Neil DeGrasse Tyson's _Cosmos_

Should give it a new thread since we've got the first formal trailer:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gklrONZ51w8

I like it. Plenty of people assuming already that the trailer is exactly how the show will be like in terms of pace/music but I don't get that sense at all. I DO get a very smart sense of how to do mixed-media approaches and how geeked out I would be as a nine year old now for this based on the creative culture and media around me the same way I was back then for the original. I think we're in good hands.

And if you want to talk the original series:

Carl Sagan's "Cosmos"

looks great! having not read much about it, i'm hoping that those little animated segments represent the way, or one of the ways, that the show will handle historical narratives (e.g., the trial of galileo). i really hope that mannheim steamroller doesn't create the entire soundtrack, though. it'd be cool if oneohtrix point never did it!

For an atheist, he sure strikes a lot of christ poses in this

I love that they borrowed some of the music (or at least recreated) that Underworld and John Murphy created for Sunshine for the teaser—though it seems louder, like it got FOX'ed up.

As much as I don't like Seth MacFarlane the entertainer, Seth MacFarlane the Sagan nerd pairing up with Neil DeGrasse Tyson has me nothing but optimistic.

i really hope that mannheim steamroller doesn't create the entire soundtrack, though. it'd be cool if oneohtrix point never did it!

― Z S, Sunday, July 21, 2013 11:18 AM (2 hours ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

this times 106 million

the trailer makes it look like utter garbage

love that they're still using the spaceship of the imagination

Are they producing educational materials with this? This seems like a great thing for like a elementary or jr high science class

With all the science and history educational programming available today, I wonder how much time kids in class spend watching tv. When I was in elementary/middle school, VCR days were few and far between.

neat t-shirt: http://www.redbubble.com/people/pacalin/works/11569545-we-are-starstuff

http://ih1.redbubble.net/image.16003563.9545/fc,550x550,navy.u4.jpg

I recently listened to a podcast version of Sagan's Cosmos and was blown away again, dude was a visionary and an incredible orator. TV networks wouldn't know what do with a talent like him these days.

I wish it was being broadcast here earlier than 8. For my target-demo daughter, 8:30 is pretty much bedtime, and in fact any sort of screen time before bed is considered deleterious these days.

Do you have a dvr? Because.

No I do not.

Because if I did I would just record it, der.

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/live-feed/president-obama-introduce-cosmos-687009

This was...good.

NatGeo reran the original series in marathon form all day leading up to the premiere tonight, and I may have gotten so reinvested in Sagan's series that I was hypercritical of Tyson's take. I'm just going to recalibrate how I watch, I guess.

This Slate take echoes what I thought watching it, at least the extended Bruno sequence -- not so much an attack on religion as an appeal for evangelicals to not see science as the enemy.

http://www.slate.com/articles/arts/television/2014/03/cosmos_tv_review_neil_degrasse_tyson_s_fox_reboot_of_carl_sagan_s_miniseries.html

>NatGeo reran the original series in marathon form all day leading up to the premiere tonight

damn wish I'd heard about this. are you enough of a fanatic to know whether they played the original edits or the recently remastered DVD versions? (the original musical score had a lot of incredible music they couldn't afford the mechanicals on when remastering the DVD set).

I don't know if it was the original original version they aired, but I seem to recall having seen a version that was rejigged with "modern" cgi at some point several years ago and this was not that. The copyright that came up at the end of each episode was 2001.

xp

Have you tried the podcast version MP? It is pretty far out and is available on i-tunes/disreputable sitez.

Caught this last night -- I enjoyed it, I kept placing myself back as a nine year old watching the original and I'd like to think I'd be just as enthused if not more so. I liked both the specific callbacks -- the same cliff location, the cosmic calendar, 'we are all made of star stuff' -- and the variations. (I remember the big human-scale historical sequence from the first episode was the Library of Alexandria; having it be Bruno's story raised the stakes in its own way.)

A friend disapproved of the 'Star Trek TNG CGI' approach to the visuals but given that Brannon Braga directed the episode and is apparently a producer on this, NOT surprising. And I didn't mind, you use the tools of the times. Per Milton's comment, the music was my major complaint-as-such -- Silvestri is no Jerry Goldsmith, say, and I would have LOVED if they'd gone full bore and done a modern electronic music equivalent to the original score. In some ways the timing couldn't be better for it. Anyway Silvestri's score not the end of the world but pretty been there/done that when it comes to 'romance of space!' approaches.

As mentioned in another thread, I got some major Mass Effect vibes from the CG.

