Jump to content


Photo

Carl Sagan's Cosmos Free on Hulu

  • Please log in to reply
29 replies to this topic

#1 DrBoring

DrBoring

    Sputnik

  • *****
  • Posts: 30
  • Joined: 04 Apr 2013
  • Loc: Western Ohio

Posted 12 April 2013 - 09:59 AM

I just wanted to let everyone know that you can watch the entire Cosmos series from 1980, for free, on hulu. Here is a direct link: http://www.hulu.com/#!cosmos

I really love this series. A few things that I think are exceptionally cool: you see Dr. Sagan discuss Voyager in 1980, then insert an interview from 1990 -- and he is talking about the present time of Voyager exiting our solar system! Super cool!

Also, I love the stories where the early astronomers did a lot with equipment that would be surpassed by the current gear an amature astronomer has available.

Enjoy!

#2 StarWars

StarWars

    Mr. Postmaster Man

  • *****
  • Posts: 26617
  • Joined: 26 Nov 2003
  • Loc: At the Gym >Spudtastic<

Posted 14 April 2013 - 03:14 PM



I like the music from Vangelis.... :bow: :jump: :jump:

http://en.wikipedia....Personal_Voyage

#3 deSitter

deSitter

    Still in Old School

  • -----
  • Posts: 6879
  • Joined: 09 Dec 2004

Posted 14 April 2013 - 09:22 PM

A pitiful caricature of science. Many factual errors, particularly about relativity. The moonings of a self-styled priest in his own made-up church. For the real deal, go to YouTube and look up the 13-part "Ascent of Man". The long and miserable decline into today's Alice in Thunderland world of pseudo-science began with Sagan and his mysticism.

-drl

#4 herrointment

herrointment

    Aurora

  • *****
  • Posts: 4619
  • Joined: 12 Mar 2011
  • Loc: North of Hwy. 64

Posted 16 April 2013 - 05:15 PM

That's one strong opinion. Have fun with it.

#5 Jason H.

Jason H.

    Apollo

  • -----
  • Posts: 1444
  • Joined: 23 Nov 2007
  • Loc: Central Florida

Posted 18 April 2013 - 08:55 AM

A pitiful caricature of science. Many factual errors, particularly about relativity. The moonings of a self-styled priest in his own made-up church. For the real deal, go to YouTube and look up the 13-part "Ascent of Man". The long and miserable decline into today's Alice in Thunderland world of pseudo-science began with Sagan and his mysticism.
-drl


If you are serious, perhaps you should try posting your specific "mysticism" criticisms here

http://en.wikipedia....Personal_Voyage

or here

http://en.wikipedia....wiki/Carl_Sagan

to see if they survive scrutiny.

Jason H.

#6 deSitter

deSitter

    Still in Old School

  • -----
  • Posts: 6879
  • Joined: 09 Dec 2004

Posted 18 April 2013 - 11:38 AM

I was there in real time, saw it happen. Knew what was coming. Thankfully it seems to be ending.

"Billions and billions", errors, triumphalism, the cult of the scientist, it all began in the 70s and Sagan was one of the main culprits. What is "Contact" but a form of cosmic mysticism, a replacement religion for the ones he couldn't abide? Of course it's not possible to really understand the depth to which science sank without knowing the details of what it was like before. There's a direct line from Sagan, who I will admit was at least reasonable, to Kaku, a full-fledged loon. The cults of Hawking, Witten, etc. would be unthinkable without the original Sagan cult.

All one need do is to read the sane and correct arguments of Disney and Cooperstock, understand that these extremely important ideas are routinely ignored, see how limited budgets are wasted on dark matter and various cosmological stupidities, and you will see that science suffered a grievous blow in the last 40 years.

-drl

#7 ChipAtNight

ChipAtNight

    Vostok 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 162
  • Joined: 09 Jan 2008
  • Loc: N.C. (Love the Blue Ridge)

Posted 18 April 2013 - 01:39 PM

Sorry to disagree and I’m sure you will flame me for that. But Mr. Sagan sure provided me and many others insight into a world we knew little about and lite a flame that is still burning bright for many.

