Slashdot Mirror


Neil DeGrasse Tyson Explains His Christmas Tweet

140Mandak262Jamuna writes Neil DeGrasse Tyson tweeted on christmas day what appeared to begin as a tribute to Infant Jesus, but ended up celebrating Isaac Newton. Apparently this was retweeted some 77000 times, far above his average of 3.5K retweets and caused many to be angry. He doubled down on it by tweeting about people being offended by objective truths. Then wrote a fuller explanation.

45 of 681 comments (clear)

  1. No group "owns" any day on the calendar. by BarbaraHudson · · Score: 5, Insightful

    "On this day long ago, a child was born who, by age 30, would transform the world. Happy Birthday Isaac Newton b. Dec 25, 1642"

    The only thing offensive is that some people continue to belief that their religious beliefs should be accepted as "universal truth".

    --
    "Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
    1. Re:No group "owns" any day on the calendar. by Livius · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The date was always meant as the day to celebrate Jesus' birth; it was not claimed to be the anniversary of his birth.

      Plus Jesus may not have accomplished much beyond a few magic tricks until after he turned 30.

      I wonder how many Christians will figure out that they might be better off having the dialogue amongst themselves about getting just their own beliefs straight.

    2. Re:No group "owns" any day on the calendar. by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 5, Insightful

      It's a bit further than that: Tyson's tweet was entirely orthogonal to Jesus and Christianity: The fact that Newton was born on the 25th of December, and that he'd revolutionized physics with extreme prejudice(among a variety of other interesting jobs, apparently he was a brutally efficient administrator of the royal mint for a while in there) before he hit middle age are true independent of the truth or falsity of any tenet of Christianity. There simply isn't any relation between Tyson's tweet and any theological position.

      Whoever was offended apparently wants their beliefs to not only be the universal truth; but to get all the airtime, when they want it.

    3. Re:No group "owns" any day on the calendar. by jbssm · · Score: 4, Insightful

      What's even worse is that Jesus was born in the spring

      I think that's exactly the kind of thought Neil Tyson wants people to avoid. There is absolutely no factual evidence Jesus was born at all, just some book written centuries after his supposed death that got more and more fantasias about his accomplishments as the years passed by.

  2. Christians: Easily Butthurt by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    It must be nice to be the most powerful political force in the world and still be able to bang the drum about how persecuted you are.

  3. Only people offended by OverlordQ · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The only people offended are the religious people who dont really know anything about their religion.

    --
    Your hair look like poop, Bob! - Wanker.
    1. Re:Only people offended by N1AK · · Score: 5, Insightful

      My wife was offended, and she's not even Christian.

      Your wife was offended by a tweet celebrating Isaac Newton because it could be construed to relate to Jesus, because of a shared birthdate, even though she isn't christian? Perhaps he should of said "the only people offended are fools and religious people who don't really know anything about their religion." because that's one of the most retarded examples of someone being offended for no reason I've seen.

  4. Re:Kind of disappointed in him. by Your.Master · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Tyson's job is to explain things to the masses.

    It's his job.

  5. For fuck's sake people... by bigsexyjoe · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Some conservatives seem to hate him just for being a smart black guy who is associated with science. He's not even really an outspoken liberal or anything. He's just a smart black guy and it drives them CRAZY.

    1. Re:For fuck's sake people... by LordLimecat · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Who exactly is this them? I know very few people who have an opinion either way regarding Tyson.

    2. Re:For fuck's sake people... by Rockoon · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Some conservatives seem to hate him just for being a smart black guy

      Some liberals seem to cry racism where none exists.

      --
      "His name was James Damore."
    3. Re:For fuck's sake people... by morcego · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Some liberals seem to cry racism where none exists.

      I find it hard to understand the rightwing usage of "liberal". When we study State Theory, the US constitution is used as the greatest example of a Liberal Constitution. John Locke, one of the fathers of liberalism, preached basically the same thing right-wingers do.

