Print

[TalkingBook]

I was big into the debunking when I started listening, and used to watch tons of videos with Randi debunking various frauds (which are still great btw), but...

How many times can you really hear about debunking a Bigfoot photo, a perpetual motion machine or ghost orbs before it just becomes a huge case of ritual dead-horse-beating in front of the skepical choir?

There are of course other pseudosciences which rightly feature into the show on a regular basis, such as vaccine denial, evolution denial, various medical quackery, etc. But for me the interesting part of listening to discussions on these topics isn't the actual debunking (we all know why homeopathy doesn't work), but rather the actual impact these pseudosciences are having on society.

Does all of this mean that the SGU is less of a skeptic and more of a science podcast? Maybe. But I can live with that.

Also, this podcast is becoming too human-centric. Can't we get a chimp or some other primate to replace one of the male rogues? Preferably an albino female with a sexy grunt.

[Bossel]

A shout out to Bossel in every episode.

I said it before, and I will say it again. Guest Rogues! I really have nothing to complain about, though. It's just a suggestion to keep things fresh.

Whatever happened to the riddles that Evan used to give?

[David E.]

A shout out to Bossel in every episode.

I said it before, and I will say it again. Guest Rogues! I really have nothing to complain about, though. It's just a suggestion to keep things fresh.

Whatever happened to the riddles that Evan used to give?

It's a mystery: solve it.

Who's that Noisy is a Fail.  Something new for 2010.

[Brandon F]

I would have to go with getting rid of the who's that noisy segment. It's entertaining sometimes, but I would prefer to have longer interviews in its place.

[Skeptaholic]

Hey guys,
A way to get rid of Rebecca's background noise is to have her record herself while she's on Skype talking with you. Then once you are finished recording simply have her email you the mp3 of herself. After that, Steve can edit out everything he's recorded from Rebecca on his computer and merge the final mp3 with the background-free mp3 that Rebecca sent you via email.

Hope this helps,
let me know if it does,
or if you need clarification,

Peace!

[Skulker]

the topic : I'm not going to be popular saying this but
has been locked so I'll stick my reply here

Skulker said
I'm not going to be popular saying this but
« on: May 22, 2009, 09:26:45 AM »I think SGU is starting to lose it a bit. I have loved the show, looked forward to it every week but lately it seems the show should be called the incredibly in-depth scientific guide to the universe not the skeptics guide. When SGU debunks something they are brilliant but sometimes I feel like the pod cast gets so detailed with science or a particular scientific discovery that it is no longer a skeptical podcast. I want to hear more debunking, more interviews, what about a debate with a skeptic and a creationist/alternative health advocate etc. Also where is Rebecca lately ? Her input gave the podcast sass also she is brilliant at calling BS BS. I know it is a voluntary commitment on behalf of the SGU team but I feel something special was created and it's started to lose it's way. Perhaps Jenny's show will be good fodder for SGU, what about a campaign to get a skeptic on Oprah ? that would be like climbing Mt Everest ! Anyway I will keep listening but I just didn't want to see the podcast wimper out without saying something. Logged


- It's about skeptics setting the agenda rather than reacting to scammers and getting more people science/critical thinking literate then Scams don't grow. -

 Skulker,I know what you mean - A lot of the science on SGU is stuff I have already heard on British/Australian Science Podcasts, but Science is closely connected to Skepticism.

Whats the difference between SGU and a normal science podcast ?
it has a job to encourage good reasoning and critical thinking, and the scientific method is part of this. It's all about truth, but we live in a world of distortion due to Information Porn in the media (hyping news headlines and appealing to the emotions tricks),  due to commercialism, marketing tricks and advertising, due to formulaic Hollywood films and due to humans genetically inbuilt irrationality.
- We need to make good decisions in life and understand the decisions that governments etc. make on our behalf, but we need the true picture.
- Skepticism and critical thinking helps us sort out what is truth.

- As regards "Jennys show being good fodder". If we skeptics aren't careful then
we end up on the back foot being reactive, allowing scammers to set the agenda, and giving then  undue free publicity. Sticking more to real science allows us to promote what is true instead of trying to counter what is untrue which is a much bigger job cos there are always a multitude more untrue positions than true positions. ie I could spend time debunking 10 theories of how a thing works or I could just explain the 1 true best idea of how it does work.
- Debunking and Exposing a scam is a good example of critical thinking in action. But scams keep appearing usually they are just new versions of scams exposed before, so it becomes a bit boring for the skeptic movement to do this ... Far better that the wider public learn to recognize a scam so preventing it growing legs and spreading to a wider audience. That's why SGU talks about science, it's about getting the publicc scientifically literate.