I found this really hard to sit through but I love that it aired on Fox in primetime.

its ok but I will always prefer Sagan as I am and old timer

over at patheos (a generally pretty reasonable religion site) they are pretty up-in-arms about it

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/godandthemachine/2014/03/dishonestcosmos/

though their resident atheist columnist is like "well but Bruno was killed for his views"

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/friendlyatheist/2014/03/10/science-writer-hank-campbell-alleges-that-cosmos-bungles-history-and-smacks-of-an-agenda/

I'm watching this, and it seems cool, but it's only 2 minutes in and I've been given terms I have to accept in order for the cosmos to be mine. I don't remember Carl Sagan pulling that kind of shit.

But NDT is great and this is a fun watch, just that felt like a weird way to open it up.

But yeah there's no anti-religion agenda in here. The big hero, Bruno, finds his vision of the universe in a spiritual revelation, and doesn't recant his faith even in the face of death.

a conservative friend of mine who refuses to watch because Obama introduced it (ridiculous) posted this which I thought was actually a reasonable criticism about the Bruno stuff:

http://www.science20.com/science_20/blog/cosmos_spacetime_odyssey_review-131240

I personally was surprised it took up so much of the episode when they could have talked about Copernicus and Galileo instead.

Adam,

If you refuse those terms it's your loss. You should just maybe weigh your options.

and fwiw, I thought it was a little weird that Obama introduced the series also, considering the NASA cutbacks. But I'm still optimistic.

It's weird that a sitting president can't do something non-political on tv anymore with everyone everywhere reading politics into it.

lol neil de ass tyson more like

Tangential, sorry, but I was reading about Edwin Hubble today and it's crazy to me that it hasn't even been a hundred years since astronomers established that there are other galaxies outside of our own, much less hundreds of billions. The idea of a single galaxy is so archaic it could almost be Aristotelian, yet there are people alive today who grew up in that vastly smaller known universe.

Well personally I don't mind those terms, but it's a bit baiting imo. And kind of pointless, since the whole Bruno sequence is about someone who has a religious revelation, no scientific method in sight.

Really interesting article, akm!

Tho yeah it is ridiculous to complain about the scientific method at the beginning of episode 1 of this science show. I don't mind being ridiculous from time to time.

yo caek,

how scientifically credible is the idea of a multiverse? or is it just a philosophical conjecture?

http://www.slate.com/blogs/bad_astronomy/2014/03/10/_cosmos_carl_sagan_s_classic_program_is_updated_and_terrific.html

i was relieved but also disappointed the animation wasn't in bugeyed family guy style. also louie ck should be the historical science-martyr in every episode.
"geez guys, I'm just thinking aloud here, y'know, geez!"

FWIW a response to that Science 2.0 piece:

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/friendlyatheist/2014/03/10/science-writer-hank-campbell-alleges-that-cosmos-bungles-history-and-smacks-of-an-agenda/

(Though the author has missed it IS on Hulu, so.)

Also:

http://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2014/03/why-em-cosmos-em-can-t-save-public-support-for-science/284355/

lol neil de ass tyson more like

caek will be hosting the 3.0 version. Oh it's true.

i didn't see the show, so i'm not sure which version of the multiverse he's talking about

if it's the idea that the universe extends beyond our horizon (in the sense that there are things further away than speed of light x age of universe) then yes, that's legit canonical big bang cosmology. these are not strictly other universes, but they are sometimes talked about that way because we can never in principle reach them or communicate with them.

if he's talking about string theory multiverses then lol 90s physics. no body hires string theorists any more.

if it's the idea that the universe extends beyond our horizon (in the sense that there are things further away than speed of light x age of universe) then yes, that's legit canonical big bang cosmology.

It was this one.

This was very well done and I'd love to see more!

I was sad to see eth shitty animation for historical narrative instead of shitty historical acting

Much prefer the animation to some history channel shit.

cosign

I was going to say, aesthetically I'm ALL about that.

The tribute to Sagan was very moving.

I went back and watched the original series (the remastered one with the overdubs, I knew something was off) after catching the new show, and I have to say there's a lot more *information* in the old series, if you compare the first 1980 ep to the new first ep. The new one looks gorgeous (the Jupiter flyby) but I can't believe they'll ever go into a story as detailed and nuanced as the original Kepler-Brahe drama later on. I also prefer the historical reenactments to the animation, which seems less human and more idealized ...

I'm enjoying the new show for sure, it's gorgeous, but it seems less intentionally hectoring and tenacious as the original run. Sagan was definitely telling you you'd fucked up and exhorted you to get your shit together, and peppered you with a ton of facts per minute.

This is all tossed off after one ep, though. It might get better.

if he's talking about string theory multiverses then lol 90s physics. no body hires string theorists any more.

