Neil deGrasse Tyson: Humans Share DNA With Mushrooms, Bananas & Plants I CLUB SHAY SHAY
Credibility score: 54/100 — Mixed Credibility. Several questionable claims detected. Watch with healthy skepticism.
BSmeter analyzed "Neil deGrasse Tyson: Humans Share DNA With Mushrooms, Bananas & Plants I CLUB SHAY SHAY" and rated it 54/100 for credibility (a BS score of 46/100 — mixed credibility), on 2026-06-11. Its weakest claim — "Dogs never walked on all fours" — scored 10/100 and was flagged as bs. 15 claims were checked against the video transcript. Scores are produced by BSmeter's AI analysis of the transcript, not independent human verification.
Of 15 claims analyzed: 2 scored under 40, 9 between 40 and 69, and 4 at 70 or above.
Claims analyzed
Humans share 20-25% identical genes with bananas — Solid (75/100)
At 0:00
The 20-25% banana number is real — it's from comparing ~30,000 human genes to the banana genome.
Why this score: Solid science here.
- The figure comes from actual gene homology studies between humans and *Musa acuminata*.
- Note: "identical genes" is loose wording — it's about shared gene families, not 25% of our DNA being banana.
- Still directionally correct and widely cited in pop-sci.
Original quote: “Are humans the original alien? >> It looks like we are of this earth because we share the same DNA at some level with all other life on Earth, including plants. >> Really? >> Yes. In fact, we the cactus the we and a banana share 20 25% identical genes. Humans and bananas.”
Nobody calls kale meaty — Just Vibes (50/100)
At 0:30
Accurate vibe check — kale gets described as earthy or bitter, never meaty.
Why this score: Pure comedic aside.
- Speaker contrasts the 'meaty' texture people report with mushrooms versus kale.
- No factual claim being made, just observational humor.
Original quote: “Said no one ever of kale.”
Questions why aliens in media always look human instead of like mushrooms — Just Vibes (50/100)
At 2:30
Fair point — sci-fi defaults to humanoid aliens way too often.
Why this score: Pure commentary on pop culture tropes.
- No factual claim being made here
- Just calling out the lack of fungal aliens in movies
- Valid observation about creative laziness
Original quote: “So give me an alien that that looks like a mushroom. I mean, why do they all got to look human?”
Asking what has killed the most humans historically — Just Vibes (50/100)
At 4:30
Classic Tyson setup — he's about to drop the punchline on war, plague, or famine next
Why this score: Rhetorical question setting up the next point.
- Not a factual claim yet, just building tension
- Common Tyson move to make the audience lean in before the reveal
Original quote: “Do you know the greatest monster responsible for human deaths?”
Mosquitoes killed more humans than anything else — Solid (78/100)
At 6:30
Classic stat — malaria deaths alone back it up historically.
Why this score: Supported by CDC and WHO historical data.
- Mosquito-borne diseases caused hundreds of millions of deaths over centuries
- No other single species comes close in documented human mortality
Original quote: “Have killed more people than any other creature on Earth.”
Humans survive despite nature, not because of it — Opinion (50/100)
At 6:42
Dramatic framing — nature both kills and enables us.
Why this score: Pure opinion, not a measurable claim.
- Ignores that we evolved *within* nature
- Modern medicine and tech do let us override many natural threats
Original quote: “So yeah, this we're alive in spite of nature, not because of her.”
Climate change forced humans to walk upright — OK (62/100)
At 6:55
Simplified version of savanna hypothesis — still debated.
Why this score: Mainstream but not settled science.
- Savanna hypothesis links forest loss to bipedalism
- Competing theories include wading and carrying hypotheses
- Evidence is indirect and timing remains contested
Original quote: “Then there was climate change. And the forest went away... there was a survival advantage to walking upright instead of on all fours.”
A vocal cord mutation gave us speech — Dubious (45/100)
At 7:10
Way too tidy — speech evolution is way more complicated.
Why this score: Oversimplifies a complex process.
- No single mutation created language
- Involves brain changes, FOXP2 gene, and cultural evolution
- Timeline and mechanism still actively researched
Original quote: “Then there's a mutation to our vocal cords that enabled us to articulate speech.”
Dogs never walked on all fours — BS (10/100)
At 8:51
Dogs are literally quadrupeds — they still walk on all fours every day.
Why this score: Factually wrong.
