Quote:
Originally Posted by MattyC
Well I think Tyson's whole reason for doing this series stems from the sentiment in my first paragraph. I think he does want to show why/how they're wrong. I think he finds it frustrating that people can still believe these things in the face of all evidence to the contrary. I really do think it's his mission to educate the masses and specifically those that have been indoctrinated into believing something that is false. Some people (kids specifically) are not made aware of these things and are sheltered to keep them in accordance with religious beliefs. I don't think his line about 6500 years is a dig at them, its an answer to what he presumes is their question. He plays it like:
"The universe is almost 14 billion years old"
"But momma says its only 6500"
"I'm glad you mentioned that, here's what the universe would look like if it was only 6500 years old....etc"
In short, I really don't think its a bad thing to throw some truth in these people's faces. They've been throwing their "truth" in everyone else's face for centuries. It's not about payback, its about making sure everyone at least has access to basic human understanding. Let's face it, none of what has been presented so far is groundbreaking, its all pretty simple.
I do wish he gave a bit more explanation about how we know how far these things are. Maybe I zonked out for a few minutes but he never really seemed to get into that.
|
I haven't watched the new series enough to notice anything like that.
The thing that made Carl Sagan so good is that you never got the feeling that he was trying to proselytize his message in that series. It makes me glad that I watched the original series in an era before social media and when I was innocent enough to not even know that there was a debate.
The whole fact that things have to be portrayed as "us versus them" these days is sad and I think it's just going to chase people away from wanting to participate in either.
While Sagan was highly critical of zealots and organized religion, he also thought that spirituality and science were totally compatible and science could be a source for spirituality. I much prefer to see that angle delivered. It just seems more positive and more effective if you really want to get religious people interested in science. Attacking just pushes them further away.