> This says more about the author than about Tyson. He takes Tyson hostage as an unwitting totem for the 'uneducated intellectual' in order to stridently indict the scholar class that he clearly despises. The author also shoehorns Tyson's genuinely incoherent statements to fit his narrative. In short, the author had an agenda and a consequent myopia. Drivel.
Your comment says more about you than you think. Try to pause and reflect on your own biases.
Do you realize that's an extraordinary claim? You have proof for this, right?