Stargazing Live!

The new series of Stargazing Live has just started on BBC2 tonight. Dara O Briain and Professor Brian Cox take a look at the sky, exploring Mars tonight, which at this time of year can be visible.

Anyone else watching?

Wow! A really fascinating tonight, looking forwards to the next couple of shows. Had some good guests on tonight too including Brian May!

It's a shame the weather isn't slightly better, come 5-6am you will be able to see Saturn and also Jupiter a bit later (about sun rise). Really good show, worth tuning into if you're not to busy watching CBB!!

An entertaining first two episodes. Even though I sometimes get lost when they start spouting all the goobledegook, especially when they matter of factly come out with some intense mathematical equation as though it's very basic maths. Brian Cox is a genius presenter but what the hell is Ho=70 Kms/s/mpc supposed to represent

I have big difficulty in watching science programmes these days with these people in (I've recored it and will give it a try), they can't help but try and shove their own personal believes on people, especially atheism, thoughts horroscops and all the rest of these things.

For example in the last series he openly described astrology as mumbo jumbo, it may be, but, apart from the none scientific language he has nothing to back that claim up; it was a pure statement of his own believes.

Nothing wrong with people holding these views, nothing wrong with peopel believing in these views, but programmes on science should concentrait on the science and the data that is available otherwise you have a science/philosophy/ theology programe; which this isn't.

David Attenborough and Patrick Moore, the old wonderful 70's open university, Jonny Ball and all the rest did programmes for years without mentioning their own personal believes.

When you introduce belief you're taking it out of science.

Don't even get me started on the hedious cgi nonsense and shoving human emotions on to animals in these modern programmes; you might as well watch a bugs bunny.

mellover - I know what you mean about certain presenters forcing their views on the audience. I don't recall however that happening so much in this series. I missed tonight's show but will watch it on iplayer. I haven't noticed any glaring points of view being expressed. I might be wrong, but it's come across quite factual.

I love it,but it makes my head hurt at times.

(11-01-2013 00:46 )Money_Shot Wrote:  mellover - I know what you mean about certain presenters forcing their views on the audience. I don't recall however that happening so much in this series. I missed tonight's show but will watch it on iplayer. I haven't noticed any glaring points of view being expressed. I might be wrong, but it's come across quite factual.

I've still to see it yet but I have it recorded. But I'll be ready to wag my dissaproving finger at the screen

Baseing my comments on previous series.

Was a few jokes about astrology not beliefs if u seen any of dara's standup he does make fun of alternative medicene and new age stuff thats his job

Been a good series only wish was regular series 3 nights a year I mean the badgers get double that

Should force kids to watch this stuff how come in the information age we are getting dumber and dumber kids lol

(10-01-2013 13:06 )mellover Wrote:  I have big difficulty in watching science programmes these days with these people in (I've recored it and will give it a try), they can't help but try and shove their own personal believes on people, especially atheism, thoughts horroscops and all the rest of these things.

For example in the last series he openly described astrology as mumbo jumbo, it may be, but, apart from the none scientific language he has nothing to back that claim up; it was a pure statement of his own believes.

Nothing wrong with people holding these views, nothing wrong with peopel believing in these views, but programmes on science should concentrait on the science and the data that is available otherwise you have a science/philosophy/ theology programe; which this isn't.

Well this style of complaint has a whiff of closed-previous-account familiarity about it.

The program is not meant to be a clichéd, dull, workman-like science program aimed at only those with existing knowledge and interest. It's supposed to transcend the sterility that science can have and make learning fun and interesting.

Astrology is pure bullshit pseudo-science. It may well be a personal belief, or more acurately (like Atheism) a personal non-belief, but that which can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence. There is no scientific evidence for Astrology whatsoever, so this personal belief is actually backed up by a total lack of evidence to the contrary. And it's not as if there was a whole section of the program dedicated to it; it was an aside, a comment, that's all; there was no 'shoving their own personal believes on people'. I'm afraid your objection seems rather ridiculous and forced.

(11-01-2013 20:11 )lucent-x Wrote:  [quote='mellover' pid='1196017' dateline='1357819597']


Well this style of complaint has a whiff of closed-previous-account familiarity about it.

Firstly, what are you talking about.

And

Quote:The program is not meant to be a clichéd, dull, workman-like science program aimed at only those with existing knowledge and interest. It's supposed to transcend the sterility that science can have and make learning fun and interesting.

I can tell you that having measured over 2000 lettuce hypocotyl for my under grad project the bulk of science IS dull workman like. There is very little of the glamour and eureka moments in science. There's very little going to volcanic islands, or diving off the barrier reefs or visiting exotic countries, most is done in pokey little labs doing the same experiments time and again collecting data. That is one reason these programmes are made, to make science seem more interesting and exciting. Not many people have a genuine interest in science. I can see why they do it, to get more people interested in science or to entertian lay people. But that is not science. And the thing is, to me those ' clichéd, dull, workman-like science program' where absolutely fascinating and never dull.

Quote: but that which can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.

Not SCIENTIFICALLY it cannot. A person having a BELIEF can believe in whatever the hell they like, they don't have to confirm a belief. Likewise, a person doesn't have to confirm any none belief. But you if make the claim of fact (Astrology is pure bullshit) and try and cloak it in science then you need data to back your claim. Not having any evidance for something is not evidance it is not there. We have absolutley no evidance for space aliens, is it therefore correct to dismiss as fantasy their possibly existance?

Quote:I'm afraid your objection seems rather ridiculous and forced

If it was isolated little aside yes, you may have a point, but time and again these people take every possible opputunitey THAT THEY CAN GET AWAY with it push their perosnal beliefs out. They simply should not be there, period.

There such a thing as the drip drip drip method of influence.