Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

CarolinaCoolin

Cosmos: a space time Odyssey

111 posts in this topic

Trying to make a point in the simplest terms possible for a child...

Rupert Murdoch owns Fox, which includes all of their networks, including the news division. The execs running those divisions work for him and his agenda.

What's so damn hard to understand? Oh ,never mind, I almost forgot you're ignorant of things such as facts.

Now, stfu and go away.

Not denying that he owns all of those networks but there is a reason he doesn't run every single one of them and that he has hired execs with their own visions for their networks. You are ignorant as poo if you aren't going to watch a show that he had nothing to do with at all on a network he doesn't make programming decisions on.

Now get out of my thread if you are going to try to derail it with ignorance.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Show was amazing. Really well done and palatable for the average person who may not know much about science. Kept away from the deep explanations, which was bad for me (I love it), but good for most people, because explaining in detail the composition of the universe and the chemistry behind everything from stars, to planets, to the rings of Saturn (the explanation of "millions of snowballs that are also moons" is a rough, layman's version that kind of bugged me, since it's a combo of ice and rock that are constantly colliding and creating more, but I can deal given that this was made for the scientifically ignorant) would be a bit much for most people and they'd lose interest.


Loved the cosmic calender to show how small we really are. Loved that it hit on the Catholic Church being a force working against scientific advancement with the Inquisition (though I thought the cartoon may have ran a bit long for my own taste).

Show ended on a high note. Rough overview of evolution that I thought was lacking (but again, show for the scientifically ignorant), but entertaining and cool. Loved his story about his relationship with Sagan.

Look forward to next week. I wonder what the ratings were like. My Twitter is blowing up with people talking about it.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I thought it was pretty hilarious that they showed a commercial for the new Noah movie in the middle of this

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Loved the irony with the commercials. One big gripe is when he mentioned when Moses supposedly lived, as well as Jesus and Muhammad. I have no problem with mentioning them as a point in a historical context for the majority audience, but we do not know for certain that those are historical figures (with the exception of Muhammad, I think? Not sure. Don't know much about the historicity of Islam), let alone that their accounts (found only in the bible, in the case of the first two) are accurate (and all we know of science suggests that neither are possible of the latter).

It just opens the door for pseudoscience, I think. Kinda irked me. As did Tyson saying "we do not know the origins of life on Earth". Not because that isn't true (it is), but because people don't understand that there is a difference in not knowing for sure how life came about and not knowing how life came to be as it is now. Him stating that isn't an admittance that evolution is false, it is an admittance that we do not yet know what caused life to spring in the very beginning. Anti-science crowds and pseudoscience enthusiasts will gladly take that confusion and run with it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is this available on demand somewhere, I don't usually watch anything on TV that isn't sports.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not sure. I do know that there was an encore at midnight and one Monday night at 10 PM on National Geographic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I love all scientific documentary type shows, especially those that discuss the universe.  I do think when comparing them all, the presentation of the cosmos series is a little boring.  Having one man talk non-stop against a serene background makes me a little sleepy if I'm sitting in a comfortable chair. hehe.  Of course that's not a bad thing for me.  Actually, I was watching all the original Cosmos shows they were playing on the National Geographic channel, and Sagan sounded like a great philosopher.  Putting science in a more social context.  Tyson was decent, but he didn't come close to Sagan's presentation.

 

It's still early, but I don't know if this show will appeal to the masses, unless they already have an interest in science.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Really if you've seen other nat geo or history shows about the universe, there's probably nothing here that will be new to you.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I remember watching the original Cosmos series with Carl Sagan- was very cool even back then.

 

I'm a little surprised Fox is carrying it since it will be a direct conflict for the Fox News crowd who don't believe facts or science or anything...

 

The people who say with disdain and disgust: "It's appearing on Fox? Their viewers don't know any science!" And I simply reply, "If true, that makes Fox the best network of them all on which to air this series."

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Great show, my 7 year old had trouble sleeping due to the time change so we let him watch it. It helped him wrap his brain around some of the concepts and got him thinking.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites



  • Topics

  • Posts

    • elton simpson was monitored over a 9 year period (fbi claims there were breaks but at the least there were still years of monitoring) and at least $132,000 in cash was spent on one informant alone. here's the fbi's version in the immediate aftermath of the shooting:   Three hours before gunmen attacked an anti-Prophet Muhammad event in Garland, Texas on Sunday, the FBI sent a bulletin to local police with a photo of one of the shooters, Elton Simpson, noting that he was "interested in the event," FBI director James Comey said. At the time, the FBI had no reason to believe that Simpson intended to attack the event, Comey told reporters Thursday. Nor did the agency know that Simpson was already on his way there. Comey also said that he does not believe that the police officer who shot Simpson and the second gunman, Soofi Nadir, was aware of the bulletin. He went on to say that while the investigation of the Phoenix gunmen is far from complete, Comey believes the FBI acted appropriately. ..... Two weeks before the Garland event, which invited artists to draw illustrations of Muhammad, the FBI and Homeland Security warned law enforcement agencies across the country that it was at risk of being targeted by Islamic extremists. The advisory noted that supporters of ISIS and other terror groups had posted links to the contest on Twitter. Simpson was reading those posts, and communicated with an American in Somalia who'd called for attacking the event, investigators have said. The FBI then developed information that Simpson might be interested in traveling to Garland, Comey said. The Sunday bulletin followed. ..... The FBI now has hundreds of investigations of potential home grown extremists under way, with cases open in every state. "I know there are other Elton Simpsons out there," Comey said. Finding them, however, is a "very hard task," he said. Investigators can follow messages that are posted on public twitter accounts. But ISIS recruiters are steering people off Twitter into encrypted forums, which the government cannot see, Comey said. "Its the old going-dark problem, in living color," said Comey. He added: "We have hundreds working on it around the clock. But in almost every case of violence, someone saw something. A friend, a family member. Its more important than ever for people to speak up."     ^^^just a reminder for the bolded parts that a federal agent was in the car directly behind them as they opened their doors and began their short lived attack
    • Looks like it has potential. BvS was terrible. I will say the extended version was a better film but still not good. Suicide Squad was one of the worst films I've seen in a while.  That said of course I will waste my money and go see this. I hope they bring back Batman's more cunning qualities in future films. I got the sense that in BvS he was a what you see is what you get type of guy. You don't get the feeling that he has something up his sleeve at all times. Which was something Nolan/Bale had, almost Bond-esque.
    • Saw it the other night and found it surprisingly decent. The acting was pretty damn good for a power rangers movie. Obvious plot holes are obvious and the plot advances before it's ready at times but it's not a bad movie. I thought the suits were cool but the zords looked terrible and the megazord was hideous. Would have been better off copying the original one tit for tat.