What's the best science TV show of all time?
Page 3.14
Marrying the line to the curve.
Profile
Maintained by the ScienceBlogs Overlords, Page 3.14 points you in the direction of some of ScienceBlogs' finest offerings, plus the tastiest tidbits of science news and opinion from around the web.
Search
Overlord Brain Food
- Ars Technica
- Boing Boing
- Danger Room
- Engadget
- Gadget Lab
- Game|Life
- explodingdog
- Geekologie
- Gizmodo
- io9
- Life Hacker
- Nothing's Shocking
- Real Climate
- Secret Science Club
- Slashdot
- Tech Crunch
- The Kicker
- The Observatory
- The Presurfer
- The XX Factor
- Threat Level
- Valleywag
- Web Monkey
- Wired Science
- xkcd
Recent Posts
- Fresh Meat, Fresh Data
- H.R. 3699 Threatens Free Publications
- Endless Questions?
- Science for the Future
- Four First Glimpses
- Coaxing the Higgs out of Hiding
- Too Green to Be True
- Burning the Midday Oil
- Fundamentally Too Fast
- The Biodiverse and the Dead
Recent Comments
- Juliet on An Interview with Carl Zimmer of The Loom
- credit loans on Fly Me to the Moon...Again
- crag von baron on H.R. 3699 Threatens Free Publications
- Madison on An Interview with Carl Zimmer of The Loom
- buy dissertation on Seven New Wonders
- Alexis on An Interview with Carl Zimmer of The Loom
- Marta Bundrick on An Interview with Carl Zimmer of The Loom
- Sesli Chat on H.R. 3699 Threatens Free Publications
- afrika mangosu on Ask a ScienceBlogger (anything!)
- plagiarism detector on The Big Quench
Archives
- February 2012
- January 2012
- December 2011
- November 2011
- October 2011
- September 2011
- August 2011
- July 2011
- June 2011
- May 2011
- April 2011
- March 2011
- February 2011
- September 2010
- August 2010
- July 2010
- June 2010
- May 2010
- April 2010
- March 2010
- February 2010
- January 2010
- December 2009
- November 2009
- October 2009
- September 2009
- August 2009
- July 2009
- June 2009
- May 2009
- April 2009
- March 2009
- February 2009
- January 2009
- December 2008
- November 2008
- October 2008
- September 2008
- August 2008
- July 2008
- June 2008
- May 2008
- April 2008
- March 2008
- February 2008
- January 2008
- December 2007
- November 2007
- October 2007
- September 2007
- August 2007
- July 2007
- June 2007
- May 2007
- April 2007
- March 2007
- February 2007
- January 2007
- December 2006
- November 2006
- October 2006
- September 2006
- August 2006
- July 2006
- June 2006
- May 2006
- April 2006
- March 2006
Other Good Stuff
MEMBER, ORDER OF THE SCIENCE SCOUTS OF EXEMPLARY REPUTE AND ABOVE AVERAGE PHYSIQUE
Add ScienceBlogs to your Technorati favorites:
« Seed's Daily Zeitgeist: 10/19/2006 | Main | Ask a ScienceBlogger, October 27 »
Ask A ScienceBlogger, October 20
Category: Ask a ScienceBlogger
Posted on: October 20, 2006 8:12 AM, by Book Club
TrackBacks
TrackBack URL for this entry: http://scienceblogs.com/mt/pings/23843
Comments
Mr. Wizard
Posted by: Robert Huckabee | October 21, 2006 3:14 PM
Americans only? Bloggers only? James Burke's early science shows in the UK really left a mark on me. Not Connections, although that had lots of slick appeal. I mean the Science Specials (1972 - 1976). For example, in one of them at the beginning he placed a volunteer in a chair in front of a counter with a $ sign leading it, and told him to "make as much money as you can". No other instruction was given. Every so often during the show they would cut to the counter, and each time the frequency with which it counted up had increased. By the end of the show it was going several counts per second. We then got to see the volunteer' face. The counter had been tied via a hidden camera to count every time the volunteer blinked. Not TK after all! Bio-feedback.
But it's a tough call. I would more list the people than the shows. James Burke. Carl Sagan. Jacob Bronowski. Isaac Asimov (more books here though - "Mass length and Time" was important to my development).
Posted by: david1947 | October 21, 2006 3:38 PM
David Suzuki's, "The Nature of Things" did it for me. Less pomp and bad thermin music than Cosmos. And he decided to become a biologist (genetics, UBC) because of his internment in a Canadian/Japanese internment camp in WWII.
Posted by: Dior | October 21, 2006 5:15 PM
I always loved Connections, it told a good story and I learned some obscure science factoids. Then I could use them to score babes.
Posted by: flounder | October 21, 2006 9:15 PM
Anyone here for the mad hijinks of Mythbusters?
Posted by: Zach Wilson | October 22, 2006 10:23 AM
I was thinking of the connections series also. I think I might have to re-watch it now...especially in light of flounders experience.
Mythbusters is good because it attracts people who would not sit down and watch a science show.
Posted by: Avery | October 22, 2006 11:40 AM
This is such a no-brainer question, I'm surprised at the answers. Far and away, with no competition, was Dr. Jacob Brownowski's 'The Ascent of Man' series. A (distant)second choice would be Carl Sagen's 'Cosmos'-- fluffy on the edges, but good science as well. 'Connections' while interesting, does not rate as it has all the rigor of an S.J. Gould argument, Intellegent Design 'theory', or Alternative History Science Fiction-- for the same reason. It all ultimately depends upon where the presenter chooses to make the links. That is not to deny cause and effect, nor to deny a progression of scientific discoveries, i.e. present advancements absolutely do depend upon past findings. Using the battle phalanx or Pike men as the starting point on a path leading to the Saturn V makes a good story-- but so does the Dodo tree. Equally valid starts might be urns dredged up in the Mediterranean or the ill fated Viking colonies in the New World.
With even more hubris and expanding the question slightly, one of the best documentaries of all time is Sir Kenneth Clark's 'Civilisation' (Brit. spell.). In this somewhat different context, I would rate 'Connections' a strong second.
David Suzuki's series 'fouls out' pun intended-read on. His series, had an 'anthropocentric element' or more plainly- if he (the author) could not see scientifically how a thing could be done it either was not true or reasonable.
And now we come to the 'fowled out'argument.
In one episode he held a female Blue-winged teal and (I believe but it has been more than 30 years) a female Shoveller stating that on a foggy day hunters could not be expected to tell the difference but, under game laws, they were. His laudable goal was to bring science into common experience and application in everyday life. All he succeeded in doing, however, was illustrating that he was no hunter, birder, nor field biologist.
Posted by: Gerald Fauske | October 22, 2006 4:10 PM
I have a soft spot for David Attenborough's Life on Earth series, which I used to slip downstairs to watch on Sunday mornings back in 7th and 8th grade.
Posted by: Antiquated Tory | November 7, 2006 8:53 AM