couple of Fourier transforms and measure the results. Now, it is obviously not as easy as this and if you bothered to learn about science you would see that. Well, maybe you did. And you don't get it. It is normal. It takes years to be able to scratch the surface of physics let alone dwell into quarks and other elementary particles. Even electrons do my head in sometimes...
+nealadamsdotcom you are full of shit. absolutely a young earth christian
Heldermaior   NEAL IN CAPITAL LETTERS, SO WE'RE NOT CONFUSED.   I know about them. Want me to tell you?  SURE, GO FOR IT! Mountains are eroded by wind and water, FACT.    WELLLLL, NO!     ALL OUR MODERN MOUNTAIN RANGES (THAT BEGAN TO RISE UP, "BEGINNING" ABOUT 60 MILLION YEARS AGO, "AFTER" THE DINOSAURS ALL DIED OFF.) ....ARE CONTINUING TO "RISE UP",  AND OF COURSE THERE IS SOME WEARING AWAY AND COLLAPSING AT THE VERY TOPS. If you need me to explain to you how water and wind can grind stone down,    HOW?   YOU CANNOT!   YES- ROCK CAN BE GROUND, SOMEWHAT,..AND SLOWLY,...LIKE THE CONTINENTAL EDGES,...BUT, THOUGH WORN, THEY ARE STILL THERE!  MOUNTAIN RANGES ARE VERY LIKE CONTINENTAL EDGES.     2.PAY ATTENTION HERE. THIS IS SCIENCE, BASED ON FACT!  THE BOTTOM TWO THIRDS OF MOUNTAIN RANGES BECOME COVERED BY SEDIMENTS AND TREES AND PLANTS OVER TIME. THESE MATERIALS BECOME THE COVERING/COATING OF THE MOUNTAIN'S BASIC BULK, AND THEY DO NOT WASH OR GET BLOWN AWAY. THEY, IN FACT GET THISKER AND DENSER AND BECOME SEDIMENTARY ROCK,....AS A RESULT THE MOUNTAIN STAYS, EXCEPT, AS I SAID THE VERY TOPS, THAT RISE UP AND WEAR AND FALL. 3. IF THERE WERE MOUNTAIN RANGES DURING THE TIME OF DINOSAURS, AS THERE ARE TODAY, THERE COULD NOT BE THE FREE MIGRATION OF DINOSAUR SPECIES ACROSS ALL 7 CONTINENTS AS WE HAVE PROVEN TODAY! (AND WHICH IS THE BASIS OF ALL TECTONIC THEORY!) 4. YOU ARE DELUDED BY  FOOLISH AND PREMATURE THEORETICAL  OBSERVATIONS OF FOLDED LAND AND BELIEVE THE CONCLUSIONS. FOLDED LAND, (HILLS, ETC.)  IS CORRECT FOR  THE GEOLOGY OF A GROWING PLANET. Quarks exhist  (EXIST,..YES?) and have been measured, FACT. I CAN MEASURE A SNOWBALL, AND YET IT WILL NEVER BE A SNOWFLAKE!  Discovered  NO,.".HYPOTHESIZED"  in the US of A  (MEANING???) and gave rise to a Nobel prize for the charm quark (The third heaviest quark btw) (1976) and another one for proving the quark structure inside protons and neutrons (1990).        APPLAUSE FOR A WRONG THEORY!!!   WHERE DO THEY COME FROM? DO THEY EXIST OUTSIDE OF A PROTON OR NEUTRON? ANYWHERE????  HOW DO THEY GET INSIDE THE PROTON-NEUTRON? HOW DO THEY ASSEMBLE????? QUARKS ARE "SNOWBALLS" MY FRIEND. AND NEVER SNOWFLAKES. THEY ARE COMPOSED OF A MULTITUDE OF SMALLER PARTICLES, AND YOU CANNOT PROVE IT IS NOT SO! FACT!!!! Echoes of the Big bang are believed to have been found which makes the big bang theory, a FACT. NO, THEY COULD BE ANY NUMBER OF A THOUSAND THINGS THAT WE DO NOT KNOW.  LIGHTNING DOES NOT PROVE GOD!  Not to mention it explains what the universe we live right now better than anything else. IT EXPLAINS NOTHING! ABSOLUTELY NOTHING,..AND IF YOU ARE SO NAIVE TO EVEN THINK SO , YOU ARE NOT A THINKING HUMAN BEING! WE DON'T WANT TO KNOW A PROCESS WITHIN THE UNIVERSE, WE WANT TO KNOW HOW ALL THE MATTER IN THE UNIVERSE "EXISTS" AND WAS "MADE".   NOT, WHAT IT DID WHEN IT GOT HERE.     WHEREIN DOES THE SSSSSTUPID "BIG BANG" EXPLAIN THAT? As for scientists being an elite trying to deceive the world, well, I am one   THEN YOU ARE AN INTELLECTUAL COWARD, AND  FOOLER OF CHILDLIKE PEOPLE.... I don't try to deceive anyone.  A TRUE SCIENTIST, WHO IS HONEST AND STRAIGHTFORWARD, WILL SAY SCIENCE AND ESPECIALLY PHYSICS IS LIKE A SWISS CHEESE, FILLED WITH HOLES AND THE MOST AMAZING THING ABOUT SCIENCE IS THAT IN SPITE OF THIS IT SEEMS TO HOLD TOGETHER.  All I do is look at the data collected, apply a couple of Fourier transforms and measure the results.      NO, YOU DO NOT. YOU BASE 99 % OF YOUR THINKING AND CONCLUSIONS ON THEORIES THAT HAVE GONE BEFORE.,...AND BEFORE THAT!     YOU DON'T KNOW THIS, ANY MORE THAN A LUNATIC IN AN ASYLUM OR A MONK IN A MONASTERY. Now, it is obviously not as easy as this  AS WHAT? and if you bothered to learn about science you would see that.  I HAVE BOTHERED, FOR MORE YEARS THAN YOU HAVE BEEN ALIVE.  Well, maybe you did. And you don't get it.  