Who is your favorite "bringer of science to the masses?"

[PlutonianEmpire]

I'd vote for Hawking, but he's not on it. I also like Nye just as much, so I voted for him.

However, Neil deGrasse Tyson is my absolute least favorite scientist ever. I loathe and despise him with every atom of my being. He's a snob of the worst kind; got Pluto demoted; and he genuinely hates anything and absolutely everything that is not non-fiction. Not to mention the constant bile he spews about anything that is fiction. Especially of the science and fantasy kind.

God I hate that guy.

 

[Valka D'Ur]

I like Bob McDonald.

I enjoy watching Bob McDonald. However, although he's very good at putting things in layman's terms, he's not inspirational.

Carl Sagan's voice is a treasure. I like Bill Nye, as much as I've heard of him; I didn't get to watch his show as a child so for me he's just a passionate guy on science/critical thinking podcasts. Tyson is a gifted science entertainer, though his podcast and videos are better than his book. Attenborough's work, of course commendable, is more nature-based than about the practice of science. On my experience, Sagan is far away the best; he had the advantage of working with space probes, he had the national wonder that was Cosmos, he penned well-crafted and engaging books, he was constantly being interviewed by the press and of course he had That Voice. Isaac Asimov probably did more than anyone on the list for layman's science education in the 20th century, but when it comes to getting The Masses interested, let alone excited about, science, I don't know that he could make the claim. TV excites the rabble more easily than books do.

I remember a few days after seeing Cosmos for the first time, I went shopping at one of the bookstores in town (as part of my usual weekly hunt for new Star Trek and other science fiction books). I mentioned to the owner that I'd seen Cosmos. Immediately he asked, "What did you think of his (Sagan's) voice?"

I said I found it very pleasing. The store owner said he did too, but that his wife couldn't stand it. So there was at least one person on this planet who didn't like Carl Sagan's voice. I guess it takes all kinds to make the world.

I would classify Isaac Asimov as a science popularizer, but of course he did it with books instead of on TV. Asimov's speaking voice wasn't all that nice to listen to (from my perspective he had a rather unpleasant accent) but I loved his science essays. Even in junior high I would read his science essays for fun - in my spare time at school, where the other kids couldn't understand why I would read a science book if it wasn't for homework - and at bedtime. I still remember the essay about the Moon/Sun and eclipses, the Moon's orbit, and how weird it was going to get in the future. Asimov really had his readers going with that essay... right until the end, when he said, this is really theoretical, because by the time this would happen, Earth and the Moon won't exist anymore.

And before people dismiss Asimov as a mere writer more known for science fiction than science, I will remind everyone that Asimov was a scientist. He had a doctorate in chemistry, he did research, wrote many articles and science books not intended for the popular audiences, and he taught university students.

Why not an actual expert in geology, instead of someone who taught undergraduate students and enjoys watching himself on TV?

Is there some reason you keep sneering at anyone who teaches/taught undergrad students? Somebody has to teach them, and why not an instructor who knows his material and can inspire his students? That's not a combination that comes along every day.

 

[classical_hero]

I have to agree with Form. Now I must go and :suicide:

The problem I have with them is that so often they go outside of their field of expertise and as a result they make complete fools when they start talking about it and just because they are an expert in one field, most watcher and followers will assume they are n expert in everything and don't question what they are saying, which is the whole idea behind science, to question and test to see what is true.

 

[Kyriakos]

Haven't watched any of those apart from (the obvious) Sagan. I can't say i really was interested, though.
There used to be a nice series here made by two Physics university professors. Probably one of the very very very few programs which had a reason for existing.

 

[Cheezy the Wiz]

Can you name a single discovery made in space by any of the moon mission astronauts that couldn't have been done either remotely or by any random uneducated person?

I admit, I have no idea if there are or aren't any, but if the answer is "no", then the astronauts were "scientifically irrelevant" at best.

Well, I have to admit that there's very little that men had to by physically there to do. You could have invented a lot of the technologies and such required to get them there if you had so wished. However, we don't really work like that, do we? We invented stuff because we had to get them to the Moon and back again. That's what challenged us. There's probably little material value of doing that: a robot can bring back rocks, or test samples, or do whatever. But it's the immaterial that was equally important: we put a member of our species on another celestial object, and we brought him home safely. At it's rawest and most cynical, how many of a new generation of scientists, astronauts, and engineers did that inspire, who might have been actors or historians or writers instead? Not that those aren't valuable things, but the modern age demands a larger number and higher caliber of such people. The not-so-exciting applicability of such things to terrestrial concerns isn't likely to inspire kids as much. Which do you think works better? "When you grow up, will you invent a new kind of spaceship to fly in the thin Martian atmosphere?" or "When you grow up, will you invent a new wing which allows airlines to fly 10% faster than before?" I know which one I'm going for.