      The only possible explanation for this is the US education system being extremely flawed, and people using the words "liberal" and "liberalism" don't know what they mean. Liberalism is pure right-wing.

      Do no confuse the Liberal Party with liberalism. Do not confuse the Democratic Party with democracy. Do not confuse the Republican Party with republic. Or are members of the Republican Party anti-democracy? Are members of the Democratic Party anti-republic?

      Considering how often and loudly people talk about politics, one would expect they would take the time to at least study it a little bit.

      Maybe you should say "Some members of the liberal party seem to (...)", or "Some left-wingers seem to (...)". Even if you say "socialists", which would still be wrong, wouldn't be as wrong as saying "liberals".

      --
      morcego
    4. Re:For fuck's sake people... by dywolf · · Score: 3, Insightful

      while plugging his fascist social programs

      So what you're saying is, you dont know what you're talkng about, and are still confused on the defintions of many of the words you are using, thus proving the GP's point when he stated "Considering how often and loudly people talk about politics, one would expect they would take the time to at least study it a little bit."

      --
      The guy who said the election was rigged won the presidency with the second-most votes.
  6. tonight at 11 by nimbius · · Score: 5, Insightful

    outspoken popular black science man uses internet to tell people something fascinating and true that really happened. Outraged and offended group who tell people something bombastic and farcical condemn black science mans refusal to adhere himself instead to their thing they tell people, which is absurd and not science. In response, infuriating white television man who 'cant explain that' demands action and protection from imaginary war on pagan shopping holiday. When asked, average American man became furious that neither group were offering a deep fried food he was never promised.

    --
    Good people go to bed earlier.
    1. Re:tonight at 11 by Millennium · · Score: 5, Insightful

      To be fair, though, that's the date Newton would have understood and recognized. England didn't adopt the Gregorian calendar until 1752, and Newton had been dead for several decades by then.

  7. He must enjoy preaching to the choir. by LWATCDR · · Score: 1, Insightful

    What is funny is so many people will just not get it.
    It doesn't matter if he is right which he isn't since that day means different things to different people.
    He has just alienated a large number of people for no good reason. His tweet will change no a single mind. All it will do is get praises from his fans.
    That is not good science, education. or frankly good manners.

    --
    See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
    1. Re:He must enjoy preaching to the choir. by iMadeGhostzilla · · Score: 1, Insightful

      That is the essence of it. It doesn't matter if he's "right", what matters is the consequence of his actions, and that is turning religious people away from science further while making his "pro-science" (a ridiculous term) fans more, well, fanatical. I have an impression that his supporters care more about settling scores with religious people than about advancing science.

    2. Re:He must enjoy preaching to the choir. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      What is funny is so many people will just not get it.
      It doesn't matter if he is right which he isn't since that day means different things to different people.
      He has just alienated a large number of people for no good reason. His tweet will change no a single mind. All it will do is get praises from his fans.
      That is not good science, education. or frankly good manners.

      Bullshit. People that were upset are just pissed as someone tweeted something that wasn't about Jesus. As he has stated in his full post, he's tweeted about Jesus before and didn't get the type of uproar that he got over this tweet.

      People just need to calm down and realise that the world doesn't resolve around their religious event on a particular day of the year. You won't change the mind of anyone that is offended by his tweet anyway.

  8. Re:Kind of disappointed in him. by LordLimecat · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Ever heard the term flamebait?

  9. Re:Dude, wait... by itzly · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Tact is nice, but why does it always have to come from the side of the non-believer ?

  10. Re:Kind of disappointed in him. by Sarten-X · · Score: 3, Insightful

    On the other hand, being misunderstood does nothing to contribute to improving the education and awareness of those who misunderstand.

    With a succinct message, Tyson started a discussion that spread to thousands of people. Some people misunderstood, and despite the elegance and artistic quality of his written words, that misunderstanding tarnishes his reputation in their minds, and that extends to everything he supports - most notably science and an appreciation of the beauty of the observable world without religious connection. By explaining his meaning clearly, and expressing no wish to offend, some of those people will see the mistake for themselves, and open their minds again to science.

