Is pop/sci/ actually harming science?

Michio Kaku is a better pop-scientist because he's actually done research in his field.

In an ideal world there'd be a pop-scientist for every field.

I think this is an american thing, in my country, both public and private media ask researchers from the local universities.

>bring mathematician onto national television
>responds to every question with "the answer is trivial and has been left as an exercise for the viewer"

>bring actual scientist onto national television
>responds to every question with a rambling response that makes no sense to anyone not in their field
>producers cut away and go to their next segment, "Why are scientists so fucking autistic?"

Bill Nye and NDT are popular figures who work in science advocacy. They're far more relatable than scientists, which is important because Americans feel threatened by people smarter than them.

>b.s in mechanical engineering
>b.s

does he work on toy train sets

What a cunt.

>people shouldn't be interested in new discoveries unless they're willing to take the graduate courses necessary to fully understand them

Shit meant to quote

people shouldn't try to talk about new discoveries unless they have an understanding of them.
if you want to be superficial, that's your deal. no one with any merit has to spend their time hearing you tho

>Why can't the media contact the actual researcher and have them on TV describing their findings
because actual researchers don't want none of that shit.

The religious right and conservative political forces are actively propogandizing against the value of Science to get the public to support cutting funding.

Either we fight in that war against the deliberate dumbing down and manipulation of the population or we don't. I say we fight.

Because brainlets have the greatest influence on decision making.

>reddiot formatting
>is an idiot
like poetry

YEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEES

It is so all over the place and without structure.

>Non-brainlets
>Being confused
Ahahaha

Was there an argument in whatever you just regergitated in that post?

your shitpost didn't beget an argument.
claims made without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.
also you're a retard

>Why can't the media contact the actual researcher and have them on TV

Real researchers are busy doing real research.
Real researcher requires a different skill set than guy who is engaging and articulate on TV.

>I wouldn't say it's harming science

If people who do not understand science and who do not want to make an effort to understand science nonetheless think science is cool and deserves more support, this is not a bad outcome.

youtube.com/watch?v=qN5L2q6hfWo

Why didn't he mention that the science on how much humans are contributing to the warming is unclear because the models are incomplete and don't factor in solar radiation, feedback loops and water currents etc?

It looks like he knew it but didn't want to admit it so he goes into some story about grapes or some shit....

>not realizing that conservatives and the religious are actively pushing anti science propaganda

you, sir are a pin head for the establishment, good job shill.

>much humans are contributing to the warming is unclear

its also unclear if smoking is bad for you according to the same scientists paid for by the fossil fuel industry to make you think their is room for debate on the issue.

I agree. He has a BS in ME.

One thing i like about Neil deGrasse Tyson is that i have heard him talking exactly about this phenomenon. He will get calls to cover some discover or concern in the scientific world and actively refuses to comment and directs reporters people who are actual experts on the subject.

>Why can't the media contact the actual researcher and have them on TV describing their findings, rather than having Bill Nye the TV guy who pretends to do science talking about every single scientific stories there is.
Are you 15? Have you ever listen to a scientist giving a conference? A lot of this guys can't even comunicate effectivily to other people who are educated in the field and you expect them to talk to the masses?

its just religious and conservative shill pin-heads casting dispersions on the idea of trying to popularize science with the public.

sorry buddy, i don't want an e-meter reading from you

>sorry buddy, i don't want an e-meter reading from you
every time you reply the stupid comes through even louder. we get it you're a scientifically illiterate moron who has drunk the big-oil / Christ-cuck coolaid.

sad

brian greene and lawrence krauss are actually good pop scientists

Doesn't even need to be one for every field, plenty of people are competent in multiple fields, the trouble is that the couple of pop scientists america has hardly ever talk about the field they actually came from. When was the last time they ever called up bill nye to talk about mechanical engineering?

>Why can't the media contact the actual researcher and have them on TV describing their findings, rather than having Bill Nye
because when someone watches TV and sees someone they know, they will watch and listen
and each time they see bill nye, a stronger relationship is built
if you put a different scientist that nobody recognizes every time, then the public has no connection to the person and has no reason to believe, respect, or even listen to them

That video is bill nye doing genuine damage

Going onto a show to talk about a subject he knows very little about gets destroyed when a fox host asks a simple question, in turn making the science look even less settled

journalists are lazy and it takes much more work to set up an interview with a proper researcher than asking what the science guy thinks live

Neil has a Ph.D. in astrophysics
Nye has a bachelors in engineering
Don't compare them.

also, michio kaku, lawrence krauss, richard dawkins, carl sagan all have/had doctorates
bill nye is the only outlier, really

oh my fucking god, are you a troll pretending to be a redditor or a real redditor?

