Support NeoGAF

[sonikokaruto]

this thread is about the tv show and people who like it.

You wanna discuss other stuff? go make a new thread, please. Don't tarnish the whole thread with your armchair investigation. Come on, put yourself on the spotlight, just like the old scientists did.

 

[Insane Metal]

Ok, whatever it is, let's keep that discussion out of this thread.

 

[Hari Seldon]

Why not? It's not like at the time scientific thought was fully developed. Nowadays of course new ideas that are grounded in facts and existing literature will be deserving of more consideration, but huge paradigm shifts have occurred with the help of thoughts that were discarded as mad by those who wanted to hold on to established theories or beliefs, specially earlier on in history. It's not like I'm saying, let's consider unicorns exist. It's more like, science asks of us to accept those theories that help explain the universe, as far-fetched as they may sound initially. Science needs skepticism and imagination both maybe it just relied a bit more on imagination back then.

Because you shouldn't make the argument that science is evidence base by illustrating that someone can guess correct science through a vision.

Also, scientists wouldn't have any time to do anything if they had to disprove every crackpot theory lol.

Also arguing that Galileo was influenced by this guy seems flimsy. Galileo clearly was working off of Copernicus.

 

[speculawyer]

The Bruno bit surprised me in how evil they made the religious look. Wouldn't have expected them to go that far, however why the hell not. It's the damn truth and there's no point wrapping it in cotton wool.

I wasn't too surprised. Seth is an out atheist and even NDT has been showing more push-back against religion lately compared the to the way he used to be. See the recent interview he did with Bill Moyers.

I thought the Bruno segment was great. And the animation instead of live-action is fine with me . . . that probably significantly reduced costs so they could spend the money elsewhere such as on the fancy computer rendering of the planets and the spaceship.

 

[Fireblend]

Because you shouldn't make the argument that science is evidence base by illustrating that someone can guess correct science through a vision.

That wasn't the point of the segment though.

Also, scientists wouldn't have any time to do anything if they had to disprove every crackpot theory lol.

This is an exaggeration. Did you even read what I posted? That's not what I'm arguing for at all, and definitely not the segment's takeaway message.

Also arguing that Galileo was influenced by this guy seems flimsy. Galileo clearly was working off of Copernicus.

That wasn't really what I was saying. I think the video mentions Bruno being influenced by other texts. The dissemination of thoughts about heliocentrism throughout society is still an important part of the theory's history, wouldn't you think?

Edit: Sorry, didn't see the posts asking for this discussion to end. I'm fine with that, no more discussion. Wouldn't want to mess up the thread at all. This thread should be all about celebrating this awesome show.

 

[sonikokaruto]

if this show has atheist tints, go make a new thread so the whole world can see you

i don;t see the usefulness of trying to make people enjoy cosmos less by debating every point in the episode

 

[Hitokage]

if this show has atheist tints, go make a new thread so the whole world can see you

i don;t see the usefulness of trying to make people enjoy cosmos less by debating every point in the episode

To be fair, the whole point of this show is to start conversation.

 

[Chojin]

if this show has atheist tints, go make a new thread so the whole world can see you

i don;t see the usefulness of trying to make people enjoy cosmos less by debating every point in the episode

I think a separate discussion would be a good idea. I think its healthy to have a debate on this but definitely not in this thread.

 

[Hari Seldon]

To be fair, the whole point of this show is to start conversation.

Yeah this thread would be dead if we all just came in and said "yep it is good" lol.

I love the show but I think choosing to put this segment in deserves some criticism or at least generate an interesting discussion.

 

[gutshot]

Isn't the point of having a discussion thread so we can discuss the show? Have you seen most other TV show threads on here? 50% of posts in them are criticizing the most minute details of each episode.

Switching topics real quick, the full TV numbers are here. Via HitFix:

UPDATE: The 10-network premiere numbers for "Cosmos" are in. Including FOX and the nine satellite airings, "Cosmos" averaged a 2.9 rating among adults 18-49 and drew 8.5 million viewers.

 

[sonikokaruto]

one thing is conversation, the other is attacking a point of view and trying to correct everyone on it.