    It's not about winning or losing, or of being the stalwart champion of misdirection. It's a matter of graceful interaction with other humans.

    --
    You do not have a moral or legal right to do absolutely anything you want.
  11. Why do they care what he thinks? by JeffOwl · · Score: 3, Insightful

    For those that know of him, they probably already know he is an atheist. For those that don't, a little internet searching on his name will lead to that conclusion. I know I don't care what most people think about religious stuff one way or the other. It doesn't bother me that they think that way, only when they try to get laws and such changed based solely on their religious beliefs does it bother me. Sure, he goes out of his way to keep his name in the public eye, but I don't think this tweet was intended as a lobbying effort, so who cares? If you don't like what he says just ignore him and pray for his soul; be sure to send him a note that you are doing so.

  12. Re:Kind of disappointed in him. by B33rNinj4 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Very true, but you are missing the point. If I make the statement: "I feel like McRibs are the best damn thing ever" I am entitled to do that. If you, as a vegan, flip out over my choice of words, that's fine too. You can be offended all you want, but I am not obligated to care. Tyson shouldn't clarify his statements to appease people who are offended, because it's implying that he "may" be wrong. It's hamstering, and that's not what men do.

  13. Kind of Disappointed in You by rubycodez · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Tyson's life work is education, when he explains something to the masses and someone learns something, he wins. You, on the other hand, want him and others to be losers. This says a lot about you.

  14. Re:Dude, wait... by mangobrain · · Score: 4, Insightful

    What part of his tweet constitutes telling Christians that Christmas is "bullshit"? The part where he celebrates Isaac Newton's birthday, or the part where.... Oh, wait; that's the ONLY part. It is not mutually exclusive with celebrating the birth of Jesus, and nowhere in the original tweet - or the following explanation - does he imply that it should be.

    Should the world at large be banned from honouring the memory of anyone else on that date, just because it happens to be a Christian religious festival? Sounds remarkably like religious discrimination to me.

  15. Re:Kind of disappointed in him. by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 5, Insightful

    On the other hand, sometimes a strategically applied barb can be pedagogically useful:

    In this case, Tyson tweeted something that was orthogonal to Jesus(not that he is actually suspected by scholars of even the distinctly pious persuasion of having been born conveniently on a pagan holiday that needed assimilating; but that's another matter). It didn't denigrate him, question his existence, use the phrase 'purportedly magic jew', laugh at the peasants who were putting up their nativity idols, none of that. It just wasn't about him, it was about Isaac Newton, who was born on that day, and who was a pretty damn titanic figure in the history of science(although also intensely pious, though his religious works are not of much broader interest).

    It is, arguably, rather interesting that he provoked a minor firestorm just by talking about someone else. It's a commonplace that some anti-jesus flamebait spread in the right areas would have caused a moderate shitstorm, and so nothing would be proven except one's own somewhat juvenile sense of humor by doing so; but that isn't what he did: he just celebrated a different guy(and pretty damn arguably a worthy one) who shared the same birthday. The fact that that caused a ruckus is frankly interesting, informative, and perhaps even food for thought for those offended. Is Jesus really incapable of gracefully sharing a birthday with one of history's more remarkable physicists? He certainly manages to share it with a load of consumerist gluttony without much comment.

    I (mostly) grew out of baiting people purely for sport years ago; but I still think that there is room for discomfort, even unrest, in the context of discourse; and this seems like a good example. Not just flamebait, which would be trivial; but prove nothing; but willing to risk kicking up a fuss. Hopefully a least a few people asked themselves why it was so necessary that exclusivity be defended(especially when other 'meanings of Christmas' like family, presents, pagan conifers, assorted ritualized meals, etc. are handled in parallel without issue. If Jesus can share a birthday with the Jones' traditional honey glazed ham, surely he can share one with Isaac Newton?).

  16. Re:Dude, wait... by itzly · · Score: 3, Insightful

    voluntary prayer is discouraged (if not banned) in public schools

    Yes, but it's not because for lack of want by the religious people. It's not a matter of them being tactful towards the atheists. It's simply because the law requires separation of church and state.

