Carl Sagan: Underappreciated Genius

You know...

I got to thinking the other day about how much I was inspired in my youth by Carl Sagan's book and television series 'Cosmos.' It was ground-breaking stuff, in that an astronomer was actually able to cross over and achieve mass appeal, celebrity and bring incredibly complex astronomical and cosmological principles to the masses.

I hadn't revisited Carl in some time, so I decided to grab my old 'Cosmos' book and flip to some of my favorite parts. I also did a search on youtube which yielded some great results. It seems that I'm not the only Sagan disciple out there.

He wasn't just one of science's greatest geniuses of all-time... He wasn't just an astronomer... He was a teacher... He was a philosopher.

In that very monotone voice, he could deliver some of the most impactful, life-altering messages in just a few syllables. In my brief time at Ohio State, I took a moderately advanced astronomy class from a guy who is a big wig in the current field (he had published several books and was highly thought of). He said that, in his few contacts with Sagan before he died in the mid-90s, he was totally awestruck by the manner in which Sagan's genius was delivered.

I think his exact quote was, "I asked him a question and, totally off-the-cuff, Sagan didn't even think before answering in the most poignant fashion that he had ever seen. It took me a week to even fully understand what Sagan had told me. It would have taken me years to deliver the kind of answer that he gave me after thinking for just mere seconds."

That is how I always thought of Sagan, as well... Sort of a computer with vast amounts of stored information that he could access without even thinking.

Also, although some of his astronomy is very bleak (his thoughts on the afterlife could make us feel very alone), his scientific ideals were always delivered in a way that offered comfort, not emptiness.

Anyway, are there any other Sagan fans on this board?

I'm going to supply you with some clips and I hope that you take the time to watch them. You will be drawn in almost immediately, I'm sure...

[URL="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WmMUuR--Qvo"]Introduction to his book, Pale Blue Dot, read by Carl[/URL].

[URL="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VuJ3Tjj40P8"]More Carl... Dropping mass amounts of knowledge.[/URL]

[URL="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y9KT4M7kiSw&feature=related"]Carl discusses the 4th Dimension.[/URL]

[URL="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=34-1W_9BhoU&feature=related"]What was here before the Big Bang?[/URL]

[URL="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iE9dEAx5Sgw&feature=related"]Carl on Evolution[/URL]

There are loads more great vids on there. Just click through and become blown away by one of the greatest geniuses of the 20th century.

:bowdown:

Btw, the thing that got me thinking about this was Benn Jordan's 2008 tribute album to Carl that I recently put back on my playlist.

Here is a [URL="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NaENN285XSw"]cut[/URL] off of the album. He did Carl justice.

Great stuff man... repped..

Sagan was a genius. Cosmos is a great read, a must-have book for anyone interested in Astronomy/Philosophy/History/Physics and other branches of science.

Great post.

I got the [URL="http://www.amazon.com/Cosmos-Carl-Sagan-DVD-Set/dp/B000055ZOB"]Cosmos 7-disc box set[/URL] for Christmas last year :pimp:

Hulu has each [URL="http://www.hulu.com/search?query=cosmos"]Cosmos episode for free[/URL].

I've always known who he was and that he was a popular astronomer, but my knowledge of him basically ended there. For whatever reason I wiki'd him a week or so and found the Cosmos link on Hulu. Astronomy, secular humanism, and just general proper skepticism lost a pillar when he died. He was so passionate and infinitely knowledgeable while being able to convey his thoughts so easily. He really did seem like a walking Wikipedia.

i desperately need a nap but i'm definitely going to be watching those clips when i wake up. . . good stuff, i can't wait

Huge marijuana advocate as well (not sure if that's been mentioned). Always been a fan of Sagan but he started to go a little crazy...Demon Haunted World is a tremendous read.

