Science

Ray commented on NOVA on 04.22.12
“Deadliest Tornadoes”, first aired on April 11, 2012, showed the destruction that took place during the tornado events in spring of 2011. The film described the basic facts of how tornadoes form, some history and geography of tornadoes and some of the efforts to give immediate warnings to people in the path of a tornado. The program was promoted as “The science behind the tornado outbreak of 2011, tornado prediction and how communities can protect themselves from future storms”. During the last minute and a half of the film there were brief general assertions about global warming using words like “probably”, “is it?” and “potential”. There was not a single word during the entire documentary discussing the science of global warming and the effect of greenhouse gas emissions. If the theme of the film really is “how communities can protect themselves from future storms”, how is it possible that the producers of this often excellent series could so completely ignore this critically important topic? I note that the credits for the show indicate the major funder for this program is the “David H. Koch Fund for Science”. To those who may not know, David H. Koch along with Charles Koch are owners of the second largest privately held corporation in the United States, the core of which are fossil fuel related industries. The Koch brothers have donated tens of millions of dollars to groups and individuals who attempt to debunk the science of human caused global warming, are actively involved in lobbying congress for this point of view and have promised as much as $100 million to defeat political candidates who advocate addressing this problem. So, what’s up NOVA, PBS and WGBH, have you become yet another employee of Koch Industries?

Marc commented on America Revealed on 04.12.12
Will there ever be full length web access? The six minute piece is OK, but I would love to watch the full hour and can never get to my TV when it is on.

B. commented on NOVA on 04.11.12
Great footage, but lacking clarity in the basic narrative I think I may have learned more of the science of tornadoes from Twister. Putting images of places side by side to show progression. More history explaining that EF means Enhanced Fujita, and who Ted Fujita actually was 023. There was so much jumping around between dates and places November, Veterans Day, April, July. Why not just tell the story in the order the events occurred. Or show a table comparing years or places and years. Or a timeline graph superposition. Death toll, number of tornadoes, weather conditions, etc. The augmented reality effects are certainly interesting...but more basic effective visual aids and a clearer narrative would have improved the documentary. I could barely read the word Joplin on the map white on white! Worth watching certainly, but not up to the standard of regular Nova episodes.

brian commented on NOVA on 04.05.12
Great show,great concept, loved it, but had to turn it off after 30 minutes. If I wanted to go to the circus I would have gone to the Big apple circus that is in Boston now. Where did you get that clown of a host? The only thing he needed was a white face, a red ball for a nose and big red shoes. Not to mention the fact that when he puts on that ear to ear grin and squints those beady eyes, he is the spitting image of Beavis of Beavis and Butthead fame. Should have a character like Brian Greene or Carl sagan type, not this idiot!! Ruined the show completely for me. I guess these days you must dumb down the shows to make them appealing to the general brain dead moron that we see way too many of these days. I love a good clown, but certainly not when you are presenting a science show. Nice try.

Ca commented on The Tiniest Inventions: Nanotechnology on 03.10.12
Improve high school English by forcing students to identify symbolism in the classics other than what "Cliff Notes" provides. Stimulate students into thinking "outside the box." For example, I finally started acing HS English, because I figured out that the other kids were just rewording "Cliff Notes" essays. Micro-example, WUTHERING HEIGHTS. What did I really think of Heathcliff & Catherine? Heathcliff was gay. The tumult was his desire to "come out." The moors symbolized people other than Catherine. "Coming out" would be like jumping into the moor. He wasn't sexually attracted to Catherine. She was his BFF. She was the only one, who understood him.