I ask because I do not know. I remember watching him on television back in the day. I remember his appearances on Carson (then, Carson imitating him). And I remember buying his book Cosmos, which I still have and remains unread.
I’m just curious: is he highly regarded by the scientific community?
mmm
Moved MPSIMS --> IMHO.
According to wikipedia, he taught at Harvard and Cornell. He worked with NASA for a couple of decades.
Awards and honors:
Realistically, though, I think he’s more thought of as a popularizer of science (particularly astronomy) than as a scientist in his own right (although he was both). He was widely demonized for being an open atheist in a time when it was uncommon, and of course parodied for the “billions and billions” comments, but aside from the usual suspects, I think he was popular for a reason (Cosmos the series is still showing in occasional repeats today, even though much of what was in it is now incomplete or even wrong).
Think of him as his era’s Stephen Hawking, with more of a public face and maybe a little lighter science credentials.
An inspirational visionary with the exceptional knack for communicating ideas, his fascination for science was contagious. An outstanding human being.
I’d say very highly regarded. In addition to the accomplishments above, it’s hard to exaggerate the importance of his role as a charismatic educator who brought the wonder of the universe to the masses.
Perhaps most telling, when a bunch of scientists decided to put together some cosmic greeting cards (Pioneer plaques, Voyager golden records) that would certainly outlast our species, possibly our planet, he was the guy they put in charge.
I named a cat after him (her name was Sagan, not Carl). While brainstorming for names, I thought of Cosmos and rejected it right away, but it lead to Sagan.
Sagan regarded her namesake with a large degree of apathy.
Auto-tuned Carl Sagan song. You’re welcome.
Thanks!
Definitely very highly regarded, although I find his only novel (Contact) to be snooze-worthy at best. His non-fiction writing is a lot better.
In his prime he was not highly regarded by his peers derided as a mere popularizer who was more interested in being on TV than generating real scientific results. In his very early days he did important work on the atmosphere of Venus and one of the first to understand the importance of the green house affect on that planet in relation to it’s very high temperature. Mainly because he was considered less than serious about his academic pursuits he was voted down as a member of the National Academy of Sciences. However as time passed and with the wave of anti science that is upon us now his work with the public has been recognized as being of immense value, he is highly praised by the skeptical community.
I probably shouldn’t admit this in a public forum, but that song made me have a serious case of the hots for Carl Sagan. Kind of a “fuck me Ray Bradbury” moment, I guess. His hair and dress look awfully dated, but goshdarnit … he was CUTE.
Many years ago, my co-worker was Carl Sagan’s neighbor. She said he was a really wonderful, down-to-earth human being. I’ve always remembered that, and been jealous that I didn’t know him personally too.
Extremely highly regarded by everyone I know, which is more the scientific educators crowd, although it includes a few astrophysicists. He was inspirational and really made a difficult topic fascinating. Cosmos made a huge impact on me, and rightly so. I don’t remember the details, but I do remember how much it made me want to know more about the cosmos.
It was an excellent story, but he was in serious need of an editor. He was so highly regarded at the time of that publication, that no one dared call him out on his questionable prose.
The movie was way better.
Still have my autographed copy of The Dragons of Eden from the one time I met Mr. Sagan. What an amazingly friendly, charming guy.
While Sagan was never the top cosmologist in his field, he was no slouch either. (Same goes for Stephen Hawking, FWIW.) What he did do was popularize science, on a scale never seen before or since. His ability to explain complex concepts in easily understood layman’s terms cannot be overlooked.
As well they should have - the fellow earned, in all likelihood, billions and billions of fans.
(I had to do it. Sorry.)
We wanted to name a cat after him, but didn’t like Carl or Sagan, so we went with Cosmo.
Different strokes, I guess; I thought Contact was a decent read, although not the best ever.
He was quite fond of marijuana; I remember reading about how on one of those right-wing evangelical TV programs his scientific insights were slammed as the result of “clouds of illegal marijuana smoke”. IIRC it was The 700 Club.
As an avid pot smoker, I feel he was quite amazing given the hours he could go on about Gaussian Orbitals and distribution curves. Remarkable really! 