I WOULD ARGUE, THE ODDS ARE, THAT YOU DON'T "GET IT", AND I MORE LIKELY DO. It is normal. It takes years to be able to scratch the surface of physics let alone dwell into quarks and other elementary particles. Even electrons do my head in sometimes.. THEN,..ALLOW ME TO HELP YOU.    THE ONLY BASIC "MATTER" PARTICLES IN THE UNIVERSE ARE ELECTRONS AND POSITRONS. THERE ARE NO OTHER,  THEY COME FROM A NON MATTER IN-FACING  COMPLETE BALLANDED NEGATIVE TO POSITIVE FIELD, AND HIGH ENERGY PHOTONS.   WHEN A HIGH-ENERGY PHOTON STRIKES THE POSITRON CORE POINT PARTICLE AND KICKS IT FROM THE CENTER OF THE ELECTRON  SHELL,.. THE POSITRON FLIES OUT AND TAKES WITH IT ONE HALF OF THE PHOTONS ENERGY, LEAVING THE OTHER HALF FOR THE ELECTRON TO FILL IT VACANT HALF. AND WE GET "MATTER"!!!!  THIS IS THE ONLY WAY WE GET MATTER!     THESE TWO AND THE FIELDS THEY COME FROM IS THE ONLY RAW MATERIAL THE UNIVERSE HAS TO BUILD WITH.  APPARENTLY IT HAS BEEN ENOUGH.         OH, ILL BE GLAD TO TELL YOU HOW. NEAL ADAMS,..REGARDS.
"All of the energy and matter that existed still exists. Matter does not create energy of itself. The actions of matter enable energy to become manifest".
I'm not impressed by DeGrasse Tyson - he certainly isn't a new Carl Sagan or Robert Sapolsky, but at least he's less politically influenced than the two I mention. I think DeGrasse Tysons public image is a political message in itself - he's an image of positive stigma towards the people of African decend.
+Sexxistentialist How is it not a typo, when the meaning is apparent? English is my second language. On second thought, your comment isn't worth a response.
+Alex Stein Your definition of the word stigma is absolutely Anglo-Saxon, not Greek. Stigma is a Greek noun, and a Greek letter. That is why you interpreted "positive stigma" (in the meaning of "positive mark") as an oxymoron.
Onime-no-Enishi       NEAL IN CAPITAL LETTERS theories are not "proven wrong", they are corrected. THAT IS CALLED SEMANTICS.  "THEY" ARE "PROVEN WRONG" WE DON'T "TALK" JUST TO "TALK"! "CORRECTED" MEANS "IT WAS WRONG" IN THE FIRST PLACE!  Theories are an ongoing search for the truth; BULLS**T,  THEORIES ARE WHAT UNIVERSITIES REQUIRE IN ORDER FOR STUDENTS TO GRADUATE,....NO MATTER HOW STUPID THESE THEORIES MAY BE.   you can never go "wrong" with your search if it's on going.  YES YOU CAN, AND I CAN SHOW YOU  IN A THOUSAND WAYS! Your hypocrisy is astounding, ONLY TO THE IGNORANT!  as your theory of how the earth is growing has as little proof as what you claim science today has. NO AND NO AGAIN. ALL THE FACTUAL PROOF IS ON THE SIDE OF THIS THEORY. PANGEA HAS "ONLY"  "ONLY"  THEORIES.  IF YOU WERE RIGHT, GOOD ARGUMENTS WOULD ARISE HERE AND THEY DO NOT. TYSON HAS AN OPPORTUNITY FOR AN OPEN PRESENTATION AGAINST ME HERE , AND HE DOES NOT!       DO YOU REALLY THINK NEIL HASN'T READ THESE WORDS HERE?   SURELY YOU JEST.
What if the reason why gravity exists in the first place is because the universe is expanding?
Quote from a Glasgow Uni rag mag in the 70s "If the human brain were simple enough for us to understand, we'd be so stupid that - we couldn't..."
Let's make it easy and simple: this DISGRACE is vague and arrogant. Nothing but a pathetic clown telling old jokes.  
rodgerfox3   Neal's comments in Capital Letters....The reason he wouldn't answer those questions is you have your facts wrong, NO, YOU ARE INCORRECT!. IT'S AS SIMPLE AS THAT. there is evidence of oceans from a lot longer then 180 million years ago.     THERE YOU ARE.     ON THE INTERNET,..GO TO "THE CRUSTAL AGE MAP"    IN/ON WHICH GEOLOGY GIVES THE RESULT OF THEIR  40 YEAR RESEARCH TO GIVE THE AGES OF THE DEEP OCEANS OF EARTH. THERE YOU WILL FIND, THAT THERE ARE "NO"  INDICATION OR SIGN, OR PROOF OF DEEP OCEAN BEFORE 180 MILLION YEARS AGO. IT'S NOT "MY" MAP!    IT'S CURRENT SCIENCE'S  MAP!  IT'S FACT!  Continental drift has been known for a while,  "CONTINENTAL DRIFT " IS SIMPLY THE "NAME" OF A "THEORY", AND A POOR NAME!  NOTHING IS "DRIFTING"   "RIFTS" ARE SPREADING!   the evidence points to you being ignorant and just thinking because you think things happened differently then the evidence states it happened makes you cool.   I'M SORRY?  WHAT?    EVIDENCE???        IT'S SAD THAT FOOLS CAN TYPE.  THE PRICE OF LIVING IN A FREE SOCIETY!
