Online reading group and book discussion forum
  HOME ENTER FORUMS OUR BOOKS LINKS DONATE ADVERTISE CONTACT  
View unanswered posts | View active topics It is currently Mon Jul 22, 2019 8:11 pm





Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 111 posts ] • Topic evaluate: Evaluations: 4, 3.00 on the average.Evaluations: 4, 3.00 on the average.Evaluations: 4, 3.00 on the average.Evaluations: 4, 3.00 on the average.Evaluations: 4, 3.00 on the average.  Go to page Previous  1 ... 4, 5, 6, 7, 8  Next
Cosmos ----why again? 
Author Message
User avatar
Years of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membership
BookTalk.org Hall of Fame

Gold Contributor

Joined: Jun 2011
Posts: 5481
Thanks: 1302
Thanked: 889 times in 763 posts
Gender: None specified
Country: United States (us)

Post Re: Cosmos ----why again?
I think we have a lot of lawyer'ly type argument here.
It's abundantly clear that it's not argument for the sake of discovering the truth (as it relates to Bruno's history) but simply for the sake of winning an argument.

I'm of the opinion that COSMOS intention was to perpetuate the MYTH of science AS religion; stories of battles fought and won, martyrs, apostles, etc, etc. Shoddy publications in the late 1800 are responsible for most all of what's become the conflict thesis that COSMOS promoted in its first show. It's disingenuous of everyone involved.

The entire Bruno segment was a soundbite oversimplification. Unfortunately, that's mostly how people are educated these days by television and Hollywood. Without placing a historical figure in proper context, historical accuracy is not likely to be achieved.



Fri Mar 14, 2014 11:31 am
Profile Email
User avatar
Years of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membership
BookTalk.org Hall of Fame

BookTalk.org Moderator
Gold Contributor

Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 7040
Location: Da U.P.
Thanks: 1071
Thanked: 2064 times in 1656 posts
Gender: Male
Country: United States (us)

Post Re: Cosmos ----why again?
Quote:
It's abundantly clear that it's not argument for the sake of discovering the truth (as it relates to Bruno's history) but simply for the sake of winning an argument.


The truth of Bruno's history has been more or less discovered and is a dead horse now. Cosmos made a mistake. I know that doesn't satiate your desire to throw the show under the bus, but it will have to do. My issue is that the mistake is used to segue into anti-science rhetoric under the guise of finding "mistakes". This is directed at Stahrwe, not you ant. If anything is abundantly clear, it's that his motive is to bash the scientific worldview in favor of his young universe worldview.


_________________
In the beginning the Universe was created. This has made a lot of people very angry and has been widely regarded as a bad move.” - Douglas Adams


Fri Mar 14, 2014 12:10 pm
Profile
User avatar
Years of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membership
BookTalk.org Hall of Fame

Gold Contributor

Joined: Jun 2011
Posts: 5481
Thanks: 1302
Thanked: 889 times in 763 posts
Gender: None specified
Country: United States (us)

Post Re: Cosmos ----why again?
Interbane wrote:
Quote:
It's abundantly clear that it's not argument for the sake of discovering the truth (as it relates to Bruno's history) but simply for the sake of winning an argument.


The truth of Bruno's history has been more or less discovered and is a dead horse now. Cosmos made a mistake. I know that doesn't satiate your desire to throw the show under the bus, but it will have to do. My issue is that the mistake is used to segue into anti-science rhetoric under the guise of finding "mistakes". This is directed at Stahrwe, not you ant. If anything is abundantly clear, it's that his motive is to bash the scientific worldview in favor of his young universe worldview.


Made a mistake? Oh common now.
Do you think a mistake was made with how they fashioned the villainous cartoon characters?
How might those Disney-like characters impress a young mind? Or any ill-informed, uneducated mind, for that matter??

You're a smart dude, Interbane.
You know exactly how. And you really don't mind.

Why don't you just be honest and say it: If it convinces people to join YOUR camp, a sprinkle of indoctrination here and there is okay.

Geez. I'd respect you more if you did.

I've said nothing negative about the rest of the show.