#8 rockethead26

rockethead26

    Gemini

  • *****
  • Posts: 3347
  • Joined: 21 Oct 2009
  • Loc: Arizona, USA

Posted 18 April 2013 - 03:40 PM

Sorry to disagree and I’m sure you will flame me for that. But Mr. Sagan sure provided me and many others insight into a world we knew little about and lite a flame that is still burning bright for many.


Exactly!

#9 buddyjesus

buddyjesus

    Vanguard

  • *****
  • Posts: 2236
  • Joined: 07 Jul 2010
  • Loc: Davison, Michigan

Posted 18 April 2013 - 04:24 PM

I wouldn't consider contact a scientific statement at all. It is called fiction for a reason.

#10 dickbill

dickbill

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 937
  • Joined: 30 Sep 2008

Posted 18 April 2013 - 05:04 PM

I didn't like much Carl Sagan either but i enjoyed the movie 'Contact'. Many ideas were brilliant in this movie.

By some coincidence, i watched my first episode of Dr Kaku, who depicted a near future of high tech nanotechnologies at the service of a highly educated population, the same day i had a very difficult day in a high school, where i was substituting Maths. Many students requested calculators for the most basic operation, including one who couldn't compute 2X3, yes two times three. As i didn't believe the student, i thought she was making fun of me and i kind of became angry a bit. Unfortunatly she was very serious and i gave up after that, distributing the calculators to everybody.
Of course that was an extreme case and most high school students can compute 2X3 without an 'electronic aide' but it made me think. What kind of world was Kaku talking about? a superelite of super whealthy than can go into space in private rocket ships while the unducated mass watches from the couch potatoe ? what was the real state of the scientific and technical skills in America ?
Is NASA a sort of show up for an elite of scientist hiding a less brilliant reality and promotes a false sense of technological superiority?
Sure, the US is still very advanced in technology but the gap between the skilled and the non-skilled has widened, in my opinion.
In a previous thread i argued that one reason for the success of Apollo, was the fact that being technologicaly skilled was main stream culturaly in America. The case of my father in law added to that. He came from a stock of german immigrants where using tools and basic level of engeenering for the youngs were part of the family tradition. That perhaps translated into an equivalent level of a bachelor in mechanic, electricity or other engeenering skills, by age 15. You could not have had Apollo without that massive main stream support.

Every time i say that i get the flak and people get angry. 'It's non-sense and unpatriotic' to say that, basicaly. But i've seem charts that indeed suggest that the general level in math skills has strongly decreased in the US. Obviously, at my level i can not have a global picture, but we can still ask questions, right, or is it really unpatriotic?

#11 buddyjesus

buddyjesus

    Vanguard

  • *****
  • Posts: 2236
  • Joined: 07 Jul 2010
  • Loc: Davison, Michigan

Posted 18 April 2013 - 05:35 PM

can't blame scientists for what non-scientists think as non-scientists will believe whatever they want and use the jargon to substantiate thier pseudoscience. check out this short vid.

http://www.youtube.c...B2AFD3EED841947

I think your confusing flowery or poetic language for some sort of religion when he expresses his wonder for the universe. Just baseless if that is the case.

I watched The Ascent of Man and was taken back by the use of darwinism to support his racist beliefs against native people. Pseudoscience has been around long before Sagan, and yet I have not seen you substantiate your views. Could you expound?

#12 dickbill

dickbill

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 937
  • Joined: 30 Sep 2008

Posted 18 April 2013 - 06:12 PM

...I watched The Ascent of Man and was taken back by the use of darwinism to support his racist beliefs against native people...


That was in the other thread, but i watched it too. Specifically episode 9-13, ' The ascent of man'
http://www.youtube.c...h?v=lOtQFRv_si4

I didn't hear anything derogatory against natives. Can you point the exact time in the video?