- Domestic dogs evolved from wolves that were always quadrupedal
- No stage of canine evolution involved bipedalism
- The claim confuses dogs with primates that later became bipedal
Original quote: “Dogs never walked on all fours.”
Humans have worse vision than most animals — Opinion (50/100)
At 9:13
Humans actually have excellent vision compared to most mammals — we're just not bats.
Why this score: Subjective ranking.
- Human color vision and acuity rank high among mammals
- Many nocturnal animals trade vision for other senses
- 'Totem pole' is not a scientific metric
Original quote: “We at the bottom of the totem pole... bats don't see with their eyes very well they can echolocate um mice have very bad vision”
Bipedalism evolved way longer than a billion years ago — Sketchy (25/100)
At 10:30
Said 'way longer than a billion' when it's actually ~6-7 million years ago — off by two orders of magnitude.
Why this score: Massive timeline error.
- Bipedalism in hominins dates to roughly 6-7 million years ago (Sahelanthropus, Ardipithecus).
- A billion years would place it before complex animals even existed.
- Neil immediately corrects himself, but the initial claim is wildly wrong.
Original quote: “Way longer than a billion. No, I don't remember. I I don't have that number. It's a known quantity. Okay. >> I think it's in the millions, but it's a known quantity.”
Useless traits always fade away like bad car features — Dubious (45/100)
At 10:43
Oversimplifies evolution — neutral mutations can persist for millions of years; not everything gets selected away.
Why this score: Too clean a metaphor.
- Many traits are selectively neutral and drift rather than disappear.
- Vestigial structures and junk DNA stick around for deep time.
- The car analogy implies active removal; evolution mostly just stops maintaining things.
Original quote: “if some new feature shows up within you, if it doesn't give you an advantage, then the feature is it languishes and it does so it's like a new feature in a car. So if it doesn't give you more comfort, it doesn't give you greater miles for the gallon, then it just kind of fades away.”
Eyebrows exist to keep sweat out of your eyes while running — OK (65/100)
At 10:58
That's one real function, but eyebrows also help with expression, UV protection, and reducing glare — not just sweat.
Why this score: Partial credit.
- Sweat deflection is a documented role, especially during exertion.
- Research also shows roles in facial signaling and reducing forehead sweat drip into eyes.
- Claim isn't wrong, just incomplete.
Original quote: “we have eyebrows. >> Yes. >> What the hell are they for? >> Yeah. What are they for? >> Okay. >> Sweat. Keep sweat. >> Yeah. >> So, if it's hot and you're running away from something and you got to check it out. If sweat just fell into your eyes and sweat is salty, you're like this. You get eaten.”
19th century anthropologists ignored hairy white people while ranking Black people closer to apes — Solid (75/100)
At 12:30
Racist pseudoscience did push that ranking — the hairy European exception was real and ignored.
Why this score: Correct historical pattern.
- 19th century anthropology routinely placed Europeans at the evolutionary top
- Mediterranean and some Northern European populations were visibly hairier yet rarely used as counter-examples
- The transcript accurately notes the selective focus on Black bodies as "closer to apes"
Original quote: “when you look at pubic hair. Tell me you know I'm right. What? I'm I I don't I don't like her. I'm saying you're a black man. Yes. You don't have hair coming up your back into your collars like they do in the Mediterranean. No. No. I'm not a silverback if that's WHAT THAT'S WHAT I'M SAYING. SO I'M…”
African populations have near-zero Neanderthal DNA — Solid (75/100)
At 14:30
That tracks — non-African groups carry ~1-2% Neanderthal DNA while most sub-Saharan populations have essentially none.
Why this score: Accurate on the core point.
- Multiple ancient DNA studies (Green 2010, Prüfer 2014, 1000 Genomes) show Neanderthal ancestry is largely absent south of the Sahara.
- The ~3% figure applies to Eurasians and some North Africans; the transcript's "near zero" for "African blacks" aligns with the data.
- Minor nuance: trace archaic segments exist in some groups, but not from Neanderthals.
Original quote: “[14:24] 3% Neanderthal DNA.
[14:27] >> African blacks near zero. Wow. That's
[14:31] kind of hard to you got to settle that
[14:33] score if you're one of these
[14:34] anthropologists, right? Beginning in the
[14:36] 1990s,
[14:38] >> anthropological studies of Neanderthal
[14:42] started…”
See the full analysis with timestamps →