Comments 1 - 40 of 144       Last »     Search these comments

1   marcus   2014 Mar 9, 12:17pm  

I agree with this:

That last statement by Seitz is ironic on two fronts. First, the show is condemning religion for overstepping its bounds by commenting on science, yet “Cosmos” is also overstepping its expertise by commenting on religion.

Conitinuing...

Furthermore, in condemning the Catholic Church, it’s also condemning a religion that doesn’t insist that the creation story in Genesis be viewed as a scientific textbook; a religion that has no issue with the theory of evolution provided that God is not taken out of the equation; a religion that gave us scientist Father George Lamaitre who is considered the Father of the Big Bang Theory and was lauded by Albert Einstein; a religion that produced so many priest-scientists that there are 35 craters on the moon named after them.

The church's connection to and involvement with higher learning over the past thousand years is far from simple, and definitely not one sided with regards to holding back science versus supporting it.

But even if you disagree with this, lets hope Tyson finds a way to do the show and make it about science while minimizing the degree to which he injects his personal opinions and emotions regarding religion.

2   HydroCabron   2014 Mar 9, 12:34pm  

The Catholic Church only admitted Galileo was correct in 1992.

I'm good with attacking the Catholic Church.

3   marcus   2014 Mar 9, 12:38pm  

If your goal is to help fundamentalist idiots realize the flaws in their belifs, what do you think is better ? Providing them with facts and interesting science? OR attacking their beliefs ?

The answer is a no brainer. Attacking their beliefs only makes them dig in and defend them more. It has to be their idea, their realization that their beliefs might be in disagreement with reality and the truth.

4   marcus   2014 Mar 9, 12:46pm  

Iosef V HydroCabron says

The Catholic Church only admitted Galileo was correct in 1992

That's total BS cheapshot. That's maybe when some official statement was made, but the church is made up of it's members, none of which have taken issue with gallieo for centuries. That is, other than the major flaws in Galileo's understanding of the universe that we now know are wrong.

I respect you, but I also know you might be too arrogant for growth in this particular area, since religion elicits such strong emotions in people. None the less, if you decide to open your mind a little,
http://www.catholic.com/tracts/the-galileo-controversy

Obviously this is the official Catholic position. But it does include some facts and nuance you might find interesting.

In any case, my point wasn't in opposition to attacking the church as much as it was that I don't think it has a place in a good science program. Let people learn without pushing their buttons. If you want them to open their minds, attacking them or their beliefs doesn't help open that door.

(I know, I don't practice that enough here. But it's understood that we are debating here. Sometimes with fools that won't open their minds anyway. )

5   turtledove   2014 Mar 9, 1:04pm  

I would think that the right would be more concerned with the irony that Obama would promote Cosmos after cutting NASA's budget.

6   New Renter   2014 Mar 9, 1:21pm  

marcus says

If you want them to open their minds, attacking them or their beliefs doesn't help open that door.

You were saying?

7   Dan8267   2014 Mar 9, 1:28pm  

thunderlips11 says

cosmos-may-get-science-right-but-it-gets-church-history-wrong/

"May get science right"? That tells you all you need to know about that article. Cosmos, both the original and the reboot, did and will get the science right, as well as the history.

The indisputable fact is that the Christian faith is founded on torture, rape, murder, and two thousand years of atrocities. The only reason most Christians today aren't as bad as Islamic terror organizations is because of us "non-believer" types keeping the power of this vile religion in check.

Remember Hypatia. Her murder is all you need to know about the rise of all Christian churches. You can't have a good organization that is built on such an evil foundation.

8   Dan8267   2014 Mar 9, 1:29pm  

turtledove says

I would think that the right would be more concerned with the irony that Obama would promote Cosmos after cutting NASA's budget.

You say irony. I say hypocrisy.

9   Y   2014 Mar 9, 2:24pm  

Tyson is wrong. That much shit cant be built in 6000 years..

10   clambo   2014 Mar 9, 5:02pm  

Tyson made two errors on the show. One was the same that they have at the Hayden Planetarium that he was in charge of.

Explosions in space make no sound, but on Cosmos they do.
There is nothing to transmit it sound in a vacuum. Why did Arthur C. Clarke and Stanley Kubrick remember this but this "scientist" Tyson not?