 

[Chojin]

Isn't the point of having a discussion thread so we can discuss the show? Have you seen most other TV show threads on here? Criticizing the most minute details of each episode is like 50% of posts in each TV thread.

Switching topics real quick, the full TV numbers are here. Via HitFix:

I'm dumb on TV ratings. Is that a good? I think its good. I wonder how it will fare on NatGeo tonight.

 

[Fireblend]

Yeah this thread would be dead if we all just came in and said "yep it is good" lol.

I love the show but I think choosing to put this segment in deserves some criticism or at least generate an interesting discussion.

For what it's worth I'm pretty sure the discussion already ran its course. I think you do have a valid point, as the segment's purpose could easily be misconstrued (specially without NDT's commentary on it right after it ends) and it could be seen as incendiary, and as the enormous OG Cosmos fan I am, I would have loved to see a reimagining of the Eratosthenes story (although admittedly they have different messages and I don't think they should be compared directly, I'm hoping it'll be mentioned later at least).

Still, I think some of the reactions to the segment are unwarranted and it did a good job of illustrating its message. I've already laid out my thoughts on the subject. We can agree to disagree I would've loved to have this conversation over a cup of coffee somewhere though

one thing is conversation, the other is attacking a point of view and trying to correct everyone on it.

I thought the discussion was pretty tame, I certainly didn't feel attacked at any point, and it certainly wasn't my intention to seem aggressive at all. Then again I'm not sure if you're talking about me. The theory of science is a subject I really care about, and in a way I was using the argument to decide whether I was right or wrong, I wasn't even settled on my position I'd be kind of a hypocrite if I was.

 

[mantidor]

During the cosmic calender section where they were talking about the formation of the moon, they made a passing comment about tidal pressure pushing the moon back. Anyone know what that's about? I know the moon's gravity effects the tides, but how do the tides effect the moon?

I haven't been able to see the episode but my guess is that they were talking about the moon getting away from us little by little.

The other part is basic gravity, it's not only the earth pushing you down, you are pushing earth up as well, you are even pushing the sun towards you, of course there's no way you could win so yeah the moon affects the tides just as the tides affect the moon, I don't know if it refers to the mass of the ocean though, which I'm sure is big but not enough to be of consideration to the moon. Tides if I'm not mistaken are geological events, the moon has enough gravity to pull up the earth's surface considerably (by our human scales), up to 10 meters.

 

[Hitokage]

The Moon's gravity affects everything on the Earth, but obviously the oceans are liquid so they respond more. Furthermore, since everything is affected, the sea level rises on the opposite side because the Earth is pulled from underneath the water.

 

[gutshot]

I'm dumb on TV ratings. Is that a good? I think its good. I wonder how it will fare on NatGeo tonight.

It's decent. I don't expect tonight's airing on NatGeo will add many more viewers. 500k-750k at most.

It will be interesting to see how many of those 8.5m stick around for next week's episode. I expect there will be a dip in the overall audience, since it will only be airing on one network, but it should top the 5.79m that Fox pulled in last night. And hopefully that 2.1 demo rating will remain steady.

 

[googleplex]

The Bruno bit surprised me in how evil they made the religious look. Wouldn't have expected them to go that far, however why the hell not. It's the damn truth and there's no point wrapping it in cotton wool.

You and I must have been watching different shows. It was Bruno's love of God that compelled him spread the ideal of an infinite universe and an infinite god. It made the ancient catholic church and the Inquisition look bad. Not Religion in general.

 

[Chojin]

For what it's worth I'm pretty sure the discussion already ran its course. I think you do have a valid point, as the segment's purpose could easily be misconstrued (specially without NDT's commentary on it right after it ends) and it could be seen as incendiary, and as the enormous OG Cosmos fan I am, I would have loved to see a reimagining of the Eratosthenes story (although admittedly they have different messages and I don't think they should be compared directly, I'm hoping it'll be mentioned later at least).

Still, I think some of the reactions to the segment are unwarranted and it did a good job of illustrating its message. I've already laid out my thoughts on the subject. We can agree to disagree I would've loved to have this conversation over a cup of coffee somewhere though

Thinking about it more I think a more apt analogy to the Bruno story is the Hypatia martyrdom Sagan lamented about with the Library of Alexandria segment. I find it odd though to dedicate a cartoon to Bruno when there could have been better examples to illustrate a point.