Fri Mar 14, 2014 12:19 pm
Profile Email
User avatar
Years of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membership
BookTalk.org Hall of Fame

BookTalk.org Moderator
Gold Contributor

Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 7040
Location: Da U.P.
Thanks: 1071
Thanked: 2064 times in 1656 posts
Gender: Male
Country: United States (us)

Post Re: Cosmos ----why again?
Quote:
Made a mistake? Oh common now.
Do you think a mistake was made with how they fashioned the villainous cartoon characters?
How might those Disney-like characters impress a young mind? Or any ill-informed, uneducated mind, for that matter??


Sorry, I understated the impact. Cosmos is a crime against humanity and we should riot.

Quote:
Why don't you just be honest and say it: If it convinces people to join YOUR camp, a sprinkle of indoctrination here and there is okay.


What normal person isn't okay with that? It's how our brains operate, right? We each justify it by saying that a slight meandering of the means is justified by the end. Overall, it's a good show for our society by eliciting passion in our youth. I honestly don't care if it shows religion in a bad light. Your comments won't make me care either. Religion in the US is leagues beyond "science" when it comes to indoctrination. Fight fire with fire, right?

But then, saying that Cosmos is indoctrinating people is a bit extreme. Influencing, yes. Indoctrinating, no. :mrgreen:


_________________
In the beginning the Universe was created. This has made a lot of people very angry and has been widely regarded as a bad move.” - Douglas Adams


The following user would like to thank Interbane for this post:
Chris OConnor
Fri Mar 14, 2014 3:38 pm
Profile
User avatar
Years of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membership
pets endangered by possible book avalanche

Diamond Contributor

Joined: Aug 2009
Posts: 4898
Location: Florida
Thanks: 177
Thanked: 344 times in 294 posts
Gender: Male
Country: United States (us)

Post Re: Cosmos ----why again?
NDT's credibility has been compromised but I have not claimed he is either anti-religion or anti dogma (I would beinterested in hearing his explanation of the distinction). I have accused him of sloppy science, factual errors, compromising accuracy for special effects, self promotion, and perpetuating false information.


_________________
n=Infinity
Sum n = -1/12
n=1

where n are natural numbers.


Fri Mar 14, 2014 4:03 pm
Profile Email
User avatar
Years of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membership
pets endangered by possible book avalanche

BookTalk.org Moderator
Platinum Contributor

Joined: Aug 2008
Posts: 4345
Location: NC
Thanks: 1837
Thanked: 1909 times in 1429 posts
Gender: Male

Post Re: Cosmos ----why again?
ant wrote:
Why don't you just be honest and say it: If it convinces people to join YOUR camp, a sprinkle of indoctrination here and there is okay.

So what "camp" does Cosmos fall under again? You mean, if you're interested in a show about science, you have to join a camp? Fact is, most people aren't going to watch Cosmos and get so totally bent out of shape about a particular animated sequence.

And, also, how could Cosmos depict the Inquisition as anything but sinister and villainous? Or maybe they should leave that part out because, heaven forbid, we can't have religion cast in a negative light.

I'll point out that other shows like Cosmos have also depicted the Catholic' Church's ideological opposition to scientific ideas (including the original Cosmos and Jacob Bronowski's The Ascent of Man). It really happened. What's new is the Discovery Institute type mentality of folks who are in fact joining the "camp" in opposition to a show about science.


_________________
-Geo
Question everything


The following user would like to thank geo for this post:
johnson1010
Fri Mar 14, 2014 4:18 pm
Profile
User avatar
Years of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membership
Tenured Professor

BookTalk.org Moderator

Joined: Mar 2009
Posts: 3564
Location: Michigan
Thanks: 1321
Thanked: 1149 times in 843 posts
Gender: Male

Post Re: Cosmos ----why again?
Hey, i wonder what the discovery institute has to say about cosmos?

Got any subscribers here to "evolutionnews"?

http://www.evolutionnews.org/2014/03/co ... 83061.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Discovery_institute

I am hearing some echos out of that link it seems...


_________________
In the absence of God, I found Man.
-Guillermo Del Torro

Have you tried that? Looking for answers?
Or have you been content to be terrified of a thing you know nothing about?

Are you pushing your own short comings on us and safely hating them from a distance?

Is this the virtue of faith? To never change your mind: especially when you should?

Young Earth Creationists take offense at the idea that we have a common heritage with other animals. Why is being the descendant of a mud golem any better?

