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 Sat Jul 20, 2019 4:51 am





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 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ... 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 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 Cosmos ----why again?
Is there a big demand for a remake of Cosmos? Maybe, but Tyson says the remake is needed due to improved special effects.
Quote:
Interviewer: How is the new ‘Cosmos’ different from the original?

NDT “Visual effects have improved since then. While the original ‘Cosmos’ was quite stunning in its day, given what our expectations now are, of every viewer who is a consumer of media..."


Cosmos reboot or Tyson promotion?


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

where n are natural numbers.


Last edited by stahrwe on Fri Mar 07, 2014 4:15 pm, edited 1 time in total.



Fri Mar 07, 2014 7:11 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?
Stahrwe wrote:
Tyson says the remake is needed due to improved special effects.


No, Stahrwe, he didn't say that.

Hulk reboot or Norton promotion?

It makes me sick how they only re-made the hulk to promote Edward Norton's career.


_________________
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:
Cattleman
Fri Mar 07, 2014 10:29 am
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 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?
Notice the question actually asked by the interviewer is about how the new version is different from the old; he did not ask the question in the thread title. Here's an answer to the question "why again", stated by Carl Sagan's wife Ann Druyan. Tyson's answer in the final sentence is excellent.

http://channel.nationalgeographic.com/c ... sse-tyson/

Tyson also answers that question more directly in this interview
Quote:
David Freeman: Cosmologically speaking, what's changed in the 34 years since the original "Cosmos?"

Neil deGrasse Tyson: Just about everything.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/03/0 ... 90408.html

This is a good interview. David Freeman presses Neil on whether he believes in God and it's obvious he has learned lessons that we've seen on BookTalk.
Quote:
DF: Do you want to talk about religion now?

NT: I'm here for you.

DF: Do you believe in god?

NT: I presume you've pre-specified which god you're asking about?

DF: Define god as you would.

NT: You're the one who's asking the question. So pick a god and ask me if I believe in that god.

DF: The Judeo-Christian god.

NT: (Well....I'll let you read it at the link above.)

The following points are tasty.
Quote:
DF: Can science and religion be reconciled?

NT: As religion is now practiced and science is now practiced, there is no intersection between the two. That is for certain. And it's not for want of trying. Over the centuries, many people--theologians as well scientists--have tried to explore points of intersection. And anytime anyone has declared that harmony has risen up, it is the consequence of religion acquiescing to scientific discovery. In every single case.

Quote:
DF: What's one interesting thing viewers will learn from "Cosmos?"

NT: We tell the stories of scientists in different cultures and different eras whose life work was fought against by the culture or the governments that controlled their lives or by social mores that interfered with their exploration of the truth. Some gave their lives for having found truth and in that world you learn that there are science martyrs. They're people who cared more about the truth than their own relationship to their homeland.

This will be a superb series for anyone interested in science, especially those who never saw the original. It begins this Sunday evening 3/9 on Fox and National Geographic channels. Spread the word.

http://www.cosmosontv.com/
http://channel.nationalgeographic.com/c ... e-odyssey/



The following user would like to thank LanDroid for this post:
Cattleman, Interbane
Fri Mar 07, 2014 11:36 am
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?
so excited for the new cosmos!

so much new territory, and new angles to look at the old territory!


_________________
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.


The following user would like to thank johnson1010 for this post:
Cattleman, Chris OConnor, Rajesh
Fri Mar 07, 2014 5:48 pm
Profile
User avatar
Years of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membership
Book Aficionado

BookTalk.org Moderator
Silver Contributor 2

Joined: Oct 2010
Posts: 1761
Thanks: 154
Thanked: 729 times in 547 posts
Gender: Male

Post Re: Cosmos ----why again?
I assume it's not going to be officially posted online? Hopefully someone will put it up on YouTube or something.



The following user would like to thank Dexter for this post:
Rajesh
Fri Mar 07, 2014 6:17 pm
Profile Email
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?
Quote:
This is a good interview. David Freeman presses Neil on whether he believes in God and it's obvious he has learned lessons that we've seen on BookTalk.


Quote:
DF: Do you want to talk about religion now?