that video on the 4th dimension was fantastic. i've been trying to grasp the concept of einstein's curved spacetime since i encountered it in depth for the first time in hawking's book, and that was probably the best breakdown i've seen so far. i guess it still remains a little more abstract in my brain than i'd like it to be, although i suppose a full grasp can never be attained given its nature. still, i hadn't yet encountered an explanation involving the progression from 2d to 3d to help make the similar progression from 3d to 4d, so that was pretty cool. i might have to watch it again.

the other videos are obviously pretty phenomenal as well, given their vast vast scale. i'm going to check out the cosmos series and perhaps pick up a book - i'm still trying to work my way through 'brief history of time' (i'm only about 3-4 chapters in, although i've read those 3-4 chapters about a half dozen times by now lol). i've also got 'the universe in a nutshell' on the backburner, but after that i'd definitely like to check out some stuff by sagan. like inspiredlebowski, i had heard the name before revolving around astrophysics and cosmology, but never actually gone in depth.

thanks for the links rba.


[QUOTE]Huge marijuana advocate as well (not sure if that's been mentioned)[/QUOTE]
this is awesome. it's mentioned in his wiki article, although only in passing. what of his work makes you say he went off the edge, marlo? something like that might be even more fascinating than his calculated science that was in the videos. it might be even more fun to read while high, assuming he was in the same state of mind when he wrote it. lol

I love watching his show The Cosmo's it just blows my mind... Michio Kaku is cool as hell too I listen to his podcast every once in a while.

Wow awesome fined. Been looking for this clips.

[QUOTE=God Shamgod]I love watching his show The Cosmo's it just blows my mind... Michio Kaku is cool as hell too I listen to his podcast every once in a while.[/QUOTE]

Kaku's BBC docu on time was amazing
[url]http://www.bbc.co.uk/bbcfour/documentaries/features/time.shtml[/url]

While we're on the topic of contemporary intellectuals, let's show some love to Neil deGrasse Tyson. Love that man and NOVA scienceNOW is an incredible program.

Came across this interesting little bit of info about Tyson and Sagan crossing paths on Neil's wiki page...very cool.

[QUOTE]Astronomer Carl Sagan, who was a faculty member at Cornell University, tried to recruit Tyson to Cornell for undergraduate studies.[5] During an interview with the writer, Daniel Simone, (See the entire interview in the November 2, 2007 issue of Dan's Papers,[6]) Dr. Tyson said, "Interestingly, when I applied to Cornell, my application dripped of my passion for the study and research of the Universe. Somehow the admissions office brought my application to the attention of the late Mr. Sagan, and he actually took the inititiative and care to contact me. He was very inspirational and a most powerful influence. Mr. Sagan was as great as the universe, an effective mentor."[/QUOTE]

[QUOTE=MarloStanfield]Huge marijuana advocate as well (not sure if that's been mentioned). Always been a fan of Sagan but he started to go a little crazy...Demon Haunted World is a tremendous read.[/QUOTE]
Yes... He was a huge proponent of legalizing marijuana and he was very out in the open about it.

I'm also a little interested in your 'off the deep end' stance, though. What did he do that led you to conclude that he was losing touch with reality? Surely, it wasn't his involvement with studying UFO sightings and beginning the SETI program, because those were things that he was pushing long before before his most famous work.

And, for the record, although he entertained the idea that these people who say they spotted alien UFOs and were abducted [I]may[/I] have interesting stories, it was just a part of his skeptical nature. While he needed definite proof of something in order to absolutely believe it as real science, like any real scientist, he also would study the facts before he deduced anything about validity.

[QUOTE]"He wrote frequently on what he perceived as the logical and empirical fallacies regarding UFOs and the abduction experience. Sagan rejected an extraterrestrial explanation for the phenomenon but felt there were both empirical and pedagogical benefits for examining UFO reports and that the subject was, therefore, a legitimate topic of study."[/QUOTE]

-Stuart Appelle


But, he was always clearly interested in the phenomena, as any astronomer should be. Hell... The guy wrote 'Contact,' which is an absolutely amazing book, btw. Those of you that loved the movie would go nuts over the book. While they did a good job of turning such an expansive narrative into a 2-hour movie, they left out much of the meat of the book, which is the best science fiction book I have ever read. He wrote that, literally, in his spare time.

