The Decline and Fall of Western Civilization
Jon Binkley
encounter (it was the 2am EDT program; I guess most of the good
stuff is earlier). Instead I was treated to this horrifying gem:
It started off with the pea-brained anchor informing us that
Voyager's trip to Mars (I kid you not-- he actually said Mars!)
wasn't the only astronomical news of the evening. Quite the
contrary; it seems that an entire town in Alabama was convinced
that they were being visited regularly, early every morning,
by a big bright flying saucer. The putative craft flashed
white and red, low in the southeast, predawn sky.
The townsfolk conned some astronomers to join them in their
vigil. Well, as anyone who's ever bothered to look at the
sky can confirm, bright stars do some dynamic flashing when
they're close to the horizon. The astronomers quickly assured
them that what they were seeing was Sirius, albeit through
a good deal of atmospheric haze.
It occurs to me that any 10 year-old alive from 100,000 B.C.
to A.D. 1900 could have told them that. We sure have forgotten
a lot, as a culture. A pretty sad commentary.
-Jon Binkley
lawrence.m.geary
>I was watching CNN to see if they had the latest on the Neptune
>encounter (it was the 2am EDT program; I guess most of the good
>stuff is earlier). Instead I was treated to this horrifying gem:
>
>It started off with the pea-brained anchor informing us that
>Voyager's trip to Mars (I kid you not-- he actually said Mars!)
>wasn't the only astronomical news of the evening. Quite the
CNN features some of the dumbest anchors I've ever seen, knowing only
what they read, and some of the worst researchers in existence. They
do not take science seriously. Yesterday they proclaimed that Triton
was the first planetary satellite known to have an atmosphere.
The sharpest CNN personalities seem to be the weather folks, particularly
"Flip" Spiceland and Valerie Voss. I feel like writing CNN and telling
them to give Flip and Valerie jobs producing science spots.
--Larry
--
l...@hoqax.att.com Think globally ... Post locally att!hoqax!lmg
Scott R. Anderson
>CNN features some of the dumbest anchors I've ever seen, knowing only
>what they read, and some of the worst researchers in existence. They
>do not take science seriously. Yesterday they proclaimed that Triton
>was the first planetary satellite known to have an atmosphere.
They said the same thing on the ABC news last night. Must be reading from (or
misinterpreting) the same source.
*
* ** Scott Robert Anderson gatech!emoryu1!phssra
* * * ** phs...@unix.cc.emory.edu phs...@emoryu1.bitnet
* * * * * **
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
William Johnson
> In article <33...@cbnewsh.ATT.COM> l...@cbnewsh.ATT.COM (lawrence.m.geary,ho,) writes:
> >do not take science seriously. Yesterday they proclaimed that Triton
> >was the first planetary satellite known to have an atmosphere.
>
> They said the same thing on the ABC news last night. Must be reading from (or
> misinterpreting) the same source.
This one is maybe not so hard to understand, since *Titan* -- looks and sounds
uncomfortably like Triton -- fits the bill. Take one typographic error, add
a misinterpretation by a semiliterate staffer, and throw in a dense
newscaster, and Triton comes out.
The more general issue of misunderstanding by the newscaster of what the
mission is all about, followed by juxtaposition on the newscast to what borders
on bogus science, bothers me more than this possibly explicable error. The
original poster on this theme was right to complain about those things (not
that the Triton/Titan gaffe should have happened, either).
--
"Times are bad. Children no longer | Bill Johnson
obey their parents, and everyone is | Los Alamos National Laboratory
writing a book." (Cicero) | {!cmcl2!lanl!mwj}
"Or a paper on cold fusion." (Johnson) | (m...@lanl.gov)
Jeff Hunter
bin...@boulder.Colorado.EDU (Jon Binkley) writes:
=
= [talking about a UFO flap ...]
=
= The townsfolk conned some astronomers to join them in their
= vigil. Well, as anyone who's ever bothered to look at the
= sky can confirm, bright stars do some dynamic flashing when
= they're close to the horizon. The astronomers quickly assured
= them that what they were seeing was Sirius, albeit through
= a good deal of atmospheric haze. ^^^^^^
Consider this from the townsfolk's point of view:
- astronomers arrive
- they look at the UFO
- they quickly say "we know what it is and we can assure you it's Serious!"
