Thanks for the recommendation - I'll definitely check that out :-)
I did not see the program (I have Tyson/MacFarlane intolerance) but what a strange choice for a "science hero" Galileo has all the same tropes but was not nuts.
I would speculate they wanted to draw the connection between inspiration and innovation. The show depicted Bruno as a wide eyed day dreamer who was considered a wack job by the powers that be. They did so to get their bias across, which I whole heartedly agree with. You have to be a little nuts to go against the mob, especially when you have nothing but your intuition guiding you.
Except he was correctly considered a wackjob They should have picked philo t. Farnsworth
They mentioned he wasn't much of a scientist. Their goal is also to focus more time on lesser known characters in the history of science instead of being just another show talking about Galileo and Da Vinci. Also Macfarlane essentially paid for it, and used his pull with Fox to get the show made, he wasn't writing for it. Brannon Braga from Star Trek is the director, Carl Sagan's Widow, a couple other former writers of the original Cosmos, and Neil deGrasse Tyson worked on it. It's also absolutely delightful.
I just watched the first episode and I enjoyed it. It's a tough line to tow to create a show of this magnitude that can be accessible to scientists, non scientists and young adults all while paying homage to Sagan's legacy. If anyone has issues with McFarlan or Tyson, my suggestion is to set them aside and judge this on its merits. So far, so good IMO.
Tyson calling Seth a genius And saying that family Guy has a lot of science in it on Science Friday marked him as a rube.