Worth-the-watch science series?
- Thread starter wegs
- Start date
How ghastly. Bloody Dawkins on his soapbox again.
Sure, there are a few times he talks about faith vs reason, but for the most part, he talks about evolution and shows enough here to warrant combating any Creationist or ID proponent.
Thanks for the suggestion, Q. Yea, not a fan of Dawkins as he gets a little long winded, but I'll check it out seeing you find it ''must watch'' worthy.
There is a series that came out a few years back about Einstein, I'll have to google the exact title of the series, but it was based on his entire life, not just his scientific contributions, although the series is mainly about that. (He had quite a dating life lol) It is worth the watch, because it's a very well-rounded view of Einstein, not the sterilized version we tend to think of.
There is a series that came out a few years back about Einstein, I'll have to google the exact title of the series, but it was based on his entire life, not just his scientific contributions, although the series is mainly about that. (He had quite a dating life lol) It is worth the watch, because it's a very well-rounded view of Einstein, not the sterilized version we tend to think of.
DaveC426913
Valued Senior Member
Just finished watching My Octopus Teacher on Netflix. Incredible footage.
I saw this pop up on Netflix last night and meant to come back to it. Great! I’ll check it out.
Yep, will be watching that this week sometime.
Others that are now somewhat dated, but worth the effort if you can get hold of them are...."Love and Bananas" An Elephant Story: [have a box of tissues handy] The most thought provoking video I have ever seen. [This Thai women, "Lek" is incredible!! [a preview]
and third,"Blackfish" [a preview]
He was giving some lectures about biology to interested children at Christmas time. Hardly soapbox territory.How ghastly. Bloody Dawkins on his soapbox again.
The old 70's "Cosmos" series is well worth a watch and available on dvd at the ABC...somewhat dated now, but the ease and competent manner in which Sagan gets across his message is worth it.
Recently of course updated and narrated by Neil De-Grasse Tyson and Sagan's former wife Ann Duryan .
And another excellent doco is David Attenborough's, "Life on our Planet"
Recently of course updated and narrated by Neil De-Grasse Tyson and Sagan's former wife Ann Duryan .
And another excellent doco is David Attenborough's, "Life on our Planet"
DaveC426913
Valued Senior Member
An incredible show that fueled my teenage science enthusiasm.
It was shown on the ABC [Australian Broadcasting Commision] in Sydney in the early/mid 70's, on a Sunday arvo, in 12 part series. Never missed an episode, even after a Saturday night out on the booze! Incredible, certainly!
Ansemthewise
Registered Member
Through the Wormhole (TV Series 2010–2017) - IMDb
1: its hosted by MORGAN FREEMAN
2: it's got 62 episodes with qualified scientists discussing matters such as: time travel, dark matter, god particle, aliens, robots, reality etc...
3:IT'S HOSTED BY MORGAN FREEMAN!!!
Through the Wormhole (TV Series 2010–2017) - IMDb
1: its hosted by MORGAN FREEMAN
2: it's got 62 episodes with qualified scientists discussing matters such as: time travel, dark matter, god particle, aliens, robots, reality etc...
3:IT'S HOSTED BY MORGAN FREEMAN!!!
Through the Wormhole (TV Series 2010–2017) - IMDb
Yazata
Valued Senior Member
It might not technically be a science series, or at least a conventional one, but I absolutely loved Mythbusters. Great experiments, great cast ensemble... and lots and lots of explosions.
https://duckduckgo.com/?q=mythbusters episodes&iax=videos&ia=videos
Sadly, “Finding Bigfoot” is considered science by Discovery and Animal Planet.
I suppose cryptozoology could be science if it was approached properly. But I wouldn't really trust Discovery to do that.
Mythbusters is a great show, indeed! The common sense practicality of the show has been helpful in kicking some long held myths of my own.
It was far more about entertainment than being informative. Most of the fielded (urban)'myths' could have been busted (or occasionally confirmed) without doing any spectacular stunt 'experiments'. Just apply basic physics. But that dull approach wouldn't generate sufficient prime-time revenue for the network hosting Mythbusters.
DaveC426913
Valued Senior Member
I thought they did a good job of finding a balance.
Their mandate was to test the actual myth as-stated - not some small-scale of it - so that very often required full-scale, full-power simulations. Examples:
- can you surf on a shock wave,
- can you survive an explosion if protected by a paneled roof,
- can you jump in a plummeting elevator to save your life,
- can you use a rocket to make a swing go 360 degrees, etc.
And then - only once they'd rigorously tested the myth as-stated - would they scale it up outrageously, just for fun. But: they were quite clear that that part was just for entertainment.
Last edited:
DaveC426913
Valued Senior Member
The one myth I wanted them to prove - but they stopped before I could submit it - is floating a kiloton ship in a bucketful of water.
I think they would would rejected it because - while it can be done in theory - it is virtually impossible to demonstrate. (How do you demonstrate a layer of water is only a few hundred molecules thick over its surface area of hundreds of square yards?)
Most “reality shows” are contrived and a bit scripted. But as you say, just being straight with the viewing audience might be considered a bore, which is sad in a way if many people feel that science topics can’t also be entertaining.
Indeed and indeed.