― caek, Tuesday, March 11, 2014 6:29 PM (Yesterday)

lol:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mda_p1Sx1lE

the story about NDT meeting Sagan as a teenager was neat but it seemed out of place in the context of a 45min premiere ep, should have been a bonus online short or something

the CGI was gorgeous though, maybe my favorite CGI i've ever seen

The thing that's also inevitably different will be episode length -- full hour vs. 45 minutes.

Plus one would think that, scriptwise, 45 minutes straight through would be different from many brief segments that add up to 45 minutes

yeah ngdt reaches the right conclusions (imo) on string theory.

i just feel like he reaches them by being a stopped clock. he takes that ignorantly skeptical approach to other bits of astronomy and demonstrates pretty clearly that he either hasn't read or hasn't understood recent research.

Greene seems like a pretty chill dude

it seemed like allot of the material was the same as the sagan? I thought it would be new material - dicsoveries since the old one - some wild string theory shit

There are 12 episodes left.

are you saying these 12 other "episodes" will have "new material"???

I wouldn't bet a vital organ on it, but it's likely.

i'm sure they will get to the post-sagan stuff for which there is observational evidence (dark matter, dark energy, exoplanets, black holes, etc.)

string theory is not a part of astronomy or astrophysics.

the mass-extinction from an asteroid impact theory/discovery came after the original cosmos iirc

Yeah the Chicxulub crater wasn't properly identified until later in the 80's.

I hope stephens hawing comes flying in and rides of degreaasee toes and laughs

I much prefer NDT to the simpering contemptible shit Cox, he is very likeable and doesn't make me want to kick the tv.

gr80 otm, i think the alvarez paper is like 81 and the putative crater was known to an oil company in the late 70s, but the story didn't come together in public/become accepted until well into the 80s

i don't like any of these dudes except jacob bronowski

caek i love when you get all astronomist

in all seriousness, any one who liked the og cosmos and would like something similar to it, but about technology, and british, watch https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Ascent_of_Man

ha ty xp!

Are there any pre-Cosmos Carl Sagan-hosted space specials out there?

huh

The 13-part series was shot on 16mm film. Executive Producer was Adrian Malone, film directors were Dick Gilling, Mick Jackson, David Kennard and David Paterson. Quotations were read by actors Roy Dotrice and Joss Ackland. Series music was by Dudley Simpson with Brian Hodgson and the BBC Radiophonic Workshop. Additional music includes, amongst others, music by Pink Floyd. Apart from Bronowski, the only other named person appearing is the sculptor Henry Moore.
Malone and Kennard later emigrated to Hollywood, where they produced Carl Sagan's Cosmos. Jackson followed them, and now directs feature films.

pink floyd in sagan's cosmos too

final scene of the ascent of man

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ltjI3BXKBgY

"One Of These Days" was used in Cosmos

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gtj9kwQCltQ

I need to watch The Ascent Of Man. hfs at ending.

James Burke's Day The Universe Changed fits in here too:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Day_the_Universe_Changed

I'm enough of an old-timer to have a Mariner 9 picture of Mars autographed to me by Sagan himself so I'm way biased on this and will sound like a fucking middle-aged hippie.

I want to like the new series, but I wish they had gone in a different direction with the soundtrack. What carries a love of my love for the original series was just how iconic and future-ahistorical the soundtrack was and the new corny Disney-one makes Tyson more nerdy than cool-nerdy.

I think it's a triumph that MacFarlane and Tyson were able to just get this on broadcast television for 13 weeks. Sure, the score may be a little hokey, but I'm willing to live with some production concessions made for the suits just to be able to witness this.

o.g. score is ace, though. that's otm.

I guess I just wanted the music to be something more than just filler out of a KOMPACT5 library. One thing I love in o.g. is that when things go all powers-of-ten on you, Vangelis' "Alpha" is going to kick in.

I watched some PLanets show from bbc with the littlun last night and it was grand to see her wide eyed - space is neat

Elvis otm. You cannot top that Vangelis track.

have posted this link many times to several threads but it belongs here too: http://cosmic_voyager.tripod.com/cosmosindex.htm

I keep thinking about the lot of the string theorists. Trapped in futile bullshit for decades. I would never do that.

Why is all including NDT so hostile towards string theorists? Just curious.

I had the same question as Evan and found this article:

http://io9.com/5890789/the-trouble-with-string-theory

also this xkcd posted in comments there:

http://img.gawkerassets.com/img/17hipu0tf2q1spng/original.png

Before I jump into that article... How did they stumble on that initial idea?

Was it really a (mostly) random conclusion they're working backwards from?

Saw the stream of the new episode 1. The music is the least of the problems here; at best, I want to believe that its depthless tone is an intentional choice to reach a much larger audience than Sagan did with version 1. I want to support the project, I hope it does well, I might make it through one or two more episodes, but I also want to believe that even the most CGI-saturated 8 year old would still prefer the original show, even today, I just do.