- they leave ^^^^^^^
bet they still think it's a UFO :-)
--
-- my opinions -- je...@censor.uucp
Keep track of the current path, and use it naturally.
Glenn Reid (Postscript Language Program Design)
Jon Binkley
(Philip C. Plait) writes:
>I heard about this on CNN Headline News. I was out observing all night about
>the same time this was broadcast, about a month ago. I noticed that Orion rose
>about an hour or two before the sun, which puts Sirius at about the same
>right ascension as the sun.
>
>Meaning, that Sirius rises with the sun and could not be seen!
>
They did say that they were seeing it in the morning, just before
dawn. If Sirius is out, my money's on Procyon, Rigel, or Betel...
uhhh, Betal... umm, Beetle... the big red star in Orion's knee.
-Jon
Philip C. Plait
bin...@boulder.Colorado.EDU (Jon Binkley) writes:
=
= [talking about a UFO flap ...]
= The townsfolk conned some astronomers to join them in their
= vigil. Well, as anyone who's ever bothered to look at the
= sky can confirm, bright stars do some dynamic flashing when
= they're close to the horizon. The astronomers quickly assured
= them that what they were seeing was Sirius, albeit through
= a good deal of atmospheric haze. ^^^^^^
I heard about this on CNN Headline News. I was out observing all night about the
same time this was broadcast, about a month ago. I noticed that Orion rose
about an hour or two before the sun, which puts Sirius at about the same
right ascension as the sun.
Meaning, that Sirius rises with the sun and could not be seen!
Of course, I'm not advocating that what they saw was indeed a UFO. I'm only
advocating that the "astronomer" they interviewed was wrong. They may have
seen Jupiter (if they were observing in the morning) or Saturn (which would have
been evening). Or possibly a bright star, which twinkles more in thick
haze.
I forgot to get the astronomer's name from the newscast. Did anyone else?
Has anyone ever heard of this person, or seen their name in the AAS directory?
Inquiring astronomers want to know!
* Phil Plait PC...@bessel.acc.virginia.EDU
* UVa Dept. of Astronomy Grad student (at large)
*
* "Censorship? You're worried about censorship when you write crap like that?"
Jon Binkley
>I heard about this on CNN Headline News. I was out observing all night about
>the same time this was broadcast, about a month ago. I noticed that Orion rose
>about an hour or two before the sun, which puts Sirius at about the same
>right ascension as the sun.
>
>Meaning, that Sirius rises with the sun and could not be seen!
>
Iain Odlin
>They did say that they were seeing it in the morning, just before
>dawn. If Sirius is out, my money's on Procyon, Rigel, or Betel...
>uhhh, Betal... umm, Beetle... the big red star in Orion's knee.
Knee? KNEE!?!
Betelgeuse is in Orion's SHOULDER. His eastern one, in fact.
Just so's you know...
--
----------------------------------Iain Odlin----------------------------------
Box 1428, Reed College, Portland OR, 97202
odlin@reed -or- {ogccse, tektronix}!reed!odlin
"God save Mrs Ethel Shroake of 393A High Street, Leightonstone."
Gedankenleere
adsf
:sdf
I have wondered now for quite sometime why the newscasters, both local and
national are unable to get by without getting publicly stung by viewers
who swoop down on them like vultures for making inconsequential "errors"
in grammar, syntax, pronounciations, or knowledge in sports and yet
can easily get by without the slightest whimper from the public when they
make blatantly stupid statements about and of science and technology!
Just recently, we had a t.v. newsreporter tell us that the Concorde flies
at twice the speed of LIGHT. Not one of several people on the achor desk
even winced!!
I've heard people on t.v. say with a straight face it would take xx number
of LIGHT-YEARS to reach some stellar destination!!
I say the T.V. puppet Alf proclaim that the radio message he broadcast would
take 100+ years to reach ANDROMEDA (i presumme galaxy). I have quite often
heard people in movies and tv refer to galaxies as "universes" that are
only a few million MILES away!
