I know "Possible worlds" is a sequel of "Our cosmos".
But it has to be said. Episode 12 "Coming of Age in the Anthropocene" is clearly from my point of view the weakest episode in all Cosmos episodes so far.
Why? It is more about "Climage change" than it is just about science.
No quesiton: Seth MacFarlanes Animations espescially about Kassandra in ancient Greece crisp and great done like always. Thats why I give it 4 stars.
But Neil Neil Neil. That with the baby in the beginning it looked really unprofessional. If you want to persuade people that there is climate change and it is an ongoing problem you dont have use emotions to let people thing its super-urgent.
You can try scientifically.
And I find it really annoying that we use a scientific terms "Anthropocene" to mask the real topic of this episode that was only hinted in earlier ones.
But then again: Just to make it clear. Im a real admirer of Neil de Grase Tyson's work and most of his shows. Nova Science now probably being one of the best shows he moderated before "Cosmos". And last christmas I bought two of his books "Astrophysics for People in a Hurry".
I know Carl Sagan was also supporthing thesis for "climage change" . And that Neil is a gread admirer of his works. And that they personally met. I guess the global agenda and his strong relationship left him no choice to also cover this topic. But I think its not really the topic you can communicate well in a docu format. Its more for discussion formats like the talshow "Star talk". I mean ofcourse with people pro and against . All based on scientific facts ofcourse. What else?
But it has to be said. Episode 12 "Coming of Age in the Anthropocene" is clearly from my point of view the weakest episode in all Cosmos episodes so far.
Why? It is more about "Climage change" than it is just about science.
No quesiton: Seth MacFarlanes Animations espescially about Kassandra in ancient Greece crisp and great done like always. Thats why I give it 4 stars.
But Neil Neil Neil. That with the baby in the beginning it looked really unprofessional. If you want to persuade people that there is climate change and it is an ongoing problem you dont have use emotions to let people thing its super-urgent.
You can try scientifically.
And I find it really annoying that we use a scientific terms "Anthropocene" to mask the real topic of this episode that was only hinted in earlier ones.
But then again: Just to make it clear. Im a real admirer of Neil de Grase Tyson's work and most of his shows. Nova Science now probably being one of the best shows he moderated before "Cosmos". And last christmas I bought two of his books "Astrophysics for People in a Hurry".
I know Carl Sagan was also supporthing thesis for "climage change" . And that Neil is a gread admirer of his works. And that they personally met. I guess the global agenda and his strong relationship left him no choice to also cover this topic. But I think its not really the topic you can communicate well in a docu format. Its more for discussion formats like the talshow "Star talk". I mean ofcourse with people pro and against . All based on scientific facts ofcourse. What else?
