YouTube video title:
. StarTalk Podcast: Neil deGrasse Tyson on Science Literacy in the Misinformation Age
my comment on 5/31/2020 at 3pm CST:
Dr. Tyson is a master of misinformation.
A scientist requires evidence for his claims. Many astrophysicists lack the required evidence including Dr. Tyson.
1) There is no galaxy in the entire universe with evidence for its actual 3-D velocity.
The Doppler effect is an indication of something happening ONLY in the line of sight. It can never offer a detail for any transverse motion.
Astronomers treat a unidirectional signal as a 3-D signal. This is a mistake not evidence.
Using the Doppler effect is a double mistake. In 1936 Edwin Hubble concluded, from the galaxy red shifts being measured, the Local Group is on an island separate from the Hubble Flow. A 1999 paper claimed its radius was confirmed having a radius of 1.18 Mpc. The galaxies beyond our Local Group were in the Inter Galactic Medium where a hydrogen absorption line increased its red shift by distance because of hydrogen atoms in the IGM (at a low density). This conclusion from decades ago was confirmed by several recent studies of the very high red shift galaxies which concluded these high red shifts in the hydrogen absorption line are caused by the hydrogen atoms in the IGM. The highest galaxy red shift is z > 11. They know these galaxies are not moving at many times the velocity of light. Slipher in the 1920's suggested galaxy red shifts were also a velocity. This was a mistake.
The Local Group reveals problems with the wrong assumption of the unidirectional Doppler effect..
Both Magellanic Clouds have red shifts > +100 km/s; M31 has -301 km/s or a blue shift.
Using Hubble Space Telescope, these 3 galaxies were checked for lateral motion by monitoring individual stars for a long time.
This exercise included several stars inside both Magellanic Clouds and several stars near enough to the side of M31 being possible halo stars and far enough laterally to use distinct background stars for detecting proper motion.
The stars in LMC & SMC showed lateral motion; Both are apparently moving sideways not directly away. The stars near M31 showed no lateral motion.
A French astronomer in 2013 captured the spectrum of a slice of the M31 galactic corona, The spectrograph found the same absorption lines for calcium ions as found in the M31 galaxy's overall spectrum. These calcium ions are moving away from the corona by their blue shift. Calcium ions moving through the solar corona have a similar velocity to those from M31 but are moving away from the Sun. The velocity of these ions is not evidence of any motion of M31.
Therefore all galaxy red shifts cannot be assumed to be 3-D velocities. There is no evidence for that claim when using a unidirectional signal.
Quasar red shifts are measured even to z > 7. This is from a hydrogen emission line shift.
The energetic quasar can provide an electron to a high velocity proton creating a hydrogen atom so the hydrogen emission line from that capture has the velocity red shift of the proton. The quasar does not have the high velocity of the passing low mass proton.
There is no evidence for quasars to have their claimed high velocities.
Because the velocities have no evidence, any distances calculated from them require their own evidence. Cepheid variable stars provide a standard candle but they have a margin of error. At greater distances they become too faint to detect so they have a limited usable range.
2) dark matter has never been defined, so it is impossible to detect.
The cosmological model wrongly assumes stars orbit in spiral galaxy like planets around the Sun. Planets orbit around the barycenter including the Sun which wobbles. There was no evidence suggesting the spiral arms are in any way similar to our solar system.
A 2010 study in Spain concluded the M31 galactic magnetic field, which has been measured, explains the M31 rotation curve but the current model cannot even when trying to use dark matter. The assumed galactic barycenter system was a mistake and dark matter cannot fix it.
Charged particles in motion form filaments inherently because moving charges create a magnetic field which confines the flow; this tendency to form a filament is why the word plasma was used to describe this behavior of charged particles.
Filaments are observed through the universe.
Dark matter is proposed to explain any filaments in the cosmos because gravity alone cannot do it.
In every case where dark matter is proposed there are magnetic fields being ignored.
There is no evidence for dark matter which has no definition to enable any method of detection. There never will be such evidence for this undefined entity because the magnetic fields are present throughout the universe wherever there are charged particles in motion or electric currents.
3) The universe is not expanding. That hypothesis is based on the wrong velocities for all galaxies and quasars from the mistake with the Doppler effect.
Dark energy is the hypothesis to explain the expanding fabric of space. There is no expansion.
There is no evidence for dark energy which has no definition to enable any method of detection.
4) there was no big bang.
The CMB has been claimed to be evidence of one step in the proposed sequence after the big bang.
Analysis by Dr Pierre-Marie Robitaille of the individual sets of equipment and the results concluded this chaotic unrepeatable map of signals is actually from Earth's oceans. The presence of any water molecules are the bane of any instrument in radio astronomy.
His analysis has been published and even extensively explained in YouTube videos.
The CMB is a mistake, not evidence.
Our view of the universe is limited by both the Zone of Avoidance and our technology to what is called the observable universe.
It is literally impossible to observe the entire universe.
The big bang is an event at a location and time beginning with an entity and a trigger. There is no evidence for any of them. The end result or the current universe is actually unknown so the big bang has no basis from beginning to end, or now.
The big bang is not science but just poor science fiction. Its followers are on the wrong path but it is wrong to call them illiterate.
Dr. Tyson is the source of much misinformation. There are many learning of what I described above.
His perceived science literacy problem can arise simply because others are learning to disagree with him. Disagreement is inevitable in proper science. Evidence drives the progress of science. Theories with no evidence become diversions when allowed to persist despite conflicting evidence.
As indicated above, there are notable diversions which deflect the progress of science.
Having celebrity status, he apparently calls those in disagreement as illiterate. A celebrity can do that but a scientist would not.
By the way, it is an outright lie data are always available. Take any galaxy at random and it is extremely difficult to find where its raw spectrum might exist. Only relative velocities are public.
This comment was visible on my computer as “3 days ago” then it disappeared.
I looked from another computer and it was gone.
Some EUT members suggested the video owner could have removed it as spam.
It is impossible to kow id NDGT ever read it.