The other was mentioning that burning coal "imperils our civilization."
Sorry, there is no scientific evidence that this is correct. It's an uninformed opinion that there is scientific proof of global warming caused by man, further it's debatable that a warmer earth "imperils civilization." What, it's gonna be a little more unbearably hot in equatorial Africa or Saudi Arabia in August? Neither are civiilzed.

11   marcus   2014 Mar 10, 12:04am  

clambo says

" What, it's gonna be a little more unbearably hot in equatorial Africa or Saudi Arabia in August? Neither are civiilzed.

You're right that it's not proven beyond doubt. But the idea, which has merit (in terms of risk) is that we get in to a feedback loop that causes continuing warming and change. This includes more extreme weather, changing coastlines, and major disruption to sea life.

The idea isn't that we know what will happen. It's that we know the risk is high and increasing.

By the definition of imperil, it means risk of harm, not guaranteed harm. This is a reasonable statement, based on what a very high percentage of scientists think.

12   Dan8267   2014 Mar 10, 12:22am  

clambo says

Explosions in space make no sound, but on Cosmos they do.

There is nothing to transmit it sound in a vacuum. Why did Arthur C. Clarke and Stanley Kubrick remember this but this "scientist" Tyson not?

If you really believe that Tyson doesn't know that sound does not travel in a vacuum, you are way off your rocker. Furthermore, who said the sound represented in the show was traveling through space? The sun is damn noisy, but you have to put your ear to the surface to hear it. It is quite reasonable for a show to depict the sound waves that travel through a star as they would be heard if interpreted by a human brain with or without frequency shifting.

clambo says

The other was mentioning that burning coal "imperils our civilization."

Sorry, there is no scientific evidence that this is correct. It's an uninformed opinion that there is scientific proof of global warming caused by man, further it's debatable that a warmer earth "imperils civilization."

And now we get to the reason why you lied about Tyson thinking that sound travels through a vacuum. You wanted to poison the well. Discredit Tyson on one thing and dumb people will think he must be wrong on everything and therefore we can pollute the Earth all we want without consequence.

You are wrong.

From the Union of Concerned Scientists

Coal plants are the nation’s top source of carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions, the primary cause of global warming.

Burning coal is also a leading cause of smog, acid rain, and toxic air pollution. Some emissions can be significantly reduced with readily available pollution controls, but most U.S. coal plants have not installed these technologies.

Coal plants are the United States’ leading source of SO2 pollution, which takes a major toll on public health, including by contributing to the formation of small acidic particulates that can penetrate into human lungs and be absorbed by the bloodstream. SO2 also causes acid rain, which damages crops, forests, and soils, and acidifies lakes and streams.

NOx pollution causes ground level ozone, or smog, which can burn lung tissue, exacerbate asthma, and make people more susceptible to chronic respiratory diseases.

Particulate matter (also referred to as soot or fly ash) can cause chronic bronchitis, aggravated asthma, and premature death, as well as haze obstructing visibility.

Coal plants are responsible for more than half of the U.S. human-caused emissions of mercury, a toxic heavy metal that causes brain damage and heart problems. Just 1/70th of a teaspoon of mercury deposited on a 25-acre lake can make the fish unsafe to eat. A typical uncontrolled coal plants emits approximately 170 pounds of mercury each year.

[A]rsenic, which will cause cancer in one out of 100 people who drink water containing 50 parts per billion.

"No scientific evidence that" global warming is caused by man or endangers us, my ass. At this point in time, anyone who makes such ludicrous statements does not get a say in how we deal with climate change and pollution. They do not get a vote because they do not give a shit about the problem and are willing to tell absurd lies just to keep society from dealing with this threat.

13   Heraclitusstudent   2014 Mar 10, 2:06am  

marcus says

That's total BS cheapshot. That's maybe when some official statement was made, but the church is made up of it's members, none of which have taken issue with gallieo for centuries. That is, other than the major flaws in Galileo's understanding of the universe that we now know are wrong.

Well, sorry but.... the dogmas of the church are not decided by what its members believe. The pope is infallible. What he says is basically dictated by God. If you dismiss it as "official rubber-stamping", you're not clear on what the Church is and how it works.

