I imagine many who visit Clutchfans never saw the original "Cosmos" with Carl Sagan. It still stands the test of time considering it was a late 70's series and is available on You Tube for those interested.
Watched another part of an episode then flipped it to Wonders of the Universe with Brian Cox and thought ... yeah, he would have been a much better host for Cosmos.
I know, right? Why didn't they just send cameras out into the universe to get real, high resolution footage of comets, black holes, and other galaxies? Or tiny HD cameras that can REALLY show us how DNA replicates? Seth McFarlane being cheap, I guess.
Love anything to do with astronomy. Used to watch sagans stuff on pbs reruns also. In fact, up unt i was in high school, i very much wanted to be an astronomer partially because of cosmos. Too bad ndt is basically the mascot of the /r/atheism crowd. Makes it hard for me to enjoy his work when he seems so disdainful of anyone who dares to question what he considers to be set in stone science.
Love watching space doco's but this one just seems like it is directionless. It goes from one topic to another way too often, it seems more focused on trying to play clever tricks with CGI than using it to really tell a story....its disappointing in my opinion.
I have to step in and defend NDT here -- he hates the 'atheist' label that has put on him and jokes about having to constantly change his wiki page to remove atheist references. He has stated unequivocally that he is not an atheist.
Agree totally. The "atheism" thing is manufactured by his critics (or, if ever the term applied, science "haters"). All that said, where Sagan came off as infinitely kind and gentle, NDT comes off as a little superior and prickly, at times. There's a real pride there, which you can respect, but which turns some non-science people off as arrogant. Brian Cox for whatever reason gives off more of a goofy fun vibe, with very little pride or prickle.
Well, no color photographs from the Hubble you've ever seen are real, either. I saw Laurie Anderson in concert at Jones Hall about 10 yrs ago. She likes to create narrative, story-telling songs now, as intro to her traditional songs. She told a story that NASA once hired her for a year. Her title? NASA Artist In-Residence Her job? Basically to add visual-spectrum color to the Hubble pictures. They hired her to create "Artist Interpretation" images of the cosmos. That's not much different than CGI, just static. I thought that was pretty cool they hired her. But it kinda disappointed her. Like everyone, she thought the images already had color, so felt completely inadequate to paint the work of God, so to speak.
I loved Sagan's Cosmos. He always had that serene poetic way of explaining things. dat voice. Spoiler <iframe width="560" height="315" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/8Lm6pEhykhs" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe> Spoiler <iframe width="560" height="315" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/BBCFQtDLPA0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe> Tyson can get really worked up lol Spoiler <iframe width="420" height="315" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/N1QwaOYCCDY" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>
True there are several spectrum images combined to give us those pictures, x rays, infrared, gamma, etc... but ultimately it gives us a clear picture of whats actually there. I dont see how anyone can not know this if theyve seen any of the modern documentaries on the universe nowadays.
The main thing you need to keep in mind is that this is primarily a show for entertainment and not so much a science show. I was talking to my GF last night about the show and pointed out how anyone who has taken high school science should know more science than what is talked about in the show. She brought up the point that there isn't much science in it but the producers probably hope that people will be interested enough by it to want to go out and learn more. Anyway other than the very end missed the first one but thought the Evolution one was interesting, really liked the part showing the development of the eye including the creature view. Thought the one on Sunday was terrible. It focused so much on over dramatizing the Newton's life story, including making Robert Hook a Hanna Barbara villain "I would've gotten away with it if not for you meddling kids Newton and Halley". Rather than really explaining how Newton's laws worked.
Spaceship looks cheesy but serves the purpose. I think the content is fantastic, and love the animations for storytelling. Mostly I'm so happy that my 8 year old nephew seemed to enjoy it and was interested enough to keep asking questions. Absolutely loved the illustration of time within one calendar year. I had never visualized it that way. Doesn't dig too deep, but IMO most people are being disingenuous if they're saying they didn't even learn one or two things while watching it. Highly recommended, especially if you're starting out with little base knowledge of the topic.
In his own words (via Big Think): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CzSMC5rWvos It boils down to movement politics and labels. He doesn't want to be a face or a part of movements apart from science itself. He finds it strange that the word atheist even exists. As he puts it: He doesn't play golf so why should there be a label proclaiming his non-golfing? He doesn't believe in God so why should his non-belief be labeled? He finds it pointless to have a discussion about not believing in something. So, to separate himself from the New Atheist movement and the aggressive and public behavior of public figures like the Four Horsemen, he claims agnosticism. To publicly engage in the debates of the New Atheists is to threaten his greater concern which is spreading science education and increasing science funding. BTW, his podcast Star Talk is hilarious. I listen to it every week. Haven't had time to watch Cosmos but am looking forward to it.
Yes, it's the Spaceship of Imagination and Carl Sagan was flying it decades before NdGT. They had to keep that in there. The 3rd episode is the best so far. They finally used real NASA footage for part of it instead of just CGI. I am hoping that the real footage ramps up as the series continues.
You couldn't remake The Godfather into a new movie for a 21st century audience -- Cosmos was on that level with Sagan -- you can't remake it. Wonders of the Universe with Brian Cox is Cosmos for the 21st century -- Brian Cox has the resume and the 'gee whiz' enthusiasm for this type of show.
