Billions and billions.
Oh, crap. I heard they were redoing it. But Neil DeGrasse Tyson is an arrogant, hateful, bigoted know-nothing.
Maybe they should try to find out what Carl Sagan found out about his “There is no God” statement when he reached the Pearly Gates. What’s that old saw?
Sagan: There is no God.
God: There is no Sagan.
Billions and billions and billions and billions...
I though it sucked. There is to much that is unknown to make the positive statements that he made.
I liked it too, but I have a feeling they insert some politically correct “science” into the new version, although Sagan did that too. I’ll bet they will talk about how “fragile” the earth’s climate is or some similar nonsense.
It was a great series then and I think it’s still available on netflix streaming.
I saw that show billions and billions and billions of days ago, it seems.
The over under is in show 5 he starts talking “global change caused by humans.”
I pick the under.
I am not looking forward to it. They will have the obligatory “we’re destroying the earth” message in each episode. I enjoy documentaries like that and I’ve watched some on Netflix. but geesh, every single one has to throw out global warming and guilt trip. One was particularly hilarious was a documentary on the sun showing how we know little about it and how it controls all aspects of life on earth BUT of course the most destructive force in the solar system is global warming caused by humans. Go figure.
Over on Business Insider, I site I otherwise enjoy; they incessantly prop this guy. So much so, that I will never watch him.
Sagan was a pot head.
Why would anyone trust anything he proposed is beyond me.
Tyson is arrogant, but, he knows his stuff. He also seems to be sober. I’ll take that.
I’m looking forward with trepidation. I enjoy the Universe series, but the production values are skimpy, and the presentation is somewhat overly dramatic for my tastes.
I have reservations about Neil de Grasse Tyson for a lot of reasons, mainly intellectual depth, and his willingness to make gratuitous and ill-framed comments about things outside his expertise, like religion, for instance. If you could get him to just stick to basic astronomy he’s not a bad presenter. Unfortunately, he is also much more opinionated than knowledgeable about the history of astronomy.
I personally found Sagan off-putting and didn’t appreciate the original Cosmos. I worked with a guy who took his PhD in physics at Cornell a couple of years after Sagan, and was a graduate student when Sagan was finishing his graduate studies. He had a few Sagan anecdotes. His first impression of Sagan was at a colloquium, where Sagan was the only graduate student who spoke right up, along side the professors and post-docs. After getting his PhD, my colleague worked at Arecibo, which was managed by Cornell. Sagan used to come down during winter break to play volleyball and have a few rum and coke-cola with the co-ed grad students, not interferring much with the administration and work of the actual facility. Sagan was the perfect TV scientist.
Because Neil cannot get his mug in front of a camera enough?
This could be cool if Tyson doesn’t go off on too many AGW rants (Sagan ranted about nuclear winter). The music for the original show can’t be beat but a whole lot of changes have come about since the first Cosmos.
Tyson is an affirmative action bad joke. I turn him off whenever he comes on. My son hates him.
Of possible interest to the ping list..