"Tyson has argued that the concept of intelligent design thwarts the advance of scientific knowledge."
Which as far as I see he didn't say in that specific form and which can even be interpreted by ID followers as "so he said that ID is stronger than scientific knowledge" (using the meaning 2 of thwart: http://www.thefreedictionary.com/thwart "To oppose and defeat the efforts, plans, or ambitions of").
Try to change that to his message that "ID is stupid" which would be less manipulative recapitulation:
With false first presentations of Einstein as "a pantheist" and Tyson as somebody who appears to acknowledge the strength of "ID"(!) at this moment religious fanatics obviously succeeded in their manipulative influence to Wikipedia articles.
No idea if the quote is accurate, but it makes sense to me. Consider the analogue: "the concept of Magick thwarts scientific progress." Or "pop culture celebtration of ignorance thwarts scientiofc progress."
It seems you're also trying to muddy the waters: a) It's not the quote (i.e. what somebody actually said or written) we discuss but the "interpretation" written by unknown or known Wikipedia troll b) The mentioned interpretation uses "the advance of scientific knowledge" not "scientific progress." Public is trained to recognize that being against the progress is bad, but the same detectors aren't triggered by "scientific knowledge" against which ID explicitly fights.
The only quote that can be properly written there in Wikipedia citing the video linked would be "Intelligent Design is philosophy of ignorance." That's what he actually said there.
The actual quote and the manipulative interpretation are by no means interchangeable.
I wasn't trying to muddy waters, I was trying to type on a phone, so I paraphrased from memory. The terms I switched are interchangable to me (anecdata).
ID absolutely does not vilify "scientific knowledge" per se. The whole point of ID is that it is a pseudoscientific rebranding of creationism, run by "Discovery Institute" that purports to find evidence for God.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neil_Tyson#Views
"Tyson has argued that the concept of intelligent design thwarts the advance of scientific knowledge."
Which as far as I see he didn't say in that specific form and which can even be interpreted by ID followers as "so he said that ID is stronger than scientific knowledge" (using the meaning 2 of thwart: http://www.thefreedictionary.com/thwart "To oppose and defeat the efforts, plans, or ambitions of").
Try to change that to his message that "ID is stupid" which would be less manipulative recapitulation:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oEl9kVl6KPc
With false first presentations of Einstein as "a pantheist" and Tyson as somebody who appears to acknowledge the strength of "ID"(!) at this moment religious fanatics obviously succeeded in their manipulative influence to Wikipedia articles.