Bill Maher and Neil deGrasse Tyson: Science and Sports Debate

Neil deGrasse Tyson's refusal to acknowledge biological differences in sports highlights a troubling disconnect from scientific reality.

### The Debate on Biological Differences in Sports: Bill Maher vs. Neil deGrasse Tyson
* 🤔 Bill Maher and Neil deGrasse Tyson engaged in a heated discussion about the biological differences between men and women in sports, with Maher criticizing Tyson's **reluctance to acknowledge these differences**.
* 📉 Maher pointed out that the left dismisses **biological advantages in women's sports** while still supporting policies that **contradict this idea**.
* 📖 In a controversial article from Scientific American, it was claimed that "**inequity between male and female athletes is a result not of inherent biological differences, but of biases in how they are treated in sports**," which Maher found unscientific.
* 🏀 Maher emphasized that the inability of WNBA teams to compete with NBA teams cannot solely be attributed to societal bias, highlighting the **biological factors at play**.
* 💪 He listed various biological advantages that men have over women, including bone density, lung capacity, and testosterone levels, stating that men's testosterone levels range from **300 to 1200 nanograms per deciliter**, compared to women's **20 to 70**.
* 🏅 Maher referenced the numerous records set by biological males in female sports, arguing that this evidence **contradicts Tyson's claims**.
* He criticized Tyson for his dismissive attitude and called for a more scientific approach to the discussion, emphasizing the **importance of recognizing biological realities in sports**.
* 🎥 The debate reflects broader societal tensions regarding gender, science, and sports, with Maher advocating for a **more honest conversation** about these issues.

It's painful to watch, but remember these are the people who told you to trust the science. So Bill Maher and Neil deGrasse Tyson kind of went at it, you know? Neil deGrasse Tyson is like the McDonald's of scientists, and he's like the Ronald McDonald of

scientists. No, he's the McDonald's in general, kids of scientists. The Jared, he's the Jared of scientists. There you go. And Bill Maher is always, I hate, he's always a daylight in a dollar short, right? But now he's, he acknowledges that, hey, we've gone so far with the left to

say that there's no biological advantage between men and women in women's sports. And the left keeps saying these are not issues we care about, yet they still try and stand behind the policy. And you'll see this with Neil deGrasse Tyson. He could very easily, considering how much

he's mocked Christians and, and, and you know, monotheists for a very long time. It should be just as easy for him to say, yeah, okay, there's obviously a biological difference between boys and girls. Yeah, but he refused to concede that on the Bill Maher show. It's painful to watch, but

remember these are the people who told you to trust the science. This is in Scientific American, yeah, less than a year ago. 'Inequity between male and female athletes is a result not of inherent biological differences between the sexes, but of biases in how they are

treated in sports.' That's nuts, and it sure ain't scientific. And it's in Scientific American. And that's why the Democrats lost the election. It's true, Bill. Every 20 minutes on your platform you come up with another reason why the Democrats lost. You already, you already

have the answer they lost the election so anything you say is why they did it engage with the idea here what I'm asking is Scientific American is saying basically that the reason why an NBA WNBA team can't beat the Lakers is because of societal bias what you're

saying is not Scientific American says that an editor for Scientific American says that who no longer has the job the scandal is not her tweet the scandal that was like a year ago was it which one was a year ago I think a year ago women

still couldn't beat men in basketball or any other sport and it wasn't because of society say the truth Neil you don't see a problem long distance swimming women might actually have the oh my god oh one example look into that yeah maybe long distance swimming yes okay yeah what

else I've looked into it well I'm going to file you under part of the problem yeah here's the thing he's such an arrogant prick he goes I've looked into it it's always I know something you don't know okay what do

you know about boys and girls males and females that allows you to suggest that there's no biological advantage for males I've looked into it okay tell me what you found Neil and people tell you you're not a scientist you're right I'm

not but I've got it in front of me he makes the one okay Grant I'm the one exception long-distance swimming because it's really the only area where a higher body fat percentage allows for more buoyancy all right okay you're not talking about a serious competitive

Sport you're talking about basically Jack Lane swimming two yachts across the English Channel, it's a gimmick, okay? When he says I don't know that there are biological advantages uh for men, let me rattle these off for you really quick: bone density, lung capacity, body fat

percentage, percentage of fast twitch muscle fibers, the testosterone average levels in the male versus female body. For a man, it's between 300 to 1200 nanograms per deciliter, for a woman, it's 20 to 70. You're not hearing that wrong.

300 to 1200 nanograms per deciliter for a woman it is is 20 to 70. In other words, the walking human pin cushion on the Mr. Olympia stage, roided out of his mind, does not enjoy the hormonal advantage over any man in this room that we enjoy over the

average woman, and it's not even close. So you looked into it Neil, you looked into it. Tell me what it is that you found. I'm tired of this gatekeeping BS, and it's anti-scientific when he talks, oh we don't know, okay? All right, so that's

empirical. Let's go to the anecdotal then. We talk about medals and records. 900 medals from over 600 female athletes, records have been set by biological males in female sports. Weightlifting for men, running 200 meters, 300 meters, you look

at swimming, you look at whether it's 200 yards, whether anything. Every example, hey if you like this video, we're probably like-minded and you may enjoy some more content. You can click that video, watch another one, uh or tune in weekdays at 10:00 a.m.

eastern cuz we're like we're the same you and me we're kindred spirits

Neil deGrasse Tyson is a Big P*ssy

CrowderBits

Critique of Neil deGrasse Tyson and Bill Maher's debate on biological sex differences in sports.

Bill Maher and Neil deGrasse Tyson disagree on the biological advantages between men and women in sports.

Maher criticizes the left's denial of biological differences, highlighting the inconsistency between their statements and policies.

Tyson's past criticism of monotheists is contrasted with his reluctance to acknowledge biological differences in sports.

Scientific American's article denying inherent biological differences is cited as an example of flawed science.

The article's claim that inequity is due to societal bias, not biology, is deemed nonsensical.

Discussion of Scientific American's article and its implications.

Maher suggests the article contributed to the Democrats' election loss.

The discussion focuses on whether societal bias or biological differences are the primary factors affecting athletic competition between sexes.

The controversy surrounding the Scientific American article and its author is mentioned.

Long-distance swimming is presented as a potential exception, where higher body fat might benefit women.

Analysis of Neil deGrasse Tyson's arguments and claims.

Maher challenges Tyson's assertion that he has investigated the topic thoroughly.

Tyson's claim of having researched the issue is questioned.

Tyson's exception for long-distance swimming is dismissed as a minor and atypical case.

Specific biological advantages for men in sports are listed (bone density, lung capacity, etc.).

Significant differences in testosterone levels between men and women are highlighted.

Presentation of empirical and anecdotal evidence.

Maher criticizes Tyson's dismissal of the evidence as 'gatekeeping BS' and 'anti-scientific'.

The number of medals won by biological males competing in women's sports is cited as evidence.

The video concludes with a call to action, encouraging viewers to watch more content.