14   Vicente   2014 Mar 10, 2:20am  

Hilarious. Was there this kind of indignation when the original came out? I watched it as a kid. Rewatched it as adult a few months ago and was struck by how casually he dismissed religion, which I hadn't remembered at all.

15   HydroCabron   2014 Mar 10, 3:30am  

turtledove says

I would think that the right would be more concerned with the irony that Obama would promote Cosmos after cutting NASA's budget.

They should be pleased that Obama has saved taxpayer money.

16   HydroCabron   2014 Mar 10, 3:32am  

Vicente says

Hilarious. Was there this kind of indignation when the original came out? I watched it as a kid. Rewatched it as adult a few months ago and was struck by how casually he dismissed religion, which I hadn't remembered at all.

More sensitivity now. The right wing has been whipped into an imaginary state of victimhood which would make an Assistant Professor of Latina Oppression proud.

17   Dan8267   2014 Mar 10, 4:21am  

marcus says

Iosef V HydroCabron says

The Catholic Church only admitted Galileo was correct in 1992

That's total BS cheapshot. That's maybe when some official statement was made, but the church is made up of it's members, none of which have taken issue with gallieo for centuries.

Because Galileo was dead and hasn't been a threat for centuries. The Catholic Church still had a problem with science.

"It's OK to study the universe and where it began. But we should not inquire into the beginning itself because that was the moment of creation and the work of God." - Pope John Paul II

Whenever the truth shows that the Church is full of shit and should have no power, the Church opposes that truth and whoever spreads it. The Church's opposition is as violent and cruel as it can get away with being in whatever society it currently operates.

18   HydroCabron   2014 Mar 10, 4:27am  

Heraclitusstudent says

Well, sorry but.... the dogmas of the church are not decided by what its members believe. The pope is infallible. What he says is basically dictated by God. If you dismiss it as "official rubber-stamping", you're not clear on what the Church is and how it works.

The Catholics weave a novel interpretation of the No True Scotsman fallacy.

Instead of a particular Scotsman who is declared to not be a Scotsman, it's just the country. So all Scotsmen are a-okay, it's just Scotland as a whole which is not Scottish.

Catholic after Catholic: "I have left the Church." But they still follow every bit of news of and often attend mass or tithe. Andrew Sullivan is a classic case.

19   Dan8267   2014 Mar 10, 4:29am  

Iosef V HydroCabron says

They should be pleased that Obama has saved taxpayer money.

If you want to save taxpayers money, keep NASA and get rid of 90% of the military.

20   MAGA   2014 Mar 10, 4:59am  

I think Realtor's need this as well.

http://www.youtube.com/embed/5JDmzNMyUU8

21   Shaman   2014 Mar 10, 6:14am  

I think you would have to perform an exorcism first!

22   Strategist   2014 Mar 10, 9:23am  

marcus says

If your goal is to help fundamentalist idiots realize the flaws in their belifs, what do you think is better ? Providing them with facts and interesting science? OR attacking their beliefs ?

The answer is a no brainer. Attacking their beliefs only makes them dig in and defend them more. It has to be their idea, their realization that their beliefs might be in disagreement with reality and the truth.

They have been presented with facts science for ever to no avail. Some people are just not capable of understanding facts.

23   marcus   2014 Mar 10, 2:14pm  

Heraclitusstudent says

If you dismiss it as "official rubber-stamping", you're not clear on what the Church is and how it works.

And you didn't read this. http://www.catholic.com/tracts/the-galileo-controversy

Because if you had you would know that the pope did not officially weigh in on Gallileo (as gods representative).

There are plenty of practicing Catholics, even a majority who aren't particularly tied to the Pope's "infallibility" that is if they even believe in it.

24   Vicente   2014 Mar 10, 4:26pm  

Just got done watching it. Was impressed with Tyson and how he handled the opening, the closing, and the bit about Bruno.

Not so impressed with the zippy tour of the solar system. Perhaps I've seen that too many times. Maybe it's Brannon Braga and modern approach with lots of fast zooms and spiffy graphics, dunno that part left me cold.

Definitely will watch next episodes, because after all what else is there to watch right now as far as documentaries and science?