NT: I'm here for you.

DF: Do you believe in god?

NT: I presume you've pre-specified which god you're asking about?

DF: Define god as you would.

NT: You're the one who's asking the question. So pick a god and ask me if I believe in that god.

DF: The Judeo-Christian god.

NT: (Well....I'll let you read it at the link above.)



:lol: :up: :lol: classic!



The following user would like to thank youkrst for this post:
Cattleman, Rajesh
Fri Mar 07, 2014 7:59 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
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?
And as NDT points out in the interview, not "Why again" but "why adding on?"

Why adding on, because things have certainly changed over these last few decades and there's a lot more to know!

Even if there was no new info from then to now, cosmos didn't say everything there was to know at that time. They could do a thousand cosmos series just trying to lay out what was known when Sagan did it.

Also, have a listen to NDT's voice in that calendar video clip in the link. Butter.


_________________
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.


The following user would like to thank johnson1010 for this post:
Cattleman
Sat Mar 08, 2014 10:03 am
Profile
User avatar
Years of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membership
Knows the secrets of the internetz


Joined: Jun 2012
Posts: 1025
Location: Texas
Thanks: 455
Thanked: 455 times in 360 posts
Gender: Male
Country: United States (us)

 Re: Cosmos ----why again?
While I feel starwhe's question has been adequately answered, I cannot let this topic go without adding my own 2 cents worth:

The original "Cosmos" was a masterpiece in its own right. But to say that an updated version is not needed, or at least, desirable, is like saying "Copernicus told us the Earth revolves around the Sun, why go further?" :? Or "Newton explained by things fall 'down,' do we need more?" :? New discoveries are being made each day, and need to be discussed and brought forth. As for Tyson, remember he was the personal choice of Ann Druyan, Carl Sagan's widow and co-producer of the new series. :) He (Tyson) in my opinion, is a worthy successor to Sagan and the great populizer of science. I am thrilled that he will be our guide (I refuse to call him a 'host') in this series. :wink:

If you are uncertain about watching the new Cosmos, give it a try (JI know I will). If you don't like it, well, that is what the channel selector and off-on switch are for.

Sagan rocks. :clap2: So does Tyson. :clap:


_________________
Love what you do, and do what you love. Don't listen to anyone else who tells you not to do it. -Ray Bradbury

Always listen to experts. They'll tell you what can't be done, and why. Then do it. -Robert A. Heinlein


The following user would like to thank Cattleman for this post:
Chris OConnor, Taylor
Sat Mar 08, 2014 5:23 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?
Interbane, he did in fact say that. As a matter of fact I quoted NDT in my opening. And, to bolster my position, NDT was interviewed on Fox & Friends this morning and 99% of NDT's comments and 100% of his enthusiasm was about the special effects. The interviewer even asked him what was new in this production compared with the Sagan effort. His answer, the budget allowed cool special effects instead of him just standing and talking.


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

where n are natural numbers.


Sun Mar 09, 2014 11:57 am
Profile Email
User avatar
Years of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membership
Knows the secrets of the internetz


Joined: Jun 2012
Posts: 1025
Location: Texas
Thanks: 455
Thanked: 455 times in 360 posts
Gender: Male
Country: United States (us)

Post Re: Cosmos ----why again?
I will reserve further comment until I have seen at least the first episode.


_________________
Love what you do, and do what you love. Don't listen to anyone else who tells you not to do it. -Ray Bradbury

Always listen to experts. They'll tell you what can't be done, and why. Then do it. -Robert A. Heinlein


Sun Mar 09, 2014 1:31 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?
Stahrwe wrote:
Interbane, he did in fact say "...the remake is needed due to improved special effects.."


No, he didn't. He said the special effects are one difference between the new and the old. Landroid gets closer to his answer of why a new Cosmos might be needed.


_________________
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


Sun Mar 09, 2014 2:56 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?
Interbane,

Quote:
In the last three decades, researchers have discovered more than 1,000 planets outside of the Earth's solar system and an ocean under Jupiter's moon Europa. Robots have explored the surface of Mars, and the Hubble Space Telescope has beamed back humbling views of the deep universe. But Tyson says the science of "Cosmos" doesn't really need to be upgraded, because the show was never intended to be a bleeding-edge science documentary.