Your probably wrong. 8 year olds would like neither.

whoever just ilxmailed me, the answer is kinda. i work in astrophysics.

I much prefer NDT to the simpering contemptible shit Cox, he is very likeable and doesn't make me want to kick the tv.

i am on record as having issues with cox but dear god ndt is irritating.

the crap effects didnt help him.

I find it difficult to dislike ndt, sure he isn't for everybody but he is more of a working presenter than Cox who seems like an overindulged solipsistic little shit, gurning away at himself in a mirror for a good living.

http://i62.tinypic.com/2wegmz8.gif

Daughter's initial skepticism was overcome within 5 minutes so I am into this

Her first comment: "why isnt he wearing a spacesuit?"

i thought i was watching a science show. and then he got into a space ship.

it's an imagination ship

right. that does make more sense because i was watching it on my imagination tube.

when he called it that, this was all i could think of:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qTn7xtVsE6U

How could you not like NDT? The man is a national treasure.

call it an exchange rate issue so

the dizzying intellectual heights of NdGT

http://storify.com/erinleeryan/monday-night-aas223

this is def aimed at kids right? and adults who like kids shit of course.

also that is the terriblest powerpoint by NDT altho i a gen a fan of his i guess?

it's aimed at ppl who fucking love science

And imagination-based spacecraft

it's cute that you guys have so much confidence in the average adult's scientific knowledge in 2014

i dont mean in terms of content! a lot of the stuff i saw in the evolution episode was like cliff notes and cool efx version of some intro college classes i remember. i mean more in presentation, it definitely seems like "what are we gonna do to hook tweens man, SPACESHIP"

i haven't seen it but i can't imagine there's any amount of dumbing down and spazzing up they could do to this thing that wouldn't have it blow my mind this thing is on network tv in 2014

however briefly

i think its def cool that its on too! i just think its target demo is older kids and their parents m/l.

idk i think the spaceship is cool, it's just a clever means of getting ndt and the audience from the outer reaches of space and down to the molecular level w/o it coming off dry. they could have made it way cornier; it's not like ndt is hunched over a command console saying "activate science boosters" or anything

btw i am not a tween

yeah this whole endeavor is m/l Science + Wonder 101 but hats off to fox for producing it, even if it was likely just part of seth macfarlane'a contract negotiation

Uh you guys know the spaceship was in the original, right?

And wasn't the spaceship actually the little flower that Carl Sagan is admiring and lets go into the wind and it flies up into outer space? Or am I making that part up?

Yeah, I was wondering if anyone complaining about the ship had remembered there was one in the original.

I mimed that scene to caek last night... was kinda drunk already

has anyone else been pronouncing it Prince-a-PEE-a for all their lives? anyone? anyone at all?

seems to be a good deal of flexibility (prin-SIP-ee-uh in the US, prin-KIP-ee-uh in the UK, prin-CHIP-ee-uh for those to kick it old school) on the "correct" pronunciation, although i'm sure people occasionally get together and demand that their own regionally accepted way of pronouncing it is the only true way

wasn't the spaceship actually the little flower that Carl Sagan is admiring and lets go into the wind and it flies up into outer space? Or am I making that part up?

Sagan is holding a dandelion tuft while narrating the intro and that "becomes" the ship of the imagination, yeah

cannot believe people are complaining about it if they've decided to reuse the idea

i hadn't the last few months of this thread until just now because i didn't get around to watching the first three episodes until last night, but anyone who is making fun of the ship of the imagination can go straight to hell

High five.

the music is a little disappointing, but i can see why they did it. it's just kind of your standard cinematic imax style, seemingly designed to be ignored. that's the modern, focus group-approved way, i suppose. but i miss the 1980 gutsy approach of trying to make a memorable theme that you can hum along to - the Cosmos song!

xxxxxxxxxxp I always thought it was prin-kip-ee-uh, though I may have just got that from In Our Time with Melvyn Bragg. But I don't think there's ever been a time in my life when I had to pronounce it and I doubt there ever will be.

I loved how he came out of the gate last night with a smackdown of young earth creationism. I almost heard half the nation changing the channel at the same time.

I'd never (or don't remember having) heard it put so succinctly: if the earth and the universe are only 6000-ish years old, and we have calculated the speed of light, how come we can see things that are further than 6000-ish light years away? The fact that we can means "all of creation" is at least as old as the most distant thing we can see.

having come from a Young Earth background when I was 15, the weirdest thing is they don't merely rely on the Bible for that nonsense. Our youth group leader showed us a video of a Christian scientist (don't remember their specialty, possibly biology), who taught us the following nonsense:

*About an inch of dust collects on the moon every thousand years. Because of this, they were expecting much more dust on the moon during our first moon landing, and there wasn't much there at all!

