FWIS3

For some reason, I am not that interested in Cosmos coming out this weekend. Maybe because I've heard from people close that NdGT is full of himself. Or that I saw him give a talk and didn't think it lived up to the hype. Or that Cosmos is such a classic that you can't "redo" it. Or maybe because it's coming out on Fox.

None of those singularly is enough for me to be skeptical, but I can't quite seem to separate them.

I know that NdGT is an important person to have for astronomy education, and particularly because he can be role model to diverse audiences. And I don't totally shy away from him. He has a great twitter account and I've enjoyed a couple of his books. So I think it's more the fact that "you can't redo Cosmos" that bothers me. Although they are calling it a sequel.

One thing that does give me a bit of excitement is that it is produced by Seth McFarlane. That guy is an enigma to me. He's the creator of some very crude (but funny) shows like The Family Guy, American Dad, and the movie Ted. And just look at this face.

He looks like he would be a frat boy with an attitude I would hate. But he is frickin hilarious and a total science geek! He was on The Daily Show last week and referenced the Kobayashi Maru from Star Trek. That baffled Jon Stewart.

So it's cool to have someone popular with a totally mainstream non-science audience at the helm of this. People might watch it because of his involvement who wouldn't otherwise.

So, that's my complicated relatiohship with Cosmos. I probably won't watch it much because I have kids going to bed at that time and a class on Monday, so if I'm not preoccupied with the kids I'm doing homework.

We'll probably buy it on Blu-Ray, though.

What about you?

pumpkinpi wrote:One thing that does give me a bit of excitement is that it is produced by Seth McFarlane. That guy is an enigma to me. He's the creator of some very crude (but funny) shows like The Family Guy, American Dad, and the movie Ted. And just look at this face.

He looks like he would be a frat boy with an attitude I would hate. But he is frickin hilarious and a total science geek! He was on The Daily Show last week and referenced the Kobayashi Maru from Star Trek. That baffled Jon Stewart.

I was surprised to hear McFarlane was the producer, but that's a selling point for me. I say him on the Daily Show and he was a hoot. He looks like such a pretty boy, but he has a twisted sense of humor (and a very good singing voice). He also must be the hardest working man in Hollywood.

I'll probably watch the first one and then... we'll see.

I've been planning to watch it since I first heard it was happening.

I've never heard anything negative about Neil Degrasse Tyson before, except from people not entirely on the "science is good" bandwagon, so that's news to me. Could you elaborate?

The Supreme Canuck wrote:I've been planning to watch it since I first heard it was happening.

I've never heard anything negative about Neil Degrasse Tyson before, except from people not entirely on the "science is good" bandwagon, so that's news to me. Could you elaborate?

Actually, no. In fact, I'm inclined to redact what I had written. I say this because I've heard also that both Carl Sagan and Bill Nye were dicks. And honestly, when someone does a lot of good for science and does things professionally that I respect, I would rather not know how they are in their personal life as long as it doesn't affect their advocacy for science. So I wouldn't want to sour anyone else's opinion of him.

Ok, I will share a bit. It's actually nothing that bad. I know someone very well at the Hayden Planetarium, who is just about 2nd in command to Neil, and has complained about the fact that his is such a figurehead but doesn't really do much for the planetarium itself. And I've heard from another planetarium colleague who hosted him at his institution's event, and he wasn't that interested in being friendly with the staff there. He just wanted to meet his obligation then get out.

An interesting twist: I may have an opportunity soon to find out if all I have heard is true. He's speaking at an event that my institution is co-sponsoring. It's at a location that has a lecture series with very high-profile speakers--others include Hilary Clinton and Deepak Chopra. And despite my institution paying $30,000 to have our name associated with this, and will be providing events all day, I don't know if any of our staff will get to actually see the event. We will have a limited amount of "VIP" tickets to the pre-lecture event, but there is no guarantee that he would actually attend. And they will all go to high-level members of our board.
The $65 general admission seats are sold out, so all that's left is $180 seats or $500 for the reception. I'd rather spend that money to see someone who's actually been to space, and doesn't just talk about it.
(This actually has no influence on my feelings about Cosmos. That all comes from feelings I had before this event took shape.)

Well, fair enough, then. I'm just always skeptical of "so-and-so is a dick" because there are a lot of people who stand to benefit from making such claims, you know? Not that I'm suggesting that's the case here, just a general observation about these things.

The Supreme Canuck wrote:Well, fair enough, then. I'm just always skeptical of "so-and-so is a dick" because there are a lot of people who stand to benefit from making such claims, you know? Not that I'm suggesting that's the case here, just a general observation about these things.