"What you remembered most about 'Cosmos' is how it affected you not only intellectually, but emotionally," Tyson said. By navigating broad questions about the history of Earth, the origin of life and the nature of the universe, Carl Sagan erased boundaries between evolutionary biology, geology and astrophysics, and he helped his audience realize science is everywhere, Tyson explained.

"When you realize that, and then you come to embrace it, your interaction with the storytelling is something completely different," Tyson told Space.com.

Tyson was emphatic that this core mission remains the same in the new iteration of the series. Still, the new show gives the retro graphics a CGI facelift, and ditches the historical re-enactors with pasted-on sideburns in favor of animated figures voiced by the likes of "Star Trek" franchise legend Patrick Stewart and executive producer Seth MacFarlane.

In the very first episode, MacFarlane, creator of "Family Guy," lends a spirited Italian accent to a Giordano Bruno, a philosopher who was burned at the stake in 1600 for (correctly) proposing that the sun was one of a countless number of stars throughout the universe.*

Is it all about the special effects?


A couple of years ago a show called Curiousity debuted with a Sore hen Hawking hosted episode about the origin of the universe in which false information was presented regarding Pope John XXI See Logic Works By Barbara. The church stood against the strictures of ancient science which opposed the concept of planetary motion and the multiplicity of world's. This Isn't my opinion, check out this book Medieval Cosmology.

Cattleman says he will reserve judgement until after watching the first episode. Well, it deals with Giordano Bruno and will falsely present that he was branded a heretic and burned at the stake for his views on cosmology. That is not true. Duhem's research clearly shows that the Church did not reject Bruno' s idea. What got Bruno into trouble was his involvement with occult practices, his denial of the divinity of Jesus Christ, and his denial of the Trinity. Let's see if NDT mentions those charges in the show. Vatican regrets burning of Bruno* if he does I suppose he is attempting to be fair. If he doesn't he is promoting falsehood.

*I deliberately picked an article which includes the cosmological angle of the Bruno trial to show that even it brings in the true heretical aspects of Bruno.


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

where n are natural numbers.


The following user would like to thank stahrwe for this post:
Cattleman
Sun Mar 09, 2014 6:03 pm
Profile Email
User avatar
Years of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membership
Knows the secrets of the internetz


Joined: Jun 2012
Posts: 1025
Location: Texas
Thanks: 455
Thanked: 455 times in 360 posts
Gender: Male
Country: United States (us)

Post Re: Cosmos ----why again?
I have just finished watching the initial episode of Cosmos. The segment on Giordino Bruno was only a portion of the show, and yes, his denial of the Trinity and of the divinity of Jesus Christ was mentioned. As and he did these horrible things, I guess it was okay to burn him at the stake. But I digress. Overall I liked the program, though there were too many commercial interruptions for my taste. Hopefully, future episodes will have fewer commericals. I especially liked Tyson's mentioning of his day with Sagan when he was a high school student.


_________________
Love what you do, and do what you love. Don't listen to anyone else who tells you not to do it. -Ray Bradbury

Always listen to experts. They'll tell you what can't be done, and why. Then do it. -Robert A. Heinlein


Sun Mar 09, 2014 9:10 pm
Profile Email
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?
Quote:
The tricky case of Giordano Bruno

One of the goals of "Cosmos" is to introduce the world to "heroes of science." This would be the premiere episode's one and only massive failure. That's because someone at "Cosmos" decided to trot out the case of a 16th-century Italian philosopher named Giordano Bruno as its first hero.

Unfortunately for "Cosmos," Bruno wasn't terribly heroic. And he wasn't a scientist at all.

A religious philosopher living in the tense years following the schism between Catholicism and the new faith of Protestantism, Bruno managed to irritate and complicate the beliefs of just about everyone by preaching a cosmology of an infinite universe in which the Sun is just a star, around which the Earth moves.

