this post was submitted on 18 Jul 2023
271 points (95.3% liked)

Science Memes

16103 readers
3231 users here now

Welcome to c/science_memes @ Mander.xyz!

A place for majestic STEMLORD peacocking, as well as memes about the realities of working in a lab.



Rules

  1. Don't throw mud. Behave like an intellectual and remember the human.
  2. Keep it rooted (on topic).
  3. No spam.
  4. Infographics welcome, get schooled.

This is a science community. We use the Dawkins definition of meme.



Research Committee

Other Mander Communities

Science and Research

Biology and Life Sciences

Physical Sciences

Humanities and Social Sciences

Practical and Applied Sciences

Memes

Miscellaneous

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
top 12 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Kerrigor@kbin.social 11 points 2 years ago (4 children)

The "cleared its orbit" requirement is too arbitrary and non-scientific. We should've gone the other direction and classified more objects as planets.

[–] Skaryon@lemmy.world 14 points 2 years ago (2 children)

Feels like we can agree to disagree on that one but I hope we can all agree that Neil deGrasse Tyson is fucking annoying.

[–] Kerrigor@kbin.social 7 points 2 years ago

While we can disagree on the latter portion, the first sentence is simply fact. The IAU does not provide any guidelines based on quantifiable data for this requirement.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/IAU_definition_of_planet
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clearing_the_neighbourhood

[–] Anticorp@lemmy.ml 0 points 2 years ago

I like him.

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

[–] Swedneck@discuss.tchncs.de 4 points 2 years ago

well yeah it's quite readily admitted to be non-scientific, scientists generally just use "celestial object" afaik.

[–] Umbrias@beehaw.org 3 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

Then we'd have several hundred to a few thousand planets and need a new term for the larger celestial objects anyway. Seems silly. Planet is already arbitrary.

[–] HawlSera@lemm.ee 1 points 2 years ago

Unironically this

[–] HawlSera@lemm.ee 3 points 2 years ago (1 children)

I'm glad Neil DeGrasse Tyson is so universally reviled by people who actually care about science..

Honestly asking one's opinion on him is enough to tell who is interested by science and who "totally loves science bro"

[–] MonkeMischief@lemmy.today 2 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 children)

It's so refreshing to hear this. Even when I was less educated, his smugness annoyed me SO MUCH that it made me feel like "If actual cosmologists are like this, I couldn't stand them anyway." It made science and the community feel very unattractive, since his marketing puts him all over the place where the tag "science" appears.

He talks like a fedora-sporting moderator from a ~2006 atheist-reason-rational-skeptics-or-else forum. As if he personally has already unlocked all the secrets of the universe and if your sci-fi movie isn't perfectly adhering to known science you're an absolute buffoon.

Sadly Bill Nye seems kinda similar, and I even got to meet him in person. He was rather irked that people wanted to get pictures and autographs with him long before the symposium even started. (Despite being lauded as a hero by countless inquisitive children and all)

TL;DR: Despite the unrelenting tide of anti-intellect, I'm glad there's a lot of serious scientists who aren't just in it to lord it over everybody else.

[–] HawlSera@lemm.ee 1 points 2 years ago

The people who "Fucking love science" are just another flavor of anti Intellectual

Probably the saddest kind. The ones in denial

[–] Eleazar@sh.itjust.works 0 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Pluto has a valid point. Neil is a grifter who’s made it his entire job to talk down to people.

[–] Arghblarg@lemmy.ca 0 points 2 years ago

I admit I want to like his science education efforts, but ... and I mean this in just an objective way and it's only my opinion but ... he just doesn't click for me anywhere close to how Carl Sagan did. Sagan had such a thoughtful, reflective and soothing manner in how he presented science concepts, and his awe and love of all things science (and science history) was infectious. The original Cosmos is capable of making one weep at the beauty of the universe... I only got through the first 2 or 3 of Neil deGrasse Tyson's new series; his style of narration just doesn't work for me. I even have trouble listening to his science podcasts, it's just too much 'sports-talk' like back and forth.

I dunno. I'm grumpy today and need more coffee.

load more comments
view more: next ›