BaalChatzaf Posted December 12, 2013 Share Posted December 12, 2013 I would think 1,000 is very generous. I was thinking more on the order of 2-3 dozen.DennisIn any case there are too many numb skulls writing crap for the newspapers and magazines. Also some of them produce dreck for the cable t.v. channels. I am very rapidly losing my patience with some of the "documentaries" on the cable Science Channel. Ba'al Chatzaf Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dennislmay Posted December 13, 2013 Share Posted December 13, 2013 I would think 1,000 is very generous. I was thinking more on the order of 2-3 dozen.DennisIn any case there are too many numb skulls writing crap for the newspapers and magazines. Also some of them produce dreck for the cable t.v. channels. I am very rapidly losing my patience with some of the "documentaries" on the cable Science Channel. Ba'al Chatzaf The Science Channel is the best of them and it is terrible.Dennis Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anthony Posted December 13, 2013 Share Posted December 13, 2013 Yes, dumbing down science with style over substance. It makes me squirm to watch it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BaalChatzaf Posted December 13, 2013 Share Posted December 13, 2013 The Science Channel is the best of them and it is terrible.DennisActually NOVA on PBS is the best and their quality has diminished over the past 20 years. When NOVA was really new (sic) back in the 70s their presentations were absolutely first rate But they became very middle brow and over the past 20 years or so their quality has declined.I used to watch NOVA "religiously" but of late I pick and chose which broadcasts I will watch very carefully.I am sorry to say the the quality of popular presentations of matters scientific (that is presentations meant for the non-specialist by intelligent watching public) had taken a nose dive. I am so annoyed I throw darts at pictures of Michao Kaku. Ba'al Chatzaf Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dennislmay Posted December 13, 2013 Share Posted December 13, 2013 I am so annoyed I throw darts at pictures of Michao Kaku. Ba'al Chatzaf A waste of good dart wear and tear.I quit watching NOVA once PBS became unavailable to me [government satellite rules] for a number of years. Once the rules changed I tried to watch a couple episodes and could not stomach it so I quit even looking at what they were offering.Dennis Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoAMadDeathWish Posted February 18, 2014 Share Posted February 18, 2014 I don't see that there is anything baffling about what they are finding. Enough time passed for there to be multiple human groups spread all over. Likely a dozen or more groups remain undiscovered.DennisExactly. It always astonishes me how alleged "scientists" are baffled when their tight little belief systems get shattered by facts.It's just journalism, calm down. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BaalChatzaf Posted February 18, 2014 Share Posted February 18, 2014 I am so annoyed I throw darts at pictures of Michao Kaku. Ba'al Chatzaf A waste of good dart wear and tear.I quit watching NOVA once PBS became unavailable to me [government satellite rules] for a number of years. Once the rules changed I tried to watch a couple episodes and could not stomach it so I quit even looking at what they were offering.DennisI remember when NOVA was a good science documentary, back in the 70's. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter Posted February 18, 2014 Share Posted February 18, 2014 “Cosmos” returning to a new network, Fox. Tyson is quite good as a narrator. I don’t know if the link to the trailer will work. Rebooting Carl Sagan's seminal "Cosmos" miniseries three decades later is almost impossible — unless you happen to be renowned astrophysicist and science educator Neil deGrasse Tyson. For those who may have missed the original back in 1980, "Cosmos: A Personal Voyage" was a documentary series on PBS that explored the universe as well as the history of scientific discovery. Sagan's topics of discussion ranged from Japanese folklore to debunking astrology to the ultimate fate of the stars and galaxies that surround us. Now Tyson is hosting a new version of the TV series called "Cosmos: A SpaceTime Odyssey," with the first episode airing in March on Fox and the National Geographic Channel. [Watch the trailer for the new 'Cosmos' series] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dennislmay Posted February 19, 2014 Share Posted February 19, 2014 “Cosmos” returning to a new network, Fox. Tyson is quite good as a narrator. I don’t know if the link to the trailer will work.Rebooting Carl Sagan's seminal "Cosmos" miniseries three decades later is almost impossible — unless you happen to be renowned astrophysicist and science educator Neil deGrasse Tyson.For those who may have missed the original back in 1980, "Cosmos: A Personal Voyage" was a documentary series on PBS that explored the universe as well as the history of scientific discovery. Sagan's topics of discussion ranged from Japanese folklore to debunking astrology to the ultimate fate of the stars and galaxies that surround us.Now Tyson is hosting a new version of the TV series called "Cosmos: A SpaceTime Odyssey," with the first episode airing in March on Fox and the National Geographic Channel. [Watch the trailer for the new 'Cosmos' series]I cannot stomach Tyson so I will not be watching.Dennis Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Stuart Kelly Posted February 19, 2014 Share Posted February 19, 2014 Dennis,What's wrong with Tyson? I saw a couple of things by him and he was great at communicating science to the layman. What a storyteller!Believe me, boring does not cut it if your audience is non-scientists.I can't speak for the science part, but Tyson's communication competence was awesome.We are stardust indeed. Michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BaalChatzaf Posted February 19, 2014 Share Posted February 19, 2014 Dennis,What's wrong with Tyson? I saw a couple of things by him and he was great at communicating science to the layman. What a storyteller!Believe me, boring does not cut it if your audience is non-scientists.I can't speak for the science part, but Tyson's communication competence was awesome.We are stardust indeed. MichaelNiel Degrasse Tyson is the best presenter currently on the t.v. and cable networks. He will be narrating a re-booted Cosmos in about a month.He wont say Billyuns and Billyun either and he won't try to sing like a whale. Please see: Sagan Jumped the Shark when he Sang the Whale.Ba'al Chatzaf Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BaalChatzaf Posted February 19, 2014 Share