I think James Burke did it best with The Day The Universe Changed, the entire series was about how people weren't stupid back then, but how knowledge can change. It's not set in stone.

 

[gutshot]

You and I must have been watching different shows. It was Bruno's love of God that compelled him spread the ideal of an infinite universe and an infinite god. It made the ancient catholic church and the Inquisition look bad. Not Religion in general.

Yeah, it actually seemed like something designed to appeal to evangelicals. Most evangelicals don't really like the Catholic Church and enjoy any story that makes them look bad.

 

[Chris R]

You and I must have been watching different shows. It was Bruno's love of God that compelled him spread the ideal of an infinite universe and an infinite god. It made the ancient catholic church and the Inquisition look bad. Not Religion in general.

No, I think the poster was commenting on how "evil" the animator made the priests and other people look by using dark lighting/shading.

 

[Chojin]

Yeah, it actually seemed like something designed to appeal to evangelicals. Most evangelicals don't really like the Catholic Church and enjoy any story that makes them look bad.

I still put my foot down on thinking its satire. I don't know if clever or not, but really the more I read on Bruno is what he believed in was more akin to how a lot of here view Young Earth Creationists today:

http://www.science20.com/science_20/bruno_was_martyr_magic_not_science-115582

Bruno Was A Martyr For Magic, Not Science

He was not a martyr for science, he was instead, as English astrophysicist John Gribbin called him, a martyr for magic and the occult.(2) He actually was a heretic, and was even worse "a walking billboard for the Inquisition" and refused to recant his arianism/hermetism, though given the better part of a decade to try and take back some of his weirder nonsense.(3) Getting burned at the stake was nothing extraordinary in 1600 AD, especially for a guy who had gone out of his way to insist his beliefs were not an alternative theological hypothesis but that they were facts that the Catholic Church and Protestants needed to recognize.

I mean its a good thing we don't burn people at the stake, but the way they portrayed Bruno in the cartoon as a "Oh man I'm just a dude trying to make it in this world" was funny in retrospect. '

The article was written a year ago. There's a column on yesterday's episode here as well: Here

It's an interesting read, I'm going to look at other articles on the episode as well. I really hope that the cartoon doesn't detract or backfire the intended means of the series though. At least what I think what Sagan originally had in mind: to make people curious to the world around them.

 

[Mgoblue201]

http://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistoria...w_accurate_is_cosmos_story_of_giordano_bruno/

The show did acknowledge Bruno's heretical views on the trinity and the divinity of Jesus (to be fair, it should have made a bigger deal about this). More importantly, however, Tyson wasn't drawing attention to the scientific validity of Bruno's formulations, but rather the price he paid for independent and heterodox thinking. Furthermore, Bruno's ideas about the universe probably played a large role in his condemnation, simply because his cosmological and theological views were indistinguishable from each other. In other words, his ideas about god derived from his conception of an infinite universe. This was dangerous to the religious authorities for obvious reasons.

 

[Hari Seldon]

Switching topics real quick, the full TV numbers are here. Via HitFix:

Don't know shit about TV ratings, is that considered good?

Edit: Nvm answered already.

 

[Head of Vengarl]

Watched it with my gf last night. We agreed that we should have put on our helmets before tuning in, because it blew our minds. I loved the visuals.

 

[GaimeGuy]

Speaking of asteroids being tipped one way or the other, Jupiter basically acts as a giant vacuum cleaner in our solar system. It's so massive that as it orbits the sun it sucks in all sorts of rocks or ejects them from our system. In 1994, the comet Shoemaker-Levy 9 impacted Jupiter and left visible scars on its surface.

Obviously it doesn't take care of everything that's around, though.

Its... surface?

 

[Loco4Coco]

Even though the 1st episode covered alot of basic (star) stuff the production value was really good and entertaining. Hopefully the following weeks gets more advance.

 

[Iztli]

So I tried showing this to my sister and she dismissed it by saying that its just a bunch of scientist making up stuff. That theories aren't real and are made up. I told her that theories are fact based conclusions but she didn't want any of it. I just got a visit from my mother saying that I made my sister cry at work and that she wants nothing with me. To keep these opinions to myself and that science wont save me when I die.

