Comments by "The Truth Channel" (@thetruthchannel349) on ""Bill Maher DESTROYED Him" - Neil deGrasse Tyson TORCHED During Elon Musk To Mars Debate" video.

  1. Mulvaney is tied to your Mil. Complex. That was NOT the authentic spontaneous thing it looked like. It was a FRAUD on the West.
    1
  2. Ive never called him a scientist because he is not a scientist nor has he ever been a scientist. A scientist is one that uses the scientific method to make NEW discoveries not build a fake soap-box to propagandize fake 'discoveries' of the late Victorian Era & present them as something new & current.
    1
  3. No what Tyson IS you can look within the animal kingdom for many examples of kinship. You can look at a troupe of Chimpanzees comprised of 20 individuals. Ok, so 10 of those will be unable to learn or at least to obtain & maintain a training program. Another 10 you'll have varying degrees of success & of these a few will do very well at a programming/training course. You'll have a few that are neither good at passing a training course or following those who successfully graduated from a training program & a few that were able to graduate from that program & do something NEW applicatively with the programming they received. Tyson is among the higher spectrum of the 2nd group - Successfully trained, programmed, able to mimic, ring the bell & get his peanuts & melon slices. Not capable of doing anything beyond. That is Tyson. A programmable troglodyte.
    1
  4. Comparing Social Media to a SPECIFIC Magazine is not what an intelligent person does. He compared a general modern FORMAT to a SPECIFIC brand within a more antiquated FORMAT & then acted as if he'd done something thoughtful. That is not thoughtful. Is it not how an analytical mind works. It's why Tyson loses debates. He is NOT a thinker. Thats like comparing A. JARS with B. Pickles & then pretending that's ok.
    1
  5. Tyson is not a scientist. He is a science teacher or what passes for a science teacher in the 21st century. He, however, is NOT himself a scientist. You might call him a propagandist for scientism to be more accurate.
    1