Carl Sagan's Cosmos Episode 2 part3

[merkaba1]

I love how he condensed the entire history of the universe into 1 calendar year. Entire spices evolving in fractions of a second on December 31st, what a trip. Thanks for all the thought provoking, inspiring concepts Mr. Sagan!

[TheREALDanontheMoon]

You can observe evolution in a petri dish. It's a fact.

[BlackHawkEU]

Please note that I never said that the theory is wrong. It may be true. I only say that we do not know. And believing in it is religion. Not science.

[kp13822]

@BlackHawkEU Scientist don't "believe in" evolution like a religion. A scientific theory makes predictions and is supported by facts. Any scientific theory can be falsified, however, the facts have continued to support evolutionary theory. It is unlikely that the basic premise of evolution is false, however, the details may be changed as new facts are obtained. All we can really say is that evolution is the best theory we currently have to explain the diversity of life.

[BlackHawkEU]

@kp13822 Actually, science of today is worse than religion in dark ages. Is a large scale of censorship of ideas based on the fact that main stream considers idiotic anything not backed by scientific dogma at the time. However, all steps in human evolution point to the fact that all new ideas are rejected by what we consider to "understanding of life" at some point in time. I do believe evolution is real. But evolution theory is far from having proof to be exact and theory as is may be fake.

[kp13822]

@BlackHawkEU There don't seem to be many papers submitted for peer review of theories that falsify the basic premise of evolution. If these theories exist and are testable or make predictions, then the authors have to play by the same rules as other scientists. I'm sure that most scientist would be reluctant to dismiss evolutionary theory, but if a strong enough case is made, then, eventually, the theory would have to be dropped or modified.

[BlackHawkEU]

Fossils will prove that those forms of life existed in past. Those only prove that something was there. Not that that something changed its DNA and converted in a new specie. The fact that life is vast, diverse, rich, is something no one can debate. Is right in front of you. But until you can prove that the evolution happens the way Darwin says, is just a theory, and the fact that is presented as fact is one of the greatest scams in modern history

[BlackHawkEU]

None of what he says is proved. However, is interesting to watch. A bit religious tho.

[cookechris28]

@BlackHawkEU Really? NOTHING of what he's said is proved? Bullshit. Watch it again. Fossils, science, watch all of this again.

[DEKeeble]

Mr Anderson...

[ekeeywaka]

I want this music.



[dhinz23]

@VideoAssembly

Amen, Brother!

[nikfirehazard]

ooh i bet the god botherers are mad as hell right now!

[MrRedpath]

@Eidolon234 It's Vangelis, the Heaven and Hell album I think.

[snipeefox]

Carl Sagan captivates me entirely, even when speaking of things I already know of. This series is so beautiful, interesting, and wondrous.

[visualart139]

@solidkake talking snake lmao

[karkovice10]

Although Dr. Sagan says here that it's a great mystery as to what caused the extinction of the dinosaurs, it's widely accepted now that it was because of that giant asteroid that crashed into Earth some 65 million years ago.

[DoctorGreyMD]

One thing that I like about Carl Sagan’s theories is that he speaks of cosmic events and universal ideas with such respect, almost a kind of reverence.

[matatan69]

@decaalv I saw cosmos and went to church at the same time and that did not negatively influence me in any way shape or form. so please stop portraying religions as the bad Karma.

[hargilad]

carl sagan makes lots of use in the phrase "by accident" i very much respect him ans science, buts thats hardly a proof of anything against theological claims.

[harrypalms1112]

Carl sagans' beauty is that he can make an idiot like me understand.

[DrakeMagnum]

@decaalv That is my own story exactly.

[Anomnom55]

Carl Sagan makes reference to DNA as being the first "living molecule". I would like to point out that there is actual debate onto whether it was actually DNA or RNA.  Nonetheless one succeeded the other.

[iraul20]

@Anomnom55 Carl Sagan was like Da Vinci, a man trapped in the technology or lack of in his time

[BjornPalmen]

@iraul20 He would have liked to see Huygens landing on Titan.

