Email Updates - Get notified each week via email of the best new documentaries      Sign Me Up!
Processing your request, Please wait....

Enjoy this Documentary? Express your views below!!

The Moon, the Tides and Neil DeGrasse Tyson

Science|21 Nov, 2012|123 Comments |
Click Stars Below to Vote!
VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
Rating: 2.5/5 (11 votes cast)

The moon, the tides and Neil deGrasse Tyson why Colbert is God is the real title of this interview.

Astrophysicist Neil deGrasse Tyson is director of the Hayden Planetarium in New York, home of the PBS series NOVA Science and now co-host (with the comedian Lynne Koplitz) star’s radio show.

He is the author of nine books including his autobiography, The Sky is Not the Limit: Adventures of an Urban Astrophysicist and most recently, Pluto Files: The Rise and Fall of America’s Favorite Planet.

This is a conversation in cosmology, physics and the history and purpose of science, among others.

The Moon, the Tides and Neil DeGrasse Tyson, 2.5 out of 5 based on 11 ratings
Subscribe via RSSPlease subscribe to our RSS feed to have new doc's delivered straight to your reader.
This Video is Tagged With:

, , , , , , ,



  1. UberNoodleX says:

    Text transcripts allow people who do not have time or access to this video to otherwise discover its content and even use it in papers, sources and citations. And what’s more, a text transcript allows deaf people to experience it too. Lastly, having a text transcript allows far easier conversion to braille.

  2. The more rigorous response is that of course entropy EXISTS in both open and closed systems. The problem is that it is only CONSERVED in closed systems. If this was not the case, NONE of our technological innovations would be possible, because all of them are low-entropy products created from high entropy raw materials. It is precisely because entropy CAN be locally decreased as long as there is an increase in another locality. In my crystal example, entropy goes into the evaporated water.

  3. So are you asserting that every single crystallized mineral is an independent act of divine intervention? Since a crystal is an organized matrix of atoms, it is orderly. It arises from ions dissolved in water, distributed randomly. Spontaneous order from chaos. So you are wrong. That’s the blunt cudgel response.

  4. osaka35 says:

    energy does not become useless, it merely changes form. When one form of energy is changed into a different form, then some of the energy is lost in the transfer. Usually it is an energy requirement to facilitate the transfer, or is a by product of the transfer (I.e. Heat from a mechanical machine). By “lost”, we don’t mean that the energy is destroyed. We mean that energy is transferred to a form different. That energy still exist, just in a different form.

  5. Mogley52 says:

    NO REAL EVIDENCE FOR DINOSAUR TO BIRD EVOLUTION: Just google the title to access this article published in Russia’s Pravda. Also, go to the Internet site ANSWERS IN GENESIS to find out about how true science supports the Bible. Find out answers to questions about dinosaurs and the Bible, the age of the earth, the fossil record, etc. Just type into the “search” box on the site your question or topic of interest to find relevant articles.

  6. Mogley52 says:

    CREATIONISTS RIGHT ABOUT ENTROPY (Internet Article): Entropy occurs in both open and closed systems. In every transfer of energy some of the energy becomes useless. If universe is left to itself, all energy will become useless and the universe cannot sustain any activity. Even in open systems, there must first exist energy-converting/directing mechanisms to develop order, such as DNA directing a seed to become a tree. Spontaneous order from chaos is not possible, not to any significant degree.

  7. Mogley52 says:

    RANDOM GENETIC MUTATIONS caused by the mindless environment are destructive. Even if mutations are not immediately harmful, after enough of them accumulate they will be harmful. And, even if a good mutation does occur, for every good mutation there will be hundreds of harmful ones with the net effect, over time, being harmful to the species as a whole and even causing extinction, not upward evolution. Most biological variations are from new combinations of already existing genes, not mutations.

  8. Mogley52 says:

    SYNTHETIC DNA NOT CAPABLE OF MACRO-EVOLUTION, only micro-evolution. The genetic code scientists created by intelligent design in the lab is capable of undergoing only micro-evolution (which involves variations of existing genes), and this can produce varieties within a natural species. It is not, however, capable of macro-evolution. That would require entirely new genes, which mindless Nature isn’t capable of inventing. Read my Internet article: HOW DID MY DNA MAKE ME?