#13 buddyjesus

buddyjesus

    Vanguard

  • *****
  • Posts: 2236
  • Joined: 07 Jul 2010
  • Loc: Davison, Michigan

Posted 18 April 2013 - 08:40 PM

39:30 is where he starts his racist rant calling native children bush babies, lower primates, inferior due to having a different hemoglobin gene. Actually using his logic he considered chimps closer to being human than the "bush babies" as their hemaglobin was more closely related. He did so directly after discussing natives.

http://www.youtube.c...h?v=lOtQFRv_si4

#14 llanitedave

llanitedave

    Humble Megalomaniac

  • *****
  • Posts: 22380
  • Joined: 25 Sep 2005
  • Loc: Amargosa Valley, NV, USA

Posted 18 April 2013 - 09:54 PM

You can't be serious.

Do you know how to use Google? You really should do that before you start rants of your own.

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

Galagos /&#609;&#601;&#712;le&#618;&#609;o&#650;z/, also known as bushbabies, bush babies or nagapies (meaning "little night monkeys" in Afrikaans), are small, nocturnal[2] primates native to continental Africa, and make up the family Galagidae (also sometimes called Galagonidae). They are sometimes included as a subfamily within the Lorisidae or Loridae.

According to some accounts, the name "bush baby" comes from either the animal's cries or appearance. The South African name nagapie comes from the fact they are almost exclusively seen at night.

Galagos are said to have evolved 40–50 million years ago from slow-moving prosimians that could not compete with larger, faster primates in Africa. The competition was much less at night, so they evolved into the bush babies they are today.[3]

In both variety and abundance, the bush babies are the one most successful primitive primates in Africa, according to the African Wildlife Foundation.[


Please, please think -- and study -- before you jump to hostile conclusions.

And no, he did not do so "directly after discussing natives". The clip preceding he was discussing stereochemistry and the concept of isomers.

#15 buddyjesus

buddyjesus

    Vanguard

  • *****
  • Posts: 2236
  • Joined: 07 Jul 2010
  • Loc: Davison, Michigan

Posted 19 April 2013 - 12:35 AM

haha. sorry for all the fuss! I just took it for the context that it is a known racist slur. He could have used a more clear example, but I do take blame.

#16 buddyjesus

buddyjesus

    Vanguard

  • *****
  • Posts: 2236
  • Joined: 07 Jul 2010
  • Loc: Davison, Michigan

Posted 19 April 2013 - 12:40 AM

maybe he should have called them by their real name Galagos and there wouldn't have been a mix up. Would have been much more clear. I knew what they were, but not by their nickname. I was also not the only one on youtube to have taken it the way I did(I am not in a bubble here.)

#17 dickbill

dickbill

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 937
  • Joined: 30 Sep 2008

Posted 19 April 2013 - 08:34 AM

Are you sure it wasn't an attack against George W Bush?
who was depicted so many times as a, ahem, 'lower primate' ?

#18 Jarad

Jarad

    Fly Me to the Moon

  • *****
  • Posts: 6386
  • Joined: 28 Apr 2003
  • Loc: Atlanta, GA

Posted 19 April 2013 - 09:59 AM

Let's leave this as an honest mistake and not move into politics, too.

:4

Jarad

#19 Jason H.

Jason H.

    Apollo

  • -----
  • Posts: 1444
  • Joined: 23 Nov 2007
  • Loc: Central Florida

Posted 20 April 2013 - 10:02 PM

I was there in real time, saw it happen. Knew what was coming.


It seems from what you said that you prophesied and then fulfilled it.

I was there too! Carl even got my mother (the ultimate non-scientist) into the subject. So much so even that she came with me to watch Carl Sagan do a talk with Isaac Asimov at Carnegie Hall in New York City. Should one accuse Isaac Asimov of the same cult building damage for his speculations in the book Extraterrestrial Civilizations, filled with hypotheses and speculations that would now be considered inaccurate (but the guy was the most prolific science-writing popularizer on Earth, and wrote some good science fiction too!)