Confidence being an expectation built on past experience, evidence and extrapolation to the future. Faith being an expectation held in defiance of past experience and evidence.


Fri Mar 14, 2014 4:44 pm
Profile
User avatar
Years of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membership
BookTalk.org Hall of Fame

BookTalk.org Moderator
Gold Contributor

Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 7040
Location: Da U.P.
Thanks: 1071
Thanked: 2064 times in 1656 posts
Gender: Male
Country: United States (us)

Post Re: Cosmos ----why again?
Quote:
NDT's credibility has been compromised


As an historian? Wouldn't that accusation be better directed at the scriptwriter's source? Or did NDT lose credibility because he dared to use metaphor?

Quote:
I have accused him of sloppy science, factual errors, compromising accuracy for special effects, self promotion, and perpetuating false information.


Begin the inquisition! :P

Sloppy science? Says the nonscientist about the astrophysicist. You're justified in not trusting him as an historian. But as a scientist? You haven't shown any sloppy or incorrect science Stahrwe. It's all in your head.


_________________
In the beginning the Universe was created. This has made a lot of people very angry and has been widely regarded as a bad move.” - Douglas Adams


Fri Mar 14, 2014 5:47 pm
Profile
User avatar
Years of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membership
BookTalk.org Hall of Fame

Gold Contributor

Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 5767
Location: Canberra
Thanks: 2236
Thanked: 2174 times in 1642 posts
Gender: Male
Country: Australia (au)

Post Re: Cosmos ----why again?
ant wrote:
there were other men at the time who held beliefs different than the orthodoxy at the time: Copernicus, Kepler, Stigliola, Digges, Maestlin, Rothmann, and Brahe. Cosmos and NDT start the Bruno tale with a complete falsehood: “1599 everyone knew the sun, planets and stars were just lights in sky revolving around the earth.” It was “a universe made for us.” And “there was only one man who envisioned an infinitely grand cosmos.” The above is simply false. All the men I've listed above were alive while Bruno was busy....
By ant's purported standards, what does the fact that Copernicus died more than half a century before Bruno was burnt at the stake by the Pope say about ant's credibility? It is completely shot. Ant is indifferent to facts, but only interested in dogma. By contrast, Giordano Bruno was a martyr for the scientific world view and a champion for truth.

I have yet to see what the "mistakes" the fundamentalists allege were committed by Neil Degrasse Tyson in Cosmos actually were. Was it because Cosmos implies that the Bible is not reliable as scientific fact? Which other astronomers in the 1500s expressed theories of the real scale of the universe with the same clarity as Bruno?
ant wrote:
As to a thought police discouraging freedom of thought? Well, tell that to the prestigious universities at the time and their intellectual students. It would be interesting bringing them all back from the dead to ask them - "Did anyone keep you from thinking freely while you were at university?"

The rampant ignorance and wanton disinformation in this comment from ant about ancient universities as supposed bastions of free thought is beyond belief. Universities in the Counter Reformation period when Bruno was murdered were dominated by dogma, and actively suppressed free inquiry, in league with the Inquisition. That is why Copernicus did not receive his published copy of his magnificent scientific work On the Revolutions of the Heavenly Spheres until his dying day in 1543. That is why Galileo was instructed not to speak by the church in the 1600s.

Bruno was a pioneer of free thought. That is why there is a concerted black propaganda campaign by apologists for the Catholic Church to tarnish his image, in order to attempt to restore the shackles of religious social control.

A More Perfect Heaven, a recent biography of Copernicus by Dava Sobel, is an excellent book to read about the social climate surrounding the emergence of modern astronomy. It shows that ant's myth of freedom of thought is farcical.


_________________
http://rtulip.net


Fri Mar 14, 2014 5:49 pm
Profile Email WWW
Years of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membership
One with Books

Silver Contributor

Joined: Dec 2010
Posts: 2751
Thanks: 2298
Thanked: 731 times in 626 posts
Gender: None specified

Post Re: Cosmos ----why again?
http://www.patheos.com/blogs/christophe ... ays-later/

Quote:
In retrospect, I believe the views they expressed were correct – that the segment gives the impression, as New York magazine said, of “painting organized religion as an irrelevant and intellectually discredited means of understanding factual reality” and as part of the show’s larger “pushback against faith’s encroachments on the intellectual terrain of science.” But I still should have waited until seeing the show myself before writing about it because some of my assumptions were, unsurprisingly, proved wrong.