25   MisdemeanorRebel   2014 Mar 17, 9:56am  

marcus says

And you didn't read this. http://www.catholic.com/tracts/the-galileo-controversy

Galileo had wealthy and powerful friends that prevented him from being executed by the Inquisition - but not from having his writings prohibited on the Index, nor being confined to house arrest.

Giordano Bruno did NOT have powerful friends, and his reading of Lucretius the Epicurean, also in the Index of Restricted Books - and Lou's ideas about infinite universes and atoms being the building blocks of all matter - and so was executed.

26   Heraclitusstudent   2014 Mar 17, 11:23am  

marcus says

There are plenty of practicing Catholics, even a majority who aren't particularly tied to the Pope's "infallibility" that is if they even believe in it.

The source of the idea of pope "infallibility" is the same as the source of many other catholic ideas. So this leaves me with 2 questions:

1 - Isn't it hypocritical to belong in an organization when you don't believe its teachings?

2 - Isn't it a terrible lack of intellectual honesty to pick and choose what ideas you believe, even when they obviously come from the same place?

27   Vicente   2014 Mar 31, 4:01am  

Episode 4 was great. Tyson took time to slam the Young Earthers by noting if the Universe is only 6,000-ish years old we'd only see stars out to about the Crab Nebula.

28   HydroCabron   2014 Mar 31, 4:07am  

Vicente says

if the Universe is only 6,000-ish years old we'd only see stars out to about the Crab Nebula

UFRL, they have a counter-argument that distance measurements aren't reliable beyond parallax capabilities, which is a few hundred light years.

No idea why they don't figure that stars which have no detectable parallax must be pretty gosh-darned far away, but such is the mind of the creationist.

(At least they don't believe in BenghaziCare!)

29   HydroCabron   2014 Mar 31, 4:14am  

Heraclitusstudent says

Isn't it a terrible lack of intellectual honesty to pick and choose what ideas you believe, even when they obviously come from the same place?

You don't know how this works, do you?

Any ideas from "infallible" texts and authorities which are embarrassing or uncomfortable to adhere to are discarded with a shrug: "That's allegorical", or "They don't really mean that - must be a misprint."

Another alternative, when the embarrassing Catholic is not the Pope, is to declare that the so-and-so in question is not a "real Catholic."

This comes up again and again in discussions with conservatives. No conservative, or conservative policy, can ever fail, because nothing that fails is truly conservative.

Google "no true Scotsman" or see Indigenous's posts on all the wars started by "liberals", including G.W. Bush, who ceased to be conservative when he started a failed war.

30   New Renter   2014 Mar 31, 4:14am  

Iosef V HydroCabron says

Vicente says

if the Universe is only 6,000-ish years old we'd only see stars out to about the Crab Nebula

UFRL, they have a counter-argument that distance measurements aren't reliable beyond parallax capabilities, which is a few hundred light years.

No idea why they don't figure that stars which have no detectable parallax must be pretty gosh-darned far away, but such is the mind of the creationist.

(At least they don't believe in BenghaziCare!)

Put a telescope in a higher solar orbit and that parallax argument goes away.

31   HydroCabron   2014 Mar 31, 4:20am  

New Renter says

Put a telescope in a higher solar orbit and that parallax argument goes away.

I believe that secular parallax - interesting terminology - using the motion of the sun as it orbits the galactic center - will blast even larger holes in that one (4 A.U. per year of motion), but if these types could be convinced, they would have given in by now.

They're like anti-vax fanatics on hormones.

32   John Bailo   2014 Mar 31, 4:23am  

Neil deGrasse Tyson is the new Prince of Middlebrows.

Turning science into The Science for people who think research means watching a series on PBS and reading a glossy coffee table book by Dawkins, Hawking and a computer regenerated Sagan.

33   HydroCabron   2014 Mar 31, 4:28am  

John Bailo says

Neil deGrasse Tyson is the new Prince of Middlebrows.

Turning science into The Science for people who think research means watching a series on PBS and reading a glossy coffee table book by Dawkins, Hawking and a computer regenerated Sagan.

Pretty much.

I have been saying this for years about Sagan: Goes on television, slowly enunciates facts which should be common knowledge, and is hailed as a great scientist and educator.