Colbert's "God"? facepalm
The God of the Gaps:  "God is an ever-receding pocket of scientific ignorance, that's getting smaller and smaller and smaller as time goes on."  (Tyson) Freaking BRILLIANT!!!
As a fellow man with the same first name as you i agree.
neil degrasse tyson is the most intelligent  " person  I have heard speak. even though he s obviously a government schill possibly illumanti. no proof of aliens ? ha ha no seriously can any one believe a colored is that smart ? hes like obama what part of nigga dont you get  ? you can see him cleverly reading that tela prompt like bush does cept gw cant read. no really why wasnt he denouncing the rioters in fergussen ? wen a niggas nose is so far up whiteys ass . what dead nigga ? besides all that bullshit i just said that fella is one impressive mo-fo. especially to all the liberals and to rcists like my self.if he ran for president most here on this board would vote for him.not me.not cause hes black but because he would be bought and paid for .end slavery free yo mind fools.whats this got to do with science who cares
38:12 '"The purpose of science is to improve life?' The purpose of science is to understand the natural world!" The purpose of ENGINEERING is to improve life.
"interesting for cocktail parties" :D I like the expression
NDT is a reductionist? :-(
A transcript (or closed-captioning) is vital for the deaf. That in and of itself should be sufficient.  Having said that - it's quite useful for the hearing as well. A transcript makes searching far easier; you can think of it as an index to the video, if you must. It also removes time dependency - I can read (or skim) to find areas of interest far, far faster than waiting on the natural pace of the video. In addition, it can remove ambiguity in what's been said - not everyone enunciates well, and not everyone is a native speaker with their brain adapted to the sounds of the language. It isn't a replacement for human interactivity - but frankly, neither is a video. It's an adjunct - a useful tool to amplify the usefulness of the recording. It enhances communication - show it some love.
I definitely understand his point--especially in this age when it seems the media makes a sport out of misquoting people by deliberately taking things out of context and /or ignoring all of the other cues he mentions.  However,  I do have some hearing loss in the vocal range and while I hear most things, there are a lot of words that I don't quite understand as I'm watching videos or movies if they're said quickly or with a lot of background noise.  In those cases, transcripts and subtitles are very useful in clearing up what was actually said.
You're damn Right - That's why I think it was kind of stupid of him to make a big fuss out of such a fundamentally practical tool, just a simple, useful, unassuming script. 
I think you're sort of right Northern85Star.  I do believe that the public at large may benefit from his endeavors on behalf of science but, there's also something about the way he sometimes gets kind of grumpy or authoritarian on his interlocutors, like for example, right at the beginning of this very video, in that awkward attempt to lecture Roger Bingham, and possibly the public, on how useless it is to get an interview's content typed into a script, when compared to the marvels of today's video possibilities.  To me that only reveals some kind of research illiteracy on his part.  It is also a bit arrogant to say: "Didn't we talk enough the last time?"    Well anyway, one way or the other I think it is better to have him out there than not. 
Hermits with interspace-webs.....would totally work going to Mars.
09DE14...Roger Bingham is a poor interviewer...he mumbles and doesn't listen.
Bill O is proof that you don't need rudimentary intelligence to succeed on Faux News. Hell, that would probably disqualify you on that network of nitwits.
+lexagon I have a theory (I doubt it's just me) that nearly everything he says is in fact show. When Silverman (the American Atheist spokesman) went on the show, he stated afterwords how articulate Bill was in conversation before the show started.. But the second the camera's turned on he did a complete 180. 
+Gary Sanders Yes, no one could be as idiotic as he seems at times ... but then again, how do you explain Sean Hannity?? 
Of course nobody able to explain why the moon and the tides since there is always next question "why" once the explanation is given. And the question "why" can goes infinitely.
that is why talking to kids is so hard haha all they do is say why....there is only so far you can go to explain something because there is always a why to be asked.
