I had no opinion of him before about 3 years ago. I have found that belief in human-caused global warming PLUS belief in the ability of politicians to reduce the global "temperature" 100 years from now is a great, great indicator of weak, butt-kissing mind.
Whenever I argue with Ayn Rand's cultists and criticize her books, they accuse me of disliking her and calling her a hack because I don't like that she's an atheist.
I wasn't even aware she an atheist until just a few years ago, though I've said for DECADES that I disliked her novels because she is a crappy writer. Now that I know she's an atheist, I can say I disagree with her on that. However, I would never falsely accuse of her "making a living by promoting atheism", and put her in the same camp as someone who DOES do that like Richard Dawkins. Atheism is just one issue she touches on among many others. I sincerely dislike her because she's a no-talent hack who writes one-dimensional characters, and beats her audience over the head with her "message". The fact I may agree with her on free market economics won't change the rest of that. I can agree with the message but thoroughly disagree with the messenger.
With Neil deGrasse Tyson, it's the opposite. I have thoroughly enjoyed his talks, presentations, and books for years. He's very engaging and articulate, and extremely knowledgeable in the area of physics. I wasn't even aware until a few years ago that he's wrong on the global warming issue. I disagree with him on that, but unlike his haters on here, I would never accuse him of "making a living promoting the global warming scam" like Al Gore does, or put him in the same category as a guy with a engineering degree who pretends to be a "scientist" because he hosted a children't TV show 20 years ago. Neil deGrasse Tyson talks about a wide range of issues, and only briefly touched on global warming in one episode when he hosted "Cosmos", for example. He is a legitimate credentialed scientist with a Ph.D. in that area of science, and a long history working in the field AND being appointed by a Republican president to oversee scientific work, whether I agree with him on global warming or not.
In short, it seems the Tyson bashers on here actually behave the way the Ayn Rand cultists FALSELY accuse her detractors of behaving. Anyone who disagrees with them on global warming is a "hack", no matter how much they demonstrate otherwise and no matter how much they are right on other issues. Also, it seems people can't separate a person's abilities with whether the person shares their worldview on an issue. I find that interesting.