I don't know if you were specifically citing his studies of UFOs and SETI as being 'out there.' If there is something I'm missing, please fill me in.

Believe it or not, I have not completely read [I]The Demon-Haunted World: Science as a Candle in the Dark[/I]. I've shuffled through bits and pieces, but never the whole thing, from beginning to end. It may have been a little too much for me to understand when I first gave it a try in my early teens. I need to revisit that one, for sure.

The end of the book Contact is insane. The movie blew it totally.

Carl Sagan rules. I know some of the theories are outdated now, but Cosmos is still the best science show ever produced.

The way Cosmos blends simple scientific explanation of complex scientific theory, scientific history and elegant explanation of scientific method is masterful.

[QUOTE=embersyc]The end of the book Contact is insane. The movie blew it totally.[/quote]

Completely agree. But, they had to sacrifice [I]something [/I]because:

A. They needed to make the movie comfortable two hours long so that moviegoers did not get too anxious and the ADD portion of the country (a rather large percentage, imo) didn't lose interest

and

B. While the book ending is much, much deeper, more detailed and just downright better, the average American (or citizen of the world, for that matter) may have left the theatre with an "I don't get it" attitude. Granted, I have a pretty cynical view of the average American... And for good reason.

But, for what it was (a corporate studio's take on an amazing book), it was not a bad watch. Compared to the book, though... Forget about it.

[QUOTE=embersyc]Carl Sagan rules. I know some of the theories are outdated now, but Cosmos is still the best science show ever produced.

The way Cosmos blends simple scientific explanation of complex scientific theory, scientific history and elegant explanation of scientific method is masterful.[/QUOTE]

That was part of Sagan's genius. He managed to get the world population excited about some very complex theories that were previously only discussed in labs and scientific think-tanks. Anyone that can make String Theory interesting to the masses deserves to be revered.

[QUOTE=RedBlackAttack]

B. While the book ending is much, much deeper, more detailed and just downright better, the average American (or citizen of the world, for that matter) may have left the theatre with an "I don't get it" attitude. Granted, I have a pretty cynical view of the average American... And for good reason.

\[/QUOTE]
I have the same view of average citizens it seems like everything on tv or in movies have to be dumbed down and made simpler so "most" people will get it. That is why a lot of people don't like shows like Lost or The Wire and can't appreciate good documentaries like cosmos and Michio Kaku's shows.

I wish Marlo would explain why he believes Sagan went off the deep end. I'm honestly interested, because I have never heard any such thing.

thanks for starting this thread. thanks for all the positive replies.

sagan was the one who fired my interest in cosmology. since then, hawking is the one who most explored cosmology (notably, black holes) most provocatively, and degrasse-tyson is the one who has explained it all the most coherantly.

(i wish more black americans would realise what a treasure they have in that dude)

another guy, i think it was "ken ustinov", did a fabulous series on cosmology and black holes back on the day on PBS.

[URL="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zSgiXGELjbc"]a friend just sent me this[/URL]

[QUOTE=RidonKs][URL="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zSgiXGELjbc"]a friend just sent me this[/URL][/QUOTE]
Wow. That was great. Thanks for sharing. Brilliant idea.

Hey.... F#ck you, Donks.

I have watched that video at least 20 times in the last 24 hours... I can't stop. It easily surpasses the Slap Chop one as the greatest thing autotune has ever produced.

Catchy as f#ck and deep... Perfect. That guy deserves some type of award. I noticed Carl's son replied in the comments section. :eek:

"The surface of the earth is the shore of the cosmic ocean. Recently we've waded a little way out and the water seems inviting."
:bowdown: :bowdown:

It is like crack for a science geek like me.


It is going viral as we speak... So strange that such a thing would become so popular right when I was getting back into Carl. I think I'm going to re-read [I]Contact[/I].

trolling through the threads I found this one back a month ago.
Carl S. show on PBS was amazing to me , and becaue of the repeats I was able to tape I think the whole series.

