This site is not maintained. Click here for the new website of Richard Dawkins.

← Cosmos Will Get a Sequel Hosted by Neil deGrasse Tyson

Cosmos Will Get a Sequel Hosted by Neil deGrasse Tyson - Comments

Jiten's Avatar Comment 1 by Jiten

I hope we get it in the UK. Can't wait.

Fri, 05 Aug 2011 23:23:20 UTC | #858411

mattymath's Avatar Comment 2 by mattymath

Outstanding. I'm sure that I'm not the only one that grew up watching Cosmos. Those are what inspired me to learn more about the universe and ultimately what led me to the field that I'm in today. WOOT!

Fri, 05 Aug 2011 23:41:41 UTC | #858416

skiles1's Avatar Comment 3 by skiles1

I think they've got the right man for the job, in Neil deGrasse Tyson.

Tyson hosting a Cosmos reboot, Hawking doing an episode of Curiosity...now, if we could just get a show hosted by Richard Dawkins, we'd really have some good programming.

Fri, 05 Aug 2011 23:59:27 UTC | #858425

Functional Atheist's Avatar Comment 4 by Functional Atheist

Great news, but with all due respect, I'd prefer Brian Cox to Neil deGrasse Tyson as host.

Brian Cox is better able to convey wonder and awe than Tyson, whose tone and style is more comic than cosmic. Tyson too often is winking at the camera, and obviously trying to be entertaining, which strikes me as occasionally condescending to the audience. Cox treats his subject and his audience with more respect--there's no sense that he's dumbing things down for the kids, which can't be said of Tyson.

Tone down the kid-stuff, Tyson! Treat your audience as if they're as smart as you are, and you will prove me wrong, as I hope you do.

Sat, 06 Aug 2011 00:05:40 UTC | #858426

QuestioningKat's Avatar Comment 5 by QuestioningKat

Yes, Neil deGrasse Tyson is perfect!

Sat, 06 Aug 2011 00:14:38 UTC | #858428

Bipedal Primate's Avatar Comment 6 by Bipedal Primate

Comment 4

The opposite of what you said.

Sat, 06 Aug 2011 00:18:36 UTC | #858429

Neodarwinian's Avatar Comment 7 by Neodarwinian

Now, now. Let us not get in an argument over the host of this Cosmos remake. I am sure the deal is done and I will look forward to this whomever the host is.

Sat, 06 Aug 2011 00:22:56 UTC | #858430

unholywarlord's Avatar Comment 8 by unholywarlord

Noooooooooooooooooooooooooooo....... Oh OK if the script is written by someone else....

Sat, 06 Aug 2011 00:31:44 UTC | #858432

Stevezar's Avatar Comment 9 by Stevezar

Comment 4 by Functional Atheist :

Great news, but with all due respect, I'd prefer Brian Cox to Neil deGrasse Tyson as host. Brian Cox is better able to convey wonder and awe than Tyson, whose tone and style is more comic than cosmic. Tyson too often is winking at the camera, and obviously trying to be entertaining, which strikes me as occasionally condescending to the audience. Cox treats his subject and his audience with more respect--there's no sense that he's dumbing things down for the kids, which can't be said of Tyson.

Tone down the kid-stuff, Tyson! Treat your audience as if they're as smart as you are, and you will prove me wrong, as I hope you do.

I like both, and Cox has his own show already with plenty of air time. What, is the field of science elucidation so crowded and over-packed we can't add any more different styles?

Plus, if Tyson dumbs things down, he will reach everyone as dumb as I am, and there are alot of us. Hell we outnumber you, just look at all the election results of the last few years.

Sat, 06 Aug 2011 00:34:13 UTC | #858434

All About Meme's Avatar Comment 10 by All About Meme

It's hard not to admire Seth MacFarlane. Neil Tyson was clearly the best choice for hosting his new Cosmos series, and I don't see how it can miss.

MacFarlane's short biography on Wikipedia reads like a real-life Marvel comic book, and here is an interesting passage:

MacFarlane came to support gay rights and gay marriage after a family member wondered aloud whether his gay cousin's homosexuality could be "cured". The incident angered MacFarlane, who said in a 2008 interview in The Advocate, that such a statement "was fucking horrifying to hear from somebody that you love." He credits his parents for raising him to be a logical person, in reference to his support for gay rights.