Carl was a popularizer, plain and simple. Of course there were inaccuracies IN THE '70's!!! Please, some people even believed in Velikovsky's World's in Collision back then! (and please note Carl's countering that as a planetary scientist in the wikipedia article!) And he was countering mysticism and astrology and other belief systems of the time. The things people believed just after the hippie age were necessarily counteracted with stylized popularization, the audience was child-like. And nobody even knew for sure if exoplanets existed yet, and it was even still possible (to a few) that a Steady-State universe existed (back then.) Give the guy a break, he's dead, from another era, would one bash Copernicus for not knowing about the Oort cloud? Besides, if you read the link I provided, you'll see that numerous updates have been made to the series to reflect changes in knowledge, and one series version was significantly edited down to allow for commercials (My mother and I watched the un-cut original series on PBS, and it's what got me even more interested in the subject, and look at what happened to me :) the staunchest advocate of the scientific method); maybe you were looking at the original series only (with outdated material), or the commercial cut ones? That would really skew ones viewpoint.

Jason H.

#20 llanitedave

llanitedave

    Humble Megalomaniac

  • *****
  • Posts: 22380
  • Joined: 25 Sep 2005
  • Loc: Amargosa Valley, NV, USA

Posted 20 April 2013 - 10:23 PM

That's a very good point. I don't know how much control Sagan had over the editing and final presentation of the episodes, but it's almost certain they did not air as they were originally conceived and written.

I've been on both sides of that equation. I was once a cub newspaper reporter, and I would often see the stories that I submitted hacked and slashed by the editor so that by the time they were published I sometimes wasn't sure that they were even about the same topic! I've also been interviewed and quoted in a couple of magazines. I should say, "misquoted". Drastically so. Should I blame the original reporters who spoke to me, or their editors? I'll never know, there are so many layers of chaos in that type of production.

#21 IDONTSEEIT

IDONTSEEIT

    Viking 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 994
  • Joined: 04 May 2003
  • Loc: NYC

Posted 20 April 2013 - 10:35 PM

~snip~Carl was a popularizer, plain and simple.~snip~


This^^^

I believe a modern day version of Carl Sagan is Dr. Neil deGrasse Tyson. He gets criticized a lot for "dumbing down science", but I think he makes science interesting.

When we watch a program with him either narrating or teaching/lecturing, my kids stay glued to the TV and then, after the show, I get swamped with questions which I either encourage them to look up themselves, especially If I don't know the answer :scratchhead: :whistle:, and/or we look it up together.

Most other programs, even science related ones, don't usually result in as many questions nor generate the interest that programs with Dr. Tyson in them do, and as far as I'm concerned I think that's a good thing for Dr. Tyson and his fans.

And to stay on topic, I like(d) Carl Sagan too......

#22 deSitter

deSitter

    Still in Old School

  • -----
  • Posts: 6879
  • Joined: 09 Dec 2004

Posted 21 April 2013 - 03:42 AM

I did see the uncut original on PBS. It was awful. I remember being astonished at how the culture of science had changed just since 1973 when the "Ascent of Man" was released (which I saw in the late 70s). The show was about Sagan and his personal opinions and slanted viewpoint. The overly emotional tone and cloying music and bad special effects and misplaced grandiosity were sickening. The real cosmos, the one of mystery and stark realities, seemed missing.

I could not quite understand my reaction at the time - there was little on the TV in the way of science at all, and much less on astronomy in particular, so I had anticipated this series with great relish. But, I had been a subscriber to Sky and Telescope and had noticed a steep decline in editorial content. The space program had come to a grinding halt. The society around me had turned hedonist/narcissist, something I wanted no part of. "Cosmos" simply confirmed what I already suspected, that we were moving away from rationality and toward celebrity and self-involvement.

