Have you seen this article -> [www.newscientist.com] ?

The main trouble with him being "Sagan's replacement" is that he's a string theorist and used to making wild speculation with no basis in experimental science. He may give science some PR advantage to the general public - but many scientists would be against having him as a representative. Not sure if that matters ?

One person who I think is under-estimated in his ability to present science to the public is Marcus Chown -> [ourworld.compuserve.com]

Simon