/sci/ - Science & Math

implying black people have contributed anything to science and aren't just stupid lazy faggots trying to take credit for the rest of the world's hard work

>>3512199

the guy's alright.

anyways... it all sounds good to me.

Ann Druyan, Seth MacFarlane and Cosmos Studios president Mitchell Cannold will executive produce along with Allan Butler of National Geographic Channel. And influenced by Bill Maher.

Pretty hardcore right there.

>>3512199
you obviously haven't seen this guy on youtube
>implying sagan contributed anything to science apart from to popularise it
>implying this guy doesn't suite that role perfectly

>>3512208
>And influenced by Bill Maher.
Maher thinks a manned Mars mission would cost close to a trillion and wants manned space missions to be shut down in order to help pay the debt, instead of moving straight to cutting the military-industrial complex.

>>3512209

seti and nuclear winter seems good enough for me.

>>3512209
when the fuck did i say i liked carl sagan?

Typical fucking /sci/faggot, can't into basic implication.

>>3512212

then they should just quote him on stuff from "Religulous"

>>3512212
Maher is right, manned space flight is a waste of money

that's not the worst thing maher has ever said tho, he also thinks HIV doesnt cause AIDS

>>3512214
by implying that op was implying black people contribute nothing to science, you implied yourself that sagan contributed shit to science

Oh fuck yes, I love Tyson.

>>3512218
Fuck you. Fuuuuck you.

How about cutting your spending on the Department of Defense? Y'know, 750 billion to 350 billion or something.

>>3512218

i don't care about manned or not, for all i care we could be sending robots... as long as we're actively exploring that's alright.

>>3512199
Check it out guys! Groupthink mentality and the inability to not behave like what's expected of somebody has left me victimized! I'm a common baboon! :3

>>3512218

>implying the way to repay debt is to stop doing anything that could progress your country that other nations might want to get in on.

Nope, cut all development budgets in everything because Maher doesn't can't in2 investing

>>3512228
but it does matter if it's manned or not, manned is more expensive which means less money on science

there's a shit ton of projects that had to be cancelled to keep the shuttles running

>>3512185

Great. Neil is an awesome.

>>3512227

how about posting the whole thing?

>>3512199 Check it out guys! Groupthink mentality and the inability to not behave like what's expected of somebody on 4chan has left me victimized! I'm a common baboon! :3

>>3512231

>Seth MacFarlane
As a director? Sounds fine, he's clearly doing something right since half of Fox's lineup is directed by him.

>Neil DeGrasse Tyson
As much as I like the guy, he can get really really excited about what he's talking about and go off on tangents if you don't keep him on topic. One of the things about Cosmos was that it had 1 person: Carl Sagan, and nobody else. No interviews, no co-stars, no supporting cast, (other than when used as scientific examples). Just him, his thoughts, and the camera. If Neil can do the same thing, while keeping his cool, he will be amazing.

I was concerned about the Bill Maher thing since he is an intolerable elitist who is more concerned about being right than being correct. (This coming from an Atheist who couldn't stand Religulous. (Bill, I hope you're reading this: Making a movie like that is not going to do anything other than split the population further, you intolerant shitbird)).

But having read the article, which only mentions him once, and that being simply that Ann and Seth went on his show, I feel safer. I also double checked by doing a Google News search for "Cosmos Bill Maher", and only got the article that OP posted.

Phew.

As much as I love Noel I just don't think he'll be able to fill Sagans shoes...

b..but.. he is BLACK!

Cosmos with Dawkins

>>3512452
Black president bitches. Shitz off the hook in modern earth Times

>>3512452

he is brown you simpleton

What >>3512278 said. I have nothing against the project being done; I just can't picture a Cosmos sequel without Carl Sagan. It might be a great show, but I just doubt it will feel the same - not that it necessarily has to. Neil DeGrasse Tyson is fine, I love his presentations, but he doesn't have the same style as Sagan. … and he’d better be wearing a turtleneck! ;)

Will be interesting to see how it turns out.

:( They're going to ruin a great thing and it'll never be the same again.......I think the only people to stand a chance at something like this would be dawkins/cox

Meh. Frankly, Cosmos needs an update. Not because the information is terribly out of date (though some of it is) and not because the original is lacking, but because with its age it becomes harder and harder for it to connect with younger audiences. People can bitch all they want about how they changed it so now it sucks, but it isn't really for us. Tyson knows his shit and is an engaging lecturer. I'm sure he'll do a fine job with it. The feel WON'T be the same, but that might be a good thing. The extremely mellow, laid back conversational feel of the original might not resonate with kids today. I don't know if that will be completely gone, but I'll understand if it is. Though I'd really prefer if it wasn't, because one of my favorite things about the original was how I felt it respected the viewer's intelligence.