Then there were the Reagans at the White House consulting their ASTROLOGY
CHARTS! [correction above: "I SAW the T.V. puppet Alf..."].
Ted Koppel of Nightline fumbles around ineptly when interviewing scientits,
and so do people at McNeil-Lehrer (?spelling).
ABC used to (maybe still does) have a scientific klutz at a "science reporter"
(I think the previous one retired).
I read an article in Time about fraud in scientific research, and quite
frankly, the author did not understand her subject!!
The list goes on and on. Let's face it, we're a nation of scientific
illiterates. Most people are totally ignorant about science and view people
interested or knowledgeable in it as total "Nerds"!
Never mind that science feeds the technology that feed the economy that
feed their bellies and support their material-oriented lifestyles.
Dennis Ferguson
>
>I have wondered now for quite sometime why the newscasters, both local and
>national are unable to get by without getting publicly stung by viewers
>who swoop down on them like vultures for making inconsequential "errors"
>in grammar, syntax, pronounciations, or knowledge in sports and yet
>can easily get by without the slightest whimper from the public when they
>make blatantly stupid statements about and of science and technology!
> {stuff deleted}
>The list goes on and on. Let's face it, we're a nation of scientific
>illiterates. Most people are totally ignorant about science and view people
>interested or knowledgeable in it as total "Nerds"!
>Never mind that science feeds the technology that feed the economy that
>feed their bellies and support their material-oriented lifestyles.
>
It doesn't take very many scientists or engineers to feed the economy. As
I recall, for a nation of 240 million people, there are less than 2 million
scientists and engineers of all types (I seem to recall the exact number
is 1.6E6).
I have been involved in four stories that made the news media,
and they never got one of the four stories right. I suspect that this
is true of 90% of the stories in the media regardless of the subject
being reported. In spite of all this, most Americans who want to
seem to be well informed.
Dennis
Eugene Miya
This must have been during Voyager.
Everybody on the net should get the public number of their local public
newstations. Then we can all phone up and flame in-masse. 8)
Actually things like this do happen all the time. As noted before,
my ex-manager with the Track and Deep Space Network has a husband who
is a writer. He wrote local and network news for the L.A. area (which
is up there with New York and Washington DC, right?). Newcaster error
happens all the time. I doubt anyone on this net is any more perfect. 8)
Anyways if you want to read any of his books (they have to eat, too),
about working for news, read the book bhy R.R. Irvine. His wife, my
ex-boss, made easy copy once, she just invited him to her (our) work
at JPL. That was a 10 minute segment on a talk show.
While there is a general lack of science (I note and like the recent
formation of sci.skeptic) from the public eye, I've come to the conclusion
we are going about it all wrong. Time to enslave the spoon-fed
masses. They don't want to go to work or school? Forget them. Let them
stay ignorant! 8) Didn't this belong in another group like sci.edu? 8)
Another gross generalization from
--eugene miya, NASA Ames Research Center, eug...@aurora.arc.nasa.gov
resident cynic at the Rock of Ages Home for Retired Hackers:
"You trust the `reply' command with all those different mailers out there?"
"If my mail does not reach you, please accept my apology."
{ncar,decwrl,hplabs,uunet}!ames!eugene
Live free or die.
Richard W. Desaulniers
>
>illiterates. Most people are totally ignorant about science and view
>people interested or knowledgeable in it as total "Nerds"!
>Never mind that science feeds the technology that feed the economy that
>feed their bellies and support their material-oriented lifestyles.
>
article (I forget where) a survey had found that only about 10-12% of
the general population could be regarded as being "science literate".
The interesting point of the article was that this ratio had not
changed significantly from a similar survey 10 years prior.
Regards; |
|
Richard W. Desaulniers | InterNet: desa...@liszt.mpr.ca
Gedankenleere
It is not the numbers that count, it is that the effect spreads outward to
form an essential basis for most of the economy. It is not the scientists
and engineers who support the economy but the repercussions of their
work which form the basis for the most the rest of the economy.
You're right, people who want to be informed are, but the problem is not
very many people want to when it comes to "that Nerdy science"; this attitude
is pervasive and extends even to a large number of educated people.