Posted February 19, 2014 “Cosmos” returning to a new network, Fox. Tyson is quite good as a narrator. I don’t know if the link to the trailer will work.Rebooting Carl Sagan's seminal "Cosmos" miniseries three decades later is almost impossible — unless you happen to be renowned astrophysicist and science educator Neil deGrasse Tyson.For those who may have missed the original back in 1980, "Cosmos: A Personal Voyage" was a documentary series on PBS that explored the universe as well as the history of scientific discovery. Sagan's topics of discussion ranged from Japanese folklore to debunking astrology to the ultimate fate of the stars and galaxies that surround us.Now Tyson is hosting a new version of the TV series called "Cosmos: A SpaceTime Odyssey," with the first episode airing in March on Fox and the National Geographic Channel. [Watch the trailer for the new 'Cosmos' series]I cannot stomach Tyson so I will not be watching.DennisHe is an excellent presenter and not a show but like Michao Kaku or the late Carl Sagan.I like Brian Cox (the physicist) best of all. Ba'al Chatzaf Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dennislmay Posted February 19, 2014 Share Posted February 19, 2014 Dennis,What's wrong with Tyson? I saw a couple of things by him and he was great at communicating science to the layman. What a storyteller!Believe me, boring does not cut it if your audience is non-scientists.I can't speak for the science part, but Tyson's communication competence was awesome.We are stardust indeed. MichaelLike Michao Kaku and Carl Sagan he is an activist central planner leftist type who lies about science and technology when it suits his socialist politics.Tyson's latest leftist rants were about how only governments can do space properly.When the leftist dominated media only allows a handful of scientists on the national stage to speak about science you can get the wrongimpression that scientists in general have a hard time communicating. That is the false narrative created and perpetuated by the media which in no way represents the literally tens of thousands of scientists with careers equaling or bettering Tyson with equal or superior communicationskills. I have known real scientists who were ladies men, professional male models, martial artist black belts, Olympic athletes, professional golfers,professional speakers, executive members of speaking clubs, and many who worked in large organizations requiring public speaking daily.Tyson has nothing unique to offer other than his connection to Sagan and being selected as the leftist agitator talking head for science for the leftist media.Like Sagan I'm sure 95% of what he does will be informative to the general public. Also like Sagan when asked to lie on important issues affectingsocialists politics he will lie convincingly and the adoring general public will believe his lies.Dennis Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frediano Posted February 19, 2014 Share Posted February 19, 2014 My question is, why would a scientist, searching for truth be baffled?The mismatch between the anatomical and genetic evidence surprised the scientists, who are now rethinking human evolution over the past few hundred thousand years. It is possible, for example, that there are many extinct human populations that scientists have yet to discover. They might have interbred, swapping DNA. Scientists hope that further studies of extremely ancient human DNA will clarify the mystery.http://www.nytimes.com/2013/12/05/science/at-400000-years-oldest-human-dna-yet-found-raises-new-mysteries.html?partner=rss&emc=rss&smid=tw-nytimes&_r=0Love that artist rendering. The guy in the lower left? I've seen that exact look before; he's just not buying any of whatever shit is being said by anyone around him. The guy right above him? He is definitely wondering "Who just farted?" Without a doubt, it was the greybeard with the deadpan look on his face. The young guy in the middle front? Trying not to breath for a few moments. Clear as a bell. This could be any section of the 700 Level of Vet's stadium at any Eagles home game from the 70s. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BaalChatzaf Posted February 20, 2014 Share Posted February 20, 2014 My question is, why would a scientist, searching for truth be baffled?The mismatch between the anatomical and genetic evidence surprised the scientists, who are now rethinking human evolution over the past few hundred thousand years. It is possible, for example, that there are many extinct human populations that scientists have yet to discover. They might have interbred, swapping DNA. Scientists hope that further studies of extremely ancient human DNA will clarify the mystery.http://www.nytimes.com/2013/12/05/science/at-400000-years-oldest-human-dna-yet-found-raises-new-mysteries.html?partner=rss&emc=rss&smid=tw-nytimes&_r=0Love that artist rendering. The guy in the lower left? I've seen that exact look before; he's just not buying any of whatever shit is being said by anyone around him. The guy right above him? He is definitely wondering "Who just farted?" Without a doubt, it was the greybeard with the deadpan look on his face. The young guy in the middle front? Trying not to breath for a few moments. Clear as a bell. This could be any section of the 700 Level of Vet's stadium at any Eagles home game from the 70s.If was the dude front and center with the spear, that farted.Ba'al Chatzaf Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BaalChatzaf Posted February 20, 2014 Share Posted February 20, 2014 I would think 1,000 is very generous. I was thinking more on the order of 2-3 dozen.DennisThe U.S. has 300,000,000 people I do not thing one in 3000 is all that generous. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dennislmay Posted February 20, 2014 Share Posted February 20, 2014 I would think 1,000 is very generous. I was thinking more on the order of 2-3 dozen.DennisThe U.S. has 300,000,000 people I do not thing one in 3000 is all that generous.http://www.sciencejournalism.net/informed_science_journalism.html20% of science reporters have science degrees [2007] - before the cutbacks. A 2013 study with 476 full time science reporters from around the world - purposefullytrying to oversample ouside the US, Canada, and Europe because of the crisis inprint journalism there:http://issuu.com/scidev.net/docs/learning_series_global_journalismOnly 1/3 expect to be science reporters in 5 years.One survey counted 82 science journalists in the UK in 2009.If you scale from the UK population to the US population the expected numberwould be 411 with 82 having science degrees and 27 expecting to have a5 year or longer career in the field.Dennis Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now