[sondano]

everyone who denies evolution explain the appendix. God sure was in funny mood to put something in humans without any useful function only to be yet another source of potential disease

[andywagoner]

cool program.

[phatmike21]

Ive always kind of understood evolution, but this explanation just makes it so clear and simplified in my mind. Carl Sagan is truly a legend.

[cirvine11]

The animations approach high art. Well ahead of their time.

[Bondianwolf]

(continued) Ask a scientist about his wedding ritual, his father's burial ritual. Superstitions abound among us all. Let's not forget that almost 90% of the planet identifies itself as "believing in some manner of God". We are still a young and frightened species governed more by our fears than our logic. Evolution makes sense to me, but what "force" in nature led to the big bang? Let's remain humble, as there are still many more questions yet to be asked, than have already been answered.

[trespire]

@Bondianwolf One school of thought does not nessacerily exclude the other. Both Creationism and Evolution have their merits. I don't see that either of these theories can fully explain life on Earth as we see it today. Our minds demand an explanations of how it came to be, but our hearts call our for a reason for why it came to be. Science without values can lead to monstrosaties, Belief without questioning can lead to dogma.

[Bondianwolf]

@trespire

The truth is we aren't that intelligent. We created God in OUR image because we are scared and ego-centric. Science does not provide all (or even enough of) the answers nor does religion. We breed ourselves toward extinction. Honor and integrity are not the hallmarks of humanity. Fear and hypocrisy are our defining characteristics. 6 billion sentient beings that don't get along. Our species-wide self-loathing is born out of a realization that we are not likable. Sad but true.

[matatan69]

@Bondianwolf , I dont have god in my mind, I feel it in my soul. but atheist don't understand that connection, its like trying to tell a blind person the colours of the rainbow.

[ImaxDSHIFTJavier]

@matatan69 thats a poor example. what if an atheist were to hav a deep, spiritual connection, but not a divine one? OR what if a very devoutly religious person stops believing? what if an atheist describing a godless life to a christian is the same as ur metaphor? the example is flawed; youre assuming that those who worship god are automatically enlightened. a non-believer is just as likely to have an open heart as a christian is to hav an open mind.

[Bondianwolf]

@matatan69

I'm paraphrasing, but I think Einstein said, "My sense of God is my sense of wonder about the Universe." Most people confuse God and religion (and without religion we are still living in caves in 2010). Is there a sentient moral authority in the Universe? I don't know. But if there is he has a Hell of a sense of humor. How else do you explain the male obsession with women in the face of their absolute indifference to us?

;^)

[donttrustany1]

@matatan69 You're dumb.

[Bondianwolf]

I knew this episode would breed much hostility and name calling from the "enlightened" on both sides. Lets not forget that Sagan himself included a "holy" character in his greatest work of fiction and made him intelligent and thoughtful. Tho I favor evolution, I understand how the beauty and diversity of life on earth seems beyond the realm of "accident" for many people. I do not hate them, nor do I feel sorry for them. Even scientists are prone to superstition on occasion. (continued)

[dprague]

There is no way evolution happen. Man was made from dust. Now, does that not makes sence?

I need my meds again.

[ericberner]

I love Cosmos and Sagan but man, those dinosaur illustrations are embarrassing. Just goes to show you what we've discovered in short period of time.

[kanga888]

you have an eyelash

[FleetingRelevance]

@ericberner discovered cgi. yes.

[geeko55]

Without Carl's example of our cosmic timeline in the calender form he picked, I would be having a hard to be comprehending actually how long the earth took to be.

[Peacemaker8310]

Just something to think about:  Here is a quote from the world-renown scientist Stephen Hawking: "The usual approach of science, constructing a mathematical model, cannot answer the questions of why there should be a universe for the model to describe. Why does the universe go to all the bother of existing?"

[Davemanz]

@Peacemaker8310 But that doesn't mean the science is wrong, just incomplete in describing the entirety of existence. The only thing the Hawking quote could lead one to believe is a model of God as a being who doesn't give two shits about humanity because the creation of the entire universe is so much more complicated and important.