His perspective of the big bang , where we stand , and who we are is something we should all look at and put into perspective.

Seldom I ever see a show , yet a series that can even come close to what he narrated and produced.
If my memory serves me correctly , he was talked into doing the show , and he had his finger on the production to ensure it wasn't a feable tale , but a true perspective.

Needless to say - he is sorely missed.

[QUOTE=Jasper]trolling through the threads I found this one back a month ago.
Carl S. show on PBS was amazing to me , and becaue of the repeats I was able to tape I think the whole series.

His perspective of the big bang , where we stand , and who we are is something we should all look at and put into perspective.

Seldom I ever see a show , yet a series that can even come close to what he narrated and produced.
If my memory serves me correctly , he was talked into doing the show , and he had his finger on the production to ensure it wasn't a feable tale , but a true perspective.

Needless to say - he is sorely missed.[/QUOTE]

The question ultimately becomes, 'where there ever be another?'

I'm not so sure... There are a ton of geniuses out there and we have probably reached a point well beyond the things that Sagan was discovering and teaching. His true genius was not in his discoveries, though. His genius was in how easily he was able to communicate his findings and the principles (from intermediate to complex) theories of astronomy.

Scientists tend to be a standoffish breed, in many of my encounters. While they can write a 200-page research paper on the most complex theories, they are at a loss when trying to explain what it really means to a layman.

I just feel like he was a one-of-a-kind genius that we won't see again in our lifetime. Some of his messages resonate and hit a chord that only the greatest philosophers to ever live can challenge.

He had me spellbound as a child. Now, 20 years later, I am equally spellbound and astonished by the vastness of his knowledge and the ease with which he could discuss the complexities of the universe, our place in the cosmic arena and the potential of the human mind.

Carl Sagan is underappreciated?

He gets plenty of respect where I'm from...

i'm still killing that song rba.

"if you wish to make and apple pie from scratch, you must first invent the universe"


[QUOTE]His genius was in how easily he was able to communicate his findings and the principles (from intermediate to complex) theories of astronomy.[/QUOTE]
i've gotten into tyson of late, upon the recommendations of a few ISHiots, and he's an even better communicator than sagan. he doesn't have carl's trademark magical enunciation, but in explaining these complex concepts to us untrained morons - he's got the edge, if only a small one. and whats more, tyson has an incredible gift of exciting his audience with his explanations. its almost as if he can't contain his own excitement, and the audience can't help but feed off of it themselves. really awesome to watch - i can't help but become transfixed when he goes into his lengthy diatribes.

both guys are absolutely incredible though. i've got all of 'cosmos' on my computer (only an episode in so far), but i can't seem to find the episodes of 'science now' anywhere on the net. there are audio versions on the pbs website, but not even a torrent of the episodes.

i'm definitely going to find 'contact' as soon as possible, and hopefully get a chance to jump into it during christmas break.

[QUOTE=RidonKs]i'm still killing that song rba.

"if you wish to make and apple pie from scratch, you must first invent the universe"[/quote]

I can't stop... it has infected my brain (in a good way).

[I]But the brain does much more than just recollect
It inter-compares, it synthesizes, it analyzes
it generates abstractions

The simplest thought like the concept of the number one
Has an elaborate logical underpinning
The brain has it's own language
For testing the structure and consistency of the world[/I]

:bowdown: :bowdown: :bowdown:

[QUOTE=RidonKs]i've gotten into tyson of late, upon the recommendations of a few ISHiots, and he's an even better communicator than sagan. he doesn't have carl's trademark magical enunciation, but in explaining these complex concepts to us untrained morons - he's got the edge, if only a small one. and whats more, tyson has an incredible gift of exciting his audience with his explanations. its almost as if he can't contain his own excitement, and the audience can't help but feed off of it themselves. really awesome to watch - i can't help but become transfixed when he goes into his lengthy diatribes.[/quote]

Neil Tyson is good. I've listened to some of his stuff and, you are right... He is probably the heir apparent to Carl. He doesn't hit me with the same force, though. Like I said, it was Carl's incredible philosophical viewpoints that are maybe the most awe-inspiring thing to me.

