Why do all science shows just talk about bullshit? I'm so

Michio Kintaku

Its popcorn for the reddit crowd who like to share atheist image macros on their facebook accounts

>>86124448
>wormholes and time travel and other crap that's impossible

It's not

>>86124448
Oooooh, Doctah Michio Kaku~

>>86124518
This, unfortunately.

The closest thing to what you want OP that isn't for children or on youtube would probably be something like 'How It's Made' or 'How Do They Do It'.

>>86124448
Here's the thing, these types of "science" shows are meant to appeal to the smug redditor, the person that feels the need to impress normies and other redditors with their "knowledge," which is funny because anyone well versed in science knows when someone's knowledge on a topic is shallow. What sounds more impressive to a person, topics such as time travel and wormholes, or more theoretical topics that don't inspire as much awe?

>>86124543
You really think humans are going to open up a wormhole and use it? It's theoretically possible, but that's it. We can't even get to the moon anymore.

>>86124987
NASA is launching "unmanned" rockets into "orbit" for "testing" when in reality they're sending a manned courier vessel to the outer reaches of space using their portable wormholes once out of human sight to trade with the interstellar celestial beings for knowledge and technology beneficial to mankind when the time comes we need such devices and information.

>>86124987
There's no real economic incentive to go to the moon, it was driven purely by politics. There would be very strong political and economic incentives to research wormholes if the science showed them to be somewhat feasible.

Think about the technological advances we've made over the last 100 years.

>>86125154
The advancements in computing and medicine has been amazing, but not in transportation. Planes are still using old tech, the concorde is gone and we still use fosil fuels

>>86124448
I hate pop-sci douches like Kaku, especially when they talk about shit WAY outside their field like they know anything about it.

>>86124448
Because the people who make them assume, whether correctly or incorrectly I don't know, but probably correctly, that the average American can't follow more than 1 straight minute of science without being stimulated by something that sounds sci-fi-ey or has explosions.

>>86124448
It's just a problem with American broadcasting style. Everything has to be over the top and ridiculously dumbed down.

The British style works much better for documentaries in general, BBC horizon gives pretty good intros to some of the big questions at the forefront of physics as well as other scientific topics that have more mainstream appeal.

Science in the real world is a joke they haven't even made walking talking robots yet

File: 1493045510933.jpg (112KB, 940x960px) Image search: [Google]

112KB, 940x960px

Pop "science" is bullshit

>>86125269
Why don't you think there have been advancements in transportation tech? The computing improvements feed directly into transportation. We nearly have completely autonomous vehicles.

>>86125728
Self driving cars are not opening up wormholes.

>>86124721
Also the original Karl Sagan Cosmos

>>86125766
Where did I say they were?

>>86124448
Because heavy calculus is boring and hard

>>86124448
money, you watch those shows almost for free, while a science book and papers are behind a big paywall.

>>86125869
It may be challenging, but it's quite fun you brainlet.

>>86125269
Society has placed a high value on number crunching mathematicians.
After Einstein they were all baffled and needed some sort of unified theory to make everything work, the numbers just didn't add up.
So along came the string theory number crunchers with a theory. Ok! But wait, we need another unified theory or else the numbers don't work. So let's add another realm, now it works. Its holographic. But now we need another unified theory or else it won't work.

Its just calculating the possibility within a hypothetical scenario, until they reach a point where it turns out its just bunk - then we add another layer to it that totally makes it work except when we get too far along where we have to add another layer to it.

File: 1465698390841.jpg (183KB, 819x633px) Image search: [Google]

183KB, 819x633px

It's because real science is boring as shit, and requires massive amounts of work and time investment to understand and appreciate.

Average people aren't interested in studying and learning, they're interested in trivia. So a "scientist" goes on TV and presents random facts, and people think they're smart for listening to it. Then they regurgitate those facts on FB to show off their intelligence. "Pop Science" does nothing but stroke the ego of retards. It breeds a huge crowd following of stupid, lazy, and entitled people who seriously believe that they're intelligent and superior to others because they listen to random "science" facts on the internet/TV.

>>86126447
Pop science is pretty useful for generating interest in science and showcasing the highlights from different disciplines without requiring years of commitment.

Obviously it does not provide nor does it try to provide an expert level understanding. The insight it does provide shouldn't be undervalued. Any improvement to society's scientific literacy is desirable.

how many white women do you think he's fucked?