[iraqsucksass]

trust me...carl sagan is fucking einstein compared to anybody who believes in creationism. sorry, but if you believe in creationism, you're a retard.

[fermerwuvu]

@iraqsucksass fucking agreed!.

[1235washington]

@iraqsucksass Your analogy is retarded. I would say that Sagan and Einstein are intellectual equals. Therefore your analogy holds no water. The fact that 51 people like your weak-ass comment is a testament to how stupid most people are. I don't think Mr. Sagan ever intended for his viewers to start immature and pseudo-intellectual poo-flinging debates between atheists and theists. Your comment is most unwelcome.

[arrourasanti2]

@iraqsucksass so newton was a retard? dude.. you've just given me a great example of a logical fallacy for english class...

[DissenteensInRevolt]

@arrourasanti2 Newton lived 400 years ago, back when they killed you for believing the earth went around the sun. He means with modern understanding.

[mecher3k]

@arrourasanti2

Yea he kinda was.

[28october19731]

@iraqsucksass exactly, I love it, they are a bunch of fucking pigs aren't they, that's why the world's a toilet, fucking 99% of these idiots actually think something comes after this, it keeps people from concentrating ON THIS life, just like the powers that be want...you have to control the savages somehow :O) I see things differently than nearly all people...I think humanity is actually quite fucking disgusting, if there is a designer...you guys can have it...

[solidkake]

Atheistic fairy tale science huh? So what your pretty much saying is that believing in some cosmic jewish zombie that can make you live forever if you symbolically eat his flesh and telepathically tell him you accept him as your master so he can remove an evil force from your soul that is present in humanity because a rib-woman was convinced by a talking snake to eat from a magical tree, is the right way than?

[fermerwuvu]

@solidkake haha yea:D..who ever made that up was definitely high!..

[guild1981]

@solidkake this is by far the most amusing, direct and absolutely correct reply to any religious hogwash. well said my friend, very well said.

[matatan69]

@solidkake Call it fairy tale if you want but many of the misteries described since thousands of years ago in the bible are slowly emerging in ways that scientist are left astonished like quantum entanglement, spontaneous creation and the prediction of hidden dimensions. Actually Richard Feynman's QED theory predicts that the wildest of our dreams do exist somewhere in our universe, and Yes my friend that also includes the possibility of a Jewish zombie excluding you from ethernal live,

[comicreaper]

@solidkake Ah I read that one before too not original, but still serves a very good purpose.

[VideoAssembly]

@solidkake "Atheistic fairy tale science huh? So what your pretty much saying is that believing in some cosmic jewish zombie that can make you live forever if you symbolically eat his flesh and telepathically tell him you accept him as your master so he can remove an evil force from your soul that is present in humanity"

I don't know what drugs I would have to take to make that a possibility but if you have any let me know, lol.

[Rymaldub]

ajmjw4--- your arrogance surprises me, Carl Sagan was a very intelligent person that promoted ending the nuclear arms race. His science and teachings should be held into consideration, as he was a person a positive influence not to just America, but the world.

[ajmjw4]

(4)

This is Atheistic Fairy Tale Science. There is NO science which explains how DNA forms. NONE. Never has been, its never been observed and I find it hysterical that you consider this science. You are so blinded.

This is as dishonest as man made global warming.

[dprague]

ajmjw4 prove that I am not God.

[ajmjw4]

dprague - good question.

Predict the manner in which you will die, then die, stay dead for three days and come back from the grave and I will accept you are God.

Jesus did that to prove He had power over death. Anyone can write a post and claim to be God, anyone can write a book and say it is 'god's book'. But God will have power over death. Only Jesus proved that and that is what makes Him unique.

Please advise on the time and manner of your death and I will wait and see.

thanks

[dprague]

ajmjw4 - prove to me that jesus rose from the dead. And please do not qoute of the the 27 versions of your bible. the quran talks about jesus too. but no mention of him rising from the dead. And please provide a single shred of evidence of any god.What happen to zues, athena and thor? Why if god created adam and eve and if you read the bible god was never disconnected from people, why did these gods exist, ever? The idea of a single god came about only 4,000 years ago with the hebrew text.

