Not sure if I'd compare Tyson (who is just a museum curator) and Nye (who has no formal scientific training that I'm aware of) with Newton and Einstein.
Newton is the originator of the phrase "If I have seen further than others, it is by standing upon the shoulders of giants". He was very complimentary and transparent about how his work was built on the discoveries of others. That being said, a cogent argument could be made that Newton is literally the most important and possibly smartest scientist the human race has ever produced.
This is a man who literally invented calculus. Let's also remember that Newton was part of the early beginnings of Free Masonry. Very unlikely that the goals of the order were anywhere similar to what they may be now.
Einstein is another subject and in the interest of keeping this comment from entering the "TLDR" category, I'll simply say that I would be very wary of discounting his contributions simply because he was a freemason. Both of these men made gargantuan contributions to our understanding of reality. Conversely, Nye and Tyson are compromised, bought-and-paid-for charlatans used for influencing public opinion.
Bottom line, I don't think putting these four men together and dismissing all of their contributions simply because they were/are Free Masons is good logic or holds up to scrutiny.
Tyson has a PhD and is in charge of a planetarium, so not exactly "just" a museum curator. Bill Nye has at least one degree in engineering, and while not exactly a formal scientist like one doing original research, he's spent his life advocating for science and helping it to be easier understood by the mass public. It's clear that he understands plenty of science in the process.
So if it is so well understood why is it not used in any technology to date?
Can you build something that proves these theories if you are so knowledgeable about them that you can refute without giving the mathematics? Beyond "they were freemasons" or "they were degenerates" etc? That is ad hominim attacks which doesn't change whether they have came up with this work themselves let along they are wrong...
Invented by tesla and stolen by Rothschild's doesn't disprove the current scientific understanding about how the universe works and how is that invention solely based on ether science or what it is you seem to be claiming to be the truth
Not sure if I'd compare Tyson (who is just a museum curator) and Nye (who has no formal scientific training that I'm aware of) with Newton and Einstein.
Newton is the originator of the phrase "If I have seen further than others, it is by standing upon the shoulders of giants". He was very complimentary and transparent about how his work was built on the discoveries of others. That being said, a cogent argument could be made that Newton is literally the most important and possibly smartest scientist the human race has ever produced.
This is a man who literally invented calculus. Let's also remember that Newton was part of the early beginnings of Free Masonry. Very unlikely that the goals of the order were anywhere similar to what they may be now.
Einstein is another subject and in the interest of keeping this comment from entering the "TLDR" category, I'll simply say that I would be very wary of discounting his contributions simply because he was a freemason. Both of these men made gargantuan contributions to our understanding of reality. Conversely, Nye and Tyson are compromised, bought-and-paid-for charlatans used for influencing public opinion.
Bottom line, I don't think putting these four men together and dismissing all of their contributions simply because they were/are Free Masons is good logic or holds up to scrutiny.
Tyson has a PhD and is in charge of a planetarium, so not exactly "just" a museum curator. Bill Nye has at least one degree in engineering, and while not exactly a formal scientist like one doing original research, he's spent his life advocating for science and helping it to be easier understood by the mass public. It's clear that he understands plenty of science in the process.
So if it is so well understood why is it not used in any technology to date? Can you build something that proves these theories if you are so knowledgeable about them that you can refute without giving the mathematics? Beyond "they were freemasons" or "they were degenerates" etc? That is ad hominim attacks which doesn't change whether they have came up with this work themselves let along they are wrong...
Invented by tesla and stolen by Rothschild's doesn't disprove the current scientific understanding about how the universe works and how is that invention solely based on ether science or what it is you seem to be claiming to be the truth
Then prove me wrong. Have you read Principa Mathematica? You make assertions and provide no facts to back them up.
Tell me why I should lump Einstein and Newton in with two charlatans and we'll talk. But ad hominem attacks on anyone get nowhere with me.