Adamo Leoni    MY RESPONSE IN CAPITAL LETTERS!    How do we know the universe is expanding?   WELL, SINCE, IN SCIENCE AND PHYSICS "NOTHING"  "EXPANDS",...WITHOUT ANOTHER FORCE BEING APPLIED, WE KNOW THE UNIVERSE IS NOT "EXPANDING" BECAUSE IT IS PHYSICALLY IMPOSSIBLE FOR    "ANYTHING" TO EXPAND! THE UNIVERSE MAY GROW, IF NEW MATTER IS ADDED, (AND, THAT IS WHAT WE ARE PROPOSING ,...AND CAN PROVE, FACTUALLY!)  SO THE REST OF THIS IS MOOT!,..UNLESS WE REPLACE "EXPANDING" WITH "GROWING"! SO,.......LET'S DO THAT, AND SEE HOW IT GOES!  Well, for a long time, we didn't know. Although the universe is expanding (GROWING)  all around us, the expansion  (GROWTH)  happens over such a large scale that we never notice it on Earth.    (SO FAR, SO GOOD!)  In fact, it was only 80 years ago that anyone realized the universe was   XX expanding  XX . (GROWING) The expansion  (GROWTH)  of the universe was discovered in 1929, when American astronomer Edwin Hubble brought together many scientists' work. In 1915, Albert Einstein wrote the General Theory of Relativity, which explained how gravity works.   (MAYBE YES, LIKELY NO!)   When Einstein applied his new theory to the whole universe, he found that it predicted that space should not be stable;  (UTTER NONSENSE!)   it should either be expanding or contracting. (AGAIN, NOT PART OF HIS THEORY,...JUST HIS OPINION!)  Einstein refused to believe his own equations   (A VERY GOOD ASSUMPTION!) - like all astronomers for thousands of years, he had assumed that the size of the universe was not changing. Meanwhile, on another continent, Vesto Slipher, an astronomer at the Lowell Observatory in Flagstaff, Arizona, was finishing a detailed study of the night sky. Through his telescope, he examined several of faint, fuzzy objects called "nebulae," from the Greek word for "cloud." He discovered that light given off by the nebulae was redder than it should have been. Slipher knew that when an object's light looked too red, that meant it was moving away from Earth. He calculated the nebulae's speeds from the redness of their light, and found they were all moving away from us incredibly quickly: one, the Sombrero Nebula, moved away at 2.5 million miles per hour! Meanwhile, astronomers in California were building the largest telescope in the history of the world - a new telescope on top of Mount Wilson, near Pasadena, with a mirror over 8 feet (2.5 meters) across. In 1923, Edwin Hubble used this new telescope to prove that some of the nebulae, including the Sombrero, are actually other galaxies similar to our own Milky Way. He spent the rest of the decade using the telescope, trying to find creative ways to measure the distances to hundreds of galaxies.   (SO NICE TO HAVE THIS HISTORY LESSON, WITHIN THE POOR SCIENCE. GO ON!) In 1929, Hubble compared his distances to Slipher's measurements of light and made a plot, which today is called a Hubble diagram. Hubble's diagram showed that the redness of a galaxy's light, and thus the speed with which the galaxy moved away from Earth, increased with its distance from Earth, and that the increase graphed into a straight line. The farther away a galaxy is, the faster it moves  (GROWS....)  away from us. Hubble saw that this was true everywhere he looked, in every direction in the sky. He knew there was nothing special about our galaxy - we can't be in the center of the universe. The best explanation for Hubble’s diagram, then, is that the entire universe is expanding, (AH-AH,...GROWING.)   like bread rising in an oven - (AH-AH.  ANOTHER FORCE-SEVERAL_ ACTUALLY-IS BEING ADDED--THERMAL, AND CHEMICAL!  LET US REPLACE THE BREAD, WITH  A BABY. LONGER TIME-SAME OBSERVATION.  THE BABY MAY "SEEM" TO BE EXPANDING,....BUT IT IS NOT,...IT-THE BABY, IS GROWING. REPLACE THE BABY WITH A WATERMELON, AN APPLE,..A TREE OF ANY SORT,...A CRYSTAL!    YES, A "CRYSTAL" AN NON-ALIVE CRYSTAL LIKE MOST PLANETS AND SUNS!   exactly what Einstein's equations said should be happening.  (WELL...) When Einstein heard about Hubble's results, he said that not realizing the expansion of the universe was his "greatest blunder." (AND CONTINUES TO BE!!!!) Although Einstein was convinced by Hubble's diagram, many other scientists were not.  (PERHAPS THEY HAD A PROBLEM,...WITH THE WORD "EXPANSION" WHICH IS IMPOSSIBLE!)  Accepting that the universe is expanding requires such a major change in thinking that many scientists refused to believe Hubble's results.   9 YES, THEY WOULD HAVE TO THROW OUT EVERY LAW IN PHYSICS, FOR THE SAKE OF A SIMPLE OBSERVATION AND THE INABILITY TO INTERPRET IT PROPERLY!  They came up with some other ways of explaining the straight line Hubble saw in his diagram. (AND YET, IGNORED "GROWTH"!.....IDIOTS!) Although the big bang picture was based on Hubble’s observations of other galaxies, the theory also predicts several other things about the universe, and so far, scientists have found all the theory's predictions to be true. Among the most important predictions are: 1) the oldest stars in the universe are all a little younger than the big bang (EXPLAINED BETTER BY "GROWTH".) 2) the amounts of hydrogen and helium in the universe are similar to what would have been produced soon after the big bang )NO, NONSENSE! A THOUSAND TIMES NONSENSE!  HELIUM IS PRODUCED /CONVERTED "FROM"   HYDROGEN! EVEN NOW, WE HAVE NO IDEA HOW BIG THE MATTER UNIVERSE IS!) 3) scientists have found a faint remnant of the big bang called the "cosmic microwave background radiation" - a field of invisible light that fills the entire universe(AND CAN BE EXPLAINED, A THOUSAND WAYS!) Because of this of evidence, most scientists today accept the big bang theory.(NO, THEY DO NOT. FIRST, FEW AGREE ON THE "SAME" PICTURE! 2. NO THEORY EXPLAINS WHERE THIS ALL CAME FROM IN THE FIRST PLACE,....IT ALL ASSUMES THE BUILDING BLOCKS WERE ALREADY THERE. THIS IS CALLED "A BELIEF THAT GOD DID IT!") Extensions of the big bang picture drive  (FRUSTRATES, MY FRIEND, FRUSTRATES!!!!!)  most of today's astrophysics research.
'Are our brains all that we are? ' Neil himself has said that if two houses are next to each other, then the space between has to have something connecting them. This is my largest problem with science; so ego based. Surely this is only making his words hypocritical when he himself understands through quantum mechanics that there is no real distinct separation from everything. That to objectify or 'name' something is a very human concept, and in being so it falls far short of breaking boundaries.
TIDES GO IN, TIDES GO OUT, YOU CAN'T EXPLAIN THAT. Seriously, Bill O can't possibly believe in that shit.
As much as I admire and respect Neil DeGrasse Tyson, I don't agree that science discovery is exponential (41:05). As a matter of fact, that as probably peaked in 1920/30's. There is not much technology that we use today that is not a refinement of science/technology discovered back then or before. There might be more breakthrough in the future but right now science knowledge is not expanding exponentially IMO.
says the person who apparently has no idea about how anything they use works. saying science peaked in the 20s is just stupid.