In my relatively minor introduction to his stuff, his messages don't come off with the same power as Sagan's ultimate messages usually did. He is a great communicator, though.

I'll have to delve a little deeper.

[QUOTE=RidonKs]
i'm definitely going to find 'contact' as soon as possible, and hopefully get a chance to jump into it during christmas break.[/QUOTE]

I envy you that you have that book to look forward to. I wish I could read it again for the first time. Magical.

[QUOTE=catzhernandez]Carl Sagan is underappreciated?

He gets plenty of respect where I'm from...[/QUOTE]
Going by the comments section in every video that he has on youtube in which, it seems, no one under the age of 20 has any clue who Sagan is (and many older people don't, either)... Yes, I believe he is underappreciated. His teachings and philosophies should be widely recognized by the masses.

Btw, Donks...

[URL="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=imS6H1JAkGY"]Cool video of Tyson discussing the influence of Sagan on his life.[/URL]

[QUOTE=RedBlackAttack]Btw, Donks...

[URL="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=imS6H1JAkGY"]Cool video of Tyson discussing the influence of Sagan on his life.[/URL][/QUOTE]
very neat. imagine how fun it would have been to see those two in their primes, sitting in armchairs and shooting the s[COLOR="Black"]h[/COLOR]it with one another. i would pay a whole hell of a lot of money to see that.


what exactly did sagan do as a scientist/philosopher/astronomer that got him the reputation it did? or was his popularity the product of his series? i know he was deep in the extraterrestrial life field, but i have no idea what he actually accomplished.

[QUOTE=RidonKs]very neat. imagine how fun it would have been to see those two in their primes, sitting in armchairs and shooting the s[COLOR="Black"]h[/COLOR]it with one another. i would pay a whole hell of a lot of money to see that.


what exactly did sagan do as a scientist/philosopher/astronomer that got him the reputation it did? or was his popularity the product of his series? i know he was deep in the extraterrestrial life field, but i have no idea what he actually accomplished.[/QUOTE]
He was pretty much the top adviser at NASA for years (starting in the early days of space exploration, well before the moon landing). He was the chief in charge of the program when it made its most astounding breakthroughs in space travel.

He had several complex theories that ultimately turned out to be correct, most notably the temperature on Venus. His scientific findings were mostly involved in atmospheres and environments of other planets and moons.

He also founded SETI.

But, of course, he because world-renowned for his Cosmos series and his ability to mesmerize an audience.

just finished the second episode of cosmos blazed off my tree. holy fooking gawd.

i must say the entire concept of a cosmic calendar to put things into perspective is absolutely brilliant. i wonder if he was the first to use it.

[URL="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Q55z6EsL8M"]YES[/URL]

[QUOTE=RedBlackAttack]The question ultimately becomes, 'where there ever be another?'

I'm not so sure... There are a ton of geniuses out there and we have probably reached a point well beyond the things that Sagan was discovering and teaching. His true genius was not in his discoveries, though. His genius was in how easily he was able to communicate his findings and the principles (from intermediate to complex) theories of astronomy.

Scientists tend to be a standoffish breed, in many of my encounters. While they can write a 200-page research paper on the most complex theories, they are at a loss when trying to explain what it really means to a layman.

I just feel like he was a one-of-a-kind genius that we won't see again in our lifetime. Some of his messages resonate and hit a chord that only the greatest philosophers to ever live can challenge.

He had me spellbound as a child. Now, 20 years later, I am equally spellbound and astonished by the vastness of his knowledge and the ease with which he could discuss the complexities of the universe, our place in the cosmic arena and the potential of the human mind.[/QUOTE]

I think some of our current scientists are not fully duvulging (spl.) some of their insightfullness for a couple of reasons I have been pondering about ever since the Bush administration.

