Fine, Let's Talk About Star (Insert Trek/Wars)

They say that you can like both Elvis and the Beetles, but you can never like both equally. The same could be said for many people and their attitudes towards the two most popular franchises with "star" in the title. In honor of the release of the new Star Wars movie, Bill Nye weighed in on his opinions about the series. It seemed to come down to his annoyance that Star Wars was not as scientifically accurate as Star Trek. Niel Degrasse Tyson had some similar comments around the same time, although he seemed to be more focused on discussing the representation of science in the new movie and less on whether this made it preferable to Star Trek. Bill Nye, on the other hand, seemed downright offended by Star Wars, which honestly doesn't care about science. It never did and it never will. I think it was pretty clear about that at the start of the relationship, so don't start acting like this is new information.

Didn't George Lucas call his movie a "space opera"?  That should've been a give away. Much of science fiction deals with changes to science, technology and society and their philosophical implications. Even though Star Trek can be just as magical as Star Wars, it makes some attempt to be grounded in the world of known science because doing otherwise would defeat the point. Gene Roddenberry intended it to be a realistic vision of the future. I'd should point out that I think this vision is oriented more towards a civilization that is more humane and sanguine than our own - rather than being fundamentally about fancy gadgets and exotic space phenomenon - but this requires speculation about science and technology too. On the other hand, Star Wars is more like a fantasy in science fiction setting than it is speculative fiction.  Of course it has magic, Mr. Nye. It takes place a long time ago in a galazy far, far away. We're talking about Lord Of the Rings in space here.