119 Comments

My guess is he is blinded by his political beliefs. 🫣

Expand full comment

Del was right to bring him on, but his arguments were very unimpressive especially repeating “consensus”. He just came off as a sell out to me. He could understand the issue but chose not to because it wouldn’t help his career.

Expand full comment

Del is over-optimistic about human nature. And that makes him resort to influence-methodology over reason too often. He will learn how wrong he is soon enough.

Expand full comment

Del was using the wrong arguments with him. What deGrass Tyson meant by "consensus science" was when there is a consensus between the results of a majority of studies that were studying the same thing. Del needed to point out that a lot of studies whose results align with the consensus that deGpass Tyson is so fond of are manipulated, rather than follow the scientific method.

Expand full comment

I think Del actually addressed that at one point, at least indirectly. And I was shocked to see Neil not challenge it. At that point I think he should have combined that with all the anecdotal evidence of how unsafe the vaccines are and point out that the HHS is seemingly ignoring it. While also withholding a lot of data from the scientific community. At which point I would contend that to push for mandates and such under those circumstances is insane.

Expand full comment

If he did talk about manipulated studies, it went right by me. I think he should have picked points that directly challenged Tyson's cherished principles and assumptions, and left out the rest of the kitchen sink he was throwing at him. I would have liked to find out if Tyson really understood all the statistical tricks that have been used to portray vaccines as more safe and effective than they really are.

Expand full comment

Yeah, and the systematic skewing of data in multiple ways. It seemed that part of Neil's strategy was to take all the time on what he wanted to talk about. I think that had Del frustrated already by the time he got to finally talk.

Expand full comment

He was a steam roller but also boring. His arguments not only weren’t convincing, they were just boring, no fascinating insights there!

Expand full comment

Yes, but was the real purpose of the interview to convince de Grasse Tyson (who is clearly far too blinded by his ego and other perverse incentives to be at all able to get it), or to reveal to those watching and listening exactly how unscientific and unreliable he is as a source of understanding the science around "covid"?

Expand full comment

Finally got around to seeing the whole thing. Obviously, de Grasse Tyson was far from covering himself with glory and too pigheaded to listen. But I seriously doubt this would move the needle with normies at all, and I found Del's sucking up to him and making too many unnecessary concessions hard to take.

Expand full comment

I saw it as an open door if others like de Grasse Tyson want to come along and discuss these issues with Del. At least the invitation is there. Yes, it was hard to take, but dialogue has to happen, somehow.

Expand full comment

To modify my last comment: I suggest anyone who wants to share Del's video include this article. My experience is that the normies I know wouldn't actually read it <sigh>.

Expand full comment

I was embarrassed for him, all he had was repeating the consensus talking point.

Expand full comment

At one point he had the nerve to suggest Del examine all the glorious studies, unless I imagined it.

Expand full comment

I think Del handled a blind zealot just about as well as one could.

Expand full comment

Excellent! Very much needed clarification and emphasis! THANK YOU!!!

Expand full comment

Thank you for this commentary. It was difficult to "hear" the things that he was saying as they at times conflicted with logic.

Expand full comment

It was difficult. Downright ridiculous to hear someone so intelligent be so (willfully?) blind.

Expand full comment

.....but is he REALLY 'so intelligent', Becky - or JUST [conventionally] PORTRAYED as being?

RHETORICAL question, that......

Expand full comment

He probably took a course at the Tavistock Institute.

Expand full comment

The consensus is clear: Tyson is a hack.

Expand full comment

I no longer watch him. He's into self-promotion. I don't like him (but so what?).

Expand full comment

ScottandJodi Wayland, your comment inspired a great guffaw - got my day off to a wonderful start. Brilliant touche' in eight words. Delicious! Thank you!

Expand full comment

It was difficult to watch. He continued to deflect responsibility; yet he went public parroting the narrative....based on his false belief that other "consensus scientists" had done the research. And that the data was clear and unbiased. That is religious or ideological belief if I ever heard one.

Expand full comment

Precisely. My conclusion about de Grasse Tyson was that he "believes in Science" just the way Fauci wants him to. "Science" is his religion. It was sickening to listen to the man. I was sorry to see Del Bigtree wade so far into de Grasse Tyson's mud in an attempt to reach him.