I believe that the sad result is that public policy and the economy suffers
as result of decisions by people who are either ignorant of the technical
issues or are antagonistic to the whole affair, or both.
robert eclipse
Russ Brown
About 6-7 years ago, I was in a philisophy class at the University
of Wisconsin, Madison (good science/engineering school) and the teaching
assistant was explaining Descarte. He was trying to show how things don't
always happen the way we think they will and explained that, while a pen
always falls when you drop it on the Earth, it would just float away if you
let go of it on the Moon.
My jaw dropped a little. I blurted "What?!" Looking around the room,
I saw that only my friend Mark and one other student looked confused by the
TA's statement. The other 17 people just looked at me like "What's your
problem?"
"But a pen would fall if you dropped it on the moon, just more
slowly." I protested.
"No it wouldn't." the TA explained calmly, "because your too far
away from the Earth's gravity."
Think. Think. Aha! "You saw the Apollo astronauts walking around
on the Moon, didn't you?" I countered, "why didn't they float away?"
"Because they were wearing heavy boots." he responded, as if this
made perfect sense. (remember, this is a Philosophy TA who's had plenty
of logic classes).
By then I realized that we were each living in totally different
worlds, and did not speak each others language, so I gave up.
As we left the room, my friend Mark was raging. "My God! How can all those
people be so stupid?"
I tried to be understanding. "Mark, they knew this stuff at one
time, but it's not part of their basic view of the world, so they've
forgotten it. Most people could probably make the same mistake."
To prove my point, we went back to our dorm room and began
randomly selecting names from the campus phonebook. We called about 30
people and asked each this question:
1. If you're standing on the moon holding a pen, and you let go,
will it a) float away, b) float where it is, or c) fall to the
ground?
About 47 percent got this question correct. Of the ones who got it
wrong, we asked the obvious follow-up question:
2. You've seen films of the Apollo astronauts walking around on the
moon, why didn't they fall off?
About 20 percent of the people changed their answer to the first question
when they heard this one! But the most amazing part was that about half of
them confidently answered, "Because they were wearing heavy boots." Maybe I
should post this in the conspiracy group...
George Kaplan
> ... [story about a discussion of Descartes, in which a philosopy
> TA thought a pen would not fall on the moon] ...
>
> Think. Think. Aha! "You saw the Apollo astronauts walking around
>on the Moon, didn't you?" I countered, "why didn't they float away?"
> "Because they were wearing heavy boots." he responded, as if this
>made perfect sense. (remember, this is a Philosophy TA who's had plenty
>of logic classes).
You should have referred him to some of Gallileo's work. Remember
the experiment with the hammer and the feather on Apollo 11?
George C. Kaplan Internet: gcka...@sag4.ssl.berkeley.edu
Space Sciences Lab UUCP: ...!ucbvax!sag4.ssl!gckaplan
University of California (415) 643-8610
Berkeley, CA 94720
lawrence.m.geary
when you realize that they probably learned physics by watching Roadrunner
cartoons and learned celestial mechanics from the STAR WARS movies. When
I was in high school, science was not a popular subject even among the college
bound, and the elective physics course was nonexistent until I demanded it.
I imagine it's worse now.
Very sad. These people have no idea where they are or when they are,
cosmically speaking. They don't know how the "world" works. It's a
mystery to them. They see Venus rise and they phone in a UFO report.
They can't even explain to their children why the sky is blue.
Is it any better elsewhere, in Canada, Europe, Japan, Australia?
John Sparks
<34...@blake.acs.washington.edu> <30...@srcsip.UUCP>
Sender:
Reply-To: spa...@corpane.UUCP (John Sparks)
Followup-To:
Distribution:
Organization: Corpane Industries, Inc.
Keywords:
In article <30...@srcsip.UUCP> ferguson@maitai (Dennis Ferguson) writes:
>I have been involved in four stories that made the news media,
>and they never got one of the four stories right. I suspect that this
>is true of 90% of the stories in the media regardless of the subject
>being reported. In spite of all this, most Americans who want to
>seem to be well informed.
>
>Dennis
Amen. This goes on in every facet of the media from TV, to Movies and to the
News. The reason we notice the blatent errors in science is that we are
familiar with the subject, so when we hear/see something like this it sticks
out to us. But did you ever stop to think that if they can't get anything right
about a subject you know about, then what the hell are they doing with the
subject you don't know enough about (World Events, Politics, etc)?