[ajmjw4]

You asked me for my test to prove you are God.

I have given you my test and you acknowledge that you are not God.

That completes the answer to your question.

Next -

[ajmjw4]

Now to the next point.

I believe because I was born again back in 1982. The Spirit of Christ came into me when I accepted Christ. And I am more aware of His presence than the computer upon which I am typing.

You asked me a question and I answered it. Now I will ask you a question:

Prove to me that love exists.

[ajmjw4]

(3)

HAHAHAHAA.. This is what you base your science upon? molecules were spontaneously recombining into more complex molecules and quite by accident a molecule arose which was able to make crude copies of itself. Can anyone tell how this is any different than a fairy tale? There is NO science behind this. This phenomena has NEVER been observed in life that somehow lightning and ultraviolet light is going to quite by accident make a molecule that can make copies of itself.

[maurice]

I'm an evolutionist, but I wouldn't expect any creationist to be swayed by the animation in this Cosmos episode, of DNA replicating. The blue blobby enzyme just drifts along the DNA nodding at it, exerting influence etherally, not even touching it . How was that supposed to convince creationists that the enzyme actually physically intervenes in the DNA in an explainable way and makes explainable atomic changes happen?

[Dreamerx47]

please dont degrade yourself by using the term evolutionist

its for retards and retards only

i dont go around calling myself a gravitationalist

do you?

[cookiejun]

also, i doubt this was purely for creationists

[Dreamerx47]

when did i say it was?

[Alnain7]

Well, you say it's for retards...

[BjornPalmen]

@ajmjw4 Well given enough time it could happen. And there were millions of years for it to happen!

[ajmjw4]

Part 2 The products of this early chemistry dissolved in the oceans forming a kind of organic soup of gradually increasing complexity until one day, quite by accident a molecule arose which was able to make crude copies of itself using as building blocks the other molecules in the soup. This was the ancestor of DNA the master molecule of life on earth.

[ajmjw4]

From Carl Sagans Cosmos 3 Episode 2 part 2-3

In his most nasal voice Sagan sniffed, no..the first stirrings of life were much more humble, and happened on the molecular level. In those early days, lightning and ultraviolet light from the sun were breaking apart simple hydrogen rich molecules in the primitive atmosphere. And the fragments of the molecules were spontaneously recombining into more complex molecules

[JOEFRO2]

Isn't life grand?

[hismadjesty]

Hitch Hiker's Guide to the Galaxy music!

[legoflamb]

Why did sexual reproduction survive and become more advanced than a-sexual reproduction? It takes two "parent" cells to produce one offspring, where as only one with a-sexually. It also take a minimum birthrate of 2.8 offspring per pair to stabilize a population. For sexual reproduction a pair of cells have to survive to get the CHANCE to multiply, where as with a-sexual reproduction only one. The survival rate must be double that of a-sexual reproduction for sexual to continue.

[legoflamb]

Why--as cells-- did our DNA survive? Why did any other species that use sexual reproduction continue to survive when competing with the other cells that could reproduce a-sexually?

I'll admit I have no answers to these questions. I would like answers though, and I have heard many speculative argument. None have had any factuality. Obviously I'm asking the wrong people.

[SirNewt]

Simply because there is little to no selection involved in which genes will perpetuate in a-sexual reproduction. Sexual reproduction is beneficial. Mate selection is an excellent tool for increasing the pace of the adaptation process. Human selection is an even more powerful one, as the diverse species bred to specific human purposes like sheep dogs and various vegetables demonstrate.

[legoflamb]

I see that as true because it did happen. I also agree that adaptation is useful to those that know how to use it(as a tool). However in the respect to randomness, and a cells inability to comprehend, strength-in-numbers out weighs adaptability. I notice your use of "tool" and "bred" is contrary to randomness, but that will be over looked. Because that is the point I'm trying to make.