  17. Re:Kind of disappointed in him. by mjm1231 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I actually read Mr. Tyson's post. I found no hamstering in it. Your problem appears to be with Slashdot characterizing it as an "explanation". In fact, it didn't contain any explanation about the motives or meaning of the tweet. Perhaps it is time to stop blindly believing what the news media feeds you, including Slashdot's slapdash editors.

    --
    Ideology: A tool used primarily to avoid the bother of thinking.
  18. Re:Kind of disappointed in him. by morcego · · Score: 1, Insightful

    How odd. Someone posting as AC saying someone else is a coward.
    Typical religious apologist.
    Don't you have a clinic to bomb? Or maybe a soldier's funeral to picket?

    --
    morcego
  19. Re:Kind of disappointed in him. by blagooly · · Score: 4, Insightful

    This was my reaction. He trolls the people, then protests getting flamed. A follow up of, "ha ha made you look" would have been fine. My general impression is that Tyson thinks a lot, sometimes even of subjects that are not himself.

  20. Re:Kind of disappointed in him. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Tyson paid respect to the birth day of a very important historical figure (who happened to be a devout Christian too). How is that an attack on Christians? Only the most narrowminded people would be able to see it that way.

  21. Re:Kind of disappointed in him. by DutchUncle · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I see no mockery whatever. A surprise ending, perhaps, worthy of O. Henry, but no mockery. Now, if you want mockery of someone's birthday, go watch "Monty Python's Life of Brian".

  22. Re:Eh by DutchUncle · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I see no mockery here. No mention of anyone or anything other than the person he is celebrating. In any group of 23 or more people, there's a 50% chance two will have the same birthday. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

  23. Dec 25th by rossdee · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Jesus Christ was not born on December 25th
    It just happens to be a day that mopst western Christians celebrate His birth.

    Like USians celebrate Washingtons birthday on a monday

    And some in the commonwealth celebrate the Queen's birthday on the 1st monday in June, and others on the 2nd monday in June, her actual birthday is April 21 which has significance to another Religion

  24. Re:Kind of disappointed in him. by smooth+wombat · · Score: 2, Insightful

    a calculated and unwarranted troll towards Christians on their numero uno holiday.

    A holiday which was forced on people at knife and spear point to co-opt an already existing holiday (nice Christians ya got there), which celebrates the birth of someone who was born sometime in the spring/summer and who has inadvertently led to the deaths of hundreds of millions of people (a billion perhaps?) and which, for the most part, has turned into feeding frenzy of mass marketing Chinese-made cruft to the masses.

    Now compare that to Newton who helped get us to the Moon, developed mathematical models to help explore our universe, and who contributed in numerous ways to our understanding of what goes on around us every day such as reflecting telescopes. See for example:

    This link and this one for what Newton gave us.

    So what did Jesus give us other than death and intolerance, as evidenced by your post?

    --
    We will bankrupt ourselves in the vain search for absolute security. -- Dwight D. Eisenhower
  25. He is my hero. by Lumpy · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Any scientist that is absolutely OK with pissing off uneducated rabid republicans is a hero in my book.

    Carl Sagan and others had no problems calling the uneducated what they are. And none of the best human beings on this planet backed down in the face of religious stupidity.

    Just Ask Galileo and Giordonano Brunio what it was like to be imprisoned by a bunch of idiots in power.

    --
    Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
  26. Re:Dude, wait... by N1AK · · Score: 3, Insightful

    It was a dick thing to do, and he should not be surprised that this upset some people.

    It isn't a dick thing to do something perfectly reasonable even though you know some completely unreasonable people will be upset by it. Everything he said was true, nothing he said was critical of Jesus/Christianity/Religion. If someone is that much of a dick that they can't appreciate that Newton was an incredibly important person born on the 25th December without seeing it as slur on Jesus then fuck them.