+Dreamr OKelly First reply since my  3 month ago comment. Thanks. Well they invented canned beer in 1935. As far as you're concerned, nothin' beats that.
He's basically saying Empathy, is lost in text.
I think the brain has a priority of tasks: survival(food, water, shelter) ; safety(fear);reproduction (sex); enjoyment (entertainment) ; understanding (science)
It is seldom that I am bold enough to differ with Dr. Neil deGrasse Tyson, but I find ttranscripts essential. I can read much faster than the best of the lecturers can talk, and for most people, the content of their comments are the important part of their talk. The emotional content is often uncontrolled and incidental, and has little to do with the communication other than to obfuscate.
85% of the universe has gravity from an unknown origin.
The convo on 6:20, it leads to cognitive dissonance. If the witness "knows" the outside input on it's brain, ie the subject, then it'll be easy to disassociate the experience with the naturalcy of being human. Genuine love rises from within, as it comes, when it comes, it's such a vital part of our lives, due to love=happiness. If you can stimulate that part of the brain on cue, then i don't know what to make of the human race. If we are just that, a pot of chemicals, our consciousness seated upon the head of the human body, then.. it really begs the question, because i cannot for one simply agree to that theorem. What are we then really? .. I refuse to acknowledge or even toy the proposition science is leading the whole world onto believe. 
The narrator in the beginning said  "...We are in New York City at an American museum..."  Isn't that kind of obvious? I doubt it the Cuban museum if you're in NYC.
You know,...I don't really know why Neil doesn't answer.Too busy?    Afraid I'm nuts, and he has too much respect for me to embarrass me?? Confusion??? Suppose he could leap over all of that, and consider his own reaction, if he lived back in those days when Wegener proposed that all the continents were stuck together in one continuous, contiguous outer crust.(no, he didn't say it was an island, but he did say they were together.)  And somehow, they broke apart! Does Neil,...or any of you believe they,...among all scientists, were unique enough to be that one person, who believed this was even possible???  I don't think so, even though we ALL thought Africa and South America sure "seemed" to fit together.      If YOU,...or Neil  think they were thus unique, know this, the Pangea Theory wasn't truly considered until trans-Atlantic cables had the nasty habit of melting in half at regular intervals,...no matter where they were laid down across the Atlantic.      Is it truly MORE incredible to see that that same (granitic) crust,....that was WHOLE, and of ONE PIECE, and it simply wrapped around the whole of the THEN Earth? (And the fish swum in the shallow seas on the continental plate.  ONLY.) If that Earth 'got larger' more aggressively with time, and could no longer resist the increasing "growth" without cracking down to the molten (heavier Basaltic) under crust, it may, and did, 180 Million Years Ago finally crack. These cracks became rifts, spreads, and eventually oceanic spread.    No swimming about, or rotating, just simply SPREAD APART, just as Geo;ogy's own  Crustal age Maps show,...perfectly.
If you're questioning life, I suggest you to read ~The Present~ at TruthContest◙com
The only Bacon I care about are the ones sitting next to my eggs. 
wow, what he said about transcripts applies perfectly to texting
+Penney Cashen :>) Not the Bible, the Bible was never supposed to be understood as direct text against us in first personality, identification and used as a controlled communication and a stifling one at that, narcisism and hell, Jesus saving the jillions of person by dieing on a cross, bullshit :>) However if one ( is ) understand we are all one idea in God's mind and then to read the Bible in a first person context as to our , perception and subconscious beliefs or and understanding of the five senses  and our reactions and astrological geometry we are just like a snow flake or a drop of water and our subconscious motivations ? Very difficult to asses our subconscious , watch Carl Jung, read Aristotlean Syllogism, G.I. Gurdjieff and maybe your journey will change for better, we are all servants of God / Consciousness and owe every breath to same, and thus how do we pay homeage to same...... unfortunately not very much at all...........do we.......very little gratitude...........:>) we are connected, and significant, and we do participate, and all within a context of Love, Truth , harmony :>) 
  THIS is a DARK AGE of SCIENCE!!!!    IN IT We STILL actually BELIEVE the Universe is EXPANDING....like pre men who have caught a glimpse of the Universe moving outward and decided it exploded in a BIG BANG and is "expanding" outward, cause ,..."Duh, dat's whut it looks like, ta me, ain't it."       Undaunted by new discoveries that the Universe is 'actually' ACCELERATING   outward our fellow chimps have made up new and magical excuses for this exponential expansion......All this in the FACE of the FACT that there is NO SUCH THING in the Physical Sciences as a thing EXPANDING! .....How does one talk to these people???? Reply  · 
