advertisement


BBC • The Planets

I like Brain Cox, David Attenborough, Carl Sagan, and Professor Julius Sumner Miller — a physicist I used to watch as a kid.



Joe
 
Love this show. I welcome Brian Cox...he is one of those presenters that still get excited like a four year old when talking about his passions, even things he already knew he gets super enthusiastic about, and thats quite infectious....plus he seems like a decent Manc, which are few and far between!
 
Marchy,

I thought Julius Sumner Miller looked more like a crazy Peter Gabriel.

Joe
 
giphy-downsized.gif


How was the next episode?

Joe
 
I’m enjoying it, but I’m mildly irritated by the way the script depicts (informed) speculation about events as irrefutable facts. It says things like ‘4 billion years ago, Mars was devastated by a huge bombardment of meteorites, caused by Neptune’ when a lot of this is basically conjecture. It wouldn’t hurt the narrative to add in a few ‘we now think that...’ to qualify things a bit.
 
Steve,

Sue Pertwee-Tyr said:
I’m enjoying it, but I’m mildly irritated by the way the script depicts (informed) speculation about events as irrefutable facts. It says things like ‘4 billion years ago, Mars was devastated by a huge bombardment of meteorites, caused by Neptune’ when a lot of this is basically conjecture. It wouldn’t hurt the narrative to add in a few ‘we now think that...’ to qualify things a bit.
Click to expand...

We now think that Mars was devastated by a huge bombardment of meteorites caused by Uranus.

I see what you mean.

Joe
 
The only thing more unbelievable than Brian Cox playing a New Year's Eve all-nighter in Leeds I went to in '93/94 is the size of the universe. It's fascinating what we can never know.

 
Bought one of his books once and half of it was taken up with him posing in different parts of the world , it was more about him really.
Like the planets series but would prefer it with another presenter , he just gets in the way.
LP12 owner too.
 
Jonathan said:
science 'popularizers' often get hate for whatever reason ... I think they are seen by established scientists as 'dumbing down' or simplifying the material. e.g. Carl Sagan or Stephen Hawking ... it's the only real explanation i can think of really ... have no problems with him myself ...
Click to expand...

Me either, but if it’s the mad scientist type you’re looking for, Magnus Pike will never be beat.
 
I think he's a super presenter. Love his enthusiastic but not overblown manner. One of my favourite TV series for a long time.
 
Really enjoyed the first episode. The science behind sending a probe to mercury is nearly as mind bending as the randomness of the existence of life on earth. Always a useful reminder.
 
I don't dislike Brian Cox, but his presentation style sends me to sleep.

I'm afraid that as far as I'm concerned fancy graphics and loads of conjecture don't make convincing science. Last nights Jupiter episode was a case in point and quite poor I thought, and it didn't hold my attention.

I wish more had been made of the stuff sent back by the various orbiter and probe missions with more input from their respective project teams.
 
I like the fancy graphics, they add some visual substance to the theories, but I do get kind of distracted trying to figure out the carbon footprint of Brian Cox, who seems to need to be in a different geographical location for every single shot to camera! My suspicion is the BBC need to go and plant a rainforest to offset him.
 
Tony L said:
I like the fancy graphics, they add some visual substance to the theories, but I do get kind of distracted trying to figure out the carbon footprint of Brian Cox, who seems to need to be in a different geographical location for every single shot to camera! My suspicion is the BBC need to go and plant a rainforest to offset him.
Click to expand...
Brian COx, where x=2
 
You must log in or register to reply here.


advertisement


Back
Top