MacFarlane is passionate about his support for gay rights. He said it is "infuriating and idiotic" that two gay partners "have to go through this fucking dog and pony act when they stop at a hotel and the guy behind the counter says, 'You want one room or two?'" He went on to say, "I'm incredibly passionate about my support for the gay community and what they're dealing with at this current point in time." MacFarlane went on to say, "Why is it that Johnny Spaghetti Stain in fucking Georgia can knock a woman up, legally be married to her, and then beat the shit out of her, but these two intelligent, sophisticated writers who have been together for 20 years can't get married?"

Sat, 06 Aug 2011 00:38:23 UTC | #858435

wetbread's Avatar Comment 11 by wetbread

Starship of the Imagination won Starship Smackdown at Comicon this year...so maybe that was an omen.

Sat, 06 Aug 2011 00:40:40 UTC | #858437

adiroth's Avatar Comment 12 by adiroth

Personally, I think Neil deGrasse Tyson is more entertaining & engaging than Brian Cox. That's my cup of tea. I find nothing wrong with having my science with a side of comedy.

If you want your starry-eyed dreamy-science-rock-star, we know that Brian fits the bill. But honestly, he has such boring presence on TV. OK, admittedly, he makes the ladies go wild. But you know what? Let's make science something for everyone to enjoy, how's that for an idea?

Sat, 06 Aug 2011 00:47:15 UTC | #858440

Ignorant Amos's Avatar Comment 13 by Ignorant Amos

Comment 12 by adiroth

Variety is the spice of life.....do you not think?

Sat, 06 Aug 2011 00:51:36 UTC | #858441

adiroth's Avatar Comment 14 by adiroth

Talking about starship: http://ninjerktsu.blogspot.com/2011/01/carl-sagan-and-his-fully-armed.html

Sat, 06 Aug 2011 00:59:07 UTC | #858443

SoHelpMeReason's Avatar Comment 15 by SoHelpMeReason

If I had never read this post and you had asked me who could replace Carl Sagan as host to a Cosmos Sequel, I'd go, "NO ONE! Not a creature on this planet! Not a human on this Earth! Not a damn living measly thing, you hear me?! How dare you sugges--NEIL DEGRASSE TYSON. Make Neil deGrasse Tyson do it."

Sat, 06 Aug 2011 00:59:57 UTC | #858444

Kilian's Avatar Comment 16 by Kilian

I think we all need to listen again to this and this.

Sat, 06 Aug 2011 01:06:46 UTC | #858447

showmeproof's Avatar Comment 17 by showmeproof

RD did a splendid job with Growing Up in the Universe

Sat, 06 Aug 2011 01:14:42 UTC | #858449

I Deny's Avatar Comment 18 by I Deny

I do enjoy Neil, but for now I'll just keep any expectations out of my mind. Expectations for sequels of any kind tend to lead to some level of disappointment ;)

Sat, 06 Aug 2011 01:45:36 UTC | #858454

drumdaddy's Avatar Comment 19 by drumdaddy

If any group needs an education it's the Fox audience. Good luck.

Sat, 06 Aug 2011 01:59:45 UTC | #858457

Eosimias's Avatar Comment 20 by Eosimias

Let's nip this "Tyson vs Cox" argument in the bud right now. It's pointless because -- fortunately -- both of them are hosting a series.

I'm a big fan of Seth MacFarlane, but I'd be a bigger one if he'd put more effort into "Family Guy" and maybe injected some more intelligence into the writing.

Sat, 06 Aug 2011 02:10:13 UTC | #858461

rocket888's Avatar Comment 21 by rocket888

Primitive special effects. Hmmm. I guess that's true. However, they were state of the art at the time.

I was the system programmer for the pdp-11 16 bit system which was used for the same computer graphics simulations that made the Voyager series spacecraft fly by animations. These were done at JPL (part of NASA run by Cal-Tech).

The system used an Evans and Sutherland line drawing "Picture System", one with a serial number of around 10. This was used in the "morphing" software to demonstrate evolution. It also had an E&S frame buffer, which had 256k bytes of memory, while the computer only had 128k. But since the frame buffer memory was mapped onto the computer, we would often use it solely for extra computer memory. It was a clever idea and had the side effect of allowing us to "see" some of our programs running, as the data was changing we could see the patterns on the screen.

Considering that the animations of, for example, dna molecules, were transferred from the frame buffer to film with a camera on a tripod sitting about 6 feet from the monitor that was triggered one frame at a time through an rs232 serial port, I was always amazed at how well these films came out. Each frame could take up to 45 minutes to compute and so we had to leave it running over night. One problem was that the cleaning crew often came in and turned on the lights, which we discovered by seeing their reflection on the large CRT monitor attached to the frame buffer.

We had some of the worlds first computer graphics artists working on series, many of whom a few years later moved on to create the Pixar systems.