The people who shared these statements with me were definitely not of that type. I know and respect them all well.

If I do think he's a dick, then I'll tell you and let you decide if I'm only saying it for attention.

Continue to be skeptical, my friend. The world would be a better place if more people were.

One thing that may or may not help is to think of things like differently.

Place yourself as an observer of your own worst behaviour that you can remember.
It may be when you were drunk, stoned, angry, grieving etc.
Imagine that moment is what defines who you are.
Effectively that's what many people do when they make a judgement on a person based on a single or sometimes couple of incidents.
While that may be what the person is like most of the time, it also may be that timing and circumstance skew the real person.
Its a two way process, the same goes for when a person appears genuine and honest.
Some things though are unforgivable.

I've always been a bit lukewarm on NdGT. Maybe because he seems less a scientist and more a talking head, and I don't find his talks compelling. But I'll watch Cosmos.

geonuc wrote:I've always been a bit lukewarm on NdGT. Maybe because he seems less a scientist and more a talking head, and I don't find his talks compelling. But I'll watch Cosmos.

Exactly my opinion. I'll give it a try.

I'll watch/tape the first episode Sunday night and decide from there. I'm not so sure if I ever saw the full original series. When it first aired on pbs, we had a rotor on the antenna and the CN Tower left a nice shadow over the faint signal. A neighbour across the street, with a ham radio set-up added to the poor reception. I have read the book a few times over the years.

Other than a few scientific errors introduced to increase the drama (Seriously? This is fucking COSMOS. Don't do that.), I enjoyed it. Tyson's no Sagan, but I think he did pretty well. Sagan invariably made me cry; Tyson didn't.

I'm especially a fan of the Terror Pope, the bagging on religious persecution, the tweaking the nose of creationists and global warming deniers, the inclusion of Sagan, and Tyson's story right at the end. Judging from the Twitter reactions (Angry creationists and the like), they're doing something right.

And, yeah... Tyson's ship is cooler, but Sagan had better music.

Y'all are just upset because he spearheaded taking away Pluto's planet status.

Not me! I'm for reclassifying Pluto.

I've posted several things on CQ's Cosmos' thread, but to summarize briefly... I though it was OK to pretty good. It was kind of choppy and I'm not sure I could tell you what the central theme of episode 1 even was. It was entertaining, but just barely. I'll probably watch episode 2, but I'm not excited.

I was listening to NPR the other day and one of the take away sound bites was that Seth McFarlane is actually a better choice to be part of the Cosmos series than you might think. Apparently he slips quite a lot of science into his shows including Family Guy. In spite of looking like a candidate for the Bachelorette Show he is actually quite science fictionally geeky enough for the job.

The intro episode gets an 85. The ship was ripped off from Star Wars, and the path of things was a bit choppy, but as an intro it's acceptable.
I exclaimed a tad when I saw that Ann Druyan was the executive producer, and of course Dr T couldn't resist playing the 'continuation of heritage' card, with Sagan's desk calendar and the book he signed. But a little sentiment about why we're continuing the series is acceptible.
We'll see how well things go as the series progresses.
BTW -- it's to be expected, but the graphics were light years beyond the original (technology has the habit of progressing). Now, let's keep the science equal to the visual so that the 'hmmm' factor equals the 'wow' factor.

SciFi Chick wrote:Y'all are just upset because he spearheaded taking away Pluto's planet status.

That's exactly it!

Regarding NdGT's persona, I have actually heard similar things to what pumpkinpi has said. I have heard from many sources (astronomers at the general meeting where he gave a talk, my father who saw him in a lecture) that he's actually not a guy who gives good talks, and in fact does some mistakes on the "you'd give a grad student pointers" level. I've also heard from some that he's known to be arrogant and such personally, but that's thirdhand info so I will not really get into the heres or theres on that.

(Regarding Carl Sagan, at SETI Institute the story I heard was he was a really wonderful man until his first cancer scare, and then he turned into the asshole that everyone heard he was. Jill would joke that she called him "King Carl" at that stage as she was a friend and could do that, but basically he no longer thought anyone else's time was worth the same as his, and would do things like send several assistants around Mountain View to find him the perfect pastrami sandwich for lunch. To quote Jill, "I didn't like him as much after that [ie post cancer scare].")

I also confess I've never been super into NdGT either, but I never get the fanboy devotion some of these folks bring (I thought Bill Nye's show was boring as hell as a kid for example, so never understood his fanbase). I also realize in my case though I always view these folks with a twinge of jealousy and intention to someday usurp them, so I am not an objective source in some ways.

