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.
"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.
Everyone has the right to mock, and everyone has the right to be offended. Some mocking is silly, and some offense-taking is silly. As a dispassionate third party observer, I'm having a hard time deciding why I should care about this episode.
But still, never forgiving him for Pluto. Next time pick on a planet big enough to fight back, tough guy.
The only people offended are the religious people who dont really know anything about their religion.
Your hair look like poop, Bob! - Wanker.
Tyson's job is to explain things to the masses.
It's his job.
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.
Democracy Now! - your daily, uncensored, corporate-free
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.
Ever heard the term flamebait?
Why are you blaming Neil?
Blame Isaac for having the NERVE to be born on December 25th! After Jesus was (not) born on that date NO ONE ELSE should be born then!
-=This sig has nothing to do with my comment. Move along now=-
Tact is nice, but why does it always have to come from the side of the non-believer ?
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.
Damn that Pope Gregory XIII. He should have left the calendar as it is. It would prevent any alchemists or astronomers born on January 4 from being praised on their birthday when it gets shifted to December 25. What was he thinking! So much for papal infallibility.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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?).
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.
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.
I don't quite know how to address this other than to say that I don't think anything you've said in this thread makes any sense. My best guess is maybe you didn't read his actual explanation and assumed it said something it does not?
Point by point:
- The (strange) strawman about a vegan who hates McRibs is an argument about why we shouldn't get mad at Tyson if he didn't make an explanation, but it does not argue against making an explanation in the first place. It's the one point where I agree with you, but it's completely irrelevant to the situation at hand.
- Explaining something to the masses does not mean you lost anything.
- Giving into criticism is not what he did (pulling his tweet or apologizing would be giving in).
- In this case I feel he was right not to give into criticism, but in general, I don't think it's good to imply that giving into criticism is necessarily wrong.
- I don't see any appeasement from Tyson.
- Talking about a thing doesn't in any way imply that what you previously said about that thing may be wrong.
- I had to look up "hamstering" on urban dictionary, and I have to disagree that he did that at all.
- "It's not what men do"? That's a literary flourish without any meat behind it.
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.
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.
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.
a) You know that "hamstering" isn't a word, right?
Hamstering is indeed a word, ffs it was used in the previous two posts, this now being the third. It is now an established word.
"I opened my eyes, and everything went dark again"
This whole thing reminds of the Back to the Future movie. I was 10 or 11 or so when it came out and I distinctly remember seeing that movie with a kid raised in a fundamentalist baptist household. When Doc Brown said "so do you want to see the birth of Christ" and then set the time machine to Dec 25 0000 I laughed quite hard. The other guy asked me why I thought that was so funny and I spent about 45 minutes trying to explain it to him after the movie. He never got it and was somewhat offended that I found it so funny. After another couple of days discussing this and other things (like creation in 6 days etc.) I finally realized how deeply misinformed people become by being taught about literal interpretation of the bible. I was absolutely amazed at that understanding of the world and it was my first real exposure to this insanity. Up to that day I had always understood bible stories as being just stories (I was raised mildly Catholic but my family was really just going through the motions). It actually makes me very sad to think back to that experience.
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".
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
I didn't ask him to, I didn't hire him to, I didn't indicate any desire on my part for him to do so.
So his tweet just randomly showed up without you following him, or without someone you follow retweeting it? I'd contact Twitter, it sounds like you've found a bug.
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.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
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.
According to your logic, we should also despise Newton because he was a follower of Jesus. At the very least, we should also despise Newton if anyone who ever favored him committed a crime.
Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.
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.
Even if one wanted to do a misdirection about Christmas in a tweet, there are tons more offensive targets one could have chosen related to 25 december:
* The Malkh festival formerly practiced by the peoples of present-day Chechnya, celebrating the birthday of the sun.
* Pakistan celebrates the birthday of the Great Leader, Muhammad Ali Jinnah
* Residents of Chumbivilcas Province in Peru celebrate Takanakuy ("To Hit Each Other"), a fighting-themed holiday where the goal is to get back at people who wronged you during the year, while wearing a traditional ski mask.
* Michael Palaiologos, ruler of Constantinople, has his 11-year-old second cousin blinded so that he is no longer qualified for the throne.
* Columbus runs aground in Haiti due to incompetent management, then proceeds to abuse and enslave the natives that helped rescue his men and supplies.
* Conquistador Pedro de Valdivia is defeated in battle, captured, then roasted and eaten.
* A drunken mutiny involving 1/3rd of the candidates at West Point is finally put down by force and their whiskey is taken away.
* Future president Zachary Taylor leads his troops into an obvious ambush by the Seminoles, leading to serious losses; gets promoted for it.
* The Vietnamese National Party is founded and quickly begins a campaign of assassinations against French officers and Vietnamese collaborators.
* Henri Nannen, later-rehabilitated Nazi propagandist, born.
* A 7,6 earthquake kills 275 people in China
* Scottish nationalist students steal the British coronation stone.
* 44 untouchables in India massacred in revenge for them campaigning for higher wages.
* Cyclone Tracy destroys more than 70% of the buildings in Darwin, Australia
* Jesus Christ, aka messianist Marshall Fields, drives a Chevy Impala through the White House gate.
* Charlie Chaplain dies
* Porn actress Joanna Angel born
* Deposed Romanian dictator Nicolae Ceauescu and his wife are captured, convicted by tribunal, and summarily shot.
* The "underwear bomber" fails
* Plane crash kills 27 people near Shymkent.
I am a proud traitor to my species in alliance with my mother the Earth in opposition to those who would destroy her.
We follow the Gregorian calendar. Newton was born on December 25th of the Julian calender. Newton's birthday isn't for another 6 days.
"Lack of speed can be overcome. In the worst case by patience." --Znork
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.
. . . he demonstrated a kernel of cleverness. He's a witch! We must burn him for upsetting the simpleminded villagers!
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?
Except he never intended it to be flamebait.
There's two general camps among science communicators, there's one camp that goes straight for the hard truths and controversial subjects with the idea that you fix the root cause and the rest is easy, this tends to be the Richard Dawkins camp.
The other side basically says communicate as much as you can but try to avoid offending people by being non-controversial as possible, I've always thought of that as the Neil DeGrasse Tyson camp.
The tweet here essentially a corny joke ie "huh, Tyson is writing about the birth of Jesus, I didn't think that was his thing... ohh Newton, now I get it, haha Mr. Tyson". There is nothing flamebaity or controversial about it as he intended it.
The problem is the religious right is embracing a culture of victimhood to compete with the left, attempts to reduce the degree of Jesus talk around Christmas become an attack to their right to talk Jesus, hence the "war on Christmas".
Viewed through that light the joke now becomes "Hey Jesus-folk, I'm on your side putting Jesus back in Christmas... ha ha! Just kidding, it was just Newton!"
And since they're actively looking for reasons to become offended, they become offended.
I stole this Sig
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
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.
Nah. Even LoB was clearly intended as a story about a different guy. They even showed Jesus in the movie, to emphasize that this is a different person they are talking about.
It was a story about someone being popularly deified when they clearly weren't in fact a deity. That certain Christians took the depiction of this possibly happening as an attack on their own faith says a lot more about their own insecurities than it does about the movie. (This is coming from a Christian, btw.)
I'll throw my two cents worth into the noise. I am an Orthodox Christian clergyman, and I think Neil DeGrasse Tyson's tweet is humorous, as well as objectively true. I am at a complete loss why anyone would be angered by it. People are so quick to hate these days, for no reason whatsoever. Truly we are in the end times.
Proverbs 21:19