What was your issue with his statement?
The percentage of scientists that agree on man-made climate change is roughly the same as those that agree that smoking is harmful to your health

Implying that all scientists questioning the standard model of GW are paid shills is simply stupid, there are scientists in this field proposing alternative models who clearly aren't getting much money from this(examples: Nir Shaviv, Henrik Svensmark, Freeman Dyson). Freeman Dyson for example was one of the most respected physicists of the last century, he has nothing to gain from this, he has plenty of money and a great reputation he wouldn't be talking against AGM models simply because of "oil money". This idea that anyone questioning the standard model is a paid shill is stupid and counterprodutive to science, just imagine what would happen with physics if the scientists in the field started to act like climatologists.("hey bro, are you questioning the indivisible proton model? Sure you're getting money from big chromo").

but freeman dyson does agree that man-made climate change is occurring, he just disagrees on some of the finer points
he's not a climate change denier by any stretch of the definition

Assuming being smart makes you omniscient

Researchers are too autistic. It's sad we don't have people like Einstein anymore who are both actual scientists and able to do the whole public relations thing.

wow this is a really COOl post my man really good post I'm reading it I read it 5 times by now oops I read it 7 now hahaha I can't stop reading your post I want to marry this post now that I think about it really GOOD post I'm just kind of not even sure how to proceed from here ahaha I'm a little nervous sorry

This faggot got destroyed by /pol/ memelord Tucker Carlson last night.

He lost an argument to Tucker fucking Carlson, known retard and brainlet. Is was embarrassing

I don't know about Bill Nye, but Neil Degrasse Tyson has a doctorate. He might not be currently working as a researcher, but he definitely knows science.

>Despite his honest advocacy to popularize science
>Bill Nye is not a researcher, nor Neil Degrasse Tyson or other pop Veeky Forums figures

If I'm trying to sell something, who do I hire to pitch my product to the public? A charismatic person the masses will trust or the autist who spends 15 hours a day mixing chemicals in isolation and is incapable of looking people in the face. The best researchers are the best researchers, the best marketers the best marketers. To be the best you have specialize, this means not wasting time on anything else, i.e. studying the field you're promoting.

Let Bill and Neil be, they're doing God's work by delivering the scientific method to the masses.

brilliance without autism-level social disorder is extremely rare
you'll get a couple such individuals per generation, and there's no guarantee that they'll end up being scientists

>Let Bill and Neil be, they're doing God's work by delivering the scientific method to the masses.

Neil maybe. Bill is just a has-been desparate to be a shill for leftist politics.

(Let me stop you there: I agree with him on climate change. But his butting in on other issues and his overal cognitive dissonance when it comes to race is fucking annoying)

"denier" is a bad term, those people aren't denying some truth, science doesn't work with truths, it works with models and the models with better accuracy to explain and predict data are chosen.

Dyson is skeptical of the simulation models used by climatologist(those models account for a lot of the science in this field). He wen't so far as to say that the models(IPCC alarmist predictions) are wrong.

>muh scientific method

W E W

>just ruining brainlet's perception of science by giving them a psuedointellect

The church didn't need its congregation to understand. Actually, they didn't want them to try to understand because catholicism is absolute bullshit. The only way to cover up their lies was through delivering their message in the secret code of God, Latin. This worked until the revolution pulled the wool back from the eyes of the masses.

>because why did anyone ever really care what brainlets think to begin with

Precisely

That doesn't mean they need to understand anything. Cattle don't have to appreciate the milk they produce, Joe Shmoe doesn't need to understand the purpose of his labor as a lowly pleb, nor the finer points of scientific discovery.

Go read Discourse on the Method and the Wikipedia entry for "The enlightenment" and then get back to me you bloodworm.

It's because he's a super hero.

youtube.com/watch?v=4e6h4zLC5U8

>watched... CNN

Theres the problem, user.

you do realise that if humans are contributing for like 10% of the warming spending all the time and energy on reducing the human causes doesn't prevent whatever you think is going to happen right?

Either show competency by making predictions we can verify or shut the fuck up, that's how science works.

Is warming even bad for us? More CO2 means more plants and vegetation, this helps the overpopulation problem by providing higher agricultural yields.

Just one of the examples where a fraud is being perpetrated. If you follow the CO2 = poison argument to it's logical conclusion, we will have to pay taxes to exhale because that is contributing to the problem.

