|
Anyone have a way to watch this legally on the internet? I don't have a TV.
|
#
¿
Mar 17, 2014 01:27
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 19, 2024 21:30 |
|
|
jisforjosh posted:Creationist Group Demands Airtime on "Cosmos" for Sake of "Scientific Balance It's a slippery slope. Creationism isn't science, so I'm not entirely sure why it would need to be showcased in a "balanced" way, or any way at all, on a show about science. It's literally as scientifically valid as the geocentric model of the universe.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 21, 2014 23:24
|
|
|
Josh Lyman posted:It would be poo poo because Michio Kaku is a hack. He's a professor at my college and he's a really awesome lecturer.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 24, 2014 03:43
|
|
|
I was a bit put off by the more hypothetical aspects of last nights episode. Then again, I really enjoyed Sagan's sinkers and floaters, knowing that's an entirely imaginative and hypothetical thought experiment, so I can't really say anything. Sagan clearly had big ideas about life on other planets, and Tyson clearly has big ideas about the interior of black holes. I suppose there's nothing wrong with a few hypotheticals here and there, especially when they're particularly interesting takes on modern science tropes (and to be fair the whole "sinkers and floaters" thing would be considered quaint these days). I'm a little disappointed they didn't go into how things become stretched/blue shifted/red shifted, as that's actual concrete science that I find to be pretty loving interesting, but for the most part the episode was interesting. I'm excited to see if they'll talk more about black holes in the future, as Tyson wrote a whole paper on the subject of falling into one in great detail.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 1, 2014 01:31
|
|
|
As a physicist, the part with the atoms had me smiling because it was such an awesome representation of an atom. I want that poo poo as a screen saver.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 7, 2014 17:10
|
|
|
As a physicist, I'm glad that they stopped using lovely 3D graphics once the bio section of today's episode finished and got back to the sweet, sweet physics.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 14, 2014 05:31
|
|
|
I wonder if people actually care about politics as much as breitbart.com would lead you to believe. I don't know anyone who even cared that the President opened the show, let alone would stop watching it because he did so. If anything it's probably losing ratings because Game of Thrones is on at the exact same time.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 21, 2014 05:57
|
|
|
computer parts posted:NDT has had a (ironically) holier than thou attitude regarding religious beliefs for the entire series, even if the vast majority of the religious don't even believe in the straw men he puts up (again, see: the comets from an earlier episode). NDT doesn't seem to have a problem with religion. He has a problem with people using religion (or anything) to override fact and reason. Unfortunately we live in a world where people still believe natural disasters are the direct result of divine reckoning as opposed to the fairly random functions of nature. He brings up people ignoring science for many different reasons, not limited to belief in religion. The crux of his arguments is that by ignoring science and the idea it preserves (to put aside prejudices and preconceived notions in the face of finding absolute truth) you end up hurting yourself and others in the long run.
|
|
#
¿
May 7, 2014 20:22
|
|
|
pik_d posted:Men of science are morally superior Davey's reaction to that is pretty appropriate. I still meet young scientists who feel that scientists are in fact morally superior to others simply because of what they study, but simply saying "you haven't met many scientists, have you?" is good enough of a reaction.
|
|
#
¿
May 12, 2014 15:09
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 19, 2024 21:30 |
|
|
AlternateAccount posted:NDT's podcast is loving awful. Really content-starved, the "comic" co-hosts are completely useless, way too many ads for its runtime and it's very rarely focused on anything actually interesting. Holy poo poo, an entire episode interviewing Laurence Fishburne? A TWO PART interview with Miles O'Brien? No, gently caress no. This is my general impression, as a former weekly listener who studies physics. I can imagine there being much better science podcasts out there. They're not absolutely terrible, but they're not very good either.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 11, 2014 22:50
|
|