I keep tab's on NASA periodically , but the assumption about why they are trying to determine the history of Mars and whats their take on exploration is not letting the public fully in on their directives.
IMO I think the Hubble has shown them that something serious is coming our way and I am not talking about the Telabon - nut cases.
I am thinking that there just might be a meteror or something that is bearing down on us , maybe in 100 years or so.
To assume they could migrate to Mars and keep our human race active is one thing , but for future generations they would seriously need to locate a planet that would be similar to our own.
When Bush stated that he wanted to use the moon as a jumping platform for scientific studies to Mars , now they are checking to see if the MOON actually has ice (H2O) there :confusedshrug:

Say for instance the planet got nuc'ed , the idea that the United Nations would not get 100% involved seems to tell me that scientists around the world were possibly hushed , about something that is coming our way.

Our world society , besides technology is in its baby steps , so if by chance they are truely aware of something cosmic , we are not being told.

[QUOTE=Jasper]I think some of our current scientists are not fully duvulging (spl.) some of their insightfullness for a couple of reasons I have been pondering about ever since the Bush administration.

I keep tab's on NASA periodically , but the assumption about why they are trying to determine the history of Mars and whats their take on exploration is not letting the public fully in on their directives.
IMO I think the Hubble has shown them that something serious is coming our way and I am not talking about the Telabon - nut cases.
I am thinking that there just might be a meteror or something that is bearing down on us , maybe in 100 years or so.
To assume they could migrate to Mars and keep our human race active is one thing , but for future generations they would seriously need to locate a planet that would be similar to our own.
When Bush stated that he wanted to use the moon as a jumping platform for scientific studies to Mars , now they are checking to see if the MOON actually has ice (H2O) there :confusedshrug:

Say for instance the planet got nuc'ed , the idea that the United Nations would not get 100% involved seems to tell me that scientists around the world were possibly hushed , about something that is coming our way.

Our world society , besides technology is in its baby steps , so if by chance they are truely aware of something cosmic , we are not being told.[/QUOTE]
:roll:

there is an asteroid coming towards earth, around 300 meters wide. and according to predictions, it isn't going to pass by in a hundred years or so, it's going to pass by in twenty-seven years or so. 2036. now there remains just a fraction of a chance that it collides with the planet - according to wiki, when it was discovered in 2004 there was around a 2.7 percent chance of collision, and that number has since decreased dramatically to about 1 in 250,000. still, it's the largest observable object that has ever passed this close to earth. if there still remains a chance that the asteroid may hit our planet (however minuscule that chance may be and continue becoming), why would the scientists let that bit of info slip?

you use commas weird.

"Look again at that dot. That's here. That's home. That's us. On it everyone you love, everyone you know, everyone you ever heard of, every human being who ever was, lived out their lives. The aggregate of our joy and suffering, thousands of confident religions, ideologies, and economic doctrines, every hunter and forager, every hero and coward, every creator and destroyer of civilization, every king and peasant, every young couple in love, every mother and father, hopeful child, inventor and explorer, every teacher of morals, every corrupt politician, every "superstar," every "supreme leader," every saint and sinner in the history of our species lived there – on a mote of dust suspended in a sunbeam.

The Earth is a very small stage in a vast cosmic arena. Think of the rivers of blood spilled by all those generals and emperors so that, in glory and triumph, they could become the momentary masters of a fraction of a dot. Think of the endless cruelties visited by the inhabitants of one corner of this pixel on the scarcely distinguishable inhabitants of some other corner, how frequent their misunderstandings, how eager they are to kill one another, how fervent their hatreds.

Our posturings, our imagined self-importance, the delusion that we have some privileged position in the Universe, are challenged by this point of pale light. Our planet is a lonely speck in the great enveloping cosmic dark. In our obscurity, in all this vastness, there is no hint that help will come from elsewhere to save us from ourselves.

The Earth is the only world known so far to harbor life. There is nowhere else, at least in the near future, to which our species could migrate. Visit, yes. Settle, not yet. Like it or not, for the moment the Earth is where we make our stand.

