Carl Sagan citations

Page 8

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.
en
Citation presque identique à Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof. de Marcello Truzzi, co-fondateur du Committee for Skeptical Inquiry.
Cosmos, 1980

[In Pseudoscience] hypothesis are often framed precisely so that they are invulnerable to any experiment that offers a prospect of disproof, so even in principle they cannot be invalidated. Practitioners are defensive and wary. Skeptical scrutiny is opposed. When the pseudoscientific hypothesis fails to catch fire with scientists, conspiracies to suppress it are deduced.
en
The Demon-Haunted World (1995)

You are made of a hundred trillion cells. We are, each of us, a multitude.
en
Cosmos, 1980

Sometimes [Pseudoscience] is a kind of halfway house between old religion and new science, mistrusted by both.
en
The Demon-Haunted World (1995)

We are like butterflies who flutter for a day and think it is forever.
en
Cosmos, 1980

99 per cent of the Earth's atmosphere is of biological origin. The sky is made by life.
en
Cosmos, 1980

Source: Contact

Source: Cosmos

33 min 20 sec
Source: Cosmos: A Personal Voyage (1990 Update), Heaven and Hell [Episode 4]
Contexte: There are many hypotheses in science that are wrong. That's perfectly alright; it's the aperture to finding out what's right. Science is a self-correcting process. To be accepted, new ideas must survive the most rigorous standards of evidence and scrutiny.
Contexte: There are many hypotheses in science that are wrong. That's perfectly alright; it's the aperture to finding out what's right. Science is a self-correcting process. To be accepted, new ideas must survive the most rigorous standards of evidence and scrutiny. The worst aspect of the Velikovsky affair is not that many of his ideas were wrong or silly or in gross contradiction to the facts; rather, the worst aspect is that some scientists attempted to suppress Velikovsky's ideas. The suppression of uncomfortable ideas may be common in religion or in politics, but it is not the path to knowledge and there is no place for it in the endeavor of science. We do not know beforehand where fundamental insights will arise from about our mysterious and lovely solar system, and the history of our study of the solar system shows clearly that accepted and conventional ideas are often wrong and that fundamental insights can arise from the most unexpected sources.

Source: The Varieties of Scientific Experience: A Personal View of the Search for God (2006)

Source: The Varieties of Scientific Experience: A Personal View of the Search for God

Source: Dragons of Eden: Speculations on the Evolution of Human Intelligence

Source: Cosmos

Source: The Varieties of Scientific Experience: A Personal View of the Search for God

Source: Contact

Source: Contact (1985), Chapter 10 (p. 164)

In Wonder and Skepticism, Skeptical Enquirer (Jan-Feb 1995), 19, No. 1.

The Varieties of Scientific Experience: A Personal View of the Search for God (2006)

Source: Cosmos (1980), p. 329

The Varieties of Scientific Experience: A Personal View of the Search for God (2006)

Pale Blue Dot: A Vision of the Human Future in Space (1994)

The Varieties of Scientific Experience: A Personal View of the Search for God (2006)

Pale Blue Dot: A Vision of the Human Future in Space (1994)

The Varieties of Scientific Experience: A Personal View of the Search for God (2006)

The Varieties of Scientific Experience: A Personal View of the Search for God (2006)

Source: Contact (1985), Chapter 23 (p. 403)

Source: Contact (1985), Chapter 10 (p. 157, quoting Euripides)

The Varieties of Scientific Experience: A Personal View of the Search for God (2006)

Source: The Demon-Haunted World : Science as a Candle in the Dark (1995), Ch. 2 : Science and Hope, p. 30

Source: The Demon-Haunted World : Science as a Candle in the Dark (1995), Ch. 2 : Science and Hope, p. 25

Source: Cosmos (1980), p. 278

"Why We Need To Understand Science" in The Skeptical Inquirer Vol. 14, Issue 3 (Spring 1990)
Contexte: I know that science and technology are not just cornucopias pouring good deeds out into the world. Scientists not only conceived nuclear weapons; they also took political leaders by the lapels, arguing that their nation — whichever it happened to be — had to have one first. … There’s a reason people are nervous about science and technology.
And so the image of the mad scientist haunts our world—from Dr. Faust to Dr. Frankenstein to Dr. Strangelove to the white-coated loonies of Saturday morning children’s television. (All this doesn’t inspire budding scientists.) But there’s no way back. We can’t just conclude that science puts too much power into the hands of morally feeble technologists or corrupt, power-crazed politicians and decide to get rid of it. Advances in medicine and agriculture have saved more lives than have been lost in all the wars in history. Advances in transportation, communication, and entertainment have transformed the world. The sword of science is double-edged. Rather, its awesome power forces on all of us, including politicians, a new responsibility — more attention to the long-term consequences of technology, a global and transgenerational perspective, an incentive to avoid easy appeals to nationalism and chauvinism. Mistakes are becoming too expensive.

25 Min 10 Sec
Cosmos: A Personal Voyage (1990 Update), Who Speaks for Earth? [Episode 13]

Source: Pale Blue Dot: A Vision of the Human Future in Space (1994), p. 395

Smithsonian magazine, May 1978, pp. 43, 44. Quoted in Awake! magazine, 1978, 8/22.