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


← Professor Stephen Hawking in Star Trek TNG

apaeter's Avatar Jump to comment 70 by apaeter

I have no problem with the fact that Star Trek isn't 'hard SF' - I've learned that most things in life aren't - but with the godawful, clichee-ridden writing of that show.
The dialogue is either some technical filler ("Synchronize the photon defibrilator and set phasers to massage!") or the interminable monologues with their hamfisted Shakespeare quotations that not even Patrick Stewart can save. Add in the inevitable non-corporeal beings taking over human minds and you've pretty much lost me. (Although I did watch a ridiculous amount of Star Trek - as a science fiction fan I have to grab what I can get. I just wish there was better written scifi (TV) out there. )

PS About ole Hawking: While the popularity of a scientist doesn't say anything about the truth or degree of difficulty of his/her findings, I think it should be recognized that his works and words have reached a far wider audience than those of for example Dirac and Penrose. And while that certainly should not replace scientific credentials I feel that it is an achieviement worth celebrating in the scientific community when one of their number manages to frame scientific inquiry in a way that excites a lot of people. This is being pointed out in practically every atheism conference that turns up on this website: To be a great popularizer of science should be able to make you a great scientist instead of earning you scorn. By that I don't mean [i]dumbing down[/i], I mean that we give as much credit to Hawking for popularizing his and Penrose's findings (for example) as we give Penrose for making them. Or something ... on a re-read this seems a bit rambling ... :)

Thu, 23 Apr 2009 07:28:00 UTC | #352368