Watch the expression on the face of David Silverman (of the American Atheists) when Bill O’Reilly gives his argument for god’s existence.
Steven Colbert shows that O’Reilly seems to be very fond of this argument.
| The Colbert Report | Mon – Thurs 11:30pm / 10:30c | |||
|
||||
Neil deGrasse Tyson oversimplifies his explanation for the tides by suggesting that it is entirely due to the moon’s gravitational pull that changes direction as the Earth rotates. That would explain only one ebb and flow a day. The effects of both the Sun and the moon are required to create the two daily tides.
Does O’Reilly really not know that we understand tides so well and that it is not an inexplicable mystery that requires god? Or is he, like some religious people, simply going through the motions of trying to find things to buttress a belief that he suspects deep down is insupportable, because is too scared to go against prevailing orthodoxy?
I was also baffled by O’Reilly’s mantra ‘no miscommunication’. What on earth is that supposed to mean?
Peter,
I also wondered about that. I think he means that the fact that things work so perfectly is a sign that god is running things and he communicates perfectly with the tides or with his angels who are charged with making the tides behave.
“Neil deGrasse Tyson oversimplifies his explanation for the tides by suggesting that it is entirely due to the moon’s gravitational pull that changes direction as the Earth rotates. That would explain only one ebb and flow a day. The effects of both the Sun and the moon are required to create the two daily tides.”
This is incorrect. The tide is caused by differential forces. The gravitational effect of the Moon on the surface of the Earth is the same when it is directly overhead as when it is directly underfoot. Hence two tides per day. When the Sun’s gravity is added (full moon & new moon) the tide is greater than normal (spring tides). When it is at right angles to the moon, the tidal effect is minimized (neap tides).
I think Steven sums up the first part of the religious argument very nicely -- “There must be a God, because I don’t know how things work.” He forgets the second part -- “…and I’m too lazy, stubborn, or frightened to find out.”
The religious myth is comforting, and that makes it attractive to many people. It is reassuring to believe that everything will turn out alright because a more powerful entity than us is running the show.
Shalom Randy,
Tyson doesn’t get it wrong.
He says that tides are caused by a “a couple of factors, but mostly the Moon.”
Factor one is our Moon, which is most responsible for tides, and less responsible is factor two, which Tyson doesn’t mention in detail, is our Sun.
I have great fun with this when I teach tides to my science students by using three volunteers, a couple of hula hoops and rope. Just envision what happens at neap tide.
B’shalom,
Jeff
Shalom Mano,
It is unfortunate, no sad, given O’Reilly’s previous use of this argument, that Silverman was not ready with the simple explanation.
B’shalom,
Jeff
Jeff,
I agree, Tyson got it right. I was objecting to the claim that the Moon alone would “explain only one ebb and flow a day” and that “the effects of both the Sun and the moon are required to create the two daily tides.” This is just plain incorrect.
If there was no Sun well, we would have other problems but bear with me. If there was only the Moon there would still be two ebbs and flows per day. The differential gravity created by the Moon causes two tidal bulges, one in the direction of the Moon and another directly opposite.
Billo is still an idiot though.
Shalom Randy,
That’s true. You’re absolutely right.
Looking back at my two comments I realized that I had flipped them.
The two tidal bulges and why neap tides occur when the Sun and Moon are at right angles to the Earth are perhaps the most difficult concepts for my students to grasp because they seem so counter intuitive.
B’shalom,
Jeff