Neil deGrasse Tyson "Cosmos". First impression:

[rex]

I like it. What I like the most is the designed landscapes. They show what they are talking about.
It's very hard to find pictures of how things looked 1 billion years ago. Not many programs do it.

[josephpalazzo]

My next blog( plug, plug, plug,  ) will be on harmonic oscillators, which is based on Hooke's law. So epi 3 was quite approriate for me as I have been writing down that equation, which BTW became the basis of Quantum Field Theory. If only Hooke was alive today to see the impact he had on science. 

[stromboli]

If there is a criticism of Tyson's treament of Hooke, it is because he comes off the villain in the episode. He was a polymath, and while his other accomplishments might not apply to the focus of that episode, Hooke was a very capable man. He was one of the first to assert, before Darwin, that fossils were an important clue to past earth history and were evidence of species die off, which was at the time theologically unacceptable. Regardless of how he is portrayed, he was an important man of science.

[Mr.Obvious]

I never watched the original (hadn't even heard of it before). So I'm glad this new series came out, it's litteraly awesome. The special effects are great, the host does an amazing job and the information is immensly interesting.
I understand what you mean with 'unkind' to religion. But I'm not sure if that's the appropriate term. I get the feeling that their main interest is to bestow knowledge and information in a captivating way based on 'storytelling'. 'Unkind' however, has always been associated in my head at least with bias, and I think they just want to bring the facts out there in consistent and captivating way. Or to put it like this; they're not trying to actively make religion look bad, I think, rather that's just a consequence of the facts they present.

[SGOS]

I understand what you mean with 'unkind' to religion. But I'm not sure if that's the appropriate term.....  They're not trying to actively make religion look bad, I think, rather that's just a consequence of the facts they present.

I suppose it's unkind in that it doesn't treat religion as worthy of the status religious people think their stories deserve.  In fact, science has never been unkind to religion.  It simply treats creation stories as myths, whether they be the stories of the Egyptians, Native Americans, Hindus, or African Bushmen.  While it's not unkind, it is indifferent.  Indifference is the opposite of "love". 

It also leaves the priests, shaman, imams, and various holy men, stripped of their powers, and the result is resentment from those with much to lose.  Now you've got con-men like Ken Ham, sitting there on a multimillion dollar creation museum that he's passing off as historically true, and science fails to fall to it's knees in praise and jubilation over it.  He ends up looking like a snake oil salesman rather than someone respectable.  That's got to sting.

[St Giordano Bruno]

Looking forward to seeing it myself, it certainly is in serious need to be more up with the times than in Carl Sagon's times.

[stromboli]

Cosmos episode: the Immortals
http://channel.nationalgeographic.com/channel/cosmos-a-spacetime-odyssey/episodes/the-immortals/

NDT is a god, seriously. He looks at different aspects of the possibilities and theories of what might have happened, explaining not only what science knows but also what scientists hypothesize about. He opens doors for conversations as well as explaining causation and why we think the way we do. My respect for the man grows with every episode.

[Shiranu]

I've unfortunately missed the last 3 episodes :\.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

Follow Stromboli's link.

[Special B]

I have enjoyed the new Cosmos series thus far, but I am surprised they haven't covered quantum physics and the discovery of the Higgs boson yet. I am sure they will.... but I feel as if the series has just covered old ground so far. Very little new information for me. Since the original Cosmos we have had a wealth of shows like Through the Wormhole, The Universe etc... that have delved deeper into modern and emerging science (quantum entanglement, spooky action at a distance, Higgs field etc...) than the new Cosmos has.

One thing I really like about the new Cosmos is how much time is given to lesser-known scientists and the world-changing discoveries they made. It really shows how science is a team effort made of small steps, building upon what others have done before. Cosmos seems to be more about *how* we know what we know, rather than covering the newest advances in science.

The original Cosmos really blew my mind as a kid. The new Cosmos hasn't done that yet, but I appreciate it for what it does differently. It has a lot more competition now (from the shows I mentioned above), so it seems like they went a different direction, focusing more on the scientists than the science.

Hopefully in the last few episodes they will talk more about where science is taking us and what discoveries have been made recently.

NDT is doing a fantastic job.

[stromboli]

I agree, a lot of old ground is being covered, but that is because Sagan did such a good job the first time. And I too hope that the findings of the LHC and later discoveries will be showcased. I give it to DeGrasse Tyson- he is a fearless man and has showcased Cosmology and science for a new generation. I honestly admire the guy and I'm a big fan of what he does.

[missingnocchi]

I just can't get into the new series that much. I find DeGrasse Tyson to be a really awkward speaker. Oh well :/

[Jack89]

I like the new Cosmos series.  I was a science major and much of the stuff he's covering is review for me, but I really like listening to him talk about it.  He's an inspirational person and the passion that he clearly has for science is infectious.  I've always liked him.