Expand full comment

Yes Kayla Wildman , Del Bigtree did try to reach Neil Degrasse Tyson and I saw Del’s frustration of the answers he was getting from him , in my way of thinking the beginning of interview when Neil talked about truths that there’re three truths that he breaks down in his book “really” from a analytic Scientific point of view to me that’s bullshit , there’s one truth and facts it’s your conclusion from those facts are what usually in error

the other two he mentioned are beliefs not truths demonstrably different……….

Expand full comment

That argument is especially invalidated by the manipulation of public opinion carried out by social media, publishing platforms, and legacy TV, magazines, and newspapers. We now know (as if it weren’t obvious from the start) that that manipulation was at the behest of government functionaries whose stated agenda was to manipulate public opinion!

Expand full comment

I should add that scientists and physicians were subject to intimidation tactics involving loss of tenure, employment, and reputation l, including retraction of papers “with no reason given.

Expand full comment

.....NGT, is one of THE most scientifically-illiterate creatures on Earth (as REPEATEDLY demonstrated for YEARS, made institutionally UNable to effectively contextualize NEW evidence) and REGARDLESS whether HE responded intelligently, had I been provided an opportunity, would've torn his rationales to PIECES - for MOST issues with modern-disease states, DO have UNMISTAKABLE macrocosmic ANALOGS in.....ASTROphysics as WELL, relative to multiversal (I'm definitely not a FAN of the more-INarticulating term 'dimension'; BADLY misused TOO long already) resonant informational effects (have come to realize with these past several months, that those at the so-called 'quantum' - how I now HATE that WORD - scale, MUST be increasingly-reduced HARMONIC expressions of same predicated by distribution of medial densities; their uniformity).....so VERY glad I followed my STRONG instincts to NOT watch this past Thursday - or, MIGHT be NEEDING another PC monitor today.....

Expand full comment

......ohhhh, an aside: since I mentioned astrophysics, was NOT happy with the tone of Del's Dane Wigington / Geoengineering Watch interview ALL around some weeks ago, and let ICAN's management KNOW my irritation - but it FAILED to say ONE word about a potentially-MASSIVE concern, looming FAST.....very FEW on this planet, are even AWARE that its magnetic field has been weakening at a rate of 5% annually, while associated North & South polar orientations, appear to be CONVERGING in the Indian Ocean.....bad ENOUGH that, as Arthur Firstenberg (who has bafflingly RENOUNCED all OTHER forms of NGO ecosystemic modification) alerted humanity to a WIDESCALE die-off of PREVIOUSLY-resilient (for MANY millennia) AMPHIBIAE, resulting from like SO much else, VASTLY-expanded sustained exposures to wireless radiation - but, I'm EXTREMELY concerned for how such a PROFOUND alteration - to say NOTHING of THE most bioelectrically-reactive agents EVER introduced to MULTIPLE genomes will, ARE impacting BILLIONS of VITAL organisms.....https://cellphonetaskforce.org/amphibians-in-the-mine/

Expand full comment

Neil defraud Tyson.......after seeing him on the Dave bet podcast I lost all respect for him. Another self serving egotistical hack.

Expand full comment

Astrophysics consensus is extremely dubious... Dark matter is modern day phlogiston... So this isn't that surprising unfortunately

Expand full comment

Explain neutrinos, as well as CP violation. Phlogiston is electrons.

Expand full comment

.....or MORE accurately - as the late Ed Leedskalnin tacitly suggested, 'MAGNETONS' - though ONLY refining Neils Bohr's conclusions; 'electrons' an ARBITRARY term / distinction, 'electricity' a SLIGHTLY more-complex, axial form of magnetic expression - and all HE ever did was move 2 MILLION pounds of oolite coral into place, (some, TWICE) by CLOSELY observing geophysical aspects around Florida and 'Bloch (i.e., ZERO charge directionality) Zone' manipulation potentials to SIGNIFICANTLY reduce their weight / provide non-natural RESISTANCE to GRAVITIC properties; COMPLETING his 'Coral Castle' (while its very CONFIGURATION, astronomically INDICATED as much) at APPROXIMATELY 7:30 EST on September 10, 1923 (yes, its centennial is THIS year - see R.L Poole's groundbreaking book 'The Leedskalnin Codex' for FURTHER details.....)