-drl

I was there in real time, saw it happen. Knew what was coming.


It seems from what you said that you prophesied and then fulfilled it.

I was there too! Carl even got my mother (the ultimate non-scientist) into the subject. So much so even that she came with me to watch Carl Sagan do a talk with Isaac Asimov at Carnegie Hall in New York City. Should one accuse Isaac Asimov of the same cult building damage for his speculations in the book Extraterrestrial Civilizations, filled with hypotheses and speculations that would now be considered inaccurate (but the guy was the most prolific science-writing popularizer on Earth, and wrote some good science fiction too!)

Carl was a popularizer, plain and simple. Of course there were inaccuracies IN THE '70's!!! Please, some people even believed in Velikovsky's World's in Collision back then! (and please note Carl's countering that as a planetary scientist in the wikipedia article!) And he was countering mysticism and astrology and other belief systems of the time. The things people believed just after the hippie age were necessarily counteracted with stylized popularization, the audience was child-like. And nobody even knew for sure if exoplanets existed yet, and it was even still possible (to a few) that a Steady-State universe existed (back then.) Give the guy a break, he's dead, from another era, would one bash Copernicus for not knowing about the Oort cloud? Besides, if you read the link I provided, you'll see that numerous updates have been made to the series to reflect changes in knowledge, and one series version was significantly edited down to allow for commercials (My mother and I watched the un-cut original series on PBS, and it's what got me even more interested in the subject, and look at what happened to me :) the staunchest advocate of the scientific method); maybe you were looking at the original series only (with outdated material), or the commercial cut ones? That would really skew ones viewpoint.

Jason H.



#23 llanitedave

llanitedave

    Humble Megalomaniac

  • *****
  • Posts: 22380
  • Joined: 25 Sep 2005
  • Loc: Amargosa Valley, NV, USA

Posted 21 April 2013 - 08:47 PM

~snip~Carl was a popularizer, plain and simple.~snip~


This^^^

I believe a modern day version of Carl Sagan is Dr. Neil deGrasse Tyson. He gets criticized a lot for "dumbing down science", but I think he makes science interesting.

When we watch a program with him either narrating or teaching/lecturing, my kids stay glued to the TV and then, after the show, I get swamped with questions which I either encourage them to look up themselves, especially If I don't know the answer :scratchhead: :whistle:, and/or we look it up together.

Most other programs, even science related ones, don't usually result in as many questions nor generate the interest that programs with Dr. Tyson in them do, and as far as I'm concerned I think that's a good thing for Dr. Tyson and his fans.

And to stay on topic, I like(d) Carl Sagan too......


I like Dr. Tyson quite a bit. My main complaint about him is that he isn't visible enough. He needs a better publicist.

#24 Jason H.

Jason H.

    Apollo

  • -----
  • Posts: 1444
  • Joined: 23 Nov 2007
  • Loc: Central Florida

Posted 21 April 2013 - 10:01 PM

[/quote]

I like Dr. Tyson quite a bit. My main complaint about him is that he isn't visible enough. He needs a better publicist. [/quote]

I once looked into having him stop in to our Astronomical Society (when I was the Publicity Chairperson and member of that organization) and I found out that he was to be visiting the region during Harmony Dark Sky Festival to do a talk at that town's high school, so I tried to contact him, and his publicist got back to me, they wanted $20,000 plus travel and accommodations (too steep for our miniscule budget for a 1.5 hour meeting.)

Maybe that's always the case, economics limiting the opportunities?

Jason H.

#25 llanitedave

llanitedave

    Humble Megalomaniac

  • *****
  • Posts: 22380
  • Joined: 25 Sep 2005
  • Loc: Amargosa Valley, NV, USA

Posted 21 April 2013 - 10:03 PM

OK, then he needs a cheaper publicist.






Cloudy Nights LLC
Cloudy Nights Sponsor: Astronomics