The star of our crew was Jim Blinn. See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jim_Blinn

Sat, 06 Aug 2011 02:21:46 UTC | #858465

Steve Zara's Avatar Comment 22 by Steve Zara

Comment 21 by rocket888

That is simply wonderful to hear about! Thank you so much for posting it. I was a huge fan of Sagan, Cosmos and computers at the time, so I love such stories.

As a programmer, I also used to occasionally "see" programs running when they started to use video buffers, but this was a almost always a sign that they had started to store data beyond their allocated range, and a computer crash was imminent!

Sat, 06 Aug 2011 02:37:40 UTC | #858470

Vicktor's Avatar Comment 23 by Vicktor

Comment 4 by Functional Atheist

I hope they don't make a "Wild Wild West" of the Cosmos sequel.

Sat, 06 Aug 2011 02:38:46 UTC | #858471

Tatsuro_Matsumae's Avatar Comment 24 by Tatsuro_Matsumae

Hoping that the fact FOX is producing this show won't affect its quality.

Sat, 06 Aug 2011 02:39:06 UTC | #858472

Reckless Monkey's Avatar Comment 25 by Reckless Monkey

I'm a science teacher, so I have a little understanding on how difficult it is to engage kids in science and make them shift there mind sets from the complete egocentricism that is normal for all children. I was fortunate to grow up with the likes of Attenbourgh, Brownoski and Carl Sagan. I remember my father criticising Sagan in comparision to Brownoski and I get why. Brownoski was however a bit inside baseball and although I enjoyed him in my teenage years and more now I have come to the conculsion that Sagan was perfectly capable of being every bit as much inside baseball as Brownoski but he was simply aiming at a sligtly different demographic. My father, is a bit uncomfortable expressing emotion (as many in his generation are). I wonder if this is the primary reason why Sagan then and Cox now keep getting bagged out for doing the extremely important job of communicating science. Laugh if you want about Brian climbing up mountains, riding in boats helicopters and jets, scoff if you like about his presentations being too rock starish but I dare you to do better, reach more and turn more people on to science that Brian has, I turn him on in class (or Sagan) and I don't have to ask kids to be quite and listen, kids just do then many of them stay back and ask questions or stop me in the playground and discuss big questions. Think you can do better? Do it, and we'd all be better off! Good Luck to Neil the more public science the better.

Sat, 06 Aug 2011 02:46:43 UTC | #858476

lucasroark's Avatar Comment 26 by lucasroark

Awesome news. I still like to watch Cosmos nowadays every now and then, just like I love to watch MacFarlane's hilarious series without taboos.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w3pExZs9IJA

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QADMMmU6ab8&feature=related

Sat, 06 Aug 2011 02:49:21 UTC | #858477

Schrodinger's Cat's Avatar Comment 27 by Schrodinger's Cat

I'm waiting for the universe to do a series on Neil deGrasse Tyson.

Sat, 06 Aug 2011 02:55:12 UTC | #858479

mordacious1's Avatar Comment 28 by mordacious1

You cannot reheat quiche...

Sat, 06 Aug 2011 03:01:22 UTC | #858480

Functional Atheist's Avatar Comment 29 by Functional Atheist

To clarify, I wasn't trying to be contentious for sheer contentiousness sake, or to unfairly disparage Tyson, who is a good educator and a reasonable choice, or to imply a swooning affection for Cox, who lacks Sagan's charisma. I was merely expressing concern that if they aren't careful, the overall tone of the new Cosmos might be off, which would be a terrible shame.

Sagan could be funny, but it was rare that he was TRYING to be funny, which can't be said of Tyson or MacFarlane. I love the Sagan original, and did from my first viewing, when I was all of 12. Kids are smart, and aiming too young, or trying to be too broad, is how you end up with monstrosities like Jar-Jar Binks, and I desperately want this program to avoid the perils of condescension.

I'm hoping for the best and wish nothing but success to Tyson and everyone else involved in this noble, difficult, enterprise. They have enormous shoes to fill, and if I have some trepidation, it is rooted in appreciation for the original, not dislike or disrespect for Tyson, MacFarlane, or anyone else involved.

Sat, 06 Aug 2011 03:21:27 UTC | #858485

secularjew's Avatar Comment 30 by secularjew

Look, if Hollywood can release basically the same, dumb superhero movie every month, then surely we can have a new version of the show on the cosmos every three decades. Neil's other shows have been really great, and he is a wonderful host. By the way, he was terrific on the Bill Maher show just now.

Sat, 06 Aug 2011 03:40:25 UTC | #858492