It has been said that astronomy is a humbling and character-building experience. There is perhaps no better demonstration of the folly of human conceits than this distant image of our tiny world. To me, it underscores our responsibility to deal more kindly with one another, and to preserve and cherish the pale blue dot, the only home we've ever known."

- Carl Sagan

[QUOTE=No.45]"Look again at that dot. That's here. That's home. That's us. On it everyone you love, everyone you know, everyone you ever heard of, every human being who ever was, lived out their lives. The aggregate of our joy and suffering, thousands of confident religions, ideologies, and economic doctrines, every hunter and forager, every hero and coward, every creator and destroyer of civilization, every king and peasant, every young couple in love, every mother and father, hopeful child, inventor and explorer, every teacher of morals, every corrupt politician, every "superstar," every "supreme leader," every saint and sinner in the history of our species lived there

[QUOTE=RidonKs]very neat. imagine how fun it would have been to see those two in their primes, sitting in armchairs and shooting the s[COLOR="Black"]h[/COLOR]it with one another. i would pay a whole hell of a lot of money to see that.[/QUOTE]
i don't think we need to. they both would have replicated huge swaths of information, just via different styles.

the fact that one remembers the other and sublimates him in his message and in his research is the way these formulas are supposed to work, have always worked, and do in fact work.

[QUOTE=gigantes]i don't think we need to. they both would have replicated huge swaths of information, just via different styles.

the fact that one remembers the other and sublimates him in his message and in his research is the way these formulas are supposed to work, have always worked, and do in fact work.[/QUOTE]
clearly. but as a fan of these two particular gentleman, i'd be thrilled to see them sit down in all of their brilliance and have a conversation about the cosmos. maybe more so even than einstein and newton - because 9/10s of what they said would go over my head. tyson and sagan can speak in laymen, and would therefore be fascinating to watch. it's similar to any basketball fan who would be thrilled to watch jordan and lebron match up one on one. it would be an absolute blast.

it really wouldn't, and that's my whole point.

jordan vs. lebron would be close to a standstill. each would bring some unique skills to the table and each would negate some of the others' strength. it's only a fantasy matchup the way that kids think that [url=http://www.japanesebugfights.com/]fighting bugs[/url] are an interesting fantasy matchup.

the real genius and interest level is in their impact across a team.

remove yourself from the video / technology age and you have to deal with the fact that only one guru is generally available at a time. it's the universality of their message that is the whole point, and always has been.

you're absolutely chalkful of insanity. so because lebron and mike excel at providing opportunities for their teammates, watching them battle each other in a 1v1 match of the ages wouldn't be exciting? the very fact that it is a standstill makes it such an intense event to behold. two of the most explosive athletes - from any sport - going against each other with no mitigating factors. find me a fan of basketball who wouldn't LOVE to see that.

[QUOTE]it really wouldn't, and that's my whole point.[/QUOTE]
it would be - i'm astounded that you can't grasp my point. these are two of the most communicative scientists since the dawn of the scientific era. their ability to use speech in translating complex theories of physics and biology and chemistry - to give a layman like myself (and from what i understand, you as well) a better chance at grasping significance - is not something you can discard.

i don't want to hear them have a conversation about the cosmos because they're the two most intelligent men to have ever walked the planet. but as academic heroes of mine, and as transmitters of knowledge to the general public, it would be an awesome experience to hear these two - both of the same breed and equally capable in expressing themselves - to go over the advancements of astrophysics over the past 40 years. forget that they come from different eras. i'm taking them for what they are - communicators of science to the general public - which includes me - and wishing that i could hear them talk to one another.

i don't know how i can explain it any simpler than that.

[QUOTE]remove yourself from the video / technology age and you have to deal with the fact that only one guru is generally available at a time. it's the universality of their message that is the whole point, and always has been.
[/QUOTE]
i have no idea where this came from, but i wouldn't mind hearing you elaborate.

wow! thanks for the hulu link. tonight is a great night to blaze and watch something like this.

:cheers: