And thanks to Quiet Desperation as well. I hope it is, in fact, fun.

Sure. Tons of scientific errors. Like every other sci fi show on TV. (Except maybe the NASA channel) But they were telling us some damn good stories.

That’s the appeal of Firefly. It was something other than the sensory dully conformity of Roddenberry’s universe. (Same with the much missed and lamented Farscape.)

It was fun.

Mind you, Jerry Doyle (Security Chief Michael Garibaldi) did run for Senate in California. Alas, he did not win.

Of course, I’m the sort of nerd who thinks it’s even MORE important to ask — which of the candidates are Whovians?

It was canceled because Fox was looking for another X-Files to magically appear, while completely botching the homeopathic quantities of marketing there was. If Firefly wasn’t wildly successful out of the gate, it was canned. Like so many other shows on Fox, some good, some not so good.

B.A., I appreciate your enlightening our darkness about the scary way your country is heading back into mediaevalism. Keep up the good work in both that and astronomy.

P.S. Mal’s tatt. is real…
–

For me Firefly is in the same category as Babylon 5 and Andromenda, as in it’s a show I’ve tried to get into but just couldn’t for some reason. Part of it I know is the opening theme being like sandpaper on my eardrums, and also the whole cowboy’s-in-space thing doesn’t make sense to me. Maybe that’s because where I live people who speak with those accents are not the oppressed but the oppressors. So I need to get over that. And I’m not too keen on getting into something that will stop after 14 episodes.

But beyond that, what is it that people like so much about Firefly? I want to like it. I used to think BSG stood for “Being Somber on Galactica” but now I love that show too, so there’s hope.

To give credit where it’s due, Fox News may be a gang of thugs actively engaged in overturning the Enlightenment, but the Fox Network proper is probably the most consistently liberal on the air. (It is true that they have occasionally been guilty of anti-science glurge, but so has PBS. One set of extremists objects to science because it contradicts the Book of Genesis? Yes, but there’s another set who object to science because it upsets their idée fixe that “there is always some truth in everything,” and half the people who shop in the magick-based aisles of your local pharmacy despise the other half.)

To return to the original point, “Firefly” was canceled because it was expensive to make and appealed to only a few fans, even though those who did like it were wildly enthusiastic.

[[Treason? Your an ass.]]

“You’re.” Scooter Libby outed a CIA field agent, which could have led to her death. That was a direct strike at US national security by a US citizen, and therefore, by any sensible definition of the word, treason. I’m only sorry he wasn’t indicted and convicted for that, along with his boss, the Vice President.

Why did they cancel Firefly anyway? Surely the people who bring you Fox News couldn’t be so foolish?

> “And let’s not forget Jeri Ryan’s ex-husband…”
And let’s not forget that Jack Ryan was the Republican candidate running against Obama in Illinois when the scandal sank Ryan’s campaign: “On March 16, 2004, [Jack Ryan] won the Republican primary, thus pairing him against Democrat Barack Obama. However, after allegations from his ex-wife [Jeri Ryan], he withdrew his candidacy on June 25, 2004, and officially filed the documentation to withdraw on July 29, 2004.”

Of course Obama likes Star Trek now. Wouldn’t you.

I like the post.
I guess that makes me one of them “yes men”. As in: Yes – I want to think critically, be aware of what the politically motivated creationist numb-skulls are up too, follow the explorations on Mars and understand more about evolution, the big bang, dark matter and the universe.

Having been hooked on Babylon 5 – I think some of the shenanigans in Washington mirror the dark side of Psy Corps, Nightwatch and the episodes when the Earth went into a dictatorship.

I must agree with the other “posters”. This is BA’s blog, and although it is primarily about astronomy, the BA does have opinions about other topics as well. I’m sure that everyone that has posted here does not agree 100% with him on everything, but that is the beauty of free speech. He has the right to post whatever he wants on his blog, and you have the right to disagree, but to ask someone not to post something because you don’t like it is wrong. So, just continue to read, and ignore the things you don’t agree with, or, comment on those things in a spirit of “no agreeing with it, but willing to hear the other side.”

(Hey Jens, I don’t like Hillary either! But, I’m Canadian… )

“Firefly” was OK, but it was clearly designed to appeal to those who believe that the Confederates were the good guys and Jesse James a misunderstood hero. For a show about standing up to the kind of treason we’ve seen from the syphilitic monkey and his handlers for the last seven years, give me “Babylon 5″ any day.

Jens, what is the point of reading stuff you already agree with?

Please quit talking about politics as it applies to astronomy-related science fiction on your very own blog, which you yourself write and solely handle the content for.

Instead, please be simply a source of raw information without any personal spin added whatsoever.

And please give me a million dollars.

And a pony, and a train set, and a football, and, and, and…

(sarcasm=off)

http://www.badastronomy.com/bablog/2007/07/15/politics-science-me-and-thee/

You said “You might want to click on the Politics/Religion link in the title bar and give it a read over.”

Sorry, I can’t find that bar. Could you direct me?

I’m aware of this website is about, yes.

And yes, please do continue to debunk and criticize any and all anti-science and pseudo science including all superstitious nonsense leveraged by politicians for political control.

Many people appreciated your work and also the astronomy news and explanations as well!

But please stop leaving your political opinions.

They are unnecessary and irrelevant.