Brian Tung wrote:
Shawn wrote:
Tyson has better graphics though. :-)

Hardly a ringing endorsement, I think. :-o

How about this: Tyson has a conversational manner that I find more
engaging than Sagan's gee whiz sharing of his wonder at the Cosmos. IMO
I find Tyson informative, more of a reporter, whereas Sagan was more of
an evangelist.

The saddest part of the
comparison is that there was a guy popularizing astronomy and science 25
years ago, and there's a guy doing it now and Bill Nye for kids in
between.

I must be having trouble parsing this: What is sad about the thing you
pointed out?

It's great that Sagan, Tyson, Nye, or even the Myth Busters are (or
were) out there spreading science to the public. But we live in a
society utterly dependent on technology based on scientific discovery,
and yet a bunch of science geeks (us) can only come up with a handful of
names of people out there trying to teach astronomy to the masses.
Compare and Contrast with the number of football pundits out there
(American or otherwise FTM). I find it sad.


Shawn