Here's the thing: Even "Cosmos" points out that Bruno had no scientific basis for his theories. "His vision of the cosmos was a lucky guess," says Tyson. So why is the long-dead philosopher important enough to rate hero status? That would be because "Cosmos" takes his case as one of "martyrdom."

What "Cosmos" does not point out to its audiences that the Catholic Church didn't really care about Bruno's views on the Earth moving around the Sun. His crimes -- the ones for which he was executed -- were theological. Several actual scientists in this period happily investigated the ideas of Copernicus' theories without running into trouble. Even Galileo only got in trouble when he published books that directly mocked the Church's adherence to the Earth being at the center.

Why does this matter?

So what if Giordano Bruno wasn't a scientist and wasn't executed for science? There are three big reasons why this does, in fact, matter and why it hurts "Cosmos" to get it wrong.

1. To borrow one of Tyson's famous quotes, the good thing about science is that it's true whether or not you believe in it. The same goes for history. Getting the history of science wrong hurts science itself. Why believe the science if other parts of the show are inaccurate?

2. Making Bruno into a martyr for science basically makes 100 years of historical research useless. The idea of Giordano Bruno as a scientific hero only originated in the 19th century, when he was championed by several historians. Since then, most have classified him as a philosopher sharing dangerous ideas in a dangerous time.

3. It's an unstated goal of "Cosmos" to champion science and scientific reasoning over superstition and religious dogmatism. But you're not going to win over anyone by vilifying religion in the face of science. Add in Bruno flying into space in an overtly crucifixion stance almost seems like giving religion the finger. You don't win arguments that way, "Cosmos."


http://blog.zap2it.com/frominsidethebox ... world.html


Snap!

This is a fine example of why I don't waste time with television and have not for 17 years now.
Yes - I haven't owned a TV in a little over 17 years.

The fact that special effects have advanced considerably since Cosmos and Sagan is nothing to get excited about really.
I can do without the glitter and yet another celebrity scientist cashing in and sneaking through the backdoor the warfare thesis "religion is very bad and science is very good."
I prefer substance over glitter.

Certain individuals who support unabashedly the indoctrination of young minds to a materialist/atheistic worldview are probably drooling all over their televisions.

I see nothing wrong with jumpstarting our interest in the cosmos. It's certainly a better use of time than watching Dancing with the Stars.
But to start off by promoting certain historical figures as martyrs of science is truly a dishonest and embarrassing way to kick off this long awaited extravaganza.

If anyone is interested in a REAL scientific exploration of the cosmos, I highly recommend Dr Alex Filipenkko's brilliant and awe inspiring course "Understanding the Universe" presented by "The Great Courses" It's worth every penny spent on it.

http://www.thegreatcourses.com/tgc/cour ... x?cid=1810

Dr Filipenkko has a true love and passion for the cosmos, untainted by personal beliefs or revisionist history tidbits thrown in for motive.

Too bad Tyson went along with adding utter bullshit to an otherwise fascinating subject.
Not surprising, really. But I'm sure certain people are loving it.



Mon Mar 10, 2014 12:06 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 membership
BookTalk.org Hall of Fame

Gold Contributor

Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 5766
Location: Canberra
Thanks: 2235
Thanked: 2170 times in 1640 posts
Gender: Male
Country: Australia (au)

Post Re: Cosmos ----why again?
ant wrote:
Quote:
Giordano Bruno wasn't a scientist and wasn't executed for science

http://blog.zap2it.com/frominsidethebox ... world.html

Typical ant defence of the inquisition. I suppose next ant will be telling us to believe in the immaculate conception of the Blessed Virgin Mary and to vilify those who mock this idiot fascist dogma.

It is good to see Cosmos recognise Giordano Bruno as a great hero of modernisation and reason. Since the Pope burnt him to death in 1600, largely to intimidate those who understood heliocentric science and the impossibility of miracles, Bruno has been celebrated as a great scientific thinker.

Religious obscurantists vilify Bruno because he did not compromise in his devotion to reason. His intuition about the scale of the universe was correct, resting on coherent extrapolation from observation.

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


_________________
http://rtulip.net


Mon Mar 10, 2014 1:42 am
Profile Email WWW
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 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ... 8  Next



Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 8 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