 

[kehs]

So I tried showing this to my sister and she dismissed it by saying that its just a bunch of scientist making up stuff. That theories aren't real and are made up. I told her that theories are fact based conclusions but she didn't want any of it. I just got a visit from my mother saying that I made my sister cry at work and that she wants nothing with me. To keep these opinions to myself and that science wont save me when I die.

Send them a link to http://www.alcor.org/.

 

[Smiles and Cries]

I hate HULU but I am paying them again to see this show

 

[Dai101]

I just got a visit from my mother saying that I made my sister cry at work and that she wants nothing with me. To keep these opinions to myself and that science wont save me when I die.

Don't worry dude. Their religion will neither save them when they die.

 

[fluffydelusions]

I hate HULU but I am paying them again to see this show

It's not on hulu+?

 

[massoluk]

Got this in my email. Some Tyson's fan may be interested.

 

[elrechazado]

Watched this with my son and was really disappointed. I was hoping for more science and less spaceship cgi and EA Dante's inferno style nonsense.

My son kept asking content questions that I wish they spent time on. It was like reading the book spines instead of the book. He'll, I'd have settled on the Wikipedia entry level info. Eg: Big Bang mentioned for 30 seconds, but two full bullshit segments on Bruno? Sigh. So wanted to love this.

 

[Abounder]

Yea there was too much Bruno. Sagan's Cosmos seemed like it taught more but this was just the first episode. Special effects are great but yea if you've already seen stuff like Hubble 3D then it's not as...special.

I do like the use of animations. Probably the only reason why my little brother was interested.

Love Tyson on StarTalk

 

[Mgoblue201]

The actual ratio of science to speechifying/visual grandeur/historical stuff really doesn't differ that much from the first episode of the original series. If anything, the cosmic calendar segment was more informative than Sagan's version.

 

[Dai101]

Watched this with my son and was really disappointed. I was hoping for more science and less spaceship cgi and EA Dante's inferno style nonsense.

My son kept asking content questions that I wish they spent time on. It was like reading the book spines instead of the book. He'll, I'd have settled on the Wikipedia entry level info. Eg: Big Bang mentioned for 30 seconds, but two full bullshit segments on Bruno? Sigh. So wanted to love this.

Ugh.... You know this is still 12 more episodes right? They can go deeper in that later, this FIRST episode is just the prologue of the whole series.

 

[elrechazado]

Ugh.... You know this is still 12 more episodes right? They can go deeper in that later, this FIRST episode is just the prologue of the whole series.

I was under the impression that I was sharing my opinion on what I actually watched, not what could happen. You know, using the scientific method. Did you perhaps have a Brunoesque dream that revealed the truth of future episodes to you?

 

[massoluk]

Watched this with my son and was really disappointed. I was hoping for more science and less spaceship cgi and EA Dante's inferno style nonsense.

My son kept asking content questions that I wish they spent time on. It was like reading the book spines instead of the book. He'll, I'd have settled on the Wikipedia entry level info. Eg: Big Bang mentioned for 30 seconds, but two full bullshit segments on Bruno? Sigh. So wanted to love this.

Did your son like it?

 

[Kimosabae]

Some of these comments make my head hurt.

For the record: if you're truly expecting anything more than surface-level presentation of various scientific areas: bail out now. Of course, I don't think anyone was really expecting this, they're just desperate to flash the size of their e-beakers.

This series won't be any different in scope or spirit than the original Cosmos. If you need a reminder on what that means, watch that series again.

 

[elrechazado]

Did your son like it?

Yes he's 7 and liked it but thought Bruno part was dumb. He loved the cosmic address piece and the calendar, as did I. It was more for both if us a " that could have been ten times better" rather than hating it or anything. Guess I bought into the hype. Will of course watch next week with him.

 

[Abounder]

The actual ratio of science to speechifying/visual grandeur/historical stuff really doesn't differ that much from the first episode of the original series. If anything, the cosmic calendar segment was more informative than Sagan's version.