Look at the way Hollywood protrays computers, computer viruses, space travel,
and so on. And the News is no better. Best thing to do is shut the damn TV off
and just read the net. At least when someone makes an erroneous statement here,
he is sure to be corrected.
--
John Sparks | {rutgers|uunet}!ukma!corpane!sparks | D.I.S.K. 24hrs 1200bps
||||||||||||||| spa...@corpane.UUCP | 502/968-5401 thru -5406
You are in a maze of twisty little passages, all alike.
m...@cs.rit.edu
>About 6-7 years ago, I was in a philisophy class at the University
>of Wisconsin, Madison (good science/engineering school) and the teaching
>assistant was explaining Descarte. He was trying to show how things don't
>always happen the way we think they will and explained that, while a pen
>always falls when you drop it on the Earth, it would just float away if you
>let go of it on the Moon.
> My jaw dropped a little. I blurted "What?!" Looking around the room,
>I saw that only my friend Mark and one other student looked confused by the
>TA's statement. The other 17 people just looked at me like "What's your
>problem?"
Followed by a discussion of the TA's reasons for saying that the pen would
float away, and the "heavy boot" theory for why astronauts didn't float
away from the moon.
Well, perhaps your TA was begin subtle and providing a meta-example to
make his point ("things don't always happen the way we think they will"):
we expect TA's to exhibit rational, intelligent, informed behavior. :-)
Mike Lutz
Rochester Institute of Technology
Rochester, NY
Mike Lutz Rochester Institute of Technology, Rochester NY
UUCP: {rutgers,cornell}!rochester!ritcv!mjl
CSNET: mjl%r...@relay.cs.net
INTERNET: m...@cs.rit.edu
Eugene Miya
>And the News is no better. Best thing to do is shut the damn TV off
>and just read the net.
>At least when someone makes an erroneous statement here,
>he is sure to be corrected.
I in fact just made an erroneous statement. I only received two corrections
in a 48 hour period, one by a friend. Fortunately for them, it was an
quantitative determination 8). I am surprised that I wasn't flamed more.
If it had been strictly qualititative, who knows. We all note the
signal to noise ratio is going down. What's this got to do with astronomy?
Hence, I don't trust the net any more than any other media. The net
used to be an interesting place to get information, but its value is
slowly deflating. (We, I, all of us are the problem). Time to rename the
group talk.astro.
Ethan Tecumseh Vishniac
>
> Best thing to do is shut the damn TV off
> and just read the net. At least when someone makes an erroneous statement here,
> he is sure to be corrected.
>
Actually, I have noticed that when someone makes a *correct* statement
they are often corrected in turn. :-(
--
I'm not afraid of dying Ethan Vishniac, Dept of Astronomy, Univ. of Texas
I just don't want to be {charm,ut-sally,emx,noao}!utastro!ethan
there when it happens. (arpanet) et...@astro.AS.UTEXAS.EDU
- Woody Allen (bitnet) ethan%astro.as....@CUNYVM.CUNY.EDU
These must be my opinions. Who else would bother?
Gary Murphy
--
Gary Murphy - Cognos Incorporated - (613) 738-1338 x5537
3755 Riverside Dr - P.O. Box 9707 - Ottawa Ont - CANADA K1G 3N3
e-mail: decvax!utzoo!dciem!nrcaer!cognos!garym
Cosmic Irreversibility: 1 pot T -> 1 pot P, 1 pot P /-> 1 pot T
Mark Brader
> he is sure to be corrected.
The trouble is that correct statements are very likely to be "corrected"
as well! Current readers of comp.lang.c will be well aware of this.
(And I'm talking about matters of fact, not opinion!)
For all that, the net is still highly valuable for the topics that arise
that aren't even *mentioned* anywhere else.
--
Mark Brader, Toronto "Those who mourn for 'USENET like it was' should
utzoo!sq!msb remember the original design estimates of maximum
m...@sq.com traffic volume: 2 articles/day" -- Steven Bellovin
This article is in the public domain.