 

[Thorgalaeg]

I would say Roger Penrose even if "popular" is not the most appropiate adjective here, since his books are not for the masses exactly. In fact you need a science background to fully understand them (and sometimes a pretty strong one btw) but at least the guy tries to give a real idead about what physics and mathematics are about instead of telling nice stories.

 

[Kyriakos]

@Cheezy: ^Indeed children are far more likely to have actually interesting aspirations (provided some parameters are met, obviously) than most grown-ups. Which is sad also because it shows that our society could have been a lot better if it was not actively working to destroy most of the good in human nature.

 

[Tahuti]

I voted Neil deGrasse Tyson. Carl Sagan deserves a honourable mention.

 

[Synobun]

Why do I get the feeling that people in this thread think becoming an astronaut is just like Armageddon?

 

[Kyriakos]

Cosmonaut is the correct term, as was said

Astronaut would have to imply those people were going from star to star, or inside/near a star. Hopefully none of the two is happening

 

[Synobun]

Cosmonaut is the correct term, as was said

Astronaut would have to imply those people were going from star to star, or inside/near a star. Hopefully none of the two is happening

Nope.

 

[Kyriakos]

^RYOL

(read your own link)

 

[Synobun]

^RYOL

(read your own link)

An astronaut (in the U.S.), cosmonaut (in Russia and many ex-Soviet satellite states) or taikonaut (in China) is a person trained for a spaceflight program to command, pilot, or serve as a crew member of a spacecraft.

The criteria for what constitutes human spaceflight vary. The Fédération Aéronautique Internationale (FAI) Sporting Code for astronautics recognizes only flights that exceed an altitude of 100 kilometers (62 mi).[3] In the United States, professional, military, and commercial astronauts who travel above an altitude of 50 miles (80 km)[4] are awarded astronaut wings.

In English-speaking nations, a professional space traveler is called an astronaut.

?????

 

[Kyriakos]

^Not sure if serious, but "would have to imply" is not in tautology with "is called".

I mean, is the US a Democracy or a Republic?

 

[SS-18 ICBM]

Think I'll have to go with Carl Sagan. He's a good introduction to the wonders of the universe, and if a person only has to listen to one on the list, it should be him.

 

[CKS]

Sagan would be my choice. I loved Cosmos. I was surprised later when I learned how much of a real astronomer he was, though, as I'd only known him as a science popularizer.

For an amusing look at fame vs productivity, see the Astronomer HR Diagram at http://www.strudel.org.uk/blog/astro/000943.shtml

 

[El_Machinae]

I like Bob McDonald.

I really, really, really like Bob McDonald. I listen to his podcast weekly. He has really good production values when it comes to popularization. And, he's a true believer in science. He loves it to bits.

I voted Neil deGrasse Tyson. Carl Sagan deserves a honourable mention.

This is my answer. Sagan gets points for being historically awesome. I find NdT infectious, and I think I have a bit of a crush on him.

 

[Smellincoffee]

I'd vote for Hawking, but he's not on it. I also like Nye just as much, so I voted for him.

However, Neil deGrasse Tyson is my absolute least favorite scientist ever. I loathe and despise him with every atom of my being. He's a snob of the worst kind; got Pluto demoted; and he genuinely hates anything and absolutely everything that is not non-fiction. Not to mention the constant bile he spews about anything that is fiction. Especially of the science and fantasy kind.

God I hate that guy.

Whaaa? He's one of the most pop-culture friendly scientists on the list. He publically chided Richard Dawkins for dismissing television as an outlet for science education, and his StarTalk podcast is brimming with pop culture. He's does just about fiction, or movies, and he has a hip-hop opening theme. What on earth are you basing 'snob of the worst kind'? His entire thing is making science open to everyone, and from the many shows I've heard and the interviews I've seen, he's got the warm personality to help make that happen.

And besides, Pluto had it coming.

 

[Spidernova]

I have fond memories of Bill Nye in elementary / Junior high

 

[PlutonianEmpire]

Pluto getting demoted is nothing less than having your entire male reproductive system physically chopped off -- with a dull blade I might add.