- The Skeptics movement is Great because :
- 1. Truly fun and enlightening as it explains amazing things which seem to be like magic
- 2. promotes the public understanding of Science and Critical thinking
- 3. Performs a consumer protection role in exposing scams and pseudoscience.

- "Who's that noisy" might be an interesting game, but I don't think it's that great at stimulating critical thinking... neither are some of the other games as effective as they might be due to the way they are played.
- Quote of day is stimulating and inspiring

Good job Jay !

bye Stew

I'm sorry, but I never said any of that. You have me confused with someone else. Has my Mafia reputation overflowed to the outside world? 

Apparently it has:

I'm all for more useless polls

Speaking of which, seaotter, you've seemed to slackened in your poll whoring. What's up with this?

The first thirty or so are obvious then it starts being work. Besides I have to protect my post count position from some people.

Yeah, that skulker, what  piece of work.

[Derwood]

My wife and I just got new droid phones.  I noticed that I could find skepchick on "google listen" but SGU isn't showing up. 

[Skepdad]

Science or Fiction?

My nit is that everyone repeats the questions. We have to hear it over and over and over in a short period of time. I'm not sure what's going on behind the scenes but it comes across that everyone has a short attention span. It would save a lot of air time not repeating the questions.

[Skulker]

Science or Fiction?

My nit is that everyone repeats the questions. We have to hear it over and over and over in a short period of time. I'm not sure what's going on behind the scenes but it comes across that everyone has a short attention span. It would save a lot of air time not repeating the questions.

I gotta agree with this one. Just paraphrase it if you have to.

[JoelWhy]

Science or Fiction?

My nit is that everyone repeats the questions. We have to hear it over and over and over in a short period of time. I'm not sure what's going on behind the scenes but it comes across that everyone has a short attention span. It would save a lot of air time not repeating the questions.

I gotta agree with this one. Just paraphrase it if you have to.

They shouldn't even paraphrase.  It's a podcast -- if the listener misses the question they can easily rewind.  In answering the question, if they provide some sort of substantive analysis, fine.  Otherwise, I think you should edit out all the hemming and hawing.  (But, I do love the segment, overall.)

[TalkingBook]

Science or Fiction?

My nit is that everyone repeats the questions. We have to hear it over and over and over in a short period of time. I'm not sure what's going on behind the scenes but it comes across that everyone has a short attention span. It would save a lot of air time not repeating the questions.

I gotta agree with this one. Just paraphrase it if you have to.

They shouldn't even paraphrase.  It's a podcast -- if the listener misses the question they can easily rewind.  In answering the question, if they provide some sort of substantive analysis, fine.  Otherwise, I think you should edit out all the hemming and hawing.  (But, I do love the segment, overall.)

I actually enjoy the hemming and hawing when it is kept to a moderate degree, as the case usually is. I often don't catch the gist of all 3 items on the first go around, and having them repeated a time or two helps me think about them. Of course I could rewind, but I usually listen while doing dishes, riding my bike, etc., and it's somewhat inconvenient to rewind while doing those things. Plus, it sounds more natural to let the rogues chew things over a bit than to edit it down to a quickfire question and response type of thing.

(BTW, where's that 2 cents smiley when you need it?)

[JoelWhy]

Science or Fiction?

My nit is that everyone repeats the questions. We have to hear it over and over and over in a short period of time. I'm not sure what's going on behind the scenes but it comes across that everyone has a short attention span. It would save a lot of air time not repeating the questions.

I gotta agree with this one. Just paraphrase it if you have to.

They shouldn't even paraphrase.  It's a podcast -- if the listener misses the question they can easily rewind.  In answering the question, if they provide some sort of substantive analysis, fine.  Otherwise, I think you should edit out all the hemming and hawing.  (But, I do love the segment, overall.)

I actually enjoy the hemming and hawing when it is kept to a moderate degree, as the case usually is. I often don't catch the gist of all 3 items on the first go around, and having them repeated a time or two helps me think about them. Of course I could rewind, but I usually listen while doing dishes, riding my bike, etc., and it's somewhat inconvenient to rewind while doing those things. Plus, it sounds more natural to let the rogues chew things over a bit than to edit it down to a quickfire question and response type of thing.

(BTW, where's that 2 cents smiley when you need it?)

I've got to say I love the functions they've added to the new iPods.  There's a feature to double the speed of podcasts (while compensating for pitch so the voices don't sound like chipmunks) as well as a 30-second rewind button.  Very convenient.

[Derwood]

and like magic the podcast shows up on google listen now.. joy!!



edit... but the most recent it shows is nov 4th

[Chew]

Who the hell is Rachael?

[Artemisia]

I'm assuming he/she meant Rebecca.