Expand full comment

.....ALSO recommend Miles Mathis' (with whose conclusions I definitely DON'T completely agree) essay on what produces this SECONDARY magnetic effect called 'gravity' and I call, 'graCAVITATION'; displacement compensating for ability to RECONCILE such perpetual resonance (another RELATED: variably-subjective TEMPORALITY) - so that aggregate COHERENCE, isn't compromised - or even LOST entirely.....http://milesmathis.com/index.html

Expand full comment

Possibly, but likely requires "dark matter" (mirror or Alice) to conjoin inductors using both to combine spin 1 electromagnetism into spin 2 gravity. (Probably no "right hand rule" for gravity.)

Expand full comment

He submits that strength of gravitic (AND levitational effects) are directly related to an object's angle to the 'charge field', SaHiB (something I believe both Bearden & Hutchison. others have concluded THEMSELVES) - his interpretation of just WHAT that IS and mine, may be VERY different though - I haven't ventured into the linked book JUST yet: FAR too much work to do still......

Expand full comment

You suggest he lightened (levitated) the coral rather than cleverly using leverage?

Expand full comment

EXACTLY - optimizing results of such efforts, by timing them with astronomical aspects, alignments....

Expand full comment

Yeah... I didn't mean to imply the problem was limited to dark matter.... Hard to find parts of standard science that do make sense these days. I believe engineering that does actually work, and some related science

Expand full comment

"Science in astrophysics requires far more reliance on untested induction for longer periods of time than research in medicine and in biology."

How true!! Neil is a shallow thinker, but it pays better in this world, unfortunately.

Expand full comment

MY issue is when such conditions are interdisciplinarily EXTRAPOLATED to make VITALLY-important policy for ALL of us, Jeff - NO harm in DEEPLY contemplating matters otherwise.....

Expand full comment

What in the context are you referring to by "otherwise?"

Expand full comment

WITHOUT requirement - or, PRIVILEGE - of MAKING official policy merely BY such review.....

Expand full comment

I'm still confused. Are you saying that Del did not DEEPLY contemplate in his responses to Neil?

Expand full comment

No - rather, that it's OK to hypothesize; actually a VITAL part of the 'scientific process', and introducing new ideas for WIDER contemplation; JUST because a disingenuously-VAUNTED DeGrasse Tyson (OR Fauci; PARDON me while I do VOMIT at THAT notion) voices a viewpoint, DOESN'T automatically VALIDATE it for MANY others (but they DEPEND upon making them, US be societally perceived as INCAPABLE of such INFORMED consideration.....)

Expand full comment

Indeed.

I was shocked when Del said he thought Neil would help him get his concerns to the broader scientific community. That's where I think Del is naive. Neil has never seemed to me to be anything but a consensus propagandist. Big science is just a branch of big government. As such, it is saturated with conflicts of interest. WAKE UP, DEL!!

Expand full comment

Science communicators are a useful tool, similar to what fact checkers have become.

Expand full comment

Truly strange times.

Expand full comment

I tuned out when he came on. Popped into chat a could times to drop Dr David Martin's prosecutenow.io website and Dr Richard Fleming's flemingmethod.com 10 Letters website to share the documents you can send to all Governors, Attorney Generals, and local County Prosecutors. Also posted one of Billy Goat Gates favorite book titles "How To Lie With Statistics," as a direct suggestion for NGT.

Expand full comment

.....or as I refer to that extended Rockefeller 'family' WHELP, 'The Man-Boy BLUNDER'.....

Expand full comment

Yes Jayne Doe especially the interview with Dr Robert Fleming by Gary Null on the 10 Letters in which I’m sure Neil Degrasse Tysons is totally clueless about , again I’m shocked that Neil went on a program to be so unprepared as a scientist to know really nothing about the topic of COVID-19 virus and the vaccine “the mRNA injectables to be precise” and just to regurgitate what he heard from the talking heads on topic from the media

Expand full comment

This was hard to watch. It's hard to see someone so smart be so blinded and downright ignorant. Is it willful? Is it not? Is he getting paid? It's disorienting.

Expand full comment

A few months ago I sent a message to NDT letting him know he’d lost my respect.

Expand full comment