"He actively promotes the greatest paramilitary program on Earth, while the new generation forgets that last time this happened we ended causing a nuclear war with Russia."
What reality do you come from, and how do I get there?
What about the hypocrisy of championing the scientific method, while also falsifying academic submissions for profit?
Cold War., Space Race.
NASA is part of the US Military.
I am not here to teach basic history. I assume most people have the basics down.
Did anybody really end up causing a nuclear war with Russia, though? Has there ever been a nuclear war between the US and Russia? Of course not, yet you act like it's "basic history". How about you think before being an arrogant prick to others. Well, wouldn't expect much else from a guy writing fake master's theses for immoral students...
it was literally one push of a button away.
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news/man-who-saved-world-doing-5736621
How about you google before you type? Check link above. Maybe I should also write one for you.
You seem to have a problem admitting when you make a mistake. There was no nuclear war, "it being one push of a button away" is completely different, it means it didn't happen. Nobody's arguing about how bad the cold war was, the first commenter just pointed out your funny mistake. You made a slip of the tongue, but refuse to admit it. Pathetic, and extremely arrogant.
He sure does. He's arrogant and argues with feeling, not logic. Point out his fallacies, he will attack you. He's called me numerous names in the last day, such as hypocrite, implied I am a religious not, etc.
Do not bother expressing a different viewpoint than him, even if you are supported by fact. It is a waste of time.
I had a typo there. "Almost causing a Nuclear war with Russia"
come on
Great, had you noticed that for the first commenter instead of attacking him for pointing it out, this unfortunately vitriolic exchange would not have taken place. All the best to you anyway, I don't know why the whole thing pissed me off so much..
It was obvious that I meant almost. A nuclear war wouldn't be allowing us to have this conversation now.
read this as well. think before you post for your own sake this time.
https://thespacereporter.com/2015/05/neil-de-grasse-tyson-advocates-militarized-space-race-mars/
How about you stop trying to push humans back into grass huts. Do you know how the internet was created? With MILITARY BUDGETS, just like most of the technology that has ever advanced humanity.
Your weird pacifistic technophobia would stop technological process, and if anyone had listened to you in the past, you would not be using the internet.
Have you heard the phrase "necessary evil"? That's what military research is. That's what space research is. Don't do it and your opponents will.
Childish.
"ARPANET was initially funded by the Advanced Research Projects Agency (ARPA) of the United States Department of Defense."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ARPANET
I am not. I cherish engineering. The heart of science. I mention it in my article if you bothered to read it. The internet was created after cumulative efforts of various individuals that eventfully ended up being manifested through the military. If it wasn't for those events some others would have occurred that also fulfilled that goal. It is called a technological tipping point. Same applies to Einstein and all the great discoverers. If it wasn't for them it would be someone due to the cumulative nature of how knowledge and technology emerges.
hur dur...
Yeah. Hitler advanced a lot of things as well. I wonder if you would offer yourself as soap for the "greater good".
I told you to upgrade your arguments mate. :) You are being pathetically pedantic.
Come on, even that link itself makes it clear he was joking. I saw this podcast live back then, he never for once "advocated a militarized space race". Indeed, he was actually criticizing and satirizing military races.
They were merely joking about hypotheticals and how if the Chinese were to build a military base on Mars, NASA will be on Mars well ahead of their 2030 schedule.
The point made was simple - NASA's potential is far greater than currently exploited. That's a pretty fair assessment, given how the original Space Race sent NASA to the moon decades before it was scheduled. This was then done by boosting NASA's budget to 4% of the total GDP back then.
I love your posts, you're one of my favourite authors on Steemit, but I'm bothered by these little confirmation biases that you exhibit here and there. I hope you take it as constructive criticism.
He wasn't joking. He was actually very serious and framed the whole thing under the important of taxation and making America the no.1 nation. He was super patriotic as well. I have clips of the video.
https://www.facebook.com/CyprusFreeThinkers/videos/vb.346542594097/10153798702724098/?type=2&theater
Haha, that's some serious Leni Riefenstahl style propaganda editing right there :)
Watch his speech again and tell me that he is not patriotic about the whole thing. :)
Sure, no doubt about that, after all that's his certain argument for this speech - how NASA funding benefits the US economy.
Still, he never said anything like "let's go to war". He was simply making a point, an accurate one, like I mentioned above. I have seen him make this point in other places where it was more obvious it was hypothetical and satirical.
We should also agree that US war mongering also benefits the US economy and that NASA is part of the US Military. Whether we like to admit it or not, war is the most profitable enterprise in human history.
Nobody ever says "lets go to war". The point is that, along with his other false narratives he us trying to create an over-pumped hype that is not objectively translated in your average tax-payer's mind. Heck, I can even see a bit of Trump's "China, China, China" in his rhetoric. I am sure you do as well.
"Almost" causing a nuclear war with Russia. You knew it was a typo.
You just chose to play it this way due to our last debate.
cheap
Also, in regards to money. I don't consider what I did to be scientific. For me it was descriptive essays. I don't recognize the thing called "social sciences".
Richard Feynman also agrees with me
No, I didn't. Stop assassinating my character. I didn't know what the hell you meant, because what you stated, was openly against accepted fact.
For all I knew, you were making a statement on Hiroshima.
If you want people to know what you mean, say what you mean. Don't blame others for leaving out a critical word that CHANGES THE WHOLE MEANING OF YOUR CLAIM.
He is using Richard Feynman to justify his own corruption.
There's no evidence that RIchard Feynman was ever corrupt like kyriacos is.
We can all agree that there are many problems with academia. kyriacos is one of them.
Yeah, yeah right...