>Bill Nye saves the world

It's literally IFLS: The show

This, really. There is rampant anti-intellectualism in the states. Anyone who sounds "too smart" is just an elitist with their head in the clouds who doesn't know how the "real world" works.

These guys are trying to make it relatable again. It's a good thing. It would be better if all people just understood real science, but we can't just magically get there. This has to be step 1.

I agree with op. I hate how trendy it is to be an edgy atheist. Sure there is no empirical evidence to support divine initiation, but there's also no empirical evidence against it, either. Ppl just think it's cool to trash religion because religion is all moral and shit.

No one likes an intellectual, son. Keep the three Gs, God, Guns, and Country.

>I don't have evidence, but I sure do love hearing myself talk!

Netflix is killing the world.

Because for a buck they can get Bill Nye to say any fucking thing they want.

NGT is much more legit than Bill Nye in my opinion. NGT has a real phd, published papers, and worked briefly in academia. Of course, it's possible that they made it easy for him and pushed him along for some reason, for example because he was black and there's hardly any black people in physics (especially back then). But NGT does, on paper, have real accomplishments and a claim to being a scientist.

Bill Nye just has a bachelors in engineering. He doesn't even look like an expert on paper. He doesn't even have a phd at all, not even a shitty fake phd.

What did he mean by this?

Really makes one ponder...

It gets worse.

I know this shouldn't bother me but I hate how he randomly capitalizes words.

Because what students value is really important and is always for the best.

When murderers go to jail it's because our society values life more than killers value killing. Shakin my damn head at these white pipo

And what exactly is wrong with this reasoning?

Hes right.

He's not really right though. It's possible to value both learning and grades equally. Some people try their hardest and still can't get an "A" without cheating. In such a case, learning and grades are more or less two independent goals.

He's implying that the school system should care less about grades because there are students who don't value learning (and that the school system is responsible for the actions of the cheaters).

The whole "disregard grades and just try to make kids value learning" thing has failed repeatedly for fucking -decades- now, and he knows it -- he's just pandering because he's an entertainer before anything else.

Students that cheat generally just do it because it's easier than studying and they don't have the discipline to prepare.

And if your response is
>But it's still technically true that the school system values grades more than most of the cheaters value learning!
, then you've completely missed the damned point.

LISTEN UP people who literally can compute with matrices and do advanced calculus but fail to see this simple point. Brainletism is a spectrum...

Bill Nye "knows everything" because he can explain shit. It could be Will Smith in his place, he would do as good of a job. Popsci like the stuff Nye does is very important, because it connects brainlets to science. In democratic countries there is a correlation: science funding increases with science popularity. WOW! It is best for scientific communities if people know what is up.

And why can't the explaining man be a REAL scientist? Because they too often understand too well what they do and are really bad at explaining this to outsiders. Remember that university teacher who has all kinds of phds and mentions of his papers in other papers but his lecture is boring and hard to comprehend? you don't let him do the lecture on TV. You get a better teacher. Like Nye.

Reminder that he said the rotation of the earth affected the way a field goal was kicked, NDT is pure concentrated hypocrisy

Bill Nye is fucking retarded and not even a good scientist.

Also they don't contact the actual scientists because Bill Nye or Black science man are popular names that get the outlet views. The real question is why are you consuming mass media? Seems brainlet tier to me

Didnt he once say helicopters will crash when the engine dies but planes will glide to safety or something? Brainlet in sheeps clothing

Based Ludwig

Anybody against popsci just outs themselves as being a brainlet. Have you ever seen countries with a culture of anti-intellectualism? If *science* becomes popular then it only enhances your position and general society's opinion of you. Assuming you're actually good at your field

Most of the anti-popsci circlejerk is just narcissists jerking themselves off to their opinion of their own intellect. If you're watching something like CNN to get informed about exoplanets you're doing something very wrong

you forget those who are against the state of popsci, especially the minimaal amount of popular scientists, who dont specialize or talk about their specialties. Furthermore pop scientist tend to force political agenda, which is parroted by brainlets and distracts from the science completely

Pop science is always just explaining basic things to a general population. You don't need highly trained specialists, you need people who can communicate in simple terms in an interesting way. People who are popular

If you want specialists talking about their field then you can so easily find that and often they get hundreds of thousands of views on youtube by people who are actually interested in that specific topic.

As for your political agenda point I don't really know what you're talking about unless you're one of those /pol/ climate change deniers that come here sometimes, I don't know

The political agenda point is massive.

Bill Nye constantly talks about how race does not exist, globalism is the ideal ideology, and climate change (although he at least gives some facts when talking about climate change).