  9. Mogley52 says:

    GENETIC AND BIOLOGICAL SIMILARITIES between different forms of life are better explained due to a common Designer Who designed similar functions for similar purposes in the various forms of life. Genetic information, like other forms of information, cannot happen by chance, so this is the best explanation rather than common ancestry via random mutations.

  10. Mogley52 says:

    IT’S INTERESTING THAT CARL SAGAN would have acknowledged sequential radio signals in space as evidence of intelligent life sending them, but he wouldn’t acknowledge the sequential structure of molecules in DNA (the genetic code) as evidence for an intelligent Cause. Read my popular Internet article, HOW DID MY DNA MAKE ME, and then ask yourself why you don’t believe. DNA can’t come by chance. It requires already existing DNA or a human genetic engineer in the laboratory to bring about more DNA.

  11. Mogley52 says:

    “JUNK DNA” ISN’T JUNK: We were simply ignorant of their usefulness. Recent research published in journals such as Nature shows that these “non-coding” segments of DNA are vital in regulating gene expression (when, where, and how genes are expressed). There’s no room for random mutations to operate safely. Just because these segments of DNA don’t code for proteins doesn’t mean that they’re useless. Read my Internet article WAR AMONG EVOLUTIONISTS!

  12. Mogley52 says:

    NATURAL SELECTION DOESN’T PRODUCE ANYTHING. It can only “select” from what is produced. Natural selection can only “select” from variations that are genetically possible and which have survival value. If a biological variation occurs that helps a species survive (i.e. change in skin color, etc.), that survival is called being “selected.” That’s all that natural selection is. There’s no conscious selection by nature. It’s a passive process. It’s just another term for survival of the fittest.

  13. Mogley52 says:

    APES ARE QUITE COMFORTABLE IN HOW THEY WALK, just as humans are quite comfortable in how they walk. Even a slight change in the position of a muscle or bone, for either, would be excruciatingly painful and would not be an advantage for survival. There’s no hard evidence that humans evolved from ape-like creatures anymore than there’s hard evidence that apes evolved from four-legged-pawed dog-like creatures. Read my Internet article: MISSING LINKS THAT NEVER WERE

  14. randeroid says:

    His last point raises the concern about our poor data analyses, which are ubiquitous. I once expected professors of statistics to challenge the poor data analysis out there, yet they place no value on cleaning up statistical ignorance. They are inwardly focused and so there are too few challengers to the poor analysis as exemplified by PottiGate.

  15. I feel like when people quote this, they’re making it seem like good ol’ Neil is saying that God is some kind of… entity created of physical ignorance, when in reality he’s just saying that people who use the God of Gaps argument are ignorant, and that they’re basically interchanging their ignorance with God… if that makes any sense at all.

  16. @WatchTheRadio Ever watch a Religion Vs Science debate? Seems like a large number of people don’t share you’re reservations of intellectual equality lmao. On the real though, it would be amazing. I’ve often wanted to pick an astrophysicist’s, neuroscientisit’s, biologists etc..brain even without a formal education in any of the fields but I admit it would be as you so accurately put it: simply “AWESOME”! :-)

  17. karlkat says:

    @TheSproingler, IF people believe that what we don’t understand is God, then “God is an ever receding pocket of scientific ignorance that’s getting smaller and smaller and smaller as time goes on.” I think your quote was a little out of context.

  18. I would love to sit down and talk with this brilliant person but a part of me thinks that i am not even close to being educated enough to have a semi productive conversation with him (ie: a three year old talking about life with an adult) but none the less it would be AWESOME

  19. donluchitti says:

    Neil has the a sort of fatigue in this interview in his response to his questions. This interviewer either was attempting to elicit Tyson’s more blunt side or was genuinely rubbing him a bit crude (IMO). Tyson seems a bit labored in the beginning of this interview, he definitely isn’t having as much fun as an interview with Colbert but nonetheless, he’s got savoir faire in science and communication; what else would you expect from someone who grew up in a smart family from the Bronx?

  20. i had to stop this clip and jump over to colbert’s site to see the video of tyson explain the moons gravitational effect on the tides. i was in tears from laughing so hard. i cant believe that people dont know that the moon influences our tides. we learned this as school kids! how does oreilly get away with his ignorance of sun rises and sunsets and tides? personally, i think oreilly does know the science behind tides and sunsets, he is just pushing an agenda. colbert is hilarious.

Leave a Comment