The Second Apocalypse
Miscellaneous Chatter => Philosophy & Science => Topic started by: sciborg2 on September 27, 2014, 03:32:45 am
-
"Why Is Wikipedia Deleting All References to Neil Tyson's Fabrication?" (http://thefederalist.com/2014/09/18/why-is-wikipedia-deleting-all-references-to-neil-tysons-fabrication/)
Hmmmm....
-
Didn't read the whole article, or this one page which is apparently some rebuttal from Neil Tyson.
https://www.facebook.com/notes/neil-degrasse-tyson/email-exchange-with-the-federalist/10152354422065869
I always thought Wikipedia was pretty unbiased. Not sure thats great place to start any argument.
-
Most of those defenses by Tyson seem pretty weak.
Oh, I think Wikipedia is undoubtedly biased. It just depends on what articles you go to.
Wouldn't surprise me to see Tyson lying given his anti-religious twisting of history in the dismally rated Cosmos, or the New Atheist types that control Wikipedia taking part in the deception.
-
If you say so. Though I think the 3-4 sentences that I read from The Federalist seemed pretty purposefully inflammatory and biased.
I wikipedia isn't sacred, nothing is. I guess the only option is to pick a delusion and stick with it.
-
To be fair, though, he does have a talk where he discusses/mentions how first-hand accounts are the lowest form of scientific proof. Regarding the headline, he claims that it was the title of a secondary story in a newspaper some 20 years ago. Maybe its time to get a new headline if you can't actually provide a verifiable citation.
The anti-religiousness of Cosmos is far overblown.