Tyson is a bore. He speaks to his audience like they are all idiots. Every show that has to do with space or cosmology always just spews grade one science for retarded americans. I stopped watching this shit ages ago. Stars a giant balls of gas, wow man trippy, i never knew that.

>>3512671

So your problem with his popsci is that it's popsci?

>>3512671
This. Talk to me like a fucking adult.

ahahahaha, imagine how Cox feels about this.

/facepalm
It's going to be a horrendous failure.

Neil Tyson is nowhere near as charismatic or poetic as Carl Sagan.

Sage for pop science bullshit.

>>3512671

>Every show that has to do with space or cosmology always just spews grade one science for retarded americans. I stopped watching this shit ages ago. Stars a giant balls of gas, wow man trippy, i never knew that.

As much as I hate to admit it, but I feel the same way for most astronomy shows I watch. And I get that it’s important to have lower level stuff for kids and laymen adults, but does *every* such doco have to cater to the lowest common denominator? Is it too much to ask for the occasional higher level show? Chances are, the main audience is going to be that of astronomy/space enthusiasts anyway, so they probably know must of the content. At this point I’m just engaging in elitist whinging, but still. :P

But maybe this is why I enjoyed the original Cosmos so much. It didn’t just deal with astro/space, it discussed a whole bunch of other topics.

Damn, I don't know about this. I mean, sure, Cosmos is a little outdated, but it's a classic and you don't temper with classics! Take movies for example. Every classic move is better than remake of that same movie. And one more thing. Niel talk like we are all dumb Americans. Planets are this, stars are that, nebula is that. NO SHIT, tell me more. I like that guy, he's a good comedian, but he is nowhere near Sagan and I thing new Cosmos is a bad idea. I read one book from Niel: "14 billion years of cosmic evolution" Good book, but he's a crappy writer. It was boring too read compared to Sagan's Cosmos, Pale Blue Dot, etc. Sagan is like a scientific poet, Neal is not.

So, a "sequel" to Cosmos implies that the audiences have watched the original, yeah? (And the originally will probably be replayed near the premier?) Perhaps I am being a little naive/hopeful, but does this suggest that it *will* contain a higher level of material? Or at least, similar but different material?

I hope it doesn’t just turn out to be a rehash of old stuff with fancy graphics and a new presenter.

>>3513272

Everything you said + books, every fucking book about astronomy is the same. I started reading "The Physics Of Star Trek by L. Krauss" But I coudn't finish it. It was so boring. Every book is the same nowdays. Only book i enjoyed this year was Hawking's "The Grand Design"

Sagan's books were always fun, something new to read. I tell you. This new Cosmos will be from Niel's "14 billion years of comsic evolution" book.

>>3512671
>>3513248

This. The guys a terrible speaker in general, always humming and hawing and going off on retarded and pointless tangents. If Seth McFarlane doesn't ruin this project, DeGrasse will.

I'm not convinced that Tyson can pull of those sweet whale sounds.

>>3513312
They have already updated cosmos with fancy graphics man. Discovery Channel ran it like a few years ago.

Whiteys greatest fear is an educated black man, not the uneducated negro on the corner with a gun.

>>3514313
>inb4 someone takes the bait

He's going to be on Real Time with Bill Maher tonight, for those of you with HBO.

>>3514313
I love seeing educated black men. Gives me hope and I give them a lot of credit.

>>3512218
Hahaha, while Maher is a voice of reason compared to the rest of the idiots on American TV, he's still pretty bad. He doesn't like microwave ovens because "they make the molecules vibrate." Dude said it with the dirtiest fucking face, too, fucking idiot.

>>3514489
>Hahaha, while Maher is a voice of reason compared to the rest of the idiots on American TV, he's still pretty bad. He doesn't like microwave ovens because "they make the molecules vibrate."

Science isn't his specialization. Not everyone can be perfect for you.

>>3512513

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lOyP44Xu5FA

this would be the perfect advertisement for that show

>>3514495
"Warmth is the degree of kinetic energy that matter has" should be a basal thing everyone should know.