*Organic objects get worse over time - if you leave an orange on the table for too long, it will rot and grow moldly. Evolution tells us organic objects get BETTER over time! That is obv absurd, amirite?

*The sun gets smaller every year - if the world was 6 billion years old, the sun would have been too gigantic at its genesis for other planets to survive (or something, I can't remember the exact nonsense he spouted)

Also my church's preacher claims to have disproven Evolution using a slime mold experiment. Yes, a grey-haired, Allman Brothers loving Georgia preacher did what scientists could not during a retreat in Alabama.

I kind of admire but am also frustrated by the restraint and good taste they had in not having Patrick Stewart's animated character played up for laughs. Maybe in the James Burke Connections reboot...

xp I grew up in the chuch too, but I don't remember a bunch of creation vs. evolution instruction. I do remember having it grilled into me that pre-marital sex was DANGEROUS AND HORRIBLE, though.

there were some folk in my youth group who took that to the next level and said sex itself was 'bad' and acted as if they'd only reluctantly participate when they got married.

meanwhile the guys in the group just whacked off a lot and lied about it

I'm quite enjoying these! They seem to be mixing in more live action stuff w the animated as the show goes on. Also the animation style in some of these really reminds me of South Park, with the 2d cutouts w paper textures. Tho that might just be the standard way to animation things these days...

the second episode on evolution was flat out wonderful, and brought me around the focus of the new series. My patience is still tried by the animated historical segments, but that's nothing. Looking forward to every episode now.

http://thinkprogress.org/culture/2014/03/25/3418425/creationism-is-getting-a-lot-of-time-on-cosmos/

its the best animation seth mcfarlane has ever produced

how come we can see things that are further than 6000-ish light years away?

We can't, we've just been fooled into thinking we can. That's the standard response, right?

I think it will be the Blues For a Red Planet episode next week, so I can't wait for that one.

xp my fave apologetic for that is that god created the world 6,000 years ago, but he created an older world w/ lots of history + stuff including a much older universe, dinosaurs, etc

it's kinda like the "idk get the fuck out of here" apologetic

god put dinosaur bones in the ground to fuck w/ godless scientists

I found it very emotive the first time he mentioned that snowy night in Brooklyn and meeting Carl Sagan as an impressionable young man, 2nd time is fucking pushing it.

how come we can see things that are further than 6000-ish light years away?

because god allows us to see a glimpse of the eternal paradise that can be yours for only $9.99

I want to go visit the Halls of Exinction so bad

http://vimeo.com/56160700

http://media.boingboing.net/wp-content/uploads/2011/08/vwGWK.jpeg

That is an awesome shirt. Damn, dude was ripped!

He never mentioned he was a hot young dude when he met Carl Sagan }:-)

The Sagan meeting happened when he was 17 or so. I'd bet that photo is from a few years later.

NGT was a competitive dancer in his college days which may account for that buff as hell physique

WS so many times holy shit

how many times do you ppl have to be told that this is not appropriate

drill datass tyson

How televised science should be done:

Neil Shubin's Your Inner Fish

not presenting this as truth but

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BlSHAv-CYAAPjuK.jpg

Sorry, Isaac Newton, you're a shitbird.

this guy needs to make a slow jamz album

The recent episode was cool, when they went inside the dew drop and he talked about that tiny species that can survive the vacuum of space. That's pretty mindblowing.

https://24.media.tumblr.com/daa16a1cd6ff64cc5983a1e3a5df868c/tumblr_n3btn4J6RW1r0jlbgo1_400.gif
He looks like he's receiving the best head ever.

lol

hahaha

that is hilarious!

When I was watching that live, I was like "um, this scene is making me uncomfortable" for some reason. Now I know the reason.

it's an imagination ship

his actorliness kind of gets in the way of this show sometimes, for me.

http://i.imgur.com/k9ucmnk.gif

a+

lol

Last night was a treat, I thought.

The Cannon and Payne story was great.

i didn't know millipedes used to be the size of alligators. cool.

One of my favorite things about NdT is how reliably in your face he is about "we are being stupid to still burn fossils for energy when there's a huge star with all the energy we will ever need!" Thought he nailed it particularly well towards the ending of last week's installment.

