Posted on 03/18/2014 7:36:49 AM PDT by C19fan
On ABC, America’s Funniest Home Videos garnered a 1.4, down 7 percent from a 1.5 adults 18-49 rating for its most recent original.
.........................................................
Cosmos earned a 1.9 adults 18-49 rating down 10 percent from a 2.1 for last week’s premiere.
(Excerpt) Read more at tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com ...
Amen, me too! Yuk!!!!!!
episode 1 with zer0 introducing the series, turned me off from the get go.
the first episode with its Catholic bashing from an incident 400 years old(around the time the constitution was written) where Giordano Bruno was burned at the stake for supporting geocentrism, ticked me off as there was no caveat about how the RC Church is currently no longer executing nor Luddites.
episode 2 was better...
The best summary criticism I have heard is they devoted 25% of the first show to a non-scientist being killed for being a heretic. No scientific basis for it. Just wanted to spread a debunked story.
Dead to most folks right out the gate.
Excellent news. When they took a hard left turn and started spouting evolution theory as some kind of fact I knew it wouldn’t be long until lights out, ratings-wise.
They fawn over every instance of water that “may have been” present on some other empty rock because, for them, all life needs to exist is a little water and billions of years and viola!
...can’t put my finger on it, but I somehow think you’re just stringing us along with your comment...
someone, perhaps the production company head (Seth MacFarlane ), decided to give Tyson bad acting lessons.
he should play it like the scientist he is and can the melodrama....
He may have a great mind, I have no idea... he is certainly not a great narrator..
the original series (hugh) was incredibly thought provoking and entertaining. Carl Sagan was just that good.. He packaged it up beautifully...
this guy... hmmm... I agree, he should be narrating this kind of thing for high school presentations... he certainly loves the sound of his own voice.... now who does THAT remind us of ?
I watched the first twenty minutes of the first episode. I could not finish, I was getting ill. It had nothing to do with insulting my beliefs, and everything to do with insulting my intelligence.
Offensive, condescending, and smarmy would have been a huge improvement. It was stoopid, confusing, unfocused, hokey, superficial, transcendently glib, juvenilely simplistic, inane and disappointing. I WAITED FORTY YEARS FOR THIS POS!!!!! We have learned SO MUCH MORE about the Cosmos in the last forty years, communications technology and media have advanced so far, and all we get is this stale dog vomit.
A total, complete and utter failure, a disgrace.
I read the puppet was doing the intro.
I knew then it would be a disaster.
Yawn.
“Venus is so hot because Venusians driving around in SUVs....”
It would be a shock to our antiquated systems.......
And that Venus is significantly closer to the sun.
8~)
Obama does a commercial for this show. All the info I need.
I still remember a great bit from the Carl Sagan version all these years later.
“So, the early astronomers with their crude telescopes looked up at the planet Venus. And they realized, they really couldn’t see any detail on the surface.
So they thought, “Why is that”? Well, obviously they were looking at clouds. The planet was shrouded in a veil of clouds, and the clouds were so thick they obscured all views of the planet surface.
Well, what does that tell us? Well, with all those clouds, they must have a lot of water vapor. So the surface of Venus must be a very wet, humid place. Lots of water vapor, probably coming from massive pools and rivers.
And, if it that humid with all that water, it must be a very lush, tropical place. With lush vegetation, palm trees.
And if it is like a rain forest, it must be teeming with animal life. Birds and insects. Maybe even dinosaurs.
Observation: We can’t see anything.
Conclusion? DINOSAURS!”
Boy, does THAT describe the logical process of a lot of people I’ve met over the years!
I watched less than half of it last Sunday.
I found the presentation to be so smarmy and condescending that it was unwatchable.
BTW, as an MIT graduate I am hardly “anti-science” - rather, I am anti-smug-liberal-groupthink dressed up as all sciency and stuff...
Agreed. That keeps me miles from that show, and it’s all i need to know.
Atheist version of resurrection?
“What they’re really looking for is a second planet that has life, because that would be another nail in the Creation narrative.”
I totally disagree. OK, THEY might take that as a “another” nail, but that would be an erroneous conclusion. God can put life on any planet he wants.
He was the best, ethnic, washed-up physicist they could find that would prostitute himself in the name of progressive propaganda.
Oppenheimer was a genius, and in the end an idiot for believing that had he not succeeded in building the bomb, the Germans would never had succeeded either.
That makes him an arrogant idiot, to boot.
Bill Gates admits its ‘logical’ for humans to believe in God, and probably (MAYBE) respects the probabilistic evidence against all of this happening by accident. He won’t, however, deign to indulge in any hocus-pocus nonsense by recognizing his own evident limitations and have the humility and open-mindedness to pursue some sort of relationship with his ‘unexplored probabilities’.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.