No, Neil deGrasse Tyson, squashing curiosity and wonder is never okay
Ethan Siegel

Probably the only time I have ever been disappointed with Neil deGrasse Tyson, one of my heroes; he did a wonderful job with the reboot of Cosmos, and it is sad to see him do something that I am sure would have disappointed Sagan.

Also, as I understand it there are very few bodies on which you can stand (which excludes gas giants) and see a total solar eclipse, like Pluto and Charon-and from out there, it would look pretty much like a moon obliterating any number of stars one would think. In other words, total solar eclipses are rare viewing anywhere in our solar system, so I think that counts as rare in itself.

I think I get what Neil was trying to get at-that we get more excited about this sort of thing than we do about actual scientific discoveries (indeed, we are quite happy to doubt them) but he chose a poor way to get it out, and missed a chance to use the fascination with the eclipse to turn people onto science. Sagan would use anything-even his own error in relation to the ‘canals’ on Mars-to promote critical thinking and teach people science; I think Neil needs to re-familiarise himself with the works of his old mentor (I know I do it regularly-lost count of the number of times I have read The Demon-haunted World).

This is also an example of how damaging a thought-bubble can be when allied with Twitter, which puts me in mind of George Clooney’s alleged response to a question as to why he isn’t on Twitter: “Because I like to drink in the evenings.” I think there is something in that for all of us…

One clap, two clap, three clap, forty?

By clapping more or less, you can signal to us which stories really stand out.