NDT would have to use that incredible space/time vessel of the imagination to explore such a tiny segment of micro-time.

On the other hand, comprehensive coverage of all the ways that religion has hindered science over the centuries would take several episodes.

there was a monk named Georg Cantor who, among many other contributions, gave us a way to measure the "size" of infinities (cardinality) and constructed the first fractal (the Cantor set). Of course, that's math, not science, and the fact he was a monk is pretty much inconsequential.

I like that NdGT mentions how some of the earlier scientists were religious, but they didn't let their religion cloud their scientific judgment (eg, the episode on comets). Kind of a slap in the face to today's fundies, dontcha think?

for his scientific heresy, which later turned out to be true.

Math's science, no?

Math > Science

But that's just me.

Science without Math is Religion.

I still didn't pass that exam.

a mere psychologist.

Let's not forget Gregor Mendel, although he did fudge some of his data. Plus, many of the early naturalists, including Darwin, justified their study of nature as a way to understand the Creator. When J. B. S. Haldane was asked what he'd learned about God from studying nature, he answered that God had "an inordinate fondness for beetles."

[link:|

How about storks, leprechauns, and please, more devil talk. Always good graphics.

Buddhist, Hindu, Jewish, Muslim, or Wiccan, etc. etc. how do we know the Christian story is valid compared to any one of these?

Part of the Catholic Church is teaching the new cosmology which incorporates scientific evolution as part of the word of God and strongly agrees with the science in cosmos. So do conservative Christians want to start arguing with Catholics ?

It's "his" show. They have Pat Robertson

and that's not even counting the cable channels.

They get plenty of air time. It's not rational peoples' fault they don't get 'popular' support.

In their own special hell!
This is a show about SCIENCE, not their damn mythology!

creation myths from many religions and cultures

Campbell is pretty good at pointing out the myriad other myths. The Christo-fascists on the hard right think only one is the 'true' story.

class. screw them and take your medieval hocus pocus with you.

Something else they are welcome to do that. I do not like what they say on Fox News so I simply to not choose to view it. I also do not care much for professional sports so I rarely watch that.

Remind them that they are not in charge of the content of TV, movies, books and many other parts of our lives. Their egos have become massive. If they were only as concerned for the welfare of little children, the elderly, the mentally ill and the disadvantaged, they could do some really good work.

I'm surprised at the posters who feel this sort of grandstanding, publicity stunt should be taken seriously. The best thing is to ignore these publicity hounds and their ludicrous demands. The few brief mentions of things like creation myths are more than enough recognition of the christo-taliban/carnival barker position for a show who's focus is on presenting scientific facts as we know them.

Having spent decades playing radio and TV bumper cars swerving around Bott Radio Network and the Hour of Power and the 700 Club and all the other outlets these money-grubbers use as digital shears to fleece their flocks, I know personally that it can be done.

that some day, they might get their wish.

While Neil is my new tv boyfriend (sorry, Steve Colbert), his show is WAY over-produced.

It's more of a populist show, so the fact that the actual science is 'dumbed' down a little to make it more attractive to the masses is a good thing IMHO.

At a time when science and rationality itself is under attack, NdGT is a breath of fresh air. Frankly, I think it captures the tone of the original fairly well. Carl Sagan was, after all, a populist when it came to science, in that he wanted to attract more people to it.

I am watching the same episode of Sagan's Cosmos immediately after watching Tyson's. Sagan's episode is 15 minutes longer, and, while he does some speculation, Sagan does not spend so much time with it. Also the interactive special effects (such as the ship of the imagination) takes much less time in Sagan's version. Finally Sagan talks more about the actual science and technology showing models and doing a masterful job explaining it. Finally the continued homages to Sagan and his interaction with Tyson is a little creepy (I will give a pass with the first episode). Tyson should be telling viewers to just go watch the original show - it holds up very well. In 30 years we might be watching it when the next Cosmos is produced instead of Tyson's.

I think Tyson's audience must be middle school, while Sagan was high school. What I want to see from Tyson's show, what I expected to see were the amazing things that have been found and seen since Sagan's time. Shoemaker-Levy, Rovers, Human Genome, Tiktaalik, dinosaur/bird transitional fossils, Higgs, etc.

Maybe I should demand that more science should be implemented on those crappy Sunday morning church worship shows.

...but really, I don't mean that...those idiot, regressive fucktards should just STFU and GTFO...

Every Sunday in their sermons!

See how simple that would be?

To me - it's like Charlie Daniels going to Jay Z and demanding he start performing "The South's Gonna Do It Again" at all of his performances.

Not gonna happen.

Nope.

He's not gonna do it.

deGrasse needs to tell them to go hang and get bent.

He's a damned scientist. The creation story has been told for over 2,000 years. If you haven't sold it by now . . . Hang it up.

But are against:

the Fairness Doctrine that would keep right wing bias on talk radio in check

The ACA contraceptives provision that Hobby Lobby is so against

Duck Dynasty having a gay or atheist cast member in theory "for balance"

what entitled narcissists.

the guy went to town on "Creationists". Look up Sunday's episode, Tyson explains how long it takes light to travel through the Universe and how that right there kills the legitimacy of any "creation science".

They can hem and haw all they want, their mythology will never be taught by Tyson as an alternative to science.

Creationism is in his cross-hairs!

How many science channels do they have? One or two? I would say the fundamentalists have enough programming. Do they not watch it? Leave Cosmos alone!

Three reasons.

1. Science is difficult.
And Evolution is one of the most difficult sciences to understand.

Creationism is easy.
"Gawd dun it!"

2. Fear.
Science says we could all be wiped out, and there isn't a damn thing would could do about it.
Look at the dinosaurs.

Religion says "Gawd made the whole world just for me!"

3. Money.
Ken Ham didn't have his "museum" built, and then let the public in for free.
He charges a hefty fee for the "privilege" of being preached to.