+LloydieP  How much clearer do I need to be?   NEAL IN CAPS LOCK.    MUCH CLEARER!  My POINT is that you are ARROGANT  WHETHER I AM ARROGANT, OR NOT, AND I AM NOT. IS NOT A POINT. IT'S NAME CALLING, BUT NOT A POINT. and way out of your depth calling scientists CHIMPS because they haven't explained EVERYTHING yet. I CALL THEM CHIMPS BECAUSE THEY CALL "THEORIES"    "FACTS" TO HIDE ALL THAT THEY DON'T KNOW. TYSON DOES IT TOO. THERE IS NO HONESTY IN  CALLING THEORIES "FACTS",.....MERELY HIDING THE "EXPERTS" IGNORANCE, FROM THE "GREAT UNWASHED"          IF YOU DON'T LIKE IT, WELL, THAT'S SIMPLY TOO BAD "They are very good mimics but provide no new thoughts. LIKE YOU. " But you're smarter than them aren't you? WELL, I AM PROVIDING "NEW THOUGHTS" New thoughts alright; the videos on your channel are certainly an example of those.  YES THEY ARE,..AND I INVITE THE FEW OF YOU INTERESTED PARTIES TO COME AND VIEW. ...AND LISTEN,...WITH YOUR BRAINS TURNED ON. Of course when anyone asks you a specific question in the comments, you ignore it  NOT THE TRUTH.  I ANSWER EACH AND EVERY QUESTION, AND GO ON TO EXPLAIN IN DETAIL.  PERHAPS PEOPLE LIKE YOU CAN'T UNDERSTAND,...BECAUSE,....YOU ARE A ,....CHIMP?   BLIND? CLOSED-MINDED? A SPECIALIST? and go off on your "make a point" rant. HARDLY A "RANT" ,...MAKE MY POINT,...YES.  Everyone's welcome to their OPINION; but waving a big bright "I'm a Crackpot" flag   I'M SORRY?  I AM HARDLY A CRACKPOT.  OR DO YOU MEAN YOU?  AH,..NO, NOT YOU, YOU "MIMIC" THE THEORIES YOU LEARN AS "FACTS"!  GOT IT.  while claiming to be smarter  DID I SAY I WAS SMARTER?  NO.  "NOT A SPECIALIST"? YES. than all modern specialist scientists, using hilariously self contradictory  YOU ARE INVITED TO FIND ONE CONTRADICTION. videos is "making noise" and nothing more. NO, IT IS EXPLAINING KNOWN "FACTS" AND CONCLUSIONS.            URM,.....DO YOU HAVE A,...ONE POINT.....ARGUMENT? .....CONTRADICTORY "FACT"/                           NOTHING? ....REALLY?     WHY DO YOU WRITE,..IF YOU HAVE NO BRAIN?
How do we know the universe is expanding? Well, for a long time, we didn't know. Although the universe is expanding all around us, the expansion happens over such a large scale that we never notice it on Earth. In fact, it was only 80 years ago that anyone realized the universe was expanding. The expansion of the universe was discovered in 1929, when American astronomer Edwin Hubble brought together many scientists' work. In 1915, Albert Einstein wrote the General Theory of Relativity, which explained how gravity works. When Einstein applied his new theory to the whole universe, he found that it predicted that space should not be stable; it should either be expanding or contracting. Einstein refused to believe his own equations - like all astronomers for thousands of years, he had assumed that the size of the universe was not changing. Meanwhile, on another continent, Vesto Slipher, an astronomer at the Lowell Observatory in Flagstaff, Arizona, was finishing a detailed study of the night sky. Through his telescope, he examined several of faint, fuzzy objects called "nebulae," from the Greek word for "cloud." He discovered that light given off by the nebulae was redder than it should have been. Slipher knew that when an object's light looked too red, that meant it was moving away from Earth. He calculated the nebulae's speeds from the redness of their light, and found they were all moving away from us incredibly quickly: one, the Sombrero Nebula, moved away at 2.5 million miles per hour! Meanwhile, astronomers in California were building the largest telescope in the history of the world - a new telescope on top of Mount Wilson, near Pasadena, with a mirror over 8 feet (2.5 meters) across. In 1923, Edwin Hubble used this new telescope to prove that some of the nebulae, including the Sombrero, are actually other galaxies similar to our own Milky Way. He spent the rest of the decade using the telescope, trying to find creative ways to measure the distances to hundreds of galaxies. In 1929, Hubble compared his distances to Slipher's measurements of light and made a plot, which today is called a Hubble diagram. Hubble's diagram showed that the redness of a galaxy's light, and thus the speed with which the galaxy moved away from Earth, increased with its distance from Earth, and that the increase graphed into a straight line. The farther away a galaxy is, the faster it moves away from us. Hubble saw that this was true everywhere he looked, in every direction in the sky. He knew there was nothing special about our galaxy - we can't be in the center of the universe. The best explanation for Hubble’s diagram, then, is that the entire universe is expanding, like bread rising in an oven - exactly what Einstein's equations said should be happening. When Einstein heard about Hubble's results, he said that not realizing the expansion of the universe was his "greatest blunder." Although Einstein was convinced by Hubble's diagram, many other scientists were not. Accepting that the universe is expanding requires such a major change in thinking that many scientists refused to believe Hubble's results. They came up with some other ways of explaining the straight line Hubble saw in his diagram. Although the big bang picture was based on Hubble’s observations of other galaxies, the theory also predicts several other things about the universe, and so far, scientists have found all the theory's predictions to be true. Among the most important predictions are: 1) the oldest stars in the universe are all a little younger than the big bang 2) the amounts of hydrogen and helium in the universe are similar to what would have been produced soon after the big bang 3) scientists have found a faint remnant of the big bang called the "cosmic microwave background radiation" - a field of invisible light that fills the entire universe Because of this of evidence, most scientists today accept the big bang theory. Extensions of the big bang picture drive most of today's astrophysics research.
The only problem I have with it is that, it was not that s argument was that you couldn't understand it, but that you couldn't explain why it exists at all; you can explain why tide "works", mechanically, but you can't explain why we exist, more or less.  Not that I like Bill o Reily as much. 
+Brodie Dowdy There is nothing in John Smith's comment that implies we are "top shit". He only states that we have no way of explaining or proving WHY anything exists. YOU however, seem to have all the answers, so I suppose the question of a creator, or creators doesn't matter to you.
The exact opposite in fact, I have no answers. Why question the purpose of something that is in essence purposeless. I was merely stating an underlining truth. We are not important in this universe because the universe is nothing, an improbability, life is thus and so thus is life.
