joining me to react, my son's hero, neil degrass tyson.st, author of a brand new book, accessory to war. thanks for joining us. do you think this is the right idea, or is it science and space better left in the private hands of elon musk and yourself? >> well, the concept of a space force is not new. plus, as a thing to do, we've done something like this before. you might remember, you wouldn't remember, you might have read, that during the second world war the army had a branch of itself called the army air force and once we learned that this theater of operations, this sphere of operations had fundamentally different needs, different training, different technologies, different personnel required to operate in that space, if you will, the air force then, split away from the army and became its own branch. this need, is in response to the fact that space in particular, lunar space, sort of new word for many people, the space between the earth and the moon, to the extent we conduct business in space, activities in space, we have billions of

>> in september, as i'm sure you're aware, neil degrasse tyson "astrophysics for people in a hurry," and the september we will publish other, "accessory to war" which is a story of relationship between astrophysicists and the military beginning with celestial navigation in the 15th century and up to the present. interest in tracking and ranging, protection and nuclear fusion, and as he puts it, a curious, what did he say, complicity, curious complicity between astrophysics and the military. that will be very interesting. and october we are over the moon to be publishing a one volume american history trade book by jill lepore, harvard university and the new yorker. classic narrative history, these truths. human driven storytelling but the people joe writes about are not the usual suspect. we talked yesterday at the breakfast about the 19th century and african american woman who was lecturing the crowds in boston. she talked about william jennings bryan, talked about polly murray and phyllis schlafly. these drivers of history don't get -- >> one volume history. and what jill lepore has

melissa: we had neil degrass tyson on the show, we were talking about the space force and is that necessaryhe thought so and he thought we need ad cyber force as well. >> yes. melissa: we're way behind in thesethose two areas. is that a step in the right direction or not even close? >> it's a step in the right direction like rebecca said. we don't want parity but unlevel playing field but we want the advantage. use of artificial intelligence for sigher warfare there is so much to do in that area. china is investing big time in quantum computing. there are a lot of areas we need to invest in this exactly and cyberdefense, cybersecurity it is hard to become a dominant player, hard to stop every threat, we have to create an iron dome like israel talked about, create something for the u.s. and still protecting our freedoms of speech, the right to do commerce. when you have the big firewall china does, you control everything goes in and out country you can do that but we're open. melissa: i i want to talk about another story, former white oust aide omarosa dropping more secret recordings. appare

may be the cavaliers don't need to acquire carmelo anthony, maybe they need near degrasse tyson. -- neil degrasse tyson. he states newton's theory of planetary motion is a big scam, i'm not making fun of that, but this quote, it is right in front of our faces, they lied to us. trust no one. okay? >>> so stefon diggs said how mad would you be if i agreed with him, and some said you think the earth is flat, he said prove that it is not right now, besides showing me a picture that you got from somewhere and i will be a believer. now one, we want not say that we are talking about a wide receiver with the minnesota vikings about whether or not the earth is flat, the evidentiary argument, that is used, which is, i don't believe it, they lied to us, show me a picture, but not one you got from somewhere. because somewhere underneath that is a sense that they lied to us, whether this is true or not, it is so tainted, it is not accessible, a circular argument in which the evidence you want to introduce will be immediately discounted because the source you are going to produce it from are the only

maybe the cavaliers don't need to acquire carmello anthony, maybe they need neil degrass tyson. i'm not here necessarily to talk -- to make fun of kyrie irving who literally states newton's theory of planetary motion as a kind of big scam. but this quote, because it is right in front of our faces, they lied to us. how mad would you guys be if i said i agree with kai re-? i don't care. some responded prove that it's not right now. besides showing me a picture you got from somewhere and i will be a believer., you want to not say we are talking with a wide receiver of the vikings about whether or not the earth is flat, but we look at the evidentiary argumentative move which is, i don't believe it, they like to us, show me a picture but not when you got from somewhere. because underneath that is a sense, they lied to us. the evidence itself by which would argue whether it's true or not it is so tainted is not accessible. a circular argument in which the evidence you want to introduce will be immediately discounted because the source are the only people who could take pictures from s