

Cosmos Will Get a Sequel - spottiness
http://www.wired.com/geekdad/2011/08/cosmos-to-get-a-sequel-hosted-by-neil-degrasse-tyson/

======
markbao
Yes. Incredible. With Cosmos, Carl Sagan opened my mind up to the incredible
wonders of space and what's out there a few years ago. It's up there with
_Planet Earth_ on the scale of seriously remarkable television series. Seeing
this continue with none other than Ann Druyan and Steven Soter themselves gets
a resounding _hell yeah_ from me.

If you haven't watched Cosmos already, I highly, highly suggest it. Start with
Episode 1: [http://www.hulu.com/watch/63317/cosmos-the-shores-of-the-
cos...](http://www.hulu.com/watch/63317/cosmos-the-shores-of-the-cosmic-
ocean#s-p3-so-i0)

~~~
frossie
Yeah, but Neil de Grasse Tyson, fine chap that he is, doesn't have anything
like Carl Sagan's charisma.

~~~
bcrescimanno
I'm a huge Sagan fan, and while I agree that Tyson doesn't have quite the same
charisma, he does have a charisma of his own.

The big question I have is, being on a major network owned by a well-known
conservative mogul, will the show be able to take the same stance on religion
as its original incarnation. Will Tyson be allowed to refer to religion as, "a
reassuring fable?"

For the sake of the integrity of a successor to Cosmos, I certainly hope so.

~~~
drgath
Tyson tweeted out yesterday: "Simple Logic: Worried that FOX viewers don't
know, think, or care about science? That's why COSMOS belongs on FOX."

It's being written by the same writers (aside from Carl) as the first one, and
produced by Seth MacFarlane, someone who doesn't take shit from FOX. Tyson
also doesn't seem like a guy who would corrupt his morals, he knows the value
of scientific passion.

FOX isn't Fox News, so don't worry too much. I'm not, at least.

~~~
philwelch
_FOX isn't Fox News, so don't worry too much. I'm not, at least._

What people don't realize is that Fox News serves a commercial rather than an
ideological agenda. The rest of the news media (especially when Fox News
started) has a slightly liberal bias, which means the big business opportunity
for Fox was right-wing news. It's not that they have a political agenda,
they're just giving people what they want--news coverage that aligns to their
political bias. As the TV viewing population has skewed older, Fox News has
pushed even further to the right to match their target market. Likewise, the
business opportunity for the Fox network was young adults. (And for The Sun in
1970, the target market was presumably working class British males who wanted
to see topless girls in their tabloids.)

~~~
mkr-hn
Ailes is an advocate for his political views, and business is just the latest
way he advances them. Even if he's somehow uninvolved in content direction,
Fox News doesn't get a free pass with "it's just business." A lot of
destructive things have been done in the name of profit, and poisoning the
national discourse is no different.

~~~
philwelch
Ailes is a means to an end. If right wing news is the business opportunity you
want to pursue, you hire Ailes. I'm speaking from the perspective of Murdoch
here.

I never intend to justify Fox News, only explain it.

------
jleyank
Unless they get one big, honkin' corporate sponsor, any commercial-television
follow-on to Cosmos will be broken up by commercials. Cosmos was done on PBS,
which meant they could write for longer-duration episodes. 12-15 minute
morsels will be more difficult to follow.

And if they assume that people's attention span are about that of house plants
(which sums up Fox sports and the rapid-cut crap), it's going to be rather
lightweight. If this is coupled with the "show rather than talk about" trend
I've seen in Nova, it's going to fail as it'll take too much time to get the
points across.

------
doctoboggan
Carl Sagan tried to recruit Tyson to Cornell for undergraduate studies after
he read his application essay. (He decided to go to Harvard though.)

So if he is good enough for Sagan, he is good enough for me.

------
cal5k
I think I'm most blown away by Seth MacFarlane's involvement in putting this
together. I didn't know the guy had such a deep respect for science and a
desire to impact our understanding of it.

~~~
icandoitbetter
<http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6p5jnqEyUs4>

~~~
hugh3
That clip shows that he hates Christians, not that he loves science.

It's not even accurate (to the extent that any counterfactual can be
considered accurate). If Christianity had never existed, would that have
prevented the fall of the Roman Empire? Unlikely. Even if it had, were the
Romans in the 3rd Century AD making huge strides in science before
Christianity came along? Nope. And you'll note that when modern science _did_
eventually arrive, it showed up in the Christian part of the world rather than
the other 90%, which suggests Christianity can't be retarding scientific or
technological progress _that_ much.

~~~
burgerbrain
Does it show that he hates Christians? I would say it indicates he is strongly
critical of the role _Christianity_ has had on the world. The strongest that
you could say is that it shows that he hates Christianity.

Hating Christians though? That is an unfounded allegation. For example, I hate
all religions, including but obviously not limited to Judaism. However, if you
said that I hate Jews, that would be slander. It is incredibly untrue.

------
troymc
I only got around to seeing Cosmos when I was in graduate school, but I could
see why it would inspire people to get into science. (For myself, I blame
Isaac Asimov.)

One problem I have with a lot of science programs today is how they don't make
it clear how we know what we know, or _who_ figured it out. Science is
presented as a bunch of facts rather than as something that was developed by
people (who always have interesting stories). Carl Sagan didn't make that
mistake, nor did Asimov, and I hope this new Cosmos sequel also takes the
historical and human perspective.

~~~
brian_c
Have you seen James Burke's Connections? Sounds like it'd be right up your
alley. <http://topdocumentaryfilms.com/james-burke-connections/>

------
lazylland
"weaving rigorous science with the emotional and spiritual into a transcendent
experience" .. the level of hyperbole .. i worry .. i worry ...