Neil Tyson is god!!! AHHHh! Oh my Neil Tyson, Bill O'Reilly is an embarrassment to mankind. It must have been tough to interview Tyson and keep up with his responses...salute. I love the bit about the people using god as an explanation for concepts out of their reach. The ever receding pocket of god hahaha. Religion is such an evil and self destructive joke.
Science has the ability to solve many of the worlds issues. It cannot however overcome the politics and the agenda's of those who wish to pervert its discoveries for their own selfish gains.
+Trevor Long The Webster definition will also perfectly do, because it is the same. Wiki articles are in fact much longer, as encyclopedia ought to be. Well wait, longer... I see, long is what you called small. And then you proceed again to ask more questions, without actually bother quoting what my mistake are. Can you answer answer my question ? Can you be civilized ? Can you display some accountability for the idiotic assertions you made ? The answer is sadly: no. Your fixation on politics is quite normal. It is the force that shape our civilization and our common life. You are the hypocrite here that did not recognize it, while  spewing "political bastard" "liberal cancer" or "big government", in comment about a science video. It is the force that is also describe by Webster "the condition that exists when people have developed effective ways of organizing a society and care about art, science, etc." BTW Thomas Jefferson is also a political beast, that is why you know him, thank for making my case. You did also not understand what electricity is, nor Jefferson scientific work, because it is not a source of energy, it is a carrier. Finally politics have always sponsored science, because it gives them new tools to wield more powers. I didn't know is was possible to be that wrong about everything. I did not just do a "free" statement like yours, it is argumented here above. You see what it is you miss ? An education. Class is definitely not over for you. It has not even started.  Does "big government " does not forced kiddo like you to go to school in the US of A ?  What keep your home warm is politic, the one that ensure bullies to plunder fossil energy in terrorized foreign countries, at the point of a gun. Natural greed. You said again " I'm over here loving my science that has solved all of the world's major problems so far". It is a good mantra, it may keep you warm in your sweet delusion  a adequacy, but it is not science. Can you name ONE, only ONE  world's major problems that is solved by science ? (come on, you can do it, there is at least a a few of them)
+TheBoing2001 I take time to ensure proper sourcing when using any Internet resource and especially "wikis" :-)  But I mostly agree with you.  At times I agree with Trevor but the ignorant "liberal" comment put a huge red flag up. :-)  The utter hatred from "the tea party" that emanates reminds me of Hitler. 
I love neil degrase tyson. Sorry if i butchered his name. He is so smart. But thats not why i love him. I love him because he makes me want to learn. He tells it like a story. He makes me want to go look it up on my own. Hes so relatable. Like hes not snobby or stuck up. Hes down to earth. Very easy to comprehend. Easy to talk to. Very amazing person. THATS WHAT SETS HIM APART FROM ANY OTHER ASTROPHYSICIST
William Bidinger Shared on Google+ · 8 months ago
Sharing because it's interesting.
at the four minute mark he almost seems sad that you can't experiment on the brain
Another great interview with Neil. Love listening to him talk. Always so insightful.
I'm jealous. I want a conversation with Neil DeGrasse Tyson.  He discovers and learns. He doesn't just listen and take for granted. He is a thinker. He isn't lazy. He thinks like I think and he follows it to uncover more (:
If you could put a person in a box and perform experiences with that person's brain the analisys you would get would be from a brain that's submited to the stimuly of that particular experience, so imo the validity of the conclusions you could draw would be short lived, because any further experiences would not be exactly the same, as i believe every experience in life is unique. As long as the data structure of exery experience contains a pointer to the address of the previous, none is the same, even if they have the same value. The value is but a representation, the memory address is the unique ID. If memory for human beings is not like a computer's, then why are we even talking about drawing conclusions about neuroscience? Drawing conclusions IS writting in memory. And im very very sleepy and senseless,
His statement on exponential growth  makes me remember a friend I had in high school 1965 that stated everything had  been invented.  I wonder what she is up to today???
Bill O didn't know how the tides worked? Really? I've known that since 5th grade science class in public school in KENTUCKY! I've finally forgiven Dr. Tyson for his involvement, however slight, in the Pluto demotion. He has a great point that the Disney character Pluto has much to do with our affection for the ex-planet. Next on my list is a Brian Greene discussion. Science is mind-blowing!
Is this asshole doing a psych eval on Neil, what the fuck
Darrell Hargett Shared on Google+ · 1 year ago
An awesome interview with Dr. Tyson
I feel they always are!  :-)
I can imagine going on a date with this man would be the most fascinating thing imaginable.  He could talk to me all night.
Lets start with the Laws of Thermodynamics that stop him dead in his theories ...Though he is a great orator and rock star,  He reminds me of the Progression of evolution chart with the Primates, monkeys, Scientists, apes.missing links, homo sapien and  erectus  all going one direction , and De grasse walking  the other telling them , '' turn around and go back! we phuqued up!''  LMAO!!!! 
sad little person you might be 
I have to give it to you guys, you know how to title your video to maximize views.
Neil DeGrasse Tyson is the man. 
neil is harsh in his wisdom
Is the host a random alcoholic from the street filling in ?
The GREED of man is the only reason Science HASN'T solved most of man's problems.
I'm fascinated by how much these two men dislike each other. There is a power struggle unfolding before us. Their interactions are remarkably distracting from the actual content, but the segment is informative nonetheless. 
Some duh notions in the first 10 minutes. What about our other physiology. Hormones. The endocrine system.And i know we have been looking for the brain firings that indicate the AHA I get it moment. Will the firing explain intuition. Or will it point to the logging of the insight only? I feel we are a still being bamboozled.
the interviewer does not appear to be in synch with Neil..I enjoy listening to Neil but find it uncomfortable to watch the tension between the two men...who define things in vastly different styles...ackward
Not only are they not in sync, the interviewer doesn't seem to know his subjects and no idea of where he wants to go with them. In short, he seems unprepared.