It's not that these guys are bad at what they do; it's the embarrassingly low level of scientific education among even PhD's in non-scientific fields. I have had bosses who don't know that seasons are due to axial tilt, and co-workers who are surprised to learn that a year is not 365 days on the nose. I have repeatedly tried to explain to my wife that lunar/solar eclipses occur at full or new moon, respectively. Holy living fuck, people are stupid about astronomy!

Remember that e-mail forward about Mars growing as large in the sky as the moon?

34   Vicente   2014 Mar 31, 4:43am  

John Bailo says

Turning science into The Science for people who think research means watching a series on PBS

Educating and engaging people with science is never a waste of time. Except for "highbrows" like yourself I suppose.

Real scientists are like alchemists I suppose, they keep it all to themselves.

35   New Renter   2014 Mar 31, 11:13am  

Iosef V HydroCabron says

Holy living fuck, people are stupid about astronomy!

What's really depressing are the people who believe intersellar trarvel is around the corner and lush class M planets are everywhere just waiting for humans to arrive.

36   Robert Sproul   2014 Mar 31, 11:22am  

marcus says

Providing them with facts and interesting science? OR attacking their beliefs ?

'Facts don’t necessarily have the power to change our minds. In fact, quite the opposite. In a series of studies in 2005 and 2006, researchers at the University of Michigan found that when misinformed people, particularly political partisans, were exposed to corrected facts in news stories, they rarely changed their minds. In fact, they often became even more strongly set in their beliefs. Facts, they found, were not curing misinformation. Like an underpowered antibiotic, facts could actually make misinformation even stronger. - http://www.boston.com/bostonglobe/ideas/articles/2010/07/11/how_facts_backfire/#sthash.vtvrqouO.dpuf

37   Reality   2014 Mar 31, 12:00pm  

It's funny to see how the usual praisers and worshippers of big government sponsorship of science (and sponsorship of everything else) is missing the detail that even Giordano Bruno was a Dominican Friar; i.e. a minor Catholic Church office holder, in between his numerous short appointments as professors at Catholic Church founded (and run) universities.

I'm not saying that without the Church those universities and leisurely research/philosophizing positions could never have existed, but they would have been much harder to come by in the 1500's than in the 1900's simply because the economic productivity was much lower back then. There was simply less "surplus" food to go around and feed "thinkers" 400+ years earlier. The market place is much more capable of supporting thinkers and their research today than it was 500 years ago.

When you have a political monopoly running big science, of course weird narcissistic theologies like earth and human being the center of the universe, and global/universal warming being due to human activity would shackle people's minds and even seek corporal punishment for dissenters.

38   marcus   2014 Mar 31, 12:08pm  

I've enjoyed cosmos, although I missed this last episode.

It doesn't bother me exactly, in fact I've found the part of the show that reflects their antireligion agenda interesting.

But honestly, I did not expect it to have as much of an agenda with regards to religion as it does.

39   Vicente   2014 Mar 31, 12:38pm  

Robert Sproul says

'Facts don’t necessarily have the power to change our minds

As a young kid who watched the Sagan originals, it was fantastic. Look there are lots of kids out there who can benefit from this, I wouldn't expect it to change the thinking of the people who run this place:

http://creationmuseum.org/

40   Reality   2014 Mar 31, 5:13pm  

Iosef V HydroCabron says

It's not that these guys are bad at what they do; it's the embarrassingly low level of scientific education among even PhD's in non-scientific fields. I have had bosses who don't know that seasons are due to axial tilt, and co-workers who are surprised to learn that a year is not 365 days on the nose. I have repeatedly tried to explain to my wife that lunar/solar eclipses occur at full or new moon, respectively. Holy living fuck, people are stupid about astronomy!

Very true, but why should that be a surprise? Even around here we have people with small knowledge base pontificating everyday on subjects that they don't understand and are not capable of analyzing. OTOH, would you prefer marrying a woman who knows why lunar/solar eclipses take place or would you prefer the girl who knows how to . . . make you happy? LOL.

Comments 1 - 40 of 144       Last »     Search these comments

Please register to comment:

api   best comments   contact   latest images   memes   one year ago   random   suggestions