I haven't been impressed generally with this series so far -- I prefer nature docs to astronomy/physics/engineering/tech programs -- but the one a couple weeks ago about how there would be no trace of life (much less civilization) left after the Solar expansion thing was really chilling and mind-spinning.

how there would be no trace of life (much less civilization) left after the Solar expansion <-- this is like the #1 thing that has plagued my mind since I was a kid

I do love that after the sun expands and kills the inner planets, it shrinks back down to dim little luminous ball the size of the earth for eternity...like a little old man.

this is like the #1 thing that has plagued my mind since I was a kid

you are alvie singer

http://theweek.com/article/index/261042/why-neil-degrasse-tyson-is-a-philistine

don't find the argument compelling, agree 100% with the conclusion

Curtis White's _The Science Delusion_ from last is all about this, the weird borderline-ascetic scraping away of anything not hard sciencey, and putting physics at the top of everything, since physics came out WWII as the victor. White makes the point that the vast majority of science giants until the mid-century had a richer background(and a bit of philosophy mixed in), like Bacon, Descartes, Newton, Spinoza, etc.

It's a book with great points, although White's style is a bit too pointedly cranky at times

Don't forget Bertrand Russell! Lived through WW2 too!

did the original Cosmos feature as many tellings of mythological tales as this one does?

I thought the episode from two weeks ago was the finale, and aside from some eye-rolling utopian daydreaming, it would've made for a very strong ending.

i'm behind and just watched the one from a few weeks ago about plate tectonics and pangaea and mass extinctions and the like. i thought it was the best one of the series so far as it cleverly and simply presenting information that can be confusing in the wrong hands. the fact that it had the fewest animated sequences didn't hurt either

man this show really delivered imo. Newfound respect for NDT. I got kinda teary at the inclusion of Sagan's "pale blue dot" monologue in the finale. Is there gonna be season 2?

No, this was it -- and yeah, thought it ended on just the right note. Also, I like how in the original series it was essentially just the final episode that was the 'downer,' for lack of a better term, while here that feeling was woven through the series but not emphasized at the end.

For people wanting further science/cosmology type tv, there is an excellent old Martin Rees series called What We Still Don't Know. Rees makes intelligent tv that wouldn't alienate older kids or non-academic types, he makes complex concepts like dark matter/dark energy interesting and with very tidy but minimal visual effects and non of that irritating, doe-eyed "isn't it amaaazzing!" Brian Cox type shit.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NqArGW6k5gc

martin rees is the best

his book 'our cosmic habitat' is my default astronomy/cosmology book recommendation

I got kinda teary at the inclusion of Sagan's "pale blue dot" monologue in the finale. Is there gonna be season 2?

― Οὖτις, Tuesday, June 17, 2014 11:31 AM

I think I got something in my eye during that too.

Oh, NDT is touring early next year: http://www.neildegrassetysonlive.com/

jesus

what a nob

But you're the opening act!

It's not like NdT hasn't already been doing live engagements for years and years. This is just the first time more than a few thousand people might be interested.

lol

https://twitter.com/neiltyson/status/475811925880610817

Surely the cover art for my nonexistent album of love songs
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BppsbLcCYAAnQaW.jpg

Dude's funny, sorry caek.

his palling around w Dawkins is too bad but eh we all make mistakes

Dude's funny, sorry caek.

― Johnny Fever, Tuesday, June 17, 2014 5:24 PM (13 minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

aim high, right?

wow caek is such a science hater nagl

glad I wasn't the only one getting choked up at sagan's pale blue dot segment

I was at Mardi Gras in New Orleans in 2010 and there was a youth group in the crowd evangelizing. When this one girl asked me why I was no longer a believer, I told her she should the text of "Pale Blue Dot" and consider how exactly unimportant we are. Then I slammed another hurricane.

*should read

Hearing the Sagan PBD segment kind of shows that NDT doesn't really rhapsodize well.

This was great but I was hoping there would be more new stuff, felt like a lot of retreading stuff form the original series, only with extra "SCIENCE only deals with FACTS" stuff that Sagan never cluttered up his series with.

feel like the cultural climate re: science is p different now than it was in the 70s tho. I don't agree w Tyson's narrow focus (surprise surprise) and am more sympathetic to Sagan's mythic stoner manner but Tyson isn't entirely wrong to be aggressive about scientific principles.

Yeah, sadly shit needs to be said.

Anyone following any of this?

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/friendlyatheist/2014/09/17/if-we-cant-trust-neil-degrasse-tyson-who-can-we-trust/

I thought it was going to say that he beat women or was a nazi. At least it's better than that.

This must mean that science was wrong after all and creationism is right, right?

famous big talker loose with his words, quelle scandale

This is stupid

Next scandal: NDT tells homeless guy he doesn't have any change when he actually DOES have some.

Yeah, this is dumb

there are pedants on the internet?

just want to tip my hat to caek for the ascent of man recommendation

👍

Watching these w my 7yo daughter. A+

One weak part is the "what's inside a black hole" segment which I believe got most of its crazy ideas from Lee Smolin.

https://represent.com/store/startalk

i h8 science

Welcome to Rationalia! https://www.facebook.com/notes/neil-degrasse-tyson/reflections-on-rationalia/10154399608556613

https://twitter.com/ClickHole/status/763037582372507649

I love Neil. I really wish he'd stop frittering the day away on social media and get back to narrating the basic concepts of existence to me in dulcet tones.

