/sci/ - Science & Math

>>15108091
>what's /sci/'s opinion on *people smarter than /sci/*
Gee, I wonder

>>15108091
I do not know of any pop sci icon's credentials and haven't read any of their papers, but I feel in general, they greatly discredit science by dumbing it down and trying to make it accessible to plebeians.

Science is essentially an esoteric field, meant to be studied, understood and appreciated by only a tiny percent of the population that can rise against the mediocrity and stench of the ignorant masses. Trying to educate the 'public' only produces an entire army of dunning kruger effect morons. Pop sci in many ways is exactly what allows pseudo-scientific thinking to dominate the less regulated circles.

Modern science education has been dumbed down to such an extent to satisfy our suicidal egalitarian fantasies that cletus from alabama has the sheer audacity to question Dr jacob from purdue on the effectiveness of vaccines, imagine the total lack of self awareness needed for a manual laborer to question our closest equivalent to gods on earth. Such a situation is unsustainable and cannot be allowed to exist.

>>15108094
Most of them are extraneous, but few of them are good, and the better ones tend have fruitful scientific careers.
On one hand Carl Sagan and Stephen Hawking were rather productive researchers before they became popsci figures.
On the other hand NDT hasn't done any real research since he finished his PhD, and Bill Nye has been undermining himself in recent years.

>>15108091
faggots all of them, not smart enough to work on the latest cutting edge physics but smart enough to look like actual geniuses to the dumbass plebs.

>>15108101
Do you have a point or are you just seething that they're smarter than you?

>>15108091
who?

>>15108097
You clearly don't know much about science if you think it's "esoteric", but it's quite common for dumb people like you to think that whatever they don't understand is magic

>>15108113
>Do you have a point
OP asked for opinions on popsci icons, my post expressed the opinion that some are certainly better than others.
I'd call you an illiterate mongrel and that you should learn how to read, but since you've repeatedly insinuated that the only reason why people on here would dislike them is because of resentment, I can only assume you're making posts like this because you're mad that not everyone has as much of Neil Tyrone Chicken's jizz in their mouths as you do.

>>15108122
So why did you quote me if you were replying to OP you illiterate mongrel?

They help raise public interest in science, therefore more graduates and funding.

>>15108127
>reddit tier image
>reddit teir understanding of how science funding works
Figures. But no, science funding doesn't increase on the basis of popular sentiment. Not to mention that there are far more STEM PhDs then there are academic positions at universities or research positions at National Labs and in Industry.

>>15108097
Science is not “meant” to be esoteric. It’s not “meant” to be anything other than an empirically driven investigatory process. If some jargon winds up being esoteric, it’s merely incidental. The goal is for scientific nomenclature in all fields to be clear and useful, whether or not the phenomena denoted are complex.
Secondly, there is no drawback to giving the public a modest scientific education, so long as it’s stressed that certain subject matters are far more complicated than they may seem. Pop science explanations tend to be most lacking in physics from what I understand, but you’re being far to cynical in your sweeping condemnation of pop-scientists who just look to teach the very most general principles of biology, chemistry, etc.

>>15108133
>If some jargon winds up being esoteric, it’s merely incidental
no, the schizophasiac jargon is intentionally concocted to be exclusionary.
when legitimate tests of intellectual ability fails to exclude dissenting voices, some other method of exclusion must be found

>>15108133
based

>>15108143
I’ve most often hear this view expressed by people who have had trouble understanding or remembering scientific jargon, or by those who don’t understand the need for certain subtle distinctions. Never, even behind closed doors, have I heard a working scientist express a desire to arbitrarily prevent people who are less intelligent from understanding their research. I suppose there’s no way for me to convince you otherwise, but I wonder where this conviction comes from in your case.

I hate Brian Cox and I have a vendetta against him. I don't really like Nye. Tyson seems ok sometimes but I didn't like his "have a nice day" tweet which was suspiciously my contemporaneous Toy Box Killer post, and some other things he says are not good. On pic related, 13 year olds can often understand that infinity less finite is still infinite. I like Jim al-Khalili and Carlo Rovelli but they aren't icons.

>>15108309
>s suspiciously *like* my contemporaneous Toy Box Killer post

>>15108309
Why do you hate brian cox?

>>15108091
All of them talk like their speaking to children and its boring and cringe. Michio Kaku talks to people like they're in kindergarten. They seem to think that there's a vast gap of intelligence between themselves and the average person. It's weird. Tyson seems to be the least like this, to me anyway, but they're all pretty bad. Everything's always all these really lame analogies when they talk too, I don't want the shitty analogy though, tell me what's actually going on you fucking genius idiot science retard

>>15108319
Because he's a huge cox

>>15108091
Cox is good, I don't like the way he pronounces Saturn but that's about it. NDT is a disgrace and it's a fucking embarrassment that he's taken on the mantle of Sagan.

>>15108326
classic Michio. Picrel is a random paragraph from here
https://tim.blog/2022/01/08/michio-kaku-transcript

It serves as a good tool for showing complex things to the masses, but it's mostly edutainment garbage. If you want to understand science then put in the elbow grease and start working instead of watching dumb videos. That's what I did at 16, couldn't even do my timetables and now I build skyscrapers for a living.

>>15108091
>brian cox
Actual scientist, even if he's a phenomenologist
>neil degrasse tyson
Barely even a scientist
>bill nye
Not a scientist at all

>>15108326
>Michio Kaku
Now there's an actual scientist.