Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 59 (9094 total)
5 online now:
Newest Member: d3r31nz1g3
Post Volume: Total: 901,515 Year: 12,627/6,534 Month: 2,120/1,988 Week: 241/460 Day: 3/91 Hour: 1/2


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Cosmos with Neil DeGrass Tyson
Diomedes
Member
Posts: 979
From: Central Florida, USA
Joined: 09-13-2013


(1)
Message 7 of 206 (721725)
03-11-2014 3:43 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by RAZD
03-11-2014 9:16 AM


That's surely going to rile up the GOP anti-science crowd.
Ironically, the network responsible for this series is none other than Fox itself. So if the GOP get's their panties in a bunch regarding the content of the new Cosmos, are they going to boycott Fox? Wouldn't that be hilarious.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by RAZD, posted 03-11-2014 9:16 AM RAZD has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 8 by RAZD, posted 03-11-2014 5:12 PM Diomedes has not replied
 Message 106 by onifre, posted 04-02-2014 10:21 PM Diomedes has not replied

  
Diomedes
Member
Posts: 979
From: Central Florida, USA
Joined: 09-13-2013


Message 72 of 206 (722338)
03-20-2014 12:40 PM
Reply to: Message 71 by NoNukes
03-20-2014 11:37 AM


Re: Colbert Report
But I imagine there will be increasing pressure on Fox to do something about this show if Tyson continues to tell the truth without hedging.
Seth MacFarlane (who is one of the producers of Cosmos) was once asked about what it was like working for Fox, where Family Guy is aired.
He actually said there is a huge disconnect between the Fox News divisions and the entertainment division. They basically function as totally separate entities, never interacting with one another. So my guess is that the guys making Cosmos do not need to answer to the folks on the news side of the aisle.
In a funny way, the company is actually gaining on both sides. They produce a show that stirs controversy and then they report on the very controversy they created. Profit on both sides.
And that is ultimately what Rupert Murdoch is all about. Folks that worked for the guy indicated he had little political sway one way or the other, despite what most may think. He is a businessman. If he realized tomorrow that he could generate more revenue turning Fox News to the left of the aisle, he would do it without a moments hesitation.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 71 by NoNukes, posted 03-20-2014 11:37 AM NoNukes has not replied

  
Diomedes
Member
Posts: 979
From: Central Florida, USA
Joined: 09-13-2013


Message 86 of 206 (722705)
03-24-2014 11:57 AM
Reply to: Message 85 by RAZD
03-24-2014 8:00 AM


Re: More whining from the pseudos
Sadly he did.
Arrgh! Tyson should have known better. I am sure it was just a slip of the tongue, but still.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 85 by RAZD, posted 03-24-2014 8:00 AM RAZD has seen this message but not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 87 by New Cat's Eye, posted 03-24-2014 12:04 PM Diomedes has not replied

  
Diomedes
Member
Posts: 979
From: Central Florida, USA
Joined: 09-13-2013


(1)
Message 90 of 206 (722732)
03-24-2014 3:17 PM
Reply to: Message 89 by NoNukes
03-24-2014 1:21 PM


Re: Comment about the first episode
Burning someone alive because they are a dirtbag? Placing someone under house arrest for the rest of their lives after you force them to recant science under threat of death is cool? That's your effing defense?
They are not any type of defense. The first one is actually just attacking the individual versus attacking the position. A typical creationist ploy. (If we tell children they came from monkeys, won't they act like them?)
I read somewhere that some creationists are complaining about the lack of airtime they are allowed on the show. Then maybe they should produce something tangible that can be reviewed and debated. But it never happens. They spend their time poking holes in other people's theories (usually leveraging science they don't understand) rather than actually creating and defining experiments that can confirm the veracity of their viewpoints.
The Templeton fund has made available grants to creationists for advancing their intelligent design or creationist theories. Yet not a single individual has produced any viable experiment or scientific concept. The only recourse they have is doing what Michael Behe did which is try to redefine science so they can pigeon hole their views into it. Which would also open the floodgates for allowing things like astrology and pyramid power into the fray.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 89 by NoNukes, posted 03-24-2014 1:21 PM NoNukes has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 91 by NoNukes, posted 03-25-2014 9:29 AM Diomedes has not replied

  
Diomedes
Member
Posts: 979
From: Central Florida, USA
Joined: 09-13-2013


Message 93 of 206 (723056)
03-26-2014 9:58 AM
Reply to: Message 92 by NoNukes
03-26-2014 8:47 AM


Re: Isaac Newton
Well, the show had plenty of Newton (in cartoon form) and Kepler got his mention
The latest episode was mostly around Newton and Halley, of Halley's Comet fame. Was quite interesting.
Tyson does lots more treading on Creationist toes in this show with no apology whatsoever.
He also coyly takes jabs at astrology and other similar nonsense. The Halley episode talked about how his discoveries and predictions about the motions of comets pretty much debunked centuries worth of idiotic superstitions and the attempts by con artists to use people's ignorance and fear to peddle their garbage.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 92 by NoNukes, posted 03-26-2014 8:47 AM NoNukes has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2022 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.1
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2022