“painting organized religion as an irrelevant and intellectually discredited means of understanding factual reality”

yes, organised religion really helped me understand factual reality with doctrines like...

original sin
eternal damnation
biblical inerrancy (the word of God, no less)
etc etc

“pushback against faith’s encroachments on the intellectual terrain of science.”

yes, when Jesus returns He is going to encroach on the intellectual terrain of science like you wouldn't believe, you unbeliever you :-D

God is so powerful that His believers feel the need to protect the minds of the innocent from the deceptive power of Satan who could easily overpower them and make them believe wrong stuff, like science :lol:

curiouser and curiouser indeed.



The following user would like to thank youkrst for this post:
Robert Tulip
Fri Mar 14, 2014 10:26 pm
Profile Email
User avatar
Years of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membership
pets endangered by possible book avalanche

Diamond Contributor

Joined: Aug 2009
Posts: 4898
Location: Florida
Thanks: 177
Thanked: 344 times in 294 posts
Gender: Male
Country: United States (us)

Post Re: Cosmos ----why again?
A Bruno fan shows how COSMOS misrepresented his story in the same grand tradition Carl Sagan did of Hypathia


_________________
n=Infinity
Sum n = -1/12
n=1

where n are natural numbers.


The following user would like to thank stahrwe for this post:
youkrst
Sat Mar 15, 2014 10:10 am
Profile Email
User avatar
Years of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membership
pets endangered by possible book avalanche

Diamond Contributor

Joined: Aug 2009
Posts: 4898
Location: Florida
Thanks: 177
Thanked: 344 times in 294 posts
Gender: Male
Country: United States (us)

Post Re: Cosmos ----why again?
I asked some Group members for guidance to information about Bruno. I got the following as one reference. The author of the article is not a member of the Group.

Quote:
His [Bruno's] place in a documentary [COSMOS] ostensibly about science is inexplicable. Actual scientists worked on similar ideas, but only Bruno is called out in [the] ten-minute long segment.

The question is: why?

The narration begins by telling us that in “1599 everyone knew the sun, planets and stars were just lights in sky revolving around the earth.” It was “a universe made for us.” And “there was only one man who envisioned an infinitely grand cosmos.”

We’re barely seconds into this [b] farrago[/] and we have our first LIE.

“Everyone” knew the earth was the center of the universe?

Wow, who’s going to tell Copernicus? Kepler? Stigliola? Diggs? Maestlin? Rothmann? Brahe? All of them believed in models of the cosmos that were not considered orthodox, and lived at the time of Bruno. All of them escaped the fire, and indeed weren’t even pursued by the Inquisition. Right here we have the major lie at the heart of modern anti-religious scientific propaganda: the war between faith and science.

We’re supposed to just assume this ignorant backwards world of the past hates smart people. Tyson himself says it matter-of-factly: “How was [Bruno] spending New Year’s Eve [in 1599]? In prison, of course.”

Of course! Because that’s what the Church does to smart people! Bad church! Bad!
- See more at: http://www.patheos.com/blogs/godandthem ... EkDFD.dpuf


_________________
n=Infinity
Sum n = -1/12
n=1

where n are natural numbers.


The following user would like to thank stahrwe for this post:
youkrst
Sat Mar 15, 2014 11:43 am
Profile Email
User avatar
Years of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membership
Book Discussion Leader
BookTalk.org Moderator
Silver Contributor

Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 2039
Location: Cincinnati, OH
Thanks: 74
Thanked: 768 times in 594 posts
Gender: Male
Country: United States (us)

 Re: Cosmos ----why again?
Regarding "seeing".....

Quote:
Gravitational waves unmask universe just after Big Bang
Astronomers have detected the earliest echoes of the Big Bang, confirming a decades-old hypothesis that describes the universe’s ultrafast expansion during its first moments. The findings provide researchers with the first direct measurement of conditions at nearly the instant that cosmic expansion began, and may have far-reaching implications for physicists’ understanding of general relativity, quantum mechanics and the origin of the universe.