^^^

or competing in dance competitions

this dude's version of cosmos sucked

the only thing i liked about it is the illustrations make the concepts a little more accessible to the average person

The concept of Rationalia began when Taylor Milsal insightfully mentioned at a cocktail reception of the Starmus Science Festival in Spain's Canary Islands (July 2016) that, perhaps, a new virtual country should be created: "Rational Land", containing member states that, by and large, embrace rational thinking in their conduct and policies. This idea was prompted by how much irrational conduct currently drives world politics. We discussed what might be charter municipalities, biased of course towards those for which we were most familiar. This list began with the big cities London, Paris, and New York. The countries Switzerland. Denmark. The states of Massachusetts, Minnesota, and California. The conversation spread rapidly through the cocktail party. Each person adding a bit here and there to what Taylor started.

worst party ever

it's a pity for NDG that Auguste Comte and Jeremy Bentham (to name a couple of philosophers) thought of this stuff 150 years ago

So turns out, we got second season incoming next year

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qGdsVhYGMes

https://imgur.com/59QM45S.jpg

just wondering what a non-arbitrary cosmological event would be

Solstices (June 21, December 21), equinoxes (March 20, September 23), perihelion (Jan 3), aphelion (July 4). Dates sometimes off by a few hours, as there are 365.242199 days/year.

The Gregorian new year happens to correspond to when the sun is transiting Sagittarius, interposing itself between the Earth and the galactic core, but it only makes a close path, getting to within about 3° of Sagitarius A* on December 18-19.

looking forward to his #metoo moment

why are you looking forward to news that neil degrasse tyson harrassed women

he has a reputation in the astronomy community that deserves to be better known

is one reason you're okay with the Defense Dept's Space Force because you're cozy with the US Defense Dept and serve on one of its boards https://t.co/ejBu0r9njP https://t.co/s2ysy7wK1i

— Adam H. Johnson (@adamjohnsonNYC) August 20, 2018

oh no they've got to Neil! Summon Sagan's ghost!

xp he did have a metoo moment

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/nosacredcows/2017/10/neil-degrasse-tyson-accused-of-rape/

this show is great, Tyson's role in the broader culture is a good one

No it isn’t

He makes my kids excited about science, so mission accomplished afaic

He’s probably an incel

Haha um no

He’s better at being a “public science advocate” than Hawking was (we are only allowed one famous “scientist” at a time in the public consciousness)

I kind of think its better to not force science down the public's throat - just let the people with traditional minds slowly fade away in time - to be replaced by HUMAN 2.0!!

the amount of hate this dude gets online is kinda strange to me. he's a bit overly earnest and says goofy things sometimes and isn't really particularly great at using twitter (see the tweet above, which is a well-meaning sentiment spoiled by "i'm ok with a space force" -- i would assume that he probably isn't actually ok with the space force that trump wants, but clumsily used that to set up his "punchline"), but he seems generally ok and i don't see any hatefulness + ignorance coming out of him the way you get w/ dawkins, etc.

He just wants to be on the space force. who wouldn't ? Even now the International House of Space Station is up there preparing for battle! I would love to zoom about in a space racer firing at ufos

re: the accusation -- i'm guessing this won't get much traction if/until a major publication reports on it/vets it?

more like Neil DeAss Bison

the amount of hate this dude gets online is kinda strange to me.

His public persona is on the border between nerdy and goofy, but that persona connects well with a lot of people. Even if you don't much like him, there's no obvious reason to hate him.

obvious reason being one is on the internet

would ppl be hating on carl sagan if he were around and tweeting?

eh, who am i kidding, they probably would

would love to hear him read his Mean Tweets

There's always going to be a contingent of people who think that they need to define themselves by who and what they violently reject. I guess some people badly want to see themselves as the Anti-Neil Degrasse Tyson, whatever the fuck that means. See also: Westboro Baptist Church and Dick Dawkins' fanboys.

well, that's quite a leap.

Did Carl Sagan work for the Pentagon?

He doesnt work for the pentagon, do u even know what advisory boards are

I do, roughly... he may not get *paid* by them, but there are other forces at work.

