Bill Nye is everyone's favorite science guy, if you're into science... but I am not, nor have I ever been.
In fact, I think scientists are idiots. They're always the last people to figure out the shit that mystics, psychics and regular-ass people have all known for decades.
For instance, did you know that scientists JUST proved that dogs can sense our feelings?
....I mean, LOOK AT THE DOG, you lab coat morons. You needed to spend weeks in a lab with a dog to find out they could pick up on your vibes?
For a bunch of so-called geniuses, scientists have little-to-no emotional intelligence or insight.
If they do, they choose to ignore it it in favor of the boring and belabored Scientific Method, which takes too long and is forced into every conversation with the religious fervor of born again Christians.
Which explains why, when Bill Nye debated the astrologer Samuel F. Reynolds from Ebony Magazine on his Netflix show, he showed no ability to listen.
Samuel F. Reynolds referred to astrology as an interpretive art.
"You're referring to it as a pseudo-science," Reynolds began, "but in order for astrology to be a pseudo-science, I would have to first believe that it's a science. I don't believe it's a science."
Bill Nye went on the defense.
Nye ignored that point, and continued to press on, as if Reynolds didn't really believe that astrology wasn't a science.
Nye's tone was condescending and sanctimonious, with slow speech and patronizing posture, as if he was speaking to a child lost at the mall.
This didn't bother the astrologer one bit, as anyone who is into astrology is used to being spoken to by skeptics like they have no clue what they're talking about.
At one point, Bill turned to another guest to ask how she felt about what Reynolds was saying about astrology.
"I want it replicated in a lab," she answered.
...She wanted to see astrology, an interpretive art, replicated in a lab? ...Is that what she said when she heard David Bowie sing about aliens in "Life on Mars?"
The most frustrating thing about this, for lovers of astrology, is that it's the only art form that scientists troll with questions like "what's the point?"
Both Bill Nye and his panel guests asked this question of Reynolds, over and over again.
Nye himself asked, "Of what use is it?" Although his tone was more exclamatory than questioning.
His panelist Jamila Bey asked, "Can you make my life better with astrology, in any way?"
To this, Reynolds clapped back:
Ultimately, Reynolds won the argument.
Nye began the debate by trying to debunk astrology as a pseudoscience.
But as Reynolds continually clarified that astrology is an art, not a science, Nye's debate unravelled into a sanctimonious tantrum about how science is just... better ...than astrology.
"I gotta say, uh, as a scientifically literate guy... when you realize what's really happening in the universe, what's really happening in the cosmos, it's far more inspiring [than astrology]."
Nye's opinion of course, is subjective, and can't be proven, which is problematic for a "SCIENCE GUY," isn't it Bill?
I'd really like to see that opinion of yours replicated in a lab.