00:05 → 00:08
"The earth is immensely interesting because it is so very different from any other planet ever observed."
This is basically directly stated by Sagan when he references our own ideas about how interesting our world is:
00:12 → 00:15

"For us it's different." He isn't appealing to the people and making a direct statement that the world is important, he is stating that as a society and as a species we attach importance to the planet we live on.
Also note that this appeal to the people (everyone thinks X is true, thus it is) is exactly the statement that Tim made about the existence of some deity.

I won't touch on repitition because it's obviously used here to increase the impact of this entire piece.

00:23 → 00:27
I disagree that transfer is being used here - contrast with his later comments about rivers of blood. He is contrasting our ideas about some sort of importance that is attached to everyone we love and know (not to mention the greatest tyrants and murderers) to the insignificance of the tiny speck that is the earth.
00:34 → 00:37
An appeal to our desire for transcendent purpose: this is basically what religion is. He is contrasting our "important" and/or "meaningful" joy and suffering and the insignificance of it all in the face of an infinite void. This entire section is about perspective, specifically how tiny we are in relation to a big bad universe.
00:51 → 00:54
Appeal to pity: again see his comments on the harsh side of human nature. He maintains the importance of both are equivalent.
01:13 → 01:15
Repetition: again for impact. Appeal to Fear is a personal reaction. I personally find it exhilirating, but it's a perspective thing.
01:19 → 01:26
The earth is very small in the space of an infinite cosmos, and atoms are huge to quarks. Irrelevant to any kind of intellectual discussion. A personal reaction to his statements about a lack of intrinsic meaning or some special quality the earth may hold.
01:27 → 01:30

Appeal to Emotion: the entire passage is an appeal to emotion because he wrote it specifically to increase the publics interest in science. it's the start of the largest pop science project ever put together, obviously it will be an appeal to emotion. Transfer: So here he's trying to make us hate the earth, then? He is exposing the absurdity of war and conflict in such a tiny place in a big universe.
01:36 → 01:41
Fundamental difference of opinion here. I can't really say anything to convince you that the earth doesn't matter and you can't say anything to make me think otherwise. Yup.
01:42 → 01:45
He has already covered the "young couple in love" and is now moving on to baser parts of human behaviour. He has already talked about the positives of humanity, such that there are.
01:45 → 01:48
Hitler was a great public speaker and this is transfer if I ever saw it. Carl Sagan wasn't Hitler because he used the same public speaking techniques. Nice job using the same propogandic techniques that you decried though.
01:53 → 0:56

Really? The Middle East. North Africa. Constant conflict around the world. Holy wars and avoidable famines. Pretty damn frequent misunderstandings if you ask me.
02:08 → 02:12
Dolphins are probably sentient. We are the only creatures who have evolved to have a society as complex as ours is on earth, but this doesn't mean we are priviledged in the universe. It just means we happen to think about the universe unlike our animal brethren. We are privelidged on the earth in this way (or so we think is likely) , but not the universe. The universe doesn't care.
02:17 → 0:24

The size of the earth doesn't by itself but the size of the universe is a hell of a challenge to our importance within it.
02:25 → 02:30
He doesn't state it is a closed universe, whatever you mean by the term. However this vast size challenges the importance of any one particular planet.
02:30 → 02:34
A search for universal meaning doesn't imply any exists. Wishing something doesn't make it so. I am inspired by this beautiful speech proves only that I love existence and a search for understanding in the universe. Not the WHY but the HOW of the universe is what inspires me. (also that any one god should exist over any others is a frankly ridiculous concept). I also fail to see what this has to do with the task at hand.
02:34 → 02:37
We would need saving from something like global thermonuclear war or other event that would destroy society. We save ourselves through our actions so as to allow human culture, such that it is, to continue.
02:38 → 02:42
Time plus genetics equals evolution. As does time plus chance. Though I don't expect you to unbury your head from the sand long enough to understand this. Chance doesn't exist as an actual conscious entity but it is a thing that happens. There are other planets roughly where earth is in relation to our sun in other solar systems. Why can't life evolve there?
02:53 → 02:59
Make our stand as the ideal of what we could be: as a way for the universe to understand itself and to create some sort of utopia presumably. A stand of structure against the chaos of the universe. If we don't matter, then why not be the ideal of what we wish we could be? Could also be a stand against the small minded stupidity and arrogance that permeates the world. Carl Sagan was pushing for increased scientific literacy amongst the genral populace.
03:18 → 03:21
How does kindness destroy the world? And how does the fact that we are atoms in any way diminish what our emotions are and how important they are?

There are no FACTUAL INACCURACIES in this work, which was really what would have in  any way made a point you could stand behind.

You're talking about whether self awareness actually exists, which is a damn hard question. There is no reason for it not to and no way to prove it does, but to equate this to an existence of a god or a soul or any such silliness is just a bizarre leap of logic. Why is the christian god the right one? why not odin? he has a big damn hammer which is pretty cool. Why not a whole pantheon? All it proves is that as a social construct I found his words inspiring. It doesn't follow that since I had a positive reaction to something then there is some deeper meaning to the entire universe. That's absurd.

Though I don't expect you to understand that. Your views are as alien and strange to me as mine probably are to yours, so I think any discussion on this topic will not be constructive at all.

Research some evolution though, not accepting that fact is just rude. To be that blind in this day and age is actually amazing.

Read The Descent of Man or... basically any modern human biology textbook. Seriously. It's important.

This is the end of my involvement in this debate because I can see no proper resolution to this given your rhetoric about logical leaps in regards to the existence of god and my own disbelief and skeptical inquiry