Cosmos: Good but Dr. Tyson is no Sagan

I’m on episode 5 (six comes out tonight).  I’m happy to say that I’ve learned a few things over the 5 episodes and they had really pretty graphics so the 5 hours that I’ve invested in the show are not a total waste.

I must say that I am not the show’s target audience.  I already have a clue about science.  Dr. Tyson has been on record saying that his target audience is the high percentage of adults who don’t know anything about science (current or past).

So, as I normally do with modern science shows, I sit through the retreads of everything I already know and look for the tidbits that are new to me.  Except that now I have something more to sit through.  Instead of just presenting the science with the beautiful and compelling graphics, he spends a lot of time on “this is why religion is wrong.”

Carl Sagan didn’t do that.  Sagan showed us his wonder and love for science.  He brought us along to see the thing he loved as he sees it.  As dated as the old Cosmos is, so far, I prefer it.

Dear Dr. Tyson,

Please realize that. despite what you spent years learning during years of academic infighting, when communicating with the public, you don’t have to waste so much time (nor do you need to gain apparent satisfaction from) proving the other guy wrong.  Just show us what is true and people will remember.  It worked for Sagan.

Sincerely,

Jeff Miller