  27. Re: Kind of disappointed in him. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    No, probably assuming he's Christian. Christian Fundies are just as bad as Muslim ones. Letting delusion rule your life is a massive fail.

  28. Re:Kind of disappointed in him. by hawguy · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Only Slashdotters would defend this guy for what was clearly a calculated and unwarranted troll towards Christians on their numero uno holiday.

    Commercial interests have turned the Christmas holiday into a shop-till-you-drop marathon, and you think Christians are under attack from a simple factual tweet? If he had posted "If you love Jesus, you'll love these deals on Telescopes!" then it'd have been ok, right?

    Really, does Tyson have nothing better to do than use Twitter to mock Christians? Are there no pressing issues in the world of astrophysics that could use his towering intellect and staggering genius?

    The most pressing issue that he's been working hard to fight against is the lack of science literacy in the country, and open hostility to Science to the point where a science educator can't post a Christmas Day related fact without coming under attack -- and at least Newton was actually born on Christmas (depending on your calendar), as opposed to Jesus -- most biblical scholars agree he was not born on Dec 25th, even if they disagree on when his birth was.

  29. This might come as a shock by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Insightful

    But publicly mocking other's religious beliefs = being an insensitive asshole. Whoodathunk?
    A non-asshole would have tweeted something more like:
    "Happy Birthday Isaac Newton b. Dec 25, 1642, your contributions to science helped transform the world!"
    No reasonable person would have been offended by that and it would have still acknowledged and celebrated Newton's birthday without deliberately trying to be "clever" and belittle others.
    I wasn't personally offended, but I can see how others would be, and it absolutely did lower my opinion of him. Maybe I'm just old fashioned but I don't think people should post mocking images of Mohammed or joke about "magic underwear" or imply that the Pope is gay or poke fun a Ganesha either. He has a right to say it, but that doesn't preclude him from being considered a jerk for doing so.

  30. Re:Kind of disappointed in him. by jmac_the_man · · Score: 4, Insightful

    At the very least, we should also despise Newton if anyone who ever favored him committed a crime.

    Based on the number of people who use weapons based on Newtonian physics to kill, Newton may be the biggest mass murderer of all time.

  31. Re:Kind of disappointed in him. by dingleberrie · · Score: 3, Insightful

    It is, arguably, rather interesting that he provoked a minor firestorm just by talking about someone else. It's a commonplace that some anti-jesus flamebait spread in the right areas would have caused a moderate shitstorm, and so nothing would be proven except one's own somewhat juvenile sense of humor by doing so;

    About 2000 years ago, there lived a man that may have agreed with you. I'm sure you have heard of him, you may even recognize him by his initials, JC, as everyone still talks about him today. We know that he was born unlike most men. And as he matured, he had many followers, but also had those who were afraid of the would-be-king, so they put him to death. Yes, Julius Caesar left a legacy that influenced generations. Anyway, what was your point?

  32. Re: Kind of disappointed in him. by ganjadude · · Score: 3, Insightful

    they tend not to go out of their way to kill you if they disagree, I know, calling people names is just as bad, if not worse than murder though

    --
    have you seen my sig? there are many others like it but none that are the same
  33. Re:Kind of disappointed in him. by rocket+rancher · · Score: 3, Insightful

    No, and no. Tyson has been trolling religious nutbars for decades. He didn't give in to criticism, he just twisted the knife when people demanded clarification. Make no mistake -- religion is more of threat to our species than global warming and nuclear winter combined. More than three-quarters of the population of the planet's last existing superpower are religious, and nearly half of them believes their messiah is going to return to them in their life time. You don't have to be a rocket scientist to understand that these nutbars have exactly zero interest in solving the problems confronting our species because they truly believe that they aren't going to be around to have to deal with them.

  34. Re:Eh by Areyoukiddingme · · Score: 4, Insightful

    No, but his followup was intended to offend Christians....along the lines of..."A pagan holiday, which became a religious holiday, which became a commercial holiday"

    Reciting unvarnished facts without a single loaded adjective is offensive to Christians? That says much more about Christians than it does about astrophysicists.