...Gravitational ripples induced by inflation would have set up swirling patterns in the polarization. Up until now, this “B-mode polarization” has been exceedingly difficult to detect. But a detection of B-mode polarization would strengthen the case for inflation: Primordial gravitational waves are the only known source. That’s just what a group of researchers did, the team announced today. Led by John Kovac, an astronomer at the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics, the researchers measured subtle variations in the polarization of the cosmic microwave background using the BICEP2 telescope.

Christopher Crockett 3/17/14
https://www.sciencenews.org/article/gra ... r-big-bang



The following user would like to thank LanDroid for this post:
geo
Mon Mar 17, 2014 10:22 pm
Profile
User avatar
Years of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membership
pets endangered by possible book avalanche

BookTalk.org Moderator
Platinum Contributor

Joined: Aug 2008
Posts: 4345
Location: NC
Thanks: 1837
Thanked: 1909 times in 1429 posts
Gender: Male

Post Re: Cosmos ----why again?
Thanks, Landroid, for posting that article.

I've got Cosmos' second episode on my TiVo. Probably will watch it tonight.


_________________
-Geo
Question everything


Tue Mar 18, 2014 8:37 am
Profile
User avatar
Years of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membership
pets endangered by possible book avalanche

Diamond Contributor

Joined: Aug 2009
Posts: 4898
Location: Florida
Thanks: 177
Thanked: 344 times in 294 posts
Gender: Male
Country: United States (us)

Post Re: Cosmos ----why again?
I happen to support the idea of inflation but if you look carefully at the news story just released about the gravity waves you will find it is another of the long list of non-discovery discovery stories. We get about one per month where some discovery is hyped as fact only to discover in the fine print that it isn't really proven yet.

This is one among many reasons why I think this production of COSMOS is premature. There are too many things brewing at the moment. Of course, NDT is ripe for celebrity status so if he is to be the new Sagan, he can't afford to wait.

As for episode #2, NDT overcomplicated the domestication of wolves. I think humans were smatter than NDT allows and would have accomplished it much faster and easier and in a much more obvious way than NDT posits.

The episode hurries by the most vexing question for evolution - how did DNA originate both in terms of structure and operation?
They had a nice CGA about it but I guess they needed to spend time with NDT wandering about the cavernous and seemingly mostly empty Hall of Extinction tomb so they couldn't afford to explain DNA's origin.

I turned the episode off when the went to Titan. Exobiology should be left to Star Trek and other Sci-Fi shows, not a cartoon producer homage to NDT.


_________________
n=Infinity
Sum n = -1/12
n=1

where n are natural numbers.


The following user would like to thank stahrwe for this post:
ant
Tue Mar 18, 2014 9:13 am
Profile Email
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 111 posts ] • Topic evaluate: Evaluations: 4, 3.00 on the average.Evaluations: 4, 3.00 on the average.Evaluations: 4, 3.00 on the average.Evaluations: 4, 3.00 on the average.Evaluations: 4, 3.00 on the average.  Go to page Previous  1 ... 4, 5, 6, 7, 8  Next



Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:



Site Resources 
HELPFUL INFO:
Forum Rules & Tips
Frequently Asked Questions
BBCode Explained
Author Interview Transcripts
Be a Book Discussion Leader!

IDEAS FOR WHAT TO READ:
Bestsellers
Book Awards
• Book Reviews
• Online Books
• Team Picks
Newspaper Book Sections

WHERE TO BUY BOOKS:
• Great resource pages are coming!

BEHIND THE BOOKS:
• Great resource pages are coming!

PROMOTE YOUR BOOK!
Advertise on BookTalk.org
How To Promote Your Book





BookTalk.org is a thriving book discussion forum, online reading group or book club. We read and talk about both fiction and non-fiction books as a community. Our forums are open to anyone in the world. While discussing books is our passion we also have active forums for talking about poetry, short stories, writing and authors. Our general discussion forum section includes forums for discussing science, religion, philosophy, politics, history, current events, arts, entertainment and more. We hope you join us!


Navigation 
MAIN NAVIGATION

HOMEFORUMSOUR BOOKSAUTHOR INTERVIEWSADVERTISELINKSFAQDONATETERMS OF USEPRIVACY POLICYSITEMAP

OTHER PAGES WORTH EXPLORING
Banned Book ListOnline Reading GroupTop 10 Atheism Books

Copyright © BookTalk.org 2002-2019. All rights reserved.
Display Pagerank