VOTE Neil deGrasse Tyson  FOR PRESIDENT! ITS ABOUT TIME WE HAVE A SMART ONE.
So right about the transcript...Especially for Neil. It is that "human" interaction that makes him so captivating when he speaks. This man inspires the heck out of me. I am proud to say that I am now a NASA employee, and have never been so excited to wake up early every weekday morning. I initially dreamed of pursuing something very different as a profession (not to mention a rather meaningless one in the long run), but listening to this man speak literally changed many my long term goals. If you somehow read this comment Neil (however unlikely), I want to say THANK YOU for being you. With your help, I found out how to be me. =)
don't watch this when you're stoned. you'll immediately feel guilty for how small you think.
He's brilliant, but seems like an arrogant jerk!!
When you talk about something you're intensely passionate about, it's easy to come across as an "arrogant jerk". It's worth bearing in mind when we're discussing something either of us is passionate about, and I get loud, contradictory, or abrasive, what I have in mind is not you. I'm thinking about my passions.
Sounds like Steve's the jerk here. Do you find clarity intimidating?
love learning new things even at 55, I think Neil is up there with Carl Sagan.  we need desperately to get more kids interested in science and not just content to sit and play games or watch TV.  Kudos to him and to the upcoming re-boot of Cosmos. how much we have learned since the original and how much more still to be learned.   
I like his emotion shown in his passion so I one up for personality over Sagan :-)  Sagan loved it don't get me wrong but he speaks so calmly at times I like falling asleep watching old episodes of a series Into the Cosmos I believe is the name :-)
Neil you are a God damn pimp my friend  
hahaha, the funny thing is, i don't think he'd see that as a compliment.
All hail DeGrasse Tyson!!!
we're not worthy we're not worthy :-)
I'm glad he is still relatively young. We're going to get a lot more awesomeness out of him!
↕ THE ULTIMATE TRUTH OF LIFE ↕ TRUTHCONTEST ♪ C  0   M
If we stimulate that part of the brain that is stimulated by a work of art or a piece of music, would we then really require the need for art or music anymore if we just stimulate that area without the arts? I think it's much more than an emotional response by way of stimulation for such subjects. We desire to learn and develop from what we see or what we hear. Therefor stimulation is one thing,but to grow and create is another.
5:35....could it be the reaction of the human brain (within its connections) to the stimulus? Connectivity rather than regionality!
Gets a bit Grumpy at times, maybe needs a "Snickers" candy bar...
Tyson has them on the ropes , hes down heres the count 6...7...8...
Great interview ty upload.
unseencaller said: "instead of the facts of the discussion" I said in regard to the facts of the discussion: What causes gravity related to neutrinos @ v-c/c=2.48e-5 matching SLAC's E158 data posted online. I showed how the missing graviton adds a 4th phase/part to the atom and a reverse Mass oscillation phase arrow to space. I showed the illusion of dark matter is because Space is a Octave Structure, etc. Nice try at hating someone for their color.
Tyson has done more to advance the excitement and understanding of your field of study than any other person in our modern era, excluding maybe Carl Sagan. So UnseenCaller, I'd stop hating on a man who is trying desperately to bring scientific literacy back into American society, and keep young inquisitive minds funneled in to your field of study. Obviously people like you have done a shit job of it, otherwise our country wouldn't be playing second fiddle to the rest of the world when it comes to new scientific breakthroughs and progression of our collective knowledge. Pretty fucking tacky to bring race into the conversation too. Grow a pair and be thankful your community has a champion the rest of the world can relate to.  
Gustavo Niemeyer Shared on Google+ · 1 year ago
It's such a pleasure to watch Neil DeGrasse Tyson explaining pretty much anything he picks. (via +Corey Goldberg)
+Jeff Bailey When all things are equal, Charisma is likely to be the determining factor to bring someone to the head of the flock. For instance, say there are two people with similar education, experience, and published works, who is more likely to get public attention, the socially awkward bore, or the charismatic, exciting, public persona? It's simple social psychology.
Jason Rivard Shared on Google+ · 1 year ago
Another fascinating interview with Dr Tyson.  Much discussion not only about physics, about the boundary between science and the human experience.
Melody Polson Shared on Google+ · 1 year ago
They open discussing how a transcript is not as full of communication as the written word... I don't think a good reader suffers this problem. All are not 'adept' readers, however. So perhaps... video is the future... but I don't think we lose the written word any time soon.
Tomi Tapio K Shared on Google+ · 1 year ago
great NDT interview... worth watching. "When you’re scientifically literate, the world looks different to you." The Moon, the Tides and why Neil DeGrasse Tyson is Colbert's God #neildegrassetyson  
Asaru nelson Shared on Google+ · 1 year ago
The Moon, the Tides and why Neil DeGrasse Tyson is Colbert's God
German Fafian Shared on Google+ · 2 years ago
Contempt kills curiosity and that kills advance!
Well, for all we know that could be a future discovery :)
Boy, these two are like oil and water. LOL
He seems almost sad. Probably at humanity.
If he doesnt know what the 96% is, how can he affix a percentage to it?
This is like watching a Saturn V go up. I watched stage one, Carl Sagan, get this popularization of science project off the ground 30 years ago. Now I'm watching Neil deGrasse Tyson igniting stage two. This is good.
Its more two people who actually have done a lot of research and know quite a bit.
Show more Loading...
to add this to Watch Later

Add to