I always suspected there was more to Tyson’s fame than what he lets on!
That was an autocorrect mistake.
Some fundamentalists would disagree.
The devil made you do it.
I kind of like it better than the original, because I was old enough and well read enough to know most of the stuff, and the current production values are so much better. And we don’t have ten minutes of shots of NDT gaping at a blank screen.
I thought it was kind of meh.
What especially lost me was when he said, something to the effect of: “the moon was ten times as close as it is now…” or something like that. This makes no mathematical or logical or scientific sense at all! One tenth as far would make sense. But no scientist would ever say “ten times as close.”
I might be remembering the details wrong, but it was one of those totally non-scientific illogical constructions that let me know the script was written by a moron. NGT should have refused to utter it.
I suppose it’s a pile on now, but I didn’t like it very much either for all the reasons listed thus far.
Someone mentioned earlier that NDGT is the Bob Villa of astro-physics. 
I get that impression as well.
I’d like to see evidence it was even on Fox News. Heck, that’s not even what the Creation Museum teaches.
My PVR missed the first 20 minutes or so, but what I managed to watch was pretty OK.
Keeping expectations fairly low.
The cosmic calendar was a pretty decent visual aid, and I hope the series has other interesting ways of distilling down these cosmic notions into terms more palatable for human comprehension, at the layman level. That’s what this series is really about.
Raising my hand with those who mentioned getting a little choked up about the Sagan anecdote. Smart move, paying homage, and respectfully done. It felt very genuine.
I see the Christian community is somewhat upset at the long passage about Bruno.
Now, I’m not religious at all. But thinking about it… they have a point. That Bruno story/cartoon took up a third of a show dedicated to the Cosmos. That seems like a lot, considering that it was a minor historical event, and that Bruno was burned for a lot more than his views on the Cosmos, and that this happened 400 years ago during a period of general intolerance. The message being sent is, “religion is bad and leads to horrible things. Science is good.”
While I might even agree with the message, it did have the effect of alienating a lot of people who might otherwise have been reachable. Unless they want to preach to the converted, taking a slam at the people you’re trying to reach doesn’t seem like a particularly good strategy. And considering that the cartoon was kind of amateurish and out of step with the tone of the rest of the show, it seems even more gratuitous.
Agreed. The cartoon seemed ill considered no matter which way you look at it.
As for the cosmic calendar… How do they know the Big Bang occurred on January 1?
It’s just a theory.
I’m sorry, I’ve been reading the SRIotD thread and my WTF meter is worn out. Please tell me this isn’t a real question.
As I said in the Pit thread, I liked it. Thought it was a very well done show that is going to get a lot wider audience than the original and bring the series up to date. Thought NDT did a good job. Yeah, the animation part was a bit of a disconnect and unsure why they did what they did there (it didn’t show the superiority of the scientific method, and the way they spun it was inaccurate as well so it was kind of a WTF moment in an otherwise good show).
As I said in the Pit thread, I think people have a bit of a rose colored view of the original series (I was in my early 20’s when it first aired). I loved it when it came out, but watching it now it’s a bit dated to me. I recently watched all of the episodes, and IMHO the original pilot wasn’t close to as good as this. Whether the rest of the episodes in this will be as good is something I’m looking forward to finding out. I can say that my kids put down their iPads and laptops and were really into the show (except the cartoon part where they were, like me, scratching their heads and giving me WTF looks, so I whipped out my own iPad and read them the Wiki on the event and explained it to them).
Poe’s Law - ain’t it a bitch. 
I’ve started to develop this strange twitch in my left eye over the past few years.
You’re not drinking enough.
More fundamentally, Bruno was NOT EVEN A SCIENTIST! If you disagree, name me some of his scientific achievements or discoveries.
You want to condemn the Church for executing a man for heresy? Go right ahead! I’m with you on that. The execution of Bruno IS proof that the Church could be cruel and arbitrary. It just doesn’t prove that the Church was anti-science.
Thing is, when secularists want to make the case that the Church is anti-science, there are always exactly three names they bring up: Hypatia, Bruno, and Galileo. Tellingly, TWO of those three were NOT scientists! And the one who WAS a scientist, Galileo, died peacefully in bed in his own home.
And Galileo’s real “sin” wasn’t espousing the Copernican theory, it was putting direct quotes from the then-current Pope into the mouth of a character named Simplicio in his Dialogue. At one time, the Pope considered Galileo his friend and let’s just say he was more than a bit miffed at literally being called a fool in print. All the rest was just justification.
I think the tale of Bruno was emphasized for two reasons:
- It brings up the conflict between religion and science that has existed since the 17th century, and…
- It does so in a way that purposely fingers the Catholic church as being the bad guy, allowing Protestants to say “well, we’re not like that”, while ignoring the fact that in today’s world it’s the Catholics who have no problem with modern cosmological theory while it’s Protestants (some, not all) who are pro-Creation, anti-Evolution, pro-intelligent design, etc.
So if the producers wanted to actually bring up the conflict in way meaningful to the modern viewer, they would have focused on the BS that is Creationist science and Intelligent Design and not some guy who was burned at the stake 400 years ago.
But… they punted.
I can’t imagine the shit-storm we’d get if Cosmos directly engaged the kill-the-fags creationists.
It would make it topical instead of being another science show with pretty graphics. That was enough back in 1977 when there weren’t many science shows with pretty graphics, but nowadays they’re pretty common (I even started a thread on the economics of such shows last year.)
So, yes, a shit-storm of controversy is just what the show needs to be something special. As it is… it’s just one of many.