True but I do miss the hands-on approach Sagan's Cosmos had so far. Even in the first episode he demonstrated Eratosthenes' findings like a teacher would to a student by bending a map with Egyptian obelisks glued on top, and going into the degrees and other scientific nomenclature. Makes me wonder if Tyson's Cosmos had these parts cut out, but in fairness they did explain Bruno's arrow in the animation sequence.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0JHEqBLG650

And while I do like the 2-d animations...there is one thing that really sucks about it: and that's not seeing the real locations and their modern way of life. There was also much more history in Sagan's. Again it makes me wonder if that stuff was cut out.

Still great show but Sagan's Cosmos is also great.

 

[SteveWinwood]

Watched this with my son and was really disappointed. I was hoping for more science and less spaceship cgi and EA Dante's inferno style nonsense.

My son kept asking content questions that I wish they spent time on. It was like reading the book spines instead of the book. He'll, I'd have settled on the Wikipedia entry level info. Eg: Big Bang mentioned for 30 seconds, but two full bullshit segments on Bruno? Sigh. So wanted to love this.

Man what a great opportunity to spend time with your son watching or reading some further information he had questions about! Thanks Cosmos!

 

[PsychBat!]

Yes he's 7 and liked it but thought Bruno part was dumb. He loved the cosmic address piece and the calendar, as did I. It was more for both if us a " that could have been ten times better" rather than hating it or anything. Guess I bought into the hype. Will of course watch next week with him.

You know this was meant for a broader audience such as people who have little to no knowledge of the universe and science right? Just curious.

 

[elrechazado]

You know this was meant for a broader audience such as people who have little to no knowledge of the universe and science right? Just curious.

No, all I know is what I have gleaned from the Internet - that being that ndt is a pimp, cosmos is one of the great science series ever that exists to drop mad knowledge on the world. Never have seen a hint of disclaiming regarding the content until after the show came out.

 

[speculawyer]

I was under the impression that I was sharing my opinion on what I actually watched, not what could happen. You know, using the scientific method. Did you perhaps have a Brunoesque dream that revealed the truth of future episodes to you?

Well then it is too bad that you failed to learn the lesson in last night's show about how dogmatically sticking to an ancient myth will lead you to the wrong answers whereas one should explore new ideas and test them.

 

[Simon Belmont]

I was under the impression that I was sharing my opinion on what I actually watched, not what could happen. You know, using the scientific method. Did you perhaps have a Brunoesque dream that revealed the truth of future episodes to you?

You really don't think they're going to address the Big Bang?

 

[Mengy]

So I tried showing this to my sister and she dismissed it by saying that its just a bunch of scientist making up stuff. That theories aren't real and are made up. I told her that theories are fact based conclusions but she didn't want any of it. I just got a visit from my mother saying that I made my sister cry at work and that she wants nothing with me. To keep these opinions to myself and that science wont save me when I die.

Know that you aren't alone bro. You aren't alone.

 

[elrechazado]

You really don't think they're going to address the Big Bang?

I don't know....all I know is what I watched. Should I be reading some guide too? I hope they do, but the comments here from people seem to be both directions - " don't expect more than cursory treatment of stuff, that's not what this is so don't judge it based on that " vs the "just wait man!!! Of course they will get all into this"
Which is it?

Well then it is too bad that you failed to learn the lesson in last night's show about how dogmatically sticking to an ancient myth will lead you to the wrong answers whereas one should explore new ideas and test them.

Wat

 

[Simon Belmont]

I don't know....all I know is what I watched. Should I be reading some guide too? I hope they do, but the comments here from people seem to be both directions - " don't expect more than cursory treatment of stuff, that's not what this is so don't judge it based on that " vs the "just wait man!!! Of course they will get all into this"
Which is it?

Well obviously as a function of time there are things they will have to gloss over, and as a function of logic they have to set up some stuff before they get into other stuff. I'm not sure what your expectations are as to how deep they'll cover certain topics, but you do have the ability to look up anything you feel they missed.

 

[kehs]

I don't know....all I know is what I watched. Should I be reading some guide too? I hope they do, but the comments here from people seem to be both directions - " don't expect more than cursory treatment of stuff, that's not what this is so don't judge it based on that " vs the "just wait man!!! Of course they will get all into this"
Which is it?



Wat

I figured the whole "Our Journey is just beginning" at the end of it meant they're just scratching the surface.

call me bruno though.