Fine, let’s back up

Do u know what the word “work” means

actually carl sagan did work for the pentagon

and the rand corporation as a matter of fact

Sagan would get super-blazed on quality weed and then personally drop bombs on kids in east timor iirc

well, this is America, so that all makes sense

carry on running the Old Guard Pelosi fanclub, Οὖτις

Cheerio old chap

it doesn't seem like sagan was too friendly w/ the pentagon by the 1980s at least:

http://articles.latimes.com/1985-03-15/news/mn-34986_1_nuclear-winter

i personally worked for the pentagon from 1999-2001 when i was at the scripps institution of oceanography, we were working under a navy grant, studying the effect that the titanium paint flaking off of the warships at naval air station alameda had on the dissolved oxygen / nitrate / phosphate / etc in the water

i even took a federal oath of loyalty as part of the job. at one point i was going to visit lawrence livermore national lab to work with some dudes who had designed a kind of fish-tank simulator of the ocean floor (we wanted to build our own version) but it was determined by them and us that it wouldn't be too much trouble to get a naturalized citizen from iran the necessary security clearance to even visit LLNL

TLDR: lots of scientists "work for the pentagon" and it doesn't really mean what you think, the military-industrial complex is complex, to say the least

would be too much trouble, not wouldn't be

or rather, it was determined it wouldn't be worth the effort

Clearly u are a war criminal

thanks for that, tlg -- v interesting

I'm sure it means you pause before saying "i wouldn't like to see a Space Force launched with the Grifter as the Cmdr-in-Chief"

xxp

not really sure what you're getting at, nobody really gives a fuck what i - and neil de grasse tyson for that matter - think of the space force

i guess he thought his Twitter followers would

i think JD had it right - he's not actually providing an expert opinion on space force, he's just using it to set up the "truth force" punchline

the military industrial complex's relationship with astronomy is complicated. it is basically impossible to do professional research astronomy in the US without using military infrastructure and/or receiving military money. it's something a lot of US astronomers feel conflicted about, but consider the price of admission. if you want the data, you join (or you leave the US and go to a country where astrophysics and space program are less synonymous).

but tyson doesn't do research astronomy, and hasn't done for 30 years. which makes his decision to work with them ... less complicated. he literally has no incentive reason to sit on boards like that other than his own ego.

tyson's fine as a science advocate. his style grates on me a little, but at least he gets some people to pay attention and learn something.

i'm not sure about his idea for a Truth Force, though. who's going to be in charge of determining the truth? jared kushner?

Advisory board issue #1 for 2018 - send Trump to mars

Two more women come forward

https://www.patheos.com/blogs/nosacredcows/2018/11/two-more-women-accuse-neil-degrasse-tyson-of-sexual-misconduct/

on the scale of this kind of thing that doesn't seem that horrible but it does sound p creepy and unpleasant, which is disappointing.

i would just like to note that i have been otm on this thread.

I miss Carl Sagan pic.twitter.com/jUKrBgFSFs

— Oedipa Maas (@bridgietherease) August 22, 2017

a friend retweeted that back then and i still think about that tweet all the damn time

i was at that AAS meeting. the "secret" after party thing was, well, "infamous" is the wrong word because these are huge dorks we're talking about. but it wasn't secret, and generally people who weren't either predators and/or colossally excitable nerds steered clear.

Boy Erased (2018) pic.twitter.com/RFYdplgtao

— Hayes Davenport (@hayesdavenport) December 14, 2018

https://www.amazon.com/Accessory-War-Unspoken-Alliance-Astrophysics/dp/0393064441

i saw someone reading this, immediately thought "oh i should read that" but then saw it was by NdT so nope, won't

all i can remember from the one about black holes are bad jokes (not like good bad jokes, like dad jokes, just bad bad jokes)

like all i remember from the chapter about the sun was this long setup where he talked for a few paragraphs (almost poetically) about how ridiculously long it takes photons to make their way from the inside to the outside of the sun, only to spoil it all w/ a lame "think about that next time you get a sunburn on your butt at the beach!" ending

I've been to an AAS meeting (honolulu). I am actually hanging at an astro conference right now. caek are you an active researcher?

i was until 2014

I am at the end of an AGN obscuration conf (whatever that means). I just tag along to these things 1-2 times a yr for the last 15 yrs when they are in nice locations (spouse).

nice! i was on a paper about that! (i did some of the modeling for it, but it was not my field and i very much did not understand the paper lol academic publishing.)

conference and observing travel is definitely one of the perks of the job in astronomy (relative to most other academic fields) that somewhat makes up for the precarious academic existence.

although this is real https://arxiv.org/abs/0903.3384

I won't try to guess which one you are. You did instrumentation? Yeah, all these guys publish a lot.

i wasn't on that paper. that's a weird one about how astronomers fly too much!

i was observation rather than instrumentation (although the AGN paper i was on used some wacky instrumentation i did not understand)

derp I was analyzing the names instead of reading the abstract. Almost everyone at the conf flew over 20 hours so this is true. I only had to fly 2 hours.

I just showed this to my spouse and he brought up that we spent a holiday in India for 3 weeks and went to Patagonia with the 8th author (which I totally missed, and he totally flies a lot too still).