Finally, Cosmos, I'll probably watch one or two of the new series once it shows on NatGeo here (though the idea that it just went all over the board doesn't surprise me, that was my dad's huge complaint about the lecture he gave), but don't know if I have time to get really into it. I also confess back in the day I was as big a Carl Sagan fan as you can imagine, but he was dead a few years by then, so I fell in love with his stuff through his books and didn't actually see any videos of Cosmos until college. So it's not as big an issue of continuity on my part.

I think you're all just upset because he's black.

rommie wrote:(Regarding Carl Sagan, at SETI Institute the story I heard was he was a really wonderful man until his first cancer scare, and then he turned into the asshole that everyone heard he was. Jill would joke that she called him "King Carl" at that stage as she was a friend and could do that, but basically he no longer thought anyone else's time was worth the same as his, and would do things like send several assistants around Mountain View to find him the perfect pastrami sandwich for lunch. To quote Jill, "I didn't like him as much after that [ie post cancer scare].")

One of my close friends did exactly this.
A guy I've known for near 30 years turned on a dime. A total personality change.
it was triggered by several deaths, all of bowel cancer, then his mother got it and went into remission and just as she did that his father got it and died a couple of years later.
He's never been the same since.
Angry with the world, short tempered and often the emotions of a child.
Unfortunately SFC just met him on the edge of that change and only knows the asshole.
I'm just hoping he can make it back but at this point I'm not really holding out much hope.

FZR1KG wrote:I think you're all just upset because he's black.

Carl Sagan was black?

Rommie wrote:I also confess I've never been super into NdGT either, but I never get the fanboy devotion some of these folks bring (I thought Bill Nye's show was boring as hell as a kid for example, so never understood his fanbase). I also realize in my case though I always view these folks with a twinge of jealousy and intention to someday usurp them, so I am not an objective source in some ways.

I'm in the same position. I'm pretty neutral on Bill Nye, I think I was too old for his program, but I also think he's just OK. I like NdGT, I think he is pretty good as a TV personality of science, but I'm not a fanboy. Even for Sagan I would not call myself a fanboy; I honestly hardly remember Cosmos, though I'm pretty sure I watched it. I remember him more for such things as the Viking landing on Mars.

None of them rise to the level of fanboy adulation for me.

Of currently living scientists, I would say Jane Goodall is one of the few who even comes close to that, and I don't agree with everything she says either.

Swift wrote:

FZR1KG wrote:I think you're all just upset because he's black.

Carl Sagan was black?

Sure he was. You believe in evolution don't you?

FZR1KG wrote:

Swift wrote:

FZR1KG wrote:I think you're all just upset because he's black.

Carl Sagan was black?

Sure he was. You believe in evolution don't you?

Funny you mention that... I do, but some people (TV stations) don't:

http://www.salon.com/2014/03/13/oklahoma_fox_station_runs_promo_over_mention_of_evolution_in_cosmos/

On Sunday, “Cosmos: A Spacetime Odyssey” premiered on prime time, which is the first science-oriented series to do so in decades. The show is a reboot of Carl Sagan’s original “Cosmos,” and is hosted by Neil deGrasse Tyson. However, viewers in Oklahoma missed around 15 seconds of the premiere — the only few seconds that briefly mentioned the theory of evolution — in favor of a station promo.

Though he hasn’t taken the Bill Nye route of debating the likes of creationist Ken Ham, Tyson comes under fire from the religious right nonetheless. He has eloquently voiced his feelings on using religious scripture as scientific text, and recently told Stephen Colbert that science is true “whether or not you believe in it.”

In this particular episode of “Cosmos” the word “evolution” is not even used. The theory is briefly mentioned during the last 10 minutes of the show. Viewers can only speculate why the promo ran randomly at this time. Real goof-up? Or blatant censorship? Who knows?

Yesterday KOKH Fox 25 tweeted out apologies. They called the mistimed promo an “operator error.”

Best part? Seth MacFarlane made fun of this on Family Guy years before it actually happened: Youtube Link.

FZR1KG wrote:

Swift wrote:

FZR1KG wrote:I think you're all just upset because he's black.

Carl Sagan was black?

Sure he was. You believe in evolution don't you?

[gcc --pendantic]

I don't believe in evolution, I think it's the most reasonable fact-based explanation on how the human race came to exist

[/gcc --pendantic]



It does have problems though, doesn't explain the existence of Nicky Ripe.....