[19RedLineR74]

A-sexual single cell reproduction relies on random mutation and natural selection to advance beneficial traits. While in more complex organisms sexual reproduction can pass on benefits from 2 organisms and random mutation+natural selection becomes a secondary and not the prime.

[Skindoggiedog]

I really don't think 'mutation' is the right way to describe it either, and I don't believe I'm talking semantics when I say I really don't think what's going on has much to do with 'mutation' at all.

It's simply environmentally influenced change.

'Random mutation' may be a correct scientific phrase, but to the layman that means "for no reason", when, in fact, there ARE reasons that these changes are taking place.

[legoflamb]

Yes, when the genes get passed on. That is if the genes get passed on. First the pair have to survive in the "soup" up to that point of gene combination. Now the chance to reproduce has halved because a pair, one of each sex, now has to survive.

[19RedLineR74]

Isn't it common to all sexual reproducing organisms that the "combination" takes place within a protected environment, and only after combination the new "child" organism is exposed to the environment?

[legoflamb]

This is nature we are talking about. Since when does anything live entirely in a protected environment at all times. In nature, where is a perpetually safe place? I am talking about the events that lead up to when "combination" takes place. I have been proposing that the chances of survival are much less for a sexual organism than an a-sexual organism, considering the requirements of their reproduction.

[19RedLineR74]

Put another way... If A-sexual reproduction has any advantages over sexual reproduction, why have plants, animals, insects and humans, basically all groups of the most complex life on earth evolved to sexual reproduction?

[legoflamb]

That is my point, the question why. That is the question anyone with a mind should ask them selves. You have finally concluded this discussion that I have started for this very reason. To get someone to ask why. Just like Charles Darwin he asked why.

[legoflamb]

If Charles Darwin didn't ask why, he would not have discovered evolution. He would have accepted that god is our creator and would not have researched natural selection. If we stop asking why we will stop advancing just the same. We will be perpetually stuck with this last conceptual revolution from 1838.

I don't like current practices of science, it is an inquisition of any possible alternatives of 'why'.

[Gerafix]

Wow, what spurious understanding of evolution. Evolution is mostly not random. The only random aspect of evolution is the great variety of DNA mutation types. ******Everything else***** is either selected for, against, or is passed on just as coincidence. Sexual reproduction is superior to asexual when it comes to genetic variation and DNA repair, both of which was and is selected for. And was that was certainly important perhaps more so for the beginning of life.

[legoflamb]

I should restate my last sentence differently, as I love science. I just don't like the segregation of the scientific community.

I agree sexual reproduction has turned out to be superior to asexual for genetic variation and DNA repair. However, there is the example of E. coli. It can double its population size in 20 minutes and can change its self with in the range of a few weeks. My convoluted interpretation of evolution comes from what I see, read and been taught.

[legoflamb]

How can you be so certain that variation and DNA repair were important for the beginning of life? Has that been proved though research, hypothesis, experiments, and then concluded upon?

[TuX1fIed]

With 2 parents you also have greater diversity

[ourpalebluedot]

@legoflamb sexual reproduction enables chromosomes from each parent to make a more advanced set of chromosomes by "crossing-over" the best traits are carried on to the next generation fast than the time it would take mutations and other genes to be carried in asexual

[legoflamb]

@ourpalebluedot

I understand the processes of sexual reproduction, you don't need to quote a biology text book. However, there is something wrong in your statement. That is "the best traits are carried on..." That would imply some sort of intelligent design if gene crossover were selected and not random chance. This is the point I had been trying to make over the course of this old discussion.

Repeating statements doesn't create certainty.

[ourpalebluedot]

@legoflamb it seems like the intelligent design would only be balance, because the best traits are carried on further because cells are run by the enviornment in an act of stability.

[trespire]

@ourpalebluedot One basic (Physical) law of nature is that matter/energy will always gravitate to the lowest local energetic state (water flowing down a hill, discharge of electrical potential etc...), there by reaching a local state of equalibrium or balance. It is as you said, stability "run by the environment".

Process are influenced by environmental forces.

We percieve the beauty of nature, which is harmony.

"The oldest art form is the search for harmony".

[aswatful]

@legoflamb because asexual reproduction means no variation. and this means that if a deadly virus could kill a member of that population, it could completely wipe it out whereas in sexual reproduction there are many variations and there is a higher chance that a member of this population would be immune to it. -----the inconcievable nature of nature ,as an old man once said.

[Thewildside]

@legoflamb

So how did sex even come about?

[Vaxliscious]

@legoflamb Asexual reproduction produces clones. There's less genetic variation. If those genes on every single member of line are fatal, then there won't be any more of whatever it was. Sexual reproduction has more room for variation. Variety is what you want when you want to live.

[Skindoggiedog]

Random mutations have almost nothing to do with evolution. If you want to call environmental change in an organism as it develops "random mutation" then so be it, but simple random mutation does not have to be present in any way or form for evolution to work.

Genes can be, and are, changed by environment. Randomness, chance etc have nothing to do with evolution, and I hate the way most scientists try to explain it. It's no wonder most people don't understand it.

[19RedLineR74]

I see random mutation as part of evolution. Many random mutations occur, but only those mutations that are better adapted to their current environment survive. The rest, and even the mutation's ancestor perish. Rinse and repeat trillions of times... Random Mutation + Natural Selection = Evolution

[legoflamb]

That is a concept that has been explained many times, and doesn't get any more true than it already is if you repeat it again. I clearly see your ability to repeat what you have been told. however, do you understand the disadvantages of sexual vs. a-sexual reproduction of single celled organisms that we have evolved from? please enlighten me on this subject that I have limited knowledge of.

[Skindoggiedog]

I think the term "random mutation" is very misleading, and does not accurately describe what is going on. I don't think 'random' has the first thing to do with evolution, or, in fact, anything that ever occurs, did occur, or will occur in the existence of the universe.

Rolling a die is not random. A 'random-number-generator' on a computer is not random. They are all products of the forces that drive them and of the environment they're in.

Random does not exist.

[GeorgesBarras]

Yeah, everything is causally affected - discounting quantum physics - nothing is arbitrary.

[Skindoggiedog]

I don't know a lot about quantum physics, but the fact that just observing quantum physical events has an impact on their behaviour would point to the idea that they're causally affected too, the mechanics of it just not fully understood .... yet!

[GeorgesBarras]

That's true, good point.

[eightyocho]

I love that he sounds like Smith from The Matrix. I seem to remember him lecturing Neo about evolution, come to think of it...

[myroseaccount]

This episode showing the evolution of life through DNA is one of the finest sequences of popular science ever filmed. A masterpiece!

[Tulkastaldo]

It's too bad all that darned knowledge and reason and common sense got in the way of this great man believing in a God. He would have made such a great televangelist.

[Massflavour]

lmfao

[mohfoz77]

EXCELLENT.

CARL SAGAN was the wise man of the 20th century.

We miss him dearly.

[toolkills]

....i cant even play around...i was hoping to lure some frightening religious psychos into siding with me...only to be shot down by me explaining to them my secret agenda to humiliate their dumb primitive ass...SAGAN DOMINATES ALL !!!!

[farrc]

I agree with everything that he says but some things dont happen by accident. Its so hard to swollow. It seems that Science has something important missing. Hopefully things will be clearer in the future

[AbbeyNormal]

"Accident" is a bad choice of words here, I think. Really, in the absence of a creator there can't be an "accident" because that implies an intent of some kind. "Accident" here means "by natural means", in other words, having to do with randomness and shaped by the environment.

[Deshara218]

I completely agree-- Science is missing something in it, and always will. If you are about to mention religion, though, I must tell you that religion knows nothing, as it is, in nature, a thing that refuses to learn when it's wrong, only to lie and deceive to make people beleive it's always been right.

[TummyTush]

It is funny that some people still cling to myths to explain the origin and diversity of life.

[zardozy]

To think that the world would still be ruled by dinosaurs to this very day had not something weird and mysterious (an asteroid?)happened to snuff them out!

[chocolategood]

any1 know the song in the background? at 3:05.

its very calming and make you feel happy.

[DaveLH]

"Entends-Tu Les Chiens Aboyer?" by Vangelis, from his album, _Ignacio_.

[Cakerolled]

Raptor Jesus appeared to us on Christmas eve. Carl Sagan says so.

[sidensvans54]

Wish my teachers had been like carl sagan..

Lovely and so interesting.

[maaanddeuta]

Carl Sagan was and will be one of the greatest personalities that ever lived.

[RJL738]

small part of it comprising a nucleus. This cell then became far more complex and then gradually became multi celled until you get the average organism wich is comprised of trillions of cells ( humans have more than 100 trillion ) all working together for the whole.

[eliteobserver]

Sigh, now creationists are flooding Carl Sagan's ancient series of Cosmos?

Get with the times!

[RJL738]

That is the way it is still said more or less, my scources are about 3 years at the oldest. And I have great respect for him, I just disagree on some things.

[RJL738]

The way I'v heard it so often ( and this may be slightly off but pretty accurate ) is that chemicals gradually and ramdomly grouped adn oranged into biger and bigger groups. This gradually became DNA wich grouped together oever and over until you get primative nucleus and allitle bit of other material around it but mostly a nucleus. This gradually became an ordinary cell, ( still hundreds of times less complex than the simplest single celled organisms today ) now being mosly cell and having a

[Aldelirium]

Sorry Sagan but most mutations are neutral rather than harmful.

[CKtheFat]

Yeah. I wonder how old this documentary is now, new information probably would have changed his statement.

[redscooby]

oh with out a doubt,  but isn't that the beauty of science when it is done correctly. We can improve upon it and admit past inaccuracy sans ego. I have no doubt that even in the short time since his death, Carl would be amazed and in awe at the new findings of science, especially string theory and M theory. But yeah, now he would have a better understanding and make a better documentary.

[DirtyDirtracer2006]

its from the 80's so no wonder its a bit out of date. but in general terms his got the gist of it

[intermender]

nobody knows the future, how do you know that a new understanding of mutations may reveal they are mostly harmful on some currently undiscovered level? (e.g compare with 'Einstein's greatest blunder, cosmological constant).

I think carl did pretty well considering the knowledge of his day. As the scientists say, knowledge including your statement is not immune to revision.

[dannyeder]

it just occurred to me that Carl Sagan talks just like a friendly, happy version of Agent Smith from the Matrix... anybody else notice that?? You just know that's where Hugo Weaving got the inspiration for his Smith interpretation!!

By the way, thanks so much for uploading this -- its my first time seeing the series, but I'm absolutely blown away. This has got to be the greatest science series ever made; I've seen tons of them, but nothing measures up.

[intermender]

now you mention it yeah i thought smiths was striking and i think you've explained why! lol

Perhaps that actor and Carl are from the same part of the world.

[dannyeder]

nah, Hugo Weaving (aka Agent Smith) is Australian and Sagan is from NYC. I read somewhere that Weaving actually denied that Sagan was the basis for his Smith voice, so I guess its just a crazy coincidence.

[intermender]

lol thanks for clearing that up. I'm in the UK so i guess i just don't have the ear to distinguish.

Perhaps Hugo saw an episode or two of cosmos and his unconscious mind picked up on that accent when he tried to do an American accent.

Sorry, i'm full of unprovable theories ;)

[Beefbonger]

OMG, I never realized how close the two voices were until you had written that, I won't be able to watch this or the Matrix again without thinking about it...

[soriano4twenty]

carl sagan was a alien

[SirNewt]

an alien

[Anomnom55]

@soriano4twenty

AN ALIENZ

[lankhazard]

i love how he states facts but still leaves room for future changes, and never dos he pretend that we have all the answers but the ones we do have are irrefutable. top vid

[terrasidius]

yeah thanks dude, much appreciated!

[alphadog7473]

I really like this video series by Carl , thank you for uploading...dog