i know we all had a deserved bitch out at seth mcfarlane
 

and family guy is awful now (and he probably knows it)

but he's funded the new cosmos series with neil degrasse tyson and it kicks fucking ass. well done seth, all that money you made from racism and transphobia is being put to good use you rich fuck. i still need some of it tho.

this is exactly the kind of series we need. i hope it rams home the science because those creationist fucks have to be ridiculed as they fade into an embarrassing memory of past ignorance.

they need to be loudly shamed and humiliated for all the damage they've done and their violent propagation of ignorance and backwardness. dont ask me to be humble unless you've grown up suffering their bullshit and oppression.

anyway, you can get torrents of cosmos, its only on american tv atm i think.

Fox and National Geographic Channel in USA.

good thing you guys mentioned this because i thought they were just showing the old vintage shit.

but here it is:

http://www.hulu.com/cosmos-a-spacetime-odyssey

Yeah, it's made it here to Australia too.

We get the National Geographic channel (on 'cable' of course) and so far I've caught Episode 11 - which focuses on the idea of immortality.

Apart from the sexy physics/cosmic stuff, it delved into some history too. (The world of ancient Mesopotamia for example).

Neil deGrasse Tyson is the MAN. I hope to catch the whole series..

And it's good to see some quality TV associated with Seth McFarlane for a change. All we seem to get here from him is Family Guy and those stupid roasts he hosts.... (hey that rhymes)

+ points for mentioning lucretius.

and good stuff on darwin.

r.e. teachers/politicians from my country would not approve.

HE funded that? wow. I barely watch television....but Ima try and DVR some episodes.

Have you actually watched this show yet? Its about 1% in depth science, 15% cool graphics, and weirdly like 27% poorly animated reenactments of historical scientists... Really, they should have just reran the original Cosmos or even just ran some old Nova ScienceNOW (this episode was about floatingslowly) with Neil in em, WAY better IMO..

Yeah... I suppose they could up the actual science quotient somewhat. The original series with Carl Sagan seemed a lot more in depth.

But it's made for a wide mainstream audience and so it's packaged as something that is easily digested by most folks out there.

I'm just grateful for something like this. At least it's not another 'Monster Moves' or "Hardcore Fishmongers" type of show which seems to be all I see on Nat. Geo....

going to see NGT in Sept, he's a good speaker, a lot of u tubes out there on him, he's a good spokesman for real science vs "creationism" etc

he is indeed a great mind, but in the more recent years he has become very counter-productive to his own cause. Initially Tyson seemed more in the neutral corner, but he has been provoked by ignorant fundamentalists, folks who wouldn't be persuaded by him in any kind of way anyway so... Meanwhile if his aim to convince skeptics and religious folks to be more scientifically inclined,he could use to be less confrontational and more informative. By framing all of his more recent discussions on a kind of "us vs them" approach he is alienating the very folks he is interested in converting. If he is just going to preach to the scientist choir for an Amen he's not really informing anybody new of anything. Tyson is a very well respected and liked scientist at a national level, his voice would be very persuasive to many folks who are not yet convinced about certain aspects of science, yet he is hurting his own cause by seemingly intentionally alienating the very people he supposedly is trying to get at..

As a note, I have always liked Neil, but I liked the funnier, campier, nerdier Neil of a few years ago who simply focused on the science itself in a fun way rather then the Neil with an Agenda who seems to be almost myopically focused on attacking people who disagree with his perspective yet those